Bush Moves Toward Martial Law

H.R.5122
John Warner National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007
October 26, 2006

In a stealth maneuver, President Bush has signed into law a provision which, according to Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), will actually encourage the President to declare federal martial law (1). It does so by revising the Insurrection Act, a set of laws that limits the President's ability to deploy troops within the United States. The Insurrection Act (10 U.S.C.331 -335) has historically, along with the Posse Comitatus Act (18 U.S.C.1385), helped to enforce strict prohibitions on military involvement in domestic law enforcement. With one cloaked swipe of his pen, Bush is seeking to undo those prohibitions.

Public Law 109-364, or the "John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007" (H.R.5122) (2), which was signed by the commander in chief on October 17th, 2006, in a private Oval Office ceremony, allows the President to declare a "public emergency" and station troops anywhere in America and take control of state-based National Guard units without the consent of the governor or local authorities, in order to "suppress public disorder."

President Bush seized this unprecedented power on the very same day that he signed the equally odious Military Commissions Act of 2006. In a sense, the two laws complement one another. One allows for torture and detention abroad, while the other seeks to enforce acquiescence at home, preparing to order the military onto the streets of America. Remember, the term for putting an area under military law enforcement control is precise; the term is "martial law."

'Beginning of the end of America'

Olbermann addresses the Military Commissions Act in a special comment

SPECIAL COMMENT
By Keith Olbermann

We have lived as if in a trance.

We have lived as people in fear.

And now—our rights and our freedoms in peril—we slowly awaken to learn that we have been afraid of the wrong thing.

Therefore, tonight have we truly become the inheritors of our American legacy.

For, on this first full day that the Military Commissions Act is in force, we now face what our ancestors faced, at other times of exaggerated crisis and melodramatic fear-mongering:

A government more dangerous to our liberty, than is the enemy it claims to protect us from.

We have been here before—and we have been here before, led here by men better and wiser and nobler than George W. Bush.

We have been here when President John Adams insisted that the Alien and Sedition Acts were necessary to save American lives, only to watch him use those acts to jail newspaper editors.

American newspaper editors, in American jails, for things they wrote about America.

We have been here when President Woodrow Wilson insisted that the Espionage Act was necessary to save American lives, only to watch him use that Act to prosecute 2,000 Americans, especially those he disparaged as “Hyphenated Americans,” most of whom were guilty only of advocating peace in a time of war.

American public speakers, in American jails, for things they said about America.

McNerney Leads Pombo in Latest Poll in CA-11

For the first time in a while, Kos actually posted an article on the Pombo-McNerney race, and it’s very, very good news. Kos reports this morning that Greenberg Quinlan and Rosner now have Jerry McNerney ahead of Pombo, 48 to 46, with 6 percent undecided, and a MoE of 4.9%. With the MoE, the race is clearly a dead heat, as this analysis points out.

» Fifty-two percent think Pombo “puts corporate interests over the people’s interests.”

» Forty-six percent think Pombo “is too close to lobbyists,” while 29 percent say he’s not.

» Forty-three percent think Pombo “is too close to oil and gas companies,” while 31 percent think he is not.

“Pombo remains in poor standing with voters in his district. Voters in California’s 11th Congressional district do not like their Congressman. As a result, they continue to support the Democratic challenger over the incumbent. With time running out, Pombo is in real jeopardy of losing his seat.”

That’s the biggest smackdown I’ve ever seen from a POLLSTER!

Michael J. Fox doesn't portray any symptoms of disease

Possibly worse than making fun of someone's disability is saying that it's imaginary. That is not to mock someone's body, but to challenge a person's guts, integrity, sanity.

To Rush Limbaugh on Monday, Michael J. Fox looked like a faker. The actor, who suffers from Parkinson's disease, has done a series of political ads supporting candidates who favor stem cell research, including Maryland Democrat Ben Cardin, who is running against Republican Michael Steele for the Senate seat being vacated by Paul Sarbanes.

"He is exaggerating effects of the disease," Limbaugh told listeners. "He's moving all around and shaking and it's purely an act. . . . This is really shameless of Michael J. Fox. Either he didn't take medication or he's acting."

Limp-baugh, whose syndicated radio program has a weekly audience of about 10 million, was reacting to Fox's appearance in another one of the spots, for Missouri Democrat Claire McCaskill, running against Republican Sen. James M. Talent.

