You need to check your facts, dear heart.
Posted By: sm on 2008-11-16
In Reply to: That's almost as sick as...(sm) - Just the big bad
Abortion is not a Christian issue. It is a humanity issue. So...
If you have personal bitterness over being molested by a priest, or if (more likely) you just like to jeer and flap around in a desperate attempt to put people off of religion because you have personally chosen to reject it, GET OVER IT.
Were your foolish comments meant to hurt my iddie biddie feewings? You failed. Miserably. You obviously have not even a minescule glimmer of a glimps of an idea about what 'the idea of christianity' is.
Oh, and by the way, I was adopted at the age of 6 moths.
And I have 5 adopted children.
Your comments like 'a large majority grow up bouncing around ... yadda ... yadda' show your glaring ignorance of the true situation.
Are you living on Romania or Bangladesh or something? Or are you just living in the State of Delusion? The need/want for adoptable babies OVERWHELMINGLY OUTNUMBERS the availability.
As an adoption advocate at my church, I fly to Russia twice a year to help desperate AMERICAN couples find children because THEY CANNOT find them in America.
Because irresponsible, shallow-mined, self-serving women choose to DISMEMBER their infants rather than let someone else have them. It's selfish. It's abhorrent. And it's wrong.
Too bad if that makes you uncomfortable. I could care less if you are offended by the truth. Even Jesus called a fool a fool. He had righteous indignation when it was required of Him.
Please, please tell me where all these orphanges and halfway houses full of unwanted babies are. I have a 17-page list of adoptive families desperately searching for them.
Well? I'm waiting...
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Check your facts mam
It is interesting that more than half the "accomplishments" were in fact, engineered by a REPUBLICAN controlled legislature, most PROMINENLTY welfare reform. AND... "BJ Bill" just went along "for the ride."
Go check your own facts.
The most blaring oversight: The constitution sets out qualification requirements for presidential candidates. The first one on the list is "natural born citizen." He's running. He will be nominated this week. That would make him a natural born citizen.
Next. Obama was born August 4, 1961 in Honolulu, Hawaii. Hawaii became the 50th state in the union 2 years before that on August 21, 1959. I remember. I was there. That would make Obama a natural born citizen. Maybe in your mind somehow Hawaii doesn't count since it is not attached to the continental 48 or because its ethnic character is not white enough to suit you, being a majority-minority state with whites outnumbered by Asians, American Indians, Alaskan Natives, Native Hawaiians, Pacific Islanders and mixed races. Could it be because they do not share American colonial history, the fact that 27% of them do not speak English (the official language) or perhaps their vast religious diversity and failure to convert the entire population to Christianity that makes them not pass muster?
Christian (28.9%)
Buddhist (9%)
Jewish (0.8%)
Other* (61.1%)
Other includes: agnostic or atheist, unaffiliated, Bahá'í, Confucian, Daoist, Druid, Hawaiian, Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Shinto, Scientologist, Unitarian, Wiccan, Zoroastrian, inc.
Every single one of the 1.2 million Hawaiian people as described above are American citizens. Whatever your reasons for not recognizing that, like it or not, Hawaii will be celebrating its 50th year of statehood next year. Obama just turned 47. That makes him natural born. Deal with it.
And BTW, most of us get enough of QA during our work hours. We like to think that when we log on here, we check the grammar police at the door. When the poliical parties start behaving worthy of a capital "R" or a capital "D", they just might have that status restored. In the meantime, like any other internet site, we exercise the option to use literary license to demote them to lower case if we choose to do so.
That's not really her. Check your facts. nm
x
Check you tax facts (etc.) here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rViRra7bHDc
Check your facts . . .
this is not voter fraud. It doesn't matter how many bogus votes are registered . . they still would not be able to actually vote. ACORN pays people to go out and register voters, and unfortunately sometimes the people they hire are less than honest and so make up names because they get paid based on volume. But these bogus voters don't actually vote. Not the most efficient system, but that's the way it goes . . . it's the way this country has been run for the last 8 years, and I don't hear you moaning about that!
You need to check your facts...
Dems Target Private Retirement Accounts
Democratic leaders in the U.S. House discuss confiscating 401(k)s, IRAs
By Karen McMahan
November 04, 2008
RALEIGH — Democrats in the U.S. House have been conducting hearings on proposals to confiscate workers’ personal retirement accounts — including 401(k)s and IRAs — and convert them to accounts managed by the Social Security Administration.
Triggered by the financial crisis the past two months, the hearings reportedly were meant to stem losses incurred by many workers and retirees whose 401(k) and IRA balances have been shrinking rapidly.
The testimony of Teresa Ghilarducci, professor of economic policy analysis at the New School for Social Research in New York, in hearings Oct. 7 drew the most attention and criticism. Testifying for the House Committee on Education and Labor, Ghilarducci proposed that the government eliminate tax breaks for 401(k) and similar retirement accounts, such as IRAs, and confiscate workers’ retirement plan accounts and convert them to universal Guaranteed Retirement Accounts (GRAs) managed by the Social Security Administration.
Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., chairman of the House Committee on Education and Labor, in prepared remarks for the hearing on “The Impact of the Financial Crisis on Workers’ Retirement Security,” blamed Wall Street for the financial crisis and said his committee will “strengthen and protect Americans’ 401(k)s, pensions, and other retirement plans” and the “Democratic Congress will continue to conduct this much-needed oversight on behalf of the American people.
Currently, 401(k) plans allow Americans to invest pretax money and their employers match up to a defined percentage, which not only increases workers’ retirement savings but also reduces their annual income tax. The balances are fully inheritable, subject to income tax, meaning workers pass on their wealth to their heirs, unlike Social Security. Even when they leave an employer and go to one that doesn’t offer a 401(k) or pension, workers can transfer their balances to a qualified IRA.
Mandating Equality
Ghilarducci’s plan first appeared in a paper for the Economic Policy Institute: Agenda for Shared Prosperity on Nov. 20, 2007, in which she said GRAs will rescue the flawed American retirement income system (www.sharedprosperity.org/bp204/bp204.pdf).
The current retirement system, Ghilarducci said, “exacerbates income and wealth inequalities” because tax breaks for voluntary retirement accounts are “skewed to the wealthy because it is easier for them to save, and because they receive bigger tax breaks when they do.”
Lauding GRAs as a way to effectively increase retirement savings, Ghilarducci wrote that savings incentives are unequal for rich and poor families because tax deferrals “provide a much larger ‘carrot’ to wealthy families than to middle-class families — and none whatsoever for families too poor to owe taxes.”
GRAs would guarantee a fixed 3 percent annual rate of return, although later in her article Ghilarducci explained that participants would not “earn a 3% real return in perpetuity.” In place of tax breaks workers now receive for contributions and thus a lower tax rate, workers would receive $600 annually from the government, inflation-adjusted. For low-income workers whose annual contributions are less than $600, the government would deposit whatever amount it would take to equal the minimum $600 for all participants.
In a radio interview with Kirby Wilbur in Seattle on Oct. 27, 2008, Ghilarducci explained that her proposal doesn’t eliminate the tax breaks, rather, “I’m just rearranging the tax breaks that are available now for 401(k)s and spreading — spreading the wealth.” 
All workers would have 5 percent of their annual pay deducted from their paychecks and deposited to the GRA. They would still be paying Social Security and Medicare taxes, as would the employers. The GRA contribution would be shared equally by the worker and the employee. Employers no longer would be able to write off their contributions. Any capital gains would be taxable year-on-year.
Analysts point to another disturbing part of the plan. With a GRA, workers could bequeath only half of their account balances to their heirs, unlike full balances from existing 401(k) and IRA accounts. For workers who die after retiring, they could bequeath just their own contributions plus the interest but minus any benefits received and minus the employer contributions. 
Another justification for Ghilarducci’s plan is to eliminate investment risk. In her testimony, Ghilarducci said, “humans often lack the foresight, discipline, and investing skills required to sustain a savings plan.” She cited the 2004 HSBC global survey on the Future of Retirement, in which she claimed that “a third of Americans wanted the government to force them to save more for retirement.”
What the survey actually reported was that 33 percent of Americans wanted the government to “enforce additional private savings,” a vastly different meaning than mandatory government-run savings. Of the four potential sources of retirement support, which were government, employer, family, and self, the majority of Americans said “self” was the most important contributor, followed by “government.” When broken out by family income, low-income U.S. households said the “government” was the most important retirement support, whereas high-income families ranked “government” last and “self” first (www.hsbc.com/retirement).
On Oct. 22, The Wall Street Journal reported that the Argentinean government had seized all private pension and retirement accounts to fund government programs and to address a ballooning deficit. Fearing an economic collapse, foreign investors quickly pulled out, forcing the Argentinean stock market to shut down several times. More than 10 years ago, nationalization of private savings sent Argentina’s economy into a long-term downward spiral.
Income and Wealth Redistribution
The majority of witness testimony during recent hearings before the House Committee on Education and Labor showed that [u]congressional Democrats intend to address income and wealth inequality through redistribution.[/u]
On July 31, 2008, Robert Greenstein, executive director of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, testified before the subcommittee on workforce protections that “from the standpoint of equal treatment of people with different incomes, there is a fundamental flaw” in tax code incentives because they are “provided in the form of deductions, exemptions, and exclusions rather than in the form of refundable tax credits.”
Even people who don’t pay taxes should get money from the government, paid for by higher-income Americans, he said. “There is no obvious reason why lower-income taxpayers or people who do not file income taxes should get smaller incentives (or no tax incentives at all),” Greenstein said.
“Moving to refundable tax credits for promoting socially worthwhile activities would be an important step toward enhancing progressivity in the tax code in a way that would improve economic efficiency and performance at the same time,” Greenstein said, and “reducing barriers to labor organizing, preserving the real value of the minimum wage, and the other workforce security concerns . . . would contribute to an economy with less glaring and sharply widening inequality.” !["](http://www.nodakoutdoors.com/forums/images/smiles/puke.gif")
When asked whether committee members seriously were considering Ghilarducci’s proposal for GSAs, Aaron Albright, press secretary for the Committee on Education and Labor, said Miller and other members were listening to all ideas.
Miller’s biggest priority has been on legislation aimed at greater transparency in 401(k)s and other retirement plan administration, specifically regarding fees, Albright said, and he sent a link to a Fox News interview of Miller on Oct. 24, 2008, to show that the congressman had not made a decision.
After repeated questions asked by Neil Cavuto of Fox News, Miller said he would not be in favor of “killing the 401(k)” or of “killing the tax advantages for 401(k)s.”
Arguing against liberal prescriptions, William Beach, director of the Center for Data Analysis at the Heritage Foundation, testified on Oct. 24 that the “roots of the current crisis are firmly planted in public policy mistakes” by the Federal Reserve and Congress. He cautioned Congress against raising taxes, increasing burdensome regulations, or withdrawing from international product or capital markets. “Congress can ill afford to repeat the awesome errors of its predecessor in the early days of the Great Depression,” Beach said.
Instead, Beach said, Congress could best address the financial crisis by making the tax reductions of 2001 and 2003 permanent, stopping dependence on demand-side stimulus, lowering the corporate profits tax, and reducing or eliminating taxes on capital gains and dividends.
Testifying before the same committee in early October, Jerry Bramlett, president and CEO of BenefitStreet, Inc., an independent 401(k) plan administrator, said one of the best ways to ensure retirement security would be to have the U.S. Department of Labor develop educational materials for workers so they could make better investment decisions, not exchange equity investments in retirement accounts for Treasury bills, as proposed in the GSAs.
Should Sen. Barack Obama win the presidency, congressional Democrats might have stronger support for their “spreading the wealth” agenda. On Oct. 27, the American Thinker posted a video of an interview with Obama on public radio station WBEZ-FM from 2001.
In the interview, Obama said, “The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society.” The Constitution says only what “the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you,” and Obama added that the Warren Court wasn’t that radical.
Although in 2001 Obama said he was not “optimistic about bringing major redistributive change through the courts,” as president, he would likely have the opportunity to appoint one or more Supreme Court justices.
“The real tragedy of the civil rights movement was, um, because the civil rights movement became so court focused that I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change,” Obama said.
Karen McMahan is a contributing Editor of Carolina Journal.
Maybe you should check your facts...(sm)
Here's a hint:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KntmpoRXFX4
You should check your facts before...
you make a complete fool of yourself! Unless you enjoy playing the fool.
Check your facts, puh-leezer.
You're not going to find any Democrats who say they approve of what Bill Clinton did. Wherever do you get the notion that you would?
You *might* find a few who bring up the fact that it didn't make a spit's worth of difference to the security of the nation and for that reason, they (and the rest of the non-American planet)felt impeachment - hey, even the inquiry which led to the famous lie - were a ridiculous, partisan witch hunt if ever this nation has seen one. And in that they would be correct.
Now, let's hear you be so Democratic. Repeat after me: I do not support the lies my president told. It was wrong of him to tell them and for that he should be publicly punished.
Only one problem,right? - it is against your religion as it is against Bush's, to admit executive wrongdoing of any kind. Ever.
Now tell us again, who comes up looking like a faker?
No, it was about not believing everything that is said without check the facts! (nm)
xx
No, it was over 1,000. killed. Check YOUR facts.
I am not sure how reliable this source is, but here goes:
http://links.org.au/node/823
Occupied Ramallah, Palestine -- December 27, 2008 -- Today, the Israeli occupation army committed a new massacre in Gaza, causing the death and injury of hundreds of Palestinian civilians [latest reports place the death toll at more than 200].
They did not state the number of wounded, but that is a far cry from the "over 1,000 killed" that you quoted. And if you do any Google searching at all, the number varies by whatever web site you go to.
And why does Israel have to kow-tow to the world? Why does Israel get blamed for all the troubles in the middle east? Ask yourself what provoked Israel to do that? I just can't see Israel waking up and saying, "Oh boy, what a beautiful day, let's go kill ourselves some Palestinians." Everybody knows that Palestine is a Hamas stronghold and that any terrorist groups in the middle east get their money and weapons from Hamas by way of iran and other countries that hate the USA. And that is most of them.
Not true, check your facts and, in fact,
all I want to do is put them all in a bus and drive them back to where they came from.
False. Check out info for facts first.
x
You should check your facts before you post - see link
Anyone looking for Barack Obama's real sentiments about whites, blacks and Muslims won't find them in this scurrilous collection of falsified, doctored and context-free "quotations." The e-mail claims to feature words taken from Obama's books, "The Audacity of Hope" (2006) and "Dreams from My Father" (1995, republished in 2004). But we found that two of the quotes are false, and others have been manipulated or taken out of context.
We have received many inquiries about this from readers whose suspicions were aroused, with good reason. Aside from the fact that the e-mail incorrectly cites the title of Obama's book as "Dreams of My Father," rather than "Dreams from My Father," you may have noticed that none of the quotes in this e-mail contain page references. This should be a sign to any reader that the author is trying to pull a fast one, betting that you won't take the time to read through all 806 pages of Obama's books to get to the facts.
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_obama_write_that_he_would_stand.html
To all you Palin lovers, please check your facts...(inside)
It is scary that so many of you think this woman is so wonderful. How in the world can you think that when she is tromping on everyone to beat it to the White House when she is so unqualified. Plus the woman must be on welfare that she has to charge the state of Alaska for flights, hotel rooms (and not in the Days Inn either), for herself, children, etc., then go back into her expense chart and add things to get it to pass, wonder who advised her to do that?) She certainly did not disclose the wardrobe that was given to her out of campaign money, and she didn't shop at Walmart either, admidst the credit crunch she pretends to care about (I guess it doesn't apply to her personally), and where there is smoke there is fire, the woman is vindictive, look at Troopergate. This morning now it is being disclosed she leaned to special bids for the Alaskan pipeline that cannot possibly be built for years if even then and that is her platform. Anyone who cries foul about the press maligning her when they find out about sneaky things she does does not get my respect. Just listen to her interview with Katie Couric - how dumb can one get? I did not start out biased towards her, I just read about her and became alarmed.
You have to check and double check every single thing they say. They're not capable of telling t
truth about anything. It's getting very boring and tedious to read their crap. Why won't they stay on their own board like they tell us to do?
Facts are facts - sorry you don't like it cos it doesn't support your candidate
You can't change facts. That's what makes them facts. You may not like it but that's the way it is.
Facts are facts. No bash intended.
It will be this stellar record from which voters will be assessing her and her running mate.
If you're offended, too bad. Facts are facts...
I know Muslims in this country who have turned from the hateful evil beliefs that were forced down their throats. They did not have the freedom to learn anything else growing up. But after they gained their freedom and came here, they were able to receive the Word of God and they have told me that NEVER were they taught anything about loving others, just other Muslims, and that the God they learned about spoke of nothing but killing and hate... so if Obama is receiving large donations from those middle eastern countries, as you say, and he is grounded in Muslim culture, being taught this in school for years as a child, do you honestly think he doesn't carry some of those beliefs with him? He's never denounced it.
Here ya go.........
http://bibleprobe.com/muhammad.htm
stating facts folks, just the facts....if it's getting
xx
Folks want facts, you give'm facts and still
xx
This poster wants facts, facts, facts...
xx
Poster wants facts, facts, facts.....
xx
Take heart, MT ME -
...Maybe they will knock the comet into the earth on July 4th and we won't have to worry about SCOTUS anymore, LOL!
or hopefully not, heh...
Take heart, AG. sm
Not all Jews believe like this poster. I was reading recently about a conference in Washington by conservative Jews, Ben Stein being among them, and a lot of others, including many Rabbis, who are distressed at the pro-abortion stance of some Jews, including the partial birth abortion stance. Not all Jews believe the same, just as not all Christians do. According to the Mishnah (Sanhedrin 4:5): Whoever destroys one life is as if he destroyed a whole world, and whoever preserves a life is as if he preserved the whole world. This was quoted at the conference. No one person speaks for all. Thank God.
ive got more heart than you ever will
you have no idea about my life so don't assume i haven't seen someone (MANY) with a lot less than me.
2 things i lack? you're one class act i can tell. again, you have no idea about my life so to make a personal attack is ridiculous, ruthless, and sad
Please take this old saying to heart - sm.
"If one person tells you you're dead, seek a second opinion.
If 50 people tell you you're dead, lie down."
Do you think maybe there's a reason the overwhelming majority of people on here think JTBB is a douche? So, when "ONE" (gee, I guess that would be YOU) person starts stroking her monkey and kissing her a$$, don't be surprised that the "MOB" calls you on it.
heart of darkness?
Heart of darkness? Because I want all to have their share in life and not suffer? Heart of darkness? WOW. I would call the super rich who give nothing back to society the heart of darkness. And to me Kruschev saying that was a dark mark on America that he was questioning how we, the richest country on earth, can have homeless when, Russia doesnt. Yes, I believe in socialism. Capitalism never has survived, it has always destroyed itself and from the way the world and America is going, Capitalism isnt gonna be around too much longer..It cant. It is an ideology for the few, the rich few, not for the working masses. No other industrialized country has capitalism like we do. they meet the basic needs for their citizens..Do you know what some super rich call the working class..**the unwashed masses**. I have a quite well off friend and he actually calls them that. I was shocked when he said it in front of me..So you go ahead and defend the capitalist fat cats who think of us as **unwashed masses**. I will defend the people.
Crushes my heart, actually
Doesnt it just crush your heart to think there are people out there that no matter how bad the country is being run, no matter that thousand are dying for a lie, no matter that hundreds died because FEMA just couldnt do the job, that senior administration officials outed a CIA operative, which endangered the United States and all who worked undercover with this operative, that Cheney met with oil officials, no doubt to create an energy policy favorable to the oil industry, on and on and on and on..they still defend this administration when the FACTS are in and more are coming in day in and day out. An upright person would see what is going on and even though they are die-hard republicans, they would realize it is time to bring this administration to task because it is THIS administration not the whole republican party..but no, instead of attacking and questioning this administration, they choose to attack us, *little people* on numerous political boards throughout the internet..
Yes I have a heart and a brain
which are 2 things you lack. If you were raped by your father would you have the baby? Take a walk (not a ride) through the homeless or less than privledged areas in your community. Get a grip lady - deal with reality and stop turning away every time you see someone who has alot less than you. It's not murder you jack a-hole!
and she has a beautiful heart
to go along with her beautiful self
murderous heart
sounds to me as if you have the heart of a true American -NOT. How fitting for you to say such a thing on 9/11- typical democrat? I hope not. shame on you for wishing someone's death.
Well, bless your heart.
Don't you talk pretty, now? Did I mess in your post toasties?
Townhall meetings = can't prepare because you don't know what the questions will be. Obama will NEVER agree to that. If he has nothing to hide and he is prepared, why won't he do it?
ACK! HEART ATTACK!
Did someone just apologize on this board?!?!??!
By golly I think we are gettin somewhere! Maybe we ain't all rurnt!
(South Georgia :-D )
Bless your heart! nm
xx
Government take God....either he's in your heart
$$
Thank you from the bottom of my heart ...sm
for posting this, though I feel that it falls on deaf ears. Sadly the bigots and racists are still in denial. I am old and white and it is hard to pull the wool over my eyes too. I voted today for Obama/Biden. The going will be rough for whoever wins, but I have hope with Obama and I have not had this much hope in a long time.
This is so heart-wrenching. I know there is nothing I can say (sm)
to change your feelings on this. I am sure in many ways you are a very good person. But this is just so sad. Because I know there are many who agree with you....and the babies cannot speak up for themselves. But earlier you did say that the baby moving around inside a mother is alive, just doesn't have a soul, just like you feel your cat is alive but doesn't have a soul. Which would make abortion killing a human being who is alive. The law doesn't know when a person gets their soul and neither do you or I. God forbid we should kill a child and be wrong.
here's a girl after my own heart. I have
done my share of camping in the winter inside the house, too. We will probably have a cold winter, we usually do after a hurricane. I had whiskey barrel planters outside that had filled with water and never got any plants put in them and they froze solid that winter; I am 20 miles off the coast. My girlfriend went "skating" on the stock pond that winter and broke through the ice. She says her feet have been cold ever since. Looks like I will be spot heating again this winter, just where I happen to be in sweats and sweaters and an electric blanket or small heater. My son is a train engineer and he tried to tell the boys at the coal plant what would happen, but they were dems and their daddies were dems, etc., and oh, the ripple effect that is coming.
be still my pounding heart
Obama's personal habits are really no one's business but his own. He is honest about the difficulty of giving up an addictive habit especially during the most stressful part of his life so far. Your gripe tells us way more about your values than it does about Obama's. Camel, needle, stone.
Wow! What has this to do with 'grow a heart?'..sm
Do you want to tell me that I should be 'merciful' in judging Michelle?
This your sentence shows me that you do not find her beautiful.
I would not say that she is ugly, but beautiful she is certainly not.
MAYBE it was just the heart of a much better woman!!
nm
A socialist's heart revealed. sm
No socialist society has ever flourished. You must know that. Kruschev. My God. I can't believe you said that. Well, I am but a passing visitor and I just saw into the heart of darkness. Woweee.
Dick at the Heart of Darkness
Dick at the Heart of Darkness
By Maureen Dowd
The New York Times
Wednesday 26 October 2005
After W. was elected, he sometimes gave visitors a tour of the love alcove off the Oval Office where Bill trysted with Monica - the notorious spot where his predecessor had dishonored the White House.
At least it was only a little pantry - and a little panting.
If W. wants to show people now where the White House has been dishonored in far more astounding and deadly ways, he'll have to haul them around every nook and cranny of his vice president's office, then go across the river for a walk of shame through the Rummy empire at the Pentagon.
The shocking thing about the trellis of revelations showing Dick Cheney, the self-styled Mr. Strong America, as the central figure in dark conspiracies to juice up a case for war and demonize those who tried to tell the public the truth is how un-shocking it all is.
It's exactly what we thought was going on, but we never thought we'd actually hear the lurid details: Cheney and Rummy, the two old compadres from the Nixon and Ford days, in a cabal running the country and the world into the ground, driven by their poisonous obsession with Iraq, while Junior is out of the loop, playing in the gym or on his mountain bike.
Mr. Cheney has been so well protected by his Praetorian guard all these years that it's been hard for the public to see his dastardly deeds and petty schemes. But now, because of Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation and candid talk from Brent Scowcroft and Lawrence Wilkerson, he's been flushed out as the heart of darkness: all sulfurous strands lead back to the man W. aptly nicknamed Vice.
According to a Times story yesterday, Scooter Libby first learned about Joseph Wilson's C.I.A. wife from his boss, Mr. Cheney, not from reporters, as he'd originally suggested. And Mr. Cheney learned it from George Tenet, according to Mr. Libby's notes.
