Great article by Greg Palast - the only investigative journalist in America who had the balls to uncover and write about the Bush Crime Family's manipulation and theft of the election in Florida in 2000.
Here's an excerpt:
"Today we witnessed more than the coronation of some privileged little munchkin of mendacity. It is the triumphal re-occupation of our nation by nitwits who think Ollie North's a hero not a conman, who can't name their congressman, who believe that Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden were going steady, who can't tell Afghanistan from Souvlaki-stan. Bloated with lies and super-size fries, they clomped to the polls 59 million strong to vent their small-minded little hatreds on us all.
When I looked today at the oaf of office, I could not shake the feeling that this election was an intelligence test that America flunked."
Click here for the entire article.
Friday, January 21, 2005
A "Good" Christian speaks . . . . the horror!!
This letter [click here]to the editor showed up in the Ridgecrest Daily Independent, a local newspaper in Ridgecrest, California, not far from where krazeeinjun lives.
It's a picture-perfect example of the fascist, tyrannical and hateful attitude that pervades today's American, right-wing Christian conservative movement.
I'll print it in it's entirety with my own rebuttal to every bilious claim made therein.
The letter writer's words are highlighted in blue and my rebuttal highlighted in red and italicized.
Newspaper shouldn't print Liberal voices
Editor:
Thank Goodness for such literate and intelligent men as Julius Wolfson, Derek Cooper, Ron Scott and May Shaw.
I just can't understand why more good conservatives haven't spoken out against the dangerous opinions of rabble-rousers such as Phyllis Lilly, Linda Robin and that R C Johnson person. Why does The Daily Independent print the degenerate views of poisonous Liberals who hate freedom? -- Does Ms. Miller prefer to live in a nazi-like state where only opinions of her and her kind are allowed in public. Anyone daring to dissent against the state-sponsored policies and laws should be rounded up and shot by firing squad? If that is the intent of Ms. Miller's statement, then Hitler and Mussolini would've been proud to count Ms. Miller as one of their supporters.
As Mr. Scott points out, the glorious Constitution is there to protect the rights of Christians to profess their faith. This country was founded by good Christians and the Constitution guarantees our right to express our religion. -- Ms. Miller does get one thing right here - The U.S. Constitution is indeed a glorious document. However, Ms. Miller is either lying or simply ignorant in stating that The United States of America was founded solely by Christians. That claim simply does not conform to historical evidence. Of course many Americans did practice Christianity, but so also did many believe in deistic philosophy. Indeed, most of our influential Founding Fathers, although they respected the rights of other religionists, held to deism and Freemasonry tenets rather than to Christianity.
Ms. Miller's other claim that the Constitution guarantees her right to express her religion while although partly true, does not give her the right or the government the right to force any religion upon any citizen. An overview of the Constitution to enlighten those of Ms. Miller's line of thinking:
The United States Constitution serves as the law of the land for America and indicates the intent of our Founding Fathers. The Constitution forms a secular document, and nowhere does it appeal to God, Christianity, Jesus, or any supreme being. The U.S. government derives from people (not God), as it clearly states in the preamble: "We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union...." The omission of God in the Constitution did not come out of forgetfulness, but rather out of the Founding Fathers purposeful intentions to keep government separate from religion.
Although the Constitution does not include the phrase "Separation of Church & State," neither does it say "Freedom of religion." However, the Constitution implies both in the 1st Amendment. As to our freedoms, the 1st Amendment provides exclusionary wording:
"Congress shall make NO law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." [bold caps, mine]
Thomas Jefferson made an interpretation of the 1st Amendment to his January 1st, 1802 letter to the Committee of the Danbury Baptist Association calling it a "wall of separation between church and State." Madison had also written that "Strongly guarded. . . is the separation between religion and government in the Constitution of the United States." There existed little controversy about this interpretation from our Founding Fathers.
If religionists cared a whit to try and understand the concept of separation of Church & State, they would realize that the wall of separation actually protects their religion. Our secular government allows the free expression of religion and non religion. Today, religions flourish in America; we have more churches than Seven-Elevens.
Although many secular and atheist groups fight for the wall of separation, this does not mean that they wish to lawfully eliminate religion from society. On the contrary, you will find no secular or atheist group attempting to ban Christianity, or any other religion from American society. Keeping religion separate allows atheists and religionists alike, to practice their belief systems, regardless how ridiculous they may seem, without government intervention.
It just is completely beyond me how we have allowed Liberals to deny us this guaranteed right. -- I challenge Ms. Miller to offer one instance of a liberal denying her or any other Christian their right to practice their religion. Of course what Ms. Miller is referring to is the evil "wall of separation between church and state." Once again, Ms. Miller seems to prefer life in a tyrannical theocratic state as opposed life in a vibrant, open and tolerant Democracy.
Oh, they raise ridiculous arguments like other (false) religions would be "upset" if they were forced to pray alongside the righteous in schools or council meetings. -- Far from being ridiculous, those arguments are the only thing preventing the likes of Ms. Miller and her crowd from destroying Democracy and instituting their own brand of tyrannical, state-sponsored religion which by it's own nature would be required to repress and persecute any and all who fail to pledge loyalty to the Christian belief system. Wouldn't be very long before Ms. Miller and her good Christian friends would be burning fellow Americans at the stake for their "blasphemous" beliefs or non-beliefs.
Surely those others would appreciate the opportunity to be saved. -- I choose the right not to be saved by your superstitious deity Ms. Miller. Do you deny me my Constitutionally protected rights to be free from religion??
As God's chosen people, we Christians have the right to express our religion and praise tolerant, patient and merciful God, -- God's chosen people?? According to who or what?? Your bible? The Muslims claim they are God's chosen people too -- says so in their bible The Koran. The Jews claim they are God's chosen people as well. Says so in their bible The Torah. Frankly, this is the mischief that has caused so much conflict and suffering in the world. Religious fanatics like Ms. Miller claiming the throne of the one and only true religion. It's my belief they are all wrong. John Lennon had it right in his song "Imagine" -- imagine no religion . . . . one can only hope.
and I don't want to read any more letters from Liberals suggesting non-believers should be allowed to express their superstitions just because we Christians can express ours. -- Ha Ha. The pot calling the kettle black. Ms. Miller seems to be saying her superstition is better than anyone elses superstition. Just think of how silly that sounds.
The Founding Fathers were God-fearing men and never intended the first Amendment to promote other superstitious beliefs. -- More disinformation about the founding fathers. Nor did the Founding Fathers intend the First Amendment to solely support the Christian religion as Ms. Miller insinuates. On the contrary, they wrote the First Amendment with the past history of religious tyranny wholely in mind.
Ridgecrest used to be filled with right-minded, polite and decent people. -- I don't live in Ridgecrest, but I'm certain there are mostly good people of varying degrees of faith in one belief or another and probably a few who choose not to subscribe to any one belief. Ms. Miller insults the entire community with this thoughtless and petulant statement.
I can't believe the vicious slander of some people who have the nerve to portray or suggest Jesus behaved as a Liberal. -- An obvious admission by Ms. Miller of her own ignorance of Jesus Christ's history and philosophy.
Webster's dictionary defines a Liberal as one who is open minded, not strict in the observance of orthodox, traditional or established forms or ways. Jesus was a pluralist Liberal who taught that one need not conform to strict and orthodox views of God, religion, and life. He rejected greed, violence, the glorification of power, the amassing of wealth without social balance, and the personal judging of others, their lifestyles and beliefs.
Over and over again, the bible says that Jesus taught man to believe in and live a spiritual and ethical life based in our essential, inherent goodness. What Jesus promoted was succinct set of spiritual principals and a way of life based upon the of love, compassion, tolerance, and a strong belief in the importance in giving and of generosity to those in need.
When one looks at today's modern conservative movement, the terms love, compassion, tolerance, giving and generosity to those in need are conspicuously absent from their language, policies and actions.
Jesus makes his position very clear. The wisdom of an "eye for an eye" would never occur to a Liberal. -- Some more biblical ignorance on the part of poor Ms. Miller. In Ms. Miller's world the cycle of perpetual violence, hate and killing is just fine as long as it fits her small-minded interpretation of a single line of holy scripture.
Liberals are always talking about peace at any price, when Jesus said: Do not think I have come to bring peace, but a sword. -- Gosh, I'm beginning to think poor old Ms. Miller has gone off her medication here. Now she has Jesus as a sword-wielding hater of peace. What a disturbed individual.
