And what's up with SP??? Been trying to wrap my mind around that one.
That is why I do not get offended by SP anymore, he is a equal opportunist when it comes to insults. How does it feel to be on the receiving end of his .......opinions?
NB needs to remove yesterday's captionfest. Enough Paris already!!! Good greif. It was bad enough that H&C devoted almost their entire program to the spoiled girl.
No RINOs in '08 - Thompson/Hunter would be a good ticket; Thompson/Steele would be a great ticket
ditto that SJ. while the country is in upheaval, the mindless continue to spend their time on issues that the MSM want to use to divert us from the real issues at hand, you know, trivial stuff like a war and illegal immigration and a prospering economy.
You don't seem to get it. While it is somewhat boorish and mundane to be talking about Paris Hilton.... it is vital at the same time.
Our laws are important. It is also important that people not get around the law. Next, if the law is not being properly applied, then we have a problem of activist judges. They have ZERO right to change what the law says. None!
For example, if the law says no less than 10 days shall be served... and people are serving no time at all.... this is judicial activism. If people don't like the law, change it the way laws are supposed to be changed. Through the legislative process.
The story of Paris is an up front examination of the justice system and what is wrong or right. She needs to be held to account just like anyone else... and judges need to stop being activists and start applying the law as written.
"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen." ~ Samuel Adams
Well you could look at it as unfortunate or fortunate that she's such a media whore.... and that we can more closely examine the laws themselves. I made a very clear post, showing the charges as presented by the prosecution, where, unfortunately for her local NB cheerleader SP, recless driving, or statute 23103 was not in the list of charges. Instead, the charges required a minimum of 10 days be served, and she could have actually had a maximum of one year. So, it was really up to the judge. Considering the maximum time he could have given, I'd say he was pretty lenient.
The specifics of the charges are of no interest to me. I don't care if it's one year or 90 days maximum. My concern is solely the application of the sentance as ruled by the judge, and is the Sheriff enforcing the court order equally regardless of bank account.
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
I understand that to us, the specifics are not important as is the application of the law. However, in order to beat back stupidity, the only weapon of choice are the facts and the truth.
I took on SP as well, and after I told him I worked for the LASD for over 17 years, and explained to him how the process works, all I got was "crickets" deafening silence. I have worked the courts, jails, patrol, and headquarters, and told him the Sheriff cannot over ride a judges order when it specifically said no home confinment, or otherwise. I dont think he has the same credentials I do.
Just wanted you to know I saw your post to me and dahlia this morning...and thank you.
I appreciate that info too...although by now I had heard that.
...anyway...I am from Calif. and I know Hollywood and other important people along with Politico's have been greasin' the palms of the LAPD from way back when....so of course it was one of the first things that crossed my mind..it was like duh....lol.
Parker was a pro at it....
I just was so aggravated at the msm doing this 24/7 after a victory for us the evening before that has to do with our national security...not the asinine reporting about Paris Hilton...and Sports attacks on us all....
He gets that way about every three months.....especially if it comes to some gal he thinks is in love with him...or could be.
I have been in the belly of the beast, and you are absolutely correct, the "good ole boys club" is alive and well. I feel at least, people will take note, I only can hope. But more is to come in the next few weeks.................it will knock your socks off,,,,,,,I guarantee, it will blow you away........I will let you know before.
Monty can't even answer if he is for or against the 'Fairness Doctrine' and that answer at least has substance. To answer your question requires ether.
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
One of the most absurd talking points that has emerged from the spin machine in the wake of Scooter Libby's sentencing for perjury and obstruction of justice is that Libby's conviction and sentence are a travesty because no "underlying crime was committed." Since special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald didn't charge anyone with the leak of Valerie Plame's classified status - even though he knew early in the investigation that Richard Armitage told Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward of Plame's work at the CIA - then why should Libby be punished whew no one else was?
First, the threshold for conviction for a violation of the statute that covered this leak is very high. Fitzgerald would have had to prove that the leaker knowingly intended to reveal an agent's status - a difficult requirement. And more importantly, this absurd line of reasoning ignores completely that Fitzgerald wasn't able to fully investigate this case because of Libby's interference.
I guess the point many are now making - including most of the Republican candidates running for the presidency - is that lying repeatedly to a federal grand jury is allowed if it ultimately turns out that the crime being investigated didn't reach the threshold for indictment.
Actually Space Cadet, the relevant facts are that Fitzgerald knew Armitage was the leaker before he even deposed Libby. That brings up the salient point of just what exactly was Fitzgerald investigating?
Secondly, the principal witness whose memory differed from Libby's, Tim Russert, had memory problems of his own, and his courtroom testimony was a different story than his original deposition. That BTW, is grounds for perjury charges.
Thirdly, Russert's courtroom testimony was contradicted by public statements made previously by his "colleague", Andrea Mitchell.
In addition to that, Plame has just perjured herself on the matter in Congressional testimony. Justice would require releasing Libby; and/or prosecuting Russert, Plame, and Wilson among others.
But, I do want to congratulate you. Despite your lack of grasp of the facts and attempt at spin, you are the first liberal I have seen actually mention the name Armitage.
The disinformation campaign to create confusion around the Plamegate issue has been easy going for the right-wing echo chamber - especially with clueless clones like you lining up to drink their kool-aid. Grasp this fact, dumbo. The reason so few talk about Armitage is because the MSM - you know, the LIBERALLY-BIASED MSM - has done such a miserable job in exposing the direct link between Cheney's office and it's campaign to discredit Wilson and Armitage.
For starters, Armitage was a back chanel to the White House from State used because of the dicey relationship between Colon Powell and the neo-cons in the White House. So, it was no suprise that Armitage would have been in the loop. The link is unambiguous between Libby and Armitage through Marc Grossman, a neo-con ally of Libby's in the State Department who Libby asked to prepare a memo on Wilson. Armitage got his information that he passed on to Woodward and Novak from Grossman's June 10, 2003 memo.
So, all the spin about Armitage having no agenda because he was considered a "moderate" or wasn't connected to the operation run from Cheney's office and thus not part of a campaign to discredit Wilson, is pure crap. Ditto Armitage's own story about "just happening to mention" Plame's status it at the end of a conversation with Novak.
Soon after Grossman had prepared a memo for Libby with information that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA and was involved in arranging for Wilson to go to Niger, reporter Bob Woodward interviews Armitage for a book. Armitage tells Woodward in a taped interview that Wilson's wife works for the CIA.
Around June 23, conservative columnist Robert Novak received a surprise call from Armitage's office offering an interview. In a Sept. 14, 2006 column, Novak said: "During his quarter of a century in Washington, I had had no contact with Armitage before our fateful interview. I tried to see him in the first 2 ½ years of the Bush administration, but he rebuffed me - summarily and with disdain, I thought. Then, without explanation, in June 2003, Armitage's office said the deputy secretary would see me."
Novak later recalled that Armitage divulged Plame's identity toward the end of an hour-long interview. Armitage "told me unequivocally that Mrs. Wilson worked in the CIA's Counter-proliferation Division and that she had suggested her husband's mission," Novak wrote, adding that Armitage seemed to want the information published. Armitage "noted that the story of Mrs. Wilson's role fit the style of the old Evans-Novak column - implying to me that it [the column] continued reporting Washington inside information." Novak says he confirmed Plame's status the next day by White House political adviser Karl Rove.
