My pardons to you, then. It was evidently picked up by
Posted By: heyhey on 2009-06-23
In Reply to: I actually got the story from CNN .... - Just sayin .....
Fox and of course had the 'ole Fox spin put on it, riling up once again the unstable.
Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old. To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Pardons....sm
*Well....he was convicted of perjury and if he in fact did lie under oath to the grand jury, he should go to jail. That being said...why not pardon him? Clinton was cited for exactly the same things...lying under oath (perjury) before a grand jury and obstruction of justice. He is free as a bird, finished his term as President, making money hand over fist....yes, for that reason alone I think Libby should be pardoned to level the playing field again. If liberals were happy that Clinton walked, they should not scream bloody murder if Bush does pardon Libby. Because it is the very same thing and would expose the hypocrisy BIG time. But, that has never stopped them before, has it? *
If they do pardon him, will you be able to let this sleeping dog lie? Libby is (was) not on level playing field as Clinton...he was never President of the US on trial for a LOVE AFFAIR of all things. Yet I digress, Clinton should have been punished for perjury. You've drilled that point home a gazillion times already. Should that be everyone's excuse from here until the end of time. *Pardon me because you let Clinton slide.* Of course not. Clinton did make some questionable pardons at the end of his term. I don't think anyone should be pardoned unless the president can provide proof that they were innocent of the crimes committed.
Possible Bush Pardons
By Dafna Linzer, ProPublicaPosted Thursday, Nov. 20, 2008, at 7:00 AM ET
Attention, convicts: Time is running out to get applications to the pardon attorney at the Justice Department if you're hoping President Bush will be your decider. Few of you should get your hopes up—Bush has rejected a record number of requests for pardons and commutations. In the last eight years, he has pardoned 157 people—a miserly sum compared with his predecessors. But you don't have to give up entirely: More are expected in the coming months, most notably for Vice President Cheney's former chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby.
Before President Clinton went on a pardon spree for wealthy friends and campaign contributors at the end of his presidency, pardons and commutations were traditionally bestowed on average citizens who had successfully reformed their lives and given back to their communities after completing lengthy sentences. Pardon experts believe that of the Bush prospects, the 1980s junk-bond king Michael Milken best fits the rich-and-famous description.
Most of the other top prospects for pardon listed below have, like Milken, been convicted and served prison time. But not all. People who are merely charged could be eligible for pardons, as Bush's father demonstrated when he pardoned former Defense Secretary Casper Weinberger. And Washington is abuzz with the prospect that Bush might issue pre-emptive pardons for government employees who could face trouble in the future stemming from their roles in his "war on terror." We've rated potential pardonees' chances from zero to four "Get of Jail Free" cards.
SPORTS Marion Jones: unlikely. This disgraced Olympic gold medalist returned five awards after she was sentenced to six months in jail in January for lying to federal agents about using steroids. She was released on Sept. 5. Jones' offense is considered mild, and her sentence was brief, but the president may not want to reward someone who cost the United States Olympic gold. Michael Vick: no chance. The Atlanta Falcons' suspended quarterback is serving a 23-month sentence in Leavenworth, Kan., for criminal conspiracy relating to dog fighting. Yuck. There just isn't much of a pro-dog fighting lobby to pull for Vick. Barry Bonds: unlikely. The former San Francisco Giants superstar who holds the MLB all-time record for home runs was indicted in November 2007 for lying about his involvement in a steroids scandal. Bonds became a free agent last year but has been unable to find a team willing to sign him while under indictment. As a former baseball team owner, Bush may be sympathetic to Bonds. But let's be honest—who in baseball likes Barry?
TEXAS Florita Bell Griffin: possible. As governor, Bush appointed Griffin to the oversight board of the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs. In 2000, she was convicted of bribery, theft, and money laundering. In 2003, a federal appeals court overturned a separate conviction for mail fraud. Griffin has two things going for her: Bush and Texas. Bush has pardoned more of his fellow Texans than residents of any other state. Texas Border Patrol guards: good chance. Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean are serving sentences of 11 and 12 years, respectively, for the nonfatal shooting in the back of an unarmed Mexican drug runner in February 2005. A jury found that the two border patrolmen then tried to cover up the shooting. Their requests for pardons have won support from numerous Republican congressmen, including Rep. Duncan Hunter of California, who introduced the Congressional Pardon for Border Patrol Agents Ramos and Compean Act. Bush left open the possibility of pardons for both men during an interview with a Texas TV station.
