Post #256,431
5/23/06 3:30:49 PM
5/23/06 3:34:59 PM
|
I know...it's sad. (and a follow-up)
Democrats have already called for him to [link|http://www.dailykos.com/|Resign] -- unlike ...what was that guy's name in Texas, you know, the one where all the Republican were backing him and keeping him in leadership position? Of course, last I check, the guy hadn't even been charged yet. (He will be though.) Democrats have been monitoring (and blasting) him. [link|http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/000717.php#more| Source ] Of course, you're blasting Nancy -- but you're silent on Newt Gingrich, and Dennis Hastert? -- on edit: follow-up -- In that context, it's a little easier to understand the sudden comity between the parties: they have a vested interest in making sure the Jefferson raid -- which was the first ever FBI raid of Congressional offices, many members quickly pointed out -- is the only such raid of Congressional offices. Say what? Cunningham pleads guilty and THIS is the first raid?
|
Post #256,435
5/23/06 4:19:19 PM
|
The Daily KOS is not "democrats"
Pelosi deserves it...cause she still maintains corruption is one sided (the idiot) first link in KOS takes you to an article with this little gem
Q Congresswoman Pelosi, you are standing in front of a sign that says "Honest Leadership, Open Government." Your party has also take up the mantra of the culture of corruption, pointing the finger at the GOP. And yet yesterday, [a businessman] plead guilty to bribing [Congressman Jefferson] for $400,000. A couple weeks ago, Congressman Mollohan stepped aside from the Ethic Committee while his name is under investigation. Do you think that perhaps you have to change the sign?
Ms. Pelosi. No. The sign is truer than ever. A culture of corruption is a system in this Congress of the United States that the Republicans have instituted. The Washington Post has called it a "criminal enterprise operating out of" the Republican Leader's office. It is about all the Republican Caucus enabling their Caucus to have a strong link to the lobbying community at the expense of America's consumers.
In the case of Mr. Jefferson, I think the Ethics Committee should investigate him. It is his private matter, and he should be investigated because of the stories that have been in the press and the guilty plea that you mentioned yesterday. That is his business; that's not ours.
She seems to forget some of the fundraising schemes her party used in the prior administration...instead focussing on "influence peddling" which was obviously countered by the Jefferson case...whether she chooses to recognize it or not (while the reporter asking the question obviously >did< get it) If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #256,438
5/23/06 4:28:55 PM
|
She made a good point badly
There's a difference between an ongoing program run by a national political party on behalf of its members with the explicit goal of circumventing campaign finance law -- if that's what they did -- and one or even two individuals taking direct bribes -- if that's what they did.
Giving her the benefit of the doubt, the press today doesn't like reporting in shades of grey, so they won't allow her to make that distinction. Or at least they won't report it if the point takes longer than 20 seconds to make.
Shades of grey leads to Kerry. Clear[1], declarative sentences[2] leads to Bush. You had to expect the Democrats to figure this pattern out eventually.
[1] Modulo pronunciation.
[2] Whether they happen to be accurate or not.
===
Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link|http://DocHope.com|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats].
[link|http://DocHope.com|http://DocHope.com]
|
Post #256,442
5/23/06 4:56:28 PM
|
I suppose your right....
given that Freeper aren't Republicans (they conservatives). Therefore I modify my statement - LIBERALS are already calling for resign. <smile> Look how far we've fallen, when damn liberals are demanding justice and conservatives are complaining about a vast-left-wing conspiracy and asking for special favors. As for Nancy.... Pelosi deserves it...cause she still maintains corruption is one sided (the idiot) Yep...let's be honest, BP, that is EXACTLY what she is claiming. She is maintaining that this guy wasn't on the Democratic leadership - that he doesn't represent the Democrats as a whole. Oh, and she's asking for an Ethics Investigation on top of any Criminal Investigation as a "Cherry on Top" for someone who truly deserves it. This is the actions of someone protecting corruption? Shine more light and investigate them more? What should she do - promote this guy to House Minority Leader? Pledge undying loyality? Give to his defense fund? Oh, that's right...we should ignore what Republicans are doing...cause Democrats do it too.
|
Post #256,452
5/23/06 5:57:48 PM
|
Did you read the title of the first post?
And calling for an ethics review is HARDLY the immediate resignation call that she sends out whenever the occurrence is on the other side of the isle. She is the quickest and loudest often to make that call (or simply the one that gives the best soundbites to the press making her look like the fastest to do this.)
Point is..it IS both sides of the isle. However, she is maintaining that this somehow shouldn't change their campaign message saying that is IS one-sided. This is how Democrats lose elections.
If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #256,457
5/23/06 6:44:56 PM
|
Agreed it is two-sided. But the Republicans do more of it.
We've had this conversation before. Opportunity is the main reason for the difference.
Cheers,
Ben
I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
|
Post #256,590
5/24/06 9:30:42 AM
|
Republicans have also claimed (just as BP is now)
that they wouldn't be the party of corruption that the Democrats are. I remember, far too well, the old arguments of THRO (Throw the Hypocritical Rascal Out) that reigned during the Reagan years.
But BP's argument falls flat. He's attempting to claim that Democrats Liberals are trying to protect this idiot. They aren't. They are demanding that he [link|http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2006/05/busby_jefferson.html|step down].
Worse, he blasts Nancy but totally ignores the comments Newt, Boehner, and Hastert. But Nancy is calling for investigations while the other three are attempting to claim that Congress is above the law.
|
Post #256,596
5/24/06 11:33:09 AM
5/24/06 11:35:46 AM
|
Great...now you have 1
Remember...good ole Nance just wants to have the Ethics Committee look at him...while I believe she was demanding full resignation of those on the other side of the aisle who were >accused< with far less actual evidence.
And on the "above the law" piece, they are ALL worried...this is one place where we will see Democrats and Republicans agree because (as my point has been all along) they are ALL created equally crooked.
If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
Edited by bepatient
May 24, 2006, 11:35:46 AM EDT
|
Post #256,599
5/24/06 11:51:45 AM
|
I think you're caught up in the vortex from the spinners.
I'm not aware of her demanding the resignation of members merely accused of misconduct. [link|http://democraticleader.house.gov/press/releases.cfm?pressReleaseID=724|Pelosi statement] from October 2004: "The repeated abuses of power by the Majority Leader have earned him three rebukes by the Ethics Committee in a single week, bringing dishonor on this House of Representatives and demonstrating a pattern of unethical behavior.
"Unbelievably, the Majority Leader denies that he has been rebuked. At every stage, he has shown contempt, not contrition. Instead of taking responsibility for his actions, he and his Republican defenders insist that these charges are merely partisan attacks. But the bipartisan Ethics Committee voted unanimously to admonish Mr. DeLay. In their seven-page letter to him, the Members wrote that his actions 'went beyond the bounds of acceptable conduct.'
"The Ethics Committee should be commended for acting in a bipartisan manner in the best interest of the House of Representatives. They were not given an easy task, but they put principle above party and did their duty.
"Still, serious allegations about the Majority Leader remain. Recent press reports indicate that he has been personally involved in directing some of the fund-raising activities of a political action committee that is under a grand jury investigation in Texas. The Ethics Committee deferred action on a similar complaint, pending action by the grand jury.
"Given this new information, and our need to restore the honor of this body, I introduced a privileged resolution in the House asking for the appointment of a special counsel to investigate these serious charges. Our duty to this institution and to the people we serve compels us to seek the truth.
[...] [link|http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/politics/3871538.html|Houston Chronicle] story from May 2006: WASHINGTON \ufffd In a burst of activity that ended 16 months of political gridlock, the House ethics committee Wednesday launched a flurry of investigations _ focusing on a Republican linked to convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff and a Democrat at the center of a separate bribery probe.
The bribery investigations of Reps. Bob Ney, R-Ohio, and William Jefferson, D-La., will determine whether they violated House rules, but the probes only add to their legal woes. The Justice Department already is conducting bribery investigations of Ney and Jefferson, both of whom have denied wrongdoing.
By targeting a member of each party, committee leaders avoided allegations of partisanship in a year when Democrats are trying to make Republican misconduct a major campaign issue. Despite the inclusion of Jefferson, House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi called the announcement "long overdue."
The investigations disclosed by the Republican ethics chairman and the senior Democrat on the evenly divided committee were only two of four separate announcements.
The committee leaders also approved an inquiry into whether other lawmakers were involved in a bribery scandal that landed former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham, R-Calif., in prison with an eight-year sentence. And they said they would have investigated payments of former Majority Leader Tom DeLay's overseas travel _ had he not decided to leave Congress next month.
[...] She may have said that DeLay should resign in frustration at the lack of action by the Ethics Committee, but I haven't found anything like that. There is [link|http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/09/28/national/w105407D86.DTL|this]: "The criminal indictment of Majority Leader Tom Delay is the latest example that Republicans in Congress are plagued by a culture of corruption at the expense of the American people." \ufffd House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California. FWIW. Cheers, Scott.
|
Post #256,604
5/24/06 1:30:18 PM
|
Pelosi calls for Jefferson's resignation
If only she's done this earlier, Bill would have had to find another Rovian talking point.
[link|http://www.bayoubuzz.com/articles.aspx?aid=7163|Link]
-----------------------------------------
Impeach Bush. Impeach Cheney. Do it now.
|
Post #256,611
5/24/06 1:44:25 PM
|
... from Ways and Means Committee - Not from the House. :-)
|
Post #256,616
5/24/06 1:53:27 PM
|
What he said
and, by the way, your "Rovian" comment would seem to be a pure defense of Democrat's virtue..since my point is they are ALL bad.
But you're too busy inventing a position for me to notice...ain't ya ;-)
If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #256,625
5/24/06 2:09:13 PM
|
Seems like it's more than she did to "the other side"
My quick google search can't find any news articles on her calling for the resignation of a Republican Copngress critter prior to an actual criminal charge (or post charge either).
And as I have already said this creep needs to be jailed, you will need to find another interpretation of my "Rovian" quip.
-----------------------------------------
Impeach Bush. Impeach Cheney. Do it now.
|
Post #256,958
5/26/06 9:34:03 PM
|
Time to apologise.
I'm sorry. I hit you like you were a right wing shill. That is not the case. I know this. Sorry.
-----------------------------------------
Impeach Bush. Impeach Cheney. Do it now.
|
Post #256,961
5/26/06 10:28:24 PM
|
That had to hurt ;-)
Not necessary...but awfully sweet of you ;-p
If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #256,603
5/24/06 1:28:06 PM
5/24/06 1:36:09 PM
|
D00d.....
while I believe she was demanding full resignation of those on the other side of the aisle who were >accused< with far less actual evidence What's-his-name hasn't even been ACCUSED yet. No charges have been filed. Remember? -- On Edit -- One point in your favor, btw. Nancy has only just now asked that he step down from the Ways and Means. (rolling eyes -- she needs to demand that he resign) [link|http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/politics/3885636.html| Source ]
|
Post #256,640
5/24/06 3:51:14 PM
|
That's still kind of a step up
from rewriting the rules about whether you can serve on the ethics committee while still under indictment like the wingnuts did for Delay.
I do think he should resign though and I hope the Dems band together and throw him under the bus.
[link|http://www.blackbagops.net|Black Bag Operations Log]
[link|http://www.objectiveclips.com|Artificial Intelligence]
[link|http://www.badpage.info/seaside/html|Scrutinizer]
|
Post #256,447
5/23/06 5:24:07 PM
|
Ya know he's guilty
when his most vocal defender is Republican Dennis Hastert. House Speaker Dennis Hastert questioned whether the raid of the congressman's office, believed the first in history, overstepped constitutional limitations on executive powers.
"Nothing I have learned in the last 48 hours leads me to believe that there was any necessity to change the precedent established over those 219 years," the Illinois Republican said in a statement.
Methinks he doth protest too much. I wonder what(who?) Denny's got in his freezer.
[link|http://www.blackbagops.net|Black Bag Operations Log]
[link|http://www.objectiveclips.com|Artificial Intelligence]
[link|http://www.badpage.info/seaside/html|Scrutinizer]
|
Post #256,451
5/23/06 5:39:49 PM
|
Oh, come now...
He just wanted to keep his long green from wilting... totally plausable... totally...
What I want to know, is why they can toss personal property or business with impunity (and a compliant judge) and congress critters are supposed to get a pass.
The congress thingys should be under greater scrutiny as they should be held to a higher standard.
What do I know?
|
Post #256,565
5/24/06 12:22:47 AM
|
I wonder what's in Dennis's freezer.
|
Post #256,626
5/24/06 2:14:39 PM
|
Cuban cigars, I wot...
jb4
"So don't pay attention to the approval ratings that say 68% of Americans disapprove of the job this man is doing. I ask you this, does that not also logically mean that 68% approve of the job he's not doing? Think about it. I haven't."
— Stephen Colbert, at the White House Correspondent's Dinner 29Apr06
|
Post #256,671
5/24/06 7:10:51 PM
|
naw, just cubans :-)
Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
|
Post #257,821
6/6/06 10:17:31 AM
|
Right. Nannies is my guess.
bcnu,
Mikem
It would seem, therefore, that the three human impulses embodied in religion are fear, conceit, and hatred. The purpose of religion, one might say, is to give an air of respectibility to these passions. -- Bertrand Russell
|
