Archives for 2004

“Desertion is whatever the hell I say it is, and if you prove me wrong, I will just say that things are ‘unclear.'”

I used to respect Neiwert, but it is clear he is nothing more than a pompous, partisan blowhard.

** Update **

Damnit- I spelled his name wrong again. Why do I keep wanting to spell it Niewert instead of Neiwert?

Shorter Dave NeiwertPost + Comments (31)

I thought Dean would rebound after the Iowa debacle. It appears not:

Howard Dean said Saturday he was surprised by the “under the table” campaigning he faced during the Iowa caucus and said the state needs to prevent such negative attacks if it wants to keep the nation’s leadoff presidential vote.

Dean said his rivals “had their folks really beating up on the people who went in, trying to get them to change their minds in caucus.”

“I think Iowa is going to have to change the way it conducts its caucuses if it wants to continue to be first,” he told reporters in an interview on his campaign bus in New Hampshire…

Asked Saturday for specifics about the negative attacks, Dean pointed to a book distributed by North Carolina Sen. John Edwards’ campaign that instructed supporters how to attack other candidates during the caucuses. For example, it told campaign captains in Iowa to describe Dean as an “elitist from Park Avenue in New York City.”

“I never dreamed that would happen,” Dean said. “And I don’t think that’s a healthy thing for democracy. It’s enough to have it go on for weeks and weeks in the press, but when it goes on inside the caucus, I don’t think that’s good,” he said.

Howard Dean, who has done nothing but throw grenades at the other candidates and employ angry and vicious rhetoric against half the Democratic party and the entire Republican party, was surprised by the negative attacks. Poor baby.

The End of Dean?Post + Comments (6)

Donald Sensing, Bill Hobbs, and Andrew Olmstead tag team the specious Bush Awol charges, with Hobbs providing the background, Sensing officially devestating Mark Kleiman’s partisan and ham-handed defense of Wesley Clark and Michael Moore, and Olmstead providing his own personal antecdotes about paperwork and the Reserve/National Guard component.

To add to Olmstead’s anecdotes about paperwork in the National Guard, here are some experiences I had while in the Guard/Reserve component:

– I received three batteries of shots that are supposed to be administered once every ten years or so, because my shot records kept coming up missing.

– I was not paid numerous times throught my Guard tenure.

– I was deployed for my two week annual training with the unit in Fort Dix, upon arrival it was discovered that no orders had been cut for me, so I went back home, only to learn that the orders had been found and I had to re-deploy.

– It took over a year from my separation from my unit to receive my honorable discharge.

– My DD Form 214 is still, to this date, incorrect, with several awards not noted.

-Every semester as an undergrad, the paperwork for my tuition waiver was lost, so halfway through the semester I was dropped from all my classes. I would then have to go back at the end of the semester, when the waiver was finally found, and re-register for the classes I had already taken and then get grade modifications filled out by the professors. EVERY SEMESTER.

– A promotion was delayed six months while various levels of the National Guard bureaucracy debated whether or not I had in fact attended PLDC. My CO was convinced. I showed him my diploma and pictures, but the official paperwork was not to be found.

Mark Kleiman is really out of his league on this one.

And That Should be The End of ThatPost + Comments (22)

Sullivan mentioned how much he enjoyed watching Sharpton squirm during the debate last night, so I have decided to post the transcript of it here. If you have never seen a fat, hypocritical, race-baiting bigot tap dance before, this is your chance:

JENNINGS: Reverend Sharpton, I’d like to ask you a question about domestic policy, if you don’t mind.

If during your term as president, if you become the nominee, and you have the opportunity to nominate someone to be chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, what kind of person would you consider for the job? You can name someone in particular, if you have someone in mind.

And maybe just take a minute or so to give us a little bit about your views on monetary policy.

You just know Jennings was enjoying every word of this question as he asked it. Alright Rev. Al- break out the top hat and cane:

SHARPTON: I think, first of all, we must have a person at the Monetary Fund that is concerned about growth of all, not setting standards that would, in my judgment, protect some and not elevate those that cannot, in my view, expand and come to the levels of development and the levels of where we need to be.

I think part of my problem with how we’re operating at this point is that the IMF and the policies that are emanating there do not lead to the expansion that is necessary for our country and our global village to rise to levels that underdeveloped countries and those businesses in this country can have the development policies necessary.

JENNINGS: Forgive me, Reverend Sharpton, but the question was actually about the Federal Reserve Board.

SHARPTON: I thought you said IMF, I’m sorry.

JENNINGS: No, I’m sorry, sir. And what you’d be looking for in a chairman of the Federal Reserve Board.

SHARPTON: Oh, in the Federal Reserve Board, I would be looking for someone that would set standards in this country, in terms of our banking, our — in how government regulates the Federal Reserve as we see it under Greenspan, that we would not be protecting the big businesses; we would not be protecting banking interests in a way that would not, in my judgment, lead toward mass employment, mass development and mass production.

I think that — would I replace Greenspan, probably. Do I have a name? No.

HUME: Thank you, Reverend Sharpton. Thanks very much.

Indeed, Al. Thank you soooooo much.

Sharpton SquirmingPost + Comments (9)