But at least have the decency not to embarrass yourself like this.

Posted by: eddiebear at 11:11 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 23 words, total size 1 kb.

When the French are getting cool Steampunk movies and we are getting Alice in Wonderland. (Would someone please put Tim Burton in a burlap sack and beat some talent into him).

Posted by: chad98036 at 01:48 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 38 words, total size 1 kb.

Whoa. The Massa resignation has the markings of a coordinated hit by Rahm and Axelrod.

“Mine is now the deciding vote on the health care bill, and this administration and this House leadership have said, 'they will stop at nothing to pass this health care bill, and now they’ve gotten rid of me and it will pass.’ You connect the dots,” Massa said Several times during the broadcast Massa raised the prospect of rescinding his resignation if national news media picked up on his story of being railroaded out of office by Democratic leaders.

And therein lies the problem. How interested will the MSM be to cover this story, knowing that an uproar from the great unwashed could lead to the guy coming back? Hell, the Mediacrats are as interested in helping Teh Won secure a victory as the Party  Rank And File, and mentioning this dirty detail would get inthe way of Obamacare's passage. As Ace has always stated, you don't need to spin that which you don't cover.

Between offering a judgeship to the brother of a wavering Democrat, and forcing out of office a "No" Vote, thus lowering the margin the bill needs for passage (now, all the Democrats need are 216 votes, not the more dicey 217), this is how the Chicago Way will get what they want. Just be on the lookout for military bases, contract awards/revocations, mysterious arrests in nightclubs, surprise tax audits, etc.

Source

Posted by: eddiebear at 10:10 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 247 words, total size 2 kb.

Instructions for using this post.
1. Swallow your mouthful of coffee.
2. Hit "more".
3.Laugh.
4.Read rest of post.

Pic nearly shamelessly stolen from the Mega Independent. A totally non-biased, fact-based Intertube News Page that's totally middle of the road and totally journalism-based in the style of the NY Times and the Washington Post (Hosannas).
They have such helpful stories as this one about tea and tea bags

"It's a disgusting drink," remarked one of the scientists, "Anyone who would even associate themselves with tea after this study is obviously just a pathetic loser with no life."

Wow, Paul Krugman couldn't have said it better. I assume we know he's a "scientist" because he had a white lab coat on.
more...

Posted by: Veeshir at 09:40 AM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 127 words, total size 1 kb.

Should I be surprised that this is being released on a Friday?



Courtesy Joshua Sharf via his Facebook page. He's one of the more intelligent and tolerant non-morons around, go give him a read.

Posted by: Alice H at 06:24 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 36 words, total size 1 kb.

This vid is good for a couple reasons.
First, we see Obama acting in his normal, classless and petty manner.
Second, we see the CNN tool admitting they spend their time just gazing at Captain Wonderful in their "iso" camera shot.
CNN has vid of Capt. Wonderful listening attentively to Republicans last week.


Via No Runny Eggs
(Just so you know, I'm not taking sides in the "runny/no runny" eggs debate)

Posted by: Veeshir at 08:46 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 74 words, total size 1 kb.

Obama displaying his intelligence.

Yeah.

Posted by: eddiebear at 10:57 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 8 words, total size 1 kb.

Hey, it's got flowers and I'm in a festive mood.

Infidelesto is questioning the recent change of heart by the Obama administration with regards to the Fort Hood attack. Apparently Janet Napolitano has decided to put on her big girl panties and call Nidal Hasan an Islamic terrorist, rather than toeing what has been the official line about the attack being the work of a lone crazy.

I don't think Napolitano is stepping away from the official line, I think the line has moved. Just last week, at the National Governors Association's Special Committee on Homeland Security and Public Safety, Napolitano stated that domestic terrorism is as big a concern as international terrorism. She was followed shortly by John Brennan:

Countering violent extremism is not just a federal issue, Brennan told the governors; it's something that needs to be addressed as a nation.

The White House hosted a meeting to discuss these issues Friday, Brennan said.

"There needs to be community engagement," he said.

Does "community engagement" mean approaching domestic Muslim leaders to promote a pro-America message?

Does "community engagement" mean pressuring mosques to stop allowing terrorists an unsupervised place to meet?

Or does "community engagement" mean the civilian national security force that Obama promised us in July 2008?

Am I conspiracy-mongering? Is the Obama administration so completely stupid that they really didn't recognize until this past week that all the Obama-infatuation in the world isn't preventing terror attacks on American soil? Or is the new attitude in the White House that the plan to increase domestic surveillance is better served by playing up the terror angle, rather than downplaying it as the administration has been doing for the past year?   I'm not sure which is worse, stupid or conniving.  How pathetic is it that I'm hoping that the administration is merely obtuse rather than actively planning to tell us, "We didn't want to have to bring in surveillance, we didn't want to have to create a civilian security force, but in light of all this domestic terrorism..."

To quote a wise dude: "I always pray the government is stupid instead of evil.  Stupid doesn't end up anywhere... evil does."

Posted by: Alice H at 10:04 AM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 383 words, total size 3 kb.

That's where President Obama thought he was visiting yesterday.

Obama's appearance has convinced me of two things:

1. Michael Bennet is, indeed, going to lose his seat. Since Obama's done such a stellar job for everyone he's campaigned for so far.
   
2. Obama is like that pimply desperate boyfriend, the one who got the hot girl by pretending to be her friend, getting her drunk, and then fooling around with her while she was out of it. He's convinced that if he brings her back to the place where he first 'seduced' her, if he can just get one more everclear-and-punch cocktail into her so he can blur her judgment again, he can convince her to stay. Obama keeps coming back to Colorado thinking that if he just does things right this time, he can get back that faux-Parthenon magic from a year and a half ago.  But the hot girl is starting to realize her friends are pointing and laughing at her and she gave up her virginity to someone who can't even string together a coherent sentence.
   

Posted by: Alice H at 11:27 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 178 words, total size 1 kb.

I found this to be a fairly well balanced article on the student loan debt problem.  I am in basically the same position as the woman in the article, though thankfully not at quite those heights.  I took out debt for law school.  Through a series of things that were not my fault bad life choices, I deferred until I ran out of time.  The principal amount tripled and I'm now making hellishly high payments.  My choices, my consequences and I try not to whine about it too much.  It sucks, it restricts my life choices and I try very hard not to think about how old I'll be before the loans are paid off.

I am somewhat torn about this entire situation.  It is utterly self-serving of me to want there to be student loan reform.  Would I like my interest rates dropped and principal payments lowered and the 20% default fee removed?  Hmmm.  Let me think about that for a minute.  Of course I want that to happen.  But I knew the details of the loans.  I knew the consequences of failure to pay.

I am less than persuaded by those who claim they did not know the details.  Read the fine print, people.  Having said that, the loan process is stunningly opaque.  The schools have a vested interest in getting as many people to take out as many loans as possible.  What does the school care if you can't pay it back?  They got theirs.  Getting answers to questions such as "what will my payments be?" and "how much will I  have to make to not starve in the streets?" are not easy.  So while I don't particularly have sympathy for those who claim they didn't know the terms and didn't know about the default fees, etc., I do think the process can be far more open.

People do not realize that student loans are the one debt that does not go away.  There is no discharge in bankruptcy.  There is no negotiating a lower rate.  There is no bargaining about the amount.  The default fee is usually about 20% or so the then outstanding balance.  Think about that.  A person who has demonstrated that s/he cannot pay is now slapped with another huge principal amount.  Interest then piles up on that as well.  Loan sharks think that's insane. 

What to do?  Again, from a totally self-serving position, I think it should be easier to come up with some type of workout program.  I understand that people who pay on time will be pissed about someone else not paying and then getting a lower rate.  Think about this though.  By the time that point is reached, the outstanding interest will be capitalized and will now be part of the principal.  I think that alleviates some fairness concerns.  There are supposedly limits as to how much can be garnished in order to prevent people from being pushed below the poverty line.  In reality, it is nearly impossible to get any loan servicing agency to correct an error.

I am extremely hesitant to make loans dischargeable in bankruptcy.  Even with the new bankruptcy laws, within 7-10 years that bankruptcy will fall off a credit history.  Absolutely there will be those who use that to get a free ride for law school/medical school/business school.  For that matter, I would argue that is a rational choice to make.  Not moral, mind you, but rational.

