Wednesday, August 15, 2007

Go Gatorade

Water is not our friend. In fact it may be the most destructive force on planet earth. We can thank God that the islamofacists live in the desert with little access to this harmful substance. Really.

You see, I am still recovering from the Great Bathroom Incident of '07. (NOTE: it is still '07) This incident was the result of my darling little children looking at water in their bathroom and having to make that tough choice between putting it

A) in the shower/tub
B) all over the floor repeatedly

Needless to say the wonderful little cherubs whom I love so much chose B. It was only logical. Many many dollars and construction workers later I they have a new bathroom. (possible sign over the bathroom door: Abandon all hope ye who enter here and get water on the floor)

But now the little joys, just a few months after bathroom construction was finished, managed to destroy the dishwasher causing yet another floor to be ruined. (This was discovered approximately 3 hours ago)

I'm thinking about tackling this project myself although the wonderful children may be a little nervous around me holding power tools while muttering under my breath about who is responsible for this mess.

But back to my main point: water damage. Do we really need water? Weren't the good liberals telling us that we were going to run out sometime back in the 90's? (If only this had happened it could have saved me two seperate floors) I mean, if Gatorade is good enough for Payton Manning then it's good enough for me.

So please, let those faucets drip. Overwater your lawn. Leave the tap on while brushing your teeth. The good liberals insisted that we will run out of this substance that falls from the very sky. It may be too late for my floor but your floor could be next!

SIDE NOTE: to start my anti-water campaign I have worked hard tonight to replace all the water in my body with Whiskey.

34 comments:

Bob said...

If it were Gatorade damage, you'd have to contend with ants as well.

You can probably do most of the work yourself. Your kids can act as gophers!

Calhoun said...

Watch out for killer mold, like stachybotras.

Grasshopper to The Nativist said...

Well, my young Nativist Miglavs, Karma has a way of creeping up when you least suspect it.

Anonymous said...

grasshopper go back to your cartoons and koolaid.

Anthony DeLucca said...

BAN DI-HYDROGEN MONOXIDE!

Anonymous said...

BwhaHahahaha, I love it. "Young Nativist Miglavs. Oh, the "Karma" you get when you are a pedophile apoligist.

R Huse said...

Apologist? I don't think I have ever really thought of Daniel as a pedophile apologist. Maybe things are confused here.

The History:

A while back everyone got sick of the tinfoil hat crowd yammering on about Bush and Cheney being guilty of treason but never being able to provide any evidence.

Daniel in a humorous way of pointing out the silliness of this said something to the effect that all liberals were pedophiles at the end of an unrelated post with evidence to be provided later.

The hat's, in their usual dullard fashion, missed the irony of this statement and proceeded on to endless copying and pasting from wacko sites thus inadvertently reinforcing Daniels point.

The Current:

At this point its gone on so long that one begins to wonder how long it will take the hat crowd to "get it". The first few times it was sort of funny to watch them step in it but one does begin to wonder how dense someone can actually be.

Anthony DeLucca said...

They will never "get it" Huse. They are followers, not thinkers. They haven't the cranial power for self reasoning. They hear something that sounds like a good idea, or a just cause, and then instead of researching, they simply "look up" articles and such from others who agree with their position. Thats when they start regurgitating what they read as though it were fact.

Anonymous said...

Reading back on some posts and researching the links of the reported pedophile republicans reveals a disturbing pattern. You can duck and dodge all you wish Mr. Refuse, but the fact remains, a large unbelievable number of Republicans are pedophiles and rapists. So, maybe instead of trying to lie and dodge, you should look within to your own ideology and political party and investigate why.

Calhoun said...

Why do the anonymouses think we're Republican Party drones here? If we were, we'd be clamoring for total amnesty for all illegal aliens. That's what the Republican party line is.

No surprise to me that the Republicans are soft on illegal aliens and pedophiles. They want criminals to have more rights than the rest of us.

Anonymous said...

So very true Calhoun.

Bobkatt said...

John Wayne Gacy, local Democratic precinct captain, convicted and later executed for rape and murder of 33 boys and youg men, 27 of whom he buried in a crawl space under the floor of his house.

Rep. Fred Richmond (D-N.Y.)
In April 1978, Richmond was arrested in Washington for soliciting sex from a 16-year-old boy. Richmond apologized for his actions, conceding he "made bad judgments involving my private life."

Sen. Brock Adams (D-Wash.)
On Sept. 27, 1988, Seattle newspapers reported that Kari Tupper, the daughter of Adams's longtime friends, filed a complaint against the Washington Democrat in July of 1987, charging sexual assault.
But two weeks later the Seattle Times reported that eight other women were accusing Adams of sexual molestation over the past 20 years, describing a history of drugging and subsequent rape.


REP. ROBERT BAUMAN (D-Md.):
On Oct. 3, 1980, Bauman, a leading "pro-family" conservative, pleaded innocent to a charge that he committed oral sodomy on a teenage boy in Washington. Married and the father of four, Bauman conceded that he had been an alcoholic but had been seeking treatment.

