Annnd there's the FISA bill passed!

227 to 183? I thought that we *lost* the House last November.

By Moe Lane Posted in Comments (85) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

Took 'em long enough, but I suppose that the delay was inevitable:

House approves wiretap bill
By CHARLES BABINGTON

WASHINGTON - The House handed President Bush a victory Saturday, voting to expand the government's abilities to eavesdrop without warrants on foreign suspects whose communications pass through the United States.

The 227-183 vote, which followed the Senate's approval Friday, sends the bill to Bush for his signature. He had urged Congress to approve it, saying Saturday, "Protecting America is our most solemn obligation."

You can see the final results here. Speaker Pelosi and Rep Emanuel voted against it, if you're interested - which is fascinating. You'd think that they would have fought harder, if they were really opposed...

(pause)

(discreet snort of laughter)

Yeah, I know.

Moe

PS: Oh, don't feel so bad: at least you guys got that energy bill that the Democratic leadership ostensibly came back to Washington in order to pass. Of course, said bill has to be reconciled with the Senate first, and is facing a veto threat anyway - but it's the thought that counts, right?


« Rep. Capuano's Newspeak for CensorshipComments (5) | So The House Will Have Its Investigation . . .Comments (3) »
Annnd there's the FISA bill passed! 85 Comments (0 topical, 85 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »

It's really too much fun. The Democrats sweep to power promising clean government, a change of course in Iraq, no more wiretaps, and a chicken in every pot.

What they delivered was the stupid minimum wage claptrap, William Jefferson, (D-LA), more troops in Iraq, more wiretaps, and ... left the Bush economy to successfully handle the chicken:pot ratio.

Not that they haven't tried dorking things up, or rather they have given the appearance of wanting to dork things up, but have dorked up their mission to dork things up. Brutal irony, isn't it?

--
Gone 2500 years, still not PC.

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson

game,

The President is most definitely a lame duck now and getting lamer by the minute. He has no "capital" left, or very little and what he has is about to be spent in September prolonging his war in Iraq. After Super Tuesday, nobody on the R side of the fence is going to want him to venture out of the Whitehouse, much less appear with a Republican canidate.

The fall campaign is going to make the non love fest of Gore with Slick Willy from the 2000 campaign look like "Love Story". "W" who ?

_______________________________
None of the Above !

that counts on the most important issue to both sides. Bush forced Congress to vote $$ for the troops soon after the 2006 losses; has won the votes on timetables for surrender and won today.

Duck is walking

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson

Let's see who gets the last laugh. President Bush is still relevant, and Congress will have a rude awakening when he uses the veto pen
The Dems took great pains to shut off any GOP support by refusing to pass any compromise bipartisan bills, and they won't peel GOP away when they try to override a veto.

"We should scrap this “comprehensive” immigration bill and the whole debate until the government can show the American people that we have secured the borders -- or at least made great headway."
Fred Thompson

pilgram

I have this nagging suspicion that President Bush will NOT go into full veto mode before the report from General P comes in and the President seeks to extend the surge.

Bush will need some support from moderates from both the R and D side of the aisle, and vetoing compromise legislation, budgets etc. will win him no support when he's going to need it.

As a test, let's see what the President does on the Ag funding bill which has funding for support illegal aliens, the one that Republicans walked out after the Dems started playing games with vote counting. If the President vetoes, then I will agree with you, if he does not, he's getting ready for battle come October on extending the surge.

Watch what he does, not what he says.

_______________________________
None of the Above !

much before.

It's bad form to veto your own party's legislation. It's good form when the opposition party can only get their stuff through with COMBINED party line voting and procedural trickery. Doing so when he would greatly like some of the illegals provisions will only highlight the attempt to reclaim the fiscal responsibility medal.

Walter Jones, NC
Tim Johnson, IL

Any chance for primary opponents in NC & IL?

