11.10.2009


Fort Hood Massacre: A Brief History of American Violence


It’s hard to pinpoint what’s the most shocking thing about Major Malik Nadal Hasan’s shooting rampage in Fort Hood, Texas. I’ll start with this: there’s nothing all that ground-breaking about it. Happens all the time, it’s just that we’re a nation of amnesiacs who forget all the unpleasantries, and refuse to learn the valuable lessons. [Just this morning, another "going postal" office massacre in Orlando, leaving at least 2 dead and 17 wounded. Early reports say the shooter was an employee.]


8.04.2007

PAUL PREACHES ADHERENCE TO CONSTITUTION

His focus on founding ideals, America first, core Republican values pays dividends

By Mark Anderson
www.AmericanFreePress.net

THE MEANING AND IMPACT of Texas Republican Rep. Ron Paul’s presidential bid is becoming clearer by the day, as Paul’s “Texas Straight Talk” resonates deeply with a diverse spectrum of Americans and changes the political climate in a way that makes establishment candidates appear dull and unappealing. Pundits and observers reluctantly point out that Paul’s consistent views and adherence to pro-American principles impress voters enough to support him even when they disagree with him on specific issues.

According to Paul himself, in Georgia, Dr. Paul Broun defeated State Sen. John Whitehead in a special election to Congress. How? By sticking to constitutional principles. In other words, the “Ron Paul approach” disarmed a well-funded establishment candidate and allowed a better man to fill a seat in Congress, where constitutionalists are nearly extinct.

“John had all the establishment and money on his side. But [Broun] discussed obedience to the Constitution, limited government, the failure of the national Republican leadership and a less aggressive foreign policy. And he won. Columnist Robert Novak said this ‘terrified’ all the establishment types in the Republican Party,” said Paul, who had talked to Broun during his campaign and was “thrilled” to congratulate him on his victory.

“There is a new wind blowing,” Paul said in a news release posted at ronpaul.com. “Our bottom-up campaign—not top-down in the usual official fashion—has gotten far bigger and more successful, at a faster rate, than even I dreamed. And the sky is the limit. Don’t we owe it to our great forebears, and to our children and grandchildren and great grandchildren down through the generations, not to lose our country? We can win the fight for the ideals of the founders. We can have freedom, peace and prosperity. We can be blessed by our fellow citizens, and by all those who come after us.”

Paul’s campaign press secretary, Jesse Benton said the Broun-Paul issue underscores the power of truth.

“There are a lot of parallels between Ron and Dr. Broun,” Benton told American Free Press. “Both are medical doctors; both are strict constitutionalists. It’s a strong indicator that if a real constitutionalist runs, they can overcome establishment backing and deep pockets of campaign finance.”

Indeed, the establishment flagship, The Wall Street Journal, ran a July 23 commentary by John Fund, who wrote that Dr. Broun told him: “The race boiled down to someone who represented the status quo versus someone who wanted to vote for change.”

Fund noted that Broun “prevailed by using direct mail and telephone messages to go over the heads of party leaders with a pledge that, once in Congress, he would apply a four-way test before voting on any bill: Is it constitutional and a proper function of government? Is it morally correct? Is it something we really need? Is it something we can afford? He has said that, like libertarian congressman and fellow physician Ron Paul of Texas, he will always carry a pocket copy of the Constitution with him and consult it before voting. In an effort to limit pork-barrel ‘earmark’ projects, he says he will even apply that standard to requests for federal funds made by local officials in his district.

“[Broun] capped off that legislative commitment by offering strong support for efforts to overturn the Supreme Court’s 2005 Kelo [vs. New London] eminent domain decision that upheld the power of local officials to seize private property for private uses. He also strongly endorsed the abolition of the IRS and the replacement of the income tax with a national sales tax.”

Notably, Paul has said repeatedly that he differs on that point, saying he would abolish the IRS and the income tax but would not replace the income tax with anything. He would deeply cut spending so less taxes are needed in the first place.

Interestingly, Fund added: “The conventional wisdom in Washington is that someone in Congress who votes against federal spending that isn’t in accord with the original conception of the Constitution will have trouble getting re-elected. But Rep. Paul, who has made his votes against almost every federal program a centerpiece of his insurgent GOP presidential campaign, says he finds that he gains more votes from people impressed with his consistency than he loses from those upset that he isn’t a passenger
on the federal gravy train.”

AFP takes the approach of setting the constitutional standard and seeing who reaches it. So far, Paul is the only one to genuinely do so, objectively speaking. AFP makes no election predictions either way. The Constitution is the basic thing to which all officials take a sworn oath to uphold and defend. News reporting should observe that standard as the measure of a candidate. Anything else becomes a mere battle of personalities, as well as repackaged legislative tinkering that has had its chance in the public domain and failed.

Benton also noted another parallel: Broun won due in part to the support he got from a combination of traditional conservatives, libertarians, assorted constitutionalists and even progressives.

This same combination, ranging from the age of 18 to the elderly, also is supporting Paul. Benton said many progressives who are bored by the Democratic presidential candidates were initially attracted to Paul by his anti-war stance but are sticking with him because of his apparent integrity and championing of liberty.

“He’s not a packaged politician” and they know that, Benton told AFP.

American Free Press reporter Mark Anderson can be reached at truthhound2@yahoo.com Watch future AFP issues for more on America’s welcome acceptance of biofuels and other energy alternatives, helping end our gluttonous addiction to foreign petroleum.

George Bush - American Idiot

8.01.2007

Cheney: I Have ‘No Recollection’

Cheney On Whether He Ordered Hospital Visit To Ashcroft: I Have ‘No Recollection’

On Sunday, Josh Marshall pointed out that the New York Times editorial on the potential need to impeach Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said that “Vice President Dick Cheney sent Mr. Gonzales and another official to Mr. Ashcroft’s hospital room to get him to approve the wiretapping.” As Marshall noted, before the editorial, Cheney’s involvement in the incident had never been established.

Today on CNN, in a preview of his interview with the Vice President tonight, Larry King said he asked Cheney about the allegation. “I asked the Vice President about that and the story that he was the one that asked him to go,” said King. “And he said he had no recollection.”

“He did not want to deal with specifics, which tells me, they’re looking at trouble,” King added. “If you don’t want to deal with specifics…I think you’re looking at trouble and you’re looking the other way if you’re denying it.”
Gonzales’ late night trip to Ashcroft’s hospital room is central to the perjury allegations swirling around him. When Gonzales was asked during his Senate testimony last week who sent him that night, he refused to say it was President Bush, instead asserting “we were there on behalf of the president of the United States.”
That Cheney may in fact be the administration official who sent Gonzales should come as no surprise. In May 2006, the New York Times reported that in the wake of 9/11, Cheney pushed for a much more expansive version of the NSA surveillance program, but was rebuffed by NSA lawyers.
UPDATE: Here’s the transcript of King and Cheney’s exchange:
Q In that regard, The New York Times — which, as you said, is not your favorite — reports it was you who dispatched Gonzales and Andy Card to then-Attorney General John Ashcroft’s hospital in 2004 to push Ashcroft to certify the President’s intelligence-gathering program. Was it you?
THE VICE PRESIDENT: I don’t recall — first of all, I haven’t seen the story. And I don’t recall that I gave instructions to that effect.
Q That would be something you would recall.
THE VICE PRESIDENT: I would think so. But certainly I was involved because I was a big advocate of the Terrorist Surveillance Program, and had been responsible and working with General Hayden and George Tenet to get it to the President for approval. By the time this occurred, it had already been approved about 12 times by the Department of Justice. There was nothing new about it.
Q So you didn’t send them to get permission.
THE VICE PRESIDENT: I don’t recall that I was the one who sent them to the hospital.

Bush Won't Let Aide Rove Testify to Congress

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Citing executive privilege, President George W. Bush on Wednesday rejected a subpoena for his close adviser Karl Rove to testify to the Senate Judiciary Committee in a probe over fired federal prosecutors.

The committee had subpoenaed Rove to testify at a hearing on Thursday morning in its investigation of the firing last year of nine federal prosecutors, which critics said was prompted by partisan politics.

"Mr. Rove, as an immediate presidential advisor, is immune from compelled congressional testimony about matters that arose during his tenure and that relate to his official duties in that capacity," White House Counsel Fred Fielding wrote in a letter to Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, a Vermont Democrat. Leahy made the letter available to Reuters.
Bush's move sets up a possible court showdown between the White House and Democratic lawmakers, who have also sought to force other Bush aides to testify and demanded documents it says the White House is not releasing.
Democrats say the firings may have been intended to influence investigations of Democratic or Republican lawmakers.
U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who signed off on the firings, also faces a possible perjury investigation over the truthfulness of his testimony to Congress.
Bush and Gonzales have said the dismissals were justified but mishandled. With the support of Bush, Gonzales has rejected bipartisan calls to resign.

7.23.2007

Foreign Investors Have More Control Over The US Economy Than Americans

Pravda
07/23/2007

America’s leading public finance watchdog has sounded a warning that the US economy is vulnerable to hostile financial actions by nations that are not its “allies”.

David Walker, the US comptroller general, indicated that the huge holdings of American government debt by countries such as China, Saudi Arabia and Libya could leave a powerful financial weapon in the hands of countries that may be hostile to US corporate and diplomatic interests.

Mr Walker told The Times that foreign investors have more control over the US economy than Americans, leaving the country in a state that was “financially imprudent”.
He said: “More and more of our debt is held by foreign countries – some of which are our allies and some are not.” Read More

Bush Aides Face Contempt Vote Wednesday

Copyright 2007 AFX News Limited
AFX.COM
July 23, 2007 Monday 10:44 PM GMT


WASHINGTON (AP) - House Democrats on Monday targeted two of President Bush's longtime aides for criminal contempt citations, escalating a legal fight over executive privilege and access to White House deliberations on the firings of federal prosecutors.

Rep. John Conyers, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said his panel would vote Wednesday on citing White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten and former Counsel Harriet Miers for contempt of Congress. Read More