Richard Reid, the “Shoe Bomber” was eligible to enter the US because he was a British subject. This bill will expand the list of exempt countries which is currently at 26.

The VWP should be eliminated entirely.

Peter Gadiel
Pres. 9/11 FSA
Father of James Gadiel, age 23
WTC North Tower, 103rd floor

ease up the the Kentucky bashing a little bit. Don’t forget…we (finally) dumped Anne Northup and put in John Yarmuth.

Anyway, calling Mitch the ditch “a hillbilly in the proud tradition of ignorant rednecks from Ky.” is a blatant and unwarranted insult!! (to all the rest of us ignorant rednecks from Ky.)!

Ky Bill

‘Gaping hole’ in nation’s preparedness, congressional report says – http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19666375/
Homeland Security had 138 vacancies among its top 575 positions, with the greatest voids reported in its policy, legal and intelligence sections, as well as in immigration agencies, FEMA and the Coast Guard.

Yeah, we’ve got Rep. David Davis from our district. He voted against these implementations in the House on the grounds that they would give too much control to the U.N. regarding our security, and we didn’t need to have the U.N.’s permission to protect ourselves. Funny that I had to write the reporter for our local news rag who published an interview with Rep. Davis to get this info. The article was about Davis’ voting record on the bills in Pelosi’s first 100 hours. The reporter left out the info about Davis’ vote on this particluar bill because “there wasn’t enough room in the paper to include this info.” I’ve been planning for months to contact Davis’ office to ask specifically what portion of the bill would give “too much control” to the U.N. I hope to do that soon.

————

I think that’s why Bush didn’t send flood Iraq with more troops in the beginning, at the suggestion of Gen. Shinseki. Suppose he had, and the “war” in Iraq really did last only 6 months (a year at most). He couldn’t keep us in Afghanistan through the 2004 elections, one of the factors that I think played into the decision to go into Iraq. Besides Shinseki, as we have recently learned there were other advisors telling Bush that many Iraqis would reject our presence and would fight us. They told Bush that what we are now seeing in Iraq would happen. But I think Bush wanted a long, drawn-out affair.

You trolls are always complaining about how liberals are trying to take away your free speech rights. Yet you post here freely, don’t you, Crappy Guy? Various liberal/progressive posters here have been banned at redstate for contrarian comments much milder than yours. And, BTW, as much as you neo-CONs like to think you own the church, there are Christians who are liberals/progressives.

If there was a REAL threat from terrorism, our government would (probably) be doing something about it…so it speaks volumes to be funnelling sooooo many billions into “defense” (read offense), and “Homeland Security” (read Fatherland Security), when the money is just being used to line the pockets of the corporations who control both parties, while NOTHING is being done to “protect the Fatherland”. And yet, surprise, surprise…even being left completely vulnerable from another “attack”, we’ve still not been “attacked” again.

Face it folks, you have a better chance of getting struck by lightning than getting killed in a terrorist attack…one is real and one is a fabrication by corporate-run governments.

If the threat fit the fear – we’d all be terrified of getting struck by lightning. Personally, I think my chances of winning the lottery are better than being attacked by those scary “Islamofascists”, and I don’t buy lottery tickets. It is MUCH more likely I’d be killed in an attack perpetrated by our own government. History shows that it is the rule of leaders and governments to lie a poplulation into war by using fear, false-flag operations and threats of violence…to not do so would be the exception.

let me correct you.. “when democracts in the minority use a filibuster,[ they do so sparingly, and] its called smart politics”

> When a Republican does it [against almost every single bill the dems try to bring to a vote ]you call it obstruction.

> Oh that’s right, hypocrisy.

Oh, thats right……your unable to understand that your opponents USE of a tactic does not equte to your grotesque and unceasing abuse of that same tactic.

> free speech for liberals but silence Republicans, conservatives and
> Christians.

no ones trying to silence you. they are merely trying to keep your deluded fairytales from being funded by government money, or from being rammed down the throats of others….. the government cannot legally fund, promote, discourage, or distrimimnate against anyone or any grounp on the basis of their religion or lack thereof. Granted, it happens in practice, but its a violation of the constitution.

Go back to washing floors at McDonalds, if your debating skills are any indication of the quality of your mental world, I’d say youve got a long life of mopping ahead of you..

Why do you suppose he would do that?

Liberals want to silence Republicans, conservatives, and Christians? What a pathetic load of nonsense. Here’s a hint: it was the ACLU that came to Rush Limbaugh’s defense regarding his right to privacy for his medical records. You know, the same right to privacy that so-called conservatives have been attacking for the last 35 years.

Anyway. You don’t want the 9/11 commission’s recommendations to be implemented. Only “some” of them. The first would be to “protect the border”. You know, building that big wall to keep out illegal, um, I mean, future Democrat votes out.

Just like you only want to enforce certain parts of the constitution. You know, free speech for liberals but silence Republicans, conservatives and Christians. And just forget about that whole second amendment deal.

If only his fervor for holding up legislation was surpassed by a ‘doing the right thing’ mentality…

Wait! I just used mentality in regard to McConnell; my bad.

In like 2038.