VISIT US ON FACEBOOK!

OUR FACEBOOK PAGE--EYE ON WASHINGTON

Stephen Colbert-- Here.

Our "Vintage" Video Collection Click On Image

Our "Vintage" Video Collection Click On Image
Great Political Moments Caught For Your Pleasure

Sunday, December 20, 2009

Boycott Joe Lieberman's State of Connecticut

Here is the list of Connecticut companies. If you are so inclined to send a letter to Joe-the hoe-Lieberman stating that you will participate in a "buycott" of the companies in his state because of his dirty, sleazy, slimy manipulative, showboating actions so as to control the outcome of the Senate Health Care bill, then look here.


Here is a Connecticut PDF of the all the corporate headquarters located in his state. See them here.


The people of Connecticut should begin to proceed with a recall of Joe-the hoe-Lieberman as their Congressperson. He has lied through his teeth regarding a public option for Americans and when caught with his pants down, he says that his pants fit fine.


Here is his D.C address:  706 Hart Office Building, Washington, DC 20510, phone the hoe: 202-224-4041; fax:2022249750


thanks, jerry

6 comments:

SPECTRE of Deflation said...

Jerry, here's a primer from Financial Armageddon on a piece written by Chris Floyd regarding the gutting of our Constitutional protections. WE ARE A BANANA REPUBLIC!!!!!!! Why are the words of Jefferson suddenly rushing at me from all directions? Healthcare? ROFLMAO!

Shocked and Unnerved

Everywhere and anywhere, those seen as rejecting even a small measure of an America-centric perspective will be labeled undesirables, subversives, and even “enemy combatants,” whether or not evidence supports the assertion.
--Chapter 11, "Social," Financial Armageddon

Although I predicted as much in my 2007 book, even I am shocked and unnerved at how quickly the U.S. is abandoning principles that once defined our nation as "the land of the free and the home of the brave." In "Supreme Court Guts Due Process Protection," Naked Capitalism highlights a recent development that should frighten the wits out of any American who is still capable of thinking:

Reader Walter passed along this distressing sighting from Chris Floyd’s blog. American civil liberties were gutted last week, and the media failed to take note of it.

The development? If the president or one of his subordinates declares someone to be an “enemy combatant” (the 21st century version of “enemy of the state”) he is denied any protection of the law. So any trouble-maker (which means anyone) can be whisked away, incarcerated, tortured, “disappeared,” you name it. Floyd’s commentary:

After hearing passionate arguments from the Obama Administration, the Supreme Court acquiesced to the president’s fervent request and, in a one-line ruling, let stand a lower court decision that declared torture an ordinary, expected consequence of military detention, while introducing a shocking new precedent for all future courts to follow: anyone who is arbitrarily declared a “suspected enemy combatant” by the president or his designated minions is no longer a “person.” They will simply cease to exist as a legal entity. They will have no inherent rights, no human rights, no legal standing whatsoever — save whatever modicum of process the government arbitrarily deigns to grant them from time to time, with its ever-shifting tribunals and show trials.

It is hard to overstate the significance of this horrid decision. The fact that the Supreme Court authorized this land grab says we no longer have an independent judiciary, that the Supreme Court itself is gutting the protections supposedly provided by the legal system.




Dred Scott Redux: Obama and the Supremes Stand Up for Slavery
Written by Chris Floyd
Friday, 18 December 2009 14:18


http://chris-floyd.com/component/content/article/1-latest-news/1887-dred-scott-redux-obama-and-the-supremes-stand-up-for-slavery.html

Tom Degan's Daily Rant said...

A tip of the hat to the senator from Connecticut for killing the first chance we've ever had for meaningful health care reform....

Honestly, has there ever been as vengeful a little gnat as Joe Lieberman? You'd really have to search the archives of history pretty thoroughly to find someone comparable. There are many reasons why Al Gore was defeated in 2000 by a half-witted frat boy like George W. Bush. One of the main reasons was the abysmal choice of running mate Lieberman.

It was obvious during the debate with Dick Cheney during that campaign that comical Joe was a useless drag on the ticket. When Cheney said that his success in the private sector had nothing to do with the government, Lieberman let the statement stand. Cheney made his fortune at Haliburton because of Government contracts! Government had everything to do with it! Did he purposefully sabotage the Gore campaign? Maybe it's pure paranoia on my part but a case could be made that he did.

Say it ain't so, Revoltin' Joe.

http://www.tomdegan.blogspot.com

Tom Degan
Goshen NY

SPECTRE of Deflation said...

This is f**king unbelievable!!

