I was shocked to learn about the appointment of Mr. Graves’ wife and brother-in-law to receive $3.6 million in no-bid contracts by running Missouri fee offices. This situation creates a dangerous conflict of interest for our state and its citizens. We have a right to expect that the U.S. attorney representing Jefferson City will act as a tenacious watchdog protecting the public’s best interests.

If you believe in integrity and if you believe in representing the best interests of the people of this state, you will resolve this conflict of interest immediately. Either Mr. Graves must step down as U.S. Attorney or his wife and brother-in-law must give up their fee office contracts. The choice is yours.

http://tomflocco.com/fs/DeathsFoulPlayQuestions.htm

http://littlethomsblog.blogspot.com/

http://www.kaisernetwork.org/daily_reports/rep_index.cf

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389×758013
http://www.stockfraudnewswire.com/piperjaffray/index.ht

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389×758013

The Motherlode – Down a dark hole in the US Attorney purge scandal

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389×849449

Any religious litmus test used in hiring any federal employee, whether a political appointee or career hire, is expressly forbidden in the “originalist” body of the United States Constitution!!!!!!

This prohibition against any religious litmus test being used is at the foundation of the wall separating church and state…which is why the worst, most corrupt and most evil administration in American history blew off our Constitution’s outright prohibition of using religion, any religion, as the basis for public service.

One just has to wonder how deep into the bowels of hell Republicans are willing to go in their power-mad lust for absolute power?

Comment by BlueArkansas — September 5, 2007 @ 12:59 pm

Wow! I couldn’t get over this one. I had to come back and respond! We provide workable solutions in these threads (even if some of us can benefit from more decorum). The other day I overheard a thread where the Political Science of Hitler’s government was dissected! Wow!

Osama Bin Laden is a Saudi, most of his recruits are Saudi, and most of the people on those planes that hit the two towers were Saudis, and guess what?

America invaded Iraq. Which had absolutely nix to do with 9/11.

Saudi Arabia is the major source of Al Qaiada’s funding and recruitment, make no mistake guns are going down into Iraq through that border because while the royal family is busy trying to look friendly the people of Saudi Arabia hate you.

Iran right now is a problem – which you can’t do anything about. You can’t do anything about Saudi Arabia either, because ultimately too many other countries rely on Saudi and Iranian oil, and those countries aren’t going to make sacrifices so your petty warlord in chief can look tough.

You don’t understand just how much Iraq has cost you and is still costing. Not just money, but allies and integrity. People don’t trust America anymore when it comes forward and says there is a threat because America lied to us.

You want to beat Osama, your real enemy? You need to get rid of the Republicans, get out of Iraq, start paying down your debt and start treating Osama as a political opponent. You cannot beat an ideology with military force, Ghandi and Ho Chi Minh both proved that, but you can beat it with a political approach.

But of course it is more important to look tough and get the visceral thrill of killing people, than to actually win.

And Jake you are still a fake.

Comment by Ringo — September 5, 2007 @ 3:08 pm

Well it seems we agree on some things after all. I, too, believe most Muslims wish to live in peace, and I don’t believe that ignoring the problem of religious terrorism will make it go away.

However, I don’t believe religion plays more than a tangential role in the current conflict with al-Qa’ida. I believe religion is a convenient recruiting and rhetorical tool that’s been used throughout history, by leaders of Islam, Christianity, Judaism, and Hinduism, to achieve some very secular goals – money, power, land, resources, etc. While there may be some impressionable footsoldiers of all faiths who believe they’re fighting for their religion, I believe the goals of the people pulling the strings on all sides are far from pious.

I agree that al-Qa’ida is a problem. However, I believe that it is a problem that ultimately can’t be solved militarily. Certainly not by dropping bombs onto wedding parties from 15,000 feet.

See here:

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

My bad.

Comment by toasterhead — September 5, 2007 @ 2:59 pm

Ringo isn’t calling for war, he is calling for genocide, there is a big difference.

Comment by Krazny — September 5, 2007
—————————————————————————————
I am not calling for genocide.

I’m merely stating the situation in which we are involved. ….I believe that most Muslims simply wish to live in peace, but not all of them. And it is they who have chosen the path of holly war, who hae decided that WE are their enemy, and so therefore, we are.

I’m sorry if it’s not pleasant, I don’t like it either, but putting your head in the sand won’t make it go away.

Comment by Krazny — September 5, 2007 @ 3:00 pm

Hey now! He’s not calling for complete genocide – only 51% genocide. Get it right!

Comment by Ringo — September 5, 2007 @ 2:52 pm

No?

Much of the Islamic world has declared war against the infidel world and it started long before ChimpskyMcHaliburton took office and will continue long after he has gone……And the Left completely ignores it because such a conflict doesn’t fit into the Left’s predetermined conclusions about the world.

Comment by Ringo — September 5, 2007 @ 11:40 am

Ok, so you’re not calling for war with the entire Islamic world. Just “much of the Islamic world.” Much of implies “a majority,” so how much are we talking about – 50%? 60%? 75%? At the very least you are calling for war with 1/12th of humanity.

My bad.

Comment by toasterhead
———————————————-

Nor am I.

Comment by Ringo — September 5, 2007 @ 2:41 pm

You’re entitled to your opinion. But I’m not the one calling for war with 1/6th of humanity.

…I just find it hard to feel much sympathy for the victim, who enabled the crime to happen through stupidity.

Comment by toasterhead
—————————————————

You are a disgrace to humanity.

Comment by Ringo — September 5, 2007 @ 2:33 pm

Thanks – I’ll go check those out when I feel like reading radical right-wing propaganda.

Comment by Ringo — September 5, 2007 @ 2:25 pm

I never said that. Don’t you dare put words in my mouth. I said that the U.S. deserved the attacks. That does not mean I feel they were justified.

If someone leaves their luggage on a bench at Penn Station and walks off to buy a pretzel, I feel that they deserve to have their luggage stolen for being so stupid. This does not in any way justify the theft, which is still a crime which I believe should be prosecuted accordingly. I just find it hard to feel much sympathy for the victim, who enabled the crime to happen through stupidity.