What is it about Northwest-tangential murders this holiday season? We’ve got the UW student whose boyfriend now says she’s not the murdering type, although that’s the most flattering thing he can come up with. We’ve got the basketball player in Brazil, whose family and friends think he was murdered despite what the cops say. And now we’ve also got the twin murder suspect connected to Graham, Pierce County, through a prison pen-pal wife he married after being released by a judge appointed by presidential candidate Mitt Romney whom Romney now says must go. Heckuva job, Mittney!
And you thought nothing could dampen the seasonal joy of $22 DVD players and $59 digital cameras. Actually, the august and usually boosterish New York Times had a real downer of a Page 1 story yesterday on just that point: “Bargains draw crowds, but the thrill is gone,” containing such heresies as “the mood was more desperation than celebration,” “the merchandise is blah-humbug,” “exasperated consumers left the store in anger” and “sparse crowds” in upscale shops “were scary.” Contrast that with the still-boosterish Seattle Times’ local banner A1 head: “Splurge Surge,” and a story that gives mall–by-mall rundowns on shopper frenzy (“this truly is the shopping Olympics”) with nary a discouraging word. So the question is, are we living in a shopping bubble here in the Northwest, where sweetness ‘n light still rule the day? Maybe it’s all those Canadian shoppers cashing in on the dollar’s woes (do they still call their own version loonies, or are they taking themselves more seriously these days?)…or maybe we’re just lagging behind the national temperament. Or could it be that shoppers who are tightening budgets and downscaling and feeling frustrated at bait-and-switch are simply unseen by local media?
Anyway, back to Murders on Parade. For a little holiday cheer my wife and I went to see “No Country for Old Men” in hopes that the Coen Brothers of “Fargo” and “Big Lebowski” had somehow rediscovered their touch. Unfortunately, and despite the aura of universal raves (96 on Rotten Tomatoes), 2 1/2 hours of uninterrupted senseless homicide somehow failed to lift our spirits. Only one visual hearkens back to the comic relief that the CBs of old used so adeptly. And as for proclamations that this film is a cinematic metaphor for the post-9/11 world, um, er, pointless killing is a metaphor? Maybe Javier Bardem is a Dick Cheney with hair. I do have one question: Can people actually walk around in public carrying cattle stun guns? Which brings us to my wife Cecile’s assessment of the film as her own definition of a “dick flick.”
But even man-god Jesus would have a hard time recommending “No Country for Old Men” as a movie for the season putatively celebrating his birth. As for metaphors, perhaps it will do for our current Northwest siege of dead and dying…escapism be damned.
And now we’ve also got the twin murder suspect connected to Graham, Pierce County, through a prison pen-pal wife he married after being released by a judge appointed by presidential candidate Mitt Romney whom Romney now says must go. Heckuva job, Mittney!
I’m also curious to know if the drug rehab center that Tavares was kicked out of right before he killed his mother was one of the ones founded by Mel Sembler, that were closed after several lawsuits showed that kids were being tortured there (Mel Sembler is Mitt Romney’s National Finance Co-Chair).
@1…Lee…
Why don’t you spend the rest of your life researching that very point, and report back with the multi-volume findings of your task force (you, Facts/Farts, Rabbit, and Darryl)?
Kind of sounds like making Willie Horton the poster boy for Mikey Dukakis is a strategy to HA liking after all!
The Piper
But Piper, didn’t 9/11 change everything? And since the Cheney 1% doctrine is simply warmed over ends justify the means blather….the ultimate question is “why not”?
After all, we have all these aphorisms that have stood the test of time. As a conservative, how can you justify throwing them overboard?
Perhaps you are not really a conservative after all, and have the ideological bent that would make a Trotskyite blush.
@2
Why don’t you spend the rest of your life researching that very point, and report back with the multi-volume findings of your task force (you, Facts/Farts, Rabbit, and Darryl)?
Because it’s more fun to make fun of you instead.
Kind of sounds like making Willie Horton the poster boy for Mikey Dukakis is a strategy to HA liking after all!
Have you been a bedwetter all of your life, or just since the 80s?
Lee: I see you found your idiot gene today.
Blaming this on Mitt Romney? Good stretch idiot.
@4…Lee…
“Because it’s more fun to make fun of you instead.”
Oh? And you’ll be starting this when? Can’t evade the Willie Horton comparisons that easily with third-grade taunts.
The Piper
“The nation’s retailers had a robust start to the holiday shopping season, according to results announced Saturday by a national research group that tracks sales at retail outlets across the country.
According to ShopperTrak RCT Corp., which tracks sales at more than 50,000 retail outlets, total sales rose 8.3 percent to about $10.3 billion on Friday, the day after Thanksgiving, compared with $9.5 billion on the same day a year ago. ShopperTrak had expected an increase of no more than 4 percent to 5 percent.
“This is a really strong number. … You can’t have a good season unless it starts well,” said Bill Martin, co-founder of ShopperTrak, citing strength across all regions. “It’s very encouraging. When you look at September and October, shoppers weren’t in the stores.””
From Kos’ favorite web site:
http://money.cnn.com/2007/11/2.....2007112417
I see the idiot-child, that lying sack from Mason county is still befouling these comment threads. “My word is my bond>”
Sure thing, lying sack.
@6
Can’t evade the Willie Horton comparisons that easily with third-grade taunts.
Willie Horton comparisons are third-grade taunts, you clown. Adults understand that issues like those are more complicated than you and your binky make them out to be.
@3…PTBAA…
Translate into English, please.
Didn’t know Dick Cheney had anything to do with Massachusetts criminal law.
We righty-tighties aren’t monolithic; we are large, we do contain multitudes, to paraphrase Walt Whitman. If you wish to understand us in our glory, watch Sam Tanenhaus’ quite good speech here: http://www.booktv.org/program......ayMedia=No
Don’t know Tanenhaus? NY Times Book Review editor and the author of an acclaimed bio of Whittaker Chambers. I don’t agree with all his conclusions, but he’s far better qualified to critique modern American conservatism and it’s antecedents than all the HA Happy Hoolians combined.
He’s read books, you know!
The Piper
Piper what would you expect from Lee? He reads these papers
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...../business/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....00678.html
http://www.nytimes.com/pages/business/index.html
http://www.latimes.com/business/
http://www.latimes.com/busines.....;cset=true
I guess to these papers an 8.3% increase is NOT news
Hey Killatroll@8: What are you bringing to the argument today?
I already stated twice why I came back. I guess to you reading is not fundamental.
I see you found your “I am stupid gene” today.
I guess we’ll see if the uptick in Christmas sales translates to more tax increase calls by Charles Rangel.
@9…Lee…
Ah, the old “too complicated” canard, which gets whipped out whenever one is faced with the paucity of one’s own argument.
Won’t wash, Lee…Tagging Romney with Tavares is no different with tagging Dukakis with Horton. That a Romney judicial appointee is a knucklehead and soft on murderers is, for a news cycle, a legit issue, although it should be noted that it wasn’t Romney who released him, while it was Dukakis who not only supported the furlough program that occassioned the release of Horton to go on a rape and murder spree, he also vetoed, as Gov of Massachusetts, a bill that would have prevented a felon with Horton’s record from being eligible to participate in the program.
Think on it: You want to make Mitt Romney look soft on crime? Consider instead all the memories of all the convict canoodling Demos have done down through the ages, putting the whole, “which party is soft on crime, again?” issue back into play.
Shall we re-play the whole “Three Strikes You’re Out” campaign? A successful John Carlson-inspired initiative campaign NOT supported by lefties?
And where do you stand on Charles Rodman Campbell or Wesley Allen Dodd? In the case of Campbell, even the liberalist of liberals, Mike Lowrey, didn’t dare stand in the way of his thirteen-long and lonely steps.
Those fellas added new meaning to the term, “Just hangin’ out!”
Still…love how lefty efforts to put the crime issue in play will backfire…Gotta love that law of unintended consequences!
The Piper
If we are living in a “shopping bubble” lets hope it bursts soon.
@14…M…
Why?
What have you got against retail store employees? Attitude like yours will get you blacklisted by the UFCW. Is yours a coal-heavy gift list this Christmas?
