Kennedy's again?

Pelican

POLITICAL TIESDr. William Kennedy Smith, remember him? The Kennedy nephew who was acquitted of sexual assault charges a few years ago.He now wants to run for Congress.That's kind of backwards. First you get elected, then you have the sexscandal. People move so quickly now.

---

"Audemus jura nostra defendere"- - - - - - - - - - - - - It is useless to hold a person accountable for anything they say while in love, drunk, or running for office.

turbo

So what's new, the Kennedys all have the idea that their qualifications to congressional service begins with their sexual, or drinking exploits and the free media coverage that comes with it.There is plenty of people that already are alined with him and would vote for him regardless of his legacy.Since he does his best work in the dark it's no wonder that roaches that higly esteem him will be happy to vote him into office. Vermont or Mass sounds like a good state to represent for him.

Free N TX

That's all we need, another Kennedy in Washington. Pray it don't happen.

timberbeast

Man, if drinking and sex scandals get you elected, I should have run when I was 19!!!!!!

turbo

Unless you've forced yourself on a woman while intoxicated or have left the seen of an auto accident without rendering 1st Aid to your injured passengers, you wouldn't have a chance in Mass, however, if you've been involved in any (intern) disappearences you might still qualify for a run at a Congressional seat in CA.

ndbilly

Relax, all. He tested the waters for about a nanosecond and then withdrew. Immediate heat regarding his trial and since he didn't have the Chicago machine's blessing, he was dead in the water, you should excuse the expression, Uncle Ted.

mudge

I was going to post a huge dissertation about my revulsion for the Kennedys (ALL of them). I decided that I can't sit here all day and that's how long it would take.Every time you see Teddy, aren't you reminded of Vito Corleone?Mudge

---

Anyone who CAN carry, SHOULD carry!Let me update that.Anyone who CAN carry, BETTER carry.

davem3

Without a hand in the Kennedy cookie jar, he won't get far-especially in Chicago. Understand that after talking with them that Papa Kennedy told Jack they would have to settle for a majority-he couldn't afford a landslide! Pelican, how 'bout driving over to Mobile & running a patch thru the 16's on the ALABAMA just in case.

Trader Dave

Here is more Kennedy Info:Cut n paste from this site but this this makes me want to barf!Terror advocacy no bar to immigrationSen. Kennedy's 1990 law says 'mere' membership in cell OKEditor's note: In collaboration with the hard-hitting Washington, D.C., newsweekly Human Events, WorldNetDaily brings you this special report every Monday. Readers can subscribe to Human Events through WND's online store. c 2001 Human Events A 1990 U.S. immigration law, sponsored by Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., instructs State Department employees that "mere" membership in a terrorist organization or advocacy of acts of terrorism should not exclude foreigners from receiving U.S. immigration visas. Under the law as it is written, someone who belongs to a Middle Eastern terrorist group and has publicly stated a desire that the World Trade Center towers be blown up cannot, on those grounds alone, be denied permission to legally enter the United States as a prospective citizen. In such a case, the ultimate decision of whether to grant an immigration visa is up to a State Department official's subjective evaluation of a person's knowledge and intent. According to the official foreign affairs manual posted on the State Department website, the immigration law requires that a foreigner must be denied a visa if he or she has "indicated intention to cause death or serious * harm, and/or incited terrorist activity." The department defines "incitement" as "the making of utterances, written or oral, which are intended to arouse, urge, provoke, stir up, instigate, persuade, or move another person to commit an act of terrorism." But merely "advocating" terrorism, or belonging to a group that engages in terrorism, cannot be used as grounds for exclusion. "Only statements that directly further or abet the commission of a terrorist act may properly constitute a basis for denying a visa," says the manual. A spokesman for the State Department confirmed that if an individual generally advocates terrorism, but does not intend to further a terrorist attack, that individual is "not automatically ineligible for a visa." Also, the spokesman confirmed, membership in a terrorist organization is not grounds for exclusion unless the individual in question "knew or should have known" that the group he belonged to was involved in terrorist activities. "It has to do with intent," says the spokesman. "If you look at the regulation, it says, 'incitement is the making of utterances written or oral, which are intended to move another person to commit another act of terrorism.' If I am a student in France, and I hate the United States and I'm sitting in my dorm room with five other people with me, and I say, 'We ought to blow up the U.S. embassy in Paris.' Is that actually intended? Do you think somebody would do it?" The regulations actually contain these words: "tatements approving a specific terrorist act, and asserting that such acts should be repeated, do not render an applicant ineligible." Most of the visa section of the foreign affairs manual is based on the Immigration and Naturalization Act of 1990, which lowered the national security standards for granting immigration visas. Prior to that, under the 1952 Immigration Act, aliens could be excluded if there was reason to believe they would engage in activities against the public interest or the security of the United States. Aliens also could be excluded for advocating anarchism, the assault or murder of U.S. government officials, the unlawful damage of property, or for publishing or possessing material advocating such activities. The term "mere membership" in a terrorist organization was not defined by Congress in the 1990 act, so the State Department had to devise its own policy. The manuals that include the State Department instructions are sent to every U.S. embassy and consulate in the world to assist consular officers in admitting aliens into the country. Certain consular offices in unfriendly states have special instructions on processing visas for foreign nationals. But every alien must go through a name check, and nationals from unfriendly regimes go through a more intensive check. In 1990, a blind Egyptian sheik named Omar Abdel-Rahman, who was later convicted as a conspirator in the 1993 World Trade Center bombings, was admitted to the United States with a visa issued by the embassy in Sudan, even though his name appeared on the State Department's list of undesirables. This watch list consists of 5.5 million people who may be inadmissible to the United States for various reasons, including criminal histories and terrorist links, as well as lack of funds or infectious diseases. Kennedy and Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, D-N.Y., pushed the new legislation through the Senate during the 1990 Persian Gulf crisis. The legislation was also promoted by some Irish-American groups. On Oct. 26 of that year, Kennedy explained on the Senate floor: "The exclusion categories are reformed and updated to end outdated ideological, medical and communicable disease provisions."

Iconoclast

Second what Mudge said.

Lowrider

Kennedy should be hung for treason.

---

She was only a fisherman's daughter,But when she saw my rod she reeled.

badboybob

The whole damn clan should be exported to the coldest spot in Siberia. I am personally sick of hearing about these * who consider themselves so far above the law that they can do anything. Ted Kennedy is a murderer. Others in that clan are murderers and rapists. They are an arrogant bunch of elitists who do not deserve citizanship in our country.

Patrick Odle

I'll give him this and no more ,He apparentlywas smart enough not to take campaign money from the mob and then turn on them like his 2 brothers did. however he is still a kennedy and in my most humble opinion that places him somewhere down scale from hog crap.

Mom Mom

Let me see if I understand this correctly- verbally advocating terrorist acts against the United States is ok, but a child who expresses vague feelings of wanting to hurt someone is arrested, suspended from school (although the statements were made after school hours off school property) and referred for psychiatric evaluations? The lunatics are really running the asylum. Too bad we can't see fit to give our own children the same benefit of the doubt regarding "intent" as we accord foreign born members of terrorist organizations. BEAM ME UP, SCOTTY; THERE'S NO INTELLIGENT LIFE DOWN HERE!!!!!!!![This message has been edited by Mom Mom (edited 10-16-2001).]