Posted on 02/09/2007 4:18:45 PM PST by Clintonfatigued
You know what I'm tired of? People like you blaming the loss last voting cycle on conservatives staying home and not voting. It's not true, OK?!....
You need to face reality. The low turnout of Republicans and their Bush-bashing turning off the swing vote was blamed for the 2006 defeat of the GOP.
All polls proved this.
The pubs-in-power lost the moderate vote last time around because they were acting like dem-lites. THAT'S why we lost.
You're not making any sense. This is exactly the excuse many Freepers used for not voting for Republican candidates.
Moderates could care less about "dem-lite" nonsense.
Tangerine.
Ouch. That's gonna leave a mark...
I didn't defend anybody. I just stated the fact that conservative political puritans bashing republicans and Bush lost the 2006 election for us.
Thank you LM, I thought s/he deserved it on the first post.
Sure thing.
Right. "Drug smugglers have more friends in the Bush Administration" than Border patrol agents.
This is the kind of nonsense that discredits your side completely.
A resolution authorizing military action is not a formal decalration of war - they are two distinct things.
BS!
(1)A resolution is a formal declaration. (2)The definition of the word "war" according to Websters is, " a conflict carried on by a force of arms between nations."
It was a formal declaration for a conflict, carried on by a force of arms between nations.
As I said above: The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 was a Constitutional declaration of war.
It is totally under the control of the Bureau of Prisons. They could move them to ClubFed tomorrow, if they wanted. I don't know why it isn't happening. Rohrabacher could do more good if he jumped on that bandwagon, IMO. And the darn judge who denied their request to remain out on bail pending appeal needs to have that judgement overturned.... now!
LOL!
We lost these elections for a lot of reasons, only the left wing sources would call it being too conservative. You are a newcomer compared to me. I have been following the border issue for years. One of the reasons the Iraq war is not going over well is our open borders. There is a huge disconnect here. American voters see this. How can we be fighting a war on terror and at the same time have our borders wide open. It makes the Iraq war look stupid.
The President needs some new advisors.
Thats what makes me wonder? Are they wanting him to be killed from some odd reason?
"Not I" said the little red hen
I think they're just bureaucrats that don't have the will to make it happen. And most government types I've dealt with don't like Congress trying to tell them how to do their job. Hopefully the heat can get turned up on that and they'll come around. The way the agents were painted by the prosecution and the DHS-OIG (rogue cops wanting to shoot mexicans, shooting unarmed man in back, etc.), they probably didn't generate a whole lot of sympathy from the BOP. This is one thing the administration could act on and help settle the firestorm a bit. I think there are just some stubborn folks out there that have been misled by prosecutors and have bad advisors.
Elected GOP politicians are with few exceptions cowards. What are cowards doing? Hiding under tables.
The bullet taken from the creep could NOT be tied to either of the Border Patrol agents weapons. Could a man, who was shot like the creep, continue to run after being shot? The BP agents didn't think they hit the guy. Second, they did verbally report to their supervisor on the discharge of their weapons.
Too bad 'nifong' has already become the verb for being railroaded by an out of control prosecutor or we could be talking about being 'suttoned'. Picking up the brass could be for two reason: 1. Don't litter or 2. Re-loading. But that's now a cover up? There were 9 (or 12?) BP agents and supervisors at the scene discussing what happened. Ah, where's the cover up? Actually, the cover up continues. They still don't have a complete trial transcript 9 months after the trial. One BP agent, who testified against the good guys, had long-time connections to the illegal, invading, drug smuggling creep. That wasn't disclosed.
Johnny Sutton and BP Management told Congress all sorts of lies, which they've now re-tracked. Yup, there's a cover up alright, but look to Sutton and BP managers for the location.
Even the IG from DHS admitted in a hearing that all of us had been "misinformed" about what actually went down that day, and the "misinformation" includes testimony at the TRIAL!
I agree with you that Johnny Sutton is the new Nifong, and I hope he and his homies up and down the line will pay a price for this. I can't imagine how it could be otherwise since he is exposed in new lie(s) almost daily.
What is horrifying me is the number of ill-informed freepers on this thread (many of whom I usually admire) who seem to be buying into the Nifong/Sutton version of "reality" when contradictory FACTS (including official testimony) have been posted all over this forum.
I'm hoping that they're just reacting emotionally to the impeachment threat and when they calm down and examine what actually is being done by Sutton's office, they'll realize the truth and stop supporting the new Nifong.
With false testimony and DHS lies?
Railroaded? I've read quite a bit about this and there is a lot of blame to go around within the Border Patrol in its handling of the case, but the reporting by conservative blogs and pundits has been bias and hardly factual.
Supporters of the 'railroaded' theory ignore the fact that this was Hispanic on Hispanic violence (no bias between parties) that was judged in El Paso (jury probably had percentage of Hispanics to protect their bretheren had they chose not to do so) and the injured man was a drug dealer (natural bias against him by the jury)
And yet the jury convicted the agents after hearing the testimony.
The Federal court sentencing guidelines made the sentences more draconian than they should be for most Freepers tastes, but I am convinced that the agents were their own worst enemy here. They made a boo boo.
In their frustration, I think they thought they could get away with shooting a drug dealer in the ass while he was running away. The story about the dealer might have had a gun obviously didn't fly with the jury.
Turns out the jury found that the BP can't make a turkey shoot out of anyone, whatever their crime, without good cause.
|
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.