Somebody had to say it
Published by Mike Stark June 22nd, 2006 in UncategorizedI’ve never understood why so many Republicans get second and third bites at the apple. I don’t get it.
Newt Gingrich cheats on two wives with younger women, and now he’s threatening a run for President in ‘08. John Poindexter and Elliot Abrams were convicted in the Iran-Contra affair, but both have returned to haunt Washington - only this time their disastrous ideology has taken full root and destroyed the lives of tens of thousands…
I got the chance to talk to Ollie North tonight. As far as I am concerned, he deserves no second chances. So I didn’t let him off the hook.
As far as the call goes, in March of 1986 I was 17 years old. My memory has fogged up a little, but I do have distinct memories of seeing “Ollie” on the teevee and feeling really proud that he was giving the smarmy politicians a ration of Marine Corps hell… It looks like he didn’t testify until 1987 though… I was still stationed at NAS Millington at that time, so my error was minor…
But notice how he totally avoided my question - even after I re-asked it: Why wouldn’t suicide bombers and beheading specialists use these stockpiles of WMD’s?
The truth is, there were no stockpiles. Just as the United States can’t account for over one trillion dollars of money that disappeared into the Pentagon black-hole, Iraq lost track of these old and rusty munitions. I’m not going to go on a google expidition to prove this, but all accounts I’ve read indicate that Iraq was one of just a few countries on earth that spent a higher percentage of their GDP on the military that we do. Saddam, in the eighties, was arming himself to the teeth (including with WMD Donald Rumsfeld sold him). He turned his entire country into a weapons dump. The fact that a few shells got lost in the shuffle should be no more surprising that learning that there is a dead letter area of the US Postal Service…
25 Responses to “Somebody had to say it”
Leave a Reply
Search
Login
Donations Accepted
Subscribe
Posts- Comments
- Podcast
My analogy was to an episode of “Roseanne” where she and Dan find a bag of weed from backin their hippie days. Doesn’t mean they were now drug dealers or anything.
Outstanding! I’m a vet (USAF, Kuwait, Iraq, Afhganistan, etc.) and to make Ollie (felon) stand up and explain himself.
Semper Fi Real Marine!
First, let’s get the very murky facts straight. You were essentially correct. He was performing what Al Franken would call a weasel.
Here’s what Wikipedia has to say about Ollie North - North was tried in 1988 in relation to his activities while at the National Security Council. He was indicted on sixteen felony counts and on May 4, 1989, he was convicted of three: accepting an illegal gratuity, aiding and abetting in the obstruction of a congressional inquiry, and destruction of documents (by his secretary, Fawn Hall, on his instructions). He was sentenced by U.S. District Judge Gerhard A. Gesell on July 5, 1989, to a three-year suspended prison term, two years probation, $150,000 in fines, and 1,200 hours community service.
However, on July 20, 1990, a three-judge appeals panel overturned North’s conviction in advance of further proceedings on the grounds that his public testimony may have prejudiced his right to a fair trial. [2] The Supreme Court declined to review the case, and Judge Gesell dismissed the charges on September 16, 1991, after hearings on the immunity issue, on the motion of the independent counsel.
Essentially, North’s convictions were overturned because he had been granted limited immunity for his Congressional testimony, and this testimony was deemed to have influenced witnesses at his trial.
——-
so where does that leave you. Well, Oliver North did not answer your main and most important question — why wouldn’t the insurgencies use this or these weapons against the Americans. The answer is obvious, they don’t work. The weapons had already degraded.
The Washington Post reported back in 2004, President Bush said — The chief weapons inspector, Charles Duelfer, has now issued a comprehensive report that confirms the earlier conclusion of David Kay that Iraq did not have the weapons that our intelligence believed were there.
Finally, in a report commissioned by the Bush camp administration (Iraqi Survey Group) states the following — While a small number of old, abandoned chemical munitions have been discovered, ISG judges that Iraq unilaterally destroyed its undeclared chemical weapons stockpile in 1991. There are no credible Indications that Baghdad resumed production of chemical munitions thereafter, a policy ISG attributes to Baghdad’s desire to see sanctions lifted, or rendered ineffectual, or its fear of force against it should WMD be discovered.
Again, Oliver North is 100% wrong.
Where’s the Outrage?
Fortunately, for once the Truth seems to have prevailed in this stupid issue, and that idiot Santorum is looking like the desperate loser that he is. Pretty much everybody (including the Administration) is either ignoring his ridiculous charges, or explaining clearly why these WMDs are not an issue. Rumsfeld tiptoed up to the line yesterday, and gave them limited credence, but even he did not wholeheartedly endorse Santorum’s ravings.
That mouth-foamers like Rush or Ollie would make this issue a staple of their program tells you all you need to know. They are getting desperate, and are seizing anything that smacks of justification for this failed policy. By attempting to give weight to Santorum’s charges, they sink themselves in the eyes of all but their core of True Believers.
