Greenwald on Obama and Congressional Democratic impotence in the face of their corporate owners

more finely-honed glenn observations...

[T]here is one principal reason that Blue Dogs and "centrists" exert such dominance within the Party: because the Party leadership, led by the Obama White House, wants it that way and works hard to ensure it continues.

[...]

[T]he White House and President -- along with key party institutions such as the DCCC -- will use their vast resources to keep Blue Dogs and "centrists" in office and crush any efforts from within the party to unseat them.

It's hard to overstate how many promising potential primary challengers with whom we've spoken -- highly energized and impressive members of City Councils or County Commissions or state legislatures or just private citizens -- who are eager to run against their corporate-owned Democratic Congressional incumbent but are deterred by one primary fear: that Obama and the Party infrastructure will undercut their efforts by actively supporting the Blue Dog incumbent. That fear is particularly pronounced for potential African-American challengers in districts where the corporate-serving "centrist" incumbent is wildly out of step with the interests and views of the typical (and sometimes overwhelmingly African-American) Democratic voter. Such potential challengers anticipate that Obama will intervene on behalf of the Blue Dog against the progressive challenger -- as he's done before -- and sabotage not only their primary challenge but perhaps their future viability as a candidate in their community and district.

[...]

[T]he central fact in American political life is that the same narrow factions continue to control our political process regardless of which party is in control...

[...]

Obama himself has been a major beneficiary of this process -- helping Democrats to be the leading recipient of corporate money -- and key Obama allies like Rahm Emanuel and Chuck Schumer have built their power bases through servitude to corporate interests. The very idea that Obama is valiantly struggling to cleanse the party of its corporate and centrist dominance, yet is just haplessly and helplessly unable to do so, is ludicrous beyond words.

[...]

[I]t's not possible to reasonably deny that the Democratic Party is how it is because that's how its leaders, including Obama, want it to be. Their actions permit no other conclusion. Indeed, one potential bright side with what's happening with the health care debate -- the Party's total devotion to the health care and drug industries despite huge majorities and a massive electoral mandate -- is that these truths have become so glaring that it is finally forcing even the most "sensible" Democratic partisans ... to recognize how fundamentally flawed the Party is.

[...]

If the Democratic Party is to become a meaningful alternative, free from corporate control, that will happen not because party leaders such as Obama cause it to happen. Instead, it will only occur from efforts on the part of Democrats to cease support for, and begin working to eject, those elements which keep the Party beholden to the same interests as the ones who own and control the so-called "other party."

i believe i mentioned in the previous post that i thought glenn had become increasingly strident in his perspectives... i should have mentioned that i believe that's a very good thing as he seems to be edging closer and closer to what i believe is the core truth about our government and the bulk of our economy in the u.s. and, indeed, in most of the rest of the world: our fates are controlled by a very small group of extraordinarily wealthy and powerful interests that are obsessively devoted to staying that way...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Are the super-rich driving up oil prices to make themselves even richer...? Na-a-a-aaah... Perish the thought...

i've been increasingly suspicious that the dramatic rise in oil prices is just another orchestrated money grab by the super-rich, power elites... looks like i may not be the only person who harbors those dark thoughts...

mcclatchy...

A key federal regulator said Thursday that it's been probing whether speculators are manipulating the price of oil and gasoline and announced a series of measures to make the opaque world of oil trading more transparent.

In a surprise announcement, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) confirmed that since last December it's been investigating the trading of contracts for future deliveries of oil, commonly called futures contracts.

"Although the commission ordinarily conducts enforcement investigations on a confidential basis, the commission is taking the extraordinary step of disclosing this investigation because of today's unprecedented market conditions," the statement said. "The specifics of the ongoing investigation remain confidential. All commission enforcement inquiries are focused on ensuring that the markets are properly policed for manipulation and abusive practices."

la times...

"It shouldn't have taken oil and gasoline prices hitting Guinness-like record highs for the federal government to look into possible price manipulation by speculators, but it should also be looking at manipulation by oil companies and oil producers," said Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), chairman of Congress' Joint Economic Committee.

[...]

A commission official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to discuss ongoing investigations publicly, said the commission's economists were fairly sure that there had been no criminal manipulation of the market.

that last paragraph as much as says that the investigation is principally for show, that there is no intention to get to the bottom of the matter... (like we thought for a moment that there would be...)

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

When I read stuff like this from a so-called "liberal-progressive," I want to cry

what is it going to take from some people to get it...?

clammyc at daily kos, writing an open letter to senator chuck schumer...

Allowing for retroactive immunity in a FISA bill that had no business even being brought to the floor is not progressive. Folding to Mister Bush on Iraq over and over and over when the vast majority of the country is on your side is not progressive. Sending a big "F-You" to MoveOn.org on the Senate floor is not progressive. Allowing extremist appointment after extremist appointment by Bush is not progressive. Caving to an unpopular President and an even less popular Congressional minority is not progressive. Allowing non-progressives to continuously set the tone of the debate is not progressive.

[...]

I sincerely hope that we can recruit more progressives for the Senate, and win more seats. However, we also expect more from the lion’s share of the current Democratic Senators – on the very issues that we were promised results on. Blaming republican obstruction is part of it - but we know better. There is much more that you and your colleagues could have (and still can) accomplish if you were to keep your promises made to us back in 2006.

You can do better. We did our part for you. Now it is time that you and your colleagues really do what you promised us. If I can't trust the DSCC and who it represents to keep up your end of the deal, then you'll have to excuse me while I work for and donate money to true progressives.

No hard feelings, though...

i completely understand the value of courtesy, especially when couched in articulate and intelligent writing, but, clammyc, in all seriousness, the time for that is long past... what we are witnessing here is criminal complicity, nothing more and nothing less, and i'm thinking of the fisa votes of the "better" democrats tester and webb as i type this... what we have here is a system so rotten to the core that even brand new "better" democrats are betraying us... scratch that... they are betraying their COUNTRY...

who are we to trust...? i was beginning to warm to obama, to "catch the wave," so to speak, but, ya know what, i simply can't get past zbigniew brzezinski as one of his chief policy advisors any more than i can get past mark penn as hillary's campaign chief...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Schumer's constituents are pissed

and rightly so...



(thanks to RagingGurrl at Daily Kos...)

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Dear Chuck - Mukasey is ALREADY under the sway of "extreme ideology" or he wouldn't have been nominated

chucky thinks mukasey isn't under the sway of "extreme ideology..." he must be smokin' that funny stuff again...

Senator Charles Schumer, the New York Democrat who turned the tide for this nomination, said that if the Senate did not approve Mr. Mukasey, the president would get by with an interim appointment who would be under the sway of “the extreme ideology of Vice President Dick Cheney.” He argued that Mr. Mukasey could be counted on to reverse the politicization of the Justice Department that occurred under Alberto Gonzales, and that Mr. Mukasey’s reticence about calling waterboarding illegal might well become moot, because the Senate was considering a law making clear that it is illegal.

That is precisely the sort of cozy rationalization that Mr. Schumer and his colleagues have used so many times to back down from a confrontation with Mr. Bush. The truth is, Mr. Mukasey is already in the grip of that “extreme ideology.” If he were not, he could have answered the question about waterboarding.

what strange, powerful, magical spell must schumer and difi be under to so completely abandon not only their constituents but also the very constitution that they have taken an oath to defend...?

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Bush covering his ass on torture

always powerful, olbermann weighs in on waterboarding, torture, and mukasey...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

I call B.S. on Chuck Schumer [w/UPDATE]

the nyt is on a roll... yesterday, ashcroft's op-ed defending telecom immunity, and today, chuck schumer defending his pledge to vote for mukasey... check the email headline and teaser...

A Vote for Justice*
By CHARLES SCHUMER
I am voting to support Michael B. Mukasey for attorney general for one critical reason: the Department of Justice is in desperate need of a strong leader**. [asterisks added]

i saw that and hadn't yet opened up the full article before i decided to post on it... i'm going to do that now, so i'll be back in a few...

ok, i'm back... here are the key paragraphs...

Judge Mukasey would be more likely than a caretaker attorney general to find on his own that waterboarding and other techniques are illegal. Indeed, his written answers to our questions have demonstrated more openness to ending the practices we abhor than either of this president’s previous attorney general nominees have had.

I understand and respect my colleagues who believe that Judge Mukasey’s view on torture should trump all other considerations. For the Senate to make a bold declaration about torture and waterboarding by rejecting him is appealing. But if we block Judge Mukasey’s nomination and then learn in six months that waterboarding has continued unabated, that victory will seem much less valuable.

To defeat him would be to abandon the hope of instituting the many reforms called for by our investigation. No one questions that Judge Mukasey would do much to remove the stench of politics from the Justice Department. I believe we should give him that chance.

unfortunately, schumer's view that it was mukasey's failure to classify waterboarding as torture that constituted the key consideration for opposing him misses an even more important reason, one which was all but lost in the brouhaha over whether waterboarding does or does not qualify as torture... as glenn greenwald noted back in mid-september...

Judge Mukasey's respect for the Constitution and the rule of law should not be overstated. As part of his ruling that Padilla was entitled to counsel and to contest the factual accusations against him, Mukasey also ruled, very dubiously, that President Bush had the authority to detain American citizens, even those detained on U.S. soil, as "enemy combatants," and that they need not be charged with any crimes. He thus rejected Padilla's claim that, as a U.S. citizen, the Constitution barred his incarceration without criminal charges being brought and a conviction obtained in a court of law.

to me, there is no question that waterboarding is illegal and constitutes torture, and it disturbs me greatly that mukasey did not strongly speak out against it... but, even more disturbing is his support for plenary executive powers, something that either isn't on schumer's radar or that he is conveniently ignoring...

[UPDATE]

like we didn't expect THIS to happen...

The Senate Judiciary Committee just voted 11-8 to approve the nomination of Michael Mukasey as Attorney General. He now heads to the full Senate for a vote. Sens. Charles Schumer (NY) and Dianne Feinstein (CA) were the only Democrats to join all nine Republicans in voting for the nomination.

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Criminal Democrats who no longer care if we know

lead item in the daily wapo email, page one in the print edition...

the headline says it all...

TODAY'S HIGHLIGHTS
Democratic Defections Clear Path For Mukasey
The nomination fight over attorney general nominee Michael B. Mukasey effectively came to an end yesterday, as two key Senate Democrats parted from their colleagues and announced their support for the former judge despite his controversial statements on torture.
(By Dan Eggen and Paul Kane, The Washington Post)

i only have one quibble... the defections are not of recent vintage... they sold out a long time ago, and we are only now seeing it in the full light of day... they have essentially declared what we have suspected all along, that they are supporters of a criminal regime, fully cognizant of their actions, and they no longer care who knows it...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Disgusting: Schumer and DiFi support Mukasey

what the hell is the matter with these idiots...? dianne feinstein is nothing more than joe lieberman in drag...

Democratic Sens. Charles Schumer of New York and Dianne Feinstein of California say they will support Michael Mukasey's nomination to be attorney general. Both are members of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

they're selling the united states down the river... actually, forget the present tense... it's already sold...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

B.O.H.I.C.A.*

pathetic, but, sadly, no surprise...

dana milbank in the wapo...

[The White House has] stalled or ignored Leahy's requests as his committee looks into the wiretapping program and the travails of Gonzales. They have calculated -- accurately so far -- that the Dynamic Duo of Leahy and Schumer would deliver harsh words but no punishment of consequence.

"The time is up. The time is up," Leahy announced yesterday. "We've waited long enough."

But what would Leahy do about it? The first questioner riddled Batman with this.

"The full Judiciary Committee will have to sit down and determine whether to seek contempt from the full Senate," said the noncommittal action hero.

Does that mean he would seek a contempt-of-Congress citation? "What I want to do is get the response to these things," Leahy demurred.

kagro x at daily kos...

