ThinkFast: December 4, 2006
ThinkFast: December 4, 2006
The pace of the $6 billion second phase of levee work in New Orleans has slowed significantly. To “save money,” the Army Corps plans to focus on longer-term plans that critics say “will leave the city at risk until 2010 at least.” The corps “has also scaled back plans to armor the levees against being scoured away when water flows over the top.”
“The Pentagon is invoking emergency authority to fast-track funding of a comprehensive war-crimes court compound at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba,” the Miami Herald reports. Pentagon spokesmen “would not say when — if ever — the Pentagon had last invoked similar authority.”
Iraqi president Jalal Talabani, a Kurd, “yesterday rejected suggestions that an international conference be held to address the violence wracking his country, echoing sentiments expressed” by other leading Iraqi politicians.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), the incoming Senate Rules and Administration Chairwoman, will push for “legislation to require that there be an independent paper record of every ballot.” See a summary of the Ballot Integrity Act here.
Every schoolchild in Scotland will be offered the chance to see An Inconvenient Truth under a plan presented by energy company ScottishPower. “ScottishPower, which has also given copies of Mr. Gore’s book…to hundreds of its staff, plans to pay for cinema screenings for older children in primary schools and all secondary pupils.”
At least 70 trade unionists were assassinated in Colombia last year, the highest number of any country in the world, a new report finds. The Bush administration signed a trade deal with Colombia in November that “ignores fundamental workers’ rights.”
The Iraq situation is ‘much worse’ than civil war, according to U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan. “We had the strife in Lebanon and other places, we called that a civil war,” Annan said, “this is much worse.”
“At least 21 people were killed at school during the 2004-05 academic year, a slight increase from the year before,” according to the Justice Department.
And finally: On Friday, Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM) was seen wearing “tartan” or “buffalo plaid” pajama bottoms. But Domenici insisted they were actually “hunting pants.” He explained that he often wears them around the house and when he leaves for work, he doesn’t “necessarily take them off.” “People stop me to talk about them. They’re Christmasy, they’re black and white.”
What did we miss? Let us know in the comments section.
Where is the story of Nanci Pelosi dumping both Jane Harmon and the next highest tenured black member of the Intelligence Committee for a third person?
It is emblematic of a couple things:
1) Her inability to work with more conservative members of her party.
December 4th, 2006 at 9:11 am2) The general weakness of the black caucus and the black community - Dems know the black community will continue to vote 90% for Dems while Dems still refuse them their due positions of power. Reps name blacks to Secretary of State, while the Dem party continues to look like a white prep school.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), the incoming Senate Rules and Administration Chairwoman, will push for “legislation to require that there be an independent paper record of every ballot.
Wow, I’d be all for this, but because a D is pushing for it, I am honor and party bound, to fight it tooth and nail.
December 4th, 2006 at 9:19 amSen. Pete Domenici (R-NM) was seen wearing “tartan†or “buffalo plaid†pajama bottoms.
I may have to move to NM just so I can vote for this guy.
President Bush has accepted the resignation of U.N. Ambassador John Bolton when his recess appointment expires, The Associated Press reports.
CNN News Flash
December 4th, 2006 at 9:25 amNIce to see the Army Corps saving money instead of saving New Orleans. I guess that money is needed more to rebuild other countries than a US city.
Wow, Jason let the Gore thing go by and focused on Pelosi although its just as bat scat crazy. I think it might be love.
December 4th, 2006 at 9:25 amJason,
We’ve had enough “failed conservative” values for the last 6 years thank you.
Since I admit I don’t know much about it, perhaps she appointed someone with “skills”.
You know much like Shrubby did with Harriet, scratch, Brownie, scratch that one too, Bolten… uggghh ooops sorry I’m sure Shrub appointed someone with skills somewhere.
December 4th, 2006 at 9:27 amsorry I’m sure Shrub appointed someone with skills somewhere.
Comment by AbortAllChristianBabies
No he only fires people with skills.
December 4th, 2006 at 9:30 amEvery schoolchild in Scotland will be offered the chance to see An Inconvenient Truth
WOW, offered the chance instead of required, what a concept.
December 4th, 2006 at 9:33 amdlet
No he only fires people with skills.
So that’s why Bolton is stepping down.
December 4th, 2006 at 9:35 amNo he only fires people with skills.
Finally someone see’s Rummy’s Skills :)
December 4th, 2006 at 9:38 amWhere is the story of Nanci Pelosi dumping both Jane Harmon and the next highest tenured black member of the Intelligence Committee for a third person?
You mean Silvestre Reyes, the Hispanic who’s been on the committee for the last six years, ? A good pick, and another non-starter for conservatives, desperate to gin up a fake controvercy. Weak attempt, J-man. Try again.
December 4th, 2006 at 9:40 am“ScottishPower.” I like the sound of that! It’s good to see a company do something to help its community, rather than just focusing on the bottom line. Of course, I’m pleased the Scots are leading the way on this. Do you think we could get the oil industry in America to spend some if its multi-billion dollar profits in a similar venture?
December 4th, 2006 at 9:41 amFinally someone see’s Rummy’s Skills :)
Comment by Tundra —
Rummy wanted to resign before the election.
December 4th, 2006 at 9:41 amFinally someone see’s Rummy’s Skills :)
Comment by Tundra
So that’s why Bolton is stepping down.
Comment by squegeeboo
Thank god that coffee up the nose wasn’t that hot. You guys ever think of taking that act on the road.
December 4th, 2006 at 9:42 amHappy Monday All, Yes, I said all…..A little note to JMH. You all know who I mean, the reich winger who want’s to distroy all Democrat’s ( his word’s) posted on this site…The same one who bosted he would be here the morning after the election….Yah, that one, the one that hid our for a week is now appearing again…..For our viewing pleasure,,,LOL,,,,,Well JMH….Palosi is a bright woman, I know that upset’s you and you’re troll friend’s…To bad, so sad, get over it and go away…..We won, you lost and now we are working for good change….Go away little troll and peddle you’re hate somewhere else…The uppity women are uniting and we are going to make big changes..Blessings
December 4th, 2006 at 9:43 amJason,
That first post was just plain lazy. Do some research, use the google.
Next time you need a little help rubbing off that nagging Monday morning
wood, just try this…
Type “first!!!!!!!!!!!1111!!!!!!”
… and be done with it.
December 4th, 2006 at 9:45 amSince I admit I don’t know much about it, perhaps she appointed someone with “skillsâ€.
And Democratic Party ideals, guy sounds like Lieberman
http://www.cnn.com/ 2006/ POLITICS/ 12/ 01/ reyes.intelligence.ap/ index.html
Reyes believes that the U.S. must increase its military strength to face the current threats in Iraq, that the Bush administration must forge better alliances, and that Iraqi militias must be disbanded. “We cannot and we should not tolerate these private armies with these warlords,” he said.
December 4th, 2006 at 9:46 amIt sounds like the Administration wants to get the Military Commissions up and running with some quick convictions before the Supreme Court gets a chance to rule on the Constitutionality of those Commissions. Politically, it will give NeoCons the argument that either one or more Justices need to be removed from office, or the Court must have 2 more Justices to get a firm conservative majority. (Or that Ann Coulter needs to give a Justice some creme broulee.) They’re positioning already for bringing out the “weak on terror” pitch for the ‘08 election.
