Death Watch: 1600 Pen. Ave.

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,399
95
48
Hell, each and every one of them has shown more respect for America than any of the head bozos in the GOP.

THAT rev, is spot on!! The fact that they all stand up and QUESTION the direction of the USR..... speaks to their CARING for America. (and respecting it). following blindly is NOT respecting America or anyplace. It is just sheeple , programmed.......or is it LAZY ??? behavior. (IMHO)


( and the last thing any of us have to do is APPEASE the likes of "uncle". or the merry neocons....They are the author of all the flack that is coming their way now..)


this could get very interesting .......and the concerning thing is that not one of these bushcons has that much intelligence......even if it were tallied collectively. So not sure what tactics they will resort to.
 

unclepercy

Electoral Member
Jun 4, 2005
821
15
18
Baja Canada
Reverend Blair said:
Uncle said:
Remember the old saying, "Put up, or shut up?"

Does that mean you want Canadians voting in your next presidential election, or does it mean that you will support whoever we tell you to?

Good Lord, have mercy, if you don't know what that means, it can't be explained to you. Forget it. You are hopeless. It means no such thing.

The really sad thing is - you all criticize and giggle over Bush's mistakes, but you can't think of anyone who is any better. Not really. That's what I asked earlier, and it was a very feeble response indeed.

You asked who we thought would make a good president and we answered. What's your problem, didn't like our picks? You really haven't supplied much of a field for us to pick from, have you?

Want to know who I think would make an excellent president? Steve Earle, with George Carlin as VP, Susan Sarandon as chief of staff, and Gore Vidal as senior policy advisor. Maybe we can get Molly Ivins, Michael Moore, and Al Franken in as cabinet members too. Each and every one of those people has more intelligence, better ideas, and more humanity than any member of the Bush White House. Hell, each and every one of them has shown more respect for America than any of the head bozos in the GOP.

I did not give you a list of candidates, because you should know that makes the poll biased. I must admit though that I am surprised you mentioned Molly Ivins. I like her. Also, I like George Carlin, who happens to be an ex-teacher and is a pretty smart guy. Crude, but intelligent. He is however, a comedian, and
has had heart surgery/I'm not sure he is physical fit. Gore Vidal is brilliant/but isn't he in his 80's? The politician with the best personality is Ann Richards. However, she is not up to public scrutiny nor is she interested.

The field is mighty sparse.


Uncle


Is that response more to your liking, Uncle?
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
Good Lord, have mercy, if you don't know what that means, it can't be explained to you. Forget it. You are hopeless. It means no such thing.

What it really means is you don't like our answers or, more to the point, the questions we raise.

I did not give you a list of candidates, because you should know that makes the poll biased.

I didn't mean you personally, Uncle. I meant the list of likely candidates. Your political system is so dysfunctional that it keeps the best candidates while promoting the most inept your country can produce.

I must admit though that I am surprised you mentioned Molly Ivins.

Now why would that surprise you?

Also, I like George Carlin, who happens to be an ex-teacher and is a pretty smart guy. Crude, but intelligent. He is however, a comedian, and
has had heart surgery/I'm not sure he is physical fit.

He's no less healthy than Dick "Spiro Agnew" Cheney.

Vidal is brilliant/but isn't he in his 80's?

Rummy is what? 672? Something like that.

The politician with the best personality is Ann Richards. However, she is not up to public scrutiny nor is she interested.

Ah "public scrutiny". The method used to disqualify the qualified and promote mediocrity and incompetence.

How many Americans never go into politics because they had an extra-marital affair or smoked a joint in public? How many are unelectable because they won't pray to the right god, or any god at all? How come so many on the right seem immune to such scrutiny?
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,399
95
48
Ah "public scrutiny". The method used to disqualify the qualified and promote mediocrity and incompetence

public scrutiny US style??? Akin to dropping the candidate into a tank filled with piranhas. and nothing civilized about that one. :x
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,399
95
48
today's NY Times, Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, Republican of Texas, in reference to the Fitzgerald/CIA leak investigation, is quoted as saying that she hoped "that if there is going to be an indictment that says something happened, that it is an indictment on a crime and not some perjury technicality where they couldn't indict on the crime and so they go to something just to show that their two years of investigation was not a waste of time and taxpayer dollars."


If you check the online record you will see that this is the same Kay Bailey Hutchison that voted in favor of both counts of impeachment against Bill Clinton. More disturbingly, she writes in the Congressional record dated February 17th, 1999:

"I do not hold the view of our Constitution that there must be an actual, indictable crime in order for an act of a public officer to be impeachable. It is clear to this Senator that there are, indeed, circumstances, short of a felony criminal offense, that would justify the removal of a public officer from office, including the President of the United States. Manifest injury to the Office of the President, to our Nation and to the American people and gross abuse of trust and of public office clearly can reach the level of intensity that would justify the impeachment and removal of a leader."
My question for today is: Why are contemporary Republicans so full of shit? And a follow-up...How did the party of Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt and General Eisenhower get taken over by such lying, thieving, self-serving scoundrels?

Send to a friendPost a CommentRead all posts by Alec Baldwin


Good question: WHY ARE todays "republicans" so full of SH*T??? :x
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,399
95
48
Andygal said:
Good question: WHY ARE todays "republicans" so full of SH*T??? Mad

Because they are sh*t heads that's why.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :laughing3: :laughing3: :laughing5:


LOVE IT ,Andygal. Good on ya... (you just made my afternoon.. :wink:
 

mrmom2

Senate Member
Mar 8, 2005
5,380
6
38
Kamloops BC
You really want to know who will be the next Prez its really easy to answer .Watch the next few Bilderberg meetings and see what candidates are invited .Then go to the CFR's web page and see if their on it .I'll bet ya 100.00 bucks i can tell who the next prez will be in another year :wink:
 

Ocean Breeze

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 5, 2005
18,399
95
48
Interesting stuff beginning to surface

Right Wingers Getting Nervous as Miers' Role in Bush Corruption Unfolds
Bush corruption, previously put behind and buried is being unearthed and could come to light in Senate judicial committee hearings. And one of the Judges Bush Brought to DC to endorse Harriet is deeply involved.
by Rob Kall


http://www.opednews.com

An army of skeletons thought hidden deep in the recesses of Texas closests are coming to life as a result of Bush's nomination of longtime crony and protectress, Harriet Miers.

Jerome Corsi, right wing author of Unfit for Command – Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry has written an extensive series of articles attacking George W. BUsh's Miers Supreme Court nomination. This is one right wing extremist who knows the danger of opening an old can of worms. While an honest, a-political person might want to see corruption uncovered and exposed, Mr. Cosi suggests "It's time for the President to withdraw this dreadful nomination or, if politics dictate, Harriet Miers to withdraw herself from consideration," arguing " so we might avoid another long, painful, and needless examination of old matters that probably would be better off never exhumed.

In the latest article, published in Worldnetdaily.com, titled,
Miers was player in Texas Lottery coverup, Corsi reports:


Larry Litwin was fired in 1997 as executive director of the Texas Lottery Commission because then-Governor George Bush wanted an investigation into possible criminal political-influence buying squashed, and then-commissioner Harriet Miers, a Bush appointee, complied with his wishes and terminated him – that is the story Litwin is prepared to tell the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The article reports that Littwin was hired to run the Texas lottery as executive director. Within three months of being hired, he issued several memos. Cosi's Worldnet article reports,

...ordering a thorough search for political campaign contributions that may have been made by GTECH to a comprehensive list of Texas legislators and state officials...

Littwin had reason to be suspicious. In January 1997, federal prosecutors in New Jersey had released a pre-sentencing report in the criminal conviction of J. David Smith, GTECH's national sales manager, which mentioned former Texas Lt. Governor and GTECH lobbyist Ben Barnes as having been involved in a criminal kickback scheme... Littwin wanted to investigate those charges and determine how deeply the corruption reached into Texas politics. Prior to his indictment in New Jersey, J. David Smith bragged he had bribed some ten Texas legislators to secure their votes when the lottery bill was before the Legislature. Lottery Commission chairperson Miers assured the Austin American-Statesman these charges against Barnes would be investigated. WND can find no record of any investigation actually undertaken, despite the accusations of criminal activity.