And the game was on - with Armitage not only in the loop but appearing to lead the charge.
I don't have time and space, nor you the intellectual capacity, to even begin to deconstruct the other foolishness you bring up. And, I'm sure you would prefer to remain ignorant at any rate.
Space Cadet, you're a joke. Your long list of conspiratorial "suggestions" totally fails to put Colin Powell's deputy in either the Rove or pro-war camp.
What you totally ignore is the fact that Wilson did lie, and that Plame lied when she claimed she did not suggest him for the trip.
I don't have time and space, nor you the intellectual capacity, to even begin to deconstruct the other foolishness you bring up.
If you lack time and space, you should have skipped your previous diatribe that proved nothing relevant to the case. I say that whatever you have to answer my other statements, it certainly isn't facts that prove them wrong. Take your best shot, bozo, I'll be happy to prove you are the one playing in propaganda land without relevant facts to back you up.
Go ahead Space Cadet, tell me how "Wilson debunked the Italian forgeries". We could all use some laughs at the expense of your foolishness.
Put it on Sunday's Open Thread, so everyone can laugh at your stupidity.
Armitage calling Novak after years of putting him off and, oh, by the way, mentioning the Plame/CIA connection, etc. is a "conspiratorial" suggestion?
You have nothing to say to the direct link between Armitage and Cheney's disinformation campaign against Wilson because all you have are the talking points you've been handed and dutifully regurgiate like the clueless sychophant that you are. I saw that in a second and figured it would be a waste of time to respond to someone who's got no game. You got nothing but the crap the spin machine hands you.
If you DO, then address how it is that Armitage happened to get the information about Plame in the first place and from whom and why he thought it was important that Novak put that information in print and how that squares with Armitage's characterizion of the interview with Novak. I really don't expect you've got an answer because it won't be found in the talking points you've been handed and you don't have the sense God gave a goose to figure it out yourself.
End of the time wasting task of educating Demonchaser. I'll talk to you again when you show you've got something besides talking points to vomit up.
Instead of sitting and waiting--for GW Brush and cohorts to come to the aid of another push on amnesty for illegals, is there a way we can file a dereliction of duty charge against Chertoff and possibly all public officials for refusing to enforce our laws? I do believe we may have some lawyers on this blog--any help???
"Americans are aware that their political class may not always act in their best interest. This belief is enshrined in the American character, its laws, and the very philosophy underpinning the U.S. Constitution. The Founding Fathers crafted things so that the "knaves" will be forced to abide by the will of the people, but they warned that their "natural progress" is to find ways to remain in power and increase that power at the people’s expense. They therefore also urged eternal vigilance, spiritedness, and the occasional revolt of the people."
Who is quoted here Misterbill? Also as is illustrated the solution is a grassroots uprising, it is up to the people to not put up with leaders who ignore the law. How do we get the people of say Massachusetts to NOT vote for Teddy?
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
botg re: MA--cannot be done. I have posted the following statement a tew times here: One of man's greatest assets is loyalty. One of man's greatest failures is blind loyalty. The fat girl drowner should be term limited as all of them should be.
The quote is from an article that I keep posting and pleading for NBers to read. It is to be found HERE. It is lengthy but well worth the reading. It is one of those things where I felt totally justified in my beliefs in what will happen here in America. previous
Our uprising can be bloodless if the threat enshrined in the second amendment rights we patriots have is to be believed.
We must demand from our leaders, the change we want. If it is only that the existing laws be enforced. Then it is that which we must demand.
The battle is not over. The phone calls and anger that got the bill derailed must continue until those in Washington DC understand the grave nature of their plight.
"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the people's liberty teeth keystone... the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable... more than 99% of them by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference. When firearms go, all goes, we need them every hour." ~ George Washington
How dare they say we almost had a Bill, if we had moret ime we will get this...some repub's saying this....let me tell you if that Bill passes with only 24 hr. background check amendment that passed in the Senate, that will allow terrorists, thugs, gang members, the filth in our society get through here legally, which we will end up paying them in the end of all of this, with the different amendments that passed and were added on....they will get an automatic Z card in less time than any of us can purchase a firearm...
It will be time for an uprising like this country hasn't seen in a long time...this is against everything that our forefathers and soldiers have fought and died for to keep this nation strong, free and brave.....
They seriously can't be this brain-dead can they/....Obviously the President is IMO...I heard his Saturday radio address today..I heard Thursday I think it was that he was meeting with the Senators Tues to see if they can't get this passed...well he is going ahead with this...President Bush may earn more disdain from me than Clinton did....I had respect and honor and backed this man...Clinton I never did from day one.
bigtimer, I, too, can't believe that President Bush can be this delusional. I think he really believes that if he legalizes all these "immigrants" they will, in gratitude, vote Republican. That's the only possible explanation I can come up with. But they won't, they will vote Democrat, almost to a man.
Rush Limbaugh used to defend the President. He would say that he was doing this or that (education, prescription drugs, etc.) to "take the issue away" from the Democrats. That, to me, always translated to "do what they want and they won't have that to beat on you with." Why he defended him for it, I don't know. I tried for weeks to get on his show to ask him about that. Because of my work schedule, I don't get to listen much anymore, but I don't think he is defending his giving in so much any more. I do remember, right after the Dems won back the House and Senate, Rush commenting on the President's remarks about the election. He said the only time Bush's face looked happy was when he was talking about being able to get the immigration bill through (with a Democratic Congress!!). It's really sad when the President seems to be more in tune with the other party.
Rush is a man I truly admire. He expresses his opinions very candidly, and he has that right. Just as you and I have the right.
You wouldn't know it , however; in these threads, where I'm not allowed to speak before they're calling me some vile name. But I FORGIVE them.
I also forgive Rush. I forgive Sean Hannity. Because my own life's experience runs counter to what they actually believe; all illegals are here only to sack our country. Or, to leech. Or to destroy our culture. Why would I agree with these preposterous ideas ? I maintain we should simply guard the border in the SAME way we've been doing it. Add more agents, help with technology. Pass stricter laws to control legal hiring; and help only those who deserve help to attain legal status.
Bush is doing all that can be asked of him. WITHOUT any help from many legislators of his own Party. AND, without Rush to support him, or talk radio. They heap scorn on a fine person, a great soul. Yet he tries to placate the hate-mongers. I shall always stand up for our President. W is trustworthy and humane, he hasn't got a mean bone in his body. May God be always be there to bless and keep our President.
Those folks will sleep much better now that you have forgiven them - point is you will never point to the question of illegality. Add to that you have never expressed why you hate or at least dismiss the law of the land. Thirdly, your own racisim against white anglos is probably too deep seated for even you to understand. When will you ever publish some proof to back up you assertions?