December 4th, 2006 at 9:46 am#14, Sharon,
I was here on the morning after the election, congratulated you and wished you luck, was there something more you needed?
Pelosi is already playing defense after loosing her battle to elect Murtha, and as the Reps demonstrated, if you aren’t playing to win, you are guarenteeing a loss. Your premature/suspect wins (even Bill Maher dismisses that “accomplishment”) in this election leave you in a very weak position, which Pelosi is demonstrating, meanwhile, Reps are now unbridled, and can bring back their most effective leaders like Trent Lott.
As for smart, is Pelosi were truly smart, she wouldn’t have nominated Murtha, then failed to ensure his win - more proof that the Clintonistas are really pulling all the strings.
December 4th, 2006 at 9:51 amThink of this every time you drink a Coke:
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060501/blanding
I’m not alleging that Coke was involved in any of the killings mentioned above, but Coke’s history in Columbia is not exactly a stellar model of protecting the human rights of its workers.
December 4th, 2006 at 9:53 amBnF, I actually have a serious question. Why would we need to protect Constitutional rights of people that are not U.S. citizens (Gitmo detainees)? I have been at a loss about this one.
I can see the case for the Genevia Conventions and Laws of War, but not the Constitution.
December 4th, 2006 at 9:56 amI’m not alleging that Coke was involved in any of the killings mentioned above
Then why reference the article, and then move directly over to Coke? Sounds like your implying at least.
dlet
December 4th, 2006 at 9:59 amThank god that coffee up the nose wasn’t that hot. You guys ever think of taking that act on the road.
But I thought conservatives don’t have a sense of humor, and/or aren’t funny?
We must all tremble before the superior intellect of the Ivy League graduate…
December 4th, 2006 at 9:59 am#1 JMH
Where is the story of Nanci Pelosi dumping both Jane Harmon and the next highest tenured black member of the Intelligence Committee for a third person?
It is emblematic of a couple things:
That post is emblematic of a few of things:
1. Very weak argument, and not exactly fresh or compelling stuff.
December 4th, 2006 at 10:01 am2. Harman has two counts against her–she often failed to even attempt any exercise of oversight in her position as ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee and she lobbied a bit too vigorously to get the chair.
3. Hastings probably would have done a great job, but he was tainted by the impeachment and it was too important a position to be making a controversial appointment.
4. Reyes is an excellent choice. What do you have against Latinos?
[And finally: On Friday, Sen. (R-NM) was seen wearing “tartan†or “buffalo plaid†pajama bottoms. But Domenici insisted they were actually “hunting pants.†]
Ssshhhhhh! Have you seen that wascally wabbit! Heh-heh-heh-heh-heh!
Where’s mommy with my corn flakes?
December 4th, 2006 at 10:05 amJMH is merely parroting the right wing talking points from his favorite sources. They are itching to find something - anything - to criticize about Pelosi and all Demcorats.
December 4th, 2006 at 10:07 amHarmon irritated a lot of us because she was too acquiescent to Bush&Co. Alcee Hastings has too many questions in his background. Pelosi’s choice was a good one, but reichwingers don’t understand doing the right thing - not when they have friends who can be paid back for services with appointments.
Anyone got a photo of Domenici?
December 4th, 2006 at 10:08 amJMH……LOL…..Be sure and keep you’re word count up in support of the Grand Old Pervert party….Keep you’re check’s coming in….Palosi is picking the best and working within the party, nothing less…..Unlike heir bush the supreme devider, drunk,druggie lier she can do her job…….Get over it looser and go away……Blessings, you realy need them
December 4th, 2006 at 10:09 amSen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), the incoming Senate Rules and Administration Chairwoman, will push for “legislation to require that there be an independent paper record of every ballot.†See a summary of the Ballot Integrity Act here
This has to be done ASAP while Dems have some power. This is of paramount importance. A repeat of the last 6 years will be prevented with a record of paper ballots.
December 4th, 2006 at 10:09 am#23, chimp,
Points 2 and 3 are correct, but they support my point that Dems are already playing defense, ensuring little or no success in Congress, and a return of the congress to Reps in 2008.
As for point 4, you missed an opportunity to point out the growing strength of Latinos in the US over the black community, which is my point. Dems best opportunity for success this year is to pass legislation to deal with illegal immigration of the millions of latinos and asians pouring into the US. Bush agrees with the Dems on this issue far more than with the Reps, so you can pass whatever you like, and get political cover from Bush …
December 4th, 2006 at 10:10 am#18 JMH
Pelosi supported Murtha for good reason. There was no fallout from showing loyalty to him (except for that make-believe fallout that the right tried and failed to generate). He helped get the Democrats in Congress to recognize that opposing the administration on the ocupation of Iraq was not going to lose them the election and was actually a view that was appreciated by the majority of voters. Hoyer’s okay with it, too. It’s all water under the bridge.
The fact that it’s ancient history but that you actually think you can still get some mileage out of it is a pretty fair indication of just how weak and desperate the right has become. Just say “uncle” and spare yourself further humiliation.
December 4th, 2006 at 10:10 amAs for smart, is Pelosi were truly smart, she wouldn’t have nominated Murtha, then failed to ensure his win - more proof that the Clintonistas are really pulling all the strings.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler
Baloney. You guys have been pushing this weak spin for two weeks. Pelosi would have had to change the committee rules to elect Harmon - a fact you wingers convieniently ignore. She was in no way constrained to elect either Murtha or Harmon, and no one else. That’s just the crap your side’s been peddling, and it’s already been thoroughly debunked. Try to focus on real issues, or your side will permanently be in the minority.
December 4th, 2006 at 10:11 amBut I thought conservatives don’t have a sense of humor, and/or aren’t funny?
Comment by squegeeboo
I never said that. I laugh at them all the time.
December 4th, 2006 at 10:14 am#7 robert
Every schoolchild in Scotland will be offered the chance to see An Inconvenient Truth
WOW, offered the chance instead of required, what a concept.
Yeah, what’s with those Scots, anyway? Doesn’t Scottish Power realize it’s going to hurt profits by showing concern for the survival of the planet? Where the hell are their priorities?!
December 4th, 2006 at 10:15 am#31, barfly,
Oh, the real issues are coming, and her current actions are an indication that she won’t be able to handle them. Clintonistas need her and the netroots movement to fail, so that Hillary will be successful in 2008 - just prepping you for fact that throwing dirt as a minority leader is one thing, but trying to unite and succeed as a majority leader is something totally different.
I will be enjoying the show, to be sure …
December 4th, 2006 at 10:16 amAs for point 4, you missed an opportunity to point out the growing strength of Latinos in the US over the black community, which is my point.
Your points keep tripping over each other. First you accuse Pelosi of incompetance for not selecting a woman or a black, and supposedly you can’t see that selecting Reyes is, as you say, “an opportunity to point out the growing strength of Latinos in the US over the black community.”
You’re all over the road.
December 4th, 2006 at 10:17 am4. Reyes is an excellent choice.
