Unlike GregH, Constantine, and of late Grebrook, she is rational, is willing to consider facts in opposition to the majority liberal view, and although she is prone to sniping (and which of us isn’t), her posts are generally not unkind, simply partisan. It comes across as hypocritical if we beat on her for taking her stand in the same way we take ours.

That said, honora, how do you feel about your party allowing Reid to continue as the prospective Senate majority leader in light of the very serious allegations of corruption, not just from Abramoff, but numerous shady deals in the recent past? Your side always calls for a member to step down from leadership, or resign their seat altogether, based on allegations before facts are in evidence, so I’m looking for the consistency and integrity I just presumed you to have.

My meaning was clear enough.

Your “commitment” to “good government” and “ethical government” is decidedly and obviously partisan. And the fact that others agree with me is evidence that I’m not using the royal “we.”

WHEN (not if) Abramoff’s testimony leads to indictment of Reid and the other “6 to 8 seriously corrupt Democrat Senators,” I (and no doubt others) will be watching you and the Troll Twins (Constantine and Grebrook) for your response. “WE” will be watching just how vigorously you (and they) defend them — or not.

Honora

why is it when its the republicans you want to hang them but when its a dem you say nothing?

rocked on November 15, 2006 at 5:38

PM

Kindly point out where I have suggested “hanging” (or its equivalent) Repubs who have been accused or convicted of corruption? If the dems are found guilty, they should be drummed out as well.

I hope I am not insulting you by stating the obvious for your consideration: far more Repubs were fingered by Abramoff because they were the ones in power. If you are looking to buy influence, you seek out the ones who have influence. You know, fish where the fish are. Duh.

Honora: “And ya’ll can celebrate at the Super Bowl: Browns versus Cardinals.”

Since you’re a “GOOD” Democrat, who wants to fight the “culture of corruption,” shall I be expecting YOU to lead the fight to remove the stain of corruption in the Democratic Party by demanding the ouster of these 6 to 8 DEMOCRATIC Senators?

I would absolutely lead the fight. I would like some actual evidence first if that’s alright by you.

Or, are you, as we all suspect, just a tad, a bit, HYPOCRITICAL?

Whis is this “we” you speak of? Have you taken to using the royal plural? Or are you talking with other people behind my back? Tsk, tsk, tsk. Honor among thieves george.

Please, tell us — are you HONORABLE or do you wear “honora” the way Harry Reid and Jack Murtha wear their underwear: They change it every day.

georgej on November 15, 2006 at 5:17 PM

I’m sorry. You’ll have to clarify if that is a rhetorical question….

Good one, Honora. Where ya been?

I’m certainly not optimistic, nor should you be pessimistic that anything will come of this. It will be fun to watch how some of the more outspoken Dems – re: Abramoff and outrage at republicans – now backpeddle when it is Dems facing accusations.

Unless some smoking gun surfaces and hits the MSM, Abramoff accusations will be dismissed.

BacaDog on November 15, 2006 at 4:46 PM

Hi BacaDog; went to NYC for a while, business and pleasure. I guess my confidence in what A says decreases in proportion to how close he is to going to the big house.

Of course, since Republicans DO believe in those things, they MUST be held accountable for them. So you can see, it’s all fair. When you’re a moral relativist, nothing can be pinned on you. Either it’s someone else’s fault, or there was no controlling legal authority, it was an administrative error, an affidavit serves “no legitimate investigative purpose“, or if caught red-handed “I deeply regret the sloppiness involved…“, and those magic words are your get-out-of-jail free card, because we know deep down you were doing what was best for your nation, regardless of those pesky laws.

Republicans should be screamming about the liberal culture of corruption as Pelousy ran on the issue, but even if they do I expect it to fall on deaf ears.

(Dogs, please forgive me. I know we just talked about pictures and bandwidth and dial-up connections and all, but this is just too priceless. )Dems to Kerry: Get Off Our Team!John Hinderaker Well, that may be a little too harsh….

I’d love to hear the DU perspective on this.

Now, to clean off the keyboard after almost laughing to death from the Kerry shot.

ABC News reports: As convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff reported to federal prison today, a source close to the investigation surrounding his activities told ABC News that Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) was one of the members of Congress Abramoff had allegedly…

Yep.

But, the MSM cannot ignore 6 to 8 Democratic Senators going to the slammer. They can’t ignore it because it will mean that the Senate change hands and that the Republicans were back in control.

What are they going to do, pretend that Harry Reid is still Senate Majority leader while he’s sitting in the federal pen? If they tried that, they would lose all credibility and would go under as unreliable purveyors of the news.

They can no more ignore this than they could ignore Monica and Bill. They tried that (Newsweek sat on the story for 5 months) until Drudge broke the story. Once that happened, and Clinton lied under oath about it, there was no going back.

If Abramoff’s charges are found credible, the MSM will be hooked by the nose and dragged along whether they want to or not.

Honora

why is it when its the republicans you want to hang them but when its a dem you say nothing?

rocked on November 15, 2006 at 5:38 PM

‘Tis a fair question, Ms. H. If it were a republican, the mere accusation of corruption is enough to raise your ire, but you are awfully quiet about Dingy Harry et al.?

Any particular reason?

why is it when its the republicans you want to hang them but when its a dem you say nothing?

Nancy Pelosi is leading the charge on “House” cleaning. She’s not off to a good start. On the Senate side, Jack Abramoff can finger 6-8 Democrat Senators that are corrupt….

And then, if convicted, they will be REMOVED FROM OFFICE, either by resignation or by formal Senate action.

You see, what the MSM says or doesn’t say is irrelevant. This isn’t NOT a “political” issue but a “CRIMINAL” one.

Since you’re a “GOOD” Democrat, who wants to fight the “culture of corruption,” shall I be expecting YOU to lead the fight to remove the stain of corruption in the Democratic Party by demanding the ouster of these 6 to 8 DEMOCRATIC Senators?

Or, are you, as we all suspect, just a tad, a bit, HYPOCRITICAL?

Please, tell us — are you HONORABLE or do you wear “honora” the way Harry Reid and Jack Murtha wear their underwear: They change it every day.

And ya’ll can celebrate at the Super Bowl: Browns versus Cardinals.

honora on November 15, 2006 at 4:22 PM

Good one, Honora. Where ya been?

I’m certainly not optimistic, nor should you be pessimistic that anything will come of this. It will be fun to watch how some of the more outspoken Dems – re: Abramoff and outrage at republicans – now backpeddle when it is Dems facing accusations.

Unless some smoking gun surfaces and hits the MSM, Abramoff accusations will be dismissed.

mountainmanbob