"We should scrap this “comprehensive” immigration bill and the whole debate until the government can show the American people that we have secured the borders -- or at least made great headway."
Fred Thompson

He's a finger-in-the-wind guy, though he calls it voting his own mind on the issues. He's a moderate-right R in a district that's mostly R in a blue state. In other words, he's not going anywhere.

Unless I run, that is.
--
Gone 2500 years, still not PC.

I lived in his district for a long time. He's a good guy - I actually met him a couple of times when my kid's team played his kid's in basketball. I thought he represented the district well and was a decent conservative. "Moderate-right" is on target. I have no idea where he was on this bill, though... (and I don't live there any more, so I don't quite have a finger on the pulse of the politics there...)


...when they see me they'll say, "There goes Loren Wallace,
the greatest thing to ever climb into a race car."

of S. 1927 by the U.S. Congress, in and of itself, must be unconstitutional, because that act clearly violates the "cruel and unusual punishment" clause of the Eighth Amendment.

***

“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn't so.” – Ronald Reagan

Since the expanded wire-tapping powers sunset in 180 days, Justice Breyer will not be placed in a position of possible conflict with Chief Justice Roberts.

***

“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn't so.” – Ronald Reagan

to terrorists phone call from anywhere on earth to anywhere else on Earth, I would call for his Impeachment. But I don't believe that. In fact, if one goes back and listens to Gonzales's testimony a few years ago when the NYT revealed the practice, you can conclude by the way he answered questions that we are listening to terror calls w/i the US. Its just that the NYT hasn't leaked it yet.

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson

historians will view President Bush in a much different light than his critics.

The inherent constitutional authority of the executive is at its highest point when the Commander in Chief is fulfilling his constitutional duty and responsibility to protect and defend the United States and the American people from all threats, foreign and domestic.

***

“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn't so.” – Ronald Reagan

The inherent constitutional authority of the executive is at its highest point when the Commander in Chief is fulfilling his constitutional duty and responsibility to protect and defend the United States and the American people from all threats, foreign and domestic.

You said it. I am glad to have a President who sees that as his primary calling and spends his remaining days tending to that business which he alone can tend to. I may be alone in this on this site, but I am convinced that we are safest in this thin slice of history having such a President rather than the bully-pulpiteer whose presence many seem to feel is required to restore a rotting culture; it passes strange for me to consider that a group founded upon objective principles should consider itself impotent to influence its world absent the desired, combined cheerleading of a profane radio announcer and the President of the United States.

soli Deo gloria

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson

Really?
You can honestly say to yourself that today America is somehow safer due to President Bush's actions? Consider these facts, which are easily verifiable via google:
• Our own intelligence sources reported that Al-Qaeda is now as strong (or stronger than) they were just after 9-11.
• The Taliban is now making a very strong comeback to power.
• Pakistan isn't helping go after known terrorists.
• Over 52% of our treasury debt is to foreign owners (This up from around 32% at the end of Clinton's second term.)
• How many first-world countries have any respect left for the USA?
• Bush tried to hand over the job of Port security to an middle-eastern company, a company which would not be subject to ANY oversight from our government.
• There are over 4,000 lobbying firms in Washington DC, employing over 33,000 lobbyists. How many do you think are lobbying for your benefit? More frightening, how many represent foreign interests?

Sadly I could go on and on. If you can, please tell what positive, verifiable things Bush has accomplished, here or abroad.
At this point in the game I'm neither Liberal nor Democrat nor Republican. At this point I have declared myself an American. I'll concede that all parties have something valuable to offer if you'll concede that all parties also have a lot of worthless rhetoric doing no one any good. Not only do I believe that the president failed us, I also believe that most of our Senators and Representatives have done the same.
I guess I'm just tired of everyone seeming to drink the party koolaid.

The report said al Qaida is AS strong they have been since we decimated them in our invasion after 911. They do not say they are as strong as they were on 911.

The Taliban has no chance of re-establishing autonomy or a safe haven. They get killed in droves when they raise their heads.

