Post pics, political rallies, meet-ups
or your own political rants!

RMcG Message Board


This is Rush's brain on drugs...
From the delusional mouth of the Vulgar Pig Boy...

"Let's face it, the left and the Democrats have a problem with democracy. They don't trust it." - Rush

"Right-wing dictatorships are impossible because right-wingers don't believe in them. We are believers in individual liberty and freedom. It would be impossible for right-wingers to set up a dictatorship." - Rush

Maybe he's just a victim...

(CBS News) Just hours after his resignation was announced, new trouble surfaced for Limbaugh, as published reports said the 52-year-old conservative commentator is under investigation in Florida for illegally buying thousands of addictive painkillers including OxyContin, Hydrocodone and Lorcet - drugs which are legal only if prescribed by a doctor. SOURCE

RMcG: Oh, excuse me... I was just searching for clues regarding my problem with democracy by reading a copy of the Nazi's Enabling Act of 1933, from which much of the Patriot Act was directly lifted.

Speaking of people seeking to create the perfect human...

At least nine child-care centers in Melbourne, Australia, have banned all stories about crime-fighting superheroes, lest it encourage aggressiveness (August). A primary school in Birmingham, England, banned parents from its annual sports day so that the kids who did not win contests and races would not feel so bad (May). The British Health and Safety Executive decided that a European Union standard for multi-story buildings should also apply to mountain climbers, thus requiring ice and snow warnings posted on mountainsides and the use of an additional safety rope for all climbers (August). An Irish government minister encouraged churches to investigate whether burning incense during services might violate the law on secondary smoke (August). [ News.com.au (The Australian), 8-19-03] [Daily Telegraph (London), 5-19-03] [Daily Telegraph (London), 8-17-03] [The Independent (London), 8-22-03]

*Source: News of the Weird


California gubernatorial candidate and steroid addled moron Arnold Schwarzenegger held a press conference today, atoning for past "bad behavior" and seeking to assure the voters that under him, men and women will be treated as equals.

Branding himself a "passionate conservative," Arnold immediately set out to demonstrate his brand of brotherly love by engaging a bi-sexual threeway with candidates Mary Carey and incumbent Gray Davis (see photo).

When asked if he approved of the new tone of Schwarzenegger's campaign, or if he feared it would further alienate the right wing of the Republican Party, President Bush offered no comment. Instead, White House spokesmen Scott McClellen said "The president cannot confirm or deny that anyone did anything, but I...uh, he...will be reviewing the videotape of the Schwarzenegger press conference frequently, and hopes to have an opinion as soon as he is told what that opinion is."


Captain's log, Stardate 1.10.03

Capitain Karl (CK) Scotty - we're getting hit right and left by Journalist attacks! Where the hell are our shields?

Engineer Scotty McLellan (ES) I'ma doin'í me best, cap'n. I can't worrk mirracles!

CK: If we still had Ari on board we'd have warp power.

ES: But sirr. Therre's a leak in the anti-matterr unit. When I say it doesnít materr, it seems to materr morre!

CK: Condee - patch me through to Commodore Bush.

Condee: Right away, Captain.

CK: Commodore, we have a problem.

Commodore Bush (CB): I have complete faith in you, Karl, you can handle it.

CK: Commodore?

Condee: Transmission terminated at the source, Captain.

CK: Raise him again.

Condee: I'm afraid the Commodore is out raising campaign contributions in an undisclosed location!

CK: Dammit! Collin! Can you do a Vulcan mind-meld with the J'Ournalists?

Collin: I'm afraid not, Captain. The dissonance is wearing off. Can I suggest a sacrificial gambit?

Dr. Ashcroft: What on Earth are you talking about, you pointed-eared, green-blooded Vulcan you?

Collin: If we can give up our RUSHan navigator, the J'Ournalists might take the bait.

CK: EXCELLENT idea, Collin! Condee, contact the USS ESPN and have them beam him to the JíOurnalists.

CK: Scotty, help is on the way. Now work on warp so we can do some damage control.

ES: Yessirr.

CK. And Scotty, don't let it happen again.



An educated electorate is the right-wing's worst nightmare! Learn their tricks and tactics in this enlightening slide presentation...

