by the way, only 5 out of the last 500 us attorneys serving under a 2 term president have been fired midterm. the administration managed to break that record in 1 day. by the way, 1 of the 5 was fired for biting a stripper. not exactly in the same league.
How is the Attorney General (or the president) firing those who work for him "obstruction of justice"? if attorneys were fired to stop investigations, like the one lam was pursuing against faggo and other "duke" cunningham cronies. then that is obstruction of justice. if pete dominecci (who has hired a defense attorney for this matter) and heather wilson improperly "leaned " on iglasius...that is obstruction of justice and tampering, etc...<br
henry hyde on the floor in 1998... I respectfully suggest we must look further by voting for this resolution and thus commencing an inquiry into whether or not the president has committed impeachable acts. We don't make any judgments. We don't make any charges. We simply begin a search for truth. You will hear from our opponents that, yes, we need to look further but do it our way. Their way imposes artificial time limits, limits our inquiry to the Lewinsky matter, and requires us to
How is merely stating a fact a "red herring"? cause it is not the reason that they need to testify. we are dealing with possible obstruction of justice, abuse of the patriot act and more. The fact is, there is no scandal here at all. according to you, tom delay and a few other members of the white house portable punditry. of course, in the 90's, tony Snow didn't quite hold the same view as he is force
I would not say that the BBC (more liberal in a lot of respects than even the NY Times) was a LaRouche mouthpiece. no, i wasn't saying they were, and i didn't claim it was..it just had that "feel." but it turns out, this source is not as iron clad as advertised. ***George Monbiot wrote in The Guardian that the forthcoming programme's thesis was "the same old conspiracy theory that we’ve been hearing from the denial industry for the pas
Sorry, I got distracted when they stated that. I do not remember how many. But as I said, it was at about minute 50 (a little after, but I cannot remember how far after). i reviewed 1:40 thru 3:20. just vague claims and accusations by 2 guys. nothing is backed up, nothing is debunked. and quite frankly, i didn't see what they said to be at all as claiming what you said they did. but i'm sure we are seeing it differently. i'm not saying it is,
and the scientists (some of them), upon seeing the hack job they did on the report tried to get their names removed. fill me in, how many scientists objected?
I will be glad to give the Bush tax cuts back if we do the same for the wealthy. My tax cuts were $300 per year. mine were much greater. and i'd gladly submit them if i was confident that every child in this nation would get decent health care. we can argue about taking care of adults as a seperate issue. but especially the "anti roe v wade" crowd should not endorse eliminating a woman's right to choose and then abandoning the baby that comes out to fen
sorry guy, i don't have an hour and 14 minutes to sit there and watch that. i did skim it tho, and tried to watch as much as possible, which amounted to about 15 minutes of the show. i appreciate ya trying to share your point of view, but this is more of a filibuster than a discussion. and they surely do preach to your choir from what i see. but debunking anything? i didn't see it. i just saw a few rogue scientists in remote places giving soundbytes and a pull on the heartstrings cause
OH NO, SAY IT ISN'T SO... AN ADVISOR TO THE PRESIDENT WAS CAUGHT ACTUALLY.... ADVISING THE PRESIDENT!!! nice red herring there.
The thing is, a business owner or CFO of a corperation can't include purely private expenses. think of it like this. the employer is the contractor, the employee is the subcontracting company. the owner, as a person, would also be a subcontractor from the business entity. Profits are not the difference between what is spent and income. Profits are the difference between the cost of doing business and income
::yawn:: blah blah blah...the only reason you are attackin me here (as predicted) in your case is because you can't work or play well with others so you are banned from my site. but just to give you the benefit of the doubt, and put your assertions above to the test, that you aren't an attack dog, i am gonna lift your b/l...we'll see how it goes. let me start us off with some common ground,,,GO STEELERS!
that linked article was like reading about myself from a parallel universe. i have gone thru much of the same trying to be a "good consumer" and giving artists the royalties they are entitled to under copy protection. when napster came out, before the recording industry spanked them, i got turned on to them. somet of the things i d/l'ed i already owned on vinyl primarily. the rest were things that i may have heard of , but never actually heard
I and others have proven you wrong on almost every article you have written. only in your minds gentlemen. it's the same portable punditry that makes those claims every time. big whoop...the COL could put up 100 indisputable facts on "fact day" and they could all come down, sit on your face and wiggle, and ya'll would still claim ya proved him wrong...the neoconservative "smear over and over" methods wore thin a long time ago...but not in your minds. bu
Add up what it costs you to do the job you do (not how much you spend every month, just what you spend on what it takes to do your job). Compare that to what you make. Most people make a heck of a lot more "profit" than any corporation. The difference is, most people don't consider their "increase" profits... even if that's exactly what it is. if you are going to do that, you must add up all your expenses from life, not just how much you spend to get to
The FBI has recently admitted to abusing our personal privacy freedoms by using national security letters and other letters improperly and illegally to obtain personal information from US corporations. that's not a blame,,,they admitted that, i am just reporting it. Now the President is atempting to block any meaningful and as importantly, public disclosure of how his administration has been operating behind their "cl
The car dealership analogy is a good one. My ex-wie used to sell cars and the dealership would routinely sell cars at a loss from the invoice in exchange for the rebates. Their profit was from the rebate and not the sticker so they also didn't have to pay anything but the minimum commision to the sales folks. The consumer gets a car below sticker price.. the dealer makes a decent profit and the sales folks got the shaft. i sold cars for years. and i know
I don't believe in government regulation; I believe in pocketbook regulation. If we collectively stop consuming so much we can control the prices. if we had any organization. unfortunately, in the case of big oil and gas prices, the american consumer is just way overmatched. this is where i sometimes split with the libertarians, concerning big business and their traditional unwillingness and resistance to any change that may effect 1 penny of their bott
it's funny how fox and nbc reported the story very differently. fox only mentioned that he resigned, NBC showed both sides... nbc... Blue State Digital said in a statement that de Vellis had been “terminated” for violating a company policy against “outside political work or commentary on behalf of our clients or otherwise.” De Vellis contradicted that in his Web posting, insisting that he had resigned voluntarily. fox... De Vellis said he resigned from the firm on
Blaming the Patriot Act, Prs. Bush or anyone else for the alledged crimes is childish i haven't blamed anyone,,,i demand the answers.
Sean I know you know better than this blame Bush for what is an ongoing problem. oh, i don't blame him for the care sucking historically. i do think this is one of those "unintended consequences" that this war has produced. i do think they could have done better, especially considering thieir rhetoric about how much more they care than anyone else. and i do think if the administration was a company and this and everything else this admin has bungled, we,
To expose the chicken littles for what they are that's fine, and i don't believe i've endorsed anything radical. like we discussed before, i believe our differences are degrees, and i don't think either of us are lookin to go far right or left here. i watched al today for a couple hours of testimony, and i heard very little that was so outrageous from him. and the lil zing barbara boxer gave inhoff was good comic relief. i think if there could be some go
a) i didn't destroy my sources. the 1st i did make fun of, granted. the 2nd i agreed with. b) and if i missed something,,,big whoop,,,i'm human too and freely admit it. oh well, egg on my face...but go to my next reply, which was there before you responded. i think it's clear that my goal is to work together, not to "win the argument" here, which is your agenda?
no bush loyalist defense here? lol
congrats!
JoeUser Forums