Today on Blogcritics
Home » Could It Get Any Worse for Bush? Sure, Just Watch

Could It Get Any Worse for Bush? Sure, Just Watch

Please Share...Tweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

You have to wonder how the president puts up with it, day after day, receiving nothing but increasingly bad news — except from his ultra-conservative Supreme Court.  He now has the honor of having the lowest ratings for the longest period of any president since Julius Caesar in Rome, and that was a long time ago.

A poll by the American Research Group reported Friday that nearly half of Americans want Bush impeached.  Over half want to see VP Cheney get the axe.  The AFP story acknowledged that Congress is unlikely to act on impeachment, although that's a mystery as well.  What do they have to do?  Have sex with interns or something?  But act or not, it's another in a series of body blows this week that has to leave the administration wondering who cast a spell on them.

Today's Washington Post ran a story on independent voters in Virginia, that former bastion of Republican strength.   Based on a survey conducted by The Post, The Henry J. Kaiser Foundation, and Harvard, not only are independents more likely to support a Democrat for president, 46 percent named Bush the worst president since 1960.  No one else got more than 15 percent.  Half of Virginia independents named Busher the worst president since 1960.  That's gotta sting.

An AP story released just recently found that Dick Cheney's popularity has now sunk as low as Bush's.  Worse, many Republicans are growing weary of his bizarre concepts of the Constitution and the Vice President's place in the grand scheme of things.  Bush may be pathetic.  Cheney is downright bizarre.  He's the best reason not to impeach the president.

Even Bush's formerly strongest war supporters, many looking at reelection in 2008, are calling on Bush to start doing something in Iraq that will work.  When Republican Senators such as John Warner (VA), Pete Dominici (NM), Richard Lugar, George Voinovich (OH), Susan Collins (ME), John Sununu (NH), and Lamar Alexander (TN) all call for a new idea, any new idea or actually support some Democratic proposals…well, what's a president to do?  I'd suggest Disney World, but he'd probably get booed out of the park.

Perhaps no president has been so ill-served by his closest advisors:  Cheney and the thankfully-departed Rumsfeld.  With Bush having no foreign policy experience, he was dependent on them, and they've let him down every step of the way. 

Will it get worse?  The economy's a mixed bag.  If you're wealthy, it's great.  If you're poor or middle class, you're struggling.  The environment?  I've just bought ocean front property in the mountains of West Virginia.  We're hated around the world, and we don't even think much of ourselves.  Of course it's going to get worse.

I never thought I'd write this, but I actually feel sorry for the Busher.  Man, forget the pledge, take a shot of something and relax.  I recommend Jameson Irish Whiskey.  (That, alas, is an unpaid endorsement, and if the Middleton Brewery doesn't start recognizing and appreciating and paying for all the free publicity I give them…well, there'll be heck to pay, I can tell you.) 

Powered by

About Mark Schannon

Retired crisis & risk manager/communications expert; extensive public relations experience in most areas over 30 years. Still available for extraordinary opportunities of mind-numbing complexity. Life-long liberal agnostic...or is that agnostic liberal.
  • http://www.whats-thebigidea.com Jeff Friedberg

    Uh…Mark. Bush isn’t running for president. Therefore—Mark—so what?

    Also—Mark—who’s your audience? If it’s me, I voted for him twice but now can’t wait to see him out of office and off the teeeveee, but I’ll still vote for the most conservative Repub’ I can find—Mark :)

    Because—mark—I am sooo peeved by hit pieces on Conserves’ that there is no Conserve’, now, who can do any wrong at all. See? Mark? Nothing.

  • Clavos

    I was with you until the next-to-last ‘graf, Mark.

    I’m middle class, and I’m most decidedly NOT struggling. I’m not getting rich, but I’m not trying to, either.

    I don’t know anybody who considers themselves middle class and who feels they’re struggling, either.

    If you’re buying oceanfront property in the mountains of West Virginia, don’t pay too much for it; there are two chances that it ever will be oceanfront: slim and none, and slim just left town.

    Even the most wild-eyed “scientist” isn’t predicting a rise in the oceans of more than twenty feet, and it probably won’t happen before this Christmas.

    We’ve been hated around the world since I was a kid, and I’m no spring chicken. The rich always are hated by the have-nots.

    On a personal level, I don’t go out of my way to irritate or annoy people (well, maybe some of them), but I don’t really care if people like me either, particularly if I have to change to conform to their idea of what I should be like in order for them to do so.

    I think we as a nation should do the same; one doesn’t have to be loved to be a good person.

    Neither does a country.

  • Les Slater

    Mr. Bush seems to be taking all this pretty well. He’s probably laughing about all the stupid critisms and poll figures.

    Nobody critisizing him has anything better to offer. When it comes time to vote, congress totally backs his war policies.

    The Republican ‘desertions’ mean absolutly NOTHING.

  • Clavos

    Glad to see you’re back commenting again, Les (meant to say so the other day).

    I always enjoy reading (and sometimes responding to) your comments, because you’re one of the few on BC who usually has a unique perspective, even if I don’t always agree with you. This time (#3), I do.

    In short, you make me think more than most.

    Welcome back.

  • etaoin shrdlu

    excuse me but I think you’ve mispelled “I am a complete idiot”

  • http://www.myspace.com/135553418 Anthony Grande

    OK…first:

    Lowest approval rating since Julius Caesar? I hope you are joking.

    second: Talk about the approval rating of your Democratic ran Congress. Bush’s approval rating is as twice as high as Nancy Pelosi’s and Harry Reid.

    Third: The Supreme Court is ultra Conservative and the only supporters of Bush? Man, where are you from?

    Anthony aka Hardcore Conservative

  • REMF

    Anthony;
    What are doing out of the Marines and back from Iraq already? Did you get wounded over there?
    – MCH

  • http://www.myspace.com/135553418 Anthony Grande

    Hey MCH…you have a great memory.

    I went Army instead of Marines. I went to boot camp last summer then came back for my senior year in high school. Now I am shipping out for Interrogator school in Arizona on Aug 7.

    So I am here to annoy you for another month.

    Anthony

  • Clavos

    Interesting.

    It’s not called “boot camp” in the Army as I recall, Anthony. What is it called again? I’ve forgotten.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    you can’t get into the Army without a diploma or a GED

    “interrogator school”?? what the fuck is the MOS for that?

    the AG story, changes every time, and facts get made up as required..like the rating for Reid and Pelosi (both of whom are idiots) being half that of W’s 29%

    pure bullshit

    Excelsior?

  • Pug

    Mr. Bush may be laughing about all the criticism and the poll numbers, but I’ll bet Susan Collins, Gordon Smith, John Sununu, Mike Voinovich, Norm Coleman and even Pete Domenici aren’t. I’ll also bet the 28 Republican congressional incumbents who squeaked by with less than a 3% margin in 2004 aren’t laughing much either. These folks would like to keep their lucrative careers going.

  • Anthony Grande

    Well, I see nothing has changed since a year ago when I left.

    As was talking so non-military folks would understand.

    I went to Army Basic Training last summer and the MOS I am going to train for is 97E – Human Intelligence Collector. I will be leaving for Fort Huachuca, Az in August.

    Anthony

  • Les Slater

    “… but I’ll bet Susan Collins, Gordon Smith, John Sununu, Mike Voinovich, Norm Coleman and even Pete Domenici aren’t.”

    And that is the only reason some repubs are taking public distance from the current administration and its policies. It means absolutely NOTHING of substance.

  • Anthony Grande

    And oh yeah…Gonzo

    As long as you are on track with you credits you can join the Army as a 17 year old Junior. It is part of the new split-option program.

    Anthony

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    The AFP story acknowledged that Congress is unlikely to act on impeachment, although that’s a mystery as well. What do they have to do? Have sex with interns or something?

    I think I have the answer to this one. They have to commit ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ as laid out in the Constitution (you’ve heard of that, right). That means knowingly breaking the law. It doesn’t mean having an arguable interpretation of a law which some on the left don’t like. It doesn’t mean having low poll numbers or a creepy vice president.

    All of those advocating impeachment are missing a key step in the process. You have to have a crime first – even if it’s just participating in a coverup or perjury – then you can pursue impeachment.

    Dave

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    The Republican ‘desertions’ mean absolutly NOTHING.

    No, Les. They mean something very specific. They mean an election is coming up.

    Dave

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    thanks for the info, AG

    is the profile for the MOS, good luck

    shows they have lowered the standards and changed the rules if they will take students who have not even graduated yet… times have indeed changed since i was inserv

    keep your head down, and if you want to excel, learn Farsi

    nuff said

    Excelsior?

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    shows they have lowered the standards and changed the rules if they will take students who have not even graduated yet…times have indeed changed since i was inserv

    That’s not all that new a practice. I know of at least one person who entered under a similar program more than a decade ago, where you did training in your Junior year and committed to join and then actually joined after graduation. And remember, there used to be high-school ROTC too.

    Dave

  • Clavos

    Just went into gonzo’s link to the Army MOS list, and the first thing I found was typical Army:

    “In this section we have seperated (sic)…

    Army hasn’t changed in the last 40 years – it’s still a wonder they can even find the enemy, let alone fight them.

    No wonder, it’s operated by the gummint…

  • Anthony Grande

    Thanks Gonzo…did you miss comment #12. You must have missed it because I posted again after that.

    I was just talking so non military folks would know what I was talking about.

    And yeah I believe the Army is lowering its standards. In Basic Traing I met alot of people who I believe to be too inmature to be wearing the uniform.

    Learing another language was why I chose 97E but I was dissapointed to see they recently removed the language requirement. I heard a lucky few still get to go to the language school in Monterrey.

    What was your MOS?

    Anthony

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    President (Republican) Job Approval:

    Newsweek 07/02 – 07/03 Approve 26% Disapprove 65%
    Rasmussen 06/28 – 06/30 36% 61%
    CBS News 06/26 – 06/28 27% 65%
    FOX News 06/26 – 06/27 31% 60%

    That’s pretty ugly…

    Congress (Democrat) Job Approval:

    BS News 06/26 – 06/28 Approve 27% Disapprove 60%
    Newsweek 06/18 – 06/19 25% 63%
    Gallup 06/11 – 06/14 24% 71%

    That’s even worse…

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    Comment #17:

    Thank you, Dave. What exactly would these “articles of impeachment” say?

    “We don’t like Bush, and we dislike Cheney even more, and they are lying liars who lied their way into a war that we mostly voted for, based on pretty much the same intelligence the guys we want to impeach were looking at”?

    If you want to impeach the President, a better bet would be the fact that he has left our borders undefended, almost six years after 9/11…

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    i was Navy, AG…and started in one field, was injured and finished my time doing something else, wound up getting out after 4 years rather than 6 due to medical and political reasons

    but that’s not important

    like i said, good luck, keep your head down..and take advantage of the one thing you are certain to get out of the experience…learning about more than what’s right in front of you

    nuff said

    Excelsior!

  • Anthony Grande

    Thank you for the advice. It is much appreciated.

    Anthony

  • Leslie Bohn

    Of course he won’t be impeached, but the President admitted on television that he repeatedly approved spying on people without proper judicial authority, each count of which is a felony punishable by up to five years in prison.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    and i quote – “You have to have a crime first – even if it’s just participating in a coverup or perjury – then you can pursue impeachment.”

    soOOooOOoo…if you commute/pardon someone convicted of perjury and obstruction, and investigation shows this was to prevent investigators/prosecutors from finding out your link to the obstruction..thus making you an accessory , would that be enough?

    not certain myself…and would normally be content to allow time to play it’s course and an election to solve the problem, as usual

    but there’s military personnel dying over some of this…thus creating a bit of urgency, and need for clarity

    so the entire circumstance surrounding the whole Libby thing, among other issues, needs to be investigated completely…in order to either hold those who have committed “high crimes” accountable…or to clear any shadow or stain from said people and just leave incompetence

    enough out of me, too much typing spent already

    take care folks

    Excelsior!

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    Scooter Libby was convicted of perjury, correct? In an investigation of a leak about an “undercover” CIA agent?

    But that CIA agent wasn’t really “undercover,” and therefore the person who actually leaked her name and position to the media – Dick Armitage – was never charged with anything. Correct?

    So…you have an investigation about a non-crime that uncovers who committed that non-crime almost immediately, and yet continues to investigate this non-crime for years in order to convict someone, anyone, of a technicality. And so they got Scooter Libby.

    (Gee, didn’t BJ Clinton lie under oath? And isn’t that perjury? And isn’t perjury a felony? Why didn’t BJ Clinton get sentenced to any prison time? Why didn’t he have to pardon himself, like he pardoned the fugitive criminal Marc Rich, whose ex-wife just happened to donate a large sum to BJ Clinton’s library?)

    Bush didn’t even pardon Libby. Libby is still a convicted felon. Bush merely commuted his sentence so that Libby does not have to rot in a federal prison for 30 months over a technicality because an over-zealous prosecutor couldn’t find anyone else to indict.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    RJ…CIA says Plame was covert, look it up

    “underlying crime” is fucking moot, since it was perjury , lying to the FBI, and obstruction of justice that Scooter was charged with, and convicted of..by a jury, in front of a judge appointed by W and prosecuted by an attorney appointed by W

    as for Clinton..he was an ass who also did fucked up shit, but he was never charged nor convicted of perjury now , was he? and to fuck you with your own “logic” where was the underlying crime there? what conviction? please cite the conviction for an “underlying crime” or Clinton’s conviction by a jury….good luck with that…Slick Willie was a shit, i heartily agree…but lying about a blowjob is a world of difference than a war

    this whole thing about a “non-crime” is bullshit, perjury and obstruction ARE crimes..and the lawyer who represented Marc Rich knew that..you know who that was right? it was Scooter… for a WH official to commit the crimes Libby was convicted of in the course of an investigation is a crime..ask Halderman,Erlichman and the rest…

    so spare us the talk radio bullshit spin, ok?”

    when did ya become soft on crime there RJ?

    or did you forget that the folks you are calling “overzealous” were all part and parcel of the GOP and appointed by W and company?

    nothing’s changed around here, partisan bullshit never ending, and some people still can’t see or agree on fucking objective facts

    been a nice visit, thanks for reminding me why i find nothing but futility here…

    for those even attempting to defend Libby.

    Excelsior!

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    Of course he won’t be impeached, but the President admitted on television that he repeatedly approved spying on people without proper judicial authority, each count of which is a felony punishable by up to five years in prison.

    Except, Leslie, that this is your interpretation, not his. What he believes is that first off, the kind of spying which was done is not the kind of spying specified in the 1978 FISA act which is rather out of date, and second off that the in the absence of clear legal restrictions – FISA not being clear enough – he can do whatever the hell he wants.

    Dave

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    soOOooOOoo…if you commute/pardon someone convicted of perjury and obstruction, and investigation shows this was to prevent investigators/prosecutors from finding out your link to the obstruction..thus making you an accessory , would that be enough?

    But Libby was pardonned after the investigation was over, and his pardon doesn’t prevent him from being questioned further or from being a witness. I don’t see how it can be part of a coverup in any meaningful way. Plus he’s not even the primary leaker, and no one has done anything to protect Armitage.

    Dave

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    the two comments above prove my point for me…

    first one – W’s warrantless wiretapping indeed does violate the FISA laws in many specific ways, time will tell if the spineless Dems have the balls to push this one, especially after the current case was rejected by the appeals court (second appeal) due to their ruling that the ones brining suit had no standing since they could not prove they were directly harmed, since the WH won’t release any records…nice Catch-22 they have going there…also since Gonzalez keeps his job by not allowing anyone to pursue anything against the Administration…

    the second is either intentionally obtuse or pretty naive… without jail time hanging over Scooter’s head, he can just wait until the last day of W’s administration for getting his full pardon…no pressure can really be placed on him…he can continue to plead the 5th while in appeals, which will last until long after W is out of office, and like i predict..last day pardon

    but it’s the whole “he can do whatever he wants” bit that galls me, and shows the mentality of some folks…

    we are supposed to be a Nation founded on the Rule of Law, not Men…this Administration has made a consistent mockery of that, with help from the rest of the GOP, and some spineless Dems

    one can only Hope that the ass-whuppin’ delivered last November is only a precursor for what will come in November ’08…and that when the Dems fuck up afterwards that “We the People” will wise up and rise up…

    but i ain’t gonna hold my breath, or waste it any further on deaf ears….

    for Vox

    Excelsior!

  • Les Slater

    Dave, #16

    “…They mean an election is coming up.”

    And my contention is that there is absolutely NO difference between the Democrats and the Republicans on the war question. Which party in the executive seat, or who controls congress, will be meaningless in any fundamental way.

    The individual desertions are only concerned with their own lousy asses and the club (party) that gives them membership to the feeding trough.

    To think otherwise is only a delusion.

    Les

  • Leslie Bohn

    Well, Dave, of course we know he hasn’t been convicted of anything, so yes, by definition this is my “interpretation” of the crime. Of course, he will have a defense. I’m saying this was a crime that he could easily be convicted of if evidence were produced and a trial held.

    Dave, FISA is not out of date. This is a lie put forth by the administration. Congress passed a comprehensive overhaul of FISA in Oct. 2001 at the behest of the White House, adjusting the requirements to allow for technologies like cell phones and satellites and the Internet, and siginificantly lowering the proof threshhold for getting warrants.

    The idea that FISA is some relic of the Carter era that has never been updated is just one of the obvious lies that the Bushies have tried to tell us, but that those of us who can read will never fall for.

  • Clavos

    I agree with Les #32.

    But, I will probably continue to vote as If I didn’t.

    Talk about an exercise in futility…

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    Gonzo demonstrates once again that he and I have different philosophies of the function of the executive in a government of divided powers. As I’ve said before, I share the belief of the founders of this nation that the role of the executive is to challenge the limits of the law in an effort to exert executive power and that it’s the role of the courts and legislature to impose clear barriers to that exercise of power. Gonzo doesn’t have the same faith as I do in the balance of powers and thinks the legislature ought to basically rule all.

    And do keep in mind that in #29 I was making the administration’s argument, not mine. I think FISA is completely unconstitutional and ought to be struck down by the Supreme court. The protection of the rights of citizens ought to be absolute, not qualified by FISA, and foreign nationals outside the US have no rights under our Constitution at all.

    Dave

  • bliffle

    The thing that continues to baffle me is, what did the WH hope to accomplish by outing Plame? It meant nothing that Wilsons wife was in the CIA.

    If this is an example of administration strategy no wonder we are losing in Iraq, a war that should have been a walkover. No wonder OBL got away.

    We truly have a government by boneheads who can’t even perform their betrayals adroitly.

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    Bliffle, are you saying ‘no motive, no crime’?

    Dave

  • Leslie Bohn

    Dave, you were, as you say, giving the administration’s defense (mostly identical to the losing one in Hamdan) in #29, but earlier you (as Dave, or at least Vox) rather derisively asked for a crime upon which Bush could be impeached. That’s it. I looked it up. Title 50 Chapter 36 Subsection 1: 1809:

    (a) Prohibited activities
    A person is guilty of an offense if he intentionally—
    (1) engages in electronic surveillance under color of law except as authorized by statute; or
    (2) discloses or uses information obtained under color of law by electronic surveillance, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through electronic surveillance not authorized by statute.
    (b) Defense
    It is a defense to a prosecution under subsection (a) of this section that the defendant was a law enforcement or investigative officer engaged in the course of his official duties and the electronic surveillance was authorized by and conducted pursuant to a search warrant or court order of a court of competent jurisdiction.
    (c) Penalties
    An offense described in this section is punishable by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than five years, or both.
    (d) Federal jurisdiction
    There is Federal jurisdiction over an offense under this section if the person committing the offense was an officer or employee of the United States at the time the offense was committed.

