http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/ en Copyright 2008 Thu, 07 Feb 2008 23:22:18 +0000 http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/ http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss link to what they came up with.) You can argue until you are blue in the face about a lot of things, and the local wag and his audience did a whole bunch of that. I started listening to him in the fall of 2000, when I moved down to Montgomery County, MD, right before the 2000 election. I stayed up all night the day after I started a new job watching election results. During the rest of the fall, the tapes of the Gore vs. Bush Supreme Court debate would be hot off the burner and Core would have them on. It was really fascinating stuff. I generally have to give Core some credit, as the discussions on his show are pretty lively, and he works okay with the callers. There were two issues that had me wanting to chime in. The first, which did not make the creed, was "states' rights." "You gotta have states' rights on that list, Chris." "Oh, yeah, you can't be a conservative without believing in states' rights." He just made that statement when I dialed into the show - something I've never done, although I had a letter read on O'Reilly once - but got busy-signalled to death, then pulled into the doctor's office parking lot. (I mean, really, who listens to talk radio in the house??) The second is the first bullet listed in the so-called conservative creed they came up with: the first responsibility of government is a strong national defense. Core kept trying to figure out the best way to talk about a strong military. You see just above what he settled upon. Let's talk about "States' Rights" for a second. I'm going to go down this rabbit hole, because it's an important, pointy-headed Constitutional issue. First, only individuals have rights: the government has powers granted them by the will of the people, as enumerated in the Constitution. Let's all say "enumerated powers." Any issues with "States' Rights" are derived therefore from a discussion of power-sharing between levels of government. Neither local municipal, county, state, nor national governmental agencies have any rights, only powers. And, according to James Madison, the federal government - as delineated in the Constitution - operated directly on the individuals, with no intervening agency. One can stop the argument right here, but let's go on, because I know what you'll say: but what about individual state sovereignty? Aren't the states sovereign, and don't they have some protection from the national government? Let's define sovereignty. Here's Wikipedia on Sovereignty: "Sovereignty is the exclusive right to complete control over an area of governance, people, or oneself. A sovereign is the supreme lawmaking authority, subject to no other." Clearly, no state can match this definition, and, under our Constitution, can it. Here's Washington, writing during the period just before the Constitutional Convention of 1787: "Thirteen sovereignties, pulling against each other, and all struggling at the federal head, will soon bring ruin upon the whole." Surely, this most pre-eminent of our Founding Fathers must echo the intent for the national union. The states were no longer sovereign once the Constitution was ratified. Under the Articles of Confederation, "each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence;" the Preamble the US Constitution states that "we, the people, in order form a more perfect union... do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." Within the national framework, our establishing document does not carve out a sovereign situation for the states. If one were to make a case, I would posit that any sovereignty implied in the Preable is shared at the moment of ratification only by the individual and the national government ("We, the people," and the "more perfect union," "the United States"). In 1777, James Wilson of Pennsylvania, speaking on Congress, declared that individuals, and not states, were the object of governmental care. He amplified that statement while a member of the Constitutional Convention in 1787, asking whether the government was to over men, or over imaginary conglomerations named states? The concept of "state sovereignty," he further declared, was "magic over logic." However, there was a decades-long debate over the powers delegated by the people to the states by the Tenth Amendment: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people." Any concept of States' Rights did not last past Reconstruction, when the national government made all of the rules for re-establishing state legislatures. Understand that at no time did the national government officially declare that any state had "left the union." The national government - Lincoln particularly - was adament that the states could not leave the union as they had no jurisdiction to do so: they had no sovereignty. Let's cut to the chase on this one: the attempt to legitimize any so-called 'states' rights' was made by the SLAVE OWNERS in order to perpetuate OWNING HUMAN BEINGS. Any other entities that joined the SLAVE OWNERS did so from a narrow, interest group, perspective. The issue was resolved in the Civil War. The modern discussion on "States Rights" is really an attempt by individuals, acting at times through state legislatures, to keep the national government from accruing non-enumerated powers to itself. Phew! Ready for a break? No chance. Let's remember a few things about our Founding Fathers in writing the Constitution. First, they were extremely capable political animals; Second, they understood a bit about grievances of the population and the recourse the people had in the face of governmental oppression; Third, they were breaking new ground in the face of foreign enemies who worked assiduously for their defeat - and knew it; Fourth they were guided by experience more than reason - they were extremely pragmatic; and, Fifth, they were mostly lawyers or businessmen who understood the power of words and contracts. Consequently, the document they wrote was pragmatic and explicit. Look at the Sixth Amendment: if the sum being contested was greater than $20 - $20! - then an individual had a right to a trial by jury. $20!!!! Washington's fortune at the time is estimated to be $500,000, making him one of the richest men in the nation. He and his bunch of revolutionaries dotted eyes and crossed tees in the Constitution to the tune of twenty bucks! Words meant a lot. So, the second issue from the wags on the radio is that "a strong national defense is the first purpose of the federal government." A strong national defense is not a purpose of our govenment, "providing for the common defense" is. "Strong" is an adjective not found in the Constitution. The Constitution is filled with nouns and verbs, Shalls and Shall Nots, not adverbs and adjectives. Neither is national defense the primary purpose of national government. The Preamble to the Constitution lists these as the functions of the national goverment: 1. Form a more perfect union 2. Establish justice 3. Insure domestic tranquility 4. Provide for the common 5. Promote the general welfare 6. Secure the blessings of liberty to [themselves] and [their] posterity These fellows made a list in certain order for a reason. The First Amendment came first for a reason, and the Second for another, but that's fish to fry on a different day. My beef with the wags on the radio was mostly about the fellow trying to explain why providing for the common defense was or is a critical function of the government, although my understanding of this being a cornerstone of conservatism is not very clear. Obviously, only a sovereign nation can perform those duties listed by the Preamble. Equally obvious is the need of guaranteeing such sovereignty, whether by crafty treaties or by carrying a big stick. So I would put on that fellow's conservative creed "Ensuring the sovereignty of the United States by whatever means available is an essential government function." The United States did not have a "strong" national defense at any time by world standards at any time other than, perhaps 1864-65; 1917-1918; or 1943 onwards. We were eyed as having a weak military throughout our history. In fact, during Jefferson's administration, we paid tribute to North African pirates! Despite an always-strong military, the United States had maintained its sovereign status, with each President taking the actions required at the time, some more successfully than others, but all of them, in the whole, successful. Which leads me back to my starting point, Conservatism, and what we call conservative today. Most folks seem to accept that "modern" conservatives are what used to "classically" be called "liberals." Whatever. Traditional conservatism means favoring gradual change and tradition. I don't see any need to go much farther than that. "A political philosophy based upon individual liberty, property rights, national sovereignty, and a strict, textual interpretation of the Constitution. Specific policy for governmental action in such a philosoply would be limited to achieving the specific purposes of the government as enumerated in the Preamble to the Constitution, and in the Constitution's Articles and Amendments." ]]> http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2008/02/conservatism.html http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2008/02/conservatism.html Politics Thu, 07 Feb 2008 23:22:18 +0000 Capitalism and Environmentalism: Free Markets and the Environment, Capitalism and Freedom, Milton Friedman, Free to Choose The money shot of all money shots: "The neo-hippies must be stopped, before they completely destroy our environment!" Any one of us at Paulie World could have written this article. From a new blog I discovered through Fark: "Arthur's Hall of Viking Manliness." ]]> http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/12/neohippies_must_be_stopped.html http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/12/neohippies_must_be_stopped.html Tue, 18 Dec 2007 11:25:31 +0000 FOXNews.com - Nebraska Mall Shooter Broke Up With Girlfriend, Lost Job Before Massacre - Local News | News Articles | National News | US News Kid breaks up with girlfriend, loses job, breaks out the shooting irons. Media types wonder "what made him do it?" Man, within 24 hours, the