Agreed:
Voted YES on making the PATRIOT Act permanent. (Dec 2005)
December 4th, 2006 at 10:17 amVoted YES on constitutional amendment prohibiting flag desecration. (Jun 2003)
Rated 30% by NARAL, indicating a pro-life voting record. (Dec 2003)
Voted NO on funding for alternative sentencing instead of more prisons. (Jun 2000)
Voted YES on more prosecution and sentencing for juvenile crime. (Jun 1999)
Rated 25% by CURE, indicating anti-rehabilitation crime votes. (Dec 2000)
Voted NO on raising CAFE standards; incentives for alternative fuels. (Aug 2001)
Voted YES on increasing AMTRAK funding by adding $214M to $900M. (Jun 2006)
Rated 55% by the LCV, indicating a mixed record on environment. (Dec 2003)
Voted YES on prohibiting product misuse lawsuits on gun manufacturers. (Oct 2005)
Voted YES on prohibiting suing gunmakers & sellers for gun misuse. (Apr 2003)
Rated B by the NRA, indicating a pro-gun rights voting record. (Dec 2003)
Voted YES on continuing military recruitment on college campuses. (Feb 2005)
Voted NO on adopting the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. (Oct 2004)
Where is the story of …. Comment by Jason M. Hendler
Why should a progressive site include any “story” that you would want? Your “advise” to Democrats and progressives is meaningless drivel. Why don’t you peddle your questionable “think tank” skills over on a Republican, neoconservative site and leave the progressive strategy to actual progressives?
December 4th, 2006 at 10:18 amI will be enjoying the show, to be sure …
Comment by Jason M. Hendler
So will I - and since your record for predictions is horrible - with somewhat more justified confidence about the outcome.
December 4th, 2006 at 10:19 amdlet
I never said that. I laugh at them all the time.
December 4th, 2006 at 10:21 amZING!!!
#33, Hey, I am all for the OPTION of seeing it. What I am against is anyone being FORCED to see it as some would like to see done here in the U.S. I would not mind if my child saw it I would actually watch it with my kids), but I can not tell my neighbor to make his kid see it.
December 4th, 2006 at 10:22 amSo Tundra, Reyes is a former border patrol officer, and serviceman. Since he can’t be tarred as a extremist by your side, what issues will the republicans try to gin up, instead?
December 4th, 2006 at 10:22 am#35, barfly,
You’re right, I forgot the weakening political strength of women as well, since their votes and black votes are taken for granted - it is the latino vote that is in play. This is a far bigger mess for Pelosi than I realized - can’t women work together?
#37, PLC,
Why hide the failures and refusals by Pelosi to incorporate progressive goals? Isn’t that the purpose of a progressive site, to hold leaders accountable against progressive metrics?
December 4th, 2006 at 10:26 amHey, I am all for the OPTION of seeing it. What I am against is anyone being FORCED to see it as some would like to see done here in the U.S.
Robert
Like that phoney-baloney Path To 9/11? Remember, they were also going to do the same with the “events” as portrayed by a right-wing hack, in “study guides” based on the propaganda. I’m also against anyone being FORCED to, as they were planning here in the US!
December 4th, 2006 at 10:27 amweakening political strength of women as well, since their votes and black votes are taken for granted
Women are def. not taken for granted as a voting block, in the majority of recent elections they are nearly split, often within a 10% vote spread for Dems and Repubs, also, if memory serves me correctly in 2000 they voted just over 50% for Bush, where as in 2004 they voted something like 54% for Kerry.
December 4th, 2006 at 10:29 amOops, my mistake, in 2004 it was 51% for Kerry, 48% for Bush.
December 4th, 2006 at 10:31 am#29 JMH
Points 2 and 3 are correct, but they support my point that Dems are already playing defense, ensuring little or no success in Congress, and a return of the congress to Reps in 2008.
No, they’d only be playing defense if they stopped and wrung their hands over the pointless criticisms of their every move by right-wing pundits and bloggers. As long as they continue to ignore them and forge ahead, they’re not playing anything. They’re doing what’s known as “public service”. I realize that’s something of a nebulous concept to Republicans–serving the public. Silly of the Dems not to be working for some specific well-heeled interest group that can buy an election for them, eh?
December 4th, 2006 at 10:33 amLike that phoney-baloney Path To 9/11? Remember, they were also going to do the same with the “events†as portrayed by a right-wing hack, in “study guides†based on the propaganda. I’m also against anyone being FORCED to, as they were planning here in the US!
Wasn’t “Path to 9/11″ a network T.V. thing. You had the OPTION to change the channel. A 12 year old child in a classroom does not have that OPTION, unless the parents are notified ahead of time in send an opt out letter to the school.
December 4th, 2006 at 10:33 amwhat issues will the republicans try to gin up, instead?
Comment by barfly — December 4, 2006 @ 10:22 am
No clue what they will do, I just predict that you all will be throwing him under the bus before too long.
http://www.ontheissues.org/TX/Silvestre_Reyes.htm
http://www.issues2002.org/Senate/Joseph_Lieberman.htm
If you just scroll all the way down on them both, they are a dead match. Plus with his support for increasing troop levels and disarming the militias in Iraq sounds like she put Lieberman in for the role of Intellegence Chariman.
I don’t think the Republicans will be complaining too loudly about him.
December 4th, 2006 at 10:35 am#36 Tundra
Voted against the resolution authorizing the use of military force in Iraq. You must happy about that, too.
December 4th, 2006 at 10:38 amWhy hide the failures and refusals by Pelosi to incorporate progressive goals? Isn’t that the purpose of a progressive site, to hold leaders accountable against progressive metrics?
Comment by Jason M. Hendler
Um, looking back on a congress that averaged two working days per week, and your inability to hold them accoutable for the myriad mistakes made by republicans, their corruption, and frankly, their hypocritical manner in dealing with legislative responsibilities, and realizing that Pelosi HASN’T EVEN TAKEN THE SPEAKERSHIP YET, I can attribute your sad sniping to sour grapes. Here’s a question: since prominent republicans are on record as saying the whole session will be a republican effort at making government more dysfunctional so that they can be returned to power, do democrats have a duty to actually shut down government, if obstructionist republicans actually carry through on their threat? It’s not as if you’ve got a Clinton in the White House. Mr. 33% is effectively neutered for the rest of his term.
December 4th, 2006 at 10:40 am#46, chimp,
Pelosi isn’t responding to anything but her own inability to handle the cards she’s been dealt. She now sees the difficulty of having things both ways, when she actually has to make a choice - she can’t promise women one thing, blacks another and the hispanics a third - she has to choose.
December 4th, 2006 at 10:40 amWasn’t “Path to 9/11″ a network T.V. thing. You had the OPTION to change the channel. A 12 year old child in a classroom does not have that OPTION, unless the parents are notified ahead of time in send an opt out letter to the school.
Comment by robert
Didn’t you know that Scholastic was going to release “study guides” that teachers would require students to use?
December 4th, 2006 at 10:42 amJeez, Jason
December 4th, 2006 at 10:44 amHave a little patience.
Pelosi doesn’t begin her Speakership until next month.
I know, I know, you’re anxious to dig up some dirt to throw at us, but
wait for something with substance.
By the way, if she had picked Hastings, Fox News & Sean Insanity would have had a meltdown. You know that. Feeling a little annoyed that she took away your thunder? Get used to it. She’s operating on what we warmly call ‘principle’…something not in the Righties’ vocabulary.
#40 robert
Hey, I am all for the OPTION of seeing it. What I am against is anyone being FORCED to see it as some would like to see done here in the U.S.