    I still know Bush won’t be impeached, but the public should know that the President admitted proudly on TV that he broke the law over and over again.

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    Leslie, let me focus on what I think is the administration’s strongest argument. To wit, that data mining is not actually ‘electronic surveillance’ as defined by the bill. It’s certainly not unreasonable to suggest that there’s a difference between listening to someone’s phonecall and having a machine sort through phonecalls for words and phrases.

    And the real key to it all is that the president’s argument doesn’t have to be a winning argument in court, it just has to be plausible enough that he can say that he was operating under reasonable legal advice absent any specific court ruling.

    Dave

  • moonraven

    You have to be kidding!

    For a retarded guy with absolutely no skills and a mean streak almost as wide as the yellow stripe down his back, being The Decider has been–and will continue to be–a great gig.

    He has received a salary for committing crimes against humanity and for being one of the worst players of Risk on the planet (that game was designed for folks with a little higher IQs).

    He has been able to feel up the shoulders of European heads of state, and travel to summits with an entourage that includes bulletproof limos and which would have made Idi Amin (RIP) drool with envy.

    What does he care if folks don’t like him. [Edited] he has made a lifestyle out of being an asshole.

    When he leaves office some publisher will pay him a few million to tell a hack “journalist” [Edited] about all the childish pranks he played in the White House that YOUR tax dollars financed.

  • Zedd

    Clav

    Most middle class Americans are in debt up to the wazoo. Not sure if that is a type of struggle in your opinion.

  • Zedd

    Dave

    Some people think that lying and selling the WMD story to the world and causing the death of hundreds of thousands including 3605 Americans and 35557 wounded Americans is criminal. 2974 people lost their lives on 9/11 and we are searching vehemently for Bin Laden. What of the murderers of the Iraqis and our soldiers?

  • Leslie Bohn

    Dave:
    The adminstration has never advanced this legal argument. In ACLU v NSA, they argued that the President’s powers in this area cannot be restricted by Article II, and that the AUMF gives him authority to break the law. Both arguments were rejected by a federal court. In the ACLU decision, the illegality of the program was referred to repeatedly as “undisputed.”

    In the more recent case, they successfully argued that since the program was secret, there is no way to know whether the parties were spied upon and hence have standing to sue.

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    Some people think that lying and selling the WMD story to the world and causing the death of hundreds of thousands including 3605 Americans and 35557 wounded Americans is criminal.

    Yes, Zedd. But those people spend too much time gazing at their navels, braiding their armpit hair and hiring feng shui consultants for anyone to take them seriously. Sensible people know where the real blame in Iraq lies and it’s certainly not with the US.

    Dave

  • Les Slater

    Dave,

    How do YOU define ‘sensible people’?

    Les

  • Clavos

    Zedd,

    Everyone in the USA is in debt. This economy operates on debt, but that doesn’t mean everyone’s struggling.

    Those who have gotten into too much debt (i.e. beyond their means) may well be “struggling,” but those who handle their money well and live within their means aren’t “struggling,” but DO have mortgages and car and boat loans, etc.
    As I said above, nobody I KNOW is “struggling,” but probably all of them have at least a home mortgage debt.

    And I don’t believe that “Most middle class Americans are in debt up to the wazoo.”

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    Leslie, you should read ACLU vs. NSA. While it does find that the administration violated FISA it doesn’t assess any penalty or criminality in that regard. Instead it defines where the dividing line between various surveillance activities is. What it does is declare data mining without a warrant to be legal under FISA, but affirms that pursuing those leads further in the form of actual wiretaps requires a warrant. It’s also important to note that the ruling has never been implemented and is currently suspended pending appeal.

    The main problem with the ruling is that it doesn’t address the key constitutional issue raised over FISA which is that FISA is an unconstitutional infringement of the powers given to the president to wage war and gather data necessary for national defense, as established in the constitution and defined more specifically in several subsequent court cases.

    Dave

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    and i quote – “While it does find that the administration violated FISA…” – the rest of the quote can be found in comment #47

    now, the FISA provisions are federal Law, written and passed in accordance with the Constitution, violating them is breaking a Federal law, a “high crime” by definition

    and the “key Constitutional issue” here is not about an Administration’s ability to do what it wants during a War, NO FUCKING WAR has been declared by Congress, whis IS the Law as it stands, now isn’t it?

    the Constitutional issue is the 4th Amendment, which i will quote

    “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

    so, no legally issued Warrant, then it becomes a clear violation of the Constitution, FISA was enacted into Law to cover certain gaps in National Security concerns while still upholding the Warrant requirement of the Constitution.

    trying to argue against the clear reasoning and facts applicable appears to stand in direct violation of not only the Spirit , but the Letter of the Law and the Constitution

    and a President who not only knowing commits such acts, but readily admits it to the public on National TV multiple times, does indeed incriminate himself to having committed a “high crime”, no matter what the weasels and Apologists might say to try and spin it their way

    the Tao of D’oh

    Excelsior!

  • troll

    I love the Rule of Law…it is so very objective and efficient at holding the bad guys to account

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    ooOOOooOOooo…now now troll, Sarcasm might be too much for some folks

    good to *see* ya olde Friend

    Excelsior!

  • troll

    y tu tambien

  • troll

    geeze Anthony – careful son…that can be a fucked up job

    remember to remember – ‘ends don’t justify means’

    you’re the one you’ve been looking for…and have to spend the rest of your life with

  • FreedomOfInformationAct

    The indictment says Libby illegally obstructed the investigation into the White House outing of an undercover CIA agent, Valerie Plame Wilson. He also was charged with perjury and making false statements to FBI agents.

    The ongoing investigation of Karl Rove revolves around the same issues, among possible others.

    Former President George H. W. Bush was right in 1999 when he said, “I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious, of traitors.”

    Former Republican National Committee Chair Ed Gillespie was right when he said, “I think if the allegation is true, to reveal the identity of an undercover CIA operative—it’s abhorrent, and it should be a crime, and it is a crime.”

    The American people must know this important truth: This indictment is about a cover-up of the lies that led our nation to war in Iraq.

  • Leslie Bohn

    You mean specifically as it applies to surveilling foreign nationals outside US soil? Then, yes, I think it’s extraconstitutional and hence unconstitutional. But I think reasonable judicial review is a proper, Constitutional separation of powers.

    All that’s true about judge Taylor’s in-limbo, fragile, sort-of ruling, but the fact remains that she did find, as you allow, that the adminsitration violated the law, and so I think I do indeed deserve whatever prize was offered for a poster who could produce an actual crime on which to impeach Bush.

    I cannot help but point out also, not that you or anyone else ever held up the President as a paragon of truth or anything, but W said:

    Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires — a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we’re talking about chasing down terrorists, we’re talking about getting a court order before we do so.

    The level of deceit that Bush has slipped to is would be embarrassing if the man were capable of being embarassed.

    Dave, BTW, your man Ron Paul was hilarious and on the money on Stephanopolous this morning, and so was Mike Gravel. The honesty and forthrightness of both stand in stark contrast to the outright, routine lies told by Bush and his representatives (Tony Snow on Libby commutation: “This decision was not political”… true story!), Hillary “I relied on my prayer squad” Clinton, Fred “Nixon Mole” Thompson, Rudy “You’ve devoted your life to weasels” Guiliani, and the rest of this depressing, cynical group of scumbags.

    Do people know what a patriot Gravel was during the Vietnam War? His role in ending the draft? His role in the Pentagon Papers dealio?

    Do people know Paul is the only truly anti-war candidate? That he had the stones to vote against the Patriot Act because he knew it violated the Constitution? Why are these guys fringe candidates, and the guy from Law and Order is mainstream? Well, in Gravel’s case, it’s because of that video where he throws the rock in the water.

  • http://musical-guru.blogspot.com/ Michael J. West

    I never thought I’d see the day when I said this…

    but…

    Anthony Grande, if you’re still watching this thread, you seem to have grown up a great deal since we last saw you. Color this “hardcore liberal” impressed.

    Good luck. Make sure you come back alive.

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    Michael, Agree completely with you about Anthony. One can be an ultra-conservative and still have respectful, civil disagreements with ultra-liberals.

    Good luck & take care over there.

    And bring plenty of Jameson…because,

    In Jameson Veritas

  • Joe

    All I have to say is FRED!08

  • http://absent-mind.blogspot.com/ Jet in Columbus

    Bush is laughing because the American voters didn’t give congress enough of a majority to get anything done, thus his fondest wish has come true…

    He can trash this country, put billions in his defense contract cronie’s pockets, and get away with it because congress’ hands are tied with no power to override vetoes, nor a majority to get the bastard impeached.

    Of course most of the American public can’t figure that little concept out, or don’t care, they just know that the Dems are supposed to have the majority, so they get the blame that nothing’s getting done instead of King George and his veto pen.

    There’s a very good reason for his everpresent smirk… he won the last election, even if the GOP didn’t. He’s having a ball blaming the dems and diverting the real cause of our national problems…. him

    …but of course that’s only my opinion!

    Jet

  • spike

    “He now has the honor of having the lowest ratings for the longest period of any president since Julius Caesar in Rome”

    Actually, what got Julius Caesar assassinated was the fear that he was becoming too popular, and was intending to crown himself king. The senate took action, and was rewarded with… Augustus, the first Roman emperor.

  • Baronius

    Troll, Gonzo, Anthony, and Jet are back?

  • http://absent-mind.blogspot.com/ Jet in Columbus

    Panic in the streets!

    Actually I’ve always been here, I’ve just been helping tu set up the BC forum page…

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    @ Baronius – pondering it, check the last comment here for some details, and i’ll be glad to discuss it there with any interested

    Excelsior?

  • http://www.parttimepundit.com John Bambenek

    If you think Bush, or the current Supreme Court is “ultra-conservative”, you really don’t know what conservative means. Bush is a moderate, always has been. The Supreme Court is nominally conservative, in that, it at least attempts to judge the constitution by what it actually says.

  • http://www.parttimepundit.com John Bambenek

    That and with Congress’ approval a full 10 points below Bush, it appears that it really isn’t policy or partisanship that is driving the numbers, but voters just fed up with politicians in general.

    Find me ANY voter that’s happy. You’ll find that almost every voter of every political stripe has got plenty to be fed up about.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    John, trying to claim that the Congressional approval rating is a full 10 points below Bush’s does not jibe with even the poll citings that RJ uses in this thread

    President (Republican) Job Approval:

    Newsweek 07/02 – 07/03 Approve 26% Disapprove 65%
    Rasmussen 06/28 – 06/30 36% 61%
    CBS News 06/26 – 06/28 27% 65%
    FOX News 06/26 – 06/27 31% 60%

    That’s pretty ugly…

    Congress (Democrat) Job Approval:

    BS News 06/26 – 06/28 Approve 27% Disapprove 60%
    Newsweek 06/18 – 06/19 25% 63%
    Gallup 06/11 – 06/14 24% 71%

    if you look at the same sources for the same dates in the data quoted, you will see the approval ratings about the same (well within the margin of error) and the disapproval a bit higher for POTUS

    but 10 points? ..please cite your source, otherwise i must call bullshit on that claim

    Excelsior?

  • Clavos

    “i must call bullshit on that claim”

    Polls – any polls are nothing but bullshit…

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    fair enough Clavos…but that doesn’t change the fact that if you are going to cite something about polling data…one should be accurate concerning said data, yes?

    it was that and not the data itself i was referring to as bullshit…

    but you knew that

    Excelsior?

  • http://absent-mind.blogspot.com/ Jet in Columbus

    I REPEAT, the general public doesn’t understand that though the Democrats have the majority in concress, they don’t have ENOUGH of a majority to override Bush…

    Therefore Bush wins.

    The American People have no one but their ignorance of politics and how vetos work to blame for their outrage at congress.

    Bush is laughing because the American voters didn’t give congress enough of a majority to get anything done, thus his fondest wish has come true…

    He can trash this country, put billions in his defense contract cronie’s pockets, and get away with it because congress’ hands are tied with no power to override vetoes, nor a majority to get the bastard impeached.

    Of course most of the American public can’t figure that little concept out, or don’t care, they just know that the Dems are supposed to have the majority, so they get the blame that nothing’s getting done instead of King George and his veto pen.

    There’s a very good reason for his everpresent smirk… he won the last election, even if the GOP didn’t. He’s having a ball blaming the dems and diverting the real cause of our national problems…. him

    …but of course that’s only my opinion!

    Jet

  • Baronius

    John, when you’re used to a Supreme Court that makes up laws whole-hog, a Court that pays attention to the Constitution and separation of powers seems ultra-conservative. It’s going to take people years to understand the actual role of the Court. (It’s never occurred to three or four of its own members.)

    There is such a thing as an activist conservative judge. I don’t think we’ve had any on the SCOTUS. Thomas is far more aggressive than the others in terms of breaking precedent, but only in pursuit of original intent. He’s no activist. I think Senator Brownback is an activist conservative. He’s more interested in how the Court rules than how it arrives at its rulings.

    From what I’ve noticed, the Roberts court has been non-activist. So does that make them conservative or, even more dreadful, ultra-conservative? No. The Court could have six Communists, two white supremicists, and Ross Perot, as long as they’re originalists.

  • sr

    Jet, of course you know I dont agree with your current comment. Im just glad to see your around. What’s the latest on your health situation?
    Take care. sr

  • REMF

    Just a reminder to #s 55 and 56;
    He still hasn’t gone anywhere yet.
    – MCH

  • Baronius

    So, MCH, let me see if I’ve got this right. You’re calling yourself REMF now, but signing your name MCH, and you occasionally use the handle MBD in replies to MCH, and you make fun of Vox Nalle? Sure, why not? From now on, I’m going to sign in as Gonzo Moon, but of course that’s only my opinion…

  • Clavos

    Yes, I did know that, gonzo.

    My point was that arguing about the accuracy of someone’s citation of bullshit is…

  • Zedd

    Clavos

    Nobody you KNOW will tell you that they are living above their means and are heavily in debt and struggling.

    That is what reports indicate. Americans are heavily in debt and don’t convey their plight because by virtue of the fact that they are so much in debt, it says that they are living a false reality. A small percent are in debt because of health care issues but a large majority simply over spend.

  • Zedd

    Dave

    I’m not sure what sort of response that was (re: navel lint and arm pit hair references). I don’t think that you’ve made a clear argument about why its not our fault that we are in a war that we started under false pretenses when the rest of the world was saying don’t do it.

    Now who is to blame?

    Dave let me see if I can help. If I bust into your fortified compound today with a Humvee, leaving your gates and doors wide open, destroy your security alarm system, take your weapons away, bust the windows and blow some of the roof off, would you simply blame the thieves who would SURELY come in to help themselves to your valuables or would you blame me for the losses in your home?

  • Clavos

    “Nobody you KNOW will tell you that they are living above their means and are heavily in debt and struggling.”

    True, Zedd, not voluntarily, but it’s very easy to look at all kinds of clues given off by the people you know, to determine whether or not they’re in debt over their heads. And actually, a surprising number of people are quite open about that kind of thing, so yes, I have an excellent general idea of what financial situation most of the people I know are in.

    As far as my customers are concerned, I know EXACTLY what their financial status is BEFORE I get too far into doing business with them.

    That pretty much covers the people I know.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    don’t forget to mention you are a yacht salesman there Clavos…

    so, by your own statement, the folks who are qualified to buy yachts are in decent shape financially…

    might one suggest they are a relatively small portion of the total population…top 15-20%, depending on just hwo big/expensive these yachts are, sound reasonable?

    might one also suggest that using this particular demographic as any kind of reasonable representation of the much larger majority of the American public, shall we say, toss out the top and bottom 20%, leaving the middle 60% are representational for the purposes of discussing the “majority”?

    in this instance, i do think that the statement that this “middle” is in debt, and that this debt is hurting in many ways…check the figures on the non-existent savings among other factors

    just trying to clarify, hope that helps

    Excelsior?

  • Clavos

    That’s exactly why, gonzo, I separated my response into the people I know who are part of my circle of friends, vis-a-vis my clients (the people I do business with).

    I myself have a pretty average middle class income, as do most of the people I hang around with; none of us feel we are struggling to get by, but by the same token none of us are driving Bentleys, either, and we live in ordinary middle class tract houses, instead of the 5,000 – 7500 square foot castles the upper middle class favors these days.

    Bringing up the rate of savings in this country is a strawman, gonzo. The USA has notoriously had one of the lowest savings rates in the world for several generations; we are consumers, not savers. Every time we get a couple of bucks ahead, we go out and buy some new geegaw with it.

    I’m not denying there are plenty of people struggling under a lot of debt, but most (not all) of them got themselves into that situation because of their inability to resist the urge to buy shit they don’t need, including pleasure boats and enormous houses.

  • Clavos

    Actually the percentage of boats to general population in Florida, the state with most boats is something in the neighborhood of 5%, gonzo (1,000,000 boats, 18,000,000 population), but we were talking about the middle class, not the entire population.

    There are LOTS of plumbers, housepainters, auto mechanics, grocery store managers, teachers, truck drivers, etc. who own boats, especially oin areas where the climate lends itself to outdoor activities.

    Add in the RV and camper owners, and you have a pretty good portion of the middle class spending money on recreation. It doesn’t take a rocket surgeon to figure out that some of them are overextended.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    not trying to give you shit, Clavos..merely stating that those who buy yachts are not indicative of the demographic being spoken of…a point we seem to both agree upon

    i utilized the dismal savings rate as a comparator, looking at that data since 1980 and looking at the curve of household debt during that same time period give a bit better picture of overall fiscal health for said demographic

    hence why some might easily make a reasonable claim that that middle 60% aren’t doing too well by the stated metrics…not trying to assess blame for the reason, merely attempting to define the parameters for some thinking so

    and yes, many of those middle folks do own boats, but not yachts, eh? that bass boat is a far cry from the beasts you sell, if i understand the definition of yacht correctly…would an apt analogy be an ATV 4 wheeler and a Humvee?…no, not quite…the 3-5 thousand for that ATV compared to what, 60-75 k for the Humvee doesn’t quite scale the same…but you get the Idea

    the point here is as you agreed with Zedd, most folks won’t get into how hurting they are, they will put on the front and go on as best they can

    another facet is that due to geographical location, income levels aren’t always a solid indicator of “middle”…what’s middle class in Manhattan would be upper mid/lower upper in say, Michigan

    and so on

    trying to make many broad generalizations about as complex a problem as fiscal matters is difficult at best…hence trying to utilize solid data as indicator of trends (how much does beer, bread and gasoline cost in adjusted dollars for example, as an indicator of purchasing power in comparative time periods, then examining wages using the same criteria)

    Reagan once asked “are you doing better now than you were four years ago?”

    I think folks are asking the same thing of themselves now, as a metric to judge how well the GOP stewardship of our nation has been handled since 2000…kitchen economics, yes..but the ones that “middle” understand fully

    to me, that’s a root to begin with, and a crucial consideration in what will drive ’08, as well as how W is going to be thought of…toss in all the rest…Iraq, our standing in the World community,allegations of corruption/malfeasance (including the mere perception of same)

    hence my basic agreement with the title of this Article…all the factors i mention, and more..lead me to think that it’s going to get much worse for W, and our Nation

    i can only hope that eventually, “We the People” can work it out, and start making it better

    Excelsior?

  • REMF

    “So, MCH, let me see if I’ve got this right. You’re calling yourself REMF now, but signing your name MCH, and you occasionally use the handle MBD in replies to MCH, and you make fun of Vox Nalle?”
    – Baronius

    1) My new chops are REMF, I sign with MCH to avoid being accused of pretending to be two different people (ala Vox Populi/Dave Nalle);
    2) No, I’ve NEVER replied to myself using the handle MBD, or any other initials;
    [Edited. I’ve already told you we’re not discussing that anymore, MCH.]
    – MCH

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    I’m not sure what sort of response that was (re: navel lint and arm pit hair references).

    i have no clear recollection of that comment. i’m sure it was fantastic in every way, however.

    I don’t think that you’ve made a clear argument about why its not our fault that we are in a war that we started under false pretenses when the rest of the world was saying don’t do it.

    because we are’t in a war we started under false pretenses. we’re in a war which started centuries ago and which we decided to get directly involved in for debatable reasons and are now stuck in because we can’t figure out a way to disengage without doing a lot of harm.

    Dave let me see if I can help. If I bust into your fortified compound today with a Humvee, leaving your gates and doors wide open, destroy your security alarm system, take your weapons away, bust the windows and blow some of the roof off, would you simply blame the thieves who would SURELY come in to help themselves to your valuables or would you blame me for the losses in your home?

    your analogy makes no sense because you’ve left out essential elements of the scenario.

    here’s how it should go.

    i’m being held hostage in my home by a gang of rapists and murderers.
    the police break in and kill the guys who are holding me hostage, doing a lot of damage in the process.
    then when the police pull out a bunch of looters, lawyers, insurance adjusters and social workers show up, some of them trying to steal my stuff and others trying to tell me how to rebuild and who to sue.
    and every once in a while the police show up again, smack everyone around and then leave.

    that’s a more accurate description.

    dave

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    i want the drugs #83 is on, because i want to know what it’s like to be soOOOoOOOooOOooo delusional

    Excelsior?

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    but gonzo, the drugs you’re already on seem more than powerful enough. the drug i call reality doesn’t mix well with other narcotics. it just keeps trying to reassert itself.

    dave

  • http://absent-mind.blogspot.com/ Jet in Columbus

    it’s like stumbling on to an AM talk-radio station and not being able to change the channel.

    I’m beginning to realize why I wandered off in the first place.

    Things in nature that aren’t flexible (including opinions) eventually break!

    Jet

  • troll

    here’s a little story that seems appropriate in the light of our ongoing experience in the Middle East

    unfortunately we couch much of our cultural knowledge in terms that we consider politically incorrect…so we avoid looking at it and become ignorant – but what else is new

    could it get any worse – ?

    well as Dave points out we’re good and ‘stuck’ – but before we jam our last foot in we should look around for the fox who sees that the US is a country with the fatal conceit of a Brer Rabbit

    I smell yams

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    Too many comments to respond to all, so I’ll be selective…like it’s critically important what I say, right?

    Most important, it’s great seeing Troll, The “new” Anthony, Jet, and Gonzo the Magnificent back. The comments in politics have been getting rather dull without them. I take full credit for this scintillating story.

    Clavos, anecdotal info on the middle class won’t cut it…and I’m too lazy to go find one of the myriad articles that have detailed the growing financial rift between the wealthy and the rest of the country. I’m not even sure what you call middle class; I have a friend who’s a powerful patent lawyer here in D.C. whose family is worth millions. He once told me he thought of himself as middle class.

    Also, the difference in attitudes towards America is more than striking–it’s scary. People have always disliked most American politicos but have generally liked and respected both Americans and American values. What we’re seeing is a severe loss of respect for the latter. Bush’s incredibly pathetic foreign policies are now affecting attitudes America in general.

    Anthony et al., Julius Caesar was joke, eh? Smile. As for Supreme Court, ultra conservative may be too strong, I admit, but 4 of them are & Kennedy’s voting with them often enough to make the ultra conservatives do the happy Snoopy dance. It really does depend on your ideology, but, as a liberal justician (thanks to Ruvy), I think this court will be Bush’s worst and most damaging legacy.

    As for whether Busher has broken the law, we’ll never agree because of the sophistry that dominates the other (evil) side of this debate. But as for Iraq, one doesn’t need analogies that don’t work.

    Bush, Rummy, and Chainey intentionally manipulated and ignored the intelligence data, destroyed looming victory in Afghanistan by pulling our best troops out, and invaded a country with no WMD, no real ties to al Qaida, and no plan for winning the peace. They lied to Congress and the American people. They created a terrorists recruitment playground. And they’ve destabilized the entire Middle East.

    Nice job for Republicans.

    As for the bullshit around FISA, it is illegal to tap American citizens without a court order, period. Even if they’re talking via cellphone to Satan, you can’t wiretap without a judge saying o.k. The fact that some of them are computer monitored is just so much dog droppings. Surveillance is surveillance (even if I’m not spelling it write.)

    Oy, gotta get me some of Gonzo’s pills.

    In Jameson Veritas

  • Zedd

    Dave

    I think the problem is that you BELIEVE that we went there to police. Again Bush and Co. said we had to go because of a threat by Iraq on our security and a tie to terrorists. That was a lie. Hundreds of thousands are dead, never to walk this earth again because of their lie. That is criminal, many would say.

  • troll

    Zedd – until the numbers are more clearly established I don’t think that you will get far that argument…some people go deaf when presented with the hundreds of thousands

  • Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Bush, Rummy, and Chainey intentionally manipulated and ignored the intelligence data, destroyed looming victory in Afghanistan by pulling our best troops out, and invaded a country with no WMD, no real ties to al Qaida, and no plan for winning the peace. They lied to Congress and the American people. They created a terrorists recruitment playground. And they’ve destabilized the entire Middle East.

    Mark, maybe you should toss out the crooked letter at all this – why did this fine folks do these things (Iraq had WMD’s which are now in the hands of the Syrians – and aimed at us)? Do you honestly think it was stupidity? Or could it have been something that they are not willing to let on to folks like you – a resource war with some sinister plans behind the war…

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    no zedd, i never said that i believe we went there to police anything. we went there for a variety of other reasons many of which are included among those enumerated in the AUMF and some of which were not. the ‘lie’ you keep prating on about has never been proven a lie, though it has clearly been shown to have been based on poor evidence and a lot of wishful thinking. a lie requires intent to deceive, not intent to believe.

    but regardless of why or how we got to iraq, the truth is that it’s now a policing situation where we’re mediating between two main factions, both primarily driven by forces from outside iraq, which means that what we accomplish in iraq will spill over to the entire region.

    if you can’t see the truth of this you’re really not paying attention.

    btw, i spilled water on my keyboard and lost my shift key.

    dave

  • Dr Dreadful

    Dave spilled water on my keyboard and lost my shift key

    For a moment there I thought that was zingzing masquerading as you…

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    oddly i only lost the right shift key, but that’s the one i normally use, so i’m only shifting when absolutely vital.

    dave

  • Zedd

    Dave

    Then you are suggesting an indictment instead of a finding of guilt. Your comment suggests that there may have been foul play but it hasn’t been proven.

  • Zedd

    troll

    I have posted those numbers on a number of occasions, sources cited, etc. during your hiatus.

    Also, I just don’t know the exact amount since the death toll continues to rise daily. Would you happen to have that data?

  • REMF

    “we went there for a variety of other reasons many of which are included among those enumerated in the AUMF and some of which were not.”
    – Dave Nalle

    First of all, “we” didn’t go to Iraq, only those brave enough to actually serve went. Secondly, the reasons GW and Cheney invaded Iraq were simply to help themselves feel better about their skipping out of Vietnam, when someone else died face down in the mud in their place over there.

    “the ‘lie’ you keep prating on about has never been proven a lie, though it has clearly been shown to have been based on poor evidence and a lot of wishful thinking. a lie requires intent to deceive, not intent to believe.”
    – Dave Nalle

    No, it was a lie Nalle.

    “but regardless of why or how we got to iraq, the truth is that it’s now a policing situation where we’re mediating between two main factions, both primarily driven by forces from outside iraq, which means that what we accomplish in iraq will spill over to the entire region.”
    – Dave Nalle

    Bullshit, Nalle. The only thing accomplished by invading and occupying Iraq is the creation of more enemies to kill our soldiers over there. And again, the “we” you keep repeating is nothing more than a transparent attempt to align yourself with those braver than yourself.

    – MCH

    “if you can’t see the truth of this you’re really not paying attention.”
    – Dave Nalle

    Look in the mirror, Nalle.

  • Zedd

    Clavos

    “I can’t say strongly enough how decent and hardworking these people are,” she says. “The cost of being middle class has shot out of the reach of the median family. For millions of families, the situation is getting desperate.”

    -Elizabeth Warren HLS professor, Harvard Gazette

    ‘‘I think a lot of baby boomers feel trapped in their debt. Since they do, they decided to ignore it. The idea seems to be that everybody has it, so if they don’t talk about it, eventually it’s just going to go away.

    I have seen couples who really worked at this, They cut back, they refinanced and they paid off all of their debt. Six months later they were right back where they started.”

    – Nancy Langdon Jones, an Upland investment counselor.

    “Middle Class in Turmoil,” produced by the Center for American Progress and the Service Employees International Union, mines data from the Federal Reserve, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, census records and other sources to paint a picture of increasing peril for those in the middle 60% of income distribution, about $18,000 to $88,000.

    Despite a growing economy, a rising stock market and stronger corporate earnings that are helping the rich get richer, the middle class in America is caught in an unprecedented squeeze that makes it increasingly unstable, the study’s authors say. The financial declines each year since 2001 have been dramatic, they report:

    Income for middle-class families has remained stagnant or flat since 2001.

    Prices for big-ticket items — housing, health care, college education and transportation — have skyrocketed, leaving families unable to save.

    Middle-class families are borrowing record amounts of money to pay their monthly bills.

    “Families are being forced to live beyond their means, just to pay for the basics, such as housing and health care,” said Christian Weller, a senior economist for the Center for American Progress, which is headed by John Podesta, a former Clinton-administration chief of staff. “They are not only spending their current income but all their future income.”

    – MSN Money

    Clavos,

    Do find your public radio station. From many of your posts (you and Dave) I sense that you want to be informed but just don’t have a good source for comprehensive information. It can be a challenge forging through the multitude of information sources. As an information junkie, I have found that NPR is the best source of information on just about every subject. I will hear a story on NPR and can be assured that it will appear on CNN and the rest including the networks a week later at the earliest, many times it doesn’t come to greater public awareness for a year.

    Take a look. Its an entirely different world if you are a curious sort.

  • bliffle

    So, for the moment, let us use ‘untruths’ instead of lies. For it is certainly true that what BushCo said was untrue. It was NOT true. It was false.

    Does it matter to the 3000 dead soldiers, buried now in the cool tombs, that they died for untruths or lies?

    Does it matter to the 30,000 wounded and disabled that they lost their legs, arms, faces for untruths rather than lies?

    Does it matter to the soldiers suffering brain damage that they suffer for untruths rather than lies?

    Look full at the horror of the war we’ve wreaked on these people for untruths. Does it really matter whether Bush spoke untruths or lies? No, he was WRONG. W R O N G. How can we let this person continue to make important decisions? Whether he’s venal or stupid is a matter between him and his conscience, but of no importance to the people who died and the people who suffer the aftermath of this misbegotten war.

    Why would you expect anything but untruths from this character based on his record?

  • moonraven

    I, too, have been really annoyed by Nalle’s use of “WE”–then I realized that he is using the Imperial or Monarchical WE–referring to himself in the plural as if he were a king or a head of state.

    Ridiculous posturing in place of facts and information–plus five bucks or so–will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks.

  • Baronius

    “Secondly, the reasons GW and Cheney invaded Iraq were simply to help themselves feel better about their skipping out of Vietnam, when someone else died face down in the mud in their place over there.

    REMF, do you claim to be a mind-reader? Did Bill Clinton believe the intelligence about Iraq out of his guilt over fleeing the country? Did Gore believe it because of his guilt over a six-week tour of duty as a reporter? Did Kerry feel guilty because of his faked injuries that got him medals, and his back-stabbing of his brothers in front of Congress?

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    Regarding all the polls that show Bush at an all-time low, yet Congress even lower: I don’t believe most pollsters put the partisan spin on this that conservative commenters have – i.e., that the public is being asked, whom do you like better [or hate more], Bush or the Democrats?

    The low popularity rating is for “Congress,” period, which happens to still be over 45% Republican. Americans are disgusted with nearly all politicians, and with the worthless stalemate we currently call a government.

    It’s debatable how much Democrats would be accomplishing even with a larger majority, but with the margins as slim as they are, what mostly gets ‘done’ is complaining and investigating.

  • http://handyfilm.blogspot.com handyguy

    Friends in London tell me the Sunday NY Times lead editorial
    is causing quite a stir over there. I haven’t seen a lot of comment on this side of the pond.

    The Times basically called for troops to be withdrawn from Iraq now, unconditionally, because we are making things worse by staying:

    “It is time for the United States to leave Iraq, without any more delay than the Pentagon needs to organize an orderly exit.”

    Conservatives may say, so what, Pravda goes peacenik. But the Times supported the initial invasion, ambivalently and reluctantly [like moi], and has until now withheld a call for immediate withdrawal.

  • REMF

    “REMF, do you claim to be a mind-reader? Did Bill Clinton believe the intelligence about Iraq out of his guilt over fleeing the country? Did Gore believe it because of his guilt over a six-week tour of duty as a reporter? Did Kerry feel guilty because of his faked injuries that got him medals, and his back-stabbing of his brothers in front of Congress?”
    – Baronius

    The difference, of course, being that Clinton, Gore and Kerry are not responsible for 3,607 U.S. soldiers KIA in Iraq, 18,609 more WIA, and the cost of $442 billion to the American taxpayer.
    (and counting…)
    – MCH

  • Clavos

    Zedd #97,

    I guess you’re right. My friends and I are not middle class, so we must be rich. I for one, have NO debt; zero, zip, nada. No mortgage, no auto loans, no boat loan no credit card debt, except what I charge each month, which I pay off each month. I don’t buy anything I can’t pay cash for.

    But, I can’t quit working, because I live on cash flow; no cash coming in means I can’t pay my bills.

    I always thought rich people didn’t have to work, but I guess I was wrong, so from now on I’m officially no longer middle class; I’m rich (with a five figure income).

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    well Clavos, you may not be in the “middle” by definition, but that does not mean you are “rich” as you point out…

    but it does hit on something, you fall into one of the upper brackets, yet..because you are not “rich”, you have considered yourself in the “middle”

    can you not see how this has skewed the conversation, if nothing else? not to mention the perception of some like yourself who still work for a living, but are above that “middle” income bracket?

    Excelsior?

  • Clavos

    A mid five figure income is “upper bracket??”

  • http://absent-mind.blogspot.com/ Jet in Columbus

    SR, whether you agree with me or not, the fact that the congress’ hands are tied by not having a sizeable enough majority to override the GOP or the President still holds true.

    By the way Bush all but said, he plans to completely ignore the September deadline concering his fourth failed “Surge” today, and will keep shipping soldiers into the civil war over there until someone gets the balls to impeach the self-righteous bastard.

    As for my health, thanks for asking, I won’t clog someone else’s article with that, looku my “Golden umbrella” article up, it has the latest.

    Jet

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    my bad, Clavos, i should have said “upper middle bracket”..i skipped a word

    but you appear to have a much higher net worth than what your income alone suggests, what with no mortgage/debt…well do i know your plight, when i owned by arcade i had no debt and about $70k annual income…and was comfortable, but careful

    but i did not own a home, my car was a solid used one i paid cash for and i had no credit card at all

    now, 10 years after selling my business, i’m nose deep in debt, but have a home..i drive 20 year old pick up, my wife drives a 15 year old escort…we are paying her college loans as well as credit cards and mortgage…add to it my medical bills, and our combined $60k income is no where near enough, but we make do…barely

    now “mid 5 figure” makes it around $50k by definition..if that is the case, you DO fall into the “middle”..but that’s not what you implied previously by what i read…so color me confused

    and heyas Jet!

    Excelsior?

  • Clavos

    gonzo,

    “when i owned by arcade i had no debt and about $70k annual income…and was comfortable, but careful”

    Except for the arcade, that about sums it up for me, and I do consider $65-70K to be in the “mid five figures.”

    I DO own a home (outright), but live in a rented apartment, because in today’s market, I can charge more for renting the home than I pay for renting the apt.; the apt. is about half the size of the home, too.

    I have two cars, paid for, but they were modest when new (a VW and a Ford), and are now decidedly not new.

    I also have a 26 year old trawler on which we used to live until my wife had to move into a wheel chair. I’m selling it, (anybody?), because there’s no way she’ll ever be able to get back in it.

    My principal asset is the house, which I hope will become my retirement fund when (and if) I ever do retire. I like what I do, and don’t have any hobbies, so I’m not inclined to retire, and probably won’t unless health forces me to.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    one thing Clavos…60-75 is NOT “mid 5 figures”, but definition…50 is halfway between 0 and 99, so one could say 40-60 was “mid five figures”, but above that is another thing completely…

    and as has been pointed out previously…the middle income 60% of the population come out between 18 and 88 thousand

    as for the rest, good for you! i’m happy for your circumstances…but please don’t think that this puts you in the “average”

    and hopefully this very conversation helps to clear up much confusion on the topic

    Excelsior?

  • Baronius

    MCH – It doesn’t matter. If Clinton and Gore believed the intel, they should have acted on it. Failure to act on bad intelligence isn’t something to brag about. And Kerry voted for the war (before he voted against the war). Does Kerry get a pass because he sort of served his country and career in Vietnam? You can’t have it both ways.

    You still haven’t explained how you know read Bush’s and Cheney’s minds. It seems to me that they’re not obsessed with their activities during the Vietnam War, but you clearly are. It’s tainting your analysis.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    do Kerry or Clinton have any fucking thing to do with the very real fact of a pre-emptive invasion of Iraq?

    or the very real fuck ups of those who did give those orders?

    or those who died because of said fuck ups?

    or cleaning up the current mess?

    Excelsior?

  • Les Slater

    “do Kerry or Clinton have any fucking thing to do with the very real fact of a pre-emptive invasion of Iraq?”

    Of course they do. So does the New York Times. Do you remember their mia culpa?

  • Franco

    #3 — Les Slater

    “Mr. Bush seems to be taking all this pretty well. He’s probably laughing about all the stupid critisms and poll figures.”

    I don’t think he is laughing about it at all. As pointed out by the author of this opinion piece when he stated, “I never thought I’d write this, but I actually feel sorry for the Busher.”

