Fox News Pushing “Criminalization of Politics” Talking Point
Fox News Pushing “Criminalization of Politics” Talking Point
Conservative defenders of Karl Rove and Scooter Libby have settled on their No. 1 talking point: the grand jury investigation into the CIA leak scandal represents the “criminalization of politics.”
In other words, they say, the outing of a covert CIA agent in a time of war to punish a whistleblower is just everyday “politics” — nothing out of the ordinary, certainly nothing criminal. In fact, according to conservatives (as articulated by the National Review), the “criminalizing of politics” is actually “the most dangerous fire of this ordeal.”
To spread this talking point across the nation, the right has received a major assist from Fox News. According to a database search, every single television reference to the CIA leak scandal as the “criminalization of politics” in the last 30 days has been on Fox. Even more stunning: on every occassion, the phrase was introduced into the segment by a Fox News anchor or correspondent, never by a guest.
Below, a compilation of clips featuring Fox anchors Chris Wallace, Sean Hannity, Stuart Varney, Bill O’Reilly, and correspondent William Kristol:
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
Nice work, Nico.
October 18th, 2005 at 10:33 amFortunately, the phrase is ambiguous. Esp. to typical Fox watchers who think the term means GOP is criminalizing politics.
October 18th, 2005 at 10:35 amThey’re just being fair and balanced: since no real reporters are using that phrase, Faux’s faux reporters use it to balance the coverage for our less-than-perceptive citizens on the right.
October 18th, 2005 at 10:41 amCriminuhlizashun? we don’t take kindly to your fancy words here mr. fancy tv man!! go back to talking about that lewinsky person!!
October 18th, 2005 at 10:42 amYou can spin any topic to your benefit, but by any standard outing covert agents for political gain should be anything but standard operating procedure.
And by the way, they didn’t mention this when they went fishing on Whitewater, couldn’t find anything and decided to try and impeach Bill Clinton for lying about his sexual transgrssions. Now talk about criminalizing politics !!
October 18th, 2005 at 10:44 amFox sures knows how to take orders.
October 18th, 2005 at 10:45 amMy how they mislead.
They may be over-playng their hand this time.
It becomes obvious and even the believers catch on.
OSAMA BIN LADEN IS PLANNING TO KILL YOU — RIGHT NOW! The CIA knew where Bin Laden was and was trying to KILL him. Bush knew too, and he pulled the troops OUT — then he LIED about it! Now the LEADER of the CIA operation to kill Bin Laden is trying to get that story out, and he is being CENSORED! Wasn’t bush’s daddy the Director of the CIA??? Which crony did this bush appoint to this un-important job?!?! WHY DOES BUSH-THE-DRAFT-DODGER HAVE OUR TROOPS TIED UP IN IRAQ AND NOT HUNTING DOWN BIN LADEN — THE TERRORIST WHO ACTUALLY ATTACKED US ON SEPTEMBER 11TH????????????????????????
“Osama was there, we were aware he was there, and we were doing everything in our power to capture, kill him, and destroy his forces,” says Bernsten, who was the leader of a secret CIA paramilitary unit pursuing bin Laden.
http://www.wtopnews.com/ index.php?nid=25&sid=593756
Remember what Bush-the-draft-dodger said!!!!
The president called his opponent’s allegation “the worst kind of Monday-morning quarterbacking.” Bush asserted that U.S. commanders on the ground did not know if bin Laden was at the mountain hideaway along the Afghan border.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8853000/site/newsweek/
(Why the HELL isn’t this news? What the HELL does Iraq have to do with this??? Why the HELL aren’t our troops hunting Osama? OSAMA BIN LADEN IS PLANNING TO KILL YOU — RIGHT NOW! WHY IS HE STILL ALIVE AND OUR TROOPS IN IRAQ?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?)
October 18th, 2005 at 10:46 amTo put it in perspective: these are the same people who think black propaganda is “educational.”
Rovewellian!
October 18th, 2005 at 10:47 amGotta go!
http://www.badmash.org/ videos/ videos_flv.php?v=george_bush_512K_Stream
October 18th, 2005 at 10:48 amFox?…oh that phoney news channel I never watch. “From the nazi brain of rupert murdock to the fox channel.
October 18th, 2005 at 10:51 amthis type of “politics” has been a staple of the rove strategy for going on 30 years and, in fact, rove pretty much wrote the book… that he has been able to construct “plausible deniability” sufficient to shield himself from charges of slander and criminality does not mean that the filthy, slimey political games he plays either have or should enter the mainstream… what these dodo’s are saying is that because they have been going on so long without consequences, they are now acceptable… they’re not… they never have been… and it’s about time that serious consequences for brutal character assassination and, yes, breaking the law, were levied…
October 18th, 2005 at 10:54 amwe’re actually witnessing the criminalization of criminality - finally!!!
October 18th, 2005 at 10:56 amThe good news is that Fox’s audience is so dumb they might interpret the phrase to mean that criminals IN the administration might be “criminalizing politics”, not prosecutors OUT of the administration.
October 18th, 2005 at 10:57 amtierney’s got a similar column in the nytimes. it’s the only article about plame/miller/et.al. today.
October 18th, 2005 at 10:59 amGive it a rest people. I am sure you weren’t outraged when Clinton was slashing his opponents.
There are no indictments yet and if Rove and Libby aren’t indicted, expect conservatives to come after you with jackhammers. Unlike idiot liberals, we will wait and see what happens. But, rest assured there will be reaction when Fitz releases his final report.
If you don’t get the indictments you want, will you people then start smearing Fitzgerald? I guess yes.
October 18th, 2005 at 10:59 amStill got one for ole’ Billy, do ya’ NeD? Get over him, he’s married to the lady you wish you could have.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:03 amGo back to work, NeD. Stop stealing.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:03 amAND another thing…. has anyone asked why Miller was put in jail? Novak came clean early on - it’s obvious he gave up his source. What did Judy do differently? Who else is she covering for? The case is so complex and the jump the gun left could end up with egg on their face…..again.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:05 amIf Rove and Libby aren’t indicted conservatives will come after us like jackhammers? As opposed to all the good-natured above the belt fighting they usually do? Puhhhhleeeze. In the courageous words of your fearless misleader……Bring it on!
This Bushies have added a new “ism” to the political lexicon. Indictmentism. They’re swimming in it.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:07 amI hate Rove et.al. and their dirty tricks as much as any liberal who posts here. But, what makes us think that if Rove is quilty and leaves the WH he will not still run the show from Texas or some other outpost. Bush will find a way to keep him engaged, he can’t survive without him, neither can the neocon machine.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:07 amDavid,
I’m sure they’ve already got plan B firmly in place. It’s the political fallout that will f%^& them up.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:09 amJay - we shall see… Maybe you’re right. I have nothing to lose at this point. The assumption on the left and in the MSM is that Rove and Libby have already been indicted. The right will have plenty of capital to trash you guys with if this goes nowhere. Notice - conservatives have not defended Rove and Libby because we simply don’t know. Neither do you.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:09 am#20 - the nomination of Miers and Bush’s lack of public interest in his job says that Rove is not running the show right now.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:10 amI don’t think it’s necessarily bad that “politics” (a word synonymous with “lying”) be criminalized, and I think it’s possible that enough fox viewers, while leaning red, do not actually like politicians any more than anyone else.
Counter this talking point with the notion that people who play politics (i.e. lying, being petty, outing CIA agents) with something as important as government should be considered criminals, no matter which side of the aisle they fall upon. I think that’s something everyone can get behind.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:12 amIf he’s indicted / convicted he’ll lose his security clearance so if Boosh passes him classified info he’ll actually be breaking the law himself. Plus, he promised he would fire anyone involved in this leak scandal so let’s all just trust him to stick to that promise.
HA! Man, I crack myself up sometimes.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:13 am“Notice - conservatives have not defended Rove and Libby ” Oh COME ON! Do you even believe the crap you type?
October 18th, 2005 at 11:14 amAND another thing…. has anyone asked why Miller was put in jail? Novak came clean early on - it’s obvious he gave up his source. What did Judy do differently? Who else is she covering for?
Those are actually good questions, Neddy. Who do you think she might be covering for? Clinton? Clinton’s schlong? We know you’d never ever consider the possibility that the Republicans might be the crooks.
The case is so complex and the jump the gun left could end up with egg on their face…..again.
Oh, and you’d be the expert on that, wouldn’t you.
Tell us again how the allegation that the Bushies stole the election is a dirty rotten lie. Then tell us again how happy you are because it’s true.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:15 amLook NeD, even if Rove and Libby weasel out of the legal ramifications, the horse is out of the barn. The administration can’t recover from all the scandal at this point. The public KNOWS they lied us to war, knows we sacrificed all those soldiers for a greedy, long-planned lie of a cause and they know that Bush is a fraud. Nothing can change that. Now if you’d like to move past Bush and his lame duck term and engage in some substantive debate about something….the floor is yours.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:17 amdon’t let trolls trick you ….
October 18th, 2005 at 11:19 amFriends don’t let friends respond to trolls.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:22 amwisedup,
Lighten up brother, it’s fun to tease and ridicule them.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:22 amEveryone should know by now, that Fox is an arm of this Administration. I don’t know if it is all Republicans, or just this Administration. Fox is not a news organization one should listen to if they believe in Democracy and truth. Anyone that has a mind and can remember the last 12 years, is finding this all difficult to understand after the last Democratic presidency was attacked. Delay, radical Christians, Limabaugh, Coultier they are the founders of hate politics.
But when you get down to it, Fox is right these politicians are criminals. Thanks for bringing that to our attention Fox.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:22 amIsn’t this the bunch that’s always telling people, whether they be jobless, criminals, poor etc., to stand up and be accountable, responsible and not place blame outside themselves.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:23 amAlso, this sounds like another favorite phrase that dismisses all wrongdoing, “It’s just business”.
the nomination of Miers and Bush’s lack of public interest in his job says that Rove is not running the show right now.
Actually, Neddy, Rove’s been 100% behind the Miers nomination and has been working hard to build up support for it among the influential wingnuts like Dobson and Huge Dimwit.
And if Bush being disinterested in doing his job is a sign of a lack of Rove influence, then Rove has never existed.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:23 amGet the criminals out of politics
That’s indicted former (he resigned so it would read former) White House procurement officer Michael Safavian, Insider Trader Bill Frist (under SEC investigation), George “W is for War criminal” Bush, Indicted former House Leader T…
October 18th, 2005 at 11:26 amI agree Jay….lololol
October 18th, 2005 at 11:26 am“And if Bush being disinterested in doing his job is a sign of a lack of Rove influence, then Rove has never existed.”
Bush has a job? You mean other than pretending to “cut brush”?
October 18th, 2005 at 11:27 amHey! Pretending to cut brush is hard work!
October 18th, 2005 at 11:28 am#32 - just like CBS, ABC and NBC are all an arm of the Democratic Party.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:32 amIt’s interesting that rove and the rest of the bushco operation seem give the impression of being “smarter” then the rest of the world. But, in fact, it’s just arrogance. They “think” they are smarter and don’t realize that over time, their compounding of lies to cover up previous lies will unravel. Their problem, especially bush and rove is that their tactic has been successful and led to increased arrogance. Bush must take the blame for it all. His life has never been about accountability or responsibility, but slipping and sliding around the truth. When he has someone who will continue to make him “look” presidential without changing the inner core of the man, he’s simply fooling himself. The rest of the world knows what is there and what is not there. He’ll be the last to know.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:32 amNED,
October 18th, 2005 at 11:34 amDude, you are the sound of one hand clapping.
Southwest Bob,
So I guess one might say FUBAR Bush has
October 18th, 2005 at 11:35 amsurrounded himself with enablers of various
stripes through his whole life.
That does seem about right.
Faux news is the most watched news(?) source with a little over 1 million viewers. Thank God the other 298 million of us have enough common sense not to watch.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:36 amThe criminals that have invaded our government will be put in their place. Even if there are no indictments, these losers are found out. They have lied to the American people long enough and we are tired of it.
Nevermind what the very few “last throes” trolls have to say, they are desperate and grasping. The mention of Clinton over and over again is damning and makes them look even more desperate.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:37 amNeD-
Where are your National Guard enlistment papers? Your President needs you. What happened to all your talk about ‘fighting terrorists’?
October 18th, 2005 at 11:38 am#32 - just like CBS, ABC and NBC are all an arm of the Democratic Party.
Comment by The Northeast Dilemma — October 18, 2005 @ 11:32 am
Fox News is too liberal for me. I want all hate, all the time. And public floggings and executions of liberals, too.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:42 amJay - we shall see… Maybe you’re right. I have nothing to lose at this point.
Comment by The Northeast Dilemma — October 18, 2005 @ 11:09 am
So true. Your mind went years ago.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:45 am#39,
Like when Disney (ABC) blocked the distribution of Fahrenheit 9/11.
Or how NBC and GE (big military) are owned by the same megacorporation Vivendi.
Those ties to democrats?
October 18th, 2005 at 11:45 amCBS, ABC and NBC are all an arm of the Democratic Party.
Okay, reality check.
CBS: On Sunday 10/2, hosted a panel to discuss the allegations against Tom DeLay. The panel consisted of three Republicans (four if you include host Bob Schieffer who is an old Bush buddy). No Democrats were invited.
ABC: Promoted young Republicans’ allegations that they were being discriminated against on campus without bothering to check their facts. Deceptively distorted poll numbers to make the Iraq war look more popular than it is.
NBC: Cable division M$NBC hosted a “town meeting” on Iraq; only supporters of the war were invited, critics were excluded.
Batting a thousand as usual, Neddy.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:47 amUmmm Gary, I think Northeast Dilemma is on your team. You guys might want to work that out.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:48 amI listened to Norah O’Donnell (sp?) MSNBC white house correspondent introduce this phrase “criminalizing politics” on IMUS this morning. That’s when I turned the channel. Oh that liberal media!!! Why do the Democrats keep faxing the GOP talking points to their hacks?
October 18th, 2005 at 11:49 amKick me! I’m Blue State Red!
http://confederateyankee.mu.nu/archives/105427.php
October 18th, 2005 at 11:49 amI always love it when the right wing fudge packers try to act tough. Whip me Garry ! Harder! Call me Hillary!
October 18th, 2005 at 11:49 amJay: Huh?
October 18th, 2005 at 11:49 amOh.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:50 amOh, wrong Gary. My bad.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:50 amBill,
I absolutely loathe Norah O’Donnell. If ever there was someone seen regularly in the mainstream media that beats the drums for the Bushies and the GOP, Norah is your girl. She even looks evil. A piece of ass, no doubt, but a real evil one.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:51 amFox is the GOP’s answer to the Soviet News Agency Tass–their number one task is the proliferation of GOP propaganda–and no one does it better!
October 18th, 2005 at 11:51 amSorry Kleppe, I was referring to Ruppert in post #46.
October 18th, 2005 at 11:52 amMaybe they should be blaming the “criminalization of politics” on those CRIMINAL POLITICIANS!!!
October 18th, 2005 at 11:53 amWhat about it, NeD? Do you have anything to say to Gary? Any nice retort? C’mon troll, make yourself useful while you sit there and waste all this time you have to burn. Ever wonder how someone gets all that time?
I figure NeD is probably just another gopher at work, so he sits around a lot. Or, maybe he forgoes work to be with us. Or maybe he doesn’t work and lives at home with mommy who lets him stay because she feels so guilty about being an absentee parent.
What gives, NeD? How do you get all of that time?
October 18th, 2005 at 11:55 amI think Kristol’s comment put it succinctly:
October 18th, 2005 at 12:04 pmThe administration’s right-wing defenders are preparing for the worst, arguing that, as asserted by another prominent neo-conservative, Weekly Standard editor William Kristol, the prosecutor is part of a “comprehensive strategy of criminalisation …implemented to inflict defeat on conservatives who seek to govern as conservatives”.
I believe he ment “conservative who seek to govern as criminals” because that is what they have shown themselves to be. Why am I not feeling elation from “I told you so”? Could it be the knowledge that the dead, the tortured and the neglected both here and in far places have already paid the ultimate price. There is a very good reason why religion and politics MUST remain separate. The marketing of a callous, ignorant, self-serving and arrogant man, George W. Bush, as a man of deep faith and compassion was the biggest bait and switch ever imagined. The frightening reality is that the same people (98% at least) who obediently voted for him are the ones who are now suffering fromhis policies. I do not understand.
I think they are just echoing Clausewitz: Crime is just the continuation of politics by other means.
October 18th, 2005 at 12:24 pm#18 why did Judy Miller go to jail? Miller’s reputation was threatened by Wilson, hence her participation (willing presumably) in the outing.
With such a shoddy record on WMD reporting as hers (including touting the nuclear weapons bs that Wilson dicredited), turning herself into a martyr for free speech was her only way of keeping the spotlight off her shilling for the Busheviks war rationale. The summer in jail was all about Judy, nothing else. Alterman goes further: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3449870/
October 18th, 2005 at 12:24 pmElection cycle contributions for 2000,2002,2004 - interestingly enough two of the supposedly ‘liberal’ media outlets are owned by companies that were in the top 25 Republican contributors
ABC - owned by disney, contributions to GW 1.25 MILLION
NBC - owned by GE, contributions to GW 2.58 MILLION
CBS - owned by Viacom, is the only contributor of the 3 that has given big money to democrats. But as we see below - that doesn’t tell the whole story.
Since reichwingers love to tout out CBS, lets hear Viacom/CBS’s Redstone had to say:
“I don’t want to denigrate Kerry,” Redstone said, “but from a Viacom standpoint, the election of a Republican administration is a better deal. Because the Republican administration has stood for many things we believe in, deregulation and so on. The Democrats are not bad people. … But from a Viacom standpoint, we believe the election of a Republican administration is better for our company.”
Then lets not forget Faux News which IS a Rupert Murdoch Riechwing republican talking point bullhorn. And finally CNN - another conservative company owned by an even more conservative Time Warner. Time Warner CEO Richard Parson, gave a $1 million party for an estimated 15,000 journalists in Manhattan to cover the republican convention. All major american media is owned by 7 major MOSTLY CONSERVATIVE parents.
Then lets not forget the journalists. Only 34% of the nationwide journalists are registered democrats! And lets remind ourselves of Lieberman and Miller before we assume that even that 34% is all liberal! So much for the ‘myth’ of the liberal journalist!
October 18th, 2005 at 12:25 pmThank Goodness for ABC,CBS,& NBC. They don’t always get it right, but they’re the best we’ve got, especially CBS. Faux is a joke.
October 18th, 2005 at 12:28 pmAnd last time I checked, wasn’t it whitewater that began the job of criminalizing politics? Or maybe it was when that criminal Nixon began using the whitehouse to actually perform criminal acts in the name of politics!
October 18th, 2005 at 12:28 pmNiko: What database search? Those are pretty striking stats, but without specifics no one on the right is going to buy it.
As far as the phrase goes, I’m not sure it’s a win for the GOP — after all, it’s keeping the word “criminal” front-and-center with respect to all these folks under investigation. I’m not sure that that’s actually better that “indicted” or whatnot (since none have actually be convicted of a crime yet)…
Given how good the GOP generally is at spin, I’m unimpressed.
October 18th, 2005 at 12:29 pm“The case is so complex and the jump the gun left could end up with egg on their face…..again.”
Could?
Changed you tone since last week, I see. Last week your tone was “The case is so complex and the jump the gun left WILL end up with egg on their face…..again. But now its only “could”? Better backpedal a little faster, you’re still losing ground.
“Maybe you’re right. I have nothing to lose at this point.”
What about conservatism being shown for the criminal-coddling crony protection movement that it really is? If you think the repubs and their “movement” aren’t going to be severely damaged by this, you are a political neophyte. Unless you’re finally considering jumping ship, and this is your belated way of telling us.
October 18th, 2005 at 12:30 pmHow much is Bush paying Fox?
October 18th, 2005 at 12:31 pmNo rules for us, you(citizens) on the other hand…
Y’know what happens when the Preacher, who plays only by his rules and answers to no one, raises his daughter in a strict authoritarian manner? ….Playboy …centerfold…. spread.
October 18th, 2005 at 12:44 pmSo get ready to see these young buds, IRI, NED, BSR etc. in all their glory when they grow up and blossom …YUK!
““Notice - conservatives have not defended Rove and Libby â€
Ah, NED, isn’t this the whole point of the original post?
Or are you thinking that Fox is liberal and they are the ones defending Rove and Libby?
Anyway, I’d like to thank Mr. Kristol for putting such an elegant loaded phrase into play. I don’t agree with him often, but this administration and the current leadership in the Republican Party have put the criminal into the “criminalization of politics”.
We should have dealt with these traitorous bastards in the 80’s (Iran-Contra) and the 90’s (BCCI). We didn’t and we are all paying the price of not dealing with the Republican Syndicate back then.
October 18th, 2005 at 12:54 pm#65 - Ryan Neat. This is the perfect example of what happens when dealing with the left. This is what Ryan said:
Then lets not forget the journalists. Only 34% of the nationwide journalists are registered democrats! And lets remind ourselves of Lieberman and Miller before we assume that even that 34% is all liberal! So much for the ‘myth’ of the liberal journalist!
This is where he got the information and what it said:
Journalists at national media outlets are more liberal and less conservative than nine years ago, and while in 1995 they were upset that the media were too critical of President Clinton, they are now disturbed that the media are going too easy on President Bush, a just-released survey conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press found. Five times more national outlet journalists identify themselves as liberal, 34 percent, than conservative, a mere 7 percent.
Not trying to be dishonest are you Ryan? Seems to be your modus operandi.
October 18th, 2005 at 12:56 pm“And last time I checked, wasn’t it whitewater that began the job of criminalizing politics?” - the PUTZ
October 18th, 2005 at 12:57 pmNo, Minnie Putz, Whitewater began the job of criminalizing bank looting.
“I think Jeffrey Toobin, the legal writer, may be onto the root of the problem in his book A Vast Conspiracy. His thesis is that we have witnessed the criminalization of politics.” - Molly Ivins, Austin American-Statesman, Oct. 4, 2000
October 18th, 2005 at 12:57 pmBFD Fox…he isn’t listening:
New on EWM: Fitzgerald Issues Frog-Marching Guidelines
October 18th, 2005 at 1:06 pmLook NeD changed into mighty aphrodite, again.
October 18th, 2005 at 1:08 pmFinally, a scientfic explanation of the phenomenon that is the conservative mind:
http://www.abc.net.au/ news/ newsitems/ 200510/ s1484365.htm
October 18th, 2005 at 1:10 pm“And last time I checked, wasn’t it whitewater that began the job of criminalizing politics?†- the PUTZ
No, Minnie Putz, Whitewater began the job of criminalizing bank looting.
Comment by mighty aphrodite — October 18, 2005 @ 12:57 pm
Um… no, Dork. Try 1929. If that’s before your time, try BCCI. You know who busted those terrorists and criminals using BCCI? John Fvcking Kerry.
http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/1992_rpt/bcci/
October 18th, 2005 at 1:19 pmWhitewater began the job of criminalizing bank looting.
Not according to Ken Starr. I suppose you’re going to tell us that he’s a liberal too?
October 18th, 2005 at 1:23 pmThis is not a new phenomenon. The criminalization of poltical activity has been underway since Watergate. It has destroyed, or threatened to destroy, both Republicans and Democrats, and both liberals and conservatives. It ought to be a matter of grave concern to every freedom loving person.
October 18th, 2005 at 1:32 pm“Whitewater began the job of criminalizing bank looting.”
Comparing a failed land deal on which the Clinton’s LOST MONEY (and which failed to achieve indictable offenses, to the deliberate outing of a CIA agent for political payback is a morally and intellectually indefensible statement. Conservative equivocation at its finest.
October 18th, 2005 at 1:37 pmBen,
No, but you are. You and your schmuck republican friends are always saying that the media is liberal, yet only 34% are identified as liberal. You even agreed with the number. The fact is that 66% of the journalists do not consider themselves liberal.
Now who’s misrepresenting the numbers? Yeah, that would be you BEN!
October 18th, 2005 at 1:42 pmBSR,
The only rational thing I’ve ever seen you write - I agree totally!
October 18th, 2005 at 1:42 pmWhitewater was a goose chase, Republicans were searching desperately for anything to nail on Clinton. It had nothing to do with policy, and everything to do with power.
Plamegate, however, is all about policy. Bush/Cheney and their crew used classified information as political weapons to intimidate anyone who opposed their policy. This is as illegal as using the FBI to spy on political opponents. That is something despots do. That is exactly the kind of criminal activity we need to purge from Washington. Make an example of these clowns. And show the red states what kind of scum they voted for.
October 18th, 2005 at 1:42 pm“No, Minnie Putz, Whitewater began the job of criminalizing bank looting.
Comment by mighty aphrodite”
Really? Then how do you explain Neil Bush getting away with it, while the clintons were attacked for years and were PROVEN INNOCENT. See you’re such a dumb bitch/ass. You keep bitching and saying that Delay is innocent until proven guilty - yet the clintons were never charged and therefore proven innocent on this. Why are you such a hateful hypocrite? Of course, we already know - because you’re a republican! You only want the constitution upheld and the principle of innocent until proven guilty applied to YOUR friends. Right? What a LOSER you are!
October 18th, 2005 at 1:46 pm“It has destroyed, or threatened to destroy, both Republicans and Democrats, and both liberals and conservatives. It ought to be a matter of grave concern to every freedom loving person.”
Too little, too late. Your side started this. Know when? When you guys refused to hold Reagan accountable for Iran-Contra - and then went after Clinton as payback for showing the country how willing conservatives were to circumvent the law and SELL WEAPONS TO TERRORISTS FOR POLITICAL GAIN. History has tarred your favorite president as the most inept, disconnected, misinformed, and corrupt president in modern times. Unless Bush breaks his record, that is.
Whining “It has destroyed, or threatened to destroy, both Republicans and Democrats, and both liberals and conservatives. It ought to be a matter of grave concern to every freedom loving person.” now just seems - pathetic.
October 18th, 2005 at 1:48 pmRyan, you are the classic case. You know you were trying to deceive by saying that 34% are liberal therefore the rest must be conservative. You’re just a dishonest person and probably will continue to be one.
Ryan, just curious, are you older than 20? I ask because your response was like a little kid. It’s okay if your a kid because one day you will grow up. But if you are older than that you may want to ask yourself about whether you want to go through life trying to say things to mean one thing and at the same time knowing that it’s a lie.
October 18th, 2005 at 2:00 pmBen, with all due respect, after the exchange we had the other day regarding media bias (if this is the same Ben), I’ve gotta give Ryan the benefit of the doubt.
October 18th, 2005 at 2:11 pmBen-
What’s your problem? A statement was made, “the press is liberal”…and, as always, Mr. Neat deconstructed the lie. Only 34% consider themselves liberal. Your silly attack questioning Mr. Neat’s age is not germaine to the point. Please don your dunce hat and join MA and NED in the corner marked “losers”.
October 18th, 2005 at 2:12 pm“The Normalization of Treason”
October 18th, 2005 at 2:16 pmRyan, you are the classic case. You know you were trying to deceive by saying that 34% are liberal therefore the rest must be conservative.
Doesn’t much matter, since reporters are nowhere near as influential as editors, publishers, and CEOs do, and very few of these are liberal.
Even if you do survey reporters, they don’t all wield anything close to equal influence. A liberal who writes fashion tips for the Podunk Weekly doesn’t counterbalance Judy Miller.
October 18th, 2005 at 2:19 pm“Ryan, you are the classic case. You know you were trying to deceive by saying that 34% are liberal therefore the rest must be conservative. You’re just a dishonest person and probably will continue to be one.”
Actually that’s your claim, not mine. You and your cohorts always claim the media is liberal and I proved them wrong. Now the remaining 66% are probably comprised of a variety of folks who consider themselves along the political perspective - but the clearly don’t consider themselves liberal - thereby debunking the myth.
“Ryan, just curious, are you older than 20? I ask because your response was like a little kid. It’s okay if your a kid because one day you will grow up. But if you are older than that you may want to ask yourself about whether you want to go through life trying to say things to mean one thing and at the same time knowing that it’s a lie. ”
Hehe, my response was like a kid? Priceless. Just because you can’t win an argument, please don’t resort to such childish tactics. The fact is you’re simply bad at arguments and deconstruction of arguments - that’s your ‘childish’ limitation - not mine.
So once again, only 34% of journalists consider themselves liberal - the rest consider themselves something else. Thereby the claim of the ‘liberal press’ is both a lie and a deception. And your argument is both irrelevant and irrational.
October 18th, 2005 at 2:22 pmThis is exactly my point. The same place he got his research from says that liberals were 5 times that of conservatives (34% to 7%). By the way they do not say 34% are registered Democrats. The study says that 34% identify themselves as liberal. Now Jay and IB if you are saying that Ryan was not trying to be deceptive and was not trying to create the illusion of no liberal bias then you may have some issues yourself. Just enter the 34% phrase in google and you will get the study and the survey that was sent out. Besides that, just remember the media is very aware that they are being accused of liberal bias. This would be like sending out a survey to whites in the South and asking them to answer questions about racism. They would of course know the purpose of such a survey and the results might not accurately reflect the truth.
IB, I was being serious about the age issue for the simple fact that Ryan’s response was like that of a very young and immature person. If he is indeed young then his behavior is understandable. All of the name calling rather than debating the facts is immature and shows a lack of credible argument.
October 18th, 2005 at 2:29 pmActually, what journalists consider themselves to be is pretty much irrelevant too. I’m sure most of them consider themselves to be nice people too; doesn’t mean they really are.
A better way to measure political orientation is to poll views on the issues. How many journalists favor Canadian-style single-payer health care? How many want corporations and the wealthy to pay a higher share of taxes? How many oppose American imperialism? Not many.
October 18th, 2005 at 2:29 pmSome other interesting statistics from the study.
“At the same time, the single news outlet that strikes most journalists as taking a particular ideological stance either liberal or conservative is Fox News Channel.”
Now isn’t that interesting?
October 18th, 2005 at 2:35 pm“This is exactly my point. The same place he got his research from says that liberals were 5 times that of conservatives (34% to 7%). By the way they do not say 34% are registered Democrats. The study says that 34% identify themselves as liberal.”
Last time I checked, that didn’t prove your point, but it did prove mine. There are still only 34% (a minority) of journalists who are liberals.
“Now Jay and IB if you are saying that Ryan was not trying to be deceptive and was not trying to create the illusion of no liberal bias then you may have some issues yourself. ”
Actually your claim that the media is ‘liberal’ is what’s deceptive and biased. If this were true, then the MAJORITY of the journalists should be liberal - clearly false.
“Just enter the 34% phrase in google and you will get the study and the survey that was sent out. Besides that, just remember the media is very aware that they are being accused of liberal bias. This would be like sending out a survey to whites in the South and asking them to answer questions about racism. They would of course know the purpose of such a survey and the results might not accurately reflect the truth.”
Why bother, here’s the link to the actual study.
Really, so does that mean only 7% of the racist republicans were willing to say they’re racists, and that block of ‘moderates’ in the middle are actually republicans? The study says you’re wrong. You can deny the validity of the study as you clearly do - but frankly that’s being ‘childish’…
“IB, I was being serious about the age issue for the simple fact that Ryan’s response was like that of a very young and immature person. If he is indeed young then his behavior is understandable. All of the name calling rather than debating the facts is immature and shows a lack of credible argument. ”
He of limited vision, sees limited outcomes…
October 18th, 2005 at 2:39 pmWhy do the Rethugs use propaganda so much? Because they can. People have proven to be gullible and believe anything they hear and see coming from the media.
That’s how the Rethugs were able to turn Kerry into a traitor instead of the war hero he was, and Bush became a protector and hero instead of the AWOL drug abuser bum that he still is.
When people stop mindlessly accepting the propaganda of the MSM and start thinking for themselves and persue internet based media, then the Rethugs will no longer be effective at pushing propaganda on the public.
October 18th, 2005 at 2:42 pm[…] Think Progress has an interesting little tidbit about new talking points coming out of the ol’ conservative wing of the media. […]
October 18th, 2005 at 2:47 pm” All of the name calling rather than debating the facts is immature and shows a lack of credible argument.”
I can call you an idiot AND debate the facts. See unlike you, I don’t have dimished capacity in either realm.
I proved that the statistics show that there are more ‘non-liberals’ than ‘liberals’. The majority of those non-liberals call themselves moderates - so be it. They DON’T consider themselves liberals - which is what you and your party claimed. If they aren’t liberals, they aren’t liberals.
So when you’ve clearly lost that argument, you go to dismiss the validity of the study - but why do that? If the study had said what you wanted to say, you wouldn’t have dismissed it would you? Clearly not.
This study is imperfect, as most are. My biggest issues with it were that it wasn’t anonymous, and 21% of the people who were surveyed refused to participate. Clearly if the majority of those who refused were republicans - that would have heavily skewed the results to produce the outcome. I personally believe that an anonymous survey would have been preferable.
But that being said, it’s the most recent and best methodology of any study in recent times - and clearly the study undermines the entire lie of the liberal media. Especially since that when you consider that 9 years ago when all of the Limbaugh nonsense of the ‘liberal media’ was going on, there were even more republicans in the survey than democrats! It just goes to show you the lengths to which republicans will go to spin, smear and lie to get what they want.
October 18th, 2005 at 2:47 pm#51 Don’t you think Norah O’Donnell is on camera simply because she is so attractive? She has delivered some of the worst commentary on MSNBC, so biased is she toward Busn&Co.
October 18th, 2005 at 2:51 pmThe only one worth seeing on MSNBC is Olbermann.
A rose by any other name smells as sweet, Ryan.
October 18th, 2005 at 2:53 pmThe response should be that the R’s are “politicizing crime”
October 18th, 2005 at 3:10 pmFrustrated by the major media? You might want to check out a really cool independent online news resource that’s respects your intelligence rather than insults it:
http://newstandardnews.net
The NewStandard. Which, by the way, is in the midst of a do-or-die funding drive. If you like indpendent media and want to support solid independent media initiatives, take a few minutes to support TNS by signing up as a premium member. Details are on the website…
October 18th, 2005 at 3:16 pm“I remember Christmas of 1968 sitting on a gunboat in Cambodia. I remember what it was like to be shot at by the Vietnamese and Khmer Rouge and Cambodians, and have the president of the United States telling the American people that I was not there; the troops were not in Cambodia. I have that memory which is seared–seared–in me.”
In the 1971 interview, Kerry told Washington’s WRC-TV he “gave back … six, seven, eight, nine” medals. He answered a questions specifically about “medals.” He said nothing about giving back ribbons only. He made no distinction then, as he does now.
