Fresh from a trip overseas that took her to Afghanistan and Kuwait, U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill blasted the Blackwater security firm -- a private contractor providing protection in U.S. war zones.
McCaskill acknowledged that, during her trip, she was escorted by Blackwater personnel -- but that didn't stop her from blasting the company, which has come under increased scrutiny for the actions of its hired soldiers. No picture of Claire in the dictionary definition of 'gratitude' ...
During a Senate Armed Services Committee on Wednesday, McCaskill complained of a double standard -- Blackwater, while on the government payroll, was engaging in conduct that never would be tolerated by members of the military, the Missouri Democrat said. Congress also "engages in conduct" that would never be tolerated by the military.
There are "two sets of rules," McCaskill said. Pentagon 'rule' - The ROE will cost us lives, but we accept the battle losses for the greater good of the mission. Xe 'rule' - If we lose a principal we have mission and contract failure, we're done.
"Until the contractors are held to the same standard as the men and women that are there in the uniform, we are going to continue to be back at this," McCaskill said. "I don't care how many names they make up for Blackwater."
Blackwater, under the weight of negative publicity, changes its name last year to Xe Services LLC. "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." Problem is, most of them vote Republican!
#1
You know Claire the Senate reviews the rules of the contractors. If I am not mistaken you sit on the Armed Services committe and the sub-comittee tasked with making those rules. Don't YOU think YOU should know something about ROEs and why things that apply to the military do not apply to private companies. If you are ignorant of these reasons perhaps YOU should find a committe for which YOU are knowledgable.
#3
Well Claire, maybe you should just go on a walking tour of Afghanistan by yourself. Or maybe the Taliban will provide escort for you as you make your rounds you ingrate.
(Bloomberg) -- Gordon Brown is on course to lead a minority U.K. administration after this year's election, according to a survey giving the opposition Conservative Party its smallest lead over Labour in more than two years.
A YouGov Plc poll gave the Conservatives the support of 37 percent of voters, down two percentage points, and Labour the backing of 35 percent, up two. The uneven distribution of votes across districts means this would leave the incumbent Labour Party with the most seats, about nine short of a Parliamentary majority, said the Sunday Times, which published the poll.
Addressing a party conference today in Brighton, on England's south coast, Conservative leader David Cameron will speak without notes in an echo of his 2007 conference speech, given two days before Brown backed away from plans for an early election. Last week, the prime minister, who has trailed in the polls ever since that decision, urged voters to "take a second look at us, and take a long, hard look at them."
"They've doubled the national debt, hit people with more than one hundred tax rises, sent our troops to war without the right equipment," Cameron wrote in an article in today's News of the World newspaper. "We've had our second look, prime minister -- and you don't deserve a second chance."
Brown can choose when to call the election, which must be held by June 3. The poll is the latest in a series over the past month showing the Conservative lead over Brown's Labour narrowing from about 10 percentage points, where it had stayed for most of the last year.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/01/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I just hope that UKIP takes all kinds of seats.
#1
They're contemplating this here in Wisconsin for some metropolitan areas, too.
Kinda slaps the 'Good Samaritan' right out of you, doesn't it?
Posted by: Mullah Richard ||
03/01/2010 15:51 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Do they charge me $300 if I call 911 to report that my neighbor's house is on fire?
Posted by: Steve White ||
03/01/2010 16:35 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Steve, you don't expect your neighbor to pay it do you?
Posted by: Rambler in Virginia ||
03/01/2010 16:37 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Let me get this straight, I live in Loma Linda and I pay taxes which pay for the police and fire departments, but I have to pay an additional, voluntary fee, to actually ask for the services for which I pay, or get charged an exhorbitant fee in an emergency.
I guess the city has no choice since they STOPPED paying for everything else and still were short of money? Oh wait, they still have other things? Fire the city council, mayor and any other idiot that instituted this then, and save the fees that way!
#7
I guess they have had too many of the following calls:
A man in Texas called 911 several times to make a date with the 911 operator. A guy in Florida called 911 because the sandwich shop made his pastrami wrong. A woman, also in Florida, called 911 to complain when McDonald's ran out of chicken nuggets.
