C
OMG! ...Dixie Endorses Franken???
- Thread starter Dixie - In Memoriam
- Start date
C
Cancel5
Guest
The bright side of this is when they screw-up (and they will) they will get all the blame.
You like when our Congress screws up? I don't, I would rather they all behave, do their job, you know represent their populace.
It amazes me that Rush and you want our government to fail, do you realize the consequences when they do? We the people suffer, Congress doesn't, the average Joe's are the ones who pay for the screw-ups.
Why is blame so important to the right? Always the need to blame, I would rather congratulate than blame!
C
Cancel5
Guest
Well, after thirty years of control by the right, I am ready for something different, I doubt they will deliver...too much corporate interest at stake in the current scheme of things, if that doesn't change, nothing will.
C
Cancel5
Guest
Ahahaha, super-size it, please!
C
Cancel5
Guest
Ahahaha, good one!
USFREEDOM911
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
:lmao: ....says the one who crucified bush and the religious right constantly through the past decade. Says the one who's party is consistently dividing us into TWO AMERICAS... pitting the poor against the rich.... blacks against whites... gays against straights... them against ours! This is precisely the technique Democrats have perfected to win elections the past few cycles. Fuel bitter hatred and fan the flames as much as you can, and drum up as much idiot support as you can for your "cause" and then ram it down our throats with glee and the arrogant attitude that we deserve this!
You got some nerve claiming it is ME who is stoking the fires... you poured as much gasoline, and blew as much hot air as you could muster at the fire! Now you want to whine like the liberal crybaby you are... well that's fine, but you simply can't whine your way out of taking responsibility for what you are solely in charge of now.
zappasguitar
Well-known member
And how well did that tactic work for the Democrats in the runup to the 2000 and 2004 elections??
They spread hate and resentment, just like the Republicans did when Clinton was running for office, and it got them a Republican in the WH and controlling both houses of Congress.
It wasn't Democrats and their " bitter hatred" that cost REpublicans the elections in 06 and 08, it was a REPUBLICAN WH and CONGRESS OUT OF CONTROL
Now you just ignore everything that I've written and call me some more names.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
The hate and divisiveness came into play during the Lewinsky scandal, not when Clinton was running for president! And it was perpetrated by the left-wingers who didn't like Republicans holding the president's feet to the fire! Since then, the right has endured this endless vehement and hostile attack from the left, as if we are fucking enemies of the state! After Gore LOST the election of 2000, because he couldn't carry his own home state, the left declared an all-out Jihad against the right. The election of 2004 was completely dominated by the Edwards assertion of "Two Americas!"
What cost Republicans the elections of 06 and 08 was their abandonment of conservative fiscal principles, and reluctance to return to them. The "right" in America, has always been stubbornly entrenched in principle, and because of that, are often divided up and split amongst themselves, and this was never more the case than in 2008. True CONSERVATIVE Republicans, mostly stayed home, and simply did not vote for McCain. Meanwhile, Liberal hate-filled masses of pinheads, united behind a popular and attractive black man, who presented an elegant speech. It didn't matter what his position were on the issues, how often he changed them, or how much he contradicted himself over and over... liberals turned out and voted for Obama, because he wasn't a republican!
I never ignore anything, and I only use names that appropriately fit.
"The hate and divisiveness came into play during the Lewinsky scandal, not when Clinton was running for president! And it was perpetrated by the left-wingers who didn't like Republicans holding the president's feet to the fire! "
Man, of all the loopy things you've written, this is the loopiest.
This is so far from earth that it's silly....
Man, of all the loopy things you've written, this is the loopiest.
This is so far from earth that it's silly....
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Well you are certainly an authority on loopy, far from earth, and silly!
maineman
Banned
exactly... to suggest that whitewater and vince foster and travelgate and filegate and on and on and on and on didn't happen is ludicrous.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Yes, it's silly to suggest that Vince Foster just committed suicide in the park, that travel office employees weren't canned for no reason, or that Hillary Clinton had no knowledge of boxes full of files in a closet at the White House. It is nice you finally admit it was ludicrous to suggest these things!
maineman
Banned
it's ludicrous to suggest that your ilk was not out to get Clinton long before Lewinsky.
moron.
Demwit
uscitizen alternate login
Read it and weep Dixie.
starr chamber________
The deep and twisted roots of Kenneth Starr's Clinton inquisition stretch back to the dark corners of the 1992 presidential campaign.
BY MOLLIE DICKENSON
Independent counsel Kenneth Starr's interminable investigation of President Clinton began as a political dirty trick cooked up in the George Bush White House in an 11th-hour attempt to defeat Clinton and win Bush's reelection. This political scheme involved generating a bogus criminal referral that charged the Clintons with financial crimes in the Whitewater affair, and then improperly using the power of the presidency to get the Department of Justice and the Resolution Trust Corporation to act on that referral. Subsequent criminal referrals naming the Clintons, which led to the appointment of a Whitewater independent counsel, were equally politically inspired.
This startling and complex story emerges from reporting, statements and sworn testimony produced by the Whitewater congressional committees, the significance of which has never been fully reported nor put into context. The facts clearly show that the investigation of Clinton, which has dragged on for over four years and has now culminated in the sordid Monica Lewinsky allegations, was from the very beginning politically motivated. They also show that Kenneth Starr's title of "independent" counsel is ludicrous. Starr, a Bush administration official and determined enemy of Clinton's, came into his office with the intent of undermining the Clinton presidency. Starr's political motivations have been widely commented upon. But completely overlooked has been his role in covering up the Bush administration's dirty tricks -- the very dirty tricks that gave rise to the endless investigation over which he now presides. The real scandal is how the nation's elite media have failed to explore the unsavory political underpinnings of the Whitewater investigation, swallowing unskeptically whatever Starr's office leaks to them.
Jan. 20 marked the fourth anniversary of the appointment of an independent counsel to investigate Bill and Hillary Clinton's 20-year-old investment in rural Arkansas property and other subsequent matters now known as "Whitewater." After four years of intensive investigations by Starr and his predecessor, the office of the independent counsel had brought no charges of illegality against the president or first lady. The very next day, however, Jan. 21, the Washington Post broke the story that Starr had evidence alleging that President Clinton might have committed or suborned perjury in his Jan. 17 testimony in the Paula Jones case. The country has been immersed in a media frenzy ever since.
To date, Whitewater independent counsels have spent $40 million of taxpayers' money. The Republican House and Senate have each held two lengthy and expensive sets of Whitewater hearings, one deliberately extended into June 1996. Throughout that campaign year, news media in Washington and New York were abuzz with rumors that at the very least, Hillary Clinton was going to be indicted. For what? For something, was the vague answer. And still, Starr made no charges of wrongdoing by the president or first lady. Indeed, once Clinton was re-elected Starr waited three months, announced his resignation and tried to slip quietly out of town, heading for an academic post at Pepperdine University in Malibu, Calif. "Hey, it was only politics," was the message. But he reversed himself days later when a media firestorm erupted.
Today we know that Starr became even more determined to dig something up on Clinton to justify his costly investigation. Now, as the possibility of a constitutional crisis looms, an examination of just how and where the charges against the Clintons began is imperative.
The evidence shows that Whitewater began with the Bush White House's attempt to use the federal bureaucracy against Clinton in the 1992 election, and included collusion with a Republican banking investigator at the Resolution Trust Corporation, the agency created to oversee the liquidation of failed S&Ls, with a deep enmity toward Clinton.
The evidence shows further that, since his first days as Whitewater independent counsel in 1994, Starr has been using his position to cover up the improper and possibly illegal actions of high Bush White House officials and Bush's attorney general against then-Gov. Clinton in the final weeks of the 1992 presidential campaign. By virtue of his office, Starr has been able to continue that coverup while relentlessly pursuing President Clinton ever since.
Through the unlimited power of his office, the former appointee of both the Reagan and Bush administrations has also been able to expand and add to his investigations. In an attempt to defeat Clinton in 1996, Starr withheld his report on Vincent Foster's suicide (something Foster's family had accepted on the day of his death) until after the election. He has continually delved into the daily operation of the Clinton White House and kept the Clintons under constant suspicion of having committed financial crimes. And now, finally, Starr is using his unchecked power to discredit Clinton once and for all in an audacious personal strike at the president.
Just as Starr used his office to cover up Republican wrongdoing in the 1992 presidential election, he has also taken steps to cover up the activities of the one person who knows how Starr came to insert himself into the Paula Jones suit against President Clinton. By immunizing informant Linda Tripp, Starr is protecting her both from prosecution and from the media. Starr also prevented Tripp from testifying under oath in the Jones trial, keeping her story and the true nature of her link to him hidden.
http://www.salon.com/news/1998/02/cov_24news.html
starr chamber________
The deep and twisted roots of Kenneth Starr's Clinton inquisition stretch back to the dark corners of the 1992 presidential campaign.
BY MOLLIE DICKENSON
Independent counsel Kenneth Starr's interminable investigation of President Clinton began as a political dirty trick cooked up in the George Bush White House in an 11th-hour attempt to defeat Clinton and win Bush's reelection. This political scheme involved generating a bogus criminal referral that charged the Clintons with financial crimes in the Whitewater affair, and then improperly using the power of the presidency to get the Department of Justice and the Resolution Trust Corporation to act on that referral. Subsequent criminal referrals naming the Clintons, which led to the appointment of a Whitewater independent counsel, were equally politically inspired.
This startling and complex story emerges from reporting, statements and sworn testimony produced by the Whitewater congressional committees, the significance of which has never been fully reported nor put into context. The facts clearly show that the investigation of Clinton, which has dragged on for over four years and has now culminated in the sordid Monica Lewinsky allegations, was from the very beginning politically motivated. They also show that Kenneth Starr's title of "independent" counsel is ludicrous. Starr, a Bush administration official and determined enemy of Clinton's, came into his office with the intent of undermining the Clinton presidency. Starr's political motivations have been widely commented upon. But completely overlooked has been his role in covering up the Bush administration's dirty tricks -- the very dirty tricks that gave rise to the endless investigation over which he now presides. The real scandal is how the nation's elite media have failed to explore the unsavory political underpinnings of the Whitewater investigation, swallowing unskeptically whatever Starr's office leaks to them.
Jan. 20 marked the fourth anniversary of the appointment of an independent counsel to investigate Bill and Hillary Clinton's 20-year-old investment in rural Arkansas property and other subsequent matters now known as "Whitewater." After four years of intensive investigations by Starr and his predecessor, the office of the independent counsel had brought no charges of illegality against the president or first lady. The very next day, however, Jan. 21, the Washington Post broke the story that Starr had evidence alleging that President Clinton might have committed or suborned perjury in his Jan. 17 testimony in the Paula Jones case. The country has been immersed in a media frenzy ever since.
To date, Whitewater independent counsels have spent $40 million of taxpayers' money. The Republican House and Senate have each held two lengthy and expensive sets of Whitewater hearings, one deliberately extended into June 1996. Throughout that campaign year, news media in Washington and New York were abuzz with rumors that at the very least, Hillary Clinton was going to be indicted. For what? For something, was the vague answer. And still, Starr made no charges of wrongdoing by the president or first lady. Indeed, once Clinton was re-elected Starr waited three months, announced his resignation and tried to slip quietly out of town, heading for an academic post at Pepperdine University in Malibu, Calif. "Hey, it was only politics," was the message. But he reversed himself days later when a media firestorm erupted.
Today we know that Starr became even more determined to dig something up on Clinton to justify his costly investigation. Now, as the possibility of a constitutional crisis looms, an examination of just how and where the charges against the Clintons began is imperative.
The evidence shows that Whitewater began with the Bush White House's attempt to use the federal bureaucracy against Clinton in the 1992 election, and included collusion with a Republican banking investigator at the Resolution Trust Corporation, the agency created to oversee the liquidation of failed S&Ls, with a deep enmity toward Clinton.
The evidence shows further that, since his first days as Whitewater independent counsel in 1994, Starr has been using his position to cover up the improper and possibly illegal actions of high Bush White House officials and Bush's attorney general against then-Gov. Clinton in the final weeks of the 1992 presidential campaign. By virtue of his office, Starr has been able to continue that coverup while relentlessly pursuing President Clinton ever since.
Through the unlimited power of his office, the former appointee of both the Reagan and Bush administrations has also been able to expand and add to his investigations. In an attempt to defeat Clinton in 1996, Starr withheld his report on Vincent Foster's suicide (something Foster's family had accepted on the day of his death) until after the election. He has continually delved into the daily operation of the Clinton White House and kept the Clintons under constant suspicion of having committed financial crimes. And now, finally, Starr is using his unchecked power to discredit Clinton once and for all in an audacious personal strike at the president.
Just as Starr used his office to cover up Republican wrongdoing in the 1992 presidential election, he has also taken steps to cover up the activities of the one person who knows how Starr came to insert himself into the Paula Jones suit against President Clinton. By immunizing informant Linda Tripp, Starr is protecting her both from prosecution and from the media. Starr also prevented Tripp from testifying under oath in the Jones trial, keeping her story and the true nature of her link to him hidden.
http://www.salon.com/news/1998/02/cov_24news.html
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
Damn, the neocons are really a bitter bunch of sore losers, are they not? They lose FAIR AND SQUARE, and they are just besides themselves with frustration, disbelief and anger!
What's really funny is that with ALL the GOPers getting caught with their hypocritical pants down in the last few years, to try and character assasinate Franken BEFORE he's done anything is like a pot calling the kettle black while sitting in a glass house.
Oh well, as the little dopes all hope for war and financial ruin to take place in the next 4 years so they can return to their former infamy, let's all congratulate Franken....and hope the people of MN hold him accountable and keep him honest.
What's really funny is that with ALL the GOPers getting caught with their hypocritical pants down in the last few years, to try and character assasinate Franken BEFORE he's done anything is like a pot calling the kettle black while sitting in a glass house.
Oh well, as the little dopes all hope for war and financial ruin to take place in the next 4 years so they can return to their former infamy, let's all congratulate Franken....and hope the people of MN hold him accountable and keep him honest.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
No Chicklet, what is REALLY funny, is how Liberal mushbrains are now revisiting history, so they can bash and trash republicans and conservatives all over again, because they can't face the current facts with their own incompetent leadership.
Bush is history.... Clinton is history.... Vince Foster is history... and you can piss and moan about it all you like now, it doesn't make a bit of difference about anything anymore. This does, however, serve to prove my point, the "hatred" and "bitterness" was started by the left, and it is obviously deep rooted... How long do we need to debate Vince Foster? More importantly, just how long do you think Liberals can remain in power, doing nothing but bitching about the past? I see how bitching could get you elected... you bitch and gripe about the ones in power, and people become sympathetic and vote you into power... but now that you are there, don't you suppose these people are going to expect you to actually lead? I really don't think they elected you to power because you were good bitchers.
Bush is history.... Clinton is history.... Vince Foster is history... and you can piss and moan about it all you like now, it doesn't make a bit of difference about anything anymore. This does, however, serve to prove my point, the "hatred" and "bitterness" was started by the left, and it is obviously deep rooted... How long do we need to debate Vince Foster? More importantly, just how long do you think Liberals can remain in power, doing nothing but bitching about the past? I see how bitching could get you elected... you bitch and gripe about the ones in power, and people become sympathetic and vote you into power... but now that you are there, don't you suppose these people are going to expect you to actually lead? I really don't think they elected you to power because you were good bitchers.
C
Cancel5
Guest
The Lewinsky ordeal was bought and paid for by people supporting the Republican Party.
Clinton was Republican lite, I never understood why they disliked the guy.
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
I'm sorry, but Republicans did not unzip Clinton's pants and stick his dick in the mouth of and intern half his age. Republicans did not instruct Clinton to repeatedly lie about that under oath. Republicans weren't even pressuring Clinton to sexually harass women to the point of them filing grievances against him! Nope my dear Froghead... that was all Clinton!
As for Clinton's actual domestic policies, I had no problems with them, but most of it was 'triangulation' of conservatism, and things I supported anyway.