I don’t think we have anything to fear in this country about the power companies forcing children to see “An Inconvenient Truth” or any inconvenient truths that might lead them to question the unbridled use of fossil fuels. They’ll be pouring all their money into hiding such truths.
Is someone trying to force children to see that film?
December 4th, 2006 at 10:45 amShe now sees the difficulty of having things both ways, when she actually has to make a choice - she can’t promise women one thing, blacks another and the hispanics a third - she has to choose.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler
Yes but she can promise a woman who has a black father and a mexican mother. That is the voting block the Dems are after. Kind of like how the Repubs go after the blond-hair blue-eyed white man who had a mother and father that are first cousins.
December 4th, 2006 at 10:46 amshe can’t promise women one thing, blacks another and the hispanics a third - she has to choose.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler —
Like promising fundies one thing, fiscal conservatives another, and still trying to play the Southern Strategy to get votes? Didn’t work too well, huh?
December 4th, 2006 at 10:46 amVoted against the resolution authorizing the use of military force in Iraq. You must happy about that, too.
Comment by chimpeach — December 4, 2006 @ 10:38 am
I’m on record as being against the war since the beginning. You can dig through the site all you want and you will see many times where I stated I was against it. So yes.
December 4th, 2006 at 10:49 am#42 JMH
You’re right, I forgot the weakening political strength of women as well, since their votes and black votes are taken for granted - it is the latino vote that is in play. This is a far bigger mess for Pelosi than I realized - can’t women work together?
Yeah, I can see that. The first woman in the US ever to serve as Speaker of the House chooses a Hispanic male over another woman and that’s a setback for women. Good thinkin’, Jason.
So, following your logic, I guess the fact that Condi Rice is only a Black woman, and not Hispanic as well, is probably the reason that the GOP is losing the Hispanic vote. I guess it’s not what you do, but what you don’t do in one isolated instance that defines everything about you for all eternity.
December 4th, 2006 at 10:52 am#55 dlet
Now, that there was funny!
I guess neocon trolls don’t understand Venn Diagrams.
December 4th, 2006 at 10:52 amTundra
I’m on record as being against the war since the beginning. You can dig through the site all you want and you will see many times where I stated I was against it.
What do you want a gold star or something?
December 4th, 2006 at 10:52 amWhat do you want a gold star or something?
Comment by squegeeboo — December 4, 2006 @ 10:52 am
Perhaps a Purple Horseshoe
December 4th, 2006 at 10:55 amWhat do you want a gold star or something?
Comment by squegeeboo
In this context, not funny, Squeeg. (Gold Star Mothers)
December 4th, 2006 at 10:56 am#51 JMH
Pelosi isn’t responding to anything but her own inability to handle the cards she’s been dealt. She now sees the difficulty of having things both ways, when she actually has to make a choice - she can’t promise women one thing, blacks another and the hispanics a third - she has to choose.
That’s been the case for everyone as long as there’s been any minority voting bloc in Congress. How has it been different for anyone before her who had viable caucuses of Blacks, Hispanics, and women in their party? So, big deal if she has to make a choice? I don’t think we’re going to see one caucus going ballistic if their candidate isn’t chosen, as long as there isn’t a pattern of denial to that group.
And, considering the number of Black and Hispanic women serving in Congress right now, are they supposed to get upset if their race is represented but not their gender, or vice versa?
The only one getting their undies in a bundle will be you when the controversy you’re expecting doesn’t materialize.
December 4th, 2006 at 11:02 amThe pace of the $6 billion second phase of levee work in New Orleans has slowed significantly. To “save money,†the Army Corps plans to focus on longer-term plans that critics say “will leave the city at risk until 2010 at least.†The corps “has also scaled back plans to armor the levees against being scoured away when water flows over the top.â€
“The Pentagon is invoking emergency authority to fast-track funding of a comprehensive war-crimes court compound at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba,†the Miami Herald reports. Pentagon spokesmen “would not say when — if ever — the Pentagon had last invoked similar authority.â€
No one sees anything wrong here? Is better to spend the hardly earned tax money evading the international treaties than save the life and future of the own citizens?
Because making a compund in Guantanamo to judge the prisoners there is simply to not transport them to the official USA
December 4th, 2006 at 11:05 am(continued) soil.
Sometimes my fingers feel like hot dogs…
December 4th, 2006 at 11:07 am#57 Tundra
I’m on record as being against the war since the beginning. You can dig through the site all you want and you will see many times where I stated I was against it. So yes.
Great! Then neither of us have anything to bitch about with Reyes leading the House Intelligence Committee. Glad that’s settled.
December 4th, 2006 at 11:07 am#21 But I thought conservatives don’t have a sense of humor, and/or aren’t funny?
Comment by squegeeboo — December 4, 2006 @ 9:59 am
Conservatives ARE funny, but HAVEN’T sense of humor.
December 4th, 2006 at 11:09 amBnF, I actually have a serious question. Why would we need to protect Constitutional rights of people that are not U.S. citizens (Gitmo detainees)? I have been at a loss about this one.
I can see the case for the Genevia Conventions and Laws of War, but not the Constitution.
Comment by robert
I can’t speak for Briseadh na Faire, but I think we need to protect the rights of non-citizens because that’s what we’re about. The US is supposed to be about protecting the rights and freedoms of eveyone in this country. There’s a reason the detainees are being held in Cuba.
I am ashamed of this practice. Detaining and trying suspects who are non-citizens, while giving them the same protections, takes nothing away from us as a country. Doing what we’re doing, shows we’ve turned our backs on what used to make this country great.
December 4th, 2006 at 11:09 am#52, I had not heard of the study guides. I would have opposed that as well. We all know (or should know) that “Path to 9/11″ was a dramatization of events as seen through the eyes of a few in Hollywood (and Washington) and is not historically accurate. Personally, I saw it as a waste of time and watch something with real meaning, like Mythbusters. lol
#54, I have seen in my area many that have called for it to be required viewing in in the middle and high schools. I, in no way was implying that it has been anyone on this site.
December 4th, 2006 at 11:13 amZooey, thanks for the comment.
The only reason I asked that to BnF directly is because I thought I saw him say that he had just passed the bar and was looking to see if there was a legal reason.
The fact that they are being held in Cuba should be irrelevant since they are on a U.S. military instillation and that is considered “sovereign U.S. territory”, much like an Embassy.
December 4th, 2006 at 11:20 amBnF, I actually have a serious question. Why would we need to protect Constitutional rights of people that are not U.S. citizens (Gitmo detainees)? I have been at a loss about this one.
Comment by robert
Exporting democracy starts with us and how we treat others inthis world. If we can’t abide by the rules and laws set forth by us and offer them to those that we detain and treat as criminals then we are just world class hypocritess. Which by the way is how most of the world sees us at the moment.
December 4th, 2006 at 11:21 amSo Sen Domenici was wearing his jammies? Are we really caring about that? Sure, it’s a little odd, but there are worse things.
I see college students in my grocery store in full out jammies, slippers, and robes.
December 4th, 2006 at 11:22 am#70
The fact that they are being held in Cuba should be irrelevant since they are on a U.S. military instillation and that is considered “sovereign U.S. territoryâ€, much like an Embassy.
Comment by robert — December 4, 2006 @ 11:20 am
The fact is that the situation of the base in foreing soil has been routinely and repeadedly used as an excuse to not bring them to a court of justice.