Sen. Daniel Inouye. The 82-year-old Hawaii Democrat was accused in the 1990s by numerous women of sexual harassment. Democrats cast doubt on the allegations and the Senate Ethics Committee dropped its investigation.

Former Rep. Gus Savage. The Illinois Democrat was accused of fondling a Peace Corps volunteer in 1989 while on a trip to Africa. The House Ethics Committee decided against disciplinary action in 1990.

Rep. Barney Frank. The outspoken Massachusetts Democrat hired a male prostitute who ran a prostitution service from Frank’s residence in the 1980s. Only two Democrats in the House of Representatives voted to censure him in 1990.

Former Sen. Brock Adams. The late Washington Democrat was forced to stop campaigning after numerous accusations of drugging, assault and rape, the first surfacing in 1988.

Former Rep. Fred Richmond. This New York Democrat was arrested in 1978 for soliciting sex from a 16-year-old. He remained in Congress and won re-election—before eventually resigning in 1982 after pleading guilty to tax evasion and drug possession.

Former Rep. John Young. The late Texas Democrat increased the salary of a staffer after she gave in to his sexual advances. The congressman won re-election in 1976 but lost two years later.

Former Rep. Wayne Hays. The late Ohio Democrat hired an unqualified secretary reportedly for sexual acts. Although he resigned from Congress, the Democratic House leadership stalled in removing him from the Administration Committee in 1976.

Former Rep. Gerry Studds. He was censured for sexual relationship with underage male page in 1983. Massachusetts voters returned him to office for six more terms.

Former Rep. Mel Reynolds. The Illinois Democrat was convicted of 12 counts of sexual assault with a 16-year-old. President Bill Clinton pardoned him before leaving office.

Yeah politicians are scum, what's your point?

Check dis OUT! said...

That ain't nuttin vato. Check dis out. Now that is what I call a list:

• Republican legislator Ted Klaudt was charged with raping girls under the age of 16.
• Republican city councilman Joseph Monteleone Jr. was found guilty of fondling underage girls.
• Republican congressional aide Jeffrey Nielsen was arrested for having sex with a 14-year old boy.
• Republican County Commissioner Patrick Lee McGuire surrendered to police after allegedly molesting girls between the ages of 8 and 13.
• Republican prosecutor Larry Corrigan was arrested for soliciting sex from 13-year old girls.
• Republican Mayor Jeffrey Kyle Randall was sentenced to 275 days in jail for molesting two boys -- ages ten and 12 -- during a six-year period.
• Republican County Board Candidate Brent Schepp was charged with molesting a 14-year old girl and killed himself three days later.
• Republican Congressman Mark Foley abruptly resigned from Congress after "sexually explicit" emails surfaced showing him flirting with a 16-year old boy.
• Republican executive Randall Casseday of the conservative Washington Times newspaper pleaded guilty to soliciting sex from a 13-year old girl on the internet.
• Republican chairman of the Oregon Christian Coalition Lou Beres confessed to molesting a 13-year old girl.
• Republican County Constable Larry Dale Floyd pleaded guilty to charges of soliciting sex from an 8-year old girl. Floyd has repeatedly won elections for Denton County, Texas, constable.
• Republican judge Mark Pazuhanich pleaded no contest to fondling a 10-year old girl and was sentenced to 10 years probation.
• Republican Party leader Bobby Stumbo was arrested for having sex with a 5-year old boy.
• Republican petition drive manager Tom Randall pleaded guilty to molesting two girls under the age of 14, one of them the daughter of an associate in the petition business.
• Republican County Chairman Armando Tebano pleaded guilty to fondling a 14-year-old girl.
• Republican teacher and former city councilman John Collins pleaded guilty to sexually molesting 13 and 14 year old girls.
• Republican campaign worker Mark Seidensticker is a convicted child molester.
• Republican Mayor Philip Giordano is serving a 37-year sentence in federal prison for sexually abusing 8- and 10-year old girls.
• Republican Mayor Tom Adams was arrested for distributing child pornography over the internet.
• Republican Mayor John Gosek was arrested on charges of soliciting sex from two 15-year old girls.
• Republican County Commissioner David Swartz pleaded guilty to molesting two girls under the age of 11 and was sentenced to 8 years in prison.
• Republican legislator Edison Misla Aldarondo was sentenced to 10 years in prison for raping his daughter between the ages of 9 and 17.
• Republican Committeeman John R. Curtin was convicted of molesting an underage teenage boy and sentenced to serve six to 18 months in prison.
• Republican anti-abortion activist Howard Scott Heldreth is a convicted child rapist in Florida.
• Republican zoning supervisor, Boy Scout leader and Lutheran church president Dennis L. Rader pleaded guilty to performing a sexual act on an 11-year old girl he murdered.
• Republican anti-abortion activist Nicholas Morency pleaded guilty to possessing child pornography on his computer and offering a bounty to anybody who murders an abortion doctor.
• Republican campaign consultant Tom Shortridge was sentenced to three years probation for taking nude photographs of a 15-year old girl.
• Republican racist pedophile and United States Senator Strom Thurmond had sex with a 15-year old black girl which produced a child.
• Republican pastor Mike Hintz, whom George W. Bush commended during the 2004 presidential campaign, surrendered to police after admitting to a sexual affair with a female juvenile.
• Republican legislator Peter Dibble pleaded no contest to having an inappropriate relationship with a 13-year-old girl.
• Republican advertising consultant Carey Lee Cramer was sentenced to six years in prison for molesting two 8-year old girls, one of whom appeared in an anti-Gore television commercial.
• Republican fundraiser Lawrence E. King, Jr. organized child sex parties at the White House during the 1980s.
• Republican lobbyist Craig J. Spence organized child sex parties at the White House during the 1980s.
• Republican Congressman Donald "Buz" Lukens was found guilty of having sex with a female minor and sentenced to one month in jail.
• Republican fundraiser Richard A. Delgaudio was found guilty of child porn charges and paying two teenage girls to pose for sexual photos.
• Republican activist Mark A. Grethen convicted on six counts of sex crimes involving children.
• Republican campaign chairman Randal David Ankeney pleaded guilty to attempted sexual assault on a child and was arrested again five years later on the same charge.
• Republican Congressman Dan Crane had sex with a female minor working as a congressional page.
• Republican activist and Christian Coalition leader Beverly Russell admitted to an incestuous relationship with his step daughter.
• Republican Judge Ronald C. Kline pleaded guilty to possession of child pornography on his home computer.
• Republican congressman and anti-gay activist Robert Bauman was charged with having sex with a 16-year-old boy he picked up at a gay bar.
• Republican Committee Chairman Jeffrey Patti was arrested for distributing a video clip of a 5-year-old girl being raped.
• Republican activist Marty Glickman (a.k.a. "Republican Marty"), was taken into custody by Florida police on four counts of unlawful sexual activity with an underage girl and one count of delivering the drug LSD.
• Republican legislative aide Howard L. Brooks was charged with molesting a 12-year old boy and possession of child pornography.
• Republican Senate candidate John Hathaway was accused of having sex with his 12-year old baby sitter and withdrew his candidacy after the allegations were reported in the media.
• Republican preacher Stephen White, who demanded a return to traditional values, was sentenced prison after offering $20 to a 14-year-old boy for permission to perform oral sex on him.
• Republican talk show host Jon Matthews pleaded guilty to exposing his genitals to an 11 year old girl.
• Republican anti-gay activist Earl "Butch" Kimmerling was sentenced to 40 years in prison for molesting an 8-year old girl after he attempted to stop a gay couple from adopting her.
• Republican Party leader Paul Ingram pleaded guilty to six counts of raping his daughters and served 14 years in federal prison.
• Republican election board official Kevin Coan was sentenced to two years probation for soliciting sex over the internet from a 14-year old girl.
• Republican politician Andrew Buhr was charged with two counts of first degree sodomy with a 13-year old boy.
• Republican legislator Keith Westmoreland was arrested on seven felony counts of lewd and lascivious exhibition to girls under the age of 16 (i.e. exposing himself to children).
• Republican anti-abortion activist John Allen Burt was found guilty of molesting a 15-year old girl.
• Republican County Councilman Keola Childs pleaded guilty to molesting a male child.
• Republican activist John Butler was charged with criminal sexual assault on a teenage girl.
• Republican candidate Richard Gardner admitted to molesting his two daughters.
• Republican Councilman and former Marine Jack W. Gardner was convicted of molesting a 13-year old girl.
• Republican County Commissioner Merrill Robert Barter pleaded guilty to unlawful sexual contact and assault on a teenage boy.
• Republican City Councilman Fred C. Smeltzer, Jr. pleaded no contest to raping a 15 year-old girl and served 6-months in prison.
• Republican activist Parker J. Bena pleaded guilty to possession of child pornography on his home computer and was sentenced to 30 months in federal prison and fined $18,000.
• Republican parole board officer and former Colorado state representative, Larry Jack Schwarz, was fired after child pornography was found in his possession.
• Republican strategist and Citadel Military College graduate Robin Vanderwall was convicted in Virginia on five counts of soliciting sex from boys and girls over the internet.
• Republican city councilman Mark Harris, who is described as a "good military man" and "church goer," was convicted of repeatedly having sex with an 11-year-old girl and sentenced to 12 years in prison.
• Republican businessman Jon Grunseth withdrew his candidacy for Minnesota governor after allegations surfaced that he went swimming in the nude with four underage girls, including his daughter.
• Republican campaign worker, police officer and self-proclaimed reverend Steve Aiken was convicted of having sex with two underage girls.
• Republican director of the "Young Republican Federation" Nicholas Elizondo molested his 6-year old daughter and was sentenced to six years in prison.
• Republican president of the New York City Housing Development Corp. Russell Harding pleaded guilty to possessing child pornography on his computer.
• Republican benefactor of conservative Christian groups, Richard A. Dasen Sr., was found guilty of raping a 15-year old girl. Dasen, 62, who is married with grown children and several grandchildren, has allegedly told police that over the past decade he paid more than $1 million to have sex with a large number of young women.
• Republican Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld authorized the rape of children in Iraqi prisons in order to humiliate their parents into providing information about the anti-American insurgency. See excerpt of one prisoner's report here and his full report here.

Anonymous said...

Don't forget Ted Bundy who worked for the Washington State Republican Party and worked on many Republican campaigns. Republicans hate woman too, so they will probably say that Ted Bundy did a service to his country.


Below is a chronological list of Ted Bundy's known victims. Bundy never made a comprehensive confession of his crimes and his true total is not known, but before his execution, he confessed to Hagmaier to having committed 30 murders. Ten of his victims remain unidentified.[96] All the women listed were killed, unless otherwise noted.


1974
Jan. 4: Joni Lenz (survived). Bludgeoned in her bed as she slept.
Feb. 1: Lynda Ann Healy (19). Beaten & bludgeoned unconscious while asleep and abducted from the house she shared with other University of Washington co-eds.
Mar. 12: Donna Gail Manson (19). Abducted while walking to a jazz concert on The Evergreen State College campus, Olympia, Washington.
Apr. 17: Susan Rancourt (18). Disappeared as she walked across Ellensburg's Central Washington State College campus at night.
May 6: Roberta Kathleen Parks (22). Vanished from Oregon State University in Corvallis while walking to another dorm hall to have coffee with friends.
May 25: Brenda Ball (22). Disappeared from the Flame Tavern in Burien, Washington.
Jun. 11: Georgeann Hawkins (18). Disappeared from behind her sorority house, Kappa Alpha Theta, at the University of Washington in Seattle.
Jul. 14: Janice Ott (23) and Denise Naslund (19), both from Lake Sammamish State Park in Issaquah, Washington.
Aug. 2: Carol Valenzuela (20). Last seen at a welfare office in Vancouver, Washington.
Oct. 2: Nancy Wilcox (16). Disappeared in Holladay, Utah.
Oct. 18: Melissa Smith (17). Vanished from Midvale, Utah on her way to a friend's house.
Oct. 31: Laura Aime (17). Disappeared from a Halloween party at Lehi, Utah.
Nov. 8: Carol DaRonch (survived). Escaped from Bundy by jumping out from his car in Murray, Utah.
Nov. 8: Debra (Debby) Kent (17). Vanished from the parking lot of a school in Bountiful, Utah, hours after DaRonch escaped from Bundy.

1975
Jan. 12: Caryn Campbell (23). While on a ski trip with her fiancé in Aspen, Colorado, Campbell vanished between the hotel lounge and her room.
Mar. 15: Julie Cunningham (26). Disappeared while on her way to a nearby tavern in Vail, Colorado.
Apr. 6: Denise Oliverson (25). Abducted while visiting her parents in Grand Junction, Colorado.
May 6: Lynette Culver (13). Snatched from a school playground at Alameda Junior High School, Pocatello, Idaho.
June 28: Susan Curtis (15). Disappeared while attending a youth conference at Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah.
July 4: Nancy Baird (23). Disappeared while working at a convenience store. Confessed shortly before his execution. Layton, Utah.

1978
Jan. 15: Lisa Levy (20), Margaret Bowman (21), Karen Chandler (survived), Kathy Kleiner Deshields (survived). This attack would become known subsequently as the Chi Omega killings, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida.
Jan. 15: Cheryl Thomas (survived). Bludgeoned in her bed, eight blocks away from the Chi Omega Sorority house.
Feb. 9: Kimberly Leach (12), kidnapped from her junior high school in Lake City, Florida. She was raped, murdered and discarded in Suwannee State Park.

Calhoun said...

^^^ LOL!

Anthony DeLucca said...

Jesus Flippety Christ! You people going on and on about which political party has the largest number of scumbags is bordering on ridiculous.

Face it, a scum-bag is a scum-bag....no matter which political party he sides with. The political party of a criminal has absolutely no bearing on the criminal activity. A person who lacks the morals, ethics, and self discipline needed to be a model citizen, will offend when the opportunity presents itself, whether he votes Republican, Democrat, Green, Independant, Whig, whatever! There are shit-heads in ALL political parties. Get over it.

You idiots sound like my 5 year old nephews for crying out loud.

Kaelri said...

Agreed. It's pointless to keep spamming that list in post after post. The misdeeds of "Republican campaign worker Mark Seidensticker" are not going to win us any seats next year. Though it's a pity that he had to tarnish the reputation of a great name like "Seidensticker." C'est la vie.

Anonymous said...

Kaelri--Thanks for you thoughts on the "GOP", Grand 'ol Pedophile, list. There are three more names that need to be added, two public officials from Oregon. Will have those soon for you.

Anonymous said...

While you people are focusing on the pedophilia our country is being taken over by illegal aliens who also rape children the nice part for you I guess is that they kill them when there done so you can focus on the murder.Your party affiliation has nothing to do with your morals so figure it out.This post could get pretty mindless if all you people want to do is spam it with child molesters,there are bigger issues at hand.

Anonymous said...

The trouble is that we don't know where the "illegal aliens" are that are raping our children, but we do know where the Republicans are. Lets go for them first and put them all in jail.

Kaelri said...

Yeah, because they're all pedophiles. All fifty million of them.

Is this seriously your argument? "Don't vote for a Republican, you might be electing a child molestor?" Out of all the reasons against giving that party control of any branch of government ever again, you picked that?

Not because they see no problem with basing major public policy on Leviticus 18:22? Not because they're trying to convince the country that we should actually be afraid of an Islamic invasion that places us all under Sharia law? (We've come a long way from "fear itself," haven't we.) Not because they see nothing wrong with torturing terrorist suspects, and instead point the "unamerican" finger at the law firms who want to defend them in court? Not because they'll distort the definitions of personal responsibiliy and obscenity in order to literally equate a liberal forum with the Nazi Party and the Ku Klux Klan? Not because they still associate opposition to their policies with genuine, indictable treason? Not because they raise hell over giving amnesty to illegal immigrants, but vote to legalize a program that almost certainly violates constitutional liberties? Not because they tried to get the thing reauthorized by taking advantage of a man in a state of delirious pain following pancreatic surgery? Not because they'll beat a talking point like "stay the course" into the ground, then turn around and claim, in the most unequivocally Orwellian fashion, that "we've never been stay the course?" Not because they think it's possible to keep a 4-million-square-mile country hermetically sealed, and yet their vision of a state of national security paradoxically includes the presence of a gun in every home? And not because they can't muster up the tiniest bit of historical perspective to see that the same claims they make against Caribbean and South American immigrants - legal or no - are identical to the accusations that have been falsely and ignorantly made against the influx of German, Irish, Italian, and Chinese for two hundred years?

Perspective is all I ask.

Calhoun said...

Not because they want to give total amnesty to all illegal aliens? Not because they blatantly lie to the American people, saying they're against amnesty, while they work for amnesty? Not because they want America to be a country where crime does pay, where dishonesty is the best policy? Not because they preach "family values" but then promote situational ethics on the illegal alien issue? Not because they're working for foreign criminals instead of the American people? Not because they've joined hands with far left scumbags in order to cater to illegal aliens? Not because they regard the will of the American people with contempt?


Also, kaelri, your last bit there : "the same claims they make against Caribbean and South American immigrants - legal or no - are identical to the accusations ... etc."

You're wrong again. All we're asking is for immigrants to come here honestly, honorably, respectfully. Respect our nation and its laws. Too much to ask? If the first thing you do when you come to our country is to break our laws, you're off to a bad start, and we don't have to welcome you here, or cater to you, or fawn upon you.

R Huse said...

Oh good lord, are we back to "violating our rights, shredding the constitution, torturing people" ? Frankly I'll take the pedophile list spamming any day over that. You know it would have been nice to see just one single post from one single America hater that said "gee, I guess I was wrong about the Valerie Plame thing, maybe I shouldn't have been so quick to throw around the treason word". To me that would have been amazing and established some credibility. Just one unequivocal, "wow, guess I was wrong". I know Ill never see it, at best Id see the response of a thirteen year old: "well, Ill admit that when you admit this".

For now it still stands - the hate America crowd thinks they should be able to hurl charges of torture, treason and criminality around at the opponents with impunity. Apply the same to them and they cry like babies and wonder why their patriotism is even being questioned. The only odd thing is why they ever expect to be taken seriously with this attitude.

"Stacking naked men in a pyramid does not become torture just because a woman with a dog leash happens to be there" - Plato, The Republic.

Kaelri said...

"You're wrong again. All we're asking is for immigrants to come here honestly, honorably, respectfully. Respect our nation and its laws. Too much to ask?"

If Daniel and his political peers had carried out their campaign against illegal immigration over the last two years with the clarity and tone of that statement, they would have had a lot more success - or at least a lot fewer crazy people being drawn to their blogs and websites like moths to flames.

No, that's not " all you're asking." You're also asking Americans to believe that they should be worried about an organized invasion of barbaric Mexicans who are here to rape and steal and murder and destroy our culture and expand Mexico's in its place. As if the vast majority of them even had the intent, to say nothing of the capability. I would be more than happy to gather dozens, if not hundreds, of posts on this blog to that effect, nearly all of them based on anecdotal and poorly-interpreted evidence, often gathered, ironically, from the "MSM" that is so despised by those around here who apparently rely on it.

Also, just a quick nitpick: you start right off saying I'm wrong "again." To what previous occasion are you referring?

"You know it would have been nice to see just one single post from one single America hater that said "gee, I guess I was wrong about the Valerie Plame thing, maybe I shouldn't have been so quick to throw around the treason word". To me that would have been amazing and established some credibility. Just one unequivocal, 'wow, guess I was wrong'."

I don't recall any development that would compel anyone to do so. Are you still on about the "Plame wasn't a covert agent" thing? The last time we got on that topic, you stopped responding. I was very disappointed. I'd be happy to pick it up where we left off, but I'm not sure how much further we could go. To recap, the rest of the country considered this question closed by a memo from General Hadley, the director of the CIA, affirming that Plame was considered a covert agent. This memo was accepted as evidence thereof in court during the Libby trial. It's not very complicated. But I doubt I'll be hearing an "I was wrong" from you, either.

On that note, it doesn't mean much to me when a person who refers glibly to the "hate America crowd" shares a thought on the subject of "being taken seriously."

Calhoun said...

kaelri said : "...you start right off saying I'm wrong "again." To what previous occasion are you referring?"

Dude, you're wrong about everything.
----------------------------

On the Valerie Plame case, there's something basic I don't understand. If Plame was a covert CIA agent, and therefore it was a crime to reveal that she was a covert CIA agent, why didn't Fitzgerald bring any charges against anyone for "outing" her?

R Huse said...

Because obviously Fitz didnt think he could get a conviction. Why? Because being listed in the Who's Who of DC and driving your car daily to Langly makes it real tough to argue you are covert.

Kaelri:

>it doesn't mean much to me when a person who refers glibly to the "hate America crowd" shares a thought on the subject of "being taken seriously."

Obviously it does, as you responded. Sorry, had to chuckle at that one.

>To recap, the rest of the country considered this question closed by a memo from General Hadley, the director of the CIA, affirming that Plame was considered a covert agent.

If you think the number of people in this country who have any awareness of this memo is over 5% you are smoking something. Get real.

>I don't recall any development that would compel anyone to do so. Are you still on about the "Plame wasn't a covert agent" thing? The last time we got on that topic, you stopped responding.

Well, then I suppose you missed the fact that the civil case was dismissed. Interesting.

I stopped responding because you simply weren't accepting the reality of the fact that what you consider obvious, that Plame was covert, seems to have escaped everyone of consequence. There simply is no getting around the fact that you consider it a slam dunk, yes, allusion intended, and the prosecutor in charge of the case does not. It is simply an inane argument, the case has been dismissed, the prosecutor never charged anyone with the crime you say was committed. At the end of the day however you continue to accuse Bush and Cheney of treason over this issue. That is absurd.

As for the CIA saying she was covert, big whoop, its not up to them, it is up to the Justice Department to investigate and see if in fact it is true. I've already been through it with you about how one of the authors of the law has said quite publicly Plame was not covered, but again, she, just like the CIA, is not in charge of the investigation.

In the end, after the Libby conviction, Fitzgerald has rolled up the case and has stated he doesn't expect anyone else to be charged. You still are swinging the broken bourbon bottle at the ramparts however.

At this point it is simply absurd to be going on about Bush, Cheney , Treason and all the other attendant hoopla. You are one of the few remaining individuals who is still beating a dead horse on this one. If no convictions for anything substantive, the prosecutor giving up the case, the civil case being very publicly dismissed wont convince you then at this point it is ridiculous to go on about it. You simply are beyond reason.

Kaelri said...

Heh. I don't have to take you seriously to argue with you. At this point, it's no longer about convincing you - which is probably hopeless - but convincing other people. It's about the words, not the writers.

"...obviously Fitz didnt think he could get a conviction. Why? Because being listed in the Who's Who of DC and driving your car daily to Langly makes it real tough to argue you are covert."

Not quite. Fitzgerald could not pursue a case against Richard Armitage because the law requires that an agent's identity was revealed "knowingly." Armitage wasn't aware of her covert status.

"If you think the number of people in this country who have any awareness of this memo is over 5% you are smoking something. Get real."

My apologies. I should clarify: the rest of the [portion of the country that pays attention to what their federal representatives are doing with their taxes] considered this question closed. Satisfied, I hope?

"I stopped responding because you simply weren't accepting the reality of the fact that what you consider obvious, that Plame was covert, seems to have escaped everyone of consequence."

Well, I guess 2+2=5, then. If we're both going to keep calling each other delusional propagandists in exactly the same terms, then I don't see how we can continue this as a dialogue. I'll simply ask anyone who might be following this exchange to look at the facts that you're ignoring with admirable persistence. First, it's downright nihilistic to dismiss what the CIA says about the employment status of its own employee. From whom do you expect the DoJ to receive better information? Second, if you absolutely insist on bypassing all other evidence than the conclusion of a federal investigator, well, here it is:

"...it was clear from very early in the investigation that Ms. Wilson qualified under the
relevant statute (Title 50, United States Code, Section 421) as a covert agent whose identity
had been disclosed by public officials, including Mr. Libby, to the press."

I don't know what more I can do for you.

One final protest, however:

"You continue to accuse Bush and Cheney of treason over this issue. That is absurd."

I have made no such accusation. Nor have I implied that proving this point is a slam dunk of any kind. On the contrary, I went into this assuming that Plame's covert status was a premise on which we could agree. This is only a small part of an admittedly-small argument. You're mistaking size for importance; the only reason our little debate has dragged on is because you have consistently failed to internalize the fact that my objective is not political and my perspective is not that of your mythical leftist drone. I quote myself (and remarkably, the quote fits the context. We've actually come completely full circle):

"Needless to say, I don't take any of the above as proof that the leak was deliberate. That's for a jury to decide. But it's more than enough evidence to warrant this investigation - an ongoing investigation, mind you, in answer to the question of why Cheney and Bush have yet to be indicted. And who knows - maybe it'll turn out that they're completely innocent, and Plame's exposure was a coincidence, and Scooter Libby just got confused under all those bright lights. Let's lay odds."

R Huse said...

>the law requires that an agent's identity was revealed "knowingly." Armitage wasn't aware of her covert status.

ding ding ding YAY, finally the light bulb turns on - I think maybe you finally got it here.

>First, it's downright nihilistic to dismiss what the CIA says about the employment status of its own employee.

Huh, interesting, but yet for some reason you did not consider it nihilistic to dismiss the view of V. Toensing, the person who wrote the law, several iterations back. Weird.

>I have made no such accusation.

Absurd, this is how the entire argument began. I protested you making these accusations when neither Bush nor Cheney had been convicted nor charged.

"...it was clear from very early in the investigation that Ms. Wilson qualified under the
relevant statute

I would advise you to re read. That is a sentencing statement by the prosecutor. It is an opinion, and of course the one a prosecutor would have. That is far different from a verdict by judge or jury.

>Let's lay odds."

Well, so much for any career as a bookie you might have. Lol


Look, argue all you want.

The fact is Toensing, co author of the law, says Plame doesn't qualify.

Fitzgerald, the prosecutor doesn't think he has a case against anyone under the law, since he hasn't brought one.

The civil case by Plame was dismissed.

By your own admission, Armitage, the person who leaked the name in the first place, broke no law

Now you can go on all you want about this or that, but the fact remains, you don't run around accusing people and indicting people without evidence. That was my problem with you flinging the wild accusations that you did and that is how this whole thing began. There clearly wasn't enough here to bring any sort of case, everyone has gone home. At this point Elvis has clearly left the building and you are the last person left.

Kaelri said...

And the walls came tumbling down!

We're very close to it, anyway.

"Huh, interesting, but yet for some reason you did not consider it nihilistic to dismiss the view of V. Toensing, the person who wrote the law, several iterations back. Weird."

I didn't dismiss it. I think it's a good point, actually. I went back and looked at Toensing's statements and testimony on the topic, in fact. The conclusion that I draw is that Toensing passed judgment on Plame's status based on what she knew of Plame's career history with the CIA - whether she had served abroad in the last five years, etc. - on which the Department of Justice and CIA itself would have better information. I don't think Toensing was wrong, or lying. Just underinformed.

"Absurd, this is how the entire argument began. I protested you making these accusations when neither Bush nor Cheney had been convicted nor charged."

Not quite. Do I really need to remind you of your own words? You protested my making accusations - by which I stand - regarding the NSA wiretapping program. On the Plame matter, you only protested my opinion that the matter was worthy of investigation. We had a couple different trains of thought running in that thread.

"I would advise you to re read. That is a sentencing statement by the prosecutor. It is an opinion, and of course the one a prosecutor would have. That is far different from a verdict by judge or jury."

Heh, I would advice you to read more closely. The passage that I quoted was not the sentencing statement; it was part of the testimony by Patrick Fitzgerald. Again, you wanted to hear it spoken by the DoJ investigator, and heard it you have.

You might be interested in the rest of Fitzgerald's testimony, actually. He spells out pretty clearly why the investigation ended the way it did; it wasn't simply a conclusion that no crime had been committed. The world, as it turns out, is a slightly more complicated place.

I feel like I've drawn this distinction for you as clearly as it's possible to draw it, but I'll try one more time, as explicitly as I can: I do not believe that Dick Cheney conspired to have Valerie Plame's identity leaked. I think it happened, but I don't know it happened, and I believe the implications are important enough that the truth should continue to be pursued. I am therefore pleased that the investigation remains open and that the civil suit is being appealed. If nothing comes of either, then so be it. Frankly, most of the damage has already been done.

R Huse said...

>Heh, I would advice you to read more closely.

Top of page of the link you supplied "Government's Sentencing Memorandum"

Nuff said.

At the end of the day it is simply impossible to escape two conclusions:

1) If there is a case regarding Plame, it is insubstantial thus that's why the Libby foolishness is all that resulted.

2) The entire case was partisan in the extreme and absurd in its basic contention. The parallel lack of concern over Sandy Burger when combined with the extreme concern over Plame simply doesn't mesh for most people. This, among other reasons is why I think most saw this as a fairly inconsequential and clearly partisan case and thus the lack of traction the Democrats found in it.

a final conclusion, one that I care about but I think few others do, is the most interesting:

3) Why, given that Wilson was sent to investigate yellow cake, was Wilson sent at all? No matter where one stands on the issue I would think this would concern people. Whether or not there is truth to the yellow cake story is not the issue for me. When a rogue state is suspected of trying to acquire nuclear material, the best CIA can do is an ex ambassador? Isn't anyone bothered by that? Doesn't it bother anyone that by his own admission all Wilson did was sit in the hotel lobby, drink tea, and interview people? Yellow cake or not, why Wilson was sent instead of someone knowledgeable is a mystery that has never been explained very well.

R Huse said...

PS By the way, Hayden said, Plame was covert, he did not testify regarding that. He simply said that Congressman Henry Waxmans statement that Plame was covert would not be an incorrect statement.

Again, not exactly a revelation since everyone is in agreement Plame was a covert agent. The question is was she covered under the act, not all agents who have been covert are covered. Toensing, the principle author of the act, answered that question in sworn testimony succinctly, Plame was not a covert agent covered under the act. Big difference.

Kaelri said...

"Top of page of the link you supplied 'Government's Sentencing Memorandum'"

Oh, come on. If you really can't summon the effort to read the thing, here's a hundred other people who did it for you.

"If there is a case regarding Plame, it is insubstantial thus that's why the Libby foolishness is all that resulted."

Read the rest of Fitzgerald's memo, starting from page 12 or so. He specifically addresses that criticism. I have no reason to restate it in whole or part.

"The entire case was partisan in the extreme and absurd in its basic contention. The parallel lack of concern over Sandy Burger when combined with the extreme concern over Plame simply doesn't mesh for most people."

This, too, is covered in Fitzgerald's statement. But I'll quote the summary of his response to that charge:

"The record should be clear that the grand jury investigation was conducted fairly and in appropriate secrecy; Mr. Libby had ample legal resources and talent available to him to raise all appropriate legal challenges and mount a legal defense; the Court provided Mr. Libby substantial opportunity to follow through on the defense he proffered; and the jury carefully and dispassionately weighed the evidence over the course of many days and convicted on four counts and acquitted on another. While the disappointment of Mr. Libby’s friends and supporters is understandable, it is inappropriate to deride the judicial process as 'politics at its worst' on behalf of a defendant who, the evidence has established beyond a reasonable doubt, showed contempt for the judicial process when he obstructed justice by repeatedly lying under oath about material matters in a serious criminal investigation."

"By the way, Hayden said, Plame was covert, he did not testify regarding that. He simply said that Congressman Henry Waxmans statement that Plame was covert would not be an incorrect statement."

The document I was referring to is from Stephen Hadley, not General Hayden. It was an unclassified summary of Plame's CIA employment that he allowed Fitzgerald to submit during the Libby trial, and it states clearly that Plame was de jure "covert," in terms of the CIA taking active measures to conceal her identity. Now, you're correct - this doesn't necessarily mean that she was covered by the act. This is a moot point, because it was Fitzgerald's finding that she was. Valerie Plame was a covert agent under both the general and IIPA definitions. Period.

(Victoria Toensing's opinion, simply put, is obsolete. I'm sure she understands the law she wrote perfectly well, but it's not about the interpretation, it's about the application, and that entails the contents of classified information relating to Plame's employment. So - a private-sector show-trial lawyer who only has access to the public record, just like the rest of us, or a federal special prosecutor with access to confidential records who's been actively investigating this specific affair for years. Who am I gonna believe?)

R Huse said...

>Read the rest of Fitzgerald's memo, starting from page 12 or so.

Again, Fitzgerald is the prosecutor, he is not the judge nor the jury. He can opine all he wants. There simply is no reason in discussing this aspect any further really since you seem dead set on simply ignoring the fact that prosecutors do not render verdicts, and unless there is a case brought, the presumption is innocence. Sorry. that's they way it works.

>Now, you're correct - this doesn't necessarily mean that she was covered by the act. This is a moot point, because it was Fitzgerald's finding that she was. Valerie Plame was a covert agent under both the general and IIPA definitions. Period.

Again, you simply do not understand our justice system. Fitzgerald is the prosecutor He is not the judge. He can make all the findings he wants but it is still opinion. His findings can result in a decision on whether or not to bring a case, but adjudication of the case is not his. You simply do not seem to understand this basic fact of criminal law. A finding by a prosecutor is not a conviction, it is simply an element in determining if there is cause to pursue a case. Period.

>Victoria Toensing's opinion, simply put, is obsolete. I'm sure she understands the law she wrote perfectly well, but it's not about the interpretation, it's about the application, and that entails the contents of classified information relating to Plame's employment.

Incorrect, Toensing based her opinion on several factors, many of which were quite public and not much in dispute such as Plame not having worked abroad under covert status in the previous five years and being listed in the DC "Who's Who" . These, among other things, were public, quite detrimental to any claim of covertness and quite key to the case. Toensing was also asked to testify before congress on the matter, so apparently although you feel her opinion is obsolete, Congress felt differently. However, you might have an ally in Congressman Henry Waxman, who's goose she quite publicly cooked in testimony.

Look, there really isn't any point in arguing this anymore. You simply will not give up this basic idea that Fitzgerald renders final judgment. Until you understand this is not the case there really isn't a lot of point in re hashing Fitzgerald said this or Fitzgerald said that.

At the end of the day, one thing is inarguable: If Fitzgerald doesn't bring a case then sorry, there is the presumption of innocence under our system. You might not like that, but that's the fact. Fitzgerald can do all the pissing and moaning he wants, it all means nothing, if he doesn't bring a case its simply another "big one that got away" story.

Anonymous said...

Thia is too funny! Daniel writes an amusing little post about how his kids got water all over the place and the resulting damage and repairs,etc and somebody immediatly goes off on a tangent and rants about pedophiles in the _______ Party. Suddenly the whole thread turns into an "Oh, yeah? Well..."
It's too bad that we can't get our heads out of our asses long enough to just have a laugh at the foibles of life.

LIGHTEN UP, FRANCIS!