BTW, you forgivness of the above mentioned folks is based on what? That they had, and used their opposition to an idea that would automatically make millions citizens, AFTER breaking the law!? That they would be able to collect and receive the benefits, that others have worked years to receive? Can you prove me wrong that any of the illegals want to become assimilated, enjoy our culture, embrace us - as we have embraced others who came here, and wanted to be come US citizens? Can you point to facts or even heresay, that illegals WANT to be citizens, or they just want to come here and make, then send money home?
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dadV
How many times do we have to say this tumbler???? Fifty? One hundred? Ten Thousand?
WE DON'T WANT PEOPLE IN OUR COUNTRY WHO DO NOT RESPECT OUR LAWS!!!
It's about law breaking. It's about border security. It's about the OTMs (other than Mexicans) who come in side by side with the other illegals who will eventually pose a huge threat. It's about the millions of illegals who have no desire to become Americans or to assimilate, but only to make money to send home to their families in Central and South America. It's about our desire to retain our cultural identity while assimilating those who DO want to come to our country legally.
But none of that stuff I just said sinks into that thick racist skull of yours. All you see is a person who is a racist. I say build a wall, you say I'm a racist. I say deport those who invade our country, you say I'm a racist. I say don't let anyone who has come here illegally become a citizen and you call me a racist. Does it matter that I never ever bring up race? No, to you, the way you try and win is to scream racist as many times as possible.
You maintain that we do the status quo on the border? This is tantamount to saying "Let's keep the same flow of illegal aliens as we have now." We need the fence. And more agents. And allow them to shoot to kill anyone who shoots at them... rather than put two honorable agents in jail for doing their job.
You lose. Now get the hell out of MY country. You are no longer welcome. This right now is an empty demand... but it won't be in the next coming decades. Consider it demand of fealty. You are either an American or you are not. If you are not and you work to subvert the very fabric of American society. You are my enemy.
misterbill, that article, "Immigration and Usurpation: Elites, Power, and the People’s Will", should be required reading in every high school in America. In fact, EVERY American should be encouraged to read this article by Fredo Arias-King. Here's an excerpt:
Americans are aware that their political class may not always act in their best interest. This belief is enshrined in the American character, its laws, and the very philosophy underpinning the U.S. Constitution...
Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and others got it right... Indeed, the American political system works remarkably well. However, there are a handful of topics where the elites do not act in the interests of those they govern. Of these, the most notorious is the contentious issue of immigration. Why are politicians so keen on mass immigration while the common American is not? ...
… I met with almost 80 U.S. congressmen and senators ... With just over 50 of them, my colleagues and I spoke about immigration in some depth, ... My findings were reported in a Backgrounder published by the Center for Immigration Studies called "Politics by Other Means." … the basic finding was: Indeed, American politicians are overwhelmingly pro-immigration … and they do not always admit this to their constituents... This was true of both Democrats and Republicans.
These empirical findings seemed to confirm what some analysts without that level of access termed as a political "perfect storm" of widespread political-elite support for immigration despite its general unpopularity with the average American… why would nine-tenths of the legislators we spoke with be so keen on increasing immigration?
… Most of them seemed to be aware of the negative or at least doubtful consequences of mass immigration from Latin America, while still advocating mass immigration.
The familiar reasons usually discussed by the critics were there: Democrats wanted increased immigration because Latin American immigrants tend to vote Democrat once naturalized …; and Republicans like immigration because their sponsors... But there were other, more nuanced reasons that we came upon… and probably more difficult to detect without the type of access that we, as a Mexican delegation, had.
"Natural Progress"
… in what the U.S. Founding Fathers called "usurpation." Madison, Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and others devised a system and embedded the Constitution with mechanisms to thwart the "natural" tendency of the political class to usurp power—to become a permanent elitelording over pauperized subjects ... based the logic of their entire model on the independent character of the American folk. … they wrote in the Federalist Papers that in the end,
"If it be asked, what is to restrain the House of Representatives from making legal discriminations in favor of themselves and a particular class of the society? I answer: the genius of the whole system; the nature of just and constitutional laws; and above all, the vigilant and manly spirit which actuates the people of America …"
While Democratic legislators … interested in those immigrants and their offspring as a tool to increase the role of the government in society and the economy. … see Latin American immigrants and even Latino constituents as both more dependent on and accepting of active government programs ... and "dependable" in supporting a patron-client system and … to circumvent the exigencies of political life … expected daily by the average American.
Republican lawmakers … (all except five) were unambiguously in favor of amnesty and of continued mass immigration (at least from Mexico)... they believed that these immigrants are more malleable than the existing American: That … they could … become dependent on them. Republicans seemed to idealize the patron-client relation with Hispanics ...
… the Republican enthusiasm … that they could weaken the restraining and frustrating straightjacket devised by the Founding Fathers and abetted by American norms. In that idealized "new" United States, political uncertainty, demanding constituents, difficult elections, and accountability in general would "go away" … Hispanics would acquiesce and assist in the "natural progress" of these legislators to remain in power and increase the scope of that power. In this sense, Republicans and Democrats were similar.
… a legislator spoke ... of ... white constituents. One even called them "rednecks," ... Jefferson and Madison would have perhaps understood … for mass immigration seems to be correlated with examples of undermining the "just and constitutional laws"...
Bill Richardson, … governor of New Mexico, kindly stopped to speak to our delegation at the Democratic National Convention in Los Angeles. He commented favorably to us: "What do Hispanics want? Fully funded government programs!" The Economist mentioned about his state:
“New Mexico is a poor place, with one of the highest proportion of people living on food stamps … Its political tradition also long had a Latin American feel, based around a padrón system of clients and bosses. The bosses ran grocery stores, gave you credit, helped you if you needed a job. And all you had to do was vote for the Democrats …”…
Some legislators had also mentioned to us (oftentimes laughing) how they had "defanged" or "gutted" anti-immigration bills and measures, by neglecting to fund this program or tabling that provision, or deleting the other measure, etc. "Yes, we passed that law, but it can’t work because we also…"
…. My feeling is that if the vote on granting amnesty to the illegal migrants was up for a secret vote, then perhaps we would see a 90 percent vote in favor, coinciding with my random sample from six years ago…
"However, there are a handful of topics where the elites do not act in the interests of those they govern. Of these, the most notorious is the contentious issue of immigration. Why are politicians so keen on mass immigration while the common American is not? This has perplexed analysts."
I have backed your campaign. I have defended you against my twin's
barbs, a minority of my friends cuts and derogatory comments.
I have always looked at you as a powerful decent man. A man who was doing
right, not only by the country but by the millions of Iraqi
citizens who now enjoy the freedoms that come with a Democracy. I
understand that it is rough going. I understand that the US as it
is now constituted took decades to obtain the freedoms, rights and other
advances that the ordinary Iraqi citizen now enjoys. I am happy
with most of your decisions. I am however quickly souring on your
administration. And, if you want to know why:
1) Not pardoning Louis Libby.
2) Immigration (When will we enforce the laws we have currently on our
books)
If you ever wonder what your legacy will be. Like Reagan's (the fall of
communism, an economy that has been booming
for decades, etc.). Like Clinton's (BJs, need I say more?). Like your
father's (raising taxes when he promised not to, stopping the
Gulf War at 100 hours because it was a nice round number. Why not just
finish the job?).
"POLITICIANS & DIAPERS NEED TO BE CHANGED
OFTEN AND FOR THE SAME REASON"
vman92 - agreed. Earlier last week I posted that the legacy of GW Bush will be that he destroyed the party that Abraham Lincoln brought to power. That overshadows any other good or bad accomplishment. It is mostly due to his INSISTENCE on forcing American citizens to become members of the Nort American Union. If one takes a hard look at this issue, one can see why he supports the "Compromise Agreement". He believes if we take that first step (which is laden with traps e.g. the unenforcable triggers by Sen Isakson), we will have pried the door open to the NAU. To me , this makes him the worst traitor in the history of the United States. I have gone from one of his strongest supporters to an opponent.
Off the topic of politics for one minute, here is an interesting video interview with Tim Berners Lee, on the future of the Web - via new projects he's working on.
In a sense, he is indirectly responsible for everyone ultimately meeting here from around the world - so hope no one minds the techie break. He doesn,t really do that many live interviews now.
I love Rudy and he indeed will be the next President but it looks like he has gotten involved in the Paris Hilton case and gotten a job with the LAPD! Is this really RUDY?
Shut up and blog! If you claim to be a conservative, please don't disgrace yourself and conservatism by thinking and arguing like a liberal. Go Rudy!
Here is just one of other statements from DiFi of Ca.....enough to tell you volumes about these elite empty-suits that are bound and determined to get their way....
D-Calif., complained that critics continue to use the word "amnesty" to refer to proposals to legalize immigrants who agreed to pay fines, learn English and, at some point, briefly return to their home countries before obtaining lawful status in the U.S
I've listened to talk show hosts drumming up the opposition by using this word 'amnesty' over and over and over again," she said. In her 15 years in the Senate, Feinstein said, "I've never received more hate or more racist phone calls and threats."
Don't you love being called a racist again if you oppose this Shamnesty Bill...wonder who her PR agent is...hmmmmm.....sounds familiar with same talking points...from the same state too.........hmmmmm...
I for one am sick and tired f being called a racist...I do not think they are bringing more and more IRE to us out here with asinine RACIST agenda-driven statements like that.
Btw...Here is the link to Numbers USA that they were talking about in the article...everyone should keep up with this site that cares about this invasion trying to be crammed down our throats...misterb first posted this web-site...it is up-to-date and has everything you want to know about all of this....tons of info.
A large group of Taliban soldiers are moving down a road when they hear a voice call from behind a sand dune. "One U S Special Forces soldier is better than ten Taliban."
The Taliban commander quickly sends 10 of his best soldiers over the dune whereupon a gun battle breaks and continues for a few minutes, then silence.
The voice then calls out "One U S Special Forces soldier is better than one hundred Taliban."
Furious, the Taliban commander sends his next best 100 troops over the dune and instantly a huge gunfight commences. After 10 minutes of battle, again silence.
The American voice calls out again "One U S Special Forces soldier is better than one thousand Taliban."
The enraged Taliban Commander musters one thousand fighters and sends them across the dune. Cannons, rockets and machineguns ring out as a huge battle is fought. Then silence.
Eventually one wounded Taliban fighter crawls back over the dune and with his dying words tells his commander, "Don't send any more men, it's a trap. There's actually two of them."
A shout out to all of our wonderful men and women who are serving!
And to really get their goat (no pun) , one of them is a woman. (Saw the Thunderbirds, and 2 of the 6 flying today are woman - so it seemed only fair). Yeah, I know Flaxen Hair, the 1 made all the difference, let's just leave it at that, though probably like Liz Hasselback.
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dadV
Aswe know, the LAST place to go to find any real info (let alone depth) about those wonderful folks plotting to murder Americans, Jews, Christians and Infidels is todays MSM.
The New York Times would rather walk on gildered splinters of broken glass than report regulary from the Islamo-terrorist frontline (the planet)... Nah, Scooter Libby is far more interested than terror enablers like CAIR.
Check out today's intersting analysis on CAIR and your government. Reading any of this in YOUR MSM newspaper? Or TV News channel?
With CAIR, ISNA as Unindicted Co-Conspirators in Terrorism Case, Will USG Policy Toward them Change? By Douglas Farah
How many organizations designated as uninindicted co-conspirators in terrorism-related cases still get invited not only to participate, but to play lead roles in major U.S. government events?
Not many, but there seems to be an exception for the Islamist-Muslim Brotherhood groups, who stand front and center in upcoming Department of Justice events and recent events with the Department of Defense.
It is hard to believe the word has not gotten out in government circles, but maybe is hasn't.
You'll laugh. You'll cry. You'll talk jive! Just check out my latest YouTube video Hillary Clinton Talks Jive
Comments Policy
Wow, how about that captionfe
June 9, 2007 - 08:36 ET by liberal_bug_zapperWow, how about that captionfest....not much joke captioning going on there eh?
And what's up with SP??? Been trying to wrap my mind around that one.
And THREE CHEERS FOR AMERICA.... we defeated the latest try by those who really don't want America to last from taking our country from us.
Next, we need to call Congress until they enforce the building of the fence that was a part of the last bill signed into law in October of last year.
Fax machines READY!!!!... ok...
Anyone get this feeling that we have Paulovs dogs in the house??? And why is it that liberals are throwing supportive arguments Ron's way??? Hmmmm...
____________________________________________________
"We can only reason from what is; we can reason on actualities, but not on possibilities." ~ Thomas Paine
Liberal Bug Zapper,.....
June 9, 2007 - 09:06 ET by shawn228Liberal Bug Zapper,.............................
And what's up with SP??? Been trying to wrap my mind around that one.
That is why I do not get offended by SP anymore, he is a equal opportunist when it comes to insults. How does it feel to be on the receiving end of his .......opinions?
NB needs to remove yesterday'
June 9, 2007 - 09:09 ET by SouthJersey1953NB needs to remove yesterday's captionfest. Enough Paris already!!! Good greif. It was bad enough that H&C devoted almost their entire program to the spoiled girl.
No RINOs in '08 - Thompson/Hunter would be a good ticket; Thompson/Steele would be a great ticket
It has relevance
June 9, 2007 - 09:12 ET by LionKingIt has relevance. This delves into the liberal-psyche of "no responsibility", just "accept me", "I do not want to grow-up".
Paris Hilton is just today's Poster Child...and I do mean CHILD.
ditto that SJ.
June 9, 2007 - 09:13 ET by misterbillditto that SJ. while the country is in upheaval, the mindless continue to spend their time on issues that the MSM want to use to divert us from the real issues at hand, you know, trivial stuff like a war and illegal immigration and a prospering economy.
You don't seem to get it. Whi
June 9, 2007 - 09:42 ET by liberal_bug_zapperYou don't seem to get it. While it is somewhat boorish and mundane to be talking about Paris Hilton.... it is vital at the same time.
Our laws are important. It is also important that people not get around the law. Next, if the law is not being properly applied, then we have a problem of activist judges. They have ZERO right to change what the law says. None!
For example, if the law says no less than 10 days shall be served... and people are serving no time at all.... this is judicial activism. If people don't like the law, change it the way laws are supposed to be changed. Through the legislative process.