But William Fisher noticed, and gave this report at Antiwar.com:

In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s refusal Monday to review a lower court’s dismissal of a case brought by four British former Guantanamo prisoners against former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld, the detainees’ lawyers charged Tuesday that the country’s highest court evidently believes that "torture and religious humiliation are permissible tools for a government to use."
[....]
Channeling their predecessors in the George W. Bush administration, Obama Justice Department lawyers argued in this case that there is no constitutional right not to be tortured or otherwise abused in a U.S. prison abroad.

The Obama administration had asked the court not to hear the case. By agreeing, the court let stand an earlier opinion by the D.C. Circuit Court, which found that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act -- a statute that applies by its terms to all "persons" -- did not apply to detainees at Guantanamo, effectively ruling that the detainees are not persons at all for purposes of U.S. law.

The lower court also dismissed the detainees’ claims under the Alien Tort Statute and the Geneva Conventions, finding defendants immune on the basis that "torture is a foreseeable consequence of the military’s detention of suspected enemy combatants."

The Constitution is clear: no person can be held without due process; no person can be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment. And the U.S. law on torture of any kind is crystal clear: it is forbidden, categorically, even in time of "national emergency." And the instigation of torture is, under U.S. law, a capital crime. No person can be tortured, at any time, for any reason, and there are no immunities whatsoever for torture offered anywhere in the law.

And yet this is what Barack Obama -- who, we are told incessantly, is a super-brilliant Constitutional lawyer -- has been arguing in case after case since becoming president: Torturers are immune from prosecution; those who ordered torture are immune from prosecution. They can't even be sued for, in the specific case under review, subjecting uncharged, indefinitely detained captives to "beatings, sleep deprivation, forced nakedness, extreme hot and cold temperatures, death threats, interrogations at gunpoint, and threatened with unmuzzled dogs."

Again, let's be absolutely clear: Barack Obama has taken the freely chosen, public, formal stand -- in court -- that there is nothing wrong with any of these activities. Nothing to answer for, nothing meriting punishment or even civil penalties. What's more, in championing the lower court ruling, Barack Obama is now on record as believing -- insisting -- that torture is an ordinary, "foreseeable consequence" of military detention of all those who are arbitrarily declared "suspected enemy combatants."

And still further: Barack Obama has now declared, openly, of his own free will, that he does not consider these captives to be "persons." They are, literally, sub-humans. And what makes them sub-humans? The fact that someone in the U.S. government has declared them to be "suspected enemy combatants." (And note: even the mere suspicion of being an "enemy combatant" can strip you of your personhood.)

This is what President Barack Obama believes -- believes so strongly that he has put the full weight of the government behind a relentless series of court actions to preserve, protect and defend these arbitrary powers. (For a glimpse at just a sliver of such cases, go here.)(SNIP)

SPECTRE of Deflation said...

I will simply point out that the USSR had universal healthcare for it's citizens. You would find yourself in a Mental Institution or worse should you be seen as an ENEMY OF THE STATE. God help us after last week's Black Robed Tyrants Ruling. Without freedom, you have nothing.

SPECTRE of Deflation said...

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
December 17, 2009
Executive Order -- Amending Executive Order 12425

EXECUTIVE ORDER
- - - - - - -
AMENDING EXECUTIVE ORDER 12425 DESIGNATING INTERPOL
AS A PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION ENTITLED TO
ENJOY CERTAIN PRIVILEGES, EXEMPTIONS, AND IMMUNITIES


By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 1 of the International Organizations Immunities Act (22 U.S.C. 288), and in order to extend the appropriate privileges, exemptions, and immunities to the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL), it is hereby ordered that Executive Order 12425 of June 16, 1983, as amended, is further amended by deleting from the first sentence the words "except those provided by Section 2(c), Section 3, Section 4, Section 5, and Section 6 of that Act" and the semicolon that immediately precedes them.

BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE,
December 16, 2009.

[link to www.whitehouse.gov]

carlandjerry said...

Hi Spectre, I am afraid that what we have with President Obama is seamlessness with the administration of Little Boy Bush. We have the several "stimulus" packages all going in the wrong directions.

2010 maybe terrible. As you shared, our civil rights are being further eroded; and, why aren't these "detainees" having trials? They are being moved to the US somewhere without trials. Just last week, 12 or so were released.

Paul Craig Roberts, Ph.D, and former Reagan assist secretary of the treasury wrote that those prisoners have been tortured so badly that if released will go public on their torture, which would likely lead to a major investigation by the Hague.

Tom Degan, thank you for writing a comment and checking out the blogspot. I appreciate it very much. Come again and Rant.

jerry