Volume 2, Number 5


"Stop talking about what the good man is like, and just be one." - Marcus Aurelius

Newest Cartoon - Posted: 10-02-03
Click here for Cartoon and Rant archives!

The fields that Bush claimed were so fertile are finally beginning to be seen for what they always were: a parched desert.

By Derrick Z. Jackson

It is October, and the harvest from the spring's planting of troops remains a grapeless vine, withering into winter compost. Without weapons of mass destruction, Tikrit has given way to Texas, Fallujah is fading into Florida, and the idiocy of another $87 billion for Iraq is rapidly becoming apparent in the latest news from Illinois, Indiana, and Iowa. In the season of pumpkins, Bush is turning into one, with millions of Americans feeling like Cinderella after the ballyhoo of violent, vengeful patriotism. Bush hoped he could sneak back into the White House in 2004 before the clock struck midnight. It is too late. The original support for the war is waning as Americans realize that they have also waged war against themselves.

In the last week, the Census Bureau released data indicating that household income in the United States is on the decrease, poverty is on the increase, and the number of Americans without health insurance grew by 2.4 million, to 43.6 million. The adding of 2.4 million Americans to the rolls of the uninsured comes at a time when 2.7 million Americans have lost their jobs since Bush took office.

"Nervous Republicans are already complaining that the Democrats are using the stumbling economy to foment class warfare. With Bush's trillion-dollar tax cuts and the spending for the invasion and occupation of Iraq, war against everyone except Halliburton and the wealthy was inevitable."

What is more ominous than the initial news is that if the Bush family and the Republicans remain true to form, it will get worse. The biggest prior jump in the numbers of the uninsured since 1987 was during the last year of Bush's father's presidency, when the numbers grew by 3.2 million. Even during the Democratic administration of Bill Clinton, the sabotaging of serious health care policies by Newt Gingrich and the Republican-controlled Congress kept the number of uninsured increasing until the late 1990s.

Bush has depended mightily on the working class and the middle class for support of his war in Iraq. But of the 2.4 million newly uninsured households, 1.4 million come from families making $25,000 to $74,999.

Nervous Republicans are already complaining that the Democrats are using the stumbling economy to foment class warfare. With Bush's trillion-dollar tax cuts and the spending for the invasion and occupation of Iraq, war against everyone except Halliburton and the wealthy was inevitable. One in five households making $25,000 to $49,999 spent 2002 without health insurance, compared with only one in in 10 households making $75,000 or more.

With all the job losses, it is not surprising that 1.7 million people were thrown into poverty in 2002. First lady Laura Bush was over in France representing the United States in its rejoining of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. That show of caring about children in developing countries was lame as the United States added 400,000 children to the ranks of the poor here at home. Poverty rose even in the suburbs, from 12.1 million to 13.3 million people. In Massachusetts, the percentage of people in poverty held stable at 9.5 percent, but the number of people without health insurance went up from 8.5 percent to 9.1 percent.

When Bush signed the first of his tax cuts in the summer of 2001, he said: "Tax relief is a great achievement for the American people. Tax relief is the first achievement produced by the new tone in Washington, and it was produced in record time. Tax relief is an achievement for families struggling to enter the middle class."

Two years later, the Census Bureau tells us that real median money income in Midwestern households has declined by nearly $1,000, from $44,531 to $43,622. The per-capita income of $22,794 represents the first annual decline in per-capita income since 1991, which -- surprise -- was again the first Bush administration.

Meanwhile, according to data released last week by the Internal Revenue Service, American households earning $56,000 to $92,800 still pay 18 percent of the nation's income taxes, more than the 16 percent of the nation's wealthiest households.

It appears that the current president Bush has learned nothing from his father. His father creamed Iraq, catered to the rich, neglected the middle class, and lost his reelection. The son crushed Iraq, gave away billions in tax breaks to the wealthy, and has sunk in some polls to an approval rating of less than 50 percent. Under Bush's father the median household income of Americans was less at the end of his term than when he took office. Bush has all but guaranteed that the same will happen on his watch.

The fields that Bush claimed were so fertile -- for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and for workers here at home -- are finally beginning to be seen for what they always were: a parched desert.