shooter becomes the victim. How about: he was possessed by demons? As our God is a living God, so too must then be Satan. How about the egging-on the media circus imparts? Suicide note says: "Now I'll be famous." Ain't that something? Of course, this is what the media really wants, to create horrific news that coerces everyone to watch. Take a gander at the weather teasers every day. What made him do it? How about "He's crazy." Can't people be crazy anymore? A friend of mine recently expressed difficulty in adjusting to suburban life after a year in Baghdad. He's a good pal and I feel for him. Better him than me putting himself in harm's way. (I am a veteran army officer, by the way, who has had enough near misses with live bullets than most of my pre-9/11 generation.) God Speed, my erstwhile colleagues. But, my response was basically: Any guns in your lunch pail? Any dogs talking to you? Truck full of ammonium nitrate in the driveway? If you can answer No to all three questions, keep on chooglin'. Some people are just crazy, just like some people are just dumb, and some people have all the luck while most of us have none of it. "Now I'll be famous." Sheesh.]]> http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/12/what_caused_mall_shootings_ent.html http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/12/what_caused_mall_shootings_ent.html Thu, 06 Dec 2007 13:40:48 +0000 Hi, the Swamp Fox again, I mentioned that there are three types of malfunctions, but I only described the first type. I apologize for this. So, let me start this post with that. The other two types of malfunctions are what the instructors called High Brass; commonly know as a stove pipe. For those of you who may not know what this is, it is when a spent shell fails to eject properly and is caught in the ejector port causing the gun to not chamber another round as it prevents the slide from returning to battery, or to the proper position for firing. One must then looks at the gun to identify the malfunction, and lifting the muzzle up slightly tap the bottom of the magazine, roll the gun to the right as one racks the slide to eject the spent shell, and any round in the chamber to make sure one has a round properly seated in the chamber. Type three is what is called Low Brass; where a spent shell fails to eject even though the ejection sequence went as planned. This allows a shell to attempt to seat in behind the spent shell. In this case one lifts the gun to identify the malfunction, locks the slide back, strips the magazine from the gun, and racks the slide 3 times, to remove the contents of the chamber, do not lose contact with the slide during this procedure. The one inserts a fresh magazine and racks the slide again to chamber a round. Sorry for the omission of this in the last post http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/11/front_sight_day_two.html http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/11/front_sight_day_two.html Fri, 09 Nov 2007 23:09:45 +0000 Hey, Paulieworld, The Swamp Fox was in Nevada, for a fun week. First on the agenda was Front Sight, a world class shooting school. I took the two day defensive handgun course. But first, I got into Las Vegas about 12:30 local time 19 October, about a half hour ahead of schedule which is always nice. After collecting my luggage, and rental car I drove to Pahrump about an hour away, I got to tell you, if you ever get to Vegas you MUST take a ride out into the country side. It is absolutely beautiful, there are some mountains, although not really big mountains, and it is a stark beauty. It’s a place like this where one can see what is meant by the stanza “Purple Mountains Majesty”. The landscape is sort of like Iceland, but different, if you know what I mean. There is that monochromatic look, in Iceland it is a yellow, and gray, well varying shades of yellow, and gray, Nevada is a tan and seems to be more uniform. However I could be wrong I was trying to take it in while driving. On the way to Pahrump along Highway 160 there were signs telling one to be aware of the wild horses and burros that may be in the road, I bet that would mess up your day, if you hit one of those bad boys. Also, there is a lot of open range, and signs that warn of it. The speed limit is 70 in some places but most people seemed to be going about 75 or 80, I went about 70. If anyone travels a lot especially to other states, if you rent a car, take my advice get a GPS. Man, are those things invaluable, no need for a map, never stop for directions. It will take you turn by turn to your destination right on the money, well, they say within 25 feet plus or minus, but hey, if you can’t find where you are going if you are within 25 feet, you shouldn’t be out wandering around outside by yourself. Further, one can program it for shortest route, no highway, or whatever, and even if you miss a turn it will still get you where you want to go. http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/11/nevada_front_sight.html http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/11/nevada_front_sight.html Thu, 01 Nov 2007 23:43:52 +0000 There has been so much noteworthy activity in the political world lately, and