But the Cardin ad is similar. It is hard to watch, unless, for some reason, you don't believe it. As he speaks, Fox's restless torso weaves and writhes in a private dance. His head bobs from side to side, almost leaving the video frame.

"This is the only time I've ever seen Michael J. Fox portray any of the symptoms of the disease he has," Limbaugh said. "He can barely control himself."

'A shameless statement'
Later Monday, still on the air, Limbaugh would apologize, but reaction to his statements from Parkinson's experts and Fox's supporters was swift and angry.

"It's a shameless statement," John Rogers said yesterday. Rogers, Fox's political adviser, who also serves on the board of the Parkinson's Action Network, added: "It's insulting. It's appallingly sad, at best."

Lyndon LaRouche's Pre-9/11 Warning

Given the hysteria and fear-mongering that the Bush Administration, and its supporters are engaged in around the 9/11 anniversary, largely as a desperate pre-election ploy, it's worth noting the warning that Lyndon LaRouche issued 8 months before 9/11 about the nature of the then-incoming regime.

LaRouche focused on the nomination of John Ashcroft to be attorney general, not so much because of the particularities of the Confederate flag-loving Ashcroft, but because of what his nomination indicated about how the Bush regime would respond to a crisis, and the underlying crisis was, and still is, the disintegration of the global financial system, similar, though different in magnitude, to what was happening in the 1930's.

Here is what LaRouche said, on Jan. 3, 2001:
"First of all, when Bush put Ashcroft in, as a nomination for the Justice Department, he made it clear, the Ku Klux Klan was riding again. That's clear. Now, maybe Bush didn't know what he was doing. But somebody in the Bush team did. And a lot of them had the voice to say something about it. Ashcroft was an insult to the Congress. If the Democrats in the Congress, capitulate to the Ashcroft nomination, the Congress is finished..."

Read the rest of the story here: Which way to the future?

Lincoln Weeps

By Bill Moyers
TomPaine.com
Tuesday 03 October 2006

If democracy can be said to have temples, the Lincoln Memorial is our most sacred.

You stand there silently contemplating the words that gave voice to Lincoln's fierce determination to save the union - his resolve that "government of, by, and for the people shall not perish from the earth."

On this latest visit, I was overcome by a sense of melancholy. Lincoln looks out now on a city where those words are daily mocked. This is no longer his city. And those people from all walks of life making their way up the steps to pay their respect to the martyred president - it's not their city, either. Or their government.

This is an occupied city, a company town, and government is a subservient subsidiary of richly endowed patrons.

Once upon a time the House of Representatives was known as "the people's house." No more. It belongs to K Street now. That's the address of the lobbyists who swarm all over Capitol Hill. There are 65 lobbyists for every member of Congress.

They spend $200 million per month wining, dining and seducing federal officials. Per month!

Of course they're just doing their job. It's impossible to commit bribery, legal or otherwise, unless someone's on the take, and with campaign costs soaring, our politicians always have their hands out. One representative confessed that members of Congress are the only people in the world expected to take large amounts of money from strangers and then act as if it has no effect on their behavior.

This explains why Democrats are having a hard time exploiting the culture of corruption embodied in the scandalous behavior of DeLay and Abramoff. Democrats are themselves up to their necks in the sludge. Just the other day one of the most powerful Democrats in the House bragged to reporters about tapping "uncharted donor fields in the financial industry" - reminding them, not so subtlely, of the possibility that after November the majority leader just might be a Democrat.

Read the full story here...Truthout: Lincoln Weeps

Abramoff-Pombo Lobbying Contacts

Records Suggest Abramoff-Pombo Lobbying Contacts
Tuesday 10 October 2006

California Rep. Richard Pombo has insisted he was never lobbied by Jack Abramoff. Records show the disgraced lobbyist billed a client for at least two contacts with Pombo a decade ago.

The lobbying records released by the Northern Mariana Islands show that Abramoff billed once for calls to Pombo, chairman of the House Resources Committee, and a second time for a discussion with him, while lobbying in 1996.

On more than two dozen other occasions from 1996 through 2001, Abramoff associates called or met with members of Pombo's staff, including his chief of staff, the records indicate. As the contacts picked up, Pombo voted Abramoff's way on a bill important to Abramoff's clients.