Wednesday, August 8, 2007
Potential Flaw Is Found in Design of Fallen Bridge
Potential Flaw Is Found in Design of Fallen Bridge - New York Times: "Investigators have found what may be a design flaw in the bridge that collapsed here a week ago, in the steel parts that connect girders, raising safety concerns for other bridges around the country, federal officials said today.... Crews were doing work on the deck of the Interstate 35W bridge when it gave way, hurling rush-hour traffic into the Mississippi River and killing at least five people.... Federal authorities indicated that one added stress on the gusset plates may have been the weight of construction equipment and nearly 100 tons of gravel on the bridge, where maintenance work was proceeding when the collapse occurred. A construction crew had removed part of the deck with 45-pound jack hammers, in preparation for replacing the 2-inch top layer, and that may also have altered the stresses on the bridge, some experts said."
Terror-nomics?
Steven D. Levitt* promotes terrorist ideas on his NY Times Blog, and asks for readers' help in coming up with more terrorist schemes... as a public service:
"I’d start by thinking about what really inspires fear. One thing that scares people is the thought that they could be a victim of an attack. With that in mind, I’d want to do something that everybody thinks might be directed at them, even if the individual probability of harm is very low. Humans tend to overestimate small probabilities, so the fear generated by an act of terrorism is greatly disproportionate to the actual risk. Also, I’d want to create the feeling that an army of terrorists exists, which I’d accomplish by pulling off multiple attacks at once, and then following them up with more shortly thereafter... I’m sure many readers have far better ideas. I would love to hear them. "
Freak, indeed.
*Of Freakonomics fame.
"I’d start by thinking about what really inspires fear. One thing that scares people is the thought that they could be a victim of an attack. With that in mind, I’d want to do something that everybody thinks might be directed at them, even if the individual probability of harm is very low. Humans tend to overestimate small probabilities, so the fear generated by an act of terrorism is greatly disproportionate to the actual risk. Also, I’d want to create the feeling that an army of terrorists exists, which I’d accomplish by pulling off multiple attacks at once, and then following them up with more shortly thereafter... I’m sure many readers have far better ideas. I would love to hear them. "
Freak, indeed.
*Of Freakonomics fame.
Stocks Rise as Risk Worries Fade
Today's Markets - WSJ.com: "The stock market prefers certainty, according to the old saw, and it thrived amid greater certainty on Wednesday, with the Federal Reserve's rate decision on the books and signs of steadiness appearing in the mortgage arena."
Winter Soldier Syndrome
RealClearPolitics - Articles - Winter Soldier Syndrome: "'The investigation is complete and the allegations from PVT Beauchamp are false,' Major Steven Lamb, a spokesman for Multi National Division-Baghdad, told USA Today. The New Republic is standing by Beauchamp's work. But Michael Goldfarb, online editor and blogger at The Weekly Standard who first challenged Beauchamp's writing, reported Monday that Beauchamp had 'signed a sworn statement admitting that all three articles he published in the New Republic were exaggerations and falsehoods -- fabrications containing only 'a smidgen of truth,' in the words of our source.'"
Apocalypse Fowl... Full Metal Racket... Now is the Winter of Our Discount Tent... "The lunch lady gets stronger while I get weaker." I can't wait for that movie.
Apocalypse Fowl... Full Metal Racket... Now is the Winter of Our Discount Tent... "The lunch lady gets stronger while I get weaker." I can't wait for that movie.
Tuesday, August 7, 2007
Bush Still Wields the Threat of Terrorism - New York Times
Bush Still Wields the Threat of Terrorism - New York Times: "In interviews, Democratic leaders and their aides acknowledged being outmaneuvered by the White House, which they accused of negotiating in bad faith, and portrayed the bill as a runaway train. Both sides agree that after a series of briefings by Michael McConnell, director of national intelligence, on potential threats to the nation and what he saw as crucial gaps in the surveillance law, they agreed to work together on a new set of provisions before the August recess."
A hint of more positive news
A hint of more positive news for the Bush admininstration - Gallup Guru - USATODAY.com:
"Now – in the data just about to be released from our weekend poll – Bush's approval rating has recovered slightly to 34%. That’s not a big jump, but it is the second consecutive poll in which the president’s numbers have been higher rather than lower.
