Joe Biden on Face The Nation yesterday.......the man who is a heartbeat away from the Presidency...

Responding on CBS’s “Face the Nation” to Brown’s comments that the United States should be spending money catching terrorists, not spending money to give them a lawyer, Biden said, “I don’t know whether the new senator from Massachusetts understands: When you get tried in a military tribunal, you get a lawyer too.”

Scott Brown's response?  Dope slap at Clueless Joe...

“He’s trying to give me a lesson on military law, and I didn’t think it was appropriate,” Brown told POLITICO. “And I thought he was off base when it comes to explaining to the American people that somehow I need a lesson on whether people get attorneys — of course they get attorneys. There’s a difference as to what type of attorney they’re going to get and when they’re going to get that attorney, and how are they treated, and what rights do they in fact get.”

Brown said he is particularly incensed by Biden’s remarks because he’s served in the Massachusetts Army National Guard for more than 30 years and is currently the Guard’s top defense attorney in New England.

“I know the military rules and regulations and procedures from A to Z,” Brown said.

And you people were worried about Sarah Palin?
This presidency is scarier than the Carter administration!

Nellcote wrote on Feb 15^th, 2010 at 7:01pm:



Dope slap? Why is Brown even in the news? This concern was voiced by many R's in the past few weeks.
Face The Nation picked Brown's comments, for the Veep to respond to? Did Biden bring up Brown?

"of course they get attorneys"
Sounds to me that he just said Biden is right.

"There’s a difference as to what type of attorney they’re going to get"
And this would financially make a difference in the war?

"and how are they treated, and what rights do they in fact get.”
Someone should tell him to stop worrying, they caught the guy in the act. He's not getting off.


Do you remember half-term Gov Palin's understanding of the duties of the Veep (from the campaign)? A heartbeat away?
She should scare the crap out of women.

Nellcote wrote on Feb 15^th, 2010 at 12:29pm:


how do you get i called you a liar... both were shown live on CNN and MSNBC... Fox pulled coverage of the Obama Republican Q&A... That's was my point, if you were watching Fox, you wouldn't have been able to see it... no calling you a liar, only making that point of what fox did, and you saying you were trying to watch the Dem Q&A... I love how you guys get all fired up over nothing, pretending like you were personally insulted, at least you're not vulgar like Riffy, and don't take a causal deabate and make it a curse fest... None of those news networks cover this shit correctly from either side... let alone if your in the middle. Jon Stewart a faux news comedy 1/2 hour covers more... Should i assume you don't like those two MSNBC hosts o their network, you seem to have some added names for them?

Pdog wrote on Feb 15^th, 2010 at 8:35pm:

It's about the statement, not about the incident.

[/quote]


arresting this guy like the shoe bomber was, was wrong because???
[/quote]
It's about the statement, not about the incident. [/quote]
So it's right when the pubs make the statement,but not the Dems?

With all of the discussion of shoe bomber Richard Reid and the issue of whether terrorism is primarily a military problem or a law enforcement one, I think the words of U.S. District Court Judge William Young at Reid's sentencing--which should have been widely publicized but were not--are pertinent.  After issuing a life sentence, Judge Young said the following:

This is the sentence that is provided for by our statutes.  It is a fair and just sentence.  It is a righteous sentence.

Now, let me explain this to you.  We are not afraid of you or any of your terrorist co-conspirators, Mr. Reid.  We are Americans.  We have been through the fire before.  There is too much war talk here and I say that to everyone with the utmost respect.  Here in this court, we deal with individuals as individuals and care for individuals as individuals.  As human beings, we reach out for justice.

You are not an enemy combatant.  You are a terrorist.  You are not a soldier in any war.  You are a terrorist.  To give you that reference, to call you a soldier, gives you far too much stature.  Whether the officers of government do it or your attorney does it, or if you think you are a soldier, you are not--you are a terrorist.  And we do not negotiate with terrorists.  We do not meet with terrorists.  We do not sign documents with terrorists.  We hunt them down one by one and bring them to justice.

So war talk is way out of line in this court.  You are a big fellow.  But you are not that big.  You're no warrior.  I've known warriors.  You are a terrorist.  A species of criminal that is guilty of multiple attempted murders.  In a very real sense, State Trooper Santiago had it right when you first were taken off that plane and into custody and you wondered where the press and the TV crews were, and he said:  "You're no big deal."

You are no big deal.

What your able counsel and what the equally able United States attorneys have grappled with and what I have as honestly as I know how tried to grapple with, is why you did something so horrific.  What was it that led you to this courtroom today?

I have listened respectfully to what you have to say.  And I ask you to search your heart and ask yourself what sort of unfathomable hate led you to do what you are guilty and admit you are guilty of doing?  And, I have an answer for you.  It may not satisfy you,  but as I search this entire record, it comes as close to understanding as I know.