The Piper
Looks Like there’s something amiss in liberalland:
” Former White House spokesman Scott McClellan does not believe President Bush lied to him about the role of White House aides I. Lewis Scooter Libby or Karl Rove in the leak of CIA operative Valerie Plame’s identity, according to McClellan’s publisher.
Peter Osnos, the founder and editor-in-chief of Public Affairs Books, which is publishing McClellan’s book in April, tells NBC from his Connecticut home that McCLellan [sic], “Did not intend to suggest Bush lied to him.”
Osnos says when McClellan went before the White House press corps in 2003 to publicly exonerate Libby and Rove, the problem was that his statement was not true. Osnos said the president told McClellan what “he thought to be the case.” But, he says, McClellan believes, “the president didn’t know it was not true.”
Osnos says the quotes which appeared on the Public Affairs Books website were part of the roll out of the book catalogues for the spring printings. And he says McClellan had not finished the manuscript for the memoir yet and was working under deadline to have the book completed for the April publishing.”
http://video.msn.com/video.asp.....f49e009029
You mean this Sam Tanenhaus?
=”http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2007/oct/10/the_cloud_over_sams_book_club”
Right?
@9, soft on crime? Hey, let’s play:
Ford Pardons Nixon!
Bush 1 Pardons Caspar!
Bush 2 Pardons Libby!
Huckabee pardons Wayne DuMond!
4 strikes! Yer out!
Discuss!
Missing Romanovs Found
When the Bolsheviks murdered the Czar in 1918, they also killed his entire family, is doctor, and 3 servants, then tossed the bodies down a mineshaft hoping they’d never be found. A short time later, however, they retrieved the bodies and took them into the woods near Yekaterinburg, disfigured them with acid and burned them, then buried them in unmarked graves.
For generations, stories circulated that Anastasia, one of the Romanov daughters, survived the assassination of the last Russian royal family; and over the years a number of pretenders came forward claiming to be Anastasia. Anastasia’s fate and whereabouts entered the realm of legend and folklore.
In 1991, searchers found 9 sets of remains, which DNA tests positively identified as those of the Romanov murder victims. But since 11 people were killed, questions swirled around the fate of the other two. One set of remains was tentatively identified as Anastasia, and the two missing bodies were believed to be the Czar’s son Alexei and daughter Maria.
In today’s news, an announcement by amateur sleuths appears to solve the mystery. Poring over long-sealed archives, they used the words of the killers to deduce what they did with the other 2 bodies. These documents, inaccessible to the world until recently, revealed the chief of the killer team set 2 bodies aside to confuse anyone who might find the grave site — and buried them nearby. That second grave was located in August about 70 yards from the grave found in 1991, and 2 sets of burned and acid-scarred bones, along with bullets and shards of acid containers, were unearthed. Unlike the 1991 excavation, this dig was conducted by professional archaeologists. The additional 2 sets of recovered bones appear to be those of a boy and a young woman, and are now undergoing DNA testing to confirm their identity. However, it seems highly certain the last 2 victims of the Romanov slayings have been found.
Lee: Of course you didn’t know this about the “lousy economy” as you read the NY Times but:
1) Almost all of NYC $600 a night hotel rooms are filled.
2) Planes packed with passengers for flights to the Caribbean and Europe
3) Planes packed with passengers for flights to Europe
4) AAA says many on the road visiting Grandma
Historians concluded the execution of the Czar and his family was ordered by Lenin. The purpose, if course, was to ensure that no claimant to the throne would be around to complicate or interfere with the Bolsheviks’ efforts to consolidate power. In 1918, the situation in Russia was still chaotic, with no group firmly in control, and the Russian Civil War would rage for two more years before Lenin’s faction was finally secure in their grip on power. In the movie “Doctor Zhivago,” Omar Sharif’s Zhivago character explains the purpose of the murders as “to show there’s no going back” to monarchy. But that didn’t stop generations of Russian expatriates from yearning for a Romanov restoration, with their hopes centered around the supposedly missing Anastasia. They can stop wishing now. Lenin and his Bolsheviks are all dead, the Soviet Union is gone, and today Russia — like the United States — is run by organized crime.
@17 & @18…PTBAA…
This: http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/%2....._book_club
…got me nowhere.
This Sam Tanenhaus: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/.....637CN1.DTL
As to pardons?
First, Dubya didn’t pardon Scooter Libby, he commuted his sentence, something entirely different.
At least he didn’t commute the sentences of bomb-making Puerto Rican terrorists belonging to FALN, pardon brother-in-law, Hugh Rodham’s pals, Edgar and Vonna Jo Gregory, brother Roger for drug crimes, pardon any number of Demo former Congressmen (Dangerous Dan Rostenkowski and pornfunk Mel Reynolds – curious…both from Illinois…do they put something in the water?), and pardon Whitewater hoochie momma, Susan McDougal.
Jerry Ford’s pardon of Nixon ended, “Our long national nightmare,” and is considered by historians to be one of the most statesman-like acts in American history.
Caspar Weinberger? He was criminalized for keeping a diary, and his pardon was hailed by those on both sides.
DuMond? Make it an issue all you like…Then stand back for the Clintonian connections…Like the fact that DuMond’s sentence was first commuted by Clinton pal, Jim Guy Tucker during Clinton’s Prexy run and that Clinton, himself, was criticized for the initial handling of that case.
Trust me…the more you try to claim lefties are tough on crime, the more people remember that lefties instinctively side with defendents or try to elect those who aren’t competent to run prosecuting attorney offices.
Hey! You’re the guys who want to provide lawyers and access to civilian criminal courts to Gitmo detainees!
I love it when you run on your record…I’m happy to run on your record, too!
The Piper
@20 Be patient, puddinghead, and keep fiddling while the flames close in on Rome. It is all coming unglued. Watch the sinking dollar, that’s the key. The value of the dollar is down by 40% since Bush took office. Its slide has only begun. You are living in the American version of the Weimar Republic. It will all unfold before your eyes in the months and years to come. As it does, you should be afraid — very afraid.
Now … can you pull your head of your ass long enough to read this article?
http://www.vanityfair.com/poli.....bush200712
The author, Mr. Stiglitz, has some fairly decent credentials to his name: Ph.D. from M.I.T., Columbia University professor, Oxford Fellow, former Chair of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers, Nobel laureate.
He probably knows more about this than you do.
Correction, Fulbright Fellow to Oxford, not Oxford Fellow.
@21…RR…
Still…Anastasia stories made for good tear-jerker movies, including a 1997 animated version featuring Meg Ryan as the voice of Anastasia.
Wandering about Europe for decades after 1917 were any number of Archdukes and Grand Duchesses of Romanov lineage who could claim the Imperial throne. Memories of the more than 10-years that Britain’s Charles II went from impoverished pillar to hand-me-down post before the 17th-Century Restoration encouraged such dreams.
Organized crime? While The Soprano’s has been cancelled, you might ask the former heads, those that are alive, anyway, of New York’s Five Families, their thoughts on GOP prexy candidate, Rudy Guliani.
And don’t forget! FDT and Law & Order!
The Piper
@18…PTBAA…
Forgot…Huckabee’s pardon of Keith Richards!
When asked whether it wasn’t favoritism for a celeb and would an ordinary Joe get the same treatment, Huckabee said, “No, I wouldn’t. . . . But here’s the deal: If you can play guitar like Keith Richards, I’d do it for you.”
Who said there’s no justice?
The Piper
@13
Ah, the old “too complicated” canard, which gets whipped out whenever one is faced with the paucity of one’s own argument.
What the hell are you talking about? You’re not even remotely following.
Won’t wash, Lee…Tagging Romney with Tavares is no different with tagging Dukakis with Horton.
Right, which is exactly why I want to dig deeper into this issue. What part of that were you having trouble understanding?
That a Romney judicial appointee is a knucklehead and soft on murderers is, for a news cycle, a legit issue, although it should be noted that it wasn’t Romney who released him, while it was Dukakis who not only supported the furlough program that occassioned the release of Horton to go on a rape and murder spree, he also vetoed, as Gov of Massachusetts, a bill that would have prevented a felon with Horton’s record from being eligible to participate in the program.
I’m not arguing any of that, but I am pointing out that it would be a strange irony if it turns out that the spark that led to Tavares’ criminal record was lit by Romney’s current Finance Co-Chair.
Think on it: You want to make Mitt Romney look soft on crime? Consider instead all the memories of all the convict canoodling Demos have done down through the ages, putting the whole, “which party is soft on crime, again?” issue back into play.
But right now, the problem in this country isn’t one of “convict canoodling”, it’s a problem where we have a massively oversized prison system filled with large numbers of people who actually don’t belong there. The tragedy is that people like Tavares get out, while non-violent people who under mandatory minimums (for drug crimes primarily) stay behind bars. You’re about 10-20 years behind the times on this, crackpiper.
Shall we re-play the whole “Three Strikes You’re Out” campaign? A successful John Carlson-inspired initiative campaign NOT supported by lefties?
Yes, let’s replay it, because more and more people now recognize that the three strikes laws were a mistake that made it very difficult for judges to keep the correct people behind bars. Some petty burglars and drug addicts now serve longer sentences than murderers and rapists.
Still…love how lefty efforts to put the crime issue in play will backfire…Gotta love that law of unintended consequences!
As I said, adults are having one conversation, and the irresponsible children like you are having another one.
Brief excerpts:
“When we look back someday at the catastrophe that was the Bush administration, we will think of many things: the tragedy of the Iraq war, the shame of Guantánamo and Abu Ghraib, the erosion of civil liberties. The damage done to the American economy does not make front-page headlines every day, but the repercussions will be felt beyond the lifetime of anyone reading this page. …
“Up to now, the conventional wisdom has been that Herbert Hoover … is the odds-on claimant for the mantle ‘worst president’ when it comes to stewardship of the American economy. … The economic effects of Bush’s presidency are more insidious than those of Hoover, harder to reverse, and likely to be longer-lasting … our grandchildren will still be living with, and struggling with, the economic consequences of Mr. Bush. …
“The first major economic initiative pursued by the president was a massive tax cut for the rich, enacted in June of 2001. … The inequities were compounded by a second tax cut, in 2003, this one skewed even more heavily toward the rich. …
“In breathtaking disregard for the most basic rules of fiscal propriety, the administration continued to cut taxes even as it undertook expensive new spending programs and embarked on a financially ruinous ‘war of choice’ in Iraq. … Agricultural subsidies were doubled between 2002 and 2005. … Tax expenditures — the vast system of subsidies and preferences hidden in the tax code — increased more than a quarter. … Although it railed against entitlement programs for the needy, the administration enacted the largest increase in entitlements in four decades — the poorly designed Medicare prescription-drug benefit, intended as both an election-season bribe and a sop to the pharmaceutical industry. …
“You’ll still hear some — and, loudly, the president himself — argue that the administration’s tax cuts were meant to stimulate the economy, but this was never true. The bang for the buck — the amount of stimulus per dollar of deficit — was astonishingly low. Therefore, the job of economic stimulation fell to the Federal Reserve Board, which stepped on the accelerator in a historically unprecedented way, driving interest rates down to 1 percent. In real terms, taking inflation into account, interest rates actually dropped to negative 2 percent. The predictable result was a consumer spending spree. Looked at another way, Bush’s own fiscal irresponsibility fostered irresponsibility in everyone else. …
“All of this spending made the economy look better for a while; the president could (and did) boast about the economic statistics. … The president undoubtedly hoped the reckoning would come sometime after 2008. It arrived 18 months early. …
“The president made a big deal out of the financial problems facing Social Security, but the system could have been repaired for a century with what we have bled into the sands of Iraq. Had even a fraction of that $2 trillion been spent on investments in education and technology, or improving our infrastructure, the country would be in a far better position economically to meet the challenges it faces in the future …. For a sliver of that $2 trillion we could have provided guaranteed access to higher education for all qualified Americans. The soaring price of oil is clearly related to the Iraq war. …
“The continuing reliance on oil, regardless of price, points to one more administration legacy: the failure to diversify America’s energy resources. … [T]he administration has pursued a policy of ‘drain America first’ — that is, take as much oil out of America as possible, and as quickly as possible, … leaving the country even more dependent on foreign oil in the future ….
“America’s budget and trade deficits have grown to record highs under President Bush. … During the past six years, America — its government, its families, the country as a whole — has been borrowing to sustain its consumption. Meanwhile, investment in fixed assets — the plants and equipment that help increase our wealth — has been declining.
“What’s the impact of all this down the road? The growth rate in America’s standard of living will almost certainly slow, and there could even be a decline. … As confidence in the American economy has plummeted, so has the value of the dollar — by 40 percent against the euro since 2001.
“The disarray in our economic policies at home has parallels in our economic policies abroad. … Not surprisingly, protests over U.S. trade practices erupted … [b]ut America has refused to compromise …. This intransigence led to the collapse of talks designed to open up international markets.
“As in so many other areas, President Bush worked to undermine multilateralism … and to replace it with an America-dominated system. In the end, he failed to impose American dominance — but did succeed in weakening cooperation. …
“Globalization means that America’s economy and the rest of the world have become increasingly interwoven. Consider those bad American mortgages. … The originators of these problem mortgages had already sold them to others, who packaged them, in a non-transparent way, with other assets, and passed them on once again to unidentified others. When the problems became apparent, … it was discovered that billions in bad mortgages were hidden in portfolios in Europe, China, and Australia, and even in star American investment banks … global risk premiums soared, and investors pulled money out of … emerging markets, looking for safer havens. It will take years to sort out this mess.
“Meanwhile, we have become dependent on other nations for the financing of our own debt. … Cumulative borrowing from abroad during the six years of the Bush administration amounts to some $5 trillion. … [T]he Bush administration’s fiscal housekeeping has eroded our economic authority. …
“Whoever moves into the White House in January 2009 will face an unenviable set of economic circumstances. … [P]utting America’s economic house in order will be wrenching and take years. The most immediate challenge will be simply to get the economy’s metabolism back into the normal range. That will mean moving from a savings rate of zero (or less) to a more typical savings rate of, say, 4 percent. … Money saved is money not spent. If people don’t spend money, the economic engine stalls. …
“The problems of foreclosure and bankruptcy posed by excessive household debt are likely to get worse …. And the federal government is in a bind: any quick restoration of fiscal sanity will only aggravate both problems. And in any case there’s more to be done.
“What is required is in some ways simple to describe: it amounts to ceasing our current behavior and doing exactly the opposite. It means not spending money that we don’t have, increasing taxes on the rich, reducing corporate welfare, strengthening the safety net for the less well off, and making greater investment in education, technology, and infrastructure.
“When it comes to taxes, we should be trying to shift the burden away from things we view as good, such as labor and savings, to things we view as bad, such as pollution. …
“Some … of the damage done by the Bush administration … will take decades to fix …. Think of the interest we are paying, year after year, on the almost $4 trillion of increased debt burden — even at 5 percent, that’s an annual payment of $200 billion, two Iraq wars a year forever. Think of the taxes that future governments will have to levy to repay even a fraction of the debt we have accumulated. And think of the widening divide between rich and poor in America, a phenomenon that goes beyond economics and speaks to the very future of the American Dream.
“In short, there’s a momentum here that will require a generation to reverse. Decades hence we should take stock, and revisit the conventional wisdom. Will Herbert Hoover still deserve his dubious mantle? I’m guessing that George W. Bush will have earned one more grim superlative.”
[Quoted under fair use.]
Waytago wingfucks! You traitors have permanently weakened America and turned us into a has-been, third-rate, Third World economic power. Fuck you assholes! May you all burn in Hell for your ignorance and stupidity. We should make you pay reparations.
Slavery Reparations II
Never mind Slavery Reparations I; that’s in the lawyers’ hands now. Let’s deal with the plot by the CHEAP LABOR CONSERVATIVES to sell the working classes into servitude for generations to come.
In light of the economic damage that Republicans have inflicted on America and their fellow citizens, we should round them all up, confiscate their property, and treat them the same way the IRS treats tax scofflaws: Give them a choice between getting a job or going to jail; confiscate their paychecks, and give them a (necessarily modest) allowance to live on, until their debt to us is repaid in full; then put them in concentration camps and execute them!*
* Just kidding! That’s an Ann Coulter joke! If this kind of sick, twisted, humor repels you — complain to her about it! I merely mimic it to demonstrate to you wingnut blockheads how grossly perverted your wingnut “sense of humor” is! Now go fuck yourselves, but if you can’t reach your asshole with your dick, call Sen. Larry Craig’s office for assistance.
“appointed by presidential candidate Mitt Romney whom Romney now says must go”
Looks like the Pubbies now have their Willie Horton and Mike Nifong all rolled into one! Hey, 2-for-the-price-of-1! Whatadeal!!!
Waytago wingfuck idiots. Another law enforcement fiasco brought to you by the ex-law and order party.
So … how do you Republicans manage to be so consistently wrong — about everything? Do you take stupid pills when you get up in the morning?
Speaking of bait-and-switch, some locals recently tried to sell us a toy train for $150 that actually costs $1,300 a year.
“Which brings us to my wife Cecile’s assessment of the film as her own definition of a ‘dick flick.'”
Should play big with the “kill ’em all and let God sort ’em out” crowd. Right up there with the best of the Chuck Norris art films.
@27…Lee…
“Yes, let’s replay it (Three Strikes You’re Out campaign), because more and more people now recognize that the three strikes laws were a mistake that made it very difficult for judges to keep the correct people behind bars. Some petty burglars and drug addicts now serve longer sentences than murderers and rapists.”
Do you understand how that law works? Three Strikes? To whom it applies, what classes of felonies?
Bitch all you wish about how unfair drug laws are, but remember this: as long as there are laws against possession and use, not to mention selling, then you violate them at your own risk. If you’re stupid enough to break those laws, then you deserve what comes your way.
And your own argument paints you as soft on crime. Tell me again how you think our DUI laws are too harsh and unfair to those who slosh and steer. That will play real well and surely become a platform plank for lefty candidates running for office!
When your idea of a judge more closely resembles Roy Bean, let me know.
The Piper
@32…RR…
Not me, Rabbit! The only train I’ve purchased lately was for my oldest grandson’s second birthday, and it cost me less than $14!
See it here: http://www.amazon.com/Brio-334.....38;sr=8-23
The Piper
Amazing how some can blame Romney, when our own Queen could be the culprit.
The WSP intellegence unit was watching this guy a week and a half before the murders. Was the “watching” for Romneys visit? If they knew he was a threat why didn’t they haul him in on the warrants he already had?
This beautiful couple would be alive today if we protected the public, and not the canidates that are “special”.
Romney was warned the guy was in washington state, our own officials warned him. Why couldn’t they have warned US.
This WSP unit reports directly to the Governor, so she was aware, but did nothing…..
Piper in full frothing mode,
“DuMond? Make it an issue all you like…”
We will, thank you very much. The ill fated pardon was propelled by pure Clinton paranoia and, frankly, moral stupidity of a catastrophic nature. But the one I like best is the nonstop petty financial self aggrandizement exhibited by Huckabee. Some moral beacon, huh?
“Trust me…the more you try to claim lefties are tough on crime…”
“Leftists” generally make no such claim. Political charlatins, hacks, and, oh yes, Hitler, make such claims. You’re in great company when you fearmonger.
234 “And your own argument paints you as soft on crime.”
No one is softer on crime than George W. Bush. He gutted domestic law enforcement. Clinton used federal money to put 100,000 more cops on America’s streets; Bush refused to spend the money and took those cops off the streets to give tax cuts to billionaires. Bush took over 1,000 FBI agents off the domestic crime beat and put them to work listening to American citizens’ phone calls and reading their library records; with these law enforcers off the beat, bank robberies and identity theft crimes are soaring. Bush’s airport screening is a fucking joke.
Republicans boasting about law and order is like Ted Bundy boasting about murder.
@35 You don’t even know what I’m talking about, do you?
“First, Dubya didn’t pardon Scooter Libby, he commuted his sentence, something entirely different.”
A distinction with little, if any, difference.
“Jerry Ford’s pardon of Nixon ended, “Our long national nightmare,” and is considered by historians to be one of the most statesman-like acts in American history.”
No. It is not.
“Caspar Weinberger? He was criminalized for keeping a diary, and his pardon was hailed by those on both sides.”
He was convicted of a crime. You claim to be tough on crime. Apparently, your hackneyed high moral outrage does not include republicans.
As for Clinton’s pardons, some of them were pretty outrageous (Marc Rich, etc.). You’ll not find me carrying water for him on those (maybe Suzan McDougal–she was railroaded).
@39…RR…
Most of the time I’m pretty sure you don’t know what you’re talking about, so were I to answer in the negative, we’d be even.
Cryptic though you can be, your comment was, I take it, a dig reference to the recently put-out-of-our-misery Prop 1.
If I’m wrong, by all means and please do…correct me.
The Piper
@39: Good artcle by Stiglitz. Cite appreciated.
The latest wingnut darling, Mike Hugabee, has a ton of baggage. Here is merely one of his embarrassing screwups:
“Huckabee has also come under criticism for his handling of the case of Wayne Dumond, a convicted rapist who was released during Huckabee’s governorship and who subsequently sexually assaulted and murdered a woman in Missouri.
“Dumond’s case had attracted national attention in the mid 1990s from critics of President Bill Clinton who felt the former Arkansas Governor had been too harsh with Dumond because Dumond’s victim was a distant Clinton relative.
“Even before taking office, Huckabee met with Dumond’s wife and privately announced his intention that Dumond be set free, stating his unhappiness with the way Clinton had handled the case. …
“On September 20, 1996, Huckabee publicly announced his intention of commuting Dumond’s sentence …. There was strong opposition … leaving Huckabee in a difficult situation politically.
“On October 31, 1996, Huckabee met privately with the parole board to talk about the Dumond case. On January 16, 1997, Dumond was granted parole, just five months after he had been rejected. Huckabee released a statement saying, ‘I concur with the board’s action and hope the lives of all those involved can move forward. The action of the board accomplishes what I sought to do in considering an earlier request for commutation …In light of the action of the board, my original intent to commute the sentence to time served is no longer relevant.’ …
“The parole was granted on the condition that another state take him. Wayne Dumond moved to Kansas City in 2000 and was convicted there of sexually assaulting and murdering a woman that lived near his home.”
Quoted under fair use; for complete article and/or copyright info see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M.....umond_case
Roger Rabbit Commentary: Wingnuts like Huckabee hate Clinton so much they’ll literally release murderers to prey on innocent victims — just to hit back at Clinton. Huckabee and his ilk are a public menace. This guy Huckabee not only shouldn’t be president, he shouldn’t be loose on the streets. He and his wingnut worshippers belong in insane asylums.
@41 Gee, crackpiper, you do have one functioning brain cell after all. But only one.
@42 The Stiglitz article is longer than I can quote even selectively here. It’s in the current issue of Vanity Fair, and the entire article is available online, free of charge. Everyone should read it. Here’s the cite again:
http://www.vanityfair.com/poli tics/features/2007/12/bush2007 12
Remember: Watch the falling dollar. The gasping dollar is the dying canary in the coal mine.
@37…PTBAA…
Godwin’s Law…
So, you make no claim to being tough on crime? It is, then, a matter of indifference to you? You could care less if violent criminals are cut loose?
Also…Please give details as to any criminal conviction in a court of competent jurisdiction in re Cap Weinberger.
Jerry Ford? Check out what Jon Meechum (I’m still plowing through his American Gospel) had to say last January: http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....00702.html
That you regard legal distinctions to be without a difference is a cavalier disregard for both the spirit and the letter of the law…and the Constitution.
Naughty, naughty!!!
The Piper
@45…RR…
As wrong in its conclusions as it is, Rabbit, you at least owed the aricle’s author the courtesy of his earned title: it’s Dr. Stiglitz, not Mr.
Still…those are his opinions, to which he is absolutely entitled. But they’re not holy writ.
The Piper
There are many historical precedents to guide us in interpreting the real meaning of the devaluation of the dollar.
Undoubtedly the most dramatic and best known is the collapse of German currency following World War I. In an effort to avoid paying the reparations owed under the Treaty of Versaillies, the German government devalued the Reichsmark to worthlessness. What followed was hyperinflation, economic chaos, and a political backlash that put Hitler in power.