Also, we are seeing a slight uptick in the percentage of Americans who say the “surge” in Iraq is working."
"Now – in the data just about to be released from our weekend poll – Bush's approval rating has recovered slightly to 34%. That’s not a big jump, but it is the second consecutive poll in which the president’s numbers have been higher rather than lower.
Also, we are seeing a slight uptick in the percentage of Americans who say the “surge” in Iraq is working."
Propaganda Redux
OpinionJournal - Featured Article:
"Take it from this old KGB hand: The left is abetting America's enemies with its intemperate attacks on President Bush....
I spent decades scrutinizing the U.S. from Europe, and I learned that international respect for America is directly proportional to America's own respect for its president."
"Take it from this old KGB hand: The left is abetting America's enemies with its intemperate attacks on President Bush....
I spent decades scrutinizing the U.S. from Europe, and I learned that international respect for America is directly proportional to America's own respect for its president."
Andrew C. McCarthy on FISA Courts on National Review Online
Andrew C. McCarthy on FISA Courts on National Review Online: "For nearly two years since the New York Times blew the NSA’s warrantless-surveillance program, the Left has transfigured itself into a whirling dervish of indignation over President Bush’s imperious trampling of “the rule of law.” The president’s constitutional authority is inviolable — it cannot be reduced by mere legislation. When Congress passes a statute, like FISA, that purports to reduce the president’s constitutional authority, it is Congress, not the president, that is trampling the rule of law. A president who ignores such a statute is not a law-breaker; he is a defender of the highest law."
Daily Kos: Sad and ridiculous
Daily Kos: Sad and ridiculous: "We didn't flinch from our position on the war. We held the line on social security, even as the Very Serious People told us it was irresponsible. We championed Dean when we were told it would kill the party. We championed Lamont when we were told it would cost us the Senate. We celebrated Nancy Pelosi when we were told we would be demonized as 'San Francisco liberals'. And we won in 2006." -- Markos Moulitsas, Daily Kos
Oh, boy. You might be laughing about this one 10 years from now... remember Michael Dukakis?
Oh, boy. You might be laughing about this one 10 years from now... remember Michael Dukakis?
Monday, August 6, 2007
Beauchamp Recants
The Weekly Standard: "Separately, we received this statement from Major Steven F. Lamb, the deputy Public Affairs Officer for Multi National Division-Baghdad:
An investigation has been completed and the allegations made by PVT Beauchamp were found to be false. His platoon and company were interviewed and no one could substantiate the claims.
According to the military source, Beauchamp's recantation was volunteered on the first day of the military's investigation. So as Beauchamp was in Iraq signing an affidavit denying the truth of his stories, the New Republic was publishing a statement from him on its website on July 26, in which Beauchamp said, 'I'm willing to stand by the entirety of my articles for the New Republic using my real name.'"
Looks like the Daily Kirk got it right earlier this week. Listen to Michael Yon and accept no imitations!
An investigation has been completed and the allegations made by PVT Beauchamp were found to be false. His platoon and company were interviewed and no one could substantiate the claims.
According to the military source, Beauchamp's recantation was volunteered on the first day of the military's investigation. So as Beauchamp was in Iraq signing an affidavit denying the truth of his stories, the New Republic was publishing a statement from him on its website on July 26, in which Beauchamp said, 'I'm willing to stand by the entirety of my articles for the New Republic using my real name.'"
Looks like the Daily Kirk got it right earlier this week. Listen to Michael Yon and accept no imitations!
Tons of Repaving Material Was on Bridge at Collapse
Tons of Repaving Material Was on Bridge at Collapse - New York Times: "The chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board, Mark V. Rosenker, said investigators had questioned employees of Progressive Contractors Inc., which was doing work on the bridge deck, regarding quantities of various materials, specific equipment they had put on the bridge, and where the materials and equipment were on the bridge. The weight and location will be entered into a computer program, Mr. Rosenker said, to calculate the stresses generated on each girder and other bridge components."
Progressive Contracting, Inc.??! I'll bet this story gets buried almost overnight if there is any implication that a group of Progressive Contractors contributed to the collapse of this bridge. This is stranger than fiction!
Progressive Contracting, Inc.??! I'll bet this story gets buried almost overnight if there is any implication that a group of Progressive Contractors contributed to the collapse of this bridge. This is stranger than fiction!
