republican = criminal..say it long and loud..
Posted by headxray at November 28, 2005 12:45 PMPlease god, let Bill Thomas be next. That pig-eyed lardoon is hiding something in the space that once contained his soul. But maybe it's just more lard... As Paul Simons sings: "big and fat - a pig's s'posed to look like that." (:>
Posted by Donald Cormac at November 28, 2005 12:49 PMAs someone said in comments somewhere, "indicting republicans is like shooting fish in a barrel."
Posted by Keith at November 28, 2005 12:49 PMAgain, here's proof that patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels. Duke is one of those super-patriots who think that the military can do no wrong (except under Clinton). Cunningham decried Bill Clinton as a traitor in the 2000 campaign for being in a peace march when Clinton was a student in England. The man has wrapped himself in the flag for his entire career. Unless he rolls over and nails several collegues, he should get the maximum sentence allowed. He used patriotism for his own selfish reasons now let him pay the price.
Posted by Marvin Toler at November 28, 2005 12:50 PMAhhhh! To see the arrogant fall!
"You know me, I want to come out throwing arrows and stones in a fight like I'm used to doing. Someone swings at you, you want to swing back," Cunningham said.
"When every week you have something coming out on your life, I want to come out and be very, very open, but my lawyers have said, 'Duke, that's not what you want to do when an investigation is going on.' That's why I don't go out to the press and start jabbering."
-“Duke” Cunningham July 5th, 2005.
Somehow I don't think he was considering fessin' up back then.
so much hate.
Why can't you ever focus on the positive?
Posted by A Former Democrat at November 28, 2005 02:09 PMWhen this kind of thing happens, it makes me really wonder if we really sent men to the moon. Seriously, hasn't the War on Terror simply been an end to transferring the taxpayers' money to the elite?
Posted by ann at November 28, 2005 02:10 PMSo much hate? Tell that to Bill and Hillary Clinton.
Posted by goose1 at November 28, 2005 02:15 PMso much hate.
Why can't you ever focus on the positive?
Why do you think this is hate?
Who said they hate the guy.
He's a corrupt sleaze who sold his office to the highest bidder so he could live in the lap of luxury.
Why can't you condemn his actions? Does the fact that you want us to ignore it mean that you condone it? Why do you condone such behavior? Why do you hate accountability for those who commit crimes?
Please. Answer these questions.
Posted by snark at November 28, 2005 02:16 PMA former D,
I think most people here find it a positive development that the truth is finally coming back to haunt those who deserve it. What's so hateful about that?
Posted by Sharon at November 28, 2005 02:17 PMHow many of you out there think that Randy Cunningham’s crimes are an isolated incident...
I do! And I can't wait until Santa brings me the gift-wrapped Brooklyn Bridge I've been craving!
Posted by at November 28, 2005 02:31 PMWhy can't you ever focus on the positive?
A corrupt politician confesses and resigns his office. Sounds positive to me.
Posted by dj moonbat at November 28, 2005 02:39 PMSharon, Mr. Democrat is confused with the meaning of the word truth. He somehow equates it with hate.
Posted by Judith at November 28, 2005 02:44 PMThis is a positive! A corrupt politician out the door!
I can't think of anything better to hate...A politician who steals from the American people and government he swore to serve honorably!!
The prick is crying only because he was caught, not because he did wrong!!
Posted by bbtb at November 28, 2005 02:48 PMI agree that it is important to distinguish rightful satisfaction that the system works in uncovering and punishing the actions of the corrupt and criminal in government from taking pleasure at their discomfiture and suffering (i.e. schadenfreude). The former is perfectly proper and reasonable, but the latter is, while understandable, hardly noble.
Posted by David Studhalter at November 28, 2005 02:49 PMCry baby!
Posted by Nik at November 28, 2005 02:52 PMWar and Piece and some interesting tidbits about Cunningham going back to 1991...
Boy, he sounds like a nice fellow. Not!
Posted by at November 28, 2005 03:10 PMso much hate.
Why can't you ever focus on the positive?
LOL. Is that the best you can do, AFD? Pathetic. But wait, focusing on the positive: a corrupt politician has been brought to justice. Democracy, it's a beautiful thing.
Posted by ann at November 28, 2005 03:19 PMisn't there a word that's a cross between schadenfreude and the feeling of relief that you're not kidding yourself by believing that no man is above the law? patriofreude? maybe not.
as far as positive feelings, I'm absolutely thrilled that AFormerDemocratBot is here to assure us how pathetic our political enemies have become.
benjoya,
A Former Astronaut,
Brain Surgeon,
and Pro Basketball Player
It is funny what everyone here has pointed out already - how the Bush apologists equate truth and justice to hate.
And since when did they ever give into being such peaceful creatures?
One word for you motherfuckers:
Whitewater.
Can I please have my share of the $55 million back that you hatemongers spent on our former President's rusty zipper?
Thanks, bud. Much appreciated. Now excuse us for applauding justice being served.
Posted by MisterOpus1 at November 28, 2005 03:39 PMThe editorially conservative San Diego Union-Tribune did a positive thing by breaking this story. Unfortunately, San Diego has a lot of cleaning up to do but we've started.
The thing that really surprises me is that Randy Cunningham didn't fight this. I wonder why (it seems) he so easily pleaded guilty. What was the deal? Or, maybe he really decided to take responsibility?
d
From the NY Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/28/politics/29cnd-resign.html?hp&ex=1133240400&en=1949deeae2f616a3&ei=5094&partner=homepage)
"That Mr. Cunningham's downfall would come in a scandal involving a military contractor contrasted with his rise to political prominence based in part on distinguished military service. As a Navy pilot more than 30 years ago, Mr. Cunningham was wounded in action and received the nation's second-highest award for valor, the Navy Cross, after shooting down three North Vietnamese warplanes in one day."
The fact that the Congressman was a war hero does not negate the fact that he was a crook and a liar.
Please remember this when you folks laud the pronouncements of John Murtha: having served with valour in the military does not mean that [you] are immune to the weaknesses of being human or that [you] possess an expertise in diplomacy or military strategy and tactics.
Posted by Bagley at November 28, 2005 04:42 PMDon't be too surprised when W issues Duke a pardon tomorrow - or the next day or a week from Tuesday. Then the Duke will be draped with Medals of Freedom. Wait for it... (:>
Posted by Donald Cormac at November 28, 2005 05:07 PM,,,when you folks laud the pronouncements of John Murtha: having served with valour in the military does not mean that [you] are immune to the weaknesses of being human…Posted by BagleyThat is a typical Republican smear. Do you have any evidence to present against Rep. Murtha or are you just practicing to be the next McCarthy? Posted by Mike at November 28, 2005 05:10 PM
This is what it looks like when crocodiles cry!
Posted by pessimist at November 28, 2005 05:18 PM"That is a typical Republican smear."
How is pointing out the obvious a smear? Please explain without vitriol (and blue language).
Posted by Bagley at November 28, 2005 05:23 PMBeing a crook is not the "weakness of being human", it is a choice one makes.
Posted by Judith at November 28, 2005 05:24 PM"Being a crook is not the "weakness of being human", it is a choice one makes."
Qualitatively, it is the choices we make that make us human: the concept of right and wrong; ideas of moral and immoral. The judgement of others. Shame. Regret. Conscience.
Posted by Bagley at November 28, 2005 05:32 PMShame=Killing innocent Iraqi's
Regret=Going to Iraq
Conscience=bu$h's America
Posted by bbtb at November 28, 2005 05:49 PM"Shame=Killing innocent Iraqi's
Clever. Rudimentary, but clever.
Shame = Bombing the power grid of Sarajevo.
Regret = US troops in Bosnia for 10 years.
Conscience = Kosavar Muslims buring 1000 year old chrches while NATO troops did nothing.
Once I went to the circus and saw a very clever monkey.
Posted by Bagley at November 28, 2005 05:54 PMOnce you looked in the mirror and found out who that clever monkey was, and it wasn't at the circus, it was in your hand.
Posted by bbtb at November 28, 2005 05:59 PM"Once you looked in the mirror and found out who that clever monkey was, and it wasn't at the circus, it was in your hand."
Such a clever poster!
Posted by Bagley at November 28, 2005 06:00 PMIf ever there was a clever poster, there was.
Posted by bbtb at November 28, 2005 06:02 PMThat is a typical Republican smear
I would not say it was a smear so much as the talking point worked out by RoveCo for the chickenhawks when they get challenged.
I knew about Dukes 3 migs in a day when I was seven.
Which means I find this whole pathetic thing a major letdown.
That said, he better cough up the goods if he truly wants atonement.If he tries to equivicate even slightly, he should be dragged behind the capitol building and shot in the head.
The only death penealty should be for politicians who betray the public trust.
There is no greater crime.
Posted by SnarkyShark at November 28, 2005 06:03 PMSnarkyShark,
You are back. How much I missed you!
Shall we dance?
Regards,
Bagley
....Darn, the football game is on....to late!
Posted by Bagley at November 28, 2005 06:07 PMBagley, If you want a good site go to "Democratic Veteran", I'm sure you could get into some good pissing contest's with them. They're a bunch of good squids!
Posted by bbtb at November 28, 2005 06:16 PMFacts are nt a "pissing contest." Facts are facts. The public record of Duke Cunningham and John Murtha are given.
Why is this so difficult to understand?
SnarkyShark, where are you buddy?
Posted by Bagley at November 28, 2005 06:20 PMCunningham got his son a lighter sentence for smuggling Marijuana. Earlier in his career he stated that drug smugglers should get the death penalty.
Does he still get to keep his Navy and Congressional pensions?
Posted by bbtb at November 28, 2005 06:29 PMThe fact that the Congressman was a war hero does not negate the fact that he was a crook and a liar.
Quite true.
Please remember this when you folks laud the pronouncements of John Murtha: having served with valour in the military does not mean that [you] are immune to the weaknesses of being human or that [you] possess an expertise in diplomacy or military strategy and tactics.
Remember what? That Murtha has close ties to the military heads and has a pretty good pulse on what they are saying privately?
Or should we remember that he could potentially be a corrupt individual in the same manner as Cunningham, despite his similar background record?
That is a direct smear implication on a man's character without any evidence to support such an implication. Unless, of course, you have evidence and have failed to present any at this time?
Of course it does leave you with a bit of wiggle room with such a statement, as you merely imply a potential character flaw that might have yet to be revealed in the near or far future.
Honestly, what is the value of such a statement? Can we not simply state there is a potential character flaw that has yet to be revealed with pretty much anyone we wish to discuss? Well gee, we can do that pretty easily:
1. Nixon was a Republican. He was booted out of the office. Bush is a Republican. Let's keep it in mind that he's a Republican should charges come up to boot him out of the office.
2. Tom Delay is from Texas, and is currently being indicted. Bush is also from Texas, so let's keep that in mind that he's from Texas should there be any charges that might get him indicted.
3. I like eating chicken, and I tend to procrastinate on the computer at times. My dog likes eating chicken too, so let's keep that in mind the next time my dog jumps in the chair by the computer - he may very well procrastinate on the internet as well.
So I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to accomplish with such a statement WITHOUT direct evidence of any wrongdoing by Murtha.
Do you have any?
Posted by MisterOpus1 at November 28, 2005 06:31 PMWow!
Bagley's 4:42 comment clearly illustrates that Bagley is not immune to the human weakness of being a partisan scumbag.
"Cunningham was a decorated vet who went bad so keep that in mind whenever any other vet, like Murtha, says anything"
Good God Bagley!
Have you no shame?
Where's A Former Democrat to deride Bagley's negativity and hate?
Posted by snark at November 28, 2005 06:57 PMSo, Baggy, answer the question. What do you have on Murtha? Tick Tock, big guy.
Posted by iamcoyote at November 28, 2005 07:03 PMSnarkyShark, where are you buddy?
Bagel, last time we danced, so to speak, you ended up launching some ad hoc attacks on my personal charactor. I don't feel like a repeat performance, thanks anyway.
I do feel as though you deserve to know where I stand. We could use some decent oppisition in here, as muckdog has had to carry the load. Trolls like west, bendito, former democrat liar and the like are pathetic.
This is in fact Steve and the reg posters house, and I'm not sure if they consider you a troll or not.I personally do not.
But I would like a clarification on that by one of the front pagers.
If they say it is OK, I would be honored to kick your mis-informed Rove conditioned ass.
In a good way of course.
Posted by SnarkyShark at November 28, 2005 07:52 PMAs someone said in comments somewhere, "indicting republicans is like shooting fish in a barrel."
He he, that was I.
Right after that I voiced the opinion that dynamite might be more enjoyable.
But with these IEDs taking out the whole barrel, well I be gettin a little bit giddy.
Posted by SnarkyShark at November 28, 2005 08:09 PMCunningham took the chance, and lost.
Posted by Judith at November 29, 2005 06:26 AMPlease remember this when you folks laud the pronouncements of John Murtha: having served with valour in the military does not mean that [you] are immune to the weaknesses of being human or that [you] possess an expertise in diplomacy or military strategy and tactics.
Good thing we don't have to worry about that with the current bunch of Repugnicant chickenhawks usurping the government, isn't it bagel boy? I'm also wondewring why you didn't use John McCain instead of John Murtha as your example. Could it possibly be an attempt to paint Murtha with the same tar that is sticking all over the Dukestir these days? A cheap and twdry way to try and paint everyone with the same corrupt brush that has been firmly in Repugnicant hands for years? Maybe that has something to do with the statements asserting that you are engaging in a Rovian smear tactic...
Please remember this when you Repugnicant arseholes laud the pronouncements of any of the Publican bastards in charge of things these days: having served with shame in the corporate world does not mean that [you] are able to rise above the weaknesses of being greedy amoral pricks with no conscience or that [you] possess any expertise in business or fiscal and economic policy.
Smarter ditto monkeys please...
Posted by (: Tom :) at November 29, 2005 11:50 AM