My name is Catherine Morgan, I'm a writer, nurse, mother, and founder of "The Political Voices of Women". This is a blog dedicated to inform and educate the voting public through articles, ideas, and links. It's also a way of giving myself a voice, rather than just sitting back and watching politics and my opinion go by.
--- I am now also at the Care2 Election Blog.
IS IT O.K. TO CRITICIZE THE PRESIDENT? — by Catherine Morgan
It seems to me that we have taken political correctness to an extreme that Roosevelt himself may have considered “wrong” and “morally treasonable”. To understand what I mean by this you need to read this quote by President Roosevelt, a Republican President.
“The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else.”
“Roosevelt in the Kansas City Star”, 149 May 7, 1918
This was what President Roosevelt thought during a time that he himself was being harshly criticized. So, when I hear people saying that if we criticize President Bush, or question his policies we are “emboldening the terrorists”, it makes me a little angry. It seems to me that freedom of speech is the cornerstone of our country, and we can not allow anyone to take away our voice.
Another great post from our guest blogger at coffeegrounds…
coffeegrounds is a blog dedicated to all things that effect the quality of daily living…for all people. My aim is to encourage people from all walks of life to become freethinkers.
The only thing I don’t know for sure is, who I’m going to vote for in ‘08. There is still just too much information to decipher. But what I do know for sure is, I don’t know nearly enough.
I’m really frustrated with the information that is being put out there by the candidates who are currently running for President in ‘08. Any information that the candidates give is rehearsed, generic, owned by someone else, and given without any feeling of obligation of having to carry it out if elected president.
WASHINGTON - The top Republican on the Senate committee investigating Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said Sunday he believes Gonzales could step down before a no-confidence vote sought this week by Senate Democrats. . . . . read more
Specter and other senators said they were particularly troubled by testimony last week that Gonzales, when he was Bush’s White House counsel, pressured then-Attorney General John Ashcroft to certify the legality of Bush’s controversial eavesdropping program while Ashcroft was in intensive care.
Gasoline prices have topped $3 a gallon at service stations across the country because several oil refineries are off-line due to maintenance or accidents, reducing gasoline production and making fuel supplies tight.
“It’s outrageous …Isn’t it interesting every year about this time, a refinery goes down for repairs,” said Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada.
“Is that coincidental? Or is it part of a plan that these multinational, huge companies who are making obscene profits in the tens of billions of dollars — is this part of their game to keep the profits going?” Reid said. — see full article
———————————————————————-
The new Link TV original program “Outside the Box: Beyond Big Oil” challenges the way traditional media has framed the debate about oil and explores some alternative fuel sources.
In remarks made Wednesday to the Associated General Contractors of America, President Bush defined his view of the success in Iraq that he hopes to accomplish.
“Either we’ll succeed, or we won’t succeed,” he said. “And the definition of success as I described is sectarian violence down. Success is not, no violence.”
I don’t need to remind you who al Qaeda is. Al Qaeda is the group that plot and planned and trained killers to come and kill people on our soil. The same bunch that is causing havoc in Iraq were the ones who came and murdered our citizens. I’ve got to tell you, that day deeply affected my decision-making. And I vowed that I would do anything that I possibly could within the law to protect the American citizens against further attack by these ideologues, by these murderers.
And so while I’m talking about al Qaeda in Iraq, I fully recognize what happens in Iraq matters here at home. Despite their tremendous brutality, they failed to provoke the large-scale sectarian reprisals that al Qaeda wants. The recent attacks are not the revenge killings that some have called a civil war. They are a systematic assault on the entire nation. Al Qaeda is public enemy number one in Iraq. And all people of that society ought to come together and recognize the threat, unite against the threat and reconcile their differences.
For America, the decision we face in Iraq is not whether we ought to take sides in a civil war, it’s whether we stay in the fight against the same international terrorist network that attacked us on 9/11. I strongly believe it’s in our national interest to stay in the fight. (Applause.)
As you watch the developments in Baghdad, it’s important to understand that we will not be able to prevent every al Qaeda attack. When a terrorist is willing to kill himself to kill others, it’s really hard to stop him. Yet, over time, the security operation in Baghdad is designed to shrink the areas where al Qaeda can operate, it’s designed to bring out more intelligence about their presence, and designed to allow American and Iraqi forces to dismantle their network.
We have a strategy to deal with al Qaeda in Iraq. But any time you say to a bunch of cold-blooded killers, success depends on no violence, all that does is hand them the opportunity to be successful. And it’s hard. I know it’s hard for the American people to turn on their TV screens and see the horrific violence. It speaks volumes about the American desire to protect lives of innocent people, America’s deep concern about human rights and human dignity. It also speaks volumes about al Qaeda, that they’re willing to take innocent life to achieve political objectives.
The terrorists will continue to fight back. In other words, they understand what they’re doing. And casualties are likely to stay high. Yet, day by day, block by block, we are steadfast in helping Iraqi leaders counter the terrorists, protect their people, and reclaim the capital. And if I didn’t think it was necessary for the security of the country, I wouldn’t put our kids in harm’s way.
We’re seeing significant progress from our new strategy in Anbar province, as well. That’s a largely Sunni area west of Baghdad. It’s been a hotbed for al Qaeda and insurgents. According to a captured al Qaeda document — in other words, according to what al Qaeda has said — and by the way, in a war to protect America, it’s really important to take the words of the enemy very seriously — according to this document, the terrorists’ goal is to take over Anbar and make it their home base in Iraq. According to the document we captured — that is a document from al Qaeda, the same people that attacked us in America — their objective is to find safe haven in this part of Iraq. They would bring them closer — that would bring them closer to their objective, their stated objective, which is to destroy the young Iraqi democracy, to help them build a radical Islamic empire based upon their dark ideology, and launch new attacks on the United States, at home and abroad. That’s what they’ve said they want to do. — read entire speech
Bush picked today of all days to veto the Iraq Spending Bill? Is there a method to the madness? I can’t believe it has been four years since “mission accomplished”. Will it ever end?
President Bush pauses in the Cross Hall of the White House as he speaks Tuesday, May 1, 2007, in Washington, after he vetoed legislation to pull U.S. troops out of Iraq in a historic showdown with Congress over whether the unpopular and costly war should end or escalate. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)
It was a day of high political drama, falling on the fourth anniversary of Bush’s “Mission Accomplished” speech declaring that major combat operations had ended in Iraq.
In only the second veto of his presidency, Bush rejected legislation pushed by Democratic leaders that would require the first U.S. combat troops to be withdrawn by Oct. 1 with a goal of a complete pullout six months later.
“This is a prescription for chaos and confusion and we must not impose it on our troops,” Bush said in a nationally broadcast statement from the White House. He said the bill would “mandate a rigid and artificial deadline” for troop pullouts, and “it makes no sense to tell the enemy when you plan to start withdrawing.”
Democrats accused Bush of ignoring Americans’ desire to stop the war, which has claimed the lives of more than 3,350 members of the military. — read full article
Radio personality Don Imus, right, waves goodbye to Rev. Al Sharpton, left, after they appeared face-to-face on Rev. Sharpton’s radio show, in New York Monday April 9, 2007. Imus issued another apology for referring to the Rutgers women’s basketball team as ‘nappy-headed hos’ on his morning show last week. (AP Photo/Richard Drew)
As the dust settles following the controversy, it is time to confront the fact that Don Imus’ remarks go far beyond one bigoted commentator. They are further proof that we must change the media system itself if we’re going to reduce hate on the public airwaves, improve journalism and media content in general.
………less than 10% of TV and radio stations are owned by people of color or women. But instead of addressing this national disgrace, Bush’s Federal Communications Commission is actually trying to let the largest companies buy up even more stations.
According to one industry study, only 2.5% of radio stations have a person of color in the role of general manager, and only 4.4% have a racial or ethnic minority in the role of news director. The percentage of women in these jobs isn’t much higher. No wonder shock jocks like Imus have been able to keep their jobs for so long. – READ FULL ARTICLE AT THE HUFFINGTON POST
Radio personality Don Imus appears on Rev. Al Sharpton’s radio show, in New York in this April 9, 2007, file photo. MSNBC announced Wednesday, April 11, 2007 that it will no longer simulcast Don Imus’ radio program in the wake of public fallout resulting from his referring to the Rutgers University women’s basketball team as ‘nappy-headed hos’ on his morning show last week. (AP Photo/Richard Drew, File) — see more photos
Say this for Don Imus: the man knows how to turn an economical phrase. When the radio shock jock described the Rutgers women’s basketball team, on the April 4 Imus in the Morning, as “nappy-headed hos,” he packed so many layers of offense into the statement that it was like a perfect little diamond of insult. There was a racial element, a gender element and even a class element (the joke implied that the Scarlet Knights were thuggish and ghetto compared with the Tennessee Lady Vols). — Read Full Article at TIME MAGAZINE - THE IMUS FALLOUT
An Upcoming Vote In The Senate On Stem Cell Research — Will we be taking a step forward, or a step backward?
This is a one minute video that demonstrates what is currently happening to unused frozen embryos from fertility clinics.
I received an Email today about a Senate vote this week on Stem Cell Research. It is very troubling to me, and that is why I wanted to post on it today.
Several weeks ago, the House of Representatives passed a bill to overturn President Bush’s restrictions on stem cell research. The Senate is expected to vote on this bill, Senate Bill 5, this week.
Unfortunately, some Senators have put up another bill, S 30, called the “The Hope Offered through Principled, Ethically-Sound Stem Cell Research Act.” The problem is — it actually imposesadditionalrestrictions on stem cell research. It seems that some Senators think that their constituents will fall for this “bait and switch” as long as they package it with a name that everyone will like. This has been very successful in the past (ie: No Child Left Behind) .
Senate Bill 5 is the real deal.Senate Bill 5 is the stem cell bill supported by doctors, researchers, and patient advocates across the nation. Please write your Senators today. Tell them to support Senate Bill 5.
Here are 71 diseases and injuries that may be treated or cured by stem cell research.First, a caveat — this research is still in its early stages, and we’re not saying that cures are here today, or will be here next week. But we are saying this — with stem cell research, we will almost certainly get these cures and treatments sooner — a lot sooner. It’s not a promise of a cure, but it is a promise of one key thing — more hope. A lot more hope.
WASHINGTON - MARCH 22: U.S. Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) addresses the National Newspaper Association’s Government Affairs Conference March 22, 2007 in Washington, DC. Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) and former New York City mayor and Republican presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani also addressed the group and all mentioned energy independence as a defining issue in the 2008 elections. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
Chuck Hagel (R) on George Bush: This is Not a Monarchy
WASHINGTON - With his go-it-alone approach on Iraq, President Bush is flouting Congress and the public, so angering lawmakers that some consider impeachment an option over his war policy, a senator from Bush’s own party said Sunday.
Meanwhile, the Senate’s No. 2 Republican leader harshly criticized House Democrats for setting an “artificial date” for withdrawing troops from Iraq and said he believes Republicans have enough votes to prevent passage of a similar bill in the Senate.
“We need to put that kind of decision in the hands of our commanders who are there on the ground with the men and women,” said Sen. Trent Lott, R-Miss. “For Congress to impose an artificial date of any kind is totally irresponsible.”
GOP Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a frequent critic of the war, stopped short of calling for Bush’s impeachment. But he made clear that some lawmakers viewed that as an option should Bush choose to push ahead despite public sentiment against the war.
“Any president who says, I don’t care, or I will not respond to what the people of this country are saying about Iraq or anything else, or I don’t care what the Congress does, I am going to proceed — if a president really believes that, then there are — what I was pointing out, there are ways to deal with that,” said Hagel, who is considering a 2008 presidential run. — READ FULL ARTICLE
——————————————————————————————
If it was up to you, would you impeach George Bush?
HOW LONG WILL WE CONTINUE TO LET “EXTREME VOICES” DICTATE ISSUES IN POLITICS? — by Catherine Morgan
Both sides of politics has it’s “extreme voices”, but to what purpose do these extreme words serve the good of the American people? I would say none. Most of the “extreme voices” we hear in politics today are purely self-serving; to sell a book, to promote a television or radio show, and to promote themselves. This is a real shame, because at the same time they are “self-promoting”, they are causing a tear in our country that is like a cancer, eating away at the foundation of what we stand for….”United”.
These people care about one thing and one thing only, themselves. They know that by causing controversy, they will in-turn get attention, and it doesn’t matter to them if it is negative attention. It’s a lot like the “terrible two’s”, only with grown-ups. These people will continue to succeed at driving a wedge between us, unless or until “we” decide to not let them. How do we do that? For starters, stop buying the books!
Maybe this Ann Coulter thing can be the last straw. What do you think? Read the article “An Open Letter to Ann Coulter”, and let me know what you think of this issue, and the issue of all the “Extreme Voices” in politics today.
image from 
President Bush pauses in the Cross Hall of the White House as he speaks Tuesday, May 1, 2007, in Washington, after he vetoed legislation to pull U.S. troops out of Iraq in a historic showdown with Congress over whether the unpopular and costly war should end or escalate. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)