#8
"Y'all don't have a 911 charge included on your phone bill already?"
swksvolFF, that's a 'tax'. This is a 'fee'. They hope you don't realize that there's no difference between the two.
Posted by: Mullah Richard ||
03/01/2010 18:08 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Gottit Mullah Richard, thanks. Just wanted to make sure that this deal is in addition to the 911 phone bill tax, and wages paid by taxes etc before stating, as a firefighter, how fucking stupid this is. It will destroy property and put people's lives at risk as witnesses dither about who will be charged or just not report fires at all. I cannot emphasise enough the difference 5 minutes can make to a fire response; or vehicle rescue for that matter, or as a first responder to an incident there have been a number of times the first vehicle I see pull up to a fight at a club is the fire department (emt training, not hospital serious emergency).
#14
So one neighbor or a pair of neighbors pay the $48 fee and instead of everyone else calling 911, you contact the neighbor who in turn calls 911. Back to the days when not everyone had a phone. Good reason to have the phone company bring back old fashion party lines to the hood. Probably still on the regulatory books.
Jamie Dimon, chairman of JP Morgan Chase, has warned American investors should be more worried about the risk of default of the state of California than of Greece's current debt woes.
Mr Dimon told investors at the Wall Street bank's annual meeting that "there could be contagion" if a state the size of California, the biggest of the United States, had problems making debt repayments. "Greece itself would not be an issue for this company, nor would any other country," said Mr Dimon. "We don't really foresee the European Union coming apart." The senior banker said that JP Morgan Chase and other US rivals are largely immune from the European debt crisis, as the risks have largely been hedged.
California however poses more of a risk, given the state's $20bn (£13.1bn) budget deficit, which Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is desperately trying to reduce.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/01/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Read, ITS ONLY GREECE, as per the size of CA's economy vee the rest of the World.
#3
"We don't really foresee the European Union coming apart."
The 'experts' at the CIA didn't foresee the Soviet Union coming apart either. Notice that it fractured along nationalistic/ethnic lines regardless of the 'dreams' of transnationalists. When the time comes, those same transnationalists, who've ignored the national borders of the US adding to the very financial crisis, will appeal to 'national' unity for sacrifice. YJCMTSU
#4
And don't forget who took California to insolvency...the Democratic controlled government, SEIU, Sierra Club, liberal judges who says that felons in jail must have Cadillac health coverage, trial lawyers and the CA Teacher Association. And Brown for the next Governor? Yeah, just what the doctor ordered.
#5
What would ultimately be nice would be either national right to work or a ban on unionization for those whose payroll is made out of tax revenue. Both are pretty unlikely, however, just as universal honesty and responsible citizenship are unlikely.
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
03/01/2010 13:00 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Everybody in state government here is convinced Oblahblah and Pelosi are going to cut a check to solve this. Only problem, is that there is not much manufacturing left, agriculture has been devastated by the water cutoff to save the fishies, and send more and more to L.A. to water lawns. SO, aside from trading money around to each other for services, there really isn't an economy left to create all those "jobs", except with other people's money via the federal spigot. So relax other 49 states, we are your new dependants, and we won't even say thanks.
That's how a spokesman for Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee described the endorsement that came the Democratic congresswoman's way Saturday afternoon. No, it wasn't from a senator or labor union, as important as those endorsements may be to the incumbent from the 18th Congressional district. This one, it turns out, was the biggest enchilada.
"Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee is a tireless champion for Houston's working families," President Barack Obama said in a statement released by the Jackson Lee campaign. "That's why we need her back in Congress to help my efforts to bring real jobs back to Houston and the nation."
What must make the president's words especially galling to Jackson Lee's challengers, City Council member Jarvis Johnson and local lawyer Sean Roberts, is that they challenged Jackson Lee in the first place in part because of her steadfast support of Hillary Clinton in the 2008 presidential race.
They maintained that most residents of the 18th were Obama supporters and Jackson Lee was thumbing her nose at them.
"I am grateful and humbled to receive this endorsement from President Obama," said Jackson Lee in the press release. "When he asked me to campaign for him, I found it so rewarding to see the outpouring of support for the change he represented and now he is the change agent that America and Houston need today."
