First thoughts

Steve, Louisville Ky — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 13:26:03 GMT

LOL, you people make me laugh, anyone remember Henry Cisneros, President Clintons Secretary of housing and urban development? 18 counts of conspiracy, 18 counts of making false statments and obstruction of justice and Lying to the FBI...Yep you guessed it, Bill Clinton pardoned him HA HA HA ..Also Google "Bill Clinton and WMD" and click on democrat quotes lol, concerning Dick Durbins statement, wasn't he the one that called our fighting men and women "Nazi"s

First thoughts

Steve Turner Cedar Falls Iowa — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 13:26:05 GMT

Well, all Politics is Local, right? Iowa has been brimming with Politicians, trying to give the impression they were born here. None, however, are sporting the one clothing item that would identify them as a Pure, Dyed in the Wool Iowan, that being a T-Shirt stating "I'd Rather Have Wrestled and Got Pinned Every Time, Than Played Basketball!". But there is a rumor going around that Hillary bought one.

First thoughts

pious hypocryte — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 13:28:36 GMT

pious hypocrytes are repubs aside from being outright liars.

First thoughts

HMT — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 13:39:33 GMT

Had a horrible nightmare that Bush was still the president and he was still sitting on Cheneys lap-------eeeeek

First thoughts

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 13:44:40 GMT

Steve Turner.....you turn my stomach.
Cisneros didn't committ an act of TREASON like Libby did.
...and what do YOU care about the people who serve this country or anything that gets said about them? Apparently you think it's just fine to expose the identity of people like Valerie Plame who risk their lives everyday for our freedom and security. Just imagine how THEY feel today, hmmmm?

First thoughts

J. Merle Stanley, Westchester, NY — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 13:44:40 GMT

First thoughts

bb — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 13:49:18 GMT

Oh Steve of Louisville, so if someone does something wrong then its OK for someone else to do it too. I hope to God you don't have kids and teaching them that foolishness. Give me a break Steve. If you break a law, must pay the consequences and then not blame anyone else. Were you ever taught that? You wonder if our fearless leaders were taught that.

First thoughts

Dave, Tn — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 13:51:59 GMT

At least Bush didn't commute the prison term for the lowest of democrat President reasons, MONEY!!! That's the only reply that needs to be made to Ms. Bill Clinton.

First thoughts

Robert Catalano, Salem, OR — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 13:54:19 GMT

Law and order Republicans? Let's see. Haldeman, Erlichman, Mitchell, Krogh, Dean, Poindexter, North, Ney, Cunningham, Safavian, and etc; the first President to resign from office and the first vice-president to do the same, both of which ran as 'law and order' candidates. The worst Presidencies for public scandal and/or convictions of top aides (whether or not pardoned): Reagan, Nixon, Harding and Grant. Check your history books, folks. Republicans, one and all and all ran campaigns claiming to support harsher penalties for convicted criminals. All that were pardoned were pardoned by Republican Presidents. Again, I ask, law and order Republicans? Well, yeah, but only if you are poor, not Republican, or not feeding from the public trough while you are railing against welfare. Believe me, I would rather have Presidents who chase interns and sleep with movie stars than ones who believe the government and the American people are their personal bank accounts.

First thoughts

Matt, Houston, TX — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 13:58:06 GMT

Actually Libby didn't commit an act of treason, the real leaker was Armitage. Plus Plame wasn't covert, oops. But hey I guess if Bush had pardoned convicted Puerto Rican terrorists to help his wife win an election that would be ok. Or if he just out right sold his pardons (i.e. the Rich pardon) that would be fine too. And technically Libby wasn't pardoned, his sentence was commuted. So he's still being punished, a big fine and it stays on his record.

First thoughts

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 13:59:22 GMT

Never had any doubts that Bush would let Libby off the hook. In fact, I was expecting a pardon. But it is typically enfuriating for a president to say, "let's let the system run its course," only to step in once the system fails to produce the result that president was going to mandate from the start. Your basic above-the-law, above-it-all Bushism.

Maybe since we have so many questionable pardons - and some from the last two administrations (Clinton and Bush 41, who actually pardoned a couple terrorists) far more questionable than this Libby one - we ought to look at an amendment that would limit this presidential power?

I'm usually the last one to suggest any tinkering with the Constitution. But I suppose the forefathers who wrote the document didn't expect it to be exercised so shamelessly. Maybe we need to define the parameters of when exactly a president may use his power of the pardon (and commutation).

First thoughts

Gary Schear, Bozeman Montana — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:01:37 GMT

Although totally expected I feel helpless rage at this latest abuse of power. After a few angry posts I decided that there may be an effective course of action. We need to start a Net-roots Grass fire. I made a donation to the DNC in Honor of the "great American" Scooter Libby. My only course of action is to punish the republicans and donate NOW to the Democratic Party and dedicate it to this criminal political hack who has been a key figure in the disgrace of my country and is culpable by administrative malpractice in the deaths of thousands in all of our names. I urge all of you who feel the same to do the same. We all complain that money is all that matters. Well it is time to use it against them. It doesn't matter if it is 10 or 1000 dollars. If several million small donors provide a massive influx of cash to the DNC we can help send more republicans deep into the political wilderness beyond '08. They will all have Scooter, Dubya, and the puppet master to thank! Imagine, a near immediate reaction to an outrage that has a crippling effect on the party that perpetrated it. If it works we will be able to smell the fear of a Government for it's people instead of the other way around for a change. Donate now and copy and paste this post EVERYWHERE in the Blogosphere that you post! We are constantly told of the empowerment that the Internet can bring to the voiceless. Lets try it out. Lets do this thing! Lets make them pay! I would love to see a news story reporting millions generated for the DNC and all dedicated to Scooter, Dubya and Darth.

First thoughts

juan,ft lauderdale,fl — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:01:58 GMT

JUSTICE FOR ALL-YEAH RIGHT.SUCH MOCKERY ON BOTH SIDES. OUR COUNTRY HAS BECOME AN OLIGARCY WHERE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY AND NO ACCOUNTABILITY. IT HAS COME DOWN TO THIS WHEREBY THE NEO-CONS BRINGING UP PAST DISCRETIONS IN PAST ADMINISTRATIONS AND THE DEMOCRATS PRESENTLY OUTRAGED. WE THE PEOPLE GET SHAFTED AGAIN.

First thoughts

lloyd roberts, Jamaica New York — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:02:59 GMT

Aw, the sentence was too harsh for a rough tough republican concervative, I though you'se guy's was tough guy's. Talk about harsh sentencing to the millions of people locked up in Americas prisons today for non violent marijuana charges, where people are doing hard time for crimes to themselves. I have zero respect for any creature that has anything to do with government, federal, state, or local, no respect at all. I only listen to what they tell me out of fear, fear for getting sentenced way too harshly if I don't do what these government as------holes dictate. What a sorry ass country we have become, disgraceful, sickening.

First thoughts

juan,ft lauderdale,fl — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:06:54 GMT

I agree with Paul that unless we the people get mad as hell and insist on a constitutional amendment to prevent such cronyism from occurring in the future this nonsense will continue with both political parties.

First thoughts

jerry/corpus christi texas — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:07:52 GMT

Yeah Steve, don't you know never to bring up democratic wrongdoing on this blog? I think the scoreboard on wrongdoing in the goverment is just about even, but the democrats have the advantage of having a president that actually had a full impeachment trial. After what happened to Marc Rich, I'm just dying to hear what Hillary has to say about this.

First thoughts

juan,ft lauderdale,fl — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:15:58 GMT

Steve Turner probably still believes that we will still find WMD'S and that Hussein was behind 911. What's truly scary is that 30-40% of these Republican's still believe it. HOW GULLIBLE AND PATHETIC THEY ARE.

