And Don't Even Get Me Started About the President's Drunk Driving…
The Chicago Tribune reports a startling discovery: Scott McClellan has a sense of humor.
White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, facing another day of questioning about initial delays in the reporting of Cheney's accidental shooting and wounding of a hunting companion in Texas, was looking forward to a more upbeat event today: The arrival of the University of Texas football team, 2005 NCAA champions, on the South Lawn of the White House, a festival in Burnt Orange and White.
"The orange that they're wearing is not because they're concerned that the vice president may be there,"' McClellan joked at the start of this morning's press gaggle at the White House.
But "that's why I'm wearing it," McClellan, sporting an orange and gray tie for his hometown Austin, Tex., Longhorns, added with a laugh.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
He must have gone back to the shop last night for some last-minute reprogramming.
Speaking of drunk driving, has anyone made a Chappaquiddick defense? You know, has anyone said something to the effect that whatever Dick Cheney did, at least he didn't drive off a bridge and leave someone to drown at the bottom of a river? Just wondering.
E. Steven,
Yep.
http://www.cafepress.com/huntwithcheney.47628082
There is a certain macho reassurence that comes with being able to say "our vice president shot somebody, yeah, so big deal." It is kind of funny when you think about it. Does anyone outside of the media care about this story? I don't know a soul who thinks this is anything more than fodder for a few mildly funny jokes. It was an accident and no one was killed or perminently injured. I don't understand why it is more than a page two story for one day. Then again I don't understand why the media goes on 24 hour alert everytime a top shelf white girl disapears either.
John-
Remember that one time when the media spent more than a year fixated on the fact that a politician got a blow job?
I thought the media was obsessed because a politician committed adultery and lied about it under oath.
🙂
Thoreau,
I think the President banging a teenage intern on the side and then lying about it in the sexual harrasment suit brought by the one bimbo in Arkansas who ever turned him and his highway patrol posse down is a little bit bigger of a story than Chaney accidently shooting some old codger. If nothing else it is at least more entertaining. I frankly don't understand what these two old farts were doing out hunting in the first place. Cheney has to be in his 70s and the victim was 78. You would think they would at some point give up the Ted Nudgent routine, but I guess not.
LOGAN'S RUN FOR EVERYONE!!!
let's turn some old farts into laser light shows! and then escape wearing awesome outfits from the future...and that's all i remember about that movie.
I did not have ballistic relations with that man!
E. Steven,
It would be pretty damn funny to see Ted Kennedy on the Senate floor talking about the VP's deficient accident reporting.
I think the President banging a teenage intern on the side and then lying about it in the sexual harrasment suit brought by the one bimbo in Arkansas who ever turned him and his highway patrol posse down is a little bit bigger of a story than Chaney accidently shooting some old codger
That would be a bigger story if anything close to what you described happened. But, again John shows that he has no need for "facts" when he has a partisan narrative to peddle.
We know Dick, it was Howard Dean from the grassy knoll.
How could you possibly forget about the Flesh Pits or whatever they were called, where it was a 24/7 orgy?
Did you watch a censored version?
I think the President banging a teenage intern on the side
She was an adult, actually -- 21 or 22, I think.
The thing about Monicagate is that it has layers. People fixate on a different layer, depending on their political proclivities.
Layer 1: The president lied under oath during an investigation into his behavior. This is a big deal.
Layer 2: Except the thing he lied about would normally be none of the business of the people doing the question, nor the public at large. So it's a small thing, blown completely out of proportion.
Layer 3: Except the personal matter being pried into was part of a sexual harrassment investigation -- they were looking for a pattern of similar behavior. This is a big deal.
Layer 4: But it does not appear that Monica Lewinsky was sexually harrassed. It was a consensual affair. A small matter blown completely out of proportion.
Layer 5: Although there is some (evidence)(rumor) that the president did engage in sexual harrassment, possibly even assault, elsewhere. (I personally am two degrees removed from a woman who, while working in D.C., stood next to Clinton and had him surreptiously grab her ass, uninvited, during a photo op. Per my reliable source -- a loyal, Volvo-driving, NPR-listening, wine-sipping liberal Democrat -- BJC is definitely an arrogant horn-dog who can't keep his hands to himself.) Potentially a big deal ...
So, how deep do you want to look? Therein lies the two widely divergent opinions of the presidential blowjob.
She was an adult, actually -- 21 or 22, I think.
But mentally, she was 8 or 9 so I figure that averages out to a teenager.
?Really Chicago Tom,
Which part is wrong? Was Bill Clinton not sued by Paula Jones for sexual harassment? She claimed that Clinton made a pass at her and that she said no and her ability to succeed in the government of Arkansas was hindered as a result. Like all sexual harassment suits, the plaintiff attempted to prove her case by establishing that Clinton had slept with other employees of his and that they had advanced where Jones had not. As part of that process, Clinton was asked in a deposition if he had ever had sexual relations with one of the employees in the Whitehouse, which he denied. Then of course we later found out from the blue dress and Linda Trip et. al that he had in fact had sexual relations with Monica Lewinski who was an intern at the Whitehouse. The short story is that Bill Clinton was banging (or having oral sex, if you buy the whole, blowjobs are not sex defense) a teenage or near teenage I can't remember if Monica was over 20 or not, in the Whitehouse and then lied about it in a deposition involving a former Arkansas State employee who accused him of sexual harassment, specifically making a pass at her and then not promoting her when she turned him down. Why is that so difficult to remember or understand?
Stevo,
No one ever accused Clinton of harassing Lewinski. The fact is that the very same people who in the 1990s claimed that none of this was anyone's business passed the sexual harassment laws in the 1990s which opened up the sexual life to judicial examination of anyone accused of sexual harassment. Clinton got caught up in these laws and lied in a deposition. The laws may be wrong. I think they are, but they are the laws nonetheless. As the law is written, Clinton did lie on a material fact and was guilty of perjury. The fact that it was perjury answering a question that if the law was fair, he should not have had to answer. That is certainly mitigating, at least in my mind. That doesn't change the brutal irony and hypocrisy of the fact that his biggest defenders were the law's biggest proponents before it was turned on someone they happened to support.
While the shooting is probably only slightly more of a story than Monica-Gate, I think John is right - this pales in comparison to lying us into a Trillion dollar war that makes us less safe, reintroducing torture, rendition, secret prisons, outing covert CIA agents working on WMD proliferation for political reasons, exploding structural deficits, nonexistent response to a major levee system giving way, and countless other criminally negligent acts by Cheney and Bush.
But I wouldn't mind a Starr-like investigation to see if there may be more to it.
Where the story does have merit, is as an analogy for the administration -- and that the VP goes after penned up, flightless quail from a few feet from his car. Oh yeah, and unlike Monica, somebody may die.
Not to get into the Clinton mess too much again, but I recall thinking that Bill Clinton, University President, or Bill Clinton, CEO, would've been fired, no questions asked, if he'd been caught while serving in either of those capacities. Shouldn't the presidency have higher standards? That was my feeling about the perjury, too. I could maybe understand why he'd lie under oath, but a president should not do such things. Yeah, I know, most would, but that doesn't mean you don't nail them to the wall when you catch them at it. Once again, that was important enough for him to have his license suspended for a number of years, but it somehow wasn't bad enough to remove him as president. Or to force a resignation, which is what should've happened. I like my presidents like Caesar likes his wives--above suspicion.
This ain't a Clinton vs. Bush issue--Bush sucks, too, and I wouldn't be surprised if he's done something impeachable as well. I just think we should have insanely high standards for anyone in office, and if it gets down to us quibbling over matters that really show a lack of ethics on the part of the officeholder, then we're tolerating too much. Toss 'em all out if you get a good reason to. What's the big loss if it isn't a fair tossing, anyway? There are thousands more equally not up to the task.
Why people waste so much energy blindly supporting these jerks who get into power is beyond me.
As an aside, my legal fellowship at the White House was in the summer of '95, when Miss Lewinsky was hired. Wish I'd hung out with the interns more, because I could've made a mint writing a book (Tales from the Oral Office: Why I Passed on Sexual Relations with Monica).
Hey Coach,
While we are investigating this trillion dollar war, how about we investigate how it is that 3000 Americans were murdered on American soil? Only one rule to the investigation, we don't stop on January of 01 but go back as far as necessary to figure out why it is that the whole country sate around on it's asses for ten years while lunatics were running around the world waging war against us. I would also like to know why it is that Bin Laden was still running free when the Sudenese offered to give him to us in the 1990s. Further, I would like to know why it is that they blew up the WTC in 1993, the embassies in 1998 and the Cole and 2000 but the powers that be never gave a shit. Let's have that investigation okay? Naw, fuck it lets just forget the whole thing and hope it goes away.
...the VP goes after penned up, flightless quail...
Uh, actually since he was cited for not having an Upland Bird Stamp, it looks like these were actually wild quail.
Pro Liberate,
If Clinton had resigned, Al Gore probably wins in 2000 running as an incumbant rather than a VP. In truth, the vehement defense of Clinton made Bush president. I suppose Bush owes a big thank you to all of the Clinton defenders.
Way to start a shitstorm, Thoreau.
John,
I think the President banging a teenage intern on the side
That's an outright lie. She was a consenting adult.
by the one bimbo in Arkansas who ever turned him
Lie, or to be quite generous, an unsubstanciated allgetation. How do you or anyone know how many times Bill Clinton has been turned down?
and his highway patrol posse down
Again this is nothing but rumor and innuendo not based in any facts.
In fact, David Brock's (who has much more credibility then you do since he was actually, you know, involved in the smearing) book has also described how bullshit the AK trooper allegations were as well.
So the only thing that you got correct was that he lied. Good Work, Columbo.
And let's not forget that the GOP and Starr had such a hard-on for "getting" Clinton that they wasted MILLIONS of taxpayer dollars (Filegate, Travelgate, WhiteWater etc), and the best they could "get him" about was lying to cover up that he cheated on his wife. Now thats some bang for that investigative buck.
I mean this with no snarkiness, but I wonder what a President Gore without the scandal and without losing the election would've been like? I actually thought he was reasonably moderate back in '92. I seem to recall even a little hawkishness in his Senate days, and his actual environmental record as VP didn't match the weird stuff he came out with later. Not to suggest that I wouldn't have most likely hated President Gore as a crazed big government, free-spending liberal (as opposed to the same adjectives "conservative"), but I wonder if he'd be anything like the nutcase he is today.
theCoach, you shouldn't believe everything you read over on DailyKos:
penned up, flightless quail...
Hunting birds on a commercial game operation has nothing to do with shooting penned up "flightless" birds. Try not to advertise your ignorance at a forum where people know better.
Tom,
Why is banging someone imply that it wasn't consensual? No one ever said that Lewinsky was raped. That was that woman from Virginia who claimed that.
As I explained above, Clinton was sued and lied under oath relating to a material fact relating to the lawsuit. That is perjury. As Pro Liberate explains, had Clinton been a CEO or university president he would would have been fired no questions asked. That is a big deal. The fact is yes, I was just being a smart ass in claiming that Jones was the one bimbo who ever turned him down. I thought perhaps the irony was obvious. Forgive me, I forgot that I was writing to a Clinton supporter and didn't try to write on a lower level so you could understand. My mistake.
ChicagoTom, I remember rolling my eyes at much of the assault on Clinton. I think he was prety unprincipled and probably was guilty of some of the corruption charges flung his way, but some of the stuff was crazy. Of course, the same could be said for 80% of the anti-Bush crowd's complaints, too. Though I will say that the willingness to operate outside of Constitutional limits seems a little greater with this administration, though I'm sure 9/11 is as much to blame as the fools running the show nowadays.
While we are investigating this trillion dollar war, how about we investigate how it is that 3000 Americans were murdered on American soil
John, can you stop pretending like 9/11 didn't happen on Bush's watch? Remember, Bush was going to be the "adult" and "serious" president?
No matter how incompetent you believe your predecessor to be, when you take office and talk about what a serious minded no-nonsense President you are gonna be, when shit hits the fan, the blame falls squarely at your feet. Real men take responsibility for what happens while they are minding the store, they don't desperately try to scapegoat everyone else.
But you are a typical Republican shill. Nothing is ever your side's fault. You want to complain that it's those dirty liberals who are destroying this country, while you sit there and bend over backwards justifying the actions of "your guy" while he wipes his ass with the Constitution and pisses on every principle this country was founded upon.
Pro Liberate,
I think Gore would have done the right thing after 9-11 and gone after Al Quada and the far left would have crucified him ala Johnson and he would have been a one term President. I think people generally rise to the occasion of being President and do not once they have real responsibility have quite the extreme views they hold when they are out of power. Perhaps I am too much of an optimist that way.
Why is banging someone imply that it wasn't consensual? No one ever said that Lewinsky was raped. That was that woman from Virginia who claimed that.
John it wasn't the consensual.part that I was calling out, it was the "teenage" part. She was an adult NOT a teenager. By claiming he had relations with a "teenage intern" the implication seems to be that of child molestation.
Huh. I blame bin Laden, personally. Maybe Clinton could've done more, but the fact is we're just vulnerable to that kind of attack (or we were, anyway--the next one couldn't happen the same way). It's hard to guard every vulnerable spot in a free and open society. Frankly, I think we thought that no one in their right minds would dare mess with us in any serious way, even after the WTC bombing. I know that I thought that way. Now we know better.
Let's see Chicago Tom,
Bush was in power 8 months prior to 9-11 and Clinton was in power for 8 years, but it is all Bush's fault, not Clinton. It was Bush's fault that Clinton didn't take Bin Laden when he was offered him in 98. It was Bush's fault that Congress after the Church Commission put up the ludicris wall between intelligence and law enforcement that kept DOJ from searching Mousaoi's computer. No doubt if DOJ had said screw it and gotten the 9-11 plotters and 9-11 had never happened, you and your ilk would be on here talking about how Bush wipes his ass with the Constition and used intelligence assets to grab innocent Arabs like Atta. Who is the shill now?
Tales from the Oral Office: Why I Passed on Sexual Relations with Monica.
Because you have a very strict "no ugly chicks" policy?
Pro Libertate, your 5:08 was very well put.
Re: Scott McClellan's sense of humor.
Sad thing is, my first reaction to that was "Wow, that's actually funny", but that was immediately followed by "I guess they had a strategy meeting and they decided that making light of the situation was their best response".
Even if it isn't true, it speaks volumes...
Pro Libertate,
The way I see it, Starr had all the resources and funding and support from the GOP he needed. If the Clinton's did indeed do something illegal he would have nailed them for it. In the end the only thing of any substance he could get was a lame perjury conviction. Granted I think Clinton should have admitted to the affair like a man, and I have a real problem with the Office of the President lying under oath. But I don't see Clinton as any worse than any other president we've had in quite some time. I would love to see a Ken Starr equivalent go after this administration and see what he can dig up after millions of dollars and years of searching. I would bet good money that its more than lying about a blow-job.
Thank you, linguist. It's easy to be eloquent when you're (1) indignant and (2) trying to avoid work 🙂
If Clinton had resigned, Al Gore probably wins in 2000 running as an incumbant rather than a VP. In truth, the vehement defense of Clinton made Bush president. I suppose Bush owes a big thank you to all of the Clinton defenders.
And while we're at it, let's all remember who was the biggest advocate of the knock-down, drag-out, fight-it-to-the-last-lawyer strategy: Hillary.
Ironic, isn't it?
I think Gore would have done the right thing after 9-11 and gone after Al Quada
Yes.
Al Gore does not sleep. He waits.
Al Gore doesn't go hunting.... AL GORE GOES KILLING.
Al Gore drives an ice cream truck covered in human skulls.
Outer space exists because it's afraid to be on the same planet with Al Gore.
Al Gore is the reason why Waldo is hiding.
Al Gore is so fast, he can run around the world and punch himself in the back of the head.
Al Gore's hand is the only hand that can beat a royal flush.
Al Gore can lead a horse to water AND make it drink.
Al Gore doesn't wear a watch, HE decides what time it is.
Al Gore can slam a revolving door.
Al Gore does not get frostbite. Al Gore bites frost.
Al Gore's real name: Al Gorris.
Why did that waskaly media flog those stories? Because that's what the audience demanded.
In Arabic, al Gore means, "The Guy Who Will Kick Muslim Ass". His coming was foretold in the Koran.
Bush was in power 8 months prior to 9-11 and Clinton was in power for 8 years, but it is all Bush's fault, not Clinton.
Well it didn't happen on Clinton's watch. So yeah... the fault lies with the sitting president.
Sorry that you don't like it, but 8 months not a negligable amount of time. It wasn't like Bush hadn't had a chance to unpack. 8 months is a more than enough time to get settled into the job. Unless you are an idiot. Be a man and take responsibility for what happened while your guy was minding the store.
It was Bush's fault that Congress after the Church Commission put up the ludicris wall between intelligence and law enforcement that kept DOJ from searching Mousaoi's computer
The GOP Congress you mean? They did control both houses for a quite a bit of Clinton's tenure did they not?
No doubt if DOJ had said screw it and gotten the 9-11 plotters and 9-11 had never happened, you and your ilk would be on here talking about how Bush wipes his ass with the Constition and used intelligence assets to grab innocent Arabs like Atta.
I doubt it John, but feel free to make up more scenarios in your head and use those as proof that anyone who doesn't agree with President Flight Suits power grab are america hating liberal terrorist sympathizers.
Who is the shill now?
Still you John-boy.
You gotta hand it to the Dem and Rep parties. Despite the fact that they are two sides of the same coin, they are able to get so much brand loyalty.
Just because Cheney went to Texas on a hunting trip and shot a fellow hunter by accident, that doesn't mean he's just another stupid hillbilly. I don't care what everybody else thinks. I mean, you can go on about this hunter being responsible for that area, etc., but, for goodness sake, the man is our Vice President, and we are at war. ...and if we made a federal case out it every time someone in Texas went on a hunting trip and shot himself or a partner, there'd be a whole government office that did nothing but that.
...Makes me wanna strum my gyitar.
"Some folk'll never shoot 'emselves in the leg,
But then again, some folk'll
Like Cle-tus the slack-jawed yokel"
P.S. This whole ordeal may have set the NRA back twenty years.
Be a man and take responsibility for what happened while your guy was minding the store.
Oh, like the first World Trade Center bombing, and the Khobar Towers bombing, and the Kenya and Tanzania Embassy bombings, and the Cole bombing?
Or the humiliating retreat from Somalia, which convinced Bin Laden that the US was only a "paper tiger" and could be attacked with impunity?
Is that what you had in mind?
Bush was in power 8 months prior to 9-11 and Clinton was in power for 8 years, but it is all Bush's fault, not Clinton.
Which one of them got a briefing mere weeks before the 9/11 attacks titled "Bin Laden Determined To Attack Inside United States?"
This, I think, seems relevant.
I think you mean this.
Oh, like the first World Trade Center bombing, and the Khobar Towers bombing, and the Kenya and Tanzania Embassy bombings, and the Cole bombing?
Funny, I don't remember a bunch of shills out there blaming Bush Sr. do you?
Whatever happened during Clinton's tenure, the responsibility falls squarly upon him. Why the other side of the aisle can't say the same thing is beyond me.
Arrgh. It's messing with the HTML.
I think you both meant THIS ?
Phil,
Not only did he have the PDB, but there there was the fact that
In June 2001, German intelligence, the BND, warns the CIA and Israel that Middle Eastern terrorists are "planning to hijack commercial aircraft to use as weapons to attack important symbols of American and Israeli culture." (Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, September 14, 2001).
But yeah, its all Clinton's fault. There was nothing Commander Clears Brush could have done.
Holly: I'm no fan of Clinton or Bush, but you can't have it both ways. Every Republican leader in Congress demanded the retreat from Somalia. No one had that mission's back. To lay that on the feet of Clinton is asinine.
I think it's instructive to note that Clinton and Cheney both shot someone in the face. There's not a dime's worth of difference between the two parties.
- Josh
Or the humiliating retreat from Somalia, which convinced Bin Laden that the US was only a "paper tiger" and could be attacked with impunity?
How many dead Americans would it have taken before bin Laden realized that we weren't a paper tiger?
...staying put, even when the costs outweigh the benefits, wouldn't have made people think we weren't a paper tiger--it would have made people think we were stupid.
I'm tryin' to imagine how that logic would go...
"Yes, Mr. President, I know there's no tangible benefit to the United States staying in Somalia, and, sure, there's a real risk in getting bogged down here--if we leave, though, the crackpots might think we're a paper tiger! ...So I think we should stay."
That logic would have made no sense at that time. ...and why not go back even farther than that? ...why not say, "You know, if it hadn't been for the idiotic way in which we supported the rebels in Soviet occupied Afghanistan..."? Is that getting too general? ...How 'bout, "If we hadn't gone to Somalia in the first place..."?
If Clinton had resigned, Al Gore probably wins in 2000 running as an incumbant rather than a VP. In truth, the vehement defense of Clinton made Bush president. I suppose Bush owes a big thank you to all of the Clinton defenders.
And while we're at it, let's all remember who was the biggest advocate of the knock-down, drag-out, fight-it-to-the-last-lawyer strategy: Hillary.
Ironic, isn't it?
I applaud Clinton for refusing to resign. Although some of his behavior was less than honorable, he was fighting the good fight against the puritanical element in American society. I'm always happy to see that element brought down a peg or two.
Al Gore is the reason why Waldo is hiding.
Oh my GOD stevo I love that book! You're so funny. L0L
Wild Pegasus wins the thread! LOCK IT!
Traffic was really bad in Austin this afternoon so I had some to come up with a really good conspiracy theory. How's this?
Cheney has become a liability, and wasn't going to run in 2008 anyway, so THEY (note the all caps, essential to my argument) need a way to get rid of him. Mr. Whittington volunteers to get shot in the face with high-velocity bird shot. His condition will worsen. Cheney is thus forced to resign, to be replaced by Condi Rice. Then Shrub resigns due to "family issues" in mid-2007, so that Condi is in place to run as an incumbent in 2008. If she takes over in 2007, then she can run again in 2012.
Now, is this crazy enougn to post at one of the more, um, excitable, websites? Cable access or talk radio just doesn't have the cachet among the Psychotic American demographic anymore.
I think it's instructive to note that Clinton and Cheney both shot someone in the face.
Guns don't shoot people in the face. Dicks do.
Bush was in power 8 months prior to 9-11 and Clinton was in power for 8 years, but it is all Bush's fault, not Clinton. It was Bush's fault that Clinton didn't take Bin Laden when he was offered him in 98.
9-11 happened over four years ago, and Bin Laden is still at large. The responsibility for that grievous slap in the collective face of the American people rests squarely on the shoulders of one man and one man only.
One more thing: I'm sick of hearing Whittington's heart attack described as "minor." A minor heart attack is someone else's. I'm quite sure Mr. W doesn't consider it minor, especially since it was caused by a gunshot wound.
Or the humiliating retreat from Somalia, which convinced Bin Laden that the US was only a "paper tiger" and could be attacked with impunity?
I thought it was Reagan and Beirut that convinced Bin Laden that. Silly me.
I'm crying because I'm confused. I think John and ChicagoTom are BOTH right, and I can't decide which one of them I want to date.
I applaud Clinton for refusing to resign. Although some of his behavior was less than honorable, he was fighting the good fight against the puritanical element in American society. I?m always happy to see that element brought down a peg or two.
You might say that element was "brought down" five pegs. They were left only with the presidency, the Senate, the House, and two USSC justices...
"Although some of his behavior was less than honorable, he was fighting the good fight against the puritanical element in American society. I?m always happy to see that element brought down a peg or two."
Really? Was he fighting the good fight when he helped create the sexual harassment law that made what he was doing with Monica a relevent line of inquiry in Paula Jones' lawsuit? A law that he was quite proud of at the time. Also, please remember that Clinton's legal argument was not that his affair with Monica should have been out of bounds (i.e. the law was bad), but that he should be above it because he was too important.
Bin Laden was offered in 1996, not 1998. He moved to Afgan in 98 when Sudan expelled him; that's why Clinton wasted cruise missiles blowing up empty tents there in 1998.
Bin Laden was offered in 1996, not 1998. He moved to Afgan in 98 when Sudan expelled him; that's why Clinton wasted cruise missiles blowing up empty tents there in 1998.
he was fighting the good fight against the puritanical element in American society
I don't think you have to be a puritan to think that repeatedly cheating on your wife is wrong. Don't mistake "fighting for libertinism" with "fighting against puritanism". Being open-minded doesn't have to mean being devoid of morals.
Funny, I don't remember a bunch of shills out there blaming Bush Sr. do you?
Well certainly Republican shills ignore any non-Clintonian wrongdoing, just as Democratic shills like to pretend that Bush bungled Clinton's anti-terror strategy and caused 9/11.
More objective people, including leading blogosphere hawks such as Reynolds, recognize that every President from Carter through Bush Junior either ignored or appeased the growing threat posed by Islamic terrorists. The threat simply wasn't widely recognized prior to 9/11 (which is why, for example, it didn't play any role in the 2000 Presidential campaign). The government (like most of the population) was guilty of bipartisan bad judgement.
...he should be above it because he was too important.
I actually think Cheney would like this line of arguement.
I have no basis for this, but I get the impression that there is no legal investigation pending. I seriously doubt that your average Joe could have a shooting accident and not have it investigated. It seems to me that even if the parties don't want it investigated, agree and all, that the insurance company paying the bills would like to know if they should pay or liability can be assigned to Mr. Cheney's policy. Or is there no liability here, because he's the VP?
God. Fu?k evey single one of you Repugnantcan trolls still bringing up Clinton. HE'S BEEN OUT OF OFFICE FOR OVER FIVE YEARS! Is this the best $hit you have to offer? I'm a registered Republican who has never voted Democrat. And unlike the Connecticut Cokehead, I am an ACTUAL Texan who laughs to the point of puking every time I see your Blessed Cokehead prance around in his Howdy Doody hat. HOLY $HIT YOU PIGS ARE FU?KING PATHETIC! You'll defend anything this alcoholic cokehead does and always fall back "well, Clinton did it first..." FU?K, IT'S UNTHINKING ATTACK-FROGS LIKE YOU THAT ARE ONE OF THE PRIME REASONS THE REPUBLICAN PARTY HAS DECAYED INTO DISGRACE, BEARING NO RESEMBLANCE TO THE PARTY THAT I JOINED, HAPPILY VOTING AGAINST CLINTON! JESUS FU?KING CHRIST YOU BIT?HES SHOULD BE SLAPPED!
Somebody needs an enema.
Eewww, it's a Rethuglican troll!
Actually, I think he's a Democrap troll. It's hard to tell, they look a lot alike. Maybe we could tell by the ears or somethin'? ...like with elephants and jackasses.
But the troll who showed up to hate Bush and defend Clinton says he's "a registered Republican who has never voted Democrat" ... and he seems so convincing ...
> I would also like to know why it is that Bin Laden was still running free when the Sudenese offered to give him to us in the 1990s.
Hmmmm.
The week after 9/11, the Taliban offered to hand over bin Laden in exchange for evidence that he was involved with the attacks.
"I seriously doubt that your average Joe could have a shooting accident and not have it investigated."
Especially, if the average Joe is as bad a shot as Cheney:
CHARLES A. SUMMERS, Respondent, v. HAROLD W. TICE et al., Appellants
L. A. Nos. 20650, 20651
Supreme Court of California
33 Cal. 2d 80; 199 P.2d 1; 1948 Cal. LEXIS 290; 5 A.L.R.2d 91
Guns don't shoot people in the face. Dicks do.
You got your dicks, your assholes, and your pussies. Pussies want everybody to get along, and they hate dicks because dicks just want to fuck all the time. But assholes want to shit all over everything, and so you need dicks to fuck those assholes.
Holly: I'm no fan of Clinton or Bush, but you can't have it both ways. Every Republican leader in Congress demanded the retreat from Somalia. No one had that mission's back. To lay that on the feet of Clinton is asinine.
Yeah, but the Republicans didn't control either house of Congress in 1993. So even if they did have the "mission's back", they couldn't have done anything about it.
This ignores the fact that the commanders in Somalia repeatedly asked for armored support, but their requests were denied by SecDef Les Aspin because the Clinton Administration didn't want to "raise the profile" of the mission.
Sorry folks. Somalia was Clinton's baby.
How many dead Americans would it have taken before bin Laden realized that we weren't a paper tiger?
Well, counting 9/11, at least 3,000.
...staying put, even when the costs outweigh the benefits, wouldn't have made people think we weren't a paper tiger--it would have made people think we were stupid.
I think subsequent events have demonstrated the opposite is true.
Whatever happened during Clinton's tenure, the responsibility falls squarly upon him. Why the other side of the aisle can't say the same thing is beyond me.
Considering that if Clinton had been responsible during his tenure bin Laden would be either dead or at Gitmo (his lawyer would without a doubt be Ramsey Clark), I'd say the burden's on Clinton in this case.
"I seriously doubt that your average Joe could have a shooting accident and not have it investigated."
---------
Especially, if the average Joe is as bad a shot as Cheney:
CHARLES A. SUMMERS, Respondent, v. HAROLD W. TICE et al.,
--------
Would one of our fine commenters from the legal profession please, once again, explain, for everyone's benefit, the difference between a CRIMINAL and a CIVIL proceeding.
There are still some folks having some problems apparently.
"Criminal" is when the lawyers yell a lot and act mean.
"Civil" is when the lawyers are polite to everyone.
What do you mean that's not right?
"Civil" is when the lawyers are polite to everyone.
And Civil Engineers are the ones with good manners.
And civilians are people who practice the art of politeness.
Wait a minute, one old codger accidentally shoots another old codger and it's got something to do with whether Bush has a bigger dick than Clinton or not.
I'm a little confused here. I guess I have a lot to learn.
Just a thought - what would happen to the average Joe Bob in Texas if he was caught hunting quail without the proper stamp on his hunting license?
Bill
The local game official who cited Cheney said that everyone was being given warnings because the upland bird stamp was new this year and a lot of hunters weren't aware of it. So if Joe Bob got cited for no stamp he'd be fine so long as he purchased a stamp promptly, which apparently is what Cheney did.
Of course this may just be part of a nefarious crony coverup by TX officials for the benefit of the veep.
And in the spirit of "don't believe everything you read in the paper", that is only partly tongue-in-cheek.