in a heck of a spot here. If he bars the door to Mr. Burris, Reid COULD be criticized for being racist...worse, if Reid condones Al Frankens seating, he could be criticized for barring Mr. Burris.

BUT if Mr. Reid backs down now, he loses face in the political arena.

Either way, Mr. Reid is in a pickle to be sure!

The problem is, if Reid seats Franken, even though there are legal issues ahead...won't he HAVE to seat Burris as well?

How could he NOT seat one without the other???

"Franken is an elected official." NOT until the legal maneuvering is done...until then, we don't KNOW whether he won or not.

That's the point I was trying to make. Until the legal status of both is known, then both are suspect. So the point is, if he approves of one, why not the other?

If Reid is smart, he'll either wait on both or approve both - one way or the other. To do otherwise would be to invite claims of prejudice.

"Is Burris connected with the Blagojevich taint of Corruption?

Is he competent enough to be a senator? If the answer to the first question is no and the second yes then that's the end of the story."

Ah these ARE the questions...the problem with the first one is, we'll never REALLY know for sure. The problem with the second one is, no one will care until the first one is answered to everyone's satisfaction.

Hence the point that Burris IS tainted by the appointment by Blago, REGARDLESS of whether he did anything or not. Sorry to say it but it's true. Even if Burris does make it into the Senate, no one will REALLY trust him and he will be watched constantly.

True, Blago IS still the democratically elected governor of Illinois and has the lawful right to appoint Obama's successor...the problem is, no matter WHO he picks, they will be tainted by their association with Blago and there will always be that doubt of whether or not they paid to play.

Quite correct...Mr. Burris most likely WILL be allowed to be a US Senator...but I suspect if he decides to take the seat, he will not like it.

Harry Reid will can refuse him any seats on any counsels and can force a snubbing of him, if you will, by all other Democrats. AND, if Mr. Burris decides to retaliate by voting with the GOP, Mr. Reid can use his voting record against him to have the DNC withhold support during reelection time.

Yes, Mr. Reid DOES have to seat him, despite his protests...BUT he can make it a miserable experience for Mr. Burris as well...and given his record, I suspect Mr. Reid will do precisely that!

the LAST thing you need is the government to be involved, specifically.

Now the government CAN be involved peripherally and still be effective. Reducing taxes, dropping interest rates, encouraging new businesses...this could help.

then if ANYTHING happens here in the US, HE gets the credit for it.

So...the question is, is he willing to take the heat if something DOES happen???

Maybe lock up all the Arabic people in the US?

Of COURSE teh number of deaths from friendly fire is down in Iraq and Afghanistan.

In Iraq, the Iraqis are doing most of the missions...we are on-hand to help but the Iraqi government is doing the job now.

In Afghanistan, the UN is there helping us do the job, so there are less Americans getting killed.

Good grief folks, this ISN'T rocket science!

Has Ann Jones ever been to Afghanistan?

Obama voted for the bailouts and wants more.

Same crap, different day.

If we are going to close Gitmo, where WILL we put them? I assume we will have to put them on trial so where will we house them until they're ready?

And assuming they are acquitted, where will we send them then? For many of them, their own countries don't want them back.

MY suggestion is, we send them to Iraq for trial...let the Iraqis try them for crimes. If found innocent, they go free there...if guilty...well, they usually take care of that once and for all.

A win/win scenario for everyone concerned.

"Why do we have the most immature politicians in the world?

Seriously."

Um...because you keep voting them into office?

"We have maximum security prisons in the US. Once all the cases are sorted out, those who should be sent home or somewhere will be. Those who should be imprisoned awaiting trial can be put into maximum security prisons and put on trial."

Granted we do...however this will be a large influx. Do we have sufficient capacity to house those we have PLUS these others? Also, will we have to provide means of separating these alledged terrorist from the general populace?

As to sending them home, how do we deport them to a country which no longer wants them (as is the case with many of them)?

I'm not saying you don't have a point but there are a LOT of questions that need answering...and I think Obama may have jumped the gun in his executive order to close Gitmo in a year.

"Speak for yourself! I haven't voted for these people, but it sounds as though you have."

Well obviously SOMEONE has!

Can't wait to see Palin again.

She is SO HOT!

Hope she runs for President in 2012!!!

if we get attacked again.

Oh well...here we go again.

they wouldn''t be pregnant for long. Obama is for late term abortion and if he offered them the opportunity to be in such a position, why they would have to give up their babies for the good of the country...wouldn't they?

but I agree with Mr. Armey.

LOL