Sunday, August 5, 2007
Remember Worries About Global Cooling?
Remember Worries About Global Cooling? - Newsweek
" In April, 1975... NEWSWEEK published a small back-page article about a very different kind of disaster... the threat was: global cooling.... In fact, the story wasn't 'wrong' in the journalistic sense of 'inaccurate'.... the tools scientists have at their disposal now—vastly more data, incomparably faster computers and infinitely more sophisticated mathematical models—render any forecasts from 1975 as inoperative as the predictions being made around the same time about the inevitable triumph of communism."
This conclusion is as amusing as it is prescient. One can imagine the counterpart article in 2029 explaining how global warming didn't quite work out like they predicted, and how that doesn't make them 'wrong' about global climate. Newsweek's unabashed excuse making is as unapologetic as the weatherman who got the weekly forecast wrong. Until climatologists can tell us with certainty what next week holds, we should remain skeptical of what they tell us next decade, century, or millennium holds.
" In April, 1975... NEWSWEEK published a small back-page article about a very different kind of disaster... the threat was: global cooling.... In fact, the story wasn't 'wrong' in the journalistic sense of 'inaccurate'.... the tools scientists have at their disposal now—vastly more data, incomparably faster computers and infinitely more sophisticated mathematical models—render any forecasts from 1975 as inoperative as the predictions being made around the same time about the inevitable triumph of communism."
This conclusion is as amusing as it is prescient. One can imagine the counterpart article in 2029 explaining how global warming didn't quite work out like they predicted, and how that doesn't make them 'wrong' about global climate. Newsweek's unabashed excuse making is as unapologetic as the weatherman who got the weekly forecast wrong. Until climatologists can tell us with certainty what next week holds, we should remain skeptical of what they tell us next decade, century, or millennium holds.
The Dumbest Move the Dems Could Make
The Dumbest Move the Dems Could Make
"If any administration since President Richard M. Nixon's has committed high crimes and misdemeanors, surely it's this one; if lying about consensual sexual activity fit the bill, then surely lying about the reason for a war does, too. As Dave Lindorff and Barbara Olshansky argue in their indignant book 'The Case for Impeachment,' the bill of indictment goes far beyond Bush's grave lies about Iraq. There's also the arrest and detention without trial of U.S. citizens, the violation of international treaties such as the Geneva Conventions at the prisons at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and the 'blatant violation' of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and the Fourth Amendment 'by secretly authorizing secret warrantless spying on thousands of American citizens by the National Security Agency'.... Bush and Cheney -- and conservatism in general -- have wrecked our civic institutions and darkened our civic impulses. Nothing is beyond politicization... but impeachment is exactly the wrong step to take at exactly the wrong historical moment."
Wow. This opinion article is truly remarkable in both its fabrication and imagination.
1. The 'bill' for high crimes and misdemeanors committed by President Clinton was not simply consensual sexual activity. The President was impeached for perjury relating to an investigation of employee civil rights violation and for obstruction of justice in the employee civil rights investigation including "his corrupt efforts to influence the testimony of that employee" and other witnesses. These crimes resulted in a contempt of court citation and his suspension and ultimate resignation from the bar.
2. Thinking individuals should reject assertions of "grave lies about Iraq." No one has demonstrated proof of deception. To the contrary, the evidence speaks of a bipartisan polity that came to an almost unanimous conclusion about the pretexts for the war, including a regime in violation of the 1991 armistice and 14 UN resolutions including Resolution 1441. The fact of absent WMD in Iraq actually speaks to President Bush's innocence since any preconceived deception most assuredly would have included means to 'plant' evidence to cover the justification.
3. Complaints on Abu Ghraib ignore the fact that the US held accountable those responsible for the abuses there. These activities were the result of abuse and not the product of official policy.
4. Complaints about Gitmo ignore the fact that the International Red Cross has had unfettered access to the facility since the month the prison opened. The Red Cross, et al, objected to the pretense of detention and certain detention conditions based on their own interpretation of the Geneva Conventions--one that grants POW status to those the US considers unlawful combatants--an honest disagreement (and the fact the USA never ratified Protocol I of the conventions). Pres. Bush's interpretation is consistent with previous administrations including FDR's. The torture allegations came largely from former detainees, and these enemies are trained to make inflated and false charges upon release to weaken our morale.
