Bush Creates More Security Agencies

I was wondering what the reasons behind this were, when I read this article and it became clearer to me. This is an attempt to brush the Downing Street memo under the carpet and out of sight. It's not like this is getting a ton of attention anyway, but it must really have some potential to do damage.

The section that stood out for me was, "Bush asked for the Robb-Silberman review in early 2004 after it became clear that prewar intelligence on Iraq was flawed. After a 13-month investigation, the commission concluded the intelligence community was "dead wrong" in almost all of its prewar findings on Iraq's arsenal" This is the same intelligence that the Bush administration has been defending since day one. I remember hearing about the commission being formed, but really didn't expect anything to come of it.

While I'm glad that something is being done in what amounts to an admission that Iraq was invaded under false pretenses, what is worrisome is that more government is being created instead of cutting fat. It also seems that this will be the penance for lying to the global community, let alone the American people, over and over again. There really should be something more done. The fact that we invaded a country under the cover of lies and deceit is not being dealt with here at home, yet Congress will try and impeach a President for perjury that in no way shape or form caused any global conflicts. Maybe we should have has Bush, or Rumsfeld, or Ashcroft swear on a bible before they addressed anyone on the war in Iraq.

It's no wonder that in the eyes of the world we have so little credibility.

Do we really need to Amend the Constitution for Flag burning?

So someone burns a flag? WHO CARES? What if someone torched one of those garden flags that litter the porches of so many homes? It is a piece of nylon or synthetic blend.
I know people will say, "It's a symbol of our country!". Yes, I'm quite aware of that. Think of it this way, would you get bent out of shape if someone burned a map of the US? It is a "symbol" of our country and conveys the same message. Well, I suppose some would. But really, some people are hypersensitive.

The flag should be treated with respect, in my opinion. That certainly doesn't stop a thousand and three people from wearing flag bandanas, hats, shirts, jackets, and boxer shorts because they want to show off their "patriotism". Guess what Bubba, that's just as disrespectful as burning the flag. It's against the US Flag Code. Where is the amendment for the protection of the flag against bad fashion choices? As a matter of fact, the code of the flag actually states that if a flag is in disrepair it should be burned rather than discarded as trash.
See this web page for more complete rules of respecting the Flag

Before anyone flames me (pun intended) and says "People died to protect that flag", please let me state....no they didn't. They died to protect the ideals the flag represents. One of those ideals being people should be able to state their beliefs and protest without violence in the way they choose. Providing they don't infringe on the rights of others. That is the issue at heart and is more important to me than cracking down on pyromaniacs who choose the flag as thier victim.

At the end of the day, someone burning a flag is simply trying to convey an emotion or make a statement. It certainly isn't worth amending the Constitution over. Don't we have much bigger fish to fry in Congress? Have we really solved all the other issues?

From good news to stupid news....

Own a telephone? You're still paying for the Spanish-American War.
Article

It's alarming that not only are we still paying into a fund for a war a century gone, but that certain members of Congress want to "expand" the tax to wireless and internet usage.

Some members of Congress voted to repeal the tax, and it passed both the House and the Senate. Clinton vetoed the bill. I can't imagine why as there was no reason to keep the tax. Unless the 3% tax was being figured into his budget. Cutting that 3% from the general fund would have made his balanced budget, not quite as balanced. Good luck in getting the current President to repeal it either. Dubya's got a "war" on terrorism to fund.

If you disagree with this, or any other tax, law, or bill please, write your congressmen. They are in their positions as your representative. They are your proxy. Make your decisions, don't let them decide for you. For the people, by the people only works if the people get involved.

The House of Delegates votes to repeal a peice of the 'Patriot Act'
Read more about it Here

True, it only covers library searches.
True, it's a baby step.
But it's a step in the right direction, and the ultra-conservatives are pissy.
Good.

From the files of 'It's probably just me':
In what's hopefully the last chapter on the 1964 murders of three civil right's advocates in Mississippi, the defendants name is Killen and the lead prosecuting attorney's name is Hood. It's either a strange twisted justice, or incredible coincidence.

#2 - I'm going to treat this as if no one is reading it. Because no one is. I guess that makes this more a journal than a log. What am I logging here anyway? Just my interpretations of everyday life, and my opinion on what I deem important. How sinfully self-centered.

That's something in itself.

First post. This should prove to go one of two ways.

1. It will become a catharsis, and I will write everyday.
2. I will post once or twice more, and fade quietly into blog oblivion.

Place your bets. Equal odds right now.....