The best spin that can be put on this -- and the spin Leahy would no doubt put on it -- is that the Senator was careful, even cagey, and displayed a statesmanlike refusal to tip his hand.

The rest of the world saw this: He's got nothin'.

our two-party system...? balance of powers...? the united states constitution...? what a joke...

* b.o.h.i.c.a...

bend over, here it comes again...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Sara Taylor's testimony

TPMmuckraker is staying abreast of sara taylor's appearance today before the senate judiciary committee... this about sums up how it's going...

[T]aylor has actually answered a number of questions that would seem to be covered by privilege, but not others. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) later remarked that Taylor's willingness to answer certain questions had "weakened" the White House's claim of privilege.

sounds to me like she's been coached...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Will Fitz testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee?

according to cliff schecter...

Just now on Face the Nation, Chuck Schumer said that the Judiciary committee was considering calling Patrick Fitzgerald to testify about the Plame leak.

would fitz be subject to having his testimony prevented under a claim of executive privilege...?

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Dana Milbank on Fourthbranch: "Madison and Franklin did not return phone calls yesterday"

with somebody this over the top and this bizarre, and someone who also seems to have been running our country for the past 6 1/2 years, it helps to have a sense of humor...

dana milbank from today's wapo...

The Cheese Stands Alone

By Dana Milbank
Tuesday, June 26, 2007; Page A02

[...]

"The vice president's theory seems to be one almost laughable on its face, that he's not part of the executive branch," Sen. Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) said in a conference call with reporters from his car. "I think if you ask James Madison or Benjamin Franklin or any of the writers of the Constitution, they'd almost laugh if they heard that."

Madison and Franklin did not return phone calls yesterday.

and, after being attacked by the press wolf pack yesterday (entirely justified, imho), i don't imagine dana perino is going to willingly throw herself back into action again any time soon... or, if she finds herself in front of the gaggle again today, maybe she can just sing them a song...

The farmer in the dell

The farmer in the dell
The farmer in the dell
Hi-ho, the derry-o
The farmer in the dell

The farmer takes a wife
The farmer takes a wife
Hi-ho, the derry-o
The farmer takes a wife

The wife takes a child
The wife takes a child
Hi-ho, the derry-o
The wife takes a child

The child takes a nurse
The child takes a nurse
Hi-ho, the derry-o
The child takes a nurse

The nurse takes a cow
The nurse takes a cow
Hi-ho, the derry-o
The nurse takes a cow

The cow takes a dog
The cow takes a dog
Hi-ho, the derry-o
The cow takes a dog

The dog takes a cat
The dog takes a cat
Hi-ho, the derry-o
The dog takes a cat

The cat takes a rat
The cat takes a rat
Hi-ho, the derry-o
The cat takes a rat

The rat takes the cheese
The rat takes the cheese
Hi-ho, the derry-o
The rat takes the cheese

The cheese stands alone
The cheese stands alone
Hi-ho, the derry-o
The cheese stands alone

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Dana Perino: the Democrats’ “obsession with trying to get Karl Rove is bordering on the weird”

no, it's not weird... in fact, a burning desire to hold karl rove accountable is perhaps one of the LEAST weird things going on in the country right now... since even before george bush's texas governorship, anybody with two brain cells to rub together who has been paying the slightest bit of attention, recognizes that karl rove, along with dick cheney, is one of the darkest forces to ever strut across the world stage... it's certainly not like the perversion, debasement, and polarization of the national dialog originated with karl rove, but karl, in his demented, obsessed passion for creating an all-powerful, one-party state, not restricted in any way by such fusty, antiquated notions as the constitutional separation of powers, the wall between church and state, congressional oversight, the rule of law, or common human decency, has succeeded in propelling us to depths so low that light does not even penetrate... if there is any justice in this world, there will be accountability for this profoundly evil man...

Senator Charles E. Schumer, the New York Democrat who is leading the investigation in the Senate, said it made sense for lawmakers to “go to the underlings first.” But Charles Black, a Republican strategist close to the White House, characterized Mr. Rove’s absence from the subpoena as a delaying tactic intended to keep the controversy alive.