“Kerry would revisit ambush locations for reenacting combat scenes where he would portray the hero, catching it all on film. Kerry would take movies of himself walking around in combat gear, sometimes dressed as an infantryman walking resolutely through the terrain. He even filmed mock interviews of himself narrating his exploits. A joke circulated among Swiftees was that Kerry left Vietnam early not because he received three Purple Hearts, but because he had recorded enough film of himself to take home for his planned political campaigns.”
Hey Kevin, that’s not what most people invision as a war hero.
October 18th, 2005 at 3:19 pm“Whitewater began the job of criminalizing bank looting.”
Huh? Not sure what you meant by that one. It sure didn’t seem to get much attention in the eighties when all the “bank looting” seemed to be going on.
Here’s a tip. Google search “S&L closings.” Better yet, “Silverado Savings.”
October 18th, 2005 at 3:28 pmBen,
I was trying to say, in a nice way, that I don’t think your the sharpest knife in the drawer. There is NO LIBERAL media. That very notion is a fabrication of the right. How many ways can it be explained that 5 or 6 massive conglomerates own ALL OF THE MAINSTREAM MEDIa, all of it! They’re all striving for the same profits, for consolidation, to keep the GOP in power because they have the same goals. Get it? This includes the NYTimes, the WashPost, and all of the major TV networks. People believe that the media is liberally biased because they’ve been told its so by people that are a part of the rightwing propaganda machine. Another Big Lie.
The facts are out there Ben. Just do your homework and stop relying on the words of the propaganda machine. Nitwit.
October 18th, 2005 at 3:29 pmBen,
Not more swiftboat nonsense. Everything they wrote about was discredited - you’re just looking even more foolish than you already did. It’s clear that the swifties were just mad because Kerry tried to bring the troops home - something that the REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT decided to do.
October 18th, 2005 at 3:30 pmJay,
When someone is that dull, they cease being a knife entirely!
October 18th, 2005 at 3:31 pmBut they clearly remain a tool :)
October 18th, 2005 at 3:31 pmNightline traveled to Vietnam and found a number of witnesses who have never been heard from before, and who have no particular ax to grind for or against Kerry. Only one of them, in fact, even knew who Kerry is. The witnesses, all Vietnamese, are still living in the same villages where the fighting took place more than 35 years ago. A Nightline producer visited them and recorded their accounts of that day. Their accounts back up Kerry’s account of what happened, the Navy’s official report, the citation for Kerry’s Silver Star, and the statements of the men who served with Kerry and were there that day.
Koppel asked O’Neill why these Vietnamese peasant villagers would have any reason to lie. O’Neill blustered and tried to change the subject to some other incident, but Koppel didn’t let the conversation wander and focused on this one incident, since that’s what O’Neill was on the show to talk about. O’Neill then got angry and started shouting over Koppel, holding up books, and evading the question, but Koppel wasn’t having any of it.
Ben is clearly easily fooled by those who would manipulate the mentally challenged. We’re sorry ben about your learning disability - but you know there are treatments for most learning challenges that might help you to overcome yours!
October 18th, 2005 at 3:34 pmAnd here’s some more.
Even a cursory examination of the available evidence reveals fatal flaws in the group’s charges, which fly in the face of all documentary evidence, and the testimony of almost every person present when Kerry earned his medals. Larry Thurlow, the Swift Boat Vet who claims that Kerry was not underenemy fire when he earned his Bronze Star, himself earned a Bronze Starfor actions under enemy fire in the same incident. Louis Letson, who claims to have treated the wound that earned Kerry his first Purple Heart, is not the medic listed in medical records as having treated Kerry. John O’Neill, the leader of the group, has said that Kerry would have been “court-martialed” had he crossed the border into Cambodia– but O’Neill is on tape telling President Richard Nixon that he himself had been in Cambodia. Several members of the group are on the record praising Kerry’s leadership. And so on.
October 18th, 2005 at 3:35 pmBen,
No, but you are. You and your schmuck republican friends are always saying that the media is liberal, yet only 34% are identified as liberal. You even agreed with the number. The fact is that 66% of the journalists do not consider themselves liberal.
Now who’s misrepresenting the numbers? Yeah, that would be you BEN!
Comment by Ryan Neat — October 18, 2005 @ 1:42 pm
You can’t be serious can you? You only believe 34% of journalists are liberal? Watch any of the big three networks or CNN. Read any major newswpaper in this country. Wake up. The majority of them do not try to hide their liberal bias. This is like believing the exit poll numbers from last year’s election. We both know that they are wrong, you can’t handle the truth.
October 18th, 2005 at 3:38 pmAnd finally, lets use the factcheck.org folks who your own Dick Cheney listed as being ‘non-partisan’.
Not only do they give a thorough money trail, but an utter smackdown of this nonsense.
For someone who accuses others of being ‘youthful’, you have a naive quality to you that’s astoundind. Clearly you either have no ability to distinguish fact from reality, or your exposure to facts is so low that you’re delusional beyond explanation. In either case - go educate yourself you helpless dope!
http://www.factcheck.org/article231.html
October 18th, 2005 at 3:38 pmThe Swifties were the PR/political version of Blackwater. Hires guns whose sole purpose was to assassinate, only it was Kerry instead or Iraqis. The very fact that the SwiftBoat liars got as much attention and traction as they did, despite the fact that they were thouroughly discredited and their funding exposed, is further evidence of just how far the mainstream media was willing to go to keep Kerry from being elected.
October 18th, 2005 at 3:39 pmRandy, another moron heard from.
You guys are so F&*^ng CLUELESS!!!!
October 18th, 2005 at 3:40 pmRyan, I saw the Nightline segment. You clearly want to see what you want to see. Was Kerry in Cambodia on Christmas? No. Even he acknowledges that. Did he try to make people think he had thrown his medals over the fence? Yes. His words, he said them. Did he take a camera and get others to do film? Yes and they thought he was a joke. Why did he have such little support? Because he was a worm and that’s what the veterans thought of him. By the way he still has not released his full record. When he released some of it recently his grades were lower than Bush’s. He didn’t want that coming out did he?
Jay, you turned out to be like the others. You guys with your name calling. No liberal media? That’s why FOX has gone to the top while the others drift away. Follow the money Jay. Follow the money.
October 18th, 2005 at 3:43 pm“You can’t be serious can you? You only believe 34% of journalists are liberal? Watch any of the big three networks or CNN.”
Oh randy the dandy liar is back.
Not only is your statement a lie, but so are your conclusions. The Pew research clearly shows you are wrong. And I do watch the big three, and I’m disgusted at how rarely they cover a story in depth. You’re so far to the right you can’t distinguish between bad journalism and slanted journalism! What an idiot you are.
And this doesn’t change the fact that 34% of journalists are liberal - the rest are something else. Anything you might ‘believe’ is just self deluded nonsese.
” Read any major newswpaper in this country. Wake up.”
Funny, I should say the same to you. Most newspapers rarely cover a story in depth - and lets not forget the NYTimes coverage of all of the LIES that led to iraq? Now THAT was partisan reporting by Miller from a supposedly ‘liberal’ outlet. You’re just delusional!
“The majority of them do not try to hide their liberal bias. ”
Really? Most news outlets disagree with any bias - the study from Pew backs this up. In fact most journalists disagree with the use of bias, yet the all list FOX as the single network that IS biased.
“This is like believing the exit poll numbers from last year’s election. We both know that they are wrong, you can’t handle the truth.
Comment by Randy”
Wow, now that’s projection! You do realize that the PENTAGON used exit polls last year to call the Ukrainian elections a fraud - right? I can dig up some republicans making statements about the reliability of exit polls if you like - you know they used to say they were very reliable before the recent election(s) - where suddenly they changed course. Geez, wonder what would make them do that?
October 18th, 2005 at 3:47 pmBen, what on God’s green earth are you talking about? Fox news is a complete laughingstock, surely you’re aware of this? The top of what? The cable network news shows only draw a fraction of what the Big Three draw. Hannity and O’Reilly’s shows have lost half their viewership in the last several months. You are lost.
As for following the money, what do you think my last post referred to? It’s all about the money, that’s why Bid media isn’t anything close to liberal. The conservatives are ALL ABOUT THE MONEY. Do you get it YET?
October 18th, 2005 at 3:49 pmRyan,
Excuse me, I am the one who is clueless? Your liberal movement is on the decline, has been on the decline and will continue to decline in the future. Why on earth do you think that Fox News is the number one network for news programs? Its not because they are putting out the same old liberal slanted crap that everyone else is. I’m suprised that not more networks have followed suit since it would increase their ratings overnight.
This country will not support a candidate that is not tough on terrorism, wants tax increases and does support social security reform. We’ll see after next year’s midterm elections who is still clueless.
October 18th, 2005 at 3:50 pmThis is your brain:
:)
This is your brain on Fox News:
“Its not because they are putting out the same old liberal slanted crap that everyone else is. I’m suprised that not more networks have followed suit since it would increase their ratings overnight.”
Randy, you’re just silly. Keep listening to the brainwashers though……things should be getting better for the rightwing movement any day now.
October 18th, 2005 at 3:54 pmIf “criminalization of politics” is the best that Karl can spin, then he is clearly buckling under the pressure. The message is ambiguous, even for the 37%(including Harriet) who believe that our Mission Accomplished/War President is so cooool. Truth and Illusion are tectonic plates now colliding under the White House Iraq Group. Something has gotta give. We the people, are ready to rumble. Bring it on,Paddy.
October 18th, 2005 at 3:58 pm“Ryan, I saw the Nightline segment. You clearly want to see what you want to see.”
Funny, that’s what I thought of when I read your bullcrap. Everything you write is irrelevant to the fact that he was an ESTABLISHED WAR HERO. Your attempts at slandering him are just embarrassing for you and your pitiful party!
“Did he try to make people think he had thrown his medals over the fence? Yes. His words, he said them. ”
Absolutely - he was protesting - it’s called free speech. The war was wrong, and he was voicing his discontent. You know it IS american you fascist pig!
“Did he take a camera and get others to do film? Yes and they thought he was a joke. ”
Irrelevant and nonsense - this reads like a highschool report - who wrote this dribble you copied and pasted anyway?
“Why did he have such little support? ”
Huh? What the heck are you talking about? This is both a strawman, and irrelevant to the charges being false. If you mean support from other ‘veterans’, the main reason is that many of the folks LIED to other veterans and convinced them of untrue statements - but then again, that’s what republicans love to do.
“Because he was a worm and that’s what the veterans thought of him. ”
Many veterans did and still do support him. So your statement of ‘that’s what the veterans thought’, is in fact MORE outrageous than the claims you made about me and the ‘liberal press’. Why? Because this implies ALL, and that’s a BULLSHIT argument. ALL of the folks who SERVED with Kerry on his boat long term backed him up - that’s what the VETERANS THAT MATTERED thought about him. The other people are just partisan hacks that put their own personal hatred ahead of their patriotism and who LIED to slander! Shame on them, and shame on you for spreading their slander!
“By the way he still has not released his full record.”
Bahaha, you HAVE to be the stupidest moron ever. Don’t you read anything!
” When he released some of it recently his grades were lower than Bush’s. He didn’t want that coming out did he?”
As I understand it Bush’s ‘worst year’ wasn’t included in the comparison - not surprising that would be ’spun’ as well. Comparing 4 years with 3 years isn’t really a comparison unless you’re a republican. I thought the point was Kerry not being a war hero - how is this related again? Oh yeah, it was part of the cheap smear. Anyone who listens to bush and kerry speak can quickly ascertain that Bush’s grades were part of the ‘gentlemen’s ‘C’ process that is applied to legacies - it’s clearly not possible he actually earned any passing grades!
October 18th, 2005 at 4:04 pm“This country will not support a candidate that is not tough on terrorism, wants tax increases and does support social security reform. We’ll see after next year’s midterm elections who is still clueless.”
Tough on terrorism - bahahaha. Terrorism has INCREASED because of this nitwit. Being TOUGH on terrorism means being EFFECTIVE, not just making threats and making it worse. That’s not TOUGH on terrorism, that’s TOUGH on americans you blind bat!
October 18th, 2005 at 4:05 pm“This country will not support a candidate that …does support social security reform.” Elpisis mine
What are you smoking? So, the country won’t support a candidate that doesn’t support an agenda that, apparently, the country doesn’t support?
The logical equivalent of a pretzel.
October 18th, 2005 at 4:10 pmTough on terrorism - bahahaha. Terrorism has INCREASED because of this nitwit. Being TOUGH on terrorism means being EFFECTIVE, not just making threats and making it worse. That’s not TOUGH on terrorism, that’s TOUGH on americans you blind bat!
Comment by Ryan “bareback” Neat
I guess your idea of being tough on terrorists transcends blowing them up by rising to the awful level of not using a condom?
October 18th, 2005 at 4:16 pmThat all you got, IRI? Back to talk about Ryan’s ass? You need help. You have some heavy issues and should discuss them before you hurt someone. You are obviously sexually repressed and have decided to come here under anonymity and get some of these “feelings” out on Ryan.
You are making yourself appear extremely dangerous. Please, enough with the sexed up chatter.
October 18th, 2005 at 4:21 pmThe “who had better grades debate” is among the most ridiculous that the wingnuts have concocted. Did you people watch the debates? I don’t care if Kerry flunked out of Yale, he’s obviously been excercising his intellect since. Bush, well…..not so much.
There have been books devoted to Dubya’s malapropisms, misstatements and general mangling of the English language. The man couldn’t speak extemporaneously if he had a speaker in his…….oh nevermind.
October 18th, 2005 at 4:21 pmRandy, you’re a funny guy. Tell me where you buy your red noses from.
http://slate.msn.com/id/2119864/#ContinueArticle
Fox News is to the Bush admin what Pravda was to communism.
October 18th, 2005 at 4:23 pmAnd Randy, I believe the floor is yours. We are waiting for you to back up your statements or to refute, WITH PROOF, Ryan’s.
Did you finish reading Kerry’s record? I know you were having trouble finding it.
October 18th, 2005 at 4:24 pmP&P,
Republicans always resort to slander, because facts NEVER support their side. We shouldn’t expect much from them, they don’t have anything real to offer to the conversation.
And I agree with you on MissWrong - clearly she has ’sexual issues’ that remain unresolved. But then again, that’s not the point of this conversation - but it is typical of missThang’s desperate attempt to change the subject EVERY TIME REPUBLICANS LOSE EVERY ARGUMENT.
October 18th, 2005 at 4:49 pm“Your side started this. Know when? When you guys refused to hold Reagan accountable for Iran-Contra - and then went after Clinton as payback for showing the country how willing conservatives were to circumvent the law and SELL WEAPONS TO TERRORISTS FOR POLITICAL GAIN.”
You seem to forget that comprehensive federal campaign finance legislation, which is just one form of criminalizing politics, was first enacted in 1974, in response to Watergate; and that the national security/foreign policy activities that were investigated during Iran-Contra were made illegal by congressional legislation making certain presidential prerogatives illegal.
It is true that the investigation of the Clintons was partially motivated by a payback mentality. However, many of the laws the Clintons were alleged to have violated were more traditional forms of criminal activity, such as fraud and perjury. Still, there is no question that some of the Clintons’ more dubious schemes were motivated by a desire to circumvent laws that made their political activities illegal.
The investigation of such matters has cost U.S. taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars over the years, without an appreciable benefit. The answer to this is not more criminalizing legislation. It is simple transparency. If political activity is regulated so that everyone can see who is doing what, and who is paying for it, the voters can judge for themselves whether corruption is involved. The court of public opinion is where such “crimes” ought to be tried.
October 18th, 2005 at 4:57 pmThere will always be a Delay to launder his funds into nice clean piles.
October 18th, 2005 at 4:59 pm“It is true that the investigation of the Clintons was partially motivated by a payback mentality. ”
Partially? Try ENTIRELY.
“However, many of the laws the Clintons were alleged to have violated were more traditional forms of criminal activity, such as fraud and perjury.”
And yet, this premise was nonsense. The clintons LOST money on whitewater - hardly something to expect from ‘fraud’. Not to mention that testimony and evidence clearly show they weren’t involved - which is why they were CLEARED.
“Still, there is no question that some of the Clintons’ more dubious schemes were motivated by a desire to circumvent laws that made their political activities illegal.”
Baseless allegations, and smears. Care to be more specific, or do you prefer to generally smear like the typical propagandist republican? I’m guessing the second, as the first doesn’t exist!
“The investigation of such matters has cost U.S. taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars over the years, without an appreciable benefit. The answer to this is not more criminalizing legislation. It is simple transparency. ”
Then republicans are once again on the wrong side. The recent executive order from bush will basically block the release of presidential papers. Not to mention the fact that more of this administration’s work has been designated ’secret’ than ever before, and purely for political reasons.
As for the ‘value’ of these investigations - well if they go after REAL crime, they’re beneficial - the alternative is a banana republic. As for transparency, that is a great idea - care to get the republican party to agree with this?
“If political activity is regulated so that everyone can see who is doing what, and who is paying for it, the voters can judge for themselves whether corruption is involved. The court of public opinion is where such “crimes†ought to be tried.”
Actually the most cogent and reasonable argument you’ve ever made - I applaud you. But please explain how this correllates with the current administration that is the least transparent, most cronyistic and corrupt in history? It doesn’t - your party is the OPPOSITE of your values on this topic!
October 18th, 2005 at 5:09 pmNo Ryan you are the one who is delusional. I gave you 3 examples concerning John Kerry where he said one thing and later acknowledged that it was something other than truth. He admitted that his staements about being in Cambodia on Christmas of 1968 were not true. He admitted that even though he claimed to have thrown his medals over the fence that they were in fact someone else’s medals. He made film with other military personnel in his group staging events as if they were happening real time but were in fact later renacted. This he has also acknowledged. The guy is a dishonest person. He was not respected by almost 300 Swiftees compared to less than a dozen who will speak favorably of him. In Vietnam that says a lot.
You just keep on ranting claiming everyone else has it wrong. The left says its wrong so you believe it. However the right brings evidence, asks Kerry to release all of his records and he does not. Slander is only slander if it is not true. If Kerry’s complete record would make these guys out to be liars he would release them. Just like anyone else. His problem is that those records will back up the claims against him.
You and your buddy Jay have lost every issue today. You twist, you turn with half truths and deceptive garbage.
If that is not the case then just spell out how Kerry is not a liar on the three issues I pointed out. That was just three. There are many more.
October 18th, 2005 at 5:11 pmYeah, and choke on the pretzel, biatch!
October 18th, 2005 at 5:15 pmHey Ben, how about that honest Bushie? Ain’t he great? And Delay, Hastert, Ney, Frist, my goodness the honesty is making my nose bleed. Repubs prop up criminals for our government. There is no excuse and they will pay the price.
October 18th, 2005 at 5:30 pmRyan:
Please don’t pretend that Bill Clinton didn’t lie to the American people about “that woman, Miss Lewinsky;” or that he didn’t lie under oath in the Paula Jones case (”it depends on the meaning of ‘is’”); or that he was not fined ($90,000.00, I believe) and disbarred for his lies under oath. And please don’t pretend that Gennifer Flowers, Kathleen Willey, Monica Lewinsky, Linda Tripp, Paula Jones and Juanita Broaddrick were all liars.
Clinton’s apples have never fallen very far from the tree. The man may not have been indicted, but there was at least some basis in fact for his impeachment. He certainly is no angel. He just has an amazing ability to escape the consequences of his bad behavior.
As for the GOP position on the “transparency” of political activity, most Republicans privately seethed when John McCain and Russ Feingold introduced their campaign finance law. Congresssmen and senators on both sides chickened out when they voted to enact McCain-Feingold. The President punted when he signed it. Basically everyone thought the Supreme Court would invalidate the law under the First Amendment - then the Court upheld the law instead. I’d be happiest if John McCain would admit his mistake and lead the repeal of his own legislation.
I think most Democratic fundraisers would agree. The Democrats seem to have been hurt, far more than the Republicans, by the McCain-Feingold fundraising restrictions.
October 18th, 2005 at 5:34 pmWhat’s with your fasination with the Clintons? Do you think about them all night? Do you dream about them? You just can’t get them out of your head. You’ve got yourself quite a problem, huh?
October 18th, 2005 at 5:38 pmPerhaps “Criminalization of Politics” is coming into the conversation so often because it perfectly describes what is going on here. Ever thought of that lemmings?
October 18th, 2005 at 5:38 pmBen-
Why do Republican apologists hate Democratic war hero’s so much? Not only was Kerry a proven leader in combat, but he’s got the war wounds to prove it. Instead, you support an AWOL pResident, a 5 time deferring VP who had other priorities, a House majority leader that claims blacks took his slot in Nam, and on and on and on. Republicans love war as long as other people are fighting them.
Whether Kerry was on the Cambodian border or over it is really a non-starter. He was in combat. How deep his war wounds are totally irrelevent. That same shrapnel that can create a minor flesh wound can kill you….it’s only the luck of inches that makes a difference in a few stiches or coming home in a body bag.
Too bad your Republican leadership didn’t answer their country’s