Tuesday, August 22, 2006
> the subject line: are you jonathan safran foer?
> hello, whoever this is. i have written a letter for jonathan safran foer.
> is short and it is personal. I am hoping this will reach jonathan. it is
> intended as a personal letter for him. i hope it will be treated as such
> accorded the appropriate confidentiality.
> Dear Jonathan,
> I am 21 and a Jew and a man and I am sitting in this empty dorm room with
> your novel in my hands and I am weeping, sobbing, heaving sobbing weeping
> and only tears, and darkness, and the thought of a moment that will last
> forever and always die. I am weeping for nothing and I am breathing deep
> hard to stop but I can't and my sobs turn to heaves, whining groans like a
> child makes, like a child throwing a tantrum, weeping unstoppably heaving
> for this happy moment of madness that will always never end. Soon the
> chapter is done and I am racing to the end and I am getting in bed and
> closing my eyes but sleep is an impossibility as I shake and heave again
> the darkness cursing FUCK YOU JONATHAN FUCK YOU FUCK YOU FUCK YOU snorting
> & wheezing like a child cursing this filthy luck of living in this moment
> existence that is as damned as the rest in a nation learning nothing
> nothing always lying killing dying in Washington D.C. where I am briefly
> assisting resident teenagers with bestowed authority, and at this moment
> cold in a burning city alone in the dark weeping heaving like a child and
> cursing hating loving you for writing something filthy and glorious enough
> for my envy and contempt.
> Mazel Tov.
This is the note I got back from the email adress:
Thank you for your kind note. Jonathan is traveling at the moment but I
will pass your email along to him when he returns.
Judge's ruling could provide grounds to impeach Bush
By CHB Staff
Aug 18, 2006, 07:57
If a judge's ruling that declares President George W. Bush's domestic spying program unconstitutional holds up under appeal, the President will be guilty of violating federal law at least 30 times and that could provide grounds for impeachment, says a leading Constitutional scholar.
|President George W. Bush|
"This ruling is a bad situation that just got worse for the White House," says Turley. "These crimes could constitute impeachable offenses."
Turley knows a thing or two about the impeachment process. He worked with Special Prosecutor Ken Starr on the investigation that led to impeachment proceedings against former President Bill Clinton.
U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor, in a stinging indictment of Constitutional abuse by the Bush Administration over its use of warrantless wiretaps of American citizens by the National Security Agency, ruled the program violates the Administrative Procedures Act, the doctrine of separation of powers, and the First and Fourth amendments to the Constitution and ordered an immediate halt to the practice.
"There are no hereditary Kings in America and no powers not created by the Constitution. So all 'inherent powers' must derive from that Constitution," Taylor wrote in her lengthy opinion.
The White House went into immediate attack mode, claiming Taylor is an activist judge appointed by a Democratic president (Jimmy Carter) and vowing to appeal the ruling all the way to the Supreme Court.
A Republican National Committee press release declared: Liberal judge backs Dem agenda to weaken national security.
Turley says such tactics are typical for the Bush White House.
"That's what's really distasteful," Turley said Thursday night on MNBC's Countdown with Keith Olbermann show. "This is not the first judge to rule against the administration. But every time a judge rules against the administration, they're either too Democratic or they're too tall or too short, or they're Pisces. I mean, it, you can, all this spin, this effort to personalize it is really doing a great injustice to our system. If you look at this opinion, it's a very thoughtful opinion. The problem is not the judge. The problem is a lack of authority. You know, when Gonzales says I've got something back in my safe, and if you could see it, you'd all agree with me, well, unless there's a federal statute in his safe, then it's not going to make a difference."
The judge's order to halt the program is stayed during the appeal process and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales vowed the domestic spying program will continue during those appeals, which could extend well beyond the end of Bush's final term in office.© Copyright 2005 Capitol Hill Blue
Friday, August 11, 2006
Poll: Bush may be hurting Republicans
By DONNA CASSATA, Associated Press WriterFri Aug 11, 12:42 PM ET
Republicans determined to win in November are up against a troublesome trend — growing opposition to President Bush.
An Associated Press-Ipsos poll conducted this week found the president's approval rating has dropped to 33 percent, matching his low in May. His handling of nearly every issue, from the Iraq war to foreign policy, contributed to the president's decline around the nation, even in the Republican-friendly South.
More sobering for the GOP are the number of voters who backed Bush in 2004 who are ready to vote Democratic in the fall's congressional elections — 19 percent. These one-time Bush voters are more likely to be female, self-described moderates, low- to middle-income and from the Northeast and Midwest.
Two years after giving the Republican president another term, more than half of these voters — 57 percent — disapprove of the job Bush is doing.
"The numbers ... are similar to what I'm hearing out in the streets," said Democrat Ed Perlmutter, a primary winner Tuesday in a competitive House race in Colorado. "I talked to so many people and they've had enough and want to see a change."
Democrats need to gain 15 seats in the House to seize control after a dozen years of Republican rule, and the party is optimistic about its chances amid diminishing support for Bush and the GOP-led Congress.
Republicans argue that elections will be decided in the 435 districts and the 33 Senate races based on local issues with the power of incumbency looming large.
"This election will be less about a political climate that is challenging for both parties, and instead about the actual candidates and how their policies impact voters on the local level," said Tracey Schmitt, a Republican National Committee spokeswoman.
But fewer than 100 days before the Nov. 7 election, the AP-Ipsos poll suggested the midterms are clearly turning into a national referendum on Bush.
The number of voters who say their congressional vote this fall will be in part to express opposition to the president jumped from 20 percent last month to 29 percent, driven by double-digit increases among males, minorities, moderate and conservative Democrats and Northeasterners.
"I don't feel like the war was the answer," said Paula Lohler, 54, an independent from Worcester, Mass., who is inclined to vote her opposition to Bush. "It seems like it's going on and on and on and nothing's being done."
That attitude propelled anti-war challenger Ned Lamont to Tuesday's Democratic primary win over Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman, a stalwart supporter of Bush on the war.
"I think it's going to be similar to what we saw in 1994 and the tremendous dissatisfaction with Democrats," said Dick Harpootlian, the former chairman of the South Carolina Democratic Party. "Republicans are going to feel the wrath, feel the pain of being associated with President Bush."