Lindsey Graham, our very own Queen of Hearts, screams "OFF WITH HIS HEAD!", AKA: "IMPEACH! IMPEACH!"

So, to continue with this hysteria about President Obama and the Taliban loving Bergdahl, as the basthit crazy bigots on the right like to scream, ranting frantically until they finally fall in a heap, grabbing their pearls, on the fainting couch(Yep, I'm talking to you, Lindsey!), now starts the "IMPEACH! IMPEACH! IMPEACH!" wave of all good cooked up conspiracies that the right love to lie about.
We have the ex-congressman Allen West who demands, yes DEMANDS! that President Obama be impeached for prisoner exchange! He did it all wrong, didn't ask permission from congress...cuz he's supposed to cuz congress said so. We have John McCain saying that these prisoners were the worst of the worst! He'd never agree to this! Except that he had before he hadn't. That Obama was, again, shown weak in negotiating and knowing about terrorism! Oh, and let's not forget the real batshit rightwing crazies, aka, the "religious right". There's Bryan Fischer, of the Focus(as in target?) on the Family getting all apoplectic about the Taliban prisoners, Bergdahl and impeachment. OH! And let's not forget that "great patriot"(she says with an eye roll), Oliver North, who said that President Obama is financing the terrorists(he means the Taliban)! Yes, the Oliver North who was convicted of the Iran Contra Affair--you know actually financing terrorists! Yes, I know the conviction was overturned, but not because he wasn't guilty, but because of a technicality.

So, all this hand wringing, pearl clutching and fainting, there must be some truth in it, right? Ahh, not really.
Let's take all of these lies separately.
1. The Taliban are terrorists!
The Taliban have never been added to the list of Terrorists by Homeland Security. Although I would agree the Taliban are one of the worst groups to rule a country, they have never attacked America, that was Al Queda and those men were from Saudi Arabia, not Afghanistan or Iraq. Am I the only one who paid attention to geography in school? And on to the next silly hysterics:
2. These five were the worst of the WORST!!
Do we have to have all of the hyperbole? Really? Of the five that were released, only one could be actually considered a strategist who could be used within a terrorist organization. Three were involved in the Afghan government, including one that was in the police department. Check the link above for evul librul fact thingies.
3. It's against the law cuz Obama didn't report to the congress 30 days in advance.
Yes, there is a law, its tied to the funding of the military, that says that Obama must notify the congress. This "law" came into fruition right around the time that Obama became president...hmmm.....and every time it comes through, President Obama issues a statement saying that he will not abide by this law since he feels its unconstitutional and every time Congress attached this to a Defense funding bill, he'd attached the signing statement. Oh, and since Congress did not take it to court when he issued the signing statement, they, in effect, said he was correct and they agreed with him. This means that not only did he not break the law, Congress agreed that they, also thought it was beyond their reach and they knew it.
On the other hand, during this administration, Republicons has leaked more information to the press just to stop the President from getting something accomplished, so why would he trust them with a matter like this? In fact, Senator Saxby Chambliss has already said that if he had known about the exchange before it happened he would have told the press, even knowing that would jeopardize an American soldier(why should he care about soldiers?). In fact when there was a meeting on the trade, the majority of congress members didn't attend! So how upset or worried about this are they? Me thinks dost thou protest too much.
4. He negotiated with terrorists and we never do that!
Umm, check #1, Taliban are not on the terrorist watch list, have never been considered a terrorist organization. On the other hand, we've never done it is an outright lie. Ain't that right Ollie?
5. They will come back and attack us!
Under George Bush, Bush let go 500 Guantanamo bay prisoners, with a 30% recidivism rate. President Obama has released 80(yep, these 5 weren't the first, you must have been sleeping on a park bench for the other 75) with a recidivism rate of only 5%. So who is it that doesn't understand how people attack us and why? The same president who allowed 9/11 to happen in the first place. The White guy.
5. The Right object to this based on principle, not on Obama Derangement Syndrome.
I cannot believe you can tell that lie with a straight face. Or maybe you've said it so much you now believe that it has nothing to do with the color of his skin, but anyone who looks at the facts knows you are lying. We, in all of our history, have never left a soldier behind, no matter the reason for his capture, otherwise, we'd have left John McCain to rot in a Vietnamese forest. We'd have left Jessica Lynch behind since, obviously her convoy did not follow orders.
And, we, as a country, and as many if not all countries, have always released prisoners of war when a war in ending. It's just the right thing to do.

The Right Wing is cheering a POW's return? NOPE, The black guy did it.