Abroad, the harvest is the bitter fruit of more than 300 American soldiers so far. At home, the harvest moon has been obscured by clouds, with wolves creeping around with unemployment slips between their teeth. Americans, finally understanding how they bit themselves, are beginning to bay against Bush. SOURCE.

Copr. 2003 The Boston Globe.

Return To Top of Page

Wherein stuff people said comes back to bite them on the ass

Today's Entries...

Original Air Date: October 4, 1997
Program: Evans & Novak on CNN
Subject: Threshold for assignment of a Special Prosecutor

ASHCROFT: "The truth of the matter is that if the law's been violated, we should be able to ascertain that. We can, if we have an independent person without a conflict of interest…"

ROWLAND EVANS: "…The attorney general has shaved down all the allegations that Vice President Gore apparently down to one single allegation -- which telephone he used to make these fundraising calls from. Do you really think that alone is worthy of a special prosecutor?"

ASHCROFT: "…you know, a single allegation can be most worthy of a special prosecutor.

If you're abusing government property, if you're abusing your status in office, it can be a single fact that makes the difference on that.

So my own view is that there are plenty of things which should have caused [Attorney General Janet Reno], a long time ago, to appoint a special prosecutor, an independent investigator.

We asked for that on March the 13th of this year in letters from Republican members on the Judiciary Committee. And she's in a bad position…

…The man who signs her check is the man that she's investigating, and she hasn't been very aggressive about it." SOURCE

Date: April 16th, 1999
Speaker: George Herbert Walker Bush
Where: Dedication Speech, GHWB Center for Intelligence
Subject: Outting CIA Agents

"We need more human intelligence. That means we need more protection for the methods we use to gather intelligence and more protection for our sources, particularly our human sources, people that are risking their lives for their country. Even though I'm a tranquil guy now at this stage of my life, I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious, of traitors."

Return To Top of Page

Squirming Ari-wannabe does miserable job attempting to shield Bush's Brain from blame.

Excerpt From October 1st Press conference

Q: All right. Let me just follow up. You said this morning, "The President knows" that Karl Rove wasn't involved. How does he know that?

McCLELLAN: Well, I've made it very clear that it was a ridiculous suggestion in the first place. I saw some comments this morning from the person who made that suggestion, backing away from that. And I said it is simply not true. So, I mean, it's public knowledge. I've said that it's not true. And I have spoken with Karl Rove --

Q: But how does --

McCLELLAN: I'm not going to get into conversations that the President has with advisors or staff or anything of that nature; that's not my practice.

Q: But the President has a factual basis for knowing that Karl Rove --

McCLELLAN: I said it publicly. I said that --

Q: But I'm not asking what you said, I'm asking if the President has a factual basis for saying -- for your statement that he knows Karl Rove --

McCLELLAN: He's aware of what I've said, that there is simply no truth to that suggestion. And I have spoken with Karl about it.

Q: Does he know whether or not the Vice President's Chief of Staff, Lewis Libby --

McCLELLAN: If you have any specific information to bring to my attention -- like I said, there has been nothing that's been brought to our attention. You asked me earlier if we were looking into it, there is nothing that's been brought to our attention beyond the media reports. But if someone did something like this, it needs to be looked at by the Department of Justice, they're the appropriate agency charged with looking into matters like this --

Q: Well, you do know that they are looking at it, don't you?

McCLELLAN: -- and so they're the ones that should do that.

Q: They're telling reporters that they're looking at it; haven't they told you that they're looking at it?

McCLELLAN: Well, there you have it. There you have it.

Q: Haven't they told you? Haven't you asked?

McCLELLAN: We've seen the media reports. There has been no requests made of us at this time.

Q: But, Scott, it gets to the question if you know, if the President knows that Karl Rove was not involved, then maybe you can tell us more about what the President specifically is doing to get to the bottom of this, or what has he ordered to be done within the White House to get to the bottom of this?

McCLELLAN: The President wants anyone, anyone who has information relating to this to report that information to the appropriate agency, the Department of Justice. That's what the President wants, and I've been very clear about that.

Q: Is the President convinced that there was no White House involvement in this?

McCLELLAN: Well, if I could get "anonymous" to 'fess up, that would make my life a whole lot easier.

Q: That's not the question. That's not the question.

