Random Thoughts on the Sad State of Affairs

It’s harder and harder to be a happy liberal nowadays. I miss the good old days when Republican obstructionism could be blamed for everything. Lately, things seem more off kilter than usual and the GOP has little to with it.

Katrina, wups, The Gulf of Mexico

We’re more than forty days into this and it’s only getting worse. Did Obama cause the well to blow? Of course not. Can Obama fix it? Of course not. With that said, optics are everything and one just doesn’t get a warm fuzzy that the Obama administration has a plan. They’ve put a dude with zero name recognition as their point man on this … I can’t come up with his name as I type this and I’m not gonna Google it to find out. I shouldn’t have to. Some administration big shot who has a reputation with the people should be the mouthpiece for this on a 24/7 basis. Maybe Joe Biden if he’s not too busy? My fellow liberals cringe at the Katrina comparison but I’m sorry, the major factor that this crisis has in common with Katrina is an unconvincing commitment from the Federal government. Yes, with Katrina, lives were lost and property destroyed. With the Gulf, an entire ecosystem is in danger. It’s been called Katrina in slow motion.

Robert Reich, former Clinton Secretary of Labor, suggests forcing BP into receivership so we can control how they allocate resources to fix the problem. Oh, can’t you just see the conservatives losing their lunch over that idea? Obama, the Socialist takes over another company. Watch out private sector, if you screw up in the least, you’ll give the Fed an excuse to take you over. How Reich could suggest this without knowing the likely blow-back is beyond me.

The disappointment here goes beyond politics. It’s yet another sad comment on human nature. BP spends its R&D money on learning how to make more money, not on how to fix major disasters. The result is we have one Rube Goldberg fix after another. As I write this, the saw that was supposed to cut off part of the well apparatus to lessen the stress is now stuck in the well apparatus. It’s the Keystone Kops while sea animals die, Gulf dependent industry falters and the BP CEO says, “I want my life back.”

The other comparison that has been made by pundits is to the Iran hostage crisis of the late 70’s. That crisis, perhaps more than any other, made Jimmy Carter appear impotent and made the climate ripe for a wise old grandfather, Ronald Reagan, to come in and take charge. Obama risks that same label of impotence if he cannot reassure the American public of the government’s ability to problem-solve.

I have no prescription for Obama this time. The only thing he can do is get someone we know and trust (maybe Colin Powell?) in charge of this thing and in front of the cameras so we can at least have the illusion that our government is competent.

Sestak-gate

Will the whole brouhaha over what job Joe Sestak got offered so he wouldn’t challenge Arlen Specter in the PA Senate primary boil over real fast? Yes, I think it will. Will a special prosecutor be appointed? No, I doubt that will happen. So as a liberal, shouldn’t I be happy that this tempest in a teapot will be yesterday’s old news very shortly? Well, politically, yes I am happy. As a human I’m kinda pissed off.

Let’s start with Sestak himself. What purpose beyond self-aggrandizement was served by Sestak hinting at impropriety on the part of the Obama administration? None. It was a pure ego move on his part. If he wins in November, I don’t see how anyone in the Democratic caucus can trust him. Quite frankly, I find the dude such a  self-righteous windbag that if I were a PA resident, I might just vote for Toomey to spite him.

It doesn’t end with Sestak though. Even if we accept the most benign version of this story, namely that Rahm Emanuel dispatched Bill Clinton to offer Sestak a non-paying appointment in exchange for not running, we’re still left with a broken promise. I didn’t vote for Obama to see business as usual in the White House. I thought I was gonna see things cleaned up. No, it’s the same old same old. The only thing worse than conservatives hypocritically jumping on Obama for this, is the sight of liberals abandoning their own moral compass when confronted with corruption. Our message should be loud and clear. This is not a big deal, but it is a big disappointment. We can’t even admit it’s a disappointment.

While I’m on the subject of pure politics, I think it’s high time for Obama and every succeeding President to declare:

While I am in office I will not attend a single solitary fundraiser. My job is to be President, not to get folks elected.

Just about every dumb-ass thing Obama has said in the past 18 months has been at a fundraiser where he totally forgot that his words were being heard by everyone, not just the Democratic insiders in the audience. The week that he flew down to NOLA for the Gulf crisis, he stopped in CA first for a fundraiser. STOP IT! Let Barbara Boxer take care of herself. We need you to run the damn country!

Al and Tipper’s Inconvenient Truth

[picapp align=”left” wrap=”false” link=”term=gary+coleman&iid=8941867″ src=”3/d/2/5/File_photo_of_f33a.jpg?adImageId=13075537&imageId=8941867″ width=”234″ height=”269″ /]

Israel shoots up a boat, North Korea gets stupid with South Korea, Greece is friggin’ bankrupt and Gary Coleman is dead. Just when you think things couldn’t get any worse, out of the friggin’ blue, Al Gore and his wife Tipper announce they are separating after 40 years of marriage. I must say this is consistent with Rutherford Lawson Rule #1207, which states:

Couples who are overly affectionate in public places are always suspect.

When Al put that seemingly endless lip-lock on Tipper at the 2000 Democratic Convention my marriage-in-trouble radar went off immediately. It’s only a surprise that it took ten years for the thing to implode. Now the only question is, was Al’s dick to blame? I hope not because I am so sick of politicians and pseudo-politicians letting their gonads run the show.

Maybe I’m just going through a rough time but I don’t see a whole lot to be happy about nowadays when it comes to being a liberal.

Respectfully,
Rutherford

WordPress.com Political Blogger Alliance

Advertisements

399 thoughts on “Random Thoughts on the Sad State of Affairs

  1. Robert Reich, former Clinton Secretary of Labor, suggests forcing BP into receivership so we can control how they allocate resources to fix the problem. Oh, can’t you just see the conservatives losing their lunch over that idea? Obama, the Socialist takes over another company. Watch out private sector, if you screw up in the least, you’ll give the Fed an excuse to take you over. How Reich could suggest this without knowing the likely blow-back is beyond me.

    Losing my lunch doesn’t come close. I watched that clip (I muted the 3 minutes of Overbite being the ass that he is) and I heard Reich admit that the knowledge and the experience are with BP on this matter, and that he knew that receivership wouldn’t change it. He seemed more concerned that BP had information that wasn’t flowing, and he felt that government control would change that (yeah, from the most transparentest government ever).

    I don’t see that as adequate cause to force receivership.

    BP spends its R&D money on learning how to make more money, not on how to fix major disasters.

    That’s because Research and Development is not spent on Disaster Planning. They are two different things. If you want share some of that blame, you might reserve it for the federal government that licenced the activity to begin with. I know, I know, they were too busy planning how to exempt themselves from the brilliant health care plan and cap and tax scheme that they were going to force on us.

  2. I disagree with the assessment that this is Obama’s Katrina.

    I think this was Obama’s 3:00am phone call.

    And he wasn’t ready to handle it, just like Hillary said he wouldn’t be. He juked and dodged the issue for weeks, until it looked like BP had a handle on it. Then he took ownership, telling us he was on in charge since day 1. Now that nobody knows what to do, his answer to stop the oil is a criminal investigation.

    “Just about every dumb-ass thing Obama has said in the past 18 months has been at a fundraiser”

    That’s because campaigning is Obama’s strong suit. Leadership—not so much.

    All Barack Obama has ever done is campaign. After he wins what he campaigned for, he starts campaigning for the next election.

    You were warned that this guy was not ready to lead this nation. You were warned by those in the opposing party and you were warned by some in your own party.

    You did not heed those warnings, and now, after 16 months, here you are expressing buyers remorse.

  3. LOL…..that was awesome. My anger and Rutherford’s anger meeting in some bizarre no-man’s land called the internet. I seriously LOLed when your well written but angry rant stumbled on to the star of Different Strokes.

    Welcome to the Dark Side, Rutherford.

  4. By the way, anyone remember that Different Strokes episode when Dudley got molested all the while a laugh track was constantly fired off?

    I’m still disturbed by that episode (which I believe was a “To be continued). The only other two part episode being when Sam got kidnapped.

  5. I think now is the time for a shout out! Let’s here it for Obama!!! Mission Accomplished! 😈 What goes around, comes around. Always does.

    At the risk of being a heretic, the BP spill bad karma for all the SOBs and hags in the Democratic party – really now the Progressive Party. What goes around, comes around cowards, hags, and shrews.

    They blamed Bush for Katrina, but what was really on trial was New Orleans and 70 years of Democratic meddling and underhanded deals. And now? A powerless, impotent President left sucking his thumb, a brain dead majority Congress downing the Maalox, where even the hag in charge suddenly got religion, unable to do nothing but watch. Sue the bastards is all they’ve got left. Karma, baby, Karma.

    All that joy when they mocked Bush for days counting that he and our military keep your domestic cities and towns safe. Blows up in their face four times in twelve months less than six month into the Obama Administration. Karma, baby, Karma.

    Bush ruined the economy, or so we were told. Then with Obama at the helm, millions more jobs lost, debt totally out of control, the economy in the tank and not looking good after a 3.4T investment. Karma, baby, Karma.

    Bush is a warmonger,or so we were told. Then Obama continues to follow through with the Bush Doctrine once he takes the big chair, and in fact escalates the unmanned drones. I say hooray for Obama. But the Left is silent about an apology. Karma, baby, Karma.

    Bush ruined the reputation of America, or so we were told. Obama would calm the seas, clear the skies, bring on that generation of goodwill and peace. Instead, we’ve alienated our allies, appeased our enemies, shown weakness when we needed strength. The world hangs by a thread, and now America looks the floundering fool. Karma, baby, Karma.

    Leftist media controls the flow of information for 40 years. The American public fed spoonfuls of shit about the evils Conservative party while FDR made messiah: ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN. Then slowly but surely, the worm turns. Talk radio, FOX News, and now the internet. Keynesian economics ruthlessly debunked. Karma, baby, Karma.

    Forty years ago, the Left took control of the public schools. Trillions wasted on idiot graduates, unable to attend college without remedial work. Disenfranchised parents removed their kids from public education and spent small fortunes for what all kids used to receive. Karma, baby, Karma.

    Urban cities – a hotbed and den of Leftist meddling. Burnt out buildings, decay, crime, filth. But they vote blue and were excused for their bad behavior. Their states on the brink of bankruptcy. Now, where do they turn? Karma, baby, Karma.

    1973, Roe V. Wade – a promise made that would assure all child born would be wanted. And the result? Almost half of children born out of wedlock, the black family destroyed, the white family not far behind. Lies, lies, and more lies. Karma, baby, Karma.

    I could go on and on. But I won’t.

    Rutherford, I am glad you are finally honest. I think there’s hope for you yet. Deep down, you’re a good man and perhaps a Lib I could work with to find common ground.

    Being a President is a bitch these days – This is not to blame Obama – he’s but a large symptom of the real problem. I’ve hinted to it many times here before. I thought him a sham then – I know him a sham now. But this is a battle that has been waged for at least 40 years, and the Liberal party has no one to blame but themselves. You’ve alienated over half the country. LIbs started it, they wanted it, and for a time they won it. But once the spotlight moved to them and they were asked to perform their magic, the hat was empty. Liberalism once again has been proven an utter failure.

    Times are tough for a Leftist. I wish I could say I feel your pain. My suggestion would be to admit the obvious, and get back to finding common ground for the good of our kids. 😉

    Thank you for a truthful article. There’s a few blowhards at this place that could learn a lesson from you.

  6. What purpose beyond self-aggrandizement was served by Sestak hinting at impropriety on the part of the Obama administration?
    Doesn’t Sestak have the right to stay squeaky clean? Serious he ran as something different.

    Tipper took all the good albums,cd’s etc. out of the Gore mansion. That led Al to snap.

    Wow that would be a pretty interesting promise to make.

  7. Tipper took all the good albums,cd’s etc. out of the Gore mansion. That led Al to snap.

    What? She took his copy of ‘Darling Nikki’ and he just couldn’t cope?

    I think he’s been spending time warming someone else’s globes, IYKWIMAITTYD.

  8. Tsk, tsk, tsk… I almost had sympathy for R. Almost.

    First off, here is a timeline on the Sestak issue:
    http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2010/05/timeline-sestak-bribe-and-white-house.html

    You’re almost there R. A felony was committed. That should really bother you. The White House is constantly changing its story on the Sestak issue and its efforts to get the story straight between Sestak, Clinton and the White House is the only transparent thing this administration has ever done.

    This is truly more serious than Watergate.

    Obama continues to blame everyone else on everything. Do you really think that’s what the American people are interested in? Do you think for a second that a President who refuses to take responsibility and who accepts only credit and shuns accountability is what the country needs or wants?

    We on the right have lots of words to define Obama- 99% of them extremely accurate, like FRAUD, COWARD, LIAR, IMBECILE, PHONEY, DISGRACE. But this Administration has come to be defined by one word- HYPOCRITE.

    You were sold a bills of goods. He’s shown no leadership. Leadership is taking responsibility, its holding yourself accountable. Leaders don’t dime out their subordinates and cast blame on others. Truman said the buck stops here. Obama, apparently doesn’t believe that. The awards certainly do, the unearned medals and accolaids, the applause and cheers, but never the buck.

    I said months ago that this administration is rebuilding the wall between law enforcement and the intelligence community. Terrorists are going to stop defeating themselves- because DHS sure as hell isn’t beating them- and a terrorist attack is going to occur in the US, and Obama in typical Obama fashion is going to blame someone else. When that happens, and it will, the backlash you will see in this nation will be unlike anything most of us have seen in ours lifetimes. The American people will not tolerate it and the best you can hope for at this point, is that it doesn’t occur before November.

  9. “Tipper took all the good albums,cd’s etc. out of the Gore mansion. That led Al to snap.”

    OMG, I haven’t been reminded of the PMRC in ages! Bastards killed my favorite 80’s radio station (KMET).

  10. And now the White House is admitting that there are other elections it has tried to influence through job offers.

    The Obama administration dangled the possibility of a government job for former Colorado House Speaker Andrew Romanoff last year in hopes he would forgo a challenge to Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet, officials said Wednesday, just days after the White House admitted orchestrating a job offer in the Pennsylvania Senate race.

  11. Cheer up, Rutherford. It’s not that bad. I think that maybe you’re letting the Obama-hating hyenas who comment on your very own blog get to you.

    Sestak-gate? Sestak answered the reporter’s question honestly without any idea that the answer would be such a big deal – to the Republican noise machine. The Emanuel-to-Clinton-to-Sestak process was dumber than hell, and so have been the explanations. But I think that the Ape is crazy when he says that a felony was committed. He’s no expert on the relevant law, and neither am I, but stupid as the whole affair has been it wasn’t THAT stupid. Is there anyone knowledgeable who thinks we have a felony here who isn’t an obvious rabid partisan?

    Rutherford, I’m exactly where you are on Al and Tipper. A little TOO cute and lovey-dovey. But after FORTY FREAKING YEARS together, why split up now? I never liked Tipper much after she got all silly over dirty words in music or whatever, but that’s just me. Who would have thought that Al and Tipper would be the ones who split, while the Clintons are still together – apparently until death do them part.

    The Gulf oil well fiasco? I have been extremely disappointed in the Administration posture toward the company and the cleanup. Tony Hayward may be a brilliant CEO of a big oil company but he’s a PR moron.

    http://www.newsweek.com/2010/06/02/what-not-to-say-when-your-company-is-ruining-the-world-.html

    And every time he opens his mouth, it makes the Administration look bad. People wonder “Why are they still letting this dumb Brit run things?”

    The feds probably don’t have the expertise to do anything about plugging off the well. Putting a “big name” “in charge” would be useless and phony. Obama says that the feds are in charge, but you couldn’t tell it from what we see and hear. At least BP doesn’t seem to be taking any orders from any body.

    To me the crunch will come when it’s time to present the bills for damages and cleanup to BP. Will they pay up cheerfully or argue over every nickle? I have my opinion. What’s yours?

  12. Without pre-judging who was right or wrong in Israel’s action against the Turkish ship – did Israel strengthen itself by this action? Or weaken itself?

  13. 7 or 8 years ago I would of punched a hole in the drywall.

    If you happen to watch ESPN you will know why. I’m too sick to even write about it.

  14. did Israel strengthen itself by this action? Or weaken itself?

    Neither…those who criticize Israel continue the drumbeat of shrillness and blaming Israel for the world’s ills. Reasonable folks that recognize Israel is the continual victim of Jew hating and malicious propaganda believe Israel did what they had to do. I commend them for their restraint.

    But they did send a message that they mean what they say. The next terrorist flotilla may not be so lucky.

  15. National Defense comes before National Perception.

    Of course, Greychin and his like don’t believe that there are people who dream of exterminating the Jews and that there is also a plethora of WMD missing out there in the world.

    So…Political correctness is more important. Risking something unspeakable is totally ok. Let the ship in and everything that may or may not be on it.

  16. Yeah R, G-chin has a better solution than applying objectivity when it comes to those “hyenas who comment on your very own blog.” Edit and delete them. Problem solved. You win. . .

  17. Yes Tex……it is exactly that.

    I know baseball. I know umps aren’t perfect. But I’m convinced that motherfucker did it on purpose.

  18. D.R. – pitching this year has been incredible. A perfect game is such a rarity. Now it seems like there is one every two weeks.

  19. Yeah I know. And the thing is, it’s damn good pitching and just not shitty batting. Have you seen Jimenez from the Rockies? Amazing stuff.

  20. By the way, anyone remember that Different Strokes episode when Dudley got molested all the while a laugh track was constantly fired off?

    Whomever invented the laugh track should have been shot. Some truly funny shows are now hard for me to watch because I’m more aware of that damn laugh track.

    Hey Rabbit, could Diff Strokes even exist nowadays? With all the pedo-paranoia Mr. Drummond would have been assumed a perv the minute he offered Willis and Arnold sanctuary.

  21. BiW, either I’m defining R&D too loosely or you are defining it to narrowly and I suspect the latter. We’re not talking mere disaster recovery here. There appears to be a technology problem, not just a procedural or process problem. The boys at BP developed (R&D) ambitious drilling methods but did not develop technologies that could fix critically broken wells.

    I call that R&D being used for profit and only for profit. So I stand by my statement.

  22. That’s because Research and Development is not spent on Disaster Planning. They are two different things.

    No, they are not. Isn’t a “blowout preventer” part of “disaster planning”? And don’t you think that BP might wish right now that they had applied a bit of R&D to disaster planning?

    If they had, perhaps Tony Hayward would have his life back. And some other lives too.

  23. Damn …. I forgot Tipper was part of the PMRC. Heck, I would have left the beeeeyatch over that years ago. If I want to listen to “Me So Horney”, that is “my prerogative”, h/t to Bobby Brown. 🙂

  24. I’m incredibly impressed wish this John Hofmeister (I think that is how it spelled). He’s the former CEO of Shell, who shredded the idiot Congress at last year’s hearings about the lies about big oil. He’s the one that tried to help out the moron Congresswoman Maxine Waters when she couldn’t think of the word “nationalize” and substituted “socialized”, and every other “ized” – an indicator of things to come.

    Here’s the facts – a man we should listen to. There have been 35,000 offshore holes drilled the last 40 years without a single incident until now. There have been 10,000 deep water wells like this without incident until now. In some places, we have had to drill in 10,000 ft of water. That is asinine and stupid in the name of saving the environment. That’s asking for trouble.

    If anybody ought to really have their asses kicked over this, besides the bumbling BP/Halliburton/Transocean management that pushed this out of sheer greed because it caused a million a day to drill, it ought to be these environmentalist goons who have made it chic to have to drill 50 miles of the coast in the name of ecology. Stupid, really stupid.

    Rutherford, in the name of fairness mainly out of my respect for you honesty in this post, just like Bush should not have been blamed for Katrina, I’m not going to lay the blame on Obama. But this is payback for the sorry crap most of the Left used as ammunition, the associated lying media that blamed Bush, and the way our sorry politics is played.

    You never did tell me if you were feeling any better.

  25. I got to quit typing while I watch TV. Of is off, and a few others you ir your, etc…

    Wish I had a preview key.

  26. Gray, I certainly don’t think Sestak-gate rises to the level of criminality and the boo-hooing from the right is such hypocritical BS that they should be ashamed of themselves.

    BUT

    If one were to believe the Obama of 2008, this kind of wheeling and dealing would not be traced to the White House. I suppose I am way too pollyanish but a visionary leader CANNOT be a politician first and foremost. Diplomacy should not be confused with politics. Compromise should not be confused with politics. Whether it’s all the damn fundraisers, or backroom deals to achieve political outcomes, we are not witnessing a visionary presidency. Hell, even in the HCR, which I ultimately support, big pharma is getting a wet dream.

    I’ve told these guys on the right before to grow-the-f*ck-up and face that this is how the sausage gets made. But I’ve stumbled upon the kink in my argument. We believed in 2008 the sausage would have a new recipe. We wouldn’t be nauseated by watching it made. We probably shouldn’t blame Obama for this. We should blame ourselves for being fools.

    I don’t agree with Tex that all this demonstrates the ultimate failure of liberalism. I just think that the next time I get fired up during an election, I’m gonna step back and realize that there’s no electing a true inspiration. It’s just another politician whom you hope can deliver on some promises.

    Camelot is dead …. and of course, smart people know Camelot never existed in the first place.

  27. Before I go to bed, a health update for Tex … the rest of you can tune out if you want.

    Two weeks of doubling up on the pro-biotics did next to no good. Like a fool I figured I’d give my body more time to get back in shape and now five weeks out, I’m still basically screwed. I plan to call the doc tomorrow to move to step 2 which is anti-biotics. If that doesn’t do the trick, it’ll be time to see a specialist.

    It’s a friggin endless loop … the “issues” feed anxiety which in turn makes the issues worse.

    This is probably the main reason I am getting tired of defending this administration. When your guts hurt, and you hear some BS, you don’t have time to rationalize stuff. You just say, “stop the damn fundraiser and do your job.” I don’t have the luxury to intellectualize everything right now. If what I hear on the TV just makes my gut hurt more, I get pissed.

    The big question is, once my guts are cured, will permanent damage have been done to my political outlook? 😉

  28. Rutherford,

    Make me a promise being I’ve been complimenting you about being more fair.

    If by chance the Republicans win both the house and the senate this November, if they then decide that rules need no longer apply, and that’s just the way things are done in Washington, try to remember they are only following your lead.

    Try to keep the same standards in judgment. You ask me, either the law is the law, or the law is an ass.

    Your boys have clearly violated the law not once, but twice. And like Clinton when you excused him for committing felonies while lying under oath, you’re wrong now.

    Rahm Emanuel is clearly corrupt and should be summarily canned. I know you know this…

  29. I was hoping you were feeling better. I think you need to go see a G.I. pronto. This vacillating between probiotics and antibiotics is not good for your body. The antibiotics is probably not the answer – if I were you that would be my last alternative as that stresses the system.

    Just wanted you to know I haven’t forgotten, and have been thinking about you. Get well old friend. Your presence has been missed.

  30. DR, on the play at 1st…I know you don’t read other blogs so I will point you to this article in hopes you will find it interesting. I did.

    Rutherford: “The big question is, once my guts are cured, will permanent damage have been done to my political outlook?”

    We can only hope.

  31. WASHINGTON – The Obama administration dangled the possibility of a government job for former Colorado House Speaker Andrew Romanoff last year in hopes he would forgo a challenge to Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet, officials said Wednesday, just days after the White House admitted orchestrating a job offer in the Pennsylvania Senate race.

