Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Lanya

Pages: 1 ... 209 210 [211] 212 213 ... 220
3151
3DHS / Re: Meditation on a Sin by Domer
« on: October 09, 2006, 12:39:47 AM »
Not making eye contact isn't a sin. 
For 2 busy men striding onward, ever onward, it's a refreshing change, I would think.   
But I have felt the same way, for almost the same reason.   If you feel bad about something there is probably a reason.    A lesson to be learned, something you need to meditate on, as you say.

3152
3DHS / Re: Illegal Immigrants Sue Wendy's
« on: October 08, 2006, 09:42:29 PM »

Agree with you, BT.

3153
3DHS / Re: And anopther one bites the dust
« on: October 08, 2006, 04:54:51 PM »
And here I thought you were going to talk about Sen. Allen of Virginia.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061008/ap_on_el_se/allen_in_business
He didn't disclose stock options.

3154
3DHS / Re: Abramoff Paid Hastert to Protect Child Prostitution
« on: October 08, 2006, 03:42:26 PM »

"Forced Abortions & Sweatshops: A Look at Jack Abramoff's Ties to the South Pacific Island of Saipan & How Tom DeLay Became An Advocate for Sweatshop Factory Owners"
[]
BRIAN ROSS: Essentially what he accomplished was to stop legislation, which is easier to do than to get it through. He was able to block legislation that would have changed the labor and immigration laws in Saipan and made it illegal to have these kinds of contracts. You couldn't have a contract like that in Los Angeles or anyplace else of the United States where the flag flies. But you could in Saipan. That was the loophole they were trying to close under the Clinton administration.

And in fact, when people at the Department of Interior attempted to do that, DeLay actually tried to introduce a bill to cut off funding for that particular section of the Department of Interior, to stop them from essentially backing the workers’ claims. And it became an ugly situation on Capitol Hill. And DeLay and others, but DeLay in particular, were involved in blocking the legislation and making sure that that status quo continued on Saipan. []
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/01/04/1524256
__________________________________________
[]
'In the late 1990s, the Clinton adminstration wanted to apply US labor laws to the Marianas Islands, to prevent sweatshop labor and forced prostitution.

The businessmen on the islands wanted Tom DeLay to make sure no changes passed Congress. DeLay did.

Then Tom DeLay was House Majority Whip. Today DeLay is the House Majority Leader. '
http://www.moveleft.com/moveleft_essay_2005_05_16_conservative_con_tom_delay_denies_his_corruption.asp

Armey and DeLay, opposing a Clinton administration proposal to bring the Marianas under U.S. minimum wage and immigration laws, wrote a letter last year to Gov. Frolian Tenorio (the top Marianas official who was replaced last month by a relative, Pedro Tenorio). They assured Tenorio they would block any move to reform the Marianas' unique wage and immigration laws.

The administration's proposed changes, they wrote, "are counter to the principles of the Republican Party, and this Congress has no intention of voting on such legislation."wpe7.jpg (4011 bytes)

Given their clout in the majority party, Armey and DeLay have made good on that promise. An aide to U.S. Rep. George Miller, a California Democrat who has been active in exposing the truth about the Marianas, says he hasn't even been able to get a hearing scheduled on the matter.

The trips DeLay and the five senior Armey staff members have made to the islands have been on the Marianas government's tab, trips typically costing $4,000 to $6,000 per person. Most got rooms at the Hyatt Regency Saipan, a $250-to-$2,500-a-night luxury hotel that, as its Web site seductively notes, "lies on 14 acres of lush tropical garden, lagoons, and a magnificent beach," with amenities such as a championship golf course and snorkeling above coral reefs.

The Nation, which published an article last month appropriately titled "Congress' Beach Boys," pointed out that more than 70 congressional and party officials--mostly Republicans--have traveled to the island on these all-expenses-paid trips over the last two years, along with squadrons of conservative journalists and think-tank types. The magazine described the trips as a "lavishly funded public relations effort by the island's governor...Numerous junketeers have come back singing the praises of the [Marianas]."

Perhaps none more brazenly than DeLay.
Returning last month from his fact-finding trip, a mission on which he took his wife and daughter and got in two rounds of golf at the first-class Lao Loa Bay Golf Resort, DeLay blasted critics of what he called Saipan's "free market success." He went on to explain how he wants to use a set of Chinese-owned sweatshops on a far-off U.S. territory--factories manned by low-paid Chinese or Sri Lankan indentured servants living in squalor--as a model for Mexican labor camps here on the mainland.

He told a reporter for the Guam-based Pacific Daily News that the workers' barracks "by some U.S. standards could be criticized," but the garment factories he toured were air-conditioned and clean.

"I didn't see anyone sweating," DeLay said, reportedly with a laugh.
[]
http://www.tylwythteg.com/enemies/Armey/news2.html

Plus many, many other articles when you enter the words- Clinton tried to change labor laws Northern Marianas- into Google.

3155
3DHS / Re: Bush asserts he has authority to disobey new FEMA law
« on: October 08, 2006, 03:26:49 AM »
What Bush is trying to do with the signing statements, regardless of their formal effect on an appellate court, is to inject his own view into a renewed POLITICAL issue.

excerpt from Marty Lederman at Balkinization

[.........]

But that's not the most alarming objection.

Remember Katrina?

Remember Michael Brown, the FEMA Administrator who did such a bang-up job dealing with the crisis?

Well, in this bill Congress took a very modest step to try to prevent that sort of incompetence in cases of future disasters: Section 611 of the Act imposes the following qualifications for the Administrator of FEMA:

    The Administrator shall be appointed from among individuals who have—

    (A) a demonstrated ability in and knowledge of emergency management and homeland security; and

    (B) not less than 5 years of executive leadership and management experience in the public or private sector.


According to the President, this provision apparently transgresses the Appointments Clause because it "purports to limit" -- purports to limit! -- "the qualifications of the pool of persons from whom the President may select the appointee in a manner that rules out a large portion of those persons best qualified by experience and knowledge to fill the office." Accordingly, "[t]he executive branch shall construe [the qualification] in a manner consistent with the Appointments Clause of the Constitution."

This is simply mind-boggling. Qualifications for presidential appointees are ubiquitous in federal law, and have been since the dawn of the Republic. Justice Brandeis, for instance, spent almost ten pages of the U.S. Reports in Myers v. U.S. enumerating scores of such qualifications from 1789 to 1926 alone -- including many cases in which Congress "has limited the power of nomination . . . by prescribing specific professional attainments, or occupational experience." 272 U.S. at 265-274. Even the majority in Myers -- a very strongly pro-President opinion -- conceded that Congress may impose "reasonable and relevant qualifications and rules of eligibility of appointees." 272 U.S. at 129. Such qualifications are constitutional as long as they "do not so limit selection and so trench upon executive choice as to be in effect legislative designation" of a particular appointee." 272 U.S. at 128.

The test was probably best articulated by Attorney General Akerman in an 1871 opinion: Statutory qualifications for federal officers appointed by the President are ok as long as they "leav[e] scope for the judgment and will of the [President]. . . . . Congress may not dictate qualifications "unattainable by a sufficient number to afford ample room for choice." Civil Service Commission, 13 Op. Att'y Gen. 516, 520-21, 525 (1871).

Obviously, section 613 easily satisfies this test. It merely requires that the Administrator of FEMA have "a demonstrated ability in and knowledge of emergency management and homeland security" and "not less than 5 years of executive leadership and management experience in the public or private sector." To be sure, this qualification would prevent the appointment of someone whose only "relevant" experience was being friends with Joseph Allbaugh and overseeing horse trial judges and stewards for the Arabian Horse Association until being ""forced out . . . after withstanding numerous lawsuits against his enforcement of rules for judges and stewards."

But it certainly could be construed to leave the President with the authority to appoint just about anyone who has the actual capacity to run FEMA.

I suppose it's possible the President could have taken the view that all statutory qualifications for presidential appointees are unconstitutional. That would have been wrong, and belied by unbroken history. But it would at least have made logical sense.

Instead, the signing statement has the temerity to state that the qualifications in the bill "rule[] out a large portion of those persons best qualified by experience and knowledge to fill the office"!

That's right -- in the views of this President, requiring a demonstrated ability in and knowledge of emergency management and homeland security and at least five years of executive leadership and management experience "rules out a large portion of those persons best qualified by experience and knowledge to fill the office" of FEMA Administrator -- and thus the President apparently will not feel bound to satisfy those qualifications.

Of course, this makes no sense at all . . . unless, in the Administration's view, what a FEMA Administrator really needs to "fill the office" is not experience and knowledge of disaster relief and management skills, but instead "experience [in] and knowledge" of how to be blindly loyal to the Republican Party.
[............]
http://balkin.blogspot.com/2006/10/shameless-presidents-constitutional.html

3156
3DHS / Re: Really Interesting Site on JFK Assassination
« on: October 08, 2006, 03:06:48 AM »
Michael--
So you're saying we had a coup in our own country and we didn't even know it?


Interesting to imagine  what would have happened if someone like George W. had been the next president. 

