Hmmm, maybe burkas aren't such a bad idea.
Posted on 08/21/2005 1:04:32 PM PDT by ovrtaxt
"When Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D., S.D.) and then-House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt (D., Mo.) selected Gorelick for the committee in December 2002, Gephardt said, of her and the other Democrats chosen for the job, "I can think of no individuals better suited to work on this project than the people we have announced today.""
from:
http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200404231117.asp
And it is a very minuet chance that it will ever be a care or concern for them unless it affects their political power in the future.
Hitlery, Bubba, Waters, Kennedy, the ACLU, People For The American Way, NOW, Specter, McCain, Helen Thomas, Ben & Jerrys, The Ninth Curcuit, Al Franken...Shall I go on?
Perhaps I have somehow misinterpreted your post, however you are paralleling my mindset....
Perhaps I read your reply properly but misunderstood it's meaning.
It says it all in a nut shell.
Thanks for the kind words, my friend.
Okay- I thought you were attributing the flood of incriminating info to Rove, as if this was all planned out by some master plan.
On the contrary, if the WH was so in tune with the crimes of the former Admin, they would have nipped this in the bud early and cleaned house. Unfortunately, It seems as if they're more prone to cover for them.
Each new revelation brings us closer to the conclusion that the Clintons' actions while in office DELIBERATELY left our country exposed to attack. For most of us, this conclusion has been, up to now, incomprehensible.
Why would they do this?
It is now obvious that the Clintons never left the mindset of the sixties. For them capitalism still owed them nothing, and the "military industrial complex" was still the embodiment of the enemy, and had to be neutered.
Those who ascribe their actions while in office as "bumbling" or a series of inadvertent "snafus" fail to see the deliberate character of everything they did, and, in light of Hillary's possible ascension to the seat of power, casts an ominous shadow over our future as a people.
Partly it's true.
For the plan, IMO, is to function with a directive for the American way and to allow the Lib's to do the dirty work via political self destruction.
It's all they know from a political standpoint.
Yes, I request that the Clinton's, Janet Reno, Sandy Burger and William Cohen join me for this target practice.
Forgot Madam not so bright.
bump
KEEEEERIST man!!!
Strychnine was the first to come to mind for me!
Haven't you any pic's of Oh say, Laura Ingraham or Ann Coultier?
After all, "happy hour" is two minutes away for me!
I envy you in your lack of memory and look forward to the day that I can post the same. ; )
"And to top it all off, the nerve of Gorelick and Ben Veniste to be as accusatory as possible to Rice! Remember that? And these are the people that we want to try and build bridges with???"
There's somebody who wants to build bridges with these people? They can't be trusted.
" Haven't you any pic's of Oh say, Laura Ingraham or Ann Coultier?"
Not handy, but how about this....
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1466993/posts?page=4#4
Because they hate the ideals of a Free Republic?
Liberals hate silly things like the 2nd Amendment, but will go to great lengths to protect their 1st Amendment rights that grants them free speech to hurl hate at Bush.
So...they would rather have chaos than peace so they can look like heroes when *THEY* try to "fix the problems".
Sickening isn't it?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.