5. The FISA abuse charges were the result of partisan politics--as evidenced by the recent modification of the FISA statute designed to overtly sanction the NSA eavesdropping program.
Finally, most of the civic turmoil and degradation has been the result of media hyperbole and partisanship. Much like the Reagan administration is remembered in an entirely different light 20 years later, the Bush administration will likely be remembered not for this list of loose and unsubstantiated charges but for its accomplishments. Impeachment would be a dumb move largely because it isn't necessary, warranted, or appropriate.
"If any administration since President Richard M. Nixon's has committed high crimes and misdemeanors, surely it's this one; if lying about consensual sexual activity fit the bill, then surely lying about the reason for a war does, too. As Dave Lindorff and Barbara Olshansky argue in their indignant book 'The Case for Impeachment,' the bill of indictment goes far beyond Bush's grave lies about Iraq. There's also the arrest and detention without trial of U.S. citizens, the violation of international treaties such as the Geneva Conventions at the prisons at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and the 'blatant violation' of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and the Fourth Amendment 'by secretly authorizing secret warrantless spying on thousands of American citizens by the National Security Agency'.... Bush and Cheney -- and conservatism in general -- have wrecked our civic institutions and darkened our civic impulses. Nothing is beyond politicization... but impeachment is exactly the wrong step to take at exactly the wrong historical moment."
Wow. This opinion article is truly remarkable in both its fabrication and imagination.
1. The 'bill' for high crimes and misdemeanors committed by President Clinton was not simply consensual sexual activity. The President was impeached for perjury relating to an investigation of employee civil rights violation and for obstruction of justice in the employee civil rights investigation including "his corrupt efforts to influence the testimony of that employee" and other witnesses. These crimes resulted in a contempt of court citation and his suspension and ultimate resignation from the bar.
2. Thinking individuals should reject assertions of "grave lies about Iraq." No one has demonstrated proof of deception. To the contrary, the evidence speaks of a bipartisan polity that came to an almost unanimous conclusion about the pretexts for the war, including a regime in violation of the 1991 armistice and 14 UN resolutions including Resolution 1441. The fact of absent WMD in Iraq actually speaks to President Bush's innocence since any preconceived deception most assuredly would have included means to 'plant' evidence to cover the justification.
3. Complaints on Abu Ghraib ignore the fact that the US held accountable those responsible for the abuses there. These activities were the result of abuse and not the product of official policy.
4. Complaints about Gitmo ignore the fact that the International Red Cross has had unfettered access to the facility since the month the prison opened. The Red Cross, et al, objected to the pretense of detention and certain detention conditions based on their own interpretation of the Geneva Conventions--one that grants POW status to those the US considers unlawful combatants--an honest disagreement (and the fact the USA never ratified Protocol I of the conventions). Pres. Bush's interpretation is consistent with previous administrations including FDR's. The torture allegations came largely from former detainees, and these enemies are trained to make inflated and false charges upon release to weaken our morale.
5. The FISA abuse charges were the result of partisan politics--as evidenced by the recent modification of the FISA statute designed to overtly sanction the NSA eavesdropping program.
Finally, most of the civic turmoil and degradation has been the result of media hyperbole and partisanship. Much like the Reagan administration is remembered in an entirely different light 20 years later, the Bush administration will likely be remembered not for this list of loose and unsubstantiated charges but for its accomplishments. Impeachment would be a dumb move largely because it isn't necessary, warranted, or appropriate.
Health Care
Health Care - New York Times:
"The major Democratic candidates are, by and large, proposing to build on this mixed system, shoring up the employer-based segment while expanding public programs for those who fall between the cracks. Some Democratic activists, in fact, are sorely disappointed that the major candidates once again stop short of a true national health insurance program."
Let's not confuse the issue. Certainly one makes valid arguments on the point of this being socialism in thin disguise. However, we should look to performance of services rather than ubiquity of coverage. Universal insurance coverage does not equal universal health care. We've seen the results of deregulation: Ma Bell in 1982, the airline industry in 1978, the rail industry and motor industry in 1980 all brought cheaper prices, better services, and more consumer choice. Government health care amounts to a regulated monopoly of the least efficient kind. That's why Canadians come to the US for urgent care needs and are desperately looking to privatize their ailing health care system. In socialized medicine more kids and poor families may have "coverage" on paper, but the services available to them will be worse at higher public cost. If you think health care is expensive now, just wait until it is free.
"The major Democratic candidates are, by and large, proposing to build on this mixed system, shoring up the employer-based segment while expanding public programs for those who fall between the cracks. Some Democratic activists, in fact, are sorely disappointed that the major candidates once again stop short of a true national health insurance program."
Let's not confuse the issue. Certainly one makes valid arguments on the point of this being socialism in thin disguise. However, we should look to performance of services rather than ubiquity of coverage. Universal insurance coverage does not equal universal health care. We've seen the results of deregulation: Ma Bell in 1982, the airline industry in 1978, the rail industry and motor industry in 1980 all brought cheaper prices, better services, and more consumer choice. Government health care amounts to a regulated monopoly of the least efficient kind. That's why Canadians come to the US for urgent care needs and are desperately looking to privatize their ailing health care system. In socialized medicine more kids and poor families may have "coverage" on paper, but the services available to them will be worse at higher public cost. If you think health care is expensive now, just wait until it is free.
How to Look at Iraq
How to Look at Iraq - Swampland - TIME:
Check out this idea:
"Anyone who says 'victory' is possible in Iraq is lying to you. Anyone who says, as Bill Richardson does, that we can and should pull all our forces out by the end of the year is also not telling the truth. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to limit the damage, as we leave, and leave carefully, intelligently, calibrating every step (which means no public timetables or end dates)."
Well, what do you know? In Joe Klein we have a defeatist who persists with the notion that 'leaving' is the best we can hope for. Such ideas never profited this nation. From Korea to Vietnam to the Cold War to the first Gulf War we see that half measures that 'limit damage' only prolong conflict and the loss of life. We live in a world governed by the violent use of force, and peace is a product of victory in the violent realm. Kenneth Waltz correctly refers to this as the anarchy of our world, and in this anarchy only force or the threat of force ensures peace. Either chaotic violence will reign, or the violence that brings liberty will reign. Our opponents bring disorder, mysticism, and darkness. We bring order, civilization, and the light of intellectual liberty. We should look at leaving only in the context of victory and nothing else. And that, Mr. Klein, is no lie. It is the hallmark of America throughout history.
Check out this idea:
"Anyone who says 'victory' is possible in Iraq is lying to you. Anyone who says, as Bill Richardson does, that we can and should pull all our forces out by the end of the year is also not telling the truth. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to limit the damage, as we leave, and leave carefully, intelligently, calibrating every step (which means no public timetables or end dates)."
Well, what do you know? In Joe Klein we have a defeatist who persists with the notion that 'leaving' is the best we can hope for. Such ideas never profited this nation. From Korea to Vietnam to the Cold War to the first Gulf War we see that half measures that 'limit damage' only prolong conflict and the loss of life. We live in a world governed by the violent use of force, and peace is a product of victory in the violent realm. Kenneth Waltz correctly refers to this as the anarchy of our world, and in this anarchy only force or the threat of force ensures peace. Either chaotic violence will reign, or the violence that brings liberty will reign. Our opponents bring disorder, mysticism, and darkness. We bring order, civilization, and the light of intellectual liberty. We should look at leaving only in the context of victory and nothing else. And that, Mr. Klein, is no lie. It is the hallmark of America throughout history.
The Turn: Defeatists in retreat.
"As the Wall Street Journal's James Taranto commented: 'Well, two cheers for the paper's diligence, but this also seems to be about as close as we're going to get to an admission of bias: an acknowledgment that those at the Times are flummoxed that the public is not responding the way they expect to all the bad news they've been reporting.' What's striking is that the Times was flummoxed. In the real world, the news from Iraq had been (relatively) good for a couple of months. General David Petraeus's military success had been followed with striking political achievements in Anbar province. At home, a mood of annoyance at the Bush administration's conduct of the war had started to yield to a realization that we were approaching a choice of paths on Iraq, and that the consequences of embracing defeat would be severe. But that's not the world the Times editors live in. In their world, this is a war that should never have been fought and that has long been irretrievably lost--and everyone should simply accept those settled facts."
Well said, well written.
Well said, well written.
Getting Iraq Wrong
"As a former denizen of Harvard, I’ve had to learn that a sense of reality doesn’t always flourish in elite institutions."
Michael Ignatieff then goes on to solidify this point with his own ongoing example of nonsense. Indeed, he 'gets Iraq wrong' today as he describes getting it wrong 5 years ago. I suggest that is everyone will just be patient and let the military do its job and the state department slouch towards doing its job, this will work out right. The Iraqi people are better off, we are better off, and our enemies are worse off in the long run if we keep chopping this wood. Remember the Barbary Pirates? If so, you probably only think of them in the context of an amusing ride at Disneyland. Such is the fate of Islamic despotic terror. If we continue to fight, this episode will end the same way.
Al Qaeda is guilty of monstrosities in Iraq - no matter what anyone says
From Michael Yon: "I, like everyone else, will have to wait for September's report from Gen. Petraeus before making more definitive judgments. But I know for certain that three things are different in Iraq now from any other time I've seen it.
1. Iraqis are uniting across sectarian lines to drive Al Qaeda in all its disguises out of Iraq, and they are empowered by the success they are having, each one creating a ripple effect of active citizenship.
2. The Iraqi Army is much more capable now than it was in 2005. It is not ready to go it alone, but if we keep working, that day will come.
3. Gen. Petraeus is running the show. Petraeus may well prove to be to counterinsurgency warfare what Patton was to tank battles with Rommel, or what Churchill was to the Nazis.
And yes, in case there is any room for question, Al Qaeda still is a serious problem in Iraq, one that can be defeated. Until we do, real and lasting security will elude both the Iraqis and us."
His is an opinion you can trust. Michael Yon is a sound source of news from the fight. Read his stuff and support him if you can.
House Passes Changes in Eavesdropping Program
"Despite the political risks, many Democrats argued they should stand firm against the initiative, saying it granted the administration far too much latitude to initiate surveillance without judicial review."
Of course, if Congress is serious about taking a stand against surveillance without judicial review, they could start by taking J. Edgar Hoover's name off of all federal buildings including FBI headquarters. He was notorious for domestic surveillance of just about any political figure. Robert Kennedy also approved FBI wiretapping of Martin Luther King, Jr., but Democrats don't talk about that much. Nor do they talk much about the ECHELON program that Democrat leaders, including presidents, have known of and utilized for years. But Dems publicly used low technology means against Rep. John Boehner (R) in the famous Rep. Jim McDermott (D) case. Americans should sleep soundly knowing that no one cares about their personal communications, unless you are a politician or are in contact with known members of AQ.
Of course, if Congress is serious about taking a stand against surveillance without judicial review, they could start by taking J. Edgar Hoover's name off of all federal buildings including FBI headquarters. He was notorious for domestic surveillance of just about any political figure. Robert Kennedy also approved FBI wiretapping of Martin Luther King, Jr., but Democrats don't talk about that much. Nor do they talk much about the ECHELON program that Democrat leaders, including presidents, have known of and utilized for years. But Dems publicly used low technology means against Rep. John Boehner (R) in the famous Rep. Jim McDermott (D) case. Americans should sleep soundly knowing that no one cares about their personal communications, unless you are a politician or are in contact with known members of AQ.
Beware of sociopaths in politics, experts warn
"Dr. Edgardo Juan Tolentino Jr., executive assistant of the National Mental Health Program of the Department of Health, cited one iconic sociopath who 'charmed and tantalized a whole society,' but on whose ultimate motive the world ended up in much misery."
Good advice.
Good advice.
House approves foreign wiretap bill
"The bill updates the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, known as FISA. It gives the government leeway to intercept, without warrants, communications between foreigners that are routed through equipment in United States, provided that 'foreign intelligence information' is at stake. Bush describes the effort as an anti-terrorist program, but the bill is not limited to terror suspects and could have wider applications, some lawmakers said. The government long has had substantial powers to intercept purely foreign communications that don't touch U.S. soil. If a U.S. resident becomes the chief target of surveillance, the government would have to obtain a warrant from the special FISA court."
The Senate approved this Friday, so the bill now goes to President Bush. I think this is a remarkably sound move that is long overdue. It also reveals that what we witnessed last year on this was largely Democrat hay-making in order to win congressional seats.
The Senate approved this Friday, so the bill now goes to President Bush. I think this is a remarkably sound move that is long overdue. It also reveals that what we witnessed last year on this was largely Democrat hay-making in order to win congressional seats.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)