Maybe Cheney? Will Libby fold, and start giving up names?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051028/pl_nm/bush_leak_dc

John Cairns

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 19:21:10 GMT, "John Cairns"
said:

Maybe Cheney? Will Libby fold, and start giving up names?

Have you actually read the indictment? It's almost funny.

Yeah, I'm sure they're all laughing in Cheney's office.

John Cairns

Have you actually read the indictment? It's almost funny.


One by one....until Bush himself will be charged with murdering
Americans. It's going to happen.

RB

It's so funny that he resigned. The issue is still open and more indictments
may follow.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 19:21:10 GMT, "John Cairns"
said:

Maybe Cheney? Will Libby fold, and start giving up names?

Have you actually read the indictment? It's almost funny.

Apparently, Scooter "sought out information" about Wilson and Plame. I
wonder who directed him to do this? It couldn't be Chumpy.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"John Cairns" wrote in message
...

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 19:21:10 GMT, "John Cairns"
said:

Maybe Cheney? Will Libby fold, and start giving up names?

Have you actually read the indictment? It's almost funny.

Yeah, I'm sure they're all laughing in Cheney's office.

John Cairns

What Davey is saying is that he doesn't care that Bushco is falling apart.
He's a true believer no matter what.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 19:48:31 GMT, "John Cairns"
said:

Have you actually read the indictment? It's almost funny.

Yeah, I'm sure they're all laughing in Cheney's office.

Are you saying you've read it?

What Davey is saying is that he doesn't care that Bushco is falling
apart.
He's a true believer no matter what.


Even my wife's republican parents, who voted for Bush, now agree he's
no republican and are ashamed of their choice. He's the most shameless
president in US history.

RB

None of them read it. They're just happy it happened.

It was 1960 and a politician named Barry Goldwater believed that the
Republican Party was losing its way. And from that fear, and perhaps from a
little disgust, came the production of The Conscience of a Conservative with
Goldwater's rallying cry for future leaders:


I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more
efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote
welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to
repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones
that do violence to the Constitution, or that have failed in their purpose
or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not
attempt to discover whether legislation is "needed" before I have first
determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later
be attacked for neglecting my constituents' "interests", I shall reply that
I was informed their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am
doing the very best I can.


It was written in 1960, but yet every chapter but the one on "The Soviet
Menace" can apply to the United States in 2003. That fact can be a little
depressing, especially as a nation gears up for the election of 2004. In
this book, Goldwater cries out for the need to return power to the states,
end regulations on areas where the federal government should not be
involved, reduce taxes, and limit the federal government's involvement in
local education. But for his passing a few years ago, Goldwater could still
yell about these very same issues. It's a testament to the ability of the
Founding Fathers' ability to create a system that changes slowly.

Here are a few of his thoughts:

On States Rights


I caution against a defensive, or apologetic, appeal to the Constitution.
There is a reason for its reservation of States' Rights. Not only does it
prevent the accumulation of power in a central government that is remote
from the people and relatively immune from popular restraint; it also
recognizes the principle that essentially local problems are best dealt with
by the people most directly concerned.


On Unions


I strongly favor enactment of State right-to-work laws which forbid
contracts that make union membership a condition of employment. These laws
are aimed at removing a great blight on the contemporary American scene, and
I am at a loss to understand why so many people who so often progress
concern for "civil rights" and "civil liberties" are vehemently opposed to
them. Freedom of association is one of the natural rights of man. Clearly,
therefore, it should also be a "civil" right. Right-to-work laws deprive
from the natural law: they are simply an attempt to give freedom of
association the added protection of civil law.


On Taxes


By reducing taxes and spending we will not only return to the individual the
means with which he can assert his freedom and dignity, but also guarantee
to the nation the economic strength that will always be its ultimate defense
against foreign foes.


On Welfare


I feel certain that Conservatism is through unless Conservatives can
demonstrate and communicate the difference between being concerned with
these problems and believing that the federal government is the proper agent
for their solution. . . Let us, by all means, encourage those who are
fortunate and able to care for the needs of those who are unfortunate and
disabled. But let us do this in a way that is conducive to the spiritual as
well as the material well-being of our citizens - and in a way that will
preserve their freedom. Let welfare be a private concern.


On Education


Their solution is to spend more money. Mine is to raise standards. Their
recourse is to the federal government. Mine is to the local public school
board, the private school, the individual citizen - as far away from the
federal government as one can possibly go. . . The third objection to
federal aid is that it promotes the idea that federal school money is "free
money" and this gives the people a distorted picture of the cost of
education. The federal government has no funds except those it extracts from
the taxpayers who reside in the various States. The money that the federal
government pays to State X for education has been taken from the citizens of
State X in federal taxes and comes back to them, minus the Washington
brokerage fee.


Intrigued? Outraged? Then read this book. The Conscience of a Conservative
is the bible of beliefs for the Republican Party. Does that mean that only
Republicans should read this book? Absolutely not. Whether you are a
Republican or Democrat and are looking to shore up the reasons why you
believe in the things that you do, this book will assist you like nothing
else.

Alicia Knight Cunningham - Washington, DC - Alicia is a Legislative Counsel
for a non-profit organization in Washington. She has worked for U.S.
Senators Orrin Hatch, Larry Craig and Mike Crapo and for the Republican
Party of Utah. She has BAs in Political Science and Public Relations from
Brigham Young University and a J.D. from George Mason University. Alicia is
member of the Virginia Bar Association. You can contact her at:







"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 19:21:10 GMT, "John Cairns"
said:

Maybe Cheney? Will Libby fold, and start giving up names?

Have you actually read the indictment? It's almost funny.