First, more and more evidence piles up clearly showing that Bush and the neocons wanted an excuse to invade Iraq and used lies and distortions to do so. More, amazing is that we heard this early on from people resigning from the Administration. They said consistently that Bush and the Boyz were manipulating facts to justify an invasion. The Downing memos are only the latest. Consider this: there is more proof - testimony and memos - that Bush and the neocons lied about the facts surrounding the invasion of Iraq than there is proof about Iraq's WMDs and support for al Qaeda. Last night, bush went on TV and pretty much told us that we're in for more of the same: same lies repeated as justifications, same policy about there being no withdrawal policy but that we're spreading Democracy so THAT justifies the dead and investments. But what really irks me about the Neocons is their whole philosophy about spreading Demeocracy is precisely the same philosophy for spreading any kind of government.


Remember: Bush and the neocons said that we were invading Iraq becuase Hussein had WMDs and was threatening America. Wait, they changed the reasons to: spreading Democracy in the MIddle East and protection from terrorism. But these justifications can be used by any government against any other government. Canada could attack us saying that we were a threat to them and that they were spreading their brand of gorvernment. Democracy is a good form of government but it's not perfect. The American form is - right now - far from perfect. It's been corrupted by business and religion.


As for Iraq, what a waste. What a pity.

Second, the Supreme Court ruled about eminent domain, that cities can take your home if it's for economic growth of the city. Translation: individuals and individual rights are less important than the business welfare of communities. What next - take your home for the religious welfare of communities?

Third, the Supreme Court send back to lower courts the clash between peer-to-peer software makers (Grokster) and the Entertainment Industry. The sent the case back down with the strong suggestion that they side with business, that Grokster (and other P2P makers) are liable if people download copyrighted material using these programs. By this logic, gun, ammunition, knife, alcohol, and automobile manufactureres should also be held liable because people can easily break laws using their products.

Fourth, the Supreme Court decided to waffle on the separation between church and state by saying that religious displays can be put on governmental property if the intention is to show the legal heritage of America. Huh? And who will decide these things? Will there be warnings saying that these religious statues are there for non-religious reasons?

The Supreme Court has shown itself as corrupt and cowardly. They had a chance to strengthen the separation between church and state but instead opened the door for abuse. Justice Suitor said something real smart like "we have God in the Pledge so..." as justification for destroying the Wall. What most people don't understand about the separation between church and state is that the separation doesn't mean the state supports Atheism, Pagaism, Communism, or any other -ism as a result. It means simply that the Government doesn't endorse ANY religion - period! It keeps out! The only people who have a problem with that are those that seek to use the Government for their own religious purposes and THAT is NOT American!!!

Finally, I'm sick of Bush and the Neocons making the following words synonymous: Terrorists, Insurgents, Democrats, Liberals. This is their way. They said it early on and they've said it repeatedly: You're either with them or against them.

If you're against them, you might want to clean off your arm for your ID tattoo...