Re: OT: Bush insults BBC Editor

mw wrote:
"VINCE" <Holvbphoto@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:Sotti.154$aj1.56@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
John W. Kennedy wrote:

VINCE wrote:

Calvin wrote:

On Aug 5, 3:21 pm, VINCE <Holvbph...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

mw wrote:

... So leave this NG if you like. But if you choose to
stay remember that you have already made your entrance, you are already branded an idiot, a homophobe, a racist, a Nazi and that will never change until you accept THEIR way of thinking. In many ways the left wingers on this NG are similar to the Jihadists we are currently fighting
in the war on terror. You must either give up your
beliefs and join their cause or die. ...


Oh get over yourself already.


As if that was an apt reply.

This is a viper pit all right. All fangs, with no interest
in conversation or civility, and even advocating for
incivility in the news media.

There's a line by Thomas More in 'A Man for All Seasons', which I don't remember well enough to quote, but the gist of
it is: what will protect you when you have banished civilized behavior; the Devil will turn on you too.


<< In many ways the left wingers on this
NG are similar to the Jihadists we are currently fighting in the war on terror. You must either give up your beliefs
and join their cause or die. ...>>


Thats about the dumbest thing anyone can say how dare you? Its
the right winger who want us to go foward witout question "Oh
you want to spy on Americans?", thats OK, you want to lesser
rights? no problem, you want to go to war based on a lie?,
Thats fine.

Lastly please don't quote Thomas More who was a nut case.

A) No, he wasn't.

B) And the character in the play is even less so.

C) Actually, what More has to say in the lines in question (which
MW paraphrases incorrectly) is /very/ relevant to Bush. The
exchange in question runs something like this:

Rich: You would give the benefit of law to the Devil himself.

More: Yes, I would, for my own sake. This country England is
planted thick with laws from coast to coast. If you, when chasing
the devil, were to cut them down, what would you do when you got
to the end and he turned on you, the laws all being down; and do
you really think that you could stand in the winds that would
blow then?

This is /exactly/ why George W. Bush and his supporters are
traitors, who must be impeached where appropriate, and sent to
prison where possible. Bush knows no law but the law of the thug,
the law of anarchy, the law of the Devil.
But the dems won't do it

--

Because, to their credit, they are not as blinded by their hate (nor
as stupid) as YOU are! You can't impeach someone cuz you don't like
them, or because you disagree with their policies. You must have a
CRIME or MISDEMEANOR, you must bring CHARGES and, in order to do
that, you must have some EVIDENCE!! Anyone who doubts this need only
watch Chris Wallace interview some Dem Senator named Russ Feingold on
last week's Fox News Sunday. Feingold admits that he has NOTHING
--absolutely no evidence of any wrong doing at all. But "We are
investigatin'!!" Here's a transcript: WALLACE: Meanwhile, this week a
House committee held two White House aides in contempt, and a Senate
committee issued a subpoena for Karl Rove to testify, all in the
investigation of the firing of U.S. attorneys.

That sounds familiar.....pretty much exactly like Whitewater.



Senator, so far, Congress has been investigating this issue all year.
You've heard from 14 witnesses. You've received 8,500 pages of
documents.

Can you point to a single smoking gun, any hard evidence, that the
White House has done anything illegal?

FEINGOLD: I think clearly with regard to the NSA surveillance program
that we've been talking about...

WALLACE: No, no, I'm talking about the U.S. attorneys, sir.

(BUT what a NICE TRY to change the subject!! LOL)

FEINGOLD: Well, I believe they probably have. I can't give you
anything definitive (NO OF COURSE NOT) on that, but I do believe
there's been terrible misconduct and misleading approaches here.

(BUT WHERE'S THE EVIDENCE????)

(At this point the Senator goes to the TALKING POINTS!)

And look. My view is that our first priority is getting us out of
Iraq. We have had successes in terms of raising the minimum wage. We
are going to pass a major lobbying and ethics bill. We've passed an
energy bill. We've got the pay-go rule back in place. This is what we
spent six months on.

But now we have started some accountability. This was a week of
accountability - a censure resolution proposal that I made, the call
for the special counsel, the issuing of contempt orders.

This administration is trying to prevent us from learning the facts
about these situations that you've asked me about. Until we can learn
the facts, how do we know whether they have committed anything
illegal?

(In other words, we are on a FISHING EXPEDITION! We have NO EVIDENCE
of any illegality but we are going to continue INVESTIGATING this
until we can get someone from the Administration to contradict the
testimony of someone else and then SNAP! The perjury trap is
successful!! We did it with Libby and we'll keep doing it until we
get everyone we want --and the person we want is the devil incarnate
himself, KAR ROVE! LOL)

That's something that we as members of Congress have an obligation to
find out, not just a question of whether we should do it or shouldn't
do it. We need to ask these questions or we're not doing our job.

WALLACE: But you know, I think the question is, is this really going
anywhere? Is this substantive oversight or is this political theater?


I mean, the point is on the U.S. attorneys which we're talking about,
six-month, seven-month investigation, 8,500 pages of documents, 14
witnesses, and you say yourself as a member of Senate Judiciary you
haven't found any hard evidence that the White House has broken the
law.

FEINGOLD: Well, I happen to think they probably did break the law
here, but I don't think the investigation is over, and...

WALLACE: But do you have any evidence of that?

FEINGOLD: ... until we - well, that's why we're asking for people
like Karl Rove and others to come down and testify so we can actually
examine the evidence.

We haven't had access to the evidence. How are you supposed to
examine it when you can't look at it?



EVIDENCE of WHAT??!! You have to have some EVIDENCE of a crime BEFORE
you do an investigation!! The police in my town can't just go around
investigating people willy-nilly without some PROBABLE CAUSE that a
CRIME was committed! I love this interview cuz Wallace mopped up the
floor with Feingold. I mean if that doesn't tell you everything you
need to know about these ridiculous investigations, I don't know what
will!

So, some of these Dems are pretty stupid --this is probably why the
Congress's numbers are even lower than the Presidents! But MOST of
them know KNOW that IMPEACHMENT is serious business and if they bring
frivolous impeachment charges against the administration, they will
be stepping in it BIG TIME! They might make the looney left (like
those on this NG) happy, but that equates to what? Maybe 35% of the
Democratic party?

Better no!

And they won't!




Check out my new BLOG

http://onemanco.blogspot.com/

-------------------------------------------------



https://be.freelancersunion.org/f/member/14270

<a href="http://www.freewebs.com/vbphoto/";>Visit My Website</a>


http://friends.phonehog.com/r/9f223a20464b102a9428
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT: Bush insults BBC Editor
    ... You would give the benefit of law to the Devil himself. ... WALLACE: Meanwhile, this week a House committee held two White House aides in contempt, and a Senate committee issued a subpoena for Karl Rove to testify, all in the investigation of the firing of U.S. attorneys. ... Can you point to a single smoking gun, any hard evidence, that the White House has done anything illegal? ... FEINGOLD: I think clearly with regard to the NSA surveillance program that we've been talking about... ...
    (rec.arts.theatre.musicals)
  • Re: hard cases make bad law
    ... The guy in question either broke the law or he did not break the law. ... Mr. Holt said he was responding to new evidence presented to him and other ... They charge that the government has intentionally withheld that material ... formal referral from Congress for investigation would make it easier for ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Ball tampering can go unseen on cameras says Sanjay
    ... EVIDENCE that SRT REALLY TAMPERED the ball in SA. ... There is no problem with the law, it is the same for everyone. ... When the LAW is FUCKED UP, umpires have to EXERCISE GOOD JUDGEMENT because ...
    (rec.sport.cricket)
  • Re: why do countries become democracies?
    ... It was in my opinion illegal. ... with evidence for the legal situation. ... bank but let's just set aside the law. ... A cite is a reference to a piece of text where someone lays out the ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Ball tampering can go unseen on cameras says Sanjay
    ... EVIDENCE that SRT REALLY TAMPERED the ball in SA. ... There is no problem with the law, it is the same for everyone. ... When the LAW is FUCKED UP, umpires have to EXERCISE GOOD JUDGEMENT ...
    (rec.sport.cricket)
Loading