« Tenet Said Saddam Would Have Nukes By 2007 | Main | It ain't worth the paper it ain't printed on »

But I won't question his patriotism

Yesterday, Kim had a good piece on John Murtha's latest stroke of genius: to use the impeachment process as "leverage" against President Bush over the Iraq war. This may come as no great surprise to people, but I think that is a very, very bad idea.

I will not question Murtha's patriotism.

I will question his integrity. In the now-legendary Abscam sting, Murtha was not indicted. He met with the bogus Arabs, discussed how their bribe money could best be used in his district, but deferred actually accepting cash "for now."

But I will not question his patriotism.

I will question his intelligence. Murtha, it is worth noting, was a proponent of of pulling US forces out of Iraq and redeploying them to Okinawa, where they could quickly return to the region if necessary. Murtha didn't bother to mention that 1) the Japanese are growing more and more dissatisfied with our presence there, and wouldn't exactly embrace a massive infusion of new forces, and B) Okinawa is practically next door to Iraq only on a celestial scale -- to everyone else, it's a third of the globe away, with China and Russia being in the way of direct transit.

But I will not question his patriotism.

I will question his judgment. Murtha was in the House during the Clinton impeachment, and as such has first-hand knowledge of what impeachment entails. The charges against Clinton were extremely specific: on August 17, 1998, Clinton had, while under oath in a federal court proceding, knowingly and willingly lied under direct questioning. Perjury is a crime, clearly spelled out in penal codes.

But I will not question his patriotism.

I will question his constitutional knowledge. Impeachment is the "nuclear option" of political power. It is the Constitutional process whereby Congress can remove other federal officials from office, without interference from the other branches. No president can veto an impeachment, no court can overrule it. The founders knew that was an incredibly potent weapon, so they installed their own fail-safes into the process. While a simple majority of the House is all that is needed to impeach, it requires a two-thirds vote of the Senate to convict. Further, the sole penalty it can carry is removal from public office and banning from ever holding public office again. (A step neglected in the case of impeached federal judge Alcee Hastings, which would have kept him out of the House, where he proudly serves now (D-FL), alongside many of those who helped take him off the bench.)

But I will not question his patriotism.

I will question his own personal record. Murtha voted for the Authorization of Military Force In Iraq, and now says that it was a "mistake." Murtha, like so many others in Congress, are trying frantically to distance themselves from their actions. They agreed with President Bush back then, and now are trying -- desperately -- to erase that inconvenient truth. The possible explanations are, at best, amusing: "I made the best judgment I could on the evidence, but my vote was an honest error. Bush deliberately made the wrong choice!" "I voted with Bush, but I was outsmarted and tricked by the chimp." "I foolishly thought I could trust Bush, especially after the way he handled the 2000 election mess, but I was mistaken and he conned me." Or the Hillary Clinton variation, "I know the measure said Bush could use military force, but I thought that was just a bluff."

But I will not question his patriotism.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference But I won't question his patriotism:

» Hyscience linked with Go Ahead - Question His Patriotism

» The Oxford Medievalist linked with John Murtha and the "Four Ways" to Influence a President

Comments (64)

Murtha sounds like Osama is... (Below threshold)
Scrapiron:

Murtha sounds like Osama is his speach writer. He is clearly senile so is only mouthing the words of someone else. Reminds me of KKK Byrd who at times stumbles on his statements so bad it appears he has to ask the writer what a word is. I can't see the strings, but it is evident they are simply puppets.

OK, let's say Murtha is a p... (Below threshold)
GeminiChuck:

OK, let's say Murtha is a patriot - but just what could a non-patriotic congressman do that that would be worse?

Note on Okinawa: The Def Dept is upgrading Guam so they can remove their presence from Okinawa - much, much further from the Middle East. This move mostly affects the AF and the Marines - Mr. Murtha (as a congressman and former Marine) would know about this move as he would have had to vote on the funding (as a patriot, he would certainly read the legislation he voted on, wouldnt he?)

A postor boy for term limit... (Below threshold)
metprof:

A postor boy for term limits.

I'm thinking age limits. T... (Below threshold)
JLawson:

I'm thinking age limits. They've got them for commercial airline pilots, because at 65 their reflexes and eyesight and judgement supposedly are starting to slip.

All a pilot will wreck is a plane, and kill his passengers. Right now, we're seeing an interesting problem - if a congressman's judgement is impaired through aging, who will tell him that?

Age limits. 65. Both sides, both House and Senate. We can't afford senility in our legislators - god knows they're wierd enough right now!

You don't need to question ... (Below threshold)

You don't need to question his patriotism, JayTea, because his own words and actions indict him.

The only things Murtha feels patriotic towards are his party (the Dems) and his ambition (and not necessarily in that order).

Add age limits to appointed... (Below threshold)
BillyBob:

Add age limits to appointed judges too. They too get wacky in their old age.

Oh yeah, while we are at it, stop with the government welfare pensions for all politicians and government employees. It is bankrupting our country and we cannot continue to provide a pension with COLA every year.

Give them 401K's with matching funds like most of the people have. Government pensions for fat cat politicians is ludicrous.

John Murtha = "Semper One"<... (Below threshold)
SShiell:

John Murtha = "Semper One"

'Nuff said!

1) the Japanese ar... (Below threshold)
Publicus:
1) the Japanese are growing more and more dissatisfied with our presence there, and wouldn't exactly embrace a massive infusion of new forces

How true! How do the Iraqis feel about our 140,000 or so soldiers in their country?

It is the Constitu... (Below threshold)
Publicus:
It is the Constitutional process whereby Congress can remove other federal officials from office, without interference from the other branches.

For lying about their sex lives. It's in the Constitution!

Murtha voted for t... (Below threshold)
Publicus:
Murtha voted for the Authorization of Military Force In Iraq, and now says that it was a "mistake."

Murtha should never admit to a mistake; he should let our soldiers to continue to die for that mistake. It would be dishonest to learn from a mistake. Flip-flopping! The horror!

Age limits. 65. Bo... (Below threshold)
Publicus:
Age limits. 65. Both sides, both House and Senate. We can't afford senility in our legislators - god knows they're wierd enough right now!

Well, we certainly don't want a senile president, either. This plan would have prevent Reagan from serving.

Publicus: "it is far better... (Below threshold)

Publicus: "it is far better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."

The charges against Clinton were extremely specific: on August 17, 1998, Clinton had, while under oath in a federal court proceding, knowingly and willingly lied under direct questioning. Perjury is a crime, clearly spelled out in penal codes.

Show me the "blowjob exception" in the law, or where Clinton argued that the matter was not admissible (in direct contrast with the sexual harassment law he himself had signed), or shut the hell up.

J.

For lying about their se... (Below threshold)
SicSemperTyrannus:

For lying about their sex lives. It's in the Constitution!

Posted by: Publicus at April 30, 2007 11:53 AM

Nope. For lying under oath about violation of...

TITLE 29--LABOR

CHAPTER XIV--EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

PART 1604--GUIDELINES ON DISCRIMINATION BECAUSE OF SEX--Table of Contents

Sec. 1604.11 Sexual harassment.

(a) Harassment on the basis of sex is a violation of section 703 of title VII.1 Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature constitute sexual harassment when (1) submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual's employment, (2) submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as the basis for employment decisions affecting such individual, or (3) such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual's work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment.

But I will not que... (Below threshold)
SicSemperTyrannus:
But I will not question his patriotism.

But I will.

Show me the "blowj... (Below threshold)
Publicus:
Show me the "blowjob exception" in the law, or where Clinton argued that the matter was not admissible (in direct contrast with the sexual harassment law he himself had signed), or shut the hell up.

Well, let's take all the Republicans and ask them about their sex lives under oath, and if they lie about anything, impeach them. Why not?

Because it's irrelevant to their official conduct and it's entrapment...and just an embarrassingly stupid thing to do!

SicSemperTyrannus --<... (Below threshold)
Publicus:

SicSemperTyrannus --

Just so you know, a consensual relationship isn't sexual harassment...

Publicus nosedives again. ... (Below threshold)
Jo:

Publicus nosedives again. Love it.

The left firmly believes in... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

The left firmly believes in Rhetoric, but not facts. They are reprobate. ww

No responses to what I actu... (Below threshold)
Publicus:

No responses to what I actually said? How dull.

Publicus, get 'em under oat... (Below threshold)

Publicus, get 'em under oath in a matter where their sex lives are germane to the legal matter, and no problem.

You'll note that Randall Tobias and Mark Foley both resigned when their indiscretions became public -- and it looks more and more like Foley never actually violated a law. So, you wanna put them back in the offices they held prior?

This ain't shooting fish in a barrel. This is shooting 'em in a bucket.

J.

Publicus - Thi... (Below threshold)
JLawson:

Publicus -

This plan would have prevent Reagan from serving.
I don't know about you, but I don't see anyone of Reaganesque stature in the current crop of candidates. I DO see a good number of folks that have lingered in office well beyond their 'sell by' date, who believe they're entitled to their office due to their seniority in that office, and who have rather dubious mental processes. We have, in essence, an elderly hereditary priesthood, who can only hear the loudest, most shrill constituents - and ignore all others.

Can't change the past, but the future is still mutable.

The President, Vice Pres... (Below threshold)

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

It is up to the House of Representatives to define 'other high Crimes and Misdemeanors'. It doesn't matter how specific the charge is.

But I will not question ... (Below threshold)
drjohn:

But I will not question his patriotism.


But I will.i>

Seconded.

Politics ahead of your country? You bet I question his patriotism.

Murtha has lost it. Time t... (Below threshold)

Murtha has lost it. Time to impeach him!

"Perjury is a crime,.." Ja... (Below threshold)
BarneyG2000:

"Perjury is a crime,.." Jay I hope you will remember writing that when Bush pardons Libby.

By the way, what was Clinton's punishment for his perjury conviction?

Disbarment, Barney G. I gu... (Below threshold)
Zelsdorf Ragshaft III:

Disbarment, Barney G. I guess the Republican majority in the Senate decided it was better to not convict Clinton than have algore become President. Publickus, please. I know you are ignorant about all things governmental like the constitution but Clintons crime was lying under oath. It really makes no difference what he was lying about. The crime is about the lying under oath. If you plot and commit murder, does the reason really make any difference? Or is that just something you are unable to grasp.

MURTHA!Can we add ... (Below threshold)
Rory:

MURTHA!

Can we add this to the list-

Murtha went out of his way to insult one of our last and BEST Allies-Australia because Prime Minister Howard Dared to attack Barak Obama-

Notice when OBAMA was asked during the debate who are best allies are-

Obama-forget Israel but he also forgot AUSTRALIA-

Why?

It's personal.

Murtha had to go on CNN to defend poor little Barak on his military expertise and Murtha decided to lend Obama his-what little Maurtha has left of it-

Here it is:

don't think anybody wants to send the troops back into Iraq without the proper training, without the proper equipment. And that is what they will have to vote on, on March 15th or 16th. BLITZER: As you know, Democratic Senator Barack Obama, who is running for the Democratic presidential nomination, he says he would like all U.S. combat forces out of Iraq by March of next year. He would like to see that withdrawal start in May of this year.

Over the weekend, Australian Prime Minister John Howard really lashed out at this idea, and lashed out personally at Barack Obama.

Listen to what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN HOWARD, AUSTRALIAN PRIME MINISTER: I think he is wrong.

If I were running al Qaeda in Iraq, I would put a circle around March 2008, and pray as many times as possible for a victory, not only for Obama, but also for the Democrats.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: All right.

Not only is John Howard taking on Barack Obama; he is seemingly taking on you, as well, because your attitude, your policy is not all that different than Barack Obama's.

MURTHA: No, that's exactly right.

But -- but that's easy for somebody to say that hasn't really participated heavily in the deployment. The American people are paying $8.4 billion a month. Our troops are being in harm's way every day.

Now, the Australians are -- are one of our best allies. But for him to say something like this, when this is a policy decision, a policy difference with the president of the United States, is uncalled for. He is trying to interfere in our election. And that is -- that's something that shouldn't happen.

We appreciate the help of the Australians, but they haven't done anything compared to what the United States forces have done.

CNN Transcript

Murtha wants to talk about countries that have contributed N-O-T-H-I-N-G-and he starts off by listing Australia?

Try France-Murtha.


Publicus,I was won... (Below threshold)

Publicus,

I was wondering if you could point me toward any employer (who main income is not tied to sex) that would allow employees to have sex (oral, cigar, etc.) on company time and on company property without SOME sort of repurcussions.

If you can do that, then I'll buy anything you can say about Bill Clinton.

You know I may have taken A... (Below threshold)
SShiell:

You know I may have taken Amoeba far too much for granted. Even though they have absolutely no:

Backbone
Beliefs
Bravery
Courage
Determination
Fortitude
Guts
Honor
Morals
Patience
Resilience
Sacrifice
Standards
(And the list goes on)

At least Publicus and BarneyG can type. Does that make them talented Amoebas? Or are they just trained Amoebas?

Yo Pubes - Go Fetch!

Of course we can't question... (Below threshold)
Althor:

Of course we can't question the "patriotism" of Murtha and all those other Democrats that are helping Al-Qaeda reach its goals in Iraq! To them outright aiding and abetting of the terrorists and the insurgents is "patriotic dissent," and their definition of a "winning strategy" is to "cut-and-rub" and surrender in Iraq, retreating in humiliation and defeat, leaving the Iraqis to their fate after we went in there in the first place, and dooming them to a greater blood bath than the "reality TV" carnage being carried out until now by Al-Qaeda and the insurgents primarily for the purpose of propaganda, and to support the Democrat's position of defeat in the eyes of public opinion.

To quote a statement made by the Foreign Minister of Iraq, Hoshiyar Zebari, last Sunday:

"The political battle in Washington over a Democratic plan to pull U.S. troops from Iraq is being exploited by al Qaeda, which has stepped up attacks to hasten a withdrawal."

Zebari added: "Iraq had become 'entangled' in domestic politics in the United States, where there is growing impatience for progress in reconciling the country's 'warring sects.' "

What is really ironic is that the on-going
insidious pseudo-religious ("anti-war,"
"defeatist," "multi-cultural secularism" is a "religion" to the left and the Democrats, while to Christian conservative "patriotism,"
"the call of duty," and the willingness to "fight for freedom in the face of adversity and not surrender," is also almost religious) feud, the vicious divide in this country, and all the bitter partisan bickering and political vendettas,
seems almost "sectarian" itself!

You know, the following analogy to Iraq would be hilariously funny if it were not so ominously pathetic. The use of the term "warring sects" to describe the bitter, petty, partisan squabbles in Washington, is just simply so apt:

The "Sunnis" in Iraq, are warring and want us to lose this war, with the help of Al-Qaeda, to regain the political power they lost when Saddam Hussein, and his Arab socialist "Baath Party," were deposed.

The "Dhimmicrats" in Congress, are warring and want us to lose this war, with the help of Al-Qaeda, to regain the political power they lost when Bill "Hussein" Clinton, and his American socialist "Baaa" (as in the bleating of sheep) Party were deposed.

In Iraq the "Shi'ite" majority see their country going to hell in a handbasket, and can't seem to get their act together.

In America the "Shiit" Republican majority see their country going to hell in a handbasket, and can't seem to get their act together.

Aren't the parallels simply eery? It's almost like that psychological phenomenon where the dog resembles the owner and acquires his traits...and God only knows we "own" the war in Iraq - even though the "Dhimmicrats" may fret and throw their tantrums, and want to take it back to the pet shop without the receipt, because they did not want a "bulldog," but a "fluffy lapdog poodle" with its nails polished, wearing a bow, and dyed, appropriately enough, in "pink!"

As the old saying goes: "You break it, you buy it." One way or another we "broke" Iraq, we "own" it, and we have the moral obligation to fix it at any cost! To simply "cut-and-run" and flee the store like the Democrats wish to do, is not only dishonorable and a betrayal of all those who have died for a better world and a better Iraq in this conflict, but irresponsibly murderous due to the bloodbath that will ensue - much as it did in the "Killing Fields" of Cambodia, when we betrayed the South Vietnamese and fled - but suicidal; the new Jihadist "store owners" will be coming after us to make us pay!

Althor

Dwayne, show me a company t... (Below threshold)
BarneyG2000:

Dwayne, show me a company that employs someone 24/7 and provides their primary residence?

But is OK for Wolfie to give his adulterous slut mistress a $60K raise?

Well, Barney, Wolfowitz pas... (Below threshold)

Well, Barney, Wolfowitz passed that judgment on to the Bank's board of ethics and told them to follow normal procedure. They came back and said they could recommend something, but only he had the authority to actually implement it. It was only when he stupidly followed their counsel that his enemies started the smearing.

Oh, and their relationship started before he went to the World Bank -- and she's a longtime employee. In fact, they both went to great pains to make sure everyone at the Bank knew about the relationship before he took the job.

Nice use of "slut," though. You can always trust a liberal to resort to puritanical slurs and objectifying women when it comes down to it.

J.

How could you questi... (Below threshold)

How could you question his patriotism when he's made it so obvious it doesn't exist?

Semper I

"But is OK for Wolfie to gi... (Below threshold)
brainy435:

"But is OK for Wolfie to give his adulterous slut mistress a $60K raise?"
Barney

Good thing the tolerant left is above name-calling, mysongony and ad-hominum attackes, no? I mean, as a woman, she couldn't possibly have earned a raise for having her promising career screwed up by a political appointment.

I keep seeing people say ... (Below threshold)
Waste:

I keep seeing people say you can't challenge the patriotism of people like Kerry and Murth because 'they served'.

So what?

Most famous traitor in American history is Benedict Arnold. Guess what. He served too. In fact he was a general and his actions were instrumental in keeping the revolution alive.

If we can questions Arnolds patriotism why not the lowly Kerry or Murtha?

Serving does not make one immune from criticism for ones actions. If it did, how many spies that were caught would we have to release since they 'served' in the military.

Barney, Granted the... (Below threshold)

Barney,
Granted the President is 'oncall' 24/7 but he is not working 24 hours a day. He does get personal time off.

The only other person I can think of that is oncall 24/7 & is provided a residence would be a member of the clergy, or perhaps a doctor hired by a town (think Northern Exposure), or maybe someone working on an offshore drilling rig, or perhaps the folks that live in the office at our local self-storage facility, or maybe a member of the military.

But, the sex happened while Bill was 'on the clock' and was in the business part of the White House. Perhaps there is an employer who would not mind an employee having sex on business premises during off-hours.

Publicus,Well, ... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Publicus,

Well, let's take all the Republicans and ask them about their sex lives under oath, and if they lie about anything, impeach them. Why not?

Because it's irrelevant to their official conduct and it's entrapment...and just an embarrassingly stupid thing to do!

First of all, look up entrapment. Second, while I always thought that the Clinton impeachment was born purely from a political motivation, it is interesting that no one from the left ever considers the fact that we are talking about the boss (older, white male boss, no less) having sex with an intern 27 years younger than him. If it were a private company or a Republican involved, you can be sure they would approve of at least an inquiry into the propriety of the matter. I sincerely doubt any of them would claim it was "irrelevant to official conduct."

Oh, and Barney, while I'm no fan of Wolfowitz, to call Shaha Riza a slut is totally uncalled for. What an asshole.

What do you call a women th... (Below threshold)
BarneyG2000:

What do you call a women that has an open relationship with a married man? Judith Nathan (Mrs. Giuliani)! Oh I'm sorry, we were talking about Wolfie.

"What do you call a women t... (Below threshold)
brainy435:

"What do you call a women that has an open relationship with a married man?"
Barney

Monica?

Doesn't your precious holy... (Below threshold)
BarneyG2000:

Doesn't your precious holy book say adultery is a death penalty offense? Or do you only follow the 'good book' when it comes to gays and abortion?

brainy, I didn't know that ... (Below threshold)
BarneyG2000:

brainy, I didn't know that Clinton/Monica was an open relationship, and when did I ever defend Monica?

Now see mantis, although I ... (Below threshold)
Chip:

Now see mantis, although I disagree with most of what you say at the very least I can respect you for your opinions because you show some common sense, I have learned to try and take Lee, Barney, and astigafa with a grain of salt. You and Larkin have earned my respect, not that you'd care but just sayin.

MURTHA RENEWS EFFORT TO LYN... (Below threshold)
Robert the original:

MURTHA RENEWS EFFORT TO LYNCH MARINES - HIRES NIFONG

In the face of growing video and eyewitness evidence of the innocence of the Hadifa marines, rumors continued to circulate that an agreement has been reached with Mike Nifong. It is thought that Nifong will soon be free of his current contract.

"Mr. Okinawa wants to get those cold blooded murderers before we get any more of this evidence stuff", a spokesman said earlier today: "I'm not saying yes or no, but Nifong already has the tree and the rope."

Quote: "I keep seeing peopl... (Below threshold)
Althor:

Quote: "I keep seeing people say you can't challenge the patriotism of people like Kerry and Murth because 'they served'."

"So what?"

"Most famous traitor in American history is Benedict Arnold. Guess what. He served too. In fact he was a general and his actions were instrumental in keeping the revolution alive."

"If we can questions Arnolds patriotism why not the lowly Kerry or Murtha?"

Posted by: Waste at April 30, 2007 02:02 PM


Actually if the standard employed today by the traitorous Democrats were to be applied to Benedict Arnold, he but would be a "patriotic dissenter" of that other "George's (Washington's) War" and worthy of standing shoulder to shoulder with them in the Pantheon of 'Our Founding Fathers'!

Althor


Sen. McCain has much more m... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Sen. McCain has much more military experience, a decorated war hero and years of public service. So, he wants the war in Iraq to continue, so according to the dimmers litmus test of who can direct the war, McCain's way rules. ww

"brainy, I didn't know that... (Below threshold)
brainy435:

"brainy, I didn't know that Clinton/Monica was an open relationship, and when did I ever defend Monica?"

You've defended Bill quite enough, even though their relationship is pretty much the definition of sexual harassment: superiors do not have consensual sex with their subordinates, due to the power the superiors hold over them. Yet you want to insist that Bills relationship was perfectly kosher because it was "private," even though it all occured when he was supposed to be hard at work failing to take terrorism seriously.

Conversely you attack Wolfowitz for his actually private relationship with a woman NOT his subordinate and who went to great lengths to make sure everyone knew about the relationship to avoid the appearance of impropriety when she was later set to become his subordinate. Than you savegely attack the woman, full of moral outrage that she dared sleep with a Republican, I guess.

As for the open aspect, it was fairly common knowledge for at least a little while that Monica and Bill were an item before the famous stained dress was uncovered and verified it for everyone.
Even disregarding that, your comment suggests that you find women sleeping with publicly seperated men morally reprehensible, yet a secret affair with a man supposedly still comitted to his wife is just peachy. Odd position....

Stick a fork in Barney, cuz... (Below threshold)
Jo:

Stick a fork in Barney, cuz he's done.

"Conversely you attack Wolf... (Below threshold)
BarneyG2000:

"Conversely you attack Wolfowitz for his actually private relationship with a woman NOT his subordinate and who went to great lengths to make sure everyone knew about the relationship to avoid the appearance of impropriety when she was later set to become his subordinate." brainy

O-Really! Can you explain this?

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- The U.S. Defense Department ordered a contractor to hire a World Bank employee and girlfriend of then-Pentagon No. 2 Paul Wolfowitz in 2003 for work related to Iraq, the contractor said on Tuesday.

According to the Wold Bank, Wolfie did not admit his relationship with Rizza until May 2005, so he got his secret mistress a job through his department!

As far as your other BS, please show us when I defended Bill's adultery? The affair was common knowledge? Do you have thing to back that up?

"This would set an unbeliev... (Below threshold)
Semanticleo:

"This would set an unbelievably dangerous precedent if the Dems were to use impeachment as a political tool to force President Bush to his knees on Iraq. Granted, they could never do it without committing POLITICAL SUICIDE themselves."

Our boys are dying every day on a suicide mission.
Each of us would do well to consider what tangible
sacrifices we, as civilians, are making in the global WoT. Political suicide seems tame in comparison to physical death.

"According to the Wold Bank... (Below threshold)
brainy435:

"According to the Wold Bank, Wolfie did not admit his relationship with Rizza until May 2005, so he got his secret mistress a job through his department!"
Barney


"By Paul Blustein and Richard Leiby
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, March 18, 2005; Page E01"
"Although many bank insiders and observers predict that the odds strongly favor Wolfowitz eventually getting the job, the furor yesterday indicated that at the very least a fight will rage for several weeks before the board approves him.

Adding fuel to the controversy is concern within the bank staff over Wolfowitz's reported romantic relationship with Shaha Riza, an Arab feminist who works as a communications adviser in the bank's Middle East and North Africa department.

Both divorced, Wolfowitz and Riza have steadfastly declined to talk publicly about their relationship, but they have been regularly spotted at private functions and one source said the two have been dating for about two years."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A45449-2005Mar17.html

"The board released documents that gave new insight into the communications between Wolfowitz and the board's ethics committee, which advised him to transfer Riza outside the bank to avoid conflict of interest issues.

The board said Wolfowitz revealed his relationship with Riza while he was negotiating his own job contract and, at the directors' request, sought guidance from the board's ethics committee."
http://images.cnn.com/2007/BUSINESS/04/13/worldbank.wolfowitz.reut/index.html


"O-Really! Can you explain this?"
Barney

Sure I can explain it.

You lied.

Again.

Barney, I don't agree with ... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

Barney, I don't agree with you on everything you said in this thread (misconstruing the Bible!!!), but reeling brainy(sic) in with the neocon bait was pretty. No harness required. (Where's Curt Gowdy when you need him?)

ergo: Riza may be "in love" with "Socks", but her errand for the War Party was Whoredom personified.

jo,...(what can I say?)

Brainy, tell me how you exp... (Below threshold)
BarneyG2000:

Brainy, tell me how you explained Wolfie getting his mistress a defense contract in 2003 again. I must have missed that?

Bryan, here is what the bib... (Below threshold)
BarneyG2000:

Bryan, here is what the bible says:

Exodus 20:14 "You shall not commit adultery."

Deuteronomy 22:22 "If a man is found sleeping with another man's wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die."

Leviticus 20:10 "If a man commits adultery with another man's wife--with the wife of his neighbor--both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death."

Proverbs 6:32 "But a man who commits adultery lacks judgment; whoever does so destroys himself."

Leviticus 21:9 "And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the whore, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire."

Deuteronomy 25:11-12 "If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity."

Matthew 19:9 "I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."

Mark 10:11 "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her."

Mark 10:12 "And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery."

Luke 16:18 "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery, and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery."

Barney, You fucki... (Below threshold)
bryanE:

Barney,

You fucking lie. What right do you have to even live in this country? I hope you die.

While you are at it brainy,... (Below threshold)
BarneyG2000:

While you are at it brainy, explain this one:
http://www.sw-asia.com/People/Bio976.htm

"Reports indicate that Dr. Clare Selgin Wolfowitz separated from Paul because he had an affair with a woman at Johns Hopkins University. Paul Wolfowitz was Dean and Professor of International Relations at the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) of The Johns Hopkins University.

**During that time he used his position to prey on woman under his authority.**

When the scandal broke, he and his wife Clare separated but appear not to have divorced.

BD are you ever going to gr... (Below threshold)
Zelsdorf Ragshaft III:

BD are you ever going to grow up, or will you always think it is fun to bait adults? Do you Pubelickus over at barneys?

And who cares about Wolfowi... (Below threshold)
Althor:

And who cares about Wolfowitz with our troops in harm's way and traitors like Murtha denying them the very bullets they need, and doing all in their power to have them lose the war? The hell with Wolfowitz and his whore!!! Wasn't this a thread questioning Murtha's - and the cut-and-run defeatist "Dhimmicrats'"- patriotism?!?! What in the hell does it have to do with "Wolfie"?!?!

Althor

Althor is correct. We shou... (Below threshold)
BarneyG2000:

Althor is correct. We should get back to debating Murtha. By the way, John and his lovely wife will celebrate their 51st wedding anniversary in June.

Murtha suggested that impeachment could be used as a threat to influence Bushs' decisions.

I have no problem with extortion, at least with this President.

Show me the "blowjob exc... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Show me the "blowjob exception" in the law...

It's right next to the "lying about telling the truth about a liar exception" in the law.

I was wondering if you c... (Below threshold)
Brian:

I was wondering if you could point me toward any employer (who main income is not tied to sex) that would allow employees to have sex (oral, cigar, etc.) on company time and on company property without SOME sort of repurcussions.

Sure, here.

If you can do that, then I'll buy anything you can say about Bill Clinton.

He's really Spider-Man.

"Brainy, tell me how you ex... (Below threshold)
brainy435:

"Brainy, tell me how you explained Wolfie getting his mistress a defense contract in 2003 again. I must have missed that?"
Barney

"In an October 24, 2005 letter to Mr. Wolfowitz, he averred that "because the outcome is consistent with the Committee's findings and advice above, the Committee concurs with your view that this matter can be treated as closed." A month later, on November 25, Mr. Melkert even sent Mr. Wolfowitz a personal, hand-written note saying, "I would like to thank you for the very open and constructive spirit of our discussions, knowing in particular the sensitivity to Shaha, who I hope will be happy in her new assignment."

And when anonymous World Bank staffers began to circulate emails making nasty allegations about Ms. Shaha's job transfer and pay in early 2006, Mr. Melkert dismissed them in a letter to Mr. Wolfowitz on February 28, 2006, because they "did not contain new information warranting any further review by the Committee." Yet amid the recent media smears, Mr. Melkert has minimized his own crucial role."
http://opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009948

So the guy asks to be recused, the banks board won't let him, he settles it based on the boards recommendations and then they jump all over him more than a year after they praise his handling of the same situation. No wonder you believe them: they were for it before they were against it...

"While you are at it brainy, explain this one:"
Well, I'm not sure what I should explain. This site offers me some nice rugs, digital photo albums and wall tapestries.... could you be more specific?

Barney, why no comparable o... (Below threshold)
metprof:

Barney, why no comparable outrage at Feinstein for her husband's company receiving billions (that's with a "B") in defense contracts from the senate committee she was a part of?

I'll patiently wait for the answer.

BTW, if you feel the urge to be crude and classless you may call me a slut anytime you need the release. I know BDS is quite intense and may occassional require an outlet.

metprof, first are you impl... (Below threshold)
BarneyG2000:

metprof, first are you implying that you are either sleeping with a married man or that you married and cheating on your husband? Are you calling yourself a guy or girl slut? Are you defending adultery?

Second, is Mr. Feinstein cheating on his wife, or you do you think there has been some corruption? If an investigation is called for then I am all for it. I do not defend corruption in either party.

BG2000, Re: the penalties f... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

BG2000, Re: the penalties for adultry in the Bible

Notice a *softening* of th *line* from Old Testament to New?

That's because the blood atonement was payed for all time by Christ's(God the Son) dying as a man. His blood is now the substitute. The only blood still required of the sinner is if the sinner himself spills INNOCENT blood or if an INNOCENT person under the age of reason (a child) is grievously damaged. Then as they say, Their blood is on the culprit's head.

Technically any sin can be forgiven, but there is a trial in the afterlife where the sinned-against will witness against the transgressor. All things being even, a murderer or rapist will lose that decision on the grounds that: If the transgressor truly Knew the Lord, he would not have transgressed against an innocent person. (The God Shall Not Be Mocked dictum)

As for adultery, no blood was spilled. Lesser penalties will suffice. There are purification rituals spelled out in Leviticus, Ezekiel and other books that foreshadow what those will be. Afterwards that sinner will be made whole.

You need to Copy and Paste in a more knowledgable manner. Agnosticism has a blind spot for context. Study Genesis chapters 1 - 6 well, and you'll understand Types and Shadows. Get a Strong's Concordance (unedited version) and KJV.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy