The House has sent articles of impeachment against George Bush to the House Judiciary Committee, however Speaker Nancy Pelosi now says that an actual impeachment VOTE isn’t on the table. On Wednesday’s Countdown, Jonathan Turley gives his expert analysis on this epic fail as well as the latest attempt by the president to obstruct Congressional oversight by claiming executive privilege in the CIA/Plame leak investigation.
As for Bush’s executive privilege claims, Turley goes right for the jugular. Attorney General Michael Mukasey all but begged the president not to make him testify about Dick Cheney’s role in the Plame case and has ignored a subpoena to appear to testify about the matter before Congress — which Turley says should prompt Congress to charge him with Inherent Contempt. That’s not likely to happen, and as Jonathan points out, Democrats who voted for Mukasey are now getting what they paid for:
“…This is why, when Senators Shumer and Feinstein saved Mukasey’s confirmation, this is what they purchased. And, what Congress needs to do, the only thing they can do, is bring back Inherent Contempt and to say they’re going to start to exercise contempt on their own, that the deal is off. Attorney General Mukasey has broken a very long standing promise to be a faithful broker, to bring these cases to the grand jury - he won’t. And Congress has a right to now say we’re going back to doing this stuff ourselves.”
Let’s imagine a world without warnings, or guides and a universe filled with safe products and do good business’ whose sole ambition is not profitability but the betterment of mankind. O.K now that we finished our little journey into la al land we can now ask ourselves and our dear friends at the EPA if they were lost in la la land when deciding to distribute pesticide labels electronically, in lieu of traditional labeling. Yes - you read it right. The EPA is planning on pulling all labels off pesticides, including instructions for proper use. The move clearly is raising more than a few eye brows. Are pesticide companies trying to save all the trees used for labels? What possible “do good spin” can they put on this absurd decision?
“Benefits from using this system will include faster access to new pesticide uses, quicker implementation of protective measures for public health and the environment, improved compliance with label directions, and lower costs for industry and EPA,” the agency said May 12 in a statement on its pesticides website. Well, we believe the last part. The utterly absurd system will rely on users to contact either the pesticide labeling website or a toll-free telephone number to obtain the detailed-use instructions that previously were attached to pesticide containers, EPA said. So let me just get this straight - their method of protecting public health is by removing labels off toxic chemicals and asking consumers to call toll free numbers or access web site? Huh? Are they installing phones and access to the web at every retail location? What am I missing here?
According to Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides, “EPA knows historically from its label improvement program that it has a difficult time getting people to read labels. Instead of further removing labels from the consumer’s sight, EPA should be enhancing label information and design to ensure better disclosure of product hazards so that consumers can make better decisions regarding pesticide product purchase and use.”
This past Fall the EPA said in its presentation on electronic labeling that it “may replace the Directions for Use on the physical container,” but that the “container label would still have all FIFRA mandated elements, e.g. product name, registration number, net contents, and ingredients (I am guessing without a dictionary enclosed). ” The enforcement of the new system as described last fall involved a number of steps, including that “users would need to have a copy of the labeling from the website at the time of application” and “labeling would be good for a specified duration of time (e.g. six months) from the date of ‘printing.’” Cumbersome, inconvenient, unrealistic and clearly not serving the best interests or safety of the consumer - the EPA misses the mark yet again.
CNBC business analyst Mark Hanes delivered the economic news on MSNBC, then asked host Joe Scarborough to explain why Hillary Clinton isn’t being given more credit for narrowly winning the primary in Indiana, where some early polls had showed Obama leading.
Scarborough explained that Clinton failed to meet recent expectations and that, just as with corporate earning statements, that’s what counts.
“You don’t want this to end, do you?” Hanes asked in conclusion.
“Of course not,” Scarborough replied. “I want the Stones’ Street Fighting Man played in the background while I monitor the streets of Denver with tear gas, the ghost of Abbie Hoffman rising up over the auditorium. Yeah, baby, I want a fight — on both sides”
This video is from MSNBC’s Primary Coverage, broadcast May 6, 2008.
Let’s imagine a world without warnings, or guides and a universe filled with safe products and do good business’ whose sole ambition is not profitability but the betterment of mankind. O.K now that we finished our little journey into la al land we can now ask ourselves and our dear friends at the EPA if they were lost in la la land when deciding to distribute pesticide labels electronically, in lieu of traditional labeling. Yes - you read it right. The EPA is planning on pulling all labels off pesticides, including instructions for proper use. The move clearly is raising more than a few eye brows. Are pesticide companies trying to save all the trees used for labels? What possible “do good spin” can they put on this absurd decision?