“I think the Democrats have a three- or four- or five-act play scripted here,” Mr. Black said, “and Karl is probably Act 5.”

Mr. Bush has already said he would not stand for top aides like Mr. Rove being dragged up to Capitol Hill for “show trials” under “the klieg lights.” And Dana Perino, the deputy White House press secretary, complained on Friday that the Democrats’ “obsession with trying to get Karl Rove is bordering on the weird.”

Now the president must decide how aggressive he wants to be about defending his right to receive confidential advice, from Mr. Rove or anyone else in his inner circle. Mr. Bush has assiduously protected presidential prerogatives. He has expanded presidential powers, claiming authority to try terror suspects in military tribunals and eavesdrop on Americans without court warrants — and without the knowledge of Congress.

Some allies of the White House say an executive privilege battle is the next logical step.

by all means, continue to paint the entire effort as merely a political chess game, a carefully crafted ploy to keep the democrats under the spotlight on the national stage, and continue to ignore the underlying constitutional crisis that threatens to swallow us all... as someone from canada said to me yesterday, "i love to watch american politics... it's so ENTERTAINING...!" yes, it would be entertaining if it was indeed only a play and the consequences weren't so potentially dire...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Phone, email or fax your Senators on the Gonzo no-confidence vote set for Monday

a complete directory of the u.s. senate including numbers and email contact info is here...

The Senate’s no-confidence vote on Attorney General Alberto Gonzales will take place Monday.

“If all Senators who have actually lost confidence in Attorney General Gonzales voted their conscience, this vote would be unanimous,” [Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.)] said in a statement. “However, the president will certainly exert pressure to support the attorney general, his longtime friend. We will soon see where people’s loyalties lie.”

casting a vote of no-confidence in gonzo is the only reasonable response for any senator who truly supports our constitution and our vaunted "rule of law..."

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

If I was in Schlozman's shoes, I wouldn't want to be interrogated by Schumer

wow...! i thought LEAHY was on fire...!

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Oh, those wascally Democwats and their bottomless bag of twicks

uh, 'scuse me, mr. fratto, who exactly IS it that still supports gonzales...?

Q Senators Schumer and Feinstein are going to introduce a no confidence resolution for Attorney General Gonzales next week, the Senate is going to vote on this. You have a sixth Republican, Norm Coleman, come out and say the Attorney General should resign. Doesn't this all add up to the weight that's dragging him down? And how can he be effective with all --

MR. FRATTO: I think it adds up to the bottomless bag of tricks that Democrats in the Senate would like to pull out on a weekly basis, regarding the Attorney General. The Attorney General has the full confidence of the President. He's focused on the mission of the Department of Justice, which is to keep Americans safe, protect us from domestic terrorism threats, child predators. We know that this has been a difficult period, dealing with the discussion and questions having to do with the U.S. attorneys. But the Attorney General is sticking to his job. We feel he's been a very strong Attorney General, and we continue to support him.

Q You addressed the Democratic part of that question. You didn't say anything about the six Republicans. And you also had Specter saying that he predicts that he'll resign -- Gonzales will resign, saying that he's unable to perform his duties. What about the Republicans?

MR. FRATTO: We understand that there are senators who have different views.

Q I'm talking about the Republicans.

MR. FRATTO: Talking about senators of both parties, and we understand that they have concerns and questions. We think that the Attorney General has been honest and forthright in addressing those questions; and as I said earlier, most importantly, has the full confidence of the President.

Jim.

Q But, Tony, when you say he has the full confidence of the President, and when you say you feel he's been a strong Attorney General, doesn't this erode the President's credibility when it seems like the entire rest of the political universe is on the other side of that?

MR. FRATTO: No, I don't think that's where everyone is. Look --

Q How is -- who's on his side?

MR. FRATTO: What we are focusing on, what we think the Attorney General is focusing on is the mission of the Department of Justice. I haven't heard anyone say that the Department of Justice has been weak in enforcing child predator laws. I haven't heard anyone say that the Department of Justice has been anything short of strong and aggressive in protecting America from domestic terrorism threats. Those are the things that we are focusing on, and those things have happened under this Attorney General's leadership.

if gonzo is good enough for george, he's good enough for me...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Senate no-confidence vote on Gonzo

At a press conference moments ago, Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) called on the Senate to hold a no-confidence vote on Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

it’s about damn time they get serious about this… after reading greenwald reinforcing my own view that things are completely out of control with bush and the white house, we need to be taking some very serious and very assertive steps to reclaim our country… a no-confidence vote is a small step, but at least it’s in the right direction…

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Comey: "devotion to the law trumped political considerations"

now, THERE'S a concept... devotion to the law, something we ought to be able to take for granted with our top justice department officials, right...? ok, i don't think anyone's so naive that they think political leanings and personal opinions don't affect judgment... of course they do... but i've also assumed that, when you are given a position of stewardship over the laws of a nation and the obligation to see that justice is served, you would bend over backwards to keep politics and your own biases out of your work... so, here's comey, obviously (to me, at least) a sincere and dedicated public servant who just so happens to be a republican and a supporter of george bush... does that keep him from doing the right thing...? no... should it have...? no... but just look at the agony and suffering the bush criminal cabal has put a good man through...

Colleagues say Mr. Comey is, even now, a reluctant critic of the administration he served. But they say he feels strongly that there was no justification for the purge of prosecutors and remains furious about what he saw in 2004 as an improper attempt by the White House to bypass the Justice Department.

Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, who led Mr. Comey through his dramatic tale on Tuesday said it was clearly an emotional release for the former No. 2 Justice Department official. “When we asked him about it, it was like a dam broke,” Mr. Schumer said.

“He had been carrying this weight around inside him and wanted the appropriate opportunity to get it off his conscience,” Mr. Schumer added. “When you watched him, he was both pained and relieved.”

Mr. Comey, a former federal terrorism prosecutor in New York and Virginia, is described by colleagues as a solid Republican but one whose devotion to the law trumped political considerations.

Steven R. Peikin, who prosecuted securities fraud cases under Mr. Comey when he was United States attorney in Manhattan, said he found Mr. Comey’s intervention in the N.S.A. program “totally unsurprising.”

“We always joked that Jimmy Stewart’s going to play him in the movie,” Mr. Peikin said. “He’s the picture of rectitude — a charming, engaging, funny guy, but one who set a tone for the office about doing the right thing, not necessarily about winning every case.”

in reading about comey's attempts to find legal justification for bushco's surveillance program and harsh interrogation methods, neither of which i support in the least, i can't say i support the guy's positions... what i DO support wholeheartedly is his effort to stay within the law and the framework of the constitution... THAT is what someone in his position is put there to do and it is deeply wrong to attempt to make someone like that a political and partisan tool...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments

Dear Gonzo, we hope this finds you well

as one think progress commenter said...

A letter?

Wow, I guess that they’ve really taken off the gloves now.

yeah, an honest-to-god letter... they're really bringing out the BIG GUNS...!

Russ Feingold (D-WI), Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Ted Kennedy (D-MA), and Richard Durbin (D-IL) sent Attorney General Alberto Gonzales a letter regarding former Deputy Attorney General James Comey’s testimony yesterday before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

You testified last year before both the Senate Judiciary Committee and the House Judiciary Committee about this incident. On February 6, 2006, at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, you were asked whether Mr. Comey and others at the Justice Department had raised concerns about the NSA wiretapping program. You stated in response that the disagreement that occurred was not related to the wiretapping program confirmed by the President in December 2005, which was the topic of the hearing. …

We ask for your prompt response to the following question: In light of Mr. Comey’s testimony yesterday, do you stand by your 2006 Senate and House testimony, or do you wish to revise it?

there MUST be stronger moves taken to restore accountability... i appreciate the fact that congress must move slowly and deliberately, but time is of the essence... day by day, the foundations of our republic are being chipped away to the point where our country is becoming unrecognizable... congress needs to MOVE... we cannot afford to wait...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet

[Permalink] 0 comments