The USA GOP, and by extension, the Pentagon wants it both ways, and this is simply, illegal.
December 4th, 2006 at 11:25 amdlet,
Again, I can understand the logical and “emotional” reasons, I am just not sure if there is a legal reason. I am not saying that I am against it. But are they being treated as criminals or POWs? There is a difference.
By the way, I have a damn good sense of humor.
December 4th, 2006 at 11:26 amrobert
The U.S. Constitution does not distinguish American citizens from non-citizens in the delineation of rights. The fact that it does make such a distinction for eligibility for office and for “priveleges” indicates that the described rights of habeus corpus, access to an attorney, trial, etc are supposed to be respected for all people.
December 4th, 2006 at 11:30 amThe fact that they are being held in Cuba should be irrelevant since they are on a U.S. military instillation and that is considered “sovereign U.S. territoryâ€, much like an Embassy.
Comment by robert
The key word you are using is SHOULD. One would think it would make a difference, but it doesn’t — obviously. Torture is occurring on sovereign US territory — imagine that, even for a moment.
December 4th, 2006 at 11:31 amTerrorists get too much special attention, they get people all riled up and scared, they get special prisons, they get the attention of the highest level of law enforcement, the administration. Terrorists need to be treated like any other common criminal, and we should stop attaching so much sensationalism to them.
December 4th, 2006 at 11:34 amBy the way, I have a damn good sense of humor.
Comment by robert
Well, you are here…!
Frankly, I didn’t think you’d last this long, but I’m glad you have.
December 4th, 2006 at 11:36 amEvery schoolchild in Scotland will be offered the chance to see An Inconvenient Truth
And we’ll get independence soon - FREEEEDOOMMMM
Also by 2020 we will be 100% renewable energy under the SNP and NO nuclear power stations.
BEAT THAT
December 4th, 2006 at 11:39 amBEAT THAT
Comment by Tobey Tall
Sounds great, but like a sore d*ck, you just can’t beat it.
December 4th, 2006 at 11:46 amComment by Evil Spaniard — December 4, 2006 @ 11:05 am
Of course it’s wrong! It just costs a lot less to torture a few brown people with funny names for god than it does to ensure the permanent safety of a many Americans of all colors…and it’s a lot easier.
December 4th, 2006 at 11:46 amTobey - would that our leaders would see this light and not run scaredy from it!
December 4th, 2006 at 11:48 ambarfly
In this context, not funny, Squeeg. (Gold Star Mothers)
Ah, had to Google them, that would put my comment in poor taste if it was meant that way.
December 4th, 2006 at 12:02 pmAh, had to Google them, that would put my comment in poor taste if it was meant that way.
Comment by squegeeboo
Squeegy, you had to use “the Goggle” for Gold Star Mothers? Oy.
December 4th, 2006 at 12:11 pmZooey
“the Goggleâ€
They do nothing?
December 4th, 2006 at 12:19 pmThey do nothing?
Comment by squegeeboo
Duh. What?
December 4th, 2006 at 12:25 pmZoo
Duh. What?
Simpson’s Reference, The Arnold knock off, Rainier Wolfcastle is filming a movie, and in it a wave of acid rolls over him while he’s wearing protective goggles, and he exclaims “The Goggles do Nothing”, which is often misquoted as “The Goggles, they do nothing.”
December 4th, 2006 at 12:31 pmOh shit, I didn’t even notice I misspelled Google. Geez…
Believe it or not, I’ve never watched The Simpsons. I think I’ve missed something, for sure.
December 4th, 2006 at 12:36 pmBelieve it or not, I’ve never watched The Simpsons. I think I’ve missed something, for sure.
Comment by Zooey
That has to be the most amazing thing I have heard all day. I mean Bolton resigning is one thing but to actually find someone that has never watched the Simpson’s has floored me.
December 4th, 2006 at 12:40 pmHigh court weighs race in schools
More than 50 years after the Supreme Court decided in Brown vs. Board of Education that separate schools are inherently unequal, the court will consider today whether race can still be a factor when school systems design programs to promote racial integration.
Gotta love that wording, can race be considered when working on promoting racial integration, gov’t work at it’s best.
Zoo
December 4th, 2006 at 12:42 pmOh shit, I didn’t even notice I misspelled Google. Geez…
Only reason why I noticed it was for the easy joke….try out Firefox 2, it comes with a built in spell check(which wouldn’t help cause goggle is still a word, but it does with other big words like cat and epidermal)
dlet,
Really? I like Doctor Who. Who can beat Doctor Who?
December 4th, 2006 at 12:43 pmFirefox 2, eh Squeegy? And I thought you were trying harder. ;}
December 4th, 2006 at 12:47 pmFirefox 2, eh Squeegy? And I thought you were trying harder. ;}
Nothing wrong with using a tool to accomplish that which I alone can not do (spell). And how about “The Invisible Enemy”?
December 4th, 2006 at 12:51 pmNothing wrong with using a tool to accomplish that which I alone can not do (spell).
I’m glad you were specific. Heh.
And how about “The Invisible Enemy�
Comment by squegeeboo
Well, I’m watching the 9th Doctor now, but that might be an old one with Tom Baker — one of my favorites.
December 4th, 2006 at 12:56 pmWell, I’m watching the 9th Doctor now, but that might be an old one with Tom Baker — one of my favorites.
I’ve actually never seen any. Now ‘Red Dwarf’, there was a British show I could watch all day.
December 4th, 2006 at 1:01 pmRed Dwarf! I’d forgotten about that one. Our PBS station only carried one season, so I lost track of it.
If you get a chance watch Doctor Who, starting with Tom Baker, he’s a good one. There is a 10th Doctor now, but I haven’t seen of them yet. I just realized I’ve been watching Doctor Who for 30 years!
December 4th, 2006 at 1:09 pm#95 Don’t miss The Young Ones. But maybe too lefties for you…
December 4th, 2006 at 1:10 pmWell, I’m watching the 9th Doctor now, but that might be an old one with Tom Baker — one of my favorites.
Comment by Zooey
If I am right that was the one with the scarf and semi-fro. I liked him the best. Although the older one that wore the white suit? was pretty good. I can’t remember too clearly. It has been a while since I watched Dr. Who.
And Red Dwarf was awesome. Maybe a new Christmas gift idea.
December 4th, 2006 at 1:15 pmI can see the case for the Genevia Conventions and Laws of War, but not the Constitution.
Comment by robert — December 4, 2006 @ 9:56 am
Because the Constitution applies to all “persons” not just to citizens. Look at the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments for a good example of the language. Could they have said “citizens?” Yes. The 14th Amendment makes this very clear that the authors knew the difference.
December 4th, 2006 at 1:49 pm#78Frankly, I didn’t think you’d last this long, but I’m glad you have.
Comment by Zooey
You know, my wife says I would argue with a fence post! Seriously, I actually enjoy the “lively” discussions, especially with you.
Thanks to all who actually know who the Gold Star Mothers(and Fathers) are. I had dinner with a couple last night from back home.
December 4th, 2006 at 1:50 pmAt least 70 trade unionists were assassinated in Colombia last year, the highest number of any country in the world, a new report finds. The Bush administration signed a trade deal with Colombia in November that “ignores fundamental workers’ rights.â€
Like this corporation.
