Offering constructive criticism to the social cripples in our midst since early 2005.

[SlaveNoMore]

Shape Shifter

Bilmore's law school graduation photo shouldn't count.

[Iron Steve]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
How odd, then, that Senators Inouye (Hawaii), Baucus (Montana) and Obama (Illinois) (for example) were OK with a roll call vote on the apology, but your Southern Republicans didn't want to go on the record.

Guilty consciences? I can only imagine the skeletons any democrat harbours in his or her respective closet.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
How odd, then, that Senators Inouye (Hawaii), Baucus (Montana) and Obama (Illinois) (for example) were OK with a roll call vote on the apology, but your Southern Republicans didn't want to go on the record.

What was the apology for? The Senate would apologize that the Klan lynched black people?

I'm afraid I'll have to agree with this IRon guy sock, then the apology should come from Mr. Byrd and any others that can be proven up as having worn the robes.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Iron Steve
Hillary has been a woman of the ultra-Left ever since she entered Wellesley College 40 years ago this year. She’s been consistently anti-military (despite her recent votes), pro-nationalized health care, and pro-abortion without parental consent.

This is going to get good. I may buy this book, even though as a rule I don't read anything but client documents, this board, the WSJ and the Sunday NYTimes (go figure).

Look for it in the fiction section, since the author just made shit up to fit his smear job:

• Smears and Lies: Klein on Clinton
  by Maura Moynihan
  
  It is sorry proof of the national decline of standards and the perversion of priorities that Senator Hillary Clinton isn’t getting coverage in Vanity Fair magazine—a New York–based publication—for her work in the U.S. Senate. Rather, the magazine’s editors have decided that it is more newsworthy and relevant to excerpt a tawdry new book that hits a new low in Hillary-bashing.
  
  Ed Klein, author of the book in question, The Truth About Hillary, alleges that New York’s late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan "despised" Mrs. Clinton, that he once hid in a cloakroom to terminate a conversation with her. Nonsense. I think I know Senator Moynihan better than Mr. Klein, because he was my father. Mr. Klein also claims firsthand knowledge of a meeting between my parents and Mrs. Clinton that took place in their apartment in Washington. It was during this meeting that Mrs. Clinton, then the nation’s First Lady, discussed the idea of running for the seat my father was about to vacate.
  
  Mr. Klein puts quotes around statements that were never uttered. I can confirm this because the only other persons present during this meeting were myself and our Tibetan cook, who speaks about 10 words of English. Mr. Klein has now gone on the record to say that he spent "several hours interviewing Mrs. Moynihan." Puzzling indeed, in that Mrs. Moynihan—my mother—hasn’t seen Mr. Klein in over 20 years. I’d like to see the transcripts or hear the tapes of his on-the-record talks with Mrs. Moynihan. And it would have been difficult for him to interview Senator Moynihan, because he’s dead.
  
  Mr. Klein has an established record of slandering Democrats and using dead people as sources: Remember his book about John F. Kennedy Jr. and Carolyn Bessette—New Yorkers and private citizens—also excerpted in Vanity Fair? If Mrs. Clinton were merely a movie star, one could shrug off the Klein book as tabloid trash, but she is the junior Senator from New York and former First Lady of the United States of America. So when national publications offer legitimacy to smear artists who attack our elected officials, the consequences are real, as it further degrades the profession of journalism and injures our public servants and the institutions they serve.
  
  Mr. Klein’s mission here isn’t "reporting"; it’s an attempt to sever Senator Clinton from her predecessor and colleague, Senator Moynihan, and to delegitimize her political career. The book also is a swipe at our deceased senior Senator. Daniel Patrick Moynihan worked with thousands of people in his 50-year career in public service—in academia, diplomacy, the Congress, journalism—who can attest to his extraordinarily high ethical standards, his respect for protocol, his disdain for the low blow. Senator Robert Dole wrote: "Pat Moynihan never had an unkind word about any of his colleagues on either side of the aisle. In Washington that says enough about his remarkable character." If Senator Moynihan had a problem with you, he said it to your face. His few disagreements with the Clintons were always about policy and are clearly stated in the Congressional Record for the world to see. As for the claim that Senator Moynihan "despised" Mrs. Clinton, to my knowledge the only person my father actively despised was Josef Stalin.
  
  As Mr. Klein wrote this book with a specific agenda, he failed to research the friendship and intellectual discourse sustained by my father and Mrs. Clinton for over a decade. In the early 1990’s, Senator Moynihan asked to read Mrs. Clinton’s Wellesley senior thesis about Saul Alinsky and gave her an A. President Clinton honored Senator Moynihan with the Medal of Freedom. We dined at the Clinton White House regularly and stood side by side with the Clintons when the First Lady was elected to the Senate in 2000. None of this is reported in Vanity Fair, because it doesn’t fit the program.
  
  As Senator Moynihan famously said, "Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts." New Yorkers are weary of the incessant Clinton-bashing that the national media seemingly never tires of. We have seen Senator Clinton become a powerful legislator, orator and advocate for New York. She travels from Buffalo to Montauk, listening to her constituents, and then she goes back to Washington to fight for them.
  
  She has endured years of personal attacks on herself and her family, and has somehow managed to bear herself with dignity and grace throughout. A lesser person would have abandoned politics and retired to the Gulf of Siam years ago. Fabricating stories about Mrs. Clinton’s relationship with Senator Moynihan is an offense to New Yorkers, an insult to my deceased father and a sad commentary on the state of "journalism." Let the woman do her work, for God’s sake, and if you want to know what Senator Moynihan said or thought about anything, visit his papers in the Library of Congress.

NY Observer
(link will work this week only)

[SlaveNoMore]

Hank Chinaski
What was the apology for? The Senate would apologize that the Klan lynched black people?

I'm afraid I'll have to agree with this IRon guy sock, then the apology should come from My Byrd and any others that can be proven up as having worn the robes.

It's an apology for the failure of earlier Senates to enact legislation.

Ty, isn't this the perfect example of a "slippery slope"?

[Iron Steve]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
I'm pretty sure that James Byrd was the one that was lynched only a few years ago. Neither of the Senators from his state (Texas) signed on to the apology.

What is there for any governmental entity or elected representative to apologize for in the case of James Byrd? I am not an expert on that case, but weren't there laws in place that made what happened to him illegal? didn't the appropriate governmental entity(ies) with jurisdiction prosecute? While I feel badly for his family (and him) I don't think that the citizens of his state need to apologize for the criminal acts of three bad actors through the voice or vote of their elected representatives. Get on with the business of government and stop wasting tax payer money. Instead of meaningless apology resolutions put the time and money into areas that needs work and can affect meaningful change, like education and maybe then the Union oppressed public schools won't produce three more ignorant fucks who go out drag a person to death.

I do think Tom Sneddon should apologize to the citizens of the State of California (hi ty!) for wasting how ever many millions of CA taxpayer money on a crap case (notwithstanding that I would bet millions that Jacko has had him some boy lovin).

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Ty, isn't this the perfect example of a "slippery slope"?

Um, how so?

[Iron Steve]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
It's an apology for the failure of earlier Senates to enact legislation.

Ty, isn't this the perfect example of a "slippery slope"?

Again, I think apology resolutions or conscience votes are a waste of taxpayer time and money (hell, Bobby Byrd is already the Conscience of the Senate, isn't that enough?), but the Senate issue is, to my knowledge, definitely distinguuishable from the James Byrd case, where there were laws in place to prosecute (or am I not recollecting correctly-and I don't care enough to google).

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Iron Steve
What is there for any governmental entity or elected representative to apologize for in the case of James Byrd? I am not an expert on that case, but weren't there laws in place that made what happened to him illegal? didn't the appropriate governmental entity(ies) with jurisdiction prosecute? While I feel badly for his family (and him) I don't think that the citizens of his state need to apologize for the criminal acts of three bad actors through the voice or vote of their elected representatives. Get on with the business of government and stop wasting tax payer money. Instead of meaningless apology resolutions put the time and money into areas that needs work and can affect meaningful change, like education and maybe then the Union oppressed public schools won't produce three more ignorant fucks who go out drag a person to death.

According to one of its sponsors:

• From 1890 to 1960, 4,742 Americans were documented as having been lynched, with actual numbers believed to be much higher. During that time, nearly 200 anti-lynching bills were introduced to the United States Congress. The United States House of Representatives even passed three anti-lynching bills, but all failed on the floor of the Senate despite the lobbying of seven U.S. Presidents. Because of the Senate’s refusal to pass the legislation, the federal government was left powerless to intervene and protect Americans from these heinous acts of mob violence.

I can't believe that S. Res. 39 cost the taxpayers all that much money, but it would be nice if one of the Republicans who was ducking the roll call would come out and say that he thought a roll call vote would have cost too much. As it is, it looks kinda like they're playing for the votes of crypto-racists.

It's endearing to see Republicans start worrying about the nation's fisc only as an excuse to avoid apologizing for lynching, or funding Sesame Street.

I do think Tom Sneddon should apologize to the citizens of the State of California (hi ty!) for wasting how ever many millions of CA taxpayer money on a crap case (notwithstanding that I would bet millions that Jacko has had him some boy lovin).

Absolutely right. The government never ought to prosecute someone who can afford to defend himself properly. It's not efficient use of taxpayer money. Stick to sticking it to the poor and defenseless.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Iron Steve
What is there for any governmental entity or elected representative to apologize for in the case of James Byrd? I am not an expert on that case, but weren't there laws in place that made what happened to him illegal? didn't the appropriate governmental entity(ies) with jurisdiction prosecute? While I feel badly for his family (and him) I don't think that the citizens of his state need to apologize for the criminal acts of three bad actors through the voice or vote of their elected representatives. Get on with the business of government and stop wasting tax payer money. Instead of meaningless apology resolutions put the time and money into areas that needs work and can affect meaningful change, like education and maybe then the Union oppressed public schools won't produce three more ignorant fucks who go out drag a person to death.

I do think Tom Sneddon should apologize to the citizens of the State of California (hi ty!) for wasting how ever many millions of CA taxpayer money on a crap case (notwithstanding that I would bet millions that Jacko has had him some boy lovin).

2. I want RT and all the moderators to apologize to me for when legaleze cheated me out of the Superbowl pool. that shit was a government action.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Iron Steve
Again, I think apology resolutions or conscience votes are a waste of taxpayer time and money

What about the "Freedom Fries" thing?

[SlaveNoMore]

Tyrone Slothrop
Look for it in the fiction section, since the author just made shit up to fit his smear job:

"Ed Klein is the former foreign editor of NEWSWEEK and former editor in chief of the NEW YORK TIMES MAGAZINE. He is a frequent contributor to VANITY FAIR and PARADE."

Wow, the Vary Right Wing Conspiracy sure has extended its reach in the last few years. Even former editors of the Leftwing Bible are involved.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Wow, the Vary Right Wing Conspiracy sure has extended its reach in the last few years. Even former editors of the Leftwing Bible are involved.

They're recruiting people to their deviant lifestyle, using tax cuts and shit.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
2. I want RT and all the moderators to apologize to me for when legaleze cheated me out of the Superbowl pool. that shit was a government action.

I'm sorry that you were cheated and I'm sorry if your being put in charge of this year's pool wasn't adequate compensation.

[SlaveNoMore]

Tyrone Slothrop
Um, how so?

It's an apology for "failure to act".

How many times has the Senate (or Congress as a whole) "failed" to act - whether through the defeat of bills, the reluctance to act, or filibuster hijack of the system.

You really want to start the precedent of publicly apologizing for everything the Senate didn't do?