from the goddess Ann
Not the whole article, just my favs:
There is nothing so dangerous as a Southern liberal hoping to be invited to a Graydon Carter party.
As is now well-known, Durham prosecutor Mike Nifong falsely accused three white Duke lacrosse players of gang-raping a stripper, even as evidence piled up proving it never happened. In the weeks after an unstable stripper — or, since this is not a Hollywood movie, "a stripper" — accused the players of rape, Nifong stated on national TV: "I am convinced that there was a rape." He called the players "hooligans," contemptuously sneering that their "daddies could buy them expensive lawyers."
None of the DNA matched any Duke lacrosse players, who are starting to look like the only adult males in the Durham area who haven't had sex with Mangum.
Nifong has tried to portray himself as simply making "mistakes." This is absurd. Not even a half-wit like Nifong could have believed "something happened in that bathroom," as he said during his disbarment hearing last weekend. He was willing to send three innocent men to prison to improve his electoral viability in a heavily black district and to become a liberal hero in Manhattan salons.
Admittedly, Nifong studiously refused to take a peek at the evidence. On March 29, 2006, he told reporters he knew a rape had occurred based on — I quote — "my reading of the report of the emergency-room nurse." That report was not given to the police until April 5, 2006, making it the equivalent of the forged Nigerian letter Joe Wilson claims to have debunked eight months before it surfaced at the CIA.
The media love to drone on about the explosive combination of "race and sex" — and they'll wait forever for a single non-hoax case to prove it! In fact, the truly explosive combination is "liberal" and "mediocrity."
Half-bright liberals think Hollywood fantasies are real life. And in Hollywood, conservatives like Rush Limbaugh are never fabulously rich and successful. Conservative Christians like Tom DeLay are never savvy, influential congressmen. And handsome boys from good families are never nice.
Second-rate liberals who went to mediocre schools and married mediocre women are burning with jealousy from their nondescript, mediocre jobs. So they use their government jobs to attack their betters and sneer about the players' "daddies."
Like so much injustice in America, this whole sick spectacle was the revenge of the mediocre against the successful. Stupid and envious is a bad combo platter.
Sunday, June 24, 2007
THE END IS NIFONG
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
24 comments:
The idea that you would say that liberals had anything to do with nifong or were big supporters of his is ludicrous. If you are happy that justice was done, I can understand and agree with that. The idea that you would lay all this at the hand of "liberals" in "manhattan" is a perfect example to anyone who can look with an unjanduiced eye that your goal is not justice but to bash liberals every chance you can get, whether it is apropo or not.
You guys are a joke. Where is your stories about the war(s) or the attorney general and all the resignations. Where is your story about the constitution or gitmo or the vps outside the law proclamations. How about Rudys criminal connections? How about wildly excessive wiretapping..Oh I forgot, it's ok cuz you are scared.
Not getting enough information on your right wing sites to talk much about that stuff are you? Notice the left let little time go by before letting the people they elected know they were getting it wrong. They didn't defend them at all costs. They let them know they needed to shape up. You radical righters have turned yourselves into a cult coming with no solutions or cogent thoughts except liberals are evil. Have fun deluding each other. Enjoy your religous ferver because everyone else has left you behind. It needs no argument anymore. You are laughable, with all the evidence out there, in your obviscation and your clear mission to find an enemy even in America so you can push your authoritarian,daddy save me, obviscation.
wow, I did that while staying on topic and not getting bent out of shape...but then again, I am a conservative
But but... Amerikkka is fascist! Hybrid cars! Bernard Kerik!
"wow, I did that while staying on topic and not getting bent out of shape...but then again, I am a conservative"
Quite a feat when all you do is cute and paste from Ann Coulter.....
Cutting and pasting from Coulter sure makes a grand contribution to debate. Your mature discourse which suggests you haven't reached puberty is similary a grand achievement.
Ron, your angry screed shows that this post hit home with you. You lash out in blind anger because you can't admit Nifong not only was wrong, but many liberals like yourself believe the same as Nifong and would have done the same actions for the same reasons as Nifong.
You got caught and that what hurts you most.
Was that you posting anonymously, too?
"Notice the left let little time go by before letting the people they elected know they were getting it wrong. They didn't defend them at all costs. They let them know they needed to shape up."
I would say that the quote above shows that Ron finds Nifong in the wrong.
Andy,
Read the note in context. Ron was trying to say that the left abandoned All wrong doing Democrats from Reps Jefferson and Murtha to Nifong. That plain is not true. Murtha and Jefferson are still defended by the Left, and the Left sat on their hands when it came to Nifong. Look at the Leftwingnut 88 professors. They supported Nifong's PERSECUTION of the lacrosse players because it suited their political agenda and damn the facts because they NEVER LOOKED AT THE FACTS.
I took a limited view of Ron's comments. Perhaps he can enlighten us all. On a broader scale, certainly both sides of the aisle haven't been fleet-footed when it comes to ethics. The GOP gutted the Ethics Committee and the Democrats didn't rush to deal w/Jefferson.
As far as the Gang of 88, the only ones defending them are their own members. Any insinuation that they are pillars of the liberal community is laughable.
andy, just how did the GOP gut the ethics committee? I'm curious on how deluded and misinformed you are. There are 6 members of the committee, made up of 3 GOP and 3 Donkeys. Now, again, how was it gutted???? And please provide some evidence from the Congressional Record that pertains.
Then you can explain how the ethics complaint against Rep. Jim McDermott was stalled in the committee for over 12 years.
Gutted was the wrong word.
How quickly you forget the shennanigans surrounding Delay....
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-01-04-gop-ethics_x.htm
andy, just how did the GOP gut the ethics committee?
"More recently, during the rise of Tom DeLay and Jack Abramoff, there was pressure on the Ethics Committee to take action to admonish members involved in their activities. However, action was slow and blame pointed to then-Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert. When the Committee did admonish Tom DeLay for a third time, Hastert fired the Chairman and two other Republican members who voted for the admonishment. Without a quorum, the Committee could not take further action against DeLay or other members involved in that scandal or others."
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_Ethics_Committee
I actually think "gutted" is a pretty good word for what Hastert did.
anon, it starts a debate which is happening here, get a clue and get some balls...
Why don't you take your own advice and post your own analysis? Are you too damn lazy (or stupid) to formulate your own opinion? Is expanding on Coulter's ideas that difficult?
Again I compliment your mature discourse.
Again, Chet and Andy, you use the disgraced wikipedia. Only libs use that as a source to prove their points because they write what they want to see in those articles. In fact, Politicians and their staffs have been banned from making changes to Wikipedia because of the abuse by liberal politicians.
Again, when it comes to Democrats and the ethics committee, you two are silent. How about no Democrat ever voted to return ethics sanctions against any Democrat in those 12 years?
On DeLay, show a conviction. With McDermott I can show a conviction. Do you doubt Jefferson will be convicted? Murtha did violate House Ethics rules, apologized for it aftet ALL the Democrats in the House refused to vote for conviction of his ethics violation.
Only libs use that as a source to prove their points because they write what they want to see in those articles.
I've never, at any time, edited a Wikipedia article.
If you have concerns about the accuracy of Wikipedia - which, in a scientific survey, was proven even more accurate than the Encyclopedia Brittanica - why don't you edit the articles?
What specific factual contention from what I quoted do you object to? Are you saying that, in fact, Dennis Hastert didn't empty those Ethics board seats? Because that's a matter of congressional record.
On DeLay, show a conviction.
Why? That's irrelevant to what we're talking about. When DeLay was indicted, Republicans immediately set in motion to overturn House ethics rules that would have forced DeLay to step down from his chairmanships - rules that were originally put in place at the behest of Republicans.
I think it speaks volumes for the credibility of your side, ethics-wise, that the very instant your golden boy looked like he was going to get hoist on his own petard, you were all falling all over yourselves to have the rules changed. Even the rules you guys made up yourselves. It's like it's the most foreign thing in the world for you to imagine that there's not supposed to be two sets of rules - strict ones for Democrats and lax ones for Republicans.
Chet,
You blow a lot of manure, but no citations. What survey on Wikipedia? What methodology? Was the survey to support the conclusion Wikipedia was accurate?
As far as ethics rules, your girl Pelosi put in real lax ones. You think an indictment of a Republican by the ULTRA, Grand Jury Shopping DA, Earle, is a good as a conviction?? How Goebbles partisan of you.
McDermott has been underindictment for how long before the ethic committee whitewashed the case under Pelosi?