If we're going to insist that everyone go to college, then kids need to be told about the true costs.  They also need to be told that there's nothing they can do to get out of the loans.  That's only fair. 

Posted by: alexthechick at 11:04 AM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 624 words, total size 4 kb.

Seriously, fuck this shit. If this is the sort of unsolicited prison goatse that comes from the Porkulus, then fuck it hard, fast, long, and freaky deaky style with the flagellum of a fucking amoeba.

Despite all the talk of green jobs, the overwhelming majority of stimulus money spent on wind power has gone to foreign companies, according to a new report by the Investigative Reporting Workshop at the American University’s School of Communication in Washington, D.C.

Nearly $2 billion in money from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act has been spent on wind power, funding the creation of enough new wind farms to power 2.4 million homes over the past year. But the study found that nearly 80 percent of that money has gone to foreign manufacturers of wind turbines.

Eighty. Fucking. Percent? What. The. Fuck?

Hey, I'm all for alternative fuels and shit like that, but is it too fucking much to ask a President and Congress allegedly on the side of "the working man" to fucking help American workers and manufacturers?

But that's just me.

Posted by: eddiebear at 09:49 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 185 words, total size 1 kb.

Especially when it comes to oil drilling and the jobs that will follow.

In April of 2009, during a discussion about offshore exploration in San Francisco, Salazar said that President Obama directed him to “to make sure that we have an open and transparent government” and that “these are not decisions that are going to be made behind closed doors.” Salazar went on to say that President Obama wanted to make sure that DOI was “maximizing the opportunity for the public to give us guidance on what it is that they want to do.”

Yet, more than four months after the comment period ended, the Department of the Interior has failed to make any public announcement about the results, even though sources have told American Solutions for months the comments show a 2-1 advantage in support of offshore drilling.

It took American Solutions almost four months and the power of the Freedom of Information Act to finally uncover indirect confirmation that, out of over 530,000 comments submitted, pro-drilling comments outnumbered anti-drilling comments by a 2-1 margin.

In an email dated October 27, 2009, Liz Birnbaum, director of the Minerals Management Service, informs other Interior officials that a preliminary tabulation of the results of the comment period had not yet gone to Secretary Salazar, adding “{so} the Secretary can honestly say in response to any questions that he’s {sic} has not yet seen the analysis of the comments – staff is still working on it. I did, however, confirm to him the 2-1 split that these guys {at American Solutions}are emphasizing.”

Yaknow, I get the feeling Obama and his crew really don not care how the people feel about oil drilling and jobs. But that's just me.

Posted by: eddiebear at 11:49 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 296 words, total size 2 kb.

Bust and Bust Reflecting Bust and Bust


In response to the Puppy Blender challenge.
Caption Contest!
edited to make sense.

Posted by: Veeshir at 07:31 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 28 words, total size 1 kb.

This could get interesting.
Speculation is that Holder's about to go under the bus.
So far nobody's who gone under has really been harmed. Sure they're blamed for something, but it didn't affect their careers too much.

But Holder is big beans. If Obama blames too much on him, his livelihood could be affected.
And I wonder if he engenders the same devotion as the Clintons.
It used to amaze me that people would go to jail for them.
But the Clintons didn't throw everybody under there, they were selective about it.

Holder might just defend himself and then what happens? He could muddy the waters a lot for Obama leading to a cascade effect where Obama has to throw more people under to "fix" things.
Obama has thrown too many people under the bus for me to think the rest will fall on their swords. And if he'll roll Holder, his preacher and his mom under the bus, well, who won't he?

What happens when it's Rahm's turn? Rahm knows where the bodies are buried and he's not so pleasant to his enemies.
I know he was in the Daly machine, but he also worked for Clinton and he really is a son of a bitch.
He could probably bring down any prominent Dem politician he wants.

The next year or so could get interesting. And by "interesting" I mean fucked up. Roll President Biden around in your mind.
His handlers can't keep him off the TV if he's the president. Imagine the first press conference where he opines about how the Shah should tone it down and stop trying to develop nukular weapons.
Or the jokes about Alabama defending them when Russia invades Georgia.
Or...
Hmmm, maybe this belonged in "Funniest End of Civilization Ever"

Yeah I'm bored. What of it?