December 4th, 2006 at 1:52 pmFirefox 2 rules.. I LOVE the built in spell checker. As well as it’s just simply a better browser. I suggest installing “NoScript”, it’s like ZoneAlarm, you decide what sites can run scripts. You simply cannot find a better, safer browser than Firefox 2.0, and make sure to buy a t-shirt or something else from their store to help support it. I also like the Google Broswer sync tool, all my links go with me on any computer I log into with Firefox.
December 4th, 2006 at 1:53 pmI guess you really don’t believe in your progressive “principles”, if you aren’t willing to air them out in a forum like this. You provide no thread at all on Pelosi’s decisions, which can only mean you are embarrassed.
December 4th, 2006 at 1:56 pmrobert
You know, my wife says I would argue with a fence post!
So you win once in a while?
ZING!!!!
Evil Spaniard
December 4th, 2006 at 1:58 pmDon’t miss The Young Ones. But maybe too lefties for you…
As long as it’s entertaining I’ll enjoy it.
Believe it or not, I’ve never watched The Simpsons. I think I’ve missed something, for sure.
Comment by Zooey — December 4, 2006 @ 12:36 pm
just so you know - you are not alone… tho i should say i’ve seen SOME of the simpsons… my son, even at 26, still loves that show… tells me that i should watch it for the social commentary… south park too… i suppose…
December 4th, 2006 at 2:05 pmjust can’t get enthused about either…
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;
Does this not translate to:The “State” can not make laws that deny the CITIZENS of the U.S. their rights?
If they are not citizens, than these rights do not apply.
nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
But at the same time they are not born or naturalized in the U.S. and are not subject to the juristiction thereof. They are being held in relation to Military action (like a POW) not criminal action(acts against society).
Really, I am not trying to start something, just looking for clear understanding.
December 4th, 2006 at 2:09 pmNo State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States
Also, how does this then apply to US Territory, but not US States?
December 4th, 2006 at 2:17 pmrobert
See my post #75. There is a difference between “privelege” (driving a car, voting in a particular precinct, etc) and basic “rights”. The Constitution does give States the right to limit priveleges to citizens, but not to limit rights.
December 4th, 2006 at 2:25 pm“[. . .] nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
But at the same time they are not born or naturalized in the U.S. and are not subject to the juristiction thereof.
“Any person” it says.
And “equal protection of the laws” extends through int. treaties to cover those from other countries, I think. The “full faith and credit doctrine,” perhaps.
December 4th, 2006 at 2:37 pmbarfly, the complete line isnor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws
Iraq and Afghanistan are not within the jurisdiction of the U.S.
December 4th, 2006 at 2:47 pmKaty, South Park may not be for you. If you did decide to sit and watch that tv, Simpson’s would be better. I like South Park, but look at my posting history…
December 4th, 2006 at 2:58 pmAh, had to Google them, that would put my comment in poor taste if it was meant that way.
Comment by squegeeboo
So, you and Tundra joke about the war-
Tundra
I’m on record as being against the war since the beginning. You can dig through the site all you want and you will see many times where I stated I was against it.
What do you want a gold star or something?
Comment by squegeeboo
- and don’t know the meaning of Gold Star? It just shows how disconnected you guys are from the consequences of this war. Or seem to be.
Tundra says he was against it, but not because it was morally wrong, or because it betrayed the Constitution, or fundamental American principles like the rule of law. And you don’t even know what “Gold Star” stands for. Perhaps you can also Google “self-respect, and common decency,” ’cause you could sure use some.
December 4th, 2006 at 3:00 pmCuts and “saving money” are exactly the reason the levees were substandard in the first place.
I’m sure that the savings were finally realized after the costliest (and preventable) natural disaster in US history.
December 4th, 2006 at 3:07 pm#98
And Red Dwarf was awesome. Maybe a new Christmas gift idea.
Comment by dlet —
Hey dude u r offending the local atheists here.
U R not allowed to use the Xmas word but swear all u want to.
Zooey with the bodacious ta-tas and unbelievable the lesbo
December 4th, 2006 at 3:23 pmwill flame ur ass for offending them
barfly
And you don’t even know what “Gold Star†stands for. Perhaps you can also Google “self-respect, and common decency,†’cause you could sure use some.
Wow, you need to relax, not everyone is going to know about every support group out there. You mentioned it, I Googled it, and now I know about them.
December 4th, 2006 at 3:24 pmRobert, my post about the constitution didn’t make it. Here it is in a nut shell.
the 4th, 5th and 6th amendments apply to all persons, not just citizens.
you’re citing the 14th Amendment, which essentially means that the States have to provide the protections of most of the bill of rights to persons residing within their boundaries.
The part you cite of the 14th Amendment means that citizens within a state will be treated the same, whether or not they are citizens of that state or another state.
That’s a real brief explanation. Bottom line: the Constitution applies to all persons, not just citizens.
December 4th, 2006 at 3:35 pmHey dude u r offending the local atheists here.
U R not allowed to use the Xmas word but swear all u want to.
Zooey with the bodacious ta-tas and unbelievable the lesbo
will flame ur ass for offending them
Comment by Flaco
I m not trying 2 offend any1. I use x-mas as a way 2 get gifts. I hope u understand. I h8 typing like this. It makes me feel like an idiot. How about u?
December 4th, 2006 at 3:59 pmBnF, Thanks for your explanation.
I cited the 14th Amendment (all of it, just broken into 2 parts) at your suggestion to (re)read it.
I know this is an issue that will be kicked around for ever, but I read it as the Constitution applies to those that are born in, naturalized in, or reside in the U.S. and its territories (jurisdiction). Since most of the detainees are not in that category, then the rights should not apply. Just my opinion.
As a nation, I do not see how it could harm us to allow these rights. If anything, it may help our world image.
December 4th, 2006 at 4:00 pmIf I am right that was the one with the scarf and semi-fro. I liked him the best. Although the older one that wore the white suit? was pretty good. I can’t remember too clearly. It has been a while since I watched Dr. Who.
Comment by dlet
Oh hell now, you’re thinking of 30 years ago! That was Tom Baker, he is one of the best. He was the 4th Doctor. The 9th Doctor is Christopher Eccleston, and he’s great.
December 4th, 2006 at 4:05 pmWow, you need to relax, not everyone is going to know about every support group out there. You mentioned it, I Googled it, and now I know about them.
Comment by squegeeboo — December 4, 2006 @ 3:24 pm
You really are a self-absorbed little prick. Your dismissive comment about “support group” shows how little you care about our country, its people and those who sacrifice to make it safe for you to criticize people with whom you disagree. Read this again and try to imagine that Gold Star Mothers are just another “support group.”
http://www.goldstarmoms.com/ agsm/ WhoWeAre/ History/ History.htm
Don’t try to draw me into one of your senseless diversions into The Simpson, Dr. Who and Red Dwarf. Get your head out of cartoons and into reality. Gold Star Mothers is one of those groups that reminds me to tolerate simpletons like you.
December 4th, 2006 at 4:16 pmrobert
You are right that the 14th Amendment does not apply to Gitmo or other detainees because they are not citizens of a U.S. state or territory which has any jurisdiction. But the rest of the Constitution’s protections when charged with a crime do apply and, therefore, SHOULD be applied on the federal level because of the “any person” status.
December 4th, 2006 at 4:16 pmRobert,
I found an article that may have some answers for you. I wish someone would write up a laymans article about what laws protect foreigners. Before and after Bush got hold of the reigns.
Georgetown University law professor Neal Katyal said the bill’s creation of two systems of justice — military commissions for foreign nationals and regular criminal trials for U.S. citizens — may violate the Constitution’s 14th Amendment, which requires equal protection of the laws to anyone under U.S. jurisdiction.
December 4th, 2006 at 4:17 pmI m not trying 2 offend any1. I use x-mas as a way 2 get gifts. I hope u understand. I h8 typing like this. It makes me feel like an idiot. How about u?
Comment by dlet
A Red Dwarf set sounds lovely as a Christmas gift, dlet.
December 4th, 2006 at 4:32 pmpete
Here’s an excerpt or two from your source(their website):
The success of our organization continues because of the bond of mutual love, sympathy, and support of the many loyal, capable, and patriotic mothers who while sharing their grief and their pride
We stand tall and proud by honoring our children, assisting our veterans, supporting our nation, and healing with each other.
Here’s a brief description from another source:
Shortly after World War I the Gold Star Mothers Club was formed in the United States to provide support for mothers that lost sons or daughters in the war.
Just as when it was founded, the Gold Star Mothers continues to concentrate on providing emotional support to its members
I’m sorry that you feel using the term Support Group is dismissive, but it appears to be at least in part how they view themselves. Why do you try to belittle them by not acknowledging a portion of what they do?
You really are a self-absorbed little prick.
December 4th, 2006 at 4:33 pmWell at least you got something right, unlike the rest of your little rant.
You really are a self-absorbed little prick.
Well at least you got something right, unlike the rest of your little rant.
Comment by squegeeboo
See? People are starting to get to know you all over again, Squeeg. :)
December 4th, 2006 at 4:54 pmYo Flaco (skinny),
I didn’t get the impression Unbelievable was a lesbian, but what do I know.
December 4th, 2006 at 4:57 pmI didn’t get the impression Unbelievable was a lesbian, but what do I know.
Comment by ForTruth
But do you get the impression Flaco is a limp dick?
December 4th, 2006 at 5:09 pm“A self-absorbed little prick” and proud of it.
The Charter
American Gold Star Mothers, Inc. is registered in the United States Patent Office, Legislative Branch of the United States Congressional Library and the United States World Book Almanac.
The original copy of the Federal Charter granted to the American Gold Star Mothers, Inc. was placed in the Archives of Congress.
One June 12th, 1984 the Ninety-Eighth Congress of the United States granted the American Gold Star Mothers, Inc. a charter. Sec. 3 lists the objects and purposes for which the corporation is organized, shall be those provided in its articles of incorporation, and shall include a continuing commitment, on a national basis.
*Keep alive and develop the spirit that promoted world services.
December 4th, 2006 at 5:17 pm*Maintain the ties of fellowship born of that service, and to assist and further all patriotic work.
*Inculcate a sense of individual obligation to the community, State, and Nation.
*Assist veterans of World War I, World War II, the Korean Conflict, Vietnam, and other strategic areas and their dependents in the presentation of claims to the Veterans’ Administration, and to aid in any way in their power the men and women who served and died or were wounded or incapacitated during hostilities.
*Perpetuate the memory of those whose lives were sacrificed in our wars.
*Maintain true allegiance to the United States of America.
*Inculcate lessons of patriotism and love of country in the communities in which we live.
*Inspire respect for the Stars and Stripes in the youth of America.
*Extend needful assistance to all Gold Star Mothers and, when possible, to their descendents.
*To promote peace and good will for the United States and all other Nations.
#127
I didn’t get the impression Unbelievable was a lesbian, but what do I know.
Comment by ForTruth
But do you get the impression Flaco is a limp dick?
Comment by Zooey
Hey Zooey that is no way to talk about your ex.
December 4th, 2006 at 5:27 pmHeh
Hey Zooey that is no way to talk about your ex.
Heh
Comment by Flaco
You must be in the same support group.
December 4th, 2006 at 6:10 pmdlet, thanks for the link, I’ll give it a look.
PLC, that is the question. Is it a crime or is it a Military Action? If it is a Military action and they are basically in a POW status, there is a different set of rules that apply. If it is a crime, let the civilian authorities deal with it.
December 4th, 2006 at 6:24 pmBy the way, I have a damn good sense of humor.
Comment by robert — December 4, 2006 @ 11:26 am
Neither. You are correct, there is a difference. Criminals are entitled to a trial. POWs may be held to the end of the conflict, or exchanged for enemy-held POWs.
Here, there is no declared war against a foreign power, therefore there can be no POWs. Under the treaties the U.S. has ratified they should have been treated as criminals. Instead, they have been treated as “unlawful enemy combatants” and many are being held indefinitely without a hearing.
Instead of conforming our conduct to comport with the treaties we’ve signed, the Republican Congress and President Bush enacted a law which basically says we are no longer a signatory to the Geneva Convention. It also takes the Constitution away from all legal immigrants residing in the United States.
The detainees in Guantanamo are being treated as non-persons, deprived of liberty without a hearing and subjected to various forms of torture.
December 4th, 2006 at 7:23 pm#132, thank you again. So basically under the current status, they are not entitled to either. (I agree it’s not right)
I will not even go into the torture issue, there again, that can be very subjective. I think it is torture if you deny me coffee in the morning!
thanks for the understanding, patience, and knowledge.
December 4th, 2006 at 7:32 pmComment by robert — December 4, 2006 @ 4:00 pm
Actually, under the current status, they are entitled to the rights guaranteed under the Constitution afforded civilians held in wartime - essentially to be treated as criminals. That’s the gist of the last Supreme Court Ruling. However, President Bush and the Republican Congress have tried to circumvent that ruling and deprive the detainees of all rights via the Military Commissions Act of 2006.
I’ve written a brief article on this issue, scheduled for publication in December. When it comes out, I’ll provide a link.
December 4th, 2006 at 7:37 pmI think it is torture if you deny me coffee in the morning!
Comment by robert
Somehow, I think this is low on the priority list of Gitmo detainees.
December 4th, 2006 at 7:57 pmZooey, I was just trying to lighten the mood..Sheesh
I could have said ” I think torture is listening to rap music” but then again, that is real torture
December 4th, 2006 at 8:42 pmI’ve written a brief article on this issue, scheduled for publication in December. When it comes out, I’ll provide a link.
Comment by Briseadh na Faire — December 4, 2006 @ 7:37 pm
Congratulations on the publication.
December 4th, 2006 at 8:47 pmWow the abuse because Squegee didn’t know who the “Gold Star” mothers are?
I knew who they are but it wasn’t by first thought when he said “Want a Gold Star?” I didn’t even think of them until it was brought up. Sure you can say that I am out of touch with the consequences of this war, and well you would be quite wrong.
Yes, I was against the war and it’s because we don’t need to be the world’s police. I realize many feel we should be the “arm of the U.N” whenever they becon. I say let some other countries pony up a little bit. You can cry for the soldiers because they are there, but only since it’s something you don’t like.
Everyone saying we need to send troops to Darfur, think about this for a minute. Do you want to arm the losing side and then be fighting them in ten years (A little research may find a country or two that we did that with)? Would you rather stick our soldiers in the middle of that little war? If so how many can die, what is acceptable loss?
Sure Slam Squegee because he said “Gold Star” (Which someone else adds the mother to and now he is insensitive) But noone slams the use of the word “Jewie” or comments saying Jews are tired from killing palastenians all day”
December 4th, 2006 at 9:03 pmI could have said †I think torture is listening to rap music†but then again, that is real torture
Comment by robert
That was my deadpan delivery, Robert.
I’ll have to get it to the shop for repair…
December 4th, 2006 at 9:13 pmComment by Zooey — December 4, 2006 @ 9:13 pm
You joke about torture, just goes to show how out of touch you are.
OK, I didn’t mean it Zoo, I know you are in touch :)
December 4th, 2006 at 9:18 pmbecause both are for smart people. my 9 year old son doesn’t get it either. you’re about his speed. maybe a bit slower.
December 4th, 2006 at 9:28 pmYou joke about torture, just goes to show how out of touch you are.
OK, I didn’t mean it Zoo, I know you are in touch :)
Comment by Tundra
Just had to get it out of your system, eh? I understand. No coffee this morning? Or a full day of rap music?
:-)
December 4th, 2006 at 9:30 pmJust had to get it out of your system, eh? I understand. No coffee this morning? Or a full day of rap music?
:-)
A day full of marketing guys running around. Talk about not understanding concepts and then assuming they have full knowledge, Oh my.
December 5th, 2006 at 12:35 amYes, I was against the war and it’s because we don’t need to be the world’s police. I realize many feel we should be the “arm of the U.N†whenever they becon. I say let some other countries pony up a little bit. You can cry for the soldiers because they are there, but only since it’s something you don’t like.
Thanks for proving my point, Tundra. You could care less that this invasion was morally wrong. You could care less that it trashes long-established legal precedent. All you want is your own short-sighted security needs met, Constitution be damned. That others (the UN) pick up more of the tab - that’s your libertarian focus. And for your info, it’s also “Gold Star Wives,” and “Gold Star Families.” As well-informed as Squeege is, I find it hard to believe he’s never heard of any of these orgs. Cindy Sheehan is a Gold Star mother, and so Squeegee’s ignorance of this org seems convieniently timed.
But noone slams the use of the word “Jewie†or comments saying Jews are tired from killing palastenians all dayâ€
Comment by Tundra — December 4, 2006 @ 9:03 pm
If I saw it, you bet your ass the hounds would be loosed. But I ain’t the TP hound.
“What do you want a gold star or something?
Comment by squegeeboo — December 4, 2006 @ 10:52 am
Perhaps a Purple Horseshoe
Comment by Tundra —
Quite reminiscent of the hilarious “Purple Heart Band-Aids,” seen during the ‘04 republican national convention. Just warning you and Squeege in advance; this kind of joking will be verbotten when we reach 3000 dead servicemen mark. “Gold Star” mentioned in a joke about the Iraq war will get you in a real fight, right quick.
December 5th, 2006 at 1:37 am“Purple Heart Band-Aids,â€
Those are the twins annual contribution to the war effort this time around.
twins
December 5th, 2006 at 1:58 amTo Jason MH,
December 5th, 2006 at 2:04 amFor all your posturing about Pelosi’s positions that you claim are taking women and black voters for granted, can you tell us how many House committees under the Repugs are currently chaired by a black or a woman of any color?
To save you the time of looking facts (not exactly your forte) up, the answer is None–meaning Zero.
Under Pelosi, black men are scheduled to chair three committees, and a black woman one. There will also be a Hispanic woman chair as well as some Caucasian women, and a Holocaust survivor (Tom Lantos).
By the way, Clinton was the first to appoint a woman Secretary of State, though she is Caucasian, but he did have a black woman and men in his Cabinet. So don’t try to get away with your BS that the Repugnacants are the true equalizers; nobody here but your fellow trolls will fall for that line.
# 59 I guess neocon trolls don’t understand Venn Diagrams.
No no they beleive in “Intelligent Sketching”
December 5th, 2006 at 4:59 am#77 Terrorists get too much special attention, they get people all riled up and scared, they get special prisons, they get the attention of the highest level of law enforcement, the administration. Terrorists need to be treated like any other common criminal, and we should stop attaching so much sensationalism to them.
Yes yes exactly, but you see, these paper tigers are what gives the people running the show all the power… with these alleged mystical islamic genies of death and destruction running around, they can say “we’re at war, we have to sacrifice our civil liberties”…
I love it how the same people who blindly refuse to beleive in conspiracies involving rich white men who actually do have enourmous amounts of corporate and governmental power are willing, at the drop of a hat, to beleive that there is actually a coherent, worldwide conspiracy of stateless, well organized guerillas whose religious fanaticism gives them superhuman abilities to wreak havok on a massive scale without armies, tanks, planes (well maybe one or two), or missles.
I’ll say it again… your bathtub poses more danger to you than these alleged islamic supermen do…
More americans have died from sliipping in thier tub since 9-11 than died on 9-11.
December 5th, 2006 at 5:19 am# 118 Without arguing Constitutional semantics (that could go on forrrevver), I have to say that invoking “war” concepts to justify detaining someone indefinitely is pretty absurd.. why? because we aren’t in any kind of “war” that can be definitively “won”…also there is no coherent organized group of enemies…. Ismlamic militancy is more a series of disorganized “Franchises” than it is a organization with a defined memebership and set of goals. And since EVERYTHING about this “Terror War” is top secret, then the ONLY benchmark we have to guage if the “war” is “over” is the word of the same group of people who told us “we know where the weapons are” and “we know without a doubt that saddam has weapons of mass destruction [ other than the ones we sold him ]”.
Now do you really think that a group of people who have profited so handily from everything that comes with perpetual war is honestly, truly going to tell us if this war was actually won?
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=HAL&t=5y
Take a look at the chart.. notice when the stock started to skyrocket?
It was a bad year to be saddam but a good year to be one of dick cheney’s old corporate buddys, and even if cheney made no direct profit lets not pretend he and any other rich folks dont have some nice quid pro quo going on.
back to my “war” point…
Is there EVER going to be day where 19 angry men can’t commit some really screwy act of violence?
In short, using this alleged “war” as a justification to do anything…whether its hold anyone indefinitely, or track the phone calls everyone in america makes, it a bunch of baloney.
I mean, if you buy into their logic, it basically boils down to this:
“I’m the president, and we are at war until I say we arent at war anymore. I’ll tell you when the war is over, but until then, I can do anything I want to.”
So if the president decides to lie, he can, according to his own logic, do ANYTHING he wants to do. A ruler who has the power unilaterially decide when he has absolute power HAS ABSOLUTE POWER, and this is just the sort of thing that would have founding fathers turning in thier graves…
December 5th, 2006 at 5:45 amOK It’s seems not only dose’nt BUSH not care about Black people , the Supreme Court dose’nt care about Black either.
December 5th, 2006 at 9:02 amIt’s OK again to be a racist in America .
So what that white person could’nt go to the school of his choice, what about the 200 years blacks could’nt even go to school. When white persons are denied something for 200 years then I’ll call it even.
[…] But that’s not all; The pace of the $6 billion second phase of levee work in New Orleans has slowed significantly. To “save money,†the Army Corps plans to focus on longer-term plans that critics say “will leave the city at risk until 2010 at least.†The corps “has also scaled back plans to armor the levees against being scoured away when water flows over the top.†[…]
December 6th, 2006 at 11:33 am