Memeorandum


Powered by TypePad

« Democratic House Intelligence - The New Oxymoron | Main | Takin' It To The Streets »

October 21, 2006

Comments

Davis

At the end of the day, voters will support the party they trust. It becomes increasingly clear that Democrats will sell out their country for political power.

Patton

I think this only becomes serious if we find out Harmon was e-mailing Jews, and those Jews didn't feel comfortable with the content of the e-mail.

clarice

As you know if you've read last night's threads--those are my thoughts exactly.
I can understand the level of logic is sufficient to meet the Nation's standards, but that it is now sufficient for Time and the UPI leads me to believe there's a lot of money to be made in a How to Write your Own News book.
(I blogged pretty much the same thing last night. If it gets online, I'll post the cite.)

jerry

I'd rather be talking about Abrahmof, Delay, Ney, Norquist, Reed, James Baker's noble task, Susan Ralston, Bolton's spying, Cunningham, the neglectful and obstructive Pat Roberts, Foley, all the really horrendous things etc... and Libby, Rove, and Fitz of course.

Semanticleo


"I'd rather be talking about Abrahmof, Delay"

How about Pat Tillman's birthday? Dig it.

http://www.truthdig.com/

Marcel

The TV news is full of images of Pres. Bush meeting with top generals. Why is this news?

Semanticleo

Forgot the hattip to Nitpicker for the headsup
on Tillman

clarice

Speaking of writing your own news-the WaPo is apparently swamped by readers who like myself belive the paper went over the cliff fo the DNC this election period.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/20/AR2006102001535.html

Geek, Esq.

Let's see, Republican hack Hoekstra suspends Democratic staffer without any evidence and turns it into a news story, and some wingnut alleges that Ted Kennedy is a traitor.

Zzzzzzzzzz. Republican bloggers can froth at the mouth over these non-stories, but the rest of the planet won't notice.

Regarding Harman and AIPAC, wouldn't surprise me. This is Washington, after all. And AIPAC is ethically-challenged, to say the least.

Sue

Democratic staffer without any evidence

And you have the link to the democratic staffer's denial of leaking?

Davis

The Dems have been out of the White House for 6 years and haven't controlled Congress for 12 years. But it has taken this long for people to stop being afraid to call out the Democrats for what they are - political opportunists who put their party above national security interests.

Geek, Esq.
"I have no credible information to say any classified information was leaked from the committee's minority staff. . . . This may in fact be only coincidence and simply 'look bad,' " LaHood said in his letter, but he requested a formal inquiry.

He even admitted that this action was politically motivated:

"We are in the political season. . . . If the ranking member wants to play politics," LaHood told Fox News yesterday, referring to Harman, "there are some of us on the other side that can play politics, and I'm not afraid to do it."

Cheap stunts like this serve as fodder for the wingnutosphere, but nothing more.

I certainly hope Messrs. Hoekstra and LaHood enjoy life in the minority next term, living under these kinds of ground rules. Payback is a b!tch.

windansea

well Geek...we know Teddy is a coward and leaves his dates in submerged cars, so traitor is not a big stretch

Marcel

Sue, the aide doesn't need to prove his innocence; the committee chair needs to provide evidence of his guilt. The aide is not an enemy combatant, in which case he would indeed be assumed guilty.

Dawnsblood

We shall see Idiot, Esq.

clarice

If you read the story Geek-you'd see that the Nation (creator of the Plame froth) rests on "sources inside and outside the government" which as I view their credibility is probably the VIPs and a charlady in the Dept of HHS.
The substance is that a big Dem contributor who also contributes to AIPAC pressed Pelosi to do something sensible if the Dems win the House--appoint Harman chairman of the intel committee. Now, I realize the Nation has had a recent success in getting normal political activity criminalized, but twice in a row to pull off such a stunt seems unlikely.

Cecil Turner

This may in fact be only coincidence and simply 'look bad,' " LaHood said in his letter, but he requested a formal inquiry.

