Free Republic

I asked if flame baiting was permitted.

Looks aren't everything. Did you miss the "no personal attacks" thread?

I was wanting to know WHY it wasn't voted on...was it pulled, or what?

It's very much a live issue, but I don't know the exact procedural posture.

Me too.

I just heard Frist say that there would be no more votes tonight.

Me too.

Do any of you know anything for the TV deprived.

I believe Frist.

-bump-

Senate is done with roll call votes for the day.

Oh, I can. Most of the cuts are in place for a few more years - unless Congress votes to REVERSE them.

The table below is from the article I linked above. Pretty funny the phrae "set to expire" when most of them don't (expire) until the year 2011.

Tax cuts set to expire

Tax cuts passed in 2001 and 2003 begin to expire this year and in 2009, with the bulk of them sunsetting in 2011. Here's what will happen unless Congress extends them:

Provision - Reduction - Expiration

Individual income tax rates
Top four rates reduced beginning in 2001. Today's rates are 10%, 15%, 25%, 28%, 33% and 35%. In 2011, rates are scheduled to revert to 15%, 28%, 31%, 36% and 39.6%. 10% bracket Bottom bracket created in 2001. Now applies to first $7,550 of income for individuals, $15,100 for couples. It is indexed for inflation. It would be eliminated in 2011.

Marriage penalty
Tax rates and deductions were changed so that married couples pay no more than they would if they filed as individuals. In 2011, many married couples again would pay more than they would pay as individuals.

Child credit
Credit for children younger than 17 increased from $500 to $600 in 2001 and 2002, and to $1,000 in 2005 through 2010. It goes back to $500 in 2011.

Estate tax
Top rate gradually reduced from 55% in 2001 to 45% in 2007; exemption gradually increased from $675,000 to $3.5 million in 2009; tax eliminated in 2010. In 2011, tax reinstated with top rate of 60% and $1 million exemption.

Capital gains
Rates reduced from 10% and 20% to 5% and 15% in 2003; 5% rate, paid by those in lower tax brackets, reduced to zero in 2008. In 2009, rates revert to 10% and 20%.

Dividends
Rates reduced from standard income tax rates to 5% and 15% in 2003. Tax eliminated for those in lower tax brackets in 2008. In 2009, rates revert to standard income tax rates.

Alternative minimum tax
Exemption increased to $40,250 for individuals, $58,000 for couples. In 2006, exemption reverts to $33,750 for individuals, $45,000 for couples.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-03-14-gop-tax-cuts_x.htm

http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/tw/tw_1764.html

Reproduced without the handy hotlinks ...

Current Travel Warnings

Travel Warnings are issued when the State Department recommends that Americans avoid a certain country. The countries listed below are currently on that list. In addition to this list, the State Department issues Consular Information Sheets for every country of the world with information on such matters as the health conditions, crime, unusual currency or entry requirements, any areas of instability, and the location of the nearest U.S. embassy or consulate in the subject country.

Côte d'Ivoire 03/03/2006
Israel, the West Bank and Gaza 02/27/2006
Nigeria 02/17/2006
Algeria 02/15/2006
Sudan 02/06/2006
Pakistan 01/27/2006
Congo, Democratic Republic of the 01/20/2006
Colombia 01/18/2006
Afghanistan 01/09/2006
Kenya 12/30/2005
Iran 12/29/2005
Iraq 12/29/2005
Saudi Arabia 12/23/2005
Nepal 12/15/2005
Haiti 11/22/2005
Indonesia 11/18/2005
Zimbabwe 11/14/2005
Lebanon 11/07/2005
Liberia 11/04/2005
Yemen 10/28/2005
Burundi 10/19/2005
Bosnia-Herzegovina 08/01/2005
Somalia 07/21/2005
Uzbekistan 07/01/2005
Central African Republic 04/19/2005
Philippines 03/23/2005

I dunno. Might have something to do with the House, too. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-03-14-gop-tax-cuts_x.htm

Other good places to check RINO plans are http://www.republicanmainstreet.org/, and Google of "House Tuesday Group."

http://www.republicanmainstreet.org/News/283.htm

No. Not inert gas.

This picture illustrates the internal structure of Saturn. The outer layer is primarily composed of molecular hydrogen. As we go deeper where the presure reaches 100,000 bars, the gas starts to resemble a hot liquid. When the hydrogen reaches a pressure of 1,000,000 bar, hydrogen changes into a new state of metallic hydrogen. In this state it resembles a molten metal. This metalic hydrogen state occurs at about half of Saturn's radius. Below this is a layer dominated by ice where "ice" denotes a soupy liquid mixture of water, methane, and ammonia under high temperatures and pressures. Finally at the center is a rocky or rocky-ice core.

http://www.solarviews.com/eng/saturn.htm

Discussion (FWIW) at http://talkleft.com/new_archives/014141.html. There may be other links to the draft bill, I just found this one, and confess to reformatting and posting it without reading it to the extent I can compose a sensible comment.

Measure Would Make Administration Seek FISA Court's Permission to Eavesdrop

By Charles Babington - Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, February 26, 2006; Page A11

... The draft version of Specter's bill, which is circulating in intelligence and legal circles, would require the attorney general to seek the FISA court's approval for each planned NSA intercept under the program. Bush has said the agency monitors phone calls and e-mails between people in the United States and people abroad when any of them is thought to have possible terrorist ties.

Specter's bill would require the attorney general to give the secret court "a statement of the facts and circumstances" causing the Justice Department to believe "that at least one of the participants in the communications to be intercepted . . . will be the foreign power or agent of a foreign power specified in [the law], or a person who has had communication with the foreign power or agent." The attorney general would have to provide "a detailed description of the nature of the information sought" and "an estimate of the number of communications to be intercepted . . . during the requested authorization period."

The draft says the surveillance program's goal is "to gather foreign intelligence information or to protect against international terrorism."

Kate Martin, director of the Center for National Security Studies, a civil rights group, said the bill's language is alarmingly broad. "It's not limited to al-Qaeda or even terrorism," she said. Those who communicate with "foreign powers" could include a vast array of innocent people, Martin said.

Specter Proposes NSA Surveillance Rules

This is at odds with the details in http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1586043/posts

See also http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1593037/posts, "Specter may block funds for wiretaps." That one is, I think, making a mountian out of nothing. Specter often makes academically accurate statements that describe the extent of power of the various branches. I've yet to see him seriously advocate a postion at the extreme limit of any branch's power.

Is flame-baiting permitted?

As more capable Iraqi police and soldiers come on line, they will assume responsibility for more territory -- with the goal of having the Iraqis control more territory than the coalition by the end of 2006. And as Iraqis take over more territory, this frees American and Coalition forces to concentrate on training and on hunting down high-value targets like the terrorist Zarqawi and his associates. As Iraqis stand up, America and our coalition will stand down. And my decisions on troop levels will be made based upon the conditions on the ground, and the recommendations of our military commanders -- not artificial timetables set by politicians here in Washington, D.C.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/03/20060313-3.html

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1594261/posts?page=12#12

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
March 15, 2006

Press Briefing by Scott McClellan
James S. Brady Briefing Room

12:44 P.M. EST

Q In the meeting with Republican lawmakers, did any of them raise the type of concerns that Senator Coleman raised yesterday?

MR. McCLELLAN: No. It was focused on the priorities that I outlined at the beginning. And there is --

Q Did it come up?

MR. McCLELLAN: -- there is a very unified effort to continue moving forward on important priorities, like winning in Iraq and implementing the Medicare prescription drug benefit and making sure it's successful, and continuing to move forward on a budget that builds upon the progress we've made to fund priorities and rein in wasteful spending. ...

Q Then why do you think even friends of the White House suggest that maybe there's time for some changes --

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, we keep talking about friends or lawmakers, but I don't hear a lot of names being mentioned.

Q Norm Coleman.

MR. McCLELLAN: There's one. ...

Q Scott, as evidenced by some of the fallout from the ports deal, there are some members of Congress, though, who are looking at the way the White House has treated them and wishing things had been different. And you, yourself, have said that, in fact, things could have been handled differently. What is --

MR. McCLELLAN: That's a different issue. So let's make that point. That's a separate issue from what we're talking about here.

Q But if some of these people that -- I know this is part of the parlor game, but some of those discussions are about bringing in people who can better deal with Congress, isn't that sort of connected then?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, let me point out a couple of things. The President has surrounded himself with a very capable and experienced team that is fully committed to helping him advance his agenda and get things done. This is a team that focuses on advancing his agenda and achieving results for the American people. We also learn from our experience. But it's a very experienced team and it's important to always learn from experience, and we do that, and we have done that over the course of our time in office. ...

---

Q Scott, on priorities -- he spoke about immigration with this group of lawmakers? And what did the President --

MR. McCLELLAN: Today?

Q Yes.

MR. McCLELLAN: Yes, it did come up. They did talk about -- I think Senator Frist was talking about some of the legislative time line in terms of pushing forward on important priorities. And the President remains firmly committed to comprehensive immigration reform. We've had a number of discussions with congressional leaders. We believe that in order to fix what is a broken system, you need to address all aspects. That means continuing to build upon the steps we've taken to strengthen our borders. It means improving our interior enforcement, and it means moving forward on meeting an important economic and humanitarian need through a temporary worker program.

Q And on the temporary worker program, what the President thinks of the new idea of Senator Specter that instead of --

MR. McCLELLAN: I think there are a lot of ideas being expressed, and we want to continue to work with all leaders at the Capitol who are committed to moving forward on immigration reform. This is an important priority. We have a broken system; it needs to be fixed and it needs to be addressed in a comprehensive way. We have taken a number of steps when it comes to beefing up the number of Border Patrol agents to using -- or deploying new technologies along the border to prevent people from coming into this country illegally, particularly those who are coming here for the wrong reason. And we need to continue to move forward on those efforts. We need to continue to move forward on a comprehensive approach that will address all these issues.

Q But the President will be flexible to adopt other ideas to his temporary work program, like ideas --

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, what we outlined were some very clear principles that we believe ought to be part of a temporary worker program. And so I think the President has spelled out what his views are and now we're in the process of working with Congress to try to advance this important priority for the American people.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/03/20060315.html

See S. 2410. (Click on 24 . INTRODUCTION OF BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS), S.2400, and Hillary! Clinton's postion expressed as follows:

BY KENNETH R. BAZINET, JAMES GORDON MEEK and MICHAEL McAULIFF
DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU

The deal may also have other fallout. Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) said she was still intent on banning foreign governments from running U.S. ports, though relationships with countries like UAE are "oftentimes in America's best interest."

Some critics of the furor have said the death of DP World's deal could lead Dubai to be less helpful in the war on terror. Clinton conceded, "There are legitimate concerns, I'm not going to deny that."

Asked if her proposed policy could backfire, she shrugged.

http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/398519p-337656c.html

Questions about the divestiture intensified during the weekend, when Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said DP World could be permitted to operate and manage some U.S. ports if no suitable American buyer were found and if the Bush administration determined there were no security risks.

But Sen. John Warner, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said during the weekend, "the deal is over" and said the company's intent "looks like in every respect a total divestiture."

An interesting difference of "opinion" there. Heheheh. Frist trying to straddle the fence with some exceptionally strong illogic.