First thoughts

Ricardo in California — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:16:51 GMT

I think Jerry in Corpus Christi is in love with Hillary Clinton. We could be talking about the weather in Oklahoma and some how he will manage to work in the name of Hillary Clinton. You have this amazing fascination for her Jerry. Whats up with that?

First thoughts

juan,ft lauderdale,fl — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:20:14 GMT

LLOYED ROBERTS-RIGHT ON-MY SENTIMENTS EXACTLY!

First thoughts

John B, Des Moines, — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:21:19 GMT

Matt, Libby and Armitage BOTH leaked the information. The difference is that Armitage came clean while Libby chose to perjure himself. And Republicans deserve to be bashed on this BECAUSE they claimed moral superiority on the Marc Rich pardon. Sorry, if you're going to claim the moral high ground you'd better be prepared to live on it.

First thoughts

John B, Des Moines, IA — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:30:13 GMT

Jerry, Republicans claim to be morally superior to the Clinton administration, how can you be upset to be held to that standard? You set the bar, don't cry foul when your guy has to slither under it instead of jumping over.

First thoughts

Nick, Ohio — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:30:50 GMT

Gee, if Bush can commute the sentence of someone who lied under oath, then he should do it for the fellow who did the same type of crime and had to serve the time and all others who are convicted of perjury. Yes, the president can do this, but to do so is a complete lack of respect for the law that he is supposed to uphold. Hmmm... Bush took an oath to uphold the laws of the United States of America. I guess he forgot that part last evening. Of course, it was not he who was speaking, but good ol' Dickie-boy, the man without a sense of morality or shame. I guess the Office of the Vice President is without responsibility to the laws of the US Constitution since it is not a part of the Executive Branch. What makes me sick of Bush at this point in time is that Bill Clinton was indicted (impeached) and went on trial in the US Senate for his lies while under oath. Scooter Libby is still guilty (for now) and will have to pay the $250k fine (for now), but he won't serve the time. Clinton was not convicted for his act as the US Senate had more sense and good counsel from the US Supreme Court. IF Bush & Cheney were both impeached, would Bush pardon Cheney?

So much for the rule of law in our country. We are no better than the common country ruled by a dictator when the word of the president holds more legal sway than the laws themselves. I believe the powers of the Executive Branch need to be severely curtailed after this event.

First thoughts

Dave, Ohio — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:34:44 GMT

I firmly believe now that our president is a criminal. Our government should pass an amendment that any action like these can be overridden by a two thirds vote.

First thoughts

JIrby, Colorado — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:35:19 GMT

So we arrive at the best reason for Bush to pardon Libby: so as not to send the message that he doesn't value loyalty. Trouble is, a sleazy, low-down, no-account piece of hazardous waste like Bush is thumbing his nose at the people so as to appear to value loyalty. To hell with being loyal, it's the appearance he's going after. He's like Jeffrey Skilling of Enron fame, who pulled the biggest heist in history, but was allowed to use money he stole from ex-employees and investors to pay a team of high-powered attorneys.

First thoughts

WDRussell, East Liverpool, Ohio — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:36:34 GMT

The GOP and values is the saddest joke ever foisted upon the American public.

First thoughts

Memmie, Connecticut — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:47:45 GMT

He got no more jail time than that other great american Billy "where did I put that cigar" Clinton. Who turned the oval office into a motel 6. Then lied through his cheating teeth about it for months. Let's call it a draw, stop the whining and move on people.

First thoughts

Independent, Texas — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:51:30 GMT

Uh - to those labasting Steve Turner - Did I miss something?

the Cisneros post was by Steve, Louisville Ky (Sent Tuesday, July 03, 2007 9:26 AM)

did I read something other than what you guys did?

First thoughts

Matt, Houston, TX — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:52:32 GMT

John, I'm confused, are you claiming that democrats have never claimed moral superiority? Didn't Pelosi tout the culture of corruption to get elected. Conveniently forgetting Jefferson, Murtha, et al. Let's be honest, entrenched politicians on both sides have significant corruption issues. And when exactly did Armitage come clean, before Fitzgerald was appointed? Before Libby and others went before a grand jury? Before NY Times reporters went to jail? Or after the smoke had cleared and he realized he would get off clean. The whole thing is junk on both sides but I find the outrage coming from the left just ludicrous.

First thoughts

Al, KS — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:53:40 GMT

I listened to the spin and ended up yelling at my TV. Remember all of the lies...WMD, greeted with flowers, last throes, mushroom cloud, Saddam ties to Al Quaeda, ad nauseum. Nobody...I repeat Nobody has said Valerie Plame was not covert. Not the CIA...not Fitzgerald...not the Administration...only Republican spin doctors...and it's another LIE. We still don't know who leaked it...only who told reporters. Who told Armitage?...who told Libby?...who told Rove? The answer is Cheney. Libby lied to protect Cheney, and now the Administration tells lies to protect Libby. The lies go on and on. Libby was not the leaker, Armitage was not the leaker. They were the messengers. Cheney was the leaker? And I don't care who Clinton pardoned...I just don't care. I care about Truth and Justice...something that has been lacking in our government for 6 years. Fitzgerald should now immunize Libby and make him spill his guts. Congress should do the same. Maybe we can eventually get to the truth.

First thoughts

Ken, Seattle WA — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:53:44 GMT

Ok, so from here on out, it's ok for the president's team to break the law. The standard has been set by both sides. And we're all ok with that, right? I hope someday I'm on the president's team. I'm gonna rob a bank and steal a yacht. Always wanted a yacht.

First thoughts

Ken, Seattle WA — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:56:05 GMT

Wow Steve Turner. Your a bad man! Just kidding. I think they got the wrong Steve, Steve.

First thoughts

Independent, Texas — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:56:39 GMT

I have a question: Has any other sitting president ever pardoned a convicted person of crimes committed on behalf of that president while that president was in office?

To claify - the crime was committed during the term AND the pardon (in this case the commutation of sentence) was during the term.

Lots of examples of pardons when the President involved was on his way out the door.

I really can't remember.

First thoughts

Sharon Sudduth — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 14:57:04 GMT

Bush had to keep Libby out of jail. If Libby served time he might have told the truth about the Bush effort to cover up it lies and deception about attacking Iraq. We know now there were no weapons of mass destruction-no links to terror (until we took over). The Bush administration orchestrated a cover up to the point of illegally revealing Plame's role as a CIA agent. Libby obstructed justice and lied under oath to protect the administration- But he would not do time for the Bush gang. Congress should subpoena Libby and get him under oath again to see if he persists in his lies and if he does put him in jail. The Bush administration thinks the three branches of government are Bush, Cheney and the court that put them in power. Libby committed a crime-perjury and obstruction of justice and showed no remorse. What can you expect from an administration that is neither bound by law or morality?

First thoughts

Jay, San Antonio, TX — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 15:02:42 GMT

Bush-haters give me a break! The commuting of the sentence of Mr. Libby by President Bush is no different that the pardons of Marc Rich (violating the trade embargo with Iran, among other things) and Susan McDougal(aiding and abetting in making false statements, among other things) by President Clinton. By the way, Mr. Libby was Marc Rich's attorney who helped get the pardon. Republicans and democrats working together!? What is next...dogs and cats living together?

First thoughts

Independent, Texas — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 15:07:51 GMT

Jay, San Antonio: what's your point? Because someone else did something wrong, I shouldn't be irate when Bush does it?

I agree with the statement about Clinton. So?