Liberals hate people who have managed to raise their station in life, and instead insist on giving money away to the irresponsible: Store yourselves treasures for Heaven for where your treasure is, there your heart is also. -- Ahh, we seem to have gotten to the crux of Ms. Miller's bilious hatred for liberals -- she can't stand the fact that they are willing to give of themselves to help those less fortunate in society. Completely contradictory belief to her savior Jesus, a man who walked amongst lepers as comfortably as he did amongst kings and a man who believed salvation did not have anything to do with garnering personal wealth or possessions. Suffice to say bibilical history suggests that Jesus did not believe as Ms. Miller and her faux Christian ilk do.
No one can serve two masters, either your are a good conservative with God or you are not with God. Remember: A bad tree cannot bear good fruit. -- And remember, one rotten apple in the barrel tends to spoil the whole bunch -- such as one lousy conservative Christian with beliefs like those of Ms. Miller tends to spoil all the Christians with decent liberal beliefs.
If being a "good" Christian means being an old, bitter, hateful, intolerant, greedy and generally anti-social human being like Ms. Miller, then I'd prefer the "good" Christians of this country leave America, find their own land someplace where they can live and hate humanity with all the passion and glory they desire. Just stay away from me.
Billie Miller
Ridgecrest
These are the kind of people who put the giggling, war-monger-in-chief back in power this past November. They are also the kind of people who's vision of a future world is one of a smoldering, nuclear-war devastated planet, all so their inhuman, idiotic belief in the Apocalypse and Armageddon can facilitate the biblical prophecy (superstition) of the 2nd coming of Jesus. Basically they want to see America and the rest of the world (with the exception of the Holy Land in Israel) and all it's inhabitants, you, me our husbands, wives, children, family, friends -- all burnt up in a fiery war just to satisfy their ignorant, cowardly and hateful belief system. They must not be allowed to see their sick fantasy come to fruition.
----krazee
It's a picture-perfect example of the fascist, tyrannical and hateful attitude that pervades today's American, right-wing Christian conservative movement.
I'll print it in it's entirety with my own rebuttal to every bilious claim made therein.
The letter writer's words are highlighted in blue and my rebuttal highlighted in red and italicized.
Newspaper shouldn't print Liberal voices
Editor:
Thank Goodness for such literate and intelligent men as Julius Wolfson, Derek Cooper, Ron Scott and May Shaw.
I just can't understand why more good conservatives haven't spoken out against the dangerous opinions of rabble-rousers such as Phyllis Lilly, Linda Robin and that R C Johnson person. Why does The Daily Independent print the degenerate views of poisonous Liberals who hate freedom? -- Does Ms. Miller prefer to live in a nazi-like state where only opinions of her and her kind are allowed in public. Anyone daring to dissent against the state-sponsored policies and laws should be rounded up and shot by firing squad? If that is the intent of Ms. Miller's statement, then Hitler and Mussolini would've been proud to count Ms. Miller as one of their supporters.
As Mr. Scott points out, the glorious Constitution is there to protect the rights of Christians to profess their faith. This country was founded by good Christians and the Constitution guarantees our right to express our religion. -- Ms. Miller does get one thing right here - The U.S. Constitution is indeed a glorious document. However, Ms. Miller is either lying or simply ignorant in stating that The United States of America was founded solely by Christians. That claim simply does not conform to historical evidence. Of course many Americans did practice Christianity, but so also did many believe in deistic philosophy. Indeed, most of our influential Founding Fathers, although they respected the rights of other religionists, held to deism and Freemasonry tenets rather than to Christianity.
Ms. Miller's other claim that the Constitution guarantees her right to express her religion while although partly true, does not give her the right or the government the right to force any religion upon any citizen. An overview of the Constitution to enlighten those of Ms. Miller's line of thinking:
The United States Constitution serves as the law of the land for America and indicates the intent of our Founding Fathers. The Constitution forms a secular document, and nowhere does it appeal to God, Christianity, Jesus, or any supreme being. The U.S. government derives from people (not God), as it clearly states in the preamble: "We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union...." The omission of God in the Constitution did not come out of forgetfulness, but rather out of the Founding Fathers purposeful intentions to keep government separate from religion.
Although the Constitution does not include the phrase "Separation of Church & State," neither does it say "Freedom of religion." However, the Constitution implies both in the 1st Amendment. As to our freedoms, the 1st Amendment provides exclusionary wording:
"Congress shall make NO law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." [bold caps, mine]
Thomas Jefferson made an interpretation of the 1st Amendment to his January 1st, 1802 letter to the Committee of the Danbury Baptist Association calling it a "wall of separation between church and State." Madison had also written that "Strongly guarded. . . is the separation between religion and government in the Constitution of the United States." There existed little controversy about this interpretation from our Founding Fathers.
If religionists cared a whit to try and understand the concept of separation of Church & State, they would realize that the wall of separation actually protects their religion. Our secular government allows the free expression of religion and non religion. Today, religions flourish in America; we have more churches than Seven-Elevens.
Although many secular and atheist groups fight for the wall of separation, this does not mean that they wish to lawfully eliminate religion from society. On the contrary, you will find no secular or atheist group attempting to ban Christianity, or any other religion from American society. Keeping religion separate allows atheists and religionists alike, to practice their belief systems, regardless how ridiculous they may seem, without government intervention.
It just is completely beyond me how we have allowed Liberals to deny us this guaranteed right. -- I challenge Ms. Miller to offer one instance of a liberal denying her or any other Christian their right to practice their religion. Of course what Ms. Miller is referring to is the evil "wall of separation between church and state." Once again, Ms. Miller seems to prefer life in a tyrannical theocratic state as opposed life in a vibrant, open and tolerant Democracy.
Oh, they raise ridiculous arguments like other (false) religions would be "upset" if they were forced to pray alongside the righteous in schools or council meetings. -- Far from being ridiculous, those arguments are the only thing preventing the likes of Ms. Miller and her crowd from destroying Democracy and instituting their own brand of tyrannical, state-sponsored religion which by it's own nature would be required to repress and persecute any and all who fail to pledge loyalty to the Christian belief system. Wouldn't be very long before Ms. Miller and her good Christian friends would be burning fellow Americans at the stake for their "blasphemous" beliefs or non-beliefs.
Surely those others would appreciate the opportunity to be saved. -- I choose the right not to be saved by your superstitious deity Ms. Miller. Do you deny me my Constitutionally protected rights to be free from religion??
As God's chosen people, we Christians have the right to express our religion and praise tolerant, patient and merciful God, -- God's chosen people?? According to who or what?? Your bible? The Muslims claim they are God's chosen people too -- says so in their bible The Koran. The Jews claim they are God's chosen people as well. Says so in their bible The Torah. Frankly, this is the mischief that has caused so much conflict and suffering in the world. Religious fanatics like Ms. Miller claiming the throne of the one and only true religion. It's my belief they are all wrong. John Lennon had it right in his song "Imagine" -- imagine no religion . . . . one can only hope.
and I don't want to read any more letters from Liberals suggesting non-believers should be allowed to express their superstitions just because we Christians can express ours. -- Ha Ha. The pot calling the kettle black. Ms. Miller seems to be saying her superstition is better than anyone elses superstition. Just think of how silly that sounds.
The Founding Fathers were God-fearing men and never intended the first Amendment to promote other superstitious beliefs. -- More disinformation about the founding fathers. Nor did the Founding Fathers intend the First Amendment to solely support the Christian religion as Ms. Miller insinuates. On the contrary, they wrote the First Amendment with the past history of religious tyranny wholely in mind.
Ridgecrest used to be filled with right-minded, polite and decent people. -- I don't live in Ridgecrest, but I'm certain there are mostly good people of varying degrees of faith in one belief or another and probably a few who choose not to subscribe to any one belief. Ms. Miller insults the entire community with this thoughtless and petulant statement.
I can't believe the vicious slander of some people who have the nerve to portray or suggest Jesus behaved as a Liberal. -- An obvious admission by Ms. Miller of her own ignorance of Jesus Christ's history and philosophy.
Webster's dictionary defines a Liberal as one who is open minded, not strict in the observance of orthodox, traditional or established forms or ways. Jesus was a pluralist Liberal who taught that one need not conform to strict and orthodox views of God, religion, and life. He rejected greed, violence, the glorification of power, the amassing of wealth without social balance, and the personal judging of others, their lifestyles and beliefs.
Over and over again, the bible says that Jesus taught man to believe in and live a spiritual and ethical life based in our essential, inherent goodness. What Jesus promoted was succinct set of spiritual principals and a way of life based upon the of love, compassion, tolerance, and a strong belief in the importance in giving and of generosity to those in need.
