What's this thread about anyway?
Overall, it appears to be a flame-war amongst the "bushbots" over true conservatism.
Discussing PJB's brand of conservatism is not entirely off topic.
In fact, trashing PJB is, at times, the only thing that seems to unify the so-called "bushbots".
Perhaps discussing PJB will reinvigorate W's "compassionate" coalition.
Do you really think anyone will take what you and your ilk say, seriously? People I know (both Dems and Repubs alike) would laugh their asses of at your comments like so many on FR are doing already!
Really? I'm sure they will also find your suggestion that Jacob Weisberg is an accurate and credible source quite funny too. For those who don't know, Weisberg is a very hard-core democRAT ... in fact, an x-editor of Slate ... who has done numerous hit pieces on Bush and Republicans. He even has a book out on "Bushisms" where he slams Bush's intelligence big time. Yet you've said he's accurate. Hummmmm.
And I'm STILL waiting for you to back up that claim you made that Klayman settled out of court with his mom for $15000 dollars. You do seem to have problems backing up anything you post with references.
And why did you once make the ridiculous statement that the Broaddrick rape allegation, Sid Blumenthals lies under oath during the impeachment trial, and the facts surrounding the death of Ron Brown weren't reported by the mainstream media because the stories weren't "released" to them. Who but a democRAT would suggest such nonsense?
So one wonder, when YOU attack the notion that Bush is violating his oath of office and the Constitution by not investigating the crimes that Clinton and his democRAT supporters committed the last 9 years, if you aren't infact a democRAT defending Clinton.
Then provide ONE indication. You can't. Despite the fact that an honest investigation of the Clinton era crimes would require the interview of dozens if not HUNDREDS of individuals, many of whom are unfriendly and would lawyer up at the first sign of investigation (and whose lawyers would use the leftwing, mainstream media and friends in Congress to try and stop an investigation), some of whom are friendly and by now surely would have provided some indication that something is up, you can't provide ONE indication. You can't provide ONE indication despite the fact that thousands of document and computers would have to be examined ... many requiring subpoenas to get access to. And again, those in possession of those items would try to stop it with every trick in the book, especially by going to the media and congress. But that hasn't happened. You can't even provide ONE example from the past where the existance of an investigation of this size, this political, and this newsworthy was not leaked and reported LONG before indictments came down. You are just using the same delay delay delay tactic you used when Clinton was STILL in office.
How about the editor of Slate, Jacob Weisberg? He was introduced by Howlin as a credible source and RedBloodedAmerican chimed in to suggest he is "accurate"? You do know who Weisberg is, don't you? Do you also know that Howlin has cited the Washington Post on occasion? I've asked her on MULTIPLE occasions to cite the sources she views as credible and she has refused to respond. Curious that the only sources she actually does cite are leftwing rags. Curious that she maintains that a far-left democRAT is correct when she says the bogus report put out during the Clinton administration on the Ron Brown crash is reason to believe he wasn't murdered. Curious that she chimed in to support VA Advogado's FALSE claim that Ron Brown was autopsied ... a claim he based on the caption of a picture at a bogus web site that even a first grader could tell was not properly reporting the facts .... a claim that both he and she had been shown was untrue by NUMEROUS citations to first hand and credible sources.
You are correct. It does make one wonder.
but you will never have a constitutionally-minded Congress as long as you have a majority of Democrats.
That's true but why do so many of the most vocal Bush supporters on this forum believe that Bush ignoring serious crimes by the democRATS is the way to make that happen? I maintain that it will do just the opposite. DemocRATS (and what really frightens me, Republicans) are learning by example after example that they can commit ANY crime you can name and the GOP won't even bother to investigate.
You know my position on Ron Brown. NOT ONE of the people on this forum who are defending Bush will even DISCUSS the facts in that case. Some of those who are most vocal in claiming to support Bush in this thread have even told untruths about the facts in the case. The reality is, you will not get a Constitutionally minded anything based on a foundation of lies or by behaving like democRATS when the issue of Ron Brown and what happened to him comes up.
Or let's talk about the Riady Non-Refund. Explain to me why either Riady's plea agreement hasn't been revoked (if he lied about not getting the campaign funds returned) or the democRAT in the campaign committees who publically stated that the illegal contributions had been returned aren't right now under indictment? Clearly a very serious crime was committed yet all I see is the Bush administration ignoring it. Do crimes against this country get much more serious than trying to subvert the election process using cash from our enemies?
I, like you, greatly desire a Constitutionally minded Congress but it is just as important to have a Constitutionally minded President (as Clinton proved) and right now Bush appears to be violating his oath of office with regards to a Constitution that says he is to FAITHFULLY ENFORCE the laws ... even where democRATS are concerned. Does anyone on this thread want to suggest no crimes were committed and covered up by the democRATS? Does anyone want to provide ONE indication that ANY of those crimes have or are being investigated by the Bush DOJ? And there will be consequences for such politically expedient behavior. The democRATS will learn that they can steal elections and the GOP won't stop them. Some Republicans may begin to wonder if the way to win is to cheat as the democRATS have done. And that will destroy this Republic as surely as not voting for Bush the next time.
Vince Foster died of a gunshot wound to the head and yet there are no x-rays of his head. The news media fail to report this and instead report the obviously false cover stories supplied to "explain" it.
But supplied by whom? The Clinton administration. If the TRUTH were investigated and the results supplied to the media by the Bush administration, do you think the mainstream media would get away with not reporting something as serious as the murder of Foster or a Secretary of Commerce? Of course not, especially now that Fox News is such a powerhouse. Look what effect Fox News had on Pardongate. The mainstream media was ignoring or glossing over it. Then because of Fox News reporting, they had to actually start reporting it and in some cases even did some half way decent investigations. Too bad that the Bush adminstration appears to have decided to ignore that one too. And the only reason the Riady Non-Refund (a blockbuster disclosure that came out last year) has been ignored by the media is that the GOP has ignored it. In my opinion, they are deliberating covering this up. WHY?