LawTalkers - Offering constructive criticism to the social cripples in our midst since early 2005.

LawTalkers (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/index.php)

- Politics (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)

- - Offering constructive criticism to the social cripples in our midst since early 2005. (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=681)

Das anti-Kapitalists!

Quote:

Originally posted by sgtclub
I'm not unwilling. I'm not at the moment (too hard to type at the same time).

No, it isn't.

Das anti-Kapitalists!

Quote:

Originally posted by nononono
No, it isn't.

You'd get more lecherous PMs if you posted this on the Fashion Board.

Das anti-Kapitalists!

Quote:

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
You'd get more lecherous PMs if you posted this on the Fashion Board.

Working my way up to it.

More Plame Stuff

The Big Lie About Valerie Plame
By Larry Johnson
From: TPMCafe Special Guests
The misinformation being spread in the media about the Plame affair is alarming and damaging to the longterm security interests of the United States. Republicans' talking points are trying to savage Joe Wilson and, by implication, his wife, Valerie Plame as liars. That is the truly big lie.

For starters, Valerie Plame was an undercover operations officer until outed in the press by Robert Novak. Novak's column was not an isolated attack. It was in fact part of a coordinated, orchestrated smear that we now know includes at least Karl Rove.

Valerie Plame was a classmate of mine from the day she started with the CIA. I entered on duty at the CIA in September 1985. All of my classmates were undercover--in other words, we told our family and friends that we were working for other overt U.S. Government agencies. We had official cover. That means we had a black passport--i.e., a diplomatic passport. If we were caught overseas engaged in espionage activity the black passport was a get out of jail free card.

A few of my classmates, and Valerie was one of these, became a non-official cover officer. That meant she agreed to operate overseas without the protection of a diplomatic passport. If caught in that status she would have been executed.

The lies by people like Victoria Toensing, Representative Peter King, and P. J. O'Rourke insist that Valerie was nothing, just a desk jockey. Yet, until Robert Novak betrayed her she was still undercover and the company that was her front was still a secret to the world. When Novak outed Valerie he also compromised her company and every individual overseas who had been in contact with that company and with her.

The Republicans now want to hide behind the legalism that "no laws were broken". I don't know if a man made law was broken but an ethical and moral code was breached. For the first time a group of partisan political operatives publically identified a CIA NOC. They have set a precendent that the next group of political hacks may feel free to violate.

. . ."

http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/7/13/04720/9340

Das anti-Kapitalists!

Quote:

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
You'd get more lecherous PMs if you posted this on the Fashion Board.

Unclear. Wonk reads this board too, you know.

More Plame Stuff

Quote:

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
The Big Lie About Valerie Plame
By Larry Johnson
From: TPMCafe Special Guests
The misinformation being spread in the media about the Plame affair is alarming and damaging to the longterm security interests of the United States. Republicans' talking points are trying to savage Joe Wilson and, by implication, his wife, Valerie Plame as liars. That is the truly big lie.

For starters, Valerie Plame was an undercover operations officer until outed in the press by Robert Novak. Novak's column was not an isolated attack. It was in fact part of a coordinated, orchestrated smear that we now know includes at least Karl Rove.

Valerie Plame was a classmate of mine from the day she started with the CIA. I entered on duty at the CIA in September 1985. All of my classmates were undercover--in other words, we told our family and friends that we were working for other overt U.S. Government agencies. We had official cover. That means we had a black passport--i.e., a diplomatic passport. If we were caught overseas engaged in espionage activity the black passport was a get out of jail free card.

A few of my classmates, and Valerie was one of these, became a non-official cover officer. That meant she agreed to operate overseas without the protection of a diplomatic passport. If caught in that status she would have been executed.

The lies by people like Victoria Toensing, Representative Peter King, and P. J. O'Rourke insist that Valerie was nothing, just a desk jockey. Yet, until Robert Novak betrayed her she was still undercover and the company that was her front was still a secret to the world. When Novak outed Valerie he also compromised her company and every individual overseas who had been in contact with that company and with her.

The Republicans now want to hide behind the legalism that "no laws were broken". I don't know if a man made law was broken but an ethical and moral code was breached. For the first time a group of partisan political operatives publically identified a CIA NOC. They have set a precendent that the next group of political hacks may feel free to violate.

. . ."

http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/7/13/04720/9340

the Wall Street Journal editorial board is unimpressed

More Plame Stuff

Quote:

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
the Wall Street Journal editorial board is unimpressed

That would be funny as hell were it not so sad that a once prestigious newspaper would print such misinformed crap.

And so much for the "Wilson's wife" defense.

From a 7/21/03 Newsday article:

Novak, in an interview, said his sources had come to him with the information. "I didn't dig it out, it was given to me," he said. "They thought it was significant, they gave me the name and I used it."

http://foi.missouri.edu/voicesdissen...nistnames.html

I wonder who the other source is.

Quote:

Originally posted by bilmore
I doubt he meant "deserve" to die, but, practically speaking, their chance of dying will increase. How long before we start to see a mini civil war, aimed mostly at the local Islamic communities? In England, I'm guessing the answer is, soon. They've had way more than their share of stories and interviews in the last two days, with young londoner muslims expressing humor and - yeah - glee - at the bombings. I don't think the reasonable Islamic community can afford to stay on the sidelines much longer there.

If they remain neutral or decry the actions of the terrorists, Muslims are prone to attack from the terrorists as sympathizers of the Great Satan.

If they remain neutral or display bias or sympathy toward the terrorists, Muslims are prone to attack from the non-Muslim community.

I agree with your prediction for a growth in the attacks on Muslims by Muslims. I wouldn't call it a civil war since it's being fought on foreign soil.

Sucks being them.

Quote:

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
He did not imply that Muslims who did not do what he said should die. He was merely listing the things they need to do.

I was imputing a perhaps undue amount of hostility toward the Muslims from his earlier post about non-muslims having to live in fear. If I misread Slave, or led other people to believe I was misconstruing Slave, I apologize.

Bitch.

Quote:

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
I disgaree. If you view things over the long term, its clear the status quo remains. Thats all checks and balances were designed to do.

People seem to expect the govt to create results. That is not what the Founders intended at all. Thats what Marx intended. The Govt is merely the manager of the basic infrastructure of rules that govern society. Viewing it as an agent of change which should proactively tinker in peoples' lives is missing the whole point of what our Republic is about.

I think there's a difference between moderating government action and creating gridlock that impedes progress.

Very sad how politics is making its way into the dating scene. After a month or so of dating someone, with this person’s interest very obvious (in almost a scary way) one night on the phone came a long, one-way harangue about “Bush and Company”, complete with conspiracy theories and all. I voted for Bush but know little about Cheney and am open to other views. But…after two hours of an endless rant (including how could I have pulled the lever for these two) I cut the phone call off and suggested it wasn’t healthy for things to be so heated, so early and if he felt so strongly maybe he should strictly date people who are democrats. Mind you, the beginning of the call had been very sexy talk on my part and our plans were to get together in a few days for some serious heat. As it turned out, after this email to me, I instead got the item I left at his place dumped on my porch. Oh well.

Quote:

The guy I was dating for a month
No--it's not a healthy sign that it's so heated, so early. It's a sign of the times--- you and I are a microcosm of the country right now. It's not a rep / dem issue at all. Powell was my first choice / hope, McCain following. I believe in their moral/ethical leadership along with their tough approach.

It's not fair or proper to begin the debate now, again, and besides anything we'd say we've heard already on cable news. But here is why I am so sensitive about the subject:

So far, I've not been such an active doer as you, although this is what I aspire to in the second half of my life. However, I have fought very hard in other ways since the age 14/15, putting my life on the line. Early on I took a very different look at the world and my place in it. From old fashioned male dominated rules/expectations on gender roles to a lust for power, at an early age, I made decisions in my life to not live in such silly ways--just as you do not. In my life's choices (career, personal decisions etc) I can not bring myself to make decisions that only serve myself. It's even held me back at my job because I refuse to make decisions based on politics, as opposed to doing the "right thing" for the business. Even in personal affairs, I have had woman I wanted badly, and in moments of vulnerability, I would fight my own selfishness needs, and instead only offer them advice that was well rounded, albeit less advantageous to me. I remember losing 2 woman in this way--- by giving them advice from two sides of the coin, at a time when I could have "sold" them on myself and really wanted them. So these are just silly examples, but you see--- like Ghandi taught the world--- avoiding human pitfalls is beyond being a DO - GOODER, it's actually a science that works for the long run.

Bringing this down to our situation, although all government has corruption, people like Cheney and Rove take the concepts of selfish POWER, WEALTH, and CONTROL to very high levels. I think it comes down to this---and this has been the hesitant factor in me since we met--- if you have any empathy, liking, agreement with people like Carl Rove and Dick Cheney, I am not your guy--in fact, you would only come to not be attracted to me and think me weak. My whole life has been spent fighting against the things that people like this stand for. Although on the outside they may say the correct things, one look at them makes it so plain that they are such old fashioned, staunchy old-time white males that are so out of touch. Gore brought with him a very intellectual vision—a broad one that would not have the same effective immediacy, but it could have set the tables for the future. (did you see the environmental chief last week who resigned because he was caught--he had the arrogance to alter a science paper no less to make global warming softer---by the way, this environmental chief was also an oil guy)

