Debate, and discuss, just dont Bore me.
Deanism #14
Published on October 24, 2005 By Dr Guy In Politics

In the continuing saga of Howlin Howie and megalomania, Howard dean has decide he is the great and powerful OZ and that when he opens his mouth, new laws are created.

In the story of the non-story of the Plame non-crime, Howie has decided that if the Prosecutor does not Indict, then the case cannot end.

George Stephanopoulos: "If [Fitzgerald] finishes his investigation without bringing indictments and without issuing a final report, will you accept that as the end of the matter?"

"No," Dean shot back. "Because I fundamentally don't think these are honest people running the government."

See where he also impugns the integrity of the Bush Administration.  Now many people don't like the Bush Administration, or its players therein, but only the loons of the extreme left would even attempt to call people who have not been convicted of any crimes, much less indicted, dishonest.  But Dean just did.  Then of course in Deanism #15, he goes on to show his all powerful nature:

"a fundamental flaw in the Bush administration - the personal attacks on people for meritorious arguments. They never make the argument - they always make the personal attack."

Check me if I am wrong.  But if you call me dishonest, with no proof other than a slur, is that not a personal attack?  You call me a liar, and I will take it as a personal attack.  If you have proof I am a liar, then you can produce it, but to just declare without any supporting evidence is simply a smear tactic, and a personal attack.

So Dean has decided he now makes the judicial rules (I guess he is Co-opting the courts now), and that he is immune from making any personal attacks, since what he says must be Gospel.

God/OZ has spoken!  Let no man question his words or face the damnation of hellfire!


Comments (Page 1)
4 Pages1 2 3  Last
on Oct 25, 2005
Thanks to T-Man!  I wonder if he would like to relocate to Va?  We can use a guy that good!
on Oct 26, 2005
Well...apparently there are alot of people other than Howard Dean who think these people are dishonest. A poll that came out today at CNN.com reports that 9 out of 10 americans believe that administration officials either did something illegal or unethical regarding the CIA leak case.

Link
on Oct 26, 2005

Well...apparently there are alot of people other than Howard Dean who think these people are dishonest. A poll that came out today at CNN.com reports that 9 out of 10 americans believe that administration officials either did something illegal or unethical regarding the CIA leak case.

When your only source of news is the MSM?  get real.  Do you want to be judged by the press?  Aparently.  Fortunately, our founding fathers were smarter than you or Howie.  They allowed us a trial before adjudging guilt.

You really dont know shit from shinola do you?

on Oct 26, 2005
Dear extreme right wing loon,

Actually I do know shit from shinola. I also know how to spell the word "apparently". It must be something I picked up reading the news in the "MSM". I'm sorry, but I couldn't resist an opportunity to show that being a democrat makes me smarter than you. Actually, I don't really believe that, but it's fun to joke about for us.

My point was that Howard Dean is not the only person who's getting the impression that these people aren't honest.

You say Dean has decided "he makes the judicial rules". Where exactly in your quotes from him did he say they are guilty of any crime? Did he refer to them as criminals? No, he did not...he said they are dishonest.

There is plenty of "proof" that shows that several administration officials have been dishonest regarding this case. I'm not saying that makes them criminals. That decision will be in the hands of the court system when they are indicted and tried.

Even though it's off topic, I'm glad you brought up the founding fathers. I think they were pretty smart too...definitely smarter than me. One of the smartest ones was Alexander Hamilton. He was so smart that in The Federalist Paper #76 he recognized the dangers of cronyism more than 200 years before it began to run rampant in 2005.

"To what purpose then require the co-operation of the Senate? I answer, that the necessity of their concurrence would have a powerful, though, in general, a silent operation. It would be an excellent check upon a spirit of favoritism in the President, and would tend greatly to prevent the appointment of unfit characters from State prejudice, from family connection, from personal attachment, or from a view to popularity. . . . He would be both ashamed and afraid to bring forward, for the most distinguished or lucrative stations, candidates who had no other merit than that of coming from the same State to which he particularly belonged, or of being in some way or other personally allied to him, or of possessing the necessary insignificance and pliancy to render them the obsequious instruments of his pleasure."