When one looks at today's modern conservative movement, the terms love, compassion, tolerance, giving and generosity to those in need are conspicuously absent from their language, policies and actions.
Jesus makes his position very clear. The wisdom of an "eye for an eye" would never occur to a Liberal. -- Some more biblical ignorance on the part of poor Ms. Miller. In Ms. Miller's world the cycle of perpetual violence, hate and killing is just fine as long as it fits her small-minded interpretation of a single line of holy scripture.
Liberals are always talking about peace at any price, when Jesus said: Do not think I have come to bring peace, but a sword. -- Gosh, I'm beginning to think poor old Ms. Miller has gone off her medication here. Now she has Jesus as a sword-wielding hater of peace. What a disturbed individual.
Liberals hate people who have managed to raise their station in life, and instead insist on giving money away to the irresponsible: Store yourselves treasures for Heaven for where your treasure is, there your heart is also. -- Ahh, we seem to have gotten to the crux of Ms. Miller's bilious hatred for liberals -- she can't stand the fact that they are willing to give of themselves to help those less fortunate in society. Completely contradictory belief to her savior Jesus, a man who walked amongst lepers as comfortably as he did amongst kings and a man who believed salvation did not have anything to do with garnering personal wealth or possessions. Suffice to say bibilical history suggests that Jesus did not believe as Ms. Miller and her faux Christian ilk do.
No one can serve two masters, either your are a good conservative with God or you are not with God. Remember: A bad tree cannot bear good fruit. -- And remember, one rotten apple in the barrel tends to spoil the whole bunch -- such as one lousy conservative Christian with beliefs like those of Ms. Miller tends to spoil all the Christians with decent liberal beliefs.
If being a "good" Christian means being an old, bitter, hateful, intolerant, greedy and generally anti-social human being like Ms. Miller, then I'd prefer the "good" Christians of this country leave America, find their own land someplace where they can live and hate humanity with all the passion and glory they desire. Just stay away from me.
Billie Miller
Ridgecrest
These are the kind of people who put the giggling, war-monger-in-chief back in power this past November. They are also the kind of people who's vision of a future world is one of a smoldering, nuclear-war devastated planet, all so their inhuman, idiotic belief in the Apocalypse and Armageddon can facilitate the biblical prophecy (superstition) of the 2nd coming of Jesus. Basically they want to see America and the rest of the world (with the exception of the Holy Land in Israel) and all it's inhabitants, you, me our husbands, wives, children, family, friends -- all burnt up in a fiery war just to satisfy their ignorant, cowardly and hateful belief system. They must not be allowed to see their sick fantasy come to fruition.
----krazee
Thursday, January 20, 2005
Dancing while they die . . . indeed . . .
Good article highlighting those good old fashioned, conservative values --- the values of the ugly Americans.
Excerpt:
"It’s hard to believe we have come to this as a country. Blustering around the world, threatening sovereign nations with destruction, bankrupting our own treasury, polluting at will and then irresponsibly foisting the whole mess off on our own kids to deal with as best they may in some future generation.
The world is burning, but our feckless leaders choose to fiddle, dance and feast. . ."
Click here for entire article.
Excerpt:
"It’s hard to believe we have come to this as a country. Blustering around the world, threatening sovereign nations with destruction, bankrupting our own treasury, polluting at will and then irresponsibly foisting the whole mess off on our own kids to deal with as best they may in some future generation.
The world is burning, but our feckless leaders choose to fiddle, dance and feast. . ."
Click here for entire article.
Priceless news headline . . . "Bush Starts New Term, Seeks End to Tyranny! . . . LOL!
George W. Bush embarked on an ambitious second term as president Thursday, telling a world anxious about war and terrorism that the United States would not shrink from new confrontations in pursuit of "the great objective of ending tyranny."
So America's little dictator wants to rid the world of tyranny huh?? He can start by resigning the Presidency, signing a confession of treason against the United States of America and crimes against humanity.
That would be positive proof to me that King George is a man of his word.
Click here.
So America's little dictator wants to rid the world of tyranny huh?? He can start by resigning the Presidency, signing a confession of treason against the United States of America and crimes against humanity.
That would be positive proof to me that King George is a man of his word.
Click here.
Tuesday, January 18, 2005
Mission Accomplished?? Well . . . . . not quite . . . . .
As for U.S. troops leaving, she said in response to forceful questioning from Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel (news, bio, voting record) of Nebraska, "Our role is directly proportional ... to how capable the Iraqis are."
"I am really reluctant to try to put a timetable on that, because I think the goal is to get the mission accomplished and that means that the Iraqis have to be capable of some things before we lessen our own responsibility," she said.
---- Secretary of State nominee Condoleeza Rice answering questions at her Senate Confirmation hearing 01/18/2005.
>
>
>
Very interesting!!
Condoliarzz Rice states under oath that the mission in Iraq is not yet accomplished!! So who is lying?? Her or her Smirking Chimperor boss G.W. Bush??
I seem to remember a certain dissembling boy king dressing up as a fighter pilot, flying on to the deck of the USS Lincoln, then standing in front of a humongous red, white and blue banner which said - "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED", patting himself on the head and reveling in the delusional madness of his self-perceived greatness. Did I dream that PR stunt up?? Please tell me I'm not the only one who saw that obscene charade on national television.
All of that fakery took place about 1000 dead American soldiers ago.
America is being run by a bunch of pathological liars, thugs and soulless criminals. But boy --- good thing we impeached evil old Bill Clinton for lying about that blow job huh?? We sure showed the world what kind of morals we have!!
Sigh!! . . .
Click here.
----krazee
"I am really reluctant to try to put a timetable on that, because I think the goal is to get the mission accomplished and that means that the Iraqis have to be capable of some things before we lessen our own responsibility," she said.
---- Secretary of State nominee Condoleeza Rice answering questions at her Senate Confirmation hearing 01/18/2005.
>
>
>
Very interesting!!
Condoliarzz Rice states under oath that the mission in Iraq is not yet accomplished!! So who is lying?? Her or her Smirking Chimperor boss G.W. Bush??
I seem to remember a certain dissembling boy king dressing up as a fighter pilot, flying on to the deck of the USS Lincoln, then standing in front of a humongous red, white and blue banner which said - "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED", patting himself on the head and reveling in the delusional madness of his self-perceived greatness. Did I dream that PR stunt up?? Please tell me I'm not the only one who saw that obscene charade on national television.
All of that fakery took place about 1000 dead American soldiers ago.
America is being run by a bunch of pathological liars, thugs and soulless criminals. But boy --- good thing we impeached evil old Bill Clinton for lying about that blow job huh?? We sure showed the world what kind of morals we have!!
Sigh!! . . .
Click here.
----krazee
Monday, January 17, 2005
More on Dumbya's fake Social Security crisis . . .
Paul Krugman puts in layman's terms, easy enough even for you red-state ditto-monkeys to understand, how Bush and the conservatives have lied about their being a crisis in Social Security.
Bush's real goal is to dismantle the most successful social safety-net program in the history of advanced nations, and turn over handling of the funds to his greed-mongering, thieving, Enronesque buddies on Wall Street.
Click here.
Bush's real goal is to dismantle the most successful social safety-net program in the history of advanced nations, and turn over handling of the funds to his greed-mongering, thieving, Enronesque buddies on Wall Street.
Click here.
More Bush lying on Social Security . . .
Some more fact-checking of Bush's lies about Social Security.
Why does he have to lie??
When will America call him on his lies??
When will the SCLM (So Called Liberal Media) grow a spine and ask him why he lies??
Isn't the standard for impeaching a sitting President the act of lying to the American people? Oh -- sorry -- that's right -- Bush isn't under oath when he lies -- not yet at least.
Click here.
Why does he have to lie??
When will America call him on his lies??
When will the SCLM (So Called Liberal Media) grow a spine and ask him why he lies??
Isn't the standard for impeaching a sitting President the act of lying to the American people? Oh -- sorry -- that's right -- Bush isn't under oath when he lies -- not yet at least.
Click here.
Lying to America -- they impeached the last President for it . . .
This article is long, but if you are at all interested in getting the truth on the phony Social Security "crisis", it's well worth your time.
An absolutely devastating counterpoint to the bald-faced lies emanating from conservative squawking heads in the media and most importantly from America's serial lying leaders in Washington --- lead by the shameless Liar-In-Chief --- George W. Bush.
You know the routine --- just click here.
An absolutely devastating counterpoint to the bald-faced lies emanating from conservative squawking heads in the media and most importantly from America's serial lying leaders in Washington --- lead by the shameless Liar-In-Chief --- George W. Bush.
You know the routine --- just click here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
