One serious note - anyone who has read Breitbart's latest tome
will understand exactly what the Left did between last weekend and now.Hat tip Howie.
39 minutes ago
Monday, June 06, 2011
... all I have to say about NY politicians ...
I will let my spokeswoman cover my thoughts about Weinerpalooza.
One serious note - anyone who has read Breitbart's latest tome will understand exactly what the Left did between last weekend and now.
Hat tip Howie.
One serious note - anyone who has read Breitbart's latest tome
will understand exactly what the Left did between last weekend and now.Hat tip Howie.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
117 comments:
Whatever-Breitbart is still scum.
<span><span>Civility, huh, Skippy? Olbermann, Maddow, Matthews, Ed Schultz, and you. Careful, or someone may think you an addle-headed, parroting, far-lefty radical idealogue who wouldn't know a relevant fact if it bit you in the a55. Such proud company.
Tell me again how everything is George Bush's fault?</span></span>
<span><span><span>Tell me again how everything is George Bush's fault?</span></span></span>
You're slipping, URR. You forgot the part about how all Tea Party members are drones blindly following Sarah Palin's bus around the country.
couldn't have happened to a more derserving schmeckle.
Typical hive-mind response.
Skippy,
You're smarter than that.
Mr Weiner has clearly demonstrated that he is no gentleman by his abusively ill mannered behavior in the past on matters political.
His conduct as a husband provides no saving grace.
One of the ladies said he has "issues", meaning poor self control and impulse control.
His personal charm and charisma are below detectable levels to me.
I, for one, would prefer a more admirable and sensible person occupied his political office. I think he might make an acceptable accident and injury attorney in his home district.
The people of New York deserve better. I hope.
Agree with everything you said, except... the people of NY deserve what they vote for.
What I think is scummy is when an individual of high public office uses said office in order to impugn the reputation of another citizen and/or make false accusation of criminal misconduct in order to cover their own arse.
Much talk about all of the challenges this country faces especially WRT the current fiscal situation. Is it any wonder that things are so broken when Washington has so many like Weiner (both sides of the aisle) who put their interests before those whom they are sworn to serve?
As I remind my folks..."you have to be smarter than the equipment you operate"...or the other saying that "the system assumes an intelligent operator. How true that is is up to you..."
Was interested to hear that there's "...nothing in the Constitution..." requiring a Member of Congress to be truthful. Since the Congressman has such a low opinion of the importance of honesty I suggest that he turn over all of his Service Academy appointment to the respective Service Secretaries for the remainder of his time in office.
Yep. All we figured out in this case was stuff we already knew:
1.) Politicians have an outsized tendency to be philanderers. If you don't believe me, ask any of Newt Gingrich's four wives, Bill Clinton's mistresses, or anything with a pulse that came within striking range of a drunken Ted Kennedy.
2.) The Right has done equally nutty things in defense of its own: Need I remind anyone of the defense of Larry Craig, or the way Mark Foley was shuffled under the rug until disclosure became inevitable? I could also just drop the name "Jeff Gannon". But none of that excuses the fact that....
3.) Markos Moulitsas, and a certain few others, just proved themselves as much a partisan hack as is Breitbart. To my thinking, that's the only good that really came of this.
4.) Breitbart's now 1-for-3, and this "win" is not terribly impressive.
5.) America has bigger fish to fry, and too much at stake to be wasting so much time analyzing pictures of a Congressman's pecker.
(Though, in fairness, given AB's track record, I really did think this would be a trumped-up bit of hogwash ala the fake pimps and the non-racebaiting racebaiting. My suspicion was "adulterous affair that the woman cashed in on" ala Lewinsky.)
Bottom line: if some Hollywood producer had just given AB a gig writing a crappy sitcom, we'd never have heard of the man. And if you think what he's doing is "helping America", or even "helping the Right", you're mistaken, and probably delusional, too. This guy's story will not end well: I hardly think you need Freud to start a long list of the psychological issues he's projecting.