Cute quote from MSNBC. Borderline deceptive:

"This may, in fact, be only coincidence, and simply 'look bad.' But coincidence, in this town, is rare."
And the idea that the electorate is going to care more about the politics involved in the suspension than the politics involved in the leak is, well, hopeful.

I certainly hope Messrs. Hoekstra and LaHood enjoy life in the minority next term, living under these kinds of ground rules.

Geek, them's eggs, not chickens.

Payback is a b!tch.

It's more than a little funny to hear Dems complain about "payback" after their obvious national security leak manipulation of the last couple years. Those are chickens, coming home to roost. It also appears to be a pattern, of which the little gay outing scheme is part, and I suspect they won't like how that works out either.

Davis

Geek may be correct that few people will pay attention. What is needed are indictments, public trials and convictions. There isn't enough time before the election, but lots of time before '08. Why is it that Justice is only charging Republicans? And why are there pre-election leaks from Justice about other investigations? Even Democratic Rep. Jefferson has not yet been charged with anything.

adam sullivan

Alcee Hastings was impeached as a Judge.

http://classes.lls.edu/archive/manheimk/fedcts/hastings1.html

Democrats: A Culture Of Double Standards

Semanticleo

"Why is it that Justice is only charging Republicans?"

Wait until they can no longer tyrannize House rules.

Sue

the aide doesn't need to prove his innocence

In the court of public opinion, it would go a long way. I find it interesting that he has hired a lawyer and even the lawyer has not denied the allegations. We'll see.

Marcel

The lawyer doen't need to make statements to the Press. This isn't a TV program like Justice or Shark where lawyers try to manipulate the Press. This is about someone's career. Congress is already held in low regard. Why would anyone want to work there?

Cecil Turner

even the lawyer has not denied the allegations.

Noticed that too, eh?

[Turley] said there was "not a single scintilla of evidence suggesting that Mr. Hanauer had any role in the leaking of the NIE," or National Intelligence Estimate, and that he was drafting a sworn statement to that effect.
Kinda sounds like Richard Gere in Chicago.

Jane

Why would anyone want to work there?

Assume you can get as rich as Harry Reid...

Sue

The lawyer doen't need to make statements to the Press.

Of course he doesn't. But, once again, in the court of public opinion, they do it all the time.

clarice

My take:
http://americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5966

Patrick R. Sullivan

'...some wingnut alleges that Ted Kennedy is a traitor.'

Please, the Soviet archives document it.

Similarly, Anatoly Dobrynin's letters to Moscow in 1980 document that Jimmy Carter sent Armand Hammer to the Soviet embassy to ask for assistance in his election with Reagan. Dobrynin quotes Hammer saying Carter 'wouldn't forget it' if they did things like relax Jewish emmigration quotas, and he was re-elected.

Carter himself went to the Soviet embassy in 1983 to encourage Dobrynin not to cooperate with Reagan. Saying he should hold out until after the 1984 election, and maybe he'd have a Democrat President to work with.

Treason is something of a tradition for the Democrats.

eric

Yikes! The word of the day is: shrill.

I'm gonna have to agree with Clarice, though, that this Harman thing really seems like a non-story (Nation-pushed or not). Maybe there's a bit of that old fallacy that if you say something bad about one side it makes the other side look good, but I think the political climate these days is so polarized that there are effectively two echo-chamber vacuums going on (does sound echo in a vacuum? Maybe not).

@Cecil Turner: "And the idea that the electorate is going to care more about the politics involved in the suspension than the politics involved in the leak is, well, hopeful."

For sure. Plus, I have no doubt that even if the power structure was different that someone would have leaked anyway.

windansea

JUBILANT DEMOCRATS SHOULD RECONSIDER their order for confetti and noisemakers. The Democrats, as widely reported, are expecting GOP-weary voters to flock to the polls in two weeks and hand them control of the House for the first time in 12 years -- and perhaps the Senate, as well. Even some Republicans privately confess that they are anticipating the election-day equivalent of Little Big Horn. Pardon our hubris, but we just don't see it.


Our analysis -- based on a race-by-race examination of campaign-finance data -- suggests that the GOP will hang on to both chambers, at least nominally. We expect the Republican majority in the House to fall by eight seats, to 224 of the chamber's 435. At the very worst, our analysis suggests, the party's loss could be as large as 14 seats, leaving a one-seat majority. But that is still a far cry from the 20-seat loss some are predicting. In the Senate, with 100 seats, we see the GOP winding up with 52, down three

Is our method reliable? It certainly has been in the past. Using it in the 2002 and 2004 congressional races, we bucked conventional wisdom and correctly predicted GOP gains both years. Look at House races back to 1972 and you'll find the candidate with the most money has won about 93% of the time. And that's closer to 98% in more recent years, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Polls can be far less reliable. Remember, they all but declared John Kerry president on Election Day 2004.

Barrons

windansea

oh yeah...a big gold star to the first lefty who whines that politics is all about money :)

Specter

Geek -

Notice that you said Hoekstra has no evidence and then quoted LaHood. Sorry - they are two different people. As far as I know, Hoekstra - who is the one who did the suspending - has not said anything to that effect. LaHood on the other hand leaked the info to the press. To me, that should not have been done. Let the investigation happen, and then tell us afterwards. Somehow, LaHood just stooped to the level of the Democrats.

Specter

I want to go back to Harman. In yesterday's thread several people noted the change in her behavior - from being fairly steady and not to obnoxious, to being more and more partisan and shrill. Do you suppose that it is the result of this investigation which apparently started last year? It almost seems like we are in a huge tit-for-tat game - Republicans investigate Harman, she leaks the Cunningham docs, they suspend her staffer....Sounds like sour grapes to me.

windansea

more bad news for lefties

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Oil on Friday fell more than 2 percent to a 2006 low below $57 a barrel on speculation that OPEC members would not follow through on plans to make deep production cuts to stem a three-month price slide.

AllenS

"JUBILANT DEMOCRATS SHOULD RECONSIDER their order for confetti and noisemakers"--Good point. I suggest they order clown noses and shoes.

SlimGuy

Specter

My take is like Clarice's on the time airpac story..sounds like a non starter until something else develops

The change is palatable in her behavior from mild mannered to shrill almost, totally out of character for a moderate dem.

Links suggest that Pelosi/Waters may be twisting her arm because of not being Dem enough ala Joe Liberman

clarice

Well, you answered specter for me SG..I think her change is reflective of internicine party fighting...and marginalizing moderates on defense. (And boy does this story highlight it.)

Specter

Ahhh....But Joe is an Independent and wiping up on the favored Dem after his own party threw him under the bus. LOL.

But you may be correct that the crazy-lefters are trying to twist Harman's arm. What does it mean to be a middle-of-the-road Democrat nowadays? It's obvious that there is an implied threat that you either play strictly by their rules or you get tossed under the bus. Too bad because they are getting rid of the strength of the party.

SlimGuy

Newsbusters is reporting a second referal to the FBI from CREW about some emails on the Weldon team.

The whole thing sounds like a non story but seems like a one/two timed punch.

http://newsbusters.org/node/8495

Sue

Somehow, LaHood just stooped to the level of the Democrats.

It would have been leaked anyway, whether it was done by LaHood or not. I still don't understand why, if he did not have anything to do with the leak, he or his lawyer, or even Jane Harman, have not categorically denied he did it. That is usually the 1st thing an accused does, whether they did it or not. All we are hearing is no evidence. Lack of evidence is not necessarily a sign of innocense. Something the democrats use to full advantage.

clarice

LaHood may have been acting on mere suspicion. I do not think Hoekstra was--and then there's that curious reference he made to the leakers as "they".

SlimGuy

Specter

My take on Lamont is that he is the darling of the web nutroots but there is a split decision by the Dems but they are having to accept him since they are using him as a Not Joe candidate. The dems endorsement is not a ringing one and also not unified. Plus he has received little financial support from the party and a good portion of his campaign is self financed.

clarice

Maybe it's a new Dem income redistribution scheme--Get rich ninnies to run on their own dime.

Specter

That is true Sue. But not actually what I was trying to get at. As much as I love seeing the Republicans finally hitting back, I don't want to be like the Democrats who run to the microphones at the slightest indication of scandal. I don't think that is where we want to be.

As far as Hanauer's leak - I think he hasn't denied it because he knows they have the goods.

Specter

SG,

Lamont did not run simply as "Not Joe" but more as "Not Bush". His biggest downfall is that he is still running ads aimed at the Democratic base, and not Republican and Indy's who will be the deciding vote.

SlimGuy

Specter

True, the dems see him in a way a not bush , but were surprised some when Joe went (I).

Now they are stuck with Lamont and so far their reaction and support have been a mixed bag.

SlimGuy

Just a sidelight on FL16 (the Foley district)

One card Negron has going for him that neither Foley or the Dem have is Negron is of Cuban decent and 10% of the districts population is hispanic.

Cecil Turner

Pardon our hubris, but we just don't see it.

Nor do I. The "generic race" poll numbers are a waste of time, and the other polls typically show Dems up by at least a couple more points than they actually get on election day (turnout?). Factoring that into the race-by-race data, the Senate seems safe (with a couple seat loss likely) and the House is gonna be really, really close.

I don't want to be like the Democrats who run to the microphones at the slightest indication of scandal.

Nor do I, but stemming these leaks is well worth doing, and a simple "cui bono?" pretty much proves it's a Dem. (And access is an administration function, not a legal one, so stripping it does not require a conviction.) That said, the really harmful leaks were the NSA ones, and I'd like to see both the perpetrators in jail, and the public informed as to which party (duh) was behind 'em.

topsecretk9

FWIW...John Boehner said:

...Chairman Hoekstra did the right thing by suspending this Democrat staff member's access to classified information pending a full review of this illegal leak. The fact is there may have been others who had access to this sensitive information, but only one staffer requested it by name the same week it was illegally leaked to the press. And that was the Democrat staff member Hoekstra suspended...

"Access to"...and sounds like only the Congresscritters not staffers.


Link

Rick Ballard

Specter,

I agree with your take on LaHood. Republicans won't win a mud wrestling contest in the Mediacrat pigpen. Ask ex-Speaker Gingrich or never-Speaker Livingston.

You're take on Lamont is also correct. The nutroot understanding of politics is a joy to watch in action. Ignorance backed by stupidity doesn't win many elections.

topsecretk9

--I want to go back to Harman. In yesterday's thread several people noted the change in her behavior - from being fairly steady and not to obnoxious, to being more and more partisan and shrill. Do you suppose that it is the result of this investigation which apparently started last year?---

Can't put my finger on it, but that whole Time story sounded straight from the left's playbook. IIRC no quotes from FBI or DOJ...all the AIPPAC and other info seemed to come straight from the person bugged by it(Pelosi). I don't think Democrats(Pelosi) like Jane Harmen and would like to set the stage for her replacement of Hastings to the Committee chair.

clarice

Does look like the Black Congressional Caucus versus the Israel lobby doesn't it? And how come the public doesn't know about it?

topsecretk9

--all the AIPPAC and other info seemed to come straight from the person bugged by it(Pelosi).--

Another clue this is Dems. insiders taking advantage of the staffer suspension...Harmon hired not exactly a Dem Lawyer -- Ted Olson.

Neo

The way I look at Ned Lamont is the same as I look at Corzine. Another rich Democrat that is willing to buy a Senate seat (and immortality), if given the chance.

Unfortunately for Ned, it is possible to buy a Senate seat, but not by pushing out the present occupant.

topsecretk9

Also...making Jane Harmon - who is NOT up for reelection under investigation for AIPAC things...over shadows the "leaking" national security secrets aspect the Dems would NOT like to talk about. Sort of 2 birds, one stone.

anonymous

I can't believe all these Republicans have the audacity to push these anti-Democrat scandals when they have no more evidence of wrongdoing that we Democrats did when we were pushing anti-Republican scandals.

