Democrats & Liberals Archives

Hammer Goes Down

Whenever a Republican gets in trouble, conservative posters on this site cry “Liberal witch hunt!” and predict that the whole fuss will come to nothing. So far, the witch hunt has been bad for the witches. Scooter Libby and Tom Delay were indicted. Now Delay has announced that he will step down. Not that he is guilty or anything. To quote The Hammer, “I refuse to allow liberal Democrats an opportunity to steal this seat with a negative personal campaign.” Don’t you hate when that happens?

Posted by Woody Mena at April 4, 2006 7:27 AM
Comments
Comment #137838

There is a God and She loves us.

Posted by: Michael M at April 4, 2006 8:15 AM
Comment #137839

I’m conservative and I’m glad to see DeLay go. I have no tolerance for corrupt politicians…Dems or Repubs. I’m not saying Delay’s guilty of any crime, but stepping down is in the best interests of the party while he gets these issues behind him.

Just goes to show you that any party in office long enough will begin to take things for granted, think they’re above the law and, in general, abuse their power. The Demos showed that during their 40 year House reign and the Repubs are sliding down that slope now. I hope there are some Repubs that can take control of the party and stop the slide. If not, I’m sure the voters will clean House (and Senate) again.

Posted by: mac6115cd at April 4, 2006 8:18 AM
Comment #137843

The 2000/2004 Republican sweep was based on Fear, Greed and Lies and nothing else. Fear of Terrorists and Gays; Greed in the DeLay/Cheney style; Lies that Bush/Rove,etc. told non-stop.
Right now they are looking for another whore to champion their Fear/Greed/Lies program and you can be sure they will find him. There is no shortage of whores in Washington.

Posted by: WYZZRD at April 4, 2006 8:47 AM
Comment #137846

One of the four horsemen has begun their death rattle. Three to go:
Bush
Cheyney
Rove
DeLay
Codicil: I’ll believe it when it happens.

Posted by: Dave at April 4, 2006 9:03 AM
Comment #137849

guess which one? NBA OR NFL?

36 have been accused of spousal abuse
7 have been arrested for fraud
19 have been accused of writing bad checks
117 have directly or indirectly bankrupted at least 2 businesses
3 have done time for assault
71,repeat 71 cannot get a credit card due to bad credit
14 have been arrested on drug-related charges
8 have been arrested for shoplifting
21 currently are defendants in lawsuits, and
84 have been arrested for drunk driving in the last year

Can you guess which organization this is?

Give up yet?


Neither, it’s the 535 members of the United States Congress.

The same group of Idiots that crank out hundreds of new laws each year
designed to keep the rest of us in line.

With representation like this why are we asking ourselve how the country got into the shape it is. Can anyone guess which catagory the “Hammer” belongs in?

Posted by: Vic at April 4, 2006 9:18 AM
Comment #137852

When someone is accused of a crime, I usually just say that we should wait for the verdict. If people are guilty, we should act appropriately. The problem I have with the liberal witch hunt is that all sorts of accusation are made that don’t pan out, yet they still hold to them. My favorite case is the accusations of fraud in the last election. We were going to hear so much about that. As I recall, a couple of Democratic officials were accused of slashing tires on Republican vehicles and we had a few minor infractions. But the myth machine still questions the legitimacy of the election. It is like big foot or the Bermuda Triangle. No amount of evidence (or lack) will disproved it to the credulous.

You mention Delay and Libby. This is pretty thin soup. Neither is found guilty so far, BTW. But considering all the sound and fury, this is nothing. The Plame case was supposed to catch some big fish and it caught Libby, who not one in 100 Americans could have identified. And he still is not in the net.

I am not sure what the ratio is, but my guess is that for every 1000 accusations, ten are credible enough to investigate. Of every ten investigation, probably less than one actually yields a result. That is why I don’t get very upset about accusations.

Delay’s political life is over, but I bet after all the smoke clears and the shouting stops he will be found guilty only of tough politics.

Posted by: Jack at April 4, 2006 9:40 AM
Comment #137856

“Delay’s political life is over, but I bet after all the smoke clears and the shouting stops he will be found guilty only of tough politics”

Jack, it doesn’t matter if that is all he is found guilty of or not. The lefts “truth be damned, at all costs” tactic worked.
And, as the right showed in the 90’s, they will not be happy until they can make the people “believe” that the opposition party is worse than themselves and get the votes.
Slick Willy - The Hammer - Larry Lib - Connie Conservative; its a never ending, vicious, cycle.
Good for the party, bad for the country.

Posted by: kctim at April 4, 2006 10:02 AM
Comment #137864

Jack,

There were so many documented cases of fraud during the last election I am hardly going to waste my time finding them again. If I recall, they have already been posted and shared with you. No one said the results of the election would have changed, only that the behavior was grossly wrong and not comparable to some kids slashing some tires.

There are some issues that should be above the pale of poliical gamesmanship. Diebold’s CEO should not be a huge Republican contributor who decides to publicly say he will do anything to get Bush elected. CIA agents’ identities should not be disclosed to the media as part of a campaign trick. Both of these should offend your sense of decency.

When a candidate reveals the identitfy of a CIA agent, placing many, many people in danger and no one is held accountable America loses, not just the other candidate’s party. When votes are tweaked or voters disenfranchised again America loses.

If I were to find out the Democratic party did either of these things I would not be sitting around saying “Yeah - we’ll see if the Republican party can do anything about it - heheheh.” I would be genuinely disgusted, and I am.

I am not so much worried about all the unproven accusations floating around as I am the number of bonafied, proven ones that are being ignored. Why is Bush getting a free ride on the Downing Street Memo now that Blair has admitted it’s authenticity? Is it okay for the president to lie to Americans about the reasons it’s necessary to go to war?

Republicans amaze me by suggesting that this is all business as usual politics when clearly it’s not. Isn’t it time we came together on a few key observations of what should and should not be allowed in this country?

Posted by: Max at April 4, 2006 10:22 AM
Comment #137870

The Hammer goes down on his knees and will be giving HUMMERS like the whore bitch that he really is.

Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Posted by: Sonny at April 4, 2006 10:39 AM
Comment #137871

Poor,poor victumized Tom.Give me a break!That piece of dirt belongs in prison but he will probably get a presidential pardon.

Posted by: BillS at April 4, 2006 10:43 AM
Comment #137872

I never liked Delay….Is he guilty? I don’t know. However, I think it only helps the Repubs to get him out of the Senate seat race. With all of the scandal that surrounds him the polls show his challenger was running close…..This in a very conservative district. New blood in that race will likely insure a GOP victory and retention of the Senate seat.

Delay will likely follow other politicians (most recent was Ashcroft) into the the beautiful, exciting, and lucrative world of lobbying. He should know what not to do….that’s for sure!

Posted by: Tom L at April 4, 2006 10:43 AM
Comment #137873

Vic,

that’s an OLD urban legend (goes back to 1999). I’ve got no shortage of issues with DeLay, but don’t trot out crap like this. It damages the credibility of all who critique DeLay.

Posted by: CPAdams at April 4, 2006 10:43 AM
Comment #137874

“Of every ten investigation, probably less than one actually yields a result”.

Like lying about a blowjob, ugh?

Posted by: expatUSA_Indonesia at April 4, 2006 10:45 AM
Comment #137875

Jack,

It’s a fact that the Republicans certainly commited some fraudulent acts in recent elections. I’m not sure about proof for 2004, but 2002 certainly. There, Democratic voters were purged through phone fraud in New Hampshire. In 2000, I believe, it was signs in black neighborhoods saying that all parking and speeding tickets, as well as outstanding debt, and some other fine or penalty, had to be paid AND GIVING THE WRONG DATE FOR THE ELECTION. None of that was true of course.
Now, before you get too worked up, I’ll admit that I am sure that the Democrats have done some sketchy things as well (part of the reason that I am an independent). The machine politics of the stretch from 1850-1970 and perhaps beyond left little integrity in either party. However, it is difficult to argue that this moment the Republicans are less corrupt than the Democrats. The opposite is true. They have allowed their power to get to them, seen themselves as invincible, just like the Democrats did in the stretch leading up to 1994.

Kctim,

Ah, the old “liberals are liars” argument. Well, I will agree that some DEMOCRATS are guilty of lies, but most of the time those are centrists like Hillary or Bill, LBJ, etc. Well, Hillary may not really be a centrist in the normal sense of the word, but her commie ideas on some issue balance out the righty ideas on some others (you can tell I love her for ‘08, right?). But in truth, you see most actual liberals have a great respect for the truth, as I would imagine many true conservatives, not the religious psychos or empire builders, but the “get the fuck off my land and leave me alone” ones. Although I am a liberal, I feel I have a lot in common with those types of conservatives and do not mind working with them. They are reasonable and liberals in the mold of Feingold, Wellstone, Kennedy (yes yes, ignore Chappaquidick for the moment) and others can work with true conservatives who also stand by their word: Sununu, Specter, Collins, maybe even Hagel to a lesser extent. Instead, you get a huge collection of d-bags: Frist, Roberts, Allen, Bush, Cheney, Delay vs. Clinton, Clinton, Gore, Feinstein, Boxer. It is pretty bad that those are the ones in charge.

Posted by: Libertyman13 at April 4, 2006 10:47 AM
Comment #137877

Jack,

I would agree with you IF there was a chance of a trial happening. For example, Bush is accused, with credible evidence, of having lied in order to start a war. If he lied, he should be removed from office. To determine if he lied, there needs to be a trial. That trial is called an impeachemnt. With a GOPer controlled congress, what’s the chance of that?

BTW: Didn’t DeLay’s chief of staff just plead guilty to his corruption and bribery charges? Didn’t he also imply that the corruption directly included DeLay? Isn’t that enough cause for a trial?

Blah blah blah, innocent until proved guilty, only one in a hundred accusations are valid? You’re full of crap unless you also say “Have the trial”.

Libertyman,

Chappaquidick is BS. I’ve been over the bridge, including in the early 70’s, and once almost drive my bike completely off it; in daylight, while completely sober. Driving there safely at night would have been almost impossible.

I also disagree with you on the dirtbag characterizations. There needs to be a distinction between politics and agendas. The GOPers have become total slimeballers, with no holds barred and no sense of humanity or interest in the nation as a whole. I hate their agenda and politics. The DEMers were hardball but kept some sense of fair play and decency. I dislike their politics but are OK with their agenda. If they played like the GOP, I would disown them completely.

Posted by: Dave at April 4, 2006 10:57 AM
Comment #137910

While the hammer was deciding to give up his bid for another term REP.McKINNEY was out assulting a D.C. POLICE OFFICER.This is not the first time she has ASSULTED a person of authority.Her last victim was a cogressman.Is this what we have to look forward to if the dems. take back the house and senate?Just wondering.

Posted by: justwondering at April 4, 2006 12:18 PM
Comment #137915

justwondering,

Heh, that reminds me. This alleged incident with McKinney just happened a few days ago, but conservatives already “know” that she is guilty. When ones of your boys get in trouble, it takes a signed affadavit from God before you believe anything…

Posted by: Woody Mena at April 4, 2006 12:29 PM
Comment #137923

Dave

You have a trial when you have sufficient reason to believe that the person might be guilty. You don’t have a trial just because some people are angry, at least you shouldn’t.

Fact check found that Bush did not lie.

Re Kennedy, nobody faults him for his accident. What he did wrong was run off and let the woman die. It Teddy had been been driving a Volkswagen Beetle, he would have been president, BTW, but as it is more people have died in Teddy’s car than in all the American nuclear power accidents combined.

Max

Elections are statistical. They cannot be made perfect. You can find isolated incidents on both sides. It seems like we have rather more of such incidents on the Dem side, but nothing particularly important and also as you say, nothing that would change the election.

I think people do the country a disserve when they make baseless accusations or try to blow little mistakes up into major incidents. For all that smoke you guys make, you find very little fire.

You can send me a list of the innuendoes or speeches by John Conyers. But when you do, please also send along a list of the people actually convicted of fraud. That is the true bottom line. Please also include their party affiliation. I know, Republicans are so clever that they manage to hide everything from Dems. Glad we are so smart.

Posted by: Jack at April 4, 2006 12:43 PM
Comment #137924

Her hair was the reason she sucker punched the cop.The D.C.police officer should be charged with one count of felonious not knowing the congress person.

Posted by: justwondering at April 4, 2006 12:44 PM
Comment #137927

Woody

I would not arrest her. What I object to is her quick racist play. If she would just have treated it as misunderstanding and immediately appologized, we would probably not be talking about it at all.

They probably have a tape of the event, so the facts will be easily seen.

Posted by: Jack at April 4, 2006 12:47 PM
Comment #137940

What a differance a post makes.you folks are so gullable.you let an idiot like me change the whole conversation?Good luck in 2006 and 2008

Posted by: justwondering at April 4, 2006 1:20 PM
Comment #137941

LibertyMan
“Ah, the old “liberals are liars” argument”

Actually, if you read my entire statement, I accused BOTH sides of being liars and being guilty of placing their party ahead of the country.

Posted by: kctim at April 4, 2006 1:20 PM
Comment #137946

Tom L,

I just wanted to call to your attention that Delay is a Congressman and not a Senator. He represents the 22nds Congressional District of Texas. He is not competing for a senate seat, nor did he ever.

Posted by: Beijing Rob at April 4, 2006 1:51 PM
Comment #137955

Jack,

Your reaction to the McKinney case pretty well illustrates my point. Delay and Libby are innocent until proven guilty, but you want McKinney to apologize. Why do you want her to apologize? Because you read something somewhere and assumed it must be true. That is exactly what you call the “liberal method”.

Posted by: Woody Mena at April 4, 2006 2:16 PM
Comment #137957
Fact check found that Bush did not lie. Posted by: Jack at April 4, 2006 12:43 PM
You’re deceiveing yourself. But let’s start a real discussion; At what point is misleading a lie? Or at what point is incompetence criminal?

From Factcheck
Similarly, the President himself said this in a speech to the nation, just three days before the House vote to authorize force:

Bush, Oct. 7, 2002: We’ve learned that Iraq has trained al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases . And we know that after September the 11th, Saddam Hussein’s regime gleefully celebrated the terrorist attacks on America.

Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists. Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints.

That statement is open to challenge on two grounds. For one thing, as we’ve seen, the intelligence community was reporting to Bush and Congress that they thought it unlikely that Saddam would give chemical or biological weapons to terrorists – and only “if sufficiently desperate” and as a “last chance to exact revenge” for the very attack that Bush was then advocating.

Furthermore, the claim that Iraq had trained al Qaeda in the use of poison gas turned out to be false, and some in the intelligence community were expressing doubts about it at the time Bush spoke. It was based on statements by a senior trainer for al Qaeda who had been captured in Afghanistan. The detainee, Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, took back his story in 2004 and the CIA withdrew all claims based on it. But even at the time Bush spoke, Pentagon intelligence analysts said it was likely al-Libi was lying.

Posted by: Dave at April 4, 2006 2:24 PM
Comment #137967

“You can send me a list of the innuendoes or speeches by John Conyers. But when you do, please also send along a list of the people actually convicted of fraud.”

Is there a liberal among us who has not at one time or another heard a conservative counterpart bemoan and deride the ACLU? Republicans like Delay and Libby this year will probably spend twice the annual budget of the ACLU to get themselves off the hook, demanding the same civil liberties the ACLU so ardently tries to provide every American. Hell, if these bums asked for it, the ACLU would probably help them out. They helped out the Illinois Nazis once.

And who hasn’t gotten tired of some know-it-all racist whining about an accused criminal getting off on a technicality, like a confession that was obtained through torture? Rest assured that if Deley’s prosecutor fails to dot an “i” or cross a “t” in a warrant somewhere along the line, Deley will have no problem whatsoever seeing that evidence thrown out.

Regardless of the sincerity of Deley’s motives; whether he is convicted or not; even if he committed no felonies… what Tom Deley did, manipulating the system and rigging the running of the United States of America… taking the power out of the hands of the voters… is wrong. And comparing it to lying about getting a hummer in the Oval office is SO TYPICAL of the republican mindset. Niccolò Machiavelli is alive and well and living in the heart of every republican.

Posted by: Thom Houts at April 4, 2006 2:59 PM
Comment #137973

Hooray, the Hammer goes down! Now I want to see the Hammer get nailed — and thrown in the slammer where he belongs.

Jack, I see you’re posting a bunch of nonsense again — what fun, riling up the liberals, eh?

Posted by: Adrienne at April 4, 2006 3:21 PM
Comment #137974

Woody

I don’t mean a public appology al la Clinton. If I was distracted and ran past the guard and he stopped me, I would quickly say “I am sorry” and show my ID. In fact that very thing has happened to me, although I have never lost control and hit anyone.

In fact, if someone bumps into me, and it is clearly his fault, I usually appologize. That is just good manners. You don’t try to assign blame and make it a court case.

This is the proper script.

Cop: stop, stop. reaches out and grabs her.

Her: Oh, I am sorry. I must have forgotten to show you my ID.

Cop: that’s okay. Sorry I had to stop you but it is my job.

Her: I know. thanks for that.

Posted by: Jack at April 4, 2006 3:22 PM
Comment #137976

“motives; whether he is convicted or not; even if he committed no felonies… what Tom Deley did, manipulating the system and rigging the running of the United States of America… taking the power out of the hands of the voters… is wrong.”

So no matter what the evidence shows, he is guilty?
That sounds fair.

“And comparing it to lying about getting a hummer in the Oval office is SO TYPICAL of the republican mindset”

Convincing yourself that it was about nothing but a “hummer” in the Oval Office is so typical of the liberal mindset.
Different rules to protect ones own.

Posted by: kctim at April 4, 2006 3:27 PM
Comment #137977

Tom Houts

I was referring to the accusations of election fraud. I heard a lot of talk and not much result. I think you are taking it out of context.

Dave

We can trade the fact check notes. I wrote a whole post on the subject a couple months back.

We agree that some of the information turned out to be incorrect. We also agree that all the statements are open to challenge. In politics and policy we make certain decisions on uncertain information. If I believe a dangerous situation is developing, maybe I move before I have complete information because by the time my information becomes complete, it is too late to act. If afterwards you find I was wrong, maybe even stupidly wrong, it does not mean I lied or even that my judgment was poor based on the information and context of the time.

Adrienne

Yes. Some people don’t like it when I shake up their conventional wisdom.

Posted by: Jack at April 4, 2006 3:31 PM
Comment #137982

Hey lib’s if you act fast you can join the iranian revolutionary guard.they will be the next cause for your party to back.

Posted by: justwondering at April 4, 2006 3:45 PM
Comment #137987

Jack,
I am not surprised that you would mention the criminal acts of the people in their incredibly stupid and innane vandalizm…

What you didn’t mention, maybe you were aware, but the Republicans seem to do things a bit more… err… professionaly? Also, why bother with a couple of vans when you can do it right and go state wide?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_New_Hampshire_Senate_election_phone_jamming_scandal

Plus, when they get caught and go to trial… wanna guess who paid their legal fees? Well, at least James Tobin seems to have his fees paid for by the RNC.

“We’re keeping a really close eye on the trial this week of James Tobin, former New England Chair of Bush-Cheney ‘04 and former Northeast field director for the RNC and the NRSC in 2002.”
http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/12/7/182627/079

Or, what about Ann Coulter’s little voter fraud. That is a felony, you know?
“Palm Beach County’s elections supervisor has given the right wing’s unofficial mouthpiece 30 days to explain why she voted in the wrong precinct.”
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/pbccentral/content/local_news/epaper/2006/03/29/m2a_jose_col_0329.html

Wow, possibly a convicted felon if she doesn’t give a really good explaination… and an alleged money laundering pill popping multiple marrage paragon of American family values pundit now.

Heck, if Coulter and Rush are your friends… who needs enemies?

Now, for the really fun part.. if all fails, switch the law that was passed by Congress and have the President sign a different version! Don’t even bother with elections… just let the Republicans write the laws they want and take them straight to the signing ceremony.

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2006/03/democrats-question-bush-on-signing-of.php

I love that one… it is a new classic!

Posted by: Darren7160 at April 4, 2006 4:04 PM
Comment #137989

Jack:
“Some people don’t like it when I shake up their conventional wisdom.”

Very amusing. Btw, have you heard:
Kenneth Blackwell just discovered he owned shares of Diebold while he was preparing a filing for the Ohio Ethics Commission.
Oooops!

