A lot of sound and fury then......

nothing

happened

Welcome to 2005.

Joni, it is customary to post a shorter sample, some hightlights, bold text, ect and a link.

If you feel that it deserves a complete posting, fair enough, but be warned ... many will see the length and scroll on by. You won't get any of your opinion or thoughts across then.

Carry on.

Maybe she could use your short rants as a sample.
Un fucking believable.

I'm giving YOU a pass! If this makes you feel better, go ahead.... take your best shot!

I suggest that you read the Congressional Record. I guess you and Hillary have a lot in common. She was the last person in the world to discover that Monica was servicing her husband. You are the only person that is denial about the illegal Chinese contributions. Yeah!

Is it my imagination or are the rightwingers getting even stranger and more erratic?

Not to worry.....
You don't have any imagination.

now that IS a dodge.

uh huh. And if the person insists on smiling, what are the police to do? Beat the grin off his face?
Maybe in America one should be allowed to smile for a mug shot, police not liking it be damned.

Maybe she's sharing Meth with your best buddy bee?

He is the King of Spam and Personal attacks!

Not likely to any of the charges!!

You weren't here when davis' buddy bee admitted to beeing an "occasional" meth user. To bolster her productivity. So I think it's kinda funny when davey doo likes to call folks that don't see things the way he does, druggies.

Well that certainly clarifies their muddled thought processes.

But, here's the irony... they don't know how absurd they really are, It also explains why conservative talk radio is so successful: the hosts can make fun of the left because they and their actions are really ludicrous .

Then you have Air America, Al Frankin, et al, theycan't have a successful talk radio show, they don't have a sense of humor. They don't make fun of themselves and can't make fun of conservatism because it's not funny, it's logical.

I can't believe it Red China buying influence with the government just like any American corporation. Corporate America's bought up and sold out congressman are suddenly alarmed at the practice? Ho hum, anyone who believes Corporate America's move to Red China is less damaging than Red China's accepting that move, go set in the corner and put on the dunce cap. Oh sure is all Bill Clinton’s fault…morons!

Desperate is what they're getting.

Imagine that.

Total contracts held by players: 11 Last Trade at: X$75

Scooter Libby will be indicted in the CIA leak case

Actually... It's Reagans fault.



Oh Wen Ho Lee? The one who was found to be innocent?



Hmmm "being led by the nose by the source," I see that all the time 'round here.

What the court actually found wasn't any kind of spying at all.



"Mishandling classified computer files." What a joke.

That's all it was. It's amazing that quite a few people here aren't aware of the fact that after all the hysteria and spin, the Republicans ended up with egg on their faces.

I'm quite surprised anyone would want to bring up that embarrassment again, as the Republicans were the ones that gave up the nuclear secrets to the Chinese, not Clinton.

When the "My Name Is Earl and these are my partners Ed, EDD and Eddy" show is over, and everyone has gone home...and I do mean everyone...Davis will have to be satisfied with Michael Moore reruns.

Space Cowboy

And in speaking of Michael...have you seen this:

'Michael & Me'

I have just seen the finest documentary ever made about the right to self-defense with firearms.

It was produced by my friend and colleague Larry Elder, a WorldNetDaily columnist and an outstanding Los Angeles radio talk-show host.

It's called "Michael & Me," and, as you might imagine, it emulates the style of Michael Moore's documentaries and turns the tables on the filmmaker responsible for "Bowling for Columbine."


This time it's Moore who is hunted down for an ambush interview the way he famously stalked Roger Smith, the chief executive officer of General Motors, in "Roger & Me," and an ailing Charlton Heston in "Columbine."

This time it's Elder scoring all the propaganda points – with the truth and facts, rather than distortions and cinematic gimmicks.

Heretofore, I have known Elder as an author, a columnist and a radio talker. I was simply not aware of his considerable skills as a documentary filmmaker. This DVD has it all – entertainment value, vital information, a distinctly American point of view.

I simply cannot recommend it highly enough.

This is a documentary that needs a wide audience. I implore you to buy it and share it with your friends and family members. I urge you to spread the word about this magical movie. It is one of those works of art that can change the culture on the gun issue.