    These officials declined to specify the job that was floated or the name of the administration official who approached Romanoff, and said no formal offer was ever made. They spoke on condition of anonymity, saying they were not cleared to discuss private conversations.

    “Mr. Romanoff was recommended to the White House from Democrats in Colorado for a position in the administration,” White House deputy press secretary Bill Burton said. “There were some initial conversations with him but no job was ever offered.”

    The new revelation of a possible political trade again called into question President Barack Obama’s repeated promises to run an open government that was above back room deals.

    The Colorado episode follows a similar controversy in Pennsylvania. An embarrassed White House admitted last Friday that it turned to former President Bill Clinton last year to approach Rep. Joe Sestak about backing out of the primary in favor of an unpaid position on a federal advisory board.
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100602/ap_on_el_se/us_colorado_senate

    Par for the course?

    By the way, this advisory board thing smells like serious BS. Supposedly, it was for an intelligence advisory board (could be economic since Obama has two advisory boards) that specifically prevents government employees from sitting on.

    An interesting article on this, though I know Chin and R will bemoan the messenger rather than the content.

    A snipit:

    “It’s time for everyone involved in this scandal to come clean,” said Tom Fitton, chief of the government corruption investigating Judicial Watch.

    He said the situation raises concerns about a “disturbing pattern” in the Obama White House.

    “We still don’t have all the details about involvement of Obama administration officials in the sale of Obama’s former Illinois U.S. Senate seat by Rod Blagojevich. And we still don’t have answers about the charge that Obama Deputy Chief of Staff Jim Messina offered a federal job to Colorado Democratic Senate candidate Andrew Romanoff to keep him out of the Senate race. There is also the report that President Obama tried to push disgruntled White House Counsel Greg Craig out of the White House by offering a federal judgeship on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. And now we have Joe Sestak,” he said. “The Chicago Machine has truly come to Washington.”
    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=161765

    For Chin and R: I pasted the laws, explain how this was not a violation of those?

  32. Rutherford @ #30

    Maybe I’m too cynical, but I think a visionary leader MUST be a politician. Otherwise he may be a visionary but he won’t be a leader.

    Jimmy Carter’s greatest weakness as president was that he was NOT a politician. And every time some bozo runs for office claiming “I’m not a politician” he should either add the word “yet” or you shouldn’t vote for him because he will be just a noisemaker who doesn’t get anything done.

    Yes, Obama ran on doing things a different way, but “change” has to be incremental or it won’t happen. That’s just the way the system is constructed. It’s not like Obama has the full cooperation of either side in Congress in changing the rotten system. Both sides seem to like it just fine the way it is.

    Camelot = Utopia. Of course it never existed. And it never will.

    And change the channel. It sounds like you’ve been watching too much Faux. 😀

  33. On Sestak-gate, part Deux:

    In Colorado, state House Speaker Andrew Romanoff announced he’d take on appointed Sen. Michael Bennet in a Democratic primary. Romanoff had, however, previously applied for a job with the Obama administration. The White House asked if he was still interested in the position. Romanoff said he was sticking with the Senate race, and the White House backed off. There was no job offer, and no guarantee that one would be traded for the other.

    http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_06/024083.php

    This is a FELONY?

    If what the Obama administration did was impeachable, then Rep. Issa might want to consider retroactive impeachment action against Ronald Reagan, whose White House directly suggested to S.I. Hayakawa that he would get an administration position if he would stay out of the Republican primary for Senate in California; or call for an investigation and special prosecutor of the Bush White House for discussing a Cabinet post with Democratic Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska to clear the field for their preferred Republican candidate Mike Johanns in 2006. At the same time, Issa might want to call for expulsion of his Senate colleague Judd Gregg, who insisted before he accepted the post of Commerce Secretary in the Obama administration that there be a guarantee that his successor, appointed by a Democratic governor, be a Republican.

    http://blog.american.com/?p=14730

    Republicans have high standards, but they always seem to be double standards.

  34. Ape, like I said before, it’s pointless for you and I to argue over what the law says. Neither of us has the training. It’s just as silly as the “constitutional scholars” in the Tea Party telling us that most of American law in the last century is unconstitutional.

    How about we trade the opinions of experts who aren’t obvious partisans?

    You first.

  35. Rutherford, please pardon me for this bit of extraneous business but…

    Those of you who have had trouble seeing your comments on my blog, please try again as I have removed the spam filter and made a couple of other modifications that may help. Comments should be wide open to everyone now, including the Russian spammers.

    If you continue to have problems, please contact me at michaelgraychin@yahoo.com, and I’ll do my best to fix it.

  36. Yes, Republicans do seem to hold double standards – a little higher than the Dimocrats which hold no standards. In fact, I can’t think of what Dimocrat in Congress anymore that I believe honorable or wouldn’t break the law, when convenient. Not one. It’s become a party of Civil Suit Lawyers and deviants, and not much else.

    I believe this law was signed by Bill Clinton – not sure how that would make it applicable to Ronald Reagan.

    Sitting President commits a felony lying under oath and they excuse that as no big deal…

    But here’s the real kicker. The Obama sycophants like Double Chin expect us to believe the first paragraph of his article…

    I am struck—and bemused—by the kerfluffle over the job offer by the Obama administration to Joe Sestak, which turns out to have been an offer of a part-time advisory board post to keep him in the House, not the position of Secretary of the Navy as widely speculated.

    So a potential Senator will resign from running in the primaries, a position which he obviously has good chance of winning and in fact did, for non paid, part-time job on an advisory board? From all people, offered by the man who has no reputation to lose nicknamed Slick Willie Clinton?

    I am struck, no actually bemused that with straight face, these Dims like Double Chin will tell you that, then expect you to believe them.

  37. My suggestion to anyone running not nominated as Democrat this election season is to completely ignore election law. Any law short of killing somebody can be bent. Any rule or stipulation of election law, discard it. Bribe and cheat if you need to. Do what you have to do to win.

    Dims have been doing this for years in plain view and perverted any semblance of justice as they packed the courts. Men like Double Chin actually promote it. Perhaps like they do, we should simply ignore the law and the courts. Doesn’t seem to mean much these days anyway.

    Like I said, long overdue to start fighting fire with fire.
    Rent us a bus with a La Cucaracha horn, and we’ll drive through poor and destitute neighborhoods holding large sums of cash, smokes and liquor out the window for exchange for a vote? Happens all the time in the inner cities.

    Why aren’t we playing the game? 🙂

  38. Without pre-judging who was right or wrong in Israel’s action against the Turkish ship – did Israel strengthen itself by this action? Or weaken itself?
    That’s kind of a trick question.
    1. can’t not pre judge to some degree.plus…
    2. right and wrong not really good parameters.Too incomplete.Smart&dumb are two points that need to be weighed.
    3. Israel has clearly started coming to terms that it is alone so strength or weakness would need to count internally and externally.

  39. @ grey in #38 I think the Hayakawa one is the only apple to apple comparison. The other two involve someone not actually in the party of the offerer and the second is based in democracy more clearly than any of the examples.

  40. Tex @ #41:

    Those are the facts, as stated by everyone involved. Sorry if they aren’t what you hoped for, but those are the facts. I don’ understand your problem or your point. The facts DO support the position that this is all a kerfuffle over nothing, don’t they? Too bad for you.

    If Obama had offered Sestak a real job (like Secretary of the Navy or any other full-time job), that would have kept him out of the Senate race automatically. No need for a “deal.” Just offer him the damn job and see if the takes it. That didn’t happen, as we know.

    Obama no doubt did promise to support Specter if he switched parties. Was that illegal too? I suspect that Obama, Rahm and the gang are just as happy that Sestak won that primary. Sestak will be a more reliable vote for the Administration when disposes of the Tea Party nut the Republicans are running for Senate in PA. Specter was always a loose cannon, even when he was an almost-Loyal Bushie.

    If you have an alternate reality that you would like to share, I’m sure we would all be fascinated to hear it.

  41. Alfie @ #44

    The Hayakawa affair isn’t “apples to apples” either. There is no indication that Obama offered Sestak an actual job. Obama was already president when this supposed felony occurred, and if he wanted to offer Sestak a job he didn’t have to make promises like the not-yet-President Reagan did. Like I said above, he could have just offered Sestak the damn job and see if he would take it – if that was what Obama really wanted to do. Which it probably wasn’t. I can’t imagine why Obama would have really preferred Specter to Sestak in the first place, except for going through the motions of keeping his promise to Specter.

  42. Those are the facts, as stated by everyone Libs involved.

    Fixed it for you…. 🙂

    Yes Graychin, why I’m absolutely sure there was no promise, no promise at all of bribes or power exchanged, no positions of authority. Just a chance to build homes for Habitat for Humanity, or something. You guys are so pure in your methods, why would anyone have any doubts about Obama and the Progressives telling the truth? Transparency and all.

    The Conservative and Libertarian party needs to ante up and buy cartons of smokes, liquor, fake ID cards, and buses with La Cucaracha, and Snoop Dawg horns.

    Let’s get rolling. Everybody get out the checkbooks and even the game up.

  43. Tex, I’m still not getting your point. What exactly do you allege happened that is illegal or immoral or whatever?

    If the facts are not as I stated above, then what are they and what do you object to.,

    Lots of mockery, no facts. Typical.

  44. Graychin,

    Either your reading comprehension skills are null and void, or I move too fast for you. Let me summarize.

    (1) Your wrong about “xenophobia” – your using the term too broadly and should be simply leaving it at racism – and you’re wrong about it being innate. It’s a learned process and easily proven as such.

    (2) Your big tent party that you brag are a party of racists and bigots, a phony cast of phenomenal proportions. It’s very similar to your practice of faith – you think it divine; its man made. You like to think you’re one of the few in the room that somehow to manage to get beyond bigotry, yet you’re one of the biggest bigots I’ve had the displeasure of ever reading. And that too was a learned process.

    I think that sums it up simply. Capiche?

  45. Graychin, what part of the law that has been posted here several times are you not understanding?

    The Obama administration is handing out job offers to prospective candidates in order to effect an election. Period. End of story.

    They have admitted to doing so on more than 1 occasion. Period. End of story.

    It’s illegal. Period. End of story.

  46. Your typical generic charges are so convoluted, I never know what you in return are alleging. So let me answer your other question for the simple minded.

    You’re asking us to believe that Sestak was offered to take an unpaid, voluntary position in return for not running.

    You then make this nebulous and completely unfounded statement:

    If Obama had offered Sestak a real job (like Secretary of the Navy or any other full-time job), that would have kept him out of the Senate race automatically. No need for a “deal.” Just offer him the damn job and see if the takes it. That didn’t happen, as we know.

    How would you know that? You’re making false assumptions where no proof exists (like your science). Perhaps Sestak was uninterested in assuming the Secretary of Navy job (which I will bet you right now is exactly what Sestak was offered contrary to your reasoning that a voluntary job would suffice as temptation).

    What is most ironic is what you will believe if the right carrot is dangled in front of your face. Your skepticism about truthfulness suddenly and magically vanishes when the driven issue or candidate has a ‘D’ beside your name Baghdad Bog.

  47. You’re asking us to believe that Sestak was offered to take an unpaid, voluntary position in return for not running.

    No, but that’s what the Republican Noise Machine seems to think Obama ought to be impeached for. Their issue, not mine. But at least you show some understanding now of what the facts are.

    What I’m trying to pry out of you is what acts you know to have occurred that constitute something illegal or immoral. Since you are alleging that a crime occurred, is it too much to ask that you cite the criminal acts in question? Citing the law won’t tell us anything in the absence of an allegation (and proof!) of criminal conduct.

  48. “what acts you know to have occurred that constitute something illegal or immoral”

    Offerring a position that would pull a candidate out of a race, with the intention of pulling that candidate out of the race, is illegal.

    See comment #10 above for another example, with link.

    Notice that it says officials admitted to offering the position specifically so that he would not run in the Dem primary, not because it felt he was the best man for the job.

    That is what makes it illegal.

  49. Graychin, how you can deny Federal Law has not been broken with a straight face is beyond me. Your own party authored it. There is absolutely nothing complex about this law – and your party absolutely committed two violations. Surely even you can dispute this:

    18 U.S.C. § 600 prohibits the use of government-funded jobs or programs to advance partisan political interests. The statute makes it unlawful for anyone to “promise any employment, position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit” to any person as a “consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity or for the support of or opposition to any candidate or any political party…in connection with any primary election.” As the OLC opinion says, § 600 “punishes those who promise federal employment or benefits as an enticement to or reward for future political activity, but does not prohibit rewards for past political activity.” Future political activity would arguably include dropping out of a contested primary in order to benefit the White House-endorsed candidate (here, Sen. Specter).

    It does not matter that Sestak did not accept the offer or that the offer was, according to the White House memorandum, for an uncompensated federal appointment. The statute prohibits making such an offer in the first place. There is no requirement even for a tentative agreement. Like the crime of solicitation, the crime happens once the words trip off the mouth of the person making the offer.

    U.S.C. § 595, prohibits any person employed in any administrative position by the United States “in connection with any activity which is financed…by the United States…using his official authority for the purpose of interfering with, or affecting, the nomination or the election of any candidate for the office of…member of the Senate.”

    Any administration position offered to Sestak would be financed by the United States, so Rahm Emanuel offering such an appointment through Bill Clinton to interfere with the Senate race in Pennsylvania would also constitute a possible violation of this statute.

    Look, we know your corruption knows no bounds. Nobody expects your feckless party follow the rules either. But at least have the decency to say, “So What?” like you normally do. To attempt to lie with a straight face when clearly the law was broken is unbecoming of even a leech like you. 🙄

  50. And as for proof, is the White House admitting it has done so proof enough?

    The White House does not even dispute it has done these things. Instead, it tries to justify them through the childish “everyone does it” excuse. It’s almost as pathetic as “that depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is.”

  51. Offering someone a job isn’t illegal. – even if he is a potential political candidate. It’s true that taking a job might disqualify someone from the office he might have run for. Duh.

    But offering someone a job “if he promises not to run” is nonsense – more nonsensical even than supposedly offering someone an unpaid job on an advisory board as an inducement not to run. No quid pro quo there. Offer the job or don’t offer it. If he takes it, end of discussion. If he refuses, so be it.

    If Obama had wanted to take Sestak out (doubtful), all he had to do was offer him a good job – no strings attached. That doesn’t seem to have happened either.

    The more corrupt scenario is the Reagan / Hayakawa incident. Reagan, not yet president, promises Hayakawa a job in the (future) administration for services rendered (not running). A quid pro quo. A bribe. Where was the outrage?

    What specifically do you think happened? If you don’t know enough to tell us, then why are you cluttering up Rutherford’s blog with your stupid /insistence that there must be SOMETHING there?

  52. Let’s see if I follow all this. Are you saying that the offering of a non-paying position on an advisory board in exchange for dropping out of the senate race violates the law?

    Or are you alleging some other set of facts? If so, what facts?

  53. “Are you saying that the offering of a non-paying position on an advisory board in exchange for dropping out of the senate race violates the law?”

    BINGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Welcome to reality. Please…stay a while.

  54. Tex, who authored the commentary that you pasted, Tex? Bad form indeed to copy/paste a long and opinionated screed without attribution. I know – you saw it on the internet, so it must be true. 😀

    And even this obviously partisan screed uses the qualifier “possible” violation of the law. His opinion, definitely a minority opinion among those who know what they are talking about.

  55. “The more corrupt scenario is the Reagan / Hayakawa incident. Reagan, not yet president, promises Hayakawa a job in the (future) administration for services rendered (not running). A quid pro quo. A bribe. Where was the outrage?”

    Are you sure you want to allow facts from decades ago to be legitimate talking points? Because if so, we can go back to using the 70’s left wing terrorism in those debates.

    We just want to know the rules so we all can play.

  56. Huck @ #62:

    Tex mocked me for believing exactly that in his comment #54. He seems to have a revelation about other acts that occurred, but he won’t say what they are.

    That’s the whole thing about Sestak-gate. The Noise Machine is telling us there is a big scandal here, but no one is exactly sure what it is. So they keep digging and thumping their chests. Talk of impeachment is in the wind, but no one is really sure why. Just because!

    It’s gonna wind up like Whitewater. Nothing there, in spite of all the digging.

  57. Huck @ #64

    Just pointing out your double standards. Where WAS the outrage?

    If you want to me to condemn 1970’s left-wing terrorists – you’ve got it.

    Now that we have disposed of the red herring – can you get back on the subject now?

  58. Oh the hypocrisy…

    ” I know – you saw it on the internet, so it must be true”

    “His opinion, definitely a minority opinion among those who know what they are talking about.”

    Where are you getting that from?

    What people?

    What poll shows them to be a majority?

    What makes them among “those who know what they are talking about’?

    If you are going to challenge people to cite their claims, you best be prepared to put up, yourself.

  59. “Now that we have disposed of the red herring – can you get back on the subject now?”

    I’d love to. You can start by addressing some of the other comments I left above that you seem to want to ignore.

  60. “Nothing there, in spite of all the digging.”

    Well so far the only people who have been allowed to do any digging on this are the same folks who are being accused of breaking the law.

    And here is what they are giving us…”We looked into this and we found that we did nothing wrong.” That might be enough for you. I’m a bit more skeptical.

    ” Talk of impeachment is in the wind, but no one is really sure why. Just because!”

    Ok, so forget what Tex said above. I am telling you why. You’ve been shown the law that says why. The WH has admitted to doing it.

    What more do you need?

  61. Bad form indeed to copy/paste a long and opinionated screed without attribution. I know – you saw it on the internet, so it must be true.

    Why? That’s all your blog back home is…I copied it because it contained the laws verbatim twit.

    Clearly, you’re lying – kind of like your deletions at your blog that “weren’t deletions” because it was some some some ‘technical issue’. 😆

    COME ON Pinocchio!!!

  62. You know how Graychin would lead us to believe that Whitewater was much ado about nothing? Uh huh…

    Kind of like Hillary Rotten’s $1,000 cattle future’s investment parlayed into $100,000 overnight was typical.

    Ask Jim McDougal, Susan McDougal, or Gov. Jim Guy Tucker if Whitewater was about nothing.

    Vincent W. Foster Jr., a close friend of the Clintons, was unavailable for comment. 🙂

    Like Bongo, the Clintons were clean as a whistle.

  63. HEY DOUBLE CHIN,

    I suppose you’re incredibly disappointed that James Cameron didn’t get a stab at “Plugging the Damn Hole?” He’s one of you, isn’t he?

    You guys are full of great ideas! 😆

  64. Guys, when you allege wrongdoing and criminal activity, you have the burden of proof – not me.

    What illegal acts took place, Tex, since you mocked my understanding of the events?

    Ask Jim McDougal, Susan McDougal, or Gov. Jim Guy Tucker if Whitewater was about nothing.

    I did, and they agree with me. Whitewater and the Starr Chamber was about pinning something on the Clintons. Nothing there. Too bad for you. All that time and money wasted investigating…. nothing. But you had lots of fun doing it, right?

    Much like Sestak-gate. Different Democrat, same old Republicans.

    Look again, Tex. That isn’t the law you posted. It’s the commentary of someone you still refuse to name.

  65. “And change the channel. It sounds like you’ve been watching too much Faux.” Greychin

    Hey Greychin……you didn’t hear what Rutherford said? He said his fucking guts are tearing him to pieces.

    So why don’t you shut the fuck up?

    I can’t stand your type.

    Want to know why?

    Because I guarantee you wouldn’t belittle Rutherford to his face while he is in this state.

    Nope….there would be no snarky comments coming from you.

    You wouldn’t do it.

    He’s not getting anything from Fox News because he doesn’t fucking watch it.

    He simply doesn’t have time for political intrigue because, again, his fucking guts are tearing him apart.

    I’d love to throw you out of your stupid fucking sandals into your own lake, pussy.

  66. “That isn’t the law you posted. It’s the commentary of someone you still refuse to name.”

    “18 U.S.C. § 600 : US Code – Section 600: Promise of employment or other benefit for political activity” via FindLaw.com.

    Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment, position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit, provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining any such benefit, to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity or for the support of or opposition to any candidate or any political party in connection with any general or special election to any political office, or in connection with any primary election or political convention or caucus held to select candidates for any political office, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

    Good so far? Let’s move on….

    “Guys, when you allege wrongdoing and criminal activity, you have the burden of proof – not me.”

    Since the White House has admitted to doing this, I don’t know if proof is an issue. See link at #10

    The Obama administration dangled the possibility of a government job for former Colorado House Speaker Andrew Romanoff last year in hopes he would forgo a challenge to Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet, officials said Wednesday, just days after the White House admitted orchestrating a job offer in the Pennsylvania Senate race.

    Still with me?

    “What illegal acts took place”

    As proven above by admission from Obama officials, the Obama administration offered a political appointment to a political candidate in order to effect a political race. As further proven above, that is against Section 600 of the United States code (U.S.C. § 600).

    Now is there anything more that I can show you to answer your questions as to whether or not this administration has violated the law?

  67. Calm down, Rabbit. (#74) My God, man, calm down.

    If my joke (marked as such) about Faux offended or hurt Rutherford (and I doubt that it did), I hereby apologize deeply and sincerely to him. Rutherford, I don’t know all the details about what you have been going through with your health, but it’s obviously difficult and I wish you the best.

    But I’m more worried about Rabbit at the moment.

  68. Huck, at least I can understand where you are coming from. I think that you and I can stipulate to the facts in the Sestak case – the facts that Tex mocks as ridiculous. I respectfully disagree that anyone broke the law, and I’m happy to let the legal machinery make that determination.

    In the Romanoff case, you left out the fact that Romanoff applied for a job with the administration last year. He had given up, and decided to run for Senate instead. When the White House asked him if he was still interested in a job, he declined. That’s the White House version. That’s the Romanoff version.

    That’s it. That’s all there is. What is illegal? You can claim that it violates the law that you quoted, but it doesn’t.

    I have no idea where Tex is coming from. He thinks that Huck’s version of the facts is worthy of mockery. He posts commentary that he calls “law,” and then is too embarrassed about its source to ‘fess up to where he copied it from. He alleges other criminal acts, but won’t say what they are.

    Is he hearing the “voices” again?

  69. Graychin, you must be thick. You’re reaching B-Ville Yellow Poodle country.

    Who cares where that came from? I’m not interested in the opinion – I wanted verbatim what the law stated like you asked. Next time I’ll modify it to contain only the content you needed so it won’t confuse you. I forget how easily confused you become. If you’re really, really interested, for a fee I’ll be glad to research what site I googled and stole that from then document it to give credit. It was a small part of a large article – I remember that much.

    I agree with Huck completely on this issue- cut the deflection horse crap. Your boys broke the federal laws. Now you’re trapped and in denial, sniveling and trying to weasel out with irrelevancy.

    You’re so damn slow, if I don’t answer one question for you at a time, you get to babbling. There was a time I actually thought you half way reasonable bright for a lib. You’re dumber than a stump.

  70. “In the Romanoff case, you left out the fact that Romanoff applied for a job with the administration last year. He had given up, and decided to run for Senate instead. When the White House asked him if he was still interested in a job, he declined. That’s the White House version. That’s the Romanoff version.”

    This is pretty clear to me…

    “in hopes he would forgo a challenge to Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet.”

    I don’t care about a prior job application. Those words right there say the law was broken when that “interest” was later floated by the WH.

