Free Republic

Didn’t all this happen in Virginia?

Agree 1000%! I was dumbfounded listening to Bush's whining, rambling performance. Almost like he was crying... Definitely sounded extremely defeated.
And, whose brilliant idea was it to have a presser less than 24 hours after getting your party slaughtered at the midterms? What were they hoping to accomplish? Conciliation? New tone? Commitment to WOT in spite of congressional changes? Even, Rummy stepping down? ALL of these could have been accomplished with a 3-5 minute prepared address to the nation. No press. Just Bush making these important points and walking away from the podium - in a PRESIDENTIAL manner. I was horrified when he rambled into a seat-by-seat analysis of the election. Tony Snow would have been eons better at this than Bush! In a prepared statement, Bush could also have added some much needed perspective, namely (1) these losses were within (or even below) what is historically expected in the 6th year midterms and (2) if he wanted to dilute the perceived impact of Iraq on the results, instead of trying to analyze strengths of Hillary and Fast Eddie Rendell's machines, he simply could have stated that brave candidates like Joe Lieberman (who essentially was booted out of his party because of his support for Iraq war) did extremely well while wearing their support of the war as a badge of honor.

Instead, we got Bush at his worst: incoherent, ahh-ing, rambling, unable to drive home any message, and sounding defeated and horribly weak. Just an absolutely dreadful performance! If the WH is going to truly "clean house", it can start with whatever Einstein insisted on Bush doing a presser even before all of the votes were officially tabulated!

I had the pleasure of voting absentee ballot last week; straight R, including Ms. Harris! I also had the tremendous pleasure of voting NOT to reinstate the 3 RAT-appointed FL supreme court justices who were up for reinstatement. All were prominent anti-Bush in the 2000 election struggle and all have been prominent advocates of the moonbat agenda here in the Sunshine state. Katherine Harris may be somehwat immature politically, but my piece of toast this morning had more personality and creative ideas than does Bill Nelson! Every time I see the "polls" predicting a RAT tidal wave, I harken back to the 2 bottles of wine I drank in despair on Election Night 2004 having heard the polls predicting an easy Kerry victory. My hangover the next day convinced me to never trust the MSM/DBM for the many reasons more politically savvy Freepers have elaborated lately.

Voted absentee here in Central Fla, straight line R - even for Katherine Harris against that do-nothing, silver hair tounged Bill Nelson! Also had the pleasure of voting against the 3 Fla Supreme Court justices who were up this year for reinstatement - all 3 Demo appointees who voted against George Bush in 2000 and against Terry Schaivo's right to live. My wife will follow suit soon and, for the first time, my 18 year old son (the most conservative of all of us in the family!) will have the distinct pleasure of formally voting against moonbat liberals for the first time in his life!

Bingo! I live in the immediate area of Longwood, FL. News reports have indicated that the poor kid was severely emotionally disturbed. Apparently, last year, he got into a scuffle with another kid and threatened to blow up the school bus that the kid was riding on. This (and perhaps other troubles) prompted his removal from the public school and placement in a regional school for troubled kids. Kid was deemed "OK" to return to the general public school population and, according to reports, was only back in school for a couple of weeks before this - his last - troubled incident.

I am in complete agreement, and I say this with a heavy heart. As a Jewish Republican, in a family of Jewish Republicans, I have worked very hard to help American Jews see the light - the anti-semitism of the far left and Democratic party. I argued at length that Israel had no friend better than George W. Bush. However, like his father and the antisemitic crowd of pro-Saudi acolyltes (led by James Baker) of Bush 41, 43 is proving to be no friend of Israel and of Jews worldwide. With the mouthpiece of his Sec of State, Bush is condemning more Israeli mothers, fathers and children to be blown to bits by the same Jihadis who we routinely imprison (with no rights, by the way) in Gitmo and "black sites" around the world. Rice's mantra of "trust the Palestinians" and "you can trust the fact that the 'international community' will enforce the security arrangements of the peace plan du jour is not naive - she and GW are not that stupid. It's simply the result that Bush has bought into the Saudi's version of how the "region" should be pacified. Coming from a country of goat-loving inbreds where a Jewish person is not even allowed entry, I don't think Israel's vital, existential security interests are really going to be respected. And, if you're Ariel Sharon, do you really trust the good offices of Koffi Annan and the Europeans (those of the "that shitty little country" fame)to ensure Israel's security?
Rice and Bush are enforcing the death warrant to the state of Israel. Isn't it ironic that the "lovers of democracy and freedom" - isn't that what they say every day? - will force the death of the only western-style, truly democratic, truly pluaristic state in the entire region - and the only true friend the US has there. Don't kid yourself, the Arabs in even our "friendly" countries hate us with a passion. And the only reason we maintain any positive relationships is via the rule of the boot, the torturer's wire and the firing squad.
Reading Rice's pronouncements, one can only conclude that Bush feels his legacy - his ultimate position in history - is tied to the Saudis and if this means sacrificing the state of Israel, so be it. They're just Jews, right? And, hey, just like Baker concluded, "Who cares, they didn't vote for us anyway?". The sad fact is that Republicans have made great inroads into the traditionally Democratic liberal American Jewish community, especially with younger Jews. And, Jews have a level of influence and visibilty far beyond their demographic numbers. An historic opportunity for Republicans is about to be lost by the American agents of the House of Saud. I guess the desert pomegrante doesn't fall far from the tree...
By sacrificing Israeli security to the worldview of desert-flea infested Saudis, Bush will - in an instant - reverse the support that those of us who worked so hard on his behalf. I have never been sadder nor felt more betrayed in my adult political life.

Honestly, I don't know. Considering that the direction of the Supreme Court will likely be set in stone for a few decades by the end of Bush's 2nd term (2 resignations now, probably at least 1 or 2 more over the next 2 years), it might not matter.

I think the demoralization of the base that Karl Rove so masterfully energized and rolled out last year will be so great that ANY Republican candidate will have a severe disadvantage. The Bush family and the Clinton family - now such close friends - will be even closer, as Prez. Hildebeest would have Bush's SC reversal to thank for her election.

No one is stopping Pres. Bush from "nominating his man". The majority of the people who voted for him primarily did so because of 2 reasons: 1. war on terror and 2. restoring sanity into the federal judicial system. It is clear that the WH is floating balloons about Gonzalez. Twerps like Kristol are simply vehicles to release said balloons. The first balloon float - when O'Connor resigned - was shot down thoroughly. Now with the imminent resignation of the CJ, the Bush team has dusted off the Gonzalez balloon and - via Kristol and others - are taking it out for another test drive. All that is happening here is that people - 95%+ Bush supporters! - are reacting to the test balloon.
This is not prescription drugs or education reform. Restoring "originalists" (as Rush calls them) to the courts is a core issue of the now-majority Republicans in this country. It's like strong self-defense. Any Republican who would run against a strong defense policy would be risking the support of the rank and file of the Republican majority and, if said policy were actually enacted under that Republican's term, would risk severe alienation of future support for the party. Same thing here. The President ran strong and hard - for 2 election cycles - on reforming the runaway federal judiciary. Go back to his campaign speeches. There's no ambiguity about the position he staked out. Appointing justices in the "mold of Scalia and Thomas" was the buzz phrase the generated massive applause at countless campaign rallies. To practice "moderation" or appeasement to keep the "balance in the court", with not 1 but 2 vacancies (likely) - and the opportunity to realign the judicial ship of state - would be nothing short of disastrous. Conservatives have been working and investing their time and money in election cycle after election cycle for this moment. Bush seized on this core desire in order to garner support and get elected not once but twice. Any deviation from HIS strongly worded and clearly stated objectives would be a true abandonment. There is no ambiguity here. He would be abandoning principles that he professed to in order to get the support of the folks who put him in power. I would be confident in proposing that nearly every person who pulled the Bush lever in November did so with the anticipation that there would be a significant opportunity to redirect the federal judiciary including the Supreme Court. Bush, to his credit, appears to have kept his word on appellate justice appointments - don't seem to be any squishy "moderates" in that group. One can argue about whether he has invested political capital in them, but he certainly has put forward nominees in the mold of his campaign rhetoric. I personally have faith that he will not take this historic opportunity to abandon his campaign promises and deviate from his past practices.
What is happening here and throughout the conservative world is that we are simply reminding the President and his team that we are watching and that we expect him to take the full advantage of the opportunity to reverse the ruinous direction of the Supreme Court. I don't sense any disrespect, just trepidation on the part of the faithful that the President might be entertaining different directions. If he indeed does go the route of appeasing the congressional democrats and the MSM and giving us "1 out of 2", I fully expect that the core conservatives will feel abandoned yet again by the Republican leadership. Although Bush is not running again, such an abandonment of a core conservative principle will vitiate the conservative support of the Republican party. Let's hope and pray he doesn't go in the appeasement direction.

Does anyone know how capital sentences are carried out in the military? Are they lethal injection like civilian ones? Also, what is the usual time on death row before sentences are carried out? Are there seemingly endless appeal opportunities as in the civilian world?
Just curious as I've not seen much written about this part of the military justice system.
Thanks in advance for answers.

I saw the gas-eruption piece (History or Discovery channel, can't recall). It was actually done as their explanation of the Bermuda Triange phenomenon (where planes and ships have mysteriously disappeared). They found that there were pockets of methane gas in the sea floor. Fascinating stuff.

Latest I've read as of Thursday evening is that 13 year old attacker has been charged with murder. Calif. law, though, will only allow him to be tried as juvenile with punishments ranging from probation to incarceration only to age 25.

Article noted that some of the parents saw the event happening, but it was so fast they couldn't intervene. Seemed like it was swing to the legs, swing to the head.
What a crying shame.
I don't think I could have been as magnanimous as the victim's family, but it seemed like they knew the attacker well.

According to the LA Times article, the 15 yo (victim) was NOT playing. He was there to watch his brother play - brother was apparently friend of the attacker. Times article also noted that victim's sister worked at the snack bar (where apparently the attack occurred). Article mentioned that there were some remarks exchanged between victim and attacker, and a little shoving while in the snack bar line. Attacker supposedly then went back to grab a bat from his baseball bag and struck the victim in the knees then a full swing to the head.
Such a "nice boy", no?
What a horrible tragedy. As father of 2 teenage sons, this hit close to home.

gabe kapler, also

But what if you WERE in that situation? It's just a slip off a ladder or a car accident away, unfortunately. If you're there, and your family loves you, do you want them to kill you? If so, I guess in our society you have the right to explicitly and unambiguously spell out those wishes. But, if it weren't clear, should society just kill these poor individuals, just because you wouldn't want to live that way? Dogmas are easy. Reality is much more complex.

This is not true. As I understand, Article 3 (section 1?) of the US Constitution enables the Congress to establish and to set the purview for all federal courts with the exception of the Supreme Court. The fact that the courts - with the exception of the Supreme Court - are totally independent of the legislature is commonly accepted but not correct. That is why the U.S. Congress was totally within its constitutional right to pass legislation directing the federal courts to examine a particular issue. Please note that Congress did not mandate the courts to rule a particular way.

Who is "worthy" of life in your world view? Alzheimer's patients? Quadraplegics? Burn victims? Your assertion that someone "left life a long time ago" is ludicrous. Perhaps she left the level of consciousness that you and I would hope for. Is that now a death sentence? There is absolutely no evidence that she was suffering - especially if you buy the arguments that she was so cortically impaired that she could not feel or comprehend pain. And you totally ignore that, for her blood-line family, she was indeed "alive" and a viable member who provided joy to her family. And, if we're going to wax philosophical, isn't this a "value" to someone's existence - that they provide joy and love for their family? And how do you know her existence was "sad"? She was obviously not in pain, nor with any illness at all. She gave joy to her family. To us, maybe the situation - in which a previously vibrant woman was struck down to a much less functional state - was "sad". But, as long as there are people for to care for these individuals, and who derive joy from their continued existence (even in a depressed state of consciousness), what indeed is so "sad" and what justifies killing them? The key here is that there were people who were willing to care for Terri at their own expense and who derived joy from her existence. On the other side was an obviously self-serving piece of human debris who - after pledging to care for Terri when there were millions of malpractice dollars to be made - abandoned her from all care and rehabilitation efforts (even down to brushing her teeth). And, as soon as he had the epiphany of Terri's "desire not to live this way", he went on with his life even to the point of squiring children with his common-law wife. There was no "right to die" here. There was only a right for state-sponsored execution of someone who is deemed by the elite as "not worthy of life" . As John Dunne wrote, "Don't ask for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee". We'll all be there one day. I can only hope that - if my existence is providing sustenance to my family and I am not in pain or otherwise medically suffering - that I can stave off the black-robed Greericidal maniacs who would want to kill me.

Laura Bush is in Afghanistan.

Please supply any evidence that Terri was "suffuring" {sic}
Ignorance is no excuse for stupidity.

The "artificial" life support in this case was food and water. YOU too are being kept "artificially" alive and have been (I assume) for decades. Yes, you're right, the madness of decades of keeping you alive artificially must end and, in your unique worldview, you need to die to relive society of your burden.