Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Times 2, Bush 0
Human Events ^ | June 30 2006 | Patrick J Buchanan

Posted on 06/30/2006 12:50:30 PM PDT by Reagan Man

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-140 next last
To: Reagan Man
Maybe Pat (and everyone else) should start looking at this issue objectively and admit that there are only two possibilities here:

A. The GOP leaders who have claimed that the New York Times has broken the law are totally full of sh!t.

B. The Bush administration knows damn well that the Times has broken the law but has simply refused to uphold the law.

I'm just about 100% certain that (A) is the correct answer here -- and the real turning point for me came last weekend when Rep. Peter King started showing up all over the media to voice his complaints over the "crimes" committed by the New York Times. If there was any truth to this accusation, the GOP never would have had such a dopey, mediocre spokesman to make the point on its behalf.

81 posted on 06/30/2006 3:29:45 PM PDT by Alberta's Child (Can money pay for all the days I lived awake but half asleep?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RAldrich

"On the other hand, Bush doesn't appear to be one to duck a fight - he just picks his battles. I'm hoping that from now until the November elections the Administration will try to gain as much political traction as they can from what happened and then - particularly if they hold on to Congress - they'll pursue the issue legally. Hope."

Hope springs eternal in some people, but the fact is that the President & his party have controlled Congress and the WH for years and produced little for conservatives besides some tax cuts (when what is needed is radical tax reform anyway). We are constantly told to hang on and cough up more campaign donations to keep these people elected, then nothing happens.

The left has learned that Bush is all bark and no bite.


82 posted on 06/30/2006 3:33:59 PM PDT by hellbender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: nopardons
>>>>> .... all you want to do and all you ever do here, is to trash President Bush, in any way possible.

More whining. For your information, legitimate debate and criticism is at the heart of our Republic. Your aim is to stifle free speech and political dissent. Won't work. This is still a conservative website, not a GOP website.

83 posted on 06/30/2006 3:35:05 PM PDT by Reagan Man (Secure the borders; enforce employer sanctions; stop welfare handouts to illegals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
Besides, RudyG even supports partial birth abortion

Not for long.

algore usd to be prolife.

All G has to do is say he was wrong.

84 posted on 06/30/2006 3:37:08 PM PDT by Rome2000 (Peace is not an option)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Rome2000
>>>>>All G has to do is say he was wrong.

Like I said, conservative pro-lifers won't buy it.

85 posted on 06/30/2006 3:40:47 PM PDT by Reagan Man (Secure the borders; enforce employer sanctions; stop welfare handouts to illegals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
Rep. Peter King started showing up all over the media to voice his complaints over the "crimes" committed by the New York Times. If there was any truth to this accusation, the GOP never would have had such a dopey, mediocre spokesman to make the point on its behalf.

King's doing that on his own. The criminal statutes would be hard to prosecute, so no GOP leaders are going to be throwing the word "crime" around.

There will be investigations aplenty into the leaking which is unambiguously a crime. Reporters will have to choose between unmasking their sources or doing time.

86 posted on 06/30/2006 3:41:24 PM PDT by NutCrackerBoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: RAldrich
If the Administration prosecutes, the NY Times will clamor

...all they want from Gitmo if Abraham Lincoln were dealing with them.
87 posted on 06/30/2006 3:45:55 PM PDT by UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide (Give Them Liberty Or Give Them Death! - IT'S ISLAM, STUPID! - Islam Delenda Est! - Rumble thee forth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
The GOP leaders who have claimed that the New York Times has broken the law are totally full of sh!t.

Nope. There isn't a shred of doubt not only that the Times has broken the law, and not just one of them, but at least two major felony statutes. The violations are egregious and willful. They would be straighforward of proof.

This is a clear case of Politics trumping Duty.

88 posted on 06/30/2006 3:46:35 PM PDT by John Valentine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Laverne; NaughtiusMaximus; doug from upland; markman46; Reagan Man
I'm with you beyond the sea; just because this administration doesn't go to the NYTimes and tell them there is an investigation ongoing, doesn't mean one isn't ongoing. For all we know, the DOJ has told the Times they are under investigation, and they are keeping it a secret...because even though the NYTimes demands transparency from the government, it covets secrecy for itself.

I think this whole thing is going to end up helping the President immensely. He's a great poker player.

***

GWB: HBS MBA

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1070924/posts

The American Thinker February 3, 2004 | Thomas Lifson

*****

One final note on George W. Bush’s management style and his Harvard Business School background does not derive from the classroom, per se. One feature of life there is that a subculture of poker players exists. Poker is a natural fit with the inclinations, talents, and skills of many future entrepreneurs. A close reading of the odds, combined with the ability to out-psych the opposition, leads to capital accumulation in many fields, aside from the poker table.

By reputation, the President was a very avid and skillful poker player when he was an MBA student. One of the secrets of a successful poker player is to encourage your opponent to bet a lot of chips on a losing hand. This is a pattern of behavior one sees repeatedly in George W. Bush’s political career. He is not one to loudly proclaim his strengths at the beginning of a campaign. Instead, he bides his time, does not respond forcefully, at least at first, to critiques from his enemies, no matter how loud and annoying they get. If anything, this apparent passivity only goads them into making their case more emphatically.

*****

89 posted on 06/30/2006 3:54:05 PM PDT by beyond the sea (Scientists Are Itching to Blame Poison Ivy's Effect on Global Warming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: NutCrackerBoy
Ten bucks says the U.S. has no authority to prosecute anyone for a "leak" about U.S. government monitoring of a financial database owned and maintained by an organization in Belgium.

Another ten bucks says the New York Times got its "top secret" information from some mid-level civilian hack in Europe who can't be prosecuted under U.S. law in any case.

90 posted on 06/30/2006 3:58:03 PM PDT by Alberta's Child (Can money pay for all the days I lived awake but half asleep?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine
There isn't a shred of doubt . . .

Yes, there is. I've posted mine a number of times on threads about this subject.

Keep in mind that I also thoroughly debunked the silly notion that the New York Times committed any kind of crime when it "revealed" all that information about a so-called "top secret NSA electronic surveillance program."

91 posted on 06/30/2006 4:01:26 PM PDT by Alberta's Child (Can money pay for all the days I lived awake but half asleep?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

"The GOP leaders who have claimed that the New York Times has broken the law are totally full of sh!t."

Well there are constitutional lawyers who disagree with you.
Are you a constitutional lawyer?

See Mark Levin's article "Dealing with the Papers"
http://marklevinfan.com/?p=1222#more-1222

Excerpt:
"Keller and his co-conspirators should be pursued for their unprecedented betrayals, which have endangered the safety of the American people, and forced to defend themselves as any other common defendant. They are at least as disloyal to the nation and the rule of law in aiding and abetting the enemy as those in the government who are leaking to them."

Why don't you call his show and straighten him out?


92 posted on 06/30/2006 4:43:10 PM PDT by RAldrich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

"Keep in mind that I also thoroughly debunked the silly notion that the New York Times committed any kind of crime when it "revealed" all that information about a so-called 'top secret NSA electronic surveillance program.'"

You mean that your citation of a television newsclip from a liberal television station (to which you couldn't provide a link) was a "thorough debunk"?


93 posted on 06/30/2006 4:49:23 PM PDT by RAldrich
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: nina0113

It wasn't inadvertent in 1942. This was the same anti-FDR paper that, before the war, published a big "Secret War Plan" story trying to gin up opposition to FDR's preparations (which we desperately needed) in case we were attacked.


94 posted on 06/30/2006 4:52:58 PM PDT by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: duckln

Ah. Ok, I see. The answer is, yes, Patsy is that stupid, then. Thank you for clarifying.


95 posted on 06/30/2006 4:54:39 PM PDT by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man
The pertinent word there, is "legitimate"; which Pat's drivel never is and which your posts seldom, if ever, contain.

And as for "whining"....you are the MASTERWHINER!

96 posted on 06/30/2006 5:45:24 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: RAldrich

Nailed in one and quite deftly! LOL


97 posted on 06/30/2006 5:48:16 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: duckln

Oh ducky...you have NEVER been right. ;^)


98 posted on 06/30/2006 5:49:14 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

"For the most part, Pat's opinion on this issue is about right"

What most part? Like AG Gonzales hasn't started an investigation already without being directed the Pres to do so? I'm sure he has.

Pat did us one favor, there is no Reform Party anymore.


99 posted on 06/30/2006 5:50:53 PM PDT by marajade (Yes, I'm a SW freak!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: nina0113

" ... Bush is in fact the nation's chief law enforcement officer ..."

Um don't think so. AG Gonzales is, not Pres Bush.


100 posted on 06/30/2006 5:52:09 PM PDT by marajade (Yes, I'm a SW freak!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-140 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson