Regardless if Jefferson stood by Nagin or not, wrong is wrong, and by Nagin standing by Jefferson just shows you what his mind-set is, and the people of New Orleans re-elected Nagin, and how stupid was that? How can New Orleans possibly change, and how do you expect the rest of America to help rebuild New Orleans when you have the kind of politicians we have? Nagin should not be the Mayor of New Orleans, but the people spoke, whether they were legal votes or not! After Hurricane Katrina, when America saw thousands of poor black folks screaming from rooftops needing help to get out, and because of an incompetent Governor, and an incompetent mayor, many lives were lost. The Democrats have had a "strangle-hold" on New Orleans for decades, and that doesn’t seem to be working, so maybe they need to try something else? Jefferson is a "crook", and if Nagin aligns himself with Jefferson, then he shall be called a “crook”. What kind of legacy will Nagin will leave behind for the great city of New Orleans!
Read below!
By Greg Brosnan
MEXICO CITY (Reuters) - Mexico pleaded with President Bush on Monday to veto a Senate proposal to build a fence to keep illegal immigrants out, saying it could backfire by making the border less secure.
The U.S. Senate overwhelmingly backed a bill on Friday to put up about 700 miles of fence, a project Republicans hope will impress voters calling for tougher immigration control ahead of November 7 congressional elections.
"The Mexican government strongly opposes the building of walls in the border area between Mexico and the United States," President Vicente Fox's spokesman Ruben Aguilar told reporters.
"This decision hurts bilateral relations, goes against the spirit of cooperation needed to guarantee security on the common border, creates a climate of tension in border communities," he said.
Aguilar said Mexico would send a diplomatic note to Washington on Monday urging Bush to veto the bill, which requires the president's signature to become law.
Well, guess what? Bob Woodward has a new book out slamming the President, and while he might be right on somethings, I just find it tiresome to even read or talk about the book! Sure, Bush as made a lot of mistakes, and I think that the situation in Iraq is not the best, but we would have eventually have to have some sort of presence in the middle-east, because lets face it, Iran is going to try to one day, either nuke us or Israel. That is what most politicians and reporters seem not to understand, and that is that one day, the time will come, when Iran will pose a great threat to us, and we need to be ready!
See how "cheesy" Bob Woodward is! Read text below,
Woodward Defends Holding Scoops for Book
By E&P Staff
Published: October 02, 2006 1:50 PM ET updated 2:15 PM
NEW YORK Interviewed by Matt Lauer on the Today show today, Bob Woodward revealed that he had deliberately timed his new book, "State of Denial," to come out before the November elections.
Lauer had challenged Woodward on the timing, since the charges in the book about the administration allegedly misleading the public on progress in the Iraq war are so significant. How could he hold that for a book? Why didn't he get them published in his newspaper, The Washington Post, or shout them from a "mountaintop" instead of waiting to "make a splash" with them in a book?
Woodward replied that he had not waited "to make a splash, but to assemble the whole story," and then go to the White House and Pentagon and CIA and ask, "What did you do?" He added: "Simon & Schuster and my bosses at the Washington Post said the only real obligation here is to tell it before the election.
"That's what we're doing. People can judge for themselves."
Asked by Lauer if he is saying in the book that Bush "lied," Woodward said he wouldn't use that language. He did deny claims from the White House that he came in with pre-meditated idea and manufactured conclusions to fit.
He also stuck by his guns on another key scoop in the book -- in which he reveals that CIA Director George Tenet and his top intelligence man met with Condoleezza Rice, then national security chief, two months before 9/11, to deliver a very strong warning about a coming terrorist attack on the U.S.
They claimed she brushed them off. Rice today denied that the meeting took place -- or if it did, she did not receive any strong warning about such an attack.
Recent Comments