The story of Paris is an up front examination of the justice system and what is wrong or right. She needs to be held to account just like anyone else... and judges need to stop being activists and start applying the law as written.
____________________________________________________
"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen." ~ Samuel Adams
LBZIf the issue can center on
June 9, 2007 - 09:46 ET byLBZ
If the issue can center on the equal protection clause and not the bimbo; i'm with ya
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Well you could look at it as
June 9, 2007 - 10:17 ET by liberal_bug_zapperWell you could look at it as unfortunate or fortunate that she's such a media whore.... and that we can more closely examine the laws themselves. I made a very clear post, showing the charges as presented by the prosecution, where, unfortunately for her local NB cheerleader SP, recless driving, or statute 23103 was not in the list of charges. Instead, the charges required a minimum of 10 days be served, and she could have actually had a maximum of one year. So, it was really up to the judge. Considering the maximum time he could have given, I'd say he was pretty lenient.
____________________________________________________
"We will surely be policed when we fail to police ourselves." ~ George Washington
LBZThe specifics of the charg
June 9, 2007 - 10:25 ET byLBZ
The specifics of the charges are of no interest to me. I don't care if it's one year or 90 days maximum. My concern is solely the application of the sentance as ruled by the judge, and is the Sheriff enforcing the court order equally regardless of bank account.
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
I understand that to us, the
June 9, 2007 - 10:29 ET by liberal_bug_zapperI understand that to us, the specifics are not important as is the application of the law. However, in order to beat back stupidity, the only weapon of choice are the facts and the truth.
____________________________________________________
"We can only reason from what is; we can reason on actualities, but not on possibilities." ~ Thomas Paine
LBZ,I took on SP as well, and
June 9, 2007 - 17:47 ET by BEGRUNTLBZ,
I took on SP as well, and after I told him I worked for the LASD for over 17 years, and explained to him how the process works, all I got was "crickets" deafening silence. I have worked the courts, jails, patrol, and headquarters, and told him the Sheriff cannot over ride a judges order when it specifically said no home confinment, or otherwise. I dont think he has the same credentials I do.
Hi BEGRUNT...Just wanted you
June 9, 2007 - 18:07 ET by bigtimerHi BEGRUNT...
Just wanted you to know I saw your post to me and dahlia this morning...and thank you.
I appreciate that info too...although by now I had heard that.
...anyway...I am from Calif. and I know Hollywood and other important people along with Politico's have been greasin' the palms of the LAPD from way back when....so of course it was one of the first things that crossed my mind..it was like duh....lol.
Parker was a pro at it....
I just was so aggravated at the msm doing this 24/7 after a victory for us the evening before that has to do with our national security...not the asinine reporting about Paris Hilton...and Sports attacks on us all....
He gets that way about every three months.....especially if it comes to some gal he thinks is in love with him...or could be.
LMAO!
Thanks Big,I have been in the
June 9, 2007 - 23:20 ET by BEGRUNTThanks Big,
I have been in the belly of the beast, and you are absolutely correct, the "good ole boys club" is alive and well. I feel at least, people will take note, I only can hope. But more is to come in the next few weeks.................it will knock your socks off,,,,,,,I guarantee, it will blow you away........I will let you know before.
BEGRUNT...Please do.Thank you
June 9, 2007 - 23:23 ET by bigtimerBEGRUNT...
Please do.
Thank you.
Bush and his henchmen need to
June 9, 2007 - 10:11 ET byBush and his henchmen need to be held accountable.
Too bad scooter libby is the only scapegoat. All the other kings men have so far gotten off scott free. Where is the justice?
"full of sh*t" Monty
June 9, 2007 - 10:14 ET by LionKingWhat's the crime? Tell me moonbat, what crime has Bush committed?
Oh that's easy, he sides with
June 9, 2007 - 10:19 ET by liberal_bug_zapperOh that's easy, he sides with conservatives more than liberals and has an (R) beside his name.
____________________________________________________
"We can only reason from what is; we can reason on actualities, but not on possibilities." ~ Thomas Paine
LK Monty can't even answer if
June 9, 2007 - 10:20 ET byLK
Monty can't even answer if he is for or against the 'Fairness Doctrine' and that answer at least has substance. To answer your question requires ether.
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Just remember, folks. Montana
June 9, 2007 - 11:48 ET by Roger the ShrubberJust remember, folks. Montana here keeps claiming to be politically independent. No moonbattery going on around here, nosiree.
One of the most absurd talkin
June 9, 2007 - 12:22 ET by Space CowboyOne of the most absurd talking points that has emerged from the spin machine in the wake of Scooter Libby's sentencing for perjury and obstruction of justice is that Libby's conviction and sentence are a travesty because no "underlying crime was committed." Since special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald didn't charge anyone with the leak of Valerie Plame's classified status - even though he knew early in the investigation that Richard Armitage told Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward of Plame's work at the CIA - then why should Libby be punished whew no one else was?
First, the threshold for conviction for a violation of the statute that covered this leak is very high. Fitzgerald would have had to prove that the leaker knowingly intended to reveal an agent's status - a difficult requirement. And more importantly, this absurd line of reasoning ignores completely that Fitzgerald wasn't able to fully investigate this case because of Libby's interference.
I guess the point many are now making - including most of the Republican candidates running for the presidency - is that lying repeatedly to a federal grand jury is allowed if it ultimately turns out that the crime being investigated didn't reach the threshold for indictment.
Actually Space Cadet, the rel
June 9, 2007 - 20:01 ET by DemonhunterActually Space Cadet, the relevant facts are that Fitzgerald knew Armitage was the leaker before he even deposed Libby. That brings up the salient point of just what exactly was Fitzgerald investigating?
Secondly, the principal witness whose memory differed from Libby's, Tim Russert, had memory problems of his own, and his courtroom testimony was a different story than his original deposition. That BTW, is grounds for perjury charges.
Thirdly, Russert's courtroom testimony was contradicted by public statements made previously by his "colleague", Andrea Mitchell.
In addition to that, Plame has just perjured herself on the matter in Congressional testimony. Justice would require releasing Libby; and/or prosecuting Russert, Plame, and Wilson among others.
But, I do want to congratulate you. Despite your lack of grasp of the facts and attempt at spin, you are the first liberal I have seen actually mention the name Armitage.
If it's not the Crusades, it's the cartoons
The disinformation campaign t
June 9, 2007 - 22:25 ET by Space CowboyThe disinformation campaign to create confusion around the Plamegate issue has been easy going for the right-wing echo chamber - especially with clueless clones like you lining up to drink their kool-aid. Grasp this fact, dumbo. The reason so few talk about Armitage is because the MSM - you know, the LIBERALLY-BIASED MSM - has done such a miserable job in exposing the direct link between Cheney's office and it's campaign to discredit Wilson and Armitage.
For starters, Armitage was a back chanel to the White House from State used because of the dicey relationship between Colon Powell and the neo-cons in the White House. So, it was no suprise that Armitage would have been in the loop. The link is unambiguous between Libby and Armitage through Marc Grossman, a neo-con ally of Libby's in the State Department who Libby asked to prepare a memo on Wilson. Armitage got his information that he passed on to Woodward and Novak from Grossman's June 10, 2003 memo.
So, all the spin about Armitage having no agenda because he was considered a "moderate" or wasn't connected to the operation run from Cheney's office and thus not part of a campaign to discredit Wilson, is pure crap. Ditto Armitage's own story about "just happening to mention" Plame's status it at the end of a conversation with Novak.
Soon after Grossman had prepared a memo for Libby with information that Wilson's wife worked for the CIA and was involved in arranging for Wilson to go to Niger, reporter Bob Woodward interviews Armitage for a book. Armitage tells Woodward in a taped interview that Wilson's wife works for the CIA.
Around June 23, conservative columnist Robert Novak received a surprise call from Armitage's office offering an interview. In a Sept. 14, 2006 column, Novak said: "During his quarter of a century in Washington, I had had no contact with Armitage before our fateful interview. I tried to see him in the first 2 ½ years of the Bush administration, but he rebuffed me - summarily and with disdain, I thought. Then, without explanation, in June 2003, Armitage's office said the deputy secretary would see me."
Novak later recalled that Armitage divulged Plame's identity toward the end of an hour-long interview. Armitage "told me unequivocally that Mrs. Wilson worked in the CIA's Counter-proliferation Division and that she had suggested her husband's mission," Novak wrote, adding that Armitage seemed to want the information published. Armitage "noted that the story of Mrs. Wilson's role fit the style of the old Evans-Novak column - implying to me that it [the column] continued reporting Washington inside information." Novak says he confirmed Plame's status the next day by White House political adviser Karl Rove.
And the game was on - with Armitage not only in the loop but appearing to lead the charge.
I don't have time and space, nor you the intellectual capacity, to even begin to deconstruct the other foolishness you bring up. And, I'm sure you would prefer to remain ignorant at any rate.
Space Cadet, you're a joke.
June 10, 2007 - 00:26 ET by DemonhunterSpace Cadet, you're a joke. Your long list of conspiratorial "suggestions" totally fails to put Colin Powell's deputy in either the Rove or pro-war camp.
What you totally ignore is the fact that Wilson did lie, and that Plame lied when she claimed she did not suggest him for the trip.
I don't have time and space, nor you the intellectual capacity, to even begin to deconstruct the other foolishness you bring up.
If you lack time and space, you should have skipped your previous diatribe that proved nothing relevant to the case. I say that whatever you have to answer my other statements, it certainly isn't facts that prove them wrong. Take your best shot, bozo, I'll be happy to prove you are the one playing in propaganda land without relevant facts to back you up.
Go ahead Space Cadet, tell me how "Wilson debunked the Italian forgeries". We could all use some laughs at the expense of your foolishness.
Put it on Sunday's Open Thread, so everyone can laugh at your stupidity.
If it's not the Crusades, it's the cartoons
Armitage calling Novak after
June 10, 2007 - 16:12 ET by Space CowboyArmitage calling Novak after years of putting him off and, oh, by the way, mentioning the Plame/CIA connection, etc. is a "conspiratorial" suggestion?
You have nothing to say to the direct link between Armitage and Cheney's disinformation campaign against Wilson because all you have are the talking points you've been handed and dutifully regurgiate like the clueless sychophant that you are. I saw that in a second and figured it would be a waste of time to respond to someone who's got no game. You got nothing but the crap the spin machine hands you.
If you DO, then address how it is that Armitage happened to get the information about Plame in the first place and from whom and why he thought it was important that Novak put that information in print and how that squares with Armitage's characterizion of the interview with Novak. I really don't expect you've got an answer because it won't be found in the talking points you've been handed and you don't have the sense God gave a goose to figure it out yourself.
End of the time wasting task of educating Demonchaser. I'll talk to you again when you show you've got something besides talking points to vomit up.
Instead of sitting and waiting--
June 9, 2007 - 08:41 ET by misterbillInstead of sitting and waiting--for GW Brush and cohorts to come to the aid of another push on amnesty for illegals, is there a way we can file a dereliction of duty charge against Chertoff and possibly all public officials for refusing to enforce our laws? I do believe we may have some lawyers on this blog--any help???
Good thought MrB, the problem
June 9, 2007 - 08:48 ET byGood thought MrB, the problem is that the charges would have to come from AG Alberto Gonzales
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
botg---AG
June 9, 2007 - 08:50 ET by misterbillbotg---AG I accept your statement, but I still wonder why a citizen cannot file a complaint against a Federal employee.
Our pols--both sides
June 9, 2007 - 08:53 ET by misterbill"Americans are aware that their political class may not always act in their best interest. This belief is enshrined in the American character, its laws, and the very philosophy underpinning the U.S. Constitution. The Founding Fathers crafted things so that the "knaves" will be forced to abide by the will of the people, but they warned that their "natural progress" is to find ways to remain in power and increase that power at the people’s expense. They therefore also urged eternal vigilance, spiritedness, and the occasional revolt of the people."
Who is quoted here Misterbill
June 9, 2007 - 08:58 ET byWho is quoted here Misterbill? Also as is illustrated the solution is a grassroots uprising, it is up to the people to not put up with leaders who ignore the law. How do we get the people of say Massachusetts to NOT vote for Teddy?
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
botg re: MA--cannot be done
June 9, 2007 - 09:07 ET by misterbillbotg re: MA--cannot be done. I have posted the following statement a tew times here: One of man's greatest assets is loyalty. One of man's greatest failures is blind loyalty. The fat girl drowner should be term limited as all of them should be.
The quote is from an article that I keep posting and pleading for NBers to read. It is to be found HERE. It is lengthy but well worth the reading. It is one of those things where I felt totally justified in my beliefs in what will happen here in America. previous
Our uprising can be bloodless
June 9, 2007 - 10:25 ET by liberal_bug_zapperOur uprising can be bloodless if the threat enshrined in the second amendment rights we patriots have is to be believed.
We must demand from our leaders, the change we want. If it is only that the existing laws be enforced. Then it is that which we must demand.
The battle is not over. The phone calls and anger that got the bill derailed must continue until those in Washington DC understand the grave nature of their plight.
____________________________________________________
"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the people's liberty teeth keystone... the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable... more than 99% of them by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference. When firearms go, all goes, we need them every hour." ~ George Washington
Exactly lbz.We have only just
June 9, 2007 - 15:38 ET by bigtimerExactly lbz.
We have only just begun.
How dare they say we almost had a Bill, if we had moret ime we will get this...some repub's saying this....let me tell you if that Bill passes with only 24 hr. background check amendment that passed in the Senate, that will allow terrorists, thugs, gang members, the filth in our society get through here legally, which we will end up paying them in the end of all of this, with the different amendments that passed and were added on....they will get an automatic Z card in less time than any of us can purchase a firearm...
It will be time for an uprising like this country hasn't seen in a long time...this is against everything that our forefathers and soldiers have fought and died for to keep this nation strong, free and brave.....
They seriously can't be this brain-dead can they/....Obviously the President is IMO...I heard his Saturday radio address today..I heard Thursday I think it was that he was meeting with the Senators Tues to see if they can't get this passed...well he is going ahead with this...President Bush may earn more disdain from me than Clinton did....I had respect and honor and backed this man...Clinton I never did from day one.
bigtimer, I, too, can't bel
June 9, 2007 - 19:19 ET by motherbeltbigtimer, I, too, can't believe that President Bush can be this delusional. I think he really believes that if he legalizes all these "immigrants" they will, in gratitude, vote Republican. That's the only possible explanation I can come up with. But they won't, they will vote Democrat, almost to a man.
Rush Limbaugh used to defend the President. He would say that he was doing this or that (education, prescription drugs, etc.) to "take the issue away" from the Democrats. That, to me, always translated to "do what they want and they won't have that to beat on you with." Why he defended him for it, I don't know. I tried for weeks to get on his show to ask him about that. Because of my work schedule, I don't get to listen much anymore, but I don't think he is defending his giving in so much any more. I do remember, right after the Dems won back the House and Senate, Rush commenting on the President's remarks about the election. He said the only time Bush's face looked happy was when he was talking about being able to get the immigration bill through (with a Democratic Congress!!). It's really sad when the President seems to be more in tune with the other party.
dear motherbeaut:
June 9, 2007 - 19:40 ET by tumblerRush is a man I truly admire. He expresses his opinions very candidly, and he has that right. Just as you and I have the right.
You wouldn't know it , however; in these threads, where I'm not allowed to speak before they're calling me some vile name. But I FORGIVE them.
I also forgive Rush. I forgive Sean Hannity. Because my own life's experience runs counter to what they actually believe; all illegals are here only to sack our country. Or, to leech. Or to destroy our culture. Why would I agree with these preposterous ideas ? I maintain we should simply guard the border in the SAME way we've been doing it. Add more agents, help with technology. Pass stricter laws to control legal hiring; and help only those who deserve help to attain legal status.
Bush is doing all that can be asked of him. WITHOUT any help from many legislators of his own Party. AND, without Rush to support him, or talk radio. They heap scorn on a fine person, a great soul. Yet he tries to placate the hate-mongers. I shall always stand up for our President. W is trustworthy and humane, he hasn't got a mean bone in his body. May God be always be there to bless and keep our President.
Those folks will sleep much b
June 10, 2007 - 07:44 ET by FastEdThose folks will sleep much better now that you have forgiven them - point is you will never point to the question of illegality. Add to that you have never expressed why you hate or at least dismiss the law of the land. Thirdly, your own racisim against white anglos is probably too deep seated for even you to understand. When will you ever publish some proof to back up you assertions?
BTW, you forgivness of the above mentioned folks is based on what? That they had, and used their opposition to an idea that would automatically make millions citizens, AFTER breaking the law!? That they would be able to collect and receive the benefits, that others have worked years to receive? Can you prove me wrong that any of the illegals want to become assimilated, enjoy our culture, embrace us - as we have embraced others who came here, and wanted to be come US citizens? Can you point to facts or even heresay, that illegals WANT to be citizens, or they just want to come here and make, then send money home?
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
Fast EdYou lack one thing:
June 10, 2007 - 09:38 ET byFast Ed
You lack one thing: click on Tumbler --- 'page not found' Eugene has left the building lets hope it sticks this time.
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Reverend Jesse Tumbler
June 10, 2007 - 09:56 ET by DontFeedTheTrollsYou lack one thing: click on Tumbler --- 'page not found'
So the Right Reverend Jesse Tumbler has taken his pack of race cards and gotten himself 'deported' again.
How nice.
It's gonna be quiet for a while.
D
A day without NewsBusters is like a day without sunshine.
How many times do we have to
June 11, 2007 - 01:17 ET by liberal_bug_zapperHow many times do we have to say this tumbler???? Fifty? One hundred? Ten Thousand?
WE DON'T WANT PEOPLE IN OUR COUNTRY WHO DO NOT RESPECT OUR LAWS!!!
It's about law breaking. It's about border security. It's about the OTMs (other than Mexicans) who come in side by side with the other illegals who will eventually pose a huge threat. It's about the millions of illegals who have no desire to become Americans or to assimilate, but only to make money to send home to their families in Central and South America. It's about our desire to retain our cultural identity while assimilating those who DO want to come to our country legally.
But none of that stuff I just said sinks into that thick racist skull of yours. All you see is a person who is a racist. I say build a wall, you say I'm a racist. I say deport those who invade our country, you say I'm a racist. I say don't let anyone who has come here illegally become a citizen and you call me a racist. Does it matter that I never ever bring up race? No, to you, the way you try and win is to scream racist as many times as possible.
You maintain that we do the status quo on the border? This is tantamount to saying "Let's keep the same flow of illegal aliens as we have now." We need the fence. And more agents. And allow them to shoot to kill anyone who shoots at them... rather than put two honorable agents in jail for doing their job.
You lose. Now get the hell out of MY country. You are no longer welcome. This right now is an empty demand... but it won't be in the next coming decades. Consider it demand of fealty. You are either an American or you are not. If you are not and you work to subvert the very fabric of American society. You are my enemy.
____________________________________________________
"We can only reason from what is; we can reason on actualities, but not on possibilities." ~ Thomas Paine
misterbill, "Immigration and Usurpation: Elites, Power, and ...
June 9, 2007 - 15:19 ET by Ten7smisterbill, that article, "Immigration and Usurpation: Elites, Power, and the People’s Will", should be required reading in every high school in America. In fact, EVERY American should be encouraged to read this article by Fredo Arias-King. Here's an excerpt:
immigration
June 9, 2007 - 08:56 ET by misterbill"However, there are a handful of topics where the elites do not act in the interests of those they govern. Of these, the most notorious is the contentious issue of immigration. Why are politicians so keen on mass immigration while the common American is not? This has perplexed analysts."
An open letter to My President.
June 9, 2007 - 09:13 ET by vman92Mr. Bush,
I have backed your campaign. I have defended you against my twin's
barbs, a minority of my friends cuts and derogatory comments.
I have always looked at you as a powerful decent man. A man who was doing
right, not only by the country but by the millions of Iraqi
citizens who now enjoy the freedoms that come with a Democracy. I
understand that it is rough going. I understand that the US as it
is now constituted took decades to obtain the freedoms, rights and other
advances that the ordinary Iraqi citizen now enjoys. I am happy
with most of your decisions. I am however quickly souring on your
administration. And, if you want to know why:
1) Not pardoning Louis Libby.
2) Immigration (When will we enforce the laws we have currently on our
books)
If you ever wonder what your legacy will be. Like Reagan's (the fall of
communism, an economy that has been booming
for decades, etc.). Like Clinton's (BJs, need I say more?). Like your
father's (raising taxes when he promised not to, stopping the
Gulf War at 100 hours because it was a nice round number. Why not just
finish the job?).
"POLITICIANS & DIAPERS NEED TO BE
CHANGED
OFTEN AND FOR THE SAME REASON"
3) Not pardoning the border a
June 9, 2007 - 09:16 ET by SouthJersey19533) Not pardoning the border agents that are only trying to do thier jobs (and not forcing your AG to back them up)
No RINOs in '08 - Thompson/Hunter would be a good ticket; Thompson/Steele would be a great ticket
vman92 - agreed
June 9, 2007 - 09:23 ET by misterbillvman92 - agreed. Earlier last week I posted that the legacy of GW Bush will be that he destroyed the party that Abraham Lincoln brought to power. That overshadows any other good or bad accomplishment. It is mostly due to his INSISTENCE on forcing American citizens to become members of the Nort American Union. If one takes a hard look at this issue, one can see why he supports the "Compromise Agreement". He believes if we take that first step (which is laden with traps e.g. the unenforcable triggers by Sen Isakson), we will have pried the door open to the NAU. To me , this makes him the worst traitor in the history of the United States. I have gone from one of his strongest supporters to an opponent.
I was going to put out a new
June 9, 2007 - 09:24 ET by Roger the ShrubberI was going to put out a new Shrub Report today, but then noticed that the all-time classic comedy, "Scooby-Doo" is on tv.
I willl leave you all, however, with some light reading for the weekend, and another website I had a link for. Enjoy!
P.S.: As a special bonus, try to guess which of our more left-addled NB comrades this person is?
balboa??
June 9, 2007 - 09:28 ET by misterbillbalboa??
Balbozo>?
June 9, 2007 - 09:42 ET by Guy Arthur ThomasBalbozo? Isn't balbozo a woman? But then looking at the pictures...I haven't quite figured out what it is.
Shut up and blog! If you claim to be a conservative, please don't disgrace yourself and conservatism by thinking and arguing like a liberal. Go Rudy!
OK then --Is it a full blown ---
June 9, 2007 - 09:46 ET by misterbillOK then --Is it a full blown ---chia--that got too much water?????
Oh thanks a lot... I've been
June 9, 2007 - 15:56 ET by balboaOh thanks a lot...
I've been working on perfecting the Gallagher hair style, and I think I got it nailed, don't you?
my guess
June 9, 2007 - 09:44 ET by LionKingJ Frank Wilson?
Leon? - Knows how to put his
June 10, 2007 - 07:46 ET by FastEdLeon? - Knows how to put his out air to good use, rides around -- NO - wait! Sport Politics?
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
Interesting Interview with Tim Berners Lee
June 9, 2007 - 09:30 ET by securityOff the topic of politics for one minute, here is an interesting video interview with Tim Berners Lee, on the future of the Web - via new projects he's working on.
In a sense, he is indirectly responsible for everyone ultimately meeting here from around the world - so hope no one minds the techie break. He doesn,t really do that many live interviews now.
http://news.com.com/1606-2-6189377.html
THANK YOU NB IT
June 9, 2007 - 09:35 ET byTHANK YOU NB IT !!! my buttons are back
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Funny @$$ Commercial
June 9, 2007 - 09:52 ET by Guy Arthur ThomasDPOST
Funny @$$ Commercial
June 9, 2007 - 09:52 ET by Guy Arthur ThomasThis is a funny commerical and one I think will be play on VH-1 in 10-15 years on, "I love the 00's" Nausea, Heartburn, Indigestion, Upset Stomach, Diarrhea
Shut up and blog! If you claim to be a conservative, please don't disgrace yourself and conservatism by thinking and arguing like a liberal. Go Rudy!
Great commercial. Thanks for
June 9, 2007 - 11:43 ET by Roger the ShrubberGreat commercial. Thanks for making my day, Guy!
Is Rudy Giuliani working with LAPD?!
June 9, 2007 - 12:36 ET by Guy Arthur ThomasI love Rudy and he indeed will be the next President but it looks like he has gotten involved in the Paris Hilton case and gotten a job with the LAPD! Is this really RUDY?
Shut up and blog! If you claim to be a conservative, please don't disgrace yourself and conservatism by thinking and arguing like a liberal. Go Rudy!
YES
June 9, 2007 - 15:39 ET byYES
Illegal Immigration Bill
June 9, 2007 - 17:54 ET by bigtimerThis article tells us we had better be ready to fight as hard if not harder than last time...until they HEAR us out here once and for all...
Here is just one of other statements from DiFi of Ca.....enough to tell you volumes about these elite empty-suits that are bound and determined to get their way....
D-Calif., complained that critics continue to use the word "amnesty" to refer to proposals to legalize immigrants who agreed to pay fines, learn English and, at some point, briefly return to their home countries before obtaining lawful status in the U.S
I've listened to talk show hosts drumming up the opposition by using this word 'amnesty' over and over and over again," she said. In her 15 years in the Senate, Feinstein said, "I've never received more hate or more racist phone calls and threats."
Don't you love being called a racist again if you oppose this Shamnesty Bill...wonder who her PR agent is...hmmmmm.....sounds familiar with same talking points...from the same state too.........hmmmmm...
I for one am sick and tired f being called a racist...I do not think they are bringing more and more IRE to us out here with asinine RACIST agenda-driven statements like that.
Btw...Here is the link to Numbers USA that they were talking about in the article...everyone should keep up with this site that cares about this invasion trying to be crammed down our throats...misterb first posted this web-site...it is up-to-date and has everything you want to know about all of this....tons of info.
The Taliban...a great joke I
June 9, 2007 - 20:27 ET by BlondeThe Taliban...a great joke I read here.
A large group of Taliban soldiers are moving down a road when they hear a voice call from behind a sand dune. "One U S Special Forces soldier is better than ten Taliban."
The Taliban commander quickly sends 10 of his best soldiers over the dune whereupon a gun battle breaks and continues for a few minutes, then silence.
The voice then calls out "One U S Special Forces soldier is better than one hundred Taliban."
Furious, the Taliban commander sends his next best 100 troops over the dune and instantly a huge gunfight commences. After 10 minutes of battle, again silence.
The American voice calls out again "One U S Special Forces soldier is better than one thousand Taliban."
The enraged Taliban Commander musters one thousand fighters and sends them across the dune. Cannons, rockets and machineguns ring out as a huge battle is fought. Then silence.
Eventually one wounded Taliban fighter crawls back over the dune and with his dying words tells his commander, "Don't send any more men, it's a trap. There's actually two of them."
A shout out to all of our wonderful men and women who are serving!
And to really get their goat
June 10, 2007 - 19:06 ET by FastEdAnd to really get their goat (no pun) , one of them is a woman. (Saw the Thunderbirds, and 2 of the 6 flying today are woman - so it seemed only fair). Yeah, I know Flaxen Hair, the 1 made all the difference, let's just leave it at that, though probably like Liz Hasselback.
There is no sense in being stupid, if you can't prove it! - my dad V
the MSM couldn't CAIRless
June 10, 2007 - 09:57 ET by Jack BauerAswe know, the LAST place to go to find any real info (let alone depth) about those wonderful folks plotting to murder Americans, Jews, Christians and Infidels is todays MSM.
The New York Times would rather walk on gildered splinters of broken glass than report regulary from the Islamo-terrorist frontline (the planet)... Nah, Scooter Libby is far more interested than terror enablers like CAIR.
Thank goodness for the best blog on the subject
The Counter Terrorism Blog...
Check out today's intersting analysis on CAIR and your government. Reading any of this in YOUR MSM newspaper? Or TV News channel?