What about Jefferson? Again under indictments and he's still in Congress. You scream DeLay, well, how about kicking out your people in the same manner. I'm sure we can find some partisan GOP DAs that can get indictments on Democrats. You going to keep them in office like you have Jefferson, McDermott, Murtha, and the Impeached Alcee Hastings?
Chet, you are a hollow partisan.
What survey on Wikipedia?
Published in Nature. I'm surprised you never heard about it. There's actually a number of scientific studies purporting to analyze the accuracy of Wikipedia - which flies in the face of your contention that Wikipedia has been "discredited."
You think an indictment of a Republican by the ULTRA, Grand Jury Shopping DA, Earle, is a good as a conviction??
I never said that it was. But certainly an indictment should make us retract our confidence in a top elected official.
But apparently you think nothing should happen to congressmen when they're indicted for crimes? Or is it just that you think nothing should happen to Republicans?
What about Jefferson? Again under indictments and he's still in Congress.
If he's convicted, I'm sure he'll step down. He's been taken off his committees just as ethics rules state - in fact, Pelosi had to force him out since he refused to step down voluntarily.
That's a long shot from what Denny Hastert tried to do - gut the ethics committee and change the rules so that Hot Tub Tom could stay in power. Don't you think?
You scream DeLay, well, how about kicking out your people in the same manner.
We did. Jefferson's off his committees. And remember that nobody kicked Tom DeLay out of congress - he decided not to run for re-election all on his own. (After he bilked campaign contributors out of millions to pay his legal bills, of course.)
Chet, Nature didn't prove anything.
You proved nothing on DeLay and you ignored the slowness by Pelosi to act. You also neglected to admit that Pelosi didn't act until there was a firestorm of publicity on Jefferson. You ignored McDermott. You ignored the hundreds of votes by Democrats on the committee not to punish Democrats.
You sir, are a hypocrite and a Democrat political hack.
Chet, Nature didn't prove anything.
Says you. The problem is, why should I believe you? Your assertions aren't arguments. Wikipedia has been vindicated; you lost. Too bad you'll never be honest enough to admit it.
You also neglected to admit that Pelosi didn't act until there was a firestorm of publicity on Jefferson. You ignored McDermott. You ignored the hundreds of votes by Democrats on the committee not to punish Democrats.
I ignored a bunch of assertions that were supported by no evidence, PCD. Whenever I look up your claims I find out that you're wrong. I've largely stopped bothering to do so; you're just not a very honest debator.
You sir, are a hypocrite and a Democrat political hack.
More personal attacks. That's really all you have, isn't it? It's the only bullet you seem to have in your gun. Doesn't that get a little boring? I mean you haven't even come up with new names to call me, yet.
Chet, you are the dishonest pile of manure. DeLay won in court today. On ABC Radio news, the conspiracy charges were again to remain dropped by an appeals court ruling.
Keep shooting yourself in the foot Democrat propagandist.
DeLay won in court today. On ABC Radio news, the conspiracy charges were again to remain dropped by an appeals court ruling.
He's still facing two counts of felony money laundering. Those charges were not dismissed.
That he was able to argue out of the lesser-felony conspiracy charges seems like kind of a drop in the bucket, there.
Chet, you are the dishonest pile of manure.
Kind of looks like you're the dishonest one when you don't give the whole story.
Chet, like you ever do?
Ronnie Earle raised money in the same manner, fashion, and methods as DeLay. Why isn't he under indictment?
Oh, Earle was Grand Jury shopping to get the indictments. He should be disbarred and removed from office.
Tell the whole story, Chet.
Ronnie Earle raised money in the same manner, fashion, and methods as DeLay. Why isn't he under indictment?
Well, even if that were true, Earle isn't a congressman; there are different rules for members of the legislature.
But your charge just isn't true.
Oh, Earle was Grand Jury shopping to get the indictments.
No, he wasn't. He used the specific grand juries that were empanelled for that purpose. Only one such jury failed to return an indictment, and Earle had presented the charges to a new jury because the previous one had expired. Several juries had returned several different indictments previously. The charge of "jury shopping" just isn't supported by the facts.
And I notice that you don't mention DeLay's venue shopping, but I suppose whatever Republicans have to do to avoid prosecution is just fine in your book.
You're a rabid partisan, PDC, and it shows. I suppose next you'll try to argue that a prosecutor who has indicted far more Democrats than Republicans is somehow on a "partisan witchhunt." Please!
Post a Comment