Joe Sestak lets loose GOP impeachment fantasies

U.S. Rep. Joe Sestak, the underdog who beat Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania’s Democratic Senate primary, says he turned down a nice job offer by the Obama administration that would have kept him from challenging Specter.

That news has Washington Republicans all up in arms, outraged at such blatantly criminal and unethical behavior at the highest levels of American government.

Well. Kinda sorta. They are at least going through the motions of pretending to believe it’s an outrage, including calling for appointment of a special prosecutor and uttering that magic word they do love so well: “Impeachable.”

It just sounds so juicy and full of promise, doesn’t it? “Impeachable.” Certain mouths begin to water at the prospect.

But it’s laughable, and Republicans in Washington know it. You can see it in their body language and hear it in their voices, even as they profess to be appalled. These are people who can look the camera in the eye and tell you with a straight face that the sun will rise in the West tomorrow, but even they can’t work up much feigned anger at this.

Nor can the experts. Listen to Melanie Sloan, the head of CREW (Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics):

“There has never been a prosecution based on such facts and I find it impossible to believe there would be. I think this is really just politics as usual. Parties routinely do what they can to clear the field for preferred candidates.”

Listen to Richard Painter, chief ethics officer under the last President Bush, who says this “is nothing new and it hardly rises to the level of a major ethics controversy”:

Congress gives us plenty of genuine ethics concerns to worry about – particularly the role of campaign contributions which are de facto “bribes” (watch carefully what happens to the banking reform bill when it goes to House-Senate conference). Voters should not be distracted by media generated sideshows having little to do with what goes on in Washington.

Listen to Peter Zeidenberg, a former federal prosecutor with the Justice Department’s Public Integrity unit:

“Talk about criminalizing the political process! It would be horrible precedent if what really truly is political horsetrading were viewed in the criminal context of: is this a corrupt bribe?”

On the other side, of course, are such legal giants as Dick Morris, Sean Hannity and Karl Rove (who I see described on one conservative blog as “Carl Rove, who was George Bush’s legal adviser…).

If the White House had offered Sestak a job so that he would vote a certain way on a bill, or to buy his silence about an illegal or unethical act, this would have legs. But it’s nothing like that, and Washington Republicans know it. They also know that every administration since George Washington has tried to arrange the political landscape to its liking in exactly this manner. You’ve got a lot of people with ambition and talent jostling in Washington for position, and the folks at the top, at the White House, have always tried to stage-manage the process to protect their best interests. The same is true of every governor’s office in the country and in many a mayoral office as well.

What you’re seeing is the national GOP playacting — and playacting pretty poorly, with no heart in the performance — just to get the folks back home stirred up and full of hope.

260 comments Add your comment

Normal

May 27th, 2010
8:27 am

Political fantasia is all.

Gotta love the Gop for their gall…

RW-(the original)

May 27th, 2010
8:30 am

What you’re seeing is the national GOP playacting — and playacting pretty poorly, with no heart in the performance — just to get the folks back home stirred up and full of hope.

That sure sounds like you’re calling the “folks back home” a bunch of ignorant rubes. Then again we do have a government in total control of Democrats so maybe you have a point.

md

May 27th, 2010
8:31 am

So I’m hearing “politics as usual” as an excuse, yet that is just the opposite of what came out of the campaign trail. Hmmm……….

Mick

May 27th, 2010
8:32 am

Much ado about nothing.

Jay

May 27th, 2010
8:34 am

Close, RW. Close.

The Washington GOP is TREATING the folks back home as a bunch of rubes.

stands for decibels

May 27th, 2010
8:36 am

Jay, I really wish you’d eliminated the word “let” in your headline and simply used “loose” as a verb here (correctly) just to annoy people who have that funny lose/loose spelling confusion issue on these Internets.

Otherwise, thanks for the typically rational bit of perspective.

This Sestac thing reminds me of the poutrage of ancient times, when Al Gore had used the wrong phone in the White House to talk about campaign contributions and the future of the Republic hinged on the outcome… or something.

jt

May 27th, 2010
8:36 am

“But it’s laughable, ”

No ….it is not.

Americans aren’t laughing.

Pennsylvanian

May 27th, 2010
8:37 am

Whatever happened to ‘transparency’? Why doesn’t the White just tell us what happened?

Louis Renault

May 27th, 2010
8:37 am

I’m shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!

Pennsylvanian

May 27th, 2010
8:37 am

er – White House

md

May 27th, 2010
8:38 am

Here Jay, you left this one out but I found it for you:

Axelrod acknowledged that if White House officials dangled a job in front of Rep. Joe Sestak’s face to keep him away from challenging incumbent Sen. Arlen Specter, that would “constitute a serious breach of the law.”

Jay

May 27th, 2010
8:39 am

And md, that’s certainly a more realistic approach than talking about special prosecutors and impeachment. But speaking for myself, I never for a moment understood promises of cleaner government to mean they wouldn’t do basic stuff like this.

No administration could function if they didn’t play politics with political positions and political people.

larry

May 27th, 2010
8:40 am

Lets see…… A political canidate says an adminstration offered him a job so he would not challenge a Republican turned Democrat vs. lying about intellegence and reasons to go to war and outing an active CIA agent AND using terror alerts to win re-election, etc.,etc.,

Which ones are impeachable and which ones aren’t .

larry

May 27th, 2010
8:42 am

Compared to previous adminstration, this is laughable.

RW-(the original)

May 27th, 2010
8:43 am

If you don’t think the “folks back home” will fall for it then you should have at least one more sentence in your last paragraph.

I’m heading to the forest now, but I’ll see what the “folks” have to say while I’m out. Last time I checked they were still pretty PO’ed at the Hope peddler in the White House.

See y’all later

Gale

May 27th, 2010
8:44 am

The amazing thing is that the voting public does not seem to wise up to the “politics as usual” and start holding elected officials accountable. The rabble rousing continues to work on the masses.

Sextet

May 27th, 2010
8:44 am

This is like the deal Reagan once offered Gerald Ford to be VP on the Reagan Ticket in 1980.

No it’s not.

Pennsylvanian

May 27th, 2010
8:44 am

larry – Did Hillary Clinton and John Kerry lie about “intellegence and reasons to go to war “.

jt

May 27th, 2010
8:44 am

What is some Democrat lawyer actually had a chance to beat Isackson in November but,,,,

Isackson owed a favor to Obama (cap and tax vote) so,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Obama offered the democrat lawyer a job up in Washington to ensure Isackson’s win.

The howling would be deafening.

Jay

May 27th, 2010
8:45 am

I left something out, md?

Don’t you hate it when people do that? For example, you yourself left out the rest of that sentence, but I found it for you. It’s the part where Axelrod says ““and when the allegations were looked into, there is no evidence of such a thing.”

Pennsylvanian

May 27th, 2010
8:45 am

And who really was the Valerie Plame mole?

BMDPD

May 27th, 2010
8:46 am

None of this is surprising. Name one politician who is ethical. It does not exist. I don’t agree with Obama’s philosophy and ideology. I also don’t mind seeing him take a few lumps. I am glad to see his sneakiness and wheeling and dealing brought to light. BUT… talk of impeachment is ridiculous.

Gator Joe

May 27th, 2010
8:46 am

Jay,
Richard Painter, chief ethics officer under the last (I hope) President Bush should be a reliable source, having witnessed plenty of ethics violations.
Should we file this latest scheme (Wiley Coyote would be proud) under “Death Panels?”

Pennsylvanian

May 27th, 2010
8:46 am

“and when the allegations were looked into, there is no evidence of such a thing.”
According to White House attorneys?

RLJ

May 27th, 2010
8:47 am

When it comes to character, nearly all politicians are impeachable.

Gale

May 27th, 2010
8:49 am

BMDPD, I think most people think Jimmy Carter was ethical as a politician. Unfortunately, most people think he was a bad president as well.

BMDPD

May 27th, 2010
8:50 am

There is nothing to this story without a confession, documentation or a tape recording. MOST Politicians aren’t stupid. They didn’t get where by making stupid mistakes. I am sure the deal was implied, but there will never be hard evidence.

Pennsylvanian

May 27th, 2010
8:53 am

Gale – Jimmy Carter ran a race baiting campaign for governor. Hardly ethical.

BMDPD

May 27th, 2010
8:54 am

Lastly, it goes both ways. If it were a Republican in the White House, then the Democrats would be screaming and making a stink. The only difference is that the Dems would have more media support. This will fizzle out.

jt

May 27th, 2010
8:55 am

Obama has his Katrina.

Now he has his Lewinsky.

Or maybe Water-gate.

He doesn’t have his Lewinsky……………..yet.

Jay

May 27th, 2010
8:55 am

For the record, I actually thought the last Bush administration was pretty ethical. The notable exceptions, such as the removal of U.S. attorneys who refused to abuse their power by pursuing political prosecutions, almost always traced back to Karl Rove.

But as a whole, and with exceptions noted, the Bush administration was less corrupt than many.

On the other hand, the Republican Congress of that era was one of the worst.

Mick

May 27th, 2010
8:57 am

jt

You are reaching……but there is nothing there to grab.

mike

May 27th, 2010
8:57 am

“What you’re seeing is the national GOP playacting — and playacting pretty poorly, with no heart in the performance — just to get the folks back home stirred up and full of hope.”

You mean the like the Dems and the national; media including Bookman do too?

Yes, Jay there are intellectually dishonest partisan hacks out there who will use any excuse to attack those who don’t agree with them, regardless of how lame. You are one of them, Mr. “Uppity”.

Physician, heal thyself. Or stop whining about the sickness. In either case, spare us your incessant hypocrisy.

md

May 27th, 2010
8:58 am

“I left something out, md?

Don’t you hate it when people do that? For example, you yourself left out the rest of that sentence, but I found it for you. It’s the part where Axelrod says ““and when the allegations were looked into, there is no evidence of such a thing.””

One would expect Axelrod to say the later, but by saying the former, he obviously thinks its a bit more than “laugable”.

BMDPD

May 27th, 2010
8:59 am

I know that the Dems can compile a long list against Bush. Heck, I will probably agree to some of them, but Obama’s list is getting pretty big already. The biggest is transparency which does not exist. He has some pretty shady connections and has made some pretty shady deals. I personally hope that one of them will stick and come back to bite him in the end.

Jay

May 27th, 2010
9:00 am

Hi Mike!

Didn’t I see you here yesterday, complaining about how posters were obsessing over you?

Don’t you hate when that happens?

md

May 27th, 2010
9:00 am

Last I heard, the WH attorneys “looked into” waterboarding as well. We all know how that turned out.

TaxPayer

May 27th, 2010
9:00 am

Oh! The horror of it all. I’m shocked. Aghast. What is the world coming to.

There. Is that the response that the Party of No was looking for. No! What! I’m shocked! Aghast! The horror of it all! What is the world coming to! Perhaps when Scout and Co., LLC, show up, the Party of No will get the response they seek.

BMDPD

May 27th, 2010
9:01 am

Jay, it is funny that you say that about the Bush admin. I met one of Reagan’s national security advisors at a Christian camp a few years ago. Off the record he told me that Bush was the most honest politician he had seen in his time with the government.

mike

May 27th, 2010
9:02 am

“Is that the response that the Party of No was looking for.”

or translated

“Baaaaa. Baaaaaa. Baaaaaa.”

Bud Wiser

May 27th, 2010
9:03 am

Oh yeah, let us focus on this created crisis while the Gulf still fills with oil.

Obowo the Fool can prattle on about anything that lets him escape his culpability in what may be the greatest ecological disaster in history, and his faithful moron troupe will still slobber and swoon over his greatness. Idiots.

JKL2

May 27th, 2010
9:04 am

larry- outing an (in)active CIA agent(who free admitted in public she worked for the CIA)

This is the same thing. No crime was committed, but they are still trying fevorishly to cover it up. The only thing that will happen is the Dems will come up with their own Scooter Libby.

Love the Transparency.

Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)

May 27th, 2010
9:04 am

Well, I had my hopes up and could just about imagine us folks at Billy Bob’s whooping and hollering about this Kenyan getting impeached and throwed out of office, but it looks like it’s going to fizzle out. Heck, it ain’t even intrusting. There was no stained blue dress or cigar or nothing like that. Much less a big report we could all read and slobber about on the innernet tubes.

So I reckon we’re stuck with him till Newt and Sarah take over in January 2013. At least we got something to look forward to. Newt can’t get alone with nobody, so it ought to be real intrusting when him and Sarah start cutting loose at each other after their first falling out. That is, if Sarah makes it till then. I read someplace this muckraking reporter moved in right next to her and can even see into one of her windows. Hard to tell what he’ll write about about the first time Sarah and her man have a falling out or one of her girls forgets to close the blinds when a boyfriend comes over.

So it’s back to the boring for me. More lugging and stocking and waiting for Scout or somebody to come up with the next big rumor.

Have a good day everybody.

Donovan

May 27th, 2010
9:05 am

Let’s see…the Democrats control Congress and the White House and there is talk of impeachment? Yeah, that will happen. Even if that fantasy became true the possibility of conviction is a pipe dream. When Democrats supported a president who had sex in the White House, supported a president who lied to the people on TV, and supported a president who perjured himself in court there is no reason to believe that Democrats would hang their community organizer. The Bookman club members don’t have the character nor morality to pursue an investigation into yet another Chicago gangster type indescretion by their Chosen One.

stands for decibels

May 27th, 2010
9:05 am

Jimmy Carter ran a race baiting campaign for governor. Hardly ethical.

I’ll admit to having only a marginal understanding of how JC actually got elected Gov. back in the day, but I want to use this as a platform to ask a deeper question.

When you mislead voters about how you’ll do something bad, in order to actually do something good, is that really all that unethical?

The world is a messy place. IMHO means do sometimes justify ends.

I know that’s kinda hard for many throughout the ideological spectrum to process, but we are talking politics here.

BMDPD

May 27th, 2010
9:06 am

Palin will not run. She will be the new Ann Coulter. She already has all the fame she needs. She will not be on the ticket. Well, I hope not anyway.

TaxPayer

May 27th, 2010
9:06 am

or translated

“Baaaaa. Baaaaaa. Baaaaaa.”

or translated

“Waaaa. Waaaaa. Waaaaa.”

Wow. That was fun. Let’s do it again.

Pennsylvanian

May 27th, 2010
9:07 am

Taxpayer @ 9:00 – That is pretty good. You will have to do better to make the inner cluster of Bookman’s dingleberries with Bosch, USinUK, and Doggone. Hang in there…..

Soothsayer

May 27th, 2010
9:07 am

BMDPD

May 27th, 2010
9:08 am

TaxPayer, I think it is quite hypocritical for a liberal to pick on conservatives for whining.

mike

May 27th, 2010
9:11 am

Jay –

LOL. While I find it amusing that you seem to feel that you and I are operating under the same rules. Let me point out a few facts that seemed to have escaped your notice.

1) You are a highyly visible public figure at the only newspaper in town. You have been so for years, including being a member of the AJC editorial board. You represent a public institution. As a result, commenting our your brand of “journalism” which has hastened the demise of our local paper is pretty expected. Folks spending their time commenting on an occasional poster does not.

2) You get paid to put out writings the enlighten your reader or at the least interest them. Your brand of undifferentiated partisan twaddle do neither. It is not my job to do this, despite your admonishments that I start a blog or criticize conservatives. Again, I am just a poster. You are the paid “journalist”.

Like most pundits, you are incredibly thin-skinned. Not surprising. Most bullies are.

Any time you want to actually address my comment, feel free. I am more than ready to defend my claim that Mr,”Uppity” is as dishonest as any you claim to be. Unfortunately, in addition to being thin skinned, bullies are cowards, so I doubt you will.

Shawny

May 27th, 2010
9:12 am

It is a non-event. Move along. Nothing to see here.

Just another distraction to move the attention away from growing jobs and sealing the border. Now, y’all get back to work.

stands for decibels

May 27th, 2010
9:13 am

Let’s see…the Democrats control Congress and the White House and there is talk of impeachment? Yeah, that will happen.

I’ve been meaning to post something that, I hope, won’t come off as too terribly patronizing but here goes.

I kinda know how it feels, GOP voters. Really I do. Back in the dark days for progressives, between Bush’s re-election and the run-up to the Nov. 2006 mid-terms, we kept hope alive with talk of “Chimpeachment.” It was insane; there was no way in hell that was going to happen, even if video emerged of George and Dick meeting with Osama Bin Laden discussing how they were going to make this weird gang of fundamentalist nutballs the fall gay for 9/11. Na gone duit.

But we clung to guns and religion, so to speak, because it was kind of felt good to reach out to others who were similarly unhappy about being out of power.

It’s what people do. Perspective is hard to come by; it’s something that happens at its own pace, and you only recognize what how silly some of the talk might have been with that benefit of hindsight, much later.

Rudolph The Red-Nosed Reindeer

May 27th, 2010
9:13 am

No one ever invites me to join in the inner cluster of Bookman’s dingleberries game. (sniff sniff)

TaxPayer

May 27th, 2010
9:13 am

I’m still struggling to figure out just what “family values” means to some folks. Then again, who knows what they teach in some of those Republican academies of pious yearning.

NRB2

May 27th, 2010
9:14 am

Who cares if it’s impeachable or not.

What’s important here is this: this illegal alien freak of a president and his worthless criminal administration DESERVE to be harrassed and bullied every second of the day.

The sun shall not set one single day without them being reminded how incompetent, useless, and un-needed they truly are as human beings.

Obama and his adminis-dration offer nothing of value. They do nothing positive for the country or for themselves or their families.

They’re liars, criminals, and un-American. They prey on the hopes of the parasite class of this country, and for media shills like Jay, a glimmer of hope that they’re existence has meaning.

So Jay is right, the “great one” won’t be impeached.

But he will always be reminded how much he SUCKS.

TaxPayer

May 27th, 2010
9:14 am

TaxPayer, I think it is quite hypocritical for a liberal to pick on conservatives for whining.

You think

Bosch

May 27th, 2010
9:15 am

I think Bob Barr and the rabid wolves who from the day Clinton walked into the White House were completely obsessed with impeaching him on anything they could find – and actually succeeded – was one of the lowest points in American history and the impetus for the kind of back and forth derangement syndrome we see today (plus the fact that most of the stoopid think that if they read it off the Internets it’s automatically true – not knowing that any moron can make a web page and make it say whatever — maybe this is the elitist in me, but sometimes stoopid people don’t need instant information — especially when they don’t know what it means or how to cognitively process it).

We saw it from the left when Bush was POTUS, and we see it now with the Obama haters.

To me, it really all boils down to people losing control when they see someone in power who thinks differently — some can handle it better than others.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

And DAMN Luckovich! That cartoon cracked me up!!

Mick

May 27th, 2010
9:15 am

The clinton impeachment was a joke and history records it as such. Marriage infidelity by consenting adults, what did it have to do with governing? Nothing. Starr went overboard and a sexual peccadillo consumed the media. I actually don’t know anyone who is worshipping obama these days but you can count me as one who hopes he is successful in repairing the mess left.

jt

May 27th, 2010
9:16 am

We do have a legal precedence for this kinda thing.

Under the doctrine of stare decisis, all President Obama has only to go on national TV ,shake his finger, and lie to the American public.

Just horse trading.

Zedd

May 27th, 2010
9:19 am

federal code: 18 USC 600 says that a federal official cannot promise employment, a job in the federal government, in return for a political act.

“Section 18 USC 211 says you cannot accept anything of value in return for hiring somebody. Well, arguably, providing a clear path to the nomination for a fellow Democrat is something of value.”

“18 USC 595, which prohibits a federal official from interfering with the nomination or election for office. … ‘If you’ll get out, we’ll appoint you to a federal office,’ – that’s a violation of the law.”

The Section 600 statute states:
Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment, position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit, provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining any such benefit, to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity or for the support of or opposition to any candidate or any political party in connection with any general or special election to any political office, or in connection with any primary election or political convention or caucus held to select candidates for any political office, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=158617

Bosch

May 27th, 2010
9:20 am

OMG, Willie Nelson cut his hair. The world has gone to hell in a hand basket.

Chaka

May 27th, 2010
9:21 am

Slestak should seek refuge in a pylon.

stands for decibels

May 27th, 2010
9:26 am

this illegal alien freak of a president

I love the smell of steamed TeaTard in the morning. Smells like… victory.

TaxPayer

May 27th, 2010
9:28 am

What’s important here is this: this illegal alien freak of a president and his worthless criminal administration DESERVE to be harrassed and bullied every second of the day.

Uh. Oh. Ugh. Don’t tell me. I know this one… Is it “How do you know when you’ve won?” Is that it!

Fly-On-The-Wall

May 27th, 2010
9:28 am

You all know what this means. If the Republicans should take back a majority in the House then we can look forward to investigations, special prosecutors, and no work done for the citizens of this country much like what happened in the ’90s with those Republican Congresses. This will be the only thing for them to focus on. You watch, it will be the first thing out of the gate for them.

Normal

May 27th, 2010
9:32 am

Bosch

May 27th, 2010
9:20 am
OMG, Willie Nelson cut his hair. The world has gone to hell in a hand basket.

Bosch, I know! It’s truly a sign the end is near. OH THE RAPTURE IS COMING!!!

williebkind

May 27th, 2010
9:36 am

Zedd

May 27th, 2010
9:19 am
That does not mean anything to the progressive liberals. That only applies to conservatives. I mean the Obama team will not prosecute people standing in front of a voting booth dressed in gang uniforms with clubs initimidating voters. Now let the KKK do that!

Bosch

May 27th, 2010
9:36 am

“TeaTard”

My new favorite word.

Normal,

I hope so – then we can get rid of the creeper fundies and then we’ll be able to enjoy ourselves without them judging us all the time.

Bosch

May 27th, 2010
9:38 am

“I mean the Obama team will not prosecute people standing in front of a voting booth dressed in gang uniforms with clubs initimidating voters. Now let the KKK do that!”

What the hell?

williebkind

May 27th, 2010
9:41 am

The Tea Party! A movement by the American people to subordinate progressvie liberal socialists and give the government back to the people. A smaller smarter government with business minds in control instead of ideology and community organizers using public funds.

stands for decibels

May 27th, 2010
9:42 am

CIA agent(who free[ly] admitted in public she worked for the CIA)

:fish:

Thogwummpy

May 27th, 2010
9:43 am

Pay attention here. Jay Bookman is actually defending a possible attempt by the White House to use a bribe (in the form of a job offer) to manipulate a congressional election. He’s got the audacity to tell us, that “there’s no problem with this”. WHAT?!?!? Bookman is an example of all liberals: hypocrisy, ommission, distortion, corruption—it’s all okay if there’s a Leftist intention behind it.

And don’t you know, that if a GOP White House did this, Bookman (and Tucker) would be right out front screaming for immediate impeachment! Hey Jay, BP gave Obama more campaign money than any candidate in 20 years…and in return, they got all kinds of environmental exemptions to drill in the gulf. Is there a peep out of you expressing any concern there might have been a quid pro quo? Of course not. I can cite topic by topic where Bookman is going to play spin-master for the Democrat Party. Shouldn’t his column count as an ongoing campign contribution? Today, he says….”aw shucks…felony (for that’s what a bribe would be) intrusion into a Federal election is just dandy as long as Obama does it.” Jay, go “blank” yourself!

Mick

May 27th, 2010
9:43 am

The tea party seems to have flat lined as of late, besides its just a repub wolf in sheeps clothing.

Rightwing Troll

May 27th, 2010
9:44 am

I don’t understand why this is such a big deal, they already have 3 other “impeachable offenses” to tar and feather Obama with, Why don’t don’t they act on one of of those three concrete “impeachable offenses”?

They do have 3 “impeachable offenses”, don’t they?… Andy?…

Rightwing Troll

May 27th, 2010
9:45 am

Hmmm… is there a correlation to the GOP and Teatards talking points of late and Andy suddenly popping up with “impeachable offenses”???

Hmmmmm…… I’m just sayin’

stands for decibels

May 27th, 2010
9:45 am

What the hell?

In 2008, some proto-TeaTards found out that scary looking colored guys were photographed outside of a polling place. Caught in the act of looking scary.

They spread this photo far and wide.

It is nearly as popular among the TeaTards as is that youtube video of a naive colored lady claiming that she’d likely have an easier time of it paying for her house and car if Obama is elected. (boy do they love to reference that one!)

Anyhoo, these scary looking colored fellaz have has become a rallying cry for the flying-monkey right about how the 2008 election was stolen.

Aren’t you glad you know?

(I’ve provided no linkees because I have no desire to see this racist crap again, myself.)

casual observer

May 27th, 2010
9:45 am

We will continue with these bumbling idiots that run our country into the ground. This is ridiculous.

williebkind

May 27th, 2010
9:45 am

Bosch

May 27th, 2010
9:38 am
Oh and now we have the ACLU lawyers giving out names and pictures of US interrogators to Islamic extremists. Wow, those progressive liberals need more degrees because they sure are coming up “stupid”.

zeke

May 27th, 2010
9:46 am

Not any more fantasy than the fool democrats wanting to impeach W. for doing his Constitutional job! Obama has raped the Constitution! Pelosi and Reid have bribed Senators to push through an unconstitutional health bill! We have many unelected so called czars that are not Constitutional! And this bum wants to leave responsibility for our security to foreign governments? IMPEACH HIM!

Rightwing Troll

May 27th, 2010
9:46 am

“And don’t you know, that if a GOP White House did this, Bookman (and Tucker) would be right out front screaming for immediate impeachment!”

Ahhh another teatard prognisticator…

stands for decibels

May 27th, 2010
9:46 am

The tea party seems to have flat lined as of late

sssshhhhh. We’re having fun here.

bmw

May 27th, 2010
9:47 am

Zedd – thanks for posting that. The section that Rove and Hannity keep referring to is 18 USC 211, which says “Whoever solicits or receives, either as a political contribution, or for personal emolument, any money or thing of value, in consideration of the promise of support or use of influence in obtaining for any person any appointive office or place under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.” The more I read that section, the more I cannot figure out exactly how it would apply to the person who allegedly made the job offer – I interpret it to only apply to someone who either accepts a job offer or asks for a job (both in return for political favor). But Section 600 seems definitely applicable here. The problem with both statues is that neither one requires jail time – even if someone were to be found guilty, they could get out of it with nothing more than a fine.

TaxPayer

May 27th, 2010
9:47 am

Tea and Party, taken separately are socially acceptable and even revered here in the south but once they are joined in an undesirable fashion statement, those tiny little tea leaves forevermore leave a bad taste. Perhaps they were simply left to brew too long and all that is left is a bitter taste, hyped up on too much caffeine.

Rightwing Troll

May 27th, 2010
9:48 am

“Obama has raped the Constitution! ”

Cite examples please? Examples of all the new czars please?

3 impeachable offenses? Higher taxes? Anything?

MT

May 27th, 2010
9:48 am

No big deal? If true, Obama tried to HAND Specter ALL of Sestak’s votes as payback for him switching parties. Then he tried to give away a position and a tax payer funded salary for democratic votes.

Just what this country needs: a president that manipulates elections to strip us of choices. In other words, Obama wants to elect Pennsylvania’s leaders for them.

Not only does Obama want to choose our leaders for us, he wants to hand off positions not based on who is the best candidate, but based on favors and bribes….which is probably why we always get stuck with incompetent federal government workers.

Makes my stomach turn honestly and I am a liberal.

I am sick of presidents that manipulate elections. SICK OF IT! Sounds like a HUGE favors were passed back and forth, IMO. HUGE.

Rightwing Troll

May 27th, 2010
9:48 am

Soothsayer

May 27th, 2010
9:49 am

IT APPEARS THAT THE “TOP KILL” EFFORT HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL.

TM

May 27th, 2010
9:49 am

In DC the coverup always makes a non issue a full blown crime. If there is nothing to hide just lay ALL of the facts of the bribe or non bribe on the table.

Big D

May 27th, 2010
9:49 am

Jay…duhh do you mean…kinda like Dems impeaching GW for war crimes.You are such a biased partisan dirtclod…please never ,never call yourself a journalist.

Soothsayer

May 27th, 2010
9:50 am

Rightwing Troll

May 27th, 2010
9:50 am

“Oh and now we have the ACLU lawyers giving out names and pictures of US interrogators to Islamic extremists. Wow, those progressive liberals need more degrees because they sure are coming up “stupid”.”

I haven’t seen anything about that. Do you have a link?

I'm here from the government and I'm here to help

May 27th, 2010
9:51 am

Today, President Obama will have his first formal, solo press conference since July 22, 2009. By my calculation, that means the champion of transparency and openness in government will have gone 309 days (more than 44 weeks) without going toe to toe with the White House press corps

Let’s see how he answers these simple questions.

1. Mr. President, since it has been more than 10 months since your last solo press conference, can you tell us why you’ve been avoiding us? Are you afraid of the scrutiny from a free press? What message does this send to countries like China or Russia, both nations which we continually urge to create greater press freedoms?

2. At the signing of the Daniel Pearl Freedom of the Press Act on May 18, you invited the pool of reporters into the Oval Office to watch you sign the bill, but you refused to answer any questions. Were you trying to be ironic?

3. About a month ago, historic floods ravaged Nashville and other parts of Tennessee. The waters caused more than a billion dollars in damage and killed more than 30 Americans. Have you ever considered visiting the state to see the damage for yourself and to console the victims of this disaster? If yes, what prevented you from going? If no, don’t you think they deserve your attention?

4. Six months ago, Umar Abdulmutallab attempted to set off a bomb in order to kill passengers aboard a flight landing in Detroit. Instead of questioning him as an enemy combatant, your administration chose to question him for less than an hour and then read him his Miranda rights so he could obtain a lawyer. Was this your decision? If it wasn’t, should you have been in the loop? If it was, do you think this was enough time to obtain valuable information in order to prevent potential future attacks?

5. Shortly after the Christmas Day bomber incident, your Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said “the system worked” and indicated Abdulmutallab was likely a lone actor. Subsequently, it was discovered he had deep ties to terrorists and your Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair recently stepped down because of the critical intelligence lapses in the matter. Should Secretary Napolitano also step down?

6. It’s been more than a month since oil began spilling into the Gulf of Mexico, but since we haven’t had an opportunity to talk with you about it, why has it taken you so long to visit the Gulf Coast? You are going there on Friday of this week, but it seems your Administration has been slow to recognize the severity of the issue. Do you wish you had paid greater attention to the spill? And, is the federal government in charge of the response, as Carol Browner said this week? Or, is BP in charge, as Admiral Thad Allen said this week?

7. Way back in March, you signed a health care overhaul that only Democrats in Congress supported and 15 percent of House Democrats actually opposed. Is this what you meant when you talked about “changing the way Washington works” as a candidate?

8. Shortly after Arizona Governor Jan Brewer signed the law to try to enforce federal immigration laws at the state level, members of your Administration questioned its constitutionality. However, weeks later Attorney General Eric Holder and DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano admitted they hadn’t even read the law. The law is less than 20 pages long. Isn’t it reasonable to ask members of your team to read laws before they criticize them?

9. In March, the North Koreans sunk a South Korean navy ship in an act of extreme provocation. Since we haven’t had a chance to talk to you in quite some time, do you still plan to “sit down without precondition” with Kim Jung Il, as you pledged you would during the presidential campaign? If you plan to keep that pledge, what will you say to the North Korean despot about this attack on South Korea?

10. Since it may be after Election Day before we are able to ask you questions again, will you state now, for the record, if you authorized members of your staff to offer Rep. Joe Sestak a job so he would drop his primary challenge to U.S. Senator Arlen Specter?

Those questions should get the ball rolling for a lively presidential press conference. Set your DVRs to save the fireworks, folks. Mr. Transparency may not make an appearance again for several hundred days

Bosch

May 27th, 2010
9:53 am

sfd,

“Aren’t you glad you know?”

Uh, yeah. Thanks. Really?

Scout

May 27th, 2010
9:54 am

“Senategate” ………….. hummmm ……… I kind of like the sound of that.

Rightwing Troll

May 27th, 2010
9:54 am

“IT APPEARS THAT THE “TOP KILL” EFFORT HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL.”

Yeah!!!! Too bad about all that seepage though, what do they plan to do about? Top Kill the entire floor of the gulf?

stands for decibels

May 27th, 2010
9:55 am

kinda like Dems impeaching GW for war crimes

Well yeah. Kinda like that. See, this lady, might’ve heard of her, named Nancy Pelosi? Upon assuming the role of as Speaker of the House in early 2007 very clearly told the progressive wing of the Democratic party that impeachment was “off the table.”

Many people within this ideological band were very PO’d at her for it. But that was the strategery, and never again did any Democrat in the House seriously pursue impeachment (yes, I’m sure someone can Google a speech or a proposed non-binding resolution someone got into the record, but you know what I mean.)

Glad to be of service in your political education, Mr. D.

Rightwing Troll

May 27th, 2010
9:56 am

“Senategate” ………….. hummmm ……… I kind of like the sound of that.”

Why do you like that? Does it give you a warm fuzzy to think about the President of the United States doing a perp walk? (or just a Democrat President?)

Bosch

May 27th, 2010
9:57 am

“And this bum wants to leave responsibility for our security to foreign governments?”

Someone help me out here, my memory is a little fuzzy, but is zeke talking about Bush when he wanted to turn over security of our ports to the Saudis or something like that?

MT

May 27th, 2010
9:57 am

And BTW, as a liberal with some moral compass, I am also fed up with liberals (like RightwingTroll) who are completely lacking in standards behaving like feverishly attacking people on the right serves some useful purpose.

We share this country with people who have differing views. Get over it, be glad we do–it affords you the right to have very low standards in your politicians. If you want to find commonground or persuade the right, you will do well to stop the hate. I’ve never seen anything like this in my 40 years.

NEWSFLASH: democrats are only slightly different from republicans, stop acting like you are miles apart, you AREN’T. Half the time, I would swear democrats are worse.