McCLELLAN: But there has been nothing -- there has been absolutely --

Q: Does the President --

McCLELLAN: I'm answering that.

Q: Scott, does he know -- is he convinced that no one in the White House was involved with this?

McCLELLAN: There has been absolutely nothing brought to our attention to suggest any White House involvement. All we've seen is what is in the media reports. The media reports cite "senior administration official," or "senior administration officials."

Q: But they're wrong, as far as you're concerned?

McCLELLAN: But I haven't seen anything before that. That's why it's appropriate for the Department of Justice, if something like this happened, to look into it.

Q: Those media reports are wrong, as far as the White House is concerned?

McCLELLAN: Well, we have nothing beyond those media reports to suggest there is White House involvement....

Return To Top of Page

CIA Leak flap causes "liberal media" to look the other way as dems are once again left out of vital national interest legislation.

By Gail Russell Chaddock, The Christian Science Monitor

WASHINGTON –The massive energy bill taking final shape behind closed doors on Capitol Hill this week began in controversy and is heading into more of it.

Secrecy on energy issues began years ago when Vice President Cheney's energy task force met behind closed doors - a controversial process still being debated in the courts.

Now the two Republican chairmen in charge of the energy packages from the House and Senate are behind closed doors again - this time to rewrite the bill themselves without input from Democrats and other critics.

The process defies convention in this capital city.

What's known so far is that if the bill becomes law it would bring about several important changes. It would seek to:

  • Open protected federal lands to exploration and drilling.
  • Revive the nuclear power industry.
  • Inventory offshore drilling sites from Florida to California.
  • Open huge natural-gas reserves on Alaska's North Slope.

Republicans say their closed-door process is the only way to wrest a bill out of a Congress that is deeply divided on energy issues. They say the result will produce American jobs, keep energy prices low, and ease dependence on foreign oil.

But the speed and secrecy of this process is raising concerns not only in the Congress, but also from many groups watching intently from the outside. On Wednesday, Democratic members of the conference protested their "partisan exclusion" from key negotiations, and said it could seriously jeopardize chances for an energy bill.

"This is clearly no way to do an energy bill that is going to be in the public interest," says Pete Rafle, a spokesman for the Wilderness Society, which opposes the current bill. He adds: "They are loading up this bill with a seemingly endless litany of disastrous provisions for public lands elsewhere."

Typically, environmental groups have been able to rely on friendly (usually Democratic) staffers to keep them in the loop on how talks between Senate and House negotiators are proceeding. But this time, Democratic conferees have also been on the outside, as Rep. Billy Tauzin of Louisiana and Sen. Pete Domenici of New Mexico, the GOP chairmen of the House and Senate energy committees, work out titles of the energy bill in secret. The chairmen first release these drafts to GOP colleagues, then to Democrats and the press.

Republicans say the discussions over these drafts are "bipartisan negotiations." Democrats say they are only listening sessions, part of a "flawed process" that is producing a giveaway to special interests. Recently, Democratic staff and environmental activists have taken to slipping into majority staff press briefings to find out what's going on in the conference.


Return To Top of Page

There is no room for dissent in the Compassionate Conservative's Big Tent

RMCG: Here is another fine essay from COMMONDREAMS.ORG. As I was entering this text, a report about Rush Limbaugh was on the teevee. He attempted to apologize away his racist ramblings by saying "I didn't mean to hurt anybody." Well, Rush, that is the problem Can't you see?

If you MEANT to hurt someone, you'd already be marginalized, as you should be, with no audience for your crap. But you didn't. You think this kind of racist thought is okay, and everyone just has his knickers in a twist. That is what the liberals are trying to teach you...if you get past the notion of the black man always trying to get what doesn't belong to him, you might actually evolve into the compassionate person you so transparently claim to be.

Compassion? Show me the money. In the meantime, Rush...God is on the phone...he's called in your loan.

by Norman Solomon

Strong critics of U.S. foreign policy often encounter charges of "anti-Americanism." Even though vast numbers of people in the United States disagree with Washington's assumptions and military actions, some pundits can't resist grabbing onto a timeworn handle of pseudo-patriotic demagoguery.

In a typical outburst before the war on Iraq last spring, Rush Limbaugh told his radio audience: "I want to say something about these anti-war demonstrators. No, let's not mince words, let's call them what they are -- anti-American demonstrators."

Weeks later, former Congressman Joe Scarborough, a Republican now rising through the ranks of talking heads, said on MSNBC: "These leftist stooges for anti-American causes are always given a free pass. Isn't it time to make them stand up and be counted for their views, which could hurt American troop morale?"

"The future of war is that these things are going to be much more of a continuum. We'll get better as we do it more often."

Today, in an era when the sun never sets on deployed American troops, the hoary epithet is not only a rhetorical weapon against domestic dissenters or foreign foes. It's also useful for brandishing against allies. Oddly, in recent months, across the narrow spectrum of U.S. mainstream punditry, even European unity has been portrayed as "anti-American."

An extensive article by Andrew Sullivan at the outset of the summer, in the mildly liberal New Republic, warned that "with the unveiling of a new federalist constitution for a 'United States of Europe' in June, the anti-American trend will be subtly but profoundly institutionalized." Sullivan added: "It's past time that Americans wake up and see this new threat for what it is."

Similar noises have come from right-wing outlets such as The Weekly Standard. Under the stern headline "America needs a serious Europe policy," a contributing editor declared that "the anti-American drift of the EU is cause for concern. At a minimum, it should lead Washington to rethink its traditional enthusiasm for greater European integration. Much as British entry into the euro zone might make life easier for American businesses (and tourists), it is sure to make life more difficult for American diplomats." And, the article could have added, for American war planners.

The elastic "anti-American" label stretches along a wide gamut. The routine aim is to disparage and stigmatize activities or sentiments that displease policymakers in Washington. Thus, "anti-American" has spanned from al-Qaida terrorists, to angry Iraqis tiring of occupation, to recalcitrant German and French leaders, to Labor Party backbenchers in Britain's House of Commons.

Any Americans gauged to be insufficiently supportive of U.S. government policies may also qualify for similar aspersions. (During a debate on CNN International this year, a fervent war supporter proclaimed me to be a "self-hating American.")

The officials now running Washington are intoxicated with priorities that involve spending more than $1 billion a day on the U.S. military. Meanwhile, the media support for de facto empire-building is tinged with sometimes-harsh criticism -- without urging forthright resistance to a succession of wars largely driven by the USA. In many cases, the fear of being called "anti-American" seems to match tacit enthusiasm for visions of pax Americana.

A few weeks before he became the New York Times executive editor, Bill Keller wrote in a June 14 essay about the Iraq intelligence debacle: "The truth is that the information-gathering machine designed to guide our leaders in matters of war and peace shows signs of being corrupted. To my mind, this is a worrisome problem, but not because it invalidates the war we won. It is a problem because it weakens us for the wars we still face."

"The wars we still face" are chronically touted as imperatives. In the months and years ahead, many commentators will keep equating opposition to military actions with "anti-Americanism."

But the fog of such rhetoric cannot hide destructive agendas. A lengthy mid-summer report in the Los Angeles Times concluded that top Pentagon officials "are studying the lessons of Iraq closely -- to ensure that the next U.S. takeover of a foreign country goes more smoothly."

A special assistant to Donald Rumsfeld was upbeat. "We're going to get better over time," said Lawrence Di Rita. "We've always thought of post-hostilities as a phase" apart from combat, but "the future of war is that these things are going to be much more of a continuum. ... We'll get better as we do it more often."

While political commanders plan to "do it more often," those of us who oppose them can expect to hear that we're "anti-American." SOURCE

Norman Solomon is co-author of "Target Iraq: What the News Media Didn't Tell You." For an excerpt and other information, go to: www.contextbooks.com/new.html#target

Return To Top of Page

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. RMcG Creative/NBY is making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml . If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Site design Copr. 2002-2003 Rob McGrath/RMcG. All artwork on this site Copyright Rob McGrath unless otherwise noted. All rights reserved.
"Bitch" scrawl, HOO Cares!, International Cheese & Tobacco are trademarks or service marks of fictitious companies or entities...and I own 'em.
All other insignias or trademarks are the property of the respective registrants. PLEASE RESPECT COPYRIGHTS.