Like James Carvell (sp?) said, most of the people there

• Tea parties vs the million man march - Researcher
  • Like James Carvell (sp?) said, most of the people there - Hmmm
    • What does it tell you, - Mythbuster
      • That Republicans who preach the most to everyone - else can't spell?
      • I knew nothing about it at all until that very day - Hmmm
        • I rest my case. - Mythbuster
          • Guess overall just not that newsworthy. NM - Hmm
            • Said the ostrich with its head in the sand. - ctmt
            • Nah, just that 'vast left-wing conspiracy' thing - Mythbuster
    • It's Carville. - Researcher
      • Knew such smart people here could just get by with (sp?) and guess what? - Hmmm
        • I think you missed the mark again - Mythbuster
          • Meant what I put - Hmmm
        • Hey, I gave you a pass on - Researcher
          • Doing spell checking on others can get you thrown off - Hmmm
    • Yeah, those horrible signs - Researcher
    • I will give you this.... - Trigger Happy
    • Horrible signs were stating - TRUE FACTS. No message
      • This is what a hate mongers looks like - Unbelievable
        • Really? Which were the hate-monging signs - and please - be specific.
        • Strange, I did not see any of them - MTfromLA
      • Truth? You're delusional if those think those hateful . . . - sm
        • you don't follow politics/economic very closely then - no-aid drinker
        • But it was okay to portray George Bush as Hitler? - Zville MT
          • I saw the same thing with Obama, comparison to Hitler - Hmm
        • 'Rob from the rich, - Just an observer
  • Good point, good post. Thanks. - nm

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

conference. Jesse Jackson, Jr. is "candidate #5" and he thinks Blagojevich should step aside and resign and let the Lt. Gov. take over. He states JJ, Jr. is qualified for the position. 

He states JJ, Jr. is not guity of anything. He is not worried about any consequences of this except the media frenzy that is being created by this. If the meeting between the Gov. and JJ, Jr. was taped, they have no concern over it.

He (JJ, Jr.) will be speaking with the investigators on Friday or Monday. He will be holding a press conference in 15-16 minutes.

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000039&refer=columnist_carlson&sid=ajuZsQQbuwl4#

With Miers, Bush Gets Fifth Vote Against Roe: Margaret Carlson

Oct. 5 (Bloomberg) -- What if former President Bill Clinton had nominated his White House counsel, Bernie Nussbaum, to the Supreme Court? I can hear Bill Frist now. What does Slick Willy think he's doing -- filling a job at FEMA?

At first glance, there seems to be no other reason for Harriet Miers's nomination to the Supreme Court other than that she is President George W. Bush's Bernie Nussbaum. The notion that a careerist corporate lawyer would have risen to the top of Bush's list if she weren't down the hall is preposterous.

Unlike famous self-selector Dick Cheney, no one suspects the modest Miers looked in the mirror and saw the best replacement for Justice Sandra Day O'Connor staring back at her. Only Bush could see the ``heart'' and ``character'' in Miers that made her the perfect selection. She's been his consigliore, fixer and confidante for more than two decades, and she thinks the way he does.

The fact that Miers is a woman helps enormously. It looks as if Bush listened to wife Laura, who publicly suggested he should replace a woman with a woman. It's far more likely that Laura publicly suggested it because he already had decided to do so. The choice prompts automatic praise from some liberals, excites Democratic Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid and placates Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein.

Bush's Wants

And notice how tongue-tied a potential critic, Senator Edward Kennedy, was two days ago trying to criticize her.

Miers satisfies a number of Bush's proclivities: his inability to distinguish an insider job from an outside one (White House counsel is the most partisan legal job in government), his desire to reward loyalty and his love of surprise.

Ambitious Republicans should be on notice that the best way to get ahead in the Bush years is to work anonymously inside. It was only because the White House floated Miers's name that she was on anyone's list.

This is not to say that Miers isn't a decent, competent (she may be a crony, but she's no Michael Brown) and respected person. She's devoted to her mother and brothers, a regular churchgoer, an early riser, an avid celebrator of birthdays.

Up the Ladder

In Dallas, she broke the glass ceiling for female lawyers (although she lived the life of a nun to get there). After meeting Bush in 1989, she represented him in matters ranging from his purchase of a fishing cottage in East Texas to questions about his National Guard service.

At the same time, she climbed a steep corporate ladder, becoming co-manager of a huge Dallas firm and chairwoman of the Texas Bar Association, specializing in commercial transactions for large corporations.

She served on the Dallas City Council and headed the Texas Lottery, where, some say, she cleaned up Powerball. She moved with the president to the White House, where the only complaint against her was that she lingered over paperwork too long.

She became counsel to the president when Alberto Gonzales was promoted to attorney general. Gonzales is another loyalist who proved himself to Governor Bush by speed-reading through death row appeals in Texas and redefining torture in the White House for purposes of allowing more of it in Iraq. With her nomination, Miers has gotten an even bigger promotion than her predecessor.

Shocked Conservatives

Some conservatives are loudly shocked that Bush ignored the long list of known quantities among conservative jurists in the mold of his favorites, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. It depressed Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol. Rush Limbaugh was so agitated Cheney gave him an interview to calm his listeners.

What those conservatives are missing is what Dr. James Dobson, chairman of Focus on the Family, and Jay Sekulow, chief counsel to the American Center for Law & Justice, see in Miers: a fifth vote for overturning Roe v. Wade. Bush even got Dobson's approval beforehand.

Like Bush, Miers had a late-in-life born-again moment, joining a conservative evangelical church in Dallas where she taught Sunday School.

In an interview in yesterday's Dallas Morning News, Miers's former campaign manager, Lorlee Bartos, said Miers told her when running for city council in 1989 that she had been ``pro-choice in her youth.'' Then, according to Bartos, Miers said she underwent ``a born-again, profound experience'' that caused her to change her mind and oppose abortion.

Keeping the Promise

That conversion fits with her $150 contribution to Texans United for Life in 1989 and her successful effort to get the American Bar Association to move from support for abortion rights to neutral in 1991. After the ABA switched back to a pro- abortion-rights position, Miers in 1993 failed in a bid to have the endorsement put to a vote of the full membership.

At his press conference yesterday, Bush claimed that in all the years he's known Miers he never learned her view on abortion. Dobson and Sekulow will have their hands full reassuring the base about that comment. It's one thing for Chuck Schumer to be left in the dark, quite another for Bush to say he purposely kept himself there.

Didn't he promise the base he'd turn the light on and give them a selection sure to reverse Roe?

I think he has. This time he's tricking Harry Reid.

I used to think the younger Bush was like his dad on abortion -- pro-life for purposes of getting elected, pro-choice otherwise. But I now see him as a victim of Stockholm syndrome, adopting as his own view that of his right-wing captors. My money is on Dobson knowing what Bush claims not to. Assuming Miers is confirmed, it won't be long before we all know.

To contact the writer of this column:

Margaret Carlson at  mcarlson3@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: October 5, 2005 00:16 EDT

Pretty sad.  At least the consevatives here weather the storms and stay.  That pretty much says a lot about you and them, too.  It's sure not like you guys never took pot shots over there. Of course, I am sure it wasn't YOU. Right.

She just got announced.  I am not saying that there is anything in her background, but it is early and I am sure if there is one iota of a person in her background then we will here about it.  For this whole experience thing, what have we got in the past 8 years and the past 8 before that with all of the so-called experience the Rep. think we need. 

Why are we still bring up Rev. Wright?  Can't we just move past that?  We've heard it all. 

focused on outward appearances?  It is a person's heart that shows true beauty......not their face.  A face can change over time, but a pure heart remains and that is what is important.

is the line Hannity uses to introduce such wild statements without accepting responsibility for stating them.  The post says the GROUP endosed McCain -- did not libel McCain.  Simply an example of how people are willing to run with any statement that supports their beliefs against a candidate.

Slice and dice in the womb - 2.1 million babies murdered.....fanatical ravings indeed

I'm cutting and pasting from an email my friend sent me.  Thought it was interesting enough to post here.  I really hope the spacing is okay.  The title of the email was "how to become a former columnist"

Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the  Orlando Sentinel newspaper.
                                       
  545 PEOPLE
  By Charlie Reese

Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered why, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, we have deficits?

Have you ever wondered why, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don't propose a federal budget.  The president does.

You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations.

The House of Representatives does.

You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.

You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.

You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president, nine Supreme Court justices = 545 human beings out of the 300 million who are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress.   In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason.
They have no legal authority.   They have no authority to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a president to do one cotton-picking thing.   I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash.   The politician has the power to accept or reject it.   No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault.   They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall.   No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits.   The president can only propose a budget.   He cannot force the Congress to accept it.

The Constitution, (supposedly) the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving
appropriations and taxes.   Who is the speaker of the House?   She or he is the leader of the majority party.   She or he and fellow House members, not the
president, can approve any budget they want.   If the president vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million can not replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and
irresponsibility.   I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people.   When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.

If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red.

If the Marines are in  IRAQ , it's because they want them in  IRAQ .

If they do not receive Social Security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's be cause they want it that way.
There are no insoluble government problems.

Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they
can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power.   Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like 'the economy,' 'inflation,' or 'politics' that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.

They, and they alone, have the power.

They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses,  provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees.

think I shouldn't waste my time replying.  I am going to agree with them.