I'm sure anyone reading this has heard about the release of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl that was engineered by President Obama and the cheers from the Right Wing...until they got the marching orders of "SSSSHHHH, the black guy did it, bad, bad, bad!"
I know, I know, I'm playing the race card, it has absolutely nothing to do with the black guy, it has to do with we've never done this before, trading prisoners or something for some silly soldier...except we have. Right John McCain? Well, that was different. OK, how about St. Ronnie? Trading 1500 missiles for 3 hostages and hosting the terrorists? To Iran? Which, the hostage takers then turned around and grabbed 2 or 3 more Americans to see what they were worth.
Oh! It's because he was a deserter! He walked away! He's not worth it!
OK, he may have walked away, may have left his post, but we don't know why. And, I, for one, have to question the sanity of any person who would walk away from the subjective safety of a military base into war torn Afghanistan...on his own...without any weapons or vehicle, supplies. So there's that. But, again, so we leave him with the Taliban? We don't bring him home? We don't care what actually happened? Even though we have worried, since his capture 2009, about what may happen to him?
BUT, due to the information leaked by Chelsea Manning, the New York Times was able to trace through the daily log of Afghanistan activities/chronology to find out that Sgt. Bergdahl had walked off the base on different occasions, always to return(reasons being to watch a sunset/sunrise, pretty non-terrorist stuff). Also blown out of the water with these logs was the story that 8 soldiers died looking for Bergdahl. Only 2 died during the active search and they died in another province, not looking for Sgt. Bergdahl.
But to watch the trashing of Sgt. Bergdahl and his family from the right is so heinous. Of course, the right says that "we" think of him as a hero. Only people I've heard throwing the "hero" label around have been the right. No, again we, on the left and most in the center, act as adults. Bring the young man home, sort out the details/facts and then figure out what should be done, but at best its all very muddied territory.
So why have they decided he's a traitor(besides the fact that Obama got him released without blowing anyone up)? Well, because the Taliban said so. They said he was helping them, because he was in 4 videos produced by them and he hadn't got his throat slit by them, so that means the Taliban is telling the truth. Of course the Taliban would have NO reason to lie to us, right? Why is he a "deserter" because the honest, truth loving Taliban said he walked away from his post/went out drinking/maybe he left to use the latrine/or it was because he decided to go AWOL for a few days in the posh hotels in that area...because the Taliban would not lie to us, right? Since we have shown them nothing but respect and honesty in all these years, right? The reports that have been released(thank you Chelsea Manning) are, at best ambiguous about why he walked off his post.
So, did he do something wrong? If he did, doesn't 5 years in Taliban custody warrant punishment? Or have we, as a country, gone off the deep end and enjoy to see torture of our own soldiers? Its time for him to come home, and, as adults, we can sort this out in our courts, our country. It's time for the right wing/republicans/teabaggers to grow the fuck up and act like adults, instead of petulant childish bullies just obstructing and gossiping their merry way to far right PACs instead of thinking about the young man that has been held prisoner and, like we have done in every other war, we didn't stop until we brought him home.

 I say, Welcome home Sgt. Bergdahl, may peace be with you.

ACA and the Supreme Court

Now, you must have known I'd have to do a post on this, right? I mean its the biggest thing since sliced bread so.....
First:
 I'm glad that SCOTUS found the law "constitutional" , not doing backflips, but it is a step in the right direction, cuz we're moving towards what the rest of the 1st world countries have--health care for their citizens that doesn't throw them into bankruptcy if they get ill. That gives us more freedom and liberty rather than less. I would prefer(along with many others) single payer, but the ACA does give America some basic health care and gets rid of recission of insurance and so-called pre-existing conditions and some of the worst parts of Bush's poison pill Medicare, part D--the doughnut hole, Medicare Advantage and stronger law/enforcement on Medicare fraud.
Second:
I don't think that Roberts did this because he has seen the light and is trying to amend his ways. Nope, but I do have some other views on why he would do this:

• He doesn't want history to remember the "Roberts Court" as the clown court--the Citizen's United being the most horrendous. The ACA decision allows historians to argue that Roberts was just looking out for the letter of the law.
• He saw the writing on the wall, if ACA was turned over, single payer was closer, the left would be energized for the election and the right just can't excited about Romney.
• Another small deal is Roberts own health issues--he has epilepsy(a pre-existing condition) and does understand some of the issues with our insurance corporations. OK, I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt on this one, but that is my happy clappy liberal way!

Third:
New battle cry for cons--abortion/gun control/gay marriage/religion. Facbook, among other places, has gone crazy--specially the right. Calling it a tax has the "right" energized for the election, to the point that McConnell is now saying that since its called a tax, when he becomes Senate leader, he will bring it to the floor under reconciliation(cannot be filibustered)...but President Obama can still veto it...so I guess this one's really just a talking point.
But, again the right just isn't too swift on Romney. And that goes in the favor of sane voters.
Oh and lets not forget the mature words from Mike Malzone, founder of the Merrimac Tea Party of Merrimac NH. On Facebook, his status read, "I hope the 5 Supremes get colon cancer." Well, at least now, they are promised care!