I am now finally becoming interested in what a few of the dozens of Presidential candidates have to say. Thompson has been a big yawn. McCain will always be McCain. I like the war hero McCain very much, however.... Just a few random comments here prompted by your message, (in no particular order): As I recall, and for what it's worth, the Oklahoma City bombing was a protest against both the Waco massacre and the siege at Ruby Ridge, Idaho. Yes, this was during the GHWB administration, in 1992. Regarding Waco, I will never forget watching the seige on live TV, shocked that the federal government (meaning the Clintonista Regime) ordered a military attack against American citizens. If I recall correctly, the first vehicle to breach the compound was from an Army Reserve engineer unit. I tried to imagine a Connecticut National Guard unit being ordered to assault a religious cult in the woods of Danielson (or East Hampton, whatever...). Two agents had been killed, but the eventual response was beyond comprehension, and no one was held accountable. This is highly relevant today, as Co-Presidents Clinton placed all blame on Janet Reno, who was Hillary's choice (albeit her third choice) for AG. Reno was never punished, and went on to abuse the AG's office to defend the regime's perpetual scandals. We need to remind voters who President Hillary will appoint. Romney will be a much stronger candidate than a lot of people think. I agree that early primary wins will increase name recognition and he will respond well to that. I had the pleasure to meet him earlier this year after a speech in Greenwich. He is very bright and charismatic, and is very likeable. Romney is a big name in Michigan, which will be pivotal in the national election. He's winning the pro-lifers, who can sink Rudy either in the primary or in the national election by not showing up. I'm still leaning toward Rudy because of leadership. Also, he has the potential to bring in several big states that otherwise might not be in play for the GOP. The September 11th factor weighs heavy in NY, NJ, PA, VA and CT. Many of the people in these states were already aware of Rudy's transformation of NYC. No matter who the GOP candidate is, he will be attacked by the left-wing media, which have been covering up for Hillary for 15 years. Now they are mostly ignoring her illegal fundraising, as well as her 50% negatives -- unprecedented for a major party's presumptive nominee! Rudy is the best candidate to go head-to-head against her, but he might not get the chance. I know a couple of Romney's insiders and they tell me that he is the most competitive man they've ever met. He will be a great candidate. http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/10/genl_putnam_chimes_in.html http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/10/genl_putnam_chimes_in.html Politics Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:17:42 +0000 In response to Mr. Adams: My dad asked me last Christmas dinner who I thought would win in 2008 and I gave him the same answer, for a lot of the same reasons. Conceding that (for the sake of the argument) it's Hillary vs Romney, whose background will rouse more prejudice in the voters, Hillary the leftist woman or Romney the whacko Mormon? A lot of people are going to be voting on that issue. The press, of course, will point to all the other woman leaders out there in the world - especially Thatcher and Meir - and at the same time point back to the troubles the Mormons and Utah had in their relationship with the US. There was a front-page article in Time or Newsweek seven or ten years ago praising the Mormons for raising their kids the right way; I'm sure by next spring, Time will have forgotten that and only focus on the polygamists and gun nuts. (Hey, Swamp Fox, was Ruby Ridge in Idaho? Or New Mexico? Where?) (NB: Let's not forget that the Oklahoma City bombing was a protest againstRuby Ridge: unfortunately that was a GHWB administration, not a Clinton one, if I remember correctly.) If Hillary is the candidate, I will bang the Waco & posse comitatus drum as loudly as I can. I really don't think there's much of a chance of Hillary not being the candidate. She (and her minion, Rahm Emanuel) have had way too much control in disbursing funds to other candidates not to have coopted them and their organizations. Her status as a front-runner has none of that Willy Stark hellfire that Dean had in the winter of 2003 - 2004, although I would say that her administration would have all of that Willy Stark corruption. Hey, good to be back. http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/10/2008_ugh_preprepredictions.html http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/10/2008_ugh_preprepredictions.html Politics Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:14:58 +0000 Just to go on record, I predict that the next POTUS will be - Mitt Romney. Here's my reasoning. Romney will likely win Iowa and NH. He has plenty of his own money. Evangelicals just won't support Rudy. Thompson just doesn't seem to be exciting anyone. McCain has no chance because of his immigration position. So Mitt is going to get the GOP nomination. Hillary will get the Democratic