Posted by: Veeshir at 01:34 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 308 words, total size 2 kb.

I've been told I should PANIC!!! so that is what I will do.

Srsly the most concise and accurate forecast evuhhh. 

Posted by: It's Vintage, Duh at 08:25 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 25 words, total size 1 kb.

With the liberal green energy push, I'm not surprised that the new suggestion from Teh Won's administration is nuclear energy.  With cap-n-tax looking like it will never see the light of day on the Senate floor, Big O has to do something new to maintain his status as Super-Green-Man; nuclear power is as good a way as any to do that, I suppose. 

He used the SOTU to talk about nuclear energy, and now wants a whole new crop of nuclear plants (that's right - crop of plants, how cheese-tastic was that, huh?):

To back that up, he is expected to seek $54 billion in additional loan guarantees for nuclear power in his 2011 budget request to Congress on Monday, according to an administration official who spoke on condition of anonymity because the request has not been made public.

 White House officials say Obama's actions reflect his long support of nuclear power. But lawmakers from both parties say the speech reflected a new urgency and willingness to reach out to Republicans who have criticized Obama for not talking more about the role nuclear energy can play in slowing global warming.

 The 104 nuclear reactors in operation in 31 states provide only 20 percent of the nation's electricity. But they are responsible for 70 percent of the power from pollution-free sources, including wind, solar and hydroelectric dams.

 Several analyses of the climate bills passed by the House and under consideration in the Senate suggest that the U.S. will have to build many more plants in order to meet the 80 percent reduction in greenhouse gases by 2050 called for in the legislation. One of those studies, by the Environmental Protection Agency, assumed 180 new reactors would come on line by 2050.

Something that is being glossed over in the MSM, however, is Obama's decision to close the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste facility.  It merits a whole sentence in the article I quoted above.

This may get a little long, so if you're interested, go below the fold.

Posted by: Ember at 09:55 PM | Comments (13) | Add Comment
Post contains 963 words, total size 6 kb.

1 Of course you can just handwave it, it's in Obama's way.  

Posted by: alexthechick at February 01, 2010 10:53 PM (TtXKB)

2 George Carlin once said, "You know what's all natural?  Dog shit.  You know something else that's all natural?  Nuclear waste."

People think that nuclear waste is something exotic that isn't supposed to exist in nature by itself.  Wrong.  Nuclear waste just happens to be the natural decaying byproduct that would have happened on its own, except we sped up the process by several orders of magnitude, harvesting a bunch of heat energy off of it in the process.  Nuclear waste already exists in nature, buried in the ground. 

Think of it this way.  Nuclear material came from the ground.  It'll go back into the ground.

Posted by: EC at February 01, 2010 11:15 PM (iWj1i)

3 Yes, it's natural, but not regularly in the kind of quantities that nuclear power plants produce it, if I'm not mistaken.

Posted by: Ember at February 01, 2010 11:20 PM (LdRAG)

4 It's not the quantity, it's the concentration. All of the U-235 that exists now has (more or less, some has decayed from Plutonium and other heavier elements) has been here since the Earth cooled from a swirling cloud of gasses. All we did was find a whole bunch of Uranium that was super diffuse - covering a very large area - filter out all of the crap we don't need, and use it to power a vapor power cycle.

So the obvious solution is to de-concentrate it. Since even spent fuel rods still have something like 95% of the original energy content, all we need to do is re-enrich the spent rods, and filter out all of the crap again. Then we have a small amount of highly radioactive shit.

From there, what you do is mix that highly radioactive shit whit a whole bunch of dirt; something like a football-stadium-full. Then you give a shoebox of this very slightly radioactive dirt to a bunch of families, and have each of them bury it in their yards, about 5 feet deep.

That way the radiation is once again spread over an incredibly vast area, and nobody is harmed!

Or you could just store the shit in a cave for 10 million years. That would work too.

Posted by: Jeff M at February 01, 2010 11:53 PM (8P3+x)

5

Newer facilities have better waste control, don't they? I thought I remembered reading awhile back about miniature nuclear plants on truck beds or somesuch that had a smaller waste footprint? I may have been sniffing glue though, so...