Currency devaluations are not random natural occurrences or acts of God. Nor are they mere cyclical economic phenomena, like ice ages. They are deliberately caused by humans who know what they’re doing and why they’re doing it.
The dollar devaluation represents the dispossession of America’s working class and middle class by the ruling class. The rich are insulated from it because they can (a) move their assets abroad, which they are doing, and (b) avoid inflationary consequences by passing price increases through to consumers while not raising workers’ wages to keep up with inflation and devaluation, by reason of the fact they control the corporations.
But, like all of history’s grandiose thieves, it is likely they will miscalculate by going to far and provoking a popular uprising that will strip them of power and property.
Personally, I like the idea of dispossessing the Republican wealthy class of their ill-gotten gains. How about a confiscatory tax, say, 200% of all their income and capital gains from the time Bush took office until the time Bush leaves office? We’ll call it an “Asshole Tax” — they get taxed for the privilege of acting like assholes. Hey, I’m just playing with words here; but, I like it …
sp correction: too not to
@48 His CV (MIT Ph.D., Fulbright Fellow, Chair of President’s Council of Economic Advisers, Nobel Prize) is better than yours (debarred lawyer), so I think I’ll give his opinion more weight than yours.
(snicker)
(raucous bunny laughter in background)
HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR
Mike Huckabee Is Not A Sane Man. Story here: http://alternet.org/story/68057/
Piper: The question is which convicted criminals under which circumstances. This is important. Not to you apparently. Bragging that you are ‘tough on crime’ is pure unmitigated pandering.
As for Caspar….then why did Bush issue a pardon? Chew on that and get back to me.
Bush’s commutation of Libby’s sentence was an outrageous violation of civic sensibility, and basically sent a message that loyalty to the Bush crime family will not be forgotten. It was shameless.
Today’s conservatives really have no moral compass whatsoever. A point brought up by thoughtful conservatives like Bruce Bartlett.
@51…RR…
To allege that I am “debarred,” synonomous with disbarred, is pretty serious.
Now…I’m pretty thick skinned on most stuff, but on this lie please either back it up or retract your words.
I cautioned PTBAA on the necessity of regarding with respect legal differences that are distinctions, and now I offer you the same caution. To allege in any way, shape, or form that someone has been disbarred (debarred suffices) is to allege at a minimum seriously unethical, if not outright criminal, behavior.
Is that what you contend, Rabbit?
Of course, that you hide behind your snickering and tedious attempts at humor while refusing to own up in your own name to these allegations speak to your own character, such little of it as there is.
For the record: Because the nature of my professional work isn’t the practice of law, I voluntarily went inactive several years ago when the cost for CLEs and active-status bar dues was more than I wanted to pay.
To contend anything to the contrary is both a lie and defamatory. Inactive though I am, I’m fairly certain that a pro se complaint for damages isn’t something I couldn’t handle.
Of course, your retraction, correction, and apology would more than assuage my injury.
The Piper
Crime without punishment is a worthy “distinction” to you, oh great crime fighter? How quaint.
You bring only shame to yourself to argue so, and throw dirt on the very profession which you claim to have left voluntarily.
“Lapsed” does have more than one meaning. Look it up.
@52…PTBAA…
In re Cap…Again…show me where he was convicted of anything. Words have meanings, oft times quite precise, and you should be mindful of the ones you choose and use.
I think it’s pure crap on both sides to criminalize political and policy differences or to engage in witch-hunt vendettas such as the one against Scooter Libby. Odd that Richard Armitage’s outing of Valerie Plame, the matter investigated by the special prosecutor, had nothing to do with the crime charged against Libby.
Fitzgerald couldn’t get anything on the matter at issue, so to avoid professional humiliation, he screwed Libby, and that’s how a lot of people – obviously, not your people – view the matter.
Why don’t you bring up Alcee Hastings? Or Louisiana’s Jefferson?
Here’s a thought: let’s criminalize earmarking, then see who is the majority party sent to the federal pen at Lewisburg, PA.
As for Bartlett? Since your idea of thoughtful includes all opposed to Bush, I take it you consider Hugo Chavez, “thoughtful?” But Bartlett…he criticized Dubya for not being consistent with the Reagan vision. In some repsects, he was correct.
McCain-Feingold is patently unconstitutional, and some of the big governemt stuff Dubya has let slide is anathema to a revanchist like me. Still and at the end of the election campaign, my gut says Bartlett still votes the “R” ticket.
“Our (meaning your) civic sensibility” isn’t a definable legal standard against which any act can be measured. Don’t confuse strident partisanship with Title 18 of the United States Code a president’s absolute power, under the Reprieves and Pardons clause of Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution.
The Piper
@54…PTBAA…
“Lapsed?” What’s lapsed?
The Piper
“In re Cap…Again…show me where he was convicted of anything. Words have meanings, oft times quite precise, and you should be mindful of the ones you choose and use.’
Yes, words have meaning. Bush issued Weinburger a pardon. Caspar accepted it. The supreme court has even weighed in on the matter that issuance and acceptance of pardon was acceptance of guilt. Jerry Ford carried a scrap of that decision around with him in his wallet. I surmise he needed the support for his decision near his ass at all times.
“I think it’s pure crap on both sides to criminalize political and policy differences….”
I think that is a lie. Just an opinion. But a google search for your anguished and heart rendering objections to the Clinton impeachment brings up nothing. What a suprise.
“Fitzgerald couldn’t get anything on the matter at issue, so to avoid professional humiliation, he screwed Libby, and that’s how a lot of people – obviously, not your people – view the matter.”
The underlying crime went unpunished because Libby was lying. He was convicted (yes, words matter, Piper) of obstructing justice. The only people who view it the way you do are Weekly Standard nut cases and a significant minority of even the republican party.
“…a revanchist like me”
Revanchist, eh? How apt.
“Why don’t you bring up Alcee Hastings? Or Louisiana’s Jefferson?”
Why? You guys bring it up all the time. But since you’re so damnned particular, Jefferson has yet to be convicted of a crime. But words, apparently, have only the meaning you wish to ascribe to them.
Like I said. How quaint.
Piper: Willie Horton was released under a Republican administration’s governor.
Meybe a little research before shooting of your fuckin’ mouth would be in order, you dress wearing freak.
“Don’t confuse strident partisanship with Title 18 of the United States Code a president’s absolute power, under the Reprieves and Pardons clause of Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution.”
Oh, my. Strident partisanship, have we? Well, then. What about the Clinton pardons? Like most conservatives you argue in circles and it all comes down to this: ItsOKIfYou’reARepublican.
Shameless.
“I take it you consider Hugo Chavez, “thoughtful?””
Some good. Some bad. In equal measure, I take it you considered Pinochet ‘thoughtful’, then. Or Diem, or Franco, or Marcos, or the Shah, or any of a number of garden variety Latin American dictators?
An don’t waste your breath trying to paint me with the broad brush of Stalin and Mao’s crimes. I heard that bullshit a lot.
But there is no denying this: Conservatives actually plotted to overthrow FDR in the 30’s, and Prescott Bush was in bed with Hitler, and the shame of the GOP’s cowardly isolationism in the 30’s is something your party will never live down, no matter how many times you invoke the Munich analogy or pound the drums for war.
Long live Mr. Godwin!
“Here’s a thought: let’s criminalize earmarking, then see who is the majority party sent to the federal pen at Lewisburg, PA.”
Prison overcrowding is not allowed by the courts. These rulings have the force of law. Yes, Piper, words matter–not your rhetorical excesses.
But otherwise….I have no problem. Maybe it’s time for a whole new set of politicians. That’s what revolutions are about (just sayin’).
“What’s lapsed?”
Your morality. Your decency. Your sense of shame. Your common sense.
I’d go on, but it would appear pointless.
@61…PTBAA…
Jefferson? Never convicted? Neither was Weinberger.
The “underlying crime” in the Libby affair turned out not to be a crime after all. Read this and weep: http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....05_pf.html
Then read this: http://thehill.com/byron-york/.....06-08.html and especially the following:
“Fitzgerald never proved, or alleged, or presented any evidence in court, that the underlying crime
even occurred.
Because the laws involved are so carefully written, it was entirely possible that CIA employee Valerie Plame Wilson’s identity could have been revealed — a bad thing — without a crime having occurred.
That appears to be what happened in this case.
To show that a crime had been committed, Fitzgerald would have had to show that Libby, or someone else, not only revealed Mrs. Wilson’s identity but did it knowing that she was a covert agent under the definition in the Act.
Fitzgerald never met that standard.
And of course, we know that from the very beginning of his investigation Fitzgerald knew that Libby was not the one who leaked Mrs. Wilson’s identity to columnist Robert Novak.
The guy who did that was Richard Armitage, then the deputy secretary of state who, even after ’fessing up to telling Novak, failed to inform the prosecutor that he also told The Washington Post‘s Bob Woodward about Mrs. Wilson. That came out much later.
But there were no charges for Armitage — prosecutors said he was just gossiping about Mrs. Wilson. It’s never been clear why they didn’t go after him for keeping his conversation with Woodward secret.
Whatever, say pro-Wilson advocates. Libby lied — and that’s a very serious thing.
Maybe he did. But if you went to Libby’s trial every day, you saw a parade of witnesses who had a hard time remembering the same events that Libby had a hard time remembering.
Some of the charges against Libby were so insubstantial as to be laughable, as when journalist Matthew Cooper testified that he, Cooper, brought up Mrs. Wilson in a conversation with Libby and Libby said, “Yeah, I’ve heard that, too.” Libby had told the grand jury he didn’t say it.
That was very, very thin stuff — in fact, one of the two charges involving Cooper was the only one on which the jury acquitted Libby. On the other, he was convicted.”
Further on, author, Byron York, issues what ought to be to you a chilling warning:
“But the throw-the-book-at-him critics on the left should remember that this case has set some terrible precedents. Just remember how Fitzgerald threatened reporters with jail, blew up pledges of reporter-source confidentiality, and countenanced some leaks while he pursued others.”
So many stock-in-trade lefty defenses for leaking this or press and First Amendment sanctity that were pissed on by Persecutor Fitzgerald.
This will come back to haunt you…
The Piper
“Jefferson? Never convicted? Neither was Weinberger.”
So Bush should issue Jefferson a pardon, right?
Piper,
Victoria “I have the right to my own facts”, Toensing? Har Har Har.
That is too much!!! I am weeping with laughter!!!!!
“Fitzgerald never proved, or alleged, or presented any evidence in court, that the underlying crime
even occurred.”
You cite this with a straight face and claim to know something about the law? You obviously did the profession a favor when you ceased to practise it.
@64…PTBAA…
Hey, one of Hitler’s biggest pimps in the USA was ol’ Joe Kennedy!
To be a pandering liberal is to be without shame and sense of self-worth…Two can play at the scorn and derision game.
Routinely, I accord Democrats and those with whom I disagree respect and applaud their patriotism. There’s a difference between fighting like cats and dogs on policy through and including the war and impugning honesty and integrity.
HA Happy Hooligans equate disagreement with treason, perfidy, and behavior worthy of capital punishment, hence the ease with which objective observers – even some Democrats – let alone conservatives regard you collectively as something akin to the lynch mob in Walter Van Tilberg Clark’s famous western novel, The Ox-Bow Incident.
The lust for Republiconvict and Bush blood have become the driving force in your lives.
As for me? Just a guy trying to have a civil debate on issues on an otherwise pleasant Sunday afternoon in between plugging away on my latest column and letting Kitty out and back in.
The Piper
“Whatever, say pro-Wilson advocates. Libby lied — and that’s a very serious thing.”
Insert “Clinton” for “Libby” in the above. Think about it. Really. Just a little.
“Hey, one of Hitler’s biggest pimps in the USA was ol’ Joe Kennedy!’
I agree. This is called acknowledging facts.
@53…ZW…
Aside from the fact that you cannot construct even a short sentence without mangling its meaning beyond repair, you still get the facts wrong. Read the following from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willie_Horton :
“On June 6, 1986, (Horton) was released as part of a weekend furlough program but did not return. On April 3, 1987 in Oxon Hill, Maryland, Horton twice raped a local woman after pistol-whipping, knifing, binding, and gagging her fiancé. He then stole the car belonging to the man he had assaulted, but was later captured by police after a chase. On October 20, Horton was sentenced in Maryland to two consecutive life terms plus 85 years. The sentencing judge, Vincent J. Femia, refused to return Horton to Massachusetts, saying, “I’m not prepared to take the chance that Mr. Horton might again be furloughed or otherwise released. This man should never draw a breath of free air again.” This was reported in the October 1987 Reader’s Digest.
Democratic Presidential candidate Michael Dukakis was the governor of Massachusetts at the time, and while he did not start the furlough program, he had supported it as a method of criminal rehabilitation. The State inmate furlough program was actually signed into law by Republican Governor Francis W. Sargent in 1972. After the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that this right extended to first-degree murderers, the Massachusetts legislature quickly passed a bill prohibiting furloughs for such inmates. However, in 1976, Governor Dukakis vetoed this bill. The program remained in effect through the intervening term of governor Edward J. King and was abolished during Dukakis’s final term of office on April 28, 1988. This abolition only occurred after the Lawrence Eagle Tribune had run 175 stories about the furlough program and won a Pulitzer Prize. Dukakis continued to argue that the program was 99% effective; yet, as the Lawrence Eagle Tribune pointed out, no state outside of Massachusetts, nor any federal program, would grant a furlough to a prisoner serving life without parole, as Horton was”
Next time try posting when sober…
The Piper
“HA Happy Hooligans equate disagreement with treason…”
So does Dick Cheney. So do many republicans. Somehow you never bring that up, and that is why I have so little regard for your claim to desire to only discuss ‘policy differences’ or your wailing and knashing of teeth regarding HA commenters. You are of the same stripe, and frankly, I find that twofacedness very telling.
Beware of cats bearing gifts!
@69…PTBAA…
You miss the point entirely! You keep contending that Cap was convicted, which he wasn’t.
Of course, Representative Jefferson is entitled to the presumption of innocence. But with that doesn’t go a deep-freeze filled with cash. Not the kind of parting gifts the Founders had in mind!
The Piper
@74…PTBAA…
Cheney? No…he argues strongly and forcefully for what he believes, and he’ll call a spade a spade when it comes to policy and what he regards as the disasterous and very short sighted nature of those with whom he disagrees – he pulls NO punches; welcome to the world of Washington politics.
But how many names and epithets and groundless, not to mention mindless, canards have been hurled at ANY who don’t toe the netroot/DailyKus/HA/uber-left line?
No wonder you find yourselves so marginalized, even in your own party!
Now, you and I have engaged in some what I hope has been good natured jostling back and forth (witness our debates during the election in re the 6th District KCC seat), and while I’ll question your judgement and call your thinking dumb, I won’t contend that you lie, have no honor, don’t care, or commit criminal acts.
Again…you seem to regard me as inferior, whereas I regard you merely as wrong.
The Piper
@71…PTBAA…
OK…Then describe to me the elements of the underlying crime and what evidence existed or was proffered to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that anyone committed it.
The Piper
“Again…you seem to regard me as inferior, whereas I regard you merely as wrong.”
No. You seem to be projecting. On the other hand, that may be a personality trait. Oh, well.
We haven’t seen the first caucus or primary yet, and two Republican contenders already have a Willie Horton problem.
So much for the so-called “law and order” party! yuk yuk yuk
“Cheney? No…he argues strongly and forcefully for what he believes…”
…and implies those who disagree with him are objectively aiding and abetting Al Quaida (i.e., traitors). Loons like Limbaugh, Coulter, Hannity, O’Reilly and Savage pretty much plainly state so.
You, of course, disavow this with all your might. No? Why am I not suprised?
I notice Bush doesn’t give speeches on military bases anymore. You WingNutz (TM) keep telling us all the soldiers love him — so why is he afraid of them?
“Victoria Toensing is also one of the attorneys for Paul Wolfowitz’s girlfriend Shaha Riza.” (Wikipedia)
This lawyer seems to show up wherever there’s Republican
treason or scandal.