Neither Johnson nor Roberts was immediately available for comment.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/01/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Posted by: Throck Protector of the Welsh4374 ||
03/01/2010 0:56 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Once again highlighting Barry's total commitment to the CBC and the Democratic 'extreme far left.' Yes, they are one in the same... but for obvious reasons, no one in the media mentions that of course.
Posted by: Mike ||
03/01/2010 8:22 Comments ||
Top||
#4
C'mon, he's got to take the easy contests now. He is 0 for 4 so far. If Teh One can't chalk this up as a win for his amazing personal charisma (hawk! spit!), he's toast.
#8
As a resident of the 18th District for the past 27 years I can personaly vouch for the absolute lunacy of one Sheila Jackson Lee. The only reason I live here is that there are no mandatory homeowners association dues or deed restrictions in my neighborhood, and I favor 8 foot iron fences and ravenous pit bulls. On the otherhand, I get a total moron as my Congressional rep. Freedom always has its costs.
With David Paterson now a self-certified lame duck, Andrew Cuomo enters a two-man race for governor as the overwhelming favorite against lightly regarded Republican Rick Lazio.
As Paterson careened from one crisis to another, Cuomo built twin stockpiles of campaign cash and political good will.
The first-term state attorney general boasts not only a famed political surname but a string of populist victories over Wall Street and other moneyed interests.
Lazio, meanwhile, has struggled to raise enough funds to fuel his first campaign since then-First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton trounced him in the 2000 US Senate race.
"It's Muhammad Ali versus Chuck Wepner, the Bayonne Bleeder," Baruch College political science professor Doug Muzzio added. "I'm betting on Ali."
The public has been betting on Cuomo for months.
His 66 percent favorability rating in a Siena poll this week made Cuomo the most popular statewide official.
In contrast, only 31 percent of voters held a favorable view of Lazio, while another 43 percent said they didn't know enough about the former Long Island congressman.
Lazio continues to lag far behind Cuomo in a head-to-head matchup -- 26 percent to 63 percent -- although he's gained a few points in recent weeks.
The attorney general's campaign had $16.1 million on hand, compared with Lazio's $637,357, as of the most recent filing in January.
If Lazio has any hope for an upset, it lies in the wave of anti-incumbency sweeping the nation.
"That's his best chance -- that's his only chance," Marist pollster Lee Miringoff said. "In what may otherwise not be a blockbuster Democratic year, [Cuomo] has a very wide lead on the morning line."
Posted by: Fred ||
03/01/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
Forbes magazine has completed a comprehensive look at "The Global Debt Bomb" and in the course of compiling the results found this very interesting tidbit:
"The five states in the worst financial condition--Illinois, New York, Connecticut, California and New Jersey--are all among the bluest of blue states. The five most fiscally fit states are more of a mix. Three--Utah, Nebraska and Texas--boast Republican majorities and two--New Hampshire and Virginia--skew Democratic."
But wait, it's actually more serious than that when you look at the 10 states in the worst financial condition, according to Forbes:
"Of the 10 states in the worst financial condition, eight are among a total of 23 defined by Gallup as "solidly Democratic," meaning the Democrats enjoy an advantage of 10 percentage points or greater in party affiliation. These states include the ones listed above as making up the bottom five, plus Massachusetts, Ohio and Wisconsin.
"Of the three other basement-dwellers, Kentucky is defined as "leaning Democratic" (a five- to 10-percentage-point Democratic advantage) and the remaining two--Louisiana and Mississippi--are termed politically "Competitive" (less than a five-percentage-point advantage for either party). Louisiana tilts slightly Democratic and Mississippi slightly Republican."
Forbes quotes an Illinois political science professor who explains why these rankings turn out as they do:
"Why do Democratic states appear to be struggling more than Republican ones? It comes down to stronger unions and a larger appetite for public programs, according to Kent Redfield, professor emeritus of political studies and public affairs at the University of Illinois' Center for State Policy and Leadership.
"'Unions in general have more influence in Democratic-controlled states,' he says. 'This isn't to say that unions are bad, but where they're strong you have bigger demands for social services and coalitions with construction companies, road builders and others that push up debt.'"
There is much, much more to the Forbes piece, which you can read in its entirety here.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/01/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
There violins for all the "Blue States"... time to get real children, your politics brought your states to economic failure. You can't have it all, all the time. Grow-up.
Posted by: Throck Protector of the Welsh4374 ||
03/01/2010 1:02 Comments ||
Top||
#2
It comes down to stronger unions and a larger appetite for public programs
Paid for by others with no such appetites.
This isn't to say that unions are bad, but where they're strong you have bigger demands for social services and coalitions with construction companies, road builders and others that push up debt.
As an employee of a road builder, I must point out how little influence we have on where the money is spent. Northern Virginia's road network is severely underfunded, but the Legislature still refuses to raise taxes on the entire Commonwealth. Besides which, if we build something, everybody gets to use it. How is that similar to a social service? Is every driver also on welfare?
Posted by: Bobby ||
03/01/2010 5:58 Comments ||
Top||
#3
California = America's future.
Time to start thinking of ourselves as Latin America North
Rep. Charles Rangel made it clear Saturday: He's running this year for a 21st term as Harlem's congressman.
Rangel, under fire for alleged ethics violations, acknowledged he was aware of calls for his retirement or resignation.
His response?
"Run for reelection," the 79-year-old Democrat told the Daily News after a Harlem meeting of city leaders.
The powerful head of the Ways and Means Committee was rebuked this week by a House ethics committee for accepting corporate-sponsored trips to the Caribbean in 2007 and 2008.
He's also facing charges of failure to pay taxes on a villa in the Dominican Republic, hiding a half-million dollars in income and reaping a sweetheart deal on four rent-stabilized apartments.
Rangel was first elected to the House in 1970.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/01/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
Charlie the Shark is ready to continue his long run in Congress. This is his campaign song.
Posted by: Throck Protector of the Welsh4374 ||
03/01/2010 1:08 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Guys like that never seem to get enough. Most old farts would be ready to enjoy their retirement way before they get to be his age. Is the power so addicting or is he afraid that if he gives up his power he'll end up in the slammer?
Over the past few weeks, the world has learned quite enough about John Edwards -- from the lies he told in trying to cover up an adulterous affair to the compulsive vanity that left some people close to him questioning his judgment and even his grip on reality.
Democrats who seriously considered making Edwards the party's 2008 presidential nominee could be forgiven for asking: Now you tell us?
The revelations about Edwards, contained in two best-selling books, have undermined one of the favorite conceits of political journalism, that the intensive scrutiny given candidates by reporters during a presidential campaign is an excellent filter to determine who is fit for the White House.
While the media "usually does well" in vetting candidates, said presidential historian Michael Beschloss, "Edwards is a good case" in which it didn't.
And that failure is worrisome in a changed political world where politicians - be they Barack Obama or Sarah Palin - can burst upon the national stage and seemingly overnight become candidates for higher office.
The media, according to Beschloss, now has "a much bigger responsibility than it used to." In the past, he said, the political establishment "would usually have known the candidate for a long time, and if there were big problems, they probably would have known about those, and tried to make sure those people wouldn't be nominated."
That did not happen with Edwards, even though as a Senator he had run for president once before, in 2004, ended up on the Democratic ticket as John Kerry's running mate, and was a known quantity to many top Democrats.
In 2008, there were conversations among some Edwards staffers, according to "Game Change," the new book by John Heilemann and Mark Halperin, about the responsibility of coming forward with what they knew about Edwards, perhaps leaking to the New York Times or Washington Post, if it looked like he might win the nomination. But there is no evidence they ever did.
Two stories by the National Enquirer that ran before Iowa described Edwards's affair with Rielle Hunter. But the mainstream media went to sources within the Edwards campaign to try to confirm the stories and got nowhere. No one in the campaign would confirm them.
Those staffers are the ones who should be held accountable, Marc Ambinder wrote in response to the question he posed on The Atlantic's website: "Should Edwards Aides Be Shamed And Blamed?"
"It's your responsibility to quit the campaign and not enable it," he wrote. "If you enable it, you are responsible in some ways for the fallout. Your loyalty isn't an excuse for that."
The failure to follow up aggressively on the reporting by the National Enquirer, which has nominated itself for a Pulitzer Prize for its Edwards coverage, has served as fodder for conservatives and others convinced the media has a double standard when it comes to vetting Democrats and Republicans.
"I feel sorry for the liberals who were duped by Edwards," said Cliff Kincaid editor of the right-leaning watchdog organization Accuracy in Media. "They were the real victims of the failure to vet Edwards."
"Now we know that Edwards was a phony in more ways than one," Kincaid added. "Our media, especially progressives in the media, were in love with Edwards because of his liberal views. But he wasn't in love with them. He was in love with someone else--and it turns out it wasn't his wife."
Posted by: Fred ||
03/01/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Only Trunks. Why would party organs bother vetting their party's own? /rhet question
#3
I restpectfully disagree Proc. Trunks are not properly vetted. There was nothing proper about the way the media treated Sarah Palin - and she was just a VP Candidate.
They ignored worries and cries to investigate Obama's Marxist roots and his association with known terrorists (Ayers) yet make a huge scandal about the purchase of a used tanning bed.
They are simply an extension of the Democratic Party.
#4
the mainstream media went to sources within the Edwards campaign to try to confirm the stories and got nowhere. No one in the campaign would confirm them.
Giggle. Journalist Mickey Kaus was all over this story from the beginning, almost daily urging, goading, and shaming his colleagues to follow up on the obvious fact that the man was lying, that the woman was pregnant, that his aide was not the father etc. There is one and only one angle to this story, which is the media double standard that nearly gave the nation an even more outrageous clown in the White House than the current joker.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said Sunday she wants let House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., hold onto his gavel for now, despite his admonishment by the House ethics committee last week.
The 10-member, bipartisan ethics panel essentially gave Rangel a slap on the wrist for taking corporate-sponsored trips to the Caribbean in recent years. The panel said Rangel's staff knew of the corporate funding of the junkets, which is a against House rules, but they found no direct evidence Rangel was told of it.
But Rangel is facing much bigger ethics trouble. The panel is also looking into his failure to disclose rental income tax, his use of four rent-controlled apartments in New York City and, more seriously, whether he used his position to secure a tax loophole for an oil company that donated $1 million to a school named after him.
Pelosi signaled on Sunday he can stay at the helm of the powerful tax-writing committee despite these troubles.
"Obviously there is more to come here," Pelosi said.
But she seemed to think last week's admonishment is not enough for him to be stripped of his powerful position.
"It said he did not knowingly violate House rules, so that gives him some comfort," Pelosi said.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/01/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said Sunday she wants let House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., hold onto his gavel for now, despite his admonishment by the House ethics committee last week
Back to business as usual Nancy.....He's back in the Saddle Again. Democrats a bunch of noise.
Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman says Congressman Charles Rangel's (D-N.Y.) ethics scandal has absolutely no national significance.
As the Roundtable segment of ABC's "This Week" turned to new revelations concerning the powerful Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee Sunday, the New York Times columnist was all by himself in making the case that Rangel hasn't really done anything wrong.
"I'm unhappy with this," he said. "I wish Rangel would go away, but it's, it really has no national significance."
Krugman actually said this after everyone on the panel, including host Elizabeth Vargas, Cokie Roberts, and Sam Donaldson, discussed how egregious Rangel's ethics violations were.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/01/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
The dean of New York's congressional delegation and a man who may try to become a member of it crossed paths - and maybe swords - in Harlem Sunday.
Rep. Charles Rangel and potential Senate candidate Harold Ford were at a closed-door meeting about Gov. Paterson when they exchanged words over health care reform and taxes, multiple sources told the Daily News.
Ford served in the House with Rangel as a 10-year Tennessee representative. He is now mulling a Democratic primary challenge to Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand.
One source said "the tensest moment was when [Ford] took on [Rangel], saying [a] jobs bill should come before health care" and that a health bill shouldn't hike New Yorkers' taxes or leave businesses unable to hire people.
Sources said Ford also warned the assembled leaders against losing touch with the will of the voters - and subsequently losing their offices - even if they felt they were doing what was best.
Rangel, in turn, insisted on defending his work with President Obama on health care, witnesses said, retorting that the final reforms passed will be in Americans' best interest - and telling Ford and the rest of the room that taxes here are less onerous than elsewhere.
"The tone that Rangel adopted seemed a little bit contemptuous - but that was consistent with how a lot of us reacted," a source said. "It was almost as if [Ford] delivered a lecture to us."
Posted by: Fred ||
03/01/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says she has much in common with the Tea Party."
So began an article published by ABCNews.com Sunday about Pelosi's interview with Elizabeth Vargas on "This Week."
"The speaker now says she shares views with movement she dismissed last summer as being 'Astroturf,'" the piece amazingly continued.
And that wasn't CLOSE to being the most preposterous part of the story.
More absurd was how Vargas during this interview actually allowed Pelosi to get away with such a ridiculous comment:
ELIZABETH VARGAS, ABC NEWS: Let's talk a bit about the coming elections in November. You had recently-- and the Tea Party movement, do you think it will be a force to be reckoned with? You had said last summer that it was a faux grassroots movement. You called it the Astroturf movement.
NANCY PELOSI, HOUSE SPEAKER: In some respects it is. Uh-huh.
VARGAS: Is the Tea Party movement a force?
PELOSI: No - No what I said at the time is, that they were -- the Republican Party directs a lot of what the Tea Party does, but not everybody in the Tea Party takes direction from the Republican Party. And so there was a lot of, shall we say, Astroturf, as opposed to grassroots.
But, you know, we share some of the views of the Tea Partiers in terms of the role of special interest in Washington, D.C., as -- it just has to stop. And that's why I've fought the special interest, whether it's on energy, whether it's on health insurance, whether it's on pharmaceuticals and the rest.
VARGAS: So, common ground with many people in the Tea Party movement.
PELOSI: Well, no, there are some. There are some because they, again, some of it is orchestrated from the Republican headquarters. Some of it is hijacking the good intentions of lots of people who share some of our concerns that we have about the role of special interests and many Tea Partiers, not that I speak for them, share the view, whether it's -- and Democrats, Republicans and Independents share the view that the recent Supreme Court decision, which greatly empowers the special interests, is something that they oppose.
And that was that.
Maybe Vargas could have mentioned to the Speaker how she is the target of great ridicule at Tea Party gatherings.
Or how about asking the Speaker how she could possibly share anything in common with a group she pathetically claimed last August was carrying swastikas?
Posted by: Fred ||
03/01/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
She finally knows the momentum is shifting. So now she brown noses the Tea Party. Kind of like telling the hang man at the gallows "But, we have so much in common!"
#6
Glegum Forkbeard3291: I knew of a family that had a very large and friendly dog. They thought they were crafty to teach the dog that it could only take food from their left hand, never their right.
But every time any of them unthinkingly picked up some food item with their left hand...sluuurrrp!
And every time they had guests over, they had to train them as well.
The grandson of Robert F. Kennedy has decided against running for the U.S. House from Massachusetts this year.
Joseph P. Kennedy III told The Associated Press on Sunday that "I've got a job I love being an assistant district attorney on the Cape, and I want to get better at it at this point."
A top state Democrat had said earlier in the weekend that Kennedy was weighing a race if Rep. William Delahunt were to decide against seeking re-election.
Delahunt and the rest of the Massachusetts Democratic establishment were rocked in January when Republican Scott Brown staged an upset to win the U.S. Senate seat formerly held by Kennedy's uncle, Edward Kennedy.
Joseph Kennedy III is one of the twin sons of former Rep. Joseph P. Kennedy II.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/01/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#3
There's something doomful and horrible about that image. Did somebody deliberately darken it so that the Kennedy brothers looked like George Romero extras?
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
03/01/2010 17:00 Comments ||
Top||
#4
No downside to this story. This is the "good news" report?
With less than two weeks before he must enter the race for governor, state Attorney General Jerry Brown told college-age Democrats on Saturday to stay tuned for news about his presumed bid. Right. Governor Moonbeam. Governor Moonbeam needs another crack at Caliphornia.
Brown, 71, has been acting rather coy for more than year about his plans, but he gave his first extensive comments about how he would run California since becoming the Democrats' presumed nominee. "I've done pretty well not doing anything," Brown told a gathering of California Young Democrats when asked if he was running for governor. "We used to have a lot of people running for the Democratic nomination. They're not there anymore, right?" Nobody wants to get in the barrel when it's about to go over the falls...
Brown's aggressive fundraising and name recognition have been enough to drive potential rivals -- such as San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa -- out of the contest for the Democratic nomination. Newsom and Villaraigosa as the face of Caliphornia's future don't really look that different from Governor Moonbeam, the face of Caliphornia's past. But likely the state will continue happily voting Democrat until nobody can afford to live there anymore. Then they'll all move to other states, where they'll continue voting Democrat.
But his $12 million campaign account is much smaller than his potential Republican opponents. I understand the Caliphornia hinterlands used to be inhabited by people who believed in Cause & Effect, but the coastal areas always outvoted them.
Meg Whitman, the billionaire former chief executive of eBay, has given her campaign $39 million so far and is poised to spend more than $100 million. Steve Poizner, a multimillionaire who developed GPS chips for cell phones, has said he will add to the $19 million he already has given his campaign. Brown said facing such a well-funded opponent is one of the reasons he has held off announcing his intentions.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/01/2010 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
Thats the way I feel about Jerry Brown being Governor of California ..... repeats are boring.
Posted by: Throck Protector of the Welsh4374 ||
03/01/2010 0:49 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Moonbeam should run on the record of his previous administration, especially his heroic and successful effort to save California's state insect, the Mediterranean fruitfly, from the nefarious chemical warfare attacks planned by corporate agricultural exploiters and their diabolical supporters and co-conspirators, some of whom may be so evil as to have joined the dread Republican Party.
The medfly is also sacred, no doubt, to the many New Age groups and counterculture cults who constitute such a large part of Brown's constituency, further broadening the appeal of this strategy.
#3
They can vote for a Democrat, or they can vote for a Republican like the Governator, or Meg "Gee I REally LIKE Van Jones" Whitman... decisions, decisions, decisions...
#1
Farrakhan continued his praise of Obama Sunday, and said the nations first black president was manipulated into disavowing Farrakhan.
Supporters say Farrakhans words are often taken out of context.
For example:
Farrakhan spent most of the fiery nearly four-hour speech recounting a 1985 vision he had in Mexico. Farrakhan has often described how he believes he was invited aboard an unidentified flying object he calls the wheel where he said he heard the late Nation of Islam leader Elijah Muhammad speak to him.
If I was gonna have a vision, it wouldn't be of some 20th-century dude.
Posted by: Bobby ||
03/01/2010 5:50 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Put some money on back of us, he said. We can reform our people.
Wasn't it the Profit Mohammad himself - the PERFECT MAN according to Islam - who said the black man was good for nothing more than being a slave and has the heart of a donkey?
#8
In order to promote the general welfare of every US citizen, both black and white and everything else, I certainly hope he has trouble from the "White Right". Whatever the he!! that is.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
(Bloomberg) -- Gordon Brown is on course to lead a minority U.K. administration after this year's election, according to a survey giving the opposition Conservative Party its smallest lead over Labour in more than two years.
Jamie Dimon, chairman of JP Morgan Chase, has warned American investors should be more worried about the risk of default of the state of California than of Greece's current debt woes.
"The Big Enchilada!"
A battle between equals this is not.
Forbes magazine has completed a comprehensive look at "The Global Debt Bomb" and in the course of compiling the results found this very interesting tidbit:
Rep. Charles Rangel made it clear Saturday: He's running this year for a 21st term as Harlem's congressman.
Over the past few weeks, the world has learned quite enough about John Edwards -- from the lies he told in trying to cover up an adulterous affair to the compulsive vanity that left some people close to him questioning his judgment and even his grip on reality.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said Sunday she wants let House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., hold onto his gavel for now, despite his admonishment by the House ethics committee last week.
The dean of New York's congressional delegation and a man who may try to become a member of it crossed paths - and maybe swords - in Harlem Sunday.
"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says she has much in common with the Tea Party."
The grandson of Robert F. Kennedy has decided against running for the U.S. House from Massachusetts this year.
With less than two weeks before he must enter the race for governor, state Attorney General Jerry Brown told college-age Democrats on Saturday to stay tuned for news about his presumed bid.
