<p>
</p>
<p>No kidding! Sheesh, if we are going back to 1975, how 'bout a little good “plumbers” talk???</p>
<p>Or, since Iran is in the news a lot these days, maybe a little arms for hostages discussion?</p>
<p>Well, NPR tonight led with the same story framed in the same way so…write your own titles. Welcome back to political leadership where you are always damned if you do…I know it’s been a long time–you’ll get the hang of it and that bad money might even start flowing your way again.</p>
<p>JM may have his say as new chairman of the appropriations committee on defense.</p>
<p>Murtha will have a shot at being an Indicted Conspirator this time around as opposed to just being an Un-indicted Co-conspirator.</p>
<p>Practice makes perfect! ;)</p>
<p>Does Alcee Hastings even have a security clearance? He may have to leave the room if sensitive information is discussed.</p>
<p>Here are the details of the Hastings impeachment:
<a href=“http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZjhiODMwNDA0ZGEwMGI3ZGExOGFjYmIzNzQzZjhjYjc=[/url]”>http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZjhiODMwNDA0ZGEwMGI3ZGExOGFjYmIzNzQzZjhjYjc=</a>
I find it amazing that a person with this record could a) be elected to Congress, b) sit on the Intelligence Committee c) even be considered for its chairmanship.</p>
<p>He was convicted by the Senate of far more serious crimes than those committed by Duke Cunningham who is now rightfully sitting in a prison cell.</p>
<p>“I still love the way Speaker Pe<em>Lo</em>Si trips off the tongue, and how the good folks at Faux Gnus want to spit.”</p>
<p>So I’ll ask my weekly question that is never answered: what is the obsession with Fox News? They have a miniscule market, so why are they threatening to you (collectively, I mean?" Who at Fox news wants to spit? Can you name names?</p>
<p>let me think, who did Cheney go to after shooting his friend in the face?</p>
<p>What’s the point CGM? Some (many) on the left have been crazed about Fox since long before the Cheney incident. Can you shed some light on the obsession? Again, it’s a very tiny market and no threat to your (collectively) domination of the news cycle. Why does its existence bother so many so much? I know you’re smart and articulate, so why can’t you explain it?</p>
<p>The NY TImes doesn’t think it was orchestrated:</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/17/opinion/17fri2.html?_r=3&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/17/opinion/17fri2.html?_r=3&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin</a></p>
<p>If it was soooo tiny, why, after such a major event, did Cheney go THERE?</p>
<p>Obviously, they have some influence…tell me, why did Cheney go to them? Because he knew they wouldn’t ask any tough questions?</p>
<p>With CNN, Cspan, MNNBC, and the major networks- 20/20, why go to FOX?</p>
<p>that NYTimes “article” was an editorial…not news, I can tell the difference</p>
<p>yes, intermural vendetta…I don’t see any intermural vendetta, and if that is what the writer things of our government, that its an intermural sport, well, shows me they already had no respect for democrats and is scrounging for anything </p>
<p>and who was talking about “liberal media” I would certainly like to see some liberal media</p>
<p>and this was one vote, she will lick her "wounds’ and move on</p>
<p>how is mr. lott btw</p>
<p>“why, after such a major event, did Cheney go THERE”
Only in the world of the obsessed was a hunting accident a “major” event.</p>
<p>Obviously he felt comfortable, CGM. I’m not disputing the connection, but asking why the fact that there is a connection bothers you so much. You can’t deny that there are outlets more favorable to and favored by democrats. What’s the difference? Why does it matter? I don’t get the reason for the animosity, I really don’t. Every public figure in times of difficulty will have a favorite journalist to turn to. Does that bother you as a matter of course or just where Evil Republicans are concerned? To me (because no one is better able to explain it), the whole thing sounds shrill, hysterical and childish.</p>
<p>He was VP…and he goes to FOX</p>
<p>Explain to me why Fox? he had to talk to the press, so instead of a general press conference, he goes to Fox? This event was all over the news, all over the world…tell me why Fox?</p>
<p>You can’t explain it…that I can see</p>
<p>“You can’t explain it…that I can see”</p>
<p>Speaking of Shrill and hysterical, I rest my case. You didn’t even give me time to answer, so obviously the answer was irrelevant because you are going to stomp your foot and raise your voice no matter what. Charming.</p>
<p>SO the VPs “comfort” is more important than talking to a network with a real audience</p>
<p>I see how it is, the second most powerful man on the planet who shots his friend after drinkingm needs to be comfortable?</p>
<p>that is kind of funny in a sad kind of way- he is too weak to take on real questions? too worried?</p>
<p>sad indeed</p>
<p>shrill and hysterical? don’t think so, but nice try at name calling when you can’t answer a question, so typical</p>
<p>wowwee, I feel so hurt you called me shrill? tell me, how was I shrill…you asked a question, I gave an example for an answer, asks why he went there, and you call me hysterical</p>
<p>hahahahahaha</p>
<p>its okay if you feel the need to do that…I am tougher than that, but nice try</p>
<p>“shrill and hysterical”- really, that all you got? a female stereotype? come back when you have a better answer than Cheney needed to be comfortable…that is farciscal at best…a man who is so gung ho for war can’t take on the press in his own country when he made a booboo…</p>
<p>If he is that weak, that is indeed scary, again, a chicken hawk</p>
<p>CGM, you truly are astounding in your delusions. The interview was advertised to anyone who wanted to view it, the clips and transcript were disseminated in all MSM outlets. It was completely available to the public as you well know. Do you also think that public officials speaking to CNN is illegitimate? It’s the same thing you know. No one seriously thinks that the VP intentionally shot anyone. I hadn’t heard the term “San Francisco values” till I read the term here, but I see exactly what it must mean. Totally out of touch with any concept of reality.</p>
<p>But was anyone else allowed to ask him questions, besides a network who loves to spin?</p>
<p>Providing footage is quite different then providing access, but guesss some people can’t see the difference</p>
<p>We must be gentle with CGM, her whole world has been turned on its head. Instead of being able to fire indiscriminate shots at the government because two of the branches were Republican controlled, she now finds out what it’s like to be on the receiving side. This could be a fun 2 years.</p>