+1, but strike "drunken". I think it could be argued that such was a normal state for the late Teddy, and even when (if) he was sober women were at risk.
Shit, I missed that quote...when did he say/imply that?
@Grampa:
There's nothing Weiner's done here for which there aren't ample examples on both sides of the aisle.
I do want to directly address "ill-mannered behavior".......if you want to hold all pols to that standard, I'm all for it, and standing by to sign your petition. Otherwise, if we're going "all-in" as a country on the quality of political discourse being not much higher than the silly heel/face "feuds" found in pro wrestling......then you might as well leave Weiner alone on that point. He's far from the worst offender on either side of the aisle.
<span>America has bigger fish to fry, and too much at stake to be wasting so much time analyzing pictures of a Congressman's pecker. </span>
-----------
And pray tell, who do you think is charged with "frying those bigger fish?" It's guys like Weiner who have demonstrated that they will abuse their position and sacrifice the people they serve in order to cover personal misdeeds. Now why do you feel such are capable of handling the bigger challenges and why do you trust them to do so?
Funny thing about moral compasses, they aren't calibrated differently for personal or professional conduct.
@Stu:
<rolls>
If you think our "Representatives in Congress" are a bunch of choirboys, I've got a terrific beachfront condo investment opportunity in the Everglades for ya.
And if you want to try to do something about it, fine by me, but please do take your fight to both sides of the aisle. A properly-run Inquisition makes no distinctions of caste or class. And if you do so, let me know in advance so I can pop some popcorn.
I could perhaps have left my argument in this regard limited to the name "Jeff Gannon". If that name and it's voluminous Google results thereof don't give you a whiff of a pretty pervasive pattern of deviance on your preferred side of the political aisle, I don't know what does. I'll leave the topic of all his mysterious "overnight" WH stays alone, and just rest my case on the very fact of his existence. I hardly think I need explain the implications of a gay call-(boy? girl?) being permitted inexplicably-preferential access to the corridors of power. (All I can say is: I bet there was a few guys in the Russki embassy who got real excited about it, in a totally hetero way.)</rolls>
Squidly, He said it a couple of times during the Q&A part of his press conference, when he wasn't talking about accepting "...full responsibility."
@Stu, partial retraction: I see above where you actually stated a bi-partisan notion to this effect. I apologize. (And want to hulk-smash this comment system, yet again.)
No worries.
I do not think members of Congress are choirboys. However, when their misdeeds become known in such a manner, then I believe we should push to get then out.
The full term was "abusively ill mannered". I do not excuse bad behavior by the bad behavior of another similar hominid. I have never heard a man refered to as a "politician and a gentleman" and do not hope to do so, although some come to mind who truthfully could.
To me, it (being well mannered whenever appropriate) is a measure of a man or woman.
While an electorate unquestionably gets (in the long run) the government it deserves, part of the process is winnowing incumbents who fail to meet standards, or not.
Hope is not an estimate of current circumstances, and I am able only to hope well for/and of the district which selected Mr Weiner.
I think he should consider his "plans after government service" on a high priority basis.
It is possible that the Republican party might sense an opportunity,
if still capable of doing so.
@Grampa:
As long as we're discussing that notion on a bipartisan basis, I couldn't agree more. American politics has long-since gone the "Jerry Springer" and "Pro Wrestling" directions.
But for every Weiner, there's a Palin. And that situation isn't going to get better unless/until people start standing on their professed principles whether they agree with somebody ideologically or not.
Why is it that whenever a Dem is caught lying and doing something sleazy the knee-jerk response is "Yeah, but him too!" as if that excuses the conduct?
And show me where Sarah Palin sent lewd pictures of herself to a bunch of men, and then lied about it, not once but dozens of times, publicly, until hemmed in by the truth which was arrived at with taxpayer money?
Your moral relativism is a weak cop-out and you simply throw allegations with nothing to back them up, while using the "everybody does it" response to excuse the Democrat.
And before you launch into your self-righteous tirade about how whoever does it is wrong, you need to begin to address why you accuse Sarah Palin of being the equivalent of Weiner, without proof, and without justification. Otherwise, keep your tirade to yourself, as it is mere noise.
@URR
Blahblahblahblahblahblahblah. When your side does crazy crap, it's apparently OK; when "dem dag-gummed evil lib'ruls" do it, the sky is falling. I'm just a guy from the political middle that's dog-tired of that act.
The topic under discussion between Grampa and myself was civility. Weiner had earned himself a rep as a liberal flamethrower, and justly so. As has Palin earned herself a rep as a mindless rabble-rouser. If you want another example from each side, I offer Alan Grayson, former Rep. from Orlando, and Ann Coulter. The pro-wrestling style rhetoric gets in the way of the grown-up work that needs to be happening.
Now, if you want to stick to the lewd, deviant, trashy crap, I once again offer your Messrs. Craig, Foley, and Gannon. Where's the outrage on those fronts? Don't get me wrong, I could care less about Craig, but the other two....more questions should have been asked to more people in the vein of "WHAT DID YOU KNOW, AND WHEN?"
Bottom line: anyone who think's Weiner's weiner is the most important possible thing our ruling class and media could be discussing needs to get a hobby and leave the politics to the grown-ups. I find it deeply ironic that Andrew Breitbart of all people is calling out Markos Moulitsas; if they'd somehow been switched at birth, and it'd be Breitbart out there throwing pro-lib fireballs, and Moulitsas that's still upset about getting dissed in Hollywood as a young man and making the whole country suffer for it. They're both cut of wholly identical cloth, and are little more than attention-seeking self-promoters.
Not when it comes to Breitbart. I despise the man.
You should also note-that I have endorsed Joshua Green's opinion that he will have to resign-but only because he got caught in the lie, not because he likes to tweet porn stars. There are no moves left on the chess board for him. His only move was to admit it up front and tell Andrew Breitbart that it is none of his business who communicates with. For that matter its not really his wife's either-she knows where the front door is. ( An option she will apparently exercise soon if you believe the NY Post).
Speaking of lack of Moral Courage URR-how come you don't have any to leave your angry comments over at my blog? We allow all kinds of comments-even yours.
That was the last question I heard shouted by the press over the media din as Anthony Weiner copped to, er, sextweeting? The country is facing potential default, the leader of the GOP is a delusional maniac, the Middle East remains on a knife edge ... and the question in the headline above is still ringing in my ears.
That sums it up pretty well.
Now excuse me, I have to go cancel my Twitter account.
strong the kool-aid is with this one.
It would have been so great if Breitbart were a no name writer in Hollywood than the uselss excuse for a human being that he is now.
It must of been great to be a Congressman in the late 40's and 50's and 60's-you could drink as much as you wanted, have sex with your secretaries, -and still get some things done. Like the Interestate Highway System, the Civil Rights act, Medicare, funding a flight to the moon. Now we live in a world where a whole lot of well meaning people, think they have the right to know every detail of a person's relationship ( or lack thereof ) with his wife, exercise judgement against conduct they themselves also indulge in, and actually beleive that somehow its ok to take America back to the 1890's and there will be no bad consequences. Quite and age we live in. Not a world I want to live in, not one bit. The guys in the 60's had a lot more fun.
One commentator said that one of the things Weinergate shows is that powerful politicians assume they can get away with things that regular people can’t. If they do assume that, they’re wrong. It would be more accurate to say that they can’t get away with things that regular people can. Look around you. Consider your friends, your work colleagues, your relatives, maybe even yourself. It’s likely that a nontrivial proportion of them have some sexual secret (at least they think it’s a secret) in their lives. If their secret comes out, if they get caught in an embarrassing lie about it, the whole world isn’t going to hear about it. It won’t be national news.
Who said the sky was falling? I observed that you equated Sarah Palin to Weiner regarding conduct, without a morsel of evidence or justification. You mentioned Gannon and Foley and Craig. Purge the whole lott (get it?) of them.
You simply don't like Sarah Palin. But you still have no reason to say Sarah Palin is a disgusting, amoral, arrogant, deviant liar. However, we know Weiner is. He admitted it.
Weak, yours.
"<span>tell Andrew Breitbart that it is none of his business who communicates with. For that matter its not really his wife's either-she knows where the front door is."</span>
If he does it over the Congressional network, it is everybody's business. And he did. So it is.
<span>Hey Skippy, why should I read your vapid, far-left drivel when I have other things to do with my time?
Apparently you view yourself as some sort of awe-inspiring threat that I should quake at. I think you are a toe-the-line bolshevik blowhard. Telling you so here or there hardly constitutes moral courage. </span><span><span></span></span><span><span></span></span><span><span></span></span>
When you talk about the Navy, I will give a listen, because you speak with some authority and clarity. You even get occasional agreement.
But when you wax authoritative about the economy and politics and such, in your language of class warfare, you do not rate a listen. The views and the conclusions are the tired, hackneyed socialist-fellow traveler nonsense from bygone days, resurrected by Obama and his radical cabal of neo-communists. If Obama said the sky was plaid, you would have that on your blog within the hour as gospel truth, with testimonials from "Tingle" Matthews, Rachel Maddow, and someone from the Economist as "proof".
@URR
"There you go again".
Please read my actual prior words, and not the words you want me to be saying, for my response. The comparison between Weiner and Palin was limited to the sub-topic of civility in political discourse. And sorry, if you're so blindly partisan that you need me to spell out how Sarah Palin is incivil, or haven't read the paper enough to know how she's arrogant or amoral, you're not going to listen anyway, so why bother?
But, I'll bite a bit further on Palin anyway. I will admit that my biggest single beef with her IS personal: up till '08, I'd been holding her up as a sensible conservative, and was forced to choke down my own words with a side of crow. No, I didn't like that.
But as for disgusting: how about her trotting her misbegotten daughter out there, or subordinating her dysfunctional family's needs to her ambitions? Amoral: how about TrooperGate? Or failing that, her trying to perma-gank the expensive wardrobe that the GOP bought for her? Or all the other he-said/she-said crap that's come out of the former McCain campaign? Old John's going back to his roots by clamming up about it all, but his daughter sure hasn't, and it doesn't sound like she has much use for Sister Sarah and her contrived Holier-than-thou act.
Nope, sorry, Ms. Palin is nobody's exemplar of integrity or honesty. For cryin' out loud, the woman's driving around in a festooned bus, but "isn't running for President" and also somehow "doesn't want the press around". Puh-leeze. The Daily Beast had it best in calling her relationship with the media a "tawdry co-dependency".
Geez. You ask me to read your words, and then follow with an even less coherent diatribe. So I should read the news to know Sarah Palin is uncivil. Any ferinstances? You then equate her daughter's indiscretions and Palin's treatment of them as equivalent to sending pictures of your penis. One is your opinion, however twisted. The pictures? 'Fraid there is proof of that fact. And then, you equate firing a State Trooper who was faking an injury to Weiner's conduct as well? And insinuate that her conduct as defined by rumors and innuendo is equal to Weiner's?
Yet, somehow, you claim not to engage in an argument of moral equivalence. You can lose the cutesy game of insinuating without saying, and then shrieking that you were misquoted.
Ah, so you are acquainted with Sister Sarah's foibles! And somehow, you still think her worth wasting keystrokes defending? Amazing.
Again: the comparison between Palin and Weiner was limited to the subtopic of incivility in politics. I've said that three or four times now, so I don't know why I'm expecting you to get it this time, but I'll repeat myself anyway.
You then expanded it to amorality and arrogance, which I think Palin shows plenty of evidence of, and the facts on it seem pretty clear.
I've stated repeatedly that have no wish at all to defend Weiner's conduct, beyond pointing out that there's plenty of worse examples out there.
You seem to think that's "excusing" by way of "moral relativism". I say it's just "placing things in fullest perspective".
As I've said elsewhere in this thread: anyone who thinks they can root out all the charlatans on both sides of the aisle would have my support, which with $0.50 would buy a cup of coffee. Strangely, though, I don't see that actually happening.
So still, no answer regarding your assertions about Palin's incivility. Weak, yours.
"<span>no wish at all to defend Weiner's conduct, beyond pointing out that there's plenty of worse examples out there."</span>
Yeah, except for that. Which is moral relativism. Weaker still.
Again, the issue with Weiner is not the initial act itself but rather the follow-on actions he took as a Congressman in order to hide those actions. He clearly had no problem making accusation that his account had been hacked as well as implying that members of the opposing political tribe were responsible. It's simply an integrity issue. Do we really want a guy like this around "leading" us and Nation? Would anyone like to work for a FOGO who employed such tactics? Would anyone like to have Sailors or Marines working for them that employed such tactics? But apparently such is acceptable for our high public offices because in the past some noteworthy accomplishments have been made.
I don't think she did, but she can send them to me. I'd be ok w/ that! :)
You still need to key in on one fact-it involved Breitbart. So even ithough he didn't hack his Twitter account-Brietbart being the useless blob of cells that he is could very easily be believed to have done it. I know I was rooting for Brietbart to get tagged with it-it would have made him 0-3 in the count. As it is he's down 1-2 and as sure as the sun comes up in the East, he will perpetrate some other falsehood or video or other flawed piece of "alternative journalism". Its what he does. Sadly now, I just have to go back to hoping Brietbart gets run over by a bus.
For Weiner it was probably tempting to go that route-especially since it involved something that was sure to piss off his wife. He clearly could have used some better tech support.
URR-I going tell you this for the 100th time. I can't accept your vision of the political world anymore. Its wrong-and more importantly it every bit as destructive as anything the people you hate have done or will do. Twas once, I lived in that closed minded strait-jacket, but by the grace of God I escaped from it. I have no desire to go back.
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I--
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference
Or said in the short version: Blow me.
@URR:
<rolls>
If you can't see the great "continental divide" at whatever point Sarah Palin is standing at any given moment, I really can't help you. Not going to waste my time on something you can get from a fifteen second google search. I'll give you two words that I feel are enough to rest my case: "Death Panels". Incivil. Divisive. Not Presidential.
Oh, and you can call me a "moral relativist" all you want when I see you publicly calling for Boehner to resign over trying to shuffle Foley's boy-fondling under the rug. But not until then, pal.</rolls>
Wish I could like this one a hundred times!
<span>strong the kool-aid is with this one. </span>
You can't help me. Which means you offer your opinion as fact, and damned thin at that. I am not interested in a google search of huffpost or code pink or some other far-lefty crap that you believe confirms that your opinion is fact.
I never asked for anyone's resignation, did I? Not even Weiner's. Yet, you think that what Weiner did is equivalent to unfounded allegations against Boehner, and grounds for the latter's resignation?
"Death panels"? Even the Obama administration admits that healthcare rationing will occur. You think expressing a viewpoint you disagree with is "divisive", "uncivil" and not "Presidential", yet you believe nationalizing health care despite its unconstitutional mandates, massive cost, and wide unpopularity is somehow not divisive? Wow.
Mark Foley? Ever heard of Barney Frank?
What was that? Kool-Aid? I dreamt last night that somebody was accusing me of moral relativism, too. Well, to borrow one of the CDR's favored phrases....BEHOLD!
http://truthticker.com/?q=node/8
I love the way the guy in the recording there talks about "internet lies" when it's all right out there in black and white.
Do I think El Rushbo deserves to keep getting called out over and over again for his faux pas? Nah, not really. Old story, played and done, just like Weinergate at this point. But he has as much business as does Breitbart telling anyone that they're "destroying America" with their "hate filled partisanship".
Now, if y'all don't mind, I'm going to kick back and watch me some "moral relativism" as y'all try to explain to me how --somehow-- what Limbaugh just did there wasn't 1.) divisive BS rhetoric, 2.) moral relativism, with 3.) a side order of pure lie. Hopefully, a few of his listeners just got woke up to what's going on behind the curtain.
Tell me 101 times, Skippy. As if you know my vision of the world in the first place. You are the one with your own blog. You are arrogant enough to think you know what I know, what I believe, and more, why I believe it.
"Blow me"? Mike Mullen thinks it is a good idea, why don't you ask him for it?
As surely as water will wet us,
As certain as fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings
With terror and slaughter, return
Or, said in the short version, Woodstock is over. Get your head out of your a55.
So Rush Limbaugh is a US Congressman from which state? Weakest, yet.
I think he effectively operates as R-At Large, to judge by the way everyone kisses his ring.
And ...is that just a wee bit of relativism there? Naw, couldn't be! So, let's see if I'm getting your responses right here:
Being a deviant or a "moral relativist" is bad....IF:
1.) You're a Democrat
2.) You're a Republican that got caught
But NOT bad if:
1.) You're a man pulling down a $400 million contract to spew divisive rhetoric --and then sputter to a commercial break protesting the same when it's thrown in your face...
2.) John Boehner covering up after one of the #2 cases from above.
Dude, we just got so much relativism going on that I'm going to have to check GPS and some atomic clocks....we might have just obtained more experimental proof on Einstein's theories with regards to space/time. I think one of us is in a whole 'nother dimension.
Gee, here I thought Limbaugh was a television and radio personality who makes his money by being controversial and entertaining. Which he sometimes is, but mostly not.
Which ISN'T the same as being an elected official and sitting Congressman, no matter how you invoke Einstein to try and keep your logic from disintegrating. Your allegations against Boehner are also not the same as the admitted facts of the Weiner case (stop giggling!) nor of the official investigation of Barney Frank's live-in male prostitute running a gay brothel out of his house. Or Gerry Studds some years ago admitting to paying for a hotel room with public funds for a liaison with a 16 year old male page. For which he was never punished because he played the persecuted gay man card, seconded enthusiastically by Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Boxer, Schroeder, etc.
BUT...Breitbart didn't do it. That is fact.
The route Weiner was taking was one of lying about another in order to cover his own arse because of his own misconduct.
But apparently that's insignificant when compared to going after some "alternative journalism" who we don't like because he works against OUR tribe.
And Weiner didn't need better tech support. He simply needed to control himself. Some common sense wouldn't hurt either.
There's that moral relativism again.
That's the whole problem with absolutist perspectives. They have a funny way of pinning one down when it's least convenient.
"<span> facts of the Weiner case (stop giggling!)"</span>
Now, all this said, I *will* man-up here and honestly admit that my inner-16-year-old *is* deriving pleasure from the fact that the distinguished peckerman --I mean, gentleman-- from New York has made a very immature joke cool again, for a brief time.
Good Lordy. Don't ever be your own defense lawyer. You will be in the slammer in twenty minutes for jaywalking.
Those I mention are NOT moral equivalents. But the stock line from those whom I mention was that they were.
If a formal investigation found significant wrongdoing on the part of Boehner (which it didn't), then he should consider resigning. To the contrary, the investigation found no such wrongdoing, and Foley's actions were strongly condemned by Boehner. However, Foley did resign. Weiner refuses. Something about relativism?
Stu, you're obviously correct in this case, but let's not forget that the ACORN "takedown" that Breitbart championed was just two idiot snot-nosed kids harassing underpaid social workers until they got want they wanted to have on tape. Not one dollar was actually going to pimps, and if there were, certainly not to "pimps" dressed up as if for Halloween.
