I am really disgusted with our party right now. As disgusted with them as I have always been with the Repukes. So I am proposing that we initiate the "Start Over Campaign". My premise is as follows:
I don't really care if you vote Dem, Repub or Independent, I just want you to vote for someone who is not an incumbent and is willing to sign on the the following immediately:

TERM LIMITS-(2) 6 years terms max.

VERIFIED PAPER BALLOTS

A STANDARD CONGRESSIONAL CALENDAR THAT REQUIRES YOU TO DO THE PEOPLE'S BUSINESS IN WASHINGTON AT LEAST 200 DAYS OF THE YEAR.

LAWS THAT PROHIBIT SIGNING STATEMENTS BY THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH THAT DIRECTLY CONTRADICT A LEGISLATIVE ACT

A CONTRACT WITH THE PEOPLE THAT MANDATES FULL CONGRESSIONAL REVIEW OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH MANDATES REGARDLESS OF POLITICAL PARTY

FULL INCLUSION OF THE MINORITY PARTY TO VOICE THEIR OPINION INCLUDING THE OFFERING OF LEGISLATION TO BE VOTED ON BY THE WHOLE

ENFORCEMENT OF PRIVACY LAWS THAT CURRENTLY EXIST

FULL DISCLOSURE OF LOBBYIST ACTIVITY WITH STRICT LAWS REGARDING GIFTS.

If our government adopted even some of these, then we would have a more fair playing field, regardless of party. So I say let's start a do-over and get rid of all of them. The people's house needs a good cleaning.

I have to say, reading the threads in this forum the last 24 hours, I am seriously wondering just how liberal DU really is. Are we open to new ideas? Are we tolerant of change? Do we just like to be the "anti" party?

Just as a refresher for myself, I looked up the definition of the word Liberal:

lib·er·al (lbr-l, lbrl)
adj.
1.
a. Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
c. Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.
d. Liberal Of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on or associated with principles of social and political liberalism, especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States.
2.
a. Tending to give freely; generous: a liberal benefactor.
b. Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of potatoes.
3. Not strict or literal; loose or approximate: a liberal translation.
4. Of, relating to, or based on the traditional arts and sciences of a college or university curriculum: a liberal education.
5.
a. Archaic Permissible or appropriate for a person of free birth; befitting a lady or gentleman.
b. Obsolete Morally unrestrained; licentious.
n.
1. A person with liberal ideas or opinions.
2. Liberal A member of a Liberal political party.

Every time the admins try to change something on this board, the bitching and moaning is intense. I have to wonder then, if people are going to get so fussed up about the small stuff, how sincere are they about the big stuff? What is going to happen if and when we do take control of the government? Will this community die because we no longer have something to complain about?

We love to criticize the right for what we perceive as their intolerance to certain lifestyles and beliefs, yet I am seeing the same types of attitudes toward any changes made on DU. I also see it when someone professes certain beliefs that may mirror the Right.

I think we need to be an accepting party. That means accepting new ideas and allowing people to hold fast to their own beliefs even if they are pro-life, anti-gay marriage of pro-gun. I believe our mission to be not to convince others that their way is wrong, but rather that their way is their choice and it is ok, but our way is ok too. Disarm the opposition and do not give them reason to fear us.

But first, I think we need to clean our own house. Before being so quick to criticize something that is new, perhaps a reminder that we are a tolerant people and we make our own choices would be in order.

And as far as the new ad experiment goes, if you don't like them, don't pay attention to them.

So I live in Carolina Beach and housing is abundant and expensive as I have posted in most housing threads. Well, for the last year, all these "luxury condos" 2500plus sq. feet with cherry floors, granite counters, 4 or 5 bedrooms and as many baths and fireplaces have been listed in the high 500's and up.

Up the street from me, (five blocks from the beach) there were 3 duplexes (6 units) that were built in the last year and initially listed at about 725K a piece. Well, needless to say they did not sell, so they decided to have an auction.

Hubby and I walked up today to see what would happen. The units were gorgeous. 7 bedrooms, 4.5 baths and a rooftop deck with a panoramic view of the ocean. The crowd was filled with realtors from all the competing agencies. They opened the bid at 500K and nothing!!!! Not one bid.

To make a long story short they ended up selling 4 units (two of them with elevators). One sold for 375K; two for 380K ; and the fourth for 365K (elevator unit). The auction was abruptly shut down and the realtors were speechless. You could have heard a pin drop. The auctioneers were flustered and kept stopping the auction to try and pump the price up. It was the strangest thing I have ever seen. There was a 10 percent buyer's premium added to the price, so the top price was 418K.

Unbelievable and I will be watching to see what happens next. We have several hundred of these brand new properties on the island for sale. Should be interesting.

5,984,685 miles˛ size of America
Population: 295,734,134

652,000 SQ KM size of Afghanistan
Population: 29,928,987

http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2006/April/06_...

More Than 1,100 Sex Offender Arrests By U.S. Marshals’
“OPERATION FALCON II”

Among 9,037 Fugitives Apprehended in Nationwide Operation

FALCON II was conducted from April 17–23, 2006.

FALCON II (Federal and Local Cops Organized Nationally) was conducted in 27 states mostly west of the Mississippi River, and the territories of Guam and Northern Mariana Islands

“During each day of FALCON II we put more than 2,100 law enforcement officers on the street to arrest individuals like Wisham,” said USMS Director Clark. “The only way to achieve huge arrest statistics like these is with the full and enthusiastic cooperation of agencies at every level of government. I’m deeply grateful for their efforts.”

For this seven-day nationwide operation, the Marshals coordinated officers from 120 state agencies, 330 county agencies, 312 police departments, six foreign law enforcement agencies, and 24 other federal agencies.

U.S. troop presence in Afghanistan at 17,900, and expected to hold steady
http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/200...

So…..Why can’t we find Bin Laden and why do we need to tap every American’s phone?

Recently we have begun a national conversation on a fundamental cornerstone of our democracy-Freedom of Speech. Many people are justifiably concerned.

This "attack on talking" as I like to frame it, is not an overt assault, rather an insidious virus slowly creeping into society. The majority of people continue to blithely go about the daily business of their lives and are forgetting to cover their mouth and nose when they sneeze. They are not washing their hands as often as they should. Next thing you know "WHAMO" they are down for the count, completely incapacitated and vulnerable as the virus attacks the very fibers of their being. Antibiotics won't fix it; the war is waged between the foreign body and the person's immune system. Those that take care of their bodies and their immune systems are much more likely to have an easier time destroying the offending virus. Those that do not can suffer irreparable harm, possibly death.

Such is the way with our right to speak our mind and tell a truth to whomever we choose. Our government wants to incapacitate our press. Anyone who speaks a truth that illuminates a shady practice may be tried for treason and go to jail. Watch what you say on the phone or on the internet, you may be labeled as a terrorist which allows Big Brother even more access to your personal life.

There are some who try to dismiss these things by saying, "It is the price you pay in the internet age". They dismiss the intrusion into our daily lives by saying, "It is the price you pay to be secure". They can't see the virus, so they don't take their Vitamin C.

What people don't get is that this virus can evolve and grow stronger. One of our national pastimes in this country is our love of complaining. We are experts at it. We can even complain while saying, "I'm not one to complain, but..." Our ancestors taught us not to complain while they complained to us about their hardships. We watch American Idol, we complain about the results, yet we tune in each week to see what we can complain about next.

Personally, I believe that this is the basic reason we are in the situation we are today. Back in the days of my beloved President Clinton, life was pretty good. Our government was in the black, we were not in a full blown war. Our phone conversations were private, and our jobs paid a decent wage. Not much to complain about, which is why I think people jumped on the impeach Bill bandwagon. A juicy scandal gave us something to exercise our complaining skills like nothing else.

Today, we have so MUCH to complain about in our personal lives that people don't have the energy or zeal to really focus on what is going on in our government. Without attention, the virus is getting stronger. First the press will be contained, then our "communication patterns" will be analyzed. Someday, our "right to complain" may cause you to be labeled "an enemy of the state". McCarthy-need I say more?

So the next time you hear someone complaining about constantly being reminded to take their vitamins and wash their hands, maybe you should tell them to enjoy their complaint because they might not get to do it in the future.

I kept trying to pin down why Valerie Plame had to go-and the Brewster Jennings thing today finally solidified it for me.
Having said that here is my theory:

1. Cheney wanted Plame out so he gave Libby his marching orders. Maybe Libby had the ethics to hesitate, whereby Cheney backed it up with "Bush said".

2. I do not think he bothered to keep Georgie in the loop.

3. Cheney did not know whether or not the Pres would back him on this so he tested the waters on Hume by announcing he has the right to declassify documents.

4. After that bold statement, it was probably brought to his attention, that there had to be a few stipulations present before he can boldly declassify intelligence.

5. The shit hit the fan with the Plame story and they had to revert to George did it so the sheeples would swallow the kool-aid.

6. The reason I say this is because in this case, I really do not think Bush was lying when he was so outraged about the leak. I just don't think he was informed. Now why would George take one for the team? A 36 percent approval rating, that's why. He is a heartbeat away from impeachment. He has ticked off his own base not to mention the 51 percent of us who vehemently hate the guy. The only thing that keeps him in office, is the reality that Cheney would be worse. If Cheney goes, George would be out on his ass so fast, the ranch dust would look like a mushroom cloud over Pennsylvania Ave.

Anyway, that's what I think!

There have been multiple threads today about Libby's disclosure to the grand jury. I have researched this before and unfortunately lost it all when my husband fried my laptop, so I got some more info today.

An interesting article "Was it illegal for President Bush to leak classified secrets to Bob Woodward" touches on the subject:

<snip>
President Nixon famously stated during the Watergate era that when a president does something that means it's not illegal. The courts disagreed and Nixon was forced to resign. But was Alterman correct in his assessment of President Bush's culpability? HNN asked Steven Aftergood, editor of Secrecy News, a newsletter published by the Federation of American Scientists, what he thinks. He told us that Alterman's conclusion that Bush had violated the law "can't be taken at face value," adding, "though I suppose it is within an opinion columnist's editorial license." He went on:

There are several specific categories of classified information that are protected by statute -- communications intelligence, identities of covert agents, nuclear weapons design information, and some others. Those statutes are binding on the executive branch as well as on everyone else.

More at this link:
http://hnn.us/articles/1753.html

And also: From Executive Order 13292
Sec. 6.2. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall supersede any requirement made by or under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, or the National Security Act of 1947, as amended. "Restricted Data" and "Formerly Restricted Data" shall be handled, protected, classified, downgraded, and declassified in conformity with the provisions of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and regulations issued under that Act.

(b) The Attorney General, upon request by the head of an agency or the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office, shall render an interpretation of this order with respect to any question arising in the course of its administration.

(c) Nothing in this order limits the protection afforded any information by other provisions of law, including the Constitution, Freedom of Information Act exemptions, the Privacy Act of 1974, and the National Security Act of 1947, as amended. This order is not intended to and does not create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law by a party against the United States, its departments, agencies, officers, employees, or agents. The foregoing is in addition to the specific provisos set forth in sections 3.1(b) and 5.3(e) of this order."

(d) Executive Order 12356 of April 6, 1982, was revoked as of October 14, 1995.

link: http://www.fas.org/sgp/bush/eoamend.html

Then an excerpt from the National Security Act of 1947 as ammended:

TITLE VI - PROTECTION OF CERTAIN NATIONAL SECURITY INFORMATION

PROTECTION OF IDENTITIES OF CERTAIN UNITED STATES UNDERCOVER
INTELLIGENCE OFFICERS, AGENTS, INFORMANTS, AND SOURCES

SEC. 601. <50 U.S.C. 421> (a) Whoever, having or having had authorized access to classified information that identifies a covert agent, intentionally discloses any information identifying such covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent's intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

(b) Whoever, as a result of having authorized access to classified information, learns the identity of a covert agent and intentionally discloses any information identifying such covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent's intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

(c) Whoever, in the course of a pattern of activities intended to identify and expose covert agents and with reason to believe that such activities would impair or impede the foreign intelligence activities of the United States, discloses any information that identifies an individual as a covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such individual and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such individual's classified intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than three years or both.

(d) A term of imprisonment imposed under this section shall be consecutive to any other sentence of imprisonment.

link: http://www.iwar.org.uk/sigint/resources/na...

Ok now I need to figure out how to start a journal so I can save this gem!