Sonic Puke
It's all fun and games until somebody pokes out an eye

12/30/2003

The Rise and Fall of the Democratic Party (Part 1) Conspira-D's

Jane's Law: The devotees of the party in power are smug and arrogant. The devotees of the party out of power are insane.
(I don't know if it's really a "law" but it sure seems relevant right about now...)

Howard Dean...
(Is he a child molesting, Satan worshiper? There is no proof. But by suppressing information you lead to these kinds of theories. Or at least that is what Howard Dean sez...)

Dean has also been trafficking in crackpot conspiracy theories. On yesterday's "Diane Rehm Show" on WAMU radio (link in RealAudio format, exchange begins at 42:39), the erstwhile Vermont governor had this to say:

Caller: Once we get you in the White House, would you please make sure that there is a thorough investigation of 9/11, and not stonewall it?

Dean: Yes. There is a report, which the president is suppressing evidence for, which is a thorough investigation of 9/11.

Rehm: Why do you think he's suppressing that report?

Dean: I don't know. There are many theories about it. The most interesting theory that I've heard so far--which is nothing more than a theory, it can't be proved--is that he was warned ahead of time by the Saudis. Now who knows what the real situation is? But the trouble is, by suppressing that kind of information, you lead to those kinds of theories, whether they have any truth to them or not. And eventually they get repeated as fact. So I think the president is taking a great risk by suppressing the key information that should go to the Kean commission.

Hmmm, I have an idea. Since "the trouble is, by suppressing that kind of information you LEAD to those kinds of theories". (In Deans words)

I guess that makes if *fair play* for me to suggest that perhaps (Of course it's nothing more than a theory that can't be proved.), just perhaps Dean is a child molesting, Satan worshiper. I think Dean is "taking a great risk by suppressing the key information" (again Dean's own words I hope he chokes on them) I mean I'm not saying that Howard Dean is a child molesting, Satan worshiper. Just kind of floating it out there...

I mean after all Dean has sealed his records as gov of Vermont for 10 years.

Dean—who has blasted the Bush administration for excessive secrecy—candidly acknowledged that politics was a major reason for locking up his own files when he left office last January. He told Vermont Public Radio he was putting a 10-year seal on many of his official papers—four years longer than previous Vermont governors—because of “future political considerations... We didn't want anything embarrassing appearing in the papers at a critical time.” “Most of the records are open,” said Dean spokeswoman Tricia Enright, adding there is “absolutely not” a “smoking gun” in those for which Dean has claimed “executive privilege.” Still, Dean’s efforts to keep official papers secret appear unusually extensive. Late last year, NEWSWEEK has learned, Dean’s chief counsel sent a directive to all state agencies ordering them to cull their files and remove all correspondence that bore Dean’s name—and ship them to the governor’s office to be reviewed for “privilege” claims. This removed a “significant number of records” from state files, said Michael McShane, an assistant Vermont attorney general.
http://www.msnbc.com/news/999347.asp
Hmmm. Is the black hole calling the sun black? Why does the term "glass houses" keep popping into my head?

But there is more to the three ring circus of hypocrisy that is the flippy floppy being known to the carbon based life forms of Earth as Howard Dean...

Dean told the ABC program: "You don't actually get to seal the majority of records, just those sensitive parts that apply to other people. President Bush sort of takes the cake for his sealing. He actually had his sent, as I understand it, to his father's presidential library, where there's a 50-year seal."
Dean said: "I'll unseal mine if he'll unseal his."
http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/7389464.htm
Sounds fair huh? (Show me yours and I'll show you mine...)

Bush's gubernatorial documents are in the custody of the Texas State Library and Archives Commission and are open under Texas public record laws.
Same Article...
Ooopsy....

Do I sense a flip-flop building? Run, run for your lives... She's gonna blow flop...

"What we think the best thing to do is to let the judge go through every single document and decide for himself what ought to be revealed and what not to be revealed," Dean said.
http://edition.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/12/07/elec04.prez.dean.records.ap/

Gotcha... Since you're not Pres Bush it's OK to hide your records. Gotcha...

Madeleine Albright
(Mad Democrats disease... It seems to be catching...)

Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright insisted Wednesday that she was just kidding when she wondered aloud whether the Bush administration is holding Usama bin Laden captive, waiting to break him out at the best political moment.

It was a "tongue-in-cheek comment and was not intended in any other way," Albright told Fox News.

But witnesses to Albright's comment said the ambassador did not appear to be joking Tuesday when she suggested President Bush may reveal bin Laden's capture as an "October surprise" before next November's presidential election.

Albright was in the Fox News studio's green room waiting to appear on an evening program when she made the remark.

"She said, 'Do you suppose that the Bush administration has Usama bin Laden hidden away somewhere and will bring him out before the election?'" said Fox News analyst and Roll Call executive editor Mort Kondracke. "She was not smiling."

Two makeup artists who prep the guests before their appearances also reported that Albright did not ask her question in a joking manner.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,106012,00.html
Yup yup. Just run it up that old flagpole and see if anyone salutes eh?
Not even the SLIGHTEST SHRED of evidence is needed. Even the most RIDICULOUS concepts sudenly are concievable.

I mean after all we all know Pres Bush is the Devil incarnate and is capable of anything. I've heard that he eats virgin children to sate his evil thirsts...


