There’s no other word for it. Martha Stewart, who lied about a stock trade, was locked up for five months and must endure an electronic bracelet and home confinement.
Meanwhile, former government hack Sandy Berger, who stole classified documents from the National Archives (by stuffing them down his pants) to help John Kerry and his former boss, plead guilty to a misdemeanor despite the national security risk his act posed.
Perverts who molest children go free instead of into the electric chair where they belong. When they’re released from jail, if they were ever in jail, they’re allowed to live among decent people and continue to molest. Some escalate to killing their prey.
I’ll let you do the talking because I don’t have anything more substantive to say. It’s just…senseless.
Update (2:50 p.m.): The stakes must be getting higher because things are escalating. A couple of liberal bloggers have nothing better to do than blog negatively about me (with crudeness thrown in for good measure). The troll with the anti-La Shawn site is infecting other bloggers who comment and trackback here. (I apologize.) And something I knew would happen has happened. Someone or several people are impersonating me on other blogs, signing my name to comments.
Commenters may want to start omitting full names. One of my readers uses his first and last names on this blog, and he received a crank telephone call last week from an idiot delivering a nasty message that he said was from me.
There’s nothing I can do about any of this on my own strength, so I ask for your continued prayers. My consolation is this:
You are of God, little children, and have overcome them, because He who is in you is greater than he who is in the world. They are of the world. Therefore they speak as of the world, and the world hears them. We are of God. He who knows God hears us; he who is not of God does not hear us. By this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error. (1 John 4: 4-6)
Satan’s minions are bound and determined, but we know how the story ends: they lose. Wait a minute…now that I think about it, they’ve already lost. 
{ 3 trackbacks }
{ 99 comments }
Some say my outlook is extreme, LB, but as this country as a whole (with the exception of some) walks away from God, and His natural order of things, it stands to reason that all order will slowly unravel.
Right becomes wrong, and wrong becomes right.
It just goes to show how corrupt our government has become over the years. Bergler should be in jail, and quite frankly, Clinton belonged there too.
It might make sense to me. The more I think of it, Berger is like the janitor for some CEO who, while rifling through his boss’s desk discovered stacks of porn mags. He’s been reassigned, and hushed up. The point is, he’s a nobody, but these documents are damning to somebody, and the powers that be have decided to live with the sin to cover a bigger crime too embarassing to reveal. If that’s not close to what’s going on, it truly is a senseless situation.
And I agree with Jim. The more we isolate God from our daily earthly lives, hauling out our faith only when it’s not controvertial, we lose site of right from wrong….His right from wrong, that is. In the end there is no reliance on God’s direction, only recitation of His word without putting it into practice.
The point seems to be that Berger is guilty of a far more serious crime and should be punished accordingly, not that Stewart is deserving of any less punishment than she has earned.
My only hope is that Berger was given a deal in exchange for damning testimony against his boss(es). It’s a slim hope, but it’s all I have.
Slim is exactly right!
Reminds me of Isaiah 5:20 –
Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil;
Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness;
Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!
To a great degree I think we have the ACLU to thank for this inverted justice scale. With goals like the normalizing of perversion and the attempted removal of God from society they are a leading force in redefining evil as righteousness and righteousness as evil.
I agree with all of you, but one question directed to RedBeard: Who would the testimony be given to? I imagine that any damning evidence fell beneath Berger’s shears and Berger’s testimony would be considered nothing more than anecdotal. Bill Clinton is certainly not going to put his own face out there and neither will Richard Clarke.
Berger is a thief, Clinton also lied to authorities, and Martha got railroaded. The Justice System is falling down (I know, I deal with it everyday) and we stand and shake our heads. I’m with Michael Savage, the men in this country have ruined it! Time for the women to take over and set it right!
Martha Stewart (as much as I adore her) made a very foolish choice and paid dearly for it.I always wondered if she had been a man would the outcome of her case had been the same??
La Shawn:
My wife and the Pope are Polish, and so is Martha. So I am biased.
But look at the results – Martha got more free publicity by the trial and afterword than she could ever afford.
It would be jsut great if she could send the prosecuting attorney and the judge some “Thank You” notes – on Martha Stewart stationary.
1 Under Berger, the CIA and FBI were more worried about Affirmative Action in hiring than whether the applicant spoke Arabic.
2 Under Berger, the Security Apparatus was looking behind every door for “Angry White Males” like Matthew Hale an Eric Rudolph and ignoring Islamists attending flight schools.
Berger is also an embarassment to the Bush administration, because they continued many of the same corrupt policies. Solution? Sweep Berger under the rug. [In third world countries, Berger would simply disappear].
Keep preaching, La Shawn. The very same thought crossed my mind. The inequity of our legal system seems ridiculous. The man that killed Jessica Lunsford had a record as long as my arm, and he was free to hurt a defenseless child. Meanwhile, Martha is the one that is constantly monitored. It makes no sense at all and it breaks my heart.
Let’s say Sandy Berger had instead committed the unspeakable crime of being brain-damaged and on a feeding tube. The judicial system would have leaped over the Constitution in a single bound to make sure he was properly executed. Where’s Judge Greer when you really need him?
But not to worry, Berger can get his classified access back in three years. I wonder how many times you can steal classified materials before your credentials are revoked permanently?
I don’t believe Martha was rail-roaded. Let’s not forget, she sold soon-to-be worthless stocks, and she knew what was coming. And do you know who bought them? Small time investors like me and you. They got stuck with these dogs and lost their shirts. Instead of taking the loss from the risk that she took, Martha unloaded these things knowing that someone else would take the loss. That’s fraud folks. No matter how we try to dress it up as some friendly hat tip from her broker, there’s no getting away from the fact that she swindled unsuspecting people who trusted the system. She got what she deserved. Now that she’s out, she’s free to start all over again. Hopefully this time with a bit more humility.
Berger on the other hand…well…that’s where I’m still left scratching my head.
“Senseless”
Yep. And if you want the trend to continue, keep voting Democrat.
Weren’t the Rosenbergs charged with stealing Atomic secrets and giving them to the Russians ?
According to some democrats Burger is nothing but a big dumb stumbling fool, ‘never meanin’ no harm’, just trying to help Hanoi johns campaign.
Now look at who was helping who. First the Rosenbergs were helping the Soviets , a communist state.
Burger was helping Hanoi John Kerry a former puppet fot Madame Binh of a communist state.
Double standard ? Had Burgler been a Republican he would be spending the next 20 years at Levenworht.
Martha was guilty. However, the stock has climbed as a result of her notoriety. She paid some time in jail and will spend some time in house arrest. OK. Big deal.
Berger was also guilty. He loses his clearance until 2008 (think there might be an election then?) and pays a $10,000 fine.
Clinton was also guilty of predatory sexual practices, lying under oath, giving secrets to the Chinese, and pandering pardons at the last minutes in office. He paid — OK, he lost — er, wait a minute!! And Berger was covering for who??
Is there a trend here? Hillary who? When? How could that ever happen??
Is that a National Security Threat Analysis in your pants or are you just happy to see me?
It was not Sandy Berger who should be punished.
It’s the scissors. They did all the damage. Had Sandy Berger not been forced – forced – to hold the scissors as they madly cut up the documents, there would be no discussion.
Sandy Berger is innocent. But Fiskars must pay.
(Remember, Sandy’s excuse is that he “inadvertently” cut up the documents. I mean, how else can you explain “inadvertently” cutting up documents you pulled from your pants unless you have demon-scissors?)
I work in a DOD facility, if I did what Burger did I would lose my clearance forever! I would be in jail for a long time. They need to fix this now!
Your post reminded me again–as if I needed a reminder–why I quit law school this year after completing one semester. After going through one semester, I read enough nonsense to convince me that the law does not have the solutions to life’s problems. Now, I am doing what I knew God was calling me to do before I went to law school: I’m going to seminary and into the ministry.
I can’t agree with a lot of what the Pope believed and taught, but I can agree with him on this one: “Jesus Christ is the answer to the question that is every human person.” (Pope John Paul II) The law does not, cannot, and will not make a difference in the lives of humans the way the Savior does, can, and will.
I agree that it’s screwed up. But on another level, this was probably one of the few times in Martha’s hectic, successful life that she had time to think about eternity. So I prayed for her while she was in the slammer.
I have heard it said over and over that we are a nation of laws. What is not said is that the interpitation of these laws is twisted and distorted by unethical lawyers and judges and once it is rulled upon this distortion in itself has become the law. What happend to our moral law? What about if it is right or wrong…does this not matter anymore?
I have a simple solution to all these problems. Pass the following law and the situation will take care of itself.
Suggested New Law: A lawyer may not hold a public office including being a judge.
Think about every situation you can imagine and I think you will agree, if we had this law and adhered to it, we would not have the situation you are thinking about.
We need a Devil’s Island where we can isolate people from children.
In a moonbat world, liberalism is THE saving grace.
Commit pedophila and the system will forgive you and try to rehabilitate you again and again and … Why? Because obviously the system failed somehow and somewhere and since it is the system’s fault, “we” must try to rectify that failure. These “sinners” are not unwanted, therefore we must use everything short of harsh punishment to restore balance and harmony in GAIA.
OTOH, if you reject liberalism and choose capitalism/conservatism, then you should be twice punished, once for the crime and again for the crime of being greedy. And if you are unwanted, then we must abort or pull the plug.
Just keep in mind, there are two types of capitalists, the selfish greedy like Martha, Ken Lay et al — throw the book at ‘em. And then there’s the social-capitalist like Soros, Kerry who use their wiles to fund the leftist and social causes and their personal wealth is their just reward for support.
Note to Martha: if you had followed the leftist talking point memo early on, all would have been forgiven.
Side note, wasn’t there a fatwa put on Soros way back when he was blamed for wrecking Indonesia’s economy? So why is he indirectly supporting the Islamofacists?
…and Ken Lay is still at large…
Cowchain,
Hmmmm, that sounds alright . . . I like that for a start. But i still want the federal judges to be accountable to the people they preside over.
W.NM.
Steve Matlock is exactly right. It must be the scissors!
When some teenager goes on a rampage shooting his school and himself, it is always the gun (not the now-deceased teen) that must be controlled.
Libs of the world, UNITE. We must implement Scissor Control immediately!
We have Cardinal Law hosting a funeral for the Pope…a guy who’s responsible for HUNDREDS of rapes and molestations in the Catholic Church…and your concern is why Sandy Berger isn’t being treated like Martha?
Please.
Have the sense to get some priorities for crying out loud.
Oh and incidentally…the answer to your request over at PK is “no”.
Carla, that was not me. Some coward is impersonating me. – Admin
If the comments aren’t sensible, why is it bad form not to point that out? Do the comments exist only as a way for you to gain validation, or are you truly interested in feedback?
When I say “the comments” at the beginning, I mean the blogauthor’s comments. Sorry if that was unclear.
The Wall Street Journal investigated the Berger case http://opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110006521
and contacted the Justice Department, which, remember, has been part of the Bush administration for over four years:
“So we called Justice Department Public Integrity chief prosecutor Noel Hillman, who assured us that Mr. Berger did not deny any documents to history. ‘There is no evidence that he intended to destroy originals,’ said Mr. Hillman. ‘There is no evidence that he did destroy originals. We have objectively and affirmatively confirmed that the contents of all the five documents at issue exist today and were made available to the 9/11 Commission.”
That’s the Bush administration Justice Department speaking, and the Wall Street Journal accepts this analysis: “the picture that emerged is of a man who knowingly and recklessly violated the law in handling classified documents, but who was not trying to hide any evidence.”
If Sandy Berger is as corrupt as some suggest, why are both the Bush administration’s Justice Department and the Wall Street Journal as sympathetic as they are?
If Berger did have evil intent, I think it could have been to cover up something on behalf of the Clinton administration, but I don’t think there’s good reason to believe he was trying to do a favor of some kind for John Kerry, as La Shawn and others suggest.
And even if the purpose was a cover-up, it’s still unfair to compare him to atom spies. After all, there were numerous participants in the Watergate coverup of 1972-1974, and I don’t think any of us would compare those gentlemen to atom spies.
Finally, Mark, it’s not correct to speak of “the Rosenbergs” as if they were both guilty. FBI chief J. Edgar Hoover acknowledged after the fact that there was never any good evidence against Ethel Rosenberg, and that the death penalty was persued against her in the hope that Julius Rosenberg would confess everything in order to save her. Between the two of them, there was at most one atom spy, not two. In short, Ethel Rosenberg was murdered by the state, based on the admissions of the prosecution.
LaShawn:
First of all, thank you for letting me know that you were being impersonated. I appreciate it.
Secondly, I am in fact noting that there is a fundamental lack of common sense in the statements regarding Berger and Stewart. There are much more dangerous and disgusting people in the world. Stewart and Berger barely rate as criminals in comparison.
For example, one of those individuals is currently being considered for nomination as UN ambassador. How does an individual who completely allowed massive amounts of fissile material to go loose and potentially get into the hands of terrorists allowed to avoid prosecution?
Amen LaShawn….they have lost already….I wonder how it feels to be always in the “Losers” catagory? Maybe some day they will realize that all is not ‘lost’…and can come over to Christ’s side. By humbling themselves, asking forgiveness for sin, and letting Christ live in them and through them….such a better way to live! But they have to be willing….