TEAM BUSH Scooter Libby: You betcha! Cheney's former chief of staff, who also served as assistant to the president, was convicted of perjury and of obstructing the FBI's investigation of the leak of former CIA officer Valerie Plame's identity. In June 2007, he was sentenced to 30 months in federal prison and ordered to pay a hefty fine. Bush commuted the prison time, but only a pardon will allow Libby to practice law again. James Tobin: good chance. Tobin was Bush's 2004 New England campaign chairman and raised more than $200,000 for the president's re-election bid. He was indicted in October for making false statements to the FBI in connection with the bureau's investigation of the plot to jam Democratic Party phones in New Hampshire in 2002. Tobin was convicted in 2005 for his actual role in that scheme, but that conviction was overturned on appeal in 2007. His fundraising prowess and the overturning of his earlier conviction—in connection with the same case—make him a good pardon candidate. Tom Noe: unlikely. Noe was a prominent Ohio Republican fundraiser for Bush-Cheney ཀ. He was sentenced to 27 months in a federal prison for illegally funneling money to the campaign. Two months later, he was also found guilty of theft, money laundering, forgery, and corrupt activity related to Ohio's rare-coin investment scandal. Noe might have a shot if his only offense were connected to campaign funding. But his Ohio crime was one of a number of nasty Republican scandals that badly damaged the party's standing in the 2006 midterm election.
CONGRESS Sen. Ted Stevens: possible. Now that the 85-year-old Alaska Republican, who was found guilty last month of corruption, has lost re-election, members of his party might push for a pardon for him—after all, he spent the last 40* years in the Senate. Stevens seemed to dismiss the need for a pardon while the votes were being counted; late Tuesday, he was tight-lipped about the whether he would ask Bush for clemency. Bob Ney: no chance. The former Republican congressman from Ohio was sentenced to two and a half years in prison after he acknowledged taking bribes from convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Ney was on the Abramoff-sponsored golfing trip to Scotland at the heart of the case against David Safavian, the former White House procurement officer who was also caught up in the scandal. A pardon of Ney could refocus public attention on cushy relationships between Republicans and lobbyists over the last eight years—relationships that a humbled GOP would rather forget. Randy Cunningham: no chance. The former Republican congressman from California pleaded guilty in 2005 to federal conspiracy charges to commit bribery, mail fraud, wire fraud, and tax evasion. He was sentenced to eight years and four months in prison and ordered to pay $1.8 million in restitution for all the fancy gifts he racked up from lobbyists. "The Duke" has a pardon attorney, and a number of people have written to the Justice Department in support of clemency. But Cunningham's naked abuse of power tainted Republican rule and contributed to steep party losses in 2006. Brent Wilkes: possible. Wilkes, a defense contractor, was sentenced to 12 years in prison in February for furnishing Cunningham with yachts, vacations, and other luxury items in exchange for lucrative contracts. Wilkes cooperated with federal investigators in the Cunningham case, and that could help him win a pardon. Kyle "Dusty" Foggo: possible. Foggo was Wilkes' childhood friend before he rose to become executive director of the CIA, the No. 3 position in the U.S. spy agency. He was indicted in 2007 on several counts of fraud, conspiracy, and money laundering in connection with Wilkes and admitted to steering a lucrative CIA contract to his pal. Foggo remains under investigation by the CIA and other federal agencies. But his cooperation with investigators and years of service in the clandestine agency once run by Bush's father could make him a good candidate for clemency.
TEAM ABRAMOFF Jack Abramoff: no chance. The former Hollywood producer-turned-Republican lobbyist was at the center of the largest lobbying scandal in Washington, which erupted in 2005. Abramoff was convicted of fraud, tax evasion, and conspiracy to bribe public officials. The sentence was reduced in September to four years in recognition of Abramoff's cooperation with investigators. That's all the break he'll get. Abramoff was such a disaster for Bush and the GOP that the White House refused to release any photos in which the president and Abramoff appeared in the same room at the same time. J. Steven Griles: possible. Griles served as deputy secretary of the Interior during Bush's first term. In March 2007, he pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice charges in connection with his 2005 Senate testimony regarding the Abramoff scandal. Griles was sentenced to 10 months in prison and fined $30,000. He was released this year. Griles' time served, combined with his senior position in the administration, make him a good candidate for a pardon. David Safavian: unlikely. The senior White House procurement officer in the Office of Management and Budget was convicted in 2006 for concealment, making false statements, and obstructing justice in the Abramoff investigation. He was sentenced to 18 months in prison, but the conviction was overturned in June. A retrial is set for December.
