Free Republic

I don't know, Ronald Reagan really liked the rule of law and protecting this country.

Until you tell me that Peter Fitzgerald (who has a really good reputation) is abusing his power with a federal grand jury, as a citizen I would like the law breaker punished and again, I don't care if its a member of the Administration or a out-of-control member of the CIA or a journalist.

I would also like this whole sad tale to be a caution to members of the intelligence community AND THE JOUNALISTIC COMMUNITY to understand that we are at war and the silly political s*** needs to stop (Sandy Berger).

So when did you stop believing in prosecuting law breakers?

I think you have bad examples. Afghanistan was a terrible graveyard for Russians. They didn't do the pounding at all especially after the Afghans got modern weapons from a large Western power.

At least several years ago they were similarly tactically inept in Chechnya, though I haven't read many analyses of the current situation.

You are comparing a ragingly ineffective, conscript army with a historically cruel approach to civilian relations (rapes in Berlin) with our forces which actually have historical experience successfully fighting insurgent warfare. And if you read here often you also get a feel for the hearts and minds that we are winning in Iraq.

If I was a mid-level governmental official and I wanted to smear somebody about a felony with no real justification (but possibly to influence a presidential election), I would put my self interest above the truth and whisper it to a journalist. Then the sloppy journalist, knowing that he or she would never have to testify it could broadcast my lie far and wide knowing that it couldn't be challenged.

My story is kind of like yours, but different.

I don't think there is any certainty about that at all, and I don't like journalists putting themselves above the law no matter who is in office. Remember, the requirement is for her to testify to a federal grand jury who represents us. Journalists should comply.

Just tell the truth about the felony that was committed and don't give us the histrionics.

"I'm here to beg President Bush ... to release an innocent boy,"


That innocent boy should hang.

I'll let the father of our country answer......

"If we desire to avoid insult, we must be able to repel it; if we desire to secure peace, one of the most powerful instruments of our rising prosperity, it must be known, that we are at all times ready for War."
President George Washington
fifth annual address to Congress, December 13, 1793

Drier is a pretty frequent guest on Hugh Hewitt. I think he's a pretty solid guy. It's pretty shameful for people to be bringing up his orientation. Who cares?

But New Jersey has been a solid blue state recently. Perhaps the understanding of how corrupt the Democrats (Torricell, McGreavy) are has sunk in there.

Liberals never think there is a free market. They screw up a market, then say that it isn't working.

Your analysis is very deep and persuasive. Do it. You can't lose!

If you think about it, my comments are the opposite of narrow. I am pointing out that there are as many reasons to work at a place of employment as there are employees.

Your comments on the other hand are silly!

does Wal-Mart actually allow these "come and go" caretakers to "come and go" as they please?

----No they are chained to shopping carts! The guards with shotguns at the door allow no one out. Its a Gulag I tell you!!


I am not sure what your apologies are about, my kids have worked for minimum wage (pizza hut) and learned valuable lessons -- I suppose you would say they were oppressed too.

Good sarcasm.. Don't forget the tags.

Yes, we lament with you!

I enjoy the name calling. Speaking as an imbecilic traitor......

The subsidies exist to MAKE THE COST OF RAW MATERIALS CHEAPER FOR THE PROCESSORS.


!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I am sure you join with me in not encouraging processors to have low costs. The interests of all of us should be for consumers to have low costs. That way even the poorest of Americans standard of living rises.


the hundreds of thousands of campaign dollars spent by ADM,

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Don't you see that in this case, by arguing for keeping the sugar tariff you are actually on the same side as ADM? Their enormous stake is CORN SYRUP, the product that benefits most from protecting the sugar growers. You need to rethink your support of agribusiness.

a vehicle for a bunch of worthless middlemen to skim money from the hard work of others.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

LOL That's great! I haven't heard that SOCIALIST argument for a couple of decades. LOL ... Sorry can't stay to chat, I have to drive to Florida to buy some oranges. After that I am going to North Dakota to buy some wheat so I can make some bread. While I am there a guy is going to let me shear his sheep so I can make a wool suit. LOL

And destroying the Everglades to grow sugar demonstrates that.

Sorry, your NAFTA explanation doesn't cut it. They went to Canada where there isn't the protectionism.

You know, I normally agree with you on class rhetoric, but in this case the economic case is so clear. I used to work in this industry. Sugar protectionism costs all of us hundreds of millions to benefit a very very very small number of inefficient "farmers".

That's what you support? Taking from the entire US population to benefit 40 or 50 thousand high income citizens?

How does a large company or organization respond to malfeasance by a small number of its members?

Tylenol was able to recover from poisons being put into their product. Abu Gharave has been investigated and the actions of ten or twelve dirtbags have been demonstrated to violate policies in effect. Is a city mayor responsible for criminal behavior of policement? Again, you generalize that everything that happened was pervasive criminal corporate behavior but the rush to judgement (evidenced by supreme court reversal) does not make that clearly convincing.

If AA had been able to demonstrate that the actions of their employees were isolated, your hypothetical might not be true. This would have been more clearly revealed had the real, responsible parties been prosecuted.

I would have been very happy to see the market appropriately deal with this problem after GUILTY parties were identified. Instead, driven by national politics, many innocent people were hurt by criminalization of actions of a corporate entitity (which this supreme ct decision suggests were not criminal).

You are just dealing with abstractions --a very common liberal trait.

Concretely there were some guilty parties at Arthur Andersen connected with Enron. The justice department overreacted (mainly because of the baying of the Democrats that Enron = Bush).

Rather than prosecute those who had actually been involved the justice department killed the entire company. Of course a Howard Dean viewpoint would be that they were all evil capitalist who never worked an honest day in their life. Sorry, I can't help feeling for some of the schmucks who weren't working in Houston and were doing a decent job.

More recent prosecutions like this have targeted individuals in a company, not the entire corporate entity.

Leaf Candies, Brach. Lots of historical candy companies have left Chicago in the last couple of years, can't compete while paying for RICH US SUGAR GROWERS to get the benefits of protectionism.

The sugar tariff is nuts. We pay a big price for it hidden in all of our groceries. How much better would all of our packaged foods taste if they were made with a little sugar rather than 'fructose' (corn syrup). Meanwhile these sugar growers are WAY inefficient.