Politics, Everyday, All day... morning, noon and night....

[DVD Burner]

Codey confronts shock jock over comments about first lady

January 26, 2005, 1:26 AM EST

EWING TOWNSHIP, N.J. -- Acting Gov. Richard J. Codey and a radio talk show host engaged in a heated confrontation Tuesday night over comments the host had made about first lady Mary Jo Codey's well publicized battle with mental illness.

According to an account published in Wednesday's Star-Ledger of Newark, Codey confronted radio host Craig Carton in a hallway at the studios of NJ 101.5 where the governor was to appear for his monthly "Ask the Governor" call-in show.

"I wish I weren't governor, I'd take you out," Codey said, according to the Star-Ledger account.

Carton responded: "That's real professional. You want to fight?"

Codey and Carton shouted at each other as members of the governor's security detail hovered nearby.

Carton then left the station, and Codey went on with the show.

Codey said he was upset about remarks Carton made during his Monday afternoon "Jersey Guys" show.

According to a partial transcript the governor's office told the newspaper it got from a "trusted source," Carton said: "What Gov. Codey ought to do is approve the use of medical marijuana so women can have a joint and relax instead of putting their babies in a microwave. Then all they want to do is cook Doritos. Women who claim they suffer from this postpartum depression ... they must be crazy in the first place."

Citing station policy, program director Eric Johnson declined to release a tape of the show to the newspaper. He said he saw nothing wrong with Carton's Monday show.

"Talk show hosts are free to comment on the news," Johnson said. "We have talk show hosts with strong opinions."

Mary Jo Codey has been candid about her many dark days, including the joyless first year after their first son was born.

She has acknowledged having murderous thoughts about the baby, but said she knew she would harm herself first. The Codeys sought treatment for debilitating postpartum depression, which affects about 2 percent of women who give birth.

The acting governor has been a longtime advocate for improved care for the mentally ill and once worked undercover at a state psychiatric hospital to gather information to support his reform efforts.

At the beginning of his call-in show, Codey delivered a prepared rebuttal to Carton.

"Let me make myself very clear: I am proud of my wife and of her work to help people with mental illness throughout the state of New Jersey. These remarks were personally offensive to me, my wife and our sons. But I am even more disturbed that they reinforced a negative stigma and hurt hundreds of thousands of other New Jerseyans who deal with this disease every day."

Codey then took on-air questions for an hour.

As he left the station, Codey said he was glad he confronted Carton. "I'm proud of what I said there," he said.


Subscribe to Newsday home delivery


Copyright © 2005, The Associated Press

[DVD Burner]

The George Bush Center for Intelligence




The Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999* was signed into law by the President on October 20, 1998. Among its provisions, the Act directed that the Headquarters compound of the Central Intelligence Agency located in Langley, Virginia, shall be known and designated as the "George Bush Center for Intelligence."

Former President George Bush was Director of Central Intelligence and head of the Central Intelligence Agency from 30 January 1976 to 20 January 1977.

On April 26, 1999, Agency employees, senior officials from current and previous Administrations and Congresses, former Directors and Deputy Directors of Central Intelligence, family members, and friends joined former President Bush and former First Lady Barbara Bush in ceremonies dedicating the Headquarters compound as the George Bush Center for Intelligence.

Activities included a ceremony which included remarks by then Director of Central Intelligence George J. Tenet, Representative Rob Portman, and President Bush; a wreath-laying ceremony at the Central Intelligence Agency’s Memorial Wall; a reception for the Bush family; and informal remarks by President Bush to Agency employees.

Remarks of then Director of Central Intelligence George J. Tenet Introducing President Bush
President George H. W. Bush's remarks
Representative Rob Portman's remarks
Photographs
* Public Law 105-272--October 20, 1998, Title III, 112 STAT.2403, Sec. 309

[About the CIA Page] [CIA Homepage]


Page last updated: 07/12/2004 09:55:48.

[DVD Burner]

Oil firms fund climate change 'denial'

David Adam, science correspondent
Thursday January 27, 2005
The Guardian

Lobby groups funded by the US oil industry are targeting Britain in a bid to play down the threat of climate change and derail action to cut greenhouse gas emissions, leading scientists have warned.
Bob May, president of the Royal Society, says that "a lobby of professional sceptics who opposed action to tackle climate change" is turning its attention to Britain because of its high profile in the debate.
Writing in the Life section of today's Guardian, Professor May says the government's decision to make global warming a focus of its G8 presidency has made it a target. So has the high profile of its chief scientific adviser, David King, who described climate change as a bigger threat than terrorism.
Prof May's warning coincides with a meeting of climate change sceptics today at the Royal Institution in London organised by a British group, the Scientific Alliance, which has links to US oil company ExxonMobil through a collaboration with a US institute.
Last month the Scientific Alliance published a joint report with the George C Marshall Institute in Washington that claimed to "undermine" climate change claims. The Marshall institute received £51,000 from ExxonMobil for its "global climate change programme" in 2003 and an undisclosed sum this month.
Prof May's warning comes as British scientists, in the journal Nature, show that emissions of carbon dioxide could have a more dramatic effect on climate than thought. They say the average temperature could rise 11C, even if atmospheric carbon dioxide were limited to the levels expected in 2050.
David Frame, who coordinated the climate prediction experiment, said: "If the real world response were anywhere near the upper end of our range, even today's levels of greenhouse gases could already be dangerously high."
Emission limits such as those in the Kyoto protocol would hit oil firms because the bulk of greenhouse gases come from burning fossil fuel products.
Prof May writes that during the 1990s, parts of the US oil industry funded sceptics who opposed action to tackle climate change. A Scientific Alliance spokesman said today's meeting was sponsored but funders did not influence policies. ExxonMobil said it was not involved.
One adviser is Sallie Baliunas, an astrophysicist at the Harvard Smithsonian Centre, who is linked to the Marshall Institute. In 1998 Dr Baliunas co-wrote an article that argued for the release of more carbon dioxide. It was mass-mailed to US scientists with a petition asking them to reject Kyoto.
• Tony Blair yesterday attempted to urge George Bush to sign a climate change accord. At the World Economic Forum he said climate change was "not universally accepted", but evidence of its danger had been "clearly and persuasively advocated" by a very large number of "independent voices".

[cowboyangel]

This Election Will Change the World. But Not in the Way the Americans Imagined
By Robert Fisk
The Independent U.K.

Saturday 29 January 2005

Shias are about to inherit Iraq, but the election tomorrow that will bring them to power is creating deep fears among the Arab kings and dictators of the Middle East that their Sunni leadership is under threat.

America has insisted on these elections - which will produce a largely Shia parliament representing Iraq's largest religious community - because they are supposed to provide an exit strategy for embattled US forces, but they seem set to change the geopolitical map of the Arab world in ways the Americans could never have imagined. For George Bush and Tony Blair this is the law of unintended consequences writ large.

Amid curfews, frontier closures and country-wide travel restrictions, voting in Iraq will begin tomorrow under the threat of Osama bin Laden's ruling that the poll represents an "apostasy". Voting started among expatriate Iraqis yesterday in Britain, the US, Sweden, Syria and other countries, but the turnout was much smaller than expected.

The Americans have talked up the possibility of massive bloodshed tomorrow and US intelligence authorities have warned embassy staff in Baghdad that insurgents may have been "saving up" suicide bombers for mass attacks on polling stations.

But outside Iraq, Arab leaders are talking of a Shia "Crescent" that will run from Iran through Iraq to Lebanon via Syria, whose Alawite leadership forms a branch of Shia Islam. The underdogs of the Middle East, repressed under the Ottomans, the British and then the pro-Western dictators of the region, will be a new and potent political force.

While Shia political parties in Iraq have promised that they will not demand an Islamic republic - their speeches suggest that they have no desire to recreate the Iranian revolution in their country - their inevitable victory in an election that Iraq's Sunnis will largely boycott mean that this country will become the first Arab nation to be led by Shias.

On the surface, this may not be apparent; Iyad Allawi, the former CIA agent and current Shia "interim" Prime Minister, is widely tipped as the only viable choice for the next prime minister - but the kings and emirs of the Gulf are facing the prospect with trepidation.

In Bahrain, a Sunni monarchy rules over a Shia majority that staged a mini-insurrection in the 1990s. Saudi Arabia has long treated its Shia minority with suspicion and repression.

In the Arab world, they say that God favoured the Shia with oil. Shias live above the richest oil reserves in Saudi Arabia and upon some of the Kuwaiti oil fields. Apart from Mosul, Iraqi Shias live almost exclusively amid their own country's massive oil fields. Iran's oil wealth is controlled by the country's overwhelming Shia majority.

What does all this presage for the Sunni potentates of the Arabian peninsula? Iraq's new national assembly and the next interim government it selects will empower Shias throughout the region, inviting them to question why they too cannot be given a fair share of their country's decision-making.

The Americans originally feared that parliamentary elections in Iraq would create a Shia Islamic republic and made inevitable - and unnecessary - warnings to Iran not to interfere in Iraq. But now they are far more frightened that without elections the 60 per cent Shia community would join the Sunni insurgency.

Tomorrow's poll is thus, for the Americans, a means to an end, a way of claiming that - while Iraq may not have become the stable, liberal democracy they claimed they would create - it has started its journey on the way to Western-style freedom and that American forces can leave.

Few in Iraq believe that these elections will end the insurgency, let alone bring peace and stability. By holding the poll now - when the Shias, who are not fighting the Americans, are voting while the Sunnis, who are fighting the Americans, are not - the elections can only sharpen the divisions between the country's two largest communities.

While Washington had clearly not envisaged the results of its invasion in this way, its demand for "democracy" is now moving the tectonic plates of the Middle East in a new and uncertain direction. The Arab states outside the Shia "Crescent" fear Shia political power even more than they are frightened by genuine democracy.

No wonder, then, King Abdullah of Jordan is warning that this could destabilise the Gulf and pose a "challenge" to the United States. This may also account for the tolerant attitude of Jordan towards the insurgency, many of whose leaders freely cross the border with Iraq.

The American claim that they move secretly from Syria into Iraq appears largely false; the men who run the rebellion against US rule in Iraq are not likely to smuggle themselves across the Syrian-Iraqi desert when they can travel "legally" across the Jordanian border.

Tomorrow's election may be bloody. It may well produce a parliament so top-heavy with Shia candidates that the Americans will be tempted to "top up" the Sunni assembly members by choosing some of their own, who will inevitably be accused of collaboration. But it will establish Shia power in Iraq - and in the wider Arab world - for the first time since the great split between Sunnis and Shias that followed the death of the Prophet Muhammad.

[cowboyangel]

The stooge idiot unmasked at last:

By BETH FOUHY, AP Political Writer

SAN FRANCISCO - Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (news - web sites) rode an extraordinary wave of popularity in his first year, thanks to a blend of celebrity, political smarts, and a bit of rookie luck. But the so-called Governator now faces so much criticism that many wonder whether he might be a mere mortal after all.





The Republican governor who negotiated tough agreements with Democrats, charmed legislators with visits to his smoking tent and met rapturous crowds at shopping malls across California has hit a sophomore slump, marked by a series of actions that his adversaries are calling naive and even hypocritical.

His state budget proposal relies on $6 billion in borrowing, despite a campaign pledge to end such borrowing. He angered teachers by refusing to give about $2 billion in unanticipated revenues to schools. He is raking in contributions from business interests despite a pledge to end the influence of special-interest money in Sacramento. And his bipartisan image has been tarnished by a government restructuring plan that takes aim at Democratic constituencies like public employees and teachers.

While Schwarzenegger is still well-liked by most Californians, polling suggests his once bulletproof popularity may be taking a hit.

A new survey by the Public Policy Institute of California shows that while 60 percent of the state's residents still approve of the job he is doing, he has lost considerable ground among Democrats and Independents, who together form the vast majority of the state's voters. Some 49 percent of Democrats now say they disapprove of his job performance, while 43 percent approve. And his disapproval rating among Independents has doubled since last year, from 18 to 32 percent.

"It's back to business as usual in Sacramento — the fuss of last year is over," said Shaun Bowler, a political science professor at University of California-Riverside. "People have responded to the movie version of leadership that he's been practicing, but you can't suspend the laws of gravity forever just because you're a movie star."

