I used to work for a Democratic senator on Capitol Hill, and we had small televisions on our desks to watch the House and Senate floors, CPAN, CNN, etc. I was on the verge of becoming a conservative, but for some reason I still liked listening to Sen. Robert Byrd prattle on. I especially liked his dramatic gestures when he was making a big point. His colleagues couldn’t hide their boredom, and no one else paid him any attention.
Byrd’s Senate office was across the hall from where I worked. I spotted him talking to his receptionist once, and he saw me trying to catch a glimpse through his entourage. He waved.
I know he was in the Ku Klux Klan, but he was a young man and it was the 1930s. Many whites shared his view of blacks at the time but didn’t join the KKK. Whenever I bring up his affiliation, I’m usually trying to counter the old conservatives-are-racists charge. We all have a past, and we’ve all done things we are ashamed of now. I don’t hold Byrd’s past against him. I really don’t. But I do hold his present against him.
Presently, he’s been accused of comparing conservatives to Nazis on the Senate floor. Byrd disputes the charges, insisting that he used the Nazi reference to warn us against repeating the past, or something like that. Whether his version is true or not, I think it’s time for the old man to retire. According to the New York Times (reg. req.):
“We, unlike Nazi Germany or Mussolini’s Italy, have never stopped being a nation of laws, not of men,” he said. “But witness how men with motives and a majority can manipulate law to cruel and unjust ends.”Mr. Byrd quoted the historian Alan Bullock, saying Hitler “turned the law inside out and made illegality legal.” He said the plan to limit filibusters would have a similar effect.
I don’t think it’s that big a deal, but I have a feeling a blog swarm will develop, one that may “encourage” Byrd to retire. The old man shouldn’t go out like that.
He should just go.
Update (3/4): Check out David Limbaugh’s, “Robert Byrd’s Identification with the Framers.”
{ 2 trackbacks }
{ 48 comments }
A Case of “Do as I say, not as I do”?
Typical liberals….If a Conservative said this, he’d be raked over the coals, but since it’s said by a liberal, it’s only meant to point out historical mistakes (which I don’t think the GOP is making in trying to avert the fillibustering of President Bush’s nominees. Frankly, I think the DEMocrats are abusing their power in this instance)
Dan
I’m not as kindly-inclined as you, LaShawn, but then, I’ve never met Byrd. However, it’s high time Byrd resigned. His latest is only one of many.
Sometimes Byrd’s past doesn’t seem to be “past” by very much. I was watching the TV program where he made the comment that included the term “white n*****.” What immediately struck me is how comfortable he seemed to be with the term “n*****,” as though he still used the word regularly.
LAShawn,
Saw you on the TIVO you did great.
I think people like Byrd don’t belong in the Senate. Ask Trent Lott what happens when you just utter a few words, much less be associated with a hate group like the KKK. What next, David Duke for Senate leader?
Byrd has repeatedly shown he has NOT lost the ways of his younger years. Just look at the recent record.
Byrd was the lead Senator of the filibuster for the Civil Rights Act of 1964, he should be the last to speak about minorities and filibusters.
The Byrd brain is an excellent example of why there should be term limits … The American taxpayers will save incredible amounts of money in transcripting & printing fees (and the tree huggers will save paper) when Byrd is gone….the Congressional Record will probably shrink by 10% when that blowhard has retired!
Every day now crap-merchants like Byrd are getting seen in a diferent light! Finally the MSM has lost their control over what we see and hear.
In my travels I have seen the same “philosophy” used almost everywhere by manipulators like Byrd. Governments controlling poorer nations are classic. “We care about YOU!” “Those other guys are for the RICH!” “Without big men like us you’ld really be in the sh##!” And on and on.
I am so thankful for the blogosphere and bloggers like you for helping to expose the age old scam “leaders” like Byrd perpetuate.
It is ironic that the left says that Republicans are small-minded and racist but when you look at the Democrats and their leadership they seem to promote the ignorant and foolish. Howard Dean and Sen. Byrd are a perfect example. The funny thing is, blacks seem to have turned a blind eye to these facts. It is time for a reality check and to get real. When the Democrats see blacks it is not people that they see but votes to be bought and pawns to be played. When will America wake up?
I don’t think he has any business being in the Senate. Talk about dinosaurs… And a blog swarm is probably right, I just blogged about it, too.
The good senator is hopelessly wrong about virtually everything, and is shamelessly mean and spiteful. Even if all this were not true, I would still want him replaced just by virtue of his disturbingly well-earned title as King of Pork.
La Shawn:
I lived in W VA from 1978 to 1982. After 2 coal strikes, I had enough.
But Byrd was old even then.
A candidate for Governor said that, if elected, he would build a “home for ageing fiddlers” – referring to Byrd.
He hasn’t changed a bit. Neither has W VA. They are still living in 1940’s (labor unions, poor education and economics) – in large part because “the people” there just love Byrd.
I saw Bill Press on TV yesterday, defending Byrd. When someone noted his former klan status, he turned around and called Bush an exalcoholic, Gannon an ex-prostitute, etc on down the list. While the point may have been accurate, the mean spiritedness of his retort was of the variety Press and his cohorts always claim is the domain of the conservative opposition.
And his actual defense of Byrd’s statements? He didn’t really equate or compare Bush to Hitler and the Nazis… he was quoting a historian. So using a historians words out of context to compare the President and his administration to Nazi’s, is A’OK in Bill Press’ world, and absolves Byrd of any responsibility for what comes out of his mouth…
I need one of those foam bricks to throw at the TV for these moments….
Go read about the Wiemar Republic and learn how the Nazi party rose to power. That’s what he was talking about. Context is everything.
Roxanne,
And you’re saying in that context it’s ok. Got it.
And you probably think Howard Deans comments to the effect of “Only if it was hotel staff” is ok too.
*rolls eyes*
Hypocrites.
Roxanne, the Weimar Republic is probably more apt of a comparison to the progressive’s undermining of our individual rights and liberties. IOW, lie & cloud issues in order to further consoldate power. No matter how much the PC crowd takes from us, it’s never enough and eventually they come back demanding more of ours.
Eventually the Weimar was so weak & corrupted, Hitler was able to “take” over and reshape German politics to his vision of how things ought to be. Hmmm, sounds familiar — Dean, an outsider and financed by lurking big-money types takes over the DNC to reshape it to his idea of progressiveness. Rather striking, how history repeats itself.
Let’s look at other parallels:
–Dean hates republicans with all of his heart,
–Dean never shared power with any minorities,
–Dean is only seen with minorities when being brown-nosed or being served by them,
–Dean throws around unsubstantiated accusations of conspiracy and villifies opposition at every turn
–Dean wants to expand socialism on a national scale,
–Dean twists the Bible out of context to support his views (Job is in the NT and he doesn’t like how the story ends?)
Need I go on?
Bottomline, anyone can espouse noble intentions (trains on time, egalitarianism, PC, etc), but if their heart is not in the right place, they will eventually be subverted by absolute power, aided and abetted by a prideful and deceitful heart. This rather paints Dean, Byrd and others of their ilk with the same brush as for Hitler.
I think he is way over the top at this point. Such comments made on the Congress floor just shouldn’t be allowed to stand.
How did this become a discussion about Howard Dean?
Double-triple rolls eyes and does a hand-stand
EVERYTHING is becoming a discussion about Howard Dean. After all, he’s the newly-minted Savior of the Democrat Party.
Putting Dean in charge of getting the Dem party back on track is like hiring the captain of the Exxon Valdez to teach maritime safety classes.
As for the connection to the topic at hand, Dean is simply a newer version of Byrd, complete with the strange behavior and the nasty disposition to go with it.
“Sheets” Byrd has been a disgrace to the U.S. Senate and to the state of West Virginia for almost 50 years. This Grand Kleagle is a racist, hypocritical buffoon. Those who have re-elected him time and time again seem to do so mainly because he has delivered astronomical amounts of pork to their state. They fail to realize this is the main reason they have remained the most economically depressed state in the Union. The voters in that state desperately need a wake-up call and send their doddering senator to the Byrd Home for Retired Klansmen. It’s right down the road from the Byrd Home for Retired Welfare Recipients.
Roxanne sez: “Go read about the Wiemar Republic and learn how the Nazi party rose to power. That’s what he was talking about. Context is everything.”
What context would that be? You do know that there is a Constitutional Option for amending Senate rules, don’t you? Go check out the Harvard Law Review. Byrd was throwing this stuff out their for shock effect and he ought to be slapped down for comparison.
Roxanne: “How did this become a discussion about Howard Dean?”
Answer: I know about the Wiemar Republic and how the Nazi party rose to power.
The closest modern day analogy is Dean & the DNC, and not how Byrd-brain misconstrues it as being applicable to changing an internal congressional rule that is hardly sacrosanct. The so-called nuclear option is about chaning a formality rule, not a law or legal document. Certainly when Byrd uses and changes rules when it suits him.
Goose, meet Gander.
I’m not holding a grudge against Byrd simply because he was in the KKK as a foolish young man or because he was a foolish US Senator and filibustered the civil rights act of 1964. However, I would never be able to vote for a person with that history. His judgment and heart are sorely wanting. The latest gaff is just that: more stupidity and insensitivity. Context? There is no context for making such an inflammatory comparison. If you want to defend the old racist you can rationalize to your heart’s content, but Hitler and the Nazis can only be compared to similarly outrageous, inhuman, murderous, and totalitarian regimes.
Let’s go back to Byrd’s original problem. The fact is that he wants to have the power to block judicial confirmations using a rule of the Senate, not a law, and certainly not the Constitution.
The Constitution does not authorize a super-majority vote of 60% in order to confirm a judge, but that is precisely what the Dem leadership is doing, in effect, by using the Senate cloture rule requiring a 60% vote in order to stop a filibuster. If the Senate chooses to change its own internal rule to cut off filibustering, that is perfectly legal, and quite constitutional.
Byrd’s argument is totally without merit, morally or legally, and smacks of a petulant child throwing a tantrum after being told to clean up his room.
Go read about the Wiemar Republic and learn how the Nazi party rose to power. That’s what he was talking about. Context is everything. Comment by Roxanne…
I don’t have to my grandfather came to this country in 1927, from Germany.
The remark here is Senator ‘Bird’s’comments regarding the Republican partys’ likeness to the Nazis. An absurd statement from an absurd man, perhaps the dumbest man in the entire Senate.
Seems to me I remember a picture on the front page of USA today in Florida, where jack-booted thugs stormed the house where Ilian Gonzalez(sp) was staying and Clintons justice department came in like a bunch of NAZIs, automatic weapons, bullet proof vests and helmets to take, or more appropriately kidnap an 8 year old boy, because Clinton did not want to deal with Fidel for fear of another flood of illegals from Castro, but talk about Nazi tactics, Clinton and Reno are right up there with the ‘paper hanger’ from Austria.
Where were the pompus blowhards from the Democrat party screaming foul, ‘just like the Nazis, ‘ I did not hear peep one from the Klansman from West Virginia.(oops former klansman)
Where in this country, Roxanne, does it cost a ‘wheel barrel full of dollars’ for a loaf of bread. Where in this country is there such chaos that people will accept the word of a nitwit like Hitler and vote for him, except in the mind of a raging left-wing Hysteric like Senator Robert Byrd, and the rest of the hate America first crowd.
I agree with Lashawn the old ‘Man’ should go.
Mark
Senator Byrd should fly home to West Virginny and get a job in #8 coal mine. That job suits him more than a job in Washington DC.
Yes, he should just Go!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dear Frank Zavisca, “They [people of WV) are still living in 1940’s (labor unions,…”
Are you saying that labor unions are a throwback?
Are you suggesting that West Virginia’s coal miners can get better wages, hours, and working conditions without the United Mine Workers Union?
Respectfully,
Dear RedBeard,
You said “Dean is simply a newer version of Byrd, complete with the strange behavior and the nasty disposition to go with it.”
Are you suggesting that Dr. Dean was once a member of the KKK, which seems to be one of the major criticisms of Sen. Byrd around here? If not, what strange behaviors to these two gentlemen have in common, other than being more liberal than you?
And what is your evidence of Dr. Dean’s nasty disposition? The famous “scream” in the wake of a poor showing in the 2004 Iowa Caucuses, whatever it was, was not a sign of nastiness. It was (if you bothered to hear what he had to say to his supporters who were meeting him there) enthusiastic encouragement for them to continue the campaign, despite the poor showing in Iowa. So, you can’t use the “scream” as evidence of his nasty disposition. Do you have any other evidence?
Respectfully,
Dear Andy,
Kindly provide evidence to support your claims that Dr. Howard Dean
1. hates republicans with all of his heart.
2. throws around unsubstantiated accusations of conspiracy and villifies opposition at every turn.
3. wants to expand socialism on a national scale.
Links to websites other than extremely partisan conservative websites would be acceptable sources.
“At every turn” — does that mean daily, weekly, monthly, or what? Surely it means at least monthly. For this claim, please provide links to at least one unsubstantiated accusation of conspiracy thrown around by Dr. Dean for each of the months of September, October, November, and December 2004.
Respectfully,
Dear Mark,
You mentioned the case of Elian Gonzalez. To recap that story, Elian Gonzales was a five-year-old boy whose mother took him from her home in Cuba on a small boat in the hopes of arriving in the United States. Unfortunately, Mrs. Gonzalez did not survive the journey. Juan Miguel Gonzalez, Elian’s father, came from Cuba to retrieve his son, and the two of them returned home.
Unfortunately, Elian’s great uncle, Lazaro Gonzalez, illegally attempted to prevent Elian’s father from having his son back (this is known as kidnapping) so desperate measures were taken to free Elian Gonzalez, who was being held hostage by his great uncle.
If the story had been the other way, and a woman from Florida had taken her five-year-old boy on a small boat to Cuba, and she didn’t make it, but the little boy did, and the American father went to Cuba to pick up the boy and return home to Florida — why — of course — it would be outrageous to say that that little American boy should have to live with a strange great uncle in Cuba, rather than with his REAL father in Florida.
But somehow, here, conservatives, who ordinarily believe that the family trumps just about everything else, can’t get over the fact that a Cuban father has a right to his family, and a right to live where he pleases with his family, and a right to raise his own son.
I’m with the conservatives on this one. Parental rights to raise their children and family rights to stay together and live as they please, where they please, trump everything else.
I only wish the conservatives were as pro-family as they constantly proclaim they are.
Sincerely,
For the record, this conservative was in sharp disagreement with other conservatives in the matter of Elian Gonzalez. The father’s rights to his child trumped any concern about returning to Cuba. If a father wants to raise his kid a communist, he can raise his kid a communist. I was appalled that Elian’s relatives wouldn’t return him to his father and I cheered (yes, cheered) when the government went into the house in the middle of the night to get him. The family had numerous chances to return him, but they essentially forced the government to act in the manner it did. No more sweeping generalizations today, OK? – Admin
Anomalocaris, do you think that the leader of a major political party should say that he hates his opposition and everything they stand for? Dean did precisely that. Do you think it proper for a national leader to say that the opposition party is evil? Dean did so. The bold words are Dean’s own, and indicate a serious lack of self-control and decorum.
Do you think it demonstrates a rational demeanor for Dean to make the ridiculous public statement he did about hotel staff? Do you think Dean was wise and prudent when he publicly called for support from people with the confederate flag in the back window of their pickups? Open mouth, insert foot.
Forget The Scream, as funny as it might have been; it’s not important. But Dean’s actual words are more than enough to indicate that he is not a rational person, and just not very nice.
If Dean were just posting on a board like this, or even running a radio talk show on Air Leftie (or whatever it’s called), a little slack for such bizarre and nasty behavior might be in order. Not so for the leader of a national party. The DNC has very foolishly fouled their own nest with this guy. Good.
Dear La Shawn,
I am pleased to learn of your support for father’s rights in the case of Elian Gonzalez.
Have a nice day,
Anom, don’t make me bring out the nippers again. Yeeaarrgghh!
Everything I just stated above was reported by multiple MSM sources. Just fire up your browser and point at LAT, Boston Globe, WSJ, US News etc and do a web search — granted, just because the DNC ordered that such Deanism be filed permanently in the memoryhole doesn’t mean the truth can’t escape.
Better yet, prove that Dean is not a raving moonbat descended from Kleagles and in turn from the Cambrian super-predator. (nice change up)
That ought to be easier than me posting all the links to the following Deanisms:
–”I hate the Republicans and everything they stand for” [A few days before Dean hoisted the hate flag in Manhattan, five Democratic campaign staffers in Milwaukee were charged with slashing the tires on 25 vehicles rented by the local Republican Party. Among the five Democrats were Michael Pratt, the 32-year-old son of a former Milwaukee mayor, and 25-year-old Sowande Omokunde, whose mother is a member of Congress.]
–”Republicans are evil”
–”Republicans are racists”
–”I don’t want to hear any lectures about Christian values from the Republican Party, they are the Pharisees and the Sadducees.”
–”Republicans get two points from the New Testament while Democrats get about 25.”
–Republicans the party of “fiscal recklessness†with “Enron-style†accounting (really? IIRC Worldcom/Enron et al happened under a dem admin)
–“We have to take a different approach [to diplomacy]. We won’t always have the strongest military.â€
–“We have got to stop having our elections in the South based on race, guns, God and gays and start having them on jobs and health insurance and foreign policy.†(take God out of the equation and you’ll have the sort of crisis that the EU is experiencing)
A quick look at democrat.org shows a website still mired in half-truths and old cum irrelevant news — the type that wouldn’t know reality-based truth if it hit them upside the head with a 2×4.
Don’t get me wrong, we love Dean. Rove, our resident evil genius, was brilliant in positioning Dean as head of DNC.
Dear Andy,
At the time of my previous comments, I was either not aware of or not thinking about Dean’s comment saying that he hates Republicans and all that they stand for. He should not have said this. Dean should have followed the advice to “hate the sin and love the sinner,” and should have said “I love Republicans, but I hate many of the policies they stand for.” In any case, I withdraw question 1.
While your excerpts of Dean’s comments partially substantiate your claim that Dean frequently villifies opposition, they do not in any way support your claim that he “throws around unsubstantiated accusations of conspiracy … at every turn.” Therefore I stand by question 2. Kindly supply at least four such unsubstatiated accusations of conspiracy on the part of Dr. Dean — or even one.
(Alleging reckessness and Enron-style accounting is not the same as accusation of conspiracy. Also, please remember that Ken Lay was a major contributor to George Bush and the Republican party. Your blaming Clinton for the Enron scandal and the WorldCom scandal is just preposterous.)
You have not responded to my request for evidence that Dean wants to expand socialism on a national scale. I take your lack of response as an admission that Dean wants no such thing. In fact, contrary to myth, Dr. Dean was a centrist governor of Vermont and cut state spending.
Democrat.org is not an active website. Perhaps you meant http://www.democrats.org/ (with an S). Like http://www.gop.com/, this is a partisan website. What you call “mired in half-truths” is really just partisan stuff you don’t agree with.
Taking a different approach does not mean giving up America’s role as the world’s number 1 military power. Neither Dr. Dean nor the Democratic party are suggesting giving up that role. Shame on you for suggesting that they are.
(It would be very difficult to give up that role, even if anyone wanted to, given that approximately half of the world’s military expenditures are made by the United States.)
Anom said: “Taking a different approach does not mean giving up America’s role as the world’s number 1 military power. Neither Dr. Dean nor the Democratic party are suggesting giving up that role. Shame on you for suggesting that they are.”
Dean said –“We have to take a different approach [to diplomacy]. We won’t always have the strongest military.â€
Please repeat the question.
As for your comment: “(It would be very difficult to give up that role, even if anyone wanted to, given that approximately half of the world’s military expenditures are made by the United States.)”
Please provide proof of that statement
Since you weren’t aware that Dean said what I said he said, then I take it you are also unaware of the other points I raised. My suggestion to you is to look it up yourself. It’s all there in the wayback machine. The onus is on you and I assure you that I’m right.
As for your comment: “He should not have said this. Dean should have followed the advice to “hate the sin and love the sinner,†and should have said “I love Republicans, but I hate many of the policies they stand for.—
Give me a break. We’re talking about a jerk that “quit’ his church because they refused to give up a piece of their property for a bikepath. Dean knows what he’s about and says what he means. Even Sharpton had to take him down sevral notches.
As for your comment: “(Alleging reckessness and Enron-style accounting is not the same as accusation of conspiracy. Also, please remember that Ken Lay was a major contributor to George Bush and the Republican party. Your blaming Clinton for the Enron scandal and the WorldCom scandal is just preposterous.)”
Did you just crawl out of a rock or something? Ken Lay was a big contributor to both parties. Get in the wayback machine and look at when and where Enron did what they did. It was under the Clinton admin. The house of cards that Enron and Anderson built crumbled under Clinton and it took that long for the facade to be ripped away. Blaming Bush is like blaming the perosn who discovers that the barn door was left open overnite and all the horses had run away.
Anom said: “Are you suggesting that West Virginia’s coal miners can get better wages, hours, and working conditions without the United Mine Workers Union?”
Why are all of the union industries struggling for survival? Because the unions have seen their day in the sun and are being nippered on 4 sides by Federal regulations, non-competitive labor rates, right to work sentiment and automation, thus making them irrelevant about as useful as your mascot.
Dear Andy,
The Dean quote about “taking a different approach” dates back to April 2003. You can read an analysis of this quote at http://slate.msn.com/id/2088896/. Here is the real context. According to Time magazine, Dean “suggested that America should be planning for a time when it is not the world’s greatest superpower: ‘We have to take a different approach [to diplomacy]. We won’t always have the strongest military.’”
What is the problem here? Realizing that China has three times our population and a rapidly-growing economy, it’s plausible that in 40 or 50 years, China might have the world’s strongest military. I am not eager to see this happen, but isn’t it smart to solve problems diplomatically in any case, which would encourage other countries to also solve problems diplomatically, whether they are more or less powerful than us?
In any event, Dean did not say that he wanted to change America’s status as the world’s number one military power. He simply said that it would be prudent to plan for the possibility that we might not always be the world’s number one military power.
U.S. share of world military spending:
http://www.globalissues.org/Geopolitics/ArmsTrade/Spending.asp
World military spending was $956 billion in 2003
For Fiscal Year 2003 the U.S. military fiscal request was $396.1 billion. Actual spending exceeds the request, because of supplemental funding.
396.1 / 956 = 41.4%.
Source: http://www.cdi.org/issues/wme/spendersFY03.html
A chart of Ken Lay’s campaign contributions can be found at
http://www.newsmeat.com/ceo_political_donations/Ken_Lay.php
The totals are:
Republican $159,950
Republican Soft Money $491,810
Democrat $61,960
special interest $62,150
Republican : Democrat ratio = 10.52 : 1
Again, it is preposterous to blame the Enron scandal on the Clinton administration.
Anom,
if you followed the notes from SPIRI (why quote 2nd hand when you can go to the source), you’d see that US expenditures jumped from less than 300 in 2000 to 470 USD Billion in 04. It would behoove you to note that most figures for other countries are from between 1999 & 2001, while US is 2004.
There are a list of other caveats, such as transparency, strength of local currency etc. Bottomline, comparing military expenditures is literally comparing apples to oranges, IOW varying degrees of bang for the buck. Military expenditure is an input measure. As such it is not directly related to the output of military activities, such as military capability. Some countries may pay a soldier $500/year while the US may pay $25,000/year.
Finally, what gets undercounted is the value of military “trade” in which technology & hardware are loaned or sold at massive discounts, sometimes on the order of 10 cents on the dollar. Usually this is done by the 10 largest economies to developing countries. We do this every year and altho solid numbers are hard to come by, I’d guess our giveaway amounts to about 10 Billion/year for stuff worth 30 to 50 billion on the open market.
A more realistic metric of Defense burderns would be to look at it as a % of GDP. Aside form the spike caused by WOT, our budget is about 3.5% of GDP, even when WOT supplementals are added it only comes to about 4.2% of GDP. Over half the countries in the world spend more, from 4% to 10%, some spend even more annually.
Subtract the WOT supplemental and our metric as measured by you would be about 35% of the world’s buget in raw numbers.
Anom,
Dean is clueless and totally lacking on an original thot that hasn’t been preprocessed and reguritated by moonbats and feed back to him via the noise machine. To wit.
Dean either doesn’t understand, is a Johnny-come-lately or is flat out wrong on War & Peace:
* One fear is that we will leave Afghanistan militarily successful, but without rebuilding that nation to ensure we aren’t leaving behind a nation harboring even larger numbers of American-hating terrorists. Defense is not just about building better bombs and intelligence capacity, although these are important. Good defense policy is also about long range vision, and that means engagement with the world. (Nov 2002)
REALITYCHECK: Afghan women hold political office from governor on down, economy growing etc.
* As commander in chief of the US military, I will never hesitate to send troops anywhere in the world to defend the US. But I will never send our sons and daughters to a foreign country in harm’s way without telling the truth to the American people about why they’re going there. And that judgment needs to be made first, not afterwards.(Sep 2003)
REALITYCHECK: Wait till he flip-flops
* I believed from the beginning that we should not go into Iraq without the UN as our partner. We cannot do this by ourselves. We have to have a reconstruction of Iraq with the United Nations, with NATO, and preferably with Muslim troops, particularly Arabic-speaking troops from our allies such as Egypt and Morocco.(Sep 2003)
REALITYCHECK: Umm, we seem to have a domino effect on SWA and now our critics want to jump in and be part of the reconstruction.
* I think Bush’s fundamental flaw in negotiating with North Korea is in fact his refusal to negotiate. The North Koreans in principal have suggested, in return for a non-aggression pact, they would give up nuclear weapons. That is something we should explore in bilateral negotiations.(Nov 2003)
REALITYCHECK: I know bilateral negotions never worked in the past so why try it again hoping for a different outcome? Multilateral negotians were never tred before, so how do we know it won’t work unless we try it???
* On NPR: The most interesting theory that I’ve heard so far — which is nothing more than a theory, I can’t think — it can’t be proved — is that [President Bush] was warned ahead of time [about the 9/11 attacks] by the Saudis. (Dec 2003)
REALITYCHECK: Spreading disinformation and unfounded conspiracy theories for partisan political purposes ???
* w/Ted Koppel: Questioned about whether it would ever be proper for a president to lie to the American people: Dean asked, “Under what circumstances?” Dean then said, “I can’t think of any circumstances, with the possible exception of some sort of national-security matter that would – if some piece of information were put out that would endanger American lives or some circumstance under which peoples’ lives would be in danger or something of that sort.” (Dec 2003)
REALITYCHECK: Flip-flopped
* I opposed the war in Iraq, and I’m against spending another $87 billion there. Our party and our country need new leadership.(Jan 2004)
REALITYCHECK: 59% of Iraqis can’t be wrong. Cost of freedom & democracy: Priceless
* US is less safe as a result of the Iraq invasion, military jets were escorting airlines “for the first time.”(Jan 2004)
REALITYCHECK: Jets have been flying since 9-11, we haven’t had an attack since 9-11 and just recently we have intercepted a message from Osama telling Zarqawi to forget about Iraq and focus on US attacks. So for the past 3 years +, Bush was right about protecting US directly by luring Al Quaida to fight & die in Iraq instead.
* Vote by Lieberman, Kerry, & Edwards sent 500 soldiers to die. (Jan 2004)
REALITYCHECK: I thot the donks were united-ly strong on defense??
* US is no safer with Saddam gone-we’re still losing troops. (Jan 2004)
REALITYCHECK: Bet ya didn’t see 8 million plus purple fingers coming, did ya?? Better the status quo, than to risk blood and treasure to support the march of freedom. Dean, you’re no JFK.
Dean either doesn’t understand, is a Johnny-come-lately or is flat out wrong on Foreign Policy:
* The greatest advance in American foreign policy in the last century was the Marshall Plan. Europe’s 1,000-year history of nearly continuous war is instead today dominated by an economic union, which would not have been possible without the investment of billions of American taxpayers dollars. We have been paid back many times over in trade dollars, and more importantly, in American lives which have not been lost to yet another European war. Our long range foreign policy ought to embrace nation building, not run from it. The most successful countries are those with democracies bolstered by a strong middle class that embraces the full political and economic participation of women. We need a solid game plan to [build] those countries that are not democratic, that treat women as second class citizens and that lack a strong middle class. (Nov 2002)
REALITYCHECK: Can we accuse Dean of plagarizing Bush’s SOTU 2002 & Bush Doctrine??
* International alliances and institutions are the backbone of a stable international order. The more that our destinies are intertwined, the greater the shared sense of purpose, the more we must work together successfully to address the difficult challenges ahead. We must fully integrate Russia and China into the international community as our partners. (Jun 2003)
REALITYCHECK: And what have we been doing all this time??
* I have as much foreign-policy experience as Bush did when he got into office. And Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter. The important part is to have very good people talking to me about foreign policy, and to use judgment and patience. (Oct 2003)
REALITYCHECK: And history will write what about each of them? So who is grounded in realities and who’s in fantasy land?
* I have a long-standing relationship with Canada. Repairing our relationship with Canada requires the same solution that repairing our relationships with the rest of the world requires, and that is the removal of a president whose arrogance and contemptuousness for others overrides the respect that is necessary between parties to conduct international relations. (Nov 2003)
REALITYCHECK: Given the current left hand not knowing what the right hand incoherence in Canada, which hand would Dean be talking to?
* I don’t think we have any choice. I supported the first Gulf War. I supported the Afghanistan war. Our people had been killed. We have a right to defend ourselves. But now we can’t just cut and run. We need to bring troops from Arabic-speaking nations in so this is an international reconstruction and not an American occupation. And I think, yes, the UN can do that. (Nov 2003)
REALITYCHECK: Still waiting on the UN. Altho given their sexual gratification tendencies, I doubt if Iraqis would prefer rapists over “occupiers”. At least I’m not hearing calls for the UN to step in from the Arab Street.
* When George W. Bush was running for president in 2000, he pledged a foreign policy based on humility. Instead, our foreign policy has ended up based on humiliation. After September 11, 2001, most of the world had such goodwill toward our country. It is amazing to me how that goodwill has been completely squandered in just two years. Increasing numbers of people in Europe, Asia, and in our own hemisphere cite America not as a pillar of freedom and democracy, but as a threat to peace. (Dec 2003)
REALITYCHECK: And after March 1, 2005, increasing numbers of people cite America as what?? A pillar of freedom & democracy? How on God’s green earth could that be? A frustrating reality-based world indeed for moonbats.
* 1st act as POTUS will be to visit international allies to undo damage. (Jan 2004)
REALITYCHECK: 11 months later, Bush visited international allies and critics begin introspective questioning that perhaps Bush Doctrine was right after all
Dean either doesn’t understand, is a Johnny-come-lately or is flat out wrong on Homeland Security
* I do have national security experience. Every single governor since September 11 has had to deal with security issues in homeland security. That’s why I don’t think the president is doing a particularly good job. (May 2003)
REALITYCHECK: Pretzel Logic. And every single president since September 11 has had to deal with security issues in homeland security.
* Shift $1B per year from missile defense to threat reduction. (Jul 2003)
REALITYCHECK: Threat reduction means what? A strong defense mitigates threats.
* Not reduce military spending but rather “redirect” it toward the development and implementation of renewable energy technology, homeland security measures to fund local first responders, inspect container ships and protect nuclear sites, and the purchase of old nuclear materials in Russia. (Aug 2003)
REALITYCHECK: Renewable energy as a form of defense?? IOW, reduce actual defense spending by focusing on other stuff that has nothing to do with maintaining a standing military. Ok genius boy.
* I believe [Americans] are ready for leadership that would strive not to divide the world into ‘us versus them,’ but rather to rally the world aroundÿ fundamental principles of decency, responsibility, freedom, and mutual respect. Our foreign and military policies must be about the notion of America leading the world, not America against the world. Presidents Truman, Eisenhower, and Kennedy built and strengthened international institutions, rather than dismissing and disparaging the concerns of allies. (Dec 2003)
REALITYCHECK: Duh!!! And when internationl institutions act like children and have dictators sitting on security & human rights committees??? Hello? Houston calling Space Cadet!!
* We need a concentrated attack on Al Qaeda and on Osama bin Laden. Saddam Hussein has been a distraction. (Jan 2004)
REALITYCHECK: Yeah! Right! Gotcha!
Conclusion: Dean is a joke and an embarassment to the medical profession. If he treated patients like he proposes to treat the US…
Anom: “Again, it is preposterous to blame the Enron scandal on the Clinton administration.”
Again, it is preposterous to blame the Enron scandal on the Bush administration.
People are responsible for their personal actions. Or do you believe as Putin does that Bush has puppetmaster power over media & corporations? Again, look at the crime timeline. Enron/Anderson started what they did under the Clinton admin and it began falling apart even before the 2000 elections before collasping in bankruptcy in 2001.
According to your favorite MSM source, dated 12 Jan 2002:
Enron officials have acknowledged that the company has overstated its profits by more than $580 million since 1997.
In a six-week downward spiral last fall, Enron disclosed a stunning $638 million third-quarter loss, the Securities and Exchange Commission opened an investigation into the partnerships and the company’s main rival backed out of an $8.4 billion merger deal.
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/01/12/enron.qanda.focus/
Repeat after me, 2 plus 2 equals 4, not 3, not 5.
As for political donations, Ken/Enron/Anderson/WorldCom and most other crooks wer equal opportunity donors. If there were more dems representing them, then the Dem share of the donation pie would have been porportionally larger.
Conclusion: faulty logic to assume politicians and crooks were in bed together for the purpose of looting the stock market or manipulating some scheme just because of the size of legal donations. On the otherhand, where there is the whiff of illegal donations, then there is typically a fire. If you can prove that Bush conspired to accept illegal donations from Ken lay, I’m all ears
Get real!!
Anom, one more stake in the hearts of the cabal of anti-American donks;
The North Koreans posted their Memorandum of DPRK Foreign Ministry on 2 Mar 05, about why they insist on bilateral talks with the US.
Excerpt: “Senator Kerry, who ran for presidency on the Democratic ticket during the 2004 U.S. presidential election, when interviewed by the New York Times on Sept. 12 openly criticized the Bush administration, saying that it refused to directly negotiate with north Korea after its emergence, bringing a nuclear nightmare. Foreign Policy Focus, the organ of the U.S. institute for international policy studies, in an article dated Feb. 22, 2005, said that Bush has taken a very rough approach towards north Korea in military and diplomatic aspects since the outset of his office and this let it have access to nukes.
In an editorial dated Feb. 11, 2005 the New York Times said that north Korea declared its access to nuclear weapons because the Bush administration made an error while leading it to isolation. It justly criticized the Bush administration, saying that its reaction to north Korea till now has been unreasonable and, accordingly, there should be a radical switchover in its future engagement.
There’s almost 5,000 words of references to, and recited MSM/DNC talking points used by NK as their justification for “Bush is evil”
http://kcna.co.jp/item/2005/200503/news03/04.htm#1
It just doesn’t get any better than to have the enemy do the factchecking for us bloggers.
Again, Byrdbrain, Deaniac, sKerry, Jiminy (attack of the Wabid Wabbits) Carter, mAddledbrain Dimbright and every other anti-American needs to GO!! The sooner, the better for America’s homeland.
My guess that byrd brains upset becuase there no longer will be money for his pork barrel spending what a dip-wad why dont he just resign in too long and frankly him and ted kennedy should both retired they sound like their screws are lose
If you call for Byrds resignations then you should also call for Sen.Gramms, Sen. Sessions, Rep. King, and Sen. Inhofe
“Now, forgive me, but that is right out of Nazi Germany. I don’t understand…why all of a sudden we are passing laws that sound as if they are right out of Nazi Germany.”
-Sen. Gramm, R-TX, September 5, 2002 (speaking in opposition to a Democratic tax plan)
“That, Mr. Speaker, is a modern-day equivalent of the Nazi prison guard saying ‘I was just following orders.’ It was all legal in Nazi Germany at the time.”
-Rep. King, R-IA, September 8, 2004 (speaking in opposition to a legal ruling on abortion)
“We certainly have all seen the rejections of Nazi Germany’s abuses of science. As a society and a nation, there ought to be some limit on what we can allow or should allow.”
-Sen. Sessions R-AL, October 11, 2004 (speaking in opposition to stem cell research)
“He also said that imposition of the Kyoto Protocol ‘would deal a powerful blow on the whole humanity similar to the one humanity experienced when Nazism and communism flourished.’ And that was the chief economic advisor to Russian President Putin. The world has certainly turned on its head that we Americans must look to Russians for speaking out strongly against irrational authoritarian ideologies.”
-Sen. Inhofe, R-OK, October 11, 2004 (speaking in opposition to the Kyoto Protocol)
Unless we live in Virginia, Byrd’s not our problem. If we want to blame anyone, it should be the people of Virginia, white and black, that keep electing him. He represents them, not us. He’s not really any of our business. The reason he’s still there is the same reason any of them from either party seem to stay on forever. He brings home the bacon. That’s what most politics is about….dividing up the tax pie. That’s why the issues of “conservative” and “liberal” are a canard. None of them can stay in office if they don’t bring home the bacon. Most of their public pronouncements on this issue or that are a veneer to hide what’s going on underneath. Byrd must be doing and saying exactly what the vast majority of Virginians want him to do and say. Even with Falwell and Robertson camped out there for 50 yrs each, he doesn’t have to bat an eye.
I think I messed up. Byrd’s from WEST Virginia, right? Anyway, same problem.
If he’s in DC, he’s the whole nation’s problem. We have to right to look at WV and Robert Byrd, and say “WTF?!?”
SPOKEN LIKE A TRUE KLANSMAN!
Wuzzy,
Again, our beef is with the voters of W VA. It doesn’t matter where he lives. If Americans have a problem with Feinstein and Boxer, there beef is with me and mine. We’re the ones who put up such pathetic candidates to oppose them. You don’t like Byrd? Blame it on the ones who voted for him and the ones who didn’t put up a strong enough candidate to beat him.
Sorry…”there” should be “their”.
Comments on this entry are closed.