Rex Kickass

So the Dems in General may not want a vote on this censure, but Feingold does. He'd just like the actual hearing and debate rather than an immediate vote. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1720883

Frist calls for a vote without debate.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...-2005Apr22.html

The only person as of last night who publically spoke out against the censure in the Democratic party is actually Joe Lieberman. Reid said he wouldn't vote for it before he read it as of last night and has voiced no specific support or opposition to the censure as of last night. I'll agree that there is some degree of grandstanding to this censure motion. I'll also agree that in Feingold's mind, he probably thinks it the right thing to do for the good of the country as well. Sometimes both motives play at the same time.

The evidence connecting him to the actual 9/11 plot/actions are actually rather tenuous, IIRC. However, he is an avowed member of Al-Qaeda and has been involved with other plots that have been foiled.

Hard to make that happen. He pleaded guilty against his lawyers' advice.

I love that you think that because I feel its important that the President follows a law regarding the surveillance of US Citizens, you think I'm crying about wiretapping terrorists. You and I know better than that. Wiretap away. Just follow the law when you do it. It's great that the UAE is letting us stage there. We also staged out of Saudi Arabia. But I wouldn't call them our friends either. Is there some racism involved in the outrage over this deal? Yes, there are some parties who are racially, or even religiously motivated. I am not one of these people. This deal is bad because I don't believe our ports should be controlled or owned or whatever by any foreign agent whatsoever. Then again, there might not have been any uproar over this deal at all had the administration chosen to follow the standards and procedures that the law requires them to follow including a 45 day security review that wasn't done. But the deal was backdoored, and corners were cut. Port security is a damn important issue, and corners should never be cut. I have serious issues with this deal, and none of them have anything to do with the President being a Republican or a Democrat. I have serious issues with wiretapping, because I have serious issues with a President who pretty much just thumbs his nose at existing law and so much as says it in public to boot.

Dubai was a key transfer point in getting nuclear equipment to Iran and North Korea from A.Q. Khan - who was in charge of Pakistan's nuclear program and went rogue. Two of the 9/11 hijackers were from UAE. Dubai was used as a money laundering gateway to help fund Al-Qaeda. And then there's this testimony from Tenet to the 9/11 commission about why one opportunity to eliminate the threat of Bin Laden was never taken. But I'm sure the UAE did everything they could to combat terrorism. They also refuse to do any business with Israel because they're Jewish. And letting them take this lease would be a violation of US law. I don't think Dubai is our friend. I don't think Saudi Arabia is our friend. And I think its stupid to risk compromising security to protect their money.

OK, we're done arguing about hypothetical people's hypothetical lives. If you have an issue with someone in particular, thats what PMs are for. Thanks.

The Reagan school of government spending? Reagan increased the size of Federal government by leaps and bounds. He also supported tax increases in his second term.

This is a sentencing trial, if I'm not mistaken. He won't be set free. It's about whether or not he'll spend the rest of his life in jail or be executed.

It was panned huge when it first came out. Critically and commercially a flop and from what I understand, it did nearly break the band up. They haven't written anything anywhere close to as personal or raw or based on emotion. Now its all deconstructed Nirvana songs with not much feeling behind them.

Christopher Hitchens' Obit on Slobo. http://www.slate.com/id/2137950/

I was just thinking about Weezer's Pinkerton album. Because I was listening to it on the way to work today. It kind of reminds me of PetSounds/Smile stuff in a way. Because it was Rivers really opening himself up and exposing himself on a CD to the rest of the world. It failed so badly, and the work was so misunderstood that the band just kinda disappeared for a while. And what came back just isn't as good. Or as personal.

I don't know why anyone on the tribunal would poison Milosevic? It seems so contrary to what they were trying to do there in the first place.

The reason the 45 day review process was started was because it was bypassed in the first place.

Soxy, Where are you going exactly?

If we were so concerned with our relations to begin with, maybe we shouldnt have tried to back door the deal.

Except we aren't at war. The "war on terrorism" is a lot more like the war on drugs or the war on poverty than it is the Civil War or World War I or II. That argument just doesn't stick.

I believe the law should be followed. The decision on a purely partisan level to not investigate whether or not Domestic wiretapping/eavesdropping violated the law leads me to believe that the law was violated.

^^^ and such.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/03/10/...D8G8UM6O4.shtml

*rimshot*

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Mar 11, 2006 -> 06:50 PM) They wouldn't have been. Why do people keep saying that? There's a difference between owning something and running something. They wouldn't be owning the ports either. DP World would assume control of a lease in NJ and NY that the Port Authority issues to them. So if they aren't owning the port, or running the port, what the hell are they doing?

It made me laugh. And according to Martha Stewart, that's a good thing!