Global
To whom it may concern:
Please, please, please do whatever you can to keep Bush from f------- up social security! Why is he taking all of us through these changes when all he has to do is just raise the cap on taxable income from 90,000 to a much bigger number. Why is he pretending to help the poor when all he's really doing is protecting the rich and screwing the middle class!!!!!!!
I'm a middle income worker who now has to pay an "alternative tax" while the rich continue to get tax breaks. Why should I have to continue paying my social security taxes only to get reduced benefits??????
Could you please start a write in campaign or something for people to tell Bush to raise the cap and move on to other more pressing problems.
Norman Solomon's "Iraq: War, Aid and Public Relations" really hit home with me.
Solomon's article brought to light the lack of trust Americans should have for
our news media. As a current public relations/journalism student at a
university, I have learned how to limit the bias in my story telling.
"...media spin promotes the illusion that the U.S. war effort in Iraq is
becoming evermore compassionate and life-affirming." This couldn't be more
true. I can only hope that I am instilled with better morals and journalistic
principals than those who let the government control the peoples' media.
David Iancu
Des Moines, IA
David Iancu
Des Moines, IA
Speaking before an ACLU crowd last week in Minnesota, the home state of Paul Wellstone, you were quoted as saying, "Now that we're there [in Iraq], we're there and we can't get out.... I hope the President is incredibly successful with his policy now." Did these words really come from the same man who claimed to represent the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party, and who had recently campaigned on the antiwar theme? What's changed?
Perhaps you now believe that an electoral victory for Democrats in 2006 and beyond requires sweeping this war under the rug. If so, you are only the latest in a long line of recent Democratic leaders who chose a strategy of letting "no light show" between Democrats and the President on the war. Emphasize the economy, instead, they advised, in 2002 and again in 2004.
Perhaps you now believe that an electoral victory for Democrats in 2006 and beyond requires sweeping this war under the rug. If so, you are only the latest in a long line of recent Democratic leaders who chose a strategy of letting "no light show" between Democrats and the President on the war. Emphasize the economy, instead, they advised, in 2002 and again in 2004.
AUSTIN, Texas -- When the history of this administration is written, I suspect the largest black mark against it will be wasting time. The energy bill just passed by the House is a classic example of frittering away precious time and resources by doing exactly nothing that needs to be done about energy. The bill gives $8.1 billion in new tax breaks to the oil companies, which are already swimming in cash.
ExxonMobil's profits are up 44 percent, Royal Dutch/Shell up 42 percent, etc. According to the business pages, the biggest problem oil executives face is what to do with all their cash. So why give more tax breaks to the oil companies? Makes as much sense as anything else in this energy bill. Nothing about conservation, higher fuel efficiency standards or putting money into renewable energy sources. It's so stupid, it's painful.
ExxonMobil's profits are up 44 percent, Royal Dutch/Shell up 42 percent, etc. According to the business pages, the biggest problem oil executives face is what to do with all their cash. So why give more tax breaks to the oil companies? Makes as much sense as anything else in this energy bill. Nothing about conservation, higher fuel efficiency standards or putting money into renewable energy sources. It's so stupid, it's painful.
AUSTIN, Texas -- Attention, all campers! "Progressive indexing" is just another word for "cutting Social Security benefits." Do not be fooled by this idiot locution. Just as sure as "extraordinary rendition" now means "shipping the guy to another country so he can be tortured," progressive indexing means cutting benefits. Got it?
In another interesting development from President Bush's news conference, if you make more than $20,000 a year, you are wealthy. That's what the president said -- "wealthy."
Would you hire this man as an investment consultant? Bush said, "I know some Americans have reservations about investing in the stock market, so I propose that one investment option will consist entirely of treasury bonds, which are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States government." These are exactly the same treasury bonds that currently guarantee Social Security and have been described by Bush, including in the very same press conference as, a cabinet full of "worthless IOUs."
In another interesting development from President Bush's news conference, if you make more than $20,000 a year, you are wealthy. That's what the president said -- "wealthy."
Would you hire this man as an investment consultant? Bush said, "I know some Americans have reservations about investing in the stock market, so I propose that one investment option will consist entirely of treasury bonds, which are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States government." These are exactly the same treasury bonds that currently guarantee Social Security and have been described by Bush, including in the very same press conference as, a cabinet full of "worthless IOUs."
The big news in the bird world is, of course, the confirmed sighting of one of America's most fabled birds, the ivory-billed woodpecker, in southeastern Arkansas. The last official sighting date -- and I stress "official" -- in the United States was back in 1944. Other than that, the stylish creature, with its black body, white wingtips, ivory bill and crown of red feathers, lived on mostly in endless reproductions of Audubon's print.
Reading most news stories, you'd think that Big Woody's first convincingly reported sighting in 60 years came on Feb. 11, 2004, when Gene Sparling, on a canoeing trip in his kayak, reported he'd seen the ivory-billed woodpecker in the Cache River National Wildlife Refuge, in southeastern Arkansas.
Not so, as was made clear in an excellent story by Bob Marshall, outdoors editor of the New Orleans Times-Picayune and published April 29, the day after official announcement of the ivory-bill's renaissance. In fact, there had been several credible sightings of the prudent ivory-bill since 1944.
Reading most news stories, you'd think that Big Woody's first convincingly reported sighting in 60 years came on Feb. 11, 2004, when Gene Sparling, on a canoeing trip in his kayak, reported he'd seen the ivory-billed woodpecker in the Cache River National Wildlife Refuge, in southeastern Arkansas.
Not so, as was made clear in an excellent story by Bob Marshall, outdoors editor of the New Orleans Times-Picayune and published April 29, the day after official announcement of the ivory-bill's renaissance. In fact, there had been several credible sightings of the prudent ivory-bill since 1944.
First Step: Getting Legislators to Sign Onto A Resolution Demonstrating the U.S. Intends to Leave
Daniel Ellsberg, of Pentagon Papers Fame, gave the worst news of the day to those examining lessons from Vietnam thirty years after the end of the war – we're going to be in Iraq a long time. It will be tougher to get out of Iraq, than it was to get out of Vietnam. Why? The major difference between Vietnam and Iraq is Iraq has oil, Vietnam doesn't and we need oil.
It is much easier to start a war than it is to end one.
Ellsberg was speaking at a forum organized by the Institute for Policy Studies held Thursday, April 28 at the Rayburn House Office Building. He pointed out that in 1968 the anti-Vietnam War protests were at full force and the U.S. did not get out until seven years later, 1975. President Nixon even ran for office promising he had a secret plan to end the war – and we did not get out for years after that. If it had not been for Watergate, says Ellsberg, we might not have gotten out.
Daniel Ellsberg, of Pentagon Papers Fame, gave the worst news of the day to those examining lessons from Vietnam thirty years after the end of the war – we're going to be in Iraq a long time. It will be tougher to get out of Iraq, than it was to get out of Vietnam. Why? The major difference between Vietnam and Iraq is Iraq has oil, Vietnam doesn't and we need oil.
It is much easier to start a war than it is to end one.
Ellsberg was speaking at a forum organized by the Institute for Policy Studies held Thursday, April 28 at the Rayburn House Office Building. He pointed out that in 1968 the anti-Vietnam War protests were at full force and the U.S. did not get out until seven years later, 1975. President Nixon even ran for office promising he had a secret plan to end the war – and we did not get out for years after that. If it had not been for Watergate, says Ellsberg, we might not have gotten out.
WHY VOTE?
The Slate
Because local politics matter. Because the smoking ban is on the ballot – again. Because if we don't back the good candidates now, there won't be anyone good on the ballot in November. Because the Columbus Public Schools budget is huge – who's minding the store?
The Slate
In 2003, President Bush nominated California Supreme Court Justice Janice Rogers Brown to the U.S. Courts of Appeals. However, due to her ultra-conservative judicial views, the Democrats in the Senate prevented her nomination from going forward by use of the filibuster. Mr. Bush re-nominated her again in February. Last week, the Senate Judiciary Committee, in a party-line vote, approved of her nomination, with all 10 Republicans affirming her, and all eight Democrats opposing her. Unless Republicans elect to carry out the so-called “nuclear option” of abolishing the filibuster, Democrats will almost certainly block her nomination again. And for good reasons.