And I'm not sure how he expects the green crowd to get on board with this. They are the same crowd that wants an end to nukes and equates all nuclear anything with Chernobyl and Hiroshima.

Posted by: Nicole at February 02, 2010 08:36 AM (Lgaa+)

6 Our idiot gummint made it illegal to reprocess spent nuclear fuel due to ridiculous fears of weapons proliferation.  Like Jeff M said, spent fuel still retains 95% of its energy.  But you can't move it because the greenies will sue, and you can't reprocess it because you'll get arrested by the feds.  So it just sits at on-site storage facilities, slowly decaying and no use to anyone, while we sit around waiting for the wind to blow and the sun to shine.

Posted by: Rich at February 02, 2010 09:58 AM (Qrjpn)

7 Nicole,
What newer facilities? None have been built in over 35 years. There have been great changes in technology but nothing has been built (here).

As mentioned above if reprocessed the actual waste from the largest plants operating for a year is equal to about a pickup truck bed full volume wise. Reprocessing takes most of the hottest and longest lasting isotopes out of the waste, making it less dangerous to store.

Posted by: Vmaximus at February 02, 2010 11:14 AM (EESSb)

8 Sorry, I'm not going to criticise Teh Won for this one.  More nuke plants ARE the way to go.  We just need to get a handle on the NIMBY shit, the enviroweenie shit, and the waste handling.  We've got several workable plans available (including glassification, MOX, and long term burial, or a combination of these), but everyone wants to play their political games with this.  You know one of the stupidest debates I've heard attached to Yucca Mountain (or any other long term burial site)?  "How are we going to mark it so someone doesn't try to dig it up in 10,000 years?"

The theories included pictograms (since we don't even know if English will exist as a language in even 2,000 years, much less 10,000... history says no), skulls and crossbones, and even not marking it at all.  The latter because any warning might be taken as "the Curse of the Americans" and encourage digging. My idea?  Fuck them.  I won't know anyone alive 10,000 years from now.  Hell, if I had kids, in 10,000 years their descendants would be less related to me than eddiebear is now.  And I don't even know him.

The point is, we just need to make a decision on where to store the shit, re-process as much of the fuel as we can for re-use, glassify the rest and bury it deep in as stable a location as we can find (i.e. out west somewhere).  Any state wanting to bitch about transporting waste across their borders can suck a dick.  Federal highway = federal property, you get the benefits Iowa, you get the suck as well.

Posted by: MikeD at February 02, 2010 11:18 AM (FkL60)

9 Science is a weapon anymore.
Or rather, "science" is a weapon.
They've spent the last 40 years explaining how evil and bad nukular power is and how the wasted is GONNA KILL US ALL!!!!!! so most people just think, "Duh, nukular power bad. Mmmmmmkay?"

This means changing people's minds is nearly impossible.
Teddy Kennedy killed more people than Three Mile Island and yet TMI is the worst thing in the world and Teddy K was a saint.

The Big Lie works in many, different areas.
People who want to make a difference but don't have the brains to learn how to do real science and make a positive accomplishment instead 'shade the truth' (read, lie) for a greater good.
This way nothing good happens but they get to feel better about themselves, and isn't that what life's all about?

Posted by: Veeshir at February 02, 2010 12:20 PM (ayh+f)

10 I have  buddy that works in the business of designing and permitting new (cough) plants. (there are a few that have been in the permitting stages over 10 years) The easiest way to overcome the NIMBY factor is to build it next to a existing plant, and the few that are in permitting are doing exactly that.

Another plus is unless someone is really old, the immediate question before a public review is "how long have you been living next to a nuclear power plant?" if the answer is less than 35 years then the obvious question is; do you mean to say you willingly bought a house next to a nuclear power plant but object to living next to it? 

Posted by: Vmaximus at February 02, 2010 04:16 PM (EESSb)

11

Not new facilities, I guess, but I thought I had read about small reactors that were to power homes? They don't exist in the market now, but apparently the tech does and this company is supposed to be developing them for sale, 2013-2023.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/nov/09/miniature-nuclear-reactors-los-alamos

I realize this comes from the Guardian, so may be total bunk, but I thought it sounded like a neat idea.

Posted by: Nicole at February 02, 2010 05:58 PM (iUBlB)

12 The little that I know about those small plants Nicole, is they are not reactors. They have Hot isotopes that can run a steam generator with no fusion involved. They absolutely work as advertised, but they do not run on fusion. Nasa uses similar power plants for some of their stuff. Radioactive yes, fusion no. 

Posted by: Vmaximus at February 02, 2010 11:05 PM (EESSb)

13 Ah... I see. Thanks for the clarification. If it wasn't abundantly clear already, I don't know nothin' 'bout no nuclear power.

Posted by: Nicole at February 03, 2010 08:45 AM (Lgaa+)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

You know what America needs?  More jobs.  Apparently, in Obama's 7 billionth speech last night, he said something about how investing in high-speed rail trains was teh ultimate fix to our broken economy.  Which is funny, since I thought that a health care bill was teh ultimate fix to our broken economy.  Or, wait, was it the stimulus program?  Although I could have sworn there was something about carbon credits in there.  Or maybe it was Hope And Change™?  I get all jumbled up sometimes.  The story changes so often, it's no wonder that Teh Won can't keep it straight.  Or a silly little tattooed right-wing extremist tea-bagging blogger.

While Big O was talking about how awesome building trains was going to be (seriously, man?), the AP was deciding that they are kind of done with all this Obama worship.  I know, it's fucking bizarre, but I think we should take what we can here.

 But the jobs to design and make the rail cars and engines, signaling and track for the fastest trains will mainly go abroad to the European and Asian companies because it will take time for the U.S. to develop its own domestic high-speed rail industry, rail experts said. There will be U.S. manufacturing and engineering jobs for slower trains often described as "higher speed" or "midspeed." Much of the domestic high-speed work, however, will be the kind of construction and earth-moving work typical of highway projects, they said.

 European and Asian high-speed trains average over 110 mph and some reach top speeds of around 220 mph. There is nothing equivalent in the United States. Indeed, most of the grants announced by the White House Thursday will go to rail projects that aren't in the same league as the fast trains being built elsewhere.

 For the U.S. to decide to build high-speed train systems using primarily U.S. companies, "would be like Bangladesh deciding they want to have a space program and only use technology they have developed and manufactured themselves," said Anthony Perl, chairman of the National Research Council's intercity rail panel.

 The technology gap between true high-speed trains and the slower trains in use in the United States is equivalent to the gap between the planes flown by World War I flying aces and today's jets, said Perl, an American who teaches transportation policy at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver, Canada.

 Some of the equipment purchased for high-speed rail like train cars might be manufactured abroad and the parts bolted together in assembly facilities in the U.S., he said.

 "There will be some jobs that come out of it, but unless people are prepared to double the cost and take at least twice as much time to ramp up the capacity to supply this high-speed technology in the U.S., it's not there," Perl said.

Good, solid B+, my friends.  Solid B+.

Posted by: Ember at 10:48 PM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 486 words, total size 3 kb.

I'm not sure if that's p-shopped or not.
Via the fine Reverend Right, don't tell FrnakJ I didn't link this at IMAO.

Posted by: Veeshir at 10:12 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 27 words, total size 1 kb.

Maybe this guy's just the crazy brother of the heads of parliament and the judiciary, I dunno. 

"When Barack Obama was sworn into office he talked of verbally engaging Iran," the U.C. Berkeley graduate was quoted as saying. "What has changed is that today this [the equivalent of the N-word in Farsi] talks of regime change in Iran."

Posted by: Alice H at 06:29 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 81 words, total size 1 kb.

With everything else going on, it's no wonder that this particular story has been largely ignored.  After all, who wants to discuss the fact that one of Obama's first acts as President was to announce that Guantanamo Bay would be closed by, oh, tomorrow?  Here's my favorite observation of the article:

Since Obama took office a year ago, more than 40 detainees have been removed from the naval base in Cuba — sent off to their homelands or to other countries. If the administration cannot quicken that pace, it would take until a hypothetical second Obama term to actually empty the site.

Good, Solid B+.

Posted by: Ember at 08:58 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 108 words, total size 1 kb.