That was just Santorum’s going away present before he loses his election.
I think we should get FUX News, Hannity, and Santorum to yell even louder about the “WMD”. It makes them look even more foolish.
BTW Who was the U.S. Senator who said, “‘Santorum’ is Latin for asshole”?
bush already said we found the wmds. they were those trailers, and he said it something like 2 weeks after our intelligence had found that they werent wmds.
maybe he didnt want that to happen again, though i must say, given his history im a bit surprised he wouldnt pounce on anything remotely like wmds. hell, it worked to link saddam and 911.
good job! it’s great to hear this creep called on his bullshit nationally.
What does younger women have to do with anything? Most men who cheat, probably do find themselves with a younger version of their wife. I understand the aim of this site is to cheerlead for the Democrats, but doing so on an issue other than fidelity might be more effective. LOTS of Democratic and Republican Presidents have been found to be “generous” with themselves when it comes to women. Does infidelity cancel or otherwise negate the rest of what a man does in his life? If so, JFK was just a coon hound in a nice suit….
Iran-Contra? Wow, that must be the only instance when any public official was ever convicted of anything! Whew, thank God Mike is here to tell the whole story. If you don’t want to know, then please don’t ever study corruption on both sides of the aisle. Continue to carry water for these corrupt parties….they love you, they all really do.
Policies that will kill tens-of-thousands? Again, it’s a good thing that a Democrat never dragged into foreign action resulting in massive loss of life and of loss of face internationally.
Pete
Pete,
I don’t like many of the Democrats but how do we fight the problems in our government if we don’t at least target the most problematic forces AT THIS TIME. Opposing everyone is simply not an option since that would logically lead to open revolt against our government. I don’t think that revolution is a likely solution to what currently ails our government.
Seriously, the Democrats and the Republicans have flipped back and forth over and over again. We went from Dixie-crats with white hoods in the closet to Republicans with a “Southern Strategy”. We went from a corrupt Democratic majority in congress to a corrupt Republican majority in Congress.
The only solution open to us other than magic appearance of a powerful third party is the focused attack against the most dangerous and most corrupt pockets in our system. By ANY guage, that ‘honor’ is currently held by the republicans. It’s almost to be expected, the corruption follows the money and the power.
When the Republicans are beaten down (and they will eventually in the next flip of the cycle), the Democrats will gain more power and more corruption and they’ll have to be reigned in. Notice I said “more” corruption when talking about Democrats. No sane person things one side are angels and the other are devils. It’s always about backing the best candidate or party, not the perfect one.
As for your comments on Newt womanizing.. it’s not about the fact that he cheated.. it’s about the fact that he rose to power riding the morality horse. He’s a liar, a cheat, and a hypocrite. Newt isn’t a reformer. He certainly isn’t in a position of moral superiority. I think he is well past a calling on his BS.
It is a little sad though, compared to the current crop of republican leadership, Newt does seem very reasonable and level-headed. I do almost respect him now, compared to his comrades, but I also think everyone should ask Newt why we should believe anything he says because I can’t think of a good reason why I should believe him on anything.
jmho,
ffakr
I sure am glad we found those 15-year-old, unusable, dismissed by the Dept. of Defense, chem shells. There were 500 shells and at a price of 2500 Americans dead, sooooo that breaks down to 5 American souls per shell. Not counting the thousands of maimed Americans. What a bargain!
Oh yeah, I’ll be heading (once again)to the Persian Gulf with the USAF this fall. Maybe I can find some WMDs too! Wouldn’t that be fun!
Keep on talkin’ Santorum, FOX News, et. al. The hole just keeps gettin’ deeper.
Some unknown group of letters,
Who should we believe on what? I saw Harry Reid(free tickets) at a boxing match sitting next to John McCain(paid for his) recently. I am dismayed by both parties, am not waiting for a “revolution”, just for people to wake up and smell the money. I went to high school with a man who is a staffer for Harry Reid, and I feel bad for him. We are all hypocrites in one way or another. Is JFK any less likable because of his trists? How about for invading Vietnam? What is more important and what constitutes the line that a man or woman can cross beyond which they are unredeemable politically? As far as attacking the most corrupt, I invite you to define the levels of corruption and categorize individual corrupt acts accordingly. They both have equal elements of corruption and equal elements of good. My quarrel is with the implication by one-sided Mike makes when he points out say crruption or infidelity. We know it goes both ways (again, for some), so why put up an argument that can so easily be swatted with the facts.
JFK cheated. So did Clinton. So did Eisenhower and FDR. So did LBJ. Apparently, Licoln had a thing for prostitutes, so what? I’m not a republican, so I don’t revel in the fact that these men did these things. Their Presidencies can easily be attacked by the bad they did as well as lauded by the good they did…..my point is simply: What the Hell is Mike from Albany getting at? He wqas represented by a local Liberal Rag as a straight shooting fact machine, why omit some and prefer others?