  71. Graychin, the Sestak case is really simple. You are trying to convince me, Huck and anyone else involved that Sestak was offered some voluntary position without pay to forgo running for the U.S. Senate. Isn’t that what you are telling me?

    If so, I say baloney – they offered Sestak a high ranking position in Obama’s inner circle jerk, and this needs an independent investigation to prove which one of us is right.

    Are you confident enough that you won’t argue about an independent investigation to clear this matter up? If I’m wrong, you can call it a witch hunt and call it White Water all over again. How’s about that?

    You can rag and whine another twenty years, or as long as you last.

  72. Are you confident enough that you won’t argue about an independent investigation to clear this matter up?

    If you are right, why didn’t they just offer Sestak a job? If they did, and he turned it down, what’s to investigate?

    Yes, it’s Whitewater all over again. But hell yes – bring Ken Starr back. He did such a great job last time. 😀

  73. Chin, you’re intentionally being thick and you know it.

    Answer your own question- why didn’t he just offer him a job? Because strings were attached. What were the strings? That he not challenge Spector in the primaries. Why not challenge Spector? Because Obama owed Spector for his switch and because he thought Spector had a better chance against Toomey.

    Either you’re really fucking stupid, or just really fucking fake.

    This isn’t comparable to Whitewater, its comparable to Watergate.

    By the way, while I’m not a lawyer, my profession requires me to understand law, which is why I’ve taken some advanced law cources. You are clearly correct in that you’re not qualified to discuss, but don’t speak for me. You don’t know me, my background, or my knowledge.

  74. Last I remember, Clinton was impeached and his reputation now lays in tatters, an object of bedroom jokes. Bet he doesn’t think Ken Starr so ineffective. Neither does Al Gore.

    Before it again became in vogue to be a Slick Willie fan, two years this month, your ilk were referring to the serial rapist as racist in South Carolina. You can see why we Republicans get confused about your stance

    So let me get this straight. Your confident that an independent investigator is called for and that they will find no wrong doing? That old Joe was just offered a position of oversight of some sort to drop out of a Senatorial race? Like a big favor to the Democratic party and Obama. Kind of like washing Obama’s car, or something?

    Okay. I think I’ve got it. 😆

    I just want to make sure I understand your grounds for dismissal. Your opinions ebb and flow, so we need to keep this more specific.

  75. By the way, while I’m not a lawyer, my profession requires me to understand law, which is why I’ve taken some advanced law cources. You are clearly correct in that you’re not qualified to discuss, but don’t speak for me. You don’t know me, my background, or my knowledge.

    Yes, it amused me that he chose to cast my knowledge and experience at the same level of his. I just chuckled and added it to the list of things that he is so certain (and wrong) about.

  76. Tex, you STILL haven’t disclosed your revelation of what really happened in Sestak-gate.

    Why not? And how do you know? Is it those voices again?

    You also haven’t disclosed where you got that silly commentary masquerading as “law.”

    I didn’t say that Ken Starr was ineffective. Just that he didn’t achieve his Prime Directive – pinning something (anything) on the Clintons.

    Except, of course, for that impeachable BJ. 😀

  77. Graychin,

    I didn’t say that Ken Starr was ineffective. Just that he didn’t achieve his Prime Directive – pinning something (anything) on the Clintons.

    Correct. Except their reputation. Without Ken Starr, we might be saying President Hillary Rotten Clinton about right now. Oh, I think he very much nailed the Clintons. O.J. walked to, but not without an incredibly high price. 🙂

  78. to/too

    These voices in my head are called sense – something you are obviously are not gifted with.

    You’re wanting us to believe a possible sitting Senator was so ingratiated with President Bongo, he was willing to walk away from a life long dream to take a non paid, board position? Guess it depends on what the word is, is?

    Like your theology, believe as you must Double Chin. I’m pointing fingers at you and snickering.

  79. Here Dummy, since you apparently are incapable of filtering except when you’re deleting posts at your blog (due to technical issues cough cough). I hope this helps…

    18 U.S.C. § 600 prohibits the use of government-funded jobs or programs to advance partisan political interests. The statute makes it unlawful for anyone to “promise any employment, position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit” to any person as a “consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity or for the support of or opposition to any candidate or any political party…in connection with any primary election.”

    and…

    U.S.C. § 595, prohibits any person employed in any administrative position by the United States “in connection with any activity which is financed…by the United States…using his official authority for the purpose of interfering with, or affecting, the nomination or the election of any candidate for the office of…member of the Senate.

    That’s where I got the law.

  80. We offer written law and published admissions and Graychin offers straw man attacks and logical fallacies.

    I believe that’s checkmate.

  81. Listen, if Graychin is anything, he’s a student of Leftist rubedom – a lifetime student of progressive politic. His type didn’t create the abject poverty of Little Dixie Oklahoma overnight, still believing it paradise.

    This man is a lifetime of tunnel vision, spin, and divert. Where many worship at the altar of Christ, I suspect Graychin knelt at the altar of Carl Albert growing up.

  82. That’s where I got the law.

    Still won’t say where you got the commentary that you tried to pass off as law?

    Too embarrassing?

    A four-flushing phony if there ever was one.

  83. Tex, check back on the “smart get dumb” thread. We’re waiting for you to tell us how many blacks live in your census tract.

    Four-flushing phony.

  84. Hey Graychin “Jim” Crow,

    I countered your ignorance from the previous thread with the royal flush. Looks like my phoniness won’t be so phony when I’m done calling your gutless bluff. Check it out Carl Albert Jr. 🙂

    When you’re ready to take that bet, I’ll have you send me 90%, 10% to Rutherford as my penance for dragging your sorry ass over to take up his bandwidth. 😛

    I want to buy him a big screen TV and a Wii with Guitar Hero with my name on it! 😉

  85. Too embarrassing? 😆 😆 Over what?

    Am I supposed to be embarrassed Jim for cutting and pasting the laws your messiah broke? Sorry about including someone’s commentary in the middle.

    I suppose I should ask in return, “Is there something inaccurate in the quotation of the laws?” If so, mea culpa. If not, you can continue to blow me like you have for the last four weeks. 😯

    I’m incredibly embarrassed (that I’m too lazy to find the site). Will it change anything? Will it give you the warm fuzzies Yellow Dog?

  86. Hey Jim Crowe,

    I just check your census tracker, assuming you live where you say you live. You’ve got a phenomenal number of black faces in your zipcode. ZERO! 😆 😆 😆

    NADA, NYET,NULL!!! I didn’t know that was possible in today’s America. What were you saying about diversity and four-flush phonies again?

    Not one black in Eucha, OK! You old turd. You ought to be smacked for stupidity.

  87. It sounds like you’ve been watching too much Faux. 😀

    LOL that is exactly what my radio co-host Sandi accused me of. 🙂

    The sad truth is you know things are bad when the liberal media starts getting all over Obama’s case. MSNBC is losing its patience with the Obama admin. Here’s a scary yardstick for you:

    Olbermann has abandoned (at least temporarily) his count of how many days since we declared Mission Accomplished in Iraq and replaced it with how many days oil has been flooding the Gulf of Mexico. 😦

  88. I think Sestak might be a surprise to the progressives

    Alfie, I agree. Sestak looks to me like another Joe Lieberman in the making … an attention whore who will flaunt his high moral ground at every turn to stay in the media spotlight. If it means screwing over other members of the Dem caucus, then so be it.

  89. Jeez, Huck and Tex, the Sestak melodrama is killing me. Politicians make deals with each other. Period. Nudge-nudge-wink-wink conversations happen all the f*cking time.

    “C’mon Joe, you know things would be a lot easier if we just let Arlen carry the ball. Even if you beat him in the primary, you’re not likely to win the general. C’mon man, put your ego aside and take one for the team. You know you’ll be treated well down the line for doing the loyal thing.”

    It’s ugly politics. Any good pol knows where the border is for illegality and he doesn’t go over it.

    I think the real fun will be watching the Blago trial. My hero Blago is a pure politician. He’s a born wheeler-dealer. And he didn’t do sh*t that no other Chicago pol wouldn’t do. He’s hated and he’s being hounded. I hope if he goes down that he brings the whole Chicago bunch down with him, including lots of his hypocritical accusers. Hell, I wouldn’t even mind seeing Rahm Emanuel go down with him.

    I’ve said it before. This is not what Obama promised us in 2008. On the other hand, the selective outrage of Tex, Huck etal is pretty hilarious.

  90. Regarding Israel, the “facts” of the case are in dispute but let’s assume that the dudes on the ship attacked the Israeli soldiers and lethal force was necessary.

    Could someone then explain to me why Bibi Netanyahu goes up to the podium and says “They were chanting anti-Israel slogans.” So-the-f*ck-what???? You called me a dirty Jew so I blew your head off???? What was the purpose of Netanyahu saying that? What does it matter what they were chanting? Either they presented a deadly threat or they didn’t.

    Sticks and stones boys, sticks and stones.

    You know, I am so sick and tired of this centuries old feud. I’m sorry guys, Israel wants peace in the region no more than anyone else does. They are all a bunch of contentious cry-babies fighting over whether or not God granted them some section of land to live on.

    My solution: Give each side the same number of nukes, and at the count of three let the damn missiles launch. Once they blow each other to smithereens, we can start fresh in the region (once the radiation wears off) and real peace can be achieved. 👿

  91. “Jeez, Huck and Tex, the Sestak melodrama is killing me. Politicians make deals with each other. Period. Nudge-nudge-wink-wink conversations happen all the f*cking time.”

    Yeah? Then name some.

    Tell us all just a few of the many times a politician has been offered a presidential appointment so he wouldn’t enter a Senate primary.

    Rutherford, is there something about the law we have posted that isn’t clear to you as to how it is being violated, or do you just not care that the law is being violated because Obama told you this goes on all the time?

  92. A pithy article on the Sestak issue: http://www.redstate.com/mark_i/2010/06/03/white-house-memo-makes-offer-gate-into-a-scandal/

    Something that has to be considered is this, Gibbs was asked if Obama knew of the job offer to Sestak, and he said yes, so efforts to dump this on Rahmbo won’t work.

    Sestak apparently confirmed to MSNBC that the position was SECNAV, which is consistent with a high ranking position origionally alluded to. Bauer’s memo says it was an unpaid advisory panel. However, this makes no sense since both of the advisory panels to Obama- Intelligence and Economic- prohibit federal employees and by no stretch of the imaginiation would an unpaid advisor on a panel be considered a high ranking position. Gibbs even admitted that, following the release of the Bauer memo, Sestak would not be able to serve on either of those panels.

    The delay in getting information out of the White House is also pointing to a cover up. If there is nothing to hide, or no wrong doing involved, it should not take 3 weeks to get something from the White House. It shouldn’t have been released on the Friday before a three day weekend and a one week recess for Congress, and it certainly should NOT be factually and logically inconsistent.

    This snowball isn’t getting any smaller…

  93. Tex @ #90:

    That is still only a description of the law, from an unknown source.

    Can’t you tell the difference? And why, oh why won’t you tell us the source?

    As for your bet: My daddy taught me not to bet when the other guy has already seen your cards. Good advice, don’t you think?

    So you live in an integrated neighborhood, eh? That’s really white of you. 😀

  94. Actually, you’re fortunate to live in an integrated neighborhood. I guess you don’t like to count the Indians who live in mine. But I suppose they were either safely out of sight or invisible in your little gated community on the Monkey Island enclave.

    And I would gladly trade some of my white neighbors for someone else of any race at all. You did see the picture on my blog of the house in my neighborhood, didn’t you?

  95. “The delay in getting information out of the White House is also pointing to a cover up. If there is nothing to hide, or no wrong doing involved, it should not take 3 weeks to get something from the White House.”

    It’s this point that to me is most fascinating.

    Rutherford, since you do have a strong opinion that none of this matters, what do you think is going on with all of the stonewalling and dissembling? After all, “the wicked flee when no man pursueth: but the righteous are bold as a lion.”

  96. Yeah, it’s a good thing you didn’t bet Graychin, being you laid an egg on your challenge. Zero blacks in the entire city, and you want to preach your sanctimony to me?

    A shame that we didn’t get to place that bet.

    By the way, what I posted from the previous thread was simply the federal law, as written under the Clinton Administration. I falsely assumed, my big mistake concerning matters of dealing with you, that you would be smart enough to read it and understand.

    Now, should we discuss those “fundamentals” of the economy you were stating were “strong” two weeks ago?

    Looks to me like you’re not too terribly perceptive Lake man. 😉

  97. Tiger – You’re absolutely right! 😀

    Would someone please point out to Tex that his previous posting of “law” is actually nothing but commentary. A law doesn’t say “the statute says…” 😀

    And never mind posting the law now. Huck already handled it. At least HE knows the difference between law and commentary.

  98. Tex, you must be so delighted that the economy is NOT perfectly healthy yet that you’re getting that warm tingle down your leg again.

    You need Obama to fail so that you don’t have to twist your political philosophy into even tighter knots. Here as in religion, you start with the answer and ignore evidence to the contrary. Political apologetics? Ideology uber alles?

    Progress is slow, but at least it’s progress. I’m really glad we didn’t listen to the Hooverites, or we would still be shedding jobs like in 1930-32.

  99. since you do have a strong opinion that none of this matters

    Tigre, let me put it this way. I’m not sure I say that it doesn’t matter. What I’m saying is that we are criminalizing politics.

    All these citations of law really speak to blatant quid-pro-quo manipulations of elections. If a dude isn’t even running for the office yet, how is it illegal to disincent him to run? Offer him a job to throw the election? Bad. Offer him a job to withdraw from a race? Bad. But tell a guy BEFORE he commits to the process that you’ve got a better alternative for him that’s a win-win-for everybody? Smelly, but not illegal.

    As for the delay in bringing forward the “facts” and then dumping them pre-Memorial Day weekend so they wouldn’t hit the news cycle … this White House is one of the most incompetent at message handling of any I’ve seen. I submit they don’t tell the truth well, and they don’t lie well either.

    As I said before …. keep your eye on Blago. One of the things he will say is “if Obama can offer Sestak a job not to run, why can’t I weigh my options when doing political appointments?”

    Who knows, maybe the stinky ethics that I say do not rise to the level of illegality, will set a new standard … a kind of Sarbanes-Oxley of politics where the run of the mill stuff that goes on every day suddenly ceases to be tolerated. Time will tell.

    Oh, and Huck … Obama didn’t tell me anything. I’m just trying to be a realist. Washington is full of deal making and bought legislators. It is a bipartisan norm of corruption. I get my dander up slightly when you wake up during a Dem administration and cry in your pretzels when Dick Cheney spent the first decade of this century shaping oil policy with his friends at Haliburton, etc. Again …. selective outrage causes me to call buuuuuuuuuullsheeeeet.

  100. “R”,

    I’ve got a little story to tell you so that you can look forward to raising your “sweet” child when she too is in college.

    I got a call this morning from mom in Texas (the daughter was too scared to call daddy) that we had a little problem. Seems my daughter and her sorority sisters attended a little rock & roll last night, and on the way back with her driving, hit a bottle and blew out the tire.

    Being it was a rough part of town, she panicked and kept driving – at least five miles on the rim. I didn’t know this until I arrived at Walmart (nearest place I could have it towed). While driving on metal, undoubtedly the front tire threw something into the back tire which shredded it too. Two Michelin tires – so far, the tune of $400.00 and counting. Also chewed the hell out of two aluminum wheels. 👿

    I drove it home out on the highway, wanting to check the safety, as she took mine home without her license, which was still in the her car. :roll:. She’s obviously having a bad day.

    I pulled in the driveway and heard a terrible squeal with the smell of burning rubber. It’s going to be 98 degrees here today, as I get under her car to figure out what else is broken.

    See how great little girls are?

  101. Tex, you must be so delighted that the economy is NOT perfectly healthy yet that you’re getting that warm tingle down your leg again.

    You need Obama to fail so that you don’t have to twist your political philosophy into even tighter knots. Here as in religion, you start with the answer and ignore evidence to the contrary. Political apologetics? Ideology uber alles?

    Desperation from our diversity disciple of Carl Albert and FDR, living in the zipcode of ZERO, COUNT ‘UM ZERO African-Americans. 😆 What a rube.

    Your little political world coming apart at the seams Jim? 🙂

  102. P.S. to Jim Crow of Eucha,

    I’ll let somebody qualified to be my judge like BiC, but if I’m not mistaken, a statute is a “LAW” enacted by the legislative branch.

    Still grasping at straws trying to find something to take hold. Don’t worry dip wad – one of those days, one of those square bullets of yours might land.

    Come on Graychin, give us some more good news from the Bongo side.

  103. Rutherford, still waiting for you to show us some of the many examples of presidents offering appointments to people so they will forgo entry into a primary election.

    Don’t waste our time with tears about Cheney and Haliburton. Haliburton wasn’t trying to become a US senator.

    You also never really answered my question as to whether or not you actually care that the law is being violated. Instead, you’ve offered us these crocodile tears over the CHANGE you thought you were going to see from the Lightworker-in-Chief.

    Section 600 of the US Penal Code is being violated, Rutherford. Stow your excuses and tell us point blank…do you care?

  104. Graychin, you really need to stop this ridiculous straw man attack against Tex’s quote. You’ve been shown the actual text of the law, and it is obvious that all you are doing is attacking the smallest and weakest points because you are unable to launch an actual argument against the real topic.

    Man up and defend your president. Don’t waste everyone’s time picking at an issue that you have already admitted to be resolved.

  105. “As I said before …. keep your eye on Blago. One of the things he will say is “if Obama can offer Sestak a job not to run, why can’t I weigh my options when doing political appointments?”

    Rutherford, this of course, is the real danger in selective application of the law. As an attorney, it appears to me that the statutes were violated. While the meaning and application of statutes are always subject to legal debate, the “this is how it’s done” approach is not so much a defense as it is an admission. Oh, and it smells too. Therefore I am at a loss as to why you would take the position that probably shouldn’t be scrutinized — the opposite of your position with respect to the AZ statute.

  106. Perhaps some of you dumb dogs from the Left, particularly you Jim Crow from Eucha, need to listen to this man so you can learn something. Your knee jerk messiah has about 1/1000th the brain power of this man.

    This is the man that shredded the stupidity of the Congressional hacks who have attacked and mislabeled the oil industry.

    http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/6-to-8-gas-prices-will-%22skyrocket%22-if-u.s.-stops-drilling-says-former-shell-exec-499176.html;_ylt=AtKnmG33NByAiDyAnDySFrFk7ot4;_ylu=X3oDMTE2MG42OWYwBHBvcwMxBHNlYwNhcnRpY2xlTGlzdARzbGsDNnRvOGdhc3ByaWNl?tickers=bp,gspc,dji,uso,XOM,OIL,XLE

  107. We all know the Obama administration was up to its nuts in the Blago scandal, too.

    Oh, but it’s no big deal because other administrations that nobody seems to be able to name have done it, as well.

  108. Huck, thanks for chiming in as I asked. You DID post the law. Tex did not. But who is the “straw man” to which you refer?

    No straw man here, only Tex. He posted commentary masquerading as law, and won’t ‘fess up to it. I’m still waiting for Tex to tell me where he got the commentary that he posted at #58, and he refuses to tell me. But I’m tired of waiting, so through the magic of Google, we now know that it came from here:

    http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=37227

    by HANS VON FREAKING SPASKOVSKY, rabid Republican partisan, champion purger of voter rolls, and all-around wingnut.

    Tex, I see why you were embarrassed. Gotcha!

    Huck, do you agree that the garbage posted at #58 is NOT the statute?

  109. We all know the Obama administration was up to its nuts in the Blago scandal,

    And just how do we know that, Huck? ESP? Divine revelation?

    Any actual, you know, EVIDENCE? Or just a hunch?

  110. I agree that the quote was not a statute. I also agree that you continuing to worry about that fact after we have already established what the actual statute is to be a straw man attack against a weakest point of a comment instead of the topic at hand—which is whether or not the statute has been violated.

    “Any actual, you know, EVIDENCE?”

    My evidence is the increasingly emerging pattern of this administration attempting to illegally influence the democratic process of this country.

    Allowing an armed, racist militia to “protect” polling places. Accusations of misconduct in the Blago scandal. And now 2 admissions of offering to give appointments to candidates with the expressed purpose of influencing a political race.

    But it’s the X-Box that is threatening our democracy.

  111. Huck said: I agree that the quote was not a statute.

    Thanks for that, Huck. Will it convince Tex?

    My evidence is the increasingly emerging pattern of this administration attempting to illegally influence the democratic process of this country.

    In other words – a hunch! 😀

  112. Let’s face in Jim Crow from Eucha.

    Bongo’s soaring rhetoric that gave you orgasm and fainting spells ain’t matching his actual performance, which is dismal. The porkulus has now been proven a complete waste of money. Congratulations for wasting another trillion. At least we paid for a war – you threw the funds down the toilet.

    While the world burns, Schmuck-in-Chief as running around with the savant idiot One Leg McCartney, fellow red diaper baby serenading the ugly belle.

    You may have won an election, but you’re looking like a complete rube and jackboot for your undying support. The dork in charge is adding $5,000,000,000.00 a day to the national debt. That’s three times anything G.W. Bush ever accomplished.

    So while you attempt to deviate, divert, excuse, and deflect, you and your fellow bozos are running on empty and out of excuses.

    Time to jump ship while you still can Jim Double Chin. 😈

  113. Huck, here is why I insisted on the actual law being posted, and not falling for Tex’s fraud of posting only a commentary on the law written by a rabid Republican partisan:

    http://mediamatters.org/blog/201006040040

    You can get to my list of actual experts (not partisan hacks) who say there is nothing here. I will be interested in your similar list, if you feel like posting one.

    Do you really think I was / am making a “straw man” argument here, or just pointing out some sneaky and dishonest tactics by one of our commenters.

    (I’m looking forward to what Tex has to say abut all this! 😀

  114. Huck called my point “straw man.”

    Can we call Tex @ 125 “ad hominem”?

    I don’t see why not. It makes plenty of personal attacks and cites no, um… facts. 😦

  115. Well one of them spent the first part of his career getting criminals off on appeals, so I think you might be a bit off on their ideologies.

    Look, if there is truely nothing going on here, and this is all on the up-and-up, then what is wrong with an independent investigation proving that?

    Are you in favor of an independent investigation looking into this matter, Graychin? Or is Media Matters and Obama’s internal investigation good enough for you? Simple question that should be answered with a simple, unqualified response.

  116. If there were serious charges, I would favor an independent investigation. But the allegations, even if true, don’t amount to anything. So the simple, unqualified response that you ask for is this:

    No.

    I’m not going to support an independent investigation every time in the next 6 1/2 years that the Noise Machine gins up some phony “scandal” that is as silly as this one. It’s your same old playbook. We have a Democratic president who has the potential to make some big changes in the status quo. Can’t have that, can we? So you blow up every little whisper into the proverbial Federal Case.

    Nope. Not this time. The biggest mistake Bill Clinton ever made (even bigger than the BJ) was allowing a special prosecutor to investigate “Whitewater” – which as we know came to exactly zero, but tied Clinton’s presidency in knots. Mission Accomplished. Right?

    Now if you want to talk about White House interference in elections, let’s talk about the U.S. Attorney firings during the administration of you-know-who.

  117. Can you believe this hack uses a George Soros funded bunch of propagandists as objective news sources, accusing me of using partisan sources? Perhaps you can see why I don’t take old Graychin too awfully seriously. This is a goosestepper par excellence.

    Using media matters for objective fact is almost as good an attempt at parody as finding out Jim Doublechin doesn’t have one black living in zipcode, yet we’re the racists! 😈

    That ad hominem Jim Double Chin had plenty of facts mixed it with casting a loogey at you. Budget busting debt, porkulus failure and lies, unemployment, census workers filling in the blanks of your “strong fundamentals.” Like Bongo, you’re a joke and see only what you want to see.

    As you orgasm next time when Bongo comes on the screen, remember this record of success. Little harder to perform than whine and wail, ain’t it Mr. Crow? Or is that just eating crow?

    Still rearranging decks chairs on the proverbial Titanic here I see.

  118. Selective memory too.

    Now if you want to talk about White House interference in elections, let’s talk about the U.S. Attorney firings during the administration of you-know-who.

    You don’t see to care or maybe just let it slip in that fogged memory of yours that the Clinton Admin. decision to ask for the resignation of all 93 U.S. attorneys

    while he and his nasty bitch were being investigated for White Water.

    SILENCE…crickets. Now isn’t that amazing? Where was your righteous indignation then Jim?

    Come on Pinocchio – you can do better than that.

  119. Huck, thanks for chiming in as I asked. You DID post the law. Tex did not. But who is the “straw man” to which you refer? — The Chin

    I posted 18 Section 600, 211, and 595 on the last thread for all to read. You ignored it, just like you keep ignoring my comments, so before you go on about nuts, you’ve yet to show any.

    If there were serious charges, I would favor an independent investigation. But the allegations, even if true, don’t amount to anything. So the simple, unqualified response that you ask for is this:

    No — The Chin

    They consitute a felony, that itsn’t serious? It is the White House committing a F-E-L-O-N-Y.

    High Crimes and Misdemeanors
    The offenses for which presidents, vice presidents, and all civil officers, including federal judges, can be removed from office through a process called Impeachment.

    The phrase high crimes and misdemeanors is found in the U.S. Constitution. It also appears in state laws and constitutions as a basis for disqualification from holding office. Originating in English Common Law, these words have acquired a broad meaning in U.S. law. They refer to criminal actions as well as any serious misuse or abuse of office, ranging from Tax Evasion to Obstruction of Justice. The ultimate authority for determining whether an offense constitutes a ground for impeachment rests with Congress.

    The exact meaning of the phrase cannot be found in the Constitution itself. Article II, Section 4, establishes, “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors.” Treason and bribery are specific, but high crimes and misdemeanors is not. In fact, considerable debate occupied the Framers of the Constitution over the issue of impeachment, and the wording of the grounds for impeachment was itself controversial. A proposed offense of maladministration was rejected as being too vague and susceptible to political abuse. Finally, they chose to use a phrase from English common law that had no precisely settled meaning at the time yet at least connoted serious offenses.”
    http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/High+Crimes+and+Misdemeanors

    Let’s read this again: They refer to criminal actions as well as any serious misuse or abuse of office, ranging from Tax Evasion to Obstruction of Justice.

    OK, felony is defined as: A serious crime, characterized under federal law and many state statutes as any offense punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of one year.
    http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/felony

    So, we’ve clarified a couple things, one is that a felony is a serious crime. Secondly, if true (which I think we have to assume they are true since the Administration has admitted to doing such), then they constitute election tampering, and the cover up that appears to be happening now would be obstruction of justice (defined: A criminal offense that involves interference, through words or actions, with the proper operations of a court or officers of the court. Which is threatening a judge, trying to bribe a witness, or encouraging the destruction of evidence, etc.– same source).

    So this straw man of ‘oh, this is no big deal’ is straight up bull shit. Let it go and stop saying it- it makes you like like a bigger ass than what we already know you to be.

  120. “Now if you want to talk about White House interference in elections, let’s talk about the U.S. Attorney firings during the administration of you-know-who.”

    I see we’ve moved from logical fallacies, straw men, and appeals to authority and onto red herrings.

  121. Huck,

    You’re wasting your time with old the old, obtuse comment deleter (Kind of like they were technical issues that your comments magically disappeared) 😉

    He’s so flustered now, he’s babbling and repeating himself.

  122. Tex, you still didn’t address the fact that you posted commentary without attribution and tried to pass it off as law. You’re really a piece of work.

    What a pathetic way to make your case! Guess you didn’t have much of a case if you had to resort to that.

    It’s just lazy scholarship. Kind of like trying to learn the Bible out of a study guide on apologetics. I’ll bet you’ve skated like that all your life, but you can’t get away with plagiarism any more in the Age of the Google.

    When you do it again, I’ll be watching. Me and The Google.

    You find no irony in passing along Hans von Spaskovski’s tripe as law while you dismiss George Soros-funded Medial Matters as biased? 😀

    Rutherford, do youREALLY think this guy can make a cogent argument? On his own? I beg to differ.

  123. post # 14,324 from the Dead Rabbit that nobody gives a rat’s ass about:

    Jewish soon to be rabbi vs Puerto Rican dude in Yankee Stadium tomorrow.

    Kind of old school.

    I’m rooting for the Jew.

  124. Tsk tsk Double Chin. I do believe the last four or five weeks, I’ve gotten under your thin skin. I knew I would once you were dragged to a blog where censoring doesn’t take place. You’re a glutton for punishment.

    You’ve become almost too easy a target, left with little else but pedantic taunt, half of which nobody understands or is paying attention to. It’s like your tinfoil hat humor you kept using until I shamed you.

    Can’t you bring some of the other sorry son of bitches from the T-World blog that also require help of a blog monitor? Even the odds a bit? Get that Karl creep from the ACLU. I’d like to light his worthless ass on fire. And that dip Democratic too – the history teacher of history teachers. You desperately need a quarterback to get you the ball in the open field, because I could sit back and not type a word and still what you get hung out to dry. The village idiot Dawg ain’t doing you any good.

    Kind of a bitch when you can’t delete comments because of “technical issues”, hey Jimmy Crow? 😈

  125. “And that dip Democratic too – the history teacher of history teachers.”

    Oh, yes please!

  126. 😆 You still haven’t gotten the point of what I posted, have you Jimmy?

    Okay, I plagiarized – never claimed anything different. Never claimed anything at all as a matter of fact. Now you’re left to making up charges.

    I was just looking for some post with the “statues” (since you’re too stupid to realize that is a legislative law) verbatim and never bothered to take out the guy’s commentary. If that’s skating, man you got me good mealy-mouth!!. 🙂

    It’s just lazy scholarship. Kind of like trying to learn the Bible out of a study guide on apologetics. I’ll bet you’ve skated like that all your life, but you can’t get away with plagiarism any more in the Age of the Google</blockquote

    😆 What is this? Gibberish? You're still making fun of a didactic method. You're too dumb to even understand what Apologetics means. You going to make fun of Socratic methods too moron?

    When you do it again, I’ll be watching. Me and The Google.

    Oh NO! Tell me you’re not going to be monitoring me with GOOGLE Jimmy? What will I ever do? 😦

  127. Therefore I am at a loss as to why you would take the position that probably shouldn’t be scrutinized — the opposite of your position with respect to the AZ statute.

    El Tigre, seems apples and oranges to me. Unlike the AZ statute, I don’t take issue with the statutes restricting “bribery” to effect elections. I’ve never said anything is wrong with that law. I’ve only ever said that the average politician finds a way to skate around it. On the other hand, I have a minor problem with the AZ statute in that no matter how many “no-profiling” caveats you attach to it, the law invites profiling.

    So again, I think you’re talking apples and oranges.

  128. Rutherford,

    Did you ever dream your board would become a carnival of vanities? Here’ the Rabbit went and got you all this traffic, and now you disappear on us.

    Rabbit, can you believe that Hag Helen Thomas? That’s what passes for unbiased reporting anymore in Washington circles. That’s where real men like Graychin get the top notch reporting and facts. 😆

  129. “R”,

    You’re right. We were twins separated at birth. Like Awnald an Danny Devito? 😆 Check the times on those last posts.

    You go see a G.I. like I asked?

  130. Oh, but it’s no big deal because other administrations that nobody seems to be able to name have done it, as well.

    I’ve only scanned some of the comments in this thread as opposed to my usual attention to detail … but you’re being thick as I’m pretty sure folks have mentioned Reagan/Hayakawa in 1981.

    There’s also 1997 Clinton/Harshbarger.
    2002 – Bush/Gilman.

    These examples come from Mark Ambinder’s analysis in the Atlantic.

    Ambinder goes on to make the very sensible case that if the statutes that have you up in arms were strictly enforced, Obama could not campaign for Democratic candidates. Certainly by doing so, he is a attempting to effect the outcome of the election.

    So Huck, there is precedent. I repeat my claim … it’s smelly politics but it ain’t illegal.

    I’d welcome your refuting Ambinder’s points.

  131. Gray is right on the money regarding the special investigator.

    I find this funny that so many of you are willing to say that Sarah Palin was hounded out of office by frivolous legal actions and yet you welcome tying down the President with legal foolishness for the next 3 to 7 years. Interesting double standard.

  132. Rabbit, I know I’m stepping in it but I think Helen is making a point worth considering. If I’m not mistaken, Harry Truman had serious misgivings about recognizing Israel back in 1948.

    It isn’t a slam dunk to say that a persecuted people have an ipso facto right to claim land that is in disputed ownership using the claim that they need sanctuary and protection from future persecution. It might justifiably tug our heartstrings (as it has for the past 60+ years) but the result is a pariah country, surrounded by enemies and living in a constant state of animosity and war.

    Honestly, I’m not sure the establishment of Israel has achieved its desired effect. I don’t believe it is anti-Semitic to discuss these issues openly.

  133. Tex, I actually had one of the best days GI wise today that I’ve had in literally weeks. I’ll probably relapse tomorrow. LOL

    Well I took the prelim step of finding the number of a GI doc who, as luck would have it, is about 10 mins away and takes my insurance (or my wife’s insurance to be completely transparent). So at least I’ve got the number to call next time I get fed up … which could easily be Monday morning. 😉

  134. Well thank you for finally stepping up to the challenge I issued days ago, Rutherford. You’re the first of your kind to do so.

    I’m not in the mood for research right now, so I will have to cross-check his examples over a pot of morning coffee. But until then I will accept that this is a challenge met and thank you.

    Now for some basic critical thinking.

    I notice Ambinder takes great pains to distract the reader with a big quote of what he feels is the “relevant” section of law at issue, while relegating the laws we here find relevant to simple links. And when it comes to those laws we’ve been citing, he is forced to admit that they require a loose interpretation to fit into his—and your—argument. When he talks about what they actually say, he takes us back to the “everyone breaks this” excuse, and adds some Red Herring for flavor. It’s not as overt as Graychin. But then, Ambinder is a professional.

    So while he may or may not be on target with his examples of “others have done this,” the rest of the piece isn’t worth much, as far as I am concerned. He forces the laws to say what he wants them to say through interpretation, “benign narrative,” and “broad disgression.”

  135. Rutherford, you truely feel that investigating an alleged felony by the President of the United States to be “legal foolishness”?

    “BTW … G sorry but my source says violation of the statutes you quote is a misdemeanor, not a felony.”

    If your source is that Ambinder piece, you might want to read over it again. He only says 1 of them is a misdemenor. Of course, that is the same 1 he finds to be “relevant.”

    On a less contentious note, It is good to have you back for a comment or two, Rutherford. And I hope you get back to feeling better soon.

  136. The village idiot Dawg ain’t doing you any good.

    I haven’t seen yellowbitch since she was dumb enough to tell me last week that no germans were interned during WWII by the US government, so that somehow made the racist internment of the japanese more racist or some such claptrap.

    And that was the second or third “Fact” in that thread that she got completely wrong.

    I do hope I hurt her feelings.

  137. Her (I guess I missed where it is a woman) game isn’t any better at their blog.

    We’re talking Sensico quality.

  138. “Rabbit, I know I’m stepping in it but I think Helen is making a point worth considering.”-R

    Yeah….ship “them” back to Poland, uh? Perhaps the Jews can move right next to Auschwitz too? After all, whats a few generations in Israel. Back to Lithuania you go, Jew! Yes….even the little toddler Jews.

    Shall we put stars on them?

    Following the kind of points that you “consider,” perhaps Liberia would make a nice home for you and your daughter?

    I bet you a couple carrots that you have spent as much time researching Israel as you have abortion.

    And another thing. This is kind of funny, but I’ve noticed a quantifiable correlation of your opinions on this blog and the discussions from the round table on Bill Maher’s show. I’m talking to a tee, too.

    For instance, I knew we were going to get some criticisms of Obama this week.

    That black guy with the fro. You know who I’m talking about too.

    I sometimes think everyone of your opinions are ultimately formed from a very thin but stinky stew of a few pop culture outlets.

    Except for the one you had this week. It was the only bit of honesty that may have ever come truly from YOU: You’re sick of deconstructing shady politics becuase your guts fucking ache. Now that I can respect.

  139. Your “consideration” of shipping Jews back to their “homes” brings to light the boxing match I referenced earlier.

    Yuri Foreman will be fighting in Yankee Stadium tomorrow. How did this soon to be rabbi get into boxing? Becuase he got his head kicked in so many times in Belarus for being a Jew. His mother made him go to the local boxing gym so that he could defend himself from the savage beatings.

    They later moved to Israel where Foreman kept winning matches. The rest was history.

    I’m no Zionist. I periodically see fault with Israeli policy.

    But a second Jewish Diaspora is worthy of consideration to you? So ignorant on so many levels. So many, dude.

  140. LOL. Great story, DR. Can you imagine the look on the faces who saw him issue that first bully beat down?

  141. Rutherford – That’s an interesting article on racial attitudes in small children. I like the suggestions about how parents can help to teach their children to know better.

    As I said the other day, I believe that racism in particular, and fear of the “other” in general, is deep in our genes. I think that its appearance in small children supports that theory. But that doesn’t excuse bigotry, as someone misinterpreted my remark. We are all born ignorant too. We can and do learn to overcome our inherent bigotry, even thought some of us choose to remain in our state of ignorance.

  142. Rutherford perhaps you and Thomas and the rest can rechristen the St. Louis.Then Obama can be like one of your other idols FDR

  143. No group of people should EVER be driven from their homeland and forced to relocate somewhere else. It was wrong when Andrew Jackson did it to the Indians. The Balkan “ethnic cleansing” was wrong. The establishment of Israel was wrong to the extent that it drove out the native people (“Palestinians”). And it would be wrong to make Israelis leave Israel and move back to Europe, Russia, Africa, or wherever they came from. There in no point in history (whether King David’s time or 1947) when anyone can say “THIS is the time when the status quo should have been frozen.”

    People must be allowed to live in peace where they are. All this talk of more ethnic cleansing is nonsense.

  144. …dumb enough to tell me last week that no germans were interned during WWII by the US government, so that somehow made the racist internment of the japanese more racist or some such claptrap.

    BIC, what are you talking about? We held some German and Italian POW’s in the US – I stayed in their former barracks when I was in the Army. But the only group of American citizens rounded up and held in camps were Japanese. No Germans. My own relatives are Germans, and they received no hassle at all during WWII.

    What are you talking about?

  145. Whoooooaaa Rabbit. Maybe I misunderstood Helen Thomas but I’m certainly not talking about shipping anyone anywhere. Everyone should be able to live peacefully in whatever country they please.

    When Thomas made her comment, it reminded me of an old Sam Kinison joke about African’s starving in the desert. His solution, shouted at typical Kinison volume was GET OUT OF THE F*CKING DESERT!!!! THERE IS NO WATER THERE!!! NOTHING GROWS THERE!!!! It was one of the funniest things I heard Sam say, and I wasn’t a big fan of Sam. Israel is a constant target, a place where no Jew can truly rest easy. So why not seek shelter somewhere that WORKS?

    The point I think is worth discussing, a point you totally avoided in your reaction, is has the “Israel experiment” (like the American experiment) been successful? I would argue it has not.

    You talk about Jews moving next door to Auschwitz with all this melodrama. Do you know plantations where blacks were whipped and worked almost to death are tourist attractions now? Blacks seem to live in the South quite successfully now despite a terrible history. If you could prove to me that the entire world is anti-Semitic, I might agree with your outrage at my comment. We’re not talking Iran here. We’re talking Poland and Germany. Are they still hostile to Jews? Germany, to my knowledge, has been very openly contrite and ashamed of its past.

    The reason your Liberia comment makes no sense is … and again, correct me if I’m wrong, Liberia was established by blacks as a safe haven (much like Israel) so you’re suggestion to ship me and my family there actually argues in the opposite direction of what I’m discussing. Families came to Israel from Germany, Poland, etc. . Thomas is simply suggesting that these true homelands from which they should never have been forced to flee in the first place, are no longer antagonistic to them, so why not live there peacefully instead of in the hell that is the Middle East.

    Two more things. You’re right, I am not an expert on Israel. You may know much more about it than I do. If so, I’d be glad to be educated. Second, I don’t take my talking points from Cornell West even though I did get a major kick out of his frustration with Obama. Isn’t it funny how when we don’t like someone’s perspective, we accuse them of mimicking other people we don’t like? Sandi and Gray said I was watching too much Fox News. You say I parrot Cornell West. And yes, I’ve accused you of listening to too much Limbaugh. It’s an argument borne of frustration with your debate opponent.

    I lied … one more thing … am I being fed BS propaganda that the folks in Gaza are suffering? If you ignore Hamas for a minute, am I to believe that Palestinians are ipso facto bad people? Seriously. Please answer that question.

  146. Gray …. just for the sake of clarity, I am not suggesting Israelis be forced to leave Israel. You are absolutely right that forcing anyone to leave their homes is abominable.

    The question I am wrestling with is what can Israel do to make matters better for them? What I see from my limited perspective is a hunker down and perpetual “fight all enemies” way of living. I don’t call that a good solution. If the establishment of Israel was a good idea, shouldn’t we be seeing peace there some 60 years later?

  147. I’m reading an incredible amount of ignorance about the history of Palestine and Israel from the usual suspects. Nothing new.

    But let’s not kid ourselves. There is one big white elephant in the room that everybody continues to ignore.

    If the Arab Word were to lay down its arms, there would be peace between Arab and Jew. If the Israelis were to lay down their arms, there would be no Israel.

    It’s really that simple. Every time the Jews of Israel have negotiated in good faith and given land for peace, they have soon thereafter been met with death. From Gaza, to the West Bank, the story is always one and the same.

  148. Rutherford – I get it.

    I think that Jews should be allowed to leave Israel and relocate in Europe – if they want to. (Not being Jewish, I can’t imagine why anyone would want to live in Israel, at war endlessly with the neighbors that THEY relocated.) But relocation of Jews is no answer to the Middle East problem. I think we all agree about that. Even Rabbit.

    The point I was trying to make is that forced relocation of any population is always wrong – no matter how supposedly benign the motivation of the occupying power.

    What to do about Israel and the Palestinians? I have no idea. Neither side seems to want peace. Gaza is nothing but a prison camp with the worst of its inmates in charge. Sixty years of knocking the stuffing out of the Palestinians hasn’t made things any more peaceful, but maybe if Bibi knocks the stuffing out of them for just a little while longer, THAT will teach them….

    I think that Bibi is going down a dead-end road. Once Israel has gradually settled everywhere in the so-called Palestinian territories, there will be no place left for a Palestinian state and all of Greater Israel will belong to the Jews. Mission Accomplished. But what about the Palestinian people? Just push them into the sea?

    (Thanks for the Sam Kinison memory. I remember that routine very well – highly politically incorrect, but hilarious anyway. “YOU LIVE IN A F**KING DESERT! NO WONDER YOU’RE STARVING! MOVE TO WHERE THE FOOD IS!”)

  149. “R”,

    Can you tell me how you might feel about a White House Press Reporter that made the statement when asked “What do you think African-Americans should do”, answered:

    “I think all the negroes should get the hell out. Go back to Africa or wherever. Just leave…”

    Mind you, this was said on a day at the White House dedicated to Jewish Heritage and Culture.

    As a black man, I assume you would be quite offended?

    And rightly so?

    So what is the validity again?

  150. BIC, what are you talking about? We held some German and Italian POW’s in the US – I stayed in their former barracks when I was in the Army. But the only group of American citizens rounded up and held in camps were Japanese. No Germans. My own relatives are Germans, and they received no hassle at all during WWII.

    What are you talking about?

    I’m talking about this, you moron. I had some distant relatives interned at the camp at Crystal City.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_American_internment

    This the problem with people like you and yellow bitch. You both know so much that simply isn’t true.

  151. Hey BiC, speaking of wishing you too could look like Helen Thomas, and taking a stab at your approximate age, my suggestion assuming you can’t look this good, would be to “off” yourself.

    When I look at Helen Thomas, I can’t help but review the movie Men in Black in my mind

  152. Helen Thomas gets away with so much bigotry and ignorance becuase she is just so damn sexy.

    I have, indeed, read quite a bit on Israel.

    However, I just don’t have the time to write about it here. In fact, I don’t have much time to give many thoughtful responses on anything.

    Part of it is a 9 month old who already knows how to walk and has a love for danger. The other part is my distraction by various bread and circuses.

    I know I’m a sensico with a dash of bombast these days and I am OK with that.

    So, I jump on things that are blatantly obvious. I love playing softball, after all.

    Your gut reaction that Helen Thomas might be on to something is one of those obvious things.

    And you probably think the Rabbit needs sensitivity training.

  153. Rutherford (@143) , I haven’t missed what you said. I don’t mean to be obtuse, but I am talking apples to apples.

    The AZ statute in all substantive respects mirrors the federal laws. You take issue with its actual or possible missapplication. While you acknowledge that it may or may not be constitutional, you look not to the text of law, but apply the subjective it “smells bad” standard.

    Yet when it comes to Sestak (and what you refer to as bribery stautes), you again do not apply the text, but the subjective “this is how its done” standard in deciding that it the stautes should have no application when it comes to Sestak.

    Again, I don’t mean to be obtuse. But your approach reminded me of Humpty Dumpty in a rather benign passage in Through the Looking Glass:

    `When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

    `The question is,’ said Alice, `whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

    `The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, `which is to be master — that’s all.’

    Such is the case here. where you have

  154. Well, since Rutherford was evidently unimpressed with the form in which I already refuted Ambinder’s piece, I suspect he will also ignore these refutations.

    First off, I find it humorous that only these few, weak, and unsupported examples of such actions, out of 44 US presidents, are offered to support a claim that this is Washington business as usual. If this is such a common practice, why only a few examples? Why no support of the claims? And all of them don’t even apply, as I will show below.

    Also, the excuse that we would have to ditch the ambassador corps if we enforced the law is both idiotic and carries no weight with me. I have spoken out against the practice of giving campaign donators ambassadorships, regadless of who does it. If my blog still existed, I could show you. But since it doesn’t, consider this to be me firmly speaking out against it.

    We wouldn’t have to get rid of the ambassador corps if we enforced the law, we’d just have to stop giving ambassadorships to campaign contributors. And really, is that such a bad thing? What benefit do we get to American diplomacy by giving people who know nothing about the art of diplomacy a diplomatic position? This practice doesn’t need to be defended. It needs to be ended.

    On Reagan and S.I. Hayakawa, Jake Tapper refutes Ambinder. The bold is the money part.

    Asked by an Associated Press reporter if President Reagan would offer Hayakawa a job if he decided not to run for reelection, Rollins, underlined that the White House was not negotiating with Hayakwa but said: “If the senator chooses, on his own initiative, not to run for re-election, I’m sure the president would be willing to offer him a substantial administration post.”
    ….
    Asked to respond, Hayakawa said, “I’m not interested… I do not want to be an ambassador, and I do not want an administration post.” In a statement, Hayakawa said, “I have not contacted the White House in regard to any administration or ambassadorial post, and they have not been in contact with me.

    So, since The Reagan White House never actually contacted Hayakawa, and the Obama White House has admitted to contacting Sestak AND Romanoff, this is clearly NOT an example of an administration doing what Obama has done.

    I don’t seem to be able to find any information on the Clinton/L. Scott Harshbarger issue. And you’ll have to excuse me if I don’t take Ambinder’s word for it. Maybe you can find something to prove him correct, Rutherford? If not, I’m not buying on his word, alone.

    I am also having trouble finding information on Bush/Gilman. All the lefty sites are talking about it, but nobody is offerring a link to substantiate the details. Washington Monthly has a piece that everyone is copying which talks about it. But notice that, while it gives links to other examples, it offers none for Bush/Gilman. I find that more than a little suspicious.

    And when you click the links it does offer, you see they are still not examples of the actions by the Obama administration. For example, on Bush/Smith we find:

    No one ever spoke to me from the administration about a job, not at any time prior to the primary,” he said. “Nor did I ever receive word of an offer through any back channels.”

    On Bush/Nelson, we end up learning the same thing.

    Nelson told CNN he could not confirm or deny that an offer from Rove was made, adding that he is “happy” in his current job.
    ….
    Attempts to reach Rove for comment were not immediately successful. His office would not confirm or deny a specific conversation with Nelson, adding that it is Rove’s practice not to divulge private conversations with members of Congress.

    Two Bush administration officials said they were not aware of any job offer or discussion of a Cabinet post with Nelson. However, one of the officials confirmed that Rove spoke with Nelson in recent days, characterizing the call as an effort to reach out to discuss second-term priorities.

    Nelson doesn’t say they talked. Rove doesn’t say they talked. Bush doesn’t say they talked. Since all parties involved in the Obama issues have admitted they talked, this is clearly not an example of actions by the Obama Administration.

    I don’t need to refute Ambinder on Bush/Pawlenty, because he does so himself.

    And Tim Pawlenty is not a senator because Rove urged him to run for governor instead.

    Did that urging include offers of political appointment? If not—which I think we can assume since no offers are mentioned—then this is clearly not an example of what the Obama White House has admitted to.

    Now my pot of coffee has been exhausted. And I suspect I have wasted my time anyway. But I think I have done as good a job refuting your source, as well as other arguments floating around the Interweb, as they have done in supporting their claims. There are absolutely zero substantiated examples of any administration doing what the Obama administration has admitted to doing.

    Show me something beside a lefty commentator making unsubstantiated claims of the same action by other administrations and I will resume my research and refutations.

  155. Sorry, I hit “submit” before I was done.

    To finish my thought:

    Such is the case here where the laws are rationalized in a way that not so coincidentally suit Obama’s personal and political objectives.

  156. Here’s an example of why campaign contributors should not be given ambassadorships.

    The State Department has conceded committing a diplomatic faux pas by sending birthday greetings to Britain’s Queen Elizabeth II a week early.

    Spokesman P.J. Crowley allowed that a congratulatory message from Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton sent Friday on what the department thought was the eve of the queen’s official birthday had been premature.

    Of course, the Brits say they took no offense. But they always say that when Obama does something diplomatically stupid concerning the UK. That they even have to say it shows there is a problem.

    And who is the diplomatic dynamo Obama appointed as ambassador to America’s greatest ally on earth—democratic fundraiser Louis Susman

    Susman is a longtime fundraiser for Democratic candidates, including Kerry, Obama and others, and was once dubbed the “hoover vacuum” for his ability to raise campaign money. He served on the Democratic National Committee from 1972 to 1982. He retired in 2009 as vice chairman of Citigroup Global Markets in Chicago. He is a graduate of the University of Michigan and earned his law degree from Washington University in St. Louis.[

    Lots of fundraising qualifications. Zero diplomatic qualifications. And that lack of diplomatic experience has shown through over the last year and a half.

  157. Ummm The article you like is based on an actual study that people who like the article should probably read

  158. And you probably think the Rabbit needs sensitivity training.

    LOL … DR, man, I gave up on the sensitivity part over a year ago! 😆 I also get the nine month old business. He will keep you on your toes, I don’t doubt it for one minute.You’re handling the nightmare I’ve already been through and Tex has warned me of the nightmare to come. I might as well shoot myself right now. 🙂

    Oh … Tex … Thomas’ comment was indelicate and her timing could not have been worse. But since you and the Rabbit have tossed this hypothetical at me about being forced to move to Africa, let me share a brief anecdote.

    During my childhood, my parents moved me around three times within the NYC metropolitan area for one reason or another. Each and every time when we needed to move, we moved to a brand new development. Do you know why? Because my parents 1) did not want to live in a “black neighborhood” and 2) they did not want to integrate a white neighborhood. So, we always moved into new neighborhoods that hadn’t acquired an identity yet.

    You see, there is something very uncomfortable about living where you are not welcome and not wanted. I’m not going to spend my last breath defending Helen Thomas. I don’t know what is in her heart and I don’t know if she is blatantly anti-Israel and pro-Palestine. I do know that Israel does not get along with its neighbors, with the exception of Turkey and it looks like they may have screwed that up.

    Again, since you don’t have a nine-month old running around to distract you, Tex, answer two questions:

    1) Does the State of Israel work? Is it a successful end-game for Jews/Israelis?

    2) Do Palestinians deserve to live anywhere? Do they deserve to have sovereignty anywhere?

    When I was in college, I had an unrequited love for a grad student there. When she followed her boyfriend to Israel I truly ached for her. Not because she had a bf (yeah that sucked) but because I literally feared for her life. As far as I know she is still alive and well and in Israel but I wouldn’t live there for all the money in the world. I’d rather live where I don’t have to fear someone blowing my house to bits.

  159. Tigre, that’s a great Humpty Dumpty comparison. I quite like his reasoning. 🙂

    I’ll tell you where I see a complete apples to apples comparison. If we ignore the AZ law and look at Federal law, we have yet another law that gets ignored and monkeyed around with to the frustration of some. Businesses hire illegals although it is unlawful to do so. Illegals reside here even though it is unlawful to do so. No one enforces the law.

    Incentives get offered all the time for politicians to behave in one way or another in direct ignorance of current law. So both AZ and Sestak-gate do represent what happens when current laws are not enforced.

    As I said before, maybe public opinion will force political influence laws to be better enforced now that Sestak has made a big deal out of it? I’d ask you the same question posed by The Atlantic journalist. Is it illegal for Obama to campaign for Democratic candidates? Clearly that is a blatant attempt to influence the outcome of an election.

  160. I don’t know what is in her heart and I don’t know if she is blatantly anti-Israel and pro-Palestine.

    Do you believe David Duke has in heart anti-black attitude or Fred Phelps anti-gay? Come on man, the hag has a 50 year history of dissing Israel – that and her love affair with Camelot is her history. Let’s be reasonable. Helen Thomas was, is and will always be a hack.

    Palestinians are unwanted Jordanians. They’re used by the Islamic world as fodder. I at one time had a degree of pity – not anymore. They elected Hamas, a government sworn to the destruction of Israel. They sealed their own fate.

    Does the State of Israel work?

    I’d say so. They’ve been there for over 3,000 years. In addition, in less than twenty years, they formed the only real Democratic society in the Middle East and turned a desert into a rose.

    Is it a successful end-game for Jews/Israelis?

    God says it is. 🙂

    I wrote this today at another site. No sense repeating myself.

    I have seen this idea kicked around of having the Israeli Jews relocate to America. Many Americans I know may believe that sound reasoning, and I’m sure it done mostly with the best of intent. But I find the very idea of suggesting Jews move an abomination.

    The America public and its representative government need to quit straddling the fence. Either lend our unbending support for Israel, or abandon her to the wolves. This mealy-mouthed approach to Middle East peace is weak, pathetic and serves no useful purpose.

    For me, the Jews of Israel are right where they are supposed to be. I believe that land is rightfully their own. Their capital is Jerusalem – all of it. Jewish ancestry suffered for it, they died for it, their sons and daughters converted a desert into a garden under the authority of covenant 4,000 years ago. Whether for “religious” reasons like mine, or completely secular reasons of Israel being the only real democracy of the Middle East, the facts for joining with Israel and providing unwavering support are readily apparent.

  161. Well Huck, I appreciate your effort and I hate to infuriate you but I think you proved pretty convincingly that the Bush admin was better at lying than the Obama admin has been. 🙂 “Neither confirm nor deny” is equivalent to no comment, which in turn is equivalent to guilty-as-charged. LOL

    Pawlenty was encouraged to run for Governor and not Senator. How is that not interference? It’s benign but it’s interference.

    The two parties have a game plan to stay in power. Already elected officials play a role in that game plan. As I’ve already said, I think every President from Obama going forward should swear an oath to not attend another damn fundraiser. This notion that the President is the head of his party needs to stop. The President is the head of the country.

    Sadly, this country has a habit of using impeachment as a political weapon. You want Obama impeached over this. Andrew Johnson was impeached because he was hated and they found a justification to impeach him. Nixon was nearly impeached because he was hated. He never endangered the safety of our country. He actually, particularly from a foreign affairs perspective, was a pretty damn good President. He got involved in the cover up of a two-bit petty politically motivated robbery. Dumb, dumb, dumb. But the country was really none the worse for it and had he finished his term, nothing terrible would have happened.

    Bill Clinton got impeached for getting a blow job and lying about it. Our country prospered during the Clinton years. He was no traitor. He was impeached because he was hated by those who had the power to impeach him.

    I can think of only one modern President who deserved impeachment, and I’m sorry boys … it was George W, Bush who lied us into a war that killed thousands of innocent American men and women. He got a pass on that. 😦

  162. Regarding 182, Tex that was one stupid video. Ok, the author gets points for all the frivolous stuff that went down in the 40+ days, but … Obama doesn’t get to appoint a Supreme Court justice? He should suspend all State dinners? When he does go down to LA, which is what you would think the author wants, he then calls it PR?

    It’s a cute video if one is mindless enough to think that the oil spill is the only thing on the POTUS plate right now. I’m not thrilled with Obama’s response either, but the vid is silly.

  163. it was George W, Bush who lied us into a war that killed thousands of innocent American men and women. He got a pass on that

    Then 109 Democrats lied with Bush and deserved to be impeached as well. Bush went with the best information available, all Democratic leaders also thought Saddam had WMD, Putin thought Saddam had WMD, and there were many good reasons without WMD to remove Saddam – unless you think the world was better with him?

    If anybody deserved to be impeached using your reasoning, it was LBJ. Now, he did lie about a war.

  164. “R”,

    Funny how perspective changes everything. It documents Obama’s huge failure and lackadaisical attitude – dismal performance, as usual.

  165. Bye the way,

    RIP John Robert Wooden – one of the classiest men and best coaches to ever walk the earth.

    His teams brought me many fun childhood memories.

  166. What portion of the statute was The Atlantic journalist referring to in posing his hypothetical? If you had a link I didn’t see it and we’re near 200 comments at this point, so I apologize for not hunting.

    In any event, the real question is whether the Sestak matter violated the activity proscribed by the laws. Now, I concede that a statute may be deemed unconstitutionally vague and therefore void under an appropriate challenge. But of course that is not what we are debating.

    I am criticizing the flexible logic applied by the left — amply captured by the “they do it all the time” defense . It irks me. (I say “the left” because it’s the same logic that drives the repugnant justifications for everything that amount to, “but look what Bush did.”). God how I wished the “everybody does it” plea worked when I was a teenager. But I knew why it didn’t work then, and I know why it shouldn’t work now.

    The dismissive “it smells bad” logic is equally flexible. And It too irks me. Let’s face it. It smells bad that they do it all the time!

    Although you stated it differently than I did, your “apples to apples” comparison is correct. I was just taking shots at your posted comments (as I said I would).

    Now, if only we could agree on a desired outcome. . . nah, what fun would there be in that?

  167. “George W, Bush who lied us into a war that killed thousands of innocent American men and women.”-R

    No…..not the “he lied to us” crap! People who believe that garbage are as silly as 9/11 conspiracy theorists.

    I didn’t think non teenage libs still went with that line.

    Your ignorant. Plain and simple.

    Now, truth be known, I think there is a great argument that the war was a massive mistake. Certainly the “Mission Accomplished” bullshit ranks up there with General Armstrong Custer.

    But, to think Bush was in cahoots with almost every intelligence agency in order to lie to the world about Iraqi WMD is seriously fucking silly.

    Only one person lied about WMD and that was SH.

  168. Atlantic link @ #147, Tiger.

    “Is it illegal for Obama to campaign for Democratic candidates? Clearly that is a blatant attempt to influence the outcome of an election.”

    No quid pro quo involved in that.

  169. Rutherford, if you truely believe George Bush lied about Iraq having WMD, then you are really going to love the guy Obama has named as our new Intel Chief. He thinks Saddam sent them to Syria.

    President Obama’s choice to be the next director of national intelligence supported the view that Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq sent weapons and documents to Syria in the weeks before the 2003 U.S. invasion.
    ….
    On Iraq, Gen. Clapper said in an interview with The Washington Times in 2004 that “I think probably in the few months running up prior to the onset of combat that … there was probably an intensive effort to disperse into private homes, move documentation and materials out of the country. I think there are any number of things that they would have done.”

  170. lol……good find Hucking.

    I’ve come to learn that Liberals and particularly Rutherford have certain canned retorts that they use.

    I bet Rutherford doesn’t really believe what he said, to be honest. Its just something from his slightly outdated team playbook he is supposed to say.

    The weak thing is….well….that it is so weak. Just makes him sound like an angry dummy.

    Rutherford has enough dirt on Bush….he doesn’t need to resort to that kind of crap.

    Want to talk about George Bush lies?

    How about Bush looting the common man in order to save his banker buddies. The upper class elite saved themselves and locked the door on us.

    Those dirty thieves got hooked up two fold. They made all the money back they irresponsibly gambled and they were endowed with the power to blood suck us working stiffs.

    I’m convinced there would have been a vested interest for a massive mortgage re-modification program (a real one). They would have met us half way.

    But no….now they don’t care if the house goes into foreclosure. Why would they?

    Bush was too much of a coward to let this bubble pop. So is Obama.

    Biggest fib told in American history was that the Troubled Asset Relief Program would save the middle class from a depression. That was a fucking whopper.

    Nope. Bush’s TARP money has gone to million dollar bonuses (how anyone calling themselves a conservative be cool with even one dollar of tax payer money going to a bonus for a failed company is beyond me), lobbying firms, an unknown abysses, hedge-fund scams…but none of it has been used to stabilize the housing market. None of it.

    The middle class took the entire brunt of the melt down.

    I fucking hate socialism. Both brands….Republican and Democrat.

  171. “Well Huck, I appreciate your effort and I hate to infuriate you but I think you proved pretty convincingly that the Bush admin was better at lying than the Obama admin has been.”

    I think what it proves is that you have no actual evidence Bush or Rove did what is alleged concerning Nelson. What it proves is that you are basing it on a hunch.

    Maybe Graychin can confirm that.

    “Pawlenty was encouraged to run for Governor and not Senator.”

    That’s nice. Now go back up to #75 and read the law.

    Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment, position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit, provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining any such benefit, to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity or for the support of or opposition to any candidate or any political party in connection with any general or special election to any political office, or in connection with any primary election or political convention or caucus held to select candidates for any political office, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

    Urging in itself is not the issue. When the urging includes an offer of the bolded parts above, then it becomes an issue.

    Do you have any evidence that Pawlenty was offered something in exchange for not running in the senate race? Or is that another hunch?

  172. How does the selective firing of the U.S. Attorneys who wouldn’t play ball with Rove’s scheme to damage Democrats running for office fit into this discussion?

    It probably doesn’t. Bush, Rove and Gonzo are all Republicans, after all.

  173. Is it illegal for Obama to campaign for Democratic candidates? Clearly that is a blatant attempt to influence the outcome of an election.

    Of course not. I actually took an hour and parsed through 18 USC 11 this morning, and posted my observations. Campaigning for someone isn’t proscribed by the statute. I’d like to say nice try, but I figure telling lies encourages others to tell them.

    How does the selective firing of the U.S. Attorneys who wouldn’t play ball with Rove’s scheme to damage Democrats running for office fit into this discussion?

    It probably doesn’t. Bush, Rove and Gonzo are all Republicans, after all.

    Actually, the important fact is that it wasn’t illegal to fire the USAs. I know that distinction is probably lost on you, as you have already admitted that you aren’t qualified to discuss the law, but having read the relevant statues, and being trained in interpreting the law, I know that a US Attorney serves at the pleasure of the President. You don’t have to like it. You don’t have to agree with it. It is the law.

    28 usc 541(c):

    (c) Each United States attorney is subject to removal by the President.

    It really doesn’t get any clearer than that.

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode28/usc_sec_28_00000541—-000-.html

  174. Damn….that was one tough Jew in Yankee Stadium tonight. The dude’s knee completely blew out. This was worse case scenario becuase Yuri Foreman is a slick, dancing type of boxer. He refused to give up, and was hobbling around taking major shots and dishing a few out. A white towel flies into the ring, the fight temporarily stopped. However, it turns out that it was from the crowd. 50 people get kicked out of the ring, the fight goes on until the Jew takes a nasty body shot. I may be the last guy in America who still loves boxing. Cool shit.

    Won a few bucks on the under too.

  175. I only watched boxing back in the days of Ali. He and Howard Cosell provided mucho entertainment. Glad you made a few bucks though DR. Every penny counts!

  176. “I only watched boxing back in the days of Ali. He and Howard Cosell provided mucho entertainment.”

    Mike Tyson was fun to watch as long as you didn’t blink.

  177. BIC, you have brought more clarity to the discussion than all the previous comments combined.

    Firing US Attorneys who refuse to conduct politically-motivated prosecutions as directed by the White House is OK, because it is NOT ILLEGAL to fire US Attorneys. (Not sure if the White House directing politically-motivated prosecutions is illlegal or not – I’ll let the legal experts chime in on that.)

    Meanwhile, offering someone a non-paying position on an advisory board if he declines to run for office may be illegal, and possibly an impeachable offense.

    Got it.

  178. Huck @199 and Biw @205: Those are huge points. Those sharing Rutherford’s view have yet to address them with anything other than ex post facto justifications (e.g. it’s done all the time).

    Rutherford, care to buck the trend?

  179. Rutherford, my computer wouldn’t play that ABC video for some reason, but I saw “Westboro Church” in the description – which told me quite enough.

    Although I have been saying that I believe that fear of the “other” is genetic, I did not mean to imply that it is inevitable. Significantly, the identity of the “other” has to be very flexible. The “other” may differ according to circumstances, and can be influenced significantly by teaching, by experience, and by the surrounding culture.

    The old song says “You’ve GOT to be taught to hate and fear.” I don’t think you HAVE to be taught – but you surely can be.

  180. @213
    So there are just a bunch of genetic fuck ups out there committing hate crimes?
    Don’t even get going on the attorneys thing. Obama has done the same thing.

  181. Firing US Attorneys who refuse to conduct politically-motivated prosecutions as directed by the White House is OK, because it is NOT ILLEGAL to fire US Attorneys. (Not sure if the White House directing politically-motivated prosecutions is illlegal or not – I’ll let the legal experts chime in on that.)

    I can’t speak to reasons for firing all the of the USAs, GC, but the offical reason the Justice Department gave for canning the one we had here, John McKay, was that it didn’t like the way he shared information with LEOs. He believed that the reason was that he didn’t investigate the allegations of voter fraud in the 2004 gubanatorial election here in the Peepuls Republick of Washingtonistan. However even he admitted the key point:

    “Any individual prosecutor is replaceable,” McKay concedes.

    Now, I knew enough about McKay to know that he is a sharp guy, and fighter. The article I link below contains some unproven allegations by him, which remain unproven.

    Secondly, as one of those legal experts you do not want to concede to, I can tell you that the firings were not illegal. If they were, the USAs would not have gone back to private life, they would have SUED! As former USA McKay concedes, they serve at the pleasure of the President. The rest is just noise. It was noise the first time, and it is noise now when you try to rehabilitate your implication that the Bush administration did something wrong here.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/14/eveningnews/main2571355.shtml

  182. “I can tell you that the firings were not illegal. If they were, the USAs would not have gone back to private life, they would have SUED!”

    As if THAT would have mattered to the Bush Justice Department! 😀

    David Iglesias (R) believes he was removed from office at the behest of two NM Republican congressmen when he refused to prosecute state Democratic senators before the November 2006 election.

    Daniel Ryan (R) Though described as “loyal to the Bush administration” he was alleged fired for the possible controversy that negative job performance evaluations might cause if they were released.

    John McKay (R) Was given a positive job evaluation just 7 months before he was fired. After a close WA governor’s race resulted in a Democratic victory local Republicans criticized McKay for not investigated allegations of voter fraud.

    Paul K. Charlton (R) Was given a positive job performance evaluation before he was dismissed. He may have been fired because he had started a corruption investigation about Rick Renzi (R) AR.

    Carol Lam (R) No reason was given or suggested for her dismissal.

    Daniel Bogden (R) was dismissed after 17 years because of a vague sense that a “stronger leader” was needed. His loyalty to President Bush was also questioned by D. Kyle Sampson.

    Margaret Chiara(R) Was given a positive job evaluation in 2005 and told she was being removed to “make way” for another individual.

    Todd Graves (R) had been pressed to bring a civil suit against Missouri Secretary of State Robin Carnahan, (D) for allegedly failing to crack down on voting fraud.

    Bud Cummins allegedly was asked to leave so Timothy Griffin an aid to Karl Rove could have his job.

    Thomas M. DiBiagio (R) believes he was asked to step down for his corruption investigations into the administration of Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr.

    All that is “noise,” but the Sestak affair is a big deal.

    Got it. I understand perfectly.

  183. Wasn’t someone just criticizing the other day for not posting credit?

    That didn’t read too original to me…

  184. And NONE of those firings broke the law.

    I know, I know. The law is unimportant when a Democrat breaks it…that was the reason for all the spirited defense of Billy Jeff’s Oval Office hummer, but perjury is a crime, and one of moral turpitude to boot. That would be why he was disbarred.

    These distinctions exist for a reason. Without them, there is no line to be drawn between the abritary and the deliberate.

    And when you serve at the pleasure of the President, the excuse simply does not matter.

  185. Yeah, Bush abused his power because he fired some US attorneys, which we are told he has the power to do under 28 usc 541(c).

    By contrast, Barack Obama did not abuse his power by offering presidential appointments to prospective congressional candidates so that they would not enter a political race, which we are told is an impeachable abuse of power under 18 USC 11, Sec. 201, 18 USC 11, Sec. 211, 18 USC 11, Sect. 595, and 18 USC 11, Sect. 600.

    Does that about sum it up?

  186. Graychin, if you feel Bush abused the power he was given, do you feel the same about Congress passing ObamaCare without a supermajority?

  187. (I know – it’s only Wikipedia.