Elder makes the compelling case that guns save lives. He doesn't just do it with statistics that no one can deny. He does it with real stories of survivors. He does it with interviews from experts. He does it with the confused thinking of people like Moore, who is, ultimately, ambushed for an interview by Elder.

This documentary leaves no stone unturned in exploring the issue of firearms and self-defense. It covers all the bases. If this is your issue, you will love this movie. If it's not, you will still love this movie and it will become your issue.

The gun-control crowd argues that the Second Amendment either doesn't mean what it says or that it has become an anachronism in the modern age because we have the government to protect us from enemies and the police force to protect us from criminals.

As someone who trusts government about as much as I trust criminals, I never had much use for that argument. And while I generally think most local policemen are good people, the truth is, they just can't be relied upon to protect you.

If you doubt what I'm saying, check out the case law in our nation's capital.

In 1981, the court there held in Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1 (D.C. Dec. 21, 1981) that neither the city nor police officials could be held liable for failure of police to respond properly to a request from victims for protection from attackers.

Listen to the facts of this incredible case: A call came in to the police on the 911 emergency hotline reporting a burglary in progress. The police department employee who received the call assured the caller that assistance would be dispatched promptly. However, the dispatcher delayed assigning the call and gave it a lower priority than "crime in progress" calls were supposed to receive.

That was bad enough. But it gets worse. When police officers finally arrived at the scene of the burglary, they failed to make a thorough check of the building and left without discovering the two burglars, who by this time had raped a 4-year-old girl and forced her mother to commit sodomy.

The victims' neighbors, two women who lived upstairs, made a second 911 call, again receiving assurance that help was on the way. No help ever arrived. For the next 14 hours, the intruders held all the occupants of the building captive, including the two women who lived upstairs – they were all raped, robbed, beaten and subjected to numerous sexual indignities.

Despite all this abuse and ineptitude, the court held that neither the assurance of assistance nor the fact that the police had begun to act gave rise to a special relationship between the police and the victims. "[T]he desire for condemnation cannot satisfy the need for a special relationship out of which a duty to specific persons arises." Because the complaint did not allege a relationship "beyond that found in general police responses to crimes," this court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint for failure to state a claim.

In other words, the police aren't there to protect average citizens. It happens sometimes. There are brave police officers who put their lives on the line for strangers. They are to be applauded. But that is not the everyday occurrence you might imagine. Most police work occurs after the fact. Most responses are post-victimization. And, frankly, most of my contact with police these days occurs after I see red lights flashing in my rearview mirror.

I suspect that's true for most people.

None of that matters to the gun-control crowd.

In their view, only important people like politicians, celebrities and the rich deserve armed protection. But as Robert Heinlein put it, "When only cops have guns, it's called a 'police state.'"

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=46707

Listen Aunt Bee, I'll have you know I have never read a Michael Moore book or watched a Michael Moore movie.

Who the hell does DeLay think he is? His arrogance is unbelievable. No Democrat judges or even one who made donations to any Democrats ever? So he wants an unbiased REPUBLICAN judge? I hope this little bastard gets convicted. Seeing him lose his seat would be cool too.


DeLay's lawyers press judge to step aside



AUSTIN, Texas — Proceedings in the political-money case against Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Texas, are on hold after the congressman's lawyer asked the presiding judge to step aside because he made campaign donations to Democrats and their liberal allies.

After a hearing that lasted less than five minutes Friday, Judge Bob Perkins deferred further proceedings, including the entry of a plea, until a hearing can be held on DeLay's request for a new judge.

The former House Republican leader, charged with conspiracy and money laundering, did not speak during the brief session but read a statement later accusing prosecutor Ronnie Earle, a Democrat, of partisanship.

He said that because Earle and the Democratic Party "could not beat me at the ballot box and could not beat me on the floor of the House of Representatives, they are now desperately trying to challenge me in a courtroom."

Defense lawyer Dick DeGuerin made an issue of the $3,400 in political donations the judge has made to Democratic causes, including one to MoveOn.org, a group critical of DeLay and Republicans.

Perkins denied bias but ended the exchange quickly, saying, "The best way for me to handle" the request for a different judge would be to defer further proceedings.

That means the issue now goes to hearing before a state administrative judge, B.B. Schraub.

Schraub, a Republican, became an administrative judge in 1990 and was appointed or reappointed by four governors: three Republicans and one Democrat. Schraub, from 1989 through 2002, contributed at least $1,500 to federal Republican campaigns, according to disclosure reports compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.

He donated an additional $4,900 to Texas GOP candidates between 1998 and 2001, according to state disclosure reports analyzed by a public interest group, Texans for Public Justice.

Outside the courtroom, prosecutor Earle spoke dismissively of DeLay's efforts to get Perkins to step aside. Judges in Texas must run for election and DeLay's lawyers filed a motion Thursday identifying 34 donations Perkins had made.


"What this means is if a judge had contributed to Crime Stoppers that judge could not hear a burglary case," said Earle. "Carried to its extreme, that is what I think this motion means and I think that's absurd."

DeLay and two political associates are accused of funneling corporate money to Texas legislative campaigns, in violation of state law prohibiting use of these donations for election or defeat of state candidates.

Two grand juries accused the three men of sending $190,000 in corporate money, raised by a Texas group founded by DeLay, to the Republican National Committee in Washington, and having the money routed back to several Texas candidates.

The felony charges triggered an upheaval in the House Republican leadership, as DeLay was obligated to step aside under House rules.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/APWires/h.../D8DD0OB80.html

davis¹³, et al,

Yes, but what does this tell you about what Tom DeLay thinks about politics and the ethics that rules it?

QUOTE(davis¹³ @ Oct 22 2005, 08:55 AM)
Who the hell does DeLay think he is? His arrogance is unbelievable. No Democrat judges or even one who made donations to any Democrats ever? So he wants an unbiased REPUBLICAN judge? I hope this little bastard gets convicted. Seeing him lose his seat would be cool too.

(COMMENT)

Tom DeLay is communicating the idea that politics trumps sevice to the nation and the law. What he is pleading is that a Judge owes a higher duty to the party and will put party politics above that of the law.

Like I said before, this is a spetic tank. And who better to tell us about it than a man like Tom DeLay, the leader of about half the scum. He knows it from the inside where it must stink to high heaven.

Most Resepctfully,

Yes sir.

How do you feel now that you are home?

And you idiot rightwingers wonder why people criticize you. You're not victims, you're perps.

Perfect example. Arrogance aplenty. I just can't believe some of the things he says. It's beyond amazing.

DeLay: Zero percent chance of jail time
Rep. discusses indictment, CIA leak probe and now infamous mug shot



RITA COSBY, LIVE AND DIRECT HOST: Congressman, thank you very much for having us here.

REP. TOM DELAY, ® TEXAS: Glad to have you in Texas.

COSBY: Majority Leader, still, right? Technically, the name still holds.

DELAY: Yeah.


COSBY: Majority Leader, thank you so much for having us here.

DELAY: Thank you very much for having me.

COSBY: How did you feel when you found out there was a warrant out for your arrest?

DELAY: Well, I was a little disappointed. It's not like I was running anywhere, if I could. We were more than willing to comply with the responsibilities that were demanded on me. But we know why they're doing this. They wanted that mug shot, they wanted a perp walk. And they got the mug shot.

COSBY: Were you surprised that all of a sudden, going from majority leader to a wanted man?

DELAY: Not really. This politics of personal destruction has been going on for a long time. The Democrats have no agenda; they're only agenda is trying to destroy people's reputation and families, and they're working very hard to do that.

I understand what it's about. It's not about me, they can't beat us at the ballot, they can't beat us in the legislative bodies. All they've got left are the courts and these renegade prosecutors.

Didn't he and Republicans use the politics of personal destruction on Clinton? On Ann Richards? On anyone who ever pisses them off? Wow. Talk about hypocrisy. And you morons wonder why I question the members of the evangelical movement. More than one of their spokesmen is a lying sack of shit. They stand up for this maggot DeLay even though he's crooked as the day is long. Morals and values my ass. Of course I will always doubt anything evangelicals say from here on out.


COSBY: Why do you believe this DA is so out to get you?

DELAY: Well, I helped the Republicans gain the Texas House of Representatives. I helped elect the first Republican Speaker of the House since Reconstruction.

COSBY: Do you believe he's out to get you personally?