The waning of Schwarzenegger's political honeymoon has restored confidence to the legislative Democrats Schwarzenegger labeled "girlie-men" and "losers." They're no longer as cowed by his star power. And groups like the California Teachers Association — who agreed last year to temporarily give up $2 billion in constitutionally mandated education funding in exchange for future revenues, only to see Schwarzenegger refuse to give them the extra money they wanted this year — have begun to question his credibility.

"Compared to the man last year, I've discovered a new person who the kids and teachers of California can't trust," said CTA President Barbara Kerr.

The PPIC poll showed fully 51 percent of Californians now disapprove of Schwarzenegger's handling of education.

Schwarzenegger has taken steps in recent days to deflect the mounting criticism, using two press conferences in the past week alone to promote his agenda. He declared that this would be the year to bring needed reforms to California, and derided legislators as stubborn defenders of the status quo.

"I thought they'd come to the table and create some action," Schwarzenegger said. "People want reform. It's what the recall election was about. They want to have changes."

At the heart of Schwarzenegger's reform agenda are four measures aimed at reducing the clout of public employees and teachers, and ending the power of incumbency in Sacramento.

He wants to convert the state's public pension program to a 401(k)-style system, require merit pay for teachers, and redraw congressional and state legislative boundaries to make the seats more competitive. He also wants to establish a mechanism that would automatically slash state spending when it exceeded revenues.

It appears all but certain that Schwarzenegger will move forward with his trademark strategy: bypassing the Legislature and taking his plan to voters in a special election to be held this fall. It would be the fourth major statewide election in three years, costing the state at least $50 million.

"I don't think he's got a choice but to do a special election, but I think he'd prefer not to," said GOP strategist Kevin Spillane. "Schwarzenegger has been energized by his interactions with the Legislature, and radicalized by their intransigence."

Meanwhile, newly emboldened Democrats are crafting their own set of proposals, which they believe have more relevance to middle-class Californians — in the areas of education, health care and transportation. And as if to tamp down their reputation as big spenders and compulsive tax raisers, they've focused much of their rhetoric on a commitment to fix the state's budget problems.

"We'll have full hearings on each and every one of the (governor's) proposals at the right time, but I fully admit they're not our No. 1 priority," said Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez. "Balancing the budget is our No. 1 priority."



Indeed, many critics see Schwarzenegger's push for political reform as a red herring, obscuring the fact that his chief campaign promise — to balance the budget and wipe out the state's crippling deficit — has remained maddeningly unfulfilled.

"Remember the recall campaign, where he talked about the budget, opening the books, stop this ridiculous deficit spending," said longtime Democratic strategist Garry South. "He hasn't done it. The biggest problem we have is the budget is spiraling out of control, and nothing he puts on the ballot is going to change that fact."

Schwarzenegger is adhering to a vow not to raise taxes, and insisted this week that the state's budget is on the right track. He's also begun calling attention to the rigid formulas embedded in the state's budgeting system that make deficit spending almost inevitable.

"That's what the people expect us to do — to create reforms, and to save the state from those formulas that send us to bankruptcy," Schwarzenegger said. "Eventually we are going to meet that line between revenue and spending."

Schwarzenegger has not yet said whether he will run for re-election in 2006, and most analysts still view him as an overwhelming favorite to win if he chooses to run. But perhaps sensing some potential vulnerability in Schwarzenegger, one prominent Democrat, Attorney General Bill Lockyer, indicated this month he plans to run for governor in 2006 — whether Schwarzenegger is in the race or not.

[cowboyangel]

[geekster]

As members of the Democratic National Committee prepare to elect their new party chairman next month, a relative unknown in the race has just gotten a fairly significant boost from key party insiders.

The DNC's executive committee voted in New York Sunday to recommend Donnie Fowler to replace Terry McAuliffe. The vote came after all seven candidates for the position made their case for the job at a regional forum for DNC officials from the East Coast.

Fowler is the son of former DNC chairman Don Fowler, and was pushed out as a top official in the presidential campaign of Wesley Clark in 2003. He has been a lobbyist for the Silicon Valley firm TechNet. Fowler is considered something of an Internet guru in the Democratic Party.

He emerges as a less ideological challenger to former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, who until the vote was considered the front-runner for the party chairmanship. But many Democrats think Dean, who screamed himself out of the presidential nomination last year following a poor showing in Iowa, is too controversial for the party and they have been seeking an alternative.

