Good morning . . .
When is an apology not an apology? Apparently when it is given by Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV). While speaking to a group of high school students on Friday, Reid called President Bush a "loser." Understanding the possible political implications, Reid immediately called the White House and a Las Vegas newspaper and apologized for the remark.
At a press conference on Tuesday, Reid backed away from his apology saying it was only a poor choice of words, but the sentiment remains the same.
"Maybe my choice of words was improper, and I have indicated that maybe they were, but I want everyone here, I repeat, to know I'm going to continue to call things the way that I see them, and I think this administration has done a very, very bad job for this nation and the world," Reid told reporters.
With Reid's non-apology apology, Senate Democrats will find working with the GOP harder. Any Republican support to stop the rule change for judicial filibusters is likely lost.
Reid's comments demonstrate the Democrats are a group that have no ideas, no solutions, and no chance to regain control of Congress or the White House for many election cycles. Unless there is a Clintonesque Republican president, Republicans will steer the country for decades.
reviewjournal.com -- News: Reid doesn't back down from Friday remark about Bush
--
Yesterday's incursion into the "no fly" zone over Washington raised questions about how many times pilots, private and commercial, fly into restricted airspace.
According to the North American Air Defense Command (NORAD) at least twice a day somewhere in the county.
AVWeb.com compiled a report after reviewing 500 recent incursions into restricted airspace. They found that the reasons are very clearly defined and include unfamiliarity with the area, complexity, confusion, and high-tech avionics. They can be mere technical violations of some obscure rule, but can have safety consequences.
Starting in mid-May lasers will be employed in the Washington "no-fly" zone to alert pilots that they have entered the restricted airspace. The lasers will alternate from red to green and in tests can be seen clearly in all types of weather.
The military will activate the lasers when an unauthorized or unidentified aircraft enters the three zones of restricted airspace around Washington's three major airports. The laser beams can be seen up to 20 miles away.
--
Sen. George Voinivich (R-OH) may become a target for his seat when his term expires in 2010. It will be the target by Republicans. Voinivich has shown that he is not interested in supporting the nominees of the president.
Speaking before the Foreign Relations Committee today, Voinivich announced that John Bolton is "not the man for the job." Bolton is President Bush's nominee as ambassador to the UN. Voinivich like other weak Republicans senators is worried about the impact of an ambassador who will talk straight and working in the best interests of the US instead of "following the pack" of incompetent and corrupt UN officials.
Voinivich said he would, however, vote to send the nomination to the Senate floor because, "We owe it to the president to give Mr. Bolton an up or down vote on the floor." Thanks for nothing Senator. As an Ohio native, I am embarrassed for the citizens of the state you claim to represent. Maybe you could retire before the 2006 elections. How about that Senator? Don't you owe the people of Ohio and the Republican Party the opportunity to give you an up or down vote?
CNSNews.com -- News This Hour
--
The Supreme Court has been asked to overturn contempt charges against two reporters who refused to reveal sources in the leak of the name of an uncovers CIA officer.
Lawyers for Matthew Cooper and Judith Miller hope the high court will clarify the protections reporters have in keeping confidential sources.
A federal judge held the reporters in contempt last fall and an appeals court rejected arguments that the First Amendment shielded them from revealing sources. I've read the First Amendment, there is nothing in it that remotely shields reporters from revealing sources. Several states have created Shield Laws, but so far federal courts do not apply them in federal cases.
If accepted for review, the high court will not hear arguments until the next term that starts in October.
Supreme Court Urged to Protect Reporters - Yahoo! News
--
More later.
No comments:
Post a Comment