bush

Ashcroft Tour

This entry was posted in ashcroft bush Democracy Domestic Terrorism Election 2004 Judiciary Patriot Act War on Terrorism on by

Pejman argues that John Conyers’ recent criticism of Ashcroft’s Patriot Act tour is too much:

I understand and respect those who disagree with the USA Patriot Act, but this goes beyond a mere difference of opinion. Conyers is stating that Ashcroft can’t even talk about the measure in speeches across the country. This is just ridiculous, and Conyers’s position is not saved by claiming that Ashcroft is “lobbying.” How can the activity qualify as lobbying when the Patriot Act was passed nearly two years ago?

I do not know if there is legislation that supports Conyers position but if there is I do not like it any more than similar laws (or regulations) that, for example, prohibit recipients of federal funds from providing information on, say condom use, to sexually active clients.
We thrive on a free flow of information and opinions, even information and opinions that we disagree with. Ashcroft should get to talk and he should make a choice to talk to the larger community not just law enforcement folks in closed or semi-closed sessions.
Is Ashcroft lobbying and does Pejman’s argument that the Patriot Act was passed two years ago so it can’t be lobbying hold up? Maybe not. I think that Ashcroft is concerned that congress may move to make changes he does not want. Why else does he, for example, make stops in the home district of the only GOP congressman who voted against it?

U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft is coming to Boise on Monday to talk up the Patriot Act in the home district of the only GOP congressman who spoke against it.
Ashcroft kicked off a monthlong speaking tour of more than a dozen cities this week to deflect growing opposition to parts of the Patriot Act.

Trying to deflect growing opposition may not be lobbying but it does walk just a little bit like it.
The other thing Ashcroft is undoubtably trying to do is build support for the pending Victory Act. Ashcroft is lobbying just as bush is currently on the campaign trail (is his re-election committee paying for this?). They are doing what public officials have done for ever and should continue to do even if we disagree with them: make their cases to the people.

Read Sisyphus Shrugged

This entry was posted in bush on by

This is a good day to go over and read Sisyphus Shrugged. Yea, I know, every day is a good day over there but today is a really good day. I’m only going to link the current most recent post of the day but you’ll want to read them all.
She has been busy discussing plans by the bushies to use a banned substance to fumigate incoming cargo containers, the FBI, the Hornstine faux valedictorian, the dem’s ‘responsibility’ for the recent blackout, and Ashcroft’s victory act.
And why stop at today. If you haven’t been there for a while read some of the back stuff too, for instance yesterday’s post on Mel Gibson’s The Passion.

Sing a Fair and Balanced Song

This entry was posted in bush Culture Economics Humor on by

Mad Kane is back from vacation and feeling very fair and balanced. So much so that she has written a fine fair and balanced tune :

Fair and balanced,
Fair and balanced.
Empty slogans, rabid views, and shrill rants.
Fox calls critics liars.
O’Reilly’s filled with angst and ire.

Go sing the rest.
And, being so excited to have missed the blackout, she created a special dubya blackout cartoon but The Village Voice thinks maybe Pataki should be blamed.

bush’s Payback, or Influence Peddling Inflation

This entry was posted in bush Democracy Election 2004 US Politics on by

As reported here bush has doubled the cost of support in the last 4 years:

His stop at a $2,000-per-head fund-raiser in the Hunts Point home of Craig McCaw will be his second visit to the billionaire cell-phone magnate’s home. In July 1999, Bush attended a $1,000-a-plate fund-raiser there.

So far 600 folks have signed up to hear bush say things like:

I look forward to signing the economic recovery bill soon. The principle of the bill is pretty simple, that we believe the more money people have in their pockets, the more likely it is somebody is going to be able to find work in America. In other words, the more money somebody has, it means somebody is more likely to demand a good or a service, which means somebody will produce a good or a service, which means somebody is likely to find work. , Washington, D.C., May 22, 2003

It seems clear that the type of service bush expects these folks to buy has a lot to do with his campaign and the bush jobs program.

Cheney on Trial?

This entry was posted in bush cheney Constitution Democracy Law on by

From the Connecticut Law Tribune via Today’s Legal News

Vice President Richard Cheney may be added to the list of defendants in Dallas accounting fraud cases, if Colchester, Conn.-based Scott & Scott prevails in its federal court bid to overturn a pending $6 million settlement….
During that period, both Cheney and his successor CEO David Lesar shared responsibility, but only Lesar was named as a defendant in the lawsuit. Neil Rothstein, a Pennsylvania-based partner in Scott & Scott, said Richard Schiffrin did not name Cheney as a defendant, despite liability exposure, because it would be “inappropriate” to do so during the war on Iraq.

Somebody please help me understand why this was inappropriate.