WASHINGTON -- Rep. Patrick Kennedy said he's "feeling healthy and strong" and plans to return to Congress Tuesday after receiving treatment at a Maryland addiction treatment center. The Rhode Island Democrat said Monday he was looking forward to returning full-time to his congressional duties. "The support and words of encouragement I have received over the past few weeks certainly help to support my efforts in recovery which I take seriously every day," Kennedy said in a statement.
The congressman, who has struggled with depression, alcoholism and addiction for much of his life, checked into the Father Martin's Ashley in Havre de Grace, Md., last month. The son of Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., has called his treatment "a lifelong process." "Addiction" to what, women, power and/or drugs? If he was a trunk we not only know the dirt on the "addiction" but he would be hounded out of Congress. Does Packwood ring a bell?
The congressman spent the July 4 weekend on Cape Cod visiting his father, who is battling brain cancer.
Kennedy previously sought treatment after an early morning car crash near the Capitol three years ago.
#5
There was a story years ago that Teddy took it upon himself to be the Kennedy clans children's drug dealer, keeping a stock of whatever they wanted to try on hand.
However, this backfired, as the older generation had stuck to liquor for the most part. They assumed that everything from pills, mescaline, LSD, ecstasy, and whatever, was just as harmless as alcohol. They were mistaken in this belief.
Pat Kennedy will probably be lucky to make it to 60 before his liver implodes.
US President Barack Obama on Tuesday strongly denied that the United States had given Israel an approval to strike Iran's nuclear facilities.
Asked by CNN whether Washington had given Israel a green light for such an attack, Obama answered: "Absolutely not." In the interview, which was broadcast from Russia, where Obama is on an official visit, he added: "We can't dictate to other countries what their security interests are.
"What is also true is, it is the policy of the United States to try to resolve the issue of Iran's nuclear capabilities," Obama said. This would be achieved "through diplomatic channels," he added.
On Sunday, US Vice President Joe Biden was asked on ABC's 'This Week' whether the US would stand in the way militarily if the Israelis decided they needed to take out Iran's nuclear program. The US "cannot dictate to another sovereign nation what they can and cannot do," he said. "Israel can determine for itself - it's a sovereign nation - what's in their interest and what they decide to do relative to Iran and anyone else," he said.
State Department spokesman Ian Kelly, however, denied that the vice president was giving Israel American approval for an attack on Iran. "I certainly would not want to give a green light to any kind of military action," Kelly said, while at the same time reiterating Israel's right to determine its security needs as a sovereign state. "We're not going to dictate its actions," Kelly added. "We're also committed to Israel's security. And we share Israel's deep concerns about Iran's nuclear program."
Earlier Tuesday, The Washington Times reported that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and his top deputies had not formally asked for US aid or permission for a possible military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, since they feared the White House would not approve. The report quoted two unnamed Israeli officials.
An anonymous senior Israeli official was cited by the Times as saying that Netanyahu was determined that "it made no sense" to press the matter after the negative response former US president George W. Bush gave the prime minister's predecessor, Ehud Olmert, when he asked early last year for US assistance for possible military strikes on Iran. "There was a decision not to press this because it was probably inadequate for the engagement policy and what we know about Obama's approach to Iran," he said.
Israel is unlikely to attack Iran without at least tacit US approval, in part because it would require cooperation from the United States. At the very least, Israel would most likely have to fly over Iraqi airspace, which is still effectively controlled by the US Air Force. However, a Sunday Times report claimed that talks conducted by Mossad head Meir Dagan resulted in Saudi Arabia agreeing to let IAF jets fly over the kingdom during any future raid on Iran's nuclear facilities.
White House officials have declined to comment on the substance of discussions between US and Israeli officials on Iran.
#2
They told me that if I voted for McCain-Palin, we'd end up with a dangerously stupid loose cannon just a heartbeat from the presidency. I voted for them anyway.
Look what happened!
Posted by: Mike ||
07/07/2009 14:42 Comments ||
Top||
The state will pay $335,000 to settle a lawsuit stemming from a crash involving former state Sen. Carole Migden.
Migden lost her Senate seat last year. She is now on the state's waste management board.
Supervising Deputy Attorney General Steven Gevercer said Monday state officials have agreed to pay the sum to 33-year-old Ellen Butawan. Butawan sued Migden and the state after suffering injuries when Migden rear-ended her in May 2007 in Solano County.
Witnesses reported Migden talking on the phone and driving wildly in her state-owned SUV before the crash. The San Francisco Democrat said she didn't remember the ride and suggested medication may have been to blame. She pleaded no contest to reckless driving.
Butawan's attorney said his client was fine with the settlement.
Migden lost her Senate seat last year. She is now on the state's waste management board.
They always take care of their own ...
Posted by: Fred ||
07/07/2009 07:41 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The article forgot to add that "Mad Madamn Midgen" has had a few accidents over the years, smokes pot, and is rumored to like other drugs. Now knowing this the CHP neglected to give her any kind of blood or urine test AFTER the crash. She claims to be on prescription drugs but we still dont know what kind (can you guess?). Also she claimed to be on state business but we never found out what that business was at the time (on a Sunday and out of her district). But now she is ensconsed in an appointed job that meets four times a year and pays six figures.
In February 2004, she married Cristina Arguedas, a criminal defense attorney and her partner since 1985, in a ceremony at Sha'ar Zahav San Francisco City Hall officiated by San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom. That marriage was later annulled by the California Supreme Court.
#3
The people of state voted her into office, they get what they asked for, a dope smoking, drug taking, law breaking idiot, but then our reps are supposed to be reps of the people and for San Fran she is. They get what they deserve.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
07/07/2009 13:21 Comments ||
Top||
#4
She is now on the state's waste management board.
President Obama's campaign to bring change to the nation's capital hasn't kept him from continuing the Washington tradition of handing out ambassadorships to political friends and fundraisers.
An old college roommate, the head of an entertainment production company and a lawyer whose family made its money selling vacuum cleaners are among more than a dozen people who have won ambassadorships after raising a total of at least $4 million for Mr. Obama's presidential campaign, according to public records.
The practice has been common for both political parties.
Since the Kennedy administration, presidents have given political appointees about 30 percent of the roughly 170 ambassadorships globally. While analysts say it's too early to say how Mr. Obama's administration will compare, government watchdog groups contend that the practice seems at odds with the president's populist rhetoric against "special interests."
"Awarding ambassadorships and other government posts to major campaign donors highlights the systematic corruption in privately financed campaigns," said Craig Holman, a spokesman for Public Citizen, a nonpartisan campaign finance watchdog group. "It is reprehensible that any government positions in the United States are awarded based on money rather than merit."
Mary Boyle, spokeswoman for Common Cause, another watchdog group, said, "The reality is big givers expect something back, and candidates typically reward big givers."
White House spokesman Tommy Vietor said Mr. Obama's nominees are qualified.
"The president said in January he would nominate extremely qualified individuals like [John] Roos, former Congressman Tim Roemer and Miguel Diaz, who didn't necessarily come up through the ranks of the State Department but want to serve their country in important diplomatic posts," he said in a June 30 e-mail.
Mr. Roos, a lawyer, is the nominee for ambassador to Japan. Mr. Roemer was nominated to be ambassador in India. Mr. Diaz, a theology professor at St. John's University, was nominated as ambassador to the Vatican. All three are political appointments, but only Mr. Roos was a fundraiser for Mr. Obama.
Asked whether appointing fundraisers to ambassadorships squares with Mr. Obama's pledge to bring change to Washington, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters that the president is appointing a mix of qualified people.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/07/2009 07:39 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
When Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania suddenly became a Democrat in April, it seemed he had virtually ensured his re-election to a sixth term in 2010.
The veteran senator had the backing of President Obama, top state Democratic leaders such as Gov. Edward G. Rendell and Sen. Bob Casey and was all but assured of the Democratic nomination in a state that has been trending heavily Democratic in recent elections.
However, a new set of obstacles stands in the way of the senator, who switched parties in the face of polls showing he could not win the Republican Party's renomination.
Rep. Joe Sestak, a relatively little-known two-term House Democrat who senses that much of his party's base is uncomfortable with Mr. Specter, confirmed last week, "I am going to get into the race against Arlen Specter." Recent polling shows Democrats cooling toward Mr. Specter's candidacy amid doubts raised by his long history as a Republican warrior who took positions and cast votes sharply at odds with those of his new party.
A Franklin & Marshall College Poll (formerly the Keystone Poll) of Pennsylvania voters reported last week that 28 percent said he deserves re-election, down from 40 percent in March. While it showed he was holding on to 43 percent of Democratic voters, just 24 percent of independents and 11 percent of Republicans questioned by the pollsters supported keeping him in office.
"In every poll we did asking does he deserve to be re-elected, he seems stuck at about 30 percent support. In other words, he has not been able to establish dominance," said G. Terry Madonna, director of the poll, conducted by Franklin & Marshall's Center for Opinion Research.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/07/2009 07:32 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
SELF SERVING P.O.S. We can only hope he goes right down the tubes!!
Finally joining the Senate, Democrat Al Franken envisions playing the "people's proxy" during Sonia Sotomayor's Supreme Court hearings. Franken, awaiting "an awfully emotional" Tuesday when he is sworn in, is joining the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is to begin hearings next week on President Barack Obama's first nominee to the high court.
"As someone who will have been in the committee a grand total of six days and isn't an attorney I kind of see myself fulfilling a certain role for Americans watching the hearings," Franken said Monday in an interview with The Associated Press.
"So I kind of see myself as people's proxy, not that the other senators aren't, but certainly that's the kind of role I want to play," he said.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/07/2009 07:26 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
but certainly that's the kind of role I want to play," he said.
Always with the role playing. Maybe he should try playing Mr. Smith goes to Washington instead of Bozo the Clown.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
07/07/2009 9:53 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Franken eyes role as 'people's proxy' in hearings
Rarely does the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights vote unanimously on anything.
A partisan divide has made the commission contentious in recent years. Yet the Department of Justice's decision to forfeit its voter-intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party and three individual defendants drew a 6-0 vote with one abstention by the commission. What unified the commission was outrage at the Justice Department for letting the Black Panthers off the hook.
The Civil Rights Commission has sent two letters -- on June 16 and June 22 -- to Loretta King, acting assistant attorney general for the civil rights division, asking for an explanation, but it has not received a response. Rep. Frank R. Wolf, Virginia Republican, sent a June 8 letter demanding an explanation, but the congressman told us he has yet to receive an answer from the department one month later.
The Civil Rights Commission's first letter expressed its "great confusion" over the department's decision. After all, "defendants were caught on video blocking access to the polls, and physically threatening and verbally harassing voters during the November 4, 2008 general election." The video showed "one of them actually brandished a nightstick in plain view of voters and poll observers ... defendants 'made statements containing racial threats and racial insults.' "
The commission's letter quoted "Veteran of the civil rights movement, Bartle Bull" calling the defendants' actions "the most blatant form of voter intimidation I have encountered in my life in political campaigns in many states, even going back to the work I did in Mississippi in the 1960s."
The commission summed up the case in its June 16 letter to Ms. King: "Though it had basically won the case ... the [Department of Justice's Civil Rights] Division took the unusual move of voluntarily dismissing the charges .... In its notice of dismissal, the Division cites as its rationale only the fact that defendants failed to appear and respond ... the Division's public rationale would send the wrong message entirely - that attempts at voter suppression will be tolerated and will not be vigorously prosecuted so long as the groups or individuals who engage in them fail to respond to the charges leveled against them."
Lenore Ostrowsky, a commission spokesman, told us, "It is rare for a letter from the commission over the last four years to be sent out without any dissent." There's good reason for today's unanimity. One of the Black Panther defendants, Jerry Jackson, is an elected member of Philadelphia's 14th Ward Democratic Committee and was a credentialed poll watcher for Barack Obama and the Democratic Party when the intimidation occurred. We agree with the concern at the Civil Rights Commission. The Justice Department needs to explain why it is not pursuing charges against these thugs.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/07/2009 07:25 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
President Obama's campaign to bring change to the nation's capital hasn't kept him from continuing the Washington tradition of handing out ambassadorships to political friends and fundraisers.
Finally joining the Senate, Democrat Al Franken envisions playing the "people's proxy" during Sonia Sotomayor's Supreme Court hearings. Franken, awaiting "an awfully emotional" Tuesday when he is sworn in, is joining the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is to begin hearings next week on President Barack Obama's first nominee to the high court.