Just days after Littwin started at his lottery commisison job, the Texas attorney General forced the release of information that former Texas Lt.Governor Ben Barnes was paid a severance fee of $23 million dollars. It has been suggested that he was paid to keep silent on what he knew about George Bush's evasion of the draft through his disputed national guard service, where it has been suggested that he failed to show up for a medical exam, possibly because he was using drugs. (Though Corsi obliquely mentions that the Miers appointment has re-opened the national guard case, he does not, in this article, tie it to the Ben Barnes payoff.)

Corsi does report that Miers and former Texas Supreme Court Justice John Hill,the newest member of the Texas lottery commission, in unison with Miers, said that the situation should be investigated. Corsi reports that no evidence of any such investigation could be found, and comments,

This was not the first time Hill and Miers spoke with one voice. In 1999, Miers' Dallas law firm, Locke, Purnell, Rain & Harrell, merged with Judge John Hill's Houston firm, Liddell, Sapp, Zivley, Hill & LaBoon, to form Locke, Liddell & Sapp. Judge Hill appeared in Washington last week as one of the Texas former Supreme Court Justices brought to the Capitol to buttress Harriet Miers' troubled nomination.

Commissioners Hill and Miers were desperate to calm the public uproar.

On October 18th, Bush brought in two Texas judges to support his nomination of Miers, CNN reported what one of them, Judge John hill had to say:

"Mr. President, we just all want to thank you for this nomination," said John Hill Jr., a Democrat who was chief justice of the Texas Supreme Court from 1985 to 1988 and served with Miers on the Texas Lottery Commission.

"We are excited about it, and we are here to try and let the people of America know what we all know, which is that she is an absolutely fantastic person and a great lawyer and will make a great judge," he said.

"We actually know Harriet Miers; I hope that still counts for something, somewhere," Hill said. "I'd trust her with my wife and my life."

Putting Judge Hill's potentially crooked connection with the Texas lottery corruption cover-up puts his exuberant endorsement of Miers in a very different context. He was, and possibly still is her partner in her law firm and possibly in a criminal coverup.

Apparently, Litwin was silenced just days after he showed signs of getting serious about his inquiry. Before the three member lottery commission (Miers, Hill and someone else) ordered Littwin to stop the investigation, Corsi reports in his article that Bush, then Governor of Texas chimed in,calling Littwin "overzealous, and unleashing his attack dog, governor's spokesperson Karen Hughs on him, saying,


"If it was an attempt in any way to embarrass or intimidate key members of the Legislature or the executive branch, then Governor Bush strongly objects."

It's clear, as investigator Patrick Fitzgerald has been discovering in the Plame Outing case, Bush learned his lesson, not to directly comment when people are disclosing his connection to nefarious, corrupt or illegal activities.

Corsi says, Commissioners Hill and Miers were soon on the same page with Governor Bush, determined to stop Littwin" and John Hill "told the newspaper. "We made our position clear. I'm sure [the investigation's findings] won't be reported."

A few days later, Corsi reports,

On October 2, 1997, Lottery Commissioners Miers and Hill told the Dallas paper they had not approved the records search Mr. Littwin had undertaken. In the same article, Littwin defended himself: "Specifically, in the exercise of due diligence with provisions of our vendor contracts, I felt this research and review was important in order to determine if any financial contributions had been made by GTECH."

Corsi reports that a few days later, the Texas Lottery commission met and voted to fire Littwin, not even five months after he was hired. A new director, Linda Cloud, was hired to replace Littwin. The Morning News reported that she was not going to continue competitive bidding for the gtech contract, though lower bids were already on the table.

Will the Senate's judicial committee ask the questions necessary to shed full light on this story? Littwin has been silenced by a gag order that was part of his settlement with Gtech regarding his wrongful termination. We'll see whether money trumps truth as it has so far in this sordid tale. One thing seems more certain, Harriet is not the sweet but clueless sycophant she's been portrayed as. She's another crooked, dishonest violator of the public's trust. If the Republican Party does not revile her nomination it will be another clear proof of how low the GOP has fallen.