This XML file does not appear to have any style information associated with it. The document tree is shown below.
<livejournal>
<entry>
<itemid>27075</itemid>
<eventtime>2007-10-03 13:39:00</eventtime>
<logtime>2007-10-03 17:43:41</logtime>
<subject>
Republicans rally around President's War on Children!
</subject>
<event>
President Bush vetoed what some might call the '<a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071003/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_children_s_health;_ylt=Asw9L5TtRqb8F6nT2RHrlYkDW7oF">Surrendering to Children</a>' bill that would have further funded children's Health Insurance. Citing that this is the first step 'toward socialized medicine' numerous republican law makers joined him. This, despite the fact, that the program does not actually fund the amount of children it is supposed to protect under the current law, did not stop President Bush from staunchly defending his conservative principles. Meanwhile, President Bush has asked congress for more than $150 billion to help fight the 'War on Terror' in Iraq. When do we get a 'Children Czar'? After all, if we believe the children are our future, then the future must be STOPPED!
</event>
<security>public</security>
<allowmask>0</allowmask>
<current_music/>
<current_mood/>
</entry>
<entry>
<itemid>27187</itemid>
<eventtime>2007-10-17 15:46:00</eventtime>
<logtime>2007-10-17 19:50:40</logtime>
<subject>Valerie Plame</subject>
<event>
So Valerie Plame has a new book. There is nothing really new about it save her perspective; yet here is a thought that occurs to me. The typical conservative defense of Bush's treatment of her are "she is not a spy." If she is not a spy, then why is it necessary to prevent her from saying what she did for the CIA for <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071017/ap_on_go_ot/cia_leak_book;_ylt=AuS2gkeqQcVR9rBp.5SRhdiyFz4D">national security.</a> The other is...Bush, as President, can make something classified or unclassified whenever he wants to. And yet, I've heard Republicans rant over and over gain about one of Clinton's aids who took classified files from the White House for political purposes. Please note: Clinton did not do this. "Well Bush didn't get involved with the Plame thing either. That was Libby/Rove/Cheney." Then do THEY have authority to classify or declassify whatever they want instead of the President? You see the holes in this logic? How do you fight an enemy that isn't rational? You can't use rational thought...you can only use noise and emotion while fighting to keep your own core principles of rationality.
</event>
<security>public</security>
<allowmask>0</allowmask>
<current_music/>
<current_mood/>
</entry>
<entry>
<itemid>27512</itemid>
<eventtime>2007-10-19 12:37:00</eventtime>
<logtime>2007-10-19 16:51:33</logtime>
<subject>Soulless Autonomatons</subject>
<event>
So Sci Fi is going to make a movie that is an anology of the American Revolution...and the first reaction of the DeathEaters is that it must be anti american. This is because the name of the country the interstellar colony is revolting against is called 'The United State.' Thus confirming the fact that in their minds, as long as the United States is dominated by a DeathEater, it can do no wrong. <a href="http://www.aintitcool.com/talkback_display/34496#comment_1735407">Read this</a> and see what I'm talking about. The supreme irony is that the DeathEaters are more ideologically like the Crown Loyalists who fought for England during the revolutionary war than they were the Patriots. Substitute "the United State" with "England" or "America" with "England" in their rhetoric and there isn't that much difference. The Founding Fathers would be branded as terrorists for threatening to overthrow the legitimate and lawful government. The final sign that it is not just the Moron in Chief who is soulless, but those who are his followers (why I am now calling them DeathEaters) is <a href="http://www.voanews.com/english/2007-10-18-voa71.cfm">this</a> lovely little gem in which the Republicans are defending the administration's actions on taking a perfectly innocent person and torturing them. "You can't make an omlette without breaking some eggs." Not one of the two defending Bush and his defecation on the Constitution (and the principles thereof) even has the decency to apologize to the man. They are capable of giving lip service by acknowledging it is a mistake (which is better than his moronicness) but not capable of seeing the larger problems with this kind of behavior. One imagines if Hillary wins and starts doing this to Republicans then they'll suddenly be up in arms. And just because she's bought and sold by the corporations, doesn't mean she might not like to 'disappear' a few of the people who gave her and her husband a hard time so long ago. Hillary doesn't strike me as the forgiving or the forgetting type. Look at her reaction to the guy who asked her a <a href="http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/10/07/400826.aspx">simple question</a>. She's coming for you boys, and she's going to use the very same corrupt machine and rights taking tools that you created through his moronicness and the Grand Vizier....and she's going to use them on you. You'd better hope that those Storm Wardens (people who see the storm coming and actually give a damn about trying to stop it) succeed in getting someone like Barrack Obama in there instead. Obama isn't going to hunt you down like dogs. Hillary will.
</event>
<security>public</security>
<allowmask>0</allowmask>
<current_music/>
<current_mood/>
</entry>
</livejournal>
No comments:
Post a Comment