Comments on: A Portrait of Unvarnished, Loyalist, Blind Partisanship

By: Wayne

Wayne — Mon, 23 Apr 2007 18:19:21 +0000

One more thing, don’t give me that there is a Republican or two that support throwing another Republican under the bus. There are plenty of them who are only looking out for themselves.

By: Wayne

Wayne — Mon, 23 Apr 2007 18:16:24 +0000

It sounds like Rush doesn’t know if Gonzales is weak or strong, only that he just another Republican to be thrown under the Bus. Doesn’t sound like most of the posters know the AG overall record, only that he is a Republican that needs to be thrown under the bus.

Of course the hyper-partisan will claim this administration has violate the constitution and anyone associated with it need to be thrown under the bus including Bush and Cheney which proves the blind partisanship of the left.

By: bains

bains — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 23:59:26 +0000

Again, provide the full context for Gonzalez's comment.

Secondly, Padilla's case is presently in the US Courts.

By: Andy

Andy — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 23:37:46 +0000

Instead of the etceteras, perhaps you could offer an example of where habeas corpus has been denied per strictures of the US Consitiution.

1) Gonzales himself said that there is no right to habeas corpus in the Constitution. That is perhaps the most scary statement that the Attorney General can make.
2) Jose Padilla.

By: bains

bains — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 23:36:47 +0000

Indeed, for my purposes you can leave off the last part of the quote.

Yeah... and that's the point of context. Anyone can make their point by leaving off selective parts of any statement.

The full context doesnt bear out your implied point, as far as I'm concerned.

By: Steven Taylor

Steven Taylor — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 22:47:20 +0000

Bains,

The ellipses don't change the meaning of the quote. Indeed, for my purposes you can leave off the last part of the quote. If one looks at the post I focuses on the first part of the quoted text.

Christopher,

Andy does a pretty fair job of detailing some of the basics.

I suppose I could toss it back 'atcha and ask what he has done that would suggest it is in the country's best interest that he stay in office. In other words: what has he done that demonstrates that he has been a good AG?

By: bains

bains — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 22:28:17 +0000

...stating that there is no right of Habeas Corpus, etc. etc.

Instead of the etceteras, perhaps you could offer an example of where habeas corpus has been denied per strictures of the US Consitiution.

By: Andy

Andy — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 20:06:43 +0000

Yeah, Christopher, there are no examples beside packing the DOJ with 4th tier law school graduates, repeated violations of FISA, helping to dismantle the Geneva conventions, making decisions on firing US Attorneys with virtually no knowledge whatsoever, allowing massive civil liberties abuses by the FBI, stating that there is no right of Habeas Corpus, etc. etc.

When you've lost Sen. Coburn, it's probably time to get out of Dodge.

By: Christopher

Christopher — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 19:15:11 +0000

Steven,

Why has he been such a bad AG? You sight absolutely no examples except some sort of liberal made-up one that is slightly embarrassing to Republicans. If the actual job has to do with serving Americans, then why don't you comment about THAT?

By: Andy

Andy — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 16:59:16 +0000

The way that you describe on how they would hold their power is a perfect example of their Nazi like preaching of hatred and socialist way of controlling the vote of the masses with promises of peanuts from the government, yes the Democratic leadership has studied their Marxism well but they iron donkey foot it out to the people like Dr. Hitlers Frankenstein.

This is really good spoofery. The Democrat Party is a bunch of Commie-Nazis!

By: G.A.Phillips

G.A.Phillips — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 14:39:18 +0000

Superdestroyer, I was joking, the liberals will never stop the voice of freedom and truth, and having them holding that much power is probably the greatest thing that could happen to shows like Rush's. The way that you describe on how they would hold their power is a perfect example of their Nazi like preaching of hatred and socialist way of controlling the vote of the masses with promises of peanuts from the government, yes the Democratic leadership has studied their Marxism well but they iron donkey foot it out to the people like Dr. Hitlers Frankenstein.

By: David L

David L — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 10:45:59 +0000

Alberto Gonzales is not much an an attorney general, but he is far better than anybody confirmable by the Pat Leaby Senate Judiciary committee. Leahy's idea of good attorney general was a domestic terrorist, Janet Reno. Leave Gonzales alone.

By: jpe

jpe — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 05:04:05 +0000

The "context" changed nothing. It was a fair quote.

By: jpe

jpe — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 05:02:03 +0000

Rush is just applying the logic of GOP foreign policy to domestic politics: never do anything that the other side would claim as a victory, regardless of the merits.

By: bains

bains — Sun, 22 Apr 2007 02:11:50 +0000

And I gave you the link to the full transcript. Notice those elipses? They signify about three or four sentences missing. Whereas Think Progress picks parts to emphasize that which you used in your headline, in the full context, Rush's comment "it seems, every time there’s a public demand for somebody to resign in Washington, it’s always a Republican[,]" is more a throw-away or transitional statement. Second, trusting a far left site to accurately report on a far right pundit is a bit credulous.

As for the later bit, I have no problem with this site's distain for Limbaugh or Malkin. What perturbs me is when some authors use the techniques of mis-quoting and false contexting, that is far too common on either fringe, to show that their ire at the subject in question is not just valid, but righteous. I dont read Greenwald nor Coulter for this very reason.