Posted by: Adrienne at April 4, 2006 4:07 PM
Comment #137991

Jack,

I notice you didn’t answer then or now. It’s pretty obvious to almost everyone that Bush “misled” the public to have us believe 9/11 and Saddam were closely related. It also seems pretty obvious that Bush knew otherwise. You seem to think the planning to start a war takes much less time than reading a report and it was all just “bad judgement”:

the claim that Iraq had trained al Qaeda in the use of poison gas turned out to be false… Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, took back his story in 2004 and the CIA withdrew all claims based on it. But even at the time Bush spoke, Pentagon intelligence analysts said it was likely al-Libi was lying.

Adrienne,
I’m more interested to know if Diebold has contributed to Blackwells campaign or if DeLay redirected soft funds to Blackwells pockets.

Posted by: Dave at April 4, 2006 4:17 PM
Comment #138014

So Anne Coulter may have voted in the wrong precinct. Man are we clever. We manipulate elections by sending someone whose face, name and personality many people recognize immediately to vote in the wrong precinct. Stealthy, ain’t we.

Then we have the President sign a bill with a clerical errot - sorry error.

And you guys wonder why people don’t take you seriously. I hear Cheney wears size 11 shoes, but one time he wore size 12. What is the significance of that?

Somebody like Ben Stein could do a standup comedy routine just by reading your accusations in his monotone voice.

Adrienne

Now imagine the Ben Stein voice. “State Kenneth Blackwell said a manager of his investments account at Credit Suisse First Boston bought 178 shares of Diebold stock at $53.67 per share in January 2005.”

Again, clever Republicans. Today that investment is worth $40.77. Kenneth Blackwell LOST $12.90 per share($2296.20) on Diebold. How did we all get so rich with investments like that?

David

Policy and politics are always uncertain. Decisions are made in a climate of uncertainty. There is a decision making motto that says often wrong but never in doubt. This is not a joke. A decision must be made with certainty even when you know it is not.

People who don’t have to make decisions love to criticize those who do. They could always do better. You may believe in your own ability (and with that ability I assume you are very rich from all the smart investment decision you make) but you need not attribute to malice what is more easily explained as the normal process of error.

Posted by: Jack at April 4, 2006 5:54 PM
Comment #138016

Beijing Rob

You are correct….I’ve been thinking a lot about our senate race here in tennessee…sorry. Delay has always been the the House of Representatives and NOT the Senate. I still think his house seat will be much less contested with his absents.

Posted by: Tom L at April 4, 2006 6:02 PM
Comment #138068

Jack,

Can I take your silence to mean you have no defense? Bush knew, and that means he “at best” misled. To put that in context; he is no Henry V leading “a happy band of brothers”

the claim that Iraq had trained al Qaeda in the use of poison gas turned out to be false… Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, took back his story in 2004 and the CIA withdrew all claims based on it. But even at the time Bush spoke, Pentagon intelligence analysts said it was likely al-Libi was lying.

Posted by: Dave at April 4, 2006 10:50 PM
Comment #138091

“So no matter what the evidence shows, he is guilty?
That sounds fair.”
Guilty? If he’s found to be guilty of Crimes, that’s merely icing on the cake. The cake being the unethical manner in which he conducted business in the name of government. It’s no wonder republicans SAY they want smaller government (though facts through the recent republican regime in congress and the white house thoroughly contradict this)… with representitives like Deley, the smaller the better. He is not only guilty of abusing the powers of his office, HE’S ARROGANTLY BOASTFUL OF IT!!!

“Convincing yourself that it was about nothing but a “hummer” in the Oval Office is so typical of the liberal mindset.”
I’m not deluded about what ‘that’ was all about. It was about a very successful president being targeted with a slew of baseless allegations of which he was not only ‘NOT GUILTY’, he was INNOCENT and for which there was NEVER any evidence obtained legally or illegally. It was about a republican congress spending $50Million+ of taxpayer money, DESPERATE to come up with something, ANYTHING they could pin on the man.

The asshat that now lives in the White House could NEVER stand the scrutiny to which Bill Clinton was held… and I look forward to the day BUSH is put under the microscope.

Posted by: Thom Houts at April 5, 2006 12:45 AM
Comment #138110
Fact check found that Bush did not lie.

Jack, I pointed out to you a couple times that’s not true. From the article:

To say Bush and the others “lied,” however, requires evidence that they knew the intelligence they were getting was wrong. The unanimous finding of the Intelligence Commission argues against that idea.

But the Intelligence Commission specifically DID NOT look at whether Bush and the others knew the intelligence they were getting was wrong. It just looked at the quality of the intelligence and made no comment on the use of the intelligence one way or the other.

The jury’s still out because there has never been an investigation into whether Bush and the others knew the intelligence they were getting was wrong.

FactCheck doesn’t get it wrong often, but they do get it wrong occasionally. This was one of those times.

Posted by: American Pundit at April 5, 2006 3:16 AM
Comment #138131

Thom,

Don’t forget that is was DeLie who led the impeachement campaign against Clinton.

Posted by: Dave at April 5, 2006 8:44 AM
Comment #138138

“being targeted with a slew of baseless allegations of which he was not only ‘NOT GUILTY’, he was INNOCENT”

He could only have been “not guilty” and “innocent” if they had done investigations and had been presented ALL of the facts.
What legal investigations have proven any of the negative assumptions, hopes and opinions against Bush?
Forgive me, but I’m just a nutty American who happens to still believe that all of us should be treated equal and should play by the same rules.
If one of the worst Presidents deserves to be considered INNOCENT until PROVEN guilty in a court of law, then Bush deserves the same.

Posted by: kctim at April 5, 2006 9:09 AM
Comment #138142

Jack,

I think you are missing my point re McKinney. The question is how you know what you know. When it comes to people like Libby, the Left posters are accused of going off the deep end if we say anything that hasn’t been proved in court. The (Republican) accused is “innocent until proven guilty”. But yet, you have apparently determined the facts about the McKinney case before any legal proceedings have occurred…

For all I know, McKinney is guilty as hell. We shall see. At least we have learned about this idiotic system that people use a magic lapel pin to breeze past security.

Posted by: Woody Mena at April 5, 2006 9:15 AM
Comment #138151

kctim,

Forgive me, but I’m just a nutty American who happens to still believe that all of us should be treated equal and should play by the same rules.

Then you agree;
- There should be a full and unfettered investigation of Bushie, the worst president ever, led by an anti-Bushie.
- Just as the investigation of Clinton, the best president in decades, was led by a fanatical anti-Willie.

Posted by: Dave at April 5, 2006 10:10 AM
Comment #138156

Dave
Yes, I agree.
I have no problem with looking into accusations based on facts, for either side.
Extremely fanatical “anti-Bushie” people are already leading this current circus.
But what good will come out of any of this?
clinton had American citizens murdered, was involved in an illegal war, money laundrying, selling American secrets, draft dodging, corruption etc… but yet, since he was a leftist, you still make the laughable statement that he was the “best president in decades.”
Don’t worry though. In 09, the right will begin their blind defense of Bush and everything will stay the same.
So much for our country. Thank god I won’t be alive to see the completion of its fall.

Posted by: kctim at April 5, 2006 10:26 AM
Comment #138157

just wondering -

“Hey lib’s if you act fast you can join the iranian revolutionary guard.they will be the next cause for your party to back.”

LoL like Regan did, with US money, for a decade?

Sheesh, man…read a history book every so often, eh?

Posted by: Beijing Rob at April 5, 2006 10:33 AM
Comment #138159

By the way, kctim,

Just because someone has not been proven guilty of crimes in a court of law, it doesn’t make them a good person. I’d say that most of the worst people ever simply got away with it or never paid for their bad deeds in this lifetime.

Also, just because i don’t like Bush it doesn’t mean I am an “anti-bushie fanatic”. Please remember that there are perfectly reasonable people who are opposed to him too. Be careful to just throw us all into your “enemies” pile. Some of us are good people and probably your friends and colleagues as well.

Nothing is ever as black and white as you would like it to be. Something to keep in mind…

Posted by: Beijing Rob at April 5, 2006 10:41 AM
Comment #138181

B Rob
” Please remember that there are perfectly reasonable people who are opposed to him too.”

I am aware of this. I consider myself a pretty reasonable guy and I am opposed to what has been going on.

“Be careful to just throw us all into your “enemies” pile”

I do not consider anyone my enemy unless they threaten my family, myself or my country.
I consider many blind though because they actually believe there is a difference between the two major parties.
To even suggest that Democrats are worse than Republicans or that Republicans are worse than Democrats, is nothing but partisan blindness.
The same goes when comparing clinton and Bush.

Posted by: kctim at April 5, 2006 12:46 PM
Comment #138193

Jack,
Forget Ben Stein, YOU crack me up!
What you’re saying is that because Blackwell didn’t make much money off that investment, there isn’t really any impropriety and it’s no big deal. Which is just so completely and totally absurd.
Blackwell is Ohio’s Sec. of State and Chief Elections Officer. His office was negotiating a deal that was attempting to steer business to the company — while he owned stock in that company.
Now he claims he didn’t know what was in his own damn portfolio. That’s crap. But this excuse does seem to be becoming commonplace for negligent GOP politicians (think Frist) who just don’t seem to give a damn about maintaining propriety while holding their positions of power.

Posted by: Adrienne at April 5, 2006 1:39 PM
Comment #138269
clinton had American citizens murdered, was involved in an illegal war, money laundrying, selling American secrets, draft dodging, corruption etc… Posted by: kctim at April 5, 2006 10:26 AM


Holy crap! You still believe that slimeboat nonsense after $50 millions spent on a GOP guided investigation led by an affirmed willie hater proved it was all unsubstantiated political bullsh!t except for one lie about marital infidelity? Do you still believe Sadaam helped OBL plan 9/11 and we found WMDs?!??!

Posted by: Dave at April 5, 2006 9:04 PM
Comment #138276

Adrienne

My point is that it is such a small amount of money that nobody would be tempted. The fact that he lost money indicates that there was no payoff even possible. People have lots of little (and that is little) investments. He was not handling his own investments. It is a technicality. He should sell when he finds out and he did. And he lost money on the deal.

Woody

I am not making myself clear. I don’t really care what the facts are. If you find yourself in a situation as she did, you should apologize for the misunderstanding. She was being pugnacious to hit the cop and compounded it by being arrogant later. If she had shown ordinary good manners, there would have been no problem.

Guards have stopped me when I flashed an ID too fast or just forgot. I apologize for the mistake. Maybe its not my fault. So what?

How about this? You are walking past a guy in a bar when he turns and you accidentally knock the beer out of his hand. Do you apologize and maybe buy him a new beer or do you challenge him to a fight because it was his own damn fault? I buy the beer. And if I am the guy who drops it, I apologize for getting in the way and I offer to buy us both a beer. If you are a nice and polite person, life is better for everybody. She should learn manners. We could argue about whether the cop was wrong TOO, but she carried on and played the race victim. That was her bigger mistake.

This is not like the Libby affair. I am not trying to jail her or give her a hard time in any paricular way. She should just quick the whining and stop trying to justify herself with racist comments.

AP and Dave

Fog of war. There are lots of uncertainties. If Bush lied, why? There are easier ways for him to make money for Halliburton. His daddy was no longer in danger. What other petty motives can we play with.

Posted by: Jack at April 5, 2006 9:30 PM
Comment #138330

“It is a technicality. He should sell when he finds out and he did.”

It is not a technicality at all, and just because you want to overlook all Republican improprieties, that simply isn’t an excuse for the actions of people like Blackwell, or Frist, or Delay. ALL public officials should be aware of ALL of their investments, and maintain ALL the proprieties. It doesn’t matter whether these things are big or small, or lucretive or not. They should feel the need to hold themselves to a higher standard if they want to retain their reputations, and keep the trust of the public.

You know this is true, Jack!!!
Now c’mon and admit for once that I’m right.

Posted by: Adrienne at April 6, 2006 12:13 AM
Comment #138365
Fog of war. There are lots of uncertainties. If Bush lied, why? There are easier ways for him to make money for Halliburton. His daddy was no longer in danger. What other petty motives can we play with. Posted by: Jack at April 5, 2006 09:30 PM
Those excuses are stupid and you know it. IraqII was part of the agenda from day 1, it was a core neocon philosophy to take down a mideast dictator and expand democracy. 9/11 was the excuse and Big Brother didn’t give a shit about truth or his father’s admonitions against the war or even the simplest basics of the real world. It has always been about BushII’s neocon “beliefs”. Which are now, finally, in the reject pile of “stupid ideas” where they belong

Adrienne,

Imagine the noise that would have happened if Clinton owned stock in a failed real estate company?

Posted by: Dave at April 6, 2006 9:14 AM
Comment #138366

Dave
“Holy crap! You still believe that slimeboat nonsense after $50 millions spent on a GOP guided investigation led by an affirmed willie hater proved it was all unsubstantiated political bullsh!t except for one lie about marital infidelity?”

Did you consider it all to be “slimeboat nonsense” when all the allegations FIRST came out against clinton? Or did you wait until after the investigations to make up your mind? Why are you treating Bush differently? Why is it not possible for much of the current accusations against Bush to be nothing but “unsubstantiated political bullsh!t?”
Blind partisanship, plain and simple.

“Do you still believe Sadaam helped OBL plan 9/11 and we found WMDs?!??”

Actually, I never believed the Saddam OBL link to 9-11.
WMD’s? We haven’t found any yet but there are 2 very important elections coming up.
The people will see what they want us to see when they need us to see it.

Posted by: kctim at April 6, 2006 9:23 AM
Comment #138397
Did you consider it all to be “slimeboat nonsense” when all the allegations FIRST came out against clinton? Or did you wait until after the investigations to make up your mind? Why are you treating Bush differently? Why is it not possible for much of the current accusations against Bush to be nothing but “unsubstantiated political bullsh!t?” Posted by: kctim at April 6, 2006 09:23 AM
I’m not a judge, nor was I on the jury. I am intitled to opinion. Yet, I am nonpartisan; I dislike political parties almost as much as I hate proslytizing religions. I was suspicious of Clinton’s morality but I liked his agenda.

Now, today, what matters is, the evidence against Bush is substantially more compelling than anything I ever saw against Clinton. Nearly eveything against Clinton was innuendo and hyped suspicion, with the notable expection for Monica, and was unrelated to the key functions of the government. The majority of evidence against Bush is public record, has observable results, documented, and/or recounted by respected former members of his inner circle, and is directly related to major policies and a WAR.

Clinton responded by saying “Bring it on (the investigation)”. Bush responds by calling everyone else a liar, “trust me”, and preventing any real investigation.

I think he is guilty of treason and crimes against humanity. Why won’t you let an unfettered investigation and possible trial prove it one way or the other?

Posted by: Dave at April 6, 2006 11:41 AM
Comment #138423

Latest on 2004 election in Ohio:
Workers accused of fudging ’04 recount
Prosecutor says Cuyahoga skirted rules

Three have been indicted for fixing the sample count to avoid a full recount.

Posted by: Adrienne at April 6, 2006 1:26 PM
Comment #138433

Dave
“Why won’t you let an unfettered investigation and possible trial prove it one way or the other?”

I am not against that in any way.

You see, you liked clintons agenda so you did not notice his corruption, Constitutional violations etc…
Many on the right on guilty of doing that now. Life under a liberal would be ten times worse than what we got now.

Dave and Adrienne
Not sure how new it is or what, but just in case you havent seen.

http://news.yahoo.com/fc/us/bush_administration

Posted by: kctim at April 6, 2006 1:52 PM
Comment #138444
You see, you liked clintons agenda so you did not notice his corruption, Constitutional violations etc…

Posted by: kctim at April 6, 2006 01:52 PM

Again, Clinton was investigated by a fantical anti-Willie and absolved of everything but Monica.Let’s try BushII and end this stupidity.

Posted by: Dave at April 6, 2006 2:11 PM
Comment #138509

kctim:
“Life under a liberal would be ten times worse than what we got now.”

This is a joke, right? It has to be, because no president could possibly be worse than what we’ve got right now. Seriously. At this point Bush makes LBJ and Nixon look good.
And please, how can you even attempt to compare the corruption and Constitutional violations of this president with ANY other president in our history? There is simply none.
At this point you really should know that — and in fact, I think you actually do know it, but you just enjoy playing devil’s advocate.

As for the link, thanks! You were posting that just as I was posting a link to the same story in another thread.

Dave:
“Let’s try Bush II and end this stupidity.”

Indeed. Let’s.

Posted by: Adrienne at April 6, 2006 5:01 PM
Comment #138689

Dave
“Again, Clinton was investigated by a fantical anti-Willie and absolved of everything but Monica.Let’s try BushII and end this stupidity.”

Again, there has NOT been an investigation by the fanatical left wing yet so you do NOT know what Bush is guilty of. You are only going off what you think. If that was how things worked, clinton would have been out of office by 96 or so.

Adrienne
I said - “You see, you liked clintons agenda so you did not notice his corruption, Constitutional violations etc…
Many on the right are guilty of doing that now. Life under a liberal would be ten times worse than what we got now”

So no, I was not making a joke. Many people believe life under a liberal would be worse and that is why they defend and excuse what is going on.

“and in fact, I think you actually do know it”

Its getting scary ma’am. You are over half-way there in understanding me :)
I don’t think Bush is worse than clinton because to me and my beliefs, what they have done mirrors each other.
I will admit though, that I do have a hatred for clinton due to my military experience under him. The embarrassment he brought unto us and his dismantling of the military warrants that.

If the right believed clinton was so bad and the left believes Bush is so bad, don’t you think there is a message there?
Your person is in power and they trample a right you don’t care about so its not really a big deal to you. You don’t notice or want to believe because the only other option is the other party and that would be even worse to you. So you look the other way. (my use of the words you and your is meant from either side, not you personally ma’am)
It happened in the 90s and it is happening now.

Posted by: kctim at April 7, 2006 9:58 AM
Comment #138802
Again, there has NOT been an investigation by the fanatical left wing yet so you do NOT know what Bush is guilty of.
I admitted freely that it’s my opinion based on the preponderence of available evidence that Bush lied to start a war, etc… As I also said, Lets have the trial. BTW: I love your phraseology we “don’t know what he’s guilty of,” but he’s certainly guilty of a lot of thing.s
Your person is in power and they trample a right you don’t care about
What right did Clinton trample on? Posted by: Dave at April 7, 2006 2:07 PM
Comment #138818

Dave
My “phraseology” was my opinion. I do not believe any of them are innocent. But my opinions do not mean its true.

“What right did Clinton trample on?”

2nd and 4th Amendments.
I know how the 2nd doesn’t mean much to many people but I will admit that I was kind of shocked when the left didn’t care enough to try and stop no knock warrants.

Posted by: kctim at April 7, 2006 2:37 PM
Comment #138849

It still amazes me that so many people will pick a prick like Bushie simply because he thinks that everyone should have a gun. And that nonsense about the (determined to be mistaken)warrantless search of one person comparing to the (admitted to be intentional) warrantless surveillence of everyone making international calls is mind numbing especially when you add the NSA also surveilling the people they talked to. So, if you talked to anyone who called Paris last week, they listened.

Please provide other examples that I might not be aware of.

Posted by: Dave at April 7, 2006 4:00 PM
Comment #139155

“It still amazes me that so many people will pick a prick like Bushie simply because he thinks that everyone should have a gun.”

Yeah Dave, that stupid 2nd Amendment is a waste of time. How dare Bush think everyone has a right to own a gun. And here I thought Bush thought the Constitution was just a worthless piece of paper.

“And that nonsense about the (determined to be mistaken)warrantless search of one person”

Read up on no-knock some, will you. It affects thousands of American citizens every year with many ending in innocent deaths.

“comparing to the (admitted to be intentional) warrantless surveillence of everyone making international calls is mind numbing especially when you add the NSA also surveilling the people they talked to. So, if you talked to anyone who called Paris last week, they listened.”

Why care about the 4th but not the 2nd?
If your so willing to believe the fear mongering about guns and give up the 2nd so that you feel safer, then why is it so hard to believe that some people think its ok to give up some of the 4th to find a terrorist.
Both issues do center on Americans feeling safer afterall.
The only difference is that you think its ok to violate rights that you disagree with or have no interest in. You do not think they are worth fighting for.

Look at EVERY right as being worth fighting for and maybe you will see how BOTH sides are guilty.
Or, stay a blinded partisan and continue to watch as that inch given to govt keeps getting bigger and bigger.

Posted by: kctim at April 8, 2006 5:42 PM
Post a comment