just face it Fatass, you're never going to get one over on me. The sooner you come to terms the sooner you can move on and try and make something of your life.
sorry if i sound cynical about this whole process, but to what extent do any of you actually expect a modern day president to wield this power in any 'just' way. and excuse me , but pardoning the dead doesn't really count in my opinion.
reading the list of those who have been pardoned or have had sentences commuted, it appears over the last 20+ years a good 70% have to do with tax fraud or drug related issues. not really what i think people had in mind when offering up this power to the president.
i don't think the issue of legality really has any merit with respect to Libby. it was in the presidents power, and as is such shouldn't be really argued over. i think the best thing opponents can do is just continue to spin this as an abuse of an authoritarian administration that sees more favor in taking care of it's own collective few than looking out for the nation as a whole.
btw, any of you still care that Valarie Plame was outed?
sorry if i sound cynical about this whole process, but to what extent do any of you actually expect a modern day president to wield this power in any 'just' way. and excuse me , but pardoning the dead doesn't really count in my opinion.
reading the list of those who have been pardoned or have had sentences commuted, it appears over the last 20+ years a good 70% have to do with tax fraud or drug related issues. not really what i think people had in mind when offering up this power to the president.
i don't think the issue of legality really has any merit with respect to Libby. it was in the presidents power, and as is such shouldn't be really argued over. i think the best thing opponents can do is just continue to spin this as an abuse of an authoritarian administration that sees more favor in taking care of it's own collective few than looking out for the nation as a whole.
btw, any of you still care that Valarie Plame was outed?
you are missing the point. libby wasn't charged with outing plame, but plame/wilson are linked to the biggest issue of the bush administration - the justifications (or lack thereof) for going to war in iraq. bush has a 25% approval rating because of it. libby was found guilty of perjury and obstruction of justice - with respect to plame.
80% of america opposes bush's decision to commute libby's sentence. if libby wasn't linked to plame/wilson and the iraq war, nobody would give a sh*t, but he is and people want to see accountability[/b].
Here's one for the "they're all crooks" crowd. I'm looking at you, Rock.
WASHINGTON -- Call it "Six Degrees of Political Separation" or "the Kevin Bacon Game Goes to Washington." President Bush's commutation of Lewis "Scooter" Libby's prison sentence highlights some interesting connections between Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff, a former fugitive from justice, an ex-president and two leading 2008 White House hopefuls.
Before entering government, Libby was a private attorney who represented billionaire international commodities trader Marc Rich.
Rich was indicted in 1983 by then-U.S. Attorney Rudy Giuliani on charges of tax evasion and illegal dealing with Iran during the American hostage crisis.
Rich fled to Switzerland. He also occupied a spot on the FBI's Most Wanted List for many years.
Giuliani, former mayor of New York, is now a leading Republican presidential candidate. He endorsed Bush's decision to spare Libby jail time even though he had tried to put Libby's client behind bars.
"After evaluating the facts, the president came to a reasonable decision, and I believe the decision was correct," Giuliani said in a written statement Monday evening.
Rich's fugitive days ended when former President Clinton pardoned him in January 2001, a move that prompted a congratulatory call from Libby to Rich.
The pardon raised questions about whether large donations to the Democratic Party and the Clinton Library by Rich's former wife, Denise, had anything to do with the pardon.
Clinton, of course, is married to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, who is the Democratic front-runner for the White House. She blasted Bush's decision on Libby, leaving out any mention of Libby's connection to Rich -- or Rich at all, for that matter.
"This commutation sends the clear signal that in this administration, cronyism and ideology trump competence and justice," she said in a written statement Monday night.
"This commutation sends the clear signal that in this administration, cronyism and ideology trump competence and justice," she said in a written statement Monday night.
now, is that one's competence at giving head?
cause then maybe you'll have a shot in the Clinton Administration Fatback.
"This commutation sends the clear signal that in this administration, cronyism and ideology trump competence and justice," she said in a written statement Monday night.
now, is that one's competence at giving head?
cause then maybe you'll have a shot in the Clinton Administration Fatback.
"This commutation sends the clear signal that in this administration, cronyism and ideology trump competence and justice," she said in a written statement Monday night.
now, is that one's competence at giving head?
cause then maybe you'll have a shot in the Clinton Administration Fatback.
Cringe.
Your attempts at humor read like a transgendered autistic kid after s/he has been through some weirdo christian conversion therapy. I can get you a bag of some good shit.
it was in the presidents power, and as is such shouldn't be really argued over.
WOW!
Can we get a "Bend Over And Spreed Them" Greamlin for our friend jlee. haha....yeah that came out pretty defeatist. i was referring to those arguing about the legality of the commutation, not the appropriateness of it.
Here's one for the "they're all crooks" crowd. I'm looking at you, Rock.
The Rich/Libby connection was linked earlier in this thread.....and yeah, "they're all crooks".
And GP....from where I sit Olberman ranting about Bush/Libby is just as on point as blowhard Limbaugh ranting about Clinton/Rich (or Berger sans pardon).
What amazes me is how people can cheer one while despising the other due to blind partisanship.
The idea that Viet Nam was an unpopular war and Iraq is a popular war; The idea that the youth of the 60s and 70s marched in the streets and the youth of 00's stayed home; is a far cry from reality and all about media coverage.
Truth: It wasn't until 1967 that there were any significant protests over the Viet Nam war which had been raging for years.
It was not until 1969 that anti-war protests started to attract a large number of people that included more than just students.
There were large scale protest across America calling on Bush not to go to war before the Iraq war even started.
In 1967 very very few people were against the war in Viet Nam.
In 2003 a third of America was against the war in Iraq.
About 1/4 of the congress voted against war in Iraq.
Almost all of congress voted for the Gulf Of Tonlkin resolution.
At the hight of anti-Viet Nam war movement only a very slim majority of Americans were against the war.
More than 2/3 of Americans are opposed to the war in Iraq.
There have been large anti-Iraq war demonstrations.
The idea that everyone was against Viet Nam war, or even that most students were is a media fiction.
The idea that no one is protesting the Iraq war is another media fiction.
Ok, you can return to attacking rockadelic because he is old.
Here's one for the "they're all crooks" crowd. I'm looking at you, Rock.
The Rich/Libby connection was linked earlier in this thread.....and yeah, "they're all crooks".
And GP....from where I sit Olberman ranting about Bush/Libby is just as on point as blowhard Limbaugh ranting about Clinton/Rich (or Berger sans pardon).
What amazes me is how people can cheer one while despising the other due to blind partisanship.
Here's one for the "they're all crooks" crowd. I'm looking at you, Rock.
The Rich/Libby connection was linked earlier in this thread.....and yeah, "they're all crooks".
And GP....from where I sit Olberman ranting about Bush/Libby is just as on point as blowhard Limbaugh ranting about Clinton/Rich (or Berger sans pardon).
What amazes me is how people can cheer one while despising the other due to blind partisanship.
Eh. Clinton was my dog.
I ain't cheerin none of these pampered fucks. I like that cat from Alaska.
Truth: It wasn't until 1967 that there were any significant protests over the Viet Nam war which had been raging for years.
It was not until 1969 that anti-war protests started to attract a large number of people that included more than just students.
There were large scale protest across America calling on Bush not to go to war before the Iraq war even started.
There have been large anti-Iraq war demonstrations.
Ok, you can return to attacking rockadelic because he is old.
TRUTH!!??.....What private mind garden are you living in.....
April 15, 1967: Spring Mobilization to End the War (MOBE). 400,000 march in Anti-Vietnam War protest from Central Park in New York to the United Nations building. [NYT, 4/16/67]
According to my sources the largest U.S. Anti-Iraqi War protest took place in New York in Feb. '03 with an estimated 100,000 people(BBC) attending although many sources say that is an inflated number.
But even if it's accurate it's 1/4th tha amount that protested in NYC in '67, a full two years before you claim that Viet Nam protests started attracting large numbers.
Statistics don't lie, statisticians do.
BTW....Dolo says you and I BOTH are irrelevent old men.
Truth: It wasn't until 1967 that there were any significant protests over the Viet Nam war which had been raging for years.
It was not until 1969 that anti-war protests started to attract a large number of people that included more than just students.
There were large scale protest across America calling on Bush not to go to war before the Iraq war even started.
There have been large anti-Iraq war demonstrations.
Ok, you can return to attacking rockadelic because he is old.
TRUTH!!??.....What private mind garden are you living in.....
April 15, 1967: Spring Mobilization to End the War (MOBE). 400,000 march in Anti-Vietnam War protest from Central Park in New York to the United Nations building. [NYT, 4/16/67]
According to my sources the largest U.S. Anti-Iraqi War protest took place in New York in Feb. '03 with an estimated 100,000 people(BBC) attending although many sources say that is an inflated number.
But even if it's accurate it's 1/4th tha amount that protested in NYC in '67, a full two years before you claim that Viet Nam protests started attracting large numbers.
Statistics don't lie, statisticians do.
BTW....Dolo says you and I BOTH are irrelevent old men.
That 400,000 number seems outrageously large. I think the organizers chose that as the official number because it equaled the amount of troops in Viet Nam at the time.
But you are right. 1967 was the year when large demonstrations against the war started, not 1969 the year I said. The 100,000 number against Iraq was on a day that were large protests in almost every major city across the country. In the VietNam Nam era people loaded onto buses and carpooled to NYC DC and SF to attend large national rallies. Today we stay home and attend our local protests. So if you add up all the protests across the nation on your 100,000 day you will get a staggering #. Especially if you use the organizers #s.
Truth: It wasn't until 1967 that there were any significant protests over the Viet Nam war which had been raging for years.
It was not until 1969 that anti-war protests started to attract a large number of people that included more than just students.
There were large scale protest across America calling on Bush not to go to war before the Iraq war even started.
There have been large anti-Iraq war demonstrations.
Ok, you can return to attacking rockadelic because he is old.
TRUTH!!??.....What private mind garden are you living in.....
According to my sources the largest U.S. Anti-Iraqi War protest took place in New York in Feb. '03 with an estimated 100,000 people(BBC) attending although many sources say that is an inflated number.
Feb 03 was a month before the invasion. 100,000 people before a shot had been fired. How does that compare to 1967?
There were already 400,000 troops in VietNam in '67, and the war had been raging for years.
I would like to thank you for helping to bring the VietNam war to an end. It was only because people like you took to the streets that our troops finally came home.
I would like to thank you for helping to bring the VietNam war to an end. It was only because people like you took to the streets that our troops finally came home.
You don't really believe that do you??
I certainly don't.
The war lasted almost 16 years.
Organized protests had been taking place for at least 11 of those years with 1967-1972 being the loudest and most significant.
The war "ended" in '75
How much longer would it have gone sans protests??
Comments
'cause people from a distance can't tell who's who".
Im the tall articulate one, with movie-star good-looks and nice teeth.
sorry if i sound cynical about this whole process, but to what extent do any of you actually expect a modern day president to wield this power in any 'just' way. and excuse me , but pardoning the dead doesn't really count in my opinion.
reading the list of those who have been pardoned or have had sentences commuted, it appears over the last 20+ years a good 70% have to do with tax fraud or drug related issues. not really what i think people had in mind when offering up this power to the president.
i don't think the issue of legality really has any merit with respect to Libby. it was in the presidents power, and as is such shouldn't be really argued over. i think the best thing opponents can do is just continue to spin this as an abuse of an authoritarian administration that sees more favor in taking care of it's own collective few than looking out for the nation as a whole.
btw, any of you still care that Valarie Plame was outed?
you are missing the point. libby wasn't charged with outing plame, but plame/wilson are linked to the biggest issue of the bush administration - the justifications (or lack thereof) for going to war in iraq. bush has a 25% approval rating because of it. libby was found guilty of perjury and obstruction of justice - with respect to plame.
80% of america opposes bush's decision to commute libby's sentence. if libby wasn't linked to plame/wilson and the iraq war, nobody would give a sh*t, but he is and people want to see accountability[/b].
WASHINGTON -- Call it "Six Degrees of Political Separation" or "the Kevin Bacon Game Goes to Washington."
President Bush's commutation of Lewis "Scooter" Libby's prison sentence highlights some interesting connections between Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff, a former fugitive from justice, an ex-president and two leading 2008 White House hopefuls.
Before entering government, Libby was a private attorney who represented billionaire international commodities trader Marc Rich.
Rich was indicted in 1983 by then-U.S. Attorney Rudy Giuliani on charges of tax evasion and illegal dealing with Iran during the American hostage crisis.
Rich fled to Switzerland. He also occupied a spot on the FBI's Most Wanted List for many years.
Giuliani, former mayor of New York, is now a leading Republican presidential candidate. He endorsed Bush's decision to spare Libby jail time even though he had tried to put Libby's client behind bars.
"After evaluating the facts, the president came to a reasonable decision, and I believe the decision was correct," Giuliani said in a written statement Monday evening.
Rich's fugitive days ended when former President Clinton pardoned him in January 2001, a move that prompted a congratulatory call from Libby to Rich.
The pardon raised questions about whether large donations to the Democratic Party and the Clinton Library by Rich's former wife, Denise, had anything to do with the pardon.
Clinton, of course, is married to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, who is the Democratic front-runner for the White House.
She blasted Bush's decision on Libby, leaving out any mention of Libby's connection to Rich -- or Rich at all, for that matter.
"This commutation sends the clear signal that in this administration, cronyism and ideology trump competence and justice," she said in a written statement Monday night.
http://www.contracostatimes.com/politics/ci_6296811?nclick_check=1
now, is that one's competence at giving head?
cause then maybe you'll have a shot in the Clinton Administration Fatback.
Cringe.
Your attempts at humor read like a transgendered autistic kid after s/he has been through some weirdo christian conversion therapy. I can get you a bag of some good shit.
WOW!
Can we get a "Bend Over And Spreed Them" Greamlin for our friend jlee.
your personal history is sad, but not relevant to the discussion unless it contributed to your head giving tallents.
why do these threads always fizzle into you and I making out?
WOW!
Can we get a "Bend Over And Spreed Them" Greamlin for our friend jlee.
haha....yeah that came out pretty defeatist. i was referring to those arguing about the legality of the commutation, not the appropriateness of it.
don't tet your boy's typo. there's method here.
i meant skilz/
I just made some sassafras pudding and put on Tumbleweed Connection.
Are you gonna call me or what?
The Rich/Libby connection was linked earlier in this thread.....and yeah, "they're all crooks".
And GP....from where I sit Olberman ranting about Bush/Libby is just as on point as blowhard Limbaugh ranting about Clinton/Rich (or Berger sans pardon).
What amazes me is how people can cheer one while despising the other due to blind partisanship.
Truth:
It wasn't until 1967 that there were any significant protests over the Viet Nam war which had been raging for years.
It was not until 1969 that anti-war protests started to attract a large number of people that included more than just students.
There were large scale protest across America calling on Bush not to go to war before the Iraq war even started.
In 1967 very very few people were against the war in Viet Nam.
In 2003 a third of America was against the war in Iraq.
About 1/4 of the congress voted against war in Iraq.
Almost all of congress voted for the Gulf Of Tonlkin resolution.
At the hight of anti-Viet Nam war movement only a very slim majority of Americans were against the war.
More than 2/3 of Americans are opposed to the war in Iraq.
There have been large anti-Iraq war demonstrations.
The idea that everyone was against Viet Nam war, or even that most students were is a media fiction.
The idea that no one is protesting the Iraq war is another media fiction.
Ok, you can return to attacking rockadelic because he is old.
For the record, ONCE AGAIN, I despise both.
Eh. Clinton was my dog.
I ain't cheerin none of these pampered fucks. I like that cat from Alaska.
MEOW.
Is this those "movie star good looks" you were talking about???
TRUTH!!??.....What private mind garden are you living in.....
April 15, 1967: Spring Mobilization to End the War (MOBE). 400,000 march in Anti-Vietnam War protest from Central Park in New York to the United Nations building. [NYT, 4/16/67]
According to my sources the largest U.S. Anti-Iraqi War protest took place in New York in Feb. '03 with an estimated 100,000 people(BBC) attending although many sources say that is an inflated number.
But even if it's accurate it's 1/4th tha amount that protested in NYC in '67, a full two years before you claim that Viet Nam protests started attracting large numbers.
Statistics don't lie, statisticians do.
BTW....Dolo says you and I BOTH are irrelevent old men.
That 400,000 number seems outrageously large. I think the organizers chose that as the official number because it equaled the amount of troops in Viet Nam at the time.
But you are right. 1967 was the year when large demonstrations against the war started, not 1969 the year I said. The 100,000 number against Iraq was on a day that were large protests in almost every major city across the country. In the VietNam Nam era people loaded onto buses and carpooled to NYC DC and SF to attend large national rallies. Today we stay home and attend our local protests. So if you add up all the protests across the nation on your 100,000 day you will get a staggering #. Especially if you use the organizers #s.
Feb 03 was a month before the invasion. 100,000 people before a shot had been fired. How does that compare to 1967?
There were already 400,000 troops in VietNam in '67, and the war had been raging for years.
I would like to thank you for helping to bring the VietNam war to an end. It was only because people like you took to the streets that our troops finally came home.
You don't really believe that do you??
I certainly don't.
The war lasted almost 16 years.
Organized protests had been taking place for at least 11 of those years with 1967-1972 being the loudest and most significant.
The war "ended" in '75
How much longer would it have gone sans protests??
Not very.