I thought it was the other side who specialized in these. :-(

Yesterday, I sent a note to Obama's campaign asking him to denounce the "Little GITMO" plans.

I just got back one of the least-helpful emails I've received lately (or at least, received from places other than Nigeria).

On Monday, I sent the following note to NPR's Morning Edition.

Might I suggest that an analyst who thinks that it's weird to take a vacation in the place that someone grew up, and where his grandmother still lives, is not likely to provide anything useful in the campaign coverage besides comic relief?

Yesterday, I got an answer.

Ninth in a series

Crossposted from Downeast Politics

ARTICLE VIII.—INVADING IRAQ, A SOVEREIGN NATION, IN VIOLATION OF THE UN CHARTER AND INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW

In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution "to take care that the laws be faithfully executed",...

Eighth in a series

Crossposted from Downeast Politics

ARTICLE VII.—INVADING IRAQ ABSENT A DECLARATION OF WAR

In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution "to take care that the laws be faithfully executed", has launched a war against Iraq absent any congressional declaration of war or equivalent action.

Seventh in a series

Crossposted from Downeast Politics

ARTICLE VI.—INVADING IRAQ IN VIOLATION OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF H.J. RES. 114

In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution "to take care that the laws be faithfully executed",...

Sixth in a series

Crossposted from Downeast Politics

ARTICLE V.—ILLEGALLY MISSPENDING FUNDS TO SECRETLY BEGIN A WAR OF AGGRESSION

In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution ‘‘to take care that the laws be faithfully executed’’,...

Fifth in a series

Crossposted from Downeast Politics

ARTICLE IV.—MISLEADING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND MEMBERS OF CONGRESS TO BELIEVE IRAQ POSED AN IMMINENT THREAT TO THE UNITED STATES

In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution "to take care that the laws be faithfully executed",...

Fourth in a series

Crossposted from Downeast Politics

ARTICLE III.—MISLEADING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND MEMBERS OF CONGRESS TO BELIEVE IRAQ POSSESSED WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, SO AS TO MANUFACTURE A FALSE CASE FOR WAR

In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution "to take care that the laws be faithfully executed", has both personally and acting through his agents and subordinates, together with the Vice President, executed instead a calculated and wideranging strategy...

Third in a series

Crossposted from Downeast Politics

ARTICLE II.—FALSELY, SYSTEMATICALLY, AND WITH CRIMINAL INTENT CONFLATING THE ATTACKS OF SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 WITH MISREPRESENTATION OF IRAQ AS AN IMMINENT SECURITY THREAT AS PART OF A FRAUDULENT JUSTIFICATION FOR A WAR OF AGGRESSION.

In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution "to take care that the laws be faithfully executed", has both personally and acting through his agents and subordinates,  together with the Vice President, executed a calculated and wide-ranging strategy to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States...

Second in a series

Crossposted from Downeast Politics

ARTICLE I.—CREATING A SECRET PROPAGANDA CAMPAIGN TO MANUFACTURE A FALSE CASE FOR WAR AGAINST IRAQ

In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution "to take care that the laws be faithfully executed", has both personally and acting through his agents and subordinates, together with the Vice President, illegally spent public dollars on a secret propaganda program to manufacture a false cause for war against Iraq.

Crossposted from Downeast Politics

NOTICE OF INTENTION TO OFFER RESOLUTION RAISING A QUESTION OF THE PRIVILEGES OF THE HOUSE

Mr. KUCINICH. Madam Speaker, pursuant to clause 2 of rule IX, I rise to give notice of my intent to raise a question of the privileges of the House.

The form of the resolution is as follows:

Resolved, That President George W. Bush be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate:

I've seen some ignorant RedState.com alerts before, but the following one takes the cake.

Dear Friend,

A friend and adviser to Barack Obama, Larry Lessig, is going to testify before Congress on Tuesday to advocate for "net neutrality," a position strongly supported by Google,Inc.

Google, recently allowed Larry Lessig to talk to Google employees.  During his talk, Lessig showed a video of Jesus, depicted as gay and wearing a diaper singing the song "I Will Survivor" until Christ is run over by a bus.  You can see for yourself here.

I was reading the Brown Alumni Magazine yesterday when I came across a good article by Republican Representative Lincoln Chafee about how the political maneuvering to cut Congress out of the loop of government started even before 9/11.

Many had been there in 1990 when the president's father, President George H. W. Bush, agreed to raise taxes to shrink the deficit, a big factor in his loss two years later. With presidential leadership exercised and political pain already endured, why would we suddenly want to turn the treasury upside down and shake out every last dime.

To me, the tax cut was a stalking horse. The Cheney-Bush strategy behind the cut was to set the tone—to preempt the Congress not just on taxes but on every issue. It would tame any future resistance to a radical agenda by serving up this politically irresistible prize: lawmakers could go home and say they had voted to cut taxes. The White House was out to neuter Congress, and the minute Congress rolled over for the cuts, it set the stage for one-branch rule in America and all the consequences we live with today.

I'm surprised that Search here doesn't bring up anything when I check the above term. I'm listening to the debate on C-SPAN, and I was interested to see that the Democratic time controller would not yieldguarantee time for Democrats to oppose the bill.

I see Dreier's point about the duty of Congress to punish its own, but Congress has singularly failed to do so lately. If Congress appoints the board, though, I don't see what the problem would be -- especially since it's a 3 Democrat, 3 Republican board.

It certainly seemed to me that Dreier was focusing a lot more on the rule than the board. So, besides "it's not Congress", what is the problem with an independent ethics board? It seems to me that this would be a good thing.

Well, maybe, but this quote from the Harvard Crimson seems to indicate otherwise.

"I don't expect him to resign," McGovern said, "and I think Congress has to stand up and have the courage to pursue this inquiry and make a finding under the impeachment clause."

A conservative friend of mine who remembered the Nixon impeachment proceedings pointed this out, and it didn't take much work to find a reference.

In 2004, Camwyn, the author of "The Silmarillion in 1000 Words", turned her talents to explaining the process of presidential elections in 500 words.

BOARDS: Okay, who won?
VOTERS: Dunno, you tell us.
BOARDS: * count votes *
VOTERS: So who’s president?
BOARDS: No one yet.
VOTERS: But- but-
ELECTORS: Hi! We’re your representatives.
VOTERS: To WHAT?
ELECTORS: The Electoral College.
VOTERS: Buh?
ELECTORS: It’s in the Constitution. Article Two, Section One.
VOTERS: . . .

When I found myself tempted to vote for my non-preferred candidate in today's straw poll, I asked if kos could post an IRV straw poll sometime. bolson responded to me, pointing me over to his online tool for creating polls.

So, if you're interested, hop over to my poll and rank the candidates. I'll post the results here in a day or two, unless there are enough votes sooner to give interesting results.

The BBC is reporting that Bilal Hussein, an Iraqi photographer who was part of a Pulitzer Prize-winning team in 2005, is being held on suspicion of being a "terrorist media operative".