Republican conversion to ethics
Tom Delay awarded spots on the committee controlling money flows and the one supervising investigations of corruption. Oh, I guess Republicans are serious about reforming their culture of corruption.
The indicted Republican congressman, forced to leave his House leadership post, has landed a coveted seat on the Appropriations Committee.GOP leaders also awarded the Texas Republican with a seat on the subcommittee overseeing the Justice Department. That panel is investigating acknowledged influence-peddler Jack Abramoff and his ties to Capitol Hill lawmakers.
Comments
All during Clinton presidency, we were promised indictments. A republican controlled congress desperately used all the powers of the Executive AND Judicial branch to sift file cabinets for five years promising a national spectacle of entertaining Clinton era indictments. With a result of ZERO!
After a billion dollars, a total of ZERO indictments.
The only thing keeping the corrupt Bush administration from indictments is the fact that Republicans control all the branches of government.
Tighten those partisan googles some more, and squeeze some more brain tissue…
Clinton: 67 indictments
33 convictions
Bush: 2 indictments
0 convictions
Just going by the numbers.
http://www.dailykos.com/sto...
Again, NOT ONE CLINTON STAFFER WAS INDICTED FOR ON THE JOB MALFEASANCE.
Already, Scooter Libby, VP chief of staff has been indicted for a serious offense that affected national secruity and the president's chief advisor as well as others including the VP may be implicated as Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald's investigation develops.
1. You automatically become a member of the coveted "Mainstream". Remember, less than 20% of Americans call themselves "Liberal" (oops: make that "Progressive").
2. You can win elections. However, just remember that in the rare event we lose an election we cannot whine about it and claim the other side cheated by rigging the machines, causing long lines, etc. Bad sportsmanship you know.
3. Our side has most the the guns and aren't afraid to use them (are we Harry?).
4. Conservative women are smarter, better looking and less likely to sue.
5. Find constant amusement in Kennedy, Kerry, Gore, Pelosi, Reid, et al. Especially that knucklehead Howard Dean. He's a riot! (Hey Moe - woo woo woo woo woo)
6. You no longer have to hang with those sullen angry lefties. The conservatives parties are more fun (but they do miss the phone calls from the polling organizations).
7. Find comfort knowing that not everything is an earth shattering scandal and the Constitution is secure after all.
Sound attractive? You bet! But there are some drawbacks:
1. You have to use your own judgement and form your own opinions. Can't simply memorize the list from Moveon.org.
2. Have to get used to the fact that the only debatable ideas these days come from conservatives. The progressives only agenda is negativity laced with reflexive anti everything.
3. Coming up with ideas is hard work.
4. The crushing realization that the information presented on most websites is wrong (even if it does re-inforce your opinion).
Well, just consider it. Always room in the big tent. Anyway, gotta go - another fun conservative party to go to tonight.
And as poll numbers clearly show, only the sycophants, one issue voters and blinded partisans wholely in support of Bush 43.
As proof Conservatives are happier than Liberals, read George Will's 2/23 column based on Pew Research.
…and I don't pay much attention to intellectual frauds, devoid of ethics, like George Will.
Are you still peeved at Mr Will because of the rumor that he stole Carter's debate book and gave it to Reagan?
He wrote about that last year and how the rumor was completely false. I saved the article in case you ever brought it up again.
Is this true? What else about George Will do you dislke?
For readers who are hazy about the Will Reagan/Carter debate fiasco - here it is in a nutshell. George Will used a briefing book stolen from Carter to coach Reagan for his 1980 debate. Then, in audacious fashion, Will was a featured ABC political analyst assessing the debate afterwards, without revealing to the public that he was essentially "on the team" for one side. While it may be true that he didn't steal the book, he's admitted to perusing its contents, and IMV, the fact that he served as "coach", aided by material that he claims didn't matter anyway (easy to say now, 25 years later...) while appearing to be impartial judge of affairs taints him mightily.
This is repeated in 1996 when he did not reveal that his wife was a staffer of Bob Dole, and thus his personal affinity for the Dole campaign, making him far from impartial. And this behavior can be traced to many other Will columns/TV commentaries.
FAIR has compiled a dossier on his antics:
http://www.fair.org/index.p...
http://www.fair.org/activis...
Will's rebuttal
http://www.washingtonpost.c...
Will isn't alone in this regard. Another prominent example is NBC Andrea Kraemer who frequently peppers political commentary with content defensive of her husband, Mr. Alan Greenspan, without any acknoledgement of her personal interest in this regard, that trumps the spirit of journalistic integrity.
Add Comment