    Like him or not, what Bush has shown is an almost super-human ability to get up and face it all everyday, carry a load of responsibility that none of us can even begin to fathom, and he still holds to his convictions and leads. And most ironically of all, as you have so clearly pointed out ……… “Nobody criticizing him has anything better to offer. When it comes time to vote, congress totally backs his war policies.”

  • Lumpy

    It seems absolutely symptomatic of the insanity of the left that I see clavos forced to defend himself and justify his existence just for earning an above average middle class income.

    As for kerry and clinton and iraq, one of them made war on iraq for 8 years and the other one voted to invade. I’d say they pretty damned well played a role.

  • Franco

    #48 — gonzo marx

    OK gonzo, I give you all of your #48.

    So now I ask you, how dose one get a warrant for a computer scanning live for words and or word phrases and their communications in efforts to thwart off another surprise attack to saves lives. Is there absolutely no value to such a program?

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    Lumpy…not all all, far from trying to attack Clavos in any way…we were having polite conversation trying to reach understanding and define out terms for discussion

    i know i did not intend any kind of “attack”….nor did i feel “defensive” in our exchange..if he did, i would gladly Apologize instantly…for such was not my intent

    having problems with your shift key there, Lumpy?

    Excelsior?

  • lumpy

    for gonzo I think the answer is that u can’t. fortunately the courts have clearly stated that data mining is not the same as acual surveillance.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    Franco – one goes to the court and asks for said warrant, giving the specifics of what you are looking for, where you are looking and your probable cause for wanting to look

    if it involves foreign intel – you go to the secret FISA court and follow the procedures for that process

    simple enough and Constitutional too!

    Excelsior?

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    oh really? have you got a link for that one, all the way through appeals?

    and i never said shit about the data mining..i spoke specifically about the FBI’s own reported cases of purely domestic wiretaps…over 200 of them

    shift key give out completely there, Lumpy?

    Excelsior?

  • Les Slater

    #114 Franco,

    I do not have any personal access to Mr. Bush so I really don’t know if he laughs about his situation. I am sure though that he does not see his situation as the majorty of the public seems to. As you say, he is holding up quite well. I think a good sense of humor would help in that respect, hence I do think he, at least occasionally, laughs about what people think of him.

    In reading your post I see no real disagreement between us, at leat as far as my #3 and your #114 go.

    Les

  • Franco

    #115 — Lumpy

    Ya Clavos,

    For the love of Pete, shame on you for managing your money and living within your means. And additionally for paying off your house so your can further capitalize on it by renting it out which brings you even more income allowing you to have the means to have additional shelter elsewhere too. You capitalistic pig. Hugo hates people like you.

    Keep up the good work!

  • troll

    Zedd #95 – as best I can gather the actual figure is somewhere between 67 thousand and a million civilians dead in Iraq since the invasion…there still seems to be a significant difference of opinion on this

    …not all readers consider the Lancet studies (the only sources that I’ve seen from which you could have taken your hundreds of thousands figure) objective and reliable

    now that it’s so peaceful there re-run the study I say…third time’s the charm

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    “RJ…CIA says Plame was covert, look it up”

    Then why isn’t Dick Armitage in a prison cell?

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    “as for Clinton..he was an ass who also did fucked up shit, but he was never charged nor convicted of perjury now , was he? and to fuck you with your own “logic” where was the underlying crime there?”

    Um, the sexual harassment of Paula Jones, which BJ Clinton eventually settled out of court for nearly a million dollars…

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    well RJ, i think it has something to do with the difficulty in the provision of proving in court that Armitage knew Plame was covert when he outed her

    we’ll probably never know , you could ask Fitzgerald, the prosecutor…his statements indicate that due to Libby’s obstruction of Justice, he was not able to pursue the investigation properly and prosecute fully

    anything else?

    Excelsior?

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    “But Libby was pardonned after the investigation was over”

    No, Libby was never pardoned. His prison sentence was commuted. There’s a difference.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    as for the Clinton bit..show me the conviction, you know..with a jury, like Libby had

    you keep trying to compare apples and oranges, and failing abysmally

    miss me?

    Excelsior?

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    “as for Clinton..he was an ass who also did fucked up shit, but he was never charged nor convicted of perjury now, was he?”

    No, but he was disbarred by the Supreme Court. For, you know, perjury and stuff.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    by the SCOTUS? you sure about that?

    i think it was the Arkansas Bar association, i don';t think that SCOTUS has anything to do with removing a state law license

    link your source and i will stand corrected, but otherwise, i do think you are mistaken there

    no matter Slick Willie deserved to be disbarred for fucking up

    it STILL has less than shit to do with Libby, why is that so difficult to understand?

    Excelsior?

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    “by the SCOTUS? you sure about that?”

    Here:

    In his deposition for the Jones lawsuit, Clinton denied having “sexual relations” with Lewinsky. Based on the evidence provided by Tripp, a blue dress with Clinton’s semen, Starr concluded that this sworn testimony was false and perjurious.

    During the deposition, Clinton was asked “Have you ever had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky, as that term is defined in Deposition Exhibit 1, as modified by the Court.” The judge ordered that Clinton be given an opportunity to review the agreed definition. Afterwards, based on the definition created by the Independent Counsel’s Office, Clinton answered “I have never had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky.” Clinton later stated that he believed the agreed-upon definition of sexual relations excluded his receiving oral sex.

    With the adducement of further evidence in the case President Clinton was held in contempt of court by judge Susan Webber Wright. His license to practice law was suspended in Arkansas and later by the United States Supreme Court. He was also fined $90,000 which was paid by a fund raised for his legal expenses.

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    Or, if you prefer, here:

    WASHINGTON (CNN) — Former President Bill Clinton will contest Monday’s Supreme Court order that suspended him from practicing law before the high court, his attorney said.

    The Supreme Court gave Clinton 40 days to argue why he should not be permanently disbarred.

    Clinton was asked about Lewinsky during a January 1998 deposition in a sexual harassment suit brought by Paula Jones, a former Arkansas state employee. His attempt to conceal the affair while under oath led to his 1998 impeachment and 1999 acquittal by the Senate.

    The U.S. Supreme Court has never disbarred a former president, said presidential historian and author Stanley Kutler, emeritus professor of history and law at University of Wisconsin-Madison.

    The decision on Clinton came as the Supreme Court opened its 2001-2002 session.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    thanks for the link, RJ…what i am reading here is that the Arkansas board disbarred him, and it was upheld by SCOTUS

    the jurisdiction of SCOTUS has to do with Constitutional issues, NOT things handled by the Bar Assosciation and licensing boards…the appeals process brought it up to SCOTUS and they rightfully upheld the Arkansas decision

    Wikipedia isn’t always a good source for some info, in this case they missed the simple fact that SCOTUS has NO jurisdiction in such a case, but DOES sit as the final route of appeals and only takes cases with Constitutional import to make a final decision on said appeals

    make sense now?

    Excelsior?

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    Now, as to whether BJ Clinton was ever convicted of perjury, the answer is no.

    But OJ was never convicted of a double homicide. And Mohamed Atta was never convicted of mass murder. But everyone (except the conspiracy kooks) knows they were guilty.

    So are you honestly suggesting, “gonzo marx” that BJ Clinton didn’t lie under oath (which is perjury, which is a felony)?

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    your second link was better..he was disbarred from arguing cases in front of SCOTUS as well…

    i stand corrected on that detail, i had no idea there was a separate process for being recognized by SCOTUS..i would have thought the Federal Bar association handled it…but it makes sense that SCOTUS would be the final arbiter in such an instance

    so, it looks like we are both correct, in a sense

    fair enoough?

    it still has shit to do with Libby…a disbarment is NOT the same as conviction by a Jury now, is it?

    so your point is?

    Excelsior?

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    Let me repeat:

    “WASHINGTON (CNN) — Former President Bill Clinton will contest Monday’s Supreme Court order that suspended him from practicing law before the high court, his attorney said.”

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    i ain’t suggesting shit about Clinton…i’m stating it has not a single fucking thing to do with Libby
    and that it’s a poor distraction tactic to bring it up, since it has NOTHING to do with the matter at hand

    simple enough, RJ?

    Excelsior?

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    Are you honestly suggesting, “gonzo marx” that BJ Clinton didn’t lie under oath (which is perjury, which is a felony)?

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    RJ..you caught up now?

    are you honestly so simple that you didn’t get that i agree Clinton lied his ass off on many occasions?

    now, question for you…do YOU admit that Libby was convicted by a jury of perjury, obstruction of Justice and making false statements to the FBI?

    Excelsior?

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    Let me make it simple for ya:

    – BJ Clinton committed perjury, which is a felony. For this, he was impeached, disbarred, and disgraced.

    – Scooter Libby committed perjury, which is a felony. For this, he will be fined, be on probation, be disgraced, and forever be a convicted felon (unless he wins his appeal).

    The above are facts.

    Now, why do you believe that Scooter Libby should go to prison for 30 months for committing perjury, when BJ Clinton didn’t spend a day in jail for his perjury?

    Or are you going to laughably try to suggest that BJ Clinton did NOT lie under oath???

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    you missed the bit about being convicted by a jury

    you also left out that Libby still has the option of being pardoned up to the last minute of W;s administration

    i ain’t sugggesting shit, merely stating that of the two cases you cite, one was convicted by a jury…the other was impeached by Congress, and acquitted by the Senate

    apples and oranges

    Excelsior?

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    i’ll make it even easier for you…IF Willie had been convicted by a jury, and then President Gore commuted his sentence…

    i’d be just as outraged and pissed about it

    unlike you, i am NOT any kind of partisan

    i think the Rule of Law should apply to EVERYONE equally

    too bad some among the GoP don’t feel the same and are soft on some crime, but hard on others…

    it’s called hypocrisy

    Excelsior?

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    Let’s try a hypothetical example.

    Person A is a drug dealer. He sells crack to 12-year olds. That’s bad. However, he has never been arrested for this, or convicted, or sentenced.

    Person B is a drug dealer. He sells crack to 12-year olds. That’s bad. But he was once arrested, convicted, and sentenced for this.

    Now, the argument you are making is a legalistic one. Person B is worse than Person A because Person B got nailed by the Criminal Justice System and Person A didn’t.

    I, however, am making a moral/ethical argument. Person A and Person B are equally bad. It’s just that one was punished more severely for his crimes than the other.

    But since you’re stuck on the legalistic argument, fine. Scooter Libby is a convicted felon. And President Bush did not pardon him (like BJ Clinton pardoned fugitive criminal Marc Rich in exchange for contributions from his ex-wife); Dubya merely commuted his sentence.

    And Dubya could have pardoned him. That, legally, is his Constitutional right. Presidents can pardon whoever they want, for whatever reason, and the Congress can’t do dick about it:

    In the United States, the pardon power for Federal crimes is granted to the President by the United States Constitution, Article II, Section 2, which states that the President:

    shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.

    The Supreme Court has interpreted this language to include the power to grant pardons, conditional pardons, commutations of sentence, conditional commutations of sentence, remissions of fines and forfeitures, respites and amnesties.[1] All federal pardon petitions are addressed to the President, who grants or denies the request.

    That’s the law.

    So, “gonzo marx” your argument is bogus on moral/ethical grounds, and it’s pointless on legal grounds.

    In other words, you have no argument.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    no RJ…your whole made up fantasy land is bullshit

    i have not made any kind of comparative value judgement at all, do you really have such problems with reading comprehension?

    read #42 again

    which part of it don’t you understand?

    did i ever say W didn’t have the right or powers as President to pardon or commute?

    nope…never did

    have i said that by doing so he has removed any possibility of further investigations because the pressure of jail can’t be put on Libby, and thus Libby’s obstructing of Justice was successful?

    yep

    did i make ANY kind of value judgement about Clinton and some of his behavior?

    yep, and you quoted it..i said he did fucked up shit…i’ll even add some of it might indeed have been worthy of prosecution

    now, would you concede the same about W?

    heh

    your fantasy argument is p[ure bullshit, your AM talk show tactics are ludicrous and transparent…yoru partisan bias is crystal clear

    and my Opinion is that you are part of the fucking problem with this nation, because you refuse to put Country above Party

    bolshoyeh, tovarich…you would do Stalin proud

    Excelsior?

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    “your fantasy argument is p[ure [sic] bullshit, your AM talk show tactics are ludicrous and transparent…yoru [sic] partisan bias is crystal clear”

    You keep accusing me of being partisan, while pretending to be non-partisan yourself. This, despite the fact that we disagree about almost everything. That’s interesting.

    Could it be that I’m just a conservative and you’re just a liberal? Perhaps our differences are not partisan, but instead ideological?

    That, as a conservative, I tend to identify more with the Republicans than the Dems; and that as a “progressive” you tend to identify more with the Dems than the GOP?

    Is that a possibility? Seems like a probability to me…

    “and my Opinion is that you are part of the fucking problem with this nation, because you refuse to put Country above Party”

    That’s bogus. The national GOP can eat shit right about now, as far as I’m concerned. The only reason I’m slightly partial to Republicans as opposed to Democrats is because Republicans tend to be ideologically to the Right of Democrats, and therefore fit me better.

    (And if BJ Clinton can get away with perjury and obstruction of justice, then Scooter Libby should at least be punished somewhat less harshly in the wake of that wonderful precedent.)

    But I still think Trent Lott is scum and Bush is largely incompetent.

    “bolshoyeh, tovarich…you would do Stalin proud”

    Oh, that’s idiotic hyperbole.

    I know you, gonzo marx. You’re a smart guy. And you try to be fair, when your temper isn’t flaring. (Kinda like me…)

    So, you’ll apologize for those remarks, and I’ll accept. You’re a worthy debater, even if you’re wrong 90% of the time. ;-)

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    Just wanted to respond to something the author of this column wrote:

    “You have to wonder how the president puts up with it, day after day, receiving nothing but increasingly bad news — except from his ultra-conservative Supreme Court.”

    ROTFL! Pretty much every decision from the USSC has been 5-4…hardly “ultra-conservative” …

    But then, the author has biases, as do all of us…

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    well RJ..let’s have aq calm look, shall we?

    partisan…meaning you favor one Party over the other… i dislike both, my current difficulties arise from the track record of the GoP during their single party rule of the last 6 years…where W and his cronies would do something, and the Congress would rubber stamp it…i have equal disdain for any Dems who went along with this shit

    you saying this – “The national GOP can eat shit right about now, as far as I’m concerned.” – helps your case somewhat

    but let me put this to you…fuck th e”ideology” anyone claims to have…look at what they actually DO…and judge from there

    i do appreciate your taking the time to explain yourself a bit, it helps in understanding…

    so let me give you this one…

    Pelosi is fucking incompetent, and W is a criminal who should be impeached due to warrantless wiretaps, torture and denying habeus corpus to a U.S. citizen for three years

    expecting an Apology when you yourself appear to show none for some of the things you have typed is an exercise in frustration

    but i can readily agree to this, show that you can be objective about shit, and i will give you props whenever you deserve them (as you know i have done in the past)

    but i reserve the right to call bullshit on partisan behavior when i perceive it..and will correct myself the instant i am corrected by facts if i am mistaken..part of my problem sometimes is some folks just never seem to admit it when they are shown to be incorrect…

    that gets me steamed

    fair enough?

    Excelsior?

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    allow me to clarify my position a bit there…

    my problem with commuting Libby’s sentence has a lot to do with the reasoning W used, any my thought that EVERY lawyer defending a perjury/obstruction case is going to cite and quote W’s “reasoning” in their cases…and their appeals of sentence

    i agree with the Founders that we are supposed to be a Nation ruled by Laws, NOT Men…and that NO ONE is above the Law…those that try and do so, especially our elected Representatives , deserve nothing but the maximum punishment under the Laws they are convicted of breaking

    hope that helps to elucidate

    Excelsior?

  • Franco

    #119 — gonzo marx

    “Franco – one goes to the court and asks for said warrant, giving the specifics of what you are looking for, where you are looking and your probable cause for wanting to look

    if it involves foreign intel – you go to the secret FISA court and follow the procedures for that process

    simple enough and Constitutional too!”

    Gonzo, wouldn’t it be nice if it were all that simple. Lets take a peak into the gargantuan enormity of the US National Security Agency (NSA) this is intertwined with countries all over the world in LIVE surveillance.

    NSA has created a global spy system, codename ECHELON, which boasts the most enviable array of intelligence equipment and personnel in the world.

    The extraordinary ability of ECHELON to intercept most of the communications traffic in the world is breathtaking in its scope. And yet the power of ECHELON resides in its ability to decrypt, filter, examine and codify these messages into selective categories for further analysis by intelligence agents from the various UKUSA agencies.

    As the electronic signals are brought into the station, they are fed through the massive computer systems, such as Menwith Hill’s SILKWORTH, where voice recognition, optical character recognition (OCR) and data information engines get to work on the messages.

    ECHELON is controlled by the NSA and is operated in conjunction with the Government Communications Head Quarters (GCHQ) of England, the Communications Security Establishment (CSE) of Canada, the Australian Defense Security Directorate (DSD), and the General Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) of New Zealand. These organizations are bound together under a secret 1948 agreement, UKUSA, whose terms and text remain under wraps even today. It is the greatest surveillance effort ever established.

    The prime mover in the UKUSA arrangement is undeniably the National Security Agency (NSA).

    The NSA is the largest global employer of mathematicians, featuring the best teams of code makers and code breakers ever assembled. The latter’s job is to crack the encryption codes of foreign and domestic electronic communications, forwarding the revealed messages to their enormous team of skilled linguists to review and analyze the messages in over 100 languages. The NSA is also responsible for creating the encryption codes that protect the US government’s communications.

    The vast network created by the UKUSA community stretches across the globe and into the reaches of space. Land-based intercept stations, intelligence ships sailing the seven seas and top-secret satellites whirling twenty thousand miles overhead all combine to empower the NSA and its UKUSA allies with access to the entire global communications network. Very few signals escape its electronic grasp.

    Having divided the world up among the UKUSA parties, each agency directs its electronic equipment towards the heavens and the ground to search for the most minute communications signals that traverse the system’s immense path.
    These programs and computers transcend state-of-the-art; in many cases, they are well into the future.

    MAGISTRAND is part of the Menwith Hill SILKWORTH super-computer system that drives the powerful keyword search programs. One tool used to sort through the text of messages, PATHFINDER (manufactured by the UK company, Memex) sifts through large databases of text-based documents and messages looking for keywords and phrases based on complex algorithmic criteria. Voice recognition programs convert conversations into text messages for further analysis. One highly advanced system, VOICECAST, can target an individual’s voice pattern, so that every call that person makes is transcribed for future analysis.

    The total international system is processing millions of messages every hour, the ECHELON systems churn away 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, looking for targeted keyword series, phone and fax numbers, and specified voiceprints. It is important to note that very few messages and phone calls are actually transcribed and recorded by the system. The vast majority are filtered out after they are read or listened to by the system. Only those messages that produce keyword “hits” are tagged for future analysis. Again, it is not just the ability to collect the electronic signals that gives ECHELON its power; it is the tools and technology that are able to whittle down the messages to only those that are important to the intelligence agencies.