It's so unfair for you guys to stoop to our level!

SlimGuy

Clarice

That caucus Maxine Waters put together for out of Iraq also is a player here.

topsecretk9

OK...last point...but also...seems like a little big donor bulling to me too...the Teenage Ninja turtle guy is a BIG donor tight with Harmon...making her damaged goods - he won't be filling HER coffers anymore...i guess he'll have to find another influential CA Dem? Pelosi?

3 birds, one stone.

Sow

Tet Offensive, Iraq offensive, elections. Surprised?

clarice

TS--I think Harman is UP for reelection.Yes, SG, that Conyers Playhouse hearing thing with Maxine and the CIPS keeps flashing before my eyes--along with CREW and Corn and Wilson.

Dr Sanity hits one out of the park again.


http://drsanity.blogspot.com/2006/10/political-left-and-their-totalitarian.html

Neo

This letter that shows Sen. Ted Kennedy trying to enlist the head of the USSR in an anti-Reagan public relations effort is the worst.
The 1st admendment ends at the water's edge and the "Logan Act" picks up from there.

This report needs to be vetted by the Senate Ethics Committee and DOJ and, if true, should be prosecuted.

Rick Ballard

Clarice,

Isn't it closer to Democrat Seniority Rules meets Democrat Resegregation Plan? The safe seat Blue Castle Dem leftists are busy picking drapes for offices they'll never sit in. The Black Caucus Dem lefties are just linking arms with the limousine lefties for a rousing rendition of the Internationale.

Top - Harmon's in the House - she's just in a Blue Castle district that the lefties want.

If the Barron's article that Windansea linked is correct then very few of the Moveon/Emily's Listers are going to get seats. I make it only Gifford in AZ-08 as a good bet.

owl

Somehow, LaHood just stooped to the level of the Democrats.

Please, please, please...do not burst my bubble of happiness. Let me wallow in the hope that the 'backbone bug' is contagious. No vacine needed as researchers have not found it to have morphed into a Special Prosecuter. The epidemic is expected to be of brief duration and never fatal....as we all know....Dems have that super-dooper protection pill.....MSM.

topsecretk9

--I think Harman is UP for reelection.--

Yes, she is. Thanks.

clarice

TS-I think you have it backwards. In Canada where the liberals were playing the same game, Harper has now picked up major Jewish support and they are leaving the liberal party in droves.

If this story gets out and it is as I think it is--maybe the Jewish voters here will finally wise up, too.
Haim Saban open your eyes!

clarice

Rick--Maybe it's just that Pelosi figured she's got the money now she wants the bloc with the most votes. Just saying.

She grew up on Daddy's very corrupt knee in Baltimore.

topsecretk9

--TS-I think you have it backwards. --
this would not be a shocker!

clarice

TS-I love you more than beans and rice.Backwards or not.

fred lapides

You folks seem to be running out of anything to say of substance to bolster what is clearly a falling apart of the Republican majority...any old port in a storm to distract American voter?

clarice

We were just lounging around waiting for some shyte for brains lefty to pop in and set us straight.
You the guy?

Bob

what clarice said...

windansea

another insta-troll bites the dust

Sue

I don't think that is where we want to be.

Me either. But I'm not bothered by this one.

Davis

What's with all the retired military officers running for the Democrats? Most of them haven't been retired long enough to develop roots in the party organizations, and they didn't save enough on military pay to finance their candidacies. So who us recruiting them and financing them? In some respects it is smart for the Democrats to have them - it's hard to attack veterans unless they are phonies like Kerry. On the other hand, they create the false impression of substantial military personnel support for Democrats. And it raises the question - is it appropriate for recent vets, in wartime, to be putting their names forward in opposition to their Commander-in-Chief?

Jane

I'm not bothered by it either and frankly I think it is important. As far as I'm concerned leakers need to be stopped. And publicity serves to let potential leakers know how serious we are.

JM Hanes

Specter:

"It almost seems like we are in a huge tit-for-tat game - Republicans investigate Harman, she leaks the Cunningham docs, they suspend her staffer....Sounds like sour grapes to me."

LaHood may characterize the Hanauer exposure as payback, but the whole Harman/AIPAC thing reads like the Democrats are the ones going after Harman in really a big way, not the Republicans. Pelosi lets it be known that she wants to replace Harman with Alcee Hastings, and then surprise, surprise, you get Maxine Waters visiting Harman's own district to rally votes against her.

Start with the Gospel acc. to Pelosi, which per Time Magazine consists of:

...insisting other House Democrats vote the party line on everything, avoiding compromise with Republicans at all cost and mandating that members spend much of their time raising money for colleagues in close races....Throughout the past year, Pelosi has demanded that Democrats unanimously oppose G.O.P. bills.... Pelosi has also ordered Democrats not to work on bills or even hold press conferences with Republicans whom the party is trying to defeat in November.
Then plug in one of the most powerful, and perhaps equally important, most prominent, Democrats in the House publicly bucking the Minority Leader's fatwa.

Barring a viable Republican challenger in Harman's district, where's the strategic (or legislative) advantage to Republicans in a Harman ouster? Even if her district were actually in play, I think the GOP might want to opt for concentrating their resources on other toss ups. Although LaHood's tit for tat attitude may be directed at Harman, I think Chairman Hoekstra is looking at a bigger picture, and, indeed, he seemed rather careful to avoid targeting Harman specifically in his public statement to me.

clarice

If the committee chair doesn't act on it, no one will .

The Statutes and problems for prosecution are too great.

(Read "Enemeies" by Bill Gertz).

JM Hanes

Marcel:

"The aide is not an enemy combatant, in which case he would indeed be assumed guilty."

If you were to say that the aide is not an enemy combatant or a Republican, in which case he would indeed be assumed guilty, I'd say you might have a point.

Tom Maguire

The aide is not an enemy combatant, in which case he would indeed be assumed guilty.

Darn - what kind of interogation bill did I support, anyway?

Republican bloggers can froth at the mouth over these non-stories, but the rest of the planet won't notice.

Energize the base, baby! It's like a dog-whistle - even if you can't hear it, Rush at al can.

And why are there pre-election leaks from Justice about other investigations?

I will float the notion that this is a pro-Alcee leak, not a pro-Bush leak. No fair asking if I am serious (I'm not sure myself), but I am starting to think I am - look around for the anti-Israel, anti-AIPAC crowd and you will certainly find the folks who support Alcee, even though he claims to be pro-Israel himself.

From the Rep side, does it make Jane Harman look bad to be seen as pushing the envelope in support of Israel?

'...some wingnut alleges that Ted Kennedy is a traitor.'

That would be a left wingnut writing memos to the Soviet files.

But let's not say he's a traitor; he's just on the other side.

does sound echo in a vacuum? Maybe not.

In space, no one can hear you scream.


PeterUK

Looks like the Jacobins are loading the Girondistes onto the tumbrils.

Jane

And Clarice follows up on Sara's great victory with an insta-launch of her own - by name. Well well well, we are in the company of greatness these days!

JM Hanes

Clarice:

"Maybe it's a new Dem income redistribution scheme--Get rich ninnies to run on their own dime."

In light of Democrats' complaints about the Republican $$ advantage, it might be interesting to see what the numbers look like if you add in the money spent self-financing candidates. It would be harder to calculate the private funds flowing into elections through various interest groups, but candidate cash flow, whether public or personal is a matter of public record, isn't it?

Larry

Neo: Did you deliberately omit the corallary to the Logan Act? Summary: This act shall not apply to treasonous senators from Massachusetts.

clarice

Jane, I figure it must be a dull day on the rialto.

(I had enough time to knit mittens and a crazy handbag for my grand daughter if that's any indication of how slow the news is today.

clarice

JMH, It's my understanding that self contributions must be reported.