nomination. And I still think Hillary's negatives are too high to be elected. Even though Hillary puts Ohio into play, Romney puts Michigan into play. And Mitt looks and sounds the part. I think Giuliani would be a good President, but he is not a conservative. He loses the social values voters. I think Romney can get the values voters. And I think he wins Michigan, making it pretty difficult for any democrat to win. That being said, I have not yet decided who I will vote for in the primary. I will vote for the Republican nominee in the general election, whoever it is. The Democrats have some pretty scary candidates on their side, and frankly, as much as she turns my stomach whenever I hear her speak, Hillary is the least scary. Hillary will screw up the country economically and socially, but on the foreign policy front I believe that she actually gets the Islamic fanatic threat – which is why the Kos idiots are so unhappy with her. Obama and Edwards are a joke on foreign policy as well as domestic policy. http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/10/mr_adams_predicts.html http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/10/mr_adams_predicts.html Politics Fri, 26 Oct 2007 18:10:21 +0000 Keating Five. (And don't come back to me after reviewing the facts that McCain was found by the Senate ethics committee to have broken no law of the United States. Quis custodiet ipso custodes? Huh? Tough now to remember how it used to be, when early summer (Stanley Cup season) decided primaries. In 1968, Bobby Kennedy won the California primary on June 5, and the expectation that the upcoming New York primary would be a dogfight. (Only 17 states had primaries in 1968; there were 30 that had them in 1976. Most states had some sort of caucus. I somewhat miss those days of smoke-filled rooms and conventions that meant something.) I thought we had much better candidates who were able to focus on more weighty issues. Besides, it's only the partisans who vote in primaries anyway, right? Today's beauty pagent is already six months too long before the primaries; getting the primaries out of the way by March is the major parties' way of eliminating competition from the incumbents, coupled with the desire to turn the substance of a political debate into pabulum. The substantive discussion of issues has become an avoidance of making mistakes, and the general debate has devolved into background noise until the party attack machines find some bomb to drop in order to make the other guy look like a sleaze. Imagine Lincoln getting elected now with a crazy wife, whose family were slaveholders, and whose sons fought and died for the cause of the insurrection. Makes poor W's 25-year old DUI bust seem pale by comparison. Ugh. Political primaries. Even reading our old reliables over at Real Clear Politics, Free Republic, and, of course, PoliPundit, seems drab and tired. Well, we'll be back up to our old tricks soon enough. Mr. Adams, Gen'l Putnam, and myself have started cranking up the sophistry machine with a string of emails with 2008 predictions. Stay tuned. ]]> http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/10/introducing_the_dismal_reality.html http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/10/introducing_the_dismal_reality.html Politics Fri, 26 Oct 2007 13:49:48 +0000 PEOPLE OF THE COMMONS, THIS IS A CALL TO ACTION! I am issuing a call to action for the citizens of Paulieworld. Now, I know we all support the troops, and wish to do what we can to help them in the completion of their mission. Well, here is a way to help, there is a product called Bore Snake, which is a cleaning device for firearms. It is something they all can use, it’s a fairly straight forward implement, quick, and easy to use, one simply drops the weighted end down the barrel of the weapon, from the breech and pulls the Bore Snake, after treating it with cleaning solvent through the barrel. The Snake has a brass brush embedded in the cleaning cloth, and is a great, quick, one step cleaning tool. Further, there is a group on the internet taking donations for Bore Snakes to be sent to Soldiers, and Marines in Iraq and Afghanistan, one submits a donation and they buy the Snake and ship it to someone, or you can specify who you wish to get the Bore Snake. To check it out go to projectboresnake.org and all you need to help will be on the website. The Swamp Fox http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/10/attention_paulieworld.html http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/10/attention_paulieworld.html Mon, 15 Oct 2007 01:19:52 +0000 Clinton: $5,000 for Every U.S. Baby And another thing that doesn't seem to hold much water: "Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton said Friday that every child born in the United States should get a $5,000 "baby bond" from the government to help pay for future costs of college or buying a home." Hillary calls a $20B gift from the taxpayers to babies a return to "the tradition of savings she remembers as a child." What is it about receiving a handout that equates with "saving." My remembrance of a "tradition of savings" was getting up and delivering newspapers to put $10 a week if I was lucky into a bank account. I don't think the "pay me for making babies" is anything close to working hard to learn the value of a dollar.]]