I've had a Bellsouth dialup account for years. A few months ago, I decided to upgrade to DSL. Due to the recent merger with AT&T, and their new system, I was not allowed to keep my old email address. I had to create a new email address for the DSL account. Eventually I got them to keep my old email address active as another (paid) account, so that I would have time to migrate to the new address.

A few days ago, I lost Internet access. After some time with tech support, I found out that they had moved my old email address to the DSL account. The new email address, that I was migrating to, was suspended. Mistakes happen, so I asked them to fix it. That turned out to be impossible. After six hours on the phone getting passed back and forth between billing & tech support people, I couldn't get past, "We are unable to reactive an account for 90 days." What kind of a goofy system allows employees to turn accounts off, but not restore them?

The economic meltdown has started. So what do our fearless leaders plan to do about it?

The Fed dropped interest rates. About all this means is that the banks who made fraudulent or stupid investments will get propped up for a little longer, because the people who are paying these loans will be able to pay them for a little while longer. Before going bankrupt and disappearing off the face of the Earth.

Tax breaks for business. After all corporation are people too. The vampirarchy must be protected. All the short-sighted, self-centered decisions made by corporations will be repaid with a tax decrease. Heaven knows we can't let them get desperate enough to sell off a couple of corporate jets.

Tax rebates for people who still have jobs.  yippee.   They think that $300 is a big enough bribe to get me to go along with the corporate handout? I'm not that cheap.

First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me--
and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Martin Niemoeller

We were waiting for a High School club meeting to end. We talked about the weather, and not enough sleep, and our kids’ plans for college. When she mentioned another child considering the military so that he could pay for college, I couldn’t resist easing the conversation over a little.

"The military can be a good way to pay for college, provided you survive it."

[Puzzled look]

"Iraq. A lot of kids have died there."

"Yes, but they are very dedicated to the cause."

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution of the United States

As everyone knows, Congress has the authority to declare war. But, who has the authority to declare the end of a war? Once war is declared, does the "Commander in Chief" have complete control over the tactics and length of a war?

I don't expect a response to every form letter that I send to my reps, but if I go to the trouble of composing a letter, it's nice to know that someone read it. My senators and representative seem to have a different opinion.

I apologize if this has been diaried already, but it's an idea worth repeating.

Nicholas von Hoffman has a novel idea on how Congress can end the war. http://www.thenation.com/...

The Democrats can tax our way out of the war. This would be a Victory Over Terror tax to be levied on incomes of $5 million a year or more. It should be a surcharge of 20 percent over and above what people in that rarified income bracket are already paying. It should be levied on all income, regardless of what form it takes, so it would include stock options, jet plane rides, company-paid-for health and life insurance, retirement programs, golden parachutes, the use of apartments in Paris, cars and drivers.

President Bush presented his latest way forward in Iraq on January 10, 2007.  He started by admitting that he had made mistakes in the past.  He then went on to claim he knew what went wrong before, and this time he could make the same old plan work.

This "surge," which will return us to about the same troop strength as a year ago, isn’t going to work any better than the last time.  It will just motivate more people to oppose our occupation.  A whole lot of people will die before we are forced to admit that this latest push hasn’t worked.  Then what do we do?  Go for one more push like a gambler in Vegas, or admit that more troops isn’t the answer?  

Molly Ivins recent column was a call to action to end the war in Iraq. As my little part, I sent the following letter to my Congressmen.

I am writing to state again my opposition to the Iraq occupation. Our continued presence does nothing but continue the violence. No one wants to live under foreign occupation. The Iraqis are no exception.

We were told that we needed to invade Iraq to find weapons of mass destruction. We found out that they no longer had them. Mission accomplished. It was time to leave.

• The Iraqis should be grateful to us for getting rid of Sadam. They are free now. Why are they so upset about the lack of security and electricity?

• I’m willing to give up a few of my civil liberties if it will keep me safer.

• The Iraq War is the most important front in the War on Terror.

• I have more important things to do than volunteer to fight, or pay, for the Iraq War.

How can anyone agree with all of the statements above? Yet I keep hearing these same statements from the same people.

Actually only Senator Shelby is willing to admit to it.  Senator Sessions and Representative Bonner can’t even trouble themselves to respond to my letters.  It seems like a pretty safe assumption though.

It’s frustrating when all of your reps are hard-core Bush puppets, but I thought I found something that might get through to them about why torture is such a bad idea.  I sent a copy of an article written by a reserve soldier who fought in the first Iraq War, entitled What We’ve Lost.  He writes about all the American soldiers that didn’t die because we had a reputation for treating prisoners fairly.

http://time.blogs.com/...

A news story came out a couple of days later that could explain the United States' position.  Thousands of weapons that we presumably provided to the Iraqi security forces are missing.  The Defense Department didn't even bother to record the serial number of most of them.

For those that aren't familar with the Church's position.  It is pro-life, which is not the same as anti-abortion.  The Catholic Church is officially in favor of universal health care, a living wage, a clean environment, no death penalty, no death penalty, etc.

My letter was in response to yet another column telling us that abortion is more important than all the other pro-life positions.  And if we have to choose between a candidate that is against abortion, but also against every other issue, and an oppsite candidate, we should go with the anti-abortion candidate.

Martin Niemoeller wrote this warning about the consequences of not resisting tyranny after WWII. It is still an important warning in this age of Patriot Acts, warrantless wiretaps, torture, and loss of Habeas Corpus. Here are some of the better-known examples of how our liberties are being protected by the US government.