Then there was the Sherrod case. She was telling a perfectly innocent story, in its full context, where she was admitting her own past flaws. The kind of thing adults are supposed to do when they're wrong. AB snips the beginning and the end, and we have ourselves yet-another manufactured "controversy" to be chewed on over at his Big Empire.
As I've said, my gut feeling was that Weiner'd screwed up. But I also wouldn't have been surprised if it'd wound up being trumped-up hogwash like the last two times, either.
Yes, to the delight of junior high-schoolers everywhere, who can now put their hands in the air in social studies and ask about the "Weiner pictures".
Since they are too young to remember the Reuters guy talking about "punishing the one-eyed mullah".
<shrug> In that sense alone, maybe America needed a scandal involving a guy with a funny sounding name.
Oh, and on Boehner: Sure, the #2 Republican at the time, the Majority Leader, had no knowledge of Foley's faux pas. Wow, what a crappy Majority Leader, to have that explode out of nowhere, am I right? And now he's *Speaker*? Third in line to the Presidency? A guy who forgets an important detail like which of his subordinate members that was nailed fondling little boys hadn't been "dealt with" yet? And then tried to play the "Mexican Standoff of Blame" game with Denny Hastert?
Doubt it.
As for the rest, you say po-tat-oe, I say poh-taht-o, as they say. Methinks you doth protest too much, but....meh. Too many keystrokes wasted on this non-story already.</shrug>
Oh horse crap. Your opinion. The investigation found no evidence of wrongdoing, but because YOU think he did, he should be punished. As opposed to investigations that did find wrongdoing. But you consider that equivalent. And then you decry being called a relativist.
Wasted keystrokes? You would have done well not to assert guilt of misconduct to people you don't like, just because you don't like them. And when called on it, provide opinion and innuendo from the blogosphere in place of facts.
True or False:
The investigation found no wrongdoing committed by Congressman Boehner.
True or False:
The ethics finding against Sarah Palin, while lodged, is under challenge in that the investigator failed to prove "personal gain" in the firing of the State Trooper.
True or False:
The person providing oversight of the investigation of Palin was a Democrat, and Obama supporter, who mentioned an "October surprise" for the McCain campaign.
'harassing underpaid social workers'? Maybe, but their pay has nothing to do with character. If you don't have character when you make $32,000/yr (which they probably made much more than that) why should you have it when you make $64K, $128K, etc.? My wife has been a social worker at a domestic violence shelter for the past 12 years and the 'no judgements' mentality of many of the workers there is absolutely chilling and makes this ACORN situation not only plausible, but more common than could be believed.
And Sherrod? AB was exposing the attitudes at the NAACP crowd clapping and cheering that part of her talk, not Sherrod herself. USDA then made a typical bureaucratic knee-jerk reaction and responded in the wrong direction.
I'm not Breitbart fan but geez, lose the hate. I swear, conservatives have all the back water cretins, but liberals more than make up for it with the sheer volume of hate that pervades their consciousness.
- KellyC
I did get my head out of my a$$-that's why I argue with your viewpoint. :) .
Can't say as I disagree with you on that-they used to call it by a different word, "discretion".
But don't kid yourself, Breitbart would have done it if he could have-he just proves the old adage its better to be lucky than good.
Let's see-they did a poll that found an interesting statistic. When takne by age, most people under 35 didn't think "sexting" was a big deal. For some odd reason people over 35 did. Probably because people under 35 do it all the time-but then again they are held to the Puritan standard that Congressmen are.
Advantge-slacker.
In today's environment, why would any one but a demented fool even want to be a Congressman?
xanax online xanax bars and drinking - xanax online rx
tramadol without prescription can buy tramadol online usa - tramadol hcl opiate
cheap generic xanax xanax drug detection - xanax xr effects
buy tramadol online tramadol 7.5 - tramadol veterinary dosage chart
buy tramadol online tramadol 50mg zydol - tramadol liver
buy carisoprodol carisoprodol 125mg para que serve - carisoprodol barbiturate
buy tramadol online tramadol side effects high - buy cheap tramadol overnight
order tramadol online cod tramadol keeps me awake - tramadol 2012
order carisoprodol online carisoprodol in urine test - carisoprodol wikipedia
xanax online xanax overdose how many mg - xanax high like
buy tramadol online tramadol extended release high - buy tramadol online overnight
buy xanax online overnight delivery buy 2mg xanax bars online - buy xanax 2mg bars online
buy tramadol online buy tramadol online usa - order tramadol cash delivery
buy tramadol online signs tramadol overdose dogs - tramadol hcl 37.5-3 tab myla
buy tramadol online tramadol for dogs online - tramadol hcl generic
generic xanax xanax side effects seizures - xanax bars what do they do
xanax online xanax withdrawal long does take - drug test information xanax
buy tramadol online tramadol side effects high - buy cheap tramadol overnight
buy tramadol overnight cod tramadol for ultram - tramadol for dogs empty stomach
carisoprodol 350 mg carisoprodol 350 mg recreation - medication soma carisoprodol
buy tramadol online whats better tramadol ultram - tramadol online no prescription overnight cod
buy tramadol online tramadol 50mg buy online - tramadol hcl 50mg online
buy tramadol online tramadol dosage 10 lb dog - can buy tramadol online usa
buy tramadol online buy tramadol no prescription cheap - tramadol 50 mg how long does it stay in your system
xanax online xanax indications - order xanax no prescription overnight
buy tramadol online tramadol hcl 50 mg mylan - tramadol 50 mg iv
cheap tramadol online tramadol hcl street value - tramadol 50 mg kern pharma
generic cialis online cialis online overnight shipping - cialis online cheapest
cialis for sale cialis soft tabs reviews - generic cialis approved fda
buy cialis online usa generic cialis any good - generic cialis cheap
cialis online cialis levitra viagra - tadalafil cialis cheap
cialis online cialis cheapest lowest price - cialis daily side effects
cialis online cheap cialis overnight - where to buy real viagra cialis online
buy tramadol online tramadol hcl 200 - tramadol medication purchase
can you buy tramadol online legally buy tramadol with cod - tramadol hcl generic ultram
http://landvoicelearning.com/#23561 tramadol used withdrawal - 100mg of tramadol side effects
learn how to buy tramdadol side effects of tramadol 50mg capsules - tramadol online with mastercard
learn how to buy tramdadol tramadol dosage 70 lb dog - is it ok to take 100mg of tramadol
buy tramadol online tramadol and pregnancy - buy tramadol online pharmacy
http://landvoicelearning.com/#51438 cloridrato de tramadol 100mg - tramadol addiction message board
buy tramadol buy tramadol online fedex delivery - cheap tramadol online
buy tramadol buy tramadol 100mg online - buy tramadol online eu
buy tramadol online order tramadol online saturday delivery - tramadol hcl-acetaminophen zen
buy tramadol overnight cod can buy tramadol online - buy tramadol online pay cod
buy tramadol tramadol and tylenol - tramadol for dogs vomiting
ways to buy ativan online buy ativan online uk - ativan dosage paramedic
buy tramadol order tramadol online cheap - tramadol 50mg much
buy ativan online ativan overdose in children - apo-lorazepam 1 mg side effects
http://reidmoody.com/#54126 ativan for pain - buy sandoz lorazepam
http://reidmoody.com/#37982 ativan dosage for children - buy lorazepam in canada
ways to buy ativan online ativan early pregnancy - ativan addiction warning signs
buy tramadol online tramadol addiction fda - tramadol for dogs high
buy tramadol online buy tramadol online australia no prescription - tramadol hcl 50 mg get you high
http://ranchodelastortugas.com/#72895 drug tests and xanax - xanax withdrawal 2012
http://bayshorechryslerjeep.com/#3880 drug test xanax long - makes generic xanax
Post a Comment