> http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/09/tradition_of_savings.html http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/09/tradition_of_savings.html Sat, 29 Sep 2007 14:05:07 +0000 From: The Swamp Fox To: The Commons Subject: GoE, OPERATION JUSTICE & A.N.S.W.E.R./MAS Rally Date: 15 September, 2007 Washington, D.C. Time: 11:00 to 18:00 Well, people, I went to the Gathering of Eagles (GoE) counter protest to the International A.N.S.W.E.R. (Act Now to Stop War and End Racism)/ Muslim American Society (MAS) peace march. First I stopped at the GoE Rally Point (RP). It was basically the same as last time (17 March, 2007) very Patriotic, lots of Flags, Veterans, Parents, Gold and Blue Star, speaking. Telling us about them children, and how they parent, and child appreciated our support. A few of the A.N.S.W.E.R. people wandered through, I think they were looking for a confrontation, if only by the way they presented themselves. They moved to the center of the group in front of the stage, displaying signs in opposition to the war. They were ignored, and were, after awhile, asked, politely, to leave the area, and were escorted out, if only to insure nothing was instigated by either side. I listened to a couple of Blue and Gold Star parents speak about their sons, and daughters. They were very proud of their children, and while I know this was not the only reason, for their commitment to what they were doing. As they spoke one could hear the pride in the voice, even as it broke with emotion. The most poignant were the Gold Star parents; they stood tall, thanking us for being there, and honoring their child, and their sacrifice. If one looked around amongst the crowd the sight of bikers with their tough hard appearance wiping their eyes as these parents spoke was touching. One incident of an anti in the crowd was they arrived and stood there watching the speaker, while wearing a shirt with a saying and holding a sign, neither of which I could read. The GoE Marshalls first asked that they leave, and when they declined, four of them stood in a box formation so as to either protect, or prevent any of sort shenanigans. They were ignored, and finally seeing that they were not going to get a rise out of the GoE they left. It was not long after, that I decided to go see what the A.N.S.W.E.R. crowd was up to. http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/09/15_september2007.html http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/09/15_september2007.html Sun, 23 Sep 2007 18:52:18 +0000 This was found on the internet, and they wonder why we don’t trust politicians. Why are these people such hypocrites? This guys votes not to allow citizens to protect themselves in their homes, but he does exactly that. There was before the Texas Legislature a bill called the castle doctrine, which allows a anyone with a concealed carry permit (CCW) who is any place they are legally allowed to be not to retreat when confronted by a criminal. This includes ones home, vehicle, place of business, or anywhere else. http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/07/houston_lawmaker_shoots_suspec.html http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/07/houston_lawmaker_shoots_suspec.html Sat, 14 Jul 2007 18:04:29 +0000 Hey, folks, sorry I haven’t had a Second Amendment update in a while, but my computer crashed, and I lost all my info. So, I had to get a new one and have just been messing around with it. But, I am back and up to speed. This is the next installment of my on going post about 2A (Second Amendment), with all the things I had before, and maybe if I am lucky I will be able to get a few new things in also, but I don’t think this issue. Anyway on to the first item Armed Citizen, which for those just joining us is a couple of news items, you won’t see in the Big Media. http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/06/second_amendment_update.html http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/06/second_amendment_update.html Tue, 19 Jun 2007 00:38:45 +0000 Reid says Bush told Iraq war lost cause�-�Nation/Politics�-�insider.washingtontimes.com Here's that patriot and troop supporter Harry Reid: "This war is lost and the surge is not accomplishing anything as indicated by the extreme violence in Iraq yesterday," Mr. Reid, Nevada Democrat, said at a Capitol Hill press conference with anti-war state legislators. Mr. Reid said that both Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates agree with his position, though neither has ever declared defeat. "You have to make your own decisions as to what the president knows," said Mr. Reid, who left the press conference without fielding follow-up questions. The White House said no one recalled Mr. Reid saying "the war is lost" at the meeting with the president. " I almost wish Tom Daschle was back.]]> http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/04/chicken_littles_the_backstabbi.html http://www.paulieworld.com/commons/2007/04/chicken_littles_the_backstabbi.html Fri, 20 Apr 2007 11:26:46 +0000