Musharef killed a bunch of terrorists last week and are currently in the middle of a surge of their own.

Its great that foreigners invest in America.

Qaddafy feared us enough to surrender w/o a shot. No new Saddams have popped up invading other countries. UK's Brown praised Bush as great war on terror leader. France elected an America loving Conservative. India and Japan are effusive allies, as are Austrailia and poland. Russia caputured the North Pole but lets Santa live.

You fear K-Street will fly planes into tall buildings?

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson

that your Talking-Point-O-Matic™ got stuck in the "On" position.

Let's see what the NIE has to say about your first misconception:

Myth:

"Our own intelligence sources reported that Al-Qaeda is now as strong (or stronger than) they were just after 9-11."

Fact:

National Intelligence Estimate
The Terrorist Threat to the U.S. Homeland

Key Judgments

We assess that greatly increased worldwide counterterrorism efforts over the past five years have constrained the ability of al-Qa’ida to attack the US Homeland again and have led terrorist groups to perceive the Homeland as a harder target to strike than on 9/11. These measures have helped disrupt known plots against the United States since 9/11.

Apparently, President Bush's actions have indeed made us safer.

***

“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn't so.” – Ronald Reagan

I posted yesterday under rokdevil. Today I cannot login to respond to the comments my post received.
Let me only respond by asking rbdwiggins to post the entire text of the NIE findings. Here are a few additional tidbits:

We assess the group has
protected or regenerated key elements of its Homeland attack capability, including: a
safehaven in the Pakistan Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), operational
lieutenants, and its top leadership. Although we have discovered only a handful of
individuals in the United States with ties to al-Qa’ida senior leadership since 9/11, we judge
that al-Qa’ida will intensify its efforts to put operatives here.

We assess Lebanese Hizballah, which has conducted anti-US attacks outside the United
States in the past, may be more likely to consider attacking the Homeland over the next three
years if it perceives the United States as posing a direct threat to the group or Iran

I won't continue with my "Talking-Points-o-matic" approach. I'm really not trying to fan flames or start bashing anyone
(except possibly bush and the gop, but isn't that fair?). Isn't it true though that if I'm guilty of pushing "party talking points" then aren't many of the people here? I've read what little the NIE released. I've also read the previous year's NIE, which describes how the Iraq conflict has helped to create
a very deep resentment in the Muslim world against the US. All this from an organization that reports to Bush.
While I may not have expressed myself in the most non-partisan manner my underlying point is straight-forward and definitely not talking-point based. Why do we all drink party-koolaid without checking the ingredients?
As for how safe the country is from terrorists, I suggest learning more about it all from a BBC documentary called "The Power of Nightmares" ( http://www.archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNightmares )
Anyway, so long and thanks for all the fish.

____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

there is a difference -- although I wouldn't expect you to see the difference.

...in this rokdevil's situation...

Hold on a second.

Blam.

Right, as I was saying: if you find your account suspended and you want to appeal, take the above as what not to do. To wit:

1). Don't re-register. Kiss of death, right there.
2). Don't frame your appeal in terms of suppression of dissent. We get way too many people showing up who don't understand that this site is private property.
3). Don't whine.

We now return you to your regular scheduled betrayal of the Democratic base by its leadership.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

If I ever find myself in that situation I will refrain from those courses of action.

Would threatening your children work? How about pointing out that everyone at Redstate is stupider than I am, so you are really lucky to have me? Some people try that second approach. Don't recall seeing much of them after that.

Quentin Langley
Editor of http://www.quentinlangley.net

International Editor of

I'm sure they come to the realization that if they're so much smarter than us, why on earth would they want to hang out with us? Just wasting their valuable time when they could be PROVING that GWB is responsible for the WTC collapse and that there was no airplane that hit the Pentagon, it was a missile. You know, important stuff.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

I don't suppose those people get banned. So if I ever get banned, I will use that as the basis of my appeal. I am sure it will work. I bet the editors love being told how stupid they are.

Quentin Langley
Editor of http://www.quentinlangley.net

International Editor of

He defeated John Kerry. The one thing he absolutely HAD to do to protect this great nation.

He has kept your sorry - err, I mean - he has kept us ALL safe since 9/11. Easily verifiable by looking around.

"I have declared myself an AMERICAN!" (chest puffs out). Well if you really mean that, pal, you'll be a Republican soon enough.

Talking-Point-o-Matic™

Haven't seen one of these in several months.

"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition." -- Rudyard Kipling

At least there are two Republicans who believe in freedom.

I don't want the government listening in on my calls.

authorized government listening to your calls. How are you harmed by listening if you aren't charged with a crime?

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson

"the terrorist surveillance bill" as opposed to "domestic spying"
that they have always called it. So now it's not illegal? No impeachment? Imagine that.

How am I harmed? By that kind of reasoning, it should be o.k. to install video cameras in your house to watch you 24/7. Hey, you're not consorting with terrorists, so why would that be uncomfortable? I guess we just draw different lines.

Since they would need to have some proof and or belief that you were inviting guests of the terrorist persuasion into your home before installing the cameras, I don't see a problem here.

But of course reading and understanding when, where, and why they may listen to suspected terrorists appears to be beyond your reading comprehension. I can see why you believe your house will soon be the next location for a weekly TV show.

judgment. We can't tie his hands. Therefore we have to elect President's of character that will focus resources on preventing attacks.

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson

don't you realize that the government already does that? Why if you now have a flat screen television, the State can watch YOU while you are watching television.

I thought everyone knew that. I believe this technology was first invented in 1984!

But I'm not convinced they fully understand the high cost of securing that freedom, or the amount of sacrifice required to maintain it.

However, the solution to your dilemma is very simple, don't communicate with suspected terrorists.

***

“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn't so.” – Ronald Reagan

We generally frown on people taking usernames of public figures - or, in this case, one that might suggest an formal connection with another website. You may choose another username, provided that it violates neither the Posting Rules or general good taste: you may indicate your choice via a response here, or the Contact link.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

Cut down the communications with terrorists. Unless you want to be free to do THAT.

I don't want the government listening in on my calls.

So...are you freely admitting that you make and/or receive calls from known members of terrorist organizations?

When the only tool you own is a hammer, every problem begins to resemble a nail. -- Abraham Maslow

and you have nothing to worry about. Or do you?
A little too much self importance there. In any case, for freedom to be enjoyed, and to last, it must be secure. Freedom is important but so are human lives, yes, no?

"a man's admiration for absolute government is proportinate to the contempt he feels for those around him". Tocqueville

Gee, maybe you should consider not talking to probably terrorists.

WHY was my name changed???? You people really do believe in censorship, I see. And you certainly don't want a dissenting voice to be heard.

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson

1. You weren't censored, your name was changed

2. Your name was changed because of an issue involving not impersonating people or websites, maybe it is even a copyright issue. It was not changed because we disagree with you, I didn't see what you first name was, but it looks the action that was taken was actually taken to protect a site has very liberal values. If so than this is the opposite of them censoring opposing views

3. Your failure to understand this indicates that maybe you do not have the intelligence to participate in this blog.

Amusingly, he's upset because we added "Not."

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

Moe,

I'd like to suggest a policy of name changing prior to blaming. The resultant high-order detonation as trolls go ballistic, is immensely entertaining. Not to mention the fact that their thrown completely off their talking points as they screw themselves through the roof, resulting in less inane spam.

Two thumbs, way up!

"The only way to negotiate with your enemy, is with your knee on his chest and your knife at his throat." - Anon.

of "naming" people based on some personality attribute or some, usually stupid, thing that they might have done. Once you get one of those "names," you'll never escape it. I've been away from The South so long that I'm not very good at naming and that uniquely Southern use of similies, but it's a skill I could enjoy working on. I think we could come up with really, really good "names" for some of our trolls and mobys.

In Vino Veritas

Maybe we could prepend all of their names with "Brother", as in "BrotherNotDailyKos", or "BrotherDemophilus". I know that's not what you meant.

Maybe we need a troll taxonomy, a way to categorize them. We have our BDS sufferers, economy trolls, war trolls, and TalkingPoint™ KnownFact™ trollomatics.

I also like it when they lose their grammatical way.

--
Gone 2500 years, still not PC.

Having sent wedding invitations to friends using their nickname, and having friends express astonishment when they look at my diploma, driver's license, etc and find my given name there, I would like to offer my endorsement of this idea.

The first one that comes to mind when looking at this idiot's posts is "Fussy Boy", soon to be shortened to "Fuss". As in, "Hey Fuss, go get me a beer."

"Chicken Legs" and "Needle D*** " are two others that just popped into my head. This could be the makings of a threadjack...

This particular conservative really appreciates "dissent" from the party of denial.

I find that one can take great pleasure in pointing out its apparent futility.

***

“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn't so.” – Ronald Reagan

The Posting Rules are clear:

Update [2006-6-2 16:11:26 by krempasky]: - An addendum to the posting rules. We will not allow users to sign up with accounts impersonating identifiable public figures. Which means, as a rule, we're going to make every attempt to scrutinize new accounts that purport to be such. If you have any questions - please feel free to fill out the contact form.

***

“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn't so.” – Ronald Reagan

... in censorship, I see"

Yes, that's why your comments were erased and your account deleted.

Wait...they weren't. Your name was changed to conform with our posting rules and to avoid copyright infringement. That's the same.

Now either grow up or scurry along, before I change your name to "Chicken Little."

but not heard. Your "censorship" cry is about as disingenuous as a John Edwards poverty tour. Your REAL disappointment was in NOT being banned, as it required you to re-write your "I Got Banned At RedState" piece you already had written.

You want to dissent? dissent away! Just TRY to make it articulate and interesting. Talking-Points-o-Matic™ and KnownFacts™ don't count.

Try a little intellectual honesty -- the exercise could do you good!

Please alleviate the boredom and give us an indication that you are the only liberal in America, who while screaming "censorship" is at least aware that it is the Democrats who wish to revive the so called Fairness Doctrine.

If not then the post I am responding to leaves hints of a possible but acute dullness.

"a man's admiration for absolute government is proportinate to the contempt he feels for those around him". Tocqueville

They censored my name too, before I changed it to Vladimir.

My original name was TrollsFromDailyKosAreLame-A**NitWits.

(Moe Lane objected to the hyphen.)

Censorship! Wolverines!

It's such a fine line between stupid and clever. - David St. Hubbins

Sorry, it's like a reflex. I must have watched that film umpteen billion times as a kid*.

Anyway, hyphens... they insinuate themselves, so. Look at the title if you don't believe me.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!

*Before any of all y'all nod wisely about that, I was a Democrat at the time: heck, my first Presidential vote was for Dukakis.

"Before any of all y'all nod wisely about that, I was a Democrat at the time: heck, my first Presidential vote was for Dukakis."

Bless your heart, Moe. Was it the tank thing that moved you?

My family on Dad's side were Truman Dems as well - I have a letter from Truman's secretary congratulating Grandad on becoming chairman of the Young Democrats of his county.
Dad was the youngest and went WAY off the reservation becoming a Republican.

Was for Ronald Reagan - something to tell the grandkids.

You and I are tied. Everyone else is trailing badly.

Quentin Langley
Editor of http://www.quentinlangley.net

International Editor of

And I thought my first vote (for Dole) was disappointing.

Hooray!

My first vote was for Margaret Thatcher, so there. (Well, techically it was for Janet Fookes, Conservative Candidate in the Plymouth Drake constituency).

Quentin Langley
Editor of http://www.quentinlangley.net

International Editor of

The point is that Moe and I voted for losers, heh.