The Honorable Rep. Jim McDermott D Washington
(My state representative... Sigh...)

On Seattle radio yesterday, Rep. Jim McDermott questioned the timing of Saddam Hussein's capture, saying, "I'm sure they could have found him a long time ago if they wanted to."
His comments came during an interview on "The Dave Ross Show" on KIRO-FM.
"I've been surprised they waited, but then I thought, well, politically, it probably doesn't make much sense to find him just yet," he said.
"There's too much by happenstance for it to be just a coincidental thing that it happened on this particular day," he continued.
Later yesterday, the Seattle Democrat said he did not know whether the Pentagon had manufactured the arrest of the Iraqi leader. "I think the fact is that the administration has been desperate to find something (positive), and this came up.
"I don't have any knowledge if they knew about it (Saddam's hideout). I think they (Bush administration) got a Christmas present early."
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001816098_mcdermott16m.html
Now I have to stick up for my congressman. He isn't playing politics here. He simply IS that crazy. It's always a conspiracy with this guy. This is nothing new. What is new is that seemingly NORMAL Democrats are sounding JUST LIKE HIM.

Yup the whole 'Saddam Capture' thing was staged. And only old Jimmy has the inside info needed to deduce this.

Ted Kennedy
(It is shocking to see an actual Kennedy showing such little understanding of politics. Nevermind ethics or truth.)

"There was no imminent threat. This was made up in Texas, announced in January to the Republican leadership that war was going to take place and was going to be good politically. The whole thing was a fraud."
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20030930-084108-4555r.htm

Does he have any proof? Nope, `and damnit how dare you ask me to produce any, I spout as I spout and will not be questioned on it`. Why? Since he can't be president (maybe in an alternate universe, maybe not) I have to assume he is under the control of aliens. (Or secret Cuban agents perhaps?)

Wesley weasley Clark

Clark said--not for the first time--that the Bush administration's war plans extend far beyond Iraq.

"I do know this," Clark told Wolf Blitzer. "In the gossip circles in Washington, among the neoconservative press, and in some of the statements that Secretary Rumsfeld and Secretary Wolfowitz have made, there is an inclination to extend this into Syria and maybe Lebanon." What's more, Clark added, "the administration's never disavowed this intent."

Well, no. Here's what a senior administration official told the Los Angeles Times's Robin Wright last April: "The lesson of Iraq is not 'Watch out, the U.S. is going to invade.' We're not. . . . Do you think President Bush would do anything to prepare for an election like fight another war? He's not looking for more foreign adventures. We won't get ahead by invading Syria or Iran."

Secretary of State Colin Powell made the same argument when he visited Syria last May. The secretary traveled to Damascus shortly after major combat operations in Iraq had ended, Powell said, in order "to pursue diplomacy and mutual political efforts that both sides can be taking." The reason for the visit? "So the issue of war hostilities is not on the table."

Case closed, right?

Wrong. Clark has made his charge a central plank of his presidential campaign.
Clark writes in his book, "Winning Modern Wars," that in November 2001, during a visit to the Pentagon, he spoke with "a man with three stars who used to work for me," who told him a "five-year plan" existed for military action against not only Afghanistan and Iraq, but also "Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia, and Sudan." Clark has embellished this story on the campaign trail, going so far as to say, "There's a list of countries."

Clark's proof? None. He never saw the list. But, the general recently told the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, "You only have to listen to the gossip around Washington and to hear what the neoconservatives are saying, and you will get the flavor of this."
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/445cqeal.asp

This is just a small taste of the nonsense he has been spreading on this front. Instead of running away from this fantasy conspiracy he is claiming it's TRUE. And that we ARE STILL GOING TO INVADE a number of countries in the middle east. It's all part of a secret plan. Really. Clark heard about it at a washington cocktail party so it has to be true. (You think I stretch here. But I do not. I have heard with my own ears him saying that he gets info on his secret conspiracy theories at Washington cocktail parties. With a totally straight face.)

Sen Clinton D-(NY)
(Vast Right Wing Conspiracy™ 'nuff said)

The D's are going NUTS. Period. The don't seem to realize that the more and more elaborate conspiracy theories being floated are now almost beyond belief. They seem to think that if they just float any random thought out there as a possibility people will accept it as true.

Wow.

These are not just random pundits either. These are some of the heavy if not heaviest hitters in the party.

It seems the D's have finally started listening to those in the party who claim that Clinton was really a conservative. (He wasn't. He was closer to the center than the radicals of the party would like. But he was clearly to the left.)

They seem to be dismissing the idea of "conservative Democrats" altogether.
Clinton wasn't a conservative but there ARE conservatives in the D party. (Or there WAS anyway)

Conservative Democratic Senators such as Zell Miller and now Sen Breux (Sic?) are leaving the party. Both of these southern conservative Senators have anounced they will not be running again in the next election. Miller has even endorsed Pres Bush.

The donkeys are lurching to the left, and I have yet to see any sign of a cut back to the center, no they seem to be moving even further to the left in fact...

More to come in a later update entitled...

The Rise and Fall of the Democratic Party (Part ?) Down-o-crats
(How the Democrats will use name calling and scare tactics to TRY and get people to vote for them.)

Hint: Giving 400 billion to 1 trillion dollars to seniors for drugs is NOT evil not matter how gullible the Democrats think the American people are. Do the math. It doesn't add up, even for the dimmest among us...

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home