Other candidates for the post include former Texas Rep. Martin Frost (search), Simon Rosenberg , former president of the New Democrat Network, former Indiana Rep. and Sept. 11 commission member Tim Roemer and former Denver Mayor Wellington Webb.

[Rabbi Dali Rick]

I see you found them sir!

[cowboyangel]

http://news.findlaw.com/nytimes/docs/do ... bee%20memo'


there's the whole 50 pages of it, in case anybody had any doubts.

[cowboyangel]

someone within the republican party wants the truth to get out. Go for it dudes. You can only save the country from going down the drain.
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/index.php?p=25

[cowboyangel]

Just a Few Questions

1. Why isn’t Kenny Boy in Jail?
2. Why haven’t heads rolled over the missing $8.8 billion in Iraq?
3. Why hasn’t the mysterious Post Office/Capitol anthrax terrorist been caught?
4. Why hasn’t someone thought to tell the president that his war is going to ruin the US economy?
5. Why hasn’t The White House’s outing of a CIA officer gone by the wayside?
6. Why can’t right wing pundits and radio-hate show hosts be prosecuted for lying?
7. Why can’t we build workable photovoltaic power plants when Germany can?
8. Why can’t we catch Bin Laden?
9. Finally, why can’t we stop spam?

[cowboyangel]

oops on 5

Just a Few Questions

1. Why isn’t Kenny Boy in Jail?
2. Why haven’t heads rolled over the missing $8.8 billion in Iraq?
3. Why hasn't the mysterious Post Office/Capitol anthrax terrorist been caught?
4. Why hasn’t someone thought to tell the president that his war is going to ruin the US economy?
5. Why has The White House’s outing of a CIA officer gone by the wayside?
6. Why can’t right wing pundits and radio-hate show hosts be prosecuted for lying?
7. Why can’t we build workable photovoltaic power plants when Germany can?
8. Why can’t we catch Bin Laden?
9. Finally, why can’t we stop spam?

[Simply Joel]

i agree CA, where are all those left wing watchdogs looking for the little guy?

[Simply Joel]

i agree CA, where are all those left wing watchdogs looking out for the little guy?

excuse me, please allow me to correct myself... "looking out for the little guy? the common man?"

[DVD Burner]

i agree CA, where are all those left wing watchdogs looking for the little guy?

Because they are punks with no spines and are as much full of shit as repubs, politicians in general, and all religions.

[cowboyangel]

two words...
Joe Conason

that's right:
Joe Conason


http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/20 ... ex_np.html

[DVD Burner]

2 words:
Ward Churchill

[cowboyangel]

sorry DV, Ward's a crackpot.

[samtzu]

two words:
Ward Clever

[Ranger Genius]

Atticus Finch.

[Bob]

Deep Throat.

[Ranger Genius]

[samtzu]

where did you find that, RG? God! I love that... !!!!

[Ranger Genius]

goats.com. It's one of their t-shirt designs.

[samtzu]

Story of my life...

[cowboyangel]

that's not fair, Jesus loves everyone.

[Simply Joel]

that's not fair, Jesus loves everyone.

yeah, and there is no accounting for taste is there.

[Silver 2]

Politics:

Not sure that I agree 100%. The Electorial College and indirect election of Senators were written into the Constitution to protect the people from themselves. Given what I have seen of the 'people' they need the protection. On the other hand, it assumes responsible electors and legislators. BTW, I know that we now have direct elections for Senators.

*Feinstein Gathering Co-Sponsors For Bill to Abolish Electoral College*
By Matthew Cardinale
YubaNet.com

Thursday 03 February 2005

U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) is currently gathering original
co-sponsors for her proposed bill to abolish the Electoral College
system for the U.S. Presidential Election, and to replace it with a
direct vote for the Presidency, according to Feinstein press secretary,
Adam Vogt.

The Electoral College has been described by critics as confusing,
complicated, alienating, diversionary, unnecessary, undemocratic, and
moreover, as hypocritical to the fundamental principles of American
governance, which has otherwise been a global leader in democracy.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/020305I.shtml

[Cardinal]

Thread drift?

[Cardinal]

Oops, wrong thread with that last post. But any discussion about getting rid of the electorial college is a good one. Go Dianne Go!