Better they blow their ill-earned pelf in losing campaigns than that they set up foundations and sustain our enemies with it. (Rockefeller, Ford, Pew.) In fact, I am all for the wealthy blowing their dough on yachts and jewels and mistresses after seeing what happens to the eelymosynary impulse in America.

JM Hanes

Larry:

If anyone had predicted Kennedy's current in-your-face prominence in the Democratic party back in 2000, I'd have thought they were nuts. Of course, if they'd predicted the Democratic party would go insane en masse, I'd have thought that was crazy too.

maryrose

Expose all leakers ASAP We can't afford niceties when national security is at stake.
clarice and sara-congrats.
"Get rich ninnies to run on their own dime" Classic comment of the day!

Jane

Jane, I figure it must be a dull day on the rialto.

Doesn't matter altho you are probably quite used to seeing your name in print these days.

You know I can't help but notice how un-dull the Foley revelation was, compared to whenever we hear about things like treason on the left. I think in part that has to do with the fact that the right actually addresses stuff they are accused of and the left, including the MSM goes mum when they are in the hot seat.

Larry

*corOllary Sigh

Larry

Jane, don't forget Ted's lil buddy and fellow Logan Act violater.

clarice

Jane, it boggles the mind to think how important this stuff is and how little coverage there is of it. Perhaps if we started putting seamy stuff in the NIE, when it's leaked someone in the press would cover the story.

clarice

Thanks, Maryrose.

Cecil Turner

What's with all the retired military officers running for the Democrats?

It looks like a plan to recruit former military candidates to counter the perception that Dems are weak on security. Probably why Reuters says:

Democrats have tried hard to recruit candidates with military background to counter the Republican contention that they are weak on national security.
is it appropriate for recent vets, in wartime, to be putting their names forward in opposition to their Commander-in-Chief?

Don't see why not. It's worth noting, however, that these guys aren't typical. (And if the next election is close, the Dems will undoubtedly again try to disenfranchise overseas military voters.)

Darn - what kind of interogation bill did I support, anyway?

Dunno. I didn't see the "presumption of guilt" part, but apparently the Kos kids have finally twigged to the jurisdiction limits (though typically they pretend it's Executive Fiat):

Unbelievable. But Bush Administration officials two days ago notified courts that they would no longer have jurisdiction in some habeus corpus cases. That's it guys. The dictator sends in his "lawyers" who notify the courts that their reach over the Executive Branch no longer exists.
Heh. They go on to cite the legislation, and claim it's unconstitutional, but apparently haven't read the applicable section:
In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make. [emphasis added]

Jane

Jane, it boggles the mind to think how important this stuff is and how little coverage there is of it.

That's why we need S.C.R.E.W

(Well SCREW might not fix that, but I wanted to say it anyway.)

Jane

Cecil,

The legislation actually extends greater access to Courts not less, but the day it was passed I was seeing all sorts of posts like that. Those are the talking points, no reason to deal with facts.

clarice

This from the folks who back Kerry (dealing behind out backs during war with the Vietnamese enemy); Rockefeller (flying to Syria to warn them of the coming battle plan) and Kennedy (pleading with the USSR to help him beat Reagan).

Hard to find a totalitarian government the left hasn't supported..So why should we be surprised they think if we don't vote them back in power they'll "take to the streets"?

Of course, Kerry will do so on a very expensive bike in a spandex outfite; Kennedy will have to be airlifted in ;and Rockefeller will have human bearers carry him about.

Bob

clarice,

you forgot to add Jimmah Carter with his pals Castro and Chavez! And What did he offer Li'l Kim of Nork, Did I miss anyone.

windansea

I propose Puerto Vallarta for the 1st annual SCREW convention with luxury oceanfront accomodations for all attendees.

clarice

Harkin and the Sandinistas, Bob?

clarice

I've tried--really tried--to figure out the left. Is it that they love totalitarian governments more than they dp ours? Or do they just long for places--like France and communist countries--where there is a permanent underclass and they needn't fear competition from upstarts?

Bob

No clarice, they like places were they are in charge, and never have to worry about having to give up their power... they hate to have to work for it!

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame