You know, I had a disclaimer line that said I was posting it knowing at least one person wouldn't read it. Then decided to delete it because that's been pretty well covered and it seemed unnecessary for me to point it out, again. Obviously I was wrong.

We-ell I was only trying to be polite in telling you why I didn't answer your queries. It's OK if you mention me by name: Evelyn, don't read" "or you won't like this....or"E. don't waste your time" etc. I always look at the end of an article for the provenance before i waste my time. Give me credit....geeze...at least I read the topic.

Thank you. :-) at least I read the topic. Well, only maybe the topic name depending on the post. ;-)

Someone on this topic said that some states would welcome some extra money.... now here's one that could use it. Arnold Schwarzenegger to sell off San Quentin to ease budget crisis http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6289694.ece Prime real estate.Look at that view

Unfortunately, it's not a seller's market. I'd be surprised if they got that much for either, or even got viable bids.

....even got viable bids. I mean....How about the Feds for our alleged terrorists? I bet California would take $80M in a minute and would relish the jobs potential. You know...."Cells with a view"

How about the Feds for our alleged terrorists? Housing them there (and in the Supermax prison, noted in the piece above you said you won't read), was my first thought actually. Assuming they have the room.

My links are from mainstream papers:-D They house 5000 prisoners...600 on death row. Surely theres' room for 240. Other states don't want them. Not even Kansas when Kathleen Sibelius was governor...of course now that she's in the cabinet.......... Diane Feinsteing said Alcatraz was one of our "historical treasures" *rolling eyes.*

Why should the Federal govt buy another prison, when it already has its own. Like I said, use existing federally owned facilities.

Does anyone here really care if they bring any of those people to appropriately maximum security prisons in their states? If so, why? I don't care with regards to here, honestly. What makes the Gitmo prisoners any different than any other criminals in those places? Especially since we have terrorists in our prisons already. Including the first WTC bombers.

The thing is that as far as I know, none of the prisoners has actually been convicted of anything so presuming they are innocent until proven guilty, I don't think we can call them criminals. In fact, I think most of the prisoners have not even been charged with any crimes. Most have been held for 8 years without due process. We have a similar situation here in Canada with our "security certificates". Several individuals have been held in jail based on national security interests but they are not permitted to defend themselves against the accusations nor even see the evidence. There are no easy solutions to either situation but I feel personally diminished by my country's actions which fly in the face of everything democracy means to me.

(me) I don't think we can call them criminals oops .... I mean, I don't think I can call them criminals.

Hard to overrule that 90-6 vote in the Senate not to house those alleged terrorists in the states. Some of those guys are up for re-election in '10 Bagram anyone? We have prisoners there. Also how about twisting a few arms of their home countries to receive them back. BTW Yemen said they would take them. (Bet they would spring to stay in Gitmo)

Op-Ed Columnist When Did Cowboys Get Wimpy? By GAIL COLLINS Published: May 22, 2009 Out of all the problems we have run into in dealing with the giant hairball that is known as the Bush War on Terror, one of the weirdest is the reaction to President Obama�s plan to close down Guant�namo. In the rank of threats to public safety, putting the Guant�namo inmates in maximum-security prisons in the United States has got to come in way behind, say, making it easy for customers to purchase firearms at gun shows. But to hear the howls coming from Congress, you�d think the Obama administration was planning to house the prisoners in suburban preschools. �Terrorists. Coming soon to a neighborhood near you,� warned a Republican Web video, which mixed pictures of accused terrorists with road signs in states where the G.O.P. predicted they might be sent. In another production, the occasionally loyal opposition resurrected the infamous �Daisy� countdown ad to show a little girl picking petals off a flower while the president prepares to close Gitmo. �To bring the worst of the worst terrorists inside the United States would be cause for great danger and regret in the years to come,� snarled Dick Cheney in his �no middle ground� speech. Although really, for the sake of the national mental health, it might be better if we all just ignore the former vice president until he agrees to undergo therapy. Forget I ever mentioned it. Instead, consider the case of Hardin, Mont., a community of 3,400 people just down the road from the place where Custer made his Last Stand. Lately, things have not been going any better for Hardin than they did for the general. Unemployment is rife. �You go look at our downtown, there�s many closed businesses ... you�ll see drunks laying in the street. It�s not a pretty sight,� the head of the town�s economic development authority told National Public Radio. The town built a $27 million, 464-bed prison under the theory that other parts of the state would pay to have Hardin look after their problem residents. But it�s been empty since it was declared open for business nearly two years ago, and the construction loans are in default. So, with the town council�s enthusiastic support, Hardin volunteered to take the Guant�namo prisoners. It�s unlikely that the White House would have accepted the offer, but it was certainly an example of pluck and you�d think everyone would give Hardin three cheers. Instead, Montana�s Democratic senators went ballistic. �We�re not going to bring Al Qaeda to Big Sky Country � no way, not on my watch,� said Max Baucus. �If these prisoners need a new place, it�s not going to be anywhere near The Last Best Place,� said Jon Tester. This shows us two things: 1) Montana has given itself many nicknames. 2) Montanans are more easily frightened than Manhattanites. Think about it. New Yorkers live in the top terror target in the nation. This week four new would-be terrorists were arrested for plotting to blow up synagogues in the Bronx. On the same day, President Obama announced that the first Guant�namo prisoner to be tried in the United States would be coming to court in Lower Manhattan. Even though it appears the guys involved in the Bronx case were deeply, deeply inept, this is still not the kind of news package you want to hear. But nobody had a fit over it. �Bottom line is we have had terrorists housed in New York before,� said Senator Charles Schumer. New Yorkers aren�t the only ones who have learned to calmly resist both international terrorism and national hysteria. The small town of Florence, Colo., has a 490-bed high-security facility known as Supermax, which houses 33 terrorists, including Ramzi Yousef, who led the first World Trade Center bombing; the failed shoe-bomber Richard Reid; and Zacarias Moussaoui, convicted of conspiring in the Sept. 11 attacks. The local residents seem fine with it, possibly because they know the prisoners spend 23 hours a day in their cells, which are made of poured concrete and furnished with concrete tables and bunks. Nobody escapes from maximum-security prisons. But even if they did, who would you rather have on the lam in your neighborhood � a native of Afghanistan whose history suggests an affinity for jihad? Or a resident of your own state whose history suggests an affinity for breaking into people�s houses, tying them up and torturing them? The nation, as we all know, is divided into crowded states and empty states, and I was always under the impression that folks in the empty places were particularly brave and self-reliant. Those of us who live in the crowded parts have many good qualities, but we are not necessarily all of pioneer stock, given the critical importance we assign to restaurants that deliver at 2 in the morning. Who knew we were tougher than Montanans? http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/23/opinion/23collins.html?_r=1&ref=opinion

(Sandy) I don't think we can call them criminals. In fact, I think most of the prisoners have not even been charged with any crimes. Most have been held for 8 years without due process. That's quite true. Some of these people it turns out were just victims of bounty hunters and pissed off neighbors. And even the ones that did do something, do not deserve indefinite detention without due process, or a flawed process such as the military tribunals that were stopped by the Supreme Court in the end due to the Hamdan case because they, among other things, violated federal and international law. Bagram = Gitmo 2 (actually it was there before Gitmo if I'm not mistaken). It needs to go too. That's the amazing thing about it. It's no different, but didn't get the attention of Gitmo. No pics I guess. (Evelyn) Some of those guys are up for re-election in '10 Of course and nothing else matters. Apparently esp common sense on their or the public's parts. Well people are freaked out thanks to the wonderful Rep propaganda campaign (including dragging out that git, Cheney).

Cuba's prisons are full of political dissidents. Some of them were turned in by pissed of neighbors who coveted a property or money. I care more for those people than I do for the Gitmo prisoners who are there for a reason, whether they have been charged or not. Because they have not been charged, some politicians have been talking about releasing some of those prisoners to their family members in VA, where there is a big Muslim population. I don't want them here. Trouble is sure to follow. I also wish the world would consider South and Central America as much as they do Africa.

(Dorine) Does anyone here really care if they bring any of those people to appropriately maximum security prisons in their states? Nope. I checked and the only Federal prison in Illinois is at Marion, which used to be a supermax facility and was renovated and downgraded to medium security in 2006. Interestingly, it was built to replace Alcatraz and the worst of the worst were housed here, including convicted mobsters and spies. Now the Colorado facility is the only supermax in the country. By design, the higher security prisons have been built in the middle of Nowheresville, USA. Arguments for creating a detention center in any populated area are specious, inflammatory, irrational and a complete waste of everybody's time. BTW, love the NY Times op-ed piece. But to hear the howls coming from Congress, you�d think the Obama administration was planning to house the prisoners in suburban preschools. LOL! If you want to politicize the decision, just put them in a state that is has voted Republican and would continue to do so no matter what. Also how about twisting a few arms of their home countries to receive them back. So they can release them the next day? *scratching head*

the Gitmo prisoners who are there for a reason, whether they have been charged or not. What makes you so certain they're any different than the Cuban prisoners. Excellent example BTW, of wrongly imprisoned people.

In my Archie Bunker style: the Muslim prisoners in Gitmo are not political dissidents, were any of them living in Israel? I think not. Do they oppose the US? Yes. And I do believe they are there for a reason, whether they'd been charged or not.

My point was...political dissidents = wrongly accused.

(Me)Also how about twisting a few arms of their home countries to receive them back. (Karen)So they can release them the next day? *scratching head* scratch all you want , some people;-) consider them innocent, and want them released in Virginia to their families For the record: I want Gitmo closed (as did GWB). And I want it given to Fidel , so he can house his political dissents there. I am sure he would appreciate the good fortune; it's a staate-f the- art venue. Think that would make the ACLU happy???? (Karen)If you want to politicize the decision, just put them in a state that is has voted Republican and would continue to do so no matter what. LOL.Not-so secret agenda creeping out;-) Remember that some of those 90 votes were Dems too.

as did GWB Maybe he really did, but he had a funny way of showing it. He said that in June 2006. What did he/his administration do to work toward that goal since then? Obama's in, what, a few weeks and he's at least announcing it's going to close within a definite time period (and we'll see if that timeline stays). At least this administration is making an effort. What effort was made previously aside from lip service?

Dorine, I don't think your point can be used for the Muslims in Gitmo. (Evelyn), For the record: I want Gitmo closed (as did GWB). And I want it given to Fidel , so he can house his political dissents there. Please no. No more gifts for Fidel.

(Karen)If you want to politicize the decision, just put them in a state that is has voted Republican and would continue to do so no matter what. LOL.Not-so secret agenda creeping out;-) I said If. But I'm not. My position has always been put them in an appropriate and existing Federal facility. There is only one such place: the Colorado one. There's no reason to buy a new place, build a new place or lease a new place. Or put them in Wyoming. By census count, there isn't enough population to rate a congressional district, but constitutionally it has to have at least one representative. Cheney can guard them. I'd feel a whole lot more safe if he stood watch. ;-)

He's killed 2 birds with one stone....a Hispanic and a woman. And relatively young as well. AP sources: Obama picks Sotomayor for high court AP By BEN FELLER, Associated Press Writer 28 mins ago WASHINGTON � President Barack Obama tapped federal appeals judge Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court on Tuesday, officials said, making her the first Hispanic in history picked to wear the robes of a justice. If confirmed by the Senate, Sotomayor, 54, would succeed retiring Justice David Souter. Two officials described Obama's decision on condition of anonymity because no formal announcement had been made. Administration officials say Sotomayor would bring more judicial experience to the Supreme Court than any justice confirmed in the past 70 years. A formal announcement was expected at midmorning. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090526/ap_on_go_su_co/us_obama_supreme_court;_ylt=Al0d08ZPxwdDJLk7CDXBQ4Cs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTJudXE0c24xBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMDkwNTI2L3VzX29iYW1hX3N1cHJlbWVfY291cnQEY3BvcwMxBHBvcwMxBHNlYwN5bl90b3Bfc3RvcnkEc2xrA3Nvbmlhc290b21heQ--

But did she pay her taxes;-)

I don't know anything about her, but I like the choice.

Sonia is an historic choice! What an exciting selection not only for Hispanic women, but for anyone who raised themselves up from poverty and challenging life circumstances to excel at the highest levels. From a Bronx housing project to Princeton and Yale, and now the highest court, and she brings a wealth of judicial experience with her. A quintessentially American success story.

You won't get any hits from me....a Catholic, Newyorkican woman :-)))) And as my Senator Coburn said: "She deserves a fair and open hearing and a dignified confirmation".

"Newyorkican" This term puzzles me. I always thought it was "Newyorican" (New-Yo-Reecan). That's what I've heard people say here anyway. Maybe I misheard them all these years. Or it's not spelled as it sounds.

Pronounced with a silent "k",(Nuyurican) but spelled with it. (Leave the "yo" out of it...we're not from the 'hood;-) http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2009/05/67275855/1 Or at least that's how yahoo spelled it today too.

Nuyurican Ah yes, I've seen this.

Wonder if the people who run our Puerto Rican Day parade have already called her to invite her to be co-Grand Marshall for the parade in a couple of weeks. Don't remember who it is this year. Obama High Court Choice Poses Political �Peril� for Republicans By James Rowley and Kim Chipman May 27 (Bloomberg) -- By nominating Circuit Judge Sonia Sotomayor to be the first Hispanic justice on the U.S. Supreme Court, President Barack Obama all but dared Senate Republicans to risk alienating Latinos by trying to block her confirmation. Sotomayor, 54, whose upbringing by a single, Puerto Rican mother in New York City public housing is the basis of what Democrat Obama called �an inspiring life�s journey,� may be a difficult political target for Republicans. After losing the 2008 elections, the party is seeking to appeal to women and to Hispanics, the fastest-growing segment of the U.S. electorate. Senator Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat designated by the White House to spearhead the confirmation effort, said the nomination will be �more a test of the Republican Party� than of Sotomayor. Republicans �oppose her at their peril,� he said. �The risk here is not just that they could be seen as anti-Latino or anti-woman, but just more anti, the party of no,� said pollster Michael Dimock, associate director of the Washington-based Pew Research Center. Hispanics make up potent voting blocs in such states as Florida, California, Texas and New York. Support among Hispanic voters enabled Obama to carry North Carolina, Nevada, Colorado and New Mexico in the presidential election, when he garnered 65 percent of the Latino vote. [cont'd....] http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=antcPk557oGw&refer=home

Media hype, and inflamatory rhetoric from the infamous Charles Shumer ...what was your word yesterday, Dorine...a git? She's going to get confirmed; she won't be "Borked" And I will say that the Republicans will afford her more courtesy than some of the Democrats to the first Italian-American that was nominated to the Supreme Court. And to his family...that was a circus! Moreover.. It didn't seem to alienate the Italian -Americans vote. Though some of my friends of Italian heritage were offended I maintain that every president has the right to appoint the nominee of his choice with the "advice and consent of the Senate". But that doesn't mean that the opposition party cannot conduct an appropriate,fair, dignified hearing . Beisdes it was the Dems in 2003 that derailed the nomination of Judge Miguel Estrada to the US Court of appeal by Pres Bush. http://spectator.org/blog/2009/05/26/sotomayors-radical-legal-group Didn't hurt tham then. FYI the Republican Hispanic National Assembly sent an email yesterday heralding her accomplishments and congratulating her.

GOP carrying out strategy to oppose Sotomayor Posted 1d 7h ago WASHINGTON (AP) � Republican Senate leaders won't call U.S. Supreme Court nomineeSonia Sotomayor a racist. But they're not opposing Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich doing so to rile up the out-of-power party. This is part of the strategy being cobbled together by Republican lawmakers and officials to oppose Sotomayor, an appeals court judge and the first Hispanic nominated to the Supreme Court. While some of Sotomayor's past comments could pose a challenge for President Obama's nominee, elected leaders are navigating a tricky question of how to object without alienating the nation's fast-growing � and increasingly politically active � Hispanic population. For now, it appears Republican lawmakers will urge respect. But they won't prevent talk-show host Limbaugh from calling Sotomayor a "racist" or former House Speaker Gingrich from saying she's a "Latina woman racist." The two-sided strategy would allow Limbaugh and Gingrich � who hold tremendous sway among the Republican faithful � to do the political attacks while those facing election can avoid potential backlash if they derail a historic nomination. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/judicial/2009-06-01-republicans-sotomayor_N.htm?csp=34