    I used it to teach both you and Yellow Bitch that something you knewto be fact, was in fact not true. (Of course, I could also verfy those facts through other sources.)

    BIC, for some reason the phrase “abuse of power” keeps popping into my head. Have you ever heard it before?

    Yes, I have. And certain acts of it have actually been codified as being abuses of power, and as being illegal. Unfortunately for your argument, the President firing people that he is permitted by law to both hire and fire, and who serve at his pleasure, is NOT one of those illegal acts.

  188. Graychin, instead of attacking the messenger, why don’t you actually click the Pajamas Media link and then see whether or not you can attack the actual substance of the article?

    But you had better do your homework, because the Pajamas Media piece emulates the feelings of Barack Obama’s recent Intel Chief appointment (See #200).

  189. Graychin, if you feel Bush abused the power he was given, do you feel the same about Congress passing ObamaCare without a supermajority?

    Interesting question, Huck.

    1) Obamacare DID pass in the Senate with the 60 votes required under Senate rules to end a Republican filibuster. BUT…

    2) The Constitution requires Congressional supermajorites only in limited circumstances, such as overriding presidental vetoes and ratification of treaties. For most of American history, and until the last four years or so when Republicans started to filibuster everything in sight, passage of legislation by simple majority vote was routine everyday business.

    Where did you get the idea that passing legislation by simple majority vote was an abuse of power? 😀

  190. “Where did you get the idea that passing legislation by simple majority vote was an abuse of power?”

    I got the idea that Congress doing what the law allows it to do is abuse of power from the same place you got the idea that the president doing what he is allowed to do is abuse of power.

    I pulled it out of my ass.

  191. Huck, when I mentioned Pajamas Media, I was only trying to head off a knee-jerk attack on my source (Wikipedia), and P.M. came to mind because it had been sourced just a bit earlier. I didn’t mean it as a slam on Pajamas Media in particular.

    Actually, I have had nothing but the greatest respect for P.M. ever since they obtained the services of Joe the Plumber as a foreign correspondent. How much more credibility could we ask for? 😀

  192. Gray, no comment on Obama’s Intel Chief pick thinking Iraq’s WMD got sent to Syria?

    I can see why the left would want to bury its head on this one. George Bush proven correct and those who have spent the last 6+ years claiming he is a lying war criminal proven wrong?

    Can’t have that, can we?

  193. “How much more credibility could we ask for?”

    Let me ask Dan Rather and CBS and I’ll get back to you, OK?

  194. That’s a very productive ass you have there, Huck. 😀

    Article 2 of the Impeachment of Richard Nixon includes “impairing the due and proper administration of justice and the conduct of lawful inquiries…”

    You seem to be of the Richard Nixon School of Presidential Conduct: “If the President does it, it is not illegal.” (Unless he is a Democrat.) 😀

  195. No, I am of the school that thinks if the law says the president can do it, then it’s OK.

    As opposed to the laws that say the president cannot do it. Which you seem to think is OK, as long as you convince yourself that others have also done it, even when they really haven’t.

  196. Huck:

    Pajamas Media says Gen. Clapper “has previously stated his belief that the weapons went to Syria…”

    Well… not exactly. If you follow the link in your Pajamas Media story, it takes you here:

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jun/4/likely-intel-chief-clapper-held-disputed-wmd-view/

    Which says:

    On Iraq, Gen. Clapper said in an interview with The Washington Times in 2004 that “I think probably in the few months running up prior to the onset of combat that … there was probably an intensive effort to disperse into private homes, move documentation and materials out of the country. I think there are any number of things that they would have done.”

    That’s it. That’s all he said. And I think I agree with Gen. Clapper. I think that Saddam probably did try to hide stuff before the invasion. I just don’t believe he had anything much to hide.

    And if Gen Clapper said that in 2004, I wonder if he has changed his mind about any of it in the face of, er, actual EVIDENCE (or lack thereof):

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/25/AR2005042501554.html

    Darn funny that all our expensive spy satellites didn’t show that massive movement of weapons you believe in so faithfully? Or maybe they did, and Bush STILL invaded the wrong country?

  197. Graychin, like his so called “progressive politic” is stuck with the dinosaur media. If you can’t win the war, at least kill the messenger, I suppose.

    I wonder if Jim Crow has noticed every news source he finds objective has lost a considerable amount of audience the last 16 months? As example, his “muff diving” dyke heroine Racial Madcow has lost over 50% of her audience since Jan 2009.

    What would be an interesting answer is for Graychin to pinpoint for the rest of us what he finds the most credible source of media with a Leftist bent?

    George Soros? Dan Rather? Keith Olbermann? Katie Couric?

    Or possibly his love Helen Thomas?

  198. What would be an interesting answer is for Graychin to pinpoint for the rest of us what he finds the most credible source of media with a Leftist bent?

    Tex, to the extent that news comes with a “bent” (left OR right), it’s that much less credible. Therefore your question is nonsense.

    I know you won’t be able to understand it, that, but that’s my answer.

    How about answering your own question for me. From the RIGHT “bent,” of course. 😀

  199. For starters, it isn’t my Pajamas Media link. It’s Tex’s. My link is the same WashTimes piece you posted (It’s buried above somewhere).

    Yes, the WashTimes piece says Clapper thought Saddam moved “material” out of the country. I am interested as to what kind of “material” you think he might have been talking about.

    Also, can you point out the portion of that WaPo piece that even hints that Clapper’s mind has been changed?

    I ask because his name does not appear anywhere in the article.

    On Walpin, no it doesn’t shed any new light to me because I have been following this story since it happened. So allow me to bring you up to speed on the matter.

    Read the whole piece. And take special note of this portion…

    After the president fired Walpin on June 10 — without giving prior notice to Congress as required by law — investigators in Issa’s and Grassley’s offices wanted to know more about what led to the firing. Solomont agreed to be interviewed on July 15.

    So, while it is debatable as to whether or not Walpin was mentally capable of doing his job. What doesn’t seem to be debatable is that we have just another example of President Barack Obama circumventing the laws of the United States with gross abuses of executive power.

  200. Huck, since the report referenced by the WaPo piece came out in 2005, and Clapper made his remark in 2004, it’s just barely possible that the facts contained in the referenced report may have changed his mind – to the extent that he was referring to WMD’s when he made his remark.

    As I said above, I think I agree with Gen. Clapper’s 2004 remark. I think that Saddam probably did try to hide stuff before the invasion. I just don’t believe that Saddam had anything much to hide.

    some Republican Congresscritter will ask Gen. Clapper what he meant then, and what he thinks now. I would be interested in knowing. Wouldn’t you?

    I confess that I barely remember l’affaire Walpin, and I don’t know any more about the details than I have read today. But if it is true that Walpin couldn’t legally be fired without adequate notice to Congress, then I guess Walpin wasn’t technically fired until after the lapse of 30 days. Maybe he isn’t fired yet, since it was not within Obama’s legal authority to fire him. What am I missing here?

  201. I want to call everyone’s attention to the date—June 6th.

    66 years ago today, a bunch of guys with big brass balls stormed the beaches of Normandy against the determined forces of a vicious dictator. Take a long moment to think about these brave men and what they did that day. Maybe go to your local video store and rent The Longest Day, if you don’t have your own copy (like I do 😉 )

    They’ve earned our thoughts today. Give them their do.

  202. Here is another link from the Examiner (rightward “bent”?) –

    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Gerald-Walpin-speaks-the-inside-story-of-the-AmeriCorps-firing-48030697.html

    It includes these statements:

    Walpin learned his fate… when he received a call from Norman Eisen, the Special Counsel to the President for Ethics and Government Reform. “He said, ‘Mr. Walpin, the president wants me to tell you that he really appreciates your service, but it’s time to move on,'” Walpin recalls. “Eisen said, ‘You can either resign, or I’ll tell you that we’ll have to terminate you.'”

    Eisen’s efforts to force Walpin to resign COULD Be seen as an effort to push Walpin out of his job so that the White House would not have to go through the 30-day process or give a reason for its action. When Walpin refused to quit, the White House informed Congress and began the 30-day countdown.

    This is pretty thin stuff, Huck. I just can’t see any “gross abuses of executive power” here. It looks to me like the letter of the law was followed. Was it wrong to tell Walpin that he was going to be fired?

    (After 30 days, of course.)

  203. I am growing bored with this, and it is leading away from the original discussion. So I am going to refer you to your own quote and then go enjoy the day and watch my movie.

    ““impairing the due and proper administration of justice and the conduct of lawful inquiries…””

    I asked you if you believe the Walpin incident applied to that, and you’ve made your belief as clear as I have made mine. I agree that we disagree.

  204. I also agree that we disagree.

    Since you consider the US Attorney firings to be perfectly cool, and l’affaire Halprin to be a “gross abuse of executive power, I suspect we won’t be agreeing on very much.

    I never did know what Clapper’s 2004 remark had to do with the original discussion. Perhaps it was supposed to make Obama look bad?

  205. How about answering your own question for me. From the RIGHT “bent,” of course.

    What’s real nonsense is you thinking you’re a clever debater. You can’t even answer a simple question anymore. I know that you believe George Soros and Media Matters stick straightly to the fact, so I’ll answer it for you. 🙂

    WSJ, Pajamas Media – final answer.

  206. Here’s some of that fine barbequed porkulus money at work.

    Massage and beauty schools, online universities and other for-profit colleges in Georgia and across the nation are cashing in on federal stimulus spending, collecting $2.2 billion in tuition grants for low-income students, public records show.

    http://www.ajc.com/news/for-profit-colleges-reap-541761.html

    Terrific showing Dimocratic Congress…

  207. Tex, I’m glad you revisited your media question.

    I used to think the the WSJ was an excellent source of unbiased news. Today I have no opinion about it, because I don’t read now. I used to read it daily. Their editorial and op-ed pages were always completely wacko, and I suppose they still are.

    Pajamas Media? 😀

    As with most of your questions (like “who were Cain and Abel’s mates?”), this question about “which slanted news source is most credible?” is ridiculous on its face. And that you would ask such a question is telling about your entire approach to “intellectual” pursuit. You only want to read things that support your pre-determined beliefs, whether it’s the right-wing faux outrage du jour about Obama and the Democrats, or the Apologetics study guide that tries to prop up as best it can what you have already decided to believe about the Bible.

    As an aside – anything that George Soros funds is no less credible than anything run by Rupert Murdoch. As are Faux and the WSJ, in case you weren’t aware of that.

  208. As an aside – anything that George Soros funds is no less credible than anything run by Rupert Murdoch.

    None so blind as those who refuse to see.

    Except that the news still consists of reporting facts. Soros doesn’t bank roll the reporting of anything, but thinks nothing of concealing his agenda through the various front groups he funds. But please, continue with your false moral equivalents. If you keep saying them, you might even start to believe them yourself.

  209. As with most of your questions (like “who were Cain and Abel’s mates?”), this question about “which slanted news source is most credible?” is ridiculous on its face. And that you would ask such a question is telling about your entire approach to “intellectual” pursuit.

    Spare us Jim Crow. Your entire approach has gotten stale. From your humor to your continual use of the word ridiculous, at least come up with something new to use as insult.

    zzzzzzzzzz…….

    Preached from the bohunk from Eucha, OK, whose sole attribute of “intellect” is what somebody spoon fed him from PuffHO.

    You’ve been proven clueless so many times here, on a variety of subjects, that I’m beginning to think you’re about half lucid. You bore me.

  210. “I never did know what Clapper’s 2004 remark had to do with the original discussion. Perhaps it was supposed to make Obama look bad?”

    It was in response to Rutherford’s attempt at distraction in #190.

  211. G-chin, I continue to see my posts appearing then disappearing on your blog. I wish I could say I am surprised. The latest was in response to bville’s juvenile claim that he can’t find any examples of GOP leadership complimenting Obama for his work as evidence of something. Asked where his proof of the opposite resides and I was again deleted. Good luck getting it fixed if it’s unintentional. I give up.

  212. Any idea why Tiger’s comments might be disappearing?

    Yeah, here’s a clue.

    Stupidity and a censoring blog owner. Man up you sniveling puke – you’re gutless. 😯

  213. Rutherford – HELP! Any idea why Tiger’s comments might be disappearing? I see that he visited the thread, but it didn’t give him a comment number.

    If it is a word press blog, go to your dashboard, click on “comments” in the sidebar, go to his comment, run your cursor down over it until you see the words at the bottom of his comment light up, click on “approve”, and they should appear.

  214. Yeah, mine didn’t go through, either. Had 2 links so maybe got caught in the spam filter.

    (Graychin, you might want to either adjust that filter or learn to use it if you are going to label people who don’t offer support for their claims as trolls. It’s very frustrating to take the time not only to comment, but to do the research to support what you’ve written, only to have it go to spam.)

  215. Also, since you are evidently unfamiliar with the inner working of WordPress (not meant as an insult but an observation) I will advise and request that you and your partner be EXTREMELY careful when pushing the “spam” button on a comment (assuming you have ever done it, because there are many times it is warranted).

    If WordPress gets enough spam buttons on a particular IP, it bans that IP from WordPress.

    I am not going to accuse you of censoring. But if you are and are using the spam filter to do it, please stop.

  216. Alfie, looked at your link. I’m living it in Atlanta. Two kids (5 and 8) in a charter here. Same shit; different location. I’m seething and grateful at the same time.

  217. The only thing that make inner city charter schools better then inner city public schools are the like minded parents that at least care enough to weigh their options.

    Most charter schools are terrible.

    Manhattan is a strange place. People will go through rigid and humiliating application processes just to get their kid in a day care center or pre-school. Certain ones are status symbols.

    I’ve worked at both. While the union in public schools allows a few horrible teachers to last forever, charter schools get strange rangers who don’t mind getting paid 28,000 a year after a 120,000 dollar, 5 year degree or decent people who get the hell out of there ASAP.

    Most charter schools in Detroit are Islamic madrases or black schools where you wouldn’t want your kids to even visit for an away game.

    There are many of us who are about to quit paying our dues to these state wide or national teacher “associations”. People always say unions have high jacked politics. It’s the other way around. These teacher unions are nothing but corrupt ACORN like organizations. Even worse for me, they recently are more of a liability then their worth. They hurt us in the eyes of the public.

    I’ve said this before. There is no problem with education.

    Schools that exist in neighborhoods full of ignorant people are ignorant schools.

    Schools that exist in neighborhoods where the family is intact, crime is low and education is valued are very successful.

    Do the research yourselves, if you don’t believe my rocket science.

    You can’t make chicken salad out of chicken shit.

  218. Actually Rabbit, after paying for two private educations K-12, I’d say private schools are much the same thing. I have no idea if the teachers more capable, but you guarantee yourself like minded parents who care.

  219. Rabbit, totally different experience for me. I’d rather send my kids to prison than inner-city public schools in Atlanta. I grew up inner-city Boston and attended public school. It was different universe than what we deal with here. It’s embarrassing. I have an extraordinary boy (savant-like) and I believe he gets an education rivaled only by the most expensive private schools. We have been met with incredible resistance from the public system, whose results speak for themselves. I only hope you’re talking about something unique in MI. Your comments don’t apply here.

  220. You misunderstood me. I feel charter schools are better then public schools in the inner city. You can’t do worse then an inner city public school.

    The results DO speak for themselves if you believe in standardized testing.

    Public schools kick ass in standardized testing in affluent or educated and stable areas. Same with the college graduation or acceptance rate.

    Sure there are some brainy charter schools that are great alternatives. But their athletic programs are often times a joke and, like it or not, many people feel that is also important. Come to think of it, guys like me.

    I’m not dissing charter schools. Hell, I think they are a good thing, depending on the situation.

    If I can afford it, I’m going to send my kid to Catholic school.

    I’m just not buying into the theory that charter schools have some sort of superior model.

    The school you send your kid to is successful becuase it is made up of students with parents that are like you. Even a crappy teacher can look like an all star at that place.

    Mean while, there is another universe out there full of either parents who don’t give a damn about their out of control kids, or weird “helicopter” parents who think their kids do no wrong.

    Add in the fact that every jack ass kid now gets some quack to diagnose them as “learning disabled”, trial lawyers circling like vultures…would you do this job for 30,000 grand a year? 40 no benefits?

    The public school I work at has no problem competing against a major, well known private school near it. And it’s not because of us teachers…..it’s becuase of the parents.

  221. Anytime the Dead Rabbit gets in a discussion about his profession, he feels like he has to proof read his writing ten times over.

    🙂

  222. Huck, you have two visible comments from this evening, one at 756 and another at 1009. Did you leave others?

    I am the only one who can mark a comment as spam, and I haven’t done that. As I said, there is nothing in the spam box except one message from an actual spammer – not from you guys.

    BIC, thanks for the suggestion, but there is nothing in the spam filter or anywhere else that is “unapproved.” Something is happening that I don’t understand.

    I appreciate your suggestions. Keep them coming. I want to fix this.

  223. My blog has always been set for “Hold a comment in the queue if it contains FOUR or more links.” I don’t think that was the problem either.

  224. Secondly, as one of those legal experts you do not want to concede to, I can tell you that the firings were not illegal.

    Oy vey! BiW am I understanding this statement to say you consider yourself a “legal expert”? I don’t doubt you are a fine attorney but don’t you feel that self-assessment a wee bit grandiose?

    What should be clear by this point in the conversation is that what is legal and what is right are two different things. I’m willing to say that even if no law were violated, the Obama admin offering incentives to folks not to run for office is distasteful … and wrong. Sadly, I am also of the opinion that reform in this area is a pipe dream. Of course, if you were successful in getting Obama impeached over this, the pipe dream would become reality.

    The USA’s serve at the Pres’s discretion. Fine. Still, when the Pres fires one of them because they prosecute stuff the Pres doesn’t want prosecuted, it’s wrong. I don’t give a rat’s ass if it’s legal or not … it’s wrong.

  225. Yeah, Bush abused his power because he fired some US attorneys, which we are told he has the power to do under 28 usc 541(c).

    Wow are we having a semantic problem here.

    To abuse power, BiW you have to have the power in the first place. So yes, Bush abused his power. Why is that so hard to understand?

  226. Enough about my stupid blog problems for now.

    Re: charter schools. Rabbit nailed this one:

    The only thing that make inner city charter schools better then inner city public schools are the like minded parents that at least care enough to weigh their options.

    Did somebody mention parents?

    An acquaintance of mine (as “conservative” as can be) was ragging on the schools, telling me that her neighbor had just found out that her kid, who was finishing second grade, could not read! My acquaintance was SHOCKED! And outraged at the SCHOOLS!

    I was outraged that an above-average income student at a pretty good Tulsa school had a PARENT WHO DIDN’T KNOW THAT HER SECOND GRADER COULDN’T READ! Pardon my French, but WHAT THE F**K ARE PARENTS FOR IF THEY DON’T MAKE SURE THEIR KIDS ARE LEARNING WHAT THEY NEED TO LEARN IN SCHOOL? Do parents still take ANY responsibility for raising their own kids?

    I did well enough in school, but if I hadn’t had my mom and dad standing over me when I did homework and making lightning flash and thunder roll if I got a C, I’d have probably been a real average student at best.

    The schools have a lot of problems, but get all the money you want and bust all the unions you want and you still won’t get results unless and until the parents give a sh*t. The biggest reason that schools suck is that parents suck at being parents.

  227. Gray, no comment on Obama’s Intel Chief pick thinking Iraq’s WMD got sent to Syria?

    Yeah, and lots of folks thought Crystal Bowersox should have won this year’s American Idol. So what? He can “think” whatever he wants. There were no WMD. Maybe Obama and Bill Ayers got together and had the weapons removed?

    I have to amend something I said earlier. I’ve actually always felt a bit sympathetic to Bush because I truly believe him to be a dyslexic dolt. So, no I would not impeach him over the Iraq war. I’d impeach Dick Cheney.

  228. Rutherford, I hesitated to bring up “right and wrong,” because Huck and BIC have been focused like a laser on what is technically legal and what is not. Besides, when did the Republican Noise Machine ever care about right and wrong?

    They would impeach Obama for giving poor demented Walpin a chance to resign gracefully before lighting the 30-day fuse on his firing. They call that a “gross abuse of executive power,” although Obama did not fire Walpin outright – he lacks that “power.”

    On the other hand, firing the US Attorneys for political reasons was OK because the President has the legal right to fire US Attorneys. In that case, I guess it wasn’t an abuse of power because it was a power that the president DOES have. 😕

    Was it wrong for Bush to fire the US Attorneys for not prosecuting Rove’s political obstacles without evidence? Who cares!

    But Huck is bored by this discussion now. Move along. Nothing to see here.

  229. Tex, you need to stop with the ratings arguments. Ratings and quality, particularly in cable do not always correspond. Cable has a greater tolerance to keep good stuff on the air despite falling ratings. And have you looked at Glenn Beck’s ratings? I’m pretty sure he’s seen a decrease too. So your ratings rant just doesn’t hold any water relative to the quality of the message.

    Your dislike of Olbermann is understandable. I enjoy watching him but he can be a pompous ass. Your dislike of Maddow is less understandable and appears to be colored by her sexual orientation. I believe she is one of the first openly gay Rhodes Scholars. She is smart and she is thorough. I think you’ve spent so much time watching the likes of Sarah Palin, Michele Bachman and Sue Lowden that you are really intimidated by seriously smart women.

  230. Rutherford, I think you are the first person I ever heard suggest that Bush has dyslexia. I’ve believed that ever since his first presidential campaign. There was clearly something wrong.

    That, and spending 20+ years of his life in an alcoholic fog certainly kept him from progressing intellectually as he could have.

  231. Graychin, for what it’s worth, I have my link limit on comments set to 4. So anyone who posts four or more links gets moderated. Sadly, multiple links is either the sign of a well documented post or a huge rotten piece of SPAM.

    I used to have my limit lower, but I raised it because the dudes here post such good comments.

  232. Clever video Rabbit.

    So I take it you believe no one in Gaza is suffering, everything is peachy and there is no need for any aid to be sent there. Do I understand you correctly?

  233. If WordPress gets enough spam buttons on a particular IP, it bans that IP from WordPress.

    Thanks Huck … that is a valuable nugget to know. I didn’t know WP kept track of how many times you spammed comments.

  234. Actually Tex, Lanny Davis is an ass. I never liked him during the Clinton/Obama face off and I don’t like him now.

    The analogy is devoid of logic. Jews fled persecution and went to Israel voluntarily. Blacks were kidnapped to America. They did not flee persecution in Africa. It’s a dumb dumb dumb analogy.

  235. The USA’s serve at the Pres’s discretion. Fine. Still, when the Pres fires one of them because they prosecute stuff the Pres doesn’t want prosecuted, it’s wrong. I don’t give a rat’s ass if it’s legal or not … it’s wrong.

    R,

    1. I believe that the allegations were that they weren’t prosecuting stuff that the President wanted prosecuted, not the other way around. Now I know that this might come as a shock to you, but every prosecuting authority has the discretion to form their own agenda, or to put it another way, to determine what kinds of matters it will focus on. In this case, that authority is ultimately the DOJ. The USAs are an arm of the DOJ. They have wide discretion, but there are limits, and when those arms are not keeping with the focus of the authority, they are subject to dismissal, just like assistant district attorneys can and will be dismissed for not pursing matters that are the focus of their superiors.

