Campy

He did use some pretty big words. Maybe that's what they meant? I'm actually watching C-SPAN now. They've reconvened and it is absolutely hillarious

Regretably, he survived, and therefore isn't eligible. But at least the gene pool has been thinned out a bit.

I appreciate that, but the Sabres play Boston tomorrow night and I'll be watching the game on Center Ice.

Politics as usual, but a pretty smart move on their part. I tried to find how it turned out, and this is what I found: http://www.11alive.com/specials/local/deci...x?storyid=72168

I thought they wore white because more often than not they use white paint.

There are well-documented sabotage attacks on staging warehouses (for lack of a better, ie, more accurate term) in New Jersey, including one at a munitions dump that was so big it blew out windows across the river in NYC. Afer a U-Boat was sunk, a dead German submariner washed up on the shore here. In his pocket was a movie ticket stub from a theater in downtown Norfolk.

I'll take "What is because they're the Ninth" for $100 please Alex. I think it died in the Senate without a vote last year, but isn't there another bill out there trying to break up the Ninth and placing AK, OR, WA, and some other states into a newly formed Twelfth? Methinks I read that a week or two ago.

That is a great post BiB. I had already considered the effects of having a friendly Iraq between Syria and Iran, but oddly enough, I never considered the effects of having an anarchy between the two, and what that would do. Good God, just imagine if they started screwing around in the Kashmir. All India and Pakistan need is a reason... If Hussein was good for anything, he at least was a non-fundamentalist and his government, while ruthless, was stable. And nice job working the Caliphate into that too - but I think you probably lost half the board! Do you think the ultimate goal for the likes of Iran is to re-establish an Ottoman empire, or do you think that they'll have problems gathering support from some players they'd need, like a relatively moderate and (now) secular Turkey? Or do you think that really isn't among their goals?

My Poli Sci prof believes that their recommendations are to be followed because the Charter requires it, while the Charter itself is unchanged. Granted, I know that my Poli Sci prof isn't the be all end all, but that's the take-away message I got, and it made sense to me. Whether it's his opinion or a generally accepted reality, I don't know. As members of the UN, we agreed via ratification of the Charter to follow UN recommendations/resolutions. As a member of the Security Council, I'd imagine that we'd exercise our veto on your specific example, but as far as the overall point you're making, I just don't know the answer. I really don't.

I missed the 3rd one. Getting the hat is one helluva way to dump a slump.

Sorry I missed that this morning. The UN Charter prohibits them from interfering in the domestic issues of nations, but your point is taken. That, IMO, is the scary part about the US Constitution's Article VI, and the even scarier part about the UN. I'd imagine that we're now discussing something that think-tanks and Constitutional lawyers probable haggle about every day. I don't know the solution, short of leaving the UN or Ammending Article VI. I do know that if I'm told to choose between one of those two that we'd be telling the UN that we sure would miss 'em. FWIW: I think Article VI is worded in the manner that it is to prevent, or perhaps discourage is a better word, the US from entering into those "foreign entaglements" in the first place.

That's starting to look more and more inevitable. And scary.

This is just my take - I agree that it's a vague standard. I can only hope that as the standing Iraqi army grows and becomes better trained than a rag tag militia, that we'll be a lot closer to pulling out. I'm not thinking that there will be a crime rate of 0%, but that when the Iraqis will be able to effectively police themselves. 'Course the Interior Ministry's torture of Sunni's isn't going to help the process along very much either. As a firm believer that history repeats itself, the baseline that I think we might go by is that of the once-named "Phillippine Insurrection," now called the The Phillippine-American War, which lasted 15 years at the start of the last century. Instead of a despotic regime, we ousted Spain (at the same time we attacked them in Cuba). It was never a declared war, and many historians believe that this was intentional because of the increased costs associated with caring for "real" War vets as opposed to those injured "in action." The McKinley administration intended to avoid the extra costs by foregoing a Declaration of War. There are a lot of similarities between the two conflicts - everything from cries of US imperialism to news of atrocities being committed by US troops. The conflict started in 1899 and lasted to 1913. We were "nation-building" in the Phillipines until 1946, at which point in time we withdrew our troops because we finally felt that Manilla could govern itself. Hopefully this mission won't take nearly as long. But it is possible.

