America Doesn't Need Crook Harry Reid As Majority Leader

This message courtesy of the terrorist loving Democrat majority in the Senate via Harry Reid.

Washington, DC—Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, released the following statement today after comments made by President Bush at the White House:

The President today asked the American people to trust him as he continues to follow the same failed strategy that has drawn our troops further into an intractable civil war. The President's policies have failed and his escalation endangers our troops and hurts our national security. Neither our troops nor the American people can afford this strategy any longer.

Democrats will send President Bush a bill that gives our troops the resources they need and a strategy in Iraq worthy of their sacrifices. If the President vetoes this bill he will have delayed funding for troops and kept in place his strategy for failure.

Come on, Harry - just as your colleague Feinstein was lining her pockets by giving away billions in tax dollars to her husband's firms, you were off stealing land in behind the scenes deals allowing you to line your pockets based upon your office. Why was it you hung up on the AP Harry? And who did you pay to kill that story this time?

You're a crook and everyone knows it, you are as dirty as a Las Vegas casino circa 1960. And if you weren't scared about your political future, you wouldn't dare suck up to the fetid left wing base the way you are.

You have to ask yourself, Harry ... do you feel lucky, punk? Well, do ya? You go right ahead with that Neville Chamberlain clone Feingold and desert our troops. The American people will march all over your corrupt political legacy before this is done.

Reid is a sleazy little piece of political garbage unfit to lead the majority he now represents. Thank goodness the way he is taking them, they won't be in the majority very long.

Comments

[scarshapedstar]

Mhmm... sure. He's shakin' in his boots.

[ConserView]

Wow! Couldn't have said it better myself. Kudos!

[Zifnab]

Whaaaa~! Why do elections have consequences?!

[southdakotaboy]

I hope Lieberman wakes up to what traitors the libs are and switches sides soon. Then won't we hear the libs howl about how unfair it is.

[Raging_Dave]

Longer Zifnab: "I have nothing worthwhile to say, but being a slimy little worm, I'm going to insult the blog owner with some half-brained crack and then fling my poo everywhere."

Congradulations for confirming damn near every Leftist stereotype, Ziffy!

[Zifnab]

Is Raging Dave related to Bloodrage Bob?
And is Lieberman brave enough to grab his balls and switch parties - giving up all those sweet, sweet committee positions he's picked up from his tenure and from the Dem majority (cause if you think Dems are going to lose Senators in '08, please pass me whatever it is you are smoking)?
Lieberman will be lucky if he makes it through his full six-year term without catching a recall election to the nuts. And Angry Andrew needs to take his pills before he bubbles over and hurts himself.

[jim]

Dan, you are absolutely right. People who may be benefitting financially from their political influence have NO right to say anything how the war in Iraq is going.

[cough] Cheney [cough, cough] Halliburton

[jim]

Oh yeah, and Republicans love terrorists and hate America, and eat kittens with babies sprinkled on top.

[templar knight]

Yeah, and McBushCoHaliNaziburton! And everything else the Democrats say. Have I left out anything?

[Hard Right]

Ah yes, unable to refute what was said the mentally ill leftards throw out Halliburton. BTW, Clinton and Halliburton, (cough, cough).

The funny thing is that Reid and Pelosi think they are a hit. They are in for a rude awakening if they keep this up til 08, which it looks like they will.

[templar knight]

Let the fish run, HR, before you set the hook. Let them take as much line as they can. That's how you do it. And when you set that hook, wow, watch 'em squirm!

[jim]

Oh, yeah, you guys are all about logical refutations. Right. Funny that you missed the logical refutation right there in my original comment.

The article states that Reid and Pelosi are crooks because of possible conflicts of interest - oh, that they incidentally were both cleared of by the respective ethics committees.

Wouldn't that mean, by your own logic, that Cheney and BUsh are also crooks, because they have conflicts of interest? And that they don't deserve to work for the American people? Yes or no?

[jim]

I also have yet to see you rightards offer any logical refutation of the terrorist-loving, America-hating kitten-eating, baby-sprinkling charge.

This is simply the counterpart of the similar charges lodged against Reid and Pelosi, in the very first sentence, with no evidence shown.

Are you finally willing to admit that the GOP is the pro-kitten eating party? Everyone knows it.

[bloodage bob]

aaaand once again the liberal loons come out from under their rocks to defend yet another incredibly crooked dem politician.

what's he done? doesn't matter: whether its "drown the bitch" ted kennedy; "burn that cross" robert byrd; "cold hard cash" william jefferson; or, most recently, "hey! that land was on SALE, that's all!" 'dirty' harry reid, they line up to praise him, like the incoherent, unprincipled sheep they are.

note to the liberal dipshits: 'changing the subject' isn't really a very impressive defense for your little heroes. you might try "hey! it's not like he *killed* anyone!", which would work for everybody except teddy.

and nagin.

and hillary.

[Hard Right]

"hey! it's not like he *killed* anyone!", which would work for everybody except teddy."

Actually most of the Dems have the blood of our soldiers on their hands, but that's another thread.

Remeber, the left feels the rules apply to EVERYONE BUT THEM. So when they steal and behave in a corrupt manner (which is most of the time), it's ok.

[ET]

Jim--

Show me evidence of Bush and Cheney's conflicts of interest. i'll bet the complexities of deferred compensation, stock options and financial conflict of interest are above your head, but i'd like to see a source that proves that either the Pres or VP has a conflict of interest.

[Zifnab]

Jim --

They don't actually read these posts. Just spout blather and call you a sockpuppet (because no one actually agrees with Democrats except poor, stupid, ethic people so there's no way more than one liberal is actual on this board), then calls you a commu-terro-fasci-hugga-muslo-phile.

Common tactics also include "... so you're saying you hate babies", "... I'm going to shoot lots of liberals, including you", and "... Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa~! Why did Democrats win in '06?! Surely by '08 everyone will be a Republican again!!!"

[templar knight]

Actually, Ziffy, I guess you identify with the brown Muslims more so than with us fat-ass white people, although I doubt you're above living off the tax money of us fat-ass white people.

[jim]

Sure, ET.

Cheney's conflict of interest:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/11/03/BU231196.DTL

From your comment, I bet the fact that deferred compensation is *still* compensation, is over your head - but please prove me wrong. Explain to me how getting paid several MILLION dollars more a few years from now, as opposed to right away, means that you can't be influenced.

Also explain how Halliburton getting no-bid contracts and not being audited at all despite being unable to account for BILLIONS in taxpayer $, proves Cheney has been impartial.

Bush conflict of interest:

http://www.houseofbush.com/

http://dir.salon.com/story/books/feature/2004/03/12/unger_2/index.html

"In charitable contributions alone, the Saudis gave at least $3.5 million to Bush charities -- $1 million by Prince Bandar to the George H.W. Bush Presidential Library and Museum, $1 million by King Fahd to Barbara Bush's campaign against illiteracy, $500,000 by Prince Al Waleed to Philips Academy, Andover, to finance a newly created George Herbert Walker Bush Scholarship Fund, and a $1 million painting from Prince Bandar to George W. Bush's White House.

Then there were the corporate transactions. In 1987, a Swiss bank linked to BCCI and a Saudi investor bailed out Harken Energy, where George W. Bush was a director, with $25 million in financing. At the Carlyle Group, investors from the House of Saud and their allies put at least $80 million into Carlyle funds. While it was owned by Carlyle, BDM and its subsidiary Vinnell received at least $1.188 billion in contracts from the Saudis. Finally, Halliburton inked at least $180 million in deals with the Saudis in November 2000, just after Dick Cheney began collecting a lucrative severance package there.

In all, at least $1.476 billion had made its way from the Saudis to the House of Bush and its allied companies and institutions. It could safely be said that never before in history had a presidential candidate -- much less a presidential candidate and his father, a former president -- been so closely tied financially and personally to the ruling family of another foreign power. Never before had a president's personal fortunes and public policies been so deeply entwined with another nation.

And what were the implications of that? In the case of George H.W. Bush, close relations with the Saudis had at times actually paid dividends for America -- certainly in terms of Saudi cooperation during the Gulf War, for example. But that carried with it a high price. The Bushes had religiously observed one of the basic tenets of Saudi-American relations, that the United States would not poke its nose into Saudi Arabia's internal affairs. "

Then when a Saudi royal family member, Bin Laden, brings about 9/11 with mostly Saudi hijackers because of Saudi gripes (US military bases on Saudi Arabian ground), the US invades Iraq. And NOTHING is done AT ALL regarding Saudi Arabia.

[jim]

Yah, Zif, I can dig it. It makes it more fun for me in some way to present solid arguments.

Maybe I'll just start slingin' it right back, tho. It was really fun callign the GOP the kitten-eating party.

Hey, anonymous sources high in an unnamed administration told me, that Bush loves it when Laura straps it on. Sorry, I can't reveal who told me; national security. You know what could happen if that info fell into the wrong hands.

[jim]

Bloodage bob, I see your Ted Kennedy, Robert Byrd and William Jefferson, and I raise you a Mark Foley, a Strom Thurmond and a Conrad Burns.

[Terry Gain]

From Soldier's Dad

BAGHDAD, April 2 (Reuters) - Sunni Arab officials said it was inevitable they would have to fight an all-out battle with al Qaeda-linked militants in Iraq's Sunni provinces, where a violent power struggle has begun to spill over into Baghdad.

"Facing them is inevitable. If it is not done right now then it will be in the near future, we do not have another choice," said a senior member in the Accordance Front, the biggest Sunni Arab bloc in parliament and who asked not to be identified.

"It's a difficult decision and violence will increase because they will fight back, but we have to do it."

I have to give Reuters some credit for keeping up with events. The whole Shite-Sunni civil war thing has given way to a Sunni Moderate-Sunni Extremist civil war.
--------

Try to keep up boys.

[Zifnab]

"Bloodage bob, I see your Ted Kennedy, Robert Byrd and William Jefferson, and I raise you a Mark Foley, a Strom Thurmond and a Conrad Burns."

You can't match a Robert Byrd with a Strom Thurmond. Thurmond is dead (and would have made an excellent President, if you don't mind asking Trent Lott!) so that's not even fair. Try Senator "Series of Tubes" "Bridge to Nowhere" "Check Out My Incredibly Cool Incredible Hulk Tie" Stevenson. You don't get much older, porkier, and crazier than the honorable gentleman from Alaska.

[Zifnab]

"Try to keep up boys."

Shia-Sunni-who-what-now?

All I know is "THEY WANT TO KILL US!!1!" and we need to nuke Tehran.

[templar knight]

Yeah, kill all those fat-ass white people, uh, they're not fat-ass white people over there? Then forget it. Kill all the fat-ass white people over here, says Zif.

[vetter]

How fun that noted homophobic bigot racist Zifnabby is vomiting out his same old same old! Yahoo! We all fear you and ur superior intellect Zifknob...But isn't it time for another anti-gay link or rant about the goat-herders? You have a mantle of ignorance to maintain, but I know ya'll won't let us down. And I do so love ur new female sockpuppet "jim," or "Regina" as we call her down at the pool hall.

[jim]

vetter, you know better than to project your feminine nature on others.

[Purple Avenger]

"Reid is a sleazy little piece of political garbage unfit to lead the majority he now represents."

Depends on if he's representative of that majority ;->

[vetter]

Oooooo Jim/Regina, BURNED ME!! Wow, I am really hurt! You are tres the wordsmith ain't ya there dimmy? Ya know the "goat-herders" of Zifknob's hate fevered world really hate "your kind," right?

[jim]

vetter is a poopyhead. Poopyhead doo-doo droppings underpants.

[southdakotaboy]

Hillery must have cracked the whip on old Harry to get this taken care of before Obama gains more ground on her. And like the good little lapdog he is Harry scamppers to do her bidding.

[Hard Right]

Reid: Damnit, that evil, warmongering nation must be stopped. They MUST BE DEFEATED! The top guys are(Gasp)religious. They think God listens to their prayers, even. They've been allowed to do as they please for too long. Think of the hostages!

Bystander: You mean Iran?

Reid: No I mean America and the poor, misunderstood victims of their crusade! We must not let America win her racist war on terror!

[jim]

Bush: ...And then they said there's 2 kinds of Iraqis! I mean, they just don't know what they're talking about.

Assistant: Actually Mr. President, there's a few different kinds. The main divisions are Shiite and Sunni.

Bush: You're fired.

Cheney: We can't fire him, George. His dad's already paid.

Bush: Well...go stick him in an attorney position somewhere.

[ET]

Thanks Jim. This is going to be fun.

--I bet the fact that deferred compensation is *still* compensation, is over your head - but please prove me wrong.

Deferred compensation is typically a defined benefit funded by an insurance policy. This is not the same as stock options, which are indeed impacted by future events. The deferred comp is usually not tied to company stock in order to help the beneficiary diversify.

So, if I quit or am fired today, you owe me xxx dollars down the line. These dollars are not correlated to the performance of the company on purpose...cause we might not have left on good terms. The deferred comp protects me from the fortune, good or bad, of the company.

--Also explain how Halliburton getting no-bid contracts and not being audited at all despite being unable to account for BILLIONS in taxpayer $, proves Cheney has been impartial.

You make it so easy. First, you assume that all of the perceived wrongs of Halliburton and all of its subsidiaries are directly attributable to Cheney's influence. Google Halliburton and try to estimate the number of employees they have at decision-making levels all over the world. Now convince me that Cheney spends his time in oak-paneled, smoke-filled rooms conspiring to rule the world.

Have you ever worked in Government contracting? Do you understand the regulations around sole-source contracting? I do. It is more common than you understand. In fact, many of the regs benefit small and minority companies through the SBA. Affirmative Action is one valid reason for "sole sourcing" services from the public sector...Specialized Operational Requirements or Technical Expertise are two others.

Did halliburton get sole-source contracts in Afghanistan and Iraq? Yes. Did Cheney get them this work? No. He was long gone from the CEO post by then. I am am not naive enough to suggest that Halliburton and individuals from all levels of government and elite classes know each other (read George Soros). But to think Cheney and all around him are shallow and conniving enough to concoct a war for profit is just a stupid idea. Oh yeah.. That was your idea.

Is it likely that Halliburton was and is one of about three firms that can execute the terms of the contracts being bid by the govt? Yep. It would have cost the taxpayer a lot more for inferior work to do a competitive search for additional qualified firms. And you know what? Hundreds of people were in on that decision. Cheney had to go to lengths to distance himself from any appearance of wrongdoing.

Ask yourself this question...Is is possible that Cheney won the job of VP because of his experience with Halliburton, not the other way around?

As to your link. The SF Chronicle from 02. Please, dude. He cites the alleged sins of KBR, a subsidairy of Halliburton, implying that everyone at KBR is getting rich on the Govt teat. You have no idea how low the margins are on these contracts. No matter, do you blame george steinbrenner when A-Rod strikes out? probably.

Cheney sold stock, and gave up millions in stock options by donating all proceeds to charity. This was 2 years before iraq. He EARNED those options and chose to forego any financial benefit to serve his country. Enough said.

I need a comfort break before I tackle your Bush allegations. But, it is getting late, so maybe I'll wait 'till tomorrow. Intellectually, you are already my bitch.

[Fred Beloit]

Way to go, ET.

[jim]

First, ET, glad you are entering into an actual substantive dialog here. besides the last line, which is beneath you.

Second, just noting so that it's not lost track of: my original point was that if Reid and Pelosi are unfit to serve because of financial allegations in their past, then so are Bush and Cheney. Note that Cheney didn't do anything about it until it was brought up to him that it might be improper, by the impartial Congressional Research Service - this puts Cheney in the same boat as Reid and Pelosi.

So this original argument of mine still stands: if it's bad for Reid and Pelosi to serve, then it's bad for Bush and Cheney to serve.

Now to your response to my charges of Cheney and Halliburton - I was unaware that Cheney had agreed to donate these Halliburton profits to charity. Him doing so does clear him of this immediate impropriety. I'll note that it also grants him a tax exemption of about $8 mil, so the rise in Halliburton still nets him money - but I agree there isn't much of any other way for him to get rid of the $, short of just flushing it.

So, thank you for bringing this fact to my attention. I try to deal with facts and be real about them; it can sometimes be hard on the ego, but it's always good for the soul.

[ET]

thanks, Jim. substantive dialogue is good, but I sometimes get caught up in the snarky tone of this blog. My bad. I'll try to resist more strongly, but sometimes it is entertaining, no?

You points are well taken. ET

[templar knight]

"...but I sometimes get caught up in the snarky tone of this blog."

Me, too, ET, and big ups on the entertainment value. Sometimes you just have to go off on some of these guys. I guess I'm bad, too.