Darryl Issa channeling Joe McCarthy on Fast & Furious non issue

Car thief Darryl Issa(and the person of interest in the arson of his own building) has decided that even tho the attorney general has given congress over 7600 pages(wow...that's more than the health care bill that republicons couldn't read), that's not enough...anyway not enough to keep it in the news so the republicons can gain some ground on a Bush approved action that turned bad...like most of Bush's ideas.
Fast and Furious was a bad idea. It was a bad idea under Bush(called Gun Walking then) and it was a bad idea under Obama(even with a "hipper" name, still a bad idea). That being said, Issa keeps bringing it back into the news by throwing out little sparkly tidbits about how HIS committee(the House Oversight and Government Reform) is going to indict Holder for contempt.....and  6 weeks or so earlier....HIS committee is so horribly disgusted that this was allowed that he must issue a press release, since the media has dropped the story again.
So, what is the story of Fast and Furious? Well, first some history. The program has been around since at 2006, this being revealed in a briefing authored by Michael Mukasey to Pres. Bush discussing the failed attempts of their version which allowed illegally bought guns from the US into Mexico, then to track where the weapons found a home. This stupid idea began through ATF(Alcohol, Firearms & Tobacco), seems like someone watched robocop way too many times. Mukasey stressed the importance of having U.S. and Mexican officials to work together, instead of it being only a U.S. operation. This necessity was never initiated, and the guns were "lost" until one found its way in the murder of a border patrol officer...in 2009 and THAT become a big deal, not that it shouldn't, but since this clandestine affair began under the republicon regime, why won't Issa subpoena Mukasey? Nope...just Holder.
In fact, under Holder, these idiots that started this program have either lost their jobs or were outright fired(including a former ATF director, former us attorney), but Issa has decided to use this to embarrass Holder--Issa hasn't found any way to tie this to Holder, he has now unlawful subpoenas which since they ain't legal, Holder's basically said, don't have to...and THAT's the premise of Issa's witch hunt and a contempt charge. 
The right is now screaming for a "special prosecutor"...oh, yes, let's waste money for something that isn't needed, something that didn't work under Clinton(remember Starr???? What a joke) just so Issa and Cronyn(the one that set up the clandestine deal for Ensign's lover and husband) can keep up the false controversy.
But, there are a couple of other angles here...does the right feel they can now get back at the Democratic Party for bringing down Attorney General Gonzalez? Remember, the congress did get him to resign...of course he was illegally purging any attorneys that wouldn't assist in his office wide witch hunts, but facts are just liberal icky things.
Or is it due to AG Holder's recent demand to Gov. "convicted felon" Rick Scott to cease and desist his illegal voter purge? Rick Scott has said he will keep purging voters, even tho the Justice Department rendered a decision stating that it is against the law in...wait for it...Florida! Florida's law states that no voter purges can happen within 90 days of an election and Florida's real primary is August 11, with the general election being November 6. Oops.
So why do I compare this to McCarthy? Joe McCarthy was a drunk. And a drunk with power and felt his paranoia was the american way...and he had help. One of his biggest helpers was a B movie actor by the name of Ronald Reagan. So, Darrell Issa, an alleged 'roid rage user, is looking for bogeyman in the same way that McCarthy did...and, when history looks back, he will look even worse than Joe McCarthy...I just hope that we, the American people, can see and understand what's going on before we decide.

President gets to sign a bill!!!! STOCK act

Today, President Obama signed into law the Stock Act. This act means that congress and their staff must now obey the same rules on insider trading as the rest of us do! Well, close to it, anyway.
Now, why is this a big deal? Because there was bi-partisan support for the bill! It got through the do nothing house and there wasn't a filibuster in the senate. It's like the republicans decided to govern instead of act like toddlers that need a nap after too much sugar(and are just yelling, "NONONONONO!")
The STOCK(Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge) Act stops members of Congress, their families,  their staff and executive branch employees from using inside information they garner from their positions to trade stocks and securities and limits them from buying stock in initial public offerings to those that are also open to the general public.
But WAIT, there's more!
The STOCK Act updates the 1978 Ethics in Government Act and improves the transparency of personal financial disclosure statements. Some of the improvements include:

• By September, Congress is required to make personal financial disclosure reports filed by executive branch hi-level employees,  lawmakers, candidates and congressional employees on the web. 
• Starting in July, transactions previously reported annually must be reported within 45 days. Prior to this law, a stock purchase/sale might not be made public for up to 18 months, depending on when it was bought/sold.
• By the end of 9/13, information contained in personal financial disclosures will be made available as a downloadable database.

For more information, please check the fact sheet. It doesn't fix everything, but its a good start.
\
Now, when are we gonna get that bill out of committee on the DISCLOSE Act and Citizen's United pimping?