I know you have the GREATEST heart. I empathize with your direct experience of 9/11 and this is why I was able to put aside my strong views-you have a reason to feel so strong, but in a few years I think you'll see men like these differently--there's a reason you're hearing this from so many people--- historians, bipartisan think tanks, scientists, etc-- most are aghast at the way this admin. has operated and conducted themselves. It's nearly unprecedented. They think short-term-- and there policies are destined to make the world worse--- their lack of moral / ethical / spiritual principle is not romantic, it's science--though we can't see it. The Christian Right Wing is a total crack up--- they have hang ups with stem cells and gays, but they're cool with 40-80K dead Iraqi civilians... regular folks / children, like us. The way this war was poorly planned (we actually planned on being greeted with open arms like WW2--poor market research) and rationalized. Just like ALL of the congress and senate have NO kids involved--in fact the poor, young kids from low income backgrounds are mostly on the front lines--- fighting for Dick's desires and Rove's lust. Bush has just been led, if not by the later two, then by the same ole Texan spirit and stupidity that brought down the companies he tried to run.

So there-- my vehement feelings for this admin--not for Replicans, not America, not Americans, but for the select few in the inner circle who are quite sure they know what God wants, but fail to hear what Jesus said.

I like you --you're a woman who has EVERYTHING going on-- but yes, these politics will separate us --- I'm not your type in the long run. If you think I need to date a Dem. than I think you might need a top-gun. I'll never be a top gun. I've fought hard my whole life not to be. But, maybe we can sort out a friendship or at least revisit one another in a calmer state soon. I have to return that [item I left at his place] too!! I'll plan to drop it off soon.

More Plame Stuff

Quote:

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
That would be funny as hell were it not so sad that a once prestigious newspaper would print such misinformed crap.

The Medium Lobster would disagree

Matt Cooper Must Go

As the Wall Street Journal points out today, the true tragedy in the Plame affair has been the burning of Karl Rove. Indeed, if there is any integrity left in Time Magazine, it must fire Matt Cooper. By outing Karl Rove as the man who outed an undercover CIA agent, Matt Cooper has selfishly, recklessly, and amorally endangered a top administration official, exposing Rove and those he works with to threat from political opponents, news organizations and the Justice Department, to say nothing of the damage done to Rove's career as one of America's hard-working partisan hacks. With his identity revealed, how will Rove effectively leak the leaks and spread the rumors necessary to serve his party? Such shameless and reckless abuse of partisan security cannot be tolerated. Matt Cooper must go.

Quote:

And so much for the "Wilson's wife" defense.

From a 7/21/03 Newsday article:

Novak, in an interview, said his sources had come to him with the information. "I didn't dig it out, it was given to me," he said. "They thought it was significant, they gave me the name and I used it."

http://foi.missouri.edu/voicesdissen...nistnames.html

I wonder who the other source is.

I'm guessing Rove gave him enough to pester someone else in the White House about what her name was. Probably even gave the name of the second source.

Das anti-Kapitalists!

Quote:

Originally posted by sgtclub
What are you smoking? Do you really think that a lack of birth control and sex education is the reason? I would bet that the rate of abortions is highest in large cities, which are nearly all liberal and in which both birth control and sex ed is plentiful.

You ay be right. But I'm pretty sure the rate of HS pregnanices and STDs is proportionally much higher in rural areas. To take one example, look at Bossier City, LA, which made the papers a few years back for having a high school system with a greater than 50% HIV-positive population.

Quote:

Originally posted by I Am A Sad Sock
Very sad how politics is making its way into the dating scene. After a month or so of dating someone, with this person’s interest very obvious (in almost a scary way) one night on the phone came a long, one-way harangue about “Bush and Company”, complete with conspiracy theories and all. I voted for Bush but know little about Cheney and am open to other views. But…after two hours of an endless rant (including how could I have pulled the lever for these two) I cut the phone call off and suggested it wasn’t healthy for things to be so heated, so early and if he felt so strongly maybe he should strictly date people who are democrats. Mind you, the beginning of the call had been very sexy talk on my part and our plans were to get together in a few days for some serious heat. As it turned out, after this email to me, I instead got the item I left at his place dumped on my porch. Oh well.

Good riddance to the tool. Anyone who'd get that fucking nuts about politics is best kicked to the curb, quickly as possible.

It's easy to be Hank without any Information

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
If Robert Byrd was saying the klan is the way of the Democratic party (instead of its more pernicious ways of hurting minortiy groups) would it be on teddy or one of them to say no? there are clerics saying jihad is a-okay. It seems to me that other clerics should be saying soemthing contrary- especially if* the vast majority of the group doesn't support the bombings.

*big if- huh?

There are plenty of Muslim Clerics speaking out against the jihadists. So, other than playing cheap shot, what was your fucking point?