The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Thursday, September 27, 2007
I'm old, so this song came to mind by The Carpenters:
Thursday, September 20, 2007
By the vote:
Today, the Senate voted 72-25 to approve Sen. John Cornyn’s (R-TX) bill criticizing MoveOn.org’s Gen. David Petraeus ad in the New York Times. The “sense of the Senate” resolution “strongly” condemns the “personal attacks on the honor and integrity of General Petraeus.”
Harry Reid (D-NV): Endorses free speech
John Ensign (R-HeadUpAss): Hates free speech
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
It took just eight decades but H.L. Mencken's astute prediction on the future course of American presidential politics and the electorate's taste in candidates came true:
On July 26th, 1920, the acerbic and cranky scribe wrote in The Baltimore Sun: "...all the odds are on the man who is, intrinsically, the most devious and mediocre — the man who can most easily (and) adeptly disperse the notion that his mind is a virtual vacuum. The presidency tends, year by year, to go to such men. As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron."
I don't understand... You support Mr. Bush and his failed war policies, yet you don't support restoring Habeas Corpus. Where do your priorities lie - with party or country??? With the way you vote, it seems that the answer is party. Have you no shame, Mr. Ensign???
Thursday, September 13, 2007
Washington, D.C. – Senator John Ensign released the following statement tonight after President Bush delivered his speech to the American People:
“After hearing from General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker, the President tonight outlined to the American people the best way forward in Iraq. Unlike some, he has listened to the recommendations of our troops engaged in the battle in Iraq. The bottom up approach and getting basic infrastructure needs in place has helped quell the violence in many of Iraq’s provinces. Al-Qaeda, and other terrorist organizations, believe the war in Iraq is the central front in their war against the West. It is critical that we listen to our generals and troops on the ground in order to achieve success in Iraq.”
Someone should remind him that Iraq had nothing to do with Al Qaeda before we invaded and occupied it. I'm still waiting for my CongrASSman Jon Porter to issue a "supportive" statement to "Dear Leader"...
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
And yet, Bin Laden is still on the loose SIX YEARS later, we're in a quagmire in Iraq with no end in sight, New Orleans is still suffering, the economy is doing terrible, his friends in China are poisoning everything, people are dying in mines, the environment is suffering - need I go on???.... WTF!!! I will be so glad when January 20, 2009 comes!!! DEMS: IMPEACH HIM NOW!!!
For a newbie, he really said something good. I'm glad he's not drinking out of the same Kool-Aid pitcher as Ensign and Porter!!
“Our military has done a tremendous job in securing certain areas of the country and has made real progress. Civilian deaths have declined and tribal leaders are rejecting al Qaeda in the Anbar Province. It is also heartening to hear that troop reductions are a part of the overall strategy moving forward,” said Heller
“While substantial progress has been made, I am concerned about the political progress of the Iraqi Government and their ability to take control of the security needs in their country. Our role in Iraq is not an opened ended one, and the ultimate responsibility for Iraq lies in the hands of the Iraqi people. I look forward to reviewing the full report to determine for myself the extent of our progress in Iraq and what degree of U.S. involvement should be necessary in the future,” added Heller.
“The testimonies delivered today by General Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker were accurate, apolitical assessments which exclusively considered the facts. The expectation that there will be substantial withdrawals of U.S. troops in the near future is encouraging. I call on my colleagues to reflect on the consequences of abrupt change.”
He needs to find a way out of that Fantasyland he's been living in!!!
He should stop raiding the drugs at his Vet Hospital... and if he is, he should share with the less fortunate!!!
“Today’s progress report on the surge in Iraq contained some encouraging news. Our military objectives are being met, and violence and death are down dramatically. Credit goes to our troops who have integrated themselves into local communities and ensured that security and basic services are provided. This bottom up approach has created a successful working relationship with local Iraqi leaders. Al Anbar province, once thought to be lost for good, is proof that this is a successful approach. By providing the basic needs of water, power and sewage to Iraqi communities, we will see continued progress toward a stable and secure Iraq. There is much work that still needs to be done, and I believe our men and women on the front lines have the ability and will to succeed.”
Friday, September 07, 2007
From CBS News:
The agency told the Federal Communications Commission, which is reviewing high-speed Internet practices, that it is opposed to "Net neutrality," the principle that all Internet sites should be equally accessible to any Web user.
Several phone and cable companies, such as AT&T Inc., Verizon Communications Inc. and Comcast Corp., have previously said they want the option to charge some users more money for loading certain content or Web sites faster than others.
The Justice Department said imposing a Net neutrality regulation could hamper development of the Internet and prevent service providers from upgrading or expanding their networks. It could also shift the "entire burden of implementing costly network expansions and improvements onto consumers," the agency said in its filing.
Thursday, September 06, 2007
The Seattle Post-Intelligencer says it best:
Known as the NSL provision, the law allowed FBI agents to fire off letters demanding private information about individuals without going through the trouble of first getting court approval.
