Michigan AG: Libby commutation ‘was plain wrong.’
By on Jul 12th, 2007 at 3:04 pm
Michigan AG: Libby commutation ‘was plain wrong.’
Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox, a Republican, “harshly criticized” President Bush yesterday for commuting the sentence of his former aide, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, who was found guilty of perjury and obstruction of justice. “It was plain wrong all the way around,” Cox said. “We can’t let people run from the obligation of telling the truth.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Yes, come on Bush… full pardon,
Do the right thing!
July 12th, 2007 at 3:06 pmnull
July 12th, 2007 at 3:06 pmRepublicans? Truth? Uhm, not gonna happen.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, Clinton lied about a blow job (jealous?) but Libby lied to cover up TREASON.
To h=ll with every GOP jerkoff in America. You’re not worth the ink on your birth certificates. And to all the paid trolls here, go back to your little GOP offices. You’re amazingly stupid and too much fun to taunt. What a waste of humanity.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:09 pmCome on libs, you need to fume over this again. Showcase your hypocrisy for us.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:09 pmnull
Comment by THE KING!!!!!!
EXACTLY!
July 12th, 2007 at 3:09 pm#3: Huh? Paid? Someone gets paid for this fun?! Got a number?
July 12th, 2007 at 3:10 pmI guess MsJoanne isnt going to get invited to Rove’s Christmas party.
Concentrate Joanne, concentrate.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:10 pmLOL and today Bush said (para):
“Yeah it would have been nice if the guilty person who leaked Plame’s identity would have stepped forward. But oh well.”
July 12th, 2007 at 3:11 pmFULL PARDON President Bush!
Do the right thing!
July 12th, 2007 at 3:13 pmCisneros who?
July 12th, 2007 at 3:13 pm#7: Maybe it’s for the best. Turdblossom’s Christmas parties aren’t really that much fun for women. I’ve been told by a reliable source that at 8 pm all the men gather in the rumpus room with Jeff Gannon and his pals, and what follows is an all-male event.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:13 pmIf the AG thinks its wrong, perhaps the good AG of Michigan might be encouraged to prosecute a sitting President outside impeachment. States have this power, retained with Amendment X.
Who is going to block the Michigan AG from prosecuting a sitting President outside Congress outside impeachment? This is not something that DOJ OLC can credibly block. It’s been untested.
What You Can Do
Please call the Michigan AG to encourage him to prosecute this sitting President and Vice President outside impeachment. Congress refuses to enforce the law through impeachment. Prosecutions remain on the table. Any prosecutor can lead this. [How to do this: Yes, it's possible for the Michigan AG to prosecute a sitting President.]
July 12th, 2007 at 3:14 pmrun from the obligation of telling the truth.â€
July 12th, 2007 at 3:14 pmThe neocon dogma.
Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox, a Republican…..
That’s what I like to see. :)
July 12th, 2007 at 3:14 pmDo they invite Congressman Stuggs(D) ghost to those parties?
July 12th, 2007 at 3:14 pmThe commutation is, technically, plain RIGHT because it’s CONSTITUTIONAL.
The AG should issue his opinions in the context of the law, not his personal objections. The President’s decision was LEGAL.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:14 pmThe struggle of prosecutors started the first day of commutation.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:15 pmBush has never fully thought out anything he’s done. His blow jobs go way beyond Clinton’s.
Bush knows someone in his administration leaked Plame’s identity.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:16 pmAnd he knows Libby lied about what he knew.
And Bush commuted Libby’s sentence.
Enough said.
Obstruction of justice.
Bush knew who was the leaker 45min. after it happened.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:17 pmBlackwater,
Not worth the energy. These black hearted senile self serving thugs are destined for the scrap heap of history. Just like Nixon they will be judged paranoid lunatics drunk with power and too sefl-absorbed to lead this nation. Hopefully they, like Nixon with his shame will have the good judgement to never show their faces again once they leave office.
Get your yuks while you can, they are more irrelevant every day. People have had enough of the “Christ666ian conserv666atives”.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:17 pmMichigan AG: Libby commutation ‘was plain wrong.’
“It was plain wrong all the way around,†Cox said. “We can’t let people run from the obligation of telling the truth.â€
This is a man who has respect for the law, and doesn’t use it as a weapon against the people of the United States. He knows wrong when he sees it.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:18 pmDamn. I think the pharmacist sold me fake stuff today. Maybe he’s suspecting something, because I visit every other day and buy the same two bottles of cough syrup. Anyway. I downed two bottles of codeine cough syrup half an hour ago and I’m not getting the same warm, euphoric feeling anymore. This sucks.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:18 pmCome on libs, you need to fume over this again. Showcase your hypocrisy for us.
Comment by Blackwater
Uh, Blackwater, Li’l Buddy, you can read?? ‘Cause this time, it’s yet ANOTHER Repub objecting to Bush’s behavior. Let me state the obvious AGAIN for you – it’s a R-E-P-U-B, just like Gen Odom, Clinton Powell, Richard Lugar, John Dean… OBJECTING to Bush’s behavior.
I know it’s a hard concept to get a grasp on, seeing as you’re clinging to your **** until your knuckles turn white, but work on it.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:19 pmBush knew who was the leaker 45min. after it happened.
Comment by leftcoast
Bush knew who the leaker was 45 min before it happened.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:20 pm“If the AG thinks its wrong, perhaps the good AG of Michigan might be encouraged to prosecute a sitting President outside impeachment. States have this power, retained with Amendment X.
Comment by anon — July 12, 2007 @ 3:14 pm”
I think you are a little confussed……..
Amendment X does NOT give the states the right to do that!
Section 10 – Powers prohibited of States
No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.
No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it’s inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.
No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.
No where in there does it indicate this as a possiblity……
The Constitution does state this:
(The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority; to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls; to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party; to Controversies between two or more States; between a State and Citizens of another State; between Citizens of different States; between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.) (This section in parentheses is modified by the 11th Amendment.)
In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:21 pmThe commutation is, technically, plain RIGHT because it’s CONSTITUTIONAL.
The AG should issue his opinions in the context of the law, not his personal objections. The President’s decision was LEGAL.
Comment by CT_V1 — July 12, 2007 @ 3:14 pm
I see. So “Right” and “Wrong” are reduced to issues of technicality, and a state official is not entitled to voice his opinion (if it conflicts with the administration’s, that is).
Thanks for the clarification. I’ll file this away.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:21 pmComment by spit take — July 12, 2007 @ 3:21 pm
He can voice his opinion. So can CT.
Why do you Lefties want to censor people?
July 12th, 2007 at 3:24 pmWhy do you Lefties want to censor people?
Comment by THE KING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! — July 12, 2007 @ 3:24 pm
This from the one who is constantly threatening to have people banned from TP.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:27 pmDear God!
http://www.rawstory.com//images/new/bushmiers.jpg
Pod people!
July 12th, 2007 at 3:29 pmA resolution sent from a state does not compel the US House to act. Section 603 of Jefferson manual simply list ways that impeachment has been set in motion in the past. It mentions the precedent of the impeachment of Federal Judge Charles Swayne in 1903 in which charges from the Florida state legislature resulted in impeachment. Section 603 should be thought of as a list of things that worked in the past and that we can try again. It is not a law that compels Congress to act.
Any individual or group, city or state can petition for impeachment. Congress is free to ignore those petitions. But a memorial from a state would carry a lot of weight and be difficult to ignore. It may also give the state’s representative the courage to introduce an impeachment resolution, which they all have the power to do.
The only things we can reasonable expect is that a properly signed petition will get entered in the Congressional Record and sent to the appropriate Committee. That is the standard procedure in the House. But some petitions seems to been mislaid in the Speaker’s office.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:29 pmThanks for the clarification. I’ll file this away.
Comment by spit take
In Virginia, there is a standing state law prohibiting “corrupt practices of bribery by any person other than candidates.”
I’m sure the CT troll will stand strongly behind the very letter of that law.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:30 pmThis from the one who is constantly threatening to have people banned from TP.
Comment by Egreggious — July 12, 2007 @ 3:27 pm
Yeah, for NAME JACKING.
Newsflash: your ilk is on a mission to have the “trolls” (dissenters) banned from TP, not related to any aspect of the TOS agreement.
You have no case.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:30 pmNo, you’re confused: The 10th Amendment — Amendment X — reserves the power to the State to prosecute a sitting President.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:30 pmNo case has ever stated that a prison sentence can be COMMUTED before the prison term has begun. What Bush did may have been illegal.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:31 pmPSA,
It’s hard to keep the flesh from rotting, evil has that effect.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:31 pmNo, you’re confusing yourself. Amendment X — is the 10th Amendment: The States are reserved teh power which has not been delegated to Congress: The power to prosecute.
Congress was only delegated the power to impeach; the States through the 10th Amendment reserve the power to prosecute this sitting President.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:32 pmWho cares what a Mich AG thinks?
July 12th, 2007 at 3:32 pmThis from the one who is constantly threatening to have people banned from TP.
Comment by Egreggious — July 12, 2007 @ 3:27 pm
——————————————————————————-
I don’t make threats.
I just say:
REPORTED!
or
COWARD!
July 12th, 2007 at 3:33 pmrumpus room with Jeff Gannon and his pals, and what follows is an all-male event.
Comment by No-one in particular
The room is called the Oval Office, it’s just used as the rump-us room.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:36 pm“No where in there does it indicate this as a possiblity……” Where the Constitution is silent — as it is on cases of State impeachmen tof a sitting President — the power is retain by the States.
Constituitonal silence does not mean it is not possible; only that there is no delegation of power to Congress or the President. Your argument fails.
A sitting President may be prosecuted by the States outside Congress, outside impeachment. What is the DOJ Staff counsel going to do: Dare to block the Michigan State AG from prosecuting this President? They have no legal power to stop any of the State AGs. Tell your friends; let your State AGs know: They can prosecute a sitting President, and you support them. Share the link with your state AG today. Call them and let them know you support your state leadership in defending this Constituion from this President.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:36 pmAnyone who wishes to file a grievence for Harriet Mier’s refusal to honor the subpoena issued by Congress, here is the URL to download the form.
DISBARRMENT for not honoring a subpoena and ignoring the rule of law in America!
http://www.texasbar.com/Template.cfm?Section=Client_Attorney_Assistance&CONTENTID=3367&TEMPLATE=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm
July 12th, 2007 at 3:38 pmComment by CT_V1 — July 12, 2007 @ 3:30 pm
I have never advocated the banning of anyone here.
Whatever TP’s TOS may be, banning someone from posting here amounts to censorship, in my mind. TP has the right to censor if they want to, it’s their site. It doesn’t mean I agree with that policy.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:38 pmComment by spit take — July 12, 2007 @ 3:21 pm
He can voice his opinion. So can CT.
Why do you Lefties want to censor people?
Comment by THE KING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! — July 12, 2007 @ 3:24 pm
Please point out where I said anything about censoring anybody, Mr. Pee.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:39 pmSorry, you’re going to have to copy and paste or click here: DISBAR!
July 12th, 2007 at 3:39 pm“the States through the 10th Amendment reserve the power to prosecute this sitting President.”
*eyeroll* Hello? Immunity? In order to actually do this, you would have to get the president to waive his (near-absolute) immunity from criminal prosecution or have a court of competent jurisidiction declare that the immunity doesn’t apply.
Good luck with that…
July 12th, 2007 at 3:40 pmTHIS JUST IN!
The Enid Oklahoma Dog Catcher (Republican) thinks King McChimpy did something wrong too!
Big News!
July 12th, 2007 at 3:41 pmThe Enid Oklahoma Dog Catcher (Republican) thinks King McChimpy did something wrong too!
Comment by Nothing matters — July 12, 2007 @ 3:41 pm
One by one, they’re all coming to their senses.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:43 pmNewsflash: your ilk is on a mission to have the “trolls†(dissenters) banned from TP, not related to any aspect of the TOS agreement.
You have no case.
Comment by CT_V1 — July 12, 2007 @ 3:30 pm
Any evidence of this?
I think maybe the problem is you folks don’t really understand the concept of “censorship”. Disagreeing with someone is not seeking to censor them. Quoting their own words is not an attempt to censor them. Filing away their statements so they can be compared with later statements for consistency is not censorship.
There have been calls from some longtime posters to ban disruptive trolls from TP (calls that have been unheeded, to this point) but that is not because of “disagreement” as much as you’d like to think it is. It’s because the trolls in question have no interest in debate and are simply posting to annoy others and so amuse themselves. if you can’t see the difference, you’re probably one of those trolls.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:44 pm“No, you’re confused: The 10th Amendment — Amendment X — reserves the power to the State to prosecute a sitting President.
Comment by anon — July 12, 2007 @ 3:30 pm”
Perhaps your right?????
I was looking in the wrong place……
I still don’t see it specifying that though!!!!
It is so vague that I don’t see that happening.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:45 pmNo one wants to ban people from posting here. We just want everyone to write with more intelligence than: I’M THE KING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
July 12th, 2007 at 3:45 pmoff topic: CT_V1 is a f*cking hypocrite when she whines about name jacking. The pus sucking troll name-jacked me on an earlier thread with some very rude and sophomoric coments. Typical Repugnicunt hypocrite.
On-topic:
Even the trolls have to see how immoral and illegal it is for the pResident to commute the sentence of a witness in a case that would have resulted in a possible criminal case against himself (or some pudgy f*ck he dearly loves.)
Presidential pardons have been abused by all of the recent Presidents. Bush’s blessing of Libby though, is egregious and should be disdained by any American.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:46 pmNo one wants to ban people from posting here. We just want everyone to write with more intelligence than: I’M THE KING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Comment by leftcoast — July 12, 2007 @ 3:45 pm
Not enough exclamation points there, leftcoast.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:46 pmLeftcoast…intelligence and rethuglican: total oxymoron.
Two or three paid shills posting under numerous different names. Guess the GOP is deadly desperate these days.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:47 pmThis page describes how a City, County or State can submit an impeachment petition that will be sent to the House Judiciary Committee.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:48 pmParliamentarian’s office, Sergeant at Arms, Pitney Bowes and others.
http://www.impeachbush.tv/impeach/localhow.html
Comment by spit take — July 12, 2007 @ 3:39 pm
YOU SAID:
By your own logic,
since CT’s thoughts conflict with your point of view, he is not entitled to voice his opinion (according to you).
July 12th, 2007 at 3:50 pmBush’s blessing of Libby though, is egregious and should be disdained by any American.
Comment by nanlichi — July 12, 2007 @ 3:46 pm
Hey, I resemble that remark.
Off topic: Namejacking sucks. Wish there was a way to get rid of it that didn’t involve actual banning. And I’m sorry for using the word “threaten”.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:50 pmHEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I’M THE KING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
July 12th, 2007 at 3:51 pm#55: I’ve asked this before, but I’m really interested in getting paid for this fun. Anyone got a number I could call?
July 12th, 2007 at 3:53 pmTP has become Troll Summer Camp.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:55 pm#59 That’s my point. You’re nothing more than someone who has lacked attention during developement. You seek that recognition today. 2 year olds do so too. We call that the need for attention whether bad or good. Eventually a parent interecedes for on your behalf and gives you the attention you need. Adults here have no tolerance for it. Get therapy.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:55 pm#58: Namejacking sucks. Wish there was a way to get rid of it that didn’t involve actual banning.
There is. Registration. It is the Troll Consortium’s opinion (vote: 38-1 with one absent vote) that a simple registration system would serve us all. If anyone here has been able to contact TP personnel, please tell them that even the trolls want them to implement a registration system.
July 12th, 2007 at 3:55 pmCT_V1, ‘The King’, etc.
If you kept a fixed single identity, I’d not be calling for registration. I have no desire to ban anyone from discourse on Think Progress, just a desire to control what tripe touches my eyes. PIP/Mr. Pres/The King/Flaco/Daryll/ConTROLLer/Conservatron/etc can post whatever crap he/she/it/they want(s), just as long as each person behind the keyboard gets ONE (1) screen name to post with.
Ideally, they’ll put the poster’s name first or give an option to kill-file by screen name. Then the above poster(s) can spout off as much as they want, and I can happily go about my life without seeing their drivel, unless I really feel like playing Whack-A-Troll(tm).
July 12th, 2007 at 3:56 pm#63 -LOL!
July 12th, 2007 at 3:57 pmBy your own logic,
since CT’s thoughts conflict with your point of view, he is not entitled to voice his opinion (according to you).
Comment by THE KING! — July 12, 2007 @ 3:50 pm
If you really believe that, then it makes your mental gymnastics to carry water for the Shrub much easier to understand. You simply don’t care about the real meanings of words. Why would you, since language has a liberal bias?
I never said he wasn’t entitled to voice his point of view. That was your boy CT_V1 who said that. So you take a statement of censorship voiced by one of your comrades, then use it to claim that I’m the one advocating censorship when I simply note his position.
Sounds about right for you guys. Up is Down. Day is Night.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
July 12th, 2007 at 3:58 pmIdeally, they’ll put the poster’s name first or give an option to kill-file by screen name. Then the above poster(s) can spout off as much as they want, and I can happily go about my life without seeing their drivel, unless I really feel like playing Whack-A-Troll(tm).
Comment by Jeremy — July 12, 2007 @ 3:56 pm
I LOVE IT!
July 12th, 2007 at 4:00 pm*takes a bow to Egreggious* Sometimes I have good ideas. Oh, yeah, and sometimes I can even shut a troll up. Check out the thread about Bush’s comment about Libby’s commutation being ‘fair and balanced’ at http://thinkprogress.org/2007/07/12/a-decision-worthy-of-fox-news/
:)
July 12th, 2007 at 4:03 pm“In order to actually do this, you would have to get the president to waive his (near-absolute) immunity from criminal prosecution or have a court of competent jurisidiction declare that the immunity doesn’t apply.”
Nope: Clinton establishes that the President is not immune to criminal proceedings. Try again. Impeachment and prosecutions remain on the table; If impeachment is not used, prosecution must be used. See the Ashcroft quote here, you’ll see. It’s on the table. The Article listed is from after Clinton-era, includes discussions.
This sitting President may be prosecuted outside imepachment, outside Congress.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:04 pmEgreggious: No offense meant by the proper spelling. I will try to use the phrase “unbefu*ckingleviably shitty” instead of egregious in the future.