First thoughts

Eileen, Navarre, FL — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 15:08:37 GMT

Did you really expect anything different? Friends, let's take a break from this disgusting issue about Libby. Two hundred twenty one years ago a group of colonists made a momentous decision; to sever the ties of government from England and form a separate nation. They pledged their lives and property to uphold this decision and signed their names to this document. The document begins: "WHEN in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. WE HOLD THESE TRUTHS TO BE SELF-EVIDENT, THAT ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL, THAT THEY ARE ENDOWED BY THEIR CREATOR WITH CERTAIN UNALIENABLE RIGHTS, THAT AMONG THESE ARE LIFE, LIBERTY AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS." There is much more written, but we remember these words. This document is the DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE which was signed on the 4th of July, 1776. Thirteen colonies fought for the liberty to form their own nation against England which was a rising power and had the best trained and equipped army of the day.
This was not an easy decision nor was it unanimous amoung the colonists. Some were loyal to the mother country. But with a rag tag army comprised of many militias, they won and we became the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Tomorrow we celebrate Independence Day. Which should mean more than holiday sales at the mall, and frantically running around through activities. If you can, take a moment to reflect. Pull up the Declaration and read it for yourself. The Americans of the 21st century have as great a responsibility for this republic, if not greater. The forefathers built this nation, we have to uphold this nation. And we who are veterans stand shoulder to shoulder with those Minutemen who fought to turn an ideal into a reality. God Bless us!

First thoughts

Jay, San Antonio, TX — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 15:15:38 GMT

Independent,
My point was that this is no different than what many President's before(and many after) have done. How quickly some forget history that may not support their opinion. I'm not a fan of either party right now as I see no leadership and very few that have vision that extends beyond their own nose.

First thoughts

Glenn Auge, Flint, Michigan — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 15:20:56 GMT

I've read a few articles on this subject in the papers and the articles haven't suggested the commutation as being much of a bad thing. Then I read the comments and the vast majority of the comments express sincere outrage. Is there really that many people upset about this, or are the articles only attracting the people who would be upset about this?

First thoughts

M - In Texas — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 15:24:11 GMT

Of course Bush covered Libby's rear and kept him out of prison. If Libby were to roll over on Bush & Cheney, I'd bet what he knows would make the whole Plame thing look like child's play.

First thoughts

Dawn, somewhere in Kansas — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 15:27:59 GMT

Eileen, Navarre, FL, thank you for very eloquently reminding all of us what tomorrow is and why it is that we can say what we want (within reason) on First Read and any other blogs we participate in. Everyone, have a safe and Happy July 4th and pray for those who are in harms way on this holiday and every day, that they stay safe.

First thoughts

bobf — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 15:35:58 GMT

Jay give me a break. Why do you assume everyone hates Bush. I do not hate Bush, I hate his policies and corruption. This is just another example where republicans think they are above the law. Go ahead keep justifing the corruption of Bush's presidency with past presidencies. That is Bull****. I do not care about the past. I live in the present. All I saw was the office of the Vice President out a CIA agent for pure political reasons. All you idiots that say Plame was not outed, read the transcripts from the trial that did state that Valerie Plame was undercover and working when outed. That is the questions I ask all you hypocritcal republicans. Do not give me any crap from the past. I thought 9-11 changed our world forever. So outing a CIA agent that was working on nuclear weapons issues for revenge for husband does not bother you law and order republicans. I call you hypocrits out, why is it alright for republicans to break the law but when we complain you call us Bush-Haters. Hypocrits/republicans have no pride or values, all they care about is their party and their own.

First thoughts

Desmond — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 15:40:55 GMT

Mama! Steve Turner Iowa is not Steve from Ky.

First thoughts

Sidney, Pa — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 15:49:52 GMT

Thanks Dawn. I will try and have a safe and happy 4th here in Pennsylvania, and hope you do the same somewhere in Kansas.

First thoughts

meg Dee virginia — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 15:57:50 GMT

how long will it take to the people of this great country to stand up to this administration, and once and for all making them accountable for so many laws and constitutional violations broken? Impeach them!!! enough already!! they have no ethics,no morals!!! hiprocits !! liars!!!

First thoughts

John B, Des Moines, IA — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 15:59:14 GMT

Jay, San Antonio; Did Republicans cry foul when Clinton pardoned Marc Rich? Then they have no right to cry foul when they pardon Scooter Libby. Oh, and Rich had compromised the nation's intelligence operations as did Libby. Republicans set the standard, they have no right to do any but live by that standard. As for Susan McDougal she was nothing but a hostage of the Independent Prosecutor, held for no other reason than refusal to fabricate a story to suit his script.

First thoughts

Ron, St. Louis, Mo. — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 16:09:16 GMT

bobf...I'm right there with ya brother!!!!

First thoughts

John, Asheville, NC — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 16:17:46 GMT

Come on people, this is a presidential privilege. There have been more or less 27762 pardons, conditional pardons, commutations of sentence by presidents since George Washington. And Bush is no where near the top abuser of this privilege (FDR with 3687) This is a constitutional issue, if it enough people really don't like it then it can be changed, although I seriously doubt that will happen.

First thoughts

jerry/corpus christi texas — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 16:20:19 GMT

I think the press cried foul more then the republicans did with marc Rich. I guess to appease you democrats, President Bush will just have to jump an intern, would that make the playing field more fair? And don't get into this thing about Bush killing soldiers, Clinton killed a few on his shift as well, maybe not as many, but he had a few problems while he was commander in chief. Anybody remember Blackhawk Down?

First thoughts

Mel, Illinois — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 16:37:12 GMT

Eileen, our town has a community band that plays every Wednesday evening in the little park downtown. For the 4th of July concert they play a medley of service tunes and the members and veterans of the different branches stand up during their tune. We usually have an audience of 2,000 or more for the patriotic concert. I'm not in the band, but I do get to direct the Civil War cannon firing for the 1812 Overture (the 1st Sgt. doesn't read music). I'll think of you and all our veterans and current military personnel and offer up a silent prayer of thanks.

First thoughts

juan,ft lauderdale,fl — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 17:00:04 GMT

bobf- you are so right!;however; the fascist right-wing government,paid hacks in the government/media and apologists on this web will continue to be obsessed with what Clinton did or did not do and conviently ignore what is happening to this country.

First thoughts

Jim, Santa Cruz — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 17:02:12 GMT

Well it's almost been two years since Katrina, the event that started Bush's slide. This Libby deal is just what we needed to charge up the electorate for '08, not that it needed any more considering the Iraq quagmire. The conservatives are extremely pleased with Libby's commutation, and it is rallying them around the old flagpole, but they just don't get it. Their influence on the American psyche has faded. No one (other than themselves) listens nor believes their line of BS any longer. It's now in the cultural awareness that republicans are generally negative and these types of societal changes are usually irreversible and take many years to morph into the next thing. It must be very weird being an incumbent republican knowing that even safe seats are now ripe for the picking.

First thoughts

Eileen, Navarre, FL — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 17:19:48 GMT

Dawn and Mel, have a happy and safe 4th of July. Mel, your town sounds like something out of a Norman Rockwell illustration. How nice!

First thoughts

Gary Schear, Bozeman Montana — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 17:51:02 GMT

The pertinent facts of this case have already been decided and a sentence handed down in a court of law in a case presided over by a Republican Prosecutor, prosecuted at the request of the Central Intelligence Agency angry at the outing of an employee who they confirm had a covert identity. Obstruction of Justice occurred and justice was handed down and then circumvented by the bush administration. No doubt a full pardon will occur on the day the idiot leaves office. So all of you bush Libby apologists stop your squirming and own the fact that you believe that your men are above the law, and that this should be a nation of men instead of laws. Very Un-American of you. You should be ashamed.

First thoughts

Mark Thieme — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 18:04:07 GMT

How can I relax on this July 4th? What with all the talk about the brave patriot Libby and friends, have we forgotten Al Queda? They are everywhere. My neighbors, brown folks, people with beards driving Beamers, they are all Al Queda. It is no secret. You gonna let those folks close to fireworks? The latest terrorist threat to this nation is cans of Jolt (Rush drinks it). If you do not immediately freeze cans of Jolt bought at the local gas station, they will become warm, then hot. If shaken, these cans of Jolt can explode and you will have hot Jolt all over your face! Do you think that is a coincidence? Al Qaeda has their name all over that one. Jolt is actually bottled as a joint venture between satanists and Al Qaeda. BE AFRAID! I have a garage full of cases of Jolt and I am not going to rest until I put a bullet in every can (and then if it is safe, of course, I'll chug it). That noise you hear out back by the '75 El Camino on blocks ain't firecrackers if you are in my neighborhood, fellow Americans. On this hallowed 4th, just be real scared. It is called patriotism where I come from.

First thoughts

Roger, Oakland, CA — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 18:21:59 GMT

I'm reading all of the pretzel logic from the Bush apologists on this blog, and I keep thinking about what my mom told me: Two wrongs don't make a right. Clinton is irrelevant. What Clinton did has no bearing on the "rightness" or "wrongness" of Bush's actions. You guys are incapable of coming up with a cogent argument supporting Bush's actions, and you are relegated to using Clinton as a shield. You know what Bush did was oily, and (Paul being a notable exception) you don't even have the moral fiber to say so. George W. Bush campaigned on bringing decency and integrity back to the White House. He ran against Clinton as much as he did Gore, so he built his glass house. He has proven time and time again that he is slicker, more of a moral relativist, and more of a parser of words than his predecessor. And you...the 26% of the country who called for Clinton's head, have proven your moral foundation...that which you and the press trumpet as a given of the "values" party...is ephemeral and facultative. Trying to point to any hypocrisy on the left is ridiculous: YOU are the self-proclaimed morals party, the family values party, the party of decency and integrity. You have built your glass house, now live in it.

First thoughts

unknown origin — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 18:35:46 GMT

"two wrongs don't make a right, but two wrongs do make a right-winger".

First thoughts

Mel, Illinois — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 18:47:56 GMT

Mark Thieme, Please keep your cans of Jolt away from my cannons. I don't want to take out the whole trombone section.

First thoughts

Acid Boy, AZ — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 18:57:59 GMT

Scooter and the Bush Administration can be summed up,
"All in all, it's just another brick in th wall." The Wall, Pink Floyd

First thoughts

bobf — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 19:09:38 GMT

Ron and Juan, have a great 4th of July. Only paid hacks can keep making excuses for this pathetic president. These republicans screamed about how Clinton ruined the presidency. To bad these blind idiots can not see the dictatorship that Bush wants so bad. There is not a law that he can break that Jerry and Dave will blindly defend him. These are the type of people that would vote in Hitler as long as he hates liberals. I have voted for republicans, Indepedents and Democrats over the years. I voted for Jessie Ventura-independant/Arnie Carlson-republican for gosh sakes. I vote for the person. Arnie Carlson is just like Arnie Schwarzanegger: Moderate republican. I consider myself a conservative democrat. But I would never ever blindly justify and enable a corrupt adminstration like Jerry and Dave. God you two, get a backbone or get a brain, but get something that will let you see the truth. That kool-aid keeps clouding your vision.

First thoughts

Lewis, Cincinnat, Ohoi — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 19:26:12 GMT

Bush commuted Libby's sentence. Libby still has to pay a fine and he is being disbarred. He's not getting off scott-free. If we were OK with the price Clinton paid for his perjury, I feel we have to be OK with Libby's punishment. Roger, it is not irrelevant what Clinton did. Republicans self proclaiming that they are the party of morals, decency and integrity doesn't make them so. Libby's paid a significant price for his actions. For those of you who do think he should have went to jail, exactly what should he have gone to jail for? Do you really think Scooter Libby was the person behind this mess???

First thoughts

Lee Holmes — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 19:30:19 GMT

Nick Ohio:The power to grant pardon by the presdient is in fact,upholding the law.This right is granted by the Constitution of the United States. Roger From Oakland. See:Aforementioned Constitution and the fact that its pardon provisions were penned by Jefferson,Monroe,Adams,Madison,et al and you will find this posters ''cogent defense''. What Clinton did , especially with Rich and the Rodhams,who were family members belonging to his wife can be considered ''oily''. Or what Ford did with Nixon, or Bush with the Iran-Contras. That Bush pardoned Libby can be considered ''oily''. But they are firmly grounded in constitutional law as well as the Document itself.Bush detractors are engaging in dishonesty when they allege that such pardons have no basis in law.

First thoughts

Joe, LA — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 19:43:56 GMT

Honestly all the talk of Libby is a waste of breath. Bush did what he can legally do. People check the Constitution (Article II, Section 2), it allows Presidential pardons. Yes, Bush has trampled all over the Constitution but not this time. Unless you want to change the Constitution there is nothing wrong here....try calling me a conservative and you are wrong...democrat who favors Obama's perspective on this

First thoughts

Ken, Seattle WA — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 19:45:40 GMT

You know Libby's still going to get a full pardon don't you?

First thoughts

John B, Des Moines, IA — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 19:47:53 GMT

OK, Libby still owes a fine that will probably be paid for by conservative fund-raisers and may be disbarred, but being the newest neocon folk hero should have no problem getting a high-paid gig as a media figure, lobbyist, or think tank member. Where do I sign up for my own obstruction of justice charge? I don't feel he was behind this mess, but he's a loyal foot soldier and is covering up for the person behind this mess. As such he absolutely deserves jail for perjury and obstruction of justice performed as part of a cover up for deliberately compromising our intelligence community.

First thoughts

Independent, Texas — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 19:49:31 GMT

Lee Holmes (Sent Tuesday, July 03, 2007 3:30 PM)

I missed something. Where did anyone say that pardons don't have basis in law. Seriously, I missed that. This is not a slap.

First thoughts

John B, Des Moines, IA — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 19:54:07 GMT

Lee, I'll grant you that what Bush did was legal. I also maintain that it is an arrogant abuse of power to have top aids within the Administration deliberately break the law then make sure there are no legal consequences. Additionally it's part of a pattern of arrogance, deception, and lust for power that makes the Bush gang unfit for public office and a positive danger to the nation itself.

First thoughts

Independent, Texas — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 19:55:37 GMT

Joe, LA (Sent Tuesday, July 03, 2007 3:43 PM)

"Unless you want to change the Constitution there is nothing wrong here...."

The correct wording would be there is nothing "illegal" here. There is, IMHO, a lot that is very wrong.

First thoughts

Roger, Oakland CA — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 20:05:05 GMT

Lewis - Libby was tried, convicted and sentenced within the parameters of the law. No one has to justify the punishment or the crime. It's moot. Are you saying the prison sentence was too harsh? Do you disagree with the law? Or do you believe he committed no crime, the jury was incorrect in its verdict, and/or the Judge overstepped his bounds?

First thoughts

Roger, Oakland CA — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 20:05:27 GMT

Lee - Yep, pardoning Rich was wrong. Yep, it's in the constitution. Yep, what Bush did was legal. Now, please explain to us why commuting Libby's sentence was the right thing to do.

First thoughts

Lee Holmes — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 20:09:30 GMT

Independant:See above post by NICK from Ohio.Specifically,here:''To do so[Pardon Libby],is a complete lack of respect of the law that he is supposed to uphold''.How is both respecting this law as well as upholding it an abridgement of this law?[Art.II].Also see: Sen.Chuck Schumer[D-NY]:Remarks,Associated Press,Jul.02,2007.Here,Bush ''tramples upon the law''.How is upholding the law ''trampling''it?

First thoughts

Eileen, Navarre, FL — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 20:11:51 GMT

Look, I can rant and rave with the best of you but I know it will do nothing except raise my blood pressure (it's high enough already). I won't argue constitutional law. What angers people (including me) is the utter disregard for ethics with the belief that the Bush/Cheney cabal is above any law. I don't appreciate the middle finger in my face or the powerless feeling I have that the will of the people doesn't matter. On the other hand, if you read the other blog sites you'll see there is a percentage of people applauding Bush's decision and Fred Thompson's support for Scooter Libby. So, where does this leave us as a nation? I chose to write the comment of 11:08 am this morning because I want to reflect on what is courageous and noble about our country; not on the disgusting, sordid, and unethical actions of our politicians of both parties! This nation isn't even 300 years old and yet we are every bit as corrupt as Rome was when it became an empire. Think about it. So what do we the people do about this? Do we still want our democracy or are we ready to become a dictatorship? Are we that damned lazy and corrupt? Do the laws of the land apply to everyone or are there two sets of laws; one for the privileged and one for the rest of us commoners? YOU DECIDE!

First thoughts

Independent, Texas — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 20:38:33 GMT

Oh Lee. Using the law to subvert the law is legal in this case.

None of the posters you cited said that the commutation or the pardons issued by others were illegal.

They said, and I concur, that although legal it was/is a travesty of justice.

First thoughts

Lee Holmes — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 21:19:25 GMT

Gary:I am in no doubts that Libby broke the law.This is not the point.The point is that the president has constituional perogative handed him by the very Document that you people claim he is always breaking.The accuasation that we are ''Un-American''is beneath contempt and will not be adressed here.

First thoughts

JIrby, Colorado — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 21:57:13 GMT

Bush has no right to claim he's conforming to the constitution since he wipes his butt on it when it stands in the way of what pleases him.

First thoughts

Lee Holmes — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 22:20:21 GMT

Nothing in this pardon gives even a scintilla of evidence that Bush ''subverted''the law.What does the law say regarding the presentation of evidence?[based upon the 4th,5th Amendments].What evidence is there that Bush ''had''Libby break the law in order to later pardon him[or commute sentance].This is little more than supersonic hyberbole unsupported by irrefutable fact.These alleged ''travesties''occur all the time.It was OK when a Democrat president did it but not OK now.Vice versa for Republicans.This is not the point.Allegiance to the Constitution is.You have a beef?Get rid of the provision of that Article by amending the Document.

First thoughts

Doug, San Diego — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 22:22:21 GMT

None of you rightwingers ever have an actual defense of Bush's actions. Never. Always time-traveling back to the blue dress. Why can't you defend your guys on the merits of the case? What, you say there is no defense? You say you've given up your bogus claim to the moral high ground? You simply can't argue the fact that no matter what ANY president in the past has done, THIS president is wrong, THIS president has presided over the worst foriegn policy blunder in U.S. history, THIS president and his vice-president would in any just world stand trial for war crimes and crimes against humanity. Defend THIS president, if you can. Live in the present, and in the immediate future. THIS president is going to do a lot more damage to YOUR party, and OUR country in the next 18 months. Think about THAT.

First thoughts

Lee Holmes — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 22:26:22 GMT

JIrby:He has every right.You will recall that those areas where Bush has been found to be in conflict with the Document,such as HAMDAN and others,the judiciary has stepped in to remind the Executive that they were abridging the Document.This is in no way the case with this commutation of the Libby sentance.

First thoughts

Gary Schear, Bozeman Montana — Tue, 03 Jul 2007 22:29:08 GMT

Lee--YOU have no doubts that Libby broke the law. That's very big of you but all of your compatriots are ready to bestow the medal of freedom on him and will not admit that he did. Yes it is legal and constitutional and yes isn't it a wonderful lesson to our children? Lying to the LAW is a good thing sanctioned by our "President". He isn't about to let one of his good soldiers (who knows where all the bodies are buried) suffer the indignities of compliance with the law when he can legally get him off. Just because it is legal doesn't make it right. Abortion is legal, do you think that is right? I make no apologies for calling you Un-American! We have all been called worse here by you people. The divisions are set in stone now. I used to believe in bipartisan government until YOU PEOPLE tore it down. If that is how you want it then I hope that is how it is in '08. May an overwhelming democratic majority banish your party to nothing. Have a good 4TH of July celebrating your Administrations successful treason.

First thoughts

JIrby, Colorado — Wed, 04 Jul 2007 02:28:29 GMT

Lee - if you have seen the same things I have and you come to that conclusion, there is nothing I can tell you that will change your mind. You point out that the judiciary has done a good job of keeping Bush on the straight and narrow. This is not true. They may have stepped in on one or two instances, but Bush has done nothing but break the law since he has been in office. If everybody was like you and these four of five other ultra-conservatives on this blog, we would be in a dictatorship now. You guys may think you are tough-minded realists, but you are the definition of sheep. America is lucky that Repubs have been continuously jumping ship from the time Bush's ratings were around 90 at the ground zero site until now when his lowest rating was 26%. I can assure you that those jumping ship are not the dummies. If you think otherwise, you will slurp up the consequences. You are a member of a small and shrinking minority, and you are close to becoming irrelevant. You and yours, (the strong Bush supporters), have the same numbers as the Hispanic vote now, twelve percent, and that isn't enough to get another Bush clone in power, not even with the other fourteen or fifteen percent of moderate Bush supporters. That's really all there is to it. I hope you are still on this blog in Nov. '08. That's when your kind will confront an ugly case of reality. Bush knows most people despise what he did, but facing that hate is better than having Libby in prison where any day he could squeal on Bush and Cheney and we would be faced with imprisoning the prez and the veep. Bush would rather walk through a throng of people spitting in his face than confront the consequences of being exposed as a major felon.

First thoughts

Gary Schear, Bozeman Montana — Wed, 04 Jul 2007 16:50:20 GMT

JIrby--Thank you for saying it so well. I don't think or type well when I am angry. One day I will learn to walk away, cool down and formulate a cogent and convincing response that is far more effective than sputtering and spitting angry words. Thanks and have an enjoyable 4th of July. Happy Birthday America. Now is the time when you need your true patriots most.

First thoughts

JIrby, Colorado — Wed, 04 Jul 2007 18:36:33 GMT

By the way, Lee = my above statement about Bush having no right to claim he's conforming to the constitution was intended as a moral right. It was in the spirit of two guys seeing a homeless guy walking down the street guzzling a bottle of tequila. One guy says "he cant do that", and you, Lee, are saying "what do you mean he can't do it? He's doing it." But check out this video, Lee. It answers your questions better than I can: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19588942/ It's as close to a poli sci clinic at Harvard as you or I will ever get.

First thoughts

JIrby, Colorado — Wed, 04 Jul 2007 19:19:18 GMT

Thanks, Gary. I read your stuff.

First thoughts

Lee Holmes — Wed, 04 Jul 2007 19:21:14 GMT

Jirby:It is not enough to merely cast down the gauntlet of accuasation,it must be supported by fact.Even a bush-league matchbook barrister knows that evidence must be presented in order to glean judgement sustained by the facts.All else remains in the catagory of ''supersonic hyberbole''I have heretofore alluded to.
If Bush has ''done nothing but break the law''then present SPECIFIC instance,that proves that a law was indeed broken by this president.You are in error Jirby.Bleating the same thing over and over again in the pattern of an ad nauseum page lifted from ''Animal Farm''is the essence of those who become sheep in thought as well as action.Say what one will regarding a Bush,his nascent replacements are among the worst this nation has ever produced and any one of these will continue these controversial pardons in their turn.Further,in the region of pardons,''moral rights''have not a damned thing to to with these actions.Someones ox is going to be gored,whether outraged parents in St.Paul see a drug-pusher-to-children get off the hook,or FALN nationalists handed their walking papers,or stepping in to protect family members and old political pals[as was done by Clinton].Or a Ford with Nixon,or a Bush I with Poindexter,or even here with Libby.In the eyes of ALL Americans,each president of each party commits in his time the indefensible[to these critics],action by the use of these pardons.Again,this is simply NOT the point.It is rather,that this action has totally legal and sound basis within the nations highest document.You do not pick and choose what you either like or dislike regarding said document,where some can be retained,and others,excised without the neccesary amending processes.This is not about Bush.[or Clinton].It is about the Document.I stand for this,having once sworn to protect it ''from all enemies,foreign and domestic''.Do not allow rank emotion to cloud the basic issue.That is,adherence to constititonal rights.[something even shrill partisan hacks like Olberman[a sportscaster,of all things], can learn from time to time].

First thoughts

Desmond — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 15:06:15 GMT

I have been labelled unpatriotic by my President and his administrtion because I did not support the war in Iraq. Sigh. I thought the President took an oath to defend all the citizens of the United States, even those who do no agree with him. Where did my rights go?

First thoughts

Gary Schear, Bozeman Montana — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 17:01:19 GMT

Lee--No one disputes the legality of a president commuting a sentence. The dispute is over the morality of a President giving a commutation or a pardon (which will come on inauguration day '08)to a subordinate who was acting on his behalf either explicitly or implicitly. That is abhorrent but completely in line with the corporate morality that has replaced common decency in this country. Spin, twist, apologize, and excuse all you want, the fact of the matter is that this commutation was issued for the self serving interest of the chief executive and his minions or I should say the chief minion and his executive. Any way you slice it Lee, A President who uses his Constitutional powers to excuse and protect the Criminal activities of his sub-ordinates is immoral and Un-American as is anyone who supports and excuses this President. And both are beneath contempt.

First thoughts

No Illusions, Somewhere,Virginia — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 17:13:01 GMT

"A President who uses his Constitutional powers to excuse and protect the Criminal activities of his sub-ordinates is immoral and Un-American" as opposed to a President who use his Constitutional powers to excuse and protect the criminal activities of his business associates and political contributors?

First thoughts

Desmond — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 17:29:29 GMT

No Illusions, we have still have an operation going on in Iraq looking for weapons of mass destruction. They are being paid through Iraqi oil porfits.To date, they have not found any of those weapons. Whose dillusional now?

First thoughts

JIrby, Colorado — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 17:37:33 GMT

Lee - I think most reasonable people who read your post will agree that you are a nut case. I have already told you that you have seen the same things I have the past six years and you have arrived at a different conclusion. Either you haven't been paying attention or you have a huge blind spot when it comes to evaluating Bush. He started right out breaking the law. I don't intend to go over everything that you should have seen for yourself but didn't, but I will go over a few things. Running up to the 2000 election, Bush and gang found ways to disenfranchise voters in Dade county, possibly enough to give Gore a win there. Then, the Repubs in his corner hired gorillas to stand around and intimidate the people recounting the vote in Dade County. The Repubs on the Supreme Court then ruled in Bush's favor. A few weeks later Bush appointed Rehnquist's daughter and Scalia's son to high government posts. Get it? He's repaying Repubs on the Supreme Court for ruling in his favor. In later months, he and Cheney start an illegitimate war supported with lies. Then Bush and Cheney get subordinates to out Valerie Plame to punish her husband for exposing one of their phony reasons for going to war. They hire Halliburton to go over to Iraq and look after the grubby little details. They send Halliburton carloads of unmarked greenbacks to cover their expenses and pay themselves. Halliburton and other contractors walk off with nearly a billion dollars in unmarked currency, the biggest heist since Enron. Henry Waxman, (D-Cal) is still looking into that one. Next, they send close to a billion to Iraqis they have appointed to supply the Iraqi troops with uniforms and weapons. These Iraqis, on Paul Bremmer's watch, spend a few million on shoddy, inappropriate equipment, clothing and weapons and then skip the country with the rest, one of them now living in Paris and another in an Arab state. These last two moronic moves by the administration will cost the taxpayer about one and a half billion. Right now, Cheney is sitting on documents that most likely hold information that would show criminal behavior by Bush and Cheney. Cheney is refusing to turn these over to proper authorities. Smart move. He could be dead of old age before the authorities get around to getting their hands on these documents, which probably contain offences by the White House which are either impeachable, criminal, or both, which if turned over now could mean jail time for Bush and Cheney. You need to buy two or three good books on what happened. Bob Woodward has written three books, including "State of Denial" and "Plan of Attack", that should walk you through most of what I have told you, but I don't believe you would know the truth if it bit you on the buttock. I think you and I will have to agree to disagree and let it go at that. If I ever decide I want to hear more tales like yours, I will go to the nearest state mental hospital for an earful. I am through trying to reason with you, and future posts from you to me will be mostly ignored. The post of No Illusions above tells me that you will have lots of support from the moron community, but no one on this blog with a brain is going to agree with you. You are a complete waste of time.

First thoughts

No Illusions, Somewhere,Virginia — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 17:48:33 GMT

Desmond, I wasn't aware that we were still on the hunt for WMD's in Iraq however it would come as no surprise. I would have to say that doesn't make the current administration delusional so much as desperately grasping at any straw no matter how slim to salvage something from this debacle.

First thoughts

No Illusions, Somewhere,Virginia — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 18:02:36 GMT

Why thank you JIrby, I guess maybe I am a moron because I like to believe that the rules and laws we have in place apply to everyone not just a select few. However with some of the things inflicted on the Ameican people by pols from both sides of the aisle in my lifetime and the incredible lack of accountabilty by either party I could see where that belief would lead many to think I am of low intelligance.

First thoughts

Desmond — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 18:25:52 GMT

No Illusions, guess that is why our Vice-President and our President still links al Quida to 9/11 to this day.He has no viable intelligence on the ground, in Iraq, and he never did when we led our country into the occupation of another country based on all those illusions(or perhaps, all those fears we had of Lord Voldermort).

First thoughts

No Illusions, Somewhere,Virginia — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 18:45:42 GMT

Desmond, I agree that the lack of intelligence along with the mis-representation and mis-interpretation of the intelligence we did have which led to the invasion and occupation of Iraq was completely negligent. Having said that I have no doubts that Al Queida was responsible for 9/11. As an aside Lord who?

First thoughts

Lee Holmes — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 18:49:15 GMT

Jirby.Being a ''nutcase''is a fortunate matter of opinion. You are dodging the issue. NONE of the instances you have mentioned makes any case for ''breaking the law''. If you do not intend to ''go over everything''with legal citation then you are wasting my time. Get with it man. A full investigation by not only the Justice Dept and the Civil Rights Commission headed by a leftwinger to boot, as well as that conducted by no fewer than five separate news agencies found no evidence of ''voter disenranchisement''in Dade at the conclusion of the 2000 Election, or during. You forget that the 10th Amendment argument by Gore was struck down on a 6-3 vote by the USSC. There are NOT this many Republican-appointees sitting on this bench. Not then, not now.[how the hell this makes the case for ''breaking every law''escapes me,as the highest court in America laid down its decision.Not a bunch of pro-Gore whiners whose closest contact with the Constitution was ABCs old SCHOOLHOUSE ROCK]. Do pals of any administration recieve favour for their actions?Damned right they do and up till now it is DEMOCRATS who are the worst offenders [running ahead of GOP lawmakers], with dozens of scions of top Dem congressmen and women serving on staffs,heading lobbying firms that are favoured by their parent lawmakers, and actually crafting policy[as was the case of Feinsteins husband and Reids children], which later benefited these families. What laws are being broken here Jirby? Be specific. You are not engaging in fact. You have brought forth nothing more than OPINION. Where is your evidence that Bush and Cheney ''got''subordinates to nail Plame? Where is it that they ''manufactured lies'' that were otherwise embraced by the current critics of the administration BEFORE Bush was even president?? Pass to Iraq, and there is little doubt that many of the ''moves''made by the administration can be rightly viewed as ''moronic''. But are these illegal? We will make the case here that leftwinger George Soros is making more off Halliburton than Cheney or Bush ever did and that Feinsteins[D-Ca] husband raked in millions off of the no-bid contracts in Iraq. Why would I rely upon a mere author[Woodward,whose books have been riddled with error before], to make a case of ''illegality''eminating from the administration? I have a better author for you. His name was TS Elliot and in his cautionary poem ''The Hollow Men'',he specifically warned against enduring the verbal slings and arrows of pseudo-intellectual featherweights whose ''voices,when whispered together,are quiet and meaningless''.He was describing you Jirby.Now.About those fact-based legal specifics........

First thoughts

Amy B Portland, ME — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 18:55:53 GMT

It appears the conservatives have shifted from defending Bush's policies and actions to attacking the very notion that anyone in politics ever behaves ethically. Apparently, this is their new strategy for avoiding accountability for giving us Bush/Cheney. Welcome to a new direction in conservative America: surrender to low expectaions, Putin style governance and the debasement of our American ideals. What would Reagan say?

First thoughts

Lee Holmes — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 19:00:24 GMT

Gary:You are alleging that Libby was acting on the ''behalf''of Bush.You have no evidence of this.Even Libbys chief inquisitor,Fitzgerald,found no such connection.Presidents make controversial pardons all of the time.They are seen by one wing as excreable and damnable,supported by another wing.Yet those of us who have been down this controversial pardon road before,have never descended to the most unpardonable sin of all.That of labeling other Americans ''un-American'' by the base virtue of their anguished emotions.In this,one becomes no better than those who play Gaza games,accusing one of not being ''Muslim''enough,or those whose religious or ideological purity is judged by those who have no business meting out such qualifications as to who consists of being a ''real''[anything],and who does not.Such judgements in and of themselves are more harmful to the fortunes of the Republic than any terrorist attack.You are not building a better nation.You are tearing it down.

First thoughts

Desmond — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 19:01:36 GMT

No Illusions, the 9/11 Commission did not find a link between al-Queda and Iraq.Senator Jim DeMint, Republican of South Carolina, has put a hold on any bill going forward in the Senate concerning an implementation of the 9/11 commision findings.He says he wants to know how the Homeland Security Department would spend the money. Say What?

First thoughts

JIrby, Colorado — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 19:18:03 GMT

Lee - I have enough facts to last you a few months.
Bob Woodward's State of Denial and Bush at War.
You and the other Bush lovers are America's enemies.

First thoughts

No Illusions, Somewhere,Virginia — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 19:33:34 GMT

Desmond, thats exactly why we shouldn't have gone into Iraq in the first place. By diverting resources to a war and occupation that should have never been this administration has not only given these terrorist a recruiting boost but has enabled them to change their organization and expand in other areas of the world (Pakistan, Afghanistan,South America, etc.)

First thoughts

Desmond — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 19:43:00 GMT

So, Senator DeMint, why do you have a "hold" on the procedure going forward in the Senate about implimententing the findings from the 9/11 commision.Are you suddenly tracking the "money"?

First thoughts

No Illusions, Somewhere,Virginia — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 19:43:30 GMT

Amy, I wouldn't go so far as to say all pols behave in an unethical manner. However I would say that if you were to swing the proverbial dead cat in a room full of pols (both parties) the chances of hitting one that has never behaved unethically would be slim to none. I think anybody thats honest with themselves can see that neither party is beyond reproach.

First thoughts

Lee Holmes — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 21:46:36 GMT

Come on Jirby,this is as lame as it gets.In Richard Clarkes book ''Against All Enemies'',he did not tell the truth about his role in the summer 2000 cancelling of a bin Laden operation nor was he honest in squaring his one account in his book with his later testimony before the 9/11 Commission regarding the Bush administration Deputies Meetings.[see:9/11 Hearings,March 24,2004,Testimony of Clarke,Richard].Joe Wilson so lied through his teeth in his own autobiography that he later admitted to CNN[July 02,2004]that he readily took ''literary licence''[or lied,to speak plainly],and a Senate Select Committee made up of Democrats along with Republicans so exposed his lies.Leftwinger Sy Hersh,writing in an July 2006 ''explosive''article for the NEW YORKER,had it down pat that the administration was to commence the invasion of Iran ''By September of this year''.It has been OVER a year since his article, gleaned from the usual ''sources within the administration''hit the newsstands.No Iran Invasion.Meanwhile,no less a liberal darling than Arianna Huffington[HUFFINGTON POST] blasts Woodwards ''Plan of Attack''as a screed written by ''the dumb blonde of American journalism''.
You will not find THE Truth eminating from these guys.Only a singular version of it.Namely,theirs.You will have to do much better than this.

First thoughts

Gary Schear, Bozeman Montana — Thu, 05 Jul 2007 22:39:13 GMT

Lee and No Illusions--For years now we have listened to conservatives ranging from Karl Rove to,(scraping the slimey foul smelling bottom of the barrel), Ann Coulter (Godless) call Liberals everything but human. The very term Liberal has been turned into an epitath that must always be spat out with the proper amount of venom. When Liberals complained, they were then called whimpy whiners that obviously don't have the strength to lead. And to the credit of the Conservatives this argument was largely swalloed by the casual electorate. A culture war was declared. (Bill O'Reily--Culture Warrior) In that war everyone's talking points painted the "ewe! Liberal" as the un american, must be defeated, god hating, child eating, enemy.
So be it. Your side initiated this stratagey so expect no apologies when we pick up the s**t thrown at us over the years and throw it back in your smug self rightous faces. In fact you are starting to sound a tad whiney. Dry those tears up guys and get up on your feet. You are going to have to be tougher than that to keep your self off the trash heap of bad ideas. After all you are now the party of Unnecesary Wars, wasted American soldiers, raped and murdered 14 year old Iraqi girls, "collateraly damaged" Iraqi babies incompetant Presidents, Puppet master vice Presidents, Pedophile members of congress in charge of the Missing and Exploited Childrens Caucus and lets not even talk about the sh*t stains on the Constitution. I could go on and on and on but I already did. We need to look to the future and what can be done about the mess and about those "ewe! Conservatives" that are responsible. Just a little hint from experience. If you try to argue and parse and explain or contest...well..it just comes out like guilty whining. And remember the casual electorate is listening and you taught them well.

