Because that strategy worked so well for Varian in Germania, Crassus at Carrhae, Edward II at Bannockburn and, lest we forget, Hitler at Stalingrad.
Monday, November 28, 2005
Tuesday, November 22, 2005
Random thoughts.
When will the SCLM accurately quote democrats? Rep. Murtha called for a six month withdrawal schedule. His plan also called for a quick reaction force of marines to be based nearby, outside of Iraqi borders, to be on call to provide assistence, when needed, to the fledgling Iraqi army. Yet we have Tweety not correcting his guests when they said Murtha favored immediate withdrawal. Tweety was not alone for Der Wolf let Rumsfeld's comment about the immediate withdrawal pass sans correction. Is it that difficult to conduct an accurate interview or is it a case of the host fearing that if they did call into question the deceptions being offered up on their shows, they would have difficulty getting republicans to appear? Republicans would appear and they would not continue their dishonest tactic because what they fear most is giving their opponents free rein to offer their arguments without opposition.
More bad news for the Republican Party, cementing the notion that it is a criminal enterprise organization. Scanlon pleads guilty in the Abramoff mess. Michael Scanlon was a former aide to, are you ready for it? Tom DeLay. Scalon is cooperating with prosecutors. Reports that Bob Ney (R-OH) is also cooperating with prosecutors is bringing a sense of foreboding to republicans. Oh, and lest you forget, Patrick Fitzgerald remains on the hunt for more conspiritors in the Plame Affair. Two investigations which are plainly not anywhere close to conclusion threaten to create an implosion of gigantic proportions for republicans. While it is true that the 2006 elections are still a year away and the Diebold and ES&S election factor has not been addressed, any trials will be conducted in the days prior to the elections and news from them will dominate the media in the runup to Election Day. On Election Day itself, the backlash could generate such a massive opposition to republican officeholders that any magical, surprise results would be immediately seen for what it would be, election fraud.
More bad news for the Republican Party, cementing the notion that it is a criminal enterprise organization. Scanlon pleads guilty in the Abramoff mess. Michael Scanlon was a former aide to, are you ready for it? Tom DeLay. Scalon is cooperating with prosecutors. Reports that Bob Ney (R-OH) is also cooperating with prosecutors is bringing a sense of foreboding to republicans. Oh, and lest you forget, Patrick Fitzgerald remains on the hunt for more conspiritors in the Plame Affair. Two investigations which are plainly not anywhere close to conclusion threaten to create an implosion of gigantic proportions for republicans. While it is true that the 2006 elections are still a year away and the Diebold and ES&S election factor has not been addressed, any trials will be conducted in the days prior to the elections and news from them will dominate the media in the runup to Election Day. On Election Day itself, the backlash could generate such a massive opposition to republican officeholders that any magical, surprise results would be immediately seen for what it would be, election fraud.
Friday, November 18, 2005
Beware the dark of winter.
As Bush's fortunes (read poll numbers) continue to tank through the winter, beware another large 'terrorist' attack on the US.
Monday, November 07, 2005
New slogan
popular preznit - politics - FidoNet Echomail Archive
The Republican Party, a criminal enterprise organization (AKA Reprobates-r-Us).
The Republican Party, a criminal enterprise organization (AKA Reprobates-r-Us).
Deceived as a strategy
GratisNet: "Some democrats are speaking out saying that the Bush Regime mislead them into supporting the misbegotten invasion of Iraq. Some pundits are claiming that such and admission, if used as a weapon in the 2006 elections would only serve to backfire on them and ultimately help the republicans.
The pundits no doubt remember George Romney and his 'I was brainwashed' comment regarding Vietnam back in 1968 and what it did to his presidential asperations. May I suggest that the conditions of Iraq 2005 and Vietnam 1968 are totally different? At the time of Romney's comment to a reporter a majority of the country did not yet believe that everything about the war was a lie. Is there even one person, outside of Cheney's office, that believes anything (let alone everything) that was claimed about Saddam's threat to us was true?
The democrats need to hammer long and hard about the deception this maladministration used to get their war on. They need to hammer long and hard about the lack of oversight, that traditional role of the congress as outlined in the constitution meant to rein it an out of control executive branch. They need to hammer long and hard about the lengths to which republicans will go to silence or discredit opponents of their policies.
Admitting to being deceived, or duped, loses much of its derogatory implication when a majority of the people feel the same way. It ceases to become a liability in 2006 as more people come to the same conclusion. This abominable regime of inveterate liars lied and deceived their way into Iraq, period. Democrats need to constantly remind the people of that fact."
The pundits no doubt remember George Romney and his 'I was brainwashed' comment regarding Vietnam back in 1968 and what it did to his presidential asperations. May I suggest that the conditions of Iraq 2005 and Vietnam 1968 are totally different? At the time of Romney's comment to a reporter a majority of the country did not yet believe that everything about the war was a lie. Is there even one person, outside of Cheney's office, that believes anything (let alone everything) that was claimed about Saddam's threat to us was true?
The democrats need to hammer long and hard about the deception this maladministration used to get their war on. They need to hammer long and hard about the lack of oversight, that traditional role of the congress as outlined in the constitution meant to rein it an out of control executive branch. They need to hammer long and hard about the lengths to which republicans will go to silence or discredit opponents of their policies.
Admitting to being deceived, or duped, loses much of its derogatory implication when a majority of the people feel the same way. It ceases to become a liability in 2006 as more people come to the same conclusion. This abominable regime of inveterate liars lied and deceived their way into Iraq, period. Democrats need to constantly remind the people of that fact."
Wednesday, November 02, 2005
Samuel Alito
Samuel Alito is, without question, most certainly qualified for membership on the Supreme Court based on his education and experience. He is also, without question, less than desirable as an Associate Justice based on a glimpse of his personal belief system which, his protestations to the contrary have, can and will color his deliberations.
His comments regarding settled law are fine for an appellate judge but surely he realizes that precedent, while certainly a desirable goal when considering the continuity of the law, has not been sacrosanct in the deliberations of the Supreme Court in the past.
Were that the case, blacks (and other people of color) would still be nonentities without the right to vote or indeed, the right to be free. Women would not have the right to vote and be relegated as little more than chattel of their husbands. Indeed, only caucasion land owners would have the right qualifications.
So please spare me the claims of "original intent" when it is painfully obvious that a large portion of "original intent" discriminated against large portions of the people then residing in the United States. As for devining what the "original intent" of the Founders were, can anyone truly say that they know, beyond question what another is thinking? It is virtually impossible to know with any degree of certainty what your spouse, significant other or best friend is thinking, let alone have any significant insight into the thoughts and beliefs of the Founders based on their anonymous writings and letters of the day.
Suffice it to say that if the Founders had intended the Constitution to be a "finished" effort, not requiring further consideration they would not have enabled a manner through which it could be modified.
As for the republican mantra of Alita deserves a fair up or down vote, I would simply remind that it was they who torpedoed the Miers nomination. Make no mistake about what they mean by "fair up or down vote" quite simply they mean that as long as they are satisfied with the nominee then that is all that matters.
Should Samuel Alito be confirmed as an Associate Justice? His experience and education say yes while his interpretation of the law seem to indicate otherwise. In any event, he deserves not only a hearing where his judicial philosophy can be investigated, but we the people and our elected representatives in the US Senate deserve his answers to be totally forthcoming and candid. Then, when he has answered every question to the satisfaction of the senators, and the people, then and only then should his nomination be sent to the floor of the senate for a fair up or down vote and not one minute before!
His comments regarding settled law are fine for an appellate judge but surely he realizes that precedent, while certainly a desirable goal when considering the continuity of the law, has not been sacrosanct in the deliberations of the Supreme Court in the past.
Were that the case, blacks (and other people of color) would still be nonentities without the right to vote or indeed, the right to be free. Women would not have the right to vote and be relegated as little more than chattel of their husbands. Indeed, only caucasion land owners would have the right qualifications.
So please spare me the claims of "original intent" when it is painfully obvious that a large portion of "original intent" discriminated against large portions of the people then residing in the United States. As for devining what the "original intent" of the Founders were, can anyone truly say that they know, beyond question what another is thinking? It is virtually impossible to know with any degree of certainty what your spouse, significant other or best friend is thinking, let alone have any significant insight into the thoughts and beliefs of the Founders based on their anonymous writings and letters of the day.
Suffice it to say that if the Founders had intended the Constitution to be a "finished" effort, not requiring further consideration they would not have enabled a manner through which it could be modified.
As for the republican mantra of Alita deserves a fair up or down vote, I would simply remind that it was they who torpedoed the Miers nomination. Make no mistake about what they mean by "fair up or down vote" quite simply they mean that as long as they are satisfied with the nominee then that is all that matters.
Should Samuel Alito be confirmed as an Associate Justice? His experience and education say yes while his interpretation of the law seem to indicate otherwise. In any event, he deserves not only a hearing where his judicial philosophy can be investigated, but we the people and our elected representatives in the US Senate deserve his answers to be totally forthcoming and candid. Then, when he has answered every question to the satisfaction of the senators, and the people, then and only then should his nomination be sent to the floor of the senate for a fair up or down vote and not one minute before!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