3157
3DHS / Re: Abramoff Paid Hastert to Protect Child Prostitution
« on: October 08, 2006, 01:08:46 AM »
Plane: there's plenty more where this came from. I typed in Child sex trade in Northern Marianas and got scads of results.
For Abramoff, Lawmaker Slandered Teen Sex Slave
By Paul Kiel - September 25, 2006, 2:56 PM

A Texas congressman is denying charges he slandered a foreign sex slave at the behest of Jack Abramoff. But documents obtained by TPMmuckraker contradict the Republican's claims.

In November of 1997, Rep. Ralph Hall (R-TX) publicly questioned the credibility of a teenage girl's claims that she'd been the victim of the sex trade in the Northern Mariana Islands. The statement, which Rep. Hall entered into the Congressional Record, was prepared by Jack Abramoff, the lobbyist for the islands.

"he wanted to do nude dancing," Hall's statement said of the fifteen-year-old girl. She had earlier told federal investigators that she'd been forced to work for a local nightclub in a nightly live sex show. You can read the entirety of Hall's statement here.

Press accounts at the time detailed how the girl had been taken from her parents in the Phillippines, and forced to perform sex acts on stage and before video cameras at a Northern Marianas sex club. A 1998 Department of Labor report confirmed those reports.

Hall's challenger in Texas' 4th District, history professor Glenn Melancon, has made the episode a campaign issue. "When investigators discovered child prostitution and forced abortions on the Mariana Islands, Congressman Ralph Hall was paid for covering it up and publicly attacking one of the raped children," read postcards his campaign distributed to voters.

Hall has called the charge an "outright lie." His office did not respond to our request for comment on this story. But records show that Abramoff's staff contacted Hall's office fifteen times in the two months leading up to his statement in the Congressional Record.

Hall has also denied being paid for making the statement, but oddly enough has revealed that "[Tom] DeLay gave him money 10 years ago," according the to the district's local paper, The Herald Banner.

DeLay was Abramoff's closest ally in Congress with regard to the Marianas. But Federal Election Commission records do not show contributions to Hall from DeLay or his PAC during that period. The former Majority Leader was known for routing donations through third parties to hide their origin. Hall was a Democrat at the time he says he took DeLay's money -- he switched parties in 2004.

Hall visited the Marianas islands on an Abramoff-sponsored junket in 1997, according to emails. The CNMI government later reimbursed Abramoff. In this photograph from the Marianas Variety, Hall is shown during that trip:

By entering his statement into the Congressional Record, Hall made himself part of a public relations counter-offensive on behalf of CNMI, orchestrated by Abramoff and his lobbying team.

For months, activists and members of Congress pushed for labor reforms in the Northern Marianas, an American territory that was rife with cases of human rights abuses. The teenaged girl Hall attacked (referred to by lawyers and activists by her stage name, "Katrina," to protect her anonymity) was just one of those cases.

The billing records from Abramoff's lobbying firm, Preston Gates, show that Abramoff and his associates logged long hours helping CNMI dodge such charges. Hall's office worked closely with Abramoff's team to compose the lawmaker's statement on Katrina, according to those same records.

Hall has claimed he never met Abramoff, and "wouldn't recognize him if he saw him." But members of Abramoff's lobbying team contacted Hall's office fifteen times over the course of September and October in 1997, working closely with his office to counter efforts by House Resources Ranking Member Rep. George Miller (D-CA) to strengthen federal oversight of the islands' labor practices.

An Oct. 17, 1997 entry in the records shows that Lloyd Meeds, a member of Abramoff's lobbying team, discussed inserting the language about Katrina with Grace Warren, a staffer in Hall's office. "Telephone conference with G. Warren (Hall) regarding Katrina insert," reads the entry. Hall inserted the statement about Katrina into the Congressional Record a few weeks later.

As detailed in the findings of a Department of Labor investigation, Katrina was taken away from her parents in the Philippines at the age of fifteen to work at a nightclub in the Northern Marianas. Once there, she was forced to sell drinks, dance naked, and perform videotaped "sex acts on stage with customers." She and the other employees lived in barracks set up by the Philippino club owner until Katrina was able to run away and contact the Philippine Consulate. She was eventually given asylum in Hawaii, where she lives today.

Jeffrey Hughes contributed research to this story.
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/001591.php

3158
3DHS / Re: Really Interesting Site on JFK Assassination
« on: October 08, 2006, 12:29:40 AM »
This is pretty interesting.  I've come across a few of these names (Bosch just today) in relation to quite separate things.  Very interesting to see it all tied together like this,  but I'm skeptical.   
It would, however, explain quite a bit.....

