HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
Dec. 11, 2006 Like betting on a two-headed coin, the one side bearing any current democrat talking head shouting the word “CONSENSUS!” while the other side of the coin bears a republican likeness of Trent Lott yelling “BI-PARTISANSHIP!”; this last week of Congressional activity would have cost us all our shirts had we been playing “Heads Liberals Win, Tails Conservatives Lose”. Reading through Fox News’ website today was like traversing a minefield. I read: “Democratic Incumbent William Jefferson Wins House Runoff Election Despite Federal Bribery Probe”, AP, Sunday, December 10, 2006 which began: U.S. Rep. William Jefferson easily defeated his fellow Democratic opponent in Saturday's runoff, despite an ongoing federal bribery investigation… Jefferson , Louisiana 's first black congressman since Reconstruction, led with 61 percent of the vote over state Rep. Karen Carter, who had 39 percent. Carter was unable to capitalize on a scandal that included allegations the FBI found $90,000 in bribe money in Jefferson 's freezer…"I guess the people are happy with the status-quo," she said.” The “culture of corruption” has apparently changed hands with the changing of the Congressional majority. I believe Mr. Jefferson has some more money stashed somewhere to help pay for that 61 percent, but that’s just a personal opinion. I’ll let the FBI sort that one out. [ Jefferson ] “described his win as "a great moment and I thank almighty God for making it possible." He called for regional unity to focus on the hurricane recovery and in bringing back evacuees who are still scattered across the country.” Personally I am offended at that remark. God does not allow crooks to get away with their “crookery” (my word). God does not “make possible” continued contempt for the laws of the land against bribery, unless of course you are a liberal democrat from a liberal democrat state with voters who only know to vote for the guy with the biggest mouth and the best lawyers. Jefferson should thank the ones who actually made his runoff success possible. The voters he snookered with his interesting act of innocence. From the article: “ Jefferson , 59, was accused of taking bribes from a company seeking lucrative contracts in the Nigerian telecommunications market. He has not been charged with any crime and denies any wrongdoing.” Even though $90,000 dollars was found in his freezer after his selfish actions in commandeering two National Guard trucks to help him save items from his Katrina-smacked home. One very good article on that fiasco can be found at: http://www.abcnews.go.com/US/HurricaneKatrina/story?id=1123495&page=1 But as O.J. was able to turn his murder trial into a referendum on race, so Jefferson was successful in turning his runoff into a “racial lines” debate. Again quoting from the article: “The scandal turned the race into a debate largely divided along racial lines, an age-old dynamic in this city that has intensified since Hurricane Katrina displaced large numbers of blacks and upended their demographic and political dominance.” Further: “Whites, who overwhelmingly voted for Carter in the primary and have been her most enthusiastic financial backers, believed a Jefferson win would confirm this city's image as corrupt and untrustworthy as it asks the nation to fund its recovery from Katrina. City Councilman Oliver Thomas said Jefferson 's victory would make the recovery more difficult. "People are watching this election all around the country and I can only imagine what they are thinking," Thomas said. "It will be very difficult to go back to them and ask them to trust us with the money we need here." Can you blame anyone for believing that Jefferson cannot be trusted to do the right thing? Oh, maybe he’ll be angelic for a while; after all he thanks God for his ill gotten monies. But how do you trust against what you can see with your eyes? Read the article and make up your own minds, but…”Carter's campaign spokesman and father, Ken Carter, said he felt they had done all they could to compete against Jefferson , but regretted the tone of the campaign in the final stages. "Race is all too often a factor in campaigns in New Orleans ," Ken Carter said. "Here we had a candidate that tried to paint this young African-American woman as a pawn of the white establishment." And where have we heard that before besides Condoleezza Rice and every other dark-skinned woman who happens to disagree with democratic corruption? One more small point to be made by the article, quote: “Before the bribery scandal erupted, Jefferson had climbed to the pinnacle of the Democratic Party. He was a confidant of former President Bill Clinton and held a seat on the powerful House Ways and Means Committee.” (Which is the “Ways and Means” to freeze cash once ill-gotten, I suppose.) In the “Ways and Liberal Dreams” Department I read this article: “Rep. Cynthia McKinney Introduces Bush Impeachment Bill, AP, Friday , December 08, 2006: which began: “In what was likely her final legislative act in Congress, outgoing Georgia Rep. Cynthia McKinney announced a bill Friday to impeach President Bush.” There is your true “spirit of bi-partisanship” and “consensus” as the liberals like to call “sour grapes” and chutzpah! Bye-Bye, Cynthia! But take heart because even though: “The legislation has no chance of passing…House Speaker (elect) Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has made clear that she will not entertain proposals to sanction Bush and has warned the liberal wing of her party against making political hay of impeachment” – we all have seen how well received Nancy’s earlier edicts were among the liberal elite. You may just get what you want Cynthia! In the “Liberal Authors Who Make Jason Blair Look Like Ernest Hemmingway” department, I found this article: “Jimmy Carter Fires Back at Longtime Aide Over Book”, Fox News, Friday , December 08, 2006, By Melissa Drosjack – which began: “Former President Jimmy Carter faced new criticism…over his controversial book on Palestinian lands when a former Middle East diplomat accused him of improperly publishing maps that did not belong to him.” Quoting: “Ambassador Dennis Ross, a former Mideast envoy… claims maps commissioned and published by him were improperly republished in Carter's book…"I think there should be a correction and an attribution," Ross said. "These were maps that never existed, I created them." “When asked if the former president ripped him off, Ross replied: “it sure looks that way.” In the meantime, still quoting: “Kenneth Stein, director of the Institute for the Study of Modern Israel, resigned Tuesday as Middle East Fellow of the Carter Center of Emory University, stating in his resignation letter that "President Carter's book on the Middle East, a title too inflammatory to even print, is not based on unvarnished analyses; it is replete with factual errors, copied materials not cited, superficialities, glaring omissions, and simply invented segments…"I'm a historian, I believe in the integrity of my profession, I believe that things should be written accurately, even if you disagree with them." The Jewish community had their say on Carter’s book too. From the article: “Rabbi Marvin Hier, dean and founder of the center, who read the book, said people in the Jewish community are outraged at Carter's book. "I think the point of the book is to be hostile to Israel ," Hier said. "I think he deliberately did it." Hier said the book sides with the Palestinian cause and blames Israel for troubles in the Middle East . "The reason he wrote this book is because he has become a spokesman for the Palestinian cause," Hier said. "Having read the book, I can tell you these are not the words of a person who is objective, who is trying to see a way out of this. He has come down 100 percent on the Palestinian side." I have to tell you that Carter, McKinney and Jefferson are all cut from the same liberal mold and that mold has been growing on a rotten pumpkin since Carter’s failed presidency. Pile all that liberal hypocrisy above with the tripe invested in the last liberal democrat response to a Presidential radio address and the puke-fest has just begun. Some parts of the democratic response: “After a combat tour in Vietnam and 26 years in the United States Border Patrol, I came to Congress a decade ago to help ensure that our nation remained strong and secure.” (invoking Vietnam – sans Kerry). “Not a day goes by when I don't think about them and pray for their safety… I ask you to join my family in praying for the troops and their families.” (invoking God – the new liberal mantra for success in the bible belt) “We've been fighting in Iraq longer than we fought in World War II, and yet we are no closer to achieving the mission.” President Bush's policy of "stay the course" is not working.” (invoking major liberal talking points) That is why I was gratified to receive the report this week of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group, led by former Secretary of State James Baker and former Congressman Lee Hamilton. Their report confirms what most of us have known for some time -- We need a new approach… the American people agree with Democrats that we need a New Direction in Iraq … But it's not only the Democrats who are calling for this New Direction…Robert Gates told the Senate this week that "we're not winning" in Iraq, and the Baker-Hamilton Group reported the situation "grave and deteriorating." (invoking the need for retreat with defeat) A key recommendation of the Iraq Study Group echoes something that House and Senate Democrats have been advocating for months: in order to begin the redeployment of our troops, we must change the mission of the U.S. military in Iraq from combat to training and support. (retreat) And we must launch a new diplomatic offensive to engage Iraq 's neighbors and the international community in the process of stabilizing Iraq and that region. (admit defeat) President Bush has not done this, but he must -- because our nation's security and the well being of our 150,000 troops (and our liberal desire to remain in power now that we’ve gotten it back) there depend on it.” (invoking the “redeployment” and “change the mission” scenarios from their current win the war and complete the stated mission scenarios) The rest of the liberal democrat response was about the many investigations they plan to conduct in the name of “oversight” and how democrats will now be all lovey-dovey to the President (because they know if they screw up they won’t have the chance to cement their new given power in the White House). The response was very disingenuous. Yet just this one paragraph from the President’s address proves to me at least that the government will not accomplish a thing between now and 2008. The President said: “I thank the members of the Iraq Study Group for their hard work and for the example of bipartisanship that they have set. The group showed that Americans of different political parties can agree on a common goal in Iraq and come together on ways to achieve it. Now it is the responsibility of all of us in Washington -- Republicans and Democrats alike -- to come together and find greater consensus on the best way forward.” To liberals, the best way “forward” will always be retreat. Heads or Heads gang? ------------ About the Author: Michael John McCrae has contributed over 700 articles to Useless-Knowledge.com. Email: macswordV@hotmail.com Comment on this article here! ------------ All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com and are not allowed to be posted on other websites. ARTICLE THIEVES WILL BE PROSECUTED! |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