Pete,
I think Mike should answer for himself, but he is calling shows that have right wing news pushers.
When you call a talk show, you only have thirty seconds to make your point. If his target is the current Republican corruption and lies, then why should Mike bring up history? You have to make your point and get off. That’s the way it works. They can’t discuss the history of the whole thing.
As for Harry Reid- He wasn’t allowed to pay for the tickets, they have no value. It is illegal to pay for the tickets. John McCain’s money went to a charity. DId you know that? The second thing you should know about Harry Reid’s boxing issue- he represents the state of Nevada. One of the industries in Nevada is boxing. It probably earns the state a lot of money. It needs to be regulated by the state. Harry Reid was doing his job. Sometimes, a job looks like a lot of fun. Even if a job looks like it’s not work, that doesn’t mean it doesn’t need to get done. I live in Washington State. My Senators go to the Boeing plant, they meet with Microsoft. It’s the same damn thing.
So….Harry Reid doesn’t like giving to charity? His position does not entitle him to free tickets….anywhere. Going to Boeing or Microsoft is not the same. You get a tour and lunch (~$20 for lunch, tours are generally no charge at those facilities). I spent ten years in the military and have been asked to oversee things myself, many times….there are many vantage points to oversee things. He even has a staff, with brains! Send one of them to walk around and look. Boxing has a commissioner, ask him what the heck is going on. Somehow, he gets next to the best seats in the house for free, he couldn’t study the industry from anywhere else? Maybe he should should referee next time, get a real close look at the “boxing industry” then.
Just explain how it is that McCain was out $1400. Perception is reality, not every one agrees that gifts worth hundreds or thousands are good to go.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/29/AR2006052900913.html
Even the Washington Post found ethics experts that thought he could be wrong. That is the point, what is corrupt? How do you prove it? Did he vote one way or another based on thousands of dollars of free gifts? We will never know, so we are faced with the decision of whether the individual is an overall agent of moral good or bad….it is a gray area to be sure.
As far as targeting only Republican corruption and lies, it would be great if every post of his was indeed based solely in fact and he didn’t get personal. Besides, like I’ve written before, one side of the story is misleading and seems too much like cheerleading to me. Cheerlead for those who deserve it, ignore those who don’t. Negative emoting has never earned anyone anything worthwhile.
Pete
Pete,
Politicians sometimes get to do things that normal folks like you and I don’t. Get over it. Perks of the job. Gas station owners get free gas, but you don’t hear people whining about that.
As far as the specifics are concerned, you’re missing a large part of the story. If you’d actually read the articles about the tickets, you would have noticed that Reid voted against what the lobbyst had wanted him to vote for.
Reid told AP the free tickets did not influence his position, noting he voted for the legislation when it passed the Senate.
pete,
“Did he vote one way or another based on thousands of dollars of free gifts? We will never know, so we are faced with the decision of whether the individual is an overall agent of moral good or bad….it is a gray area to be sure.”
in the particular instance you raise, yes we do know whether his gift influenced his vote. he voted against the people who gave him the tickets. thats hardly a bribe. it doesnt even seem unethical.
about newt, by and large, i dont think democrats care about politicians personal lives. its fine with me if they have 50 divorces. however, republicans care about it a lot. they’re still talking about bill and hillary (the new york times even published something recently on the front page that they got from a tabloid paper). i once read a statistic during the lewinsky investigation or whatever, and an incredible number of the republicans investigating clinton had also had extra-marital affairs. its the hypocrisy. its like criticisizing the anti-gay gay mayor (Spokane mayor Jim West), the criticism comes not because hes gay (as your logic would imply), but because hes hugely hypocritical.
as for “targetting only republican corruption and lies”, well, its a fact right now that the malfeasance is mostly on the republican side. theres a couple isolated incidents (jefferson, mollohan) on the democratic side, but why would mike call up hannity to talk about that? im sure hannity’s listeners know about democratic corruption, but im also sure that many of them have no idea of the malfeasance on their own side (probably 5-10% have heard of jerry lewis, for example)
the fact is, voting democratic in the fall is a vote for change, and a vote for seperation of powers (which are currently lacking). republicans have all the power, they have no excuses for the state of the country (and also the state of iraq) now. i dont see how you can seriously argue democrats are just as bad as republicans, at least not currently, and i think ive heard the corruption is about as bad now as it has ever been.
Pete,
Perception is reality? WTF is that supposed to mean? The tickets had no face value. It was illegal for them to be sold. They weren’t even tickets! They were credentials. They were supposed to be given away, but McCain insisted on Paying.
The problem is you were reading the original AP article which didn’t bother to include any of the pertinent information- like that it’s Harry Reid’s job to attend to his state’s business interests.