    I can’t speak to all the instances, but I can say that John McKay, while smart, did wrankle some local LEOs in how he conducted his prosecutions, and his apparent disineterest in even simply investigating the allegations of fraud in the 2004 gubanotorial elections here in Washington wasn’t going to earn him any good conduct citations either. If either of these were not in accord with the DOJ’s focus at the time, then it was not an “abuse of power” to show them the door.

    2. The reasons given by the USAs were largely based on their suspicions, and they remain unproven.

    3. Making unproven allegations that dismissals are “unfair” or “political” does not make them an abuse of power when the dismissed do not have a property interest in the jobs, which they do not in the case of USAs. Serving at the pleasure of the President means just that.

    4. If the conduct was so eggregious, please explain to me why it is that the Democrat controlled Congress (since 2006) has not passed any legislation requiring the dismissal of USAs to be “for cause” or other wise affirming set terms of office and removal only in the event of bad behavior.

    Its one thing to deliberately to shadow box; it is another to swing wildly at them.

  236. Schools that exist in neighborhoods full of ignorant people are ignorant schools.

    Aren’t you ignoring economics Rabbit?

    How ’bout schools that exist in neighborhoods with a high tax rate do well and those that don’t typically don’t.

  237. Could Rutherford or Graychin perhaps explain why the firing of the White House Travel Office Staffers, who also serve at the President’s pleasure, by Billy Jeff the Philanderer and Perjurer wasn’t an abuse of power?

    *swallows box of Dramamine in anticipation of a stellar Tilt-A-Whirl ride*

  238. Rutherford, I think you are the first person I ever heard suggest that Bush has dyslexia.

    I believe this has been broached … in fact, I believe Bush has denied it. A Google search should yeild something for you.

    I wrote about my theory a couple of years ago. You might want to read that also. Unfortunately, the video upon which I based my article has since been taken down, either because the White House realized their mistake or because Bush is no longer President.

  239. Rutherford: “Yeah, and lots of folks thought Crystal Bowersox should have won this year’s American Idol. So what?”

    Lots of people have not been named by the President of the United States to be the Director of National Intelligence.

    ” He can “think” whatever he wants. There were no WMD.”

    Well, the man Obama has tapped to head our nation’s intelligence thinks there was. But I guess you know more about it than he does.

    “Thanks Huck … that is a valuable nugget to know. I didn’t know WP kept track of how many times you spammed comments.”

    If I am not mistaken, WP tracks how many times the “SPAM” button is used to report and delete a comment that has been deemed spam by the blog owner.

    Graychin, try and keep up. There was no “they” arguing the Walpin thing. There was only me. And that isn’t even the actual thing we have been discussing. It was a secondary point brought up after you introduced the Nixon red herring.

    If you’d like to continue debating the law and how Barack Obama has admitted breaking it to take power away from the American electorate, then by all means, let’s continue.

  240. Rutherford: “I hesitated to bring up “right and wrong,” because Huck and BIC have been focused like a laser on what is technically legal and what is not. Besides, when did the Republican Noise Machine ever care about right and wrong?”

    Come on Rutherford. What a worthless comment. In this context, legal v. illegal and right v. wrong is at the heart of the debate. Your relativism with respect to both IS the problem.

    Maddow and Olbermann? Yeah. Two giant snark machines that refuse to directly engage their supposed adversaries. What a tired shtick. I mean, Maddow’s mouth appears to have permanent hook in it from the years of snide, sarcastic b.s. Nothing but third-rate John Stewart wannabes without a real sense of humor.

  241. I’m going to refer to R and Chin from now on a Brick 1 and Yellow (yellow is for the intellectual cowardice he consistently shows) Brick 2.

    First, as mentioned previously in this monstrosity of a thread, the law O broke wasn’t written until the Clinton admin, so the Reagan analogy is both inaccurate and N/A.

    All of your Bush examples ignore a couple simple things: 1) no proof of contact with the administration, 2) no admission from both the administration and the candidate.

    Your debating whether or not an offense occurred when the administration has admitted as much- whether they or you characterize it as such doesn’t matter.

    In fact, if there is debate on the legality of an admitted action on the part of the WH, then all the more reason for a special investgator to check, but alas, this AG, like his boss, isn’t so much interested in doing his job.

    At this point, you two have demonstrated the intellectual ferver of a doorknob.

  242. 1. I believe that the allegations were that they weren’t prosecuting stuff that the President wanted prosecuted, not the other way around.

    Actually, it was both. It depended on the case in the particular district that the USA wasn’t handling the “right” way.

    2. The reasons given by the USAs were largely based on their suspicions, and they remain unproven.

    Funny how no one in the Bush Administration could remember why the US Attorneys were fired, isn’t it? Perhaps they were too embarrassed to say. Would you have favored a Grand Inquisition on the matter – like the one you want for Sestak-gate?

    3. Making unproven allegations that dismissals are “unfair” or “political” does not make them an abuse of power when the dismissed do not have a property interest in the jobs, which they do not in the case of USAs. Serving at the pleasure of the President means just that.

    No, it doesn’t. Initiating a prosecution for political reasons, or quashing one, is a “gross abuse of executive power” if there ever was one. And you would seriously equate that with firing people in the White House Travel Office? 😀

    I believe that US Attorneys should continue to serve at the pleasure of the president. Apparently, so does the Congress. But when the president’s top political operative (e.g. Karl Rove) uses the offices of US Attorneys as tools in his political manipulations, and has the ones fired who won’t cooperate in malicious prosecution or won’t turn a blind eye to wrongdoing by their allies, THAT is a “gross abuse of executive power.”

    If Barack Obama decided that he didn’t like Huck and BIC, and the US Attorneys in question refused to prosecute them on some trumped-up charges, so Obama then fired those US attorneys and replaced them with someone who would play ball, would THAT be OK? Huck? BIC?

  243. Yeah “R”, I’m going with the Gorilla on this one. You are demonstrating a great deal of irrationality (the norm), and phenomenal ignorance. Perhaps Graychin is wearing on you.

    And have you looked at Glenn Beck’s ratings? I’m pretty sure he’s seen a decrease too. So your ratings rant just doesn’t hold any water relative to the quality of the message.

    Here, you couldn’t be more wrong. The week O’Reilly took vacation, Glenn Beck had the highest cable rated show – unheard of for a 5:00 EST broadcast in cable commentary. This was less than two months ago – Beck is more popular than ever. I know it pains you, as he exposed the ass of the Dimocratic hacks so many times, but he’s beat you in so many ways, I’ve lost count.

    Your dislike of Maddow is less understandable and appears to be colored by her sexual orientation. I believe she is one of the first openly gay Rhodes Scholars. She is smart and she is thorough.

    Baloney – Racial Madcow is a useful idiot as I proved here a few weeks back. It’s worth repeating, as this only one example of her consistent stupidity of anything relevant and/or academic. Racial during one of her boring schtick insinuates that the Gulf Spill is a clear indicator of the dangers of drilling in ANWAR. Her reasoning? It’s so cold there, it would prove even more dangerous and difficult to prevent spillage than the Gulf. 😯

    Ignoring the brontosaurus sitting in plain view Racial, as we’ve an 800 mile pipeline in Alaska for almost 40 years and been drilling for over 80 there, Racial Madcow obviously understandings nothing of: (1) physics, (2) hydrocarbons, (3) pressure, (4) oxygen, (5) drilling (6) business.

    Her dialogue was beyond stupid. And for comments like that, dunce caps like you look the other way. This was the equivalent of your cohost’s famous there are no hermaphrodites comment. Like MSNBC, Racial’s future is bleak.

    I think you’ve spent so much time watching the likes of Sarah Palin, Michele Bachman and Sue Lowden that you are really intimidated by seriously smart women.

    Right, that’s why I’ve been married to one for 23 years who supports my lazy ass. 🙄 Perhaps you’ve been associated with weak misandrists for so long like Hillary Rotten, Boxer, Pelosi, Maxine Waters, and the ever brilliant Cynthia McKinney, you wouldn’t recognize real women if they sat on your head.

    As far as Helen Thomas, your blindness is revealing. Blatant anti-Jewry, along with the normal lack of discernment concerning racism and bad manners.

    Doesn’t matter – Thomas is toast. Her own co-author has stated he refuses to work for her anymore. They’ll quietly move her to pasture – about 50 years overdue.

  244. “I hesitated to bring up “right and wrong,” because …” Come on Rutherford.

    Tigre, I admit I sometimes confuse one conservative with another so I can’t fault you for attributing Gray’s comment to me. I’ll let Gray defend himself.

    Your analysis of Olbermann and Maddow proves that you don’t watch both shows. What distinguishes Maddow from Olbermann is her willingness to bring on guests who do NOT agree with her agenda. Her recent evisceration of Rand Paul is one such example. In fact, if I’m not mistaken Paul announced his intention to run for the Senate on Rachel’s show.

    Furthermore, Maddow will nuke a liberal whom she finds deserving. Case in point her interview of Rod Blagojevich last year. I actually was angered by that interview because she gave a seemingly sympathetic (or at least objective) interview and then tore him a new one in her post-interview analysis. I found that under-handed.

  245. Because the issue is sufficiently sensitive and I need to get all my ducks in a row, I will wait a bit before posting an article on the Helen Thomas brouhaha. I find it fascinating that we do have to do some minor connect-the-dots to equate being anti-Afghanistan with being anti-Muslim. Yet anything anti-Israel is knee-jerk, automatically anti-Jewish.

    I’ve got news for you, Israel’s capital building isn’t a temple. Bibi isn’t a rabbi. Israel has a government that should be just as much a target of critical analysis as any other government. We should be able to analyze the behavior of the State of Israel without being accused of hating the predominant religion of Israel.

  246. I know that you guys hate Rachel Maddow, and I can understand why. She is as good as any interviewer in the business, and better informed and more intelligent than any two “conservative” talking heads added together that you might care to name.

    When Rachel finds herself interviewing a lying sack of poop, she smiles sweetly as she slices him open. No ranting or bullying. It’s all smiles. I love her good humor about it all, and her total lack of bluster. She is Yin to Olberman’s Yang.

    Rachel might even rate a place on the “hotness scale” for Faux Noise personalities if she were not an open lesbian.

    Which is usually the worst thing that any of you guys can think of to say about her – using your best seventh-grade vulgarities.

  247. I could care less about how much carpet she plows, she a hack and a moron.

    Chin’s last post says more about his bias and intellectual shallowness that most of his posts combined.

    Such a fraud…

  248. Rutherford, I look forward to your post on Helen Thomas.

    Of course you are exactly right in pointing out how Israel’s apologists frequently try equate criticism of the State of Israel’s politics with anti-Semitism. It’s a classic red herring.

    The other weird dynamic in the ongoing Israel debate is Christian fundamentalism. Some believe that Israel’s founding was prophesied, and that the Jewish people are still “special” to God – at least more “special” than their Arab neighbors. I never really did understand it, but it’s there. Perhaps someone will volunteer to explain it to us.

  249. No, expand please.

    You’ve intentionally dodged almost every single one of my posts. What’s the matter, you don’t like hard question?

    Maybe you just see your own bullshit and, like the One, think it better ti ignore than actually own up to the fact that you’re just wrong.

    What’s the matter Chin, your balls tucked up so far in the folds that you can’t manage to pull them out just once?

  250. Red herrings…. you’re the epitome of such.

    Where you dig this shit up from god only knows.

    Was Israel wrong, either morally or legally in what they did, no. Was it dumb how they did it, maybe, they took the bait in what was clearly a provocation, not a humanitarian effort.

    From what I’ve seen thus far though, you’re not qualified to discuss international issues…

  251. Expand? I was referring to your ability to criticize Rachel Maddow being limited to seventh-grade mocking of her lesbianism. I thought that was obvious.

    I guess I don’t feel qualified (as you do) to judge whether Israel was right or wrong in what they did. The details of what happened are in dispute, and I am no expert on international law as you guys are.

    I am bothered by reports that some of the dead were shot in the head multiple times at close range. Is “thou shalt not murder” part of international law?

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/04/gaza-flotilla-activists-autopsy-results

    Would there be any harm in having independent autopsies on the dead?

  252. Sure, who does them? The UN is a farce, if we do it, it’ll be viewed as biased and could you really name an alt?

    Besides, what does it prove? That the commandos had a moment of panic? Are you questioning the events? Why?

  253. I don’t care that she is gay…at`all.

    I do care that she has national podium, well not really when you consider her ratings. She’s an intellectual fraud, like just about everyone else on that network.

    Maybe that’s the lesson of the ratings, most of us recognize MSNBC as just that…

  254. It really is amazing to read so called “progressives” apply two standards. I used to think they were deluded. Now I think they’re just depraved and evil.

    First, Butch Maddow is about as “hot” as Helen Thomas If you’ve ever seen her yak for a lover, you’d recognize even the gay women found her unappealing. But then libs always have had horrid taste in people. I guess that is why God made enough of them to share in their short term misery. Racial is so marvelously talented and brilliant, her TV show is tanking, I just demonstrated her stupidity about anything not routine (the Blago comment a diversion to protect Bongo and Racial), and she’s second fiddle on a failing news network. Air America redux.

    But the most pathetic point of this entire conversation is Rutherford suggesting there may be nothing wrong with the Wicked Witch Helen Thomas’ directing Jews back to the very place where almost half their entire population was exterminated. A new low for you Rutherford. Either your knowledge of German and Polish history and WWII is completely vacuous, or maybe you’ve been twisted for so long, you no longer recognize right from wrong. Perhaps both.

    I’m sure you’ll pat yourself on the back for your witticism in making jest and your penchant for playing antagonist, but in about 2-3 weeks, you’ll look as stupid as you did when you tried to defend putting KSM on trial in New York. You’ve been proven consistently wrong-headed for seventeen months. No sense turning back now.

    The mistake Israel made is not blowing the ship out of the water. In trying to appease the rest of the world, who will criticize the Jews any way they turn, Israel forgot the most important lesson about dealing with fundamental Islam. Appeasement is interpreted as weakness. Obama has perfected it.

    Bet Israel doesn’t repeat that mistake in Round 2. She’ll blow the Rachel Corrie (appropriately named moniker for a crushed vessel) to kingdom come, where Israel’s enemies await an even worse fate than death.

  255. Helen Thomas has announced her retirement, effective immediately.

    Today is truly a day of joy…

  256. Ape, I’m glad you’re having such a joyful day.

    So is Drudge. His big headline is “HELEN SENT TO POLAND.” Classy!

    It’s about time someone came out with some really crazy anti-Semitism to take the heat off Mel Gibson.

    where Israel’s enemies await an even worse fate than death.

    Rutherford, there’s some of that Christian fundamentalist craziness that I mentioned earlier. Mess with Israel and you’re headed for Hell! 😀

  257. what was clearly a provocation

    Well Gorilla (you appear to be on a roll this morning), this is exactly why I need to get my ducks in a row before committing a full article to this.

    You see, I don’t understand how wheelchairs qualify as weapons of mass destruction. I don’t see how enforcing a blockade involves dropping commandos from helicopters. I don’t understand why you use a gun in a “club fight”. Has Israel not heard of tasers, billy clubs, and other non-lethal forms of force?

  258. From what I’ve seen thus far though, you’re not qualified to discuss international issues…

    Oh and by the way, Graychin hardly needs my defense but if your idea of analysis Gorilla is:

    Palestine bad
    Israel good

    then you my friend are hardly qualified to discuss international issues.

  259. Rutherford, Sorry. I did confuse Greychin’s comments for yours. Now that’s unforgivable!

    As for Maddow, you are right. I can’t sit through her show, so perhaps she does engage those that disagree with her on rare occasions. I’ve certainly never seen it. Usually it’s some lame shill that is asked questions that start with “wouldn’t you agree that. . . ,” followed by complete agreement with an approving smirk offered by Maddow as punctuation. Pure mental masturbation.

    I honestly don’t know what you guys get out of MSNBC other than affirmation of the weakest sort. I find it hilarious that they spend time attacking Fox when the entire evening line-up is just the antimatter to Fox’s line-up — or as they call it, “hate speech.”

    G-chin, if you think Maddow is attractive in the slightest I truly pity you — well at least pity you more than I already did.

  260. I’m surprised Tex that it is now you who is dodging. I asked you why criticizing Israel is ipso facto criticizing Jews. I heard crickets. But then maybe I should expect this. You (and G and BiW and …) don’t have a problem with Afghans, you have a problem with Muslims. So you must assume that because I don’t genuflect to Israel I must have a problem with Jews.

    Your reaction does make sense. Shame you don’t want to engage in an analytical argument about it. Better just to scream “anti-Semite”. Mmmmm, is there a religious equivalent to “race-baiter”? If so, I suspect you’re it.

  261. Gray, the Christian angle on Israel is one I am very eager to learn more about. My “radio” co-host Sandi brought this up on yesterday’s show. To put it in very generic terms, again because I need to do more research on it, Christians “care” so much about Israel for very selfish reasons. It has something to do with the second coming I think. Also, if I’m not mistaken, Jews ain’t going to heaven … unless they accept Christ as their savior … which “graduates” them from Judaism to Christianity.

    OK Tex etal, have your sh*t-fit. You’re pissing in the wind since as I said I need to substantiate my generic understanding of this with more details before I’ll make definitive statements.

  262. Tigre, again … if you level that argument against Olbermann, I really can’t refute you. It does irk me that Keith never books guests that don’t affirm his world view. It is the biggest problem with his show.

  263. I honestly don’t know what you guys get out of MSNBC other than affirmation of the weakest sort.

    What do you get out of Glenn Beck and Bill O’Reilly? I’d really like to know.

    Olbermann? Yes, he’s entertainment for the Left, kind of like (fill in the blanks) is entertainment for the Right.

    Maddow is in a different league entirely. As much as you might hate to admit it, she’s an excellent journalist. I really don’t understand your obsession with her sexuality and her appearance. Or maybe I do.

    And a big AMEN to what Rutherford said at #317.

  264. I don’ t believe I genuflect with Israel Rutherford , nor do I believe I would ever avoid one of your insipid questions. I believe that for 62 years now, Israel has been at war with enemies that are sworn to her annihilation.

    I would be more than happy to debate, but frankly feel like you have nothing to offer besides criticisms out of ignorance like your charge of “selfish reasons.” Your foundations are made of sand.

    So let me shoot down your argument and the moronic host you share opinion with. AS A CHRISTIAN, I support the Jews of Israel because Israel is rightfully the Jews and has been for 3,000 years.

    As to your idiot partner’s charges of ushering in the second coming or whatever it is that the idiot Sandi believes, tell your host this for me please so she doesn’t continue to parrot the unbeliever’s words which reveal the ignorance. Frankly, I don’t care if she does, but if she is interested in truth (a big if), it is this:

    Christians have neither the authority to invoke God’s Wrath, nor are we qualified to usher in Christ’s second coming. The fact that you, the insufferable Graychin and Sandi are hostile towards Israel is of no surprise to me, nor concern. It’s due to one immutable fact – you are wrong, have been proven wrong, and will always be wrong about anything of relevance.

    As to Graychin’s charges from above Rutherford, I will only say this to show you that he is as equally uninformed about Christianity as you are.

    You may have noted that Graychin has some loose affiliation with Christianity, and occasionally makes mention of Jesus. It appears to be the only part of the Bible that he feels confident and comfortable (and he really doesn’t, but that is for another day).

    I would suggest that you, and not some pointy head from the unitarian, atheistic, or agnostic like Graychin, but you pickup a Bible and read the four Gospels. You could do it in less than three hours.

    And when you do, I have one very simple question that requires a one word answer. Did Christ talk about Heaven or Hell more?

    These discussions are beginning to bore me, especially the religious aspects. Graychin has become a repetitious, predictable and monotone snoozer. So at the risk of you accusing me too like you did BiC about vanity, you have no idea what you speak. Worse, you have little intent of becoming informed. Remain in your ignorance… 😉

  265. “If Barack Obama decided that he didn’t like Huck and BIC, and the US Attorneys in question refused to prosecute them on some trumped-up charges, so Obama then fired those US attorneys and replaced them with someone who would play ball, would THAT be OK? Huck? BIC?”

    If I had allegedly violated the law and warranted prosecution, then yes, it would be OK.

    I’m afraid I am not familiar enough with the issue to take the “trumped up charges” portion of your argument into account. If you would care to provide me with a link that supports that claim so that I can learn more, I would welcome it.

    “Rachel might even rate a place on the “hotness scale” for Faux Noise personalities if she were not an open lesbian.”

    Are you kidding? The only hot points she gets is for being a lezbo. But lesbian or not, she is not in the same league with the Fox News babes. I mean really, have you ever seen Megyn Kelly?

  266. “I would suggest that you, and not some pointy head from the unitarian, atheistic, or agnostic like Graychin, but you pickup a Bible and read the four Gospels. You could do it in less than three hours.”

    This is actually more or less true. I read the 4 gospels that are in the Bible, as well as some that are not, and gave historical analysis, in a day.

    Whether one reads it for spiritual purposes or for whatever knowledge it can offer, I would call it recommended reading. There’s some interesting stuff in there.

  267. Rutherford, I have made a real effort to understand fundamentalist Christian attitudes and beliefs toward Israel and the “end times,” but I have never been able to “get it.” Perhaps I just haven’t found the right study guide yet.

    Some believe that Jesus is going to come back and do battle with the “Antichrist” right there in Israel’s neighborhood, and that the founding of Israel means that day is coming soon. Some believe that all Christians will be “raptured” away before all this happens, others believe that this “rapture” comes later. As best I can tell, belief is all over the place, but it seems to converge on something “special” about the State of Israel.

    To me, the thing that can be dangerous about these beliefs is that some might actually cheer for and promote war in the middle east. If it means that Jesus is coming back, what could be bad about that?

    I won’t accept Bible stories as an excuse for them when they misbehave. Israel should be held to the same standards of behavior that we expect of ourselves and every other nation – especially those that we call our friends and allies.

  268. “What do you get out of Glenn Beck and Bill O’Reilly? I’d really like to know.”

    I ask this question with the utmost sincerity….

    Do all on the left believe that all on the right are fans of Beck, Rush, and O’Reilly?

    I ask because, frankly, I am a fan of none of them. I simply could not care less about what they have to say.

  269. I get nothing out of Beck or O’Reilly. I don’t watch either of them. But I will say, on the occassions that I have, they at least take on (or pretend to take on) opposing viewpoints.

    Obsession with Maddow’s sexuality or appearance? Along with her intellect I find them regunant.

    I find it interesting that you seems to consdier Maddow’s sexuality some kind of a credential — but I guess that’s just how libs think. When it comes to politics, I prefer to focus on the merits.

  270. Israel should be held to the same standards of behavior that we expect of ourselves and every other nation – especially those that we call our friends and allies.

    Yes, you’re exactly right. Israel should be held to the same standards – but they are not. They are held to an impossible standard with men like you as their accusers. Surprise, surprise.

    How many examples do you need that Israel is unfairly castigated by the U.N. and Europe, for instance. Here is but one recent article:

    http://www.goerie.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100607/OPINION09/306079992/-1/RSS

  271. I get nothing out of Beck or O’Reilly. I don’t watch either of them. I find them irritating. But I will say, on the occasions that I have watched them, they at least seem willing to take on (or pretend to take on) opposing viewpoints.

    Obsession with Maddow’s sexuality or appearance? Along with her intellect I find them repugnant. Olbermann is just not smart.

    I find it interesting that you seem to consider Maddow’s sexuality some kind of a credential — but I guess that’s just how libs think. When it comes to politics, I prefer to focus on the merits.