Classy. Tuesday, June 02, 2009 Group friendly to GOP equates Sotomayor with Klan by John Aravosis (DC) on 6/02/2009 12:59:00 PM The Council of Conservative Citizens, a southern group that has been wooed by former GOP Senate leader Trent Lott and current GOP presidential hopeful Haley Barbour, has a doctored photo on its Web site of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor in KKK garb. The CCC also calls Sotomayor "whitey hating." The ADL says that the CCC is an "extremist group" that is "squarely within Southern racist traditions." The Southern Poverty Law Center calls the CCC "brazenly racist." More from SPLC on the CCC: "[A] hate group that routinely denigrated blacks as "genetically inferior," complained about "Jewish power brokers," called homosexuals "perverted sodomites," accused immigrants of turning America into a "slimy brown mass of glop," and named Lester Maddox, the baseball bat-wielding, arch-segregationist former governor of Georgia, 'Patriot of the Century.'" The ADL and the SPLC both note that former GOP chairman, and current GOP presidential hopeful, Haley Barbour spoke to a CCC gathering after the scandal that ensued when Trent Lott's associations with the group were revealed (in other words, Barber knew full well what the group was about and he still wooed them). Someone needs to ask Republican party chair Michael Steele, who is himself black, what he thinks of the Council of Conservative Citizens, of Haley Barbour wooing them, and of the CCC comparing Sotomayor to the Klan. http://www.americablog.com/2009/06/group-friendly-to-gop-equates-sotomayor.html

Classy. No. Rubbish! Moreover part of WH spin. There are radicals (ie Move on.org types) in all parties. (They who took a full page ad in the NYT calling General Betrayous ) Moderates (in either party;-)don't pay attention to such.

(Evelyn) There are radicals (ie Move on.org types) in all parties. Really?! 8-O Moreover part of WH spin. Um....wha? 'Splain, please.

In keeping with the new WH buzz term : "unfortunate choice of words";-) From THE ATLANTIC Gingrich Explain-ogizes For "Racist" Comment http://politics.theatlantic.com/2009/06/gingrich_explain-ogizes_for_racist_comment.php However, I know what he and Ms Sotomayor meant by their remarks. Neither deserved the inflamatory responses by the media....and don't get me started about those far-out blogs and politico groups. I could quote remarks from such opinioniated hot-heads as Olberman, Maddow...and to say the least, that loon ex Pres Carter. But I consider it an insult to your intelligence to post such. They do not represent the Democratic Party. A waste of my time and yours. Don't fall into that camp. You're better than that.

I'll thank you for saying I'm better than that. Problem is, I'm not sure what "that" is? I'm not sure what you're upset about, exactly. I don't understand... don't get me started about those far-out blogs and politico groups. About what exactly? Fringe right wing groups that doctor images of SCOTUS candidates to wear KKK gear? The original BTW... http://cofcc.org/?p=5135 Sure there are fringe groups on either side. I could quote remarks from such opinioniated hot-heads as Olberman, Maddow...and to say the least, that loon ex Pres Carter. I don't agree with them all the time, esp Olberman when he gets really worked up. He can get a little out of control which does no one any good. Maddow is generally quite level headed. I have no opinion really on Carter. Are you saying I should not point out that Gingrich and Limbaugh are calling her racist, which is quite inflammatory? My only point in any of this is to show the contrast between the reports of Congress members open statements of conciliation vs opposition out there that is less than conciliatory (and may or may not be the voice of the Congressional opposition). Not like it wouldn't make sense. I was making no judgements or not intending to sound judgemental (well, except for the "Classy" comment on that pic and rightly so IMO. That would be ridiculously tacky from either side). I don't always agree with everything I post, but put it out there to be informative, on either side. Are you saying there's a WH media conspiracy about something? I'm not saying there's not (it's not uncommon), I just don't understand what it would be about.

Is that all they've got on her? Calling her a racist? LOL!

Exactly. Still, it's rude.

Not sure how I ran across this, but thought it was interesting. A bit long, but stick with it. http://onthemedia.org/transcripts/2009/05/29/01

Rubbish! I've never received a fundraising request based on any inflamatory remark. And I wouldn't ,even if I did receive such. Gingrich has apologized for the remark ,and probably in the hearings she will explain the inference of her comments. On The Jim Lehrer News Hour last night they announced that in the Pew Poll t she has almost the same favorable rating as Sam Alito had at this stage; 49% vs 52% for the latter. He didn't exactly *sail* through, and neither will she, but she'll make it But remember what the Dems put the Italian American nominee through in the process; it was not their finest hour. And for someone who didn't vote for either Roberts or Alito on the basis of ideology , Pres Obama, for all his charm ,has some nerve insisting that she be confirmed rapidly.

I've never received a fundraising request based on any inflamatory remark. I don't think they just come out and ask for it like that (well, I suppose some do), but as it says they bank on people supporting them with $$ through donations for a group that espouses a particular viewpoint/ideology (racist or otherwise), the pundits who sell their books, give Q&A's, donate to like-minded politicians, buy magazines and newspapers that espouse the view that person favors, etc. And you wouldn't give, but there's plenty who would and have. I thought she had a higher favorable rating than that, but I hadn't been paying attention. Actually, I don't remember what Alito went through at all (when there's a Polish or Scottish candidate I'll perk up and pay attention more ;-)). Whatever the assuming somewhat minor attention I paid to his process is long forgotten. I don't even remember 98% of the details of the Thomas hearings and I did follow that quite a bit. By August recess doesn't seem *that* rapid.

hot-heads as Olberman, Maddow I don't think I've ever heard anyone ever refer to Maddow as a hot-head, except maybe by someone who has never watched/heard her. Pres Obama, for all his charm ,has some nerve insisting that she be confirmed rapidly. I believe that request is de rigeur.

How were Italian Americans insulted by the Alito hearings? What did the Dems "put him through" that other nominees didn't face?

From today's WASHINGTON POST David Broder: "Based on the Obama precedent, the White House can hardly complain if Republicans push beyond the question of Sotomayor's qualifications and examine her values -- and her biases. Someday, the Senate may again be satisfied to examine only professional credentials, recognizing the uncertain dynamics of a nine-person bench. But while the Bork and Obama precedents live, that is not likely. " http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/03/AR2009060303237.html

the White House can hardly complain if Republicans push beyond the question of Sotomayor's qualifications and examine her values -- and her biases. I don't believe anyone here has said or implied that examining all that should not be done. It's the extreme rhetoric that is unnecessary and uncalled for. Also, Obama was on target with his (5%) reservations about Roberts as his voting record while on the SCOTUS has attested to.

I'm sorry I can't answer everyone's questions/comments online. There's only one of me and three of you, LOL. I just don't have the time to devote to writing lost posts.(or read them;-) But you all have my phone #, so call me some evening . I can talk faster:-)

Gosh, it took me all of two seconds to Google this Alito thing, and the culprit was Chris Matthews, who misrepresented a document and injected the whole Italian-American aspect to it. Read the whole thing: http://mediamatters.org/research/200511010009 Love Howard Dean's line near the end: "All I'm trying to say is, you know, this guy is not the best prosecutor since sliced bread." Frankly, after the Harriet Meirs stunt the WH pulled, who wouldn't go after any subsequent candidates.

(Karen) after the Harriet Meirs stunt That was insulting to the institution of the SC as well as the fellow justices I thought.

That was insulting to women. It was a stunt, so that the WH could say it had tried to nominate a woman to replace Sandra Day O'Connor but the Senate wouldn't have it. Then the WH could go ahead and nominate whomever it really wanted, knowing that the Senate wasn't going to place itself in the bad guy role by continuing to raise a fury over another candidate.

I can't imagine anybody not seeing through the Meir play.

I don't read Media Matter, sorry. It's the hearings you want to find...not Media Matter. LOL about your perception of Harriet Meirs nom.*shaking head* you always come back to GWB. So transparent . And Howard Dean...another loon. FYI her nomintation was not popular with the Conservatives and it was *they* who asked for her nomination to be cancelled.

Because she couldn't have been less qualified and everyone knew it. They'd have been laughingstocks to take that nomination seriously.

Howard Dean was speaking in his capacity as chairman of the DNC. The uproar about Harriet Meirs was unanimous. Like I said it was a stunt. "Oh, we tried to nominate a woman, but who we wanted wasn't good enough." *sniff sniff* Two sseconds later, they put up their real nominee. Talk about being transparent.

I don't read Media Matter, sorry. But Media Matters confirms that this was a Chris Matthews problem, not a problem with anything that Democratic elected officials did or said. If you don't read MM, fine, but maybe you can link to an acceptable source that supports the notion that his heritage was denigrated. It's the hearings you want to find...not Media Matter. I have found the hearings transcript simply by googling "Alito hearings transcript." Where in the transcript is Alito's heritage denigrated?

Howard Dean was speaking in his capacity as chairman of the DNC. Worse! I never considered him to be representative of the party. I don't think the new administration likes him either. Witness his conspicuous absence at the innauguration & other festivites.Don't blame them. Your'e new leader is not shrill....ahem*sane*

I guess this is what you're referring to. In some other quick reading, there's also some evidence that it wasn't just Raum, but the DLC (Democratic Leadership Council) who were against Dean as well. The Clintons (and I believe Raum) are strong members in that group. IIRC, the DLC and DNC had been competing for power over the Dem party. Or something like that. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/democratic-party/the-decline-of-dean.html

I'm not talking about now, but then, during the Alito confirmation hearings. It would be appropriate for him to speak on behalf of the party at that time, just as Michael Steele now speaks for the Big-Tent-of-Welcome-to-the-Fold Republicans.

Then....*Now...* In the party ...*Out* of the party... He's a loser. I like Michael Steele...he's gentlemanly-like....not shrill. Got off to a shaky start...but he's doing OK. Loved the repartee at the WH dinner(they're friends, BTW)

I liked the President's speech. Looks like we're hug-hug/ kiss-kiss with Muslims. "Keep your friends close, but keep......" Wonder where he stayed. I stayed at the Mena House an Oberoi hotel next to the Pyramid at Giza. Fabulous.

(Evelyn) He's a loser. Um, Obama won using his strategy. That doesn't look or sound like a loser to me. Steele's a boob, but I actually like him. He's not really so much one of them and it shows in what he says. His true feelings keep popping through in his attempts to tow the party line. At the same time he's an opportunist. Will say anything to keep his top dog status.

His true feelings keep popping through in his attempts to tow the party line. some people think that is like trying to find middle ground; instead of ramming through with no exceptions. Ok by me. At the same time he's an opportunist Carpe diem/ OK by me. But I like Tim Kane too. I'm so easy to get along with:-)))))))

some people think that is like trying to find middle ground; He very well may be, and that's ok with me, but not ok so much with the people (in power and further on the right) he speaks for.

BTW, I'm guessing you're still poring through those Alito transcripts looking for the Italian-American bashing by the Dems in the hearings. :-)

LOL. Just the bashing of SA who happened to be an IA. And then there's the lynching of Clarence Thomas....... But you wouldn't remember that.....er, too young;-)

But you wouldn't remember that.....er, too young;-) Not even 20 yrs ago? LOL, I'm not *that* young!... even though I may look it. ;-D (In my dreams :-)).

I think this might be more appropriate here... Has anyone seen that movie, Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism? The documentary about Fox News. I finally got around to seeing it. OMG, was that painful (yet somewhat fascinating) to watch. Matter of fact, I couldn't watch it all at one sitting. Took me 3 times. Part of it I think was because Fox News shows are so shrill and to have tons of clips all concentrated in one 90 min film (broken up by moments of commentary) was just sensory overload. Plus, I think being reminded of some of the BS they spewed was quite disheartening as well. I'm of course well aware of their style and tactics, but to see it all presented concentrated at once was just too much. That being said, I did at one time watch Brit Hume's show on Sunday and during the week for quite a while, and at times Hannity and O'Reilly's shows, just to see what they had to say. (Also listened to Limbaughs show years ago for a while). And last thing....that Hannity and O'Reilly are total asses, but gotta give 'em credit, they're damn good at what they do (deceiving the public -including flat out lying - and distorting information).

Anybody doing a documentary on MSNBC? I'd have to bring a barf-bag;-) I want to see the doc on VALENTINO; THE LAST EMPEROR A documentary portrait about the legendary fashion designer Valentino Garavani Depicts the behind-the scene of the great fashion house. Was just thinking...I know why people don't want to post here. No one has to time to document resource material for anything they say. Really. I blow you all away, but not everyone wants to be that rude;-))))LOL

Wow! I'm not sure anyone has had that high opinion of themselves since Arami.

(Evelyn) I'd have to bring a barf-bag;-) I'll lend you the one I used. ;-) No one has to time to document resource material for anything they say. Well, as Karen and Mari (and myself) have shown just this week, it takes mere seconds to minutes to Google virtually any information you want. Please! Blow us away! :-D It's not being rude. It's called debating. MSNBC was brought up in clips and an interview from....their CEO or someone like that. I forget now. Plus, MSNBC isn't even remotely as influential (for promoting an agenda and ignorance if nothing else) as Fox has been. That's one of the points brought up in it. Fox was so successful at getting ratings that other outlets, including MSNBC have made steps to copy it in various ways, unfortunately. I mention the Valentino one on Q&E. I only mentioned Outfoxed here because of it's obvious political connections.

No one has to time to document resource material for anything they say. Because we're all so busy poring through all the personal and professional minutiae of Colin's life. ;-)

LOL. Which is a lot more fun. Though, I'm not doing much "poring" these days. Well, as Karen and Mari (and myself) have shown just this week, it takes mere seconds to minutes to Google virtually any information you want. But, but....I'm not as talented as you, Karen and Mari...you know that. I'm just honored to be in your company;-) Still, I don't get no credit around here for trying. evelyn, *the poor Newyorkican on Drool*

Still, I don't get no credit around here for trying. *cough, cough!* I think you need to rethink that statement (and perhaps the length of your sideburns should you have any? ;-))

LOL...do stray hairs on chinny -chin-chin count;-) Hey lookee, lookee....I might have to look at the ole boy after awl http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090605/ap_on_en_tv/us_tv_colbert_in_iraq

I guess this is the aforementioned Steele trying to work the middle ground. *cough* ;-)) Steele On Sotomayor: �God Help You If You�re A White Male Coming Before Her Bench� Last week, while guest-hosting Bill Bennett�s radio show, RNC Chairman Michael Steele urged Republicans to stop �slammin� and rammin�� Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor with personal attacks. Instead, Steele argued that conservatives should �move on to the substance of the conversation about what this woman believes, why she believes it.� But just one week later, while hosting the same show, Steele couldn�t help but paint Sotomayor as a racist. �God help you if you�re a white male coming before her bench,� declared Steele before agreeing with a caller who who wanted the GOP to raise questions about her �character�: http://thinkprogress.org/2009/06/05/steele-sotomayor-white-male/ And from last week: �I�m excited that a Hispanic woman is in this position,� Steele said. He added that instead of �slammin� and rammin�� on Sotomayor, Republicans should �acknowledge� the �historic aspect� of the pick and make a �cogent, articulate argument� against her for purely substantive reasons. Steele warned that because of the attacks, �we get painted as a party that�s against the first Hispanic woman� picked for the Supreme Court. �We don�t need to play this the way the Democrats have played it in the past,� Steele said, adding that Republicans can�t do this because they don�t have the �liberal media� on their side, the way Dems did. Said Steele: �MSNBC will rip everything we have to say up into shreds.� Steele didn�t mention Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich, the two leading proponents of the racially-loaded attacks on Sotomayor. It�s a reminder of Steele�s predicament: He knows how badly these attacks are damaging the party and how neatly they play into the hands of Dems, but he can�t call out the leading figures launching those attacks, because that risks infuriating the base and feeding the meme that the GOP is hopelessly divided. [Ed note - what did I tell ya] http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/republican-national-committee/steele-gop-needs-to-stop-slammin-and-rammin-on-sotomayor/

Oh and btw, Evelyn, the reason I find time to get info as backup.....because I google....and I read blogs, who do the work of aggregating the news and information for me from various mainstream and other sources. Why should I do all the work of finding stuff when they'll do it for me?!

Hey, it's Friday night, Dorine.... Time to play. Let's take the weekend off.... Anybody find what Michelle is wearing in Paris? I didn't even know she was on the trip. Didn't see her at Dresden this morning. Hill looked good at the mosque yesterday, though , in Cairo.

The weather here is too crappy to play anywhere but here.

