Millennials are the largest generation in American history. Born between 1978 and 2000, WE are 95 million strong, compared to the 78 million Baby Boomers. WE are politically, socially, and philosophically independent, and are spearheading a period of sweeping change in America and around the world. The new book, Generation We, explains the emerging power of our Millennial Generation, and shows how WE (and older people who think the way WE do) are poised to change our nation and our world for the better.
California State Senator Mark Ridley-Thomas "welcomes" Sarah Palin outside the Home Depot Center in Carson, California. Learn more about Ridley-Thomas who is running for the extremely important L.A. County Supervisor position against ex-police chief Bernard Parks.
Not only do I endorse the progressive, community oriented, Ridley-Thomas over the virtual Republican, business first, Parks, but I'm now working to get Ridley-Thomas elected. For Angelenos this election is almost as important as the presidential election so please consider volunteering for the campaign if you are local.
By Jason Leopold and Alan Breslauer, Cross-posted at The Public Record
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's appearance Monday at a West Los Angeles college to discuss her recently published book was marred by dozens of protestors and several angry outbursts by audience members who demanded Pelosi immediately authorize a House committee to hold impeachment hearings against President George W. Bush.
The Speaker made it clear she would not support any effort to hold impeachment hearings against President Bush saying that the president "will be gone in a hundred days."
Halfway through her discussion at The American University of Judaism, where more than 300 people paid $30 each to hear Pelosi speak about her upbringing and her family's impact on her political career as detailed in her book Know Your Power: A Message to America’s Daughters, the topic shifted to Congress's historically low approval rating and how it reflected on Pelosi’s tenure as Speaker.
American University of Judaism's Rabbi Robert Wexler, who led the 75 minute interview, asked Pelosi to analyze a recent Rasmussen poll that found nine percent of individuals polled believed Congress was doing a good job, far lower than President Bush's overall approval rating.
Pelosi responded by defending her performance and the performance of her Democratic colleagues in Congress.
"I preside over the greatest collection of integrity and idealism," Pelosi said.
Prior to her appearance in West Los Angeles Monday evening, CNN’s Larry King interviewed Pelosi. She told King she was willing to drop her staunch opposition to offshore drilling and would likely allow the House to vote on the issue.
She said, in her opinion, the reason behind Congress’s low approval rating was largely due to the fact that Democrats could not muster up the votes to end the Iraq war, which the Democratic Speaker from San Francisco said she could not do much about because of the Democrats’ razor-thin majority in both Houses.
Wexler, however, continued to press Pelosi to elaborate on her response given that the Rasmussen poll suggested that a wide-range of issues beyond the Iraq war was responsible for Congress’s single-digit approval.
Pelosi, visibly flustered, said she was well aware that “much more work needs to be done.”
In November 2006, Pelosi explained the significance behind the record voter turnout that helped shift the balance of power in Washington for the first time in 12 years.
“People voted for change and they voted for Democrats who will take our country in a new direction,” Pelosi said during a victory speech in San Francisco on Nov. 8, 2006.
But Pelosi, who became House Speaker, never managed to exact the change she promised. She explained that she and her colleagues tried vigorously to pass legislation to end the war in Iraq.
"The public doesn’t want to know about process and 60 votes, they want outcomes, they want results," Pelosi said, explaining why Democrats could not end the war as promised prior to the midterm 2006 elections.
But Pelosi’s comments appeared disingenuous to many, since she was largely responsible for crafting an appropriations bill in backroom discussions with House Democratic leaders, passed in June, and then worked secretly with the White House budget director offering up concessions on Iraq war benchmarks if Bush would agree to the domestic spending attached to the final bill with little debate preceding a vote on the measure.
In fact, since the electoral victories in November 2006, the Democratic-controlled Congress has approved more than $300 billion in emergency spending bills for Iraq and Afghanistan without the benchmarks or withdrawal timetables that Pelosi and other leaders said they would demand.
When Pelosi launched into the reasons an administration led by presumptive Republican nominee Sen. John McCain would be dangerous for the country, identifying the candidate's support for an endless war in Iraq and his intention to uphold many of the questionable constitutional interpretations relating to torture and civil liberties during the Bush administration, Pelosi said the only way to "dig our way out" is by electing Sen. Barack Obama, the presumptive Democratic nominee.
“Whether it’s the deficit or the challenges to the constitution we have to dig our way out,” Pelosi said, adding “this election is like death for life on this planet as we know it today."
Her response led Peter Thottam, founder of the LA Impeachment Center, to demand Pelosi do her job and pursue impeachment hearings against President Bush for launching a war on false pretenses.
"Who gave you the right to take the constitution and shove it down the toilet? Who gave you the right to take impeachment off the table? Nobody told them to do this,” Thottam shouted at Pelosi moments before Secret Service agents removed him from the packed auditorium. “One million Iraqis are dead. Five thousand Americans are dead. You have destroyed the First, Second, Fourth, Fifth and Eighth Amendments."
Pelosi seemed stunned by the outburst, but the way she addressed Thottam’s charges further fanned the flames and led to additional verbal protests over her decision not to hold the administration accountable for what many individuals in the audience believe are High Crimes and Misdemeanors by President Bush.
When a member of the activist group Code Pink stood up and insisted Pelosi brush up on her reading regarding evidence of the Bush administration's long list of alleged constitutional violations, Pelosi reacted angrily.
"I take an oath of office to uphold the constitution of the United States and don't tell me that I don't do that,” Pelosi said, using hand gestures to emphasize her disdain over the impeachment demands. "Why don't you go picket the Republicans in Congress that will not allow us to have a vote on the war. This is not very effective. Not very effective."
"As Speaker of the house, the third highest office, first is the president, then vice president, and then Speaker, I take my responsibilities deadly seriously,” Pelosi said. “I try to promote bipartisanship but that's not what the other side wants."
Before Election 2006, Pelosi declared impeachment “off the table,” in part, to avoid alarming centrist voters. Now, with Democrats hoping to gain additional seats in Election 2008, a similar political calculation applies, fearing a backlash against a last-minute drive to impeach Bush and Cheney. Bush knows that Pelosi long ago rejected impeachment proceedings, the one instrument included in the Constitution for Congress to wield against a President who has abused his powers.
At the conclusion of Monday evening’s presentation, Pelosi signed books but refused to answer questions about her policy decisions. The Public Record asked Pelosi whether she would authorize the full House to vote on contempt charges against former White House political adviser Karl Rove, who has refused to comply with a congressional subpoena to testify about his role in the alleged political prosecution of former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman, a Democrat.
Immediately following his query to Pelosi, Alan Breslauer was grabbed by Secret Service and dragged away from the table where Pelosi was signing copies of her book. The Speaker did respond to Breslauer's question, however, saying a vote on contempt charges against Rove is "up to [House Judiciary Committee Chairman] Conyers."
But the hits stopped coming because the link to the Snow video was suddenly pulled and I want to know why. I'm no expert about Wikipedia but would be much obliged if someone who understands the machinations of the site could investigate the matter. It seems to me that the unique video is newsworthy and helpful to understanding Snow. Incidentally, I reposted the link at 12:12 p.m. but that one was pulled as well.
The video which was clearly found offensive by some Wikipedia member follows...
Susan Atkins spent the last 37 years in a California state prison for the murders of the actress Sharon Tate and musician Gary Hinman. Tate, who was 8 1/2 months pregnant with director Roman Polanski's son, unsuccessfully begged Atkins for mercy stating, according to prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi, "please let me live so I can have my baby."
Atkins, however, showed no compassion and replied to Tate, "look bitch I do not have any mercy on you, you are going to die," before stabbing her to death.
Now Atkins, who suffers from brain cancer, has had her leg amputated and has been given six months to live, is requesting that the state parole board grant her a "compassionate release". Surprisingly Bugliosi, who sought the death penalty for the entire Manson Family and opposes parole for of all of its members, supports Atkins' petition.
"I'm not sure that you can say that just because she was this monster that 37 years later under these new conditions that it necessarily follows that we cannot give her whatever little mercy it is," Bugliosi said. "I think it's a non-sequiter to say that," he continued before adding, "and if she were not in the condition she's in obviously I would be against her ever being released on parole."
The state parole board will also likely consider the testimony of the surviving relatives of Atkins' victims, many of whom oppose any mercy, before issuing it's ruling in the coming months.
FluxRostrum (Gianni Lazuli) is the real deal when it comes to independent journalism. I was first turned on to him when I viewed many of his incredible Katrina/New Orleans videos.
Now Flux has built his own media bus that runs on waste vegetable oil and is equipped with satellite internet access. He is touring the country to get to all the big political events including the Democratic and Republican conventions. He will also be there if there is another Katrina style catastrophe.
In any case, he is now looking for two things: (1) journalists who want to come aboard for a while, and (2) some dollars to offset his internet costs. Should you want to support this type of independent journalism go here.
Last Thursday Keith Olbermann began an excellent conversation with George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley about Karl Rove being subpoenaed by the House Judiciary Committee by stating:
“Joe Wilson's dream of watching Karl Rove frog marched out of the White House in handcuffs is long since gone. But a new dream has been born tonight. What about a Turdblossom perp walk out of the front door of Fix news.”
Later that night I asked Ambassador Joe Wilson to comment on Olbermann's statement and the Karl Rove subpoena. While Ambassador Wilson was unsure whether or not Congress will be able to get to Rove, he was certainly supportive of the effort:
“Whether they will actually be able to get to Karl I don't know. But it's great to keep the pressure on him. It forces him back on defense. It's amazing to me the extent to which these guys have operated with absolute impunity, absolute disregard for American law and American jurisprudence.”
Ambassador Wilson also gave a superb talk Thursday night covering all aspects of his ordeal with the Bush administration:
The L.A. Times did the right thing and corrected its grossly misleading headline in reference to Karl Rove's refusal to deny involvement in the Don Siegelman prosecution. However, Mark Impomeni at AOL News is refusing to correct his similarly misleading headline, "Rove Denies Tampering With Investigation", and even sites the L.A. Times in his defense when I confronted him in comments below the article.
This blog encourages others to further prod Mr. Impomeni to do the right thing, like the L.A. Times, and correct his currently propagandistic headline.
UPDATE: I have unsuccessfully lobbied (see comments section) Mark Impomeni to issue a correction (along with 99) and have now turned to the editors at AOL's "Political Machine" to fix the propaganda:
I have unsuccessfully tried to compel author MARK IMPOMENI to change his false and misleading headline, "Rove Denies Tampering With Investigation", which is pure unadulterated propaganda. The fact -- picked up by the blogospehere, news outlets around the internet and now the mainstream media (MSNBC) -- is that Rove refused to deny involvement in the Siegelman prosecution during an interview with George Stephanopoulos Sunday.
This was evidenced by the three attempts by Stephanopoulos to get Rove to make such a denial. Each time Rove refused and gave an unrelated answer. Stephanopoulos even stated at one point, "But that's not a denial." Stephanopoulos picked up on the obvious, something which Impomeni still has failed to do.
Also troubling was Impomeni's clear bias as evidenced by this line: "But what [Democrats] really want is the headline grabbing subpoena and [Rove's] refusal to testify in public". There are endless reasons for Democrats (and American citizens) to want Rove to testify. Not the least of which was the call from 52 former attorney's general for an investigation and the 11th US Circuit Court of Appeals which found "substantial questions of fact and law" in the Siegelman case.
But to Impomeni it is really just a matter of Democrats scoring points!
Finally, in his defense, Impomeni twice sited the L.A. Times which ran a similar headline. And I can't help but agree that the L.A. Times should serve as an example. Today, the L.A. Times recognized its error and rectified the situation by running a correction. I encourage AOL to do the same.
"A Day at the Beach with Heroes of Peace" was a special live KPFK/Pacifica broadcast that took place at Arlington West in Santa Monica on Sunday. The top video is a short mashup (5:45) I made of some of the event highlights and videos of most of the speakers follow.
There's no doubt that the GOP is in big trouble, facing catastrophic losses in the House and Senate this November. But if you believe that Bush and Cheney will observe the law and honor the traditions of American democracy, and therefore let themselves be forced from power, you're living in a world of happy dreams.
The fact is that this criminal regime cannot afford to drop their guns and walk out here amongst the rest of us; and there's much evidence that they do not intend to let that happen--ever. So we had better face that evidence (i.e., unearth it, since the media has largely played it down, or tuned it out), and brace ourselves for a protracted fight; because those men are capable of anything that will maintain their death-grip on the US government.
In this new vlog, I talk about that evidence (or some of it), and what we may expect before Election Day. Here is Part One (7:51):
Yesterday I interviewed Byron DeLear who is running for Congress in Missouri's 2nd District. The current holder of the seat is the ultra-conservative war supporter and Bush crony, Todd Akin (R-MO), who last year infamously argued to keep sending reinforcements to Iraq by invoking Davy Crockett at the Alamo.
I found the intellectual DeLear, who supports the withdrawal of our troops from Iraq and the impeachment of Bush and Cheney, extremely knowledgeable on a wide range of issues including election integrity. DeLear even goes so far as to call for the 28th Amendment to the US Constitution to secure the vote:
“I talk about the necessity for the 28th Amendment to the US Constitution to be securing the most sacrosanct institution of our Republic which is the vote – the cornerstone of our democracy. And how is it that we can allow corporations to own the source code that instructs voting machines how to count the vote? How is it that in our supposedly popular and public owned electoral system can we have privatization occurring where the basic functions of our elections are in secret and are not available to the scrutiny of the American people?
So I think the 28th Amendment to the Constitution should be securing the vote, providing for independent verification of ballot results and I think we should explore the idea of perhaps standardizing the American voting experience. Because when you have 13,000 different methods of counting the vote littered across the landscape of our Republic – that essentially violates the essence of equal protection under the law. And I don’t think it’s fair that you can have African Americans waiting six hours in the rain in Ohio and then other people in other parts of the country just walk in and get their votes cast and there is no problem whatsoever.
So we got to end this kind of unequal, unfair playing field that is occurring in regards to counting our votes and getting our voice heard.”
You can find out more about DeLear and contribute to his campaign at his website - DeLear for Congress.
UPDATE: DeLear also spoke at length on Sunday with Gore Vidal. Below are some of the highlights from DeLear that had me thinking he should be running for President instead of Congress:
I captured on video a bunch of very young anarchists (I think) clowning around at the May Day rally in Los Angeles on Thursday. And while kid anarchists are certainly entitled to have as much fun as the next person, it still makes for an odd sight. Watch them play tag, leap frog and do handstands in the short video above (0:40).
WASHINGTON — Backed-up plumbing, peeling paint and other corrosive conditions in aging barracks at Fort Bragg prompted U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Dole to propose changing the way maintenance is handled on U.S. Army bases.
The North Carolina Republican said Friday she wants a pilot program that was tested at Fort Hood in Texas to be expanded Army-wide.
Called the First Sergeant's Barracks Initiative, it transfers responsibility for daily maintenance of barracks to a beefed up team dedicated solely to maintenance that would report directly to the base commander.
Now, the units that occupy the barracks must do much of the work themselves, and they often face delays when requesting help from base work crews on more complicated jobs.
Dole introduced a bill late Thursday to expand the pilot program to all Army installations.
“Anything less than safe and clean housing is unacceptable,” Dole said in a phone interview.
Problems at some of the 1950s-era barracks at Fort Bragg in central North Carolina came to light last week when Sgt. Jeff Frawley's father videotaped the conditions and posted them on YouTube.com.
Ed Frawley said he was disgusted that troops with the 82nd Airborne, who had been serving in Afghanistan, came home to such an environment.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Thursday that he'd watched the video and found the conditions “appalling.”
“Soldiers should never have to live in such squalor,” he said, adding that “current needs must not be sacrificed to future capabilities.”
The latest outrage is a father’s video of a U.S. Army barracks at Ft. Bragg, North Carolina, the home of the famed 82nd Airborne Division.
It shows the quarters where his soldier son and other soldier sons were sent to live upon their return from combat. Mold and mildew and peeling paint are bad enough, but what about a big barracks bathroom ankle-deep in raw sewage?
Scandals like this latest one and an earlier eruption of public outrage over the miserably maintained quarters where wounded soldiers were warehoused at Walter Reed Army Hospital are an indictment of the core competency of our Army.
If the Army cannot afford to maintain minimally decent standards of housing and feeding our soldiers — and treat them with the best medical care and all the loving attention they deserve when they're wounded in combat — then, by God, the Army doesn’t deserve to have ANY soldiers at all.