@48 We’re much tougher on crime than Republicans are. Remember Clinton’s 100,000 cops? They’re just a dim memory now, as criminals run amok on Bush’s watch. There’s so little law enforcement now they’re even stealing the wiring from street lights.
Roger Rabbit Quiz
Who poses the greatest threat to your safety?
[ ] 1. Iraqi insurgent
[ ] 2. al Qaeda terrorist in Afghanistan
[ ] 3. airline passenger with a baby bottle
[ ] 4. the guy pulling the wires out of the street lights in front of your house
@49 “As wrong in its conclusions as it is, Rabbit, you at least owed the aricle’s author the courtesy of his earned title: it’s Dr. Stiglitz, not Mr. Still…those are his opinions, to which he is absolutely entitled. But they’re not holy writ.”
I imagine if you met Stiglitz in a hotel lobby and told him what you think of his opinions he’d likely reply, “That’s MISTER Stiglitz to you, runt.”
And that’s what you are compared to Mr. Stiglitz, popeye: A runt. He’s a world-renowed economist with a Ph.D. from MIT and a Nobel Prize, and you’re a fucking nobody. The only thing you have after your name is an ex-Esq. As far what’s in front of your name, “Miz” seems to fit you well.
Miz Piper Scott, ex-Esq. … I like it. Has a cheap tinny sound to it that fits you perfectly. Kind of like the “thunk” noise that a piton makes when a mountain climber pounds it into bad rock.
@54 “To allege that I am ‘debarred,’ synonomous with disbarred, is pretty serious.”
Okay, have it your way. You’re unbarred. Or how about defrocked? Or excommunicated? How about if we just say you were too fucking cheap to pay your dues? Your law license must not have been worth much to you.
Main Entry: de·bar
Function: transitive verb
Pronunciation: di-‘bär, de-
Etymology: Middle English debarren, from Middle French desbarrer to unbar, from des- de- + barrer to bar
: to bar from having or doing something : PRECLUDE
– de·bar·ment/-m&nt/ noun
Would you like it better if we said you’re “precluded” from practicing law?
@54 “Now…I’m pretty thick skinned on most stuff”
Nah, I don’t think so. You’re a whiny little pussy.
How you like getting tickled with them thar rabbit claws, kiddo? Retraction my ass, you can kiss my cute cottontail! Have you forgotten I was raised to be a Republican, was trained by Republicans? I never retract anything, and I never apologize for anything — even if I’m wrong!
HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR
debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar debar
Know what “debar” means? Dat’s de place where de Italians go for de drinks! harharharhar
254 “To allege in any way, shape, or form that someone has been disbarred (debarred suffices) is to allege at a minimum seriously unethical, if not outright criminal, behavior. Is that what you contend, Rabbit?”
Of course not. All I said was you’re not a member of de bar anymore.
@54 “Of course, your retraction, correction, and apology would more than assuage my injury.”
Pooor baby! Here, let me kiss your owie! WHACK!!!
HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR
Piper @ 79: “OK…Then describe to me the elements of the underlying crime and what evidence existed or was proffered to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that anyone committed it.”
You actually passed the bar (congratulations, by the way. No, really.) and then write this drivil? Are you trying to have a discussion, or auditioning to be Libby’s mouthpiece?
Is this the standard you would hold drug dealers or gangland syndicates to when prosecuting under RICO? NO? Why not? “Underlying crime” my ass. Victoria Toensing teach you that one? Billy Kristol? John Gotti’s attorney?
Shame on you. Shame. You don’t even know the law.
Hey crackpiper, I have a suggestion for ya, good buddy. If the give-and-take on HorsesAss is too much for your sensitivities, you have another option: Run away like that coward John McDonald did. He lasted only two weeks on this blog. He’s went back to Sucky Politics after getting run out of here. Feel free to join him over there, where you can live happily ever after licking each other’s wounds.
Man this is fun! =:-D
Looks like I found one of Scotty’s buttons.
HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR
I suppose, for decorum’s sake, from now on we should refer to crackpiper being “precluded” from the practice of law. yes, I like that. It’s so much more genteel. We are, after all, gentlemen here. We don’t want anyone to have hurt feelings.
[snicker]
[raucous rabbit laughter in background]
Hey crackpiper, how about if we call you “precluded”? Does that make you happy? We don’t want you to be unhappy! Remember,
Turn that frown
Upside down!
Be happy!
@103 & too many others to count…RR…
Your laughter and demeanor is more that of a hyena than a rabbit, so I’m willing to chalk your behavior and complete lack of decorum to the fact you seek to scavenge on the offal of others.
Still…that you admitted that what you at first snidely sought to aver wasn’t in fact the case is evidence that when pushed, you will back down.
BTW…I still regard you fondly much as one does a crazed relation much like the Randy Quaid character in National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation.
How’s the RV and leisure suit workin’ out for you?
BTW…I’m not out of the WSBA, merely an inactive member…there is a difference.
Chase me off? In your wet dreams!
The Piper
@98…PTBAA…
Dizzy? Does chasing your tail make you dizzy?
What was Fitzgerald charged to investigate?
Was any evidence of a crime discovered during the investigation?
Were the facts upon which Scooter Libbey was convicted in existence at the time of Fitzgerald’s appointment as a special prosecutor?
Had there not been a special prosecutor, would Libby have been convicted of anything?
Net, net, net…violation of the statute governing disclosing the identity of covert intelligence agents was not violated. Evidence sufficient to prove each element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt wasn’t to be found.
You understand anything about this stuff? About how criminal law works?
The Piper
63 – zebra washington said: “Piper: Willie Horton was released under a Republican administration’s governor.”
Dukakis Bio says:
“Dukakis came back to defeat King in 1982 and was re-elected to an unprecedented third four-year term in 1986 by one of the largest margins in history. In 1986 his colleagues in the National Governors Association voted him the most effective governor in the Nation.
“On June 6, 1986, convicted murderer Willie Horton was released from the Northeastern Correctional Center in Concord. Under state law, he had become eligible for an unguarded, 48-hour furlough. He never came back.
Hmmm… My reckoning says you are an idiot! I’m glad you found your idiot gene today!
Zebra:
“On October 20, 1987, Horton was sentenced in Maryland to two consecutive life terms plus 85 years. The sentencing judge refused to return Horton to Massachusetts, saying, “I’m not prepared to take the chance that Mr. Horton might again be furloughed or otherwise released. This man should never draw a breath of free air again.””
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/f.....nted=print
“The furlough program has long been a source of controversy in Massachusetts. As the Dukakis campaign is quick to note, it began in 1972 under a Republican Governor, Frank Sargent. And the most controversial part of the program, the practice of giving furloughs to first-degree murderers sentenced to life without parole, was the result of a decision by the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, which held that such inmates were eligible under the 1972 law that created the program because the statute did not exclude them.”
And that, as Paul Harvey would say, is the rest of the story.
Zebra Washington: More on your “hero” Mike Dukakis
http://forerunner.com/forerunn....._Hort.html
Enjoy revisiting another soft on crime Democrat.
Zebra Washington you wrote: “Piper: Willie Horton was released under a Republican administration’s governor.”
— Ummmm no he wasn’t. Ready to admit defeat!
In the words I first penned here – “Nuff SAID!
You can’t believe anything a Republican says. For instance, Piper avows that there was no “underlying crime” in the Scooter Libby case.
The man was convicted of lying and obstruction of justice. For Piper to then state that Libby is innocent because there was no underlying crime begs the whole queation and is an attempt to confuse and obfuscate — much like Scooter Libby does.
http://www.horsesass.org/?p=3593#comment-701589
Now it’s ’nuff sed! You are obfuscating. Admit that the whole program was concocted by a Republican governor. Sorry chump! You are the defeated one.
“The furlough program has long been a source of controversy in Massachusetts. As the Dukakis campaign is quick to note, it began in 1972 under a Republican Governor, Frank Sargent. And the most controversial part of the program, the practice of giving furloughs to first-degree murderers sentenced to life without parole, was the result of a decision by the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, which held that such inmates were eligible under the 1972 law that created the program because the statute did not exclude them.”
And that, as Paul Harvey would say, is the rest of the story.
Zebra Washington you wrote: “Piper: Willie Horton was released under a Republican administration’s governor.”
— Ummmm no he wasn’t. Ready to admit defeat?
In the words I first penned here – “Nuff SAID!
My original words are above. Anything else is not my words.
re 109: Puddy; Let’s hear about your ‘hero’ Sen. Larry “the tapper” Craig.
ATJ: Broken record?
Zebra Washington let’s recap.
Mike Dukakis is relected for 4th term in 1986. Willie Horton is released in 1986. Did Dukakis become a Republican?
Zebra Washington – You write like headless lucy.
Zebra Washington: I already stated my position on Larry Craig. Go back and read the Wipes archives!
Yer a liar!! You need to GO AWAY, and wear diapers with your friend, Sen. Craig Vitter.
The whole program was instituted in 1972 by a Republican Governor.
Admit it, Bitch!!!
You slammed Dukakis in 1988 with the results of a criminal release program dreamed up by a CRAZY, WEAK-ON-CRIME REPUBLICAN!!!
I can’t fuckin’ breath! Your constant obfuscation and obtuseness is CRAZY!!!!
Zebra Washington you typed: “Piper: Willie Horton was released under a Republican administration’s governor.” Them’s yo words!
That’s the bone of contention.
To help set Zebra Washington to think straight —
Yes you are correct as the Massachusetts inmate furlough program began under Governor Francis Sargent in 1972.
But Governor Dukakis in 1976 vetoed a bill to ban furloughs for first-degree murderers. It would, he said, “Cut the heart out of inmate rehabilitation.”
By March 1987, Dukakis had commuted the sentences of 28 first-degree murderers. Isn’t that amazing Zebra?
The complaint was this program released killers on an “honor system”. On average, in Massachusetts, “life without parole” convicts spent fewer than 19 years in prison. Dukakis wouldn’t stop it.
Yes. An incredibly stupid thing for both Republicans and Democrats to do. The bone of contention is that you tar and feather a Democrat with the results of a progrsm dresmed up by a Republican.
That’s what I mean by lying and obfuscation — and obtuseness.
How can you be so obtuse?
@111 That’s a well-known wingnut talking point. Crackpiper isn’t smart enough to come up with that argument himself.
To put this whole Willie Horton thing in perspective, Dukakis supported the furlough program, but so did his predecessors, including the Republican who signed it into law. The point is, furlough programs hadn’t been discredited by a Willie Horton yet.
It’s easy to look at Horton’s crime with the benefit of hindsight and say, “the furlough program was a bad idea.” Given the after-the-fact hindsight, the Massachusetts legislature repealed the furlough law; and it’s probably safe to say no other jurisdiction will ever enact one.
One thing you won’t here crackpiper, puddinghead, or the other trolls talk about is the difference between the Horton and Dumond cases, namely, Dukakis wasn’t personally involved in Horton’s release but Huckabee WAS personally involved in freeing Dumond.
And Huckabee, unlike Dukakis, had a Horton case in the history books telling him it might be a damned bad idea, both from the standpoints of public safety and his own future political career.
sp correction – hear not here
@104 I haven’t backed down from anything. Imputing “disbarred” from the word “debarred” is your idea, not mine. I vigorously take issue with your doing so. They are two different words with two different meanings.
When you are not an active member of the bar, you are in fact debarred by your unlicensed status from practicing law.
Every time a wingnut loses a war or an argument, he declares victory and goes home. Do you see a pattern here?
@131…RR…
Ever notice how much time you spend talking to yourself? A sure and certain sign of derangement.
BTW…No underlying offense? That the only hide Fitzgerald was able to tack on his barn door had nothing to do with the incident he was assigned to investigate says something about the nature of the alleged “crime.”
And you did back down when you started parsing your words.
Rabbits aren’t the most courageous of animals…
The Piper
@132: “BTW…No underlying offense? That the only hide Fitzgerald was able to tack on his barn door had nothing to do with the incident he was assigned to investigate says something about the nature of the alleged “crime.””
Do tell us about the “underlying crime” of the Starr investigation, Piper.
#125: Written like headless lucy.
Wrong on all accounts whomever you are. History has proven it was Dukakis who didn’t do the right thing. When Bernard Shaw of CNN asked Dukakis in 1988 what would Dukakis do if his wife was attacked, remember the Dukakis response?
Many programs are put in place by people to help others. The Furlough program was put in place to try and help prisoners work their way back into society. Dukakis could have improved the program, but instead injected his politics into the dynamic and if memory serves correct, over 80 prisoners; many of them major offenders like Willie Horton walked from the program during his four terms as governor.
Pelletizer (TM) I realize reading is NOT your strong suit.
Dukakis was directly involved. Dukakis in 1976 vetoed a bill to ban furloughs for first-degree murderers (Willie Horton). It would, he said, “Cut the heart out of inmate rehabilitation.”
For Pelletizer (TM) and Zebra Washington (Headless Lucy).
Darryl is ZW really another HL doppelganger?
Did you know about confessed rapist John Zukoski? In 1970Zukoski, beat and murdered a 44 year old woman, was eligible for the Massachusetts furlough program and he was paroled in 1986. A little later he was arrested and indicted again for what? Guess you two? Beating and raping a woman! All this was because Dukakis vetoed the 1976 bill to keep first-degree offenders out of the program. Hmmm…?
The first step is recognizing that you have a problem and are powerless over your addiction. Your addiction controls you, not the other way around.
http://www.horsesass.org/?p=3593#comment-701589
14 PS
Tagging Romney with Tavares is no different with tagging Dukakis with Horton.
Wrong. Mitt’s comments on Tavares are another sign of his lack of principle and brazen fip-floppery as he runs like hell away from his moderate record as governor, because he knows that only the most bloodhtirsty crazies are going to make it through the GOP primary season.
That’s fine, because he’s providing us all with weapons to use against him if he miraculously (Mormons have miracles, right?) gets the nom and tries to appear “moderate” again.
24
You’re the guys who want to provide lawyers and access to civilian criminal courts to Gitmo detainees!
How silly of us to think that the US Constitution means that the State is not allowed to torture, detain indefinitely without challenge, or refuse due process. It’s sure great to have you around!
Underlying crime-schmunderlying crime. Misdirection and deceit.
Lewis Libby was convicted by a jury who had all the opportunity in the world to hear any and all evidence he wanted to present in his defense. It wasn’t enough, clearly, because a jury of his peers decided that there was evidence beyoond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty of one count of obstruction of justice; two counts of perjury; and one count of making false statements to federal investigators.
None of those counts required and underlying crime, or he could not have been convicted of them. Pleaseremember, for example, the various miscreants in this state who recently had vacated convictions after a court decided that one of the underlying crimes for (I think it was) felony murder should no longer be included.
Lewis Libby lied to the FBI, and he lied on one or more occasions to a grand jury. Sorry, but that’s convictable and jailable, and he was rightly convicted and his sentence should never have been commuted, presidental prerogative notwithstanding. Never before has a sitting president commuted a sentence for a member of the Executive staff convicted of crimes committed while in office. It just shows the criminal nature of this administration.
Besides which, Bush ignored the recommendations of the probation office, went outside the normal course of consulting with the Justice Department’s pardon attorney (who would have obtined input from the US Attorney Fitzgerald), and commuted Libby’s sentence against the wishes of the majority of Americans.
I think Cap Weinberger’s pardon means that if the next Democratic president pardons Rep. Jefferson, Republicans should just keep their hypocritical mouths shut. After all, he just took a bribe, Cap lied to Congress about selling arms to Iran in Iran-Contra.
132
Fitzgerald subccessfully tried, and a jury convicted, Irving Libby of lying to the grand jury and to federal investigators to block investgation of a possible crime comitted in revealing VP’s identity and covert status. You see, that investigation was successfully blocked by his and others’ lying and obstruction of justice. Absent that lying and obstruction, you and I do not know if a conviction on some charge stemming from outing VP would have been obtained.
Unfortunately, the only perp he was able to try and obtain a conviction for was Libby, but the pattern of both the original effort to out VP to tar Joe Wilson was clear, as well as the subsequent attempt to muddy the waters and impede investigation of same.
In February 2004, Bush said, “If the person has violated law, that person will be taken care of…” Boy, was he telling the tuth. He took real good care of Irving.