FROM THE HORSE'S MOUTH

Who's lying? Republican lying spinmasters or a CIA operative who knows Valerie Plame very well? You know the answer. By Larry Johnson - TPM Cafe "Valerie Plame was a classmate of mine from the day she started with the CIA. I entered on duty at the CIA in September 1985. All of my classmates were undercover--in other words, we told our family and friends that we were working for other overt U.S. Government agencies. We had official cover. That means we had a black passport--i.e., a diplomatic passport. If we were caught overseas engaged in espionage activity the black passport was a get out of jail free card. A few of my classmates, and Valerie was one of these, became a non-official cover officer. That meant she agreed to operate overseas without the protection of a diplomatic passport. If caught in that status she would have been executed. The lies by people like Victoria Toensing, Representative Peter King, and P. J. O'Rourke insist that Valerie was nothing, just a desk jockey. Yet, until Robert Novak betrayed her she was still undercover and the company that was her front was still a secret to the world. When Novak outed Valerie he also compromised her company and every individual overseas who had been in contact with that company and with her". Karl Rove committed an act of treason when he not only outed Valerie Plame but he blew the cover for her overseas contacts as well. Contacts that were helping the U.S. in finding WMD's. If some of you want to defend that type of behavior just so you can defend the Republicans-go ahead. It doesn't surprise me one bit and it's exactly the type of person I've known you to be all along anyway.

REPUBLICANS vs. THE FACTS

As usual, Republicans play lip service to our nation's security Below are the description and the vote on Senate Amendment 220 that a Democrat sponsored to restore funding that Republicans had cut from the FY06 Homeland Security budget. It passed the Senate by a vote of 63-37 and the 37 Senators who voted 'no' are listed below. Do you see anything about the 37 Senators who voted 'no' that would give you any indication of which party is serious about the security of our nation? Senate Amendment 220 To protect the American people from terrorist attacks by restoring $565 million in cuts to vital first-responder programs in the Department of Homeland Security, including the State Homeland Security Grant program, by providing $150 million for port security grants and by providing $140 million for 1,000 new border patrol agents. NAYs ---37 Alexander (R-TN) Allard (R-CO) Bennett (R-UT) Bond (R-MO) Brownback (R-KS) Bunning (R-KY) Burns (R-MT) Burr (R-NC) Chambliss (R-GA) Coburn (R-OK) Cochran (R-MS) Cornyn (R-TX) Craig (R-ID) Crapo (R-ID) DeMint (R-SC) Domenici (R-NM) Ensign (R-NV) Enzi (R-WY) Frist (R-TN) Graham (R-SC) Grassley (R-IA) Gregg (R-NH) Hagel (R-NE) Hatch (R-UT) Inhofe (R-OK) Kyl (R-AZ) Lott (R-MS) McCain (R-AZ) McConnell (R-KY) Santorum (R-PA) Sessions (R-AL) Shelby (R-AL) Smith (R-OR) Stevens (R-AK) Sununu (R-NH) Thomas (R-WY) Voinovich (R-OH) Do you see any 'no' votes from Democrat Senators? The total restored to homeland security was $855 million. Keep in mind, George Bush is spending that same amount, $855 million, every 2 1/2 days in his made-up 'war on terrorism' debacle in Iraq. Every 2 1/2 days! Along with that, the House of Representatives proposed $150 million in rail and transit security funding for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2005. The Senate Appropriations Committee (read-REPUBLICANS again) proposed cutting related grants for fiscal 2006 by $50 million to $100 million. $50 million? That's what Bush is wasting every 3 1/2 hours in Iraq. As usual, Republicans are liars, pretenders and downright fools who talk a big game on security. And as usual it is Democrats who are fighting them tooth and nail to deliver on national security. Republicans can lie and spin all they want but Democrats have the facts and the voting record to back their argument. Source