Posted by: Boldwin
- [24528715] Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 11:32
Not one word about this all week and we all know theyda had Nixon or Delay or strung up for half as much by now.
Why no energy to pursue this? Because we all know the media would never do the Nixon firestorm to their baby.
We in Chicago recognize the lethargic apathy well. Some corrupt machines just have the situation wired so well that they can get away with anything and everyone knows it.
1
Mith
ID: 482583111 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 11:34
theyda had Nixon or Delay or strung up for half as much by now
You have to offer a specific thing of value to commit a felony afaik. Obama team is trying to say they only offered an unpaid advisory position for that reason.
No word on whether Reagan actually did that or if he will be impeached for it.
6
Mith
ID: 482583111 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 12:26
Gotcha. Obviously this doesn't qualify for anything like half as much as your evidence for what Obama offered.
And of course media firestorms clearly are strictly contingent on the felony status of any presidential infractions.
Onto this scene in November 1981, enter Ed Rollins, Reagan's incoming political director.
Asked by an Associated Press reporter if President Reagan would offer Hayakawa a job if he decided not to run for reelection, Rollins, underlined that the White House was not negotiating with Hayakwa but said: "If the senator chooses, on his own initiative, not to run for re-election, I'm sure the president would be willing to offer him a substantial administration post."
Rollins told the AP reporter "it has never been discussed" so it would be "purely speculative to say" what job Hayakawa might be offered. "We are clearly not encouraging it," he said.
Asked to respond, Hayakawa said, "I'm not interested... I do not want to be an ambassador, and I do not want an administration post." In a statement, Hayakawa said, "I have not contacted the White House in regard to any administration or ambassadorial post, and they have not been in contact with me."
Even professional sports leagues recognize an exchange like that between media and franchise management as illegal tampering. Are we supposed to take this more seriously than the NFL does free agent tampering or not? Because if this is the sort of thing that should be overlooked as long as you phrase your offer the right way, then it's a waste of time.
Does anyone really believe these offers don't get floated in every administraion?
While I'm well aware of the turmoil the right would happily descend the country into just for the opportunity to say I told you so, if a sitting president is going to take a fall for a buisness-as-usual type of infraction, I'd hope it would be for something much more serious than this.
9
Perm Dude
ID: 5510572522 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 13:10
Another example of conservatives being ill-served by their airtight "media." FOX stirs the pot in the hopes of generating a "scandal" so that conservatives will tune in for "news" on the developing "scandal."
Sad, really. Stuff that can't be turned into a "scandal" or offered up as some sort of confrontational narrative is ignored in favor of FOX's talking points of the day (or news cycle). Conservative-leaning voters are getting tooled.
10
Boldwin
ID: 24528715 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 13:17
Do you two think Obama is taking the question seriously? Behind closed doors?
Issa has already asked for a special prosecutor so he thinks it's serious.
On the scale from turning the WH into a vacation time-share...all the way to...shoeboxes full of money this one is somewhere in the middle.
11
Boldwin
ID: 24528715 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 13:21
My bad, all seven of the Republicans on the Senate Judiciary committee have called for an independent prosecutor, not just Issa.
Question for MITH...you were sure quick on the Reagan trigger. Were you saving that for months waiting for this subject to come up, just a lucky google hit, or was it your favorite lib talking points website?
12
Mith
ID: 482583111 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 13:31
It was all over the lefty blogs maybe two weeks ago and has since been fisked by the national media as well.
When I wrote post #1 I really assumed you'd seen it. But no surprise that all the media you checked in the past two weeks wanted no part of that.
13
Boldwin
ID: 24528715 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 13:51
Honestly I haven't been following deliberately, just catching whiffs in general broadranging interviews. It's just too depressing living in a state were one party has carte blanche to break the law with impunity from the one party state media.
14
Mith
ID: 482583111 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 13:54
Yeah I'm sure Hannity was all over it whe you weren't looking.
15
Boldwin
ID: 24528715 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 17:27
Twelve is way off the mark. EVERY news source I have was all over it. It was just a given that the MSM would look the other way so why get my hopes up?
16
Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 37838313 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 17:42
EVERY news source I have was all over it.
All over what?
17
Boldwin
ID: 24528715 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 18:44
The obvious felony.
18
Boldwin
ID: 24528715 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 18:48
The most galling thing to me is that when Bill Clinton's prospective employees were interviewed the first thing they were told was that they were expected to lie for the administration even if it meant lying to the FBI.
So naturally Bill was the obvious choice for cutout.
I am really curious if he has any leverage with this admin now. Perhaps it's not such good blackmail material if exposing it would get yourself convicted, then again there's always the plea bargain.
19
Boldwin
ID: 24528715 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 18:49
IE, first one on the prosecutor's bus gets a free ride.
20
Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 37838313 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 18:53
I don't understand #15 at all.
You asked where I found the Reagan item and #12 was my response to that question. WTF are you talking about?
21
Boldwin
ID: 24528715 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 18:59
This was the part that was simply not true: But no surprise that all the media you checked in the past two weeks wanted no part of that.
22
Boldwin
ID: 24528715 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 19:02
But I'm still curious about how easily you found the Reagan issue. One of the kind of things the Obama crew is dredging up to get themselves off the hook and what they needed a month of unresponsiveness to the question for. Not the kind of thing a random google search could have found 4 months ago.
23
Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 37838313 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 19:06
Pronouns 'it' and 'that' in post #12 both refer to the Reagan item, as in:
"no surprise that all the media you checked in the past two weeks wanted no part of the fact that President Reagan did exactlly the same thing back in 1981."
I think we're all well aware there has been no shortage of coverage of the Sestak story on all of your favorite rags.
24
biliruben
ID: 358252515 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 19:07
Did you not read his response or simply not believe it?
25
Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 37838313 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 19:07
But I'm still curious about how easily you found the Reagan issue.
Are you reading this thread from a parallel universe or is your dementia official now?
26
Perm Dude
ID: 5510572522 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 19:10
I suspect Baldwin is still using this forum as a blog. Responses optional, in other words.
27
Boldwin
ID: 24528715 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 19:10
In his campaign announcement speech, Obama highlighted his lack of Beltway experience: “I know I haven’t spent a lot of time learning the ways of Washington. But I’ve been there long enough to know that the ways of Washington must change.”
Wow is that one gonna be stale the next time he pulls it out of his bag of tricks.
28
Perm Dude
ID: 5510572522 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 19:17
confirmed.
29
Pancho Villa
ID: 29118157 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 19:22
So we've retreated from obvious felony to stale political rhetoric.
Pancho Villa
ID: 29118157 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 20:35
Then what does #17 relate to?
34
Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 37838313 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 20:47
Anyone ever try to read Naked Lunch?
35
Boldwin
ID: 24528715 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 21:31
Norman Mailer?
36
Seattle Zen Leader
ID: 055343019 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 22:01
Yeah, Baldy, lay off the bug powder dust.
37
Mattinglyinthehall
ID: 37838313 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 22:02
Heh
38
Boldwin
ID: 24528715 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 22:21
I made it to the part where he murders his wife and never picked it up again. If I'm thinking of the same book.
39
Boldwin
ID: 24528715 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 22:24
Nope, I'm prolly thinking of An American Dream.
40
Tree
ID: 248472317 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 22:47
wow. this has been one rambling, tripped out thread. Baldwin high cracks me up.
41
Boldwin
ID: 24528715 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 22:51
Actually I may be thinking of The Naked and the Dead. Doing a little research I figured out the connection to Naked Lunch. That is the book by Burroughs, that Mailer wishes he could have written. Mailer having been instrumental in bringing that writer and book to prominence.
42
Boldwin
ID: 24528715 Wed, Jun 09, 2010, 23:03
How I loathe Norman Mailer. The prototypical effete amoral liberal with an insatiable ambition towards transgressiveness.
43
Tree
ID: 248472317 Thu, Jun 10, 2010, 00:09
lol. good lord, what drugs are you on tonight?
If you believe a recent post violates the policy on Civility and Respect, you may report the abuse via email to moderators@rotoguru1.com