Evelyn thought Obama had nerve asking for a SCOTUS confirmation by August, which seems plenty of time for something like that to me. But I think his more highly ambitious agenda of getting a health care reform bill on his desk by Oct 1 is a lot more than nervy. I really don't agree with it it yet, esp seeing even so far how things are playing out. This column gives a time time for various reform related issues til then. EXCLUSIVE: The Finance Committee's Health Care Timeline I was given an internal Finance Committee memo today that offers the clearest look yet on the Congress's timetable for health-care reform. Staffers in various Senate offices affirmed that the dates sync with the schedule they've been given. The document, as you might expect, has the most information on the Finance Committee's efforts, but it outlines the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee's schedule, the legislation being built in the House, and Congress's overall goal: A bill on the president's desk by Oct. 1. The Finance Committee: According to the memo, Finance will meet next week to discuss the issues where it sees an emergent consensus. These include delivery system and insurance market reforms -- "80-90% of the bill," the memo says. The author also outlines the "3 major sticking points": Public plan, employer pay or play, and financing. [cont'd] http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2009/06/exclusive_the_finance_committe_1.html

To quote Mark Darcy, "This really is the most incredible shit." Gingrich: Americans �surrounded by paganism.� bidenfire On Friday, Newt Gingrich, Mike Huckabee, and Oliver North visited Rock Church in Hampton Roads, Virginia to give a three-hour long lecture on �Rediscovering God in America.� The speakers warned the audience about the �continuing availability of abortion, the spread of gay rights, and attempts to remove religion from American public life and school history books.� The Virginia-Pilot reported that Gingrich argued that, while Christianity is the foundation of American citizenship, Americans are experiencing a period where they are being �surrounded by paganism�: GINGRICH: I am not a citizen of the world. I am a citizen of the United States because only in the United States does citizenship start with our creator. [...] I think this is one of the most critical moments in American history. We are living in a period where we are surrounded by paganism. Huckabee also equated America�s victory against the British in the Revolutionary War with the right-wing�s success in the Proposition 8 fight in California as being miracles �from God�s hand.� http://thinkprogress.org/2009/06/06/gingrich-paganism/ http://hamptonroads.com/2009/06/huckabee-gingrich-urge-political-engagement-va-beach

(Karen)Evelyn thought Obama had nerve asking for a SCOTUS confirmation by August,... *scratching head* Yeah? Did I say that? I remember saying he had a nerve asking everyone to vote for Sotomayor since he didn't vote for either Ailto or Roberts. I didn't think I put a timetable on it...makes no diff to me. But Dorine, your "incredible shit" is somebody else's belief. What's wrong with people voicing their opinions of the current culture? It's OK...no "skin off your nose" on that one.

FLOTUS in Normany... Dress by Michael Kors, coat by Narciso Rodriquez, metallic Jimmy Choo shoes with lantern heels, Givenchy belt. How clever to add the French touch. Question to our resident fashionista: Moon, what are lantern heels I love this stuff.:-))))

LOL, Evelyn. Just got your SOS. 'Lantern' is the name Jimmy Choo uses for the shoe, maybe because the heel reflexes like an outdoor lantern, go figure: Here it is. Very nice.

You always come through with style, Moon. Thanks. I like her taste in clothes and shoes. Though I'd never wear a striped tee shirt ($10 on sale @The Gap), and flower sweater; she can pull it off. Nancy Reagan looking v. fragile. They were so sweet to her at the unveiling of RR statue at the Rotunda. I follow all this stuff on C-Span.

(Evelyn) I didn't think I put a timetable on it.. Well, you said... Pres Obama, for all his charm ,has some nerve insisting that she be confirmed rapidly. He asked she be confirmed by the August recess, which you equated to rapidly by your statement IMO. Christianity is the foundation of American citizenship, Uh, since when is religion of any kind in my country a foundation, or anything at all, of citizenship??? Since when does religion have any place per se in history books? And where is it not being included and where does he feel it should be? If it's relevant, fine, if it's not relevant to the events, it shouldn't be in there. Plus I find his problem with paganism rich coming from the Christian hypocrite. I have some other problems with his statements and inferences and other things of this ilk in general, but I'll leave it here. As someone in the comments noted, how is Christianity lacking in America when someone's falling over a church everytime they turn around in not a small number of places. I have 2 churches and 3 synagogues within a literal 6 block radius. That's a lot I realize, but this country doesn't lack churches IMO.

Glad your're keeping track of what i say...LOL. Thanks. I take it back, I don't care. I not going to defend Newt or his opinions. I don't care. But why is he a hypocrite? Married 2/3 times? So? Lighten-up, Dorine;-)

Aw, I think too many people being a bit too light is partially how we're in the state we're in today. :-) But as you request: Stephen Colbert shaves head for US troops in Iraq AP By KIM GAMEL, Associated Press Writer 1 hr 7 mins ago BAGHDAD � It's official. Stephen Colbert has declared victory in the war in Iraq. But the top U.S. commander in the country says not so fast. Colbert, wearing a camouflage suit and tie, brought "The Colbert Report" � Comedy Central's political satire in which he plays a conservative TV pundit � to hundreds of U.S. troops at Camp Victory, the U.S. military headquarters on the western edge of Baghdad. He drew rousing applause from the uniformed audience when he poked fun at the fact that many of them have been deployed to Iraq multiple times and could end up in Afghanistan as soon as the U.S. effort there accelerates. "It must be nice here in Iraq because I understand some of you keep coming back again and again," he said during the taping of the first show on Sunday. "You've earned so many frequent flyer miles, you've earned a free ticket to Afghanistan." But the loudest roars came when his first guest, Gen. Ray Odierno, accepted a videotaped order from President Barack Obama to shave Colbert's head. The towering, bald general started the job with an electric razor, although a stylist finished it off. The back-and-forth was humorous, but it took on serious undertones as Colbert sought to cast a spotlight on the declining attention paid to the 6-year-old war in Iraq. Colbert, who traveled to Iraq from Kuwait on Friday on board a military transport plane, has said he was spurred to make the trip when he noticed economic news coverage eclipsing reports from Baghdad. The four shows, which were being taped in the domed marble hall at Saddam Hussein's former Al Faw Palace, will air Monday through Thursday next week at 11:30 p.m. EDT. Claiming the war must be over because nobody's talking about it anymore, Colbert invoked the power of cable television to "officially declare we won the Iraq war." He offered a list of successes and commentary to bolster his point. They included finding weapons of mass destruction, which was deemed "easier than we thought," and telling the troops that President Barack Obama should deploy them to the struggling General Motors. However, his first guest, Odierno, disagreed the war has ended. "We're not quite ready to declare victory," he said. "Things are moving forward but again, it's about bringing long-term stability." Colbert, who sat at a desk propped up by sandbags painted to simulate an American flag, responded by asking Odierno if he can bring long-term stability to the United States when he's done in Iraq. He also joked about the economic crisis, congratulating a soldier in the audience who recently got his college degree while serving in Iraq for being the lone 2009 graduate with a job. Colbert has promoted the trip for weeks but because the military urged caution, he only trumpeted a vague trip to "the Persian Gulf." He showed a clip claiming he himself didn't know his destination until he got off the plane and somebody threw a shoe at him. That was a reference to a December news conference at which an Iraqi journalist threw a shoe at then-President George W. Bush. He also made fun of himself with a previously taped skit that showed him arriving at Fort Jackson, South Carolina, in a stretch limousine for a "the full 10 hours" of basic training, which included him struggling to do push-ups and sit-ups. Odierno later told him he had too much hair to be a soldier, prompting the crewcut. "Definitely the highlight was seeing him sacrifice his hair," said Spc. Ryan MacLeod, 35, of Greenville, South Carolina. Former Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain also made a surprise appearance in a videoclip in which he thanked the troops for their service and reminded them to clean their muskets. Celebrities have frequently traveled to Iraq to entertain the troops. But the series of half-hour shows � dubbed "Operation Iraqi Stephen: Going Commando" � mark the first time anyone has broadcast a taped show from Iraq from a tour intended to entertain U.S. troops. USO senior official John Hanson said the production faced a major setback when a sandstorm grounded the crew on Saturday, forcing it to cancel plans for an outing. Both the character Colbert (silent "t") and the real Colbert (pronounced "t"), a Catholic family man, are ardent supporters of the troops. He has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for the Yellow Ribbon Fund (a charity that assists injured service members and their families), and he's a board member of DonorsChoose.org, which is raising money for the education of children of parents in the military. The trip came about when former Assistant Secretary of Defense Bing West suggested it after an interview last July on "The Colbert Report." The show sent about 30 production workers, about a third of the show's regular staff, to Iraq. Troops in the audience said they enjoyed Colbert's equal opportunity humor. "I especially appreciate the fact that he could make fun of both sides and you'd learn something and you'd laugh," said Chaplain Lt. Col. Barbara Sherer, 52, from Springfield, Missouri. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090608/ap_on_en_tv/ml_tv_colbert_in_iraq

Atta girl! thank you. You must have read my mind, I was going to ask those of you who watch Colbert to tell me when his Iraq show was on...or as he says my "Bob-Hopeing trip"

I think he's on all this week, or Mon-Thurs, not sure if he's on Fridays.

Colbert week to watch. Conan as usual is awful. I miss Leno. Now, great news on the EU front! The right has won in all the EU countries which had elections this past weekend. The push to the right has come about because Europeans are not happy with all the illegals from Muslims countries coming through Africa.

Always the classy lady... Laura Bush Endorses Sotomayor http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rLWquRy4GY&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Ebreitbart%2Etv%2F%3Fp%3D356083&feature=player_embedded

(Moon)Now, great news on the EU front! The right has won in all the EU countries which had elections this past weekend. Great news indeed. Clean sweep! LOL, while the US moves to the left. "Some right-leaning parties said the results vindicated their reluctance to spend more on company bailouts and fiscal stimulus to combat the global echttp://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090608/ap_on_re_eu/european_electionsonomic crisis." And they don't even have GM! Silvio must be v. happy. Even Spain! Is Zapatero out?..I hope.

No, neither Jon Stewart or Stephen Colbert has programs on Fridays, except during the conventions, when it went Tues-Friday, as I recall. Anyway, Stephen was doing his "Where in the Gulf" thing for months, where he'd spin a wheel and you'd get a little tidbit about some country. (Moon) Conan as usual is awful. I miss Leno. So true. I watched the first show and that was it. Nothing to tempt me. Thought I'd put the link up here, as this is really funny. I received an audio version of this via email. Click on #37, the Homicide Phone Call. Evidently this guy loves to put on telemarketers. It is brilliant. http://www.tommabe.com/videos.php Dumbass Parking isn't bad either. ;-)

FLOTUS in London! Cute wrtie-up Fish and chips for the First Lady: Michelle Obama takes her daughters to traditional English pub for �7.95 dinner http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1191620/Fish-chips-First-Lady-Michelle-Obama-takes-daughters-English-pub-7-95-dinner-London-tour-continues.html I like her belt..I read it's a Sacai ..??? She wore it on the cover of ESSENCE magazine. Dress is from Talbot's on sale , BTW Wow...I can see where Michelle gets her sense of style.

Sorry...here's the website: http://photos.essence.com/galleries/may_essence_issue_first_lady_michelle_obama__mom#129071