Are you trying to get me riled up? I'm not sure if I'm totally understanding the question, but you know me - that'll never stop me from giving you my two cents! I don't think we should have gone in to begin with. IMO, morally it was acceptable if for no other reason than to make it one less despotic regime in the world, but I'm not sold on the legalities of it. Many of my posts from yesterday notwithstanding, it's something of a moot point now that we are there. We, ie, America, has an obligation (to the dead, to the injured, to the Iraqis, etc) to see to it that we finish the job. When I said that I wanted them home ASAP, I didn't mean immediately, I met as soon as the mission is accomplished, literally as soon as possible, but IMO it's not possible until the mission is done. Not being a military man, I'll only say that the mission was a success once the country is stabalized and the Iraqis are capable of defending themselves - from external threats as well as internal ones. That's when I'll want our troops home, and I'll want them home immediately. IMO, bringing them home before such a time would make the mission a failure (with apologies to The Honorable Mr Murtha).

Given that he's a politician, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if that too was part of his 6-month plan.

We don't, unless they play the Sabres, which is what they did last night. Bflo held on to win, Pyatt got goals number 1 and 2 on the season, and my namesake, Campbell, put two in as well - in case you're interested.

As you may have picked up on, I'm no fan of this war. Two people I know, one fairly well, the other only in passing, were killed in Iraq. A third is trying to get the money to get a prosthetic lower leg (for some reason supporting the troops seems to stop when they come home maimed). Nobody wants the remaining troops to come home ASAP more than me. That said, I don't see how they'll be able to come home in 6 months. Leaving Iraq with a rather unstable government and probably on the verge of a civil war over the recent Sunni abuse scandal, and a spotty infrastructure to boot, would be perhaps the worst thing they could do. IMO, it would destabalize the entire region, and if we thought Iraq is/was a training ground for terrorists, an unstable, unsettled, and unsecure Iraq would make Taliban-era Afghanistan look like an amusement park. That's a pretty powerful retort by Murtha. The administration has gone on the offensive. It's an age-old tactic in politics. They control the debate, they control the topic, and it deflects the debate from other areas where the administration is embroiled in controversy. Murtha's comments and retort only serve to assist the administration's goal of keeping the real issues off the front page IMO.

Joe Benenotti (sp?) and Craig "Locker" Laughlin. They really are terrible. If they were in Tampa or Nashville, or someplace like that, I'd understand. But I'd think that DC and/or the Caps could attract some kind of broadcasting talent - because they sure don't have any right now.

The monkey already addressed it a few posts after the one you quoted.

I know you have no love-loss for TD, but I imagine there's not a GM who over the course of their career has had no busts. One pick isn't the be-all end-all. Certainly not anymore than saying his 2003 draft makes him the best GM in the history of Gms. Both statements are reaches IMHO.

Chapter 1, Article 2: BTW: Did you start to get a little nervous after the Caps started chipping away at the huge lead last night? I know I was.

It was a caricature (an exaggerated cartoon) of the mentality I've seen on display here (and in the real world) over the past couple years. People have claimed that the only good arab is a dead arab (substitute arab with muslem, there's been plenty of that too). It seems to me that many people, most people, could care less about the Constitution. If they cared, why didn't every American rise up and urge Bush to not invade Iraq? He had no legal ground to do so. Why was it that few people here, regardless of political party, expressed concern or outrage over the Patriot Act which chipped away at the right of privacy? Why is it that people fail to recognise that when the US Government detains people, those detained are promised due process and a speedy trial (POWs are an exception by virtue of the US being a signatory to the Geneva Conventions. The gov't has already said that "detainees" are not POWs). There's that old axiom that ends with "and when they came for me, there was no one left to defend me." It speaks to the slow errosion of rights and the trashing of the Constitution. It is happening now, whether people want to see it or not. There was a national ID card provision tucked away in an appropriations bill to provide more money for the war. Again, if that's not unconstitutional by its very existence, it certainly opens the door for abuse. Yet nobody here seems to care (by virtue of the lack of posts) that we just took another step toward Big Brother. The Katie Couric reference speaks to the people who fail to see that their rights, that the ideals of their country, and that their Constitution, are all being gutted in the interest of... uhmm... Well, I'm not sure why. I guess because we're allowing it to happen?

You mentioned hurricanes. Would you rather live inland and not on the coast, or are the hurricanes just a part of the bigger picture? And yup, Asheville is nice. Actually, there are a lot of good towns down there, and Asheville's one of 'em for sure.

A 'tango' is super top secret military jargon for an enemy troop or target. Having never served in the military I'm not supposed to know that, so please don't tell anyone you heard it from me.

I remember reading about the posiblity of a fine after the Bucs game surprise. Do any of you guys remember if the Bills were fined?