I’m pretty sure you’re full of crap about not being a Republican. This story was like crack for Republicans.
Read the following article:
http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2006/May-31-Wed-2006/news/7696406.html
Arum said he didn’t know what to do with the money.
“Those credentials cannot be sold,” he said. “There’s no price on them. (They are given to) governors, attorney generals, boxing commissioners of other states. … It’s illegal to accept money for a credential.”
Arum said he couldn’t accept McCain’s money but McCain wouldn’t take it back, so Arum donated it to Catholic Charities.
Here is the MediaMatters link on the Reid boxing story:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200605310008
Pete, feel free to comment further about the situation after you become better informed.
Who gives a shit about boxing tickets and Harry Reid? Is that the Repugs. version of “gotcha”? Fucking boxing tickets?
Wake up America. We are not kvething about boxing tickets here, we are talklng about American blood and our financial capital being squandered, pissed away by a small, extremely corrupt, oblivious administration.
If you have not watched this then please do. It’s elightening to put it mildly. Deadeye Dick, the real public enemy number one.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/darkside/view/
I have seen thousands of rounds of boxing and have only paid twice. That’s right TWICE and that is only because at some smaller shows the boxers sell tickets and gets a cut of the price so I was giving some extra cash to a couple boxers.
Credentials have ZERO value, except to hang on the my kids wall after the fight. Now what did I have to give up to accept this “bribe” of credentials? Not one thing, not one favor, not one consideration, again NOTA!!!!
Now how did I get these credentials? I am know by several promoters, boxers, managers and trainers. That is what happens when one is known by the HMFIC of allowing entrance into these events. Every Promoter almost always makes extra credentials to be given out to friends of the Sweet Science.
Oh one more thing, most knowledgeable boxing people, such as Sen. Reed know that pulling up a folding chair next to ringside is not the best seat in the house. Most insiders don’t like to sit that close and prefer to sit further back. Close is not always better!
As boxing is a multi-million dollar business in Nevada I would expect the Senator representing the state of Nevada to make appearances, especially when Sen. Reed had a history of being involved in the sport for decades. McCain and Reed have tried for years trying to establish a national commission, but as it is a big business guess which political party refuses to support it when the votes are there for it to be passed? I have spoken with both of the Senators personally about the legislation and both strongly support a Federal Commission. So given a piece of plastic to wear around his neck did not interfere with either Reed or McCain in their quest for the legislation.
RetLT,
That’s a great post. You nailed it.
odanny,
You’re right about the boxing issue. But, Reid has been made to be the most corrupt politician around. He is a target. I don’t think it’s smart politics to leave targets uncovered.
I’ve seen years and years of political innuendo benefit the Republicans. There is now an outlet for opposition to that innuendo. It needs to be used.
Yeah yeah yeah yeah!!!
You get ‘em mike.
You keep doing what you are doing and allow people to see your true colors and points and then they will decide which direction the country will go.
Olliver North…
I remember those days. The thought of him getting off makes my skin crawl.
Whenever I hear him I have to turn the channel/stattion.
He is a traitor to the United States who now has the audacity to hide behind the flag.
What a dark stain on the Marine Corp.
I’m pretty sure you’re full of crap about not being a Republican. This story was like crack for Republicans.
Now I’m a liar? Otto, you don’t have to go there. I’m not here to hurl or dodge personal attacks. The Harry Reid thing is just that, one thing. I don’t have to go on about Abscam or Reid’s involvement with Abramoff or some Republicans involvement with PAC money shuffling…. I’m saying if the issue is corruption or infidelity, both parties have that in spades. What we need is leaders. Leadership means a lot of things to a lot of people, but simply put, the country needs someone they can look up to. That person will never be perfect (Martin Luther King Jr. was unfaithful, and he has his own holiday).
As far as countering innuendo and myth with more innuendo and myth, it is an interesting idea but I do not believe it will gain you the results you desire.
Pete
Pete S.
I’m with ya buddy…
“I’ve never understood why so many Republicans get second and third bites at the apple. I don’t get it. Newt Gingrich cheats on two wives with younger women, and now he’s threatening a run for President in ‘08″
Umm….What? Clinton? Among others, but damn, that’s a sore thumb there, that shoulda jumped out at you when you typed “Republican”…
“I’m not going to go on a google expidition to prove this, but all accounts I’ve read indicate that Iraq was one of just a few countries on earth that spent a higher percentage of their GDP on the military that we do.”
Well, as of 2005 (after 3 years of war, and still currently engaged) there were 46 countries that spent more of the GDP on their military than the United States did. Not sure what you infatuation is with linking to Wiki for facts, but here is a real website based on the CIA World Factbook.
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/mil_exp_per_of_gdp-military-expenditures-percent-of-gdp