|
Bond's record-setting baseball will go into the HOF with an asterisk. "distract, delude, amuse and insulate us." People trust the Democrats more than they trust Republicans. Are you smarter than the average American? Test your knowledge of the news.. Neo-Nazi's go after the Jena 6 Feds investigating Blackwater USA for weapons smuggling The death of the History of Civilization… The good General couldn't accomplish his first job in Iraq, why should we expect anything better out of his second stint there? Support Debra Bowen's decision regarding Diebold voting machines Coast Guard's Deepwater project price skyrockets June 06 July 06 August 06 September 06 October 06 November 06 December 06 January 07 February 07 March 07 April 07 May 07 June 07 July 07 August 07 September 07 October 07 November 07 December 07 January 08 February 08 March 08 April 08 May 08 June 08 July 08 August 08 September 08 October 08 Its My Right to be Left of the Center Bring it On! Sirens Chronicles
RSS 2.0![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Share! |
|
|
By Any Means Necessary
From Citizens for Responsibilty and Ethics in Washington(CREW):
The GOP has an image problem. A dozen years of Republican control in DC left many in the party complacent and open to the types of activities that give politics a dirty name. Of the 25 most corrupt members of Congress, 21 are Republicans, according to the nonpartisan watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), and included in that list is Republican Rep. Jerry Lewis. Lewis' likely malfeasance is unfortunate. At a time when California is decently positioned to have a fairer shake at federal monies, Lewis, along with fellow "under ongoing investigation" Cali buddies Rep. John Doolittle and Rep. Ken Calvert is tainted by the stench of bribery. But Shawn Steel, FlashReport contributor and former chairman of the California Republican Party, will hear nothing of it. In a piece entitled "Blood Sport: Slamming Jerry Lewis," Steel blames his party's corruption conundrum on, who else, the Democrats! Oh, and Vladimir Lenin makes a guest appearance: "Democrats will do anything to get and maintain power. After all, Lenin wasn't too good a revolutionary. His specialty, once he took power, was to create a ruthless system for permanent power at any cost. Democrats hope to do the same in 2008. By any means necessary, get more senate and house seats." The stench of desperation in this post reeks more than the mold and rat infested rooms at Walter Reed Army Medical Center under Bush's watch. The zig zag from Republican corruption to Democratic power lust to the first communist dictator of the Soviet Union is just surreal, and shows just how far some of the more scrupulous GOPers will go to deflect attention away from some of their entourage's very real ethics problems. But if Steel wants to discuss the creation of "a ruthless system for permanent power at any cost," he need look no further than his own party. Let's review some recent history: Which party was it again that redistricted away five Democrat-held Congressional seats in Texas, in a way that Justice Department lawyers concluded violated the Voting Rights Act? And which party was it again that tried to suppress the black vote in Florida in preparation for a hotly contested presidential race in 2004? Here's a hint: the governor with oversight was President Bush's brother. And in that same election, which party's donor class funded a well-publicized smear campaign against the military service credentials of the only candidate in the race to have actually fought for his country -- with ads so outrageous that even Republican Senator John McCain called them "dishonest and dishonorable"? Tip: while Dubya "partied and dated with gusto, dabbled half-heartedly in business and politics, and flew jets part time," Senator John Kerry was dodging bullets in Tran Thoi. And which party persistently manipulates wedge issues -- including the relentless demonization of law-abiding gays -- to distract the public from issues that actually, you know, impact us, like suppressing voter rights? If you guessed Republicans, you'd be correct. But don't tell that to Shawn Steel. He's been reading from the Bolshevik Revolution playbook for so long, that he forgot which side he was on. 59 comments from 14 users
posted by
mattloch
on Jul 9, 2007 at 10:53 AM
It wasn't just Florida that had voter problems in 2004 (Ohio anyone? Illegal caging lists used by Tim Griffin FTW?). It is people like Steel that will continue to consign the California Republican Party to the minority side of the aisle. And if that's the best they can offer, good riddance..... posted by
dusty1215
on Jul 9, 2007 at 10:56 AM
As Talon continues to spy on Peace Groups as well Mattloch. posted by
Hardliner4freedom
on Jul 9, 2007 at 11:03 AM
It's because the fascists who have infected the GOP are capable of seeing only a very narrow wavelength -- they can only see in degrees of corruption and degrees of power-lust. They see Democratic "power-lust" only because they are themselves gripped by an all-consuming power lust.
posted by
mattloch
on Jul 9, 2007 at 11:11 AM
I know it honestly doesn't matter, but I'm curious to which side you think they fall on. posted by
randomfactor
on Jul 9, 2007 at 11:20 AM
Everyone looks at others as pretty much the same as they themselves are, IMHO. . Democrats see opponents as people who can be reasoned with and persuaded to do what's right, particularly for society as a whole. Republicans see opponents as people who will use "any means necessary" to achieve their own ends, at the expense of society as a whole. . There are exceptions, but I believe that a certain criminal fraction of the current leadership of the Republican party gives the other ten percent a bad name. posted by
robbwillis
on Jul 9, 2007 at 11:20 AM
posted by
Hardliner4freedom
on Jul 9, 2007 at 11:23 AM
Matloch asked, "or do you believe that they're blind to their own power lust (but can see it because of their own sub-conscious use of it)?" That's it. In their minds, they literally can do no wrong. They don't need to reflect on their own power-lust because they consider everything they do to be noble and infallible. posted by
dusty1215
on Jul 9, 2007 at 11:28 AM
posted by
robbwillis
on Jul 9, 2007 at 11:51 AM
Rather than a Democrat vs Republican ethical problem, I'd call it a lawyer problem. Just to piss everyone off... posted by
GrpThink
on Jul 9, 2007 at 12:35 PM
"Democrats will do anything to get and maintain power. After all, Lenin wasn't too good a revolutionary. His specialty, once he took power, was to create a ruthless system for permanent power at any cost. Democrats hope to do the same in 2008. By any means necessary, get more senate and house seats." This is called projection. Rove, DeLay, Cheney and the neo-cons tried to do this for the Repugs (DeLay was the first to use the term "permanent majority" in 2003) but pissed it all away by starting an ill-advised and failing war in Iraq.
posted by
allRED
on Jul 9, 2007 at 04:28 PM
Yeah Kerry was after his 3rd Purble Heart how many times can you shoot your foot? Senator John Kerry was dodging bullets in Tran Thoi. posted by
ProgressivePete2
on Jul 9, 2007 at 04:31 PM
posted by
randomfactor
on Jul 9, 2007 at 04:34 PM
Ron, the Navy has no problem with either of John Kerry's purple heart citations. Now Bush, on the other hand, had a self-inflicted nasal septum irritation that kept him off flying status...if he'd actually *SERVED* in the military, we might not be in the mess we are in Iraq. Another example of that "projection" thing. posted by
montfred
on Jul 9, 2007 at 04:43 PM
posted by
dusty1215
on Jul 9, 2007 at 04:48 PM
posted by
allRED
on Jul 9, 2007 at 04:57 PM
posted by
randomfactor
on Jul 9, 2007 at 04:58 PM
I hope so too, Allred. It would give her antiwar message much more exposure, and Pelosi would *STILL* win. . We on the left call that a win/win situation. You *DO* know that Pelosi is generally the most conservative candidate running in her district, right? posted by
ProgressivePete2
on Jul 9, 2007 at 04:59 PM
posted by
dusty1215
on Jul 9, 2007 at 05:00 PM
posted by
allRED
on Jul 9, 2007 at 05:07 PM
I wouldnt mind Sheehan there that would make 210 commie liberals. Sheehan trying to sell her lot in crawford but the dirt she left is to dirty with crap and the clean up cost to much. posted by
sagefever
on Jul 9, 2007 at 05:12 PM
posted by
dusty1215
on Jul 9, 2007 at 05:13 PM
posted by
Tolerance
on Jul 9, 2007 at 05:15 PM
Commie liberals? How ridiculous. So the opposite would be a Fascist Conservative? [edit] What's even funnier is Ron's affinity for red. posted by
montfred
on Jul 9, 2007 at 05:15 PM
posted by
randomfactor
on Jul 9, 2007 at 05:16 PM
posted by
dusty1215
on Jul 9, 2007 at 05:29 PM
Spam word: foxbi posted by
allRED
on Jul 9, 2007 at 05:34 PM
posted by
dusty1215
on Jul 9, 2007 at 05:40 PM
posted by
randomfactor
on Jul 9, 2007 at 05:43 PM
Ron, what I care about is keeping the country from going over the cliff any more. If Cindy Sheehan helps that effort, great. If not, I'm fully prepared to nudge her over the cliff in favor of someone else. . I don't agree with everything Cindy Sheehan says in challenging Pelosi. I *DO* agree with her that she never had her question satisfactorily answered: why her son died. Why the sons of 3600 other American mothers died. Why we're spending $10 billion--that's BILLION--dollars in Iraq every month. We've already spent more on Iraq than Vietnam, the *OTHER* war Bush dodged responsibility for. . The Iraq "government" is about to get a report card later this week on how well they're meeting Bush's "benchmarks." The report card is going to come back all "F's." The only question is whether we leave Iraq soon, and in some semblance of an orderly fashion, or later, after killing another couple thousand of our best and with helicopter evacuations from the embassy rooftop. Right now the Republicans are choosing to waste lives and money in Iraq and the Democrats haven't yet stepped up to stop them. . I'm not happy that impeachment is "off the table," but it's not "off" just because Pelosi said so. She's stating a fact, not a command. And Cindy Sheehan is expressing the opinion of about two-thirds of the country. Ending the Iraq War is not a matter of passing a bill, something which these days takes 60 votes in the Senate. It's a matter of not passing any more funding, something which takes 40 erect spines. posted by
allRED
on Jul 9, 2007 at 05:44 PM
posted by
dusty1215
on Jul 9, 2007 at 05:45 PM
posted by
randomfactor
on Jul 9, 2007 at 05:46 PM
That will be determined by whether or not those in office take global warming seriously, Ron. And whether it's already too late. . I know you're leading up to "letting God decide." But "God" is a notoriously bad decider. posted by
randomfactor
on Jul 9, 2007 at 05:47 PM
posted by
dusty1215
on Jul 9, 2007 at 05:47 PM
posted by
dusty1215
on Jul 9, 2007 at 05:49 PM
For the 2007 budget year, CRS says, the $166 billion appropriated to the Pentagon represents a 40 percent increase over 2006. The Vietnam War, after accounting for inflation, cost taxpayers $650 billion, according to separate CRS estimates. posted by
allRED
on Jul 9, 2007 at 05:55 PM
posted by
randomfactor
on Jul 9, 2007 at 06:05 PM
Ron, Iran made their play when they suckered Bush into Iraq. They've been playing chess against Shrub, who's been playing solitaire, cheating, and *STILL* losing. . That's why Iran is holding down the death count in Iraq. They're winning *NOW*, why rock the boat?
posted by
dusty1215
on Jul 9, 2007 at 06:10 PM
posted by
mattloch
on Jul 9, 2007 at 06:10 PM
Fixed that for you. ;) Ron: "but Iraq has been held off for 5 years now Iran China Russia will make there play." Held off of what? Do you think that Iran, China, and Russia can control Iraq's civil war? If they can, I say "more power to them." I'll bet you that if they try, they won't send in some measly 150,000 soldiers..... posted by
dusty1215
on Jul 9, 2007 at 06:11 PM
posted by
dusty1215
on Jul 9, 2007 at 06:17 PM
posted by
allRED
on Jul 9, 2007 at 06:38 PM
No Matt as usal you missed the point Israel has been safe from all the commotion in Iraq but after the fall of Iraq China Russia Iran will make there move to control the middle east. I believe the timeing was planned far far ago. I believe the one thing that will make Atheist come to the fact that there is a God, is Prophecy, the true Word of God. posted by
mattloch
on Jul 9, 2007 at 07:37 PM
What do you believe that China and Russia will do that will give them greater power? In case you didn't notice, nobody was undercutting the US's strength in the middle east except our President. Same with giving power to Iran. Why do you think we were supporting Saddam in the '80s? The only "power" that China and Russia held before we occupied Iraq was the oil contracts they signed with Saddam. And those went out the window as soon as Humvees crossed the Iraqi border. So, I ask you again, what do you think China and Russia can do now to increase their power in Iraq? The only thing that truly terrifies me about what you said is your "end times" scenario. And not that I believe that could even remotely happen. But because there are actually people who believe that noise. And many of them vote. Some even hold positions of power within our government. You've already proven your complete ignorance about anything Israeli. At least, anything that's happened since Biblical times. posted by
sagefever
on Jul 9, 2007 at 08:37 PM
posted by
Hardliner4freedom
on Jul 9, 2007 at 08:42 PM
Yes, I noticed that Scarborough Country is off the air. Maybe MSNBC is trying to keep Olbermann's fans from changing the channel, ya think? Abrams seems off to a bit of a shaky start. Hope he gets his spiel down.
posted by
dusty1215
on Jul 9, 2007 at 08:43 PM
Joan whats-her-name from Slate, or was it Salon.. really used to hold her own. That woman could let it fly at any of them! I readily admit I watch them all. I also curse at the tv and mock them..but I do watch all their political shows on MSNBC. I am a junkie. posted by
dusty1215
on Jul 9, 2007 at 08:46 PM
posted by
Hardliner4freedom
on Jul 9, 2007 at 08:47 PM
posted by
dusty1215
on Jul 9, 2007 at 08:50 PM
posted by
Hardliner4freedom
on Jul 9, 2007 at 08:54 PM
(See, I really do notice liberal slants when there actually seems to be one...) Anyhoo, I gotta turn on my laptop... I bought a wireless access point for my wired network so that I can work on my new blog and keep my sweetheart company at the same time.
Our readers recommend: |