WHITE COLLAR Michael Milken: excellent chance. The junk-bond king became the symbol of the ྌs greed on Wall Street that led to insider-trading scandals and a stock-market crash. Milken was sentenced to eight years for conspiracy and fraud charges and ordered to pay $200 million in fines. But he was released in January 1993, after less than two years in prison. Milken, who was diagnosed with prostate cancer that year, has since devoted significant resources to philanthropy and has created several foundations to support cancer research. Milken, who is believed to be worth more than $1 billion, tried unsuccessfully to secure a pardon from President Clinton. He is currently represented by Washington powerhouse attorney Ted Olson,* Bush's longtime friend and first-term solicitor general. Olson also represented Armand Hammer, who received a pardon from former President George H.W. Bush. The Smartest Guys in the Room: possible. Former Enron executives Jeffrey Skilling and Andrew Fastow were convicted of multiple federal felonies in 2006 in connection with Enron's downfall. Skilling, who was Enron's CEO, is serving a 24-year prison sentence at a federal penitentiary in Minnesota. Fastow, the corporate CFO, is nearing the end of his six-year sentence. Bush was friends with the now-deceased chairman, Kenneth Lay of Enron, which, of course, was based in Texas. But the president managed to distance himself from the company's extraordinary collapse. A point against pardons for these guys: Considering the current financial crisis, rewarding Enron's failed leadership might not be smart. Martha Stewart: Why not? Millions of glue-gun aficionados would love to see a pardon for the domestic doyenne who was convicted in 2004 of lying to investigators about a stock sale and who served five months in a women's correctional facility. Thousands of people have even signed a petition seeking a pardon for Martha. It's hard to see what would be in it for Bush. But Martha's spectacular book sales and daytime-TV ratings are testament to millions of other Americans' ability to forgive. Why not the president, too? (The question, of course, that all pardon applicants ask.)
Bush's pardons
Did anyone happen to notice that his pardon list didn't include Ramos and Campion? Now there was a miscarriage of justice for ya and it just happened to come out of the Great State of Texas or maybe Bushexas. There is sure something fishy going on there!!!!
Pardons....admission of guilt...
According to this that I found, they are saying that if you *accept* a pardon, that is an implicit admission of guilt. A person does not have to say formally *yes, I am guilty.*
In the United States, the pardon power for Federal crimes is granted to the President by the United States Constitution, Article II, Section 2, which states that the President:
shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.
All federal pardon petitions are addressed to the President who grants or denies the request. Typically, applications for pardons are referred for review and non-binding recommendation by the Office of the Pardon Attorney, an official of the Department of Justice. Since 1977, presidents have received about 600 pardon or clemency petitions a year and have granted around ten percent of these, although the percentage of pardons and reprieves granted varies from administration to administration (fewer pardons have been granted since World War II than historically had been the case).
The presidential power of pardons and commutations was controversial from the outset; many Anti-Federalists remembered examples of royal abuses of the pardon power in Europe, and warned that the same would happen in the new republic. However, Alexander Hamilton makes a strong defense of the pardon power in The Federalist Papers, particularly in Federalist 74. It is worthy of note that Hamilton called for something like an elective monarch at the Constitutional Convention. President George Washington granted the first high-profile Federal pardon to leaders of the Whiskey Rebellion.
Many pardons have been controversial; critics argue that pardons have been used more often for the sake of political expediency than to correct judicial error. One of the more famous, recent pardons was granted by President Gerald Ford to former President Richard Nixon on September 8, 1974, for official misconduct which gave rise to the Watergate scandal. Polls showed a majority of Americans disapproved of the pardon and Ford's public-approval ratings tumbled afterward. He was then narrowly defeated in the presidential campaign, two years later. Other controversial uses of the pardon power include Andrew Johnson's sweeping pardons of thousands of former Confederate officials and military personnel after the American Civil War, Jimmy Carter's grant of amnesty to Vietnam-era draft evaders, George H. W. Bush's pardons of 75 people, including six Reagan administration officials accused and/or convicted in connection with the Iran-Contra affair, and Bill Clinton's pardons of convicted FALN terrorists and 140 people on his last day in office - including billionaire fugitive Marc Rich.