In other words, companies, say, an Internet provider, as in this lawsuit (John Doe v. Gonzales, yes, that Gonzales, with Doe represented by the American Civil Liberties Union), would have to fork overinformation about their customers and clients (transactions, credit info, account activities, the works) to the FBI. Furthermore, those receiving the NSLs could also be forbidden from discussing them with anyone, something the court deemed unconstitutional.
We hope the Democratic Congress will seize this opportunity to look at just what the Patriot Act will actually accomplish. Hey Dems: You're the majority. Now act like it and start throwing your weight around a bit.
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
From the NYT:
First, Mr. Bush said, “I’ll give some speeches, just to replenish the ol’ coffers.” With assets that have been estimated as high as nearly $21 million, Mr. Bush added, “I don’t know what my dad gets — it’s more than 50-75” thousand dollars a speech, and “Clinton’s making a lot of money.”
Tuesday, September 04, 2007
Keith Olbermann hit another one out of the park tonight with his "Special Comment".
Keith Olbermann (full transcript):
Mr. Bush probably did not know that, with his own words, he had already proved that he had been lying… is lying… will be lying.... about Iraq.
He presumably did not know, that there had already appeared those damning excerpts from Robert Draper's book "Dead Certain."
"I'm playing for October-November," Mr. Bush said to Draper.
That, evidently, is the time during which, he thinks he can sell us the real plan. Which is, to quote him: "To get us in a position where the presidential candidates, will be comfortable about sustaining a presence."Comfortable” -- that is -- with saying about Iraq, again quoting the President, "stay... longer."
And there it is, Sir.
We've caught you.
Thank you for contacting me regarding the important issue of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). I appreciate your taking the time to share your thoughts with me, and I value the opportunity to address them.
As you may be aware, Congress passed, with bipartisan support, and the President signed into law the Protect America Act on September 6, 2007. This legislation to reform FISA, was proposed by the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), Retired Navy Vice Admiral Mike McConnell. The DNI's proposal allows the Intelligence Community to close critical gaps in its current ability to identify and provide early warnings of terrorist threats to the country. DNI McConnell, who is neither a politician nor a partisan, has stated that this act is the bare minimum he needs to protect this country against terrorist attacks, while safeguarding our civil liberties.
Nearly three decades have passed since the FISA act was last modified. Since that time the threats we face have changed dramatically and so has communications technology. These changes in technology unintentionally broadened the scope of FISA and harmed our ability to conduct surveillance on those plotting from abroad to attack the United States. The Protect America Act clarifies that the Intelligence Community should not be required to obtain court orders to effectively collect foreign intelligence from foreign targets located overseas. This was not deemed appropriate in 1978, and it is not appropriate today.
I can assure you that I understand the importance of preserving our civil liberties. This legislation would in no way change the manner in which domestic intelligence is collected and requires our intelligence community to create and maintain a document trail that is easily auditable. Additionally, this act requires both the Attorney General and the DNI to jointly authorize foreign targeting for individuals believed to be threats. Finally, it reaffirms Congress's oversight role by requiring the Attorney General to provide semi-annual reports to both the Senate and House Intelligence and Judiciary Committees.Please know that I will keep your concerns, and the concerns of all Nevadans, in mind. Thank you again for sharing your thoughts with me. Please feel free to contact me in the future on matters of importance to you. Should you have any other questions or comments or would like to sign up for my monthly newsletter, please do not hesitate to either write or e-mail me via my website.
Monday, September 03, 2007
A case filed by a group called "Friends of Jesus" calls on the court to interpret the Law of Moses to determine whether Jesus received a fair trial for blasphemy.
Dola Indidis - The man spearheading the case - says, "For a long time I have been thinking over the case of Jesus Christ and I'm convinced, I have been convinced for a long time that Jesus was not given a fair trial and that the trial was a nullity as a result of which he suffered crucifixion .I then decided to instruct counsel so that the same can be challenged in court with a view of correct record because as we stand today Jesus Christ remains a convicted criminal, we want the records to be set right."
As for Vitter, Ensign said, "he has not admitted to anything. The Senate
Ethics Committee would have no jurisdiction over him."
Vitter was a member of the House when he was alleged to be using the services of Pamela Martin and Associates, run by Deborah Jean Palfrey, the accused "D.C. Madam."
Saturday, September 01, 2007
Porter said most people who talk to him about the war want the American troops
to come home - but not without victory. Porter has said he bases his decisions
about the war on information gleaned from his visits to Iraq - a one-on-one
visit with a Nevada Guardsman, lunch with an Iraqi soldier, meetings with
officials. Where Porter saw progress and cause for hope on the recent trip,
however, another lawmaker on the trip saw something different.
Wasn't victory attained when Saddam Hussein was overthown by our invasion of his sovereign country??? What is victory now??? I want your definition of "victory" - not Republican talking points.
Porter said most people who talk to him about the war want the American troops to come home - but not without victory. Porter has said he bases his decisions about the war on information gleaned from his visits to Iraq - a one-on-one visit with a Nevada Guardsman, lunch with an Iraqi soldier, meetings with officials. Where Porter saw progress and cause for hope on the recent trip, however, another lawmaker on the trip saw something different.
Presenting MY case is Edwin Starr: