Why Did the Republicans Fail to Deliver on Roe V. Wade - Why is it Still the Law of the Land?

For the last 6 years the Republicans have held the White House, They have held majorities in the House and the Senate. They have installed judges in the Courts. Their critics say they have packed the courts. They held all three branches of the government. During that time they could have overturned Roe v Wade. But they didn’t. Roe v Wade remains the law of the land.


While it is never an easy choice, I believe that people should have access to the medical procedures they need when necessary, no matter how difficult or painful. The alternative in this case is a world where people have no control over when and with whom they have children. Your daughter could get raped by some 'gangsta-rapper' and would have to be reminded of the torture of the rape every day for the rest of her life.


But that’s not the issue. The issue is that for the last 6 years the “Republicanistas,” the ideologues of the Republican Party, controlled all the branches of government, yet they didn’t follow through on their promises. While their cheerleaders in the media whined that the liberals were in control, these “Republicanistas” had the power but did next to nothing. All they did was take your money for their campaigns and line their pockets. They took your vote, they made promises, and they broke their promise. They sold your vote to the lobbyists but the Republicans did not keep their word.


I’m going to vote for people who say what they stand for. I’m going to vote Democratic.


I’m going to vote for people who deliver on their promises. I’m going to vote Democratic.

Iraq War To End: US & Iraq Declared Winners, France & Russia Losers.

Paris, France, Dec. 9. Objective Oriented Press Service, OOPS. The good news is, the war is almost over. As President Bush said, on an aircraft carrier, May 1, 2003 “Operation Iraqi Freedom was carried out with a combination of precision, speed, and boldness that the enemy did not expect.” Since then the war has been little more than a ‘mopping up operation.’

Now that the Iraq Study Group suggests we complete the mission by early 2008, just in time for the U.S. Presidential elections, and people all over the world are calling for Iran and Syria to get involved, some questions remain. Who won? And what can we expect to happen next? I spoke to Silas W. Coddington, noted pundit.

“Iraq and the United States are the real winners – we toppled Saddam, and destroyed whatever weapons of mass destruction Saddam had that we couldn’t find. Iran and Syria are also winners, and you can’t forget the Hamas, Hezbollah, and Palestinian people. The real losers – the Russians, and the French.”

“Wait a minute,” I said. “How did the Russians and the French lose this war? They are not involved. And how, exactly, did we win?”

“Well,” he started to explain, “it’s complicated. It’s really complicated. And I’m not sure you can really understand. I understand it, but I have a PhD.”

“Try me.”

“It’s like this. Remember Rumsfeld saying ‘You go to war with the army you have,’” he asked.

“December 9, 2004 – hard to forget.”

“It’s like that. When it’s time to stop fighting, and it will be in 2008, before the elections, we just declare victory. ‘Peace with Honor’ is good, but Nixon used that for Viet Nam, so we need a new slogan.”

“But that’s so cynical. It sounds like you’re manipulating the war for political gain.”

“Nothing could be further from the truth. We’re not manipulating the war, and we certainly wouldn’t do it for political gain. That’s un-American. That’s something the Russians would do. Or the French. Or the Terrorists. But not us. We wear the white cowboy hats. That’s why they lost the war.”

“But,” I protested, “How could they lose the war? They aren’t fighting.”

“Listen,” he answered, “You’re getting bogged down in ‘facts.’ We don’t need facts. We’re not reality based. We have TV, and Radio and the Internets. All we have to do is tell the reporters what the facts are, who won, they will write up the stories, if they want we can write up the stories for them, they publish the story, and everyone will eventually know the truth – that we won, that the facts are what we decide they are. Now if you’ll excuse me, I have an appointment to discuss some stock options with a defense contractor.”

***

This is a work of satire. Any resemblance to the facts is purely tragic.

Coulter, Limbaugh, Rumsfeld and Bush: The Real Winners of Election 2006

Washington, DC, Dec. 4. Objective Oriented Press Service, OOPS. The conventional wisdom inside the Beltway, throughout America, and all over the world is that the Democrats won the election. And while it’s technically true that candidates from the Democratic Party won election after election across the country, and Democrats won a majority in the House and the Senate, did they really win the election? I spoke to Silas W Coddington, noted “pundit.” He says “No, the Democrats didn’t win; they lost.”