It seems to me you hate the one thing that to us is most precious.  You hate our freedom.  Our individual freedom.  Our individual freedom to live as we choose, to come and go as we choose, to believe or not believe as we individually choose.  Here, in this society, the very wind carries freedom.  It carries it everywhere from sea to shining sea.  It is because we prize individual freedom so much that you are here in this beautiful courtroom, so that everyone can see, truly see, that justice is administered fairly, individually, and discretely.  It is for freedom's sake that your lawyers are striving so vigorously on your behalf, have filed appeals, will go on in their representation of you before other judges.

We Americans are all about freedom.  Because we all know that the way we treat you, Mr. Reid, is the measure of our own liberties.  Make no mistake though.  It is yet true that we will bear any burden, pay any price, to preserve our freedoms.  Look around this courtroom.  Mark it well.  The world is not going to long remember what you or I say here.  The day after tomorrow, it will be forgotten, but this, however, will long endure.

Here in this courtroom and courtrooms all across America, the American people will gather to see that justice, individual justice, justice, not war, individual justice is in fact being done.  The very President of the United States through his officers will have to come into courtrooms and lay out evidence on which specific matters can be judged and juries of citizens will gather to sit and judge that evidence democratically, to mold and shape and refine our sense of justice.

See that flag, Mr. Reid?  That's the flag of the United States of America.  That flag will fly there long after this is all forgotten.  That flag stands for freedom.  And it always will.

Mr. Custody Officer, stand him down.

That, my friends, is why captured terrorists are best prosecuted in civilian courts.  That is why the Nervous Nellies (Thank you, English language!) who shudder at the idea of "giving terrorists a platform to spout their propaganda" at a trial are so wrong-headed.  Let's face it:  the yahoos who want to "Jack Bauer" the terrorists or send them to Gitmo hate freedom nearly as much as the terrorists do.

Brainy

If you got an hour and eighteen minutes-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5vOMIN673A

because, trust me he won't be invited back.

he wore out his welcome.

Thanks Scoop!

I noted that in my post...

Some Guy wrote on Feb 15^th, 2010 at 7:28pm:


Because Nellie doesnt want any other teams outside of Bahston to have any hope or change his sports fortunes!

nankerphelge wrote on Feb 16^th, 2010 at 6:27am:



I just don't see how there's a difference between Richard Reid and Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. both tried to do the same exact things, and failed and baiscally beinr prosecuted the same way. Not saying you persobnally, but the overall sense i get from the people who hate Obama, is that it almost seems they wish the attack was succesful. That's a aeque, and another debate... If someone, non- citizen is captured outside the USA, I think we shoulkd be open to both civil or miltary courts, and whether or when we decide if we will bring them to the USA. Regardless of ideals, if we are going to protect our system, we have to use our system... and not lower ourselves to their level. Not an easy thing, but that's why it is worth fighting for, and going further, otherwise we are fighting to protect a paper tiger. The question is still the same, why is it wrong to merandize the underwear dude, just like the shoe bomber was?

nankerphelge wrote on Feb 16^th, 2010 at 9:40am:



That sense come from comments like Rudy Giulianni saying that the underwear dude thing was an AQ success, and saying nothing, no attacks happened when Bush was president. He was mayor of NYC on Spet. 11th.
Her's his quote.
""We had no domestic attacks under Bush," Giuliani said. "We've had one under Obama."
This isn't some random person, this is a former Republican prez candidate and was mayor of NYC... I don't need to seek help, I've heard these statemnt by others in the Republican party... There's no shortage of people who are dumb and beleive anything, but when you have people who know certain truths, presenting a false representation, over and over... you have poltics, and we obviously agree on certain points here, that trnascend poltics.
When I read the line, we hold these truths to be self evident, all men are created equal... I beleive that means even the most vile scum, even enemies of our nation. If we go beyond our beleifs, and eliminate the ideals, to justify anything, than we don't get to kepp them ourselves!!!
And to stay on point, don't even try to bullshit me or yourself, there's people in our own govt. who want excuses to do shit to further their agendas, and those include attacks, natural disasters, randoms acts of violence, economic hardships...  the list can go on... they are oppurtunists, and they exist behind relgion, education, economic systems, corporations, non- profits, media... fuck, I could go on for days... and I know you know what I mean.
what i really don't understand, is why a party with some much potential for intelectual brilliance, puts up candidates like Bush and Palin, who are mediocore at best. It's like Republicans don't want smart people making the decisions on purpose...

Has nothing to do with people being in my profession, douchebrain.  
It has to do with the fact that PDog's post covered a number of issues all in one big paragraph.

So I broke it into small parts to address the issues he raised.

Maybe you ought to be more worried about not being such an asshole of Biblical proportions!

PS - the use of a military tribunal does not require an Declaration of War.
In fact, a war does not even require a Declaration of War.

"Can you break it down some more, talk to me like i'm Sarah Palin"

I am not even going to attempt to break that post down!

And I did not mean to come off as elitist as JC suggested - if you took it as such, I apologize.
I thought you raised some points and I was trying to respond to them.

And my reference to a Declaration of War was in response to JC's post, and the point is that Congress is the only branch of government that can actually issue a Declaration of War.  But because the President (executive branch) is the commander in chief, he/she can direct hostilities even is a "war" is never formally declared by Congress.  That is all I meant.