House Holds the White House in Contempt

Keeping order flovent a diary and taking note of any potential triggers may diovan free delivery help people identify when a migraine episode is likely. When order viagra without prescription a person or one of their loved ones experiences warning buy cafergot without prescription signs of schizophrenia — such as suspiciousness or an expressionless order cialis from canada gaze — they should contact a doctor. Leukotriene modifiers and augmentin alternative corticosteroids are drugs that reduce swelling and inflammation in the purchase generic atrovent alternatives problems airways for people with allergies or asthma. Many people with tablet zithromax H. pylori may remain asymptomatic for years, while others may cheap pyrantel pamoate develop various gastrointestinal symptoms. However, tingling in the back can information no viagra prescription buy cheap also be a symptom of more serious conditions, which may spiriva australia require medical attention and treatment. This help could be via advair prescription their doctor or any qualified therapist, whether or not they norvasc uk offer VR therapy. Children should not take oral antitussives but may.

Well, well, well. It’s finally happened. Pretty rediculous day on the hill. Where does one begin?

Yesterday the House Judiciary Committee Chair introduced two resolutions that would hold the White House in contempt for failing to respond to supoenas issued by Congress. One is a criminal citation, the other is civil. The second was needed because US Attorney General Michael Mukasey said that he would not enforce teh criminal citiation, leaving the Judiciary Committee with the option to sue the White House on civil grounds of contempt.

As those resolutions were filed this morning during a memorial service for the recently deceased Rep. Tom Lantos (a holocaust survivor) the Republicans called for a ”motion to adjourn” in an attempt to delay the vote. Later, the GOP walked out of teh chamber in protest of the vote under the logic taht it was detering the House from their proper agenda of working on the Protect America act and teh wiretapping bill. There claim was that national security is at risk in part because of this situation.

TPM provides us with the footage:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J78xjQOqFM0[/youtube]

Ninjas, the vote took place anyway, and it passed. Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten and former White House Counsel Harriet Miers are held in contempt for their refusal to testify, provide documents or cooperate in any way concerning the White House’s role in the US Attorney purge scandal that shamed Alberto Gonzales. The twoclaim executive priviledge because GDubz told them not to go. Crazy.

Go check out TPM for all the details, they’re more articulate than this ninja.

You Down With OCC?

eliot_spitzerthumbnail.jpg

Two days in a row of big wig Op-Ed pieces in the Washington Post. Today’s piece is courtesy of the former Attorney General and present Governor of New York, Eliot Spitzer. Spitzer claims that the Bush Administration has greatly contributed to the sub-prime mortgage crisis currently plaguing ninjas everywhere. I’m not one for long quotes but you should all really check this out:

Predatory lending was widely understood to present a looming national crisis. This threat was so clear that as New York attorney general, I joined with colleagues in the other 49 states in attempting to fill the void left by the federal government. Individually, and together, state attorneys general of both parties brought litigation or entered into settlements with many subprime lenders that were engaged in predatory lending practices. Several state legislatures, including New York’s, enacted laws aimed at curbing such practices.

What did the Bush administration do in response? Did it reverse course and decide to take action to halt this burgeoning scourge? As Americans are now painfully aware, with hundreds of thousands of homeowners facing foreclosure and our markets reeling, the answer is a resounding no.

Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye.

Let me explain: The administration accomplished this feat through an obscure federal agency called the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). The OCC has been in existence since the Civil War. Its mission is to ensure the fiscal soundness of national banks. For 140 years, the OCC examined the books of national banks to make sure they were balanced, an important but uncontroversial function. But a few years ago, for the first time in its history, the OCC was used as a tool against consumers.

In 2003, during the height of the predatory lending crisis, the OCC invoked a clause from the 1863 National Bank Act to issue formal opinions preempting all state predatory lending laws, thereby rendering them inoperative. The OCC also promulgated new rules that prevented states from enforcing any of their own consumer protection laws against national banks. The federal government’s actions were so egregious and so unprecedented that all 50 state attorneys general, and all 50 state banking superintendents, actively fought the new rules.

But the unanimous opposition of the 50 states did not deter, or even slow, the Bush administration in its goal of protecting the banks. In fact, when my office opened an investigation of possible discrimination in mortgage lending by a number of banks, the OCC filed a federal lawsuit to stop the investigation.

Just another reason why we all can’t wait for Bush to get the f*ck out of town. Keep your eyes out for Spitzer, too. I predict a bid at the Oval Office someday.

Clinton Pledges to Fight to the Bitter End

070112_hillary_vmed_7awidec.jpg

In a press conference with important members Hillary’s campaign it was made very clear that even if Sen. Barack Obama finishes the primary season with more pledged delegates (the delegates awarded from State primaries and caucuses) than she’s earned, she will continue to pursue the Democratic nomination in an attempt to woo the super-delegates. Now, this is a guarantee that she will instigate a war within the Democratic primary and almost ensure that should she win under these pretenses she will lose the general election to John McCain. It just shows you that Hillary Rodham Clinton is willing to sacrifice a Democrat controlled White House for her personal gains. She’s stubborn, ignorant, and obviously confused. During the conference her campaign staff also belittled Obama’s victories by claiming none but Illinois were important. Disenfranchisement, much? Selfish? Irrational, even? Yes, ninjas, yes.

Additon: The reason I think HIllary is clinging so desperately to this campaign is because she’s been planning this race for her entire political career. It’s why she’s still with Bill, it’s why she ran for Senate, and it’s reason enough to question her priorities.

The ‘Raq, Rice and Gates

ap_rice_gates_071010_ms.jpg

I don’t know how I missed it this morning but today Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates had an opinion piece in the Washington Post. Titled “What We Need Next in Iraq” this dynamic duo take a moment to give us what they consider to be the most important things to consider in regards to our current military occupation of Iraq. To me, this piece represents some sort of want to show us that there will soon be a change in our involvement in Iraq. Rice and Gates mentioned “normalized relations” with the Iraqi government and included that a “status of forces” agreement.

The role and scope of US military forces in Iraq, the way they would like to see it, seem down-right reasonable. Now, this ninja has done his homework in regards to the ‘Raq (read: Gerges, Packer, Marr, etc.) and I happen to think that indeed a 0 troop count in Iraq is not the best thing for either us or them. This does not mean that I, in any way, support the rediculous amounts of unnecessary resources (lives, money) we currently have dedicated to this cause. Today’s piece offered by Rice and Gates says:

In these negotiations, we seek to set the basic parameters for the U.S. presence in Iraq, including the appropriate authorities and jurisdiction necessary to operate effectively and to carry out essential missions, such as helping the Iraqi government fight al-Qaeda, develop its security forces, and stem the flow of lethal weapons and training from Iran. In addition, we seek to establish a basic framework for a strong relationship with Iraq, reflecting our shared political, economic, cultural and security interests.

Nothing to be negotiated will mandate that we continue combat missions. Nothing will set troop levels. Nothing will commit the United States to join Iraq in a war against another country or provide other such security commitments. And nothing will authorize permanent bases in Iraq (something neither we nor Iraqis want).

Obviously, no specifics of what this entails are available (i.e. number of troops required). I’m just not sure what to make of the piece. Why can’t Bush ever articulate these aims? Is this just an attempt to lower the distain levels of the current administration? What do you think, ninjas?

Obama Sweeps Again

2008-01-14t231322z_01_nootr_rtridsp_2_politics-usa-politics-nevada-dc.jpg

Well, ninjas, it seems that your MNP endorsed candidate, Barack Hussein Obama, won three contests last night handedly. Virginia, Washington D.C. and Maryland all showed strong support for Obama and ensured that he is indeed ahead on Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in the delegate count. Should Obama’s great success continue, Hillary will not be able to come back as she risks starting a fight within her party that Dems. do not need going into the spring, summer and fall. There are now rumors that Hillary is losing potential support amongst the super-delegates, too. Maybe they’re catching on to how poorly she’s managing her campaign. They may have also heard about how the man who managed Rudy Giuliani’s train-wreck of a campaign supported her tactics of waiting for Ohio and Texas to shine.

 [Thanks TPM]

GOP for Hillary

Ninjas, I came across an interesting fact yesterday. It seems that because there is not a strong drive for Republicans to go out to the primaries and caucuses now that Sen. John McCain has all but clinched his nomination, they’re finding another reason to go to the polls: to vote for Hillary. Why? Because they believe that Hillary will be easier to beat than Obama in the general election. Scandalous, ain’t it? Unfortunately they’re completely within their rights to pick up a Democrat ballot, and I have word from TPM that the instances of this are few.

 

Like Hope, But Different

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gwqEneBKUs[/youtube]

All I have to say about this video is that it’s hilarious – Iraq withdrawal date: 12,008? My Ninjas, PLEASE!

From the makers of the video:

Will.i.am totally stole this idea from us, we’ve been thinking for a long time that earnest people reacting to a candidate is the future of music video.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUKINg8DCUo[/youtube]

Here’s a second video, this time by Barely Political.

Alito’s A Lot to Take

060327_scalia_vmed_5pwidec.jpg

In a rare interview, Justice Antonin Scalia plays politricks in discussing torture. In this interview Scalia somehow tries to frame the issue regarding the illegal torturing of detainees by the US to apply in completely different situations:

“Is it really so easy to determine that smacking someone in the face to determine where he has hidden the bomb that is about to blow up Los Angeles is prohibited in the constitution?”

First of all, this kind of fearmongering is horrible. Why would he suggest such a scenario? Second, should this stupid hypothetical clearly would warrant any means necessary to … I can’t even keep talking about the absurdidty of this argument, I’m sorry, ninjas. This man clearly has an agenda, and his stance on troture is clearly that of fool. Thanks, Bush. Check out this article at the BBC and if you can, check out the interview either by listening in or getting the podcast.

“Who matches up best against John McCain?”

[The following is a response to David Broder’s Sunday Washington Post Op-Ed piece] 

laughreagan.jpg

Well, my ninjas, the answer is not very clear. Now that Arizona Senator John McCain has secured the Republican nomination the Democrats have some questions to ask themselves. The first, “Who best represents my interests?” is a hard one to answer as the discrepancies between Sens. Clinton and Obama’s platforms are few. The second is based on preference, not policy: “Who do I like better?” It is the third question that Democrats should be considering most important in 2008: “Who is more capable of beating John McCain in November?” This, my ninjas, is what we all Democrats need ask themselves. In this ninja’s opinion that person is Barak Obama.

            Should Hillary Clinton get the nod for the Democratic nomination the GOP will find reason to band together against her, regardless of what Rush Limbaugh says or what Ann Coulter says. The fact of the matter is that Republicans, Conservatives, Right-Wing nut-jobs, all of them, have a deep passionate distain for all things Clinton. The force against her would be relentless. This may be way off, but the sentiments I’ve been feeling recently tell me that there are just as many people who are willing to vote Democrat for Obama as there are people who are not willing to vote for McCain based on his ani-Conservative tendencies.

            Ninjas, Barak Obama would definitely have a better chance against John McCain than Hillary Would. Should we be fortunate enough to see this race it would be a battle for the Independent vote. Independents would are a huge support for McCain as a moderate Republican and they would also side with Obama based on his platform of change. Everything that this ninja has seen thus far has shown that Obama has the edge on McCain just as McCain has the edge on Hillary.