Posted on 01/04/2002 8:52:30 AM PST by editor-surveyor
I'll tell you how: I make it a habit NOT to post when I don't know what I'm talking about, like some people do (*wink wink*); I don't ramble on and on, posting incoherent rants, filled with words that don't mean anything, formatting that is irritating, or self-absorbed conspiracy theories to further my own agenda.
I suppose by that remark you mean that if I dare to actually ask people for proof of their accusations, for instance that Ashcroft and Bush are as crooked as Bill Clinton and are covering for them, that I am calling them liars, I suppose you're right.
And I have never indicated anybody is unAmerican; just whacky.
I, for one, am willing to wait until there is some INCIDENT or PROOF that somebody has broken the law before I condemn them to hell -- something you all are not willing to do, since you started in on Bush and Ashcroft before they even were sworn in. Unlike the Clintons, who came into office dragging a bunch of scandals behind them, we have been almost 12 whole months without one WHIFF of any kind of impropriety from this administration. You may not agree with the things that they do or the policies that they implement, but that doesn't mean they are criminals, which is evidently what most of you think.
You also cannot contend that they have broken promises to you that were never made. I, for one, never considered that I would agree with every single word they utter, as I thought that might just be a little pompous on my part. If you did, I can see what you all are so unhappy.
My point, since it obvously went right over your head, is that most of us do not look at every single thing that happens and immediately believe somebody has done something wrong and is trying to cheat me or lie to me. It must be a miserable way to live.
YOU: we'll just let you and your hero run things. Just please let me know if he ever slips up any in promoting that New World Odor. So far, it looks like he's right on track
You were nice enough to jump right in and supply the buzzwords! It's obvious nobody could satisfy you. He's doing the best he can, no thanks to the likes of you.
BTW, I never said I was smarter than anybody; all I said was I didn't see crooks under every rock; if you feel like that makes me smarter than you are, that's your problem.
Well, now we can all see where your faulty reasoning comes from. To say that recognizing what words in the English language mean is admitting to be a participant in it is quite an admission of illiteracy. No wonder your posts are so inchoherent. I notice on another thread you were holding forth about cancer; does that mean you have it?
BTW, you sound supremely jealous; lonely?
BTW, if you're frightened of terriers, you should seek help from the Humane Society! Or you could use a spell checker. (Don't bother to respond to that -- I know you're mocking Bush; it's real cute.)
Oh. So now you are trying to suggest that it is not Ashcroft's responsibility to investigate the possible murder of a Secretary of Commerce (Brown), the possible murder of Vince Foster, the illegal use of FBI files, the selling of US secrets for ILLEGAL campaign contributions from COMMUNISTS, etc. etc. etc. Then whose responsibility is it?
Then, YOU explain how, in wartime and with a slipping economy,he manages to devote time, effort, manpower to trying to convict people, with little to no evidence ( It's al been shreded ! ) with a DEM majority in the same Senate, which has previously given Slick a pass.
First, the DOJ STILL has sufficient manpower to assign people to overriding voter mandated efforts on medical marijuana and assisted suicides. If they've got time and manpower enough to do THAT WHILE this war is going on, then they have the resources to exhume and autopsy TWO bodies, and investigate REALLY SERIOUS matters such as Filegate and Chinagate. This notion that NOW Bush is TOO BUSY to worry about UPHOLDING IMPORTANT LAWS in this country is just plain NONSENSE. Furthermore, his administration had 8 months PRIOR to the terrorist attack to begin investigating. Instead ... they did NOTHING.
Second, much of the evidence has NOT been shredded (of course it hasn't helped that Bush has kept so many democRAT holdovers in important positions). The people in question are still there to be questioned and there is a lot that can STILL be used as leverage. Both Brown's and Foster's bodies are there to be autopsied. This notion that nothing can be done is nothing more than SPIN.
Third, this isn't going to be dealt with by the Senate so whether there is a democRAT majority or not is IMMATERIAL. This is a matter for LAW ENFORCEMENT and the COURTS.
You are claiming that I ( ? ) said that President Bush is as " bad " as Wilson, FDR, LBJ, and Clinton ? IN WHAT UNIVERSE ? Maybe YOU think he is, but I don't.
YOU are the one who tried to compare the Clinton administration scandals to previous ones and suggest that since THEY ALL DO IT, NO PRESIDENT INVESTIGATES A FORMER ONE.
The press, the media, both Houses, and many just " average " citizens would call for his impeachment.
Don't be ridiculous. On what grounds would they call for it? Furthermore, the House of Representatives has to vote for impeachment and who do you think controls the House? This argument is just more SPURIOUS SPIN ...
Instead, try to use your intellect, instead of " feelings ", as a Dem would.
HA! You and the rest of the "move-on'ers" are the ones who FEEL that investigating serious crimes and upholding the law would be bad for the nation. The rest of us just want to see that the CODEFIED LAWS are enforced. Otherwise, why bother to even have laws. Let's just have an anarchy.
This isn't about party; it's about saving what's left of this nation.
Oh nonsense. This is ALL about party. The ONLY reason the GOP isn't investigating these crimes (little things ... like MURDER) is because they FEEL that it will be bad for their reelection chances. And for the democRATS that goes TRIPLE.
It's about doing what CAN be done, instead of demanding the impossible.
That's just your FEELING.
It's about being an adult, rather than a " terrible two " throwing a tantrum.
And that's the way democRATS argue ... by insults and adhominem attacks. Tell me, which laws don't you think we should enforce. Which laws should we repeal (at least as far as our leaders and their PARTY members are concerned). That IS what you are suggesting, you know. I'd just like to know this before I vote for YOUR candidate next time.
NO, TEAPOT DOME wasn't anywhere near as horriffic , as what the Clintons and Co. pulled off; however , what FDR and Co. did was!
And what EXACTLY was that? Did they sell secrets to our enemies? Did they commission the murder of people who threatened them? Did they violate SPECIFIC LAWS to spy on and/or BLACKMAIL the opposing party? Did they use the military to distract attention from their legal troubles? Did they use the IRS against their opponents? Tell us ... what EXACTLY did they do that is half as bad as the crimes committed by the DNC and Clinton administration?
He took an OATH to defend the constitution and uphold its laws. Is he an oath breaker?
The statements of the photographer and pathologists in the Ron Brown case, and the photos of the wound and x-ray of his skull, are NOT hearsay. They are direct evidence of a possible MASS MURDER. Nor is much of the other evidence in that case or in many of the other cases in question.
Then why claim Brown wasn't murdered when you couldn't name a single citation with facts to support your claim? I guess habits are meant to break.
And don't kid yourself ... you have an agenda ... plain as day.
Quit trying to come on to me, Howlin. Go back to your husband or your boss.
Forgive me if I pick who I choose to believe. Your "facts" are just that, yours.
Who? Name them. And cite the information they posted that convinces you Brown wasn't murdered. If you (and they) are so well informed, you shouldn't have any problem doing that. Go ahead. Name ONE pathologist who says the hole in Brown's head was definitely due to blunt force trauma. But just remember that if you name Dickerson I can PROVE he is a LIAR. But just remember that if you name Gormley, he no longer stands behind that claim. Go ahead, Howlin, post some of that "information" "on your side". Or RUN as usual.
Forgive me if I pick who I choose to believe.
But you STILL haven't said WHO you believe? That makes me ... and should make others ... SUSPICIOUS.
See there. You can't even remember who you argue with right here on FR, which is about the only threads you are on; why would you expect me to believe your "facts?"
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.