Name-jacking is bad when there is a serious attempt at dialogue, but how long has it been since we have seen anything but a sophomoric food fight from the trolls? When it has digressed to the point of who can be the most creative with references to bodily emissions, the name-jacking is pretty damn amusing at times.
The name-jacking is totally transparant, only the jacked get pissed.
I know I did when I was jacked on an earlier thread, I just wish the jacker had a better sense of humor.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:05 pmComment by Jeremy — July 12, 2007 @ 3:56 pm
Look up the difference between “name-jacking” and “multiple identities.” Mr. President, for example, has changed his screen name multiple times, but he makes it clear and isn’t impersonating anyone. Not a TOS violation.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:09 pmGee, if only Democrats would have criticized Clinton for pardoning terrorists to aid his wife’s political ambitions.
Thankfully, Republicans are not hateful hypocrites like Democrats. The GOP doesn’t have a bloodlust for babykilling either.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:09 pmGee, if only Democrats would have criticized Clinton for pardoning terrorists to aid his wife’s political ambitions.
Thankfully, Republicans are not hateful hypocrites like Democrats. The GOP doesn’t have a bloodlust for babykilling either.
Comment by You Don’t Have the Votes — July 12, 2007 @ 4:09 pm
(Yawn…)
Got anything better?
July 12th, 2007 at 4:11 pm#64: The Troll Consortium shares your concern and we feel that the solutions you suggest in your post might provide a reasonable starting point for further negotiations aiming at a peaceful coexistence between the trolls and other regular users.
To quote our current President:
Peace is possible in our time.
Any such negotiations would, however, have to be trilateral in nature, involving the regular users, the troll community and TP administration. We see the lack of communication from the last party to be the major obstacle on our road to peace. Until such links of communication have been secured, it is the recommendation of the Troll Consortium that, in order to maintain a semblance of decorum on TP, both parties will refrain from any overly provocative action to prevent escalation.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:11 pmComment by nanlichi — July 12, 2007 @ 4:05 pm
Since the lefties make up the majority of name-jackers, they are the food throwers.
“Name-jacking is bad when there is a serious attempt at dialogue.”
Nice try. It’s bad all-around because it violates the TOS. Where are you trying to get at with this “serious attempt at dialogue” disguise?
July 12th, 2007 at 4:13 pmThank you for your efforts, Troll Consortium.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:13 pmI feel I’ve ruined what might have been a perfectly good thread.
I have a hard time not feeding the trolls. I’m going to impose a rule on myself right now. No feeding for the first 75 posts of a thread. Give folks a chance to actually discuss the topic.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:15 pmAnd CT_V1 shows he can’t read. Did I mention anything about name-jacking? Not until now. I explicitly said that I’m against the multiple identities. If CT_V1 was smart, he’d understand why. If a bad reputation gets you ignored by the majority of the posting public on Think Progress, well, then if you’re fixed to a single ID, you’re screwed. But Mr. P. changes his name, and prompts a ‘Who is this new person’. Only by paying attention to his post do we see that it’s just Mr. P’s next other personality. Granted, we still have to read into his posts now, but if TP listened to me and put you trolls names on the top of the post, along with everyone else…why, you’d have to change your names on a regular basis or you might find your posts never read!
July 12th, 2007 at 4:15 pmSince the lefties make up the majority of name-jackers, they are the food throwers.
Comment by CT_V1 — July 12, 2007 @ 4:13 pm
Whaaaa…???
Do you even listen to yourself when you type?
July 12th, 2007 at 4:15 pmOh, and ‘You don’t got your votes’:
*clears throat*
CLINTON DID IT!!!!!!111!!1!!one!!1!!1!!!one!1
July 12th, 2007 at 4:16 pmThankfully, Republicans are not hateful hypocrites like Democrats. The GOP doesn’t have a bloodlust for babykilling either.
Comment by You Don’t Have the Votes — July 12, 2007 @ 4:09 pm
I was with you up until these two statements.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:18 pm#80 – since Hitlery is going to be your nominee (lol!), the Clintons scandals will come up quite a bit. AND it won’t be Monica. Vince Foster, cattle futures, Hillary’s pardon problems, her fascist pollster… It will come out just like Kerry’s past did.
Just because the lying MSM and the bloodthirsty left don’t bring it up, doesn’t mean we won’t!!
July 12th, 2007 at 4:20 pmFor the record, when I asked CT_V1 if it “even listens to (itself when it) types”, I was NOT advocating censorship.
(H/T to Jake)
July 12th, 2007 at 4:20 pm“Clinton establishes that the President is not immune to criminal proceedings.”
For acts that occured outside his official capacity as President in the context of a civil suit. In the same opinion, the Supreme Court points out that the immunity still exists for functions of a President in his official capacity.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:20 pmWAR CRIMINAL Bush is a COXUCKER punk TRAITOR to the USA and a MURDERER of US troops and 700,000 Iraqis for his LIES.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:21 pm#81 – that was just venting. Democrats aren’t really babykillers, they just love abortion.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:21 pm#82 — welcome to You Don’t Have the Votes — the public access channel in the TP cable lineup.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:22 pmYDHTV:
And CLINTON DID TI!!!!!!111!!111!!!111oneONE!11! will go over VEEERY well with the American public. Keep playing that card. Bring up everything Clinton ever did in the general election next year. Let’s see how well your CLINTON DID IT!!!!111!11!11one!1 will go over with the Center and Left. ;)
July 12th, 2007 at 4:22 pmI llllluuuuuvvvv abortion.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:23 pm#81 – that was just venting. Democrats aren’t really babykillers, they just love abortion.
Comment by You Don’t Have the Votes
George W. Bush—ABORTIONIST and CHILD MOLESTER…
at age 25 got his FIFTEEN-YEAR-OLD girlfriend, Robin Lowman, an abortion.
Now he is a MURDERER, LIAR and WAR CRIMINAL TRAITOR to the USA.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:23 pmWhy don’t Democrats focus more on getting out of Iraq and less of “getting Bush.” The Libby pardon is a distraction from our wounded soldiers. We can’t redo the past. The notion that Bush could fool 22 Democratic senators into voting for this war on faulty intelligence is ridiculous. He’s a moron. It’s beside the point anyway – where do we go next.