3160
3DHS / Re: 'Just a Comma' Becomes Part of Iraq Debate
« on: October 07, 2006, 04:32:49 PM »
Plane,
If the  words come out of his mouth, do we presume they are what he means?
Does he have any, I repeat ANY, responsibility for the words that come out of his own mouth?

If he does, then I will not say, "Oh sure, fine, my filter is all screwy, you meant something entirely different than "just a comma.""

Are you saying it's all MY responsibility to have a PRO_ BUSH_FILTER on when he talks so I interpret him correctly?
  I understand plain language. Just a comma sounds pretty damn cold to me.

3161
3DHS / Re: 'Greater love hath no man...', or schoolgirl for that matter
« on: October 07, 2006, 04:22:15 PM »
Thank you for posting this. 

3162
3DHS / Re: Room-mates
« on: October 07, 2006, 04:19:56 PM »
This is interesting too.
[.............]

"We know there are reports of people that knew it and kind of fed it out or leaked it to the press," Hastert said. "That's why we've asked for an investigation. So, let me just say, that's why we've asked for an investigation, to find who that is."

Obviously, Republicans are interested in finding out whether this was a Democratic operation and, if so, exposing it since that would take some of the sting out, at least for them and make this all seem like a bare-knuckle partisan fight of the type they're accustomed to.

But Hastert's language betrays something troubling. He speaks of someone leaking the information to the press. Leaks occur when insiders give secret information to reporters, information that others wish to keep from the press.

Is Hastert saying that he would've preferred to keep the Foley matter a secret? And, if so, does he believe it should've stayed a secret until after the election or until he decided to retire from the House?

Another point. He said: "I, first of all, learned of this last Friday, when we were about to leave Congress for, you know, the break to go out and campaign. And that's the first time I heard of the explicit language."

So is he acknowledging that he was told about the emails with the non-explicit language before last Friday? So when did he learn of that series of emails in which former congressman Mark Foley asked the former page from Louisiana for a photograph?

Hastert raised as many questions as he answered.
[.......]
http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/news_theswamp/2006/10/hastert_briefin.html

3163
"You GO, profile in courage!"
Isn't that the truth.   Sad, sad. 

3164
3DHS / Room-mates
« on: October 07, 2006, 03:47:56 PM »


Who is Scott Palmer?

He is Speaker Hastert's chief of staff, which makes him the key player in the what-did-Hastert-know-and-when-did-he-know-it drama. Scott Palmer has issued a statement flatly denying that Kirk Fordham, Mark Foley's former chief of staff, warned him that Foley was crossing the line with pages long before Foley's inappropriate email surfaced.
Palmer's denial of Fordham's headline-grabbing claim is the thread Hastert's Speakership is now hanging by.

In Hastert's brief, evasive press conference on Thursday, sharp reporters immediately zeroed in on Palmer's role in the Foley information flow. Did Hastert leap to the defense of his chief of staff's honor in the crucial credibility contest with Kirk Fordham? Did he say I know Scott Palmer and I know he's telling the truth? No. He avoided every question with Palmer's name in it. Hastert obviously does not want to talk about Scott Palmer.

If Fordham did warn Palmer about Foley a long time ago, what are the odds that Palmer did not tell Hastert? As close to zero as you can get. Many chiefs of staff are close, very close, to their bosses on Capitol Hill. But none are closer than Scott Palmer is to Denny Hastert. They don't just work together all day, they live together.

There are plenty of odd couple Congressmen who have roomed together on Capitol Hill, but I have never heard of a chief of staff who rooms with his boss. It is beyond unusual. But it must have its advantages. Anything they forget to tell each other at the office, they have until bedtime to catch up on. And then there's breakfast for anything they forgot to tell each other before falling asleep. And then there's all day at the office. Hastert and Palmer are together more than any other co-workers in the Congress.

For now, Hastert is holding on to the Speaker's office because the Republicans don't have anyone in the leadership who is squeaky clean enough to take the job. Every one of them is tainted by the Foley scandal or the Abramoff scandal or the DeLay scandal or, like Henry Hyde, has some ancient sexual indiscretion in his background. But if the press cracks Scott Palmer's denial of Kirk Fordham's bombshell, then Denny Hastert is going to have to pass the gavel to some freshman we've never heard of.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lawrence-odonnell/who-is-scott-palmer_b_31171.html

3165
3DHS / Re: Abramoff Paid Hastert to Protect Child Prostitution
« on: October 07, 2006, 03:20:19 PM »
It is so little-known, so poorly covered in the press.  Horrible situation.   

This is all reminding me of the Gilded Age.  Very Victorian.

Pages: 1 ... 209 210 [211] 212 213 ... 220