Posted on 11/01/2005 4:27:06 PM PST by new yorker 77
Perhaps the best explanation for the Democrats' decision to virtually shut down the Senate today can be found in one passage from CIA leak prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's news conference last Friday:
This indictment is not about the war. This indictment's not about the propriety of the war. And people who believe fervently in the war effort, people who oppose it, people who have mixed feelings about it should not look to this indictment for any resolution of how they feel or any vindication of how they feel....The indictment will not seek to prove that the war was justified or unjustified. This is stripped of that debate, and this is focused on a narrow transaction. And I think anyone who's concerned about the war and has feelings for or against shouldn't look to this criminal process for any answers or resolution of that.
Fitzgerald's statement, and his decision to confine the indictment of Lewis Libby to charges of lying and obstruction, threatened to dash the Democrats' hope of using the CIA leak case as an opportunity to re-debate the reasons for going to war in Iraq. So the party, or at least its leaders in the Senate, has decided to use another route, the shutdown of the Senate, as a way to achieve that goal.
Posted at 03:34 PM
Once something gets loose on the web - it is impossible to put it back in the bottle......
Sad thing is, it looks like Frist has already caved. I could be mistaken. It's late and I've missed some stuff but that's the way it looks.
Ooooh. Thank you!
Thanks for that link.
Reid and dems did it for several reasons:
1) Fitzgerald did not indict Rove, nor was there a charge that any covert operative was outed, hence Libby's indictment will be forgotten quickly.
2) The 2000th casualty in Iraq (God rest their souls) was not the huge story the dems and the MSM were hoping for.
3) Gas prices are coming down.
4) Bush nominated an exceptionally qualified conservative for the Supreme Court, a nominee who will be confirmed by the Senate with the help of 5-6 fellow dems hence changing the ideological balance of the court.
5) Reid and the dems have absolutely no new ideas whatsoever, in fact I think the last original thought the dems had was in 1994 when they tried to pass Hillarycare/socialized medicine.
6) The dem party has been completely taken over by the Howard Dean/moveon.org radical wing of the party, and it's clearly starting to show. The DLC/moderate wing of the party has very little ,if any, say at all on anything. Simply put the dem party has become the party of NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO and NO!
This action is symptomatic of a party that is beyond desperate, and it does not bode well for them in 06, nor does it help any of their perceived "moderate" candidates for president in 08. SORRY HILLARY!
This Country is at war.
Instead of presenting a united front behind our President, the left wing of the Democratic party are doing everything they can to prevent victory.
I'm sure Osama (wherever he is) couldn't be happier. They are working hand in hand right along with the enemy.
Reid looked like a complete jack ass when he was waiving his finger in the air on the senate floor in an obviously (poorly) rehearsed show of outrage.
If you noticed, his running buddies had nothing to say after Reid finished. Sounds to me, they should have stayed behind closed doors for a little longer.
Tucker Carlson is a handwringer. If conservatives stay true to their cause, we'll GAIN seats in the Senate in 06.
rock58seg; Actually what the President said was that, "British Intelligence reported, they were trying to buy yellowcake in Africa."
Nice catch of a semantic irrelevancy. Are you sure that is an exact quote of the famous 16 words in the State of the Union address?
He's stupid, hateful, and scared to death of the ever increasing loss of power. I hope he gets his and soon.
I'm a bit confused here. Did the demorats meet alone or were the pubbies included?
YEAH, like punch drunk. Too many hits to the head. Snicker.
My understanding is the repubs. were there, not sure why they didn;t tell Reid to go himself, maybe for political reasons, who knows why they do what they do (repubs,)
Senator Reid is a cull among other Democrat culls.
All to worthless to be salvaged.
O.K. here is the exact quote:
"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
If it's such an irrelevancy? Why have so many people gone out of their way to intentionally misquote it?
Further to the above. You are quite correct in that I am being pedantically semantic.
The thing is:
1. The president didn't say they tried to buy it. He said the British govt. said so.
2. It wasn't limited to Niger. It was all of Africa.
3. So if Jivin Joe Wilson goes to Niger, and even if his story is true, when did he visit the rest of Africa.
My point is:
Had we held the LSM, Jivin Joe, and the Dumbocrats to a stricter adherence of quotation, and logic, we would not be having this discussion.
You've got me laughing again. SHE's clearly not in a bottle!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.