I regret that I ever voted for Mr. Bush in 2000. But I voted for Democrats in 2004 and 2006 to end this war, not launch partisan investigations. I am just so disgusted with both parties.
Democrats are just as guilty as the GOP if they do not stop this partisan bickering and shut down the senate until Bush brings the troops home!
July 12th, 2007 at 4:25 pmDemocrats are just as guilty as the GOP if they do not stop this partisan bickering and shut down the senate until Bush brings the troops home!
Comment by Moderate Mary of Maine — July 12, 2007 @ 4:25 pm
Um, Moderate Mary? You DO understand the nature of the legislative process, don’t you? That is, a bare majority of either party has a difficult time getting anything done, by design?
I agree with you that the Democratic leadership caved way too easily to an unpopular president on the war funding, but it’s weak rhetoric to claim that they are “just as guilty” as the GOP at this point.
And the Libby commutation, in my opinion, is important because it demonstrates the disdain with which the President views the Rule of Law. I don’t want to see it dropped.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:30 pmMary, well, we would, but you see, there’s a small problem.
1) There are more than 40 republicans in the senate. 40 Republicans + Lieberman can block anything that the Senate does.
2) The Democrats aren’t sure that they won’t be painted as anti-troop instead of anti-war by the so-called ‘Liberal Press’. (A valid concern, but I wish they’d take the plunge)
3) There are more than 34 republicans in the Senate. 34 Republicans + Lieberman can uphold any Presidential Veto.
Now do you see why ‘getting Bush’ may be important? Throw in accusations of illegal wire-tapping, and partisan staffing of the DoJ, outing of a covert agent during a time of war, and you might get even more of an insight as to why the congress is overseeing Dubya so hard….
July 12th, 2007 at 4:32 pm#92 – well, that’s where you lose me. No President has ever respected the rule of law. It’s just a given. You sound as childish as the Republicans did in 1998.
As for what I can do to end the war… Unfortunately, my favorite Republican, Susan Collins, will not get my vote next year. I am voting against her because she supported Samuel Alito and she supports the bloodshed in Iraq.
That said, Democrats need to grow up!
July 12th, 2007 at 4:33 pm#93 – I agree with Bush’s domestic terror policies and fully expect a Democrat to embrace them in office. The rancor over it is misguided. As for the 2008 elections, I will support Democrats in 2008, except maybe Hillary Clinton. I would probably vote indy in that case.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:35 pmYou sound as childish as the Republicans did in 1998.
That said, Democrats need to grow up!
Comment by Moderate Mary of Maine — July 12, 2007 @ 4:33 pm
Thanks for starting out on the right foot, Mary. Real classy.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:35 pm#96 – take my advice. People like me decide elections. The Democrats look foolish and weak right now. Compared to Bush, that’s fine, but compared to a 2008 candidate, it’s not.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:36 pmCT_V1,
Don’t play stupid. The majority of troll comments are meant to be disruptive and take the thread on a tangent or derail.
There is a real world out there and I think we all pretty much agree as to what is reality and what is not, but the trolls insist on denying reality and defending Bush at every turn.
I can agree with Bush going after Al Qaeda in Afghanistan.
Can you agree that it was a colossal mistake for Bush to take his Crusade to Iraq?
Can you agree that Iraq is a quagmire? That we have sacrificed our country’s best men and women and billions of dollars for Bush’s failed War?
I have had reasonable discussions with right-wingers over a campfire and a few beers, and we see things differently, but don’t resort to flinging shit at each other like so often happens on a blog. Somehow the potential to get a broken nose imposes a little civility.
I have never heard an honest, sincere answer to why someone supports Bush. The best I ever get is, “He’s a Christian, he’s a good man.”
So take a stab at it CT, why do you support Bush?
July 12th, 2007 at 4:38 pmMary, that sounds like a variation of the ‘Clinton Did It!’ defense our resident trolls use. I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt and try to explain this concept clearer to you.
I believe we can all agree that obeying the law is important. Some might quibble as to how important obeying the law is in certain situations, but things like outing an undercover agent, staffing the DoJ in a partisan manner, and ordering wire tapping without court approval are rather serious. In fact, the first and third are extra serious. The first one is damn serious, to the point of being arrested and tried for treason, with a possible _death_ penalty for conviction. The third point? Well, that was one of the events that prompted Nixon to resign.
Just because everybody else does it is, as you should be well aware from countless lectures from your mother, much like how my mother lectured me on the same point, not an excuse for misbehavior. This applies to you, me, and to the President of the United States.
I’ll leave off the whole arguements about a blowjob versus possible treason…
July 12th, 2007 at 4:39 pm#99 – I am giving you advice for 2008. The Democrats need an agenda. Trying and executing some two bit chief of staff is not going to cut it.
I want to hear about health care, the hijacking of our Courts by the radical right, the war in Iraq and I guess on taxes I tend to be conservative, but can overlook that in 2008.
As for the rule of law, I stand by my statement. All Presidents have broken the law one way or another. Impeaching President Bush is not going to stop the bloodshed in Iraq. AND ultimately, he would survive a vote in the Senate.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:43 pm#96 – take my advice. People like me decide elections. The Democrats look foolish and weak right now. Compared to Bush, that’s fine, but compared to a 2008 candidate, it’s not.
Comment by Moderate Mary of Maine — July 12, 2007 @ 4:36 pm
Forgive me for what may be a rash judgment, Mary, but you don’t sound genuine.
Your insistence that “No President has ever respected the rule of law. It’s just a given.” pegs you as either real cynical or a flat-out right-winger straight away, and your casual insults don’t seem calculated to foster reasoned debate, which, believe it or not, several of us here are capable of indulging.
And the advice I should take was what? “Grow up”? Thanks. I’ll get to work on that. I try to grow every day, but with your encouragement, I’ll really make it happen! Maybe I’ll even grow up enough to become moderate like you.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:43 pmBut for the record, I find the Libby pardon disgusting.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:43 pm#101 – you seem more interested in trying President Bush than bringing the troops home to safety. That is a problem for me.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:45 pmMary, you’re right. People like us decide elections. Hi. I’m somewhere between libertarian and green in philosophy. On the Left vs. Right scale, I’m actually closer to the center, mainly because I distrust big corporations but am definitely free-market. However, authoritarian vs. liberalism? Government? Get the *hell* out of my personal life.
I’m all for our government watching the threats outside and inside of our country, however, I want checks and balances. Go to the Courts for the warrant needed. Just because ‘The Terrerists may get away!’ is no reason to violate over 220 years of our country’s history of government. Stop snooping on us in the name of national security and secure the damn borders! Watch the foreign visa holders, of course, within the limits set by law. But if you suspect that an American or resident alien are trying to break the law, go to the courts. If the alien is not here on Visa, then they are in the process of committing a crime…arrest them, then deport them! But follow the law!
That’s what ‘rule of law’ is all about. Exempt someone from some part of that, Mary, and you have destroyed the very foundation of our nation.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:47 pm#101 – you seem more interested in trying President Bush than bringing the troops home to safety. That is a problem for me.
Comment by Moderate Mary of Maine — July 12, 2007 @ 4:45 pm
How can you judge from here which topic spit has more interest in?
July 12th, 2007 at 4:48 pm“As for the rule of law, I stand by my statement. All Presidents have broken the law one way or another. Impeaching President Bush is not going to stop the bloodshed in Iraq. AND ultimately, he would survive a vote in the Senate.
Comment by Moderate Mary of Maine — July 12, 2007 @ 4:43 pm”
There is a difference between performing a small violation and a LARGE violation…..
A HUGE DIFFERENCE!!!!
How are you so sure he would survive the Senate???
When all the evidence came out of his criminal activities, and believe me more would come out when the Impeachment started because ALL documents would have to be provided, then the Republicans would have a hard time supporting the crimes.
I’m sorry, but I don’t see that being the case……..
Look how they run when one of their own is caught in a scandal…….Now multiply that by 1000, then tell me you still think it would fail in the Senate?????
The only way to know is to do it!!!!
I guess we can send all the cops and prossecutors home, because if they can’t gaurantee a conviction there is no sense in bringing a case against anyone.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:48 pmJeremy, I agree with most of what you’re saying, but I do feel the debate over wiretapping has been misguided. If we know of an attack, we must stop it at whatever cost.
My anger with the war in Iraq is that it’s diverted our resources from fighting terror.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:50 pm#106 – it is not a practical use of our country’s resources. Ultimately, the right-wing majority on the Supreme Court would stop it thanks to Susan Collins and Democrats who refused to filibuster Alito.
I believe in moving America forward. I hate George Bush for what he has done to this country, but impeaching him would probably help the worthless bastard.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:52 pm“I agree with most of what you’re saying, but I do feel the debate over wiretapping has been misguided. If we know of an attack, we must stop it at whatever cost.
Comment by Moderate Mary of Maine — July 12, 2007 @ 4:50 pm”
So what your saying is that you don’t mind giving up your liberty for some small amount of security?????
You know…… There was once a wise man who said “those that give up liberty for security, deserve NEITHER”
Wiretapping is HUGE!!!! Especially considering that only 3 MONTHS after getting into office Bush was talking with AT&T about setting up these monitoring rooms……. It’s called INTENT!!!!
July 12th, 2007 at 4:53 pm#101 – you seem more interested in trying President Bush than bringing the troops home to safety. That is a problem for me.
Comment by Moderate Mary of Maine — July 12, 2007 @ 4:45 pm
If that’s how I seem to you, then your reading comprehension isn’t very good, or you are looking for something that isn’t there. Or maybe you’re just as willing to make rash judgments as I am.
My nephew is serving in Iraq right now. I want to get him home as soon as possible. I think our presence there puts us in the middle of an unresolvable conflict and makes terrorism worse. But I recognize how difficult it will be to extract ourselves,and how damn near impossible it will be under this president.
I despair at how poorly the Democratic leaders have handled most of their war-related business so far. But they’re doing a whole lot more good than the Republican majority did for six years.
I don’t understand why someone like you, a self-described “moderate” cares so little about the depth of treason and criminality being exposed in the White House. That is a problem for me.
If you’re genuine, if you’re really a moderate from Maine looking to interact with real live liberals, your posts will prove that. If on the other hand, you’re a fraud, just another troll adopting a new, benign identity to better have fun with “libtards”, then you’ll reveal that just as surely.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:53 pmMary: ‘At any cost’. Three of the most dangerous words in the English Language, or any other language, for that matter. Those three words have justified great evil. ‘At any cost’ means that you could be taken and held, without the right of habeus corpus, for an indefinite amount of time. ‘At any cost’ means that you can be tortured to gain information that may or may not thwart a terror attack. ‘At any cost’ justifies your disappearance. Do you want that? I do not.
Germany needed to get out of its depression and rampant inflation ‘at any cost’. That cost turned out to be the lives of millions of Jews, hundreds of thousands of soldiers on all sides, and 6 years of history. The end result of ‘at any cost’ was the destruction of the nation of Germany, and a stain that, should you speak to any German even today, still lives on.
We are the United States of America. One of our founding principles was that no one branch has the ability to determine guilt, prosecute crime, or determine the law in the first place. That principle has guided us since 1776 up to 2000. The few times that someone tried to challenge that principle, our country got dangerously close to totalitarianism. Again, we’re on the brink of that drop that will kill Lady Liberty. Every time up to this point, we’ve stepped back from that brink. What do you advocate we do this time?
July 12th, 2007 at 4:56 pmWow, a Republican who still believes that lying is wrong! We should put him on exhibit in the Smithsonian.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:56 pm“I believe in moving America forward. I hate George Bush for what he has done to this country, but impeaching him would probably help the worthless bastard.
Comment by Moderate Mary of Maine — July 12, 2007 @ 4:52 pm”
How can we move forward?????
This has set PRESIDENCE and the only way we can move is BACKWARDS if this is not corrected by legal means…..
This means that the next president can comitt the same or worse crimes and nothing can happen to them because the Congress did not act and the next president can point to this president as a reason why they can do those acts…..
They can state that since this president was not charged or prevented from it and so this means that the Congress “recognizes” that this is in fact legal, or they would have enacted to stop it.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:56 pm#109 – I am not sure I agree and if a Democrat is elected, I fully expect that there will be little to no changes on that front. It is too politically risky.
Spit Take, you are just hurting your cause. I am a troll because I don’t want to impeach the President. Most pollsters say that would actually help Bush because even Republicans hate him.
I agree with Sen. Obama (who I also support) – no impeachment.
July 12th, 2007 at 4:58 pmJeremy – you lose me on the Germany comparison as alot of TP posters do. Please do not compare the Nazi Germany to wiretapping. There is no comparison.
July 12th, 2007 at 5:00 pm“I agree with Sen. Obama (who I also support) – no impeachment.
Comment by Moderate Mary of Maine — July 12, 2007 @ 4:58 pm”
Then I suggest you contact Congress and tell them they might as well Ammend the Constitution and get rid of Impeachment!!!!!!
Why have it if when we need to use it people like you say it’s not worth it????
When, pretell, is it worth it????
When YOU are sitting in jail and YOU have no Habeas????
It seems this is the only time that people feel it’s worth it, is when it only effects them directly……
Sorry, but if we let this go then we have lost our country!!!
July 12th, 2007 at 5:02 pm“Please do not compare the Nazi Germany to wiretapping. There is no comparison.
Comment by Moderate Mary of Maine — July 12, 2007 @ 5:00 pm”
Actually there is!!!!!
The Germans used Punch cards to track people so they could know who they needed to put on the list……
Wiretapping of AMERICANS is the same thing….. Do you think they simply do NOTHING with any information they receive????
If you do then you are really naive!
July 12th, 2007 at 5:04 pm#116 – you seem obsessed with impeachment. ME: Stop the war, stop the killing. That will not be accomplished by an impeachment attempt. In reality, it will just be an attempt.
July 12th, 2007 at 5:06 pm“That will not be accomplished by an impeachment attempt. In reality, it will just be an attempt.
Comment by Moderate Mary of Maine — July 12, 2007 @ 5:06 pm”
No Impeachment WON”T stop the war, but it will UP HOLD our laws!!!!!
It WILL show the rest of the world that we STAND BY OUR LAWS!!!!
It WILL ensure that Bush and company are held ACCOUNTABLE for their war crimes and face punishment for it……
OTHERWISE, you just give them a pass and they walk without having to pay for their crimes……
July 12th, 2007 at 5:10 pm“Bush knew who was the leaker 45min. after it happened. leftcoast”
I’m sorry leftcoast, I totally disagree with you. Bush knew who the leaker was 45 minutes before it happened.
July 12th, 2007 at 5:10 pmSpit Take, you are just hurting your cause. I am a troll because I don’t want to impeach the President. Most pollsters say that would actually help Bush because even Republicans hate him.
I agree with Sen. Obama (who I also support) – no impeachment.
Comment by Moderate Mary of Maine — July 12, 2007 @ 4:58 pm
Your judgment is fast proving suspect, as is your reading comprehension.
I did not say you were a troll. I said that if you are a troll, that will be proven by your posts. I said that some of the things you have written suggest that possibility. Trolls have been known to adopt benign identities and then gradually reveal themselves for the rapid partisans they are.
Perhaps you are genuine. If so, that will be proven as well. But you didn’t seem at all interested in why i would be suspicious of you, you simply attacked me for it, and distorted what I had said. That’s another red flag — the distortion. For instance, I said nothing about impeachment. Yet somehow, what I wrote became a judgment that “I am a troll because I don’t want to impeach the President.” when I said nothing of the kind.
I’m willing to give you the benefit of the doubt for now, but I have my suspicions.
July 12th, 2007 at 5:12 pmSpit Take – What do I need to say or do to get in your good graces?
July 12th, 2007 at 5:13 pmLibby is a convicted felon who should be in jail right now serving out his 30 month sentence. He was the first White House official to be convicted of serious crimes since Iran Contra. Bush commuted Libby’s sentence to protect himself, Rove and Cheney from criminal prosecution. Clinton never did this to protect himself from prosecution. Bush has no respect for the rule of law. He doesn’t respect the courts where a republican judge he himself appointed to the federal bench sentenced Libby. He showed utter disregard for the verdict given by a jury of Libby’s peers.
July 12th, 2007 at 5:19 pmMary, you’re wrong. There are alot of things to compare between Nazi Germany and the United States today. Granted, we are not yet a fascist country, but we’re near to it. You probably think that Fascism is nothing more than Jew Hatred and wanting to go to war. Nope…it’s not that. That’s just one aspect of fascism, a particular breed of Fascism misnamed National Socialism ( in German), or Nazism, for short. Fascism itself is a much larger philosophy.
What is Fascism? It’s simply the belief that the Nation trumps the Individual. From Wikipedia, Mussolini definied fascism as a right-wing collectivistic ideology — in short, a devotion to the state over the individual. While some quibble about Nazism being Fascism, the main focus is that our needs are subservient to the needs of the State.
You must ask yourself: Whose interests does unlimited access to our information serve? Us or the State? My answer: While I have nothing to hide, my conversations with my wife, my e-mail, my taste in erotic material, my taste in general material, my choices of books at the library, my reading tastes on the internet, my conversations with my mother and father and friends are all my business. The State says that this information is needed to fight the War on Terror, and that if it has to go to the Courts to get it (which is technically part of our legitimate system of government) comprimises the State’s ability to fight the War on Terrorism…regardless of the fact that I don’t have any ties to anyone overseas nor do the vast majority of my countrymen, and those that do have legitimate and private ties that do not endanger the country. HOwever, it’s too hard to do old-fashioned police work. They gotta have that information so they can sift through it. It benefits the State, not me…
That is the root of Fascism. And THAT is how we and Nazi Germany are related.
July 12th, 2007 at 5:20 pm“I believe in moving America forward. I hate George Bush for what he has done to this country, but impeaching him would probably help the worthless bastard.
Comment by Moderate Mary of Maine
If impeachment would help Bush, then we might as well throw in the towel as a nation. We probably would not get the votes to impeach Bush, because there are still enough Lemming Republics to protect him. But, if we bring Articles of Impeachment against him, then he won’t be able to declare “Executive Privilege” and we will be able to get to the bottom of all the crimes he has committed. And, it will expose the Lemming Republics to their constituents. I believe when the American people hear the depth of the crimes that this administration has committed, though, there is a very real possibility that both Bush and Chaney can be impeached.
To all the trolls out there. Do you really want a Democratic President to have the unfettered power that Bush has awarded himself? Will you really be happy if a Democratic President breaks the law and thumbs his/her nose in your face? Now, answer truthfully, if you dare. But, you trolls are not here for intelligent discourse, you are here to act like 2 year olds, so I doubt any of you will answer this question.
July 12th, 2007 at 5:20 pm“Two or three paid shills posting under numerous different names. Guess the GOP is deadly desperate these days.
Comment by MsJoanne”
The RNC is running out of money. No one wants to bet on the losing side, so their fund raising is in the toilet. They are running out of money to pay the trolls. Thus, the declining quality of the trolls on this site.
July 12th, 2007 at 5:22 pmSpit Take – What do I need to say or do to get in your good graces?
Comment by Moderate Mary of Maine — July 12, 2007 @ 5:13 pm
I’m not sure why you need to get in my good graces, but all I ask of other posters on this forum is to write honestly, and deal honestly with what I write. I can be quite comfortable with other points of view. But I have no time for people who don’t debate honestly or who distort what I write to suit their own arguments.
I have been known to enjoy a good game of Whack-A-Trollâ„¢, so I can’t claim that I’m always as reasoned and sober as I’m asking you to be now. But that’s only after someone has proven to be here simply to disrupt and annoy. So they’re fair game, I figure.
July 12th, 2007 at 5:23 pmValerie Plame Wilson was a COVERT spy specializing in WMD’s.
When she was exposed, not only was HER career over, but that of the CIA-company Brewster Jennings.
Likely all the people associated with them throught the world were KILLED.
Whoever exposed the operation has committed TREASON, and Bush does NOT CARE.
So much for the “war on terror”…
July 12th, 2007 at 5:24 pmOK….apparently the system ate my post. I said the verboten word that starts with J, ends in s, has an e and a w in it, and is 4 letters long…..funny TP filters that out when it’s used in a discussion about fascism….
OK, Mary, I’ll restate this.
Yes, we do share something in common with Nazi Germany.
First, so you understand clearly, Mary, Nazism is a particular, and very specialized version of Fascism. That is what many people quibble with when discussing America of today and Germany of the 1930s. So, let me define Fascism for you.
Mussoulini, the Italian founder of Fascism, described it as a ‘right-wing collectivist alternative to socialism and communism’. From his book Doctrine of Fascism,
Today, we’re faced with a question that is almost at the root of the needs of the individual vs. the needs of the state — Warrentless Wiretapping. What benefit does Warrantless Wiretapping bring me? Uh, some would argue terrorists won’t kill me. I’d answer back: “I value my privacy. I have nothing to hide, yes, but I don’t want World+Dog to know about my conversations with my mother, friends, family, and most importantly, wife. I don’t want World+Dog to know about my tastes in porn (which doesn’t include Child Porn, no crime here). I don’t want World+Dog to know about my taste in books. I don’t want World+Dog to know about my taste in anything. I want to know when I’m calling someone that my calls are my business, not yours or anyone elses. I don’t call out of country. I only call friends, family, and business associates here in the USA, that’s it. Neither do the majority of my countrymen. And the ones that do, of them, the majority of those are calling friends and family on legitimate business and personal matters, as well. But the State needs to catch those few bad guys who mean to attack us. And they don’t want to do the police work to find out which of us may be trying to blow up shit, they just want everything they can get. Who does this benefit? The State.
That is the first step of Fascism, saying that not only are the needs of the many more important than the needs of the one, but that the needs of the many are more important than following the law. If you can’t see that, then you’re not as moderate as you think you are.
I support finding and punishing terrorists, however, I think it’s very dangerous to stop terrorists ‘at any cost’. That is my point, and you should address _that_ point.
July 12th, 2007 at 5:38 pmI have the feeling “Moderate Marie of Maine” is not from Maine, or moderate. Or even a woman, for that matter.
It wouldn’t be the first time a troll pretends to be something they aren’t. They seem to like doing that for some reason.
Moderate Marie, or whatever you call yourself this week: This is a thread about how even Republicans are disgusted with Pres Bush granting commutation to Libby.
Oh, and the problem with wiretapping is that it’s done outside of the boundaries of the law. It’s done even though “we don’t know of an attack”. Get a clue already.
July 12th, 2007 at 5:38 pmI have the feeling “Moderate Marie of Maine†is not from Maine, or moderate. Or even a woman, for that matter.
Of course. Did you MISS MarieJake’s “for the record” above??
July 12th, 2007 at 5:55 pmMr. Bush Goes To Hell,
Ha! I missed that.
Hellooo Jake!!!
July 12th, 2007 at 6:05 pmI missed it too, MBGTH. Good catch. It makes sense now. Jake loves pulling that sh!t where he pretends to be a moderate or even a “liberal” but he can’t keep up the facade for very long.
July 12th, 2007 at 6:19 pmWhere was this guy during the Marc Rich pardon?
July 12th, 2007 at 10:22 pmWhere was this guy during the Marc Rich pardon?
MAYBE he was HAVING LUNCH with Marc’s ATTORNEY, Scooter Libby!!
And, a question for YOU:
WHERE was he when Poppy Bush pardoned INTERNATIONAL TERRORIST Orlando Bosch (still in Miami 15 years later), OR
the Iran/Contra CRIMINALS, thus saving Poppy’s and TRAITOR Ronnie Reagan’s collective azzes???
HUH??
ROTFLMAO!!!
July 12th, 2007 at 11:44 pmComment by Mr. Vitter Goes To Hell — July 12, 2007 @ 11:44 pm
Back in 1992? This guy was probably boozing it up in law school!
July 12th, 2007 at 11:59 pmComment by Mr. Vitter Goes To Hell — July 12, 2007 @ 11:44 pm
Back in 1992? This guy was probably boozing it up in law school!
Comment by m12
And Bush Sr. was pardoning the Iran/Contra TRAITORS to save HIS and TRAITOR Reagan’s azz.
And pardoning INTERNATIONAL TERRORIST Orlando Bosch…
July 13th, 2007 at 3:27 am