America has played the role of the bull in the Iraqi china shop. It was inarguably not the most peaceful establishment in town to begin with; its “employees” have fought amongst themselves since the dawn of recorded history. But Iraq is their shop, and had no part in viciously assaulting our own on September 11, 2001. There is no credible evidence it has ever planned to do so.

The United States still plays the rampaging bull to the people of Iraq, swinging its horns wildly and destroying everything in sight. A bull is incapable of picking up the broken pieces, of walking cautiously and gently between the aisles. It has only two courses of action: to stay and continue to lay waste to the shop, or walk out the front door. As long as the bull stays, the Iraqi people will escalate their assaults to induce it to leave. But a bull is stubborn, and stubbornly believes it can kill all its enemies; such is the nature of bulls. But the rare smart and moral bull decides to walk out of the shop on its own, because it knows it cannot destroy all its enemies in the shop, and because it knows it has no business being in someone else’s shop in the first place.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers has said that if three more Congress Members get behind impeachment he will start the impeachment proceedings.

I was a guest today on Bree Walker's radio show. She's the progressive radio host from California who purchased Cindy Sheehan's land from her in Crawford, Texas.

Bree attended an event on Friday in San Diego at which Congressman Conyers spoke about impeachment. Her report was extremely interesting. I had already heard reports that Conyers had said: "What are we waiting for? Let's take these two guys out!" But, of course, what we're waiting for is John Conyers. Is he ready to act? It was hard to tell from that comment. In January, Conyers spoke at a huge rally on the National Mall and declared "We can fire them!" but later explained that what he meant was that we could wait for two years and Bush and Cheney's terms would end. Was this week's remark just more empty rhetoric?

Unless Congress immediately impeaches Bush and Cheney, a year from now the US could be a dictatorial police state at war with Iran.

Bush has put in place all the necessary measures for dictatorship in the form of "executive orders" that are triggered whenever Bush declares a national emergency. Recent statements by Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff, former Republican senator Rick Santorum and others suggest that Americans might expect a series of staged, or false flag, "terrorist" events in the near future.

Many attentive people believe that the reason the Bush administration will not bow to expert advice and public opinion and begin withdrawing US troops from Iraq is that the administration intends to rescue its unpopular position with false flag operations that can be used to expand the war to Iran.

It was a chilling moment on a split-screen of history. While the Senate debated the Iraq war on the night of July 17, a long-dead senator again renounced a chronic lie about congressional options and presidential power.

     The Senate was in the final hours of another failure to impede the momentum of war. As the New York Times was to report, President Bush “essentially won the added time he said he needed to demonstrate that his troop buildup was succeeding.”

     Meanwhile, inside a movie theater on the opposite coast, the thunderous voice of Senator Wayne Morse spoke to 140 people at an event organized by the activist group Sacramento for Democracy. The extraordinary senator was speaking in May 1964 -- and in July 2007.

     A typical dash of media conventional wisdom had set him off. The moderator of the CBS program “Face the Nation,” journalist Peter Lisagor, told the guest: “Senator, the Constitution gives to the president of the United States the sole responsibility for the conduct of foreign policy.”

If "The Waitress" were a pie, which it very well may be, it would taste like a variety of flavors from sweet, sour and spciy to utterly delightful! Somehow all of these flavors seem to work for this dish!

The main character a sincerely sweet pie-making artiste. All of her life feelings and problems are translated into different pies. Everyone feels badly for her, especially after her recent pregnancy with her horrible husband. Even her closest friends, two fellow waitresses at the pie shop, tell her they would never trade places with her. I too, would never want to be in her shoes, married to a man like Earl. All of which sets off the deliciousness of the main characters' affair. This movie is by no means a setting of morals and values. Almost all of the characters in it commit adultery or suffer from personality disorders!

But this gives the movie its reality factor as well. Although it's a movie with real problems and sadness, there is humor and irony to be found everywhere. The doctor with whom the main character confides and finds herself in love, is also married. Their love may be the most random suprising part of the movie