The Bush hawks presented themselves as protectors and exporters of American values. But they were so feverish about projecting the alternate reality they had constructed to link Saddam and Al Qaeda - and fulfilling their idée fixe about invading Iraq - they perverted American values.
Whether or not it turns out to be illegal, outing a C.I.A. agent - undercover or not - simply to undermine her husband's story is Rove-ishly sleazy. This no-leak administration was perfectly willing to leak to hurt anyone who got in its way.
Vice also pressed for a loophole so the C.I.A. could do torture-light on prisoners in U.S. custody, but John McCain rebuffed His Tortureness. Senator McCain has sponsored a measure to bar the cruel treatment of prisoners because he knows that this is not who we are. (Remember the days when the only torture was listening to politicians reciting their best TV lines at dinner parties?)
Colonel Wilkerson, the former chief of staff for Colin Powell, broke the code and denounced Vice's vortex, calling his own involvement in Mr. Powell's U.N. speech, infected with bogus Cheney and Scooter malarkey, the lowest point in his life.
He followed that with a blast of blunt talk in a speech and an op-ed piece in The Los Angeles Times, saying that foreign policy had been hijacked by a secretive, little-known cabal that hated dissent. He said the cabal was headed by Mr. Cheney, a vice president who speaks only to Rush Limbaugh and assembled military forces, and Donald Rumsfeld, a secretary of defense presiding over the death by a thousand cuts of our overstretched armed forces.
I believe that the decisions of this cabal were sometimes made with the full and witting support of the president and sometimes with something less, Colonel Wilkerson wrote. More often than not, then-national security adviser Condoleezza Rice was simply steamrolled by this cabal.
Brent Scowcroft, Bush Senior's close friend, let out a shriek this week to Jeffrey Goldberg in The New Yorker, revealing his estrangement from W. and his old protégé Condi. He disdained Paul Wolfowitz as a naïve utopian and said he didn't know his old friend Dick Cheney anymore. Vice's alliance with the neocons, who were determined to finish in Iraq what Mr. Scowcroft and Poppy had declared finished, led him to lead the nation into a morass. Troop deaths are now around 2,000, a gruesome milestone.
The reason I part with the neocons is that I don't think in any reasonable time frame the objective of democratizing the Middle East can be successful, Mr. Scowcroft said. If you can do it, fine, but I don't think you can, and in the process of trying to do it you can make the Middle East a lot worse.
W. should take the Medal of Freedom away from Mr. Tenet and give medals to Colonel Wilkerson and Mr. Scowcroft
Let's get to the heart of what I originally posted...
CBS, the same network that trotted her back out on Sunday, filed a brief with the US District Court stating emphatically that she was not covert at the time of the incident, therefore the reporters in question should not have to reveal their sources. CBS, like the good liberal mouthpiece it is, was trying to defend the first amendment...freedom of speech and the right of reporters to keep their sources anonymous...you know, to PROTECT whistle-blowers. Any other time, you would be FOR that.
I was pointing out the hypocrisy...CBS filed a brief stating they did not believe she was covert. And then they bring her on their network, supporting her statement that she was.
You cannot have it both ways.
Both of those are facts.
And, logically speaking...if a person goes to the CIA every day, sits at a desk in the CIA offices, gets a check from the CIA, chances are that person works for the CIA. And since when do covert operatives get a desk job and walk in and out of Langley every day? Surely common sense should win out here. While she was covert at one time, she was not at the time of the incident.
There is much more common sense evidence on the side of that than on the side that she was still covert.
What about Richard Armitage? Is he a liar too?
I was only taught to put my hand over my heart for
.
I think his dad died of a heart attack at 70? nm
.
Well, duh. But she's only a heart attack or a stroke
Bless your heart.....I know you're trying
he said NONE of that stuff about any of his other opponents ability. 'nuf said.
You talk about not for the faint-at-heart,
www.100abortionpictures.com/Aborted_Baby_Pictures_Abortion_Photos/
And you are worried about legal wild game?
Oh, no...... those bleeding heart liberals
than we all sit around a campfire with them holding hands and singing Kum Ba Ya, all the while their plotting to slit your throat. No doubt there may be a few innocents in the bunch, but even then, one cannot be too careful. Even the innocents are being used by the terrorists to do their ugly deeds and they will do them just to keep their families safe or they use the mentally retarded to do their sick deeds!
|