  272. NOBODY watches O’Reilly and Beck. At least no one will admit to it.

    Yet they are among the highest-rated shows on cable.

    No one listens to Limbaugh either. 😕

  273. Are you accusing us of lying, Graychin?

    Is there anything I have ever said that would lead you to believe I am in fear of the truth to the extent that I need to lie?

  274. Rutherford, so do you really think a call for us to “consider” the comments of a person who longs for Israel to vanish by uprooting her citizens and moving them back to the very places they were wholesale slaughtered to be a valid example of “criticism” on Israeli politics? Wow. Is that what I’m hearing from you?

  275. AS A CHRISTIAN, I support the Jews of Israel because Israel is rightfully the Jews and has been for 3,000 years.

    Rutherford, this is the sort of thing I was talking about earlier. How do you dispute a statement like that?

    This land is mine
    God gave this land to me

    (from the song “Exodus” – lyrics by Pat Boone)

    Does America rightfully belong to the Indians? Other claims on America are only about 500 years old at most.

  276. I’m not accusing anyone of lying. It’s just my observation that no one I encounter ever admits listening to the highly-rated programs that I mentioned. Ever.

    Does ANYONE here ever listen to any of those highly-rated programs? Ever?

    I’ll have to ask Elric about it. Maybe he will break my perfect record.

  277. Does America rightfully belong to the Indians? Other claims on America are only about 500 years old at most.

    I don’t know. Let’s just say that I put The Creator’s opinion of the matter on a higher plane than I do say some old unfriended bigot from Jerkwater USA.

    That kind of intellectual understatement is about what I have come to expect from an old fool that likes to make claims of his purity and love of fellow man while he has exactly zero black Americans living in his own zip code. 😉

    Not a mention of the standards that Israel is expected to keep vis-a-vis the rest of the world I see? A shame. I wanted you to defend her enemies like only you are capable of doing.

    P.S. – When will you be “giving up” your “conquered” land there on Lake of the Cherokees?

  278. By the way, any tears shed from you guys over the American that was killed on the flotilla? Just askin’. stop being such a naive git R. The answer is NO!!!!!!

  279. Never mind on the popular program bit. I don’t watch or listen to any of them. I read one of Limbaughs books way back when,of course I’ve read books on the other side too.

  280. By the way, any tears shed from you guys over the American that was killed on the flotilla?

    I guess I missed that question too this morning.

    Crocodile tears – kind of like when they hanged Saddam. 🙂

  281. @333
    Sovereignty Matters or if thats too deep for y’all try toddler rules. If I have my hands on it,it’s mine.
    Regardless of the history of ancesteral lands the only thing that matters is…The Jews kicked the Arabs asses.Not unlike how previously the Arabs kicked the Jews asses after the Romans did. If the Arabs do it at a time in the future so be it.

  282. I don’t know. Let’s just say that I put The Creator’s opinion of the matter on a higher plane than I do say some old unfriended bigot from Jerkwater USA.

    Tex speaks for God!

  283. Graychin, I watch/listen to Fox News from the moment I wake up until the moment Beck’s show starts. Because that is the moment when news turns into commentary.

  284. Tex speaks for God!

    Foolish words from a foolish, old man.

    Amos 9:15
    I will firmly plant them there in their own land. They will never again be uprooted from the land I have given them,” says the LORD your God.

    However, I am absolutely sure Graychin speaks for Satan…

  285. The same goes for your comment about him, Graychin. You have not shown yourself to be any more interested in a sensible discussion with Tex than he has shown toward you. All either of you do is antagonize each other. And that is fine. But don’t try and put up a front that you are being different than he is, because you aren’t.

  286. Which explains why with all his contacts, and with all his unique experience, Alberto Gonzales can’t find a job.

    Anywhere.

    You know, it is rather odd. I followed the link, GC, read the article, and I didn’t see any mention of his inability to find a job.

    I checked with your favorite source, and found this:

    In August 2009, Gonzales began teaching a political science course at Texas Tech University. He will also serve as the diversity recruiter for the Texas Tech University System.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberto_Gonzales

    I checked their staff directory, and he isn’t coming up. Apparently he was able to find a job, however.

    I guess I can add it to the list of things GC “Knows” that are wrong.

  287. How can you have a sensible discussion with someone who says you speak for Satan?

    You can’t, as I find nothing sensible about you. Even then, you rate as a failure as you are only a minion, not talented enough to provide challenge. 🙂

  288. GC,

    I listen to Beck’s radio show when I drive to work in the morning. I rarely watch the TV show. It is on at 2 and 11 PM here. I’m at work at 2, and usually going to bed at 11.

    Limbaugh is on when I am at work. I find him entertaining, but I don’t get to hear him much.

    Not fond of O’Reilly and don’t watch him.

    Beck readily admits that he isn’t a journalist, though he does a better job than most journalists at rooting out stories and connections between groups and people that the journalists can seem to, or aren’t interested in doing.

    He also reintroduces a lot of history that is no longer taught, or rarely, if ever, was taught. He is doing a special on the American Interment Camps next week…you know, the ones that held American citizens of german and italian descent in the first and second world wars, even though you and your sidekick said that they didn’t. For that type of content alone, I would recommend watching him.

  289. Huck,

    I guess it pretty revealing I’ve grown bored with Graychin, huh? 😆

    I get that way when the boredom sets in. I feel like if set my mind to it, I could almost write LuLu’s posts for him.

    Graychin is dull as hell (literally).

  290. re Gonzales…
    Too funny, you look at places like Wonkette and Think Progress and TTU is some shithole. Same thread master are probably the first to come to the aid of the state education system in any other format.
    As for Gonzo…he’s getting paid in a recession,so what?

  291. And thanks for the summary of your media sources. I have heard that Beck deals in “history” a lot but if I were you I would verify what he says.

  292. Tex, any time you get bored with me you can always stop writing long paragraphs about my personal shortcomings.

    Those endless days at home watching Faux must get really, really long and boring….

  293. “BIC, since I was talking about what the legal profession thinks of Gonzo, perhaps I should have specified his troubles finding any law-related job. ”

    Absolutely. Saying what you actually mean is critical to debate.

    “For some reason, Gonzo owes legal fees related to the US Attorney firings. Any idea what that is all about? It was all perfectly legal….”

    I can’t say I know what it is about, but my first guess is that it is about the fact that lawyers, whether they are defending someone who is convicted or not, usually like to be paid.

    Do you think that might have a little something to do with it? Or is it that you think he shouldn’t have had legal counsel?

  294. For some reason, Gonzo owes legal fees related to the US Attorney firings. You’re right gray…he should’ve been exempt but then again try to pass legal and tort reforms in America.
    In a recession which I know GC is all about especially the Bush one…. why is it so hard for you to get how he isn’t finding work at the level he is now pigeon holed in?
    I mean it’s not as if Reno went home and hung a shingle doing mortgages,wills and slip and falls etc.

  295. Graychin, here is a novel idea.

    Why don’t you provide like say one or two facts when you wish to refute somebody’s post rather than what you wish to believe right or “feel” is right.

    It would make the conversation a little more meaningful than say your blog, where sufficient commentary magically disappears into oblivion.

    Can you do that for us Big Boy?

  296. “Those endless days at home watching Faux must get really, really long and boring….”

    Trust me. I have been sitting around on my ass for the last 9 weeks. The endless days at home watching anything are really, really long and boring. And I still have to get through summer before I start my Master’s program.

    (I know that wasn’t meant for me. That shows you how bored I am!)

  297. “Actually that applies to every source of information.”

    As usual, Alfie shows himself to be the most sensible person in the room. (Yes I am including myself).

  298. Huck,

    That was a problem for me too when I went back to school. Between keeping kids and going to school part-time, I was able to stay sufficiently busy. Medical school was consuming.

    After I left, I had way too much time on my hands partially explaining why I have become Rutherford’s biggest fan and critic. One can only mow their lawn so many times during the week.

  299. Maybe you could branch out and mow the neighbors’ lawns too…

    I did, yesterday. I take care of my little widow across the street. My wife over the years has volunteered my “handy” services for numerous things around the neighborhood. It’s become a running joke about Neighborhood Honey Doos.

    Did you fix Bonnie’s guttering for her? “Yes Dear.”

    Did you remember to pick up Andy’s paper and mail? “Yes Dear.”

    Could you help Beverly next door? She told me she needs to replace a faucet and she doesn’t have anybody to help anymore? She’s old and retired and probably doesn’t have much money. “Yes Dear. I’d love to Dear.”

  300. Anybody get a hoot last week, when Dear Leader announced, “This is proof the economy is getting stronger every day.”

    Then we find out 95% of the new jobs were census workers hired, fired, rehired and the stock market tanked 300 plus points?

    That census only cost us $14.5 billion dollars.

  301. For some reason, Gonzo owes legal fees related to the US Attorney firings. Any idea what that is all about? It was all perfectly legal….

    You mean like for representation in the investigations that would have been evident had you read the article?

    And would those fees be less legitimate then the Clinton legal fees resulting from the investigations, or the legal fees expended by the Palins for the investigations related to her time in office? You see, there is a common thread of Investigation (but no charges proffered or convictions) that require the hiring of counsel, even when the subject of the investigation is an attorney.

    And thanks for the summary of your media sources.

    I never said it was a summary of my media sources. I was answering your question about being the audience of the highly rated shows.

    I have heard that Beck deals in “history” a lot but if I were you I would verify what he says.

    Wow. Thanks for the scare quotes and advice. It sure is a mystery to me how I ever got to be an attorney with an LL.M. without ever checking sources and simply taking someone’s word for it. Of course, as I continually pwn you by checking what you present as fact, I’m sure you had a solid basis for believing that I would do that, right?

    BIC, since I was talking about what the legal profession thinks of Gonzo, perhaps I should have specified his troubles finding any law-related job.

    Perhaps you still are suffering from an inability to precisely say what you mean. Given how many politicians are lawyers, and the fact that their jobs revolve around the creation of laws, one could say that politics and the teaching of it is a law-related job. Having said that, there is no requirement that a practicing lawyer go to work for someone else. They can always hang out their own shingle, and he would not be the only AG to leave office and do something else (but don’t take my word for it…check wikipedia).

  302. Tex, let’s follow up on the notion raised by Graychin.

    Do you believe it was God’s plan for the (mostly) British to come to this continent and beat down the Native American? If the answer is yes, would that be because they were savage and heathen … not believers in Christ? Does that justify it?

    Now before you call me a hypocrite, NO, I do not lose any sleep over how we screwed over Indians 400 years ago. That’s the honest truth. But that does not mean that I have to ignore the fact.

    I think it takes a lot of balls for Americans to talk about people’s sacred homeland when we robbed this very land from its original occupants.

  303. We didn’t rob it. I won’t say it was all fair and square but we didn’t rob it.
    I also have to chime in that the religiously minded did indeed come to the New World but they were essentially financed and empowered by pure capitalism. Some like to play the God angle for our beginnings but the truth is a lot less pure than that.

  304. Rutherford, the Indians that populated North America in 1491 are all dead, mostly from European smallpox. So are their descendants who were murdered or cheated for their land. So are all the Africans that were brought here in chains. None of us alive today is responsible for any of that. We all have to make the best of where we find ourselves today, whether we live in North America or the Middle East.

    Attempting to restore things to the status quo ante of 500 years ago or 3000 years ago does a grave injustice to the living. Our ancestors’ wrongs do not justify doing wrongs to people alive today.

    No matter what Amos said.

  305. Rutherford,

    I’ll answer your question later, but I had to laugh at the letter I just opened. My daughter won some scholarship for the Honor’s Program at A&M (ironic how they can’t seem to invoke these rides until their Senior year, hey?)

    The big news is that the redneck Taylor family is now hobnobbing with the “elite.”

    My oldest daughter has been nominated by the Honors Dept. for candidacy for Rhodes Scholar, Truman Scholar, Churchill scholar, and a host of other scholars of which I have no idea what they are.

    I tell you all this not to brag, but it made me laugh out loud that we were talking about about the brilliancy of some certain “Rhodes Scholars” this morning. I suddenly recognized just how overrated this crap is when we qualify. 🙂

  306. Attempting to restore things to the status quo ante of 500 years ago or 3000 years ago does a grave injustice to the living.

    I actually like that line as it can be applied to every human on the planet.

  307. It’s hard for me to fathom just how uninformed and dumb Graychin can be.

    First Rutherford, do you have any comments about the angelic Helen Thomas and “her retirement” today? Didn’t take you long to blow this one, hey? 😆

    Do you believe it was God’s plan for the (mostly) British to come to this continent and beat down the Native American?

    I don’t believe Christopher Columbus, the Pilgrims or Puritans beat down the Indians. More like unintended biological warfare – but I think you can hardly blame man for that. Three hundred years passed. And I don’t buy that these “peaceful” Indians were without sin. First, they were already fighting like “Injuns” amongst themselves – why do you think we have so many tribes? They were more like diverse countries. I’m not excusing what happened – the historical facts are atrocious much like the sin of slavery. So in that regard, I say to the victor go the spoils. It’s a common theme in man’s history, is it not? But there were definitely two aggressors.

    If the answer is yes, would that be because they were savage and heathen … not believers in Christ? Does that justify it?

    I can find nowhere that America is even mentioned in God’s word. Tells me in the last days, we are not relevant to the eschatology. I have a theory as to why. It has something to do with only men like you and Graychin remaining. 😈

    Now, on to the moron.

    Our ancestors’ wrongs do not justify doing wrongs to people alive today.

    What part do you not understand that the Jews were already there and had been for over 3,000 years? Are you aware that the Disputed Territories never belonged to the “Palestinians” and only came into Israeli possession as a result of the 1967 six day war in which Egypt, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon all massed forces at Israel’s border in order to “push the Jews into the sea”. I’ve explained this at least five times now and it is still not sinking in.

    Let’s talk about a few other facts that make your analogy to America comically ignorant. This makes the last time I try to explain it to an old fool.

    Did you know that the “Palestinians” could have had their own country as far back as 1948 had they accepted the UN sponsored partition plan which gave Israel AND the Palestinians a countries of their own on land which Jews had lived on for thousands of years?

    Are you aware Israel resettled and absorbed all of the Jews from Arab countries who wished to become Israelis? Why haven’t any Arab countries offered to resettle Arabs who were displaced from Israel, leaving them to rot for 60 years in squalid refugee camps?

    Did you know that the Arabs in the disputed territories (conquered by Israel in the 1967 war which was started by Arabs) and who are not Israelis already have two countries right now? And that they are called Egypt and Jordan?

    Like I said, the White Elephant in the room you purposely ignore is that if Arabs would lay down their arms, there would be peace. If Israel laid down their arms, there would be no more Israel. That enough is enough to condemn your bigotry. If we took off your mask like Helen Thomas let her’s slip, underneath there would be a Jew hater (and probably a Helen Thomas look alike).

    No matter what Amos said.

    If you had any sense, and you don’t, this might finally convince you of the historical accuracy of biblical prophecy – including what is to come. Unfortunately Uncle Satan has you too close to the vest, leaving you in your wretched stupidity.

  308. Tex, congrats. Seems to be that kind of day. I just got notice that I have been accepted into the MA program I was shooting for.

    Rutherford, regardless of how Tex answers, this discussion is not complete without mention of the concepts of White Man’s Burden and Manifest Destiny. I’m not defending them, just pointing out their existence and that they did influence people’s thoughts at the time to some extent.

  309. I just got notice that I have been accepted into the MA program I was shooting for.

    Congrats – getting accepted into the program is 90% of the game.

  310. Speaking of “the brilliance of Racial “Butch” Madcow, compliments of Nicedeb.com where the wonderfully talented BIC is guest writer, I found this jewel. You can move the stimulometer back to “Soup Lines” now. 🙂

    Be sure to watch until the last second to watch Racial’s wonderful commentary. 😆

  311. BIC, mea culpa.

    Speaking of great moments in Presidential Obama history:

    “I don’t sit around just talking to experts because this is a college seminar, we talk to these folks because they potentially have the best answers, so I know whose ass to kick.”

    Does the chump own a mirror? If so, let’s hope his leg flexes backwards with great force.

  312. You see, I don’t understand how wheelchairs qualify as weapons of mass destruction. I don’t see how enforcing a blockade involves dropping commandos from helicopters. I don’t understand why you use a gun in a “club fight”. Has Israel not heard of tasers, billy clubs, and other non-lethal forms of force?” — R

    Is this yet another issue in which R talks before he actually knows anything?

    They did use non-lethal force first, but were overwhelmed by the PEACE ACTIVISTS who happen to also be connected to known terrorist organizations– surprise, surprise.

    When you’re getting tossed over the side of a ship structure to the deck below- a fall mind you that could very well kill you- or when you’re encountering clubs and knives, well, you protect yourself.

    Tell me R, had something similar happened on our coast, where the Coast Guard boarded a vessel bringing supplies to a known terrorist organization that was presently shooting rockets into the US, would you really have the same opinion as you do now?

  313. I would echo BiW on the Beck, o’Reilly and Limbaugh. I like Limbaugh but don’t get to listen very often. I particularly like Beck, but again, the amount and timing of the hours I work prevent me from really listening very often. O’Reilly annoys me, along with Hannity, but the gist of what they cover is of value.

    By and large, there is a very large list of media sources I go to for news.

  314. “How ’bout schools that exist in neighborhoods with a high tax rate do well and those that don’t typically don’t.”-R

    If I had time, I’d write something how a good school could be run in a cave with nothing but a few books and chalk. Money doesn’t mean anything when it comes to a good school. Just look how much Detroit Public Schools sucks down.

    Biggest Liberal myth about education goes something like this…”.if only the school had that new computer room and new books everything would be fixed.”

    False.

    Bad schools have nothing to do with taxes.

  315. DR, I learned why many of our schools are in the shape they are in when I sent a letter to one of my kid’s teachers and the teacher responded with a letter thanking me for taking an interest in my child’s education.

    It made me kind of sad.

  316. Our ancestors’ wrongs do not justify doing wrongs to people alive today.

    Gray, on this we agree 100%. What irks me is the notion that Jews get to hold a grudge and blacks don’t. The overriding sentiment on this board towards blacks and racism is “get over it”. If such a dismissive tone was applied to Jews, all hell would break loose.

    Living in the “now” and learning to get along with your neighbors is the ultimate answer to our problems and this goes for everyone, black, white, Jew, Gentile, Arab, Israeli. Sadly, it will never come to pass because people just enjoy “the fight” way too much. 😦

  317. BiW, you may be referring to my saying that anyone who rejects Maddow and embraces Beck is an ass. I actually had Gorilla in mind at the time. 😀

    Thanks for your well wishes. I’m not in terrible shape at the moment (as my late night blogging makes evident).

    Oh, by the way, while I do take a smack at you when I sense your ego has gotten the best of you, I have always admired the precision of your arguments …. and I believe I’ve even said so from time to time.

  318. I suddenly recognized just how overrated this crap is when we qualify.

    LOL Tex, my friend you play your daughter cheap. Those are great honors to be considered for and I wish her luck in getting any of them. There is something about familiarity that makes stuff we used to admire seem less “magical”. The only reason I ever entertained the notion of attending Harvard was that a kid two years ahead of me went to Yale. I said “damn … a kid from a Glen Cove public school can go to Yale? Shit, if he can do it so can I.”

    You’ve got one smart kid. Your wife must have done something right over the years. 😉

  319. R,

    There is a reason I play here. You and I may never agree on 98% of things political, but none the less, I could have a beer with you and enjoy the experience without wanting to take a shovel to the back of your head and planting you in the back yard.

    You make it fun, and you are careful about the things you say (even when I don’t think you’ve thought them through very carefully), unless the topic is Palin of Cheney. And that’s ok too, because if there wasn’t a red flag for you to reflexively charge, you wouldn’t be human, right? 😆

  320. You’ve got one smart kid. Your wife must have done something right over the years.

    See, now this is what I mean. If the two of you were women, I could so see R saying something to Tex like:

    “That’s a lovely dress. For last year.”

    or

    “I love what you’ve done with your hair. I didn’t know the salon was willing to tackle hopeless cases.”

  321. Your wife must have done something right over the years.

    She married right. Can’t you imagine how lucky my wife feels at this moment? Two kids, a dog, and a blogging bum to support.

    Isn’t that every woman’s dream? 😛

    No, my oldest daughter is bright – both of them actually as the other one brought home straight A’s from TU too. But I’m afraid my baby has Daddy Tex syndrome – whatever the path of least resistance, that is the one she takes.

    I know my oldest will be whatever she wants – my youngest, not so much.

  322. Oh Gorilla, it isn’t nearly as simple as that. I’d never call you an assh*le for thinking Maddow is an idiot. I wouldn’t agree with you but I wouldn’t call you a butt-head,

    However if you were to cast aspersions on Maddow and in the same breath hold that lunatic clown Glenn Beck up as some paragon of journalistic/commentary virtue, then yeah … the butt-head adjective does apply.

    There’s something skewed about comparing a recognized scholar whose politics you reject to a recovering drug addict/radio shock jock. Is Beck entertaining? Absolutely. In fact, I’d even go so far as to say Rachel might put some to sleep compared to Beck’s histrionics. But it’s hard to take anyone seriously who gives Beck more credibility than Maddow.

    In fairness, I’ll spend a few brain cells this morning trying to come up with a conservative commentator who has Maddow’s credibility. I’ll get back to you. (It’s a shame I’m limited to the living because I always cite William F. Buckley as someone worth listening to.)

  323. Racial Madcow has no credibility and anyone who believes she does is fooling themselves. If she had credibility, she wouldn’t be losing audience in leaps and bounds. She’s a younger version of Helen Thomas.

    Racial’s a flimflam and Obama cheerleader, steeped in progressive politics because it lends more flexibility for her sick and twisted life. If this is the best you can do for coming up with talent and credibility, it’s no wonder you’re losing.

  324. Oh … one more thing G, that video you posted was a hoot. Imagine the time the poor dude had to invest to put all that muck in one place.

    It’s been mentioned on this board before how terribly George W. Bush was treated by liberals for 8 years but I have to ask, did any lib go to the trouble of compiling such a full “dossier” on W? If anyone can find a YouTube vid tracing W’s devious trajectory all the way back to childhood, I’ll at least give a hat tip to them.

  325. it lends more flexibility for her sick and twisted life.

    Ahhh Tex, playing the lesbo card again? Tex for all you know she and her partner cozy up with a nice rerun of the Waltons every night. They could be a far more functional couple than many of the hetero marriages you’re witness to. In fact, the only divergent factor may be the mutual “muff diving” as you would say. And I’m not sure the average guy would consider muff diving all that twisted. 😉

  326. There’s something skewed about comparing a recognized scholar whose politics you reject to a recovering drug addict/radio shock jock.

    Drug addict? Really? I’m sure you have a citation for this.

    He admits that he is a recovering alcoholic, but drug addict? Really?

  327. Way back on the charter school thing. Charter school admin are responsive to parents were as other public schools are not. As for kids in poor tax base areas.
    Tobin school in Boston,KIPP and anything Geoff Canada has his hands in puts that tired premise in the dumpster.
    See ya in a new post folks.

  328. “In fairness, I’ll spend a few brain cells this morning trying to come up with a conservative commentator who has Maddow’s credibility.”

    I’m interested in how you plan to measure a subjective quality. A person’s credentials do not equate to credibility. Their actions do.

    Just ask Dan Rather.

What's on your mind?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s