Hooray!

I win in the sense that I voted for a decent candidate.

Quentin Langley
Editor of http://www.quentinlangley.net

International Editor of

The Iron Lady should never be referred to as "a decent candidate".

I really wish we could knock 30 years off her age and find a US birth certificate with her name on it.

Your "little Island" has produced two of the three most important leaders of the last century. Lady Thatcher was one.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

That's fair. But here is a thought for you: she may elderly and not disqualified from the US Presidency, but her grandchildren are neither of these things. Michael and Amanda Thatcher are both US citizens. Of course, Michael, the elder, only turned 18 this year, so it may be a while before President Thatcher takes office.

Quentin Langley
Editor of http://www.quentinlangley.net

International Editor of

Quentin Langley
Editor of http://www.quentinlangley.net

International Editor of

Michael and Amanda are even a mere shadow of their mom, you may have given us a most wonderful gift. Consider this to be my thanks, even well in advance.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.

Let's certainly hope that they take after Grandma and not after their Dad.

Shall we say the jury is out for now, and sign up for the Thatcher for President campaign when we see signs of Grandma's greatness in one or other of the pair.

Quentin Langley
Editor of http://www.quentinlangley.net

International Editor of

Wait till it sinks in that Congress just gave the President the power to do one of the main things the loony Dems were planning on impeaching him for doing.

Time to replace this guy. This is a suicide vote for him. is primary opponent(s) should beat him like a dead horse with this vote, among others.

Don't bet on it ! As shown on this thread there are more loose wires around then just those of the surveillance program.

"a man's admiration for absolute government is proportinate to the contempt he feels for those around him". Tocqueville

Other Democrats Aye votes to help US intelligence agents=13
Blue Dog Democrats Aye votes to help US intelligence agents=28
Dirty Dog Republican No votes to help US intelligence agents=2
Blue Dog Democrats No votes to help US intelligence agents=15

The Blue Dog Democratic Coalition is supposed to be made up of the conservative and moderates of their party, and yet 15 of their membership support the 'privacy rights of terrorists' over vigilance in stopping terrorists.

"We should scrap this “comprehensive” immigration bill and the whole debate until the government can show the American people that we have secured the borders -- or at least made great headway."
Fred Thompson

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson

The 186 House GOP Aye voters needed those 28 plus 4 more for the bill to be passed with a majority vote.

"We should scrap this “comprehensive” immigration bill and the whole debate until the government can show the American people that we have secured the borders -- or at least made great headway."
Fred Thompson

Mike Gamecock DeVine @ The Charlotte Observer
www.race42008.com
www.hinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
"One man with courage makes a majority" - Andrew Jackson

...is that the Dems who self-flagellate over the potential violation of terrorists' supposed "civil rights"....

...are the very same partisan hacks who would stonewall an investigation of abuse on the part of White House Director of Personnel Security Craig Livingstone, allegedly at the direction of the then-First Lady, into the FBI files of hundreds of political opponents.

[Wikipedia link on the Filegate scandal provided, out of sheer laziness on my part.]

These idiots pray at the altar of "individual rights", but apparently politics comes first.

It's such a fine line between stupid and clever. - David St. Hubbins

What I find troubling is that at the same time they are having this debate in the House read what is going down in South Carolina.

"We should scrap this “comprehensive” immigration bill and the whole debate until the government can show the American people that we have secured the borders -- or at least made great headway."
Fred Thompson

and in Canada.

Of course, it is possible that Karl Rove planted both the explosives and the landmines in a vain attempt to frighten us into supporting the bumpersticker war on terror!

I'm not exactly sure why the link didn't work!

I guess preview is our friend!

I've always wondered if your taunts have been hitting home. Well, what we've seen here is like one of those cameras mounted on a missile as it hits its target.

Hooray!

 
Redstate Network Login:
(lost password?)


©2008 Eagle Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved. Legal, Copyright, and Terms of Service