"The real winners." according to Coddington, "were Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Don Rumsfeld, and George W. Bush. Coulter, Limbaugh and all the other right wing pundits, commentators, writers, hacks, sycophants, and hangers on have made their living – and some have made a very good living – complaining that the Democrats were in control. This was really hard to do with a Republican President, Republican majority in both the House and the Senate, and Republicans in control of the Judiciary. Now that the Democrats control the House and the Senate, the job of these pundits will be so much easier. They won’t have to stretch the truth so far it breaks. Limbaugh will be able to stop “doing” drugs. Or he’ll be able to “do” better ones. And if a Democrat wins the Presidency in 2008? Coulter, Limbaugh and company will be in Heaven.”

“But wait,” I said. “Rumsfeld resigned on Nov. 8, day after the elections. How can you say he won?”

“It’s true that Rumsfeld resigned but look at it this way: he’s free. He may not have liberated Iraq, but he himself is now liberated. And with his skills and experience – advisor to Presidents, Secretary of Defense – he should run for President. His slogan: ‘Rumsfeld in ’08: Because there’s no success like failure.’ I think lots of people would love to see Rumsfeld as the Republican candidate for President in 2008. Especially Democrats.”

“The same holds for President Bush,” Coddington explained. “He’s got a little over two years left to his Presidency. People are starting to call him a ‘Lame Duck.’ The Disloyal Opposition, which is just about everybody, can’t wait. They have ‘Countdown’ clocks that count the days between now and Jan. 20, 2008. Unreasonable people are even calling for him to accept responsibility for the response to Hurricane Katrina, the felony of identifying a covert CIA agent, and misrepresenting the facts and “making up” the justifications of the Iraq war, as if the Commander-in-Chief really needs ‘Justifications’ to go to war … why incredible as it may sound, some even want him impeached for ‘Violating the Law’ over the NSA wiretaps. It could even happen.”

“But that sounds really bad,” I said, “How can he be considered to have won the election?”

“Simple. ” Coddington explained. “He just blames someone else for the failure in Iraq. He says ‘I’m the ‘Decider,’ not the ‘Fall Guy.’ I declared ‘Mission Accomplished’ way back, May 1, 2003. It’s not my fault the Iraqis didn’t listen. Ask the Democrats – they’re in control now, have been since January, 2007. We Republicanistas have been too busy working with lobbiests and decidering decisions about who gets what. Cheney spent a lot of time with Ken Lay’s people talking about energy policy before they went bankrupt. Cunningham, DeLay, Foley, we've been working hard. And now they’re all gone. Some went to jail. How can we accomplish anything?’”

“Well,” I asked, “what should he do?”

“If you ask me,” Coddington replied, “He should just go back to his ranch for a few days, or the next two years. chop some wood and hand over the keys to Jeb, or Cheney, or Rumsfeld. Yeah, that’s the ticket.”

Press Release: The President Is Not Above The Law.

For Immediate Release. July 4, 2006.

Washington, DC. The President is not above the law. However, according to top Constitutional law scholars David Addington and John Yoo, the law is below the President.

This is the kind of distinction, a fake one, that is obvious to Conservatives, but that Liberals, with their illogical insistance on “the facts” never understand.

In the United States Of America, we have a system of checks and balances. Usually lobbyists write checks, which increase campaign fund balances.

Think about those “totalitarian” states. A guy like Saddam Houssein, or Assad of Syria, or Stalin, or that guy in Korea; that guy makes the law. No checks. No balances. Here in the United States, which is a democratic republic, a people's republic, the Congress makes the law. The President enforces the law. Now today there’s a crisis, so the President has to choose which laws to enforce, how to enforce them, and who they apply to. And when he has to act fast the President makes the law.

And remember, in those “totalitarian” states the presidents are never elected. President Bush was elected with a clear majority. In 2000 and again in 2004. Not November, 2000 – that one went to Al Gore, but later, in December, 2000. And earlier, in the Republican Party Primaries and Republican Convention. So then in December the Supreme Court voted 5 to 4 to make George W. Bush the 43rd President. It may only have been one vote, but it was more than 10% of the voters.

And Bush was elected again, in 2004. It was close – it almost went to Kerry, but patriots in Ohio took action. They didn’t just vote – multiple times – they got dead people to vote, and they stopped college students, liberals and “people of color” from voting. Those kinds of people – young, poor, inexperienced, liberals; they don’t know enough to vote for the right guy. Voting for them is not a right or a privilege. It would be an exercise in futility. But not allowing them to vote - it gives them something to look forward to, to strive for.

This is the kind of democracy we live in. The Supreme Court elects the President. The Congress agrees with the President, especially in times of war, when as ‘Commander in Chief’ the President wields all the power he needs to get the job done. The Press writes what it’s told to write, what it’s paid to write, or what it makes up. And the people go about their business, try to make ends meet and stay out of trouble.

And that’s why we are winning the war on Terrorism. We toppled Saddam Houssein three years ago. The War in Iraq today is just a mopping up operation. We have bin Laden cornered – he is somewhere south of the North Pole and north of the South Pole, probably on land.

Even the glaciers are on the run.

Machiavelli Would Sell the Ports

Washington. The Bush administration is leading the war on terror. The White House understands the security implications in the proposed $6.8 billion sale of the ports of New York, Elizabeth, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Miami, and New Orleans to a company in the United Arab Emirates, a benevolent dictatorship where Islamic Fundamentalism, oil, banking and slavery meet, mingle, and thrive under the watchful eye of the Emir, and where women and Christians better stay in their place and Jews ought stay away. The Bush administration understands very well that there are security concerns with the sale. But there is more to the proposed sale than meets the eye. Six Point Eight Billion Dollars more to be exact.

And granted, neither Presidents Roosevelt nor Truman would have sold the port of Pearl Harbor to the Japanese in World War II, nor would they have sold New Orleans. Gulf or Eastern Seaboard ports to the Germans in what Senator Dole called that “Democrat War.” But remember, Roosevelt and Truman were “Liberals.” Similarly, neither Presidents Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, or Reagan would have given these or any ports to the Soviets during the Cold War. But this is different. Some of those Presidents were “Liberals.” Even Reagan was a “Liberal,” albeit in his youth, and he learned better. While giving control over ports to “The Enemy” in time of war could seem like treason, and could seem to be an “impeachable” event, this is different. We are not giving the ports away; we’re selling the ports. Big difference. And no one is having sex.

It is actually a very ingenious plan, hatched by covert operatives in the White House basement – the same people who brought us the Watergate break-in and the Iran Contra affair. This is the best thing for the country since Jack Abramoff’s courageous work on behalf of the American people, and this plan has several goals.

First it distracts Americans from the silly incident in which the Vice President shot that lawyer. (And is it really so bad to shoot a lawyer? Doesn’t everyone want to shoot a lawyer? At least sometimes? Isn’t it practically guaranteed by the Second Amendment – does not the Right to Bear Arms imply the right to Shoot Lawyers?)

It also lulls the left-wing “humorists” like Jay Leno, David Letterman, Jon Stewart with the sense that they can take it easy. Why make stuff up – the facts are even better. The White House, eyeing the success of “Saturday Night Live”, “Weekend Update,” “The Daily Show,” and the “Dave Chappell Show” and its own poor performance in the “Katrina Show” aims to improve its ratings.

In addition, it gives the Democrats a false sense of security that they will recapture the House and Senate in the mid-term elections, and the White House in 2008.

And remember, it’s not a security risk if more than $1 billion will change hands, and $6.8 billion will finance a lot of campaigns.

Besides, New York, New Jersey, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Miami, New Orleans – some of these are liberal Democratic strongholds. Not Miami, sure you have a lot of old retired New Yorkers, but you also have the free Cubans, and they can be counted on to sacrifice – like they did in the glorious Bay of Pigs adventure.