…from my own worthless blog,regarding “Sticky Sandy”
http://jerseynut.blogspot.com/2005_04_01_jerseynut_archive.html
If this were a Republican involved, we would have heard:
1)the word “Watergate” applied as often as the media has applied “Vietnam”
2)countless editorials crying out “Full Disclosure!,” “Taking Responsibility,” “Republican Obstructionism” as well as endless calls for investigations on who knew what and when…
3)concerns about an election “compromised” by the stealing of internal documents
4)non-stop coverage, both front-page and broadcast lead-in, on this scandal.
sigh….
LaShawn, you continue to speak the truth! Please continue letting your light shine before men.
I don’t think you were prioritizing one criminal act over the other as it appears one of the commenter’s was alluding to.
Gary, great reminder. Folks need to stop skirting around the truth and justifying Martha’s actions. If we all had the same “info” or was it “intuition” as Martha . . . well, I just wonder.
“..” this was probably one of the few times in Martha’s hectic, successful life that she had time to think about eternity” MJ, my intuition tells me Not. Anyone sending her attorneys to push for more “preferential treatment” when they just got away litely, shows me that where one spends eternity is unfathomable.
. . . and because lawlessness will abound, the love of many will grow cold. But he who endures to the end shall be saved (Matt 24)
The standards for outrage changed quicker than Law did. Priest daliance with altar boys was a running joke. Only recently was it determined that such acts ruined lives and rated million dollar poltices.
walter, are you attempting to say that child molestation was considered OK until recently, and that Law just didn’t get the memo?
I sure hope not.
Not to sound pessimistic, but it seems to me that some folks may be overreacting. Whether you agree or disagree with the pleas in these various cases, please understand that the law favors compromise over all.
The time and expense of trial, even a ’slam dunk,’ is not necessarily the best use of judicial resources.
Sandy Berger, Martha Stewart, even Michael Jackson’s cases are often more trouble than they are worth. If they will plea out, the Gov’t is really attracted to that; Judges too.
La Shawn – you know that you’re doing something right when the forces of darkness attempt to silence you. Be encouraged about the tremendous impact you are making on a lot of people as an instrument for good. God Bless.
forces of darkness? Silencing?
Er?
Ms. Barber–
FYI, your imposter has struck at my corner of the Web as well:
http://alsoalso.typepad.com/also_also/2005/04/cardinal_lawles.html
At least I assume it’s the same one trying to bedevil Preemptive Karma. In any case, I accept that it’s not you–and I invite you to peruse the site and offer comment as you wish. That goes for anyone here, obviously. We accept the forces of light AND darkness.
its not senseless that Martha was punished, however it is senseless that others are not punished, based soley on their “being” … to paraphrase Animal Farm … once some animals become more equal than others everyone loses.
Fwiw, La Shawn, the comment at my site didn’t come from a liberal wacko impersonator, but from from wacko conservative at a new anti-ACLU blog. Perhaps, he/she feels you being both black and not enamored with the ACLU, that using your name in the stupid posting makes some kind of point. I have the person’s ISP if you’re interested.
Will you e-mail the ISP to me? See “Contact Me” in the right sidebar – Admin
Dont ya just love the “progressive, tolerant,” far left liberals? They are sooooo open minded.
La Shawn,
Everything in Scripture points to the fact that “they” will win…until the Second Coming of Christ and the ushering in of eternity. Prepare for the worst.
keep your chin up LB
Sorry, I should have Emailed it to you. It doesn’t necessarily mean that YOUR opponents win and the fight must go on no matter what because it is right.
And last time I checked, we’re still supposed to love our enemies. That’s what makes us different, not our “correct” political philosophy.
Is Tae still at it? He is such a child. Not much past puberty in the emotional development area.
Just ignore them.
Keep the faith.
Saintknowitall
Finally, Mark, it�s not correct to speak of �the Rosenbergs� as if they were both guilty. FBI chief J. Edgar Hoover acknowledged after the fact that there was never any good evidence against Ethel Rosenberg, and that the death penalty was persued against her in the hope that Julius Rosenberg would confess everything in order to save her. Between the two of them, there was at most one atom spy, not two. In short, Ethel Rosenberg was murdered by the state, based on the admissions of the prosecution.
Comment by Anomalocaris � 04.12.05 @ 2:59 pm
———————————————————————–
Really, sorta like Terri Schiavo eh ?
But in the case of Ethel and Julius they were both guilty.
According to Nikita Khrushches memoirs 1990, The late former Soviet Primier gushed about the very significant help given to the Soviets by the Rosenbergs in accelerating the production of the Russian atomic bomb. Khrushchev almost dedicated his book to the Rosenbergs, He said, ” let this be a worthy tribute to the memory of the Rosenbergs. Let my words serve as an expression of gratitude to those who sacririced their lives to the great cause of the Soviet state at a time when the U.S. was using its advantage over our state to blackmail ou state and undermine its proletarian cause.”
Khrushchev book was also backed up by the Venona Tapes released by the KGB about how helpful the rosenbergs were and all of the communists in the Roosevelt and Truman administration, who were helping the Communists
Get your facts straight .
The Rosenbergs were guilty and got what any traitor should get, the Electric Chair.
Hey Anormalcaris try rooting for the good guys for a change
I have missed your blog for the past few days (I am on travel) but of course, nothing has changed. You are in my prayers and I don’t think I can add anything that has not already been said. Like you pointed out yourself, they’ve already lost
There seem to be a lot of people who don’t understand the phrase: “It is finished”.
Game, set, match! The fat lady has sung! The curtain has dropped! Turn out the lights, the party’s over! ad nauseum!
I know it’s tangental, but I couldn’t resist!
Mark, good work on setting the Rosenberg caper straight. Sort of like other memes running around that so & so was railroaded.
Looks like all the looney left has left is prank phone calls and pie throwing. Or should we call them Nazi intimidation tactics?
TO ANY MOONBAT THAT WANTS TO INDULGE IN HARASSMENT
BRING IT ON !!!
But you won’t go after those that can come back to you … will you??? Coward.
About Martha’s guilt/innocence…
Some here are saying she committed fraud by insider trading. You have misunderstood her charges. She was neither tried nor convicted of insider trading. The “fraud” of which she was convicted was lying about her innocence (of insider trading) to prop up the prices of her Omnimedia stock. Does that make sense? She was found guilty of proclaiming her own innocence of a crime she wasn’t formally charged with committing.
“It seems bizarre to charge a person with fraud when all she does is publicly proclaim her innocence under a system of justice which requires the state to prove guilt, and which allows defendants to maintain their innocence. After all, a proclamation of innocence, even containing a false assertion, is the natural way for a person charged to put the state to its proof.”
(Robert Weisberg, Sr. Law prof at Stanford,as quoted in the Wall St. Journal, 1-24-04, with regards to the Martha Stewart case)
Hi,
I am so sorry to hear about the personal low attacks against you. After hearing from some new talk radio guy who is apparently the great white hope for the liberals to reconquer the airwaves, I am afraid we are in for a whole lot more trashing, misquoting, lying and manipulation. The left, to the extent that they have sided with the enemy (at all levels) will lose, but that does not mean they will lose in a pleasant fashion. Hang in there. Your faith is much more profound than the low-class unethical liars who attack you.
regards,
The most interesting thing about the Stewart case is not that she was convicted, but that she was convicted of the crime of “deceiving a Federal Agent”. Anyone who seriously loves liberty should reflect very dillegently upon whether this “crime” should even exist.
Consider the following scenario: An FBI agent comes knocking on my door to ask a few questions about my neighborhood. I answer his questions and the agent knocks on the door of my next door neighbor, who gives a different set of answers. In such a case, I strongly suspect that both I and my neighbor between us have just given the FBI “probable cause” to arrest us for “deceiving a Federal Agent”.
The mere fact of federal arrest is enough to ruin most people financially, whether they are innocent or guilty. This sort of financial ruin through arrest is the most powerful weapon federal prosecutors have against anyone, far more powerful than genuine evidence of guilt.
This just in: Martha Stewart Inc. has just announced a new line of products designed with the home-confined ex-con in mind. The line includes a variety of socks and stockings bulky enough to cover the bulging ankle bracelet, yet slender enough to be stylish. A variety of colors and patterns are available.
In addition, a medicated salve designed specifically for the irritating skin rash caused by the chafing of the bracelet will be available sometime in May. The cream, odorless and colorless, is absorbed into the skin in less than a minute and is guaranteed to leave it soft and smooth, even beneath the strangulating grip of the bracelet.
Here’s the problem:
You supply the motive for Sandy Berger taking papers from the National Archives. Let’s see your proof. How do you know it was to help Kerry, whose campaign he’d join months later, or to help cover up something for Bill Clinton, who had been out of office for three and a half years? The incident happened, if I’m not mistaken, back in the Fall of 2003, before Berger was officially working for Kerry. It was floated to the press during the Presidential campaign and used as a football for the mechanized right-wing between the Swift Boater lies.
Was Martha Stewart overcharged and overprosecuted? Seems like it to me, which speaks volumes for the current Justice Department, doesn’t it? Can’t wait till they get around to the Plame case. Is Ken Lay still walking the streets.
Dear Mark,
Sorry to burst your bubble, but the Venona project documents point to Ethel’s innocence, not guilt. For one thing, actual spies always had code names. Julius Rosenberg’s code name was “Liberal.” Ethel was just plain Ethel, without a code name. J. Edgar Hoover’s own acknowledgment is pretty damning to the theory of Ethel’s guilt. In any event, just for the sake of argument, even if Ethel had been a spy, they did not know this at the time, and evidence since then points to her innocence. She was not “guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.” She was executed because it was hoped that her death sentence would motivate Julius to talk. Even if that motive was sincere, Hoover could have telephoned Eisenhower and said, “Mr. President, the truth is we framed Ethel Rosenberg in the hopes of getting Julius to talk, but it didn’t work, so please commute her sentence.” He didn’t. Ethel Rosenberg’s execution remains one of the travesties of Cold War hysteria — hysteria that evidently persists today in some quarters.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethel_Rosenberg
Respectfully,
Dear Mark,
Kindly drop the theory that people who disagree with you are rooting for the bad guys. Like you, I love America, and I want our republic to thrive and flourish. So do our elected representatives in the House and Senate — Democrats, Republicans, and independents. There are really very few Americans rooting for the bad guys. You’ll have more luck persuading people to your side if you remember that.
Respectfully,
Anomalocaris
Everyone says liberals love America, too. No they don’t. Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or with out, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence. The left’s obsecession with the crimes of the west and their Rousseauian respect for third world savages all flow fro this subversice goal. If anyone has the audacity to point our the lefts nearly unblemished record of rooting against America, liberals turn areound and Scream ‘McCarthyism’.
Liberals invented McCarthyism to delegitimaze impertinent questions about their own patriotism. They boast (lyingly) about their superior stance on civil rights but somehow their loyalty to the United States is off-limits as a subject of political debate.
McCarthy said 50 years ago, ” The democrats of this nation no longer have a party”.
Since then , the evidence has continued to pour in, liberals mock Americans who love their country, calling them; Cowboys, warmongers, religious zealots, and jingoists.( I am everyone of them) By contrast, they call Americas enemies ‘Uncle Joe’ Fidel , agrarian reformers,. Indeed Communists and Terrorists are called practitioners of a ‘religion of peace’ and advocates of peace.
But I digress, As far as the Rosenbergs go they were guilty your buddy Nikita proved it as did the Venona tapes. quit trying to spin so that America looks like the bad guy all the time.
Funny…if the liberals are rooting for the US, they have a funny way of showing it. Undermining all points of view but their own (read hate crimes, ‘tolerance’ – which should be called acceptance….tolerance is NOT acceptance, however, ethnic/sexual intimidation laws, etc)…Liberals want free speech, true…but only if that free speech coincides with what they want to hear.
President Bush is by no means perfect (Point in fact, the Illegal Immigrant issue), but I’ll take his standards and morals over the lefts non-existing ones, thanks. The lefts way is destruction for this great nation, not salvation.
Dan
Kindly drop the theory that people who disagree with you are rooting for the bad guys. Like you, I love America, and I want our republic to thrive and flourish.
Comment by Anomalocaris — 04.13.05 @ 2:16 am
————————————————–Ok you tell that to the Michael Moores, the Ted Kennedys, the Bidens, Boxers et al.
How can they be rooting for America when they in front of the whole world call (since you are an American) our President in front of the whole world , A liar, a loose canon. Just to tear down the Troops Morale.
They call the Abu Ghrab prison fiasco, an Atrocity, really they said nothing about American civilians being burned and then strung up to bridges, they said nothing about Americans being beheaded as hostages, but yet the liberal-activists judges turn around and give POW s due process rights.
You ever been spit on because you wore the uniform of the United States Military while in a wheel chair ? It will not happen again to these young wonderful guys putting it all on the line for their country.
This is what your democrats and moderates and some weak kneed Republicans are trying to do to these troops and the war effort. Their motto is if it is bad for America it is good for the democrats.
Just be glad that your Troll is stalking you by email instead of in person. Sounds like the guy/gal/heshe/ has a serious mental disorder instead of just a nasty blog streak. Probably someone who is stuck at home due to some physical/mental disability and has just gone over the deep end with their obsession for you and others. Being a victim of a stalker at one point I know it gets to be annoying but we should all pray for this fella to see the light.
Either way his tatics seem to be working since you are spending alot of time speaking about him. Good or bad your attention to him is fueling his fire.
Increase..the peace… Sorry…
Couldn’t help being…
silly…
First of all, I don’t think it’s the person you’re thinking of. Secondly, the reason I wrote about this was to let everyone know about the commenting imposter and warn readers against using their full names when commenting. Some people don’t need an excuse or reason to do to things like, and whether this post is fueling him/her/it, that’s the risk I have to take.
“plead guilty to a misdemeanor despite the national security risk his act posed.”
What national security risk did he pose? that he would hand the documents to our enemies?
Anomalocaris,
There you go again…Telling me I can’t have an opinion.
Unless it’s yours of course.
Dan
why was my question to Mark not printed? It was entirely valid and not at all offending.
Anom, So now Wikipedia is the last word on a subject? Hardy-har-har.
Actus, there you go again. I don’t care if the only thing on the document simply said “Osama is a bad man”.
The laws are on the book to protect the “sanctity” of classification. The act of violating the rules is the issue, not the content.
Granted there might be a situation where documents were classified as part of a coverup. But then the goal here would be to expose the coverup. What did Bergler blow the whistle on? Nada.
Bergler took documents that were classified out of the archive, that is tantamount to trying to rewriting the historical records because at some point in time, classified document get declassified.
So maybe there was no good reason for his doing so, but had he suceeded in destroying the record, historians would be debating to eternity as to what was in the missing documents.
LaShawn – I fully sympathize with people posing as you on other sites. A disgusting troll “took over” my name on another site, forcing me to switch names. The childishness of some people (especially on the left) knows no bounds.
BTW, you’re right! The Lord HAS ALREADY WON!
Blessings from MO.
“walter, are you attempting to say that child molestation was considered OK until recently, and that Law just didn’t get the memo?
I sure hope not.
Comment by torridjoe”
Attempting? That is exactly what I said. You can’t hope away the past.
“The laws are on the book to protect the “sanctity” of classification. The act of violating the rules is the issue, not the content.”
I know. Thats why my question. He’s a lawbreaker, but what security risk is he.
walter, that’s an entirely false, foul thing to allege. What a sad commentary on the Church for you to excuse Law’s disgusting, criminal behavior on the basis of some bizarre notion that it wasn’t considered wrong to have sex with young children. If he thought it wasn’t wrong, why did he hide his priests and move them around to keep things quiet?
You’d think Christians would have a better eye for sin than that. Guess not.
LaShawn,
Let not your heart be troubled, as our Lord said. Heck, I’m nowhere near as big or as good as you and I have to fight off trolls. I even have them being nice to me on my site and then when I tell them I’m no longer going to participate in their discussion on their site they invite me back for a final look and it’s all downhill from there. And I’ve only been online for maybe a month and a half.
Best wishes and God bless you and your work on your site and everything else.
Hey, Toridjoe – If I told you that Japan attacked Pearl Harbor would you blame me for WWII?
I am neither priest nor child molester not Catholic, and what I said was true. We also used to deny service to people based on race and deny jobs based on religion.
You call me a liar. You hide behind a mask while I proudly put my name on my statements. You are a poultroon of vestigal discernment.
Did you really think I’d post this disrespectful tripe? Pretend you’re in my house and try it again. – Admin
walter–your last comment was incomprehensible, except for the part where you allege I call you a liar. I did not; I more accurately posited the possibility that you were merely dangerously ignorant.
What does discrimination have to do with child molestation not being illegal or socially abhorrent?
What mask am I hiding behind? I don’t understand your allegation.
Actus, good.
Dare I say anyone who doesn’t see a problem fiddling, or diddling as the case may be, while various geographically remote acts of war are committed against a country is as much of a security risk as someone who would sell nuclear technology to an enemy.
Anyhoo, we can only wait and see how it all plays out.
Um, one point I’d make in Berger’s defense is that he ultimately admitted what he did, which is something Martha has yet to do.
Hang in there LaShawn! Yours is living water. Keep pouring!
“Dare I say anyone who doesn’t see a problem fiddling, or diddling as the case may be, while various geographically remote acts of war are committed against a country is as much of a security risk as someone who would sell nuclear technology to an enemy.”
Thats pretty stupid.
Some of ya’ll are still floating the rumor that he put papers down his pants (or socks in some cases). It was a attaché case, folks. With copies of papers that he helped write. Where is your moral outrage for Scooter Libby (for Plame), Ken Lay (Enron), and Chicken Cesar himself (for authorizing torture in violation of Geneva Convention that is part of federal law).
Law enforcement sources said archive staff members told FBI agents they saw Berger placing items in his jacket and pants, and one archive staffer told agents that Berger also placed something in his socks. That latter allegation drew a sharp response from Berger associate and former White House lawyer Lanny Davis, who challenged any unnamed official who makes such an accusation to come forward publicly.
“I suggest that person is lying,” he said. “And if that person has the guts, let’s see who it is who made the comment that Sandy Berger stuffed something into his socks.”
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/07/20/berger.probe/
Not true? Unless you’ve seen a copy of Berger’s deposition or other statement, how do you figure the pants stuffing to be “rumor?” And why do you assume we have no moral outrage against Ken Lay just because Ken Lay isn’t mentioned in the post? When I criticize one, must I criticize every conceivable other, or I’m a hypocrite? Do you do that on your blog? If I clicked on your link, would I find long posts which list every single person who ever did the thing you’re criticizing someone for? Good grief.
As a matter of fact, a few commenters mentioned Ken Lay. You probably didn’t check to make sure what you’re saying was accurate before you posted your own comment.
Oh, dear. I’m sorry to hear people are being so nasty, La Shawn – but it could be worse: you could be that person with nothing better to do than attempt to shut someone up by ripping them to shreds. We all have a troll or two we can’t shake! *hug*
La Shawn, sister in Christ, keep the faith and be ye strong, for God never changes nor will He forsake His children. Jesus said that the world hated Him and would hate His followers, the enemy is just proving the Lord of Glory true by their actions! Jesus was crucified for preaching the truth, so must we endure the same if we are true to Him. May God’s peace be in you and continue to guide you as you speak the truth, a friend and brother in Christ.
It is a rumor because there is no factual source. It still somehow became part of the story.
My “your” was directed towards the conservative media in general. It is pretty obvious that the hubbub about Berger is to give a sense of equality for the MANY scandals that have come out of the Bush Admin.
Wrong again!!! Files printed from hard drive, zero files missing
Some people won’t let a bad conspiracy theory go. We’re referring to those who loudly assert that former NSC adviser Sandy Berger was trying to protect the Clinton Administration when he illegally removed copies of sensitive documents from the National Archives in late 2003.
On Wednesday, we quoted Justice Department prosecutor Noel Hillman that no original documents were destroyed, and that the contents of all five at issue still exist and were made available to the 9/11 Commission. But that point didn’t register with some readers, who continue to suggest a vast, well, apparently a vast left- and right-wing conspiracy. The Washington Times, the Rocky Mountain News and former Clintonite Dick Morris have also been peddling dark suspicions based on misinformation.
The confusion seems to stem from the mistaken idea that there were handwritten notes by various Clinton Administration officials in the margins of these documents, which Mr. Berger may have been able to destroy. But that’s simply an “urban myth,” prosecutor Hillman tells us, based on a leak last July that was “so inaccurate as to be laughable.” In fact, the five iterations of the anti-terror “after-action” report at issue in the case were printed out from a hard drive at the Archives and have no notations at all.
“Those documents, emphatically, without doubt–I reviewed them myself–don’t have notations on them,” Mr. Hillman tells us. Further, “there is no evidence after comprehensive investigation to suggest he took anything other than the five documents at issue and they didn’t have notes.” Mr. Berger’s sentencing is scheduled for July, and Mr. Hillman assures us Justice’s sentencing memo will lay out the facts and “make sure Mr. Berger explains what he did and why he did it.” Meanwhile, conservatives don’t do themselves any credit when they are as impervious to facts as the loonyhttp://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110006534 left.
Your comments about Sandy Berger “stuffing documents down his pants” are false and have even been dismissed as such by the WSJ: http://snipurl.com/e06s. It’s reckless and irresponsible to repeat such lies and impugn the reputation of a decent civil servant.
The article doesn’t mention the pants stuffing; it’s about whether Berger destroyed documents with notations in the margin. – Admin
The only thing worth addressing in this comment is this: I called the man a thug, not a “black thug.” As you know, they come in all colors, shapes and sizes. Here’s some unsolicited advice. Find something better to do with your time. Admin
“walter, that’s an entirely false, foul thing to allege”
Sounds like you call me a liar.
The last sentence “You are a poultroon of vestigal discernment.” means you are a dumb coward. The mask you hide behind, unless your real name is torridjoe, is your pseudonym.
So Berger took five absolutely identical papers home and scissored 3 of them? Pardon me if that sounds unlikely, bordering on the fantastic.
Walter, sounds like “scissored” is going to be the latest addition to the lexicon of American colloquialism
As long as the Berger Defense Team is insisting upon a full accounting of wrongs done by others, as a way of mitigating Berger’s guilt, I hereby admit that I swiped a honeydew melon from a neighbor’s garden when I was 13 or 14.
All better now?
I also had the imposter (I hope) strike my site:
I believe the comment is not you, just wanted to let you know and double check
.
Tim
Tim, I’d rather not call attention to the creep. E-mail the link if you want. – Admin
Comments on this entry are closed.