DELAWARE WATCH
I wonder if my name was dropped. Oh how sweet that would be!
"Mike Protack did not attack the Delaware College Republicans." - D. Garrett.
"I will admit when a College Republican student who has never made a mortgage payment, served a day in the military, taken a sick child to the hospital or planned a parent's funeral on Christmas Eve says I have no conservative credentials because I support "universal health care" - Mike Protack on Delaware Watch.
Concerned,
That was an excellent try, but, alas, it doesn't work. The claim on the convention flyer was that Protack attacked the ORGANIZATION called the Delaware College Republicans. Protack's statement--and you cited it correctky--was a reply to "a [AN INDIVIDUAL] DE Republican college student."
Big difference.
Prozak the war ace, never fired a shot ! But get's the pink star for shooting his mouth off !
Prozak, I hear you MOS was In Flight Rocket Mechanic.
"Prozak the war ace, never fired a shot ! But get's the pink star for shooting his mouth off"
You are not the least bit concerned that someone told a lie about a fellow Republican at the convention? You don't have to like him as a candidate, but why don't you care enough about your party's electoral proecess to be outraged about the deliberate and, I have evidence to believe, sanctioned use of lies to influence the convention's delegates?
And why are you calling Protack "Prozak?" (And here I was told no one tries to smear him by suggesting that he is crazy. lol!) Why can't you simply state that you don't agree w/ his views and prefer Ting's and leave it at that? Why must you go for the smear? Is it because you lack a conscience?
Referring simply to "a College Republican student" may have been attacking one in particular, but reread it, and it can also certainly be interpreted to refer to a generic College Republican student and then, by extension, to all College Republicans. In that sense of the statement, Mike Protack was attacking College Republicans in general.
Now, for the relevant facts from the Convention, from someone who was actually there...
The "member of party leadership" did indeed defend the College Republicans' right to distribute the letter. Almost every candidate distributed literature at the Convention, and the College Republicans' letter was right there with the rest of it...or was, until a Protack staffer started collecting them all.
As I'm sure you know, it is illegal to remove yard signs from someone else's yard. In the same vein, it is against campaign law to remove literature that someone else has distributed. In addition, when a College Republicans representative told the Protack staffer not to remove the letter, the staffer made threatening remarks to the student, according to the student himself.
Even if you think that Seth's original letter was overstepping the bounds of his authority (although Protack apparently has no issue with it), you must agree that the Protack campaign has behaved in an entirely unprofessional manner since then.
Of course, no summary of the Convention would be complete without acknowledging the profuse compliments and praise given by Mike Castle to the College Republicans.
So let me get this straight. College Republican punks who abuse the process and literally sell-out their organization to a particular candidate and his masters in the party hierarchy - prior to the nominating convention - are above being 'attacked' or even held accountable?
Protack can't even respond to this organization after it is bought and paid-for by his opponent in the most unseemly, SLEAZY manner - just because they are 'College Republicans'?
Horse puckey. They aren't College Republicans in this instance but Ting operatives and that kid Wimer deserves a smack for being so fast and loose with his position. Did he get approval from his organization? Does he have the slighest notion of what ethics are? or do Strine et al just own it and him outright?
If I were Protack I would have torn a new one on anyone who abused the CR's like this, whether inside or outside that organization. Politics is hardball, baby, and these little college worms should learn early on that no one is going to shield them just 'cause they're dumbass kids. Maybe if they are held to task they will learn how to fight for real and start helping our party win for once, rather than protecting idiots like Strine and company. Strine only weakens us more and more by making these young people into his sycophantic pawns, setting up the next generation of useless little suck-up dweebs, like the one he has running the party office.
I cannot think of anything more pathetically hypocritical and transparently phony than to use the CR's as pawns against Protack, act as though they are some special exception to the rules of political warfare, and then falsely accuse Protack of attacking them in violation of this phony rule. I cannot think of anything more cowardly than hiding behind college kids to pull your dirty tricks and then feigning indignation when they are held to account because of your own dirty little intrigues.
Those who would abuse the CR's by instigating them into wrongdoing and then using them for political cover are terrible, dishonest people. I am ashamed of my party and believe the whole staff should be fired for simple ineptitude with such amateurish tactics. No wonder we are constantly beaten even by such hacks as the Delaware Democrats.
These people truly need to realize that Karl Rove is a fat pig of a criminal and that using his playbook only corrodes us from the inside out. They need to remember what our party's greatest leader - and I don't mean the idiot Bush, fellas - said about trying to fool the people. Strine and his minions need to stop dishonoring all of us and for Jesus' sake do something good for the WHOLE party FOR ONCE and put a stop to these types of embarrassing schemes.
" Referring simply to "a College Republican student" may have been attacking one in particular, but reread it, and it can also certainly be interpreted to refer to a generic College Republican student and then, by extension, to all College Republicans. In that sense of the statement, Mike Protack was attacking College Republicans in general."
Oh, come on. There's an obvious & indisputable difference between a particular human being and an organization. That anyone would want to debate such a point is too absurd to take seriously for a single moment.
"The "member of party leadership" did indeed defend the College Republicans' right to distribute the letter."
Care to name the person? Surely there would be no problem w/ it if his actions were proper.
"Almost every candidate distributed literature at the Convention, and the College Republicans' letter was right there with the rest of it..."
What are you referring to as the "letter?" The letter written by Mr. Wimer or the one claiming that he attacked Mr. Wimer's organization on a an "ultra-liberal" blog? If you mean the former, then the letter was an act of redundancy since it had previously been sent to the delegates as paid for for Mr. Ting's campaign. If you mean the latter, then someone distributed info that contained an outright lie which should have concerned the party leadership since it's a corruption of the electoral process.
Mr. Protack didn't attack the DE College Republicans. I attacked Wimer and, astonishingly, Protack defended him.
"or was, until a Protack staffer started collecting them all. As I'm sure you know, it is illegal to remove yard signs from someone else's yard. In the same vein, it is against campaign law to remove literature that someone else has distributed. "
I agree it is improper just to collect the letters w/o permission of the proper person at the convention even if the letter contained untruth.
"In addition, when a College Republicans representative told the Protack staffer not to remove the letter, the staffer made threatening remarks to the student, according to the student himself."
I'd like to know what the remarks are, but I certainly agree that the matter should have never been discussed w/ the DE College Repubs' rep alone. Protack's person should have simply lodged his complaint w/ the proper person at the convention and asked for a ruling. And if Protack's person made a threat of violence or harm against the student, then at a minimum Protack's person should have been booted from the convention. Such actions violate the electoral process as well.
"Even if you think that Seth's original letter was overstepping the bounds of his authority (although Protack apparently has no issue with it), you must agree that the Protack campaign has behaved in an entirely unprofessional manner since then."
If by "unprofessional" you mean this one person who tried to collect the letter and allegedly threatened the student, then I agree. But the actions of one person is not the entire "campaign" since I posted Seth's letter here. So unless you are referring to other actions of the Protack campaign I am unaware of since Wimer's letter appeared here, then I believe your use of "campaign" is excessive and I hope not deliberately so.
"Of course, no summary of the Convention would be complete without acknowledging the profuse compliments and praise given by Mike Castle to the College Republicans."
Well, that's good. No doubt they deserve the praise. It's no small thing to engage in political activity when you are a college student. I didn't do it as a college student and I regret it.
My e-mail box has been swamped w/ statements like this:
"Those who would abuse the CR's by instigating them into wrongdoing and then using them for political cover are terrible, dishonest people. I am ashamed of my party and believe the whole staff should be fired for simple ineptitude with such amateurish tactics. No wonder we are constantly beaten even by such hacks as the Delaware Democrats."
That's really a shame. "Keeping them..." is correct on this point. Corrupt processes yield awful electoral outcomes and horrible office holders. It's all the more tragic because it's much simpler and beneficial to do the right thing.
I know who probably was at this convention....Elder of the Swift Boater initiative......MO of the lame and feckless!!!
“Is it because you lack a conscience?”
Bingo ! Why should I have any compassion for a man who uses the Viet Nam War was a backdrop for his campaign? Where is his conscience bringing up Viet Nam War protesting for his own personal political gains?
There were two types of protesters during Viet Nam. One against the war itself and the other against the soldiers that were spit at and taunted getting office planes in LA. If Protack cares so much about veterans then why doesn’t tell us his position on inadequate veteran benefits ? The Viet Nam War is still a daily struggle for many veterans and many take Prozac and they need not hear Mr. Prozack dragging the veterans through another elections. They say, once a Marine always a Marine so, why doesn’t Protack stand on his own two feet and not use the veterans as his political crutch.
If Mr. Protack is so skillful in flying jets then where is his battle ribbons from the war in Iraq part 1, he was old enough to reenlisted? Was this a form of protest on his part not to come to the aid of his brothers? He ends his 10-year service right as Gulf War 1 was about to erupt.
...soldiers that were spit at and taunted getting office planes in LA.
Urban legend.
...soldiers that were spit at and taunted getting off planes in LA.
You weren't even old enough to remember !
No doubt there were spitting incidents and other conflicts between protesters on both sides at organized events. But the "spitting at the airport" thing, although there may be some moral truth to it as an allegory, is not factually true.
************************
Hollywood was a major accomplice in the construction and popularization of the victim-veteran image. Rambo: First Blood (1982) provided the most indelible image of the disturbed and dangerous Vietnam veteran... And it was his coming home experience—"I see all those maggots at the airport. Protesting me. Spitting. Calling me baby killer."—that ignited Rambo's rampage... (link)
************************
"If you go back and look at the historical record, like I did – newspaper accounts, police records, and also just things historians have written," Lembcke told this reporter, "you don't find any record or any evidence that these things happened – or even that they were being claimed as happening – in the late '60s and early '70s." A number of other scholars cited by Lembcke have also combed contemporary records in vain. ...
What the researchers did find, however, were numerous contemporary accounts of anti-war protesters being spat on and labeled "traitors," "cowards" or "commies" by pro-war demonstrators. Civilian peace groups and veterans' groups like Vietnam Veterans Against the War worked together closely, Lembcke documents, and vets initiated such dramatic protest actions as burning draft cards and throwing their medals back at the Pentagon. "Most actual hostility toward Vietnam vets emanated from other, older vets who despised their long hair, love beads and peace symbols," Lembcke writes. (link)
************************
If you are a younger conservative you did not experience the Zeitgeist of the 60s, while you have a right to an opinion today, you must respect the experiences of people who were alive at the time.
You need to know that in the 60s you didn't hear much of "My country, right or wrong" or "Support the troops! (blindly)" Not because society was unpatriotic, but because it had recently witnessed the Nazi command defending its atrocities with the Nuremberg Defense ("just following orders") and was filled with horror at the moral vacancy of the "Good German." The moral wisdom of the time was that soldiers were individually responsible for the morality of their own actions. The United States, both officially and in popular culture thoroughly rejected the Nuremberg Defense, which during the Vietman conflict was very fresh in the public mind after the 1962 trial and hanging of Eichmann. It used to be considered unacceptable for American troops to adopt that moral posture - but now it seems we tolerate it. Or rather, we have developed new ways for soldiers and citizens to rationalize the rightness of the cause.
iamyourdaddy don't know what your f-ing game is putting my link to your message!
So big f-ing deal I gave Mike Protack a delegate vote !!! For Christ sake give the man a break ! At least he is running for office based on his Beliefs ! I'm tied of hearing this man get slandered ! Mike is a very decent person so F- off
Mike knows I must support the party's endorsement of Ting and will work with Ting's campaign. And those in the party for treating Mike like shit are responsible for him going to primary ! Should have just let the process work like it should have.
So much for American political process.
iamyoudaddy go ahead and leave a message on my site and I'll expose you IP address. ass wipe ! m fer
Anonymous
“If you go back and look at the historical record, like I did – newspaper accounts, police records, and also just things historians have written," Lembcke told this reporter, "you don't find any record or any evidence that these things happened”
What a masterpiece of a post! Henry Kissinger is that you?
Anonymous, what is your spin on candidates bringing up the whole Vietnam protest issues and when will it stop? To me , its getting rather old and not much of an issue. However, I did serve in Vietnam as I was in Junior High at the time.
Opps, I did not serve in Vietnam
Anonymous, what is your spin on candidates bringing up the whole Vietnam protest issues and when will it stop?
It will stop when there is a universal draft.
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa3...no-
appendix.pdf
Universal Draft ! That’s the draft all boys and girls of all colors serve their country for two years. Hopefully this would mean National Guard training as for preparedness not active service. I know there would be limited college deferment as completing current semester and being able to complete senior year. Most people confuse sole surviving child with meaning only child however it mean as surviving child of a service member KIA or died as a result of combat injury or a result of even after discharge. This would be another great subject to debate.
Mystery guest are you Charles Krulak
Any proposed draft should be as universal as possible for several reasons:
1. Eliminate the chickenhawk problem.
2. Make them think twice about passing the draft in the first place ("Not MY kids!!")
3. Make them think twice about sending troops in harm's way ("Not MY kids!!")
4. Eliminate Swiftboating attacks (or maybe not; liars will still be liars, but if voters have all served maybe they won't believe the lies).
5. Eliminate the "Hates the Troops" attacks against war opponents (because everybody served).
I don't know Krulak; I'm just a random blogreader with too much time today.
Amen, Kilroy. Let's start with the College Republicans!
Actually that would not be a good thing for the rest of the troops. Those chicken hawks would be the first to turn the tail and run the moment a firecracker went off.
It seems they have learned all too well from their overseers how to dive for cover and let someone else take the bullets for them.
I guarantee their saber-rattling would yield to a runny 'squish' sound in their drawers if they had to face a far more vicious and bloodthirsty enemy than "liberals" and Democrats. An enemy they want to send others to fight in their place.
“Amen, Kilroy. Let's start with the College Republicans!”
Don’t know about that, they must being doing something right if everybody is so concerned about their activities.
If they are going to play in the major leagues the rookies need to get dirty! Take a looking at Carper how he trashed Bill Roth and disgraced him because of his age!
All joking aside, the blogs will soon rule the political land. Just thank God we don’t have a one party system. I can see why many young bloggers are envious of Seth because he commands so much attention in which many his age are jealous. It appears the College Democrats lack such a leader.
It’s a bit ironic, many feel the Republicans aka Bush is screwing the country and in Delaware it the Democrats screwing the Delawareans. What real sucks, is in the middle the Independents aren’t raking in the support. As I said, Mike Protack is decent person trying to make a difference however in may not be as an elected official. The College Republicans had noting to do with his down fall at the convention. I think you can thank the News Journal for that, as they seem to beat the rhythm of the drum the community marches to. The college Republicans can’t touch the negative impact the News Journal puts out.
Ting has an up hill Battle with Carper however give Ting a chance at some debates with Carper, Ting will show you that he’s the teacher and Carper is the student.
I predict Ting over Carper, Ramone over Sokola and not doubt Wharton over Beau Biden. By time Elections roll around gas will be at $3.35 and voters will still be pissed about the new electric rates triggered by Carper’s signature on that stupid legislation. The cost are being passed on the consumers is goods and services. No way the majority of democratic voters are that stupid to return the status quo to power.
"don't know Krulak; I'm just a random blogreader with too much time today.
Anonymous | 05.01.06 |"
If I were you, I'd dump the Anonymous and take credit for you particaption.
"It’s a bit ironic, many feel the Republicans aka Bush is screwing the country and in Delaware it the Democrats screwing the Delawareans. What real sucks, is in the middle the Independents aren’t raking in the support."
Well said. We can't win for trying as R's. We are stuck with lousy national leadership in a Democratic state with lousy state leadership. The Delaware Dems are as crooked and wayward as the national Repubs. The Libertarian Party is the best alternative. They are in 50 states and stand for something besides merely being 'independent'. You can't form a viable third party around the sole idea of being NOT THE OTHER TWO.
=======================================
"No way the majority of democratic voters are that stupid to return the status quo to power."
I wish that were true. Carper polls at 62-63% on a consistent basis (higher than Biden). He is a savvy pol and the ghosts of '99 will not haunt him. Delaware loves its incumbents and I see nothing so dire (gas prices and energy costs or not) that will upset the whole incumbency apple cart. Ting is just too weak. No third round draft candidates ever win, especially when they only get started with 6 months to go.
Nah, I guarantee we will see no changes here in Delaware. It will require generational change not voter discontent.
========================================
Nationally however, I believe the Dems will take the House. As a Republican second and a patriot first I say THANK GOD. Voters know a crook like Bush and his syndicate when they see it.
Just look at this article (Bush is such a dangerous disgrace) :
http://www.boston.com/news/natio...ndreds_of_laws/
Bush challenges hundreds of laws
President cites powers of his office
By Charlie Savage, Boston Globe Staff | April 30, 2006
WASHINGTON --
President Bush has quietly claimed the authority to disobey more than 750 laws enacted since he took office, asserting that he has the power to set aside any statute passed by Congress when it conflicts with his interpretation of the Constitution............
or this:
FBI Investigated 3,501 People Without Warrants
Received Details From Banks, Credit Card, Telephone and Internet Companies
By MARK SHERMAN, AP
WASHINGTON (April 29) - The FBI secretly sought information last year on 3,501 U.S. citizens and legal residents from their banks and credit card, telephone and Internet companies without a court's approval, the Justice Department said Friday.
"The Libertarian Party is the best alternative."
No thanks I'll stick to eating meat (smile)
" No third round draft candidates ever win, especially when they only get started with 6 months to go.'
When radical change is in order so then is radical behavior that deviates from the norm.
"FBI Investigated 3,501 People Without Warrants" How many were American Citizens becuase, We the people of The United States want to remain just that ! What next cmaers catching us running red lights, looking trough out lugage without warrants and the elimination of the plain view doctrine. How many of those warrents would be denied? How often do the feds get denied for such warrants.
"President Bush has quietly claimed the authority to disobey more than 750 laws enacted since he took office, asserting that he has the power to set aside any statute passed by Congress when it conflicts with his interpretation of the Constitution............"
Are you saying Kennedy followed the book ! Carter kissing ass with the Shaw of Iran, showering his with tanks and jets. Bringing Iranians to Texas for flight training.
The best defense if a good offense, right !
Kilroy - spare us the look back at Dem did this and Dem did that. If they were wrong they were wrong. BUSH IS WRONG.
Every day he looks more and more like a Nazi - yes I said it. If the shoe fits....
I am not interested in hearing about 'following the book' arguments. The law is the law and the CONSTITUTION IS NOT NEGOTIABLE.
I supported Clinton't impeachment for his crimes and I will support Bush's removal for his.
"CONSTITUTION IS NOT NEGOTIABLE."
Which version are we talking about the white one or black one?
Agreeable about not looking back!
2 1/2 more years we'll have somebody new to bitch about. I honestly think we need to address Delaware concerns this November.
I barely remember Eisenhower, did they bitch about him? I also thought we elected presidents so we would have someone to blame. It use to be the "man" but nobody knew who the "man" was.
So what do you say we have a Blog Fest at Dana house ! Dana you still a Scotch man ?
The comments on this blog are becoming very convoluted and I'm becoming intimidated.
But I tend to agree with Dana's original assertion. The statement that Protack "attacked" the college republicans, if not smearish, was at least smirchy. I thought his comments were very measured. (I submit that "smirchiness" should be considered a new noun - like "truthiness)"
In addition, while the college republicans are a political asset to the party, I doubt it's wise for them to be held inviolate from criticism. I have a child in college - not a dumb kid - but I'm not generally impressed with his judgment. Look, I live in Newark. College kids routinely step off curbs with cars coming at them. Mr. Protack's comments about kids who haven't paid their dues and don't even yet know ARE dues, struck a chord with me. Anyone else?
Finally, I don't think the specifics of Mr. Protack's military service have any bearing here. Being pulled away from your life as a young person to serve your country, in whatever function, is a sacrifice that should be considered honorable.
My challenge to Dana is this: This is what local political parties do (not just now but always, I think). I respect your idealism. But do you think you will change this?
By the way Anonymous, I was also very disugusted with Clinton, but his "crimes" were precisely, lying about a blow job in a room full of lawyers.
Despite my personal disappointment with the guy, who clearly just couldn't keep his thing in his pants, I also wanted to ask, what's the real crime here? isn't it. maybe, our ridiculous anxiety about blow jobs? You have to admit it's pretty damn petty.
Puzzler - thoughtful comments on your part.
I just don't agree with your minimization of Clinton's crimes. As both the chief 'executor' of our nation's laws and a (former) attorney (Arkansas disbarred him for his crimes) Clinton subverted the judicial process in a very calculated and grotesque manner. The issue was not a blowjob but his rampant and disgusting abuse of many women by harrasing and perhaps even sexually assaulting some. It was how he used his power to initimidate, smear, and silence them by breaking laws and abusing his power.
Without getting too far into that mess Paula Jones was a real litigant with a real case and old Bubba tried every underhanded lie and trick in the book to deny her due process of law. His actions were criminal.
LYING TO A FEDERAL JUDGE IN SWORN TESTIMONY IS A HIGH CRIME. Scooter Libby is facing 30 years for lying just to investigators!
The point here is not the scope of the crime, but that it IS a crime (unless you want split hairs about what 'is' is). The only difference between a white collar thief and a shoplifter is the wealth and influence of the person doing the stealing. Is it just that the wealthy and powerful get a free pass while the poor are prosecuted and jailed for, essentially, the same malum per se offense. Given that Clinton is white trash I am not sure which rule to apply to him here, but I do know that he used the power of the office we gave him to undermine another branch of government in an attempt to escape justice while denying it to others.
As I mentioned earlier about the Constitution being non-negotiable, adherence to the laws (much less their proper, lawful execution) are not matters of choice for the President of the United States. If they break the law, whether (hypothetically) lying to a magistrate about shoplifting or wiretapping Americans, the basic point is that they have not just broken the law but undermined our system of government because of the massive trust we place in them.
Whether you bought it or not many Republicans (like me) abhored having to deal with Clinton's convolutions in such a public spectacle - it cost us politically whether you believe it or not. But we remember Nixon and how dangerous it was to permit any precedent by which a President makes himself immune from the law and judicial process.
So, again, it is not the severity of the crime but that its commission is a betrayal of public trust and subversion of substantive and procedural due process. We can never permit a President to commit ANY CRIMES WHATSOEVER WITH ANY IMPUNITY.
The depth and nature of the crime should not determine whether or not it is prosecuted but how it is ultimately punished. Clinton should have been removed, or at least harshly sanctioned somehow, since his acts, though relatively lesser crimes, were nonetheless grievous, substantial, and prolonged. In the case of Bush, if even 1/10th of his assaults on the Constitution are factually true and legally provable he should probably be hanged for treason.
In any event CRIMINAL PRESIDENTS MUST BE PROSECUTED AND REMOVED, NO MATTER THE CRIME. No ifs, ands, or buts. So please do not minimize crimes committed in office simply because their self-serving nature is lurid and personal. In such cases they are grotesque but, again, still crimes.
"Bingo ! Why should I have any compassion for a man who uses the Viet Nam War was a backdrop for his campaign? Where is his conscience bringing up Viet Nam War protesting for his own personal political gains?"
Jesus, how long must I repeat this until you Repub Party true believers get this? NONE OF THIS HAS ANYTHING TO DO W/ PROTACK AS A CANDIDATE OR HIS VIEWS. It's anout the ELECTORAL PROCESS of your party.
You should be very concerned when someone istreated unjustly in your party even if you can't stand him personally because--now go slowly on this point--INJUSTICE IS WRONG.
I personally find Protack's attack on Ting's protest years offensive, but I don't hink that means people in the party should be allowed to spread lies about him or corrupt the electoral process by getting party officials to write letters of support for him BEFORE THE CONVENTION.
Why is that distinction so difficult to comphrened?
"1. Eliminate the chickenhawk problem."
I doubt I could support draft. No one should be compelled to go and fight in a war that they think is unjust--rich, poor, whatever race, etc. Violating the conscience on life and death matters should never be the cost of redressing class-based inequities.
Besides, even if the draft were reinstated, don’t think for one moment that the upper classes and political elites wouldn’t build in exemptions from the draft in a new law. They would find a way to exempt their children or serve in some non-combat capacity. They’ve always done it in the past. It would be historically foolish to assume they wouldn’t do it again.
"I have a child in college - not a dumb kid - but I'm not generally impressed with his judgment. Look, I live in Newark. College kids routinely step off curbs with cars coming at them. Mr. Protack's comments about kids who haven't paid their dues and don't even yet know ARE dues, struck a chord with me. Anyone else?"
It resonates w/ me sort of. But at the same time debates about the meaning of terms like "conservative" are worthwhile when the term's use is so variable. If a oollege student makes a valid point about it, I'm not altogether sure the point can be easily dismissed because the student never made a house payment.
"My challenge to Dana is this: This is what local political parties do (not just now but always, I think). I respect your idealism. But do you think you will change this?"
Not eliminate it, but hopefully change the culture from thinking that nothing can or should be done to correct it. Also, it is so bad in DE that it can only be seen as a manifestation of incumbency politics, which is my real target in all this mess.
"WASHINGTON --
President Bush has quietly claimed the authority to disobey more than 750 laws enacted since he took office, asserting that he has the power to set aside any statute passed by Congress when it conflicts with his interpretation of the Constitution............"
That comes to 1 out every ten laws he's signed I heard tonight. Why is and avowed lawbreaker still in office?
" but I don't think that means people in the party should be allowed to spread lies about him or corrupt the electoral process by getting party officials to write letters of support for him BEFORE THE CONVENTION."
Dana, sometimes I think this whole country is build on lies. Isn't polls in general no more then distored lies prior to the convention? Hasn't the current political establishmnet set the stage for the next generation to set the the new low standards. Look how low poltics has come over the years. What positive morals are left. Has a law been broken ? Don't forget Carper brought Delaware politics to a new low standard by his unjust attacks on Roth becaue of his age and displayed poor taste by publishing distastful photos of Roth.
Bush's assumption of powers reminds me of Boris Yeltsin governing Russia by proclamation.
Arlen Specter has been making noises about using the power of the purse to withhold certain funding for Bush's unauthorized activities. But as the Iran-Contra affair showed, lack of appropriated funds is not an obstacle for neocon skulduggery. And it's a sad state of affairs when our best hope is Arlen Specter.
Probably everybody already knew about this but me, but the "signing statement" theory was put forth in 1986 by one Deputy AG named Samuel Alito (link).
Doesn't sound like "strict construction" to me!! there's nothing about signing statements in the Constitition.
So forget about getting a Supreme Court ruling ordering Bush to obey the law - the fix is in. It's all starting to fit together now, isn't it? The idea that Bush will try to subvert or postpone the next election is not as moonbatty as I once thought it was.
"Probably everybody already knew about this but me, but the "signing statement" theory was put forth in 1986 by one Deputy AG named Samuel Alito"
I did not know that. It certainly puts his nomination to the Supreme Court in a new light.
It certainly puts his nomination to the Supreme Court in a new light.
It also casts the modern "conservative revolution" not as a political movement but as a criminal conspiracy covering three decades.
Keeping them Honest:
We are agreed that Clinton was wormish in his personal life and that he broke the law and should have been held accountable for that.
I don't remember much about Paula Jones but wouldn't be surprised if you were completely correct in your statements about Bubba's behavior.
I am also not unaware of how Clinton's adolescent sexual behavior hurt our nation - it probably handed the 2000 election to Bush. It should be added that Gore's wooden personality helped. So did Karl Rove's sociopathic genius (Bush, who spent substantial portions of that campaign being tutored on the basics of western history and geography, had little to do with it).
But I still maintain it's sorry and sad that a sitting president had to answer questions, under oath, about his frigging sex life. That remains a disgusting precedent and an amazing testament to the courseness and the voyerism that passes for leadership and journalism in America nowadays.
"But I still maintain it's sorry and sad that a sitting president had to answer questions, under oath, about his frigging sex life. That remains a disgusting precedent and an amazing testament to the courseness and the voyerism that passes for leadership and journalism in America nowadays."
Yes, indeed. This was my issue w/ it as well. In fact, I feel so strongly about this matter that I hold it should never be considered illegal to fail to respond or even lie about a question that one should have never been asked in a courtroom or during deposition in the first place.
To show that this is no partisan matter for me: I believe that it was absolutely abhorent, and chilling, that the prosecutors in FL were able to get Limbaugh's Doctor's medical records. That should always be off limits unnless there is probable cause to believe that the patient is a danger to himself and others.
Come on Dana! Stop being so damn liberal.
Clinton never judged others for their sexual misconduct. Rush has made a career of criticizing people for drug abuse. There's a huge hypocracy gap here.
"Come on Dana! Stop being so damn liberal."
Appatrently, the official operative phrase now is "ultra liberal."
"There's a huge hypocracy gap here."
Certainly. But I still think that even hypocrites should have their privacy rights w/ docs protected.
What do you think about the Rush case?
I'm apparently not as informed as you are about it. Are there ways of protecting folks privacy while also precluding doctor shopping?
Other than that I don't think much. I'm just enjoying this slow conservative unraveling. It couldn't happen to nicer people.
Let me answer the question about Veteran's Health Care, my service, Jan's protesting and college kids.
First, Jan protesting does matter. Not to me but to Veterans all over the state, Carper is not many things but he is a respected Veteran. When the info on Jan was given to me I asked the person who gave it to me to contact the GOP chair to make sure he knew. He did. I asked him not to make any public statements until Jan talked about it. Once Jan did many veterans called me offering their support. We then ran a poll to see if this issue would matter and 86% said they would never support Jan and 85% said they would support me. This poll was done by a professional outfit that does contract work for the RNC. Against Carper, this means about 25,000 Veterans votes are gone in a race where only 125,000 are needed to win.
Second, I support complete funding of Veterans Health Care needs and a Flag Desecration constitution proposal.
Thirdly, my service was from June 1979 to November 1989. That time was before the first Gulf War. I rejoined the Reserves at Willow Grove the next year but our unit was not called up or activated. My service record is solid. I am an American Legion member and a Marine Corps League member. Again, given Carper's service this issue will kill us if Jan is the nominee.
Lastly, I support and admire college kids who get involved. I worked full time to pay for College so I didn't have time for that activity, bills had to be paid. As individuals they can speak out whenever they want about anything they want. At the convention when the shrill and inaccurate letter was put on the chairs I asked Dave Crossan, GOP ED, to have then removed because they were not true. He responded," No, they stay because I read the site and you trashed the CR's". I was then told if you remove the letters your presentation to the convention will be cancelled!
Have a great day.
Mike Protack
Mike...you almost had me. Then you started talking that shit about banning flag burning. The First Amendment is pretty much all inclusive to me...including burning the damn flag. Unless of course, it's in a schoolhouse that later lights on fire. But that would be reckless arson. What are you folks against flag burning so afraid of? Get over your irrational fear and come back with some fresh ideas.
That Alito facto was out there BEFORE the nomination, the shameful go ahead that all but had the DE reps go for him, thank their lucky stars they voted no.
Commenting by HaloScan