A presidential pardon may be granted at any time after commission of the offense; the pardoned person need not have been convicted or even formally charged with a crime. Clemency may also be granted without the filing of a formal request and even if the intended recipient has no desire to be pardoned. In the overwhelming majority of cases, however, the Pardon Attorney will consider only petitions from persons who have completed their sentences and, in addition, have demonstrated their ability to lead a responsible and productive life for a significant period after conviction or release from confinement.[1]
It appears that a pardon can be rejected, and must be affirmatively accepted to be officialy recognized by the courts. Acceptance also carries with it an admission of guilt. Burdick v. United States, 236 U.S. 79 (1915). However, the federal courts have yet to make it clear how this logic applies to persons who are deceased (such as Henry Flipper - who was pardoned by Bill Clinton), those who are relieved from penalties as a result of general amnesties and those whose punishments are relieved via a commutation of sentence (which cannot be rejected in any sense of the language - See Chapman v. Scott (C. C. A.) 10 F.(2d) 690).
The pardon power of the President extends only to offenses cognizable under U.S. Federal law. However, the governors of most states have the power to grant pardons or reprieves for offenses under state criminal law. In other states, that power is committed to an appointed agency or board, or to a board and the governor in some hybrid arrangement.
BUSH PARDONS OSAMA BIN LADEN??
**** I am so glad this man is no longer the president. He is retarded!!! May want to credit him with "keeping us safe" after 9-1-1. No credit due him, Remember, we were never attacked before 9-1-1 and he knew about the attack and ignored it. PLUS -- He is friends of Osama Bin Laden's family. BYE RETARD!!
ARTICLE-BUSH PARDONS OSAMA BIN LADEN
Forgot to post the link for all you "naysayers" ...... MAN - Before you get on your high-horse, READ, READ, READ -- It's all over the internet. I meant to say, that Bush is friends with members of Osama Bin Laden's "family."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-rees/breaking-bush-pardons-osa_b_159272.html
ARTICLE BELOW:
WASHINGTON, DC: In a stunning late-hour development, President George W. Bush has granted Osama bin Laden a pardon for the murder of more than 2,700 Americans in the fall of 2001.
"This kinda came out of nowhere," said a White House aide who requested anonymity. "I wouldn't have put bin Laden on the short list myself. On the other hand, maybe this is the president's way of finding closure. Because ... y'know ... he wasn't actually able to kill bin Laden, or capture him, or even keep him from making all those (expletive) videos. I mean, jeez, let's face it: Osama bin Laden is basically a one-man Netflix of cave movies."
The aide paused, then went on to say, "Can you believe this dude (Bush) was actually president for eight (expletive) years? What were we thinking? Seriously, what the (expletive) were we thinking?"
The aide began weeping quietly. "May God have mercy on me for my role in the unfathomable travesty that was the Bush administration."
Conservative columnist William Kristol insisted the pardon made sense.
"George W. Bush is a brilliant strategist. I'm sure he has a good reason for this pardon. I'll figure it out."
Kristol sucked his thumb for a few minutes, lost in thought. He was then distracted by a brightly colored piece of string.
A passerby, told of the bin Laden pardon, offered a possible explanation:
"Maybe Bush is trying to smoke him out. Wasn't that the plan?"
ARTICLE-BUSH PARDONS OSAMA BIN LADEN
Forgot to post the link for all you "naysayers" ...... MAN - Before you get on your high-horse, READ, READ, READ -- It's all over the internet. I meant to say, that Bush is friends with members of Osama Bin Laden's "family."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-rees/breaking-bush-pardons-osa_b_159272.html
ARTICLE BELOW:
WASHINGTON, DC: In a stunning late-hour development, President George W. Bush has granted Osama bin Laden a pardon for the murder of more than 2,700 Americans in the fall of 2001.
"This kinda came out of nowhere," said a White House aide who requested anonymity. "I wouldn't have put bin Laden on the short list myself. On the other hand, maybe this is the president's way of finding closure. Because ... y'know ... he wasn't actually able to kill bin Laden, or capture him, or even keep him from making all those (expletive) videos. I mean, jeez, let's face it: Osama bin Laden is basically a one-man Netflix of cave movies."
The aide paused, then went on to say, "Can you believe this dude (Bush) was actually president for eight (expletive) years? What were we thinking? Seriously, what the (expletive) were we thinking?"
The aide began weeping quietly. "May God have mercy on me for my role in the unfathomable travesty that was the Bush administration."
Conservative columnist William Kristol insisted the pardon made sense.
"George W. Bush is a brilliant strategist. I'm sure he has a good reason for this pardon. I'll figure it out."
Kristol sucked his thumb for a few minutes, lost in thought. He was then distracted by a brightly colored piece of string.
A passerby, told of the bin Laden pardon, offered a possible explanation:
"Maybe Bush is trying to smoke him out. Wasn't that the plan?"
We all know why he picked her.....
It is so obvious that he would pick a female to back him even though he is not for EQUALITY!!
Picked him probably because
x
Yep and ABC picked that up, plus she
was interviewed on NBC today by Matt Lauer.
Certainly WOULD NOT have picked
x
She was picked loooong before the
xx
And that is why McCain picked SP.n/m
x
Glad I'm not the only one who picked up on that.
It is so dreadfully uncomfortable listening to him. He's got a good speaking voice, but the uhh, um, uh, uh, um gets very old and I sit at the TV and shout "spit it out".
At first I was thinking wow they picked up....sm
on that quick, but I forgot that I get a late showing. It happened less than 5 minutes ago on the 4 pm broadcast.
Well, Obama picked her?
nm
On CNN this morning, John McCain picked...sm
Sarah Palin because of her ideology. She was never veted. Investigators are in Alaska now doing so. Smart move John.
Okay....let's see...McCain picked the financial meltdown...
as the #1 issue. OBama picked his run for the Presidency. Meaning he is always going to put Barack first. McCain put his country first. End of story.
And Nancy Palosi hand picked more
than 11 of her people to vote NO, people who owed her favors.
Why I think Palin was picked as VP running mate - sm
I have this feeling that somewhere near the end of this campaign, McCain had second thoughts. I think he changed his mind about wanting to try to lead this mess of a country for the next 4 years. He's no spring chicken. I think Palin was plucked from practically out of nowhere to become his running mate because she was such a joke, so inept and incpable of handling the job of being a US vice-pres., that he knew he would lose, but didn't have to stop running and be viewed as a quitter.
Any thoughts on that?
McCain knew about Bristol before he picked her so what on Earth does that say...sm
about his judgment?!?! Palin has her hands full at home...I understand why he chose a woman but why this one I will never understand?!?!
I picked up the quack word from the original post.
No double standard here...unless only Obama detractors are allow to use the quack word. Since you have a hard time talking about more than one thing at a time, let's not divert our attention to include the third subject of homosexual marriage, OK...just keep it simple so you can keep up.
That wasn't my whole message - you just picked out the sentence you wanted to
But that's no surprise. There was one sentence in those two paragraphs about how the crats always blame the pubs, but they never take responsibility and blame the people in their own party who are at fault too. So you take one sentence out of the whole two paragraphs and say that's what the whole message was about. Nice try. My message was about this admistration so far being a disaster in less than one month. The only ones who see it okay are the kool-aid drinkers, and that I'm sick of all the people acting as though there was never a United States until Obama came along. Since you evidently did not read my message I'll repeat it now.
American has been around for over 200 years. We've had some good presidents and we've had some bad presidents, but Obama did not discover a new country here.
Since McCain was not elected nobody can say whether or not he would have been a better president or not, so time to put that dog to rest.
I think you picked the wrong time to make such a suggestion...nm
nm
You should but evidently you don't.
Did you bother reading it before you posted?
Evidently everybody here gets this
except you. It will never fly. Will be looking forward to your retraction on this stupidity.
Picked Rahm Emanuel, most left wing liberal for
Wow, real great choice. I wished he would have picked more of a conservative or at least someone for both sides of party. Great way to make start as President.
You evidently don't know what a NeoCon is.
She is not one of them. Why do you think Bush & Cheney and other NeoCons are upset by this pick.
Is this what the democrat party has turned into...hateful, mean-spirited, sour, and jealous. Your comments are about the lowest I have seen in a long time.
The only thing I can think of is that you thought because Bush was such a horrible president and everyone hates him that Barack and Joe would just be able to waltz in and take over. Now the republicans have a good VP candidate and there is more and more discussions about how JM has just elevated his chances of winning. The more people are learning about her the more they are like her and all reports for both conservative and liberals are in agreement with one thing...this is an amazing lady and definitely qualified to become the first woman president in history.
You are just grasping at straws trying to invent things that are not true and just stir up trouble.
Your comments are so juvenile. I just say thank goodnes at least I'm not in grammar school anymore.
Well you evidently didn't -
read the article. Can't stand hearing that McCain and Obama are closing in on the polls can you. Not even when it's from CNN which is a liberal station.
Next you really need to change your name. If you are a Christian I am glad I am not one because all you are filled with is hate!
Evidently you are not following your own thread
The rational people are the Obama folks who will not engage in the foolishness of the conspiracy theory to nowhere and the brick wall...well, that would be you, "Everyone should be interested!"
She has it right - evidently you don't know what it means
In Wikipedia: In law, treason is the crime that covers some of the more serious acts of disloyalty to one's sovereign or nation.
Dictionary.com: 1. the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign.
2. a violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or to one's state.
3. the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith; treachery.
For sure Obama is committing treason.
Whether he gets in or not Hillary Clinton should file a law suit against him. She understand the country better than he does and would make our country a better. We all know whose skeletons are in Hillary's closet. Obama's are just starting to come out.
If they lose I truly hope to hear of a lawsuit as Obama's lies will be what causes them to lose and the democrats a chance of getting in.
So you say, but evidently the courts
I have a tendency to agree with them....so do an overwhelming majority of rational citizens who are just as disgusted as I am over the mental illness that is the driving force behind this lunacy.
Evidently, she did't quite catch your drift.
nm
Evidently these tiresome accusations
Ever get the feeling you are being tuned out? Boy cries wolf once too often?
Evidently, better than you do. I'm backing the winner,
Better luck next time. Do us all a favor and nominate Failin/Bailin/Palin in 2012.
Different strokes for different folks, but evidently....
I respect your opinion, but do not share it...not on any level.
Evidently not. It's 2930 more days until 01/17/17.
x
Evidently, this is nothing new - check date
Recently, one of the most irksome members of the Senate, Joe Lieberman (I-Clowntown) expressed openness to one of the boldest and most effective climate-change policies possible. Some background,
A cap-and-trade system begins by placing a cap on carbon emissions and distributing permits (permission to emit a certain amount of CO2) equal to the capped amount. The notion is that permits will be bought and sold, allowing market forces to determine where emission reductions can be made fastest and easiest. The question is how to distribute those initial permits.
When the EU carbon trading system was established, permits were given away based on emissions, meaning the biggest polluters got the most permits. The idea was that those polluters most needed the money because they had the biggest reductions to make, but in practice it was an enormous financial windfall for their shareholders and prompted very little action on their part to reduce emissions.
The alternative is to sell the permits at auction. This would, in effect, put the proceeds in government coffers rather than in the pockets of utility shareholders. The question then becomes: what should the gov't do with all that money (up to $50B a year)?
The Lieberman-Warner cap-and-trade proposal, released early this year, was widely seen as the "moderate" bill that could get some support from Senate Republicans. One of the biggest criticisms it faced is that it would auction only 20% of the permits -- 80% would be given away to polluters.
But an intriguing item in Politico indicates that Lieberman may be open to changing that:
Lieberman, following a forum sponsored by the Progressive Policy Institute Wednesday, said such a change to his legislation was possible. "We've heard [calls for a 100 percent auction] from some stakeholders and heard that from some of our members. We're thinking about it. Warner and I haven't closed our minds to that. It's on the table," he said.
This could be huge news. The L-W proposal is viewed as the middle of the road. If it moves to 100% auctioned credits, that will effectively sanctify it as the new baseline. The policy and political implications are both huge.
Prove it - You evidently have done your research
I just went back through the last three pages to when I first began posting. Never once did I start off badgering posters calling them names. Not to Mrs. B or anyone else on this board. I have even posted that I was wrong on some issues. I'm never disrepectful of posters. Just because I have a difference of opinion with someone doesn't mean anyone should be disrespectful and I'm not.
So seeing as you are acusing me of having a nasty attitude I want you to find the post and prove it. I've just gone through every single post. I have not been the one initiating anything. But call me Newton, and yes I'll reply by calling you Einstein. So I guess that makes me the nasty name calling and not her?
Telling someone I think they are wrong and explaining why is not having a nasty attitude. Calling someone names for no reason is.
Evidently you hadn't heard the latest.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
and
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=76933
Evidently, some rich folks have a conscience
for the sake of COUNTRY FIRST.
Evidently he does not understand the gravity of the crisis.
Farewell to Iraq trip timing and all.
Evidently you didn't read the package.
Most of the money will not go to the people. So far, I have not come across anything that deals with foreclosures, etc. The item I posted last night from our local newspaper is the so-called stimulus package that will help foreclosures.
Read the doggone bill that they are trying to pass, please. Then you may see the light of day.
Evidently you didn't read the post....
no one said a black person wouldn't vote for anyone but Obama (HELLO.....Steele, etc., etc.).
You evidently have not been listening with an open mind
It sounds like you too have been listening to the left wing media. Rush Limbaugh has come out as one of the most powerful and positive voices. What he says is just the way it is. It is what more and more people are feeling. People are listening to him and his ratings have been skyrocketing because of what he has to say. He tells it like it is and the liberals are trying their best to trash him but it isn't working. Like Rahm Emanuel who takes what he says and twists it and outright lies. It's funny how good the liberals are at lying and distorting the facts. Rush Limbaugh is not the only reason but one of the main reasons why we will see a surge in more Americans moving to being conservative. They are tired of the same ol rhetoric garbage and not being told the truth from the liberal media and this is why MSNBC (Olberman & Matthews shows) are tanking big time.
You evidently have not been listening with an open mind
It sounds like you too have been listening to the left wing media. Rush Limbaugh has come out as one of the most powerful and positive voices. What he says is just the way it is. It is what more and more people are feeling. People are listening to him and his ratings have been skyrocketing because of what he has to say. He tells it like it is and the liberals are trying their best to trash him but it isn't working. Like Rahm Emanuel who takes what he says and twists it and outright lies. It's funny how good the liberals are at lying and distorting the facts. Rush Limbaugh is not the only reason but one of the main reasons why we will see a surge in more Americans moving to being conservative. They are tired of the same ol rhetoric garbage and not being told the truth from the liberal media and this is why MSNBC (Olberman & Matthews shows) are tanking big time. Rush Limbaugh is the Democrats worst hope/fear to losing the next election. Not the only reason though because the Democrats are doing a great job of that on their own.
You evidently have no idea - the parts fit just fine
It's called creativity. Having a sexual relationship is more involved than only the act to have a child. There is the emotional aspect and the joy of it. When you love someone you find a way to express it, and you have fun.
You evidently have a hard time staying on task.
if your mother, father, daughter, son, grandmother, grandfather, husband or best friend cast a vote in the early election and passed away on November 4th, how would it make you feel if their votes were thrown out?
You evidently didn't read my post - it was not a question
of if you think he's done harm. He has, it's a fact and no matter how much you want to cover it up you can't. You think bowing to our enemy, telling other countries we are selfish, and that we don't want our jobs so they can have them, tripling our deficit (nothing Bush had to do with -sorry can't pull that crap anymore), lining the pockets of his rich friends and CEOs, filling his cabinet with unqualified crooks and thieves, and the list goes on and on and on. And that's just the first 90 days. So the question was how many more years will it take to undo the harm. You can keep drinking the kool-aid thinking socialistm/communism is fine. It is not. Even the other countries keep telling him - "Don't go there, it is not a path you want to take", while other country leaders who are telling him not to go there are saying "why aren't you listening to us. We've been there and done that and it doesn't work".
Hence, how many more years will it take to undo the harm he has already done (and its only been less than 90 days). My guess is at least 2. It's going to be hard once he's out of office, but I do have faith the country will bounce back as long as we have some decent politicians in the office and take congress out from the control of the crats.
Evidently, pubs didn't care that McC directly denied
tried to diffuse all the scare tactics fall-out. What I want to know is why would McC supporters and their campaign turn a blind eye to a frightened senile old woman and keep right on pushing agendas that will produce more such embarrassing moments for their own candidate? Is this the kind of leadership we can expect under a McCain regime? How disconnected is this candidate from his own campaign management and supporters? Is that really the picture you want to paint for him? How much more fuel do you guys intend to use to stoke the fires of ignorance, division and deceit?
McCain seemed really sad last night when he tried to reassure that shaking, frail, senile old woman, but instead of looking presidential, he just looked like a beaten down has-been. Congratuations on an utterly moronic campaign strategy. Enjoy the fall-out.
Evidently, Cheney doesn't agree...NODDED OFF during the drivel
Now THAT'S disrespectful!
|
Posted September 20, 2007 | 05:06 PM (EST)