First thoughts

JIby, Colorado — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 01:53:42 GMT

Lee - you seem to have the idea that I owe you some kind of explanation for what I think and believe. I don't owe you didley squat. I am confident in my thinking process and what it has yielded to me. You are not going to change my mind and I am not going to change yours. I am convinced you are a lost cause. I am not your teacher. I don't owe you explanations for anything. If you are convinced I am wrong, we will let that be my problem. I am not on this blog to chew the fat with conservatives. I am here to converse with my peers. These people don't need explanations for what I post. They are already up there. If you don't like my suggestions, fine. Go your way. If you think I don't know what I'm talking about, you are crazy to keep pumping me for my ideas. Apparently you are really confident of the sources where you get your information. You have already said it is not FOX News or Rush Limbaugh, so it remains a mystery to me. My personal best source is Noam Chomsky and Kevin Phillips. If you want to know what I think, my thoughts can be found in the books of these two. I don't want you as a pen pal. Finally, the people who still strongly support Bush are twelve percent of the population. They don't stand a dog's chance over the next ten years. As for what Gary Schear said about liberals, we have our own dirty word for conservatives now. Rednecks.

First thoughts

Gary Schear, Bozeman Montana — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 03:58:27 GMT

No Lee, JIrby doesn't have to do better than that. It is YOUR President that is down in the 20's, HIS war that 3/4s disapprove of, HIS dysfunctional puppet presidency that is now being exposed, HIS Attorney General that has made a mockery the justice system, HIS party that is headed for more losses in '08. No one owes you or any like you proof of anything. WE are not on trial. In point of fact HE and the failed Neocon agenda, and by extension the Republican Party are on trial in the court of public opinion. And the great and wondrous Worm Tongue Rove has taught us well abut that court. No actual facts were needed to destroy the political career of a paraplegic Vietnam veteran Max Clealand. No actual facts were needed to convince southern voters that McCain had fathered a black Child. All that was needed was the malignant whispered lie repeated often enough to convince the casual electorate. So even though it exists, lets not even argue proof and truth. When did that ever matter to you people. You have taught us well. Reap what you sow and stop whining like a little girl.

First thoughts

No Illusions, Somewhere,Virginia — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 14:42:36 GMT

Gary Schear, I know replying to this is just gonna make me sound like a whiny little girl... but my original post on here was a rhetorical question, nothing more. There was no defense of Bush's policies or administration for which I have no respect whatsoever nor was there an attack on "whiny liberals" in fact I don't believe I espoused any political viewpoints other than my belief that neither party is "bright and shiny". I must have hit a bone though because I was immediately lumped in with the "moron community" and pontificated at by your post telling me what I've done wrong and why I should expect to be belittled everytime I give my opinion.

First thoughts

JIrby, Colorado — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 15:48:01 GMT

No Illusions - my post above, at the bottom of 1:37pm may have gotten me off on the wrong foot about what you meant. I was probably too quick to judge, I don't really know at this point, but it does seem likely. I have a strong tendency to dismiss anyone who seems conservative for going six years defending the Bushies, which may have been a wrong assumption on my part. Bush is so transparent that most people should be able to see through him by now. Most of the Dems on this blog have such similar views on the present rotten state of the Repub party that we can practically finish each other's sentences on that matter.

First thoughts

No Illusions, Somewhere,Virginia — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 16:46:06 GMT

JIrby - I completely understand the urge to take to task anyone whom would blindly defend the current administration or even physically wrap them on the head with my knuckles while asking "What the hell are you thinking??!!". I have read this blog for awhile now and for the most part everyone seems to engage in legitimate discussions instead of namecalling with the exception of a select few. This was my first time posting on this blog and to be so quickly and wrongly categorized and generalized probably got my "goat" quicker than it should have. At any rate the only thing I would ask of anyone on this blog is to be able to trade opinions and ideas not insults.

First thoughts

No Illusions, Somewhere,Virginia — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 16:55:14 GMT

JIrby - I completely understand the urge to take to task anyone whom would blindly defend this administration or even to physically wrap them on the head with my knuckles while asking "What the hell are you thinking??!!". I have read this blog for awhile and for the most part everyone engages in legitimate discussion with the exception of a select few. This was my first time posting here and to be so quickly and wrongly categorized and generalized probably got my "goat" quicker than it should have. At any rate all I can ask of anyone on this blog is to trade opinions and ideas not insults

First thoughts

No Illusions, Somewhere,Virginia — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 16:55:47 GMT

sorry double post

First thoughts

Lee Holmes — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 20:38:27 GMT

Gary:Get real.Long before a Clinton or even a Bush,[whose father was called a ''wimp''by liberals,never mind the fact that this man was a highly decorated Naval pilot who fought in WWII],came down the pike,liberals hurled base invective bordering on the insane or the rabid at consertvatives and Republicans.''Borking''entered the American lexicon as a word to literally ''destroy'',coined by Democrats.Reagans Alzheimers,a disease which does not respect political party,was routinely made the butt of jokes by these alleged ''liberals''.Dan Quayle was a buffoon,Al Haig,a Nazi,even other liberal giants such as LBJ were not immune to their screeching hysterics.Cindy Sheehan,of all people,was deemed a ''traitor''by the liberal-left whose hatred is all-consuming and in no way benefits this nation.I could with at least as much justice call your party the one of racebaiters,anti-Semites,Guevara-worshipping hypocrites,anti-religious bigots[except for Islamics,for some strange reason],wannabe Eurotrash,open-borders advocates,tax-and-spend socialists,trashers of the 1st,2nd,4th,5th,10th,and 14th Amendments to the Constitution,Kangaroo-Rat worshippers who desire that every single last farmer,rancher,miner and logger be kicked to Iceland,panderers to murderous dictators,isolationist Luddites that want to turn the clock back to Year Zero,nanny-state nabobs who demand that they control all that you read,hear,or see,pals of rackateers,mafioso,Tinseltown dimwits who cannot wipe their asses even with a whole roll of toilet paper,guys who think that the dead of 9/11 are ''little Eichmanns'',''supporting our troops''by calling them rapists,thieves,Nazis,Gulag Soviets,murderers,no ROTCs,no Boy Scouts,no YMCAS no nothing that offends the idea that this is a patriarchal tyranny.Get out the dead vote.Or illegals.Or criminals.Or dogs.Make our kids as dumb as the dumbest one in the classroom.No Reading.No Writing.No Math.''Gay''history.Nice Mexicans at the Alamo.No Dead White Guys.Islam Good,Christianity Bad.
And heck Gary.This is just the SHORT list.You watch who you call ''un-American''.I was twice decorated for my service to this nation which has since been without taint or flaw.

First thoughts

Gary, Schear, Bozeman, Montana — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 22:42:28 GMT

Lee--Thank you for your service to this country. It's good you should mention kicking around members of the Military. Senator Joe McCarthy, another of your esteemed Republicans, made his career destroying the careers of good American enlisted men and officers in the Army/McCarthy hearings. In doing so he made the country safe for blacklists, and loyalty oaths. He also used charges of communism, communist sympathies, or disloyalty to attack a number of politicians and other individuals inside and outside of government. Yes you are correct. it is small minded and just wrong to question another Americans Patriotism because of their Politics or their opinion on an issue. I apologize. You yourself have never used the word un-American do describe me and so I vow to attempt to be as imaginative as you in choosing my adjectives to infer rather than state. I am not worthy. I will do better.

First thoughts

Paul Miller, Woodbridge, VA — Mon, 09 Jul 2007 12:49:15 GMT

Being called un-American seems to have struck a nerve with you, Lee. For understandable reasons, too. And from one veteran to another, let me throw in an obligatory thanks for your service.

Seems to me something close to half our nation was called un-American by "our" president and his supporters, repeatedly, for the sake of political expediency. Maybe that helps explain the animosity toward him?