ping
I can't wait until Hillary runs and all this Clinton crap is over. I hear talk about how everyone is going to work against her....but.....
Jeez. They are both crooks. OK? The real danger lies in the people covering up the Barrett report. The next socialist that comes along will get a new and improved pass.
The American government is more corrupt than the worst thing the Central Americans have produced. We just have the resources to cover it up. The OSS has morphed into something it was never intended to be.
ping
ping
I would argue that Clinton's pardon of Marc Rich gives him a poor score on equal justice for all.
The former wife of Marc Rich, the fugitive commodities trader and tax evader pardoned by President Clinton in his final hours in office, donated more than $1 million to Democratic causes since 1992, including Bill Clinton's and Al Gore's presidential campaigns.
Mr. Rich fled to Switzerland in 1983 after the U.S. government indicted him on 65 counts of tax fraud, racketeering and tax evasion charges that carry a maximum 325 years in jail.
The billionaire trader, one of the world's richest men, was accused of evading more than $48 million in taxes and faced prosecution for violating U.S. sanctions by trading oil with Iran during the time Iran held American hostages.
Denise Rich, who now lives in New York, contributed nearly $1.3 million to Mr. Clinton and Mr. Gore's campaigns, the Democratic National Committee and various Democratic causes, including contributions to Hillary Rodham Clinton's New York Senate campaign. She also has donated to more than a dozen congressional campaigns.
Mrs. Rich, who identifies herself on federal contribution records as a "songwriter," "actress" or "philanthropist," also gave money to pro-choice and family-planning organizations with Democratic ties and a group called "Friends of Albert Gore, Jr. Inc." . . .
Mr. Rich's attorney, former Clinton White House counsel Jack Quinn, had been lobbying for a pardon for Mr. Rich. Asked yesterday about the pardon of Mr. Rich, Mr. Clinton said he had spent a lot of time considering the case.
Joseph Curl
Washington Times
January 22, 2001
ping
Thanks, Mia.
"Many people today marvel when looking back at the leaders who created the United States of America. Most of the founders of this country had day jobs for years. They were not career politicians.
"George Washington, who took pride in his self-control, lost his temper completely when someone told him that a decision he was going to make could cost him re-election as President. He blew up at the suggestion that he wanted to be President, rather than serving as a duty when he would rather be back home.
"Power is such a dangerous thing that ideally it should be wielded by people who don't want to use power, who would rather be doing something else, but who are willing to serve a certain number of years as a one-time duty, preferably at the end of a career doing something else.
"What about all the experience we would lose? Most of that is experience in creating appearances, posturing, rhetoric, and spin -- in a word, deception. We need leaders with experience in the real world, not experience in the phony world of politics."
-- Thomas Sowell - December 2005
[Thomas Sowell is a Rose and Milton Friedman Senior Fellow]
I thank G-d for you, Dearest Mia and for your intellect - and thank you for your passion - and for your life.
Merry Christmas - Hanukkh Shalom Aleichem - Wonderful 2006 to you and to all of those you love.
Blessings - Brian
Thanks Mia T.
bttt
My tagline sums up the short-sightedness of the Clinton Administration............
Bookmarked for later, when I get broadband.
Shameless pharisees in stark relief crowd the Capitol frieze: Baucus, Biden, Bingaman, Breaux, Bryan, Byrd, Cohen, Conrad, Daschle, Dodd, Gore, Graham, Harkin, Hollings, Inouye, Kennedy, Kerrey, Kerry, Kohl, Lautenberg, Leahy, Levin, Lieberman, Mikulski, Moynihan, Reid, Robb, Rockefeller, Sarbanes, Schumer. These are the 28 sitting Democratic senators, the current Vice President and Secretary of Defense -- clinton defenders all -- who, in 1989, voted to oust U.S. District Judge Walter Nixon for making "false or misleading statements to a grand jury." In 1989 each and every one of these men insisted that perjury was an impeachable offense. (What a difference a decade and a decadent Democrat make.) Senator Herb Kohl (November 7, 1989): "The hypocrite's crime is that he bears false witness against himself," observed the philosopher Hannah Arendt. "What makes it so plausible to assume that hypocrisy is the vice of vices is that integrity can indeed exist under the cover of all other vices except this one. Only crime and the criminal, it is true, confront us with the perplexity of radical evil; but only the hypocrite is really rotten to the core." If hypocrisy is the vice of vices, then perjury is the crime of crimes, for perjury provides the necessary cover for all other crimes. David Lowenthal, professor emeritus of political science at Boston College makes the novel and compelling argument that perjury is "bribery consummate, using false words instead of money or other things of value to pervert the course of justice" and, thus, perjury is a constitutionally enumerated high crime. The Democrats' defense of clinton's perjury -- and their own hypocrisy -- is three-pronged. ONE: clinton's perjuries were "just about sex" and therefore "do not rise to the level of an impeachable offense." This argument is spurious. The courts make no distinction between perjuries. Perjury is perjury. Perjury attacks the very essence of democracy. Perjury is bribery consummate. Moreover, (the clinton spinners notwithstanding), clinton's perjury was not "just about sex." clinton's perjury was about clinton denying a citizen justice by lying in a civil rights-sexual harassment case about his sexual history with subordinates. TWO: Presidents and judges are held to different standards under the Constitution. clinton's defenders ignore Federalist No. 57, and Hillary Rodham's constitutional treatise on impeachable acts -- written in 1974 when she wanted to impeach a president; both mention "bad conduct" as grounds for impeachment. "Impeachment," wrote Rodham, "did not have to be for criminal offenses -- but only for a 'course of conduct' that suggested an abuse of power or a disregard for the office of the President of the United States...A person's 'course of conduct' while not particularly criminal could be of such a nature that it destroys trust, discourages allegiance, and demands action by the Congress...The office of the President is such that it calls for a higher level of conduct than the average citizen in the United States."
Hamilton (or Madison) discussed the importance of wisdom and virtue in Federalist 57. "The aim of every political constitution is, or ought to be, first to obtain for rulers men who possess most wisdom to discern, and most virtue to pursue, the common good of the society; and in the next place, to take the most effectual precautions for keeping them virtuous whilst they continue to hold their public trust." (Contrast this with clinton, who recklessly, reflexively and feloniously subordinates the common good to his personal appetites.) Because the Framers did not anticipate the demagogic efficiency of the electronic bully pulpit, they ruled out the possibility of an MTV mis-leader (and impeachment-thwarter!) like clinton. In Federalist No. 64, John Jay said: "There is reason to presume" the president would fall only to those "who have become the most distinguished by their abilities and virtue." He imagined that the electorate would not "be deceived by those brilliant appearances of genius and patriotism which, like transient meteors, sometimes mislead as well as dazzle." (If the clinton debacle teaches us anything, it is this: If we are to retain our democracy in this age of the electronic demagogue, we must recalibrate the constitutional balance of power.) THREE: The president can be prosecuted for his alleged felonies after he leaves office. (Nota bene ROBERT RAY.)
Such indecorous, dual-purpose architectonics not only threatens the delicate constitutional framework -- it disturbs the cultural aesthetic. The senators must, therefore, roundly reject this elliptic scheme.
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2005 |
|||||||
|
No offense, I think the demonic pictures of Hillary, though appropriate, are overplayed in your posts. Instead of reading your posts, I typically just move on when I see you graphics. Just thought you would like to know.
bump