But most important, and this is pure Machiavellian genius, selling these ports for $6.8 Billion will give us a lot of money – enough to finance the war in Iraq for about a month, which will be sufficient to end the war, after all, didn’t the President declare the mission accomplished and major fighting ended back in May, 2003, almost 3 years ago? So today, 3 years later, it must really be almost over, little more than a mopping up operation. So selling these ports to a company headquartered in a country where they launder money for Al Qaeda Terrorists will lay a trap for Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. The next time they try something we’ll know where they are!

Press Release: Martyrs Insurance Expanded With Due Process Insurance Unit

Press Release: Martyrs Insurance Expanded with Due Process Insurance Unit Formed.

For Immediate Release. July 4, 2006.

Jersey City, NJ. The Al Aksa Al Queda Martyrs Insurance, Inc., AAAQMI, with its headquarters in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, and with offices in Gaza City, Gaza, Ramallah, West Bank, Jersey City, New Jersey, and Detroit, Michigan, today announced a new business unit to sell a new product line to its North America based customers. Modeled after the popular “martyrs life” insurance paid to the families of martyrs who die blowing themselves up to kill infidels, “Due Process Insurance,” also known by it’s legalese name as “Habeus Corpus Insurance” provides payments to the families of living martyrs of Jihad who are imprisoned at Quantanamo Bay or elsewhere. All that is required to collect on the policy is for a Moslem to be imprisoned without bail, without access to an attorney, without knowledge of the specific charges against which he or she is being held. As with the Martyrs Death Products, American citizens are eligible for the payments, however, only Moslems are eligible. Parents or siblings of people who embrace the peaceful ways of Allah as revealed by the Prophet Mohammed are eligible after they convert.

So parents, siblings, dependents and spouses of Americans killed or imprisioned while defending the freedom of Palestinians, or their weapons caches are also eligible for compensation, once they embrace the peaceful ways of Allah, after they convert.

Additional riders for additional benefits in the event of extended periods of solitary confinement or torture will only allow payment after the victim is released from prison. After all, the purpose is to help families recover from the tragedy, not make them wealthy. However, if the torture is believed to involve humiliation or nudity in the presence of female infidels, additional payments are permitted after one of the wives or daughters of the martyr is ritually killed by her father, a brother, or an Imam to avenge the honor of the family.

According to AAAQMI, payments will not be made to those “Foolish Incompetents” who are actually convicted of planning terrorist activities. According to Ali Allah Akbar Mohhamed, spokesman for AAQMI, “First of all, praise be Allah, when they are caught it means they can no longer fight for jihad. It means their martyrdom must wait until they are released from prison. Even if, Praise Allah, the event they were planning does occur, it occurs without the continued efforts and participation of the wanna-be. When he dies he will not get his virgins. This insurance benefit is for martyrs and Wahabis, not wannabis. Second, getting caught and getting convicted is very bad for Jihad. It gives us a bad name. Think about it. It makes us look stupid. After Sept. 11 America was united but people were afraid. After Moussauwi and that idiot with explosives on his shoes, Richard Reed, people laughed at us. Those infidels at Saturday Night Live, that Robin Williams – a Fatwah on all their heads. And what kind of name is “Richard Reed” for a Moslem anyway?

Initially believed to be a moneymaker, “Bean Counters” at AAQMI, or as they are known “Counters of the Grains of Sand and the Stars in the Sky” are concerned that the NSA, the CIA, the FBI and the British MI 5 will mine their customer database for likely candidates for imprisonment. According to Yoo and Addington, who do not work for the NSA, the CIA, the FBI, or MI 5 “This is great. It makes our work so much easier. Well not our work,” they qualified. “After all, 100% of the people who buy life insurance die at some point in their life, usually at the end. Unless of course they choose to live in Omeha. These people wouldn’t buy this insurance if they weren’t guilty of something.”

For information contact Ali Allah Akhbar Mohammed, at AAAQMI.

* This is a work of satire. Any resemblance to actual events that may or may not be reported in the news is purely tragic.