    Each international station maintains a list of keywords (the “Dictionary”) designated by each of the participating intelligence agencies. A Dictionary Manager from each of the respective agencies is responsible for adding, deleting or changing the keyword search criteria for their dictionaries at each of the stations. Each of these station dictionaries are given codewords, such as COWBOY for the Yakima facility and FLINTLOCK for the Waihopai facility. These codewords play a crucial identification role for the analysts who eventually look at the intercepted messages.

    Each message flagged by the ECHELON dictionaries as meeting the specified criteria is sorted by a four-digit code representing the source or subject of the message (such as 5535 for Japanese diplomatic traffic, or 8182 for communications about distribution of encryption technology,) as well as the date, time and station codeword. Also included in the message headers are the codenames for the intended agency: ALPHA-ALPHA (GCHQ), ECHO-ECHO (DSD), INDIA-INDIA (GCSB), UNIFORM-UNIFORM (CSE), and OSCAR-OSCAR (NSA). These messages are then transmitted to each agency’s headquarters via a global computer system, PLATFORM, that acts as the information nervous system for the UKUSA stations and agencies.

    OK, I too am for keeping the government from abuse of power against it citizens. So to address the fears of the paranoid skeptics on the activities of the NSA, I think we need to use a little common sense. It goes without saying that any information picked up by NSA on American citizens and used against them, (that is not directly linked to the war on terror against the USA or its allies) would not stand up in any Court. It would be insane for the government to even try to abuse this power over citizens in court and to prosecute any citizen for anything other then directly the war on terror.

    In contrast, in a 2-1 decision, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed this legal challenge to the Bush administration’s warrantless surveillance program. The challenge was brought by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of (as the ACLU states) prominent journalists, scholars, attorneys and national nonprofit organizations who say that the unchecked surveillance program was disrupting their ability to communicate effectively with sources and clients.

    Even though the plaintiffs alleged a well-founded fear that their communications were subject to illegal surveillance, the court dismissed the case because plaintiffs could not show that there activities had be compromised and could not state with certainty that they had been wiretapped by the National Security Agency.

    This bogus case clearly shows that at this stage, it is the government, not the citizens, who are in need of legal protection.

    There is a concerted effort by the heads of intelligence agencies, federal law enforcement officials and congressional representatives to defend the capabilities of ECHELON. Their persuasive arguments point to the tragedies seen in the bombings in Oklahoma City and the World Trade Center in New York City. The vulnerability of Americans abroad, in the bombing of the American embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya, all emphasizes the necessity of monitoring those forces around the world that would use senseless violence and terror as political weapons against the US and its allies.

    Intelligence victories add credibility to the arguments that defend such a pervasive surveillance system and all point to the need for comprehensive signals intelligence gathering for the national security of the United States.

    So gonso, I will repeat my question to you. How in the world could the NSA request a billion warrant per day to meet the demands of is enormous ability to work both domestically and internationally with countries all over the world to find terrorist plots. Explain to me how one goes to the court and asks for said warrant, giving the specifics of what you are looking for, where you are looking and your probable cause for wanting to look. Explane to me how the current system with is specific computer code searchs fails your approval, and do you truly believe we are better off with out it like the ACLU and some dems in Cogress think we are.

  • bliffle

    This is so easy to refute and so naive in its awe as to be funny.

    “#149 — July 11, 2007 @ 04:03AM — Franco

    ..
    Gonzo, wouldn’t it be nice if it were all that simple. Lets take a peak into the gargantuan enormity of the US National Security Agency (NSA) this is intertwined with countries all over the world in LIVE surveillance.”

    What a joke! All these complex (and fabulously expensive, I might add) spy systems are USELESS against any spies who wish to keep their communications secure and who employ simple security measures, such as the easily available PGP. Combined with steganography that makes even traffic invisible to our elaborate (and, did I mention, expensive?) counterspy systems.

    Do you understand what that means? It means that they are only useful against people who have no reason to use secure communications: the ignorant and the innocent.

    Therefore, they are only useful to detect idiotic spies, or to contrive evidence against the innocent.

    Oh, they are also useful for enriching the companies that relentlessly peddle these useless monsters to gullible government officials (did I mention that they are expensive?). Are you as gullible?

    “This bogus case clearly shows that at this stage, it is the government, not the citizens, who are in need of legal protection.”

    Haha. You’ve turned the Bill Of Rights, specifically intended by the Founders to defend people against the government, on it’s head! This would be novel if it weren’t such a repetitive theme of the Rush Limbaugh claque.

    The poor cowering government! Being beaten by those nefarious citizens! After all, ‘citizen’ starts with ‘C’, just like ‘communist’! And didn’t the commies of the French Revolution call each other ‘Citizen’? Tailgunner Joe, where are you when we need you?!

    “There is a concerted effort by the heads of intelligence agencies, federal law enforcement officials and congressional representatives to defend the capabilities of ECHELON. Their persuasive arguments point to the tragedies seen in the bombings in Oklahoma City and the World Trade Center in New York City. The vulnerability of Americans abroad, in the bombing of the American embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya, all emphasizes the necessity of monitoring those forces around the world that would use senseless violence and terror as political weapons against the US and its allies.”

    And yet, and yet, no one has ever been able to show that any of these extraordinary, illegal (and did I mention expensive?) measures would have been able to prevent any of those disasters!

    “Intelligence victories add credibility to the arguments that defend such a pervasive surveillance system and all point to the need for comprehensive signals intelligence gathering for the national security of the United States.”

    Only in the minds of the Activist Judges who abandon the Strict Construction interpretation of the Constitution and defy the Originalist intentions of The Founders to grant extraordinary power to rogue Executive Administrations to oppress the citizens of the USA. And anywhere else their power can reach.

    “So gonso, I will repeat my question to you. How in the world could the NSA request a billion warrant per day to meet the demands of is enormous ability to work both domestically and internationally with countries all over the world to find terrorist plots. Explain to me how one goes to the court and asks for said warrant, giving the specifics of what you are looking for, where you are looking and your probable cause for wanting to look.”

    If you don’t then you are going on a fishing expedition against people who are innocent, probably to contrive evidence against people who have committed no crime.

    ” Explane to me how the current system with is specific computer code searchs fails your approval, and do you truly believe we are better off with out it like the ACLU and some dems in Cogress think we are.”

    We would be better off deploying that money and effort into more useful and rewarding spy techniques.

    Don’t be deluded by those flashy (and very expensive) fake detection systems, else you worsen the ability of our own counterspies.

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    have i said that by doing so he has removed any possibility of further investigations because the pressure of jail can’t be put on Libby, and thus Libby’s obstructing of Justice was successful?

    yep

    really not so true. all they have to do is subpoena him and if he doesn’t cooperate they can jail him for contempt pretty much indefinitely.

    dave

  • Les Slater

    Bliffle,

    “Therefore, they are only useful to detect idiotic spies, or to contrive evidence against the innocent.”

    This is a fairly complicated issue. The above statement grossly oversimplifies.

    I was on the phone with another Detroiter on Monday of this week. This was my first ever conversation with him but he heard about me from a mutual friend. He had guessed that I was a Communist. My friend acknowledged it.

    When we were talking he said that he knew I was a Communist and he had no problem with that. He said at one time he had a boss that was a Communist. I laughed. A boss? communist?

    I explained that I was a real communist. He then got very serious sounding and asked if the FBI might be surveying me. I said, ‘I don’t know, but if they are, now they got your number too.’ He cleared his voice, and ‘for the record’, announced that he was a capitalist and only knew a Communist, his boss.

    This surveillance is designed to intimidate people, secondarily to frame up, especially fools that take the bait of agent provocateurs.

    Les

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    for #51 – incorrect, all Scooter has to do is plead the 5th…if the commutation had not taken place, he could be granted immunity and compelled to testify…your scenario is moot in light of the actual circumstance

    and now Franco – nice cut and paste job…a comprehensive overview indeed, let me do a little cut and paste , much shorter

    ” The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

    now, there is plenty of precedent from the SCOTUS that says your phone is covered under that bit of the Constitution

    my Objection, specifically, is to the over 200 cases of purely domestic wiretapping that the government had admitted to that have been done without ANY kind of warrant

    my Objection is to the violations of our Rights that have come from the PATRIOT Act, try this article for just a taste of how far the violations go.

    you mention the recent ruling by the 6th Court of appeals, and even accurately state that it was because the judges found that the parties who brought the suit could not prove they themselves had been harmed!

    you do realize they couldn’t prove anything because they could get NO information from the Administration…even if each of them as individuals had been bugged 24/7…they had NO redress to find out yes or no.

    contrary to what some had said, this did not mean the lawsuit itself had no merit, merely that the court ruled those bringing the suit could not show those entities themselves had been harmed…not that NO ONE had been.

    we know some have been, the FBI alone has documented over 200 cases, as well as the things mentioned in the link i provide above

    ECHELON has many problems with it, and many in the Intel community have made these very points against it

    as for what can be done, many things…let’s start with ,oh…catching bin Laden, perhaps?

    me, i’ll stick with the 4th Amendment, and defend it with my life if need be

    “Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.” – Ben Franklin

    Excelsior?

  • bliffle

    Well, Les, if you hear the sound of military boots coming down the hall don’t wait for the knock on the door before fleeing thru the window!

    I know just how you columnists think! I’m not going to say the wrong thing and get arrested like some stupid cosmologist.

  • Les Slater

    bliffle, ;-)

  • Clavos

    How very cosmopolitan of you, bliffle!

  • Zedd

    Clav

    Post $100k is upper.

  • Zedd

    The dialouge between Gonzo and RJ pretty much sums up the differences between those who consider themselves to be Democrats and those who are Republican, at this time in our history.

    They are having a conversation but not speaking the same language.

    One person is trying to advance the discussion to issues that affect matters on a grand scale and the other is focused on minute details about an issue which has no real impact on governance, one which was created as a political tool.

    One person is patiently trying to move the discussion on and one person is fully engaged in the trivia, thinking that what he is discussing is what good political debate and engagement consists of.

    Interesting…….

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    Les, the FBI couldn’t care less if you’re a communist so long as you don’t advocate medical marijuana or make phonecalls to Yemen.

    Post $100k is upper.

    Upper middle class, Zedd? Barely, and not at all if you’re a 2 income family with kids. Solid middle class if that’s the case.

    dave

  • REMF

    “You still haven’t explained how you know read Bush’s and Cheney’s minds. It seems to me that they’re not obsessed with their activities during the Vietnam War, but you clearly are. It’s tainting your analysis.”
    – Baronius

    Baronius;
    I did reply to this earlier, but my response was deleted by the comments editor.
    – MCH

  • REMF

    This by Zedd bears repeating:
    “One person is patiently trying to move the discussion on and one person is fully engaged in the trivia, thinking that what he is discussing is what good political debate and engagement consists of.”

    Dittos, Zedd.
    – MCH

  • Zedd

    Dave

    Upper middle class, Zedd? Barely, and not at all if you’re a 2 income family with kids. Solid middle class if that’s the case.

    I am assuming that you are saying that it doesn’t feel like “upper”.

    If you are refuting what I posted, I would like to find out what you are basing your assertion on? Are you an expert on social class?

    However, I must say that with the demands that we place on ourselves for material possessions, it never seems to be enough, does it?

  • Clavos

    I personally make a distinction between social and economic classes.

    Many (maybe even most, these days) rich people are VERY low class (Paris Hilton or Mike Tyson, anyone?), while a number of “Upper Class” (socially) people aren’t wealthy (though most are wealthy).

    But of course, social class distinctions are not PC…

  • Baronius

    REMF – in regard to your comment #160, I’m sure that the earlier deleted reply was wonderful, but that doesn’t help me, does it? I think it’s fair to say that you’re focused on politicians’ military records. I’d assume that you read a lot of importance into them, maybe more than you should.

    You still haven’t explained why Kerry should get a pass for acting on bad intelligence, or Clinton and Gore for not acting on it.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    Baronius – perhaps they were skeptical of said bad intel enough to decide not to act on it?

    that would make sense…somebody tells you something, but you aren’t certain it’s correct…you don’t act on it until solid confirmation is had

    make sense?

    one would hope that before launching pre-emptive military actions, one would have all their ducks in a row

    in the case of Iraq, it appears that Slick Willie did the correct thing, contain the murderous bastard…control the airspace…bomb as required by military experts, and wait for the pigfucker to die off or be overthrown by Iraqis/Kurds because they are sick of his bullshit and the sanctions imposed by the rest of the world

    compare how that worked for ten years, and how many soldiers and Iraqis died, to what happened in the last 4 years since the Bush invasion

    just a Thought

    Excelsior?

  • Zedd

    Clavos

    People are members of the same class (socioeconomic) if they not only have access to the same goods in society but also have shared experiences. Mike Tyson an Paris are not in the same class even though they are both rich. While Paris’ behavior is outlandish, she shares the same experiences as many of the ultra rich in our country. She was educated in the top schools and was exposed to the same lifestyle as many of the old money crowd. Her public misbehavior does not change her class status. Mike Tyson is different.

    Paris may not be “classy”……. but that may be an issue of poor etiquette. However, many rich kids are bratty. We just don’t get to read about them.

  • Zedd

    Dave

    I just realised that you may have thought that I meant by “upper”, I meant upper class. I meant upper middle class.

  • Lumpy

    Well there’s a clarification that’s clear as mud.

  • Clavos

    “Her public misbehavior does not change her class status.”

    You can bet that she is not accepted by the the doyennes of the upper class, and never was. There’s a concept called breeding, and Paris never had it. She’s common; just like Tyson. Her family’s just had money longer.

    All she is is rich.

    Going to good schools and leading a specific kind of lifestyle don’t make you upper class, and the Hilton family, going all the way back to Paris’s grandfather, Nicky, have never been upper class, just rich.

    Ask any of the Cabots or Lodges of Boston.

  • Zedd

    Clavos

    Breeding is a concept that never existed for an entire class of people.

    I agree that decorum can be defined by your family and upbringing but it certainly is not defined by socioeconomic status.

    Now the pretense of refinement among the upper class has been consistent over time. All of the famous novels of the Victorian era highlight that fact. Drama, impropriety and scandal has always existed. The art was in developing the most creative way of disguising it.

    Human nature is human nature. Wealth never diminishes it. People have their proclivity regardless of breeding. Every family has a knucklehead.

  • Dan

    ” Every family has a knucklehead. ”

    That’s for sure. And if you don’t know who it is…

  • Clavos

    “I agree that decorum can be defined by your family and upbringing but it certainly is not defined by socioeconomic status.”

    Breeding involves a lot more than just decorum, but that’s exactly what I’ve been trying to tell you; “socioeconomic status” is a specious term if there ever was one, since it encompasses two unrelated aspects. Social status has nothing to do with money (except to the uninformed), and economic status has nothing to do with social status, which isn’t conferred by money.

    Paris isn’t the only Hilton “knucklehead.” They have been low class and common for several generations. They are not of the upper social class, no matter how much the tabloids attempt to bestow it on them.

  • Dan

    Gonzo and Clavo’s had a pretty meaningful discussion there about their financial standings. It’s great to see ideological combatants bonding over shared circumstance.

    I don’t desire to bond, but I’m in the same ballpark. A little debt, but a positive debt to net worth ratio.

    One really great calculated risk for me was to move all my 401’s into stocks just as legislation was approved to cut taxes. Those “tax cuts for the rich” have arguably changed my life. Though the games not over.

    Since it’s worked everytime, I thought why not go for it? Reagan had to spend to please the Dem’s, but Bush didn’t need to. I think over-all though that the increased revenue, along with the spending was a good “rev” for the economic engine. Bush will get credit eventually. It’s frustratingly absurd to witness some media hammering incessantly away against all economic indicators. But these are the times we live in.

    Bush’s war plans worked except for one thing no-one ever dares mention: Iraqi’s failure to embrace democracy. It’s hard to understand why a people would turn down representative government. You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink. Except for the Kurds of course. They seem to be more like Americans.

    Bush won’t historically be blamed for a mis-calculation based on egalitarian humanitarian principle.

    Bush will be credited with finally answering the call to war by Islamic jihadists. No matter what happens in Iraq, it’s on. It’s always been on. Bush and Co. just recognized it and landed a calculated blow to the enemy.

    Bush would have more moderate polling popularity if it weren’t for his stand on immigration. Slanted media elements want to pretend he’s slumping solely because of the war.

    Few liberals care that wiretapping phones was OK when the Clinton administration did it to 100% American citizens involved in Constitutionally ordained militias in the wake of the Oklahoma City bombing. That was just fine.

    Valerie Plame wasn’t covert. She wasn’t even close. That’s why Fitzgerald didn’t try to prove she was. And why the jury in the “sham” Libby trial wasn’t allowed to know of her status.

    Just to understand how weak the argument was for Plame being covert: One speculative legal argument was to declare that a personal business trip she went abroad for, met the requirement of being “dispatched” by the CIA.

    Her code name: “Valerie Plame”

    Bush will get some legacy cred for restoring dignity to the white house. (insert Clinton atrocity here). Did they change the sheets in the Lincoln bedroom?

    I’m not sure exactly how stupid and soft Americans are. I hope for the best, but I think conventional wisdom is such that we will decline precipitously until we’re forced to reject liberalism and the complicit dishonest media.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    Dan…no offense intended, but i can’t even begin to go over how much of your comment appears completely delusional in light of objective reality

    i guess with some folks, all one can do is agree to disagree

    (remember, i’m an Independent with no party affiliation)

    Excelsior?

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    Gonzo, it’s abundantly clear that not everyone’s “objective reality” is the same. And I bet that Dan can trott out facts to back his version of reality as easily as you can, and you may both be right.

    I do think Dan is misreading the situation in Iraq, though. Clearly the Iraqis love democracy. They’re just choosing to vote with guns and bombs at the moment. Despite the nancies who recoil from the idea, it’s a time-honored way of settling political differences, and it works too.

    Dave

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    @ #175 care to admit the error in objective reality you committed recently concerning the statement “I never mentioned the GOP platform”?

    until then, there ain’t much you and i have to talk about, is there?

    Excelsior?

  • Doug Reese

    Baronius said: “REMF – in regard to your comment #160, I’m sure that the earlier deleted reply was wonderful, but that doesn’t help me, does it? I think it’s fair to say that you’re focused on politicians’ military records.”

    I read his post before it was deleted. Seemed kinda mild to me, but that’s just me.

    But you may be right, he does seem to be focused on the military records of politicians to a degree — those who have them.

    You seem to be leaning in a different direction — misrepresenting their military records — which is what you did in regards to one person mentioned in your earlier post.

    I need not go into detail, other than to say that according to everyone with him, nothing was faked. With that in mind, who are we to say otherwise?

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    gonzo, if you can point to where i referenced the GOP platform rather than core principles I’ll gladly admit that I made an error in mentioning the platform, which would certainly have been innaccurate. I certainly never intended to reference the platform, and as far as I can tell from scanning past comments I don’t see where I used the word ‘platform”, but I could certainly have done it by mistake.

    That you choose to focus on whether or not I erroneously mentioned the platform rather than actually addressing the substance of my comments is typical of your unwillingness to engage in meaningful discussion.

    Dave

  • Zedd

    Clav

    What exactly do you think Sociologists study?

    Just a point of illumination… What do you call the royals that party like rock stars? You see you don’t understand that impropriety is a staple within the upper class. Actually it is a right of passage to some extent. The boys in the best of clubs engage in the most sophomoric of activities not withstanding some forms of debauchery. Because they are an insular society, we are not privy to their activities. Actually this class tends to engage in activities that would be frowned upon by some of the most adventurous coeds. This is not to say that the youths that we speak of don’t know how to engage in social situations that call for calm and deliberate engagement.

    Clav the restrained world you speak of is one of 9yr olds as they go through their training and preparation for engaging in society and eventually taking over the dynasty.

    As in any society or subculture there are always those who raise eyebrows. It doesn’t mean that they are not part of that society. There are rebels, the “wild child”, drunks, sluts, drug addicts and dummies in this class.

    It is true that the preppy set are modest in dress and demeanor seemingly. However as we have seen from the example of our own President, who has an “impressive pedigree” going back to jolly old England, with his history of drug use and partying, the upper class are just people. They hide their humanness by devising elaborate schemes to maintain the elusion of a much further evolved state. To them, its important that people such as yourself, see them as possessing something unique from the rest of us.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    @ comment #178 – bullshit…both zing and i cited and quoted previously during that conversation which went on across 3 threads that afternoon the day you spilled water on your keyboard…

    comment #99 in this thread you say
    “the gop does not include warrantless wiretaps, torture or changes to habeas corpus in their party platform. they do not run candidates who openly advocate violating peoples rights and destroying the constitution. the policies which they advocate as good for the country are mostly actually positive.”

    and later in the conversation (comment #37 in this thread) you claim you “never said a word about the platform”, not the “core principles” as you do above

    do note the time stamp on both comments

    in comments #38 and 40 both zing and i cite and quote you as i have done here

    this example demonstrates why some have difficulties discussion things with you sometimes, the ability to admit a simple mistake (as i do previously with RJ in this very thread when we “engage in discussion” and i make a mistake and admit it , then we move on) is detrimental to honest debate

    not as egregious as the *Vox Incident*, but still symptomatic

    as for your earlier statement about “objective reality” in regards to Dan’s comment and my reaction…i’ll give a small example… Plame’s status as a covert operative, is a simple one from Dan’s comment to easily disprove…just a single example of what i am talking about in my following comment in response to his

    Excelsior?

  • http://LesPaulisanexcellentguitarplayerwithanadmirablegraspofgoodjazz. bliffle

    Dan sez:

    “Bush won’t historically be blamed for a mis-calculation based on egalitarian humanitarian principle.”

    No, but he will be blamed for a mis-calculation based on oil policy.

    Bush has told Maliki that the most important issue facing the Iraq government is the Iraq Oil Law (which contains very favorable terms for USA oil monopolies). NOT human rights, NOT womens rights, NOT democracy, NOT representative government, etc. First they must pay tribute to the oil companies.


    a citation


    a citation


    a citation

    And once again it looks like we’ll betray our most loyal allies, the Kurds.

    Read it and weep.

  • Clavos

    Zedd,

    It’s clear from your comments that we’re not even on the same page.

    I’m moving on…

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    ok gonzo, i mentioned the platform. was what i said not true? does it in any way invalidate the point i was making?

    this example demonstrates why some have difficulties discussion things with you sometimes, the ability to admit a simple mistake (as i do previously with RJ in this very thread when we “engage in discussion” and i make a mistake and admit it , then we move on) is detrimental to honest debate

    what it demonstrates is that the difficulty in discussion is that you focus on minutiae instead of on the substantial points.

    in the context you quoted it’s not even a mistake, it’s a true and perfectly reasonable statement and doesn’t detract from the point.

    the GOP as a party does not endorse the various actions in question, neither as individuals, as a group, or in their official platform. that was the point. the fact that i don’t think parties should be judged solely by their relatively meaningless platforms is a separate issue.

    why do you have to constantly engage in distraction and misdirection and try to make discussion personal instead of focusing on the issues raised?

    dave

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    Plame’s status as a covert operative, is a simple one from Dan’s comment to easily disprove.

    And Dan or anyone else who’s interested can trott out as contradiction several equally valid facts which show that her covert status had been multiply compromised, was being regularly disregarded by the CIA itself and was functionally meaningless, even if its existence was technically arguable. You may be right, but that doesn’t mean that Dan is wrong.

    Dave

  • Dr Dreadful

    Dave, what’s going on with your keyboard? Day before yesterday you spilled water on it and couldn’t do caps. Then yesterday everything appeared fine – I assumed you’d bought yourself a new one. Now we’re back to all lower case, except somehow you managed to capitalize “GOP”.

    I surmise that one of the following has happened:

    1. You have discovered that abandoning the use of the shift key is a liberating experience.
    2. zingzing has busted into your compound and is holding you hostage while posing as you… Some people will do anything to get their hands on those fonts.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    @183 at least you sort of admit your mistake, and it WAs part of the ongoing discussion at the time…which is admittedly complex and spans three threads, the salient points as to why it was pertinent are there for any interested in the breadth of the discussion

    the context of your statement about the platform is correct, your later use/abuse/dodge concerning the content of the overall discussion was not, hence the point zing and i were making…but that appears to have slipped you mind at this time, fair enough

    the so called minutia you mention is indeed relevant in many cases, we will use this bit about Plame since it is recent, and wont tax your apparent current failings of memory

    if the CIA classes someone as covert (the Proof is in the link i provided), and demonstrates she is covert by legal definition (also in that link) what more Proof does one need to show an objective Fact?

    THAT is the gist of the problem, when presented with completely proven facts, some still try and deny and wiggle, not for the sake of solving a problem, but merely to score political points of Party over Country

    so trot out contradictory evidence, don’t just baldly state there is some but not substantiate the claim

    imo, a BIG part of our Nation’s problems right now arises from some partisans not being able to man up and admit to fucking Reality when it’s right in front of them…both sides can do this, but the GOP and cronies over the last six years have taken it to the extreme, and they have held single Party rule over our government

    even among Citizens this can be found, as is demonstrated right here in this conversation

    the difference is that some can admit when facts show them to be mistaken (what i did with RJ i this very thread), where others do not, will not or are simply unwilling to do so for partisan purposes, or even other unknown reasons

    Excelsior?

  • http://www.roblogpolitics.blogspot.com RJ

    “But shouldn’t the party of morals and values hold itself to a higher standard than the [other] side? Or is the sanctimonious preaching of superior morals and values simply more rhetoric?”

    Well, let’s see:

    BJ Clinton (Democrat) commits perjury. For this, he is disbarred.

    Scooter Libby (Republican) commits perjury. For this, he is disbarred, fined, is nearly sent to prison for 30 months, and faces probation.

    BJ Clinton (Democrat) currently travels the globe as an “elder statesman” giving speeches for six figures a pop, and he’ll probably be back in the White House in 18 months.

    Scooter Libby (Republican) has pretty much been banished from public life, forever, as a disgraced convicted felon.

    So, it seems that members of the “party of morals and values” are held to a higher standard…

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    apples and oranges again RJ

    comparing Slick Willie to maybe Nixon might be a closer analogy

    but , right to your own opinion and all

    Excelsior?

  • Zedd

    Clavos,

    Quite clear. This is a silly topic and yet not so silly. It does shine a light on your world view.

    In order for the elite to maintain power in society, they must convince the masses (you) that they posses some qualities that the rest of the populous don’t have. Just as in the past kings and various rulers had declared some sort of ordaining from a god or greater power, it is important for people in power to maintain a facade of super humanness.

    While adherence to protocol (etiquette) is useful and has been the staple of most societies until just recently, additional codes have been used to keep people out of certain groups, including the aristocrats of a culture. These codes prevent anyone from feeling welcome in their midst so their exclusivity remains intact. They however also prevent anyone from seeing who these mini gods really are. Going back in time we have examples of recorded occurrences that were atrocious that were performed by the upper crust. We also know that people, especially men from this culture have engaged with the lower classes (especially women of the night) some actually producing off spring. Such behaviors are no different than what takes place in all classes. The significant factor is that there is a great deal of effort put forth in hiding their occurrence. Being open about ones improprieties produces shunning by that set and social and business opportunities become limited.

    I could go on…….

    However, know that this class exists partly due to its ability to convince you that they are who you think they are. Many don’t have the funds that brought them the status any longer but subsist on the reputation of being BETTER (if we are to speak in simple terms).

    Let it go.

    Clav you keep forgetting that this is my field. What you are talking about is perception. All of that is what is presumed and has been for times past. Its a nice fantasy about the gentry but it is just an illusion. Let it go.

  • Clavos

    @ #191:

    Our discussion “shines a light” on nothing except your preconceptions and habit of pigeonholing folks on the basis of what you studied; which is a dubious practice under any circumstances, but especially so on the internet.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    shun the unbeliever!

    shuuUUUuuuUuuunnnnnuh…

    heh

    Excelsior?

  • moonraven

    Sorry guys, but all of what you have posted is horseshit.

    Bush used NO REASONING whatsoever for pardoning Libby. He’s The Decider, remember–he can decide what ever he feels like and tell you limp pimps to kiss his ass.

    And of course he laughs about everything–that’s what retarded people do when they fuck up big time and the supposedly “normal” population pays the price for it.

    If you don’t believe me, spend an hour or two in a sheltered workshop.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    i must differ with you there moonraven

    imo, it was a cold calculation…pardon him right now and you get a huge outcry from most of the population for blatant cronyism above the law

    his attempt at Solomonic decision making is to assuage such an outcry from many, saying he agrees with the Jury, but not the Judge’s sentence

    it still leaves room to pardon Libby last minutes of the Administration on the way out the door

    and any that think Libby is “ruined” is being naive, he’ll have his six figure job at Haliburton or the American Enterprise Institute (home of the neocons, which Libby is a charter signatory too) the nanosecond they consider it politically expedient for him to do so

    Excelsior?

  • moonraven

    No–You are wrong. The arrogant asshole knows full well that you will stand for anything–from the War President (with sweat socks stuff in his jumpsut) and The Decider.

    He could not possibly care less about a hue and cry–he’s committed crime after crime against humanity and you wimps have not even impeached his ass.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    glad you can read minds..i can’t

    and you appear to labor under the impression that the US public at large are some kind of monolithic block that all thinks and does the same thing in lockstep

    again, i must disagree

    with only a 1 vote majority of the Senate, it becomes next to impossible for our Legislature to pull off an impeachment due to the our rule of Law

    now i can easily Agree that all the crimes should be properly investigated and prosecuted to their fullest extent

    but your invective that all of U.S. are sitting idly by and not speaking up?

    this proves you incorrect.

    just my one sixth billionths of the Worlds opinion, your mileage may vary…

    Excelsior?

  • moonraven

    I don’t see anyone speaking up.

    I see you sitting idly by–when you are not watching tv and putting yourselves deeper in debt at the mall.

    You folks are about as politically active as a doorknob.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    so you add precognition and prescience to your skill list as well?

    the amazing Kreskin has some competition

    joking aside, might one suggest that you are not Aware of everything that occurs?

    or perhaps you believe that anything short of armed insurrection and rioting in the streets is inadequate?

    now, i can agree many are not doing all they can, and that in many instances political change works slowly in this Nation…

    but it does get there, sooner or later, for better or for worse…i am not quite as pessimistic as you appear to be

    for moonraven

    Excelsior?

  • Clavos

    hey gonzo,

    You got both your kidneys?

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    heh..”shun the unbeliever!”

    i thought ya might like that one, Clavos…

    almost as good as this weather report..

    heh

    i must also ask if moonraven watched the Keith Olberman clip i linked to? or does she not consider a major prime time anchorman calling for impeachment, and laying out his case on a world wide news network something?

    Excelsior?

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    Gonzo. There really are situations – and the Plame case is one of them – where there are facts which argue both ways.

    Yes, the CIA currently maintains that she was covert, but they showed no similar concern on the previous occasions where her identity was revealed, suggesting that their attitude towards her covert status was not always what it is now. Their current position is certainly worth considering, but it is not in and of itself sufficient to prove that she had a meaningful covert status at the time in question. Remember, the CIA is far from neutral in this. They have a grudge against the administration – with some reason – and this is an opportunity for them to get some revenge.

    The idea of absolute truth becomes even more of a myth when you take into consideration the subjectivity of the people involved. If as has been claimed, the fact that Plame worked at the CIA was common knowledge, then even though she may have still been technically covert, it’s understandable that many would think otherwise, even if they were technically wrong. And it is also a truth that if enough people knew her identity and assumed she was not covert, then that covert status would become functionally meaningless.

    So on your side you have the CIA’s statement about Plame, while on Don’s side he has the past behavior of the CIA, the prior violations of her covert status, the beliefs of various Washington figures about her covert status, and her own rather public behavior using her position on behalf of her husband.

    The truth is that Plame was a troublingly overt covert operative, and there’s plenty of ammo for both sides to argue what her real status was.

    Plame is, of course, just an example. This same kind of ambiguity surrounds many other issues where partisans proclaim belief in contradictory truths.

    Dave

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    more bullshit…

    do please actually read the article i cite, which has the information placed in evidence by the ruling Court that Plame was indeed covert at the time of the Novak article in every legal meaning of the term by all standards, including the statute under question

    and the Issue here remains objective facts…i present them as a court of law has accepted them as FACT…and link to my source

    no opinion, or bias at all

    but i appreciate you providing a perfect example of how partisans can try and spin simple objective facts to suit their need of placing Party before Country

    Excelsior?

  • moonraven

    Calling for impeachment is NOTHING.

    You have not impeached the criminals.

    You have not filed charges against them and put them in jail.

    In short, you are supporting them in their destruction of the planet and its societies.

    In the 60s we said, If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.

    It’s not a case of being pessimistic. I just do not fucking believe that meaningful social change happens by MAGIC.

    And I repeat, I don’t see you folks doing squat.

  • moonraven

    Well, actually, that was a bit hasty: I DO see Nalle squatting all over this site.

    And I see a fair number of you believing what he tells you: that his shit is really ice cream.

    His logic: Eat shit, millions of flies can’t be wrong.

    Uh huh.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    i must again disagree

    any effort towards a Goal counts

    and your exhortations read hollow coming from an expatriate who has refused to fight themselves, but instead choses to flee the conflict and snipe ineffectually from said distance

    but every little bit helps, so rant on

    what you can see from your perch is not all there is

    Excelsior?

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    That’s exactly it, gonzo. One partisan’s truth is another partisan’s bullshit. And one rarely sees a truly non-partisan ‘truth’ exposed anywhere.

    And there’s nothing new in the MSNBC article that counters the argument that her covert status was more technical than functional. As for the intelligence act you cite, it states explicitly that outing an agent is only a crime if it’s done knowingly, meaning that ignorance is a defense in the face of this law.

    Personally, I think your assertion has slightly more merit, but that doesn’t mean that those who believe Plame was not really covert are lying or bullshitting, because they DO have some real evidence to back their position. It’s not just some crazy shit they made up.

    Dave

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    then cite and/or link your proof, not hollow assertions

    you see, i cite evidence that has been vetted by a court of law , the judge of which as appointed by W’s administration, and the prosecutor appointed by the same

    you also make the bullshit assertion that i am some kind of partisan…again, nice try at spin

    thanks again for proving beyond a reasonable doubt that you are not worth engaging in, imo, since you can’t for a microsecond stop being a blatant partisan who cannot even agree on simple facts when presented to you

    while in meatspace you might indeed be a fine husband and a good father…in this medium you have proven time and again to be unscrupulous and disingenuous to the extreme, a complete shitweasal diehard partisan who’s priority is Party uber alles in the finest Stalinist tradition of Pravda

    all you deserve, imo

    Excelsior?

  • moonraven

    Just a damn minute there, gonzo.

    I do carry a US passport, but I do not consider the US–a country founded on the genocide of MY people–to be worthy of the least effort. I prefer to put my support towards governments moving in directions that benefit humanity and the planet.

    It’s you lazy bums that claim the US to be YOUR country and yet don’t lift a fat finger to do anything to save it.

    I will bemore than happy to be the one who pushes the handle and flushes the US into the sewers of history.

  • Clavos

    “Ooooohhh nnooooo…3 – 4 days of shaaaade!!!”

    LOL, gonzo, & you’re right, the dog IS funnier than the unicorns.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    and the Persecution rests, your Honor

    what you carry is incidental, i did mention that you left the U.S. for what you perceive to be greener pastures, for your own reasons…your right to do so, of course

    but bitching from away about folks here doing what they think is best is pure bullshit at best, and disingenuous at the least

    also, painting 300 million people with your broad brush…from a good, safe distance… is also not helping your case in the least

    especially after i have cited proof in the form of a major news networks prime time anchor calling for impeachment….and you have given us nothing but your assertions in generalities that remain unfounded

    petulant mewlings even, about it not going fast enough or radical enough to suit your viewpoint

    you want all consideration to favor you, but will not grant one iota towards others

    and thus render your ranting moot, imo

    Excelsior?

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    gonzo, why do you always misconstrue what i’m saying and then resort to personal attacks? Are you deliberately misunderstanding me so you can set me up as a partisan strawman or are you just not paying any attention at all?

    Read what I wrote. I never even stated my position on the Plame affair. I was just using the case as an example of a point I was trying to make which has nothing to do with the mythological absolute truth of the Plame affair.

    You want proof of MY argument? Look at what Dan posted and what you posted. That proves my point about truth being largely subjective.

    Try to read more closely. I didn’t say that Plame was not covert, I said that an argument with evidence can be made for that viewpoint. I’m not interested in making that argument, I’m pointing out that your absolutist perspective just doesn’t work. it’s the worst form of partisanship.

    in this medium you have proven time and again to be unscrupulous and disingenuous to the extreme, a complete shitweasal diehard partisan who’s priority is Party uber alles in the finest Stalinist tradition of Pravda

    The fact that you can say ridiculous shit like this shows how little you pay attention to anything which I write. I”m probably the least partisan person you’re likely to encounter in a political discussion. I bend over backwards to give both sides the benefit of the doubt, and certainly have no special enthusiasm about even the marginally more likeable GOP as an organization.

    What I don’t do is give in to one-sided, blatantly partisan and absolutist rhetoric, and you spew a superabundance of it. You see me as partisan because I won’t put up with your holier-than-thou, self-righteous, fanatical myopia. It’s even more annoying from someone who claims to be more or less rational than it is from the fundamentalists on the right – with them i’ve learned not to expect any better.

    your worldview is simplistic, irritating and counterproductive.

    Dave

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    @ #211 – you confuse me with someone who gives a shit what you expect

    i’ll keep myself to ignoring the Vox Weasalius bit, and at the most dealing with salient points of discussion if required

    best you are going to get

    Excelsior?

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    but will not grant one iota towards others

    and thus render your ranting moot, imo

    only utterly closed-minded gonzo brand ranting will be allowed.

    Dave

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    never said i wouldn’t defend myself from direct attacks

    do please note, gentle readers, the exchange between myself and RJ previously in this thread…during it, RJ presents a fact and a link..i read it, and admit my mistake, clarify and modify myself to fit the facts…and we move on

    that’s how close minded i am

    but hey..i haven’t used two names in the same thread to agree with myself, denied it and then went back and deleted and edited the Record to suit my self protecting spin

    have i, Vox?

    Excelsior?

  • moonraven

    gonzo,

    The difference is that I walk my talk.

    It’s YOU mewling wimps that are bitching all the time and doing nothing to make the changes you believe–or say you believe–need to be made in the US.

    I am calling you out as the lazy goodfornothings that you are–and yes, in broad strokes across your equally broad asses.

    If you gave one shit about YOUR country you would have clapped Bush and Cheney and that slimebag Speedy Gonzales in irons by now.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    again, moonraven..we must disagree

    what is it you expect people to do..walk up to the White House as a lawless mob and tear people apart in the streets?

    may work in some countries, but not how things are done here

    and the quantity of what you do NOT know about myself, and those 300 million would not even fit in the combined tomes held withing both the Library of Congress and Alexandria combined

    Excelsior?

  • moonraven

    Rubbish, gonzo!

    Remember something called The Boston Tea Party?

    That was precisely how things USED to be done there.

    And, since you have not noticed, may Ipoint out–ever so gently, of course–that THINGS ARE NOT WORKING THERE….

  • moonraven

    PS: The US government IS a lawless mob.

    Speedy Gonzales said all laws are obsolete, remember?

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    moonraven – the Tea Party is a fallacious analogy..it was rebellion against a lack of representation and the rule of a Man

    we are supposed to be a Nation under the rule of Law, not Men

    Gonzalez had said the Geneva Conventions were obsolete, not all laws…that being said, i agree Gonzalez should be tossed into a 10×12 and pumped in sunlight for the rest of his days for the crimes he has committed and has been accessory to…his stance on torture alone, much less couples with the warrantless wiretaps deserve nothing but the harshest punishment allowed under the law

    as for whether things are working…you appear to lack patience, if the pace troubles you, come home and do what you think is required, otherwise, again…your point is moot

    but do feel free to rant as you like, free speech and all…

    Excelsior?

  • moonraven

    Gonzo,

    The Decider is not Mad King George? Last time I looked he sure was.

    Why are you not revolting? Is wimpdom now an epidemic, or what? Get off your fat ass!

    Gonzales also said subpoenas are worthless and can be ignored.

    That doesn’t sound like Rule of Law to ME–or to anyone else who isn’t a moron!

    I already told you that I am more than willing to do EXACTLY what is required: Flush the US and you lazy fucks into the sewer of History.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    well then, your position is noted as an enemy of people, rather than a foe of a group of political hacks and criminals

    there’s the difference…the system is slow, but it works…W will be gone in ’08 at the latest (Jan ’09 to be exact)…along with Cheney and Gonzalez and the rest

    what you propose would be like me saying “because the Mexican government is corrupt, flush all of Mexico..those lazy bums aren’t revolting against their oppressors!”

    flip the script and see how you like it before you advocate extremes

    it appears there is no reasoning with you on some subjects, your mind is made up…

    enjoy your day

    Excelsior?

  • Lumpy

    Just to keep the facts straight, the boston tea party was a tax revolt.

    Anyone else find the idea of an argument between gonzo and moonraven over who’s more of an extremist to be inherently hilarious?

  • Les Slater

    “I already told you that I am more than willing to do EXACTLY what is required: Flush the US and you lazy fucks into the sewer of History.”

    Ms. Raven, why such hostility? Even those who do not see the need for revolution at this point, many will later, and join the fight.

    Les

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    almost as funny as you and Vox having shift key troubles that come and go at the same time there, Lumpy

    but do feel free to demonstrate my extremist positions?

    extreme in defense of the Constitution, yep…i’ll go for that

    got anything else? or ya just sniping?

    no matter, but do go on…and i’ll defend your right to rant as much as i do my own…or moonraven’s

    Excelsior?

  • REMF

    “Anyone else find the idea of an argument between gonzo and moonraven over who’s more of an extremist to be inherently hilarious?”

    No more hilarious than your pretense of patriotism.

  • REMF

    “I bend over backwards to give both sides the benefit of the doubt…”
    – Dave Nalle

    CRASH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    (50 BC readers falling of their chairs at the same time)

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    actually, gonzo, my shift issues are a recent development. looking at past comments lumpy seems to have had them since his very first visit here. you’d have to ask him why. of course you frequently don’t capitalize words. perhaps you’re lumpy’s evil twin.

    dave

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    clarification…was a Joke, i don’t intend it to be serious

    Excelsior?

  • Zedd

    Clavos

    You made an observation . I offered an adjunct which included a differing opinion that is supported by stacks of research over several decades. In essence de pigeon holing and actually stating that people are just people.

    We’ve had this conversation before and I am also making an observation that your understanding of social hierarchy highlights some of what you espouse on this page. I didn’t say that I know you. I do however know your posts and there is a thread. What I can only comment on is a persona that you have established on this page off course.

    I do apologies for making you feel as if you were being pigeon holed. No one enjoys that.

  • Dan

    Gonzo: “Dan…no offense intended, but i can’t even begin to go over how much of your comment appears completely delusional in light of objective reality”

    “i’ll give a small example… Plame’s status as a covert operative, is a simple one from Dan’s comment to easily disprove…just a single example of what i am talking about in my following comment in response to his”

    “do please actually read the article i cite, which has the information placed in evidence by the ruling Court that Plame was indeed covert at the time of the Novak article in every legal meaning of the term by all standards, including the statute under question”

    The information you cite illustrates perfectly how biased media suckers the gullible into believing lies.

    To start with, the “information” is simply a legal brief filed by Fitzgerald. It’s like him simply writing on a piece of paper “Plame was covert” It’s his opinion, nothing more. Not a legal finding of any kind.

    There wasn’t a legal finding because Fitz’s brief was only brought to light when it couldn’t be legally challenged. You have to wonder about the integrity of a man who would file an opinion he was afraid to have scrutinized during trial, as a reason for a stiffer sentence.

    Notice the deceitfulness at the end of the article: “The nature of Plame’s CIA employment never came up in Libby’s perjury and obstruction of justice trial.”

    Yea, sure, it just “never came up”. Imagine that, the whole reason for the investigation, the underlying crime, simply didn’t come up.

    I’m sure the jury got to hear the word “leaked” plenty.

    If it had “come up” during trial, the jury might have gotten to hear some expert testimony.

    One person who might know something of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act would be Victoria Toenging. A principle architecht and drafter of the act. She would probably be a good source for defining the intent of the legislation.

    Here’s a link to Henry Waxman doing his best Chris Mathews impersonation to try and bully Victoria away from the truth.

    Toenging’s testimony under oath would seem to undercut Gonzo’s statement that “Plame was indeed covert at the time of the Novak article in every legal meaning of the term by all standards, including the statute under question”

    The “statute under question” never got to be questioned, for obvious reasons.

    Geez Gonzo, two shellacking’s in one thread.

    Good thing your non-partisan. Humility is easier to find when one isn’t ideologically vested.

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    glad to see dan came back to actually defend his position and present his evidence.

    now to the key question. is one of their versions of the story the absolute truth, or is it possible that the truth lies somewhere between?

    dave

  • Dan

    good question Dave.

    For me, I usually throw in against the side that is actively suppressing facts and seems to be deliberately creating a false impression.

    The MSNBC article Gonzo cited wants you to think Plames identity is settled.

    Few people even realize that Armitage was the leak. (Actually a non-leak because Plame wasn’t covert)

    Fewer still realize that Joe Wilson’s version of the Irag/Niger deal in his New York Times story was discredited by the findings of a bi-partisan senate intelligence committee. Based upon their questioning of him.

    The reason for the ignorance is because of the suppression.

    The article says Plames status didn’t “come up”. That’s because it wasn’t allowed to. It was actively suppressed by the judges order.

    Libby’s “crime” was the word of one man, taken over the word of another man.

    Apparantly, in the juries eyes, Tim Russert is the sole arbiter of truth. His word alone, moved them past reasonable doubt.

    In another infamous trial, finding Ron Goldmans blood in OJ’s vehicle wasn’t enough to get beyond reasonable doubt.

    I think truth’s subjectiveness to be over-rated.

    It’s always the people who want to quibble over things like “what the meaning of is, is” who uphold that truth is subjective.

    Maybe we should just ask Tim Russert if truth is subjective. He’s the arbiter.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    here’s the file of the unclassified document that was accepted as evidence by the Judge in the case (who was appointed by Bush)

    if the rules of evidence in our courts as well as a document and statements from the CIA themselves are not proof enough…then i cannot fathom what could be satisfactory

    nuff said…
    Excelsior?

  • Dan

    needless to say, but calling someone “covert” or having someone meet the standard of covert under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act are separate things.

    You would think you could trust the CIA. That’s what Bush thought. But now he’s a “liar”.

    When it comes to Constitutional law we’re always fretting over the founding framers original intent. When it comes to the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, we have a living, breathing framer willing to testify. But her testimony doesn’t square with the template. So few want to hear from her.

    So readers can decide for themselves if Valerie Plame (code name,Valerie Plame) was outed in violation of the act, despite no pursuit of any legal finding (telling), and against the judgement of the person who framed the legislation.

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    Apparantly, in the juries eyes, Tim Russert is the sole arbiter of truth. His word alone, moved them past reasonable doubt.

    apparently I’m with the jury in having more confidence in the honesty of tim russert than in the witnesses thrown out on ths issue by eiher side.

    dave

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    Dan..the document i linked comes form the CIA itself..THEY say at the time of the outing, Plame was covert

    the reason Armitage wasn’t brought up on charges, according to the prosecutor..was twofold…to pursue prosecution required proof that Armitage knew her status as covert…and that the investigation itself was obstructed by Libby’s perjury

    how’s that for a shellacking?

    so the facts, in actuality, do not substantiate you claims…the facts are a matter of record in the court documents…ruled on by a Judge appointed by Bush, prosecuted by Fitzgerald, also appointed by Bush…and decided upon by a jury in accordance with our Laws

    did you need it written on a stone tablet on Mount Sinai?

    please…all snarking aside..what does it take to convince you of a simple fact? is it that you don’t think the legal system works at all, even when the Judge and Prosecutor are republicans appointed by Bush?

    or am i missing something?

    Excelsior?

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    Just to be fair, a document admitted as evidence in a case which was never realy tried isn’t exactly definitive, since no one ever had an opportunity to challenge it or examine it in court.

    dave

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    what?…i’m confused here

    it was entered as evidence in the Libby case…which was indeed tried and completed with the findings of Libby being guilty of perjury, obstruction and making false statements to the FBI

    the validity of the documents was indeed able to be challenged by Libby’s lawyers, if they so chose….and was admitted as an exhibit of evidence in accordance with the law

    so, do explain your point…because as far as i understand it, it just doesn’t get ANY more definitive than that

    Excelsior?

  • Zedd

    Gonzo

    I do believe that your current engagement is referred to in most circles as “A SPANKING”!

    Walk away gentlemen, you’ve been sufficiently thrashed.

    Well done Muppet!

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    well Zedd…such is not really my Intent

    i am honestly seeking to determine if it is possible in the realm of political discourse to ascertain a definitive Fact and have actual agreement by all concerned…like pointing to something and saying “that’s red”…or an example i’ve used earlier of observing a car hit a cat, where some try and say “that cat was trying to commit suicide, give me a few days and i’ll find the note”

    a small Jest, but it illustrates my point

    without the ability to agree on verifiable facts, no real discussion can take place

    an Example and illustration of what i mean

    Excelsior?

  • moonraven

    gonzo,

    Facts are not accepted as existing by certain people on this board, and Nalle is one of them. He believes in just making stuff up and seeing if other folks will be dumb enough to swallow it.

    A fair number of folks on this site have proved themselves to be indeed just that dumb, so Nalle gains strength and continues on.

    As for the differences between you and me:

    1. The change of W’s “government” is 18 months away. Anything can happen in that time, but experince shows that most likely it will be NEGATIVE. And there is no one even remotely credible ready to form a government that would be decent enough to offset the damage that W has done to the planet and to the already marginal credibility of the US.

    2. I don’t happen to believe that there is that much time left in which to make certain really desperately needed changes. Not because I am turning 63 this year, or because I am hedging my bets about 2012 (although I probably am)–but because the negative changes to the planet and to its social structure are now happening at a rate that is no longer arithmetical progression, but geometrical.

    In short, if you want to suck your thumb for the next 10 years, you may find that thumb–and the rest of you–is no longer matter, but energy.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    moonraven, duly noted..but take into consideration what i was saying is that the system is self correcting if left alone…NOT that some are not taking matters into their hands to change things at a faster pace

    to wit: recent polls show that about 46% of the population now favor impeaching Bush and Cheney…this lends political Will to the spineless creatures in Congress, who for their own political survival, will be more apt to listen to that growing segment

    the shift of Power in Congress has lead to the launch of many Investigations into what had previously been a rubber stamp Administration, and thus much of the *damage* caused is now under scrutiny and has the strong possibility of being corrected…

    a Test will be the next time the PATRIOT Act comes up for renewal, as will the tax cuts Bush implemented…many in Congress are stating that they will do away with those cuts for people making over $200k per annum

    the link i gave you to Olberman’s calling for Impeachment is a barometer of the shift in the public’s view, as well as their discontent with how things are going

    you are, of course, more than welcome to what you *believe*…i’ll try and stick to observation of trends and doing what i can to aid in steering things towards what i think should be worked towards

    but that’s a representative Democracy for you

    Excelsior?

  • moonraven

    I don’t believe there is time left for the pokey self-correction that you believe in and which I do not.

    Impeachment–which probably will NOT happen (folks will just let that ole self-correction mechanism, the 18 months left of Bush and Co., do its usual)–is much too good for folks that have been the renegades of the planet since 2001. They have committed crimes against humanity. we are not talking about a splotch of Clintonian semen on somebody’s dress!

    I really do not understand why you folks conitnue to keep your heads up your ass.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    we call it the Rule of Law…not the mob, or men

    but hey, each are entitled to their Opinion, and to do whatever they think is required within the Law…even to go outside as civil disobedience as long as they are comfortable taking the responsibility for their actions and work it through the process

    one of the smiles i got this past week was Sheehan saying she would challenge Pelosi for her seat…i’m not a fan of either lady, politically…but it would be good to see an average citizen stomp the Speaker in a straight up election over the single Issue of Iraq

    Excelsior?

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    sheehan challenging pelosi isn’t going to be allowed to happen. sheehan’s handlers have too much allegiance to pelosi’s institutional backers. sheehan will find herself alone, unfunded and unsupported by those she thought she trusted.

    dave

  • moonraven

    I strongly suspect that you are not a fan because they are both WOMEN.

    Continue making sure that your posture is correctly misogynist–that’s really the way to make changes in your society.

    Where do they get you guys, anyway?

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    i didn’t actually say i wasn’t a fan, MR. stop projecting your prejudices onto others. at least a couple of my favorite politicians are women. I’m sure you’d hate them because they believe in individual liberty and basic human rights.

    dave

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    moonraven, you are again factually incorrect…i could give a fuck about their gender…it’s political weakness when it comes to Pelosi…her record of not being able to handle the job as Speaker stands on it’s own

    as for Sheehan, i’m willing to give her the benefit of the doubt in many areas…but she has to demonstrate she is more than a one trick pony in the political arena before i would back her play…demonstrate her independence and do what she says

    but do feel free to continue to hurl baseless accusations over things you know nothing about..it’s not even amusing, but does continue to demonstrate your own ignorance and prejudice in some matters

    you keep shouting that folks don’t do enough according to your *belief*, but you don’t appear to be doing shit about anything, except fleeing the country, bitching from afar and sloppy thinking

    Excelsior?

  • moonraven

    Sorry gonzo, but I think you are applying–as usual–a far more severe measuring stick to both women than you ever would do if they were men.

    Just the usual misogynist bullshit aout how the women need to dance twice as fast to prove themselves.

    I don’t remember a credible speaker since Tip O’Neill.

    As for what I am doing in Latin America, I am not going to give the rundown again. If you were actuallyinterested you would have gone back to some of my earlier posts and refreshed your memory.

    Sufficient to say that I walk my talk.

    Nalle, I was not referring to you–you are NOT, after all, the center of the Universe. But since you took the bait anyway, let me comment that your misogyny has been obvious since I first visited this site nearly a year ago.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    moonraven – might i suggest you take your own advice?

    my track record of trashing anyone and everyone is pretty clear…i don’t give a shit what age/sex/nationality/proclivity/race/creed or whatever they are

    if i think they fuck up, i say so…and why

    if i think they do well, i say so…and why

    take your blinders off sometime, it lets more of the Light in…

    Excelsior?

  • moonraven

    gonzo,

    I have no blinders. That’s why I was smart enough to vote with my feet–which is what counts–15 years ago.

    You are kidding yourself. Time to do some soul-searching.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    your Right to flee, of course

    me, i’ll stick around and do what i can…my Right to do so

    isn’t it time for you to hold your one person Revolution in Mexico? since they are such a paragon of virtue in their politics…

    and my *soul* is my own..i know every crevice of it’s contents quite well…which, as is obvious from your typings…you know nothing about at all

    enjoy your day

    Excelsior?

  • moonraven

    I always enjoy my day.

    Foreigners do not participate in politics in Mexico–but that doesn’t stop one from doing it through theater, and through organizing coops so that folks don’t have to take their chance on the border.

    As for themore direct stuff, that’s why I go to Venezuela.

    But of course you missed all that….

    Too busy examing the intimate crevices of your navel.

  • moonraven

    I guess in your demented narcissism of being a US person you cannot imagine that voting with one’s feet can be TO something–not fleeing.

    And that kind of arrogant thinking is just why my hand is poised over the handle to flush you fuckers–my hand and a few BILLION others.

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    well now…you advocate hypocrisy on top of the rest?

    you flee to something, but still retain your US passport, along with all the Rights and privileges that come with it

    and glad to hear you consider yourself not only an enemy of a corrupt Administration, but of the 300 million people living here as well

    until you revoke your US citizenship in favor of whatever you are fleeing too, you remain a cowardly hypocrite by your own admission and description

    i’ll check back later, vaya con tequila blanca

    Excelsior?

  • moonraven

    I am not admitting to any sort of hypocrisy. Nor am a hypocrite by any definition. I walk my talk, and do not sit on my fat ass like you wimps and whine because criminals are running the US.

    And I have no intention of letting go of the pension that I am legally entitled to for having worked in the racist cesspool of the US from 1964 to 1993 and which will be used to bankroll my social projects in Latin America because some pipsqueak beat-off artist on blogcritics says I am obliged to do so.

  • zingzing

    if you say “walk my talk” one more time, you’ll have a fucking catch phrase.

    in the game of hypocrisy, you are the clear winner. i mean, what are you doing but sitting on your fat ass and whining? i don’t see you taking down the u.s. gov’t. as a citizen, and a whiner, that’s what you should be doing, right?

    (also, i thought you weren’t going to be returning to this thread.)

    and a 60+ year old woman shouldn’t have such a nasty vocabulary. it’s childish.

  • Clavos

    Damn, I’m glad I brought my beach chair and six-pack; this is a good show!

  • SonnyD

    Clavos: Scoot that chair over a bit and make some room. Here, grab a bottle out of this cooler.

  • zingzing

    she always runs away when i come around these days. it’s kind of disappointing, as i really do like to argue just for the sake of arguing… but i feel like it’s a bit of a public service.

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    It’s amusing to watch, but at some point I have to expect gonzo to realize how utterly pointless trying to have a discussion with someone as delusional and narcissistic as MR really is.

    Oh, and to answer an earlier question:

    the validity of the documents was indeed able to be challenged by Libby’s lawyers, if they so chose….and was admitted as an exhibit of evidence in accordance with the law.

    Except that the evidence in question was never used in the trial because it was rapidly clear that Libby had not committed the primary offense for which he was on trial. Once the trial focused on offenses not related to outing Plame, then the document was irrelevant, not raised as evidence and therefore not challenged or tested in any way.

    Dave

  • SonnyD

    Zing: That’s the way some people are. If you can’t handle something just run away from it. I can’t say much, though, I almost moved to Mexico at one time, myself. Then they changed their laws so that you had to go back across the border and re-enter every six months. It seems Mexico didn’t like the way the country was being invaded by a bunch of unwashed US hippies who found out you can live much better for less down there.

  • Clavos

    “It seems Mexico didn’t like the way the country was being invaded by a bunch of unwashed US hippies who found out you can live much better for less down there.”

    It’s probably all mr’s fault. After she arrived, they closed the door.

  • SonnyD

    Clavos: Gee, Clav, you picked a beautiful beach, but I don’t think the fish are biting today. ::Folds chair, grabs cooler of the good stuff, drifts away::

  • Clavos

    Sigh.

    Think you’re right, Sonny. But don’t despair, we’ll do some chumming tomorrow, and they’ll be back.

    Bring your cooler…

  • http://LesPaulisanexcellentguitarplayerwithanadmirablegraspofgoodjazz. bliffle

    I am not, and never have been, a member of the cosmopolitan party!

  • Clavos

    LOL, Bliff.

    Took a while, though?

  • STM

    I have decided to join the Party Party Party party

  • Clavos

    G’day, mate.

    Been partying the last few days?

    Wondered where ya was…

    SYD was in the news here today, but can’t remember what for…oh, wait it was about the bloke who was connected to the Londonistan bombing plot being arraigned, or something. [damn senior moments…mumble….mumble…]

  • Dan

    Gonzo: “Dan..the document i linked comes form the CIA itself..THEY say at the time of the outing, Plame was covert”

    agreed.

    “the reason Armitage wasn’t brought up on charges, according to the prosecutor..was twofold…to pursue prosecution required proof that Armitage knew her status as covert…and that the investigation itself was obstructed by Libby’s perjury”

    Close, Armitage was indeed cleared of knowingly doing anything wrong, but Libby’s so called “obstruction” didn’t have anything to do with clearing Armitage. The inquiry into Armitage stood alone. It was at that point that Fitzgerald knew the underlying crime he was called to investigate hadn’t happened.

    See, we can agree on things, sometimes partially.

    Fitz pursued a perjury trap anyway and found conflicting statements from Libby to the grand jury.

    The conflicting statements started when he told a grand jury that he first learned about Plames identity from Cheney in June of 2003, and then later, telling the grand jury his memories of conversations with reporters Tim Russert and Matt Cooper in July of that year. He said then that It was in those conversations that he thought he was learning it for the first time.

    That was it. Perjury and obstruction for that.

    Here’s where we break down:

    The “facts” you contend to not substantiate my claims, although “a matter of record in the court documents…ruled on by a Judge appointed by Bush, prosecuted by Fitzgerald” blah, blah, blah, *were not* presented during the jury trial.

    At pre trial, the Fitz denied Libby’s guys access to the document you presented, (as well as a concurring note from his mother) saying Plames status was irrelevant because he was charging no violation of that law. The parties were thereafter barred from mentioning it.

    After securing a guilty verdict, (trial over) Fitz deliberately conflated the Agency’s terminology with that of the far more restrictive language in the Act, arguing that the underlying (and uncharged) crime was so serious that he should serve twice as long as the probation office recommended. His brief included the document you submitted.

    So you see, there was never a legal finding for Plames status under the act.

    Your statements suggest that you think there was.

    My statements are meant to suggest that if a legal test were allowed to be brought, Plame would be found to not be covert under the act.

    Are we in agreement now? At least to the facts?

  • STM

    Just been busy old boy. I love that name: Londonistan. Yes, the doctor arrested here has been charged today with something quite minor, but I suspect that’s simply a ploy by the Feds as the time (and patience of the judiciary, which has been agreeing to extensions) runs out on how long he can be held without charge under the counter-terrorism Act.

    The changing face of western society, eh? Globalisation. It’s getting that way here too, mate. The Sydney suburb of Eastwood is already known around the traps as Eastwoo.

    At least the Chinese keep to themselves though, and don’t cause any strife … except on the road.

    It’s not all bad though. Last night, I stopped on my way home from work for a schnitzel at a German restaurant where they serve malty, hoppy Erdinger non-alcoholic beer (mmmm, is good). Drink that stuff all night and still drive home.

    This is in a very leafy, posh suburb, mind. Right next door, a new place has opened: Bombay Fusion, “with Halal meat”. The menu talks about layering of wonderful, exotic tastes and what have you, but when I looked at the dishes it just looked like any old Indian restaurant.

    The cooking smells were good though. I’m up for a vindaloo next week.

  • Clavos

    Yeah, I know what you’re talking about, Stan.

    One of the best aspects of all the furriners living here in Miami is the plethora of GOOD foreign cuisine restaurants that have sprung up like…ahem…mushrooms all over town.

    You still on for Portugal later in the year?

    Listen, if you need an interpreter, eu falo Portugues bem, though I might have some trouble translating into Strine, so you’d have to work with me in English…

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    for #s 271 & 260 – about the CIA document

    if the content of said document is not enough for you, then perhaps the rules of evidence are the thing

    as far as i am aware, not being a lawyer myself…for ANYTHING to be entered as an exhibit of evidence in a court case, the Judge and opposing attorney have to vet and approve the document upon submission of said evidence as an exhibit!

    so, if you present a photo, deposition..anything…THAT is when the opposing attorney can object or what have you, the Judge rules..it is submitted as evidence and given a number/letter/title (exhibit “a” or what not)

    the document from the CIA themselves that i linked earlier was indeed entered into evidence and has it’s exhibit mark…as far as i am aware, this means it was vetted by opposing council and accepted by the Judge

    hence my considering the document vetted in two ways…coming FROM the CIA in toto, and being vetted by the court rules of evidentiary procedure

    hope that explains it…last i’m gonna say about it

    and to all the rest of yas…sorry i was away for the evening, just got back from the TooL concert in Portland…

    Excelsior?

  • STM

    Clav: actually, I am definitely going to Portugal. I leave Sydney on August 25, and have two weeks there, minus the extended travel times of course from this bloody continent at the bottom of nowhere.

    I have a whole week in Porto, then I’m in Lisbon for four days. The three missing days are travel time. The trip from Sydney-Singapore-Frankfurt is bad enough, but then I have to also have connecting flights to Lisbon and Porto. I’ll be totally rooted by the time I get there. However, I have pencilled Cascais onto the must-do list, and found a website in English on how to get there and to Sintra by train. It also talks about the 28 Tram route up through the Alfama district, and the hotel I’m staying at in Lisbon is in the historic centre and is an old heritage building.

    Can’t wait. Don’t know what’s going on in Porto as that’s been organised from Europe. Still, it’s not a huge city so I can probably navigate around easily. I’m also taking the family to Thailand for a holiday afterwards. Chilling out under swaying palms on an exotic beach in the Andaman sea and doing fu.k all for a fortnight. That’s my kind of holiday … but even that’s eight hours away.

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    I went to Portugal years and years ago, and it was nice. It has excellent beaches and is generally kind of quaint, medieval and off the main tourist track, and I don’t think that’s changed all that much. My recollection was that they hadn’t done much to capitalize on their historical sites – such as they are – but maybe that’s better now.

    Dave

  • http://LesPaulisanexcellentguitarplayerwithanadmirablegraspofgoodjazz. bliffle

    Portugal! Good thing we don’t have to talk about Iraq. I notice that Iraq talk has disappeared across the length and breadth of BC. Good thing, too, as otherwise the delicate self-esteem of BC Bush supporters might be upset.

    Pakistan. Maybe we should talk about Pakistan. The new National Intelligence Estimate, about to be released says Al Quaida is stronger than ever and operating from Pakistan.

    Why is AQ getting stronger? Should we invade Pakistan.

    OK, back to Portugal talk guys. Sorry for the irrelevant interruption. Resume your positions.

  • STM

    OK Bliff, let’s talk about Iraq. I used to live there. Wonderful place prior to 1968. It’s been a bit fucked up since then. Still, most of Baghdad still exists so we can start there if you like.

    The red double-decker buses are my favourite thing, because they look like they should be in London – apart from the white roofs. Imagine these London-style buses heading along the main drag on the edge of the Tigris, with palm trees everywhere. Very much an incongruous kind of look.

    They have much to keep that’s good over there. Let’s hope they can get rid of the idiots who want to destroy the place and take it back to the medieval era.

  • Alec

    Could things get any worse for Bush? I certainly hope so. And since the Republican candidates have so far bought into the party line that they must endorse almost all of Bush’s actions, his failures may have a tremendous impact on the upcoming elections.

    By the way, I have been to Spain, but not Portugal.

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    Portugal actually looks quite a bit like Iraq. I don’t know if it’s changed, but the women even used to dress in all black from head to toe and wear veils, but that was 25 years ago.

    As for the shortage of discussion of Iraq, what’s there to discuss? Haven’t we gone over the basic conundrum pretty thoroughly? It’s not like it’s changed in recent weeks. Have you come to a sudden change of attitude, Bliffle? If you’d suddenly realized that terrorism is a real threat, not just a political football then we’d have something to talk about.

    Dave

  • http://LesPaulisanexcellentguitarplayerwithanadmirablegraspofgoodjazz. bliffle

    Are you suggesting we invade Pakistan with Baghdads double-decker buses in pursuit of Al Quaida?

  • http://LesPaulisanexcellentguitarplayerwithanadmirablegraspofgoodjazz. bliffle

    Dave, as usual, is wrong. There are new developments, like the pending National Intelligence Estimate which says that AQ is stronger than ever and domiciled in Pakistan. Cf.

    National Intelligence Estimate

    The Iraq Invasion has not diminished but increased the fearsome threat of terrism by wasting political capital on Iraq, which had no bearing, while reinforcing terrist recruiting and providing a refuge for them in Pakistan.

    But I suppose the BC Political Poobahs want to diminish such discourse because, oh, it hurts their feelings.

  • Zedd

    Gonzo

    On the discourse thingy……..

    I fully understand where you are on that. Its one of the primary reasons that I participate in such venues. It is a real thirst. It rarely gets quenched but in reading some contributors one feels akin, simulated and challenged. In those instances, the beauty of this medium is ever more appreciated. However, an unintended benefit is the opportunity to observe varying perspectives. Moreover, we get to better grasp the rationale behind the notions in society that baffle us. Not that we accept them any more readily, however we are not as confounded as to their origin. Many times our original conclusions about why these distortions and aberrations exist are verified and we feel all the more saner :o).

    Sometimes observing a good flogging fulfills ones natural voyeuristic tendencies. Especially when one espouses what is being presented — I know, its horrible right.

    – Rubbernecking in TX

  • moonraven

    Talk about old news! Here’s a flash for you non-readers:

    AL QUAEDA HAS ALWAYS OPERATED FROM PAKISTAN.

    Because the house of cards that the Bush Gang of Petrocriminals created and called The War on Dandruff–er, Terror–would come leafing down if they did not personally keep Al Quaeda in business, they maintain the dictatorship in Pakistan because Musharraf periodically lets the CIA explode some bombs on a village of his subject(ed)s a couple minutes after, supposedly, several highups of AQ split for the Afghani border.

    Everybody is happy.

    And Bin Laden (or his many heirs) is still on the CIA payroll.

    I mean, really, how dumb can you people be?

    No answer is needed to rhetorical questions.

  • Dan

    Gonzo: “as far as i am aware, not being a lawyer myself…for ANYTHING to be entered as an exhibit of evidence in a court case, the Judge and opposing attorney have to vet and approve the document upon submission of said evidence as an exhibit!”

    I’ve never argued the authenticity of the document, just that it is meaningless as evidence to establish that Plame was covert under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. I think I’ve been pretty clear about this.

    Here’s the thing, the word “Covert” is simply a term the CIA uses, broadly, to cover a range of intelligence officers, some of them covered under the act, some not.

    This is what Victoria Toenging, architect of the legislation, was trying to get across to the bellicose Henry Waxman in that video I submitted.

    The CIA didn’t author the legislation, and they aren’t under any obligation to adjust their terminology to reflect the way the term is used under the Act.

    Just as an aside, although the CIA document in Fitz’s sentencing phase memorandum was silent on the question of Plames status under the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, It wouldn’ve mattered if they had proffered an opinion.

    The document would be nearly twice as influential in deciding Plames status under the Act, if Fitzgerald would have stapled on a concurring opinion from his dog. Complete with paw print of course. Maybe 3 times as persuasive if he has a border collie, (they’re smart)

    Gonz: “hope that explains it…last i’m gonna say about it”

    I wouldn’t want you to disappoint Zedd.

    To be fair though, I do understand the impression your laboring under.

    To continue the fairness, I agree that Plame was called “covert” by the CIA, and that her identity is sensitive and protected, albeit under mundane, “classified” laws, with penalties far less severe than what Fitz was summoned to investigate.

    Gonzo, since your leaving the matter behind, I just want to say to you that our discussion spurred me to uncover some things about Libby’s involvement I didn’t know. Negative things.

    Not that I’ll share. I embrace my partisanship. If it were wrong I’d want to stop. But it’s not wrong, because the ideological divide these days is profound. It makes it impossible to stradle.

    Not that you guys don’t try.

    Mr. Nalle is nearly zealous in the 2 or 3 liberal positions he stakes out.

    I think he’s over-compensating in order to win friends and influence people.

    That’s a natural human tendency. Nothing wrong with that.

    The choice in the ideologic chasm is good and evil. Good has to be sought out. Evil tricks you into thinking it’s good. Evil manipulates good intentions, and bestows honor, (and dissing rights) on those who most stridently uphold her hyper-illogical, but ultra-humanitarian ideals.

    I read you guys’s crap. Hope you enjoyed mine.

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    Bliffle said, “But I suppose the BC Political Poobahs want to diminish such discourse because, oh, it hurts their feelings.”

    I don’t know how old you are, you young whippersnapper, but I was fighting the good liberal causes when you were probably sucking goat’s milk from a bottle because of maternal rejection. (Is that too personal?)

    As one of the polical editors, I guess your inconsiderate crack makes me a Poobah, although I resent the implication about my inadvertent weight gain. And I wrote this stupid article, which has garnered way more commentary than it deserves,and that should suggest that I’m not one of the Baby Busher’s most ardent fans.

    So before you lump all us into the same vat of lye, at least have the decency to recognize that you’re painting the horse of a different color all one color. And, by the way, the fucking horse is dead…you’ve all beat it to death hundreds of comments ago. I’m now going to have to write another article just to end this painful regurgitation of ill-considered opinions, my own included.

    Why can’t we all just get along and have fun? Except for moonbeam, who seems constitutionally incapable of enjoying anything, which is too bad, because she sounds like a neat old broad if she’d only get off her high horse and stop yelling at everyone…but who knows what color her horse is. Maybe it’s red because she’s such an obvious commie pinko radical hippie.

    And if this isn’t incoherent enough, just wait a while….for as the mages say,

    In Jameson Veritas

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    Mark me boyo – yer a’trying way too hard there fellow me lad…

    yer gonna strain yerself if’n yer not careful

    Dan – glad ya did some digging and found out something, also give ya credit for Honesty in your “embracing” you partisanship bit

    the gulf is not too wide to breach, just put the Country before your Party, be honest with yourself and others..and discuss those differences in good faith…

    but pure bullshit in trying to paint the partisan squabbling as some kind of battle between “good and evil”…THAT kind of shitweasal bullshit is part of the problem, NOT part of any solution

    Excelsior?

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    Gonzo, me lad, tryin’ too hard? Jesus, Mary, & Joseph, it was pure stream of consciousness, which is about all I can do these days. But in deference to your wisdom and sagacity, I did a quick check, and nothing was injured in the creation of that post. What the hell…I can spend 30 seconds writing anything.

    But it’s growing boring. I want something new, something unexpected. I need to be surprised by what people say. It’s like I used to tell my minions in the PR office I ran, “if you’ve said it before, then everyone’s now saying it, so find something new to say.”

    Is that so much to ask, my dear partner in absurdity?

    In Jameson Veritas

  • http://blogcritics.org/writer.php?name=gonzo%20marx gonzo marx

    not at all…you want different?

    out downgo rightward through the thing, no?

    i come to bring Fire and the Lash to the unthinking, burnt scars to those enamored of the Hypocritical Oaf

    why?…because we like you

    wouldn’t you like to be a Pepper too?

    Excelsior?

  • http://www.elitebloggers.com Dave Nalle

    You want different, Mark? I’m planning on bringing the ‘different’ in a few days. be afraid.

    dave

  • http://parodieslost.typepad.com Mark Schannon

    Gonzo & Dave, I will be a Pepper in the fields of your weeds…a red pepper, I think. We all must stop posturing in the mirror of our own self-inflicted magnificence and seek absurdity and parody.

    Gonzo, unleash your lash with unrestrained incomprehensibility. The masses don’t understand anyway…what have you to lose.

    And I “fear” nothing you can offer, Dave, but await with great anticipation something that, if not absurd, is at least different.

    My disease, I fear, has left me with even less tolerance for boredom than before. Weep for me, my lads & ladies.

    And never forget,

    In Jameson Veritas

    And…as Sam Pepys so admirably wrote, ‘And so to bed.’

  • moonraven

    Christ, the guy must be 85.

    And Paul McCartney, who thought he would be shitting his pants by 64, has made it to 65.

    I guess I am the young whippersnapper here….Hard to believe.

    But it doesn’t matter, as I ALWAYS enjoy myself–even if it means yelling at the deliberately stupid and pathologically hard of hearing….

  • STM

    Blif: “Are you suggesting we invade Pakistan with Baghdads double-decker buses in pursuit of Al Quaida?”

    No, but I am suggesting you learn to spell al-Qaeda :)

  • Dan

    Schannon’s over the top. good for him.

    Moonraven, even though if we ever met, one of us would probably have to kill the other, I like how you bring it.

    These other commentors, who fancy themselves tempered voices of reason, make me want to puke.

    Gonzo, you’ve learned far more than I from our exchange. What are you going to do with that?

    When the MSNBC article tells you that Valerie Plame’s status just… “never came up.” Are you satisfied?

    You now know that Plames status was barred from being a topic in the trial.

    Do you want to feign the stupidity required to believe that the “underlying” crime just never came up?

    Gonzo: “but pure bullshit in trying to paint the partisan squabbling as some kind of battle between “good and evil”…THAT kind of shitweasal bullshit is part of the problem, NOT part of any solution”

    By labeling it as “shitweasal” I assume you think it’s both preposterous and sneaky.

    weasals are sneaky, and shit is preposterous.

    I like the term “shitweasal” just because it’s caustic and confrontational.

    Good and evil.

    Follow your heart.