DELAY: Oh, no doubt about it. And pay me back for redistricting the congressional districts in Texas. We were successful at that. And we were successful at electing more Republicans so that now the congressional delegation has a good majority of Republicans.

COSBY: But you seem to feel you are target number one.

DELAY: I don't know about that; you have to ask them who's their number one target. But certainly I've been very visible as of late. And when you're indicted on baseless charges, you've got to — I'm not paranoid. I'm not a victim. I understand what this is all about. But we're not going to take it. We're going to find back.

We're not going to allow a renegade prosecutor to undermine our justice system. This is about undermining our criminal justice system. This is about undermining our representative government. This is about undermining our grand jury system. This is very serious stuff.

COSBY: What was going through your mind when they actually booked you? Here you had to go to a sheriff's department, got the mug shot, got the fingerprints. It's got to be humiliating.

DELAY: Well, it's not fun, I got to tell you. It's enough to make sure you don't do anything to break the law to get there — it's not fun. It's very serious. It's very grim.

You're thrown in basically with people that have been arrested for various reasons. They're all in inmate suits and all that kind of stuff. And, you know, it's a little humiliating.

COSBY: Embarrassing, too?

DELAY: A little embarrassing. I don't recommend it to anybody.

COSBY: Well, for yourself, either, right?

The mug shot. The famous mug shot now. You're smiling in it.

DELAY: Yes.

COSBY: Why?

DELAY: Well, that's how I feel. I mean, this is not getting me down. I have a certain sense of peace and joy about this. I mean, I'm not happy about it. It's not fun.

This fight is hard. And it's very hard on my family. But I know what this is about. And I haven't done anything wrong, and I know I haven't done anything wrong. So it doesn't get me down.

COSBY: Was it also so the Democrats and others couldn't use it in an ad against you or the Republicans?

DELAY: Well, there's a certain amount of that...

COSBY: It was an intentional grin?

DELAY: Well, I wasn't going to get. I was going to make sure that I was smiling, you know, when the picture was taken.

COSBY: It was intentional?

DELAY: You only get one take.

COSBY: Intentional take?

DELAY: Intentional, certainly.

COSBY: You're also wearing the congressional pin that I see you're wearing now. Was that to send a statement to your colleagues?

DELAY: Not to my colleagues, but to the American people. I'm a member of Congress, a member of Congress that is being treated this way, a member of Congress that is having his reputation drug through the mud, his character being questioned. People ought to understand that.

COSBY: They call you "the Hammer." Are you about out of nicknames? After the mug shot, are you getting any new nicknames?

DELAY: All the blogs are doing a lot with the mug shot.

COSBY: Is there a nickname that you...

DELAY: Maybe I'll start selling mugs with the mug shot on it.

COSBY: You think we're going to see that face a lot?

DELAY: Oh, you already are. They're selling t-shirts, especially by enemies. They're using it all over the place. They're doctoring it up. Yes, they're trying their best to make it look as bad as possible. It's hard to do, though.

COSBY: Well, the photo of a wanted man with an arrest warrant. Did you ever think in your life it would come to that?

DELAY: I didn't think — I worry — you know, I've got the utmost respect for Democrats that believe in what they're doing and stand up and fight for what they believe in. I don't have a whole lot of respect for people that want to personalize and criminalize politics. And that's what this is about.

I really didn't. I never really believed that politics would come to this point, this low point. think it's really unfortunate. But when we get through this, and I'm exonerated, people will know what this is all about and people will know that these prosecutors need to be held accountable.

COSBY: Are you in the political fight of your life right now?

DELAY: I guess you could say that. I've got some very tough enemies. And we're trying to make a statement. I'm going to stand up for what I believe in. Nobody's going to intimidate me and keep me from fighting for what I believe in, and nobody's going to intimidate me and keep me from fighting for the rule of law, for our criminal justice system, for our political system.

Now he's fighting for the good of our political system? 3 admonishments. DeLay is the danger to our political system.

I won't give up. And that's probably where they underestimated me.

COSBY: These charges are serious.

DELAY: Very serious.

COSBY: You could face life in prison.

DELAY: Yes.

COSBY: Are you worried at all? I mean, isn't there just a shred of doubt, even though you believe it's what if the case doesn't go my way?

DELAY: Oh, listen, this is so over-the-top. I mean, I have been charged with a law that doesn't exist. I mean, can you imagine that?

The law that I — the money laundering and the conspiracy in 2002 didn't exist, as it applies to the election code. Look, I'm very confident that we're going to be exonerated.

They have nothing. They have no evidence. They don't even have the law on their side. So I have the facts and the law will shine here. Ronnie Earle will be shown for what he is.

COSBY: And what is he?

DELAY: He's a renegade prosecutor that uses the criminal justice system to criminalize politics.

Republican zombie talking point # 8,649.

COSBY: Is there any chance at all that you think you could go to jail?

DELAY: None at all.

COSBY: Zero percent?

DELAY: Zero.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9777784/

Check out this piece on the Newmax site. It has a .... unique read on the Plame outing and what the NYT is saying. I call attention to their interpretation of what the times article means. Of course their interpretation attempts to minimize the serious nature of the charges, of the investigation and those involved. Then they even try to drag Hillary Clinton into it crying LIAR!!!! It's a masterwork of propaganda and deciet, sure to inflame the base.

Friday, Oct. 21, 2005 9:45 a.m. EDT

NY Times: Karl Rove, Lewis Libby Likely Cleared on Leakgate Charges


Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald has likely decided not to indict top White House aides Karl Rove and Lewis "Scooter" Libby based on allegations they "outed" CIA employee Valerie Plame, lawyers close to Fitzgerald's Leakgate investigation have told the New York Times.

Instead, the paper said, conflicting accounts given by Mr. Rove and Mr. Libby have been the focus of Mr. Fitzgerald's probe "almost from the start" - raising questions about whether the respected prosecutor continued his investigation after determining that no underlying crime had been committed.

It's not clear whether Fitzgerald believes that Rove and/or Libby had indeed violated the 1982 Intelligence Identities Protection Act, but couldn't prove his case. Or whether he realized early on that the law didn't apply to Ms. Plame, who doesn't qualify as a covert agent because she hadn't served abroad within five years of her "outing."

Instead, the Times said: "Among the charges that Mr. Fitzgerald is considering are perjury, obstruction of justice and false statement" - raising speculation that the Leakgate case may devolve into a Martha Stewart-like prosecution, which drew howls of derision from legal critics.



Stewart was sentenced to jail in 2003 for lying to investigators after the Justice Department abandoned its insider trading case against her for lack of evidence.

Unlike the Stewart case, however, it's hard to see how Fitzgerald could have ever believed that the 1982 law in question had been violated, when a quick check of Ms. Plame's work history would have rendered his investigation moot from the start.

Even the Times noted: "Possible violations under consideration by Mr. Fitzgerald are peripheral to the issue he was appointed in December 2003 to investigate."

In Mr. Rove's case, Fitzgerald's prosecution may rest, not on any false testimony, but instead on Rove's failure to tell the grand jury early on about a conversation he had about Ms. Plame with Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper.

"Mr. Fitzgerald has remained skeptical about the omission," the Times said.

It's still not clear that Rove and Libby would be indicted even if Fitzgerald could prove they gave false testimony to the grand jury.

In 2000, Independent Counsel Robert Ray concluded that then-first lady Hillary Clinton had provided materially false testimony in the Travelgate investigation.

Mr. Ray declined to indict, however - explaining that he could not prove that Mrs. Clinton's false statements were intentional.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/10/21/94643.shtml

Just heard Nancy Pelosi got hit by a bus?

With gerrymandering and campaign finance "reform" how do you clean out the scum? As far as I can tell this is about a photo op for Earle and a surgical strike on DeLay's leadership. When he's gone what will really be different?

If your septic tank is backed up, taking out one turd isn't going to fix anything.

You are just silly. You look like a complete fool.

I know what you want. Everyone else to play fair while you cheat and complain at the same time. Well fuck that.

Why is that davey?
Seems like it's the first glimmer of a plan available to the left in years.....you can always apply for a position as plumber's helper.

Cause davey says so, and if ya don't hate Repuslickans davey is gonna say so.

The story goes THIS way:

Government Investigation The US Postal Service has issued a recall of a stamp they created with a picture of now US Senator Hillary Clinton to honor her achievements while serving as the First Lady of our nation.

The problem was discovered when claims had been made that the stamp was not sticking to envelopes, and that mail which had been sent using the "Hillary" postage was not being delivered. Senator Clinton demanded a full investigation into the allegations.

A special Postal Service Investigation team was formed and after several months and many dollars spent, made the following findings:

*The stamp was manufactured properly.
*There was nothing wrong with the adhesive.
*People were just spitting on the wrong side

You must be blind or stupid.


How many fucking times do I have to say LET'S HAVE AN ALL OUT ETHICS WAR??


Clean em out.


I don't care. A crook is a crook. How many god damned times do I have to say that? Do I have to post an equal number of Democrat crooks to be fair? Fuck that. These Republican sons of bitches got elected on morality and ethics reform.




Jesus man. What the hell is your problem? I HATE REPUBLICANS. Backstabbing cocksuckers. Contract for America? Returning honor and dignity and ethics to DC?

Of course I'd love to see that filthy fucking hypocritical criminal get his. You hate Democrats. You'd like to see them get busted. Fine, but you don't want ANY Republicans to get caught. You want to give them a total pass.

FUCK THAT.

Not cause davey says so. I post a hundred articles about corruption at the highest levels of the Republican party, charges spanning the spectrum and it makes no difference to you rightwingers. You don't care how your political operatives work.

You have - 0 - moral high ground.

FO.



BS




FO




Exactly why your first point was a LIE.

You can say it but everyone who has been around the community has read my criticism of Rostenkowski, Daschelle, the whole Daley clan of Chicago, the selling of Congress by DEMOCRATS. I voted nader in 2000, that's why. But that's alllll irrelevant to you because I target my favorite congressional hypocrites and villians. It may not bother you that Republicans got in on ethics then turned around and cashed in big time. It may not bother you that they have done the exact opposite of what they said they would. It may not even bother you that they tried to change the rules so they couldn't be busted. It does bother me.


Your argument just doesn't wash.

You don't want ANY Republican to be held accountable for ANYTHING. How can you defend THAT?

The Republican In Fall:


The Senate Republican keeps a plastic baggie of Tucks in his coat pocket, for these days, in this strangely chilled autumn, he is shitting blood on a regular basis. Every day, the Republican reads the newspapers, and every day, his stomach heaves at what he sees: Patrick Fitzgerald's Sword of Damocles, hanging by that damned single hair, ready to take off the head of the administration; the tumble of Tom DeLay; the monkeyfuck insane House of Representatives that keeps pushing the cruelest legislation possible; the debacle that is the Harriet Miers nomination; the murderous war in Iraq; the rife incompetence of the White House. The Republican tries to avoid seeing all of this information, but partly he knows he must face it - it is his party, after all, and his job; and partly he can't avoid it. Indeed, he's directed his staff to keep him updated on each scandal.

The Republican has been in the Congress for a long time now. He has seen scandals come and go. He knows of a few that never surfaced in the public, like when Bob Dole was caught in the Senate cloakroom, his penless hand being used as a dildo by a moaning Jeanne Kirkpatrick as he was being blown by Kirkpatrick's female assistant; like when Exxon gave Frank Murkowski a stuffed caribou, its fiberglass carcass filled with cash; like when Alphonse D'Amato threatened to have Lawrence Eagleburger whacked. Yes, the Republican has seen so much he has dealt with by winking and looking away. But now, now.

The Republican knows he's going to be called upon to defend his President, to defend his party, to defend conservatism. He will be given talking points on discrediting Fitzgerald that he is to repeat like a mantra of the damned on every Sunday morning talk show. He will put on a good show of playing hardball with Harriet Miers until, ultimately, as expected, he votes for her. He will grill Rumsfeld and Rice and generals big and small about the war and foreign policy before voting for whatever the White House asks. His leadership will tell him turn this around on the Democrats, that they are making mountains out of molehills, that you don't wanna fight, you just wanna move the country forward. And he knows that if he doesn't do any of this, Karl Rove or someone under him will fuck him over - ensure that his state gets few defense contracts or homeland security funds, close a base or two there, dry up that corporate campaign funding trough, put up a true blue Bush lover against him, have his children followed after school, threaten to rape his wife.

The Republican knows he's placed himself in a corner. Because he knows that chances are this time things are different. If that hair breaks, if Fitzgerald goes after the head of the snake, the public's gonna turn on his party. He's seen that happen before, too, with both parties. And he's gotta pick his side: the administration or self-preservation. His learned behavior of the last five years is gonna say to him to prop up the White House, ride this out. All those times he's been beaten by Rove, screamed at by the mad President, scowled at by Cheney - the abuse that makes his reflex tell him to cower. His natural instinct is now to go down with the ship, if necessary.

The Republican, as he looks over this morning's news, wonders what it would be like to break ranks, to name evil where he sees it. To say, as other conservatives have, that this administration has failed, that it is a shit-encrusted assault on the very foundations of the things the Republican loves about America, about politics, about governing. The Republican knows that it would only take one - that once he turns, others will join him, like a branch that pushes through a logjam. And he could save his party from this amateur, this manchild, this pretender, this Bush. He could lead the way, showing that the Republicans put the good of the nation above loyalty to criminals. God, what a magnificent thing that would be: the hearings, the resignations, the housecleaning that would elevate discourse and set the country at least back on the proper path.

For the Republican knows, at the end of the day, each and every individual in his party, in the Congress, bears the weight of complicity in letting things go this far. And if the Capitol crumbles, it will be because men and women like him failed to act as individuals with consciences instead of as good soldiers in a lost platoon.

Yes, he should act, now, but he will not. Such things are what noble men do, but he is not a noble man; he is just a Republican. And the fall has just begun.


// posted by Rude One @ 12:02 PM


http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2005/10/rep...republican.html

Real nice. Rude, but nice.

More Republican morals and values for ya (spelled CHAAAAAAA-CHINNNNGGGG!!!!!!!!)

And if I don't get my way, I'm gonna resign. sniff, sniff. I mean it! Waaaaaa!!!!!!

Half a billion dollars in pork.

Mr. Stevens's Tirade


Sunday, October 23, 2005; Page B06

ALASKA SEN. Ted Stevens threw the senatorial version of a hissy fit on the floor the other day. The issue was a proposal by his Republican colleague, Oklahoma Sen. Tom Coburn, to block $453 million earmarked for two Alaska bridges in the recent highway bill and instead use some of the money to rebuild the Interstate 10 bridge across Lake Ponchartrain wiped out by the recent hurricane. Mr. Stevens is one of the masters of the Senate at steering federal money in the direction of his state, but he was not going to stand for this reverse flow.

"I will put the Senate on notice -- and I don't kid people -- if the Senate decides to discriminate against our state and take money only from our state, I will resign from this body," Mr. Stevens vowed. Sounds awfully tempting to us -- but not, apparently, to Mr. Stevens's colleagues; the amendment failed 82 to 15.


What's most impressive about Mr. Stevens's tantrum is his ability to summon up this degree of righteous indignation -- self-righteous might be more apt -- over the alleged mistreatment of a state that benefits enormously, and disproportionately, from federal spending.

Leave aside for the moment the matter of whether these two earmarks represent a wise use of federal dollars. Okay, we can't let it go; they don't. One, a partial payment for the now infamous "Bridge to Nowhere," would link Ketchikan (population 8,900) with its airport on Gravina Island (population 50). The other, the magnificently named "Don Young's Way" -- hint: Mr. Young, Alaska's sole House member, conveniently happens to chair the transportation committee -- would be a down payment on a billion-dollar bridge across an inlet in Anchorage to a nearly deserted port.

Rather, think about this spending in the larger context: Poor, mistreated Alaska. It ranks number one in per capita federal spending, $12,279 in 2003, compared with Nevada, number 50 at $5,235 for every resident. Alaskans received $1.89 in federal help for every tax dollar they sent to Washington, making the state second only to New Mexico as a net beneficiary of federal largess.

This tale of woe is particularly heart-wrenching when it comes to transportation funding: Of the $24 billion in earmarked projects in the most recent transportation bill, nearly $1 billion went to Alaska, putting the nation's 47th most populous state just behind California and Illinois. The measure provided $1,597 in earmarked funding for every man, woman and child in the state.

Indeed, even if Mr. Coburn's amendment had been adopted, Alaska would have remained by far the leader of the pack in per capita funding. If that's being discriminated against, every state should be so lucky.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...5102201040.html

Can anyone seriously picture AlGore as Commander-in-Chief?

Americans trust each other because of shared values and faith

By Tony Snow
Tony Snow
Team Bush, in its desperation to court conservative favor, recently leaked word that Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers is a church lady — earnest and regular in her devotions; marked deeply by the words and precepts of the Good Book; traditionalist and Protestant to the marrow of her soul.


The leak naturally inspired a cannonade of yawping and protesting. Conservatives pointed out that religious views ought to have no bearing on one's candidacy for anything (a position reflected in the Constitutional prohibition against religious requirements for federal office), while left-wingers complained (again) about what they consider the unseemly kinship between Republicans and conservative Christians.


The deeply inept sales pitch, like most idiocies, presented some glorious teaching opportunities — including a chance to knock down the all-too-popular Religion Bogeyman.


The rant goes something like this: "Republicans need to stop claiming they have cornered the market on morality. They must stop asserting that people who don't agree with their view of religion and G-d not only are wrong, but bound for perdition. They have to cease and desist with their persistent attempts to force their beliefs upon an American public that embraces a wide variety of religions and spiritual views." The litany almost always includes references as well to Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, the Moral Majority, or a combination of the three.


Not one component part of this complaint has any grounding in fact. To begin, Republicans in general have never claimed to have locked up the morality market — although politicians in both parties have been known to hint that their opponents are sin-saturated scum.


Sure, politicians love donning the mantle of morality, provided it doesn't impose any affirmative obligation to act upon religious edicts. But Mark Twain was on to something when he described the member of Congress as the only distinctively native American class of criminal: It is as silly to get one's moral instruction from an office-seeker as it is to adopt the politics of the parson.


As for the cavil that conservatives have decreed their enemies inferno-bound; poppycock. Members of the political class don't predict that their foes are headed for Hades. Real fighters tell their foes where to go.


Next comes the "forcing of views" trope, which is rich coming from a party that supports the forcible, court-ordered imposition of radical social change, from legalized abortion to gay marriage to the criminalization of the mere mention of the Almighty. If any ideological camp stands guilty of imposing views, it's the American left, which has worked its will through the courts, the media, Hollywood — and educational institutions that now worship at the Altar of Political Correctness.


Finally, the nattering about Rev. Falwell and Mr. Robertson. Jerry Falwell stepped out of the political ring long ago; the Moral Majority has all but collapsed as an organization. Pat Robertson still enjoys modest currency as a television personality, but long ago lost his ability to make elected officials quake with fear. The warnings about these fellows are comically anachronistic: It is rather like waving one's arms and warning about the awful menace of Daniel Berrigan.


The Religion Bogeyman is less an appeal to thought than a cry for help. It seeks simultaneously to suppress open religious expression, deride men and women of faith as hateful hayseeds and deflect attention from the fact that the Democratic Party has embraced a politically fatal hostility toward the most widely practiced and deeply rooted of American practices — religious observance.


It also reveals an utter blindness to religion's profound impact on American life. Faith over the centuries has defined us, drawn us together.


We Americans trust each other because we take for granted certain views about right and wrong, and about the dignity of human life. We don't have to waste time watching our backs (or at least waste as much time as other cultures). We owe this sense of security to one thing: a tradition of faith — the very tradition the American left has tried so mightily in recent decades to destroy.


The more left-wingers complain about religion, the more they expose their misunderstanding of American history and contemporary culture. This disconnect always becomes obvious during heated Supreme Court confirmation hearings; it became more so during the alarmist reaction to the clumsy Miers sales job.


If Bushphobes want to confront a bogeyman bent on wrecking the country and the Democratic Party, they should stop whining about Jerry Falwell and pick a more appropriate target — like the ACLU.

Thanks for bringing back the memories!
Sometimes taking out all the turds doesn't solve the problem!

I do not share this jerk's values or faith. I have no use for lying war mongering so-called Christians. Fuck em all.

Murdering sons of bitches.

Office of Special Counsel


Patrick J. Fitzgerald
Special Counsel

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/osc/index.html


You rightingers may want to add this to your favorites. It'll keep you up to date on your favorite Republicans.