It's unfortunate that this adminstration didn't review the wisdom of our founding fathers before nominating Harriet Miers.
on Oct 26, 2005
#4 by davad70
Wednesday, October 26, 2005


I also know how to spell the word "apparently


ah yes! a perfect point on how liberals think If They cannot attack the article, point out spelling errors.

No wonder the left has degenerated into a party with no ideas, no hope and not a single solution to anything. They do know how to spell though.
on Oct 26, 2005
Howard Dean isn't sure osama is guilty and thinks he should be tried in the courts.

Howard Dean thinks Rove and Delay are guilty without trial.

Tells you something, doesn't it?
on Oct 26, 2005
by the way left wing loser you misspelled administration.

your spelling "It's unfortunate that this adminstration didn't review the wisdom of our founding fathers before nominating Harriet Miers."

correct spelling is i WILL DO THIS TO GET MAXIMUM PLEASURE OUT OF THIS,

A D M I N I S T R A T I O N.

foolish to point out spelling errors while making them yourself. moron. oops NON-spelling moron.
on Oct 26, 2005
Apparently you missed the statement I made that I was joking _______. At that point I guess I should stick in some denigrating term like "shit from shinola" or "moron". I know I would fit in better here if I called people names, but I'm not really sure I would want to "fit in" here.

ah yes! a perfect point on how liberals think If They cannot attack the article, point out spelling errors.


Apparently you didn't read the rest of what I wrote. That's all I did was point out the spelling errors?

Howard Dean thinks Rove and Delay are guilty without trial.


Here is the statement from Dean on the Democratic party's web site.

"Today, the state of Texas is doing what the Republican-controlled federal government has failed repeatedly to do, which is hold Republicans in Washington accountable for their culture of corruption. This alleged illegal activity reaches to the highest levels of the Republican Party.

Island Dog...can you show me a quote from Dean saying that Rove & Delay are guilty and shouldn't have a trial?
on Oct 26, 2005
"Tom DeLay ought to go back to Houston where he can serve his jail sentence." - Howard Dean

Sounds like Howard Dean has forgot that Delay hasn't even gone to trial, and when this quote was made he wasn't even indicted yet.

Here's the comparison.

"I've resisted pronouncing a sentence before guilt is found," Dean said in the interview. "I will have this old-fashioned notion that even with people like Osama, who is very likely to be found guilty, we should do our best not to, in positions of executive power, not to prejudge jury trials." - Howard Dean


Let me get this straight. Howard Dean has already prejudged Delay to be guilty without trial, but he wants to give osama the benefit of the doubt?
on Oct 26, 2005
Ok, I see where you got your quote from. He definitely did say that, but we all have seen that he has a tendency to get a little overexcited. However...you forgot to include this part;

Asked whether he was rushing to judgment, the former Vermont governor said with a laugh, “I got in trouble because I wouldn’t convict Osama bin Laden. Maybe I’ve learned something.” He's damned if he does, damned if he doesn't.

So which way do you want it? He didn't prejudge Bin-Laden and righties say he should have. Now you're saying he shouldn't prejudge things?

His official comment on it is the one stated on the DNC website. It's not as if repub politicians don't sometimes say silly things they shouldn't when they get on a roll. You know...like when Dick C. said he didn't know anything about Joe Wilson?

Delay/Bin-Laden issues aside, Dr. Guy started all this referring to his comments about Bush's administration. He simply called them (the A D M I N I S T R A T I O N) dishonest doesn't mean he thinks he's God. It's not as if there isn't proof they're dishonest...there is.
on Oct 26, 2005
So which way do you want it? He didn't prejudge Bin-Laden and righties say he should have. Now you're saying he shouldn't prejudge things?


I don't care if he prejudged osama or not. The fact is he rather give osama the benefit of the doubt than a fellow American.

His official comment on it is the one stated on the DNC website. It's not as if repub politicians don't sometimes say silly things they shouldn't when they get on a roll. You know...like when Dick C. said he didn't know anything about Joe Wilson?


Howard Dean goes beyond "silly things". If I had the time I would post his comments on how he thinks Bush was somehow behind Sept. 11.


Delay/Bin-Laden issues aside, Dr. Guy started all this referring to his comments about Bush's administration. He simply called them (the A D M I N I S T R A T I O N) dishonest doesn't mean he thinks he's God. It's not as if there isn't proof they're dishonest...there is.


Howard Dean is dishonest also. However I would imagine Howard Dean and his followers buy into the propaganda that this was an "oil war", and all the other lies that are told.
on Oct 26, 2005
To be honest...I'm not a big fan of Howard Dean, and I don't like that he's currently the face of the party.

I just hate seeing people tell lies and make ridiculous statements like "Howard dean has decide he is the great and powerful OZ and that when he opens his mouth, new laws are created."

All of us, Dean included, have justification right now to say that the members of this administration have been dishonest.
on Oct 27, 2005
All of us, Dean included, have justification right now to say that the members of this administration have been dishonest.


It's of interest to me that this is simply assumed. Please explain what you mean by the term "dishonest" and then give some examples of proven lying (my definition of dishonest) by any administration official(s). I'll get you started by giving you a freebie, even though it isn't "proven" yet - looks like Frist has been dishonest about what he knew about his "blind" trust.

Then I'd like to hear how this enumeration of proven dishonesty distinguishes this Administration from priors and how it merits the moniker Culture of Corruption, as opposed to the political culture in past Democratic administrations.

Cheers,
Daiwa
on Oct 27, 2005
1) let's assume, for the most brief of moments, that everyone in this administration (i'm going to ignore the dictionary sitting on my desk, o peoples left and peoples right) has demonstrated nothing but the purest form of honest dialogue with the american people.

2) let us now, if we may, assume, in general, that we the people of the united states only elect government officials who have proven themselves to be honest individuals (FDR, JFK, RN, R-actor, BC, GB.2--we knew all of these politicians were honest, sneak-proof personalities when we elected them).

3) finally, let us now, if we may, also assume, for a shudderingly brief moment, that howard dean speaks for a consensus of the democratic party. and let us, for the sake of argument, assume that howard dean is always in control of everything he says.

Q: put all of these assumptions together and what do we have?

A: a joke.

common sense is all we mortals get on this planet. there are some things we can logically assume, and some things that just make no sense to assume.

howard dean may or or may not be a good man. he may or may not fear republicans more than he fears terrorists (as an individual, he has more reason to fear republicans, i'd say).

common sense says we should simply assume the following: howard dean is a blurter (at this time, please feel free to consult your dictionaries). whether he blurts inadvertantly, whether he blurts for attention, or whether he blurts because he's an unstable idiot, i do not know nor do i care. in the primary i voted for kerry because i ASSUMED that dean's proclivity for outbursts would show itself again and again--and his outbursts embarrass me.

again, we have no way of knowing (at this moment) how dishonest our administration is or had been. politicians being what they are, and the legitimate need for secret-keeping for the sake of national security being very real, i think it is safe to assume that this administration has been dishonest. i do not KNOW whether this assumption merits a full investigation--i have my own assumptions, but i'll keep them to myself.

finally, i assume that my life would be infinitely more enjoyable if the nation-at-large would use a little common sense, would demonstrate restraint when an opportunity arises to wrench an isolated, uttered phrase until it loses all of its original contextual significance.

i would love to assume that when i flip on the news or open a paper, that the information i see would be more than a pathetic tennis match between two evil anachronizing geniuses.

leave quotes intact, quit picking nits.

tbt
on Oct 27, 2005
I never said that the current administration is any more dishonest than previous administrations. A case could probably be made to support that position, but that's not what we've been discussing here.

I do realize that Clinton faced indictments similar to the charges that Rove & Libby will be. However, in my book someone lying about getting a hummer is not quite as bad as people exposing the identity of a CIA operative and lying about it.

I have to get to work, but I'll give one additional example of them lying.

Scooter Libby has stated that he first learned of Plame's identity from reporters. Evidence now shows that Libby first learned of Plame from a conversation with Cheney.

Sorry I don't have time to give links also.
4 Pages1 2 3  Last