Like a cult, contrary evidence just hardens the belief system of the stupid.[...]
Read The Full Article:
If you have come to believe that Iraq is now firmly in the rear view mirror, General George W. Casey Jr., the Army chief of staff, seems to think others. On Tuesday, General Casey suggested to an invite-only gathering of policy analysts and journalists[...]
Read The Full Article:
One of the major reasons given for not moving the Gitmo detainees is NIMBY: as in, there is no place to keep them. No one wants them. Ha! Welcome to Hardin, Montana, marked with an "A" on the map.
Why does Hardin want them?
Because they need the jobs. It's that simple. Hardin is a town of 3,400 people, with a high unemployment rate. Acording to CNN, even the Dollar Store is in danger of closing. They desperately need jobs. And what they have that could lead to jobs is a very new, 464-bed, state of the art prison called Two Rivers. It was completed in 2007, and it has never been used because of internal state politics.
The Hardin Town Council voted 5-0 to offer up the jail as a place to put the detainees. They believe that such a situation would bring jobs to the area, and enable them to repay the bond issue they floated to build the jail. They contend that since no one but Gitmo detainees would be brought to the facility, there is no danger of radicalizing other inmates, and aver further that the facility could be easily modified to keep the prisoners completely separate, as in any supermax prison.
Greg Smith, Executive Director of Two Rivers, said this:
Two Rivers Detention Center is a modern, empty facility. It is built so that with just minor conversions it can be upgraded from medium to higher security. Because the detainees would be the only prisoners in the facility, it would be easy to accommodate prisoners' dietary, language and religious requirements.
If someone were to escape, Smith said, there aren't any huge buildings nearby to dodge into. Montana is pretty homogenous, so detainees, many of Middle Eastern descent, would not easily blend into crowds, he said.
And bringing detainees to this area has happened before, Smith said. There were prisoner-of-war camps in Laurel during World War II. There were also internee camps in Missoula and near Powell, Wyo.
Not everyone is in favour of it, of course. But it's a better option than the other location that has been floated: Alexandria, VA. Smith's point about the openness and homogeneity of the area is very valid. Assuming a prisoner could escape from a prison, it is much easier to hide in an urban area than in a rural plane. It is easier to track someone if, for example, they are trying to escape though the kinds of winters (and snows) that Montana gets.
Morning poll will be up later today.
We will now hear the usual noises from the Republicans, decrying her as "hard left", and zooming in on this one comment that she made where she stated that the supreme court is "where policy is made". Republicans will be all over that like a rash.
Obama, whose life story is mirrored to a large extent by Sotomayor, introduced her at the White House today as "an inspiring woman who I believe will make a great justice", but some Republicans have described her as coming from the "hard left".
Speaking about her rise from the Bronx in New York to Princeton and Yale and then onto the judicial bench, Obama presented her as a symbol of America's diversity. "You've shown in your life that it doesn't matter where you come from, what you look like, or what challenges life throws your way," he said.
If confirmed by the Senate, Sotomayor would not alter significantly the overall balance of the nine-member court, which has five conservatives and four liberals.
The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think-tank in Washington, labelled her "hard left" but there is little in her background to emerge so far to sustain that. It seems to be more a case of like-for-like, replacing the liberal Justice David Souter, who has opted for early retirement.
So here you have a racist. You might want to soften that, and you might want to say a reverse racist. And the libs, of course, say that minorities cannot be racists because they don't have the power to implement their racism. Well, those days are gone, because reverse racists certainly do have the power to implement their power. Obama is the greatest living example of a reverse racist, and now he's appointed one.He bases this, as far as I can tell, on this comment which Sotomayor made:
"I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life."She's talking about experience and the life that she has lived and, I presume, that dreaded word; empathy. And, whilst one could argue that she perhaps is being terribly presumptive in the conclusion she reaches, I find it hard to take this charge seriously coming from a man who played the song, "Barack the Magic Negro" on his show.
Why is this man on TV talking about race in America? What does he have to add? Here's one of Tancredo's racist campaign ads.Tags: Sotomayor, Limbaugh, Tancredo, Supreme Court, Barck Obama
Tancredo's racism is such that he's the darling of the Malkin wing of the GOP. He's a man who even called Miami a "Third World country.?
I'm not kidding. And let's not forget his "bombing Mecca," statements either.
This isn't the pot calling the kettle black. It's the pot calling the tablecloth black.
(More) Right Wing SchizophreniaWill They DislikeThe SCOTUS Nomineea) Because She’s A WomanOr b) Because She’s A Minority
Read The Full Article:
video details and more
Erich "Mancow" Muller talks to Keith Olbermann about his recent experience with waterboarding, which he undertook to prove that waterboarding was NOT torture, but ended up stating that this was "absolutely torture".
Muller states that he's already had Hannity on the phone to tell him that it's not torture, despite the fact that Hannity has still not taken up the challenge to be waterboarded himself. Maybe we should listen to Hannity on this subject when he has shown the same courage of his convictions which Muller has shown.
Tags: mancow, keith olbermann, interview, bush, cheney, war criminal, crime, torture, waterboard, gitmo
Read The Full Article:
Bizarro WorldCheney Wants To Release DocumentsAnd Iowa Is More ProgressiveThan California
Read The Full Article:
Lahore is the Los Angeles of Pakistan. With approximately 10 million people, it's the second largest city in the country as well as the film and popular culture capital. The headline in today's Washington Post, Car Bombing Kills At Least 30 In Pakistan doesn't give the full impact about how devastating this was for the Pakistani nation. The explosive-packed van entered a government compound that houses police, judicial and intelligence buildings on Mall Road, in the herat of the bustling city. After a brief gun battle at a checkpoint, the van drove up to an emergency response police building a detonated, killed at least 30, injuring at least 300 and causing the two story building to collapse.
Interior Minister Rehman Malik said linked the attackers to militants who have been fighting government forces in the Swat valley and tribal regions. In televised remarks, he said the insurgents, who have been linked to the Taliban, were facing defeat in Swat and were now moving to destabilize other parts of country.
Yesterday was a pretty wild news day. It was just non-stop.
The president really delivered on his Supreme Court appointment. Once again, he ignored the usual D.C. chatter, gossip and whispers. And, this is going to be quite the confirmation battle. The Republicans have to navigate a minefield. The GOP Senators will have to cater to their extreme base, but in doing so will alienate one of the fastest growing voting blocs. And, you know those idiots on Capitol Hill will side with their wing nuts. They always do.
On Prop. 8, let the repeal effort begin -- and do it right this time. If the so-called leaders of the movement in California hadn't screwed up the campaign last year, we wouldn't be in this situation. They were too worried about who got credit for the victory. But, we are where we are -- and we have to win at the ballot box in California. In the meantime, we'll keep making progress and moving forward across the country. Time is on our side -- and the right wingers know it. (Now, we just need our friends in the White House to figure that out.)
Let's see where this days leads us...
The news that Bush v. Gore attorneys Theodore B. Olson and and David Boies are seeking an injunction against California's same-sex marriage ban could be the first step in the U.S. Supreme Court guaranteeing gay Americans equal protection, due process and privacy rights.
Their case, Perry, Stier, Katami and Zarrillo v. Schwarzenegger, could result in gays ultimately being permitted liberty to marry just like any other Americans as the U.S. Supreme Court may offer a liberty-friendly venue, contrary to a LA Times report.
Six years ago, the landmark due process decision Lawrence v. Texas (2003) [overturning the infamous Bowers v. Hardwick (1986)] was decided by a six-to-three majority.
Five pro-due process (and roughly speaking pro-liberty and pro-privacy) justices will likely sit on the Court [the pro-liberty Souter being replaced by the pro-liberty Sotomoyer] if the Olson-Boies case works its way to consideration by the Court. The wildcard Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the Lawrence v. Texas (2003) decision.
Kennedy delivered the opinion of the Court in Lawrence v. Texas (2003) in which justices Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer and O?Connor concurred in the judgment.
Justice Antonin Scalia filed a dissenting opinion in which Rehnquist and Thomas joined.
A near-future U.S. Supreme Court could offer a five-four decision overturning state and federal bans on gays marrying.
As Justice Kennedy writes in the Lawrence v. Texas opinion: "Far from possessing 'ancient roots,' American laws targeting same-sex couples did not develop until the last third of the 20th century."
Reading the Perry, Stier, Katami and Zarrillo v. Schwarzenegger brief, it's not difficult to speculate on a comprehensive decision in which gay marriage bans are overturned in the near future.
Near-Future U.S. Supreme Court Justices and Lawrence v. Texas
John Paul Stevens: Pro due process in Lawrence v. Texas (2003)
Ruth Ginsburg: Pro due process in Lawrence v. Texas (2003)
Anthony Kennedy: Pro due process in Lawrence v. Texas (2003)
Stephen Breyer: Pro due process in Lawrence v. Texas (2003)
David Souter: Pro due process in Lawrence v. Texas (2003) [Souter will likely be succeeded by a pro-due process Sonia Sotomayor]
Antonin Scalia: Against due process in Lawrence v. Texas (2003)
Clarence Thomas: Against due process in Lawrence v. Texas (2003)
Samuel Alito: Against liberty claims generally [succeeded pro-due process O'Conner]
John Roberts: Against liberty claims generally [succeeded against-due process Rehnquist]
via mal contends
Read The Full Article: