Crush Liberalism

Liberalism: Why think when you can “feel”?

Abscam Jack being sued by one of his so-called “cold-blooded killers”

You reap what you sow, you sorry sack of Abscam crap! From Hot Air:

Well, the Marine Corps investigator has now dropped all charges against 3 of the 8 accused Marines in the case, and only one Marine still stands accused of crimes at the scene. The others are charged with various after-the-fact issues that arose from investigations of Haditha, not the events themselves. Murtha’s aim, of course, in accusing the Marines of murder “in cold blood” was to pin the blame on Bush. But in the process of blaming Bush, he slandered those Marines.

One of those Marines, Col. Jeffrey Chessani, plans to sue Murtha once he’s exonerated.

Brian Rooney, one of the attorneys at Michigan’s Thomas More Law Center representing Lt. Col. Jeffrey Chessani and a former Marine captain himself told NewsMax.com that his client, who is alleged to have failed to fully investigate the killing of 24 Iraqis in Haditha November, 2005 and not reporting an alleged Law of War violation, may follow the example of another Haditha Marine, SSgt. Frank Wuterich who is suing Murtha for libel.

Recall that Murtha claimed to base his accusations on internal Marine Corps investigations and reports. Well, I have the 31-page report that the investigating officer issued that exonerated several of the Marines.

[Excerpts from report here. Click here to see the excerpts from the actual report. - Ed.]

Based on that reasoning, the case against Wuterich is likely to fall apart too. He is the last Marine against whom charges from that night remain. If the charges against him fall, game over. Jack Murtha will have slandered Marines who acted according to their training during the course of ongoing combat.
…
But nope, no criticism of Murtha. Don’t you people support the troops in any tangible way, ever?

In fact, if one thing seems to unite liberal lawmakers and pundits these days, it’s the art of the lazy and counterfactual smear. “Bush LIED!” “All conservatives from the South are raaacists.” Etc. Smear Marines here, bloggers over there, the president just for fun, whatever, whoever and wherever, why bother to do any research when smears are so handy and easy to write and will land you gigs at USA Today and Time magazine?

Well, I’m cheering on any Marine who chooses to sue Jack Murtha over his Haditha comments. He got himself way out ahead of the facts, and now the facts are sneaking up to bite him on the backside. He deserves it, and it’s about time someone got some justice over one of these slanders.

If you have not yet done so, feel free to go ahead and question their patriotism.

August 30, 2007 Posted by | Murtha, shameful | 4 Comments

One less Taliban camelhumper to worry about

“He’s dead, Jim!” al-Reuters, the “one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter” network, delivers the bad news:

A wanted Taliban insurgent leader in Afghanistan, Mullah Brother, was killed on Thursday in a U.S.-led raid in the southern province of Helmand, the Afghan Defence Ministry said, citing ground commanders.

Brother served as a top military commander for the Taliban government until its removal from power in 2001 and was a member of the movement’s leadership council led by its fugitive leader, Mullah Mohammad Omar.

Damn that George Bush! Tryin’ to keep a Brother down!

August 30, 2007 Posted by | Afghanistan, religion of peace | Leave a Comment

Craig story three years old?

From Ace:

This is an awful lot like the Mark Foley scandal. The story had been out there for years but, conveniently enough, it was only pushed into the MSM before an election.

In this case, the arrest report wasn’t leaked earlier when it would have given an Idaho GOP challenger time to suddenly whip up the makings of an insurgent campaign. Instead, it comes far too late for that, making it almost certain Craig will prevail in the primary for lack of a real challenger and then be defeated by a Democratic candidate.

How do these lucky breaks keep accruing to the Democrats?

The Roll Call reporter who broke the story himself questions the timing by wondering how it could be that this was never broken previously.

He could help answer that himself by divulging not the name but the partisan leaning and organizational association of who tipped him the story. Of if it was done anonymously, he ought to say so.

Dirty tricks like this aren’t all that dirty. It was Craig, after all, who colluded in this by trying to hide what could not be hidden, leaving himself at the mercy of partisan opponents as regards the timing of the inevitable leak.

And yet the media is awwwwwfully interested in the skullduggery aspects of stories like this when the GOP is behind them — or even whispered to be behind them. Indeed, the rule is generally this: If a leak hurts a Republican, the MSM focuses on the content of the leak. If a leak hurts a Democrat, the MSM plays down the actual information divulged by the leak and instead focuses on the skullduggery of how the leak came to happen.

Obviously, in both cases, the MSM is casting the GOP as the bad guy. A leak that hurts a Republican proves the Republican is the bad guy. A leak that hurts a Democrat also proves the Republican is the bad guy, because what’s he doing spreading malicious information?

The MSM now routinely “questions the timing” of even terror alerts but apparently has no interest in the well-timed outing of closeted gay Republicans engaging in highly questionable behavior. Even though this is the second time running that a Late Summer Surprise threatened to turn an election in the direction of Democrats.

Related: To both the Craig and Hillary! stories.

While the media floods the zone on Craig, they seem curiously uninterested in the details of Hillary’s shady fundraising from Peter Paul — despite the fact she might soon be under oath and required to answer questions about the matter in court.

Nope…no liberal media bias!

August 30, 2007 Posted by | Larry Craig, media bias | 6 Comments

Barry O trying to be like FDR

But not in the positive sense (i.e. war leadership). From Forbes:

“Fine the lenders!” writes Barack Obama here.

Hoping to prop up his poopy presidential primary campaign, Obama says we should round up “the unlicensed, unregulated, fly-by-night mortgage brokers who are hoodwinking low-income borrowers into taking on loans they cannot afford” and treat them as “the criminals they are.”

Who, exactly, are these criminals? How does one identify them? What laws does one use to punish them? Obama, the lawyer, oddly never answers these questions.

In her wonderful book, The Forgotten Man–the book of the year–Amity Shlaes writes how FDR would tell his minions to ignore or retroactively change the law when going after wealthy businessmen such as Andrew Mellon.

Shlaes writes:

The president told Congress that though Washington had raised its tax rates, the Treasury was still short $600 million. Roosevelt blamed not the arrangement but the wealthy themselves. Roosevelt, [Treasury Secretary Henry] Morgenthau would tell Treasury officials, “wants to say flatly that our estimates and our methods of estimating are correct, but the citizens–that’s the word he used–found a trick way of finding loopholes.” Roosevelt insisted that these “loopholes be closed and that they be retroactive.”

If revenues were wanting, Roosevelt didn’t mind investigating, prosecuting or legislating his way to them.

Panicked for cash, Morgenthau now had his Treasury set about trying to create dozens of Mellons. Roswell Magill of the department audited individual returns in New York and found, according to Morgenthau’s diary, that citizens were using old tax breaks–legally, mostly. But Roosevelt was now set on erasing the old distinction between evasion and avoidance that the Treasury had danced around for so long.

Roosevelt also set out to prove that the intention of the taxpayer who failed to complete complex returns correctly was malign: Where there was ambiguity, taxpayers ought to be presumed guilty.

By 1937, investors and businessmen were sick of FDR’s capriciousness. Capital went on strike. Businessmen stopped investing and hiring. The 1932-1936 recovery collapsed, leaving “a depression within a depression,” writes Shlaes. Consequences were dire. In Brooklyn, in 1937, a 13-year-old boy named William Troeller hanged himself. The boy worried that his parents and five siblings weren’t getting enough food.

When Obama calls mortgage lenders criminals but doesn’t specify the laws broken, he’s playing with fire. Retroactive prosecution, hinted by Obama, is tyranny, plain and simple. 

Pandering to the economic illiterates in this country is the modus operandi of the left. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t. In BHO’s case, I doubt it works, especially with all of that empty suit’s other gaffes considered.

August 30, 2007 Posted by | economic ignorance, Obama | 3 Comments

   

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 25 other followers