Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: SiouxPal who wrote (74615)	7/29/2006 9:00:23 PM
From: CalculatedRisk	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 361700

A Senate Race in Connecticut nytimes.com Published: July 30, 2006 Earlier this year, Senator Joseph Lieberman’s seat seemed so secure that — legend has it — some people at the Republican nominating convention in Connecticut started making bleating noises when the party picked a presumed sacrificial lamb to run against the three-term senator, who has been a fixture in Connecticut politics for more than 35 years. But Mr. Lieberman is now in a tough Democratic primary against a little-known challenger, Ned Lamont. The race has taken on a national character. Mr. Lieberman’s friends see it as an attempt by hysterical antiwar bloggers to oust a giant of the Senate for the crime of bipartisanship. Lamont backers — most of whom seem more passionate about being Lieberman opponents — say that as one of the staunchest supporters of the Iraq war, Mr. Lieberman has betrayed his party by cozying up to President Bush. This primary would never have happened absent Iraq. It’s true that Mr. Lieberman has fallen in love with his image as the nation’s moral compass. But if pomposity were a disqualification, the Senate would never be able to call a quorum. He has voted with his party in opposing the destructive Bush tax cuts, and despite some unappealing rhetoric in the Terri Schiavo case, he has strongly supported a woman’s right to choose. He has been one of the Senate’s most creative thinkers about the environment and energy conservation. • But this race is not about résumés. The United States is at a critical point in its history, and Mr. Lieberman has chosen a controversial role to play. The voters in Connecticut will have to judge whether it is the right one. As Mr. Lieberman sees it, this is a fight for the soul of the Democratic Party — his moderate fair-mindedness against a partisan radicalism that alienates most Americans. “What kind of Democratic Party are we going to have?” he asked in an interview with New York magazine. “You’ve got to agree 100 percent, or you’re not a good Democrat?” That’s far from the issue. Mr. Lieberman is not just a senator who works well with members of the other party. And there is a reason that while other Democrats supported the war, he has become the only target. In his effort to appear above the partisan fray, he has become one of the Bush administration’s most useful allies as the president tries to turn the war on terror into an excuse for radical changes in how this country operates. Citing national security, Mr. Bush continually tries to undermine restraints on the executive branch: the system of checks and balances, international accords on the treatment of prisoners, the nation’s longtime principles of justice. His administration has depicted any questions or criticism of his policies as giving aid and comfort to the terrorists. And Mr. Lieberman has helped that effort. He once denounced Democrats who were “more focused on how President Bush took America into the war in Iraq” than on supporting the war’s progress. At this moment, with a Republican president intent on drastically expanding his powers with the support of the Republican House and Senate, it is critical that the minority party serve as a responsible, but vigorous, watchdog. That does not require shrillness or absolutism. But this is no time for a man with Mr. Lieberman’s ability to command Republicans’ attention to become their enabler, and embrace a role as the president’s defender. • On the Armed Services Committee, Mr. Lieberman has left it to Republicans like Lindsey Graham of South Carolina to investigate the administration’s actions. In 2004, Mr. Lieberman praised Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld for expressing regret about Abu Ghraib, then added: “I cannot help but say, however, that those who were responsible for killing 3,000 Americans on September 11th, 2001, never apologized.” To suggest even rhetorically that the American military could be held to the same standard of behavior as terrorists is outrageous, and a good example of how avidly the senator has adopted the Bush spin and helped the administration avoid accounting for Abu Ghraib. Mr. Lieberman prides himself on being a legal thinker and a champion of civil liberties. But he appointed himself defender of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and the administration’s policy of holding hundreds of foreign citizens in prison without any due process. He seconded Mr. Gonzales’s sneering reference to the “quaint” provisions of the Geneva Conventions. He has shown no interest in prodding his Republican friends into investigating how the administration misled the nation about Iraq’s weapons. There is no use having a senator famous for getting along with Republicans if he never challenges them on issues of profound importance. If Mr. Lieberman had once stood up and taken the lead in saying that there were some places a president had no right to take his country even during a time of war, neither he nor this page would be where we are today. But by suggesting that there is no principled space for that kind of opposition, he has forfeited his role as a conscience of his party, and has forfeited our support. Mr. Lamont, a wealthy businessman from Greenwich, seems smart and moderate, and he showed spine in challenging the senator while other Democrats groused privately. He does not have his opponent’s grasp of policy yet. But this primary is not about Mr. Lieberman’s legislative record. Instead it has become a referendum on his warped version of bipartisanship, in which the never-ending war on terror becomes an excuse for silence and inaction. We endorse Ned Lamont in the Democratic primary for Senate in Connecticut.

To: SiouxPal who wrote (74615)	7/30/2006 11:01:03 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 361700

Cindy Sheehan: Camp Casey III: The Struggle Continues Submitted by BuzzFlash on Sat, 07/29/2006 - 6:23am. Guest Contribution A BUZZFLASH GUEST CONTRIBUTION by Cindy Sheehan Camp Casey is moving! The Camp Casey Peace Movement, and the peace movement in general, will be eternally grateful to the Mattlage Family for allowing us to use their land near George's Crawford, Tx ranch. They were extremely generous and courageous in allowing us to use their property when we were bursting at the seams at Camp Casey I this past August and we were also being threatened by shot gun blasts and drunken drivers plowing through our memorial. We also are grateful for being allowed to use the site for our other two subsequent Camp Caseys at Thanksgiving and at Easter especially since the Mc Clennan County Supervisors passed the ordinances suppressing our 1st Amendment rights to camp at Camp Casey I. We owe the Mattlage Family a debt of gratitude that I don't know if we will ever be able to repay! I know that their comfort, as well as ours, will be when our troops come home from the illegal and immoral occupation of Iraq. However, we have now grown out of Camp Casey II and we needed to move on to bigger property. During Camp Casey Easter, we housed a few hundred people that the site could barely contain. With our commitment to being in Crawford every time that George goes on vacation (even though he seems to be skipping out on us a lot lately) we decided to buy property in Crawford to use until George's resignation or impeachment -- which we all hope is soon for the sake of the world. Our new property is in town and literally right around the corner from the Peace House. It is a beautiful, wooded 5 acres of land that will be ideal for our expanding peace population and for hosting our growing family. We are looking forward to being good neighbors in Crawford whenever we are there and we are looking forward to having good neighbors, also. I think the people of Crawford are beginning to understand that we come in peace and love and that we just have an issue with just one resident: George Bush. Even though we don't agree politically with many of our neighbors we hope to enjoy a cordial relationship with everyone. I never understood how George Bush could pick such a place as Crawford to have his home. When I first arrived and set up camp there last August 6 th, I had even bigger misgivings...but now after spending an entire year there in every season, I totally understand. I even get upset now when people put Crawford down in any way -- but these are people who have never been there. Crawford is a beautiful place and Camp Casey has made it even lovelier. I feel so at home there. When I am able to return, I feel a renewal and resurgence of energy and hope. The sunrises and sunsets and star-lit nights are breathtaking and there is nothing like a cool (if rare) Crawford evening breeze to dry off the sweat and sweeten the soul. Dwight David Eisenhower said that when the people of the world finally want peace the governments better get out of their way. Well we want peace. BushCo, so get out of our way. Come to Camp Casey and show George and the other governments of the world that you want peace and when you say you want peace, you mean it! It is so imperative today when violence is being born out of violence and the world is crumbling around us. With almost 2600 of our brave soldiers tragically dead for George's lies and greed and countless numbers of Iraqis dead because they had the audacity to live on top of Exxon's oil, how can we not gather together in peace and commitment to ending this travesty in Iraq and call for those in the Bush Regime who are truly responsible, to be punished. We have been advertising that Camp Casey was going to begin on the 16th of August, so George is now going to his ranch in Crawford until the 14th. Since he didn't visit his ranch at Easter for the first time since he has been President, we are beginning to believe that he is frightened of us. It can't be because we are a physical threat to him: We have proven to be peaceful and non-violent -- so it must be that he is afraid of the truth and too cowardly to, again, face grieving families and thousands of others who adamantly oppose his murderous policies. Consequently, we will begin Camp Casey on August 12th so we can at least share part of the summer with Georgie. We will still run Camp Casey until Sept. 2nd. There is so much to do. Here's to Crawford. Here's to Camp Casey -- but most of all, here's to peace and accountability. Donate to the operation of Camp Casey this summer. Camp Casey plans on running this year on its new site from August 13 th to September 2nd. For more info such as what to bring, etc, please go to the Gold Star Families for Peace website. A BUZZFLASH GUEST CONTRIBUTION buzzflash.com