Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Possible update on our Queen of Cups?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » DU Groups » Religion & Spirituality » Astrology, Spirituality & Alternative Healing Group Donate to DU
 
BlueIris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-03-06 11:33 PM
Original message
Possible update on our Queen of Cups?
Is the "woman who will bring down Bush" that we have speculated about for so long about to step forward? I mean, I know most think that there's definitely more than one woman out there who will start "acting up" to oppose him soon, but I am still waiting for one specific female to show herself.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2850486&mesg_id=2850486
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
NMDemDist2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-04-06 01:09 AM
Response to Original message
1. wouldn't it be a hoot if it was Harriet Myers??
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueIris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-04-06 01:32 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Well, I *was* just thinking about her the other day.
But Miers was the one who called Bush the "best governer ever"?

My guess is that it may be a woman who at least one thread we had here mentioned a loooong time ago: a woman who knew about the election theft of 2004 and was deeply remorseful about it, really struggling with her conscience. Supposedly religious (or believed she was). An aide no one will have heard of before. I don't think it's going to happen in 2006, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yankeeinlouisiana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-04-06 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. If it doesn't happen in 2006,
2007 is just around the corner!!

:bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cassiepriam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-04-06 06:54 AM
Response to Original message
3. Now that dems are going to be investigating the repug crimes
it is quite likely that many will be giving incriminating testimony
against Cheney, Bush, Rummy, etc.

They will do this not necessarily because their consciences are nagging them, but will do it in exchange for immunity against
being charged themselves with crimes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stellanoir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-04-06 07:09 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. though I agree that is a strong likelihood. . this is not so encouraging
Edited on Mon Dec-04-06 07:16 AM by stellanoir
It's mostly from last year but has since been updated.
There has to be such a backlog in these matters from the last 6 years. Yikes.

"#6 Federal Whistleblower Protection in Jeopardy

Source:

Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility website
Titles: “Whistleblowers Get Help from Bush Administration,” December 5, 2005
“Long-Delayed Investigation of Special Counsel Finally Begins,” October 18,2005
“Back Door Rollback of Federal Whistleblower Protections,” September 22, 2005
Author: Jeff Ruch

Faculty Evaluator: Barbara Bloom
Student Researchers: Caitlyn Peele and Sara-Joy Christienson

Special Counsel Scott Bloch, appointed by President Bush in 2004, is overseeing the virtual elimination of federal whistleblower rights in the U.S. government.

The U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC), the agency that is supposed to protect federal employees who blow the whistle on waste, fraud, and abuse is dismissing hundreds of cases while advancing almost none. According to the Annual Report for 2004 (which was not released until the end of first quarter fiscal year 2006) less than 1.5 percent of whistleblower claims were referred for investigation while more than 1000 reports were closed before they were even opened. Only eight claims were found to be substantiated, and one of those included the theft of a desk, while another included attendance violations. Favorable outcomes have declined 24 percent overall, and this is all in the first year that the new special counsel, Scott Bloch, has been in office.

Bloch, who has received numerous complaints since he took office, defends his first thirteen months in office by pointing to a decline in backlogged cases. Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) Executive Director Jeff Ruch says, “. . . backlogs and delays are bad, but they are not as bad as simply dumping the cases altogether.” According to figures released by Bloch in February of 2005 more than 470 claims of retaliation were dismissed, and not once had he affirmatively represented a whistleblower. In fact, in order to speed dismissals, Bloch instituted a rule forbidding his staff from contacting a whistleblower if their disclosure was deemed incomplete or ambiguous. Instead, the OSC would dismiss the matter. As a result, hundreds of whistleblowers never had a chance to justify their cases. Ruch notes that these numbers are limited to only the backlogged cases and do not include new ones.

On March 3, 2005, OSC staff members joined by a coalition of whistleblower protection and civil rights organizations filed a complaint against Bloch. His own employees accused him of violating the very rules he is supposed to be enforcing. The complaint specifies instances of illegal gag orders, cronyism, invidious discrimination, and retaliation by forcing the resignation of one-fifth of the OSC headquarters legal and investigative staff. The complaint was filed with the President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency, which took no action on the case for seven months. PEER was one of the groups who co-filed the complaint against Bloch and Ruch wants to know, “Who watches the watchdogs?”

This is the third probe into Bloch’s operation in less than two years in office. Both the Government Accountability Office and a U.S. Senate subcommittee have ongoing investigations into mass dismissals of whistleblower cases, crony hires, and Bloch’s targeting of gay employees for removal while refusing to investigate cases involving discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

The Department of Labor has also gotten on board in a behind-the-scenes maneuver to cancel whistleblower protections. If it succeeds, the Labor Department will dismiss claims by federal workers who report violations under the Clean Air Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act. General Counsel for PEER, Richard Condit says, “Federal workers in agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency function as the public’s eyes and ears . . . the Labor Department is moving to shut down one of the few legal avenues left to whistleblowers.” The Labor Department is trying to invoke the ancient doctrine of sovereign immunity, which says that the government cannot be sued without its consent. The Secretary of Labor’s Administrative Review Board recently invited the EPA to raise a sovereign immunity defense in a case where a woman was trying to enforce earlier victories. Government Accountability Project General Counsel Joanne Royce sums up major concerns: “We do not want public servants wondering whether they will lose their jobs for acting against pollution violations of politically well-connected interests.”

UPDATE BY JEFF RUCH
With the decline in oversight by the U.S. Congress and the uneven quality of investigative journalism, outlets such as the U.S. Office of Special Counsel become even more important channels for governmental transparency. Unfortunately, under the Bush-appointed Special Counsel, this supposed haven for whistleblowers has become a beacon of false hope for thousands.

Each year, hundreds of civil servants who witness problems ranging from threats to public safety to waste of tax funds find that their reports of wrongdoing are stonewalled by the Office of Special Counsel (OSC). Consequently, these firsthand accounts of malfeasance are not investigated and almost uniformly never reach the public’s attention.
The importance of this state of affairs is that the actual workings of federal agencies are becoming more shrouded in secrecy and disinformation. Americans are less informed about their government and less able to be in connection with the people who actually work for them—the public servants.

In a recent development, employees within the OSC have filed a whistleblower complaint about the Special Counsel, the person who is supposed to be the chief whistleblower defender. After several months delay, the Bush White House assigned this complaint to the Inspector General for the Office of Personnel Management for review. This supposedly independent investigation has just begun in earnest, nearly one year after the complaint was filed.

Also, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report in May 2006 blasting the Bush-appointed Special Counsel for ignoring competitive bidding rules in handing out consultant contracts. GAO also recommended creating an independent channel whereby Office of Special Counsel employees can blow the whistle on further abuses by the Special Counsel.

In another recent development, PEER’s lawsuit against the Special Counsel to force release of documents concerning crony hires has produced more, heavily redacted documents showing that these sole source consultants apparently did no identifiable work. Ironically, the PEER suit was filed under the Freedom of Information Act, a law that the Special Counsel is also charged with policing.

And in a new annual report to Congress, OSC (stung by criticism about declining performance) has, for the first time, stopped disclosing the number of whistleblower cases where it obtained a favorable outcome. Consequently, it is impossible to tell if anyone is actually being helped by the agency.

PEER’s web page on the Office of Special Counsel has posted all developments since this story and also allows a reader to trace the story’s genesis."

I'll post the primary source in a minute or two. . .
http://www.projectcensored.org/censored_2007/index.htm#2

It's odd the site says top censored stories for '07 though most of the articles are written in '05. Maybe these folks are more psychic than the folks at in Inquirer or something. That wouldn't say much though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cassiepriam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-04-06 07:26 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. It is one thing to be a whistle blower, another thing to be forced
to testify in exchange for immunity.

One comes forward at their own volition and is innocent.
The other is charged with crimes and speaks up to save his or her own skin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stellanoir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-04-06 07:57 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Yeah I know but still,
I'm wistful for the day when whistleblowers were considered heroic.

'Member several years ago when the three lady whistleblowers (Colleen Rowley was one of them and one of the Enron ladies and I forget who was the third) were lauded as people of the year by "Time" magazine ?

Since then it seems every whistleblower has either been gagged (Edmunds,) marginalized (Kwiatowski (sp?,) or totally smeared (Wilson.) Oh and that gentleman who ratted out Diebold in So Cal. faced charges and had to settle out of court. That was especially disheartening. Out of concern for the public interest he leaked internal memos that made the company look bad and it completely blew up in his face and cost he and his wife dearly.

My only point was an obvious one. That the climate for dissent or whistleblowing, hasn't been less friendly so you're probably right and whomever reveals the truth will probably do so not of their own volition and integrity but out of sheer self preservation. That's just plain sad.

Oh. . .and sheesh. . .what was I thinking by posting on an "even" day. . .? :)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cassiepriam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-04-06 09:15 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. No laws can protect a whistle blower any way....
And no one likes a whistle blower.

I know of what I speak.

Years back I was involved with a company that
was taken over by Bush Co/ oil mafia.
It became apparent that their goal was to
come in and rob the company of all of its assets.
The ruined the company which had been tremendously
profitable. They borrowed billions of dollars
from banks, bondholders, etc. They took all the
money and declared bankruptcy. They left the employees,
customers, banks, stock and bond holders holding the bag.

I saw up close and personal how the oil mafia works.
No laws stop them at all. They either buy off the
lawmakers and get the law changed to their favor.
Or they bribe the regulatory agency officials who
then turn a blind eye to any wrong doing. There is an
incredibly powerful system of rewards and punishments.
And any one who speaks out is destroyed one way or the other.
Professional and character assassination are common.

So in terms of whistle blowing every person has to look deep
inside themself and understand what it will mean.
They have to be ready to take the consequences for speaking the truth and doing the right thing. It is a thankless job, and very few will support or protect them.

It is really about inner character and integrity. And not about
getting praised or protected.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stellanoir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-04-06 10:40 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Welp my brother
(mr. uranus conjunct jupiter in the 9th) is a bit of a mad inventor and had a five foot tall tesla coil in the living room as exhibit A. He was always going on about how the oil cos. would always buy up the patents for alternative energy devices and shelve them. So their self interest is nothing new I suppose.

An elderly gentleman for whose grandchildren I used to babysit in my youth wrote a book during the 30's warning of our over dependence on mideastern oil. He had been demonized during the McCarthy era under false charges of being a communist. So again it's nothing new.

I've a friend who has a severely compromised immune system.
She worked in a "sick building" a decade ago and though she worked for a huge corp the building was owned by the state. She has a copious amount of data on strange illnesses and deaths of her former coworkers and has been trying to pull an Erin Brockovich (sp?) as long as I've known her. In these times, no one will touch her case with a barge pole.

Yet when I think of the whistleblowers of the past few decades though, (Silkwood, Brockovich, etc) it just feels like the odds of those sorts of stories getting out there now are far less likely than before, at least at present.

I agree it's about integrity and not seeking praise or expecting protection, but this case in So Cal wherein the truth teller got prosecuted and fined and dragged through the mud was really shocking to me.

I can be fairly naive though as you well know.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cassiepriam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-04-06 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Naivety is good
as is optimism and hope.
We have to have them.....

Just never underestimate what the BushCo crowd is capable of...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 06:23 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » DU Groups » Religion & Spirituality » Astrology, Spirituality & Alternative Healing Group Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC