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

[SlaveNoMore]

ltl/fb
What about the "Freedom Fries" thing?

I hear they're good with Ketchup.

[Iron Steve]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Look for it in the fiction section, since the author just made shit up to fit his smear job:
[list]Smears and Lies: Klein on Clinton
by Maura Moynihan

Couple of thoughts:

1. It is my understanding that he claims to have backup for the Mrs. Moynihan interview, so I guess we shall see.

2. While Pat Moynihan may never have had an ill word about a "colleague", I am not sure in what sense Mrs. clinton, a non-elected to anything at the time, wife of a president, would be a colleague of Moynihan's. I sense a "what is 'is'" moment.

3. speaking of apologies, when is Hillary going to apologize to the American public for her performance and assertions on the Today Show back in 1998 where she unmasked and blamed the VRWC for promoting the lies about her husband and Monica. To refresh your memory, let's go to the tape:


MATT LAUER: Let me take you and your husband out of this for a second -- Bill and Hillary aren't involved in this story: If an American president had an adulterous liaison in the White House and lied to cover it up, should the American people ask for his resignation?

HILLARY CLINTON: Well, they should certainly be concerned about it.

LAUER: Should they ask for his resignation?

CLINTON: Well, I think -- if all that were proven true, I think that would be a very serious offense. That is not going to be proven true.

WHAT?!?!!?!?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
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?

According to Senator Landrieu, the Senate was the roadblock for the anti-lynching stuff. I didn't know that, but don't have any reason to disagree. Pro-segregation Southerners knew how to use the Senate, notwithstanding that Byrd's filibuster ultimately failed.

And I think that the Senate can apologize for lynching without being drawn down the slippery slope that you're concerned about.

At any rate, none of the Southern Republicans I was talking about had the cojones to come out in opposition to the apology on the sort of principled grounds you've articulated. They just didn't want to have to go on the record as voting for it.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Iron Steve
It is my understanding that he claims to have backup for the Mrs. Moynihan interview, so I guess we shall see.

I doubt we will, but you let me know if someone ever establishes that Klein actually had the goods. Until then, we can assume that he is lying, since Moynihan's daughter says her mother hasn't seen Klein in 20 years.

speaking of apologies, when is Hillary going to apologize to the American public for her performance and assertions on the Today Show back in 1998 where she unmasked and blamed the VRWC for promoting the lies about her husband and Monica.

Of course the VRWC was promoting the story about Bill and Monica, and I'm sure that the fact that he was cheating on her was made all the more palatable by all the low-lifes pushing the story in the press for political purposes. I'm not really clear why you think she has anything to apologize for.

[Iron Steve]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
According to one of its sponsors:


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 still don't see the point. I have always been a fiscal conservative and am not a representative of the party in any official capacity. That said, I propose a blanket apology, "we are sorry to everyone for not always doing everything that you think we should have and for doing anything that you think we should not have and we will try not to let any of that happen again, but if we do, we apologize in advance" Next.

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop


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.

Is the standard for deciding to prosecute that someone has enough money for a defense? It was an awful case, it should not have been brought. Is there a case to bring? Perhaps, but I think they need to develop it a little more first.

FTR, I am just as critical of prosecutorial indiscretion against poor people. there was case years back (mid 90s) in Chicago. A cook county prosceutor charged a couple with 1001 counts of child abuse and related offenses against their minor children. The kids were immediately taken and put in foster care. The parents were poor. Each and every count was later dismissed, prior to trial. There was no apology and there should have been. And the prosecutor should have been fired for what he did to those people's lives and the destructive affect the state visited on what proved to be an otherwise healthy (but poor) family.

I am an equal opportunity critic of the system.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Iron Steve
Couple of thoughts:

1. It is my understanding that he claims to have backup for the Mrs. Moynihan interview, so I guess we shall see.

2. While Pat Moynihan may never have had an ill word about a "colleague", I am not sure in what sense Mrs. clinton, a non-elected to anything at the time, wife of a president, would be a colleague of Moynihan's. I sense a "what is 'is'" moment.

3. speaking of apologies, when is Hillary going to apologize to the American public for her performance and assertions on the Today Show back in 1998 where she unmasked and blamed the VRWC for promoting the lies about her husband and Monica. To refresh your memory, let's go to the tape:


MATT LAUER: Let me take you and your husband out of this for a second -- Bill and Hillary aren't involved in this story: If an American president had an adulterous liaison in the White House and lied to cover it up, should the American people ask for his resignation?

HILLARY CLINTON: Well, they should certainly be concerned about it.

LAUER: Should they ask for his resignation?

CLINTON: Well, I think -- if all that were proven true, I think that would be a very serious offense. That is not going to be proven true.

WHAT?!?!!?!?

"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent. In such quantities, these chemical agents could also kill untold thousands. He's not accounted for these materials. He has given no evidence that he has destroyed them.

U.S. intelligence indicates that Saddam Hussein had upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents. Inspectors recently turned up 16 of them -- despite Iraq's recent declaration denying their existence. Saddam Hussein has not accounted for the remaining 29,984 of these prohibited munitions. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed them.

From three Iraqi defectors we know that Iraq, in the late 1990s, had several mobile biological weapons labs. These are designed to produce germ warfare agents, and can be moved from place to a place to evade inspectors. Saddam Hussein has not disclosed these facilities. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed them.

The International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed in the 1990s that Saddam Hussein had an advanced nuclear weapons development program, had a design for a nuclear weapon and was working on five different methods of enriching uranium for a bomb. The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production. Saddam Hussein has not credibly explained these activities. He clearly has much to hide."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...030128-19.html

[Iron Steve]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
I hear they're good with Ketchup.

2. or salt and vinegar

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Iron Steve
I still don't see the point.

As is your perogative. But we weren't talking about whether it was a good idea. We were talking about the Senate Republicans who blocked it from getting a voice vote because they didn't want to go on the record as apologizing for lynching.

Is the standard for deciding to prosecute that someone has enough money for a defense? It was an awful case, it should not have been brought.

I'm happier not knowing how strong a case it was. The main weakness of the case seemed to me to be that Jackson surrounds himself with freaks, and so the only witnesses who could testify against him are freaks.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Iron Steve
And you still fail to respond how as to how that apology for a single action means anything in light of a subsequent documented twenty-five year history of racist speech and action. My posit is that it is a meaningless sop and that the people his people (and by association him) lynched should not be bamboozled by this.

It means, simply, that he's one up on Helms. Damning with faint praise, but since I promised club that if Byrd published an autobio I would post about it, I felt I should.

By implication you tried to tag all Repubs as racist by virtue of southern republicans lack of support for the civil rights act (and subsequent republican presidential candidates exploitation of that position for electoral gain). I responded in like kind. Why is one criticism any more legitimate than the other?

Bullshit. I responded to your statement that Dems should apologize to African-Americans for (on Planet Penske) trying to prevent the Civil Rights Act from passing. When I pointed out how utterly full of shit you were, you had to look back another hundred years to try and say something else meaningful (try, but fail).

[Iron Steve]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I doubt we will, but you let me know if someone ever establishes that Klein actually had the goods. Until then, we can assume that he is lying, since Moynihan's daughter says her mother hasn't seen Klein in 20 years.

Why do we assume the veracity of one person's baseless assertion and not the other? is the mother alive? If so, where is her statement? If not, to me, its a he said she said. Certainly we are not to believe that Moynihan's daughter was a first hand witness to every minute of her mom's life over the last 20 years are we? Are they are siamese twins?

I will go with credible journalist for now and wait to see what other evidence comes to the fore.

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Of course the VRWC was promoting the story about Bill and Monica, and I'm sure that the fact that he was cheating on her was made all the more palatable by all the low-lifes pushing the story in the press for political purposes. I'm not really clear why you think she has anything to apologize for.

She was a self-proclaimed part of the administration. Two for the price of one. She went on a national news program with an agenda to influence the American public's opinion.

She said:

CLINTON: Well, I think -- if all that were proven true, I think that would be a very serious offense. That is not going to be proven true.

But it was.

She is either a bald faced liar or an inadvertant shill for her husband's perjurious cover-up. Either way she owes the American public an apology for her part in perpetuating the lie as a supposedly credible part of his administration.

[Iron Steve]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
It means, simply, that he's one up on Helms. Damning with faint praise, but since I promised club that if Byrd published an autobio I would post about it, I felt I should.



Bullshit. I responded to your statement that Dems should apologize to African-Americans for (on Planet Penske) trying to prevent the Civil Rights Act from passing. When I pointed out how utterly full of shit you were, you had to look back another hundred years to try and say something else meaningful (try, but fail).

We might not have needed the civil rights act were it not for decades of Southern Democrats subverting the results of the Republican prosecuted Civil War and the intent of 14th and 15th Amendments. Can't have it both ways Sidd, your party is at least as complicit and probably more. Given my choice of low level associations, I'll take the party that once tried to block the civil rights act (with Democratic assistance, Senator Byrd) over the party that tried to perpetuate slavery and has a former Kleagle as its Conscience.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Iron Steve
Why do we assume the veracity of one person's baseless assertion and not the other?

Because the daughter was actually at the meeting between Senator Moynihan and Hillary Clinton, and Klein was not.

She is either a bald faced liar or an inadvertant shill for her husband's perjurious cover-up. Either way she owes the American public an apology for her part in perpetuating the lie as a supposedly credible part of his administration.

It's pretty clear that Bill was lying to her. She may be owed an apology, but she ought not apologize for having been embarrassed before the whole country.

[Iron Steve]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop




I'm happier not knowing how strong a case it was. The main weakness of the case seemed to me to be that Jackson surrounds himself with freaks, and so the only witnesses who could testify against him are freaks.

did Sneddon not know he was relying on freaks? Did he not know the questionable value of freak testimony? Why can't you admit it was a crappy case. Rich or poor defendant, it was one that should not have been brought.

[Iron Steve]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Because the daughter was actually at the meeting between Senator Moynihan and Hillary Clinton, and Klein was not.

he said, she said, she said. The mom was there. Klein says the mom said x. Daughter who claims to have been there (do we have any verification of her presence?) says no, mom never said x and never talked to Klein. One is lying and one is telling the truth. From the facts in front of us, I don't see how one is more or less credible than the other, other than Klien's established journalistic credentials for major respectable news organizations.

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop

It's pretty clear that Bill was lying to her. She may be owed an apology, but she ought not apologize for having been embarrassed before the whole country.

She was the self-proclaimed smartest woman in America. A Yale educated attorney, who was so smart she could make 100K in the commodities market with no experience and yet, she could not discern that she was being lied to by her husband and/or that by going on that show she was using whatever credibility she had to bolster his statement and as such she had better be damn sure that what she was so aggressively asserting was correct.

Shocking.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Iron Steve
We might not have needed the civil rights act were it not for decades of Southern Democrats subverting the results of the Republican prosecuted Civil War and the intent of 14th and 15th Amendments.

Plessy was decided by decided by six Republican appointees and three Democratic appointees:

Chief Justice Melville Fuller, appointed by Grover Cleveland, a Democrat
Justice Stephen Field, appointed by Lincoln
Justice Horace Gray, appointed by Chester Arthur, a Republican
Justice John Harlan, appointed by Rutherford Hayes, a Republican
Justice David Brewer, appointed by Benjamin Harrison, a Republican
Justice Henry Brown, appointed by Harrison
Justice George Shiras, Jr., appointed by Harrison
Justice Edward White, appointed by Cleveland
Justice Rufus Peckham, appointed by Cleveland

Though Harlan gets mad props for dissenting.