AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

Foxfyre wrote:

It was Clinton supporters who demanded the investigation, and it was conducted by the GAO at the Clinton supporters' request to settle the matter

I don't think you'll be able to back that up.

Please show a source that confirms your claim that the GAO investigation was a response to a request from Democratic Representative or "Clinton supporter".

On Jan. 25, [2001], White House spokesman Ari Fleischer had declined to detail the nature of any vandalism but criticized such behavior indirectly by asserting that the new administration would lead Americans toward greater civility.

Foxfyre,

let me state it plainly: you're resorting to lies and fabrications.

And to think that conservatives now want the current administration to ignore torture approved by the Bush administration shows how tainted their brains are.

Foxfyre,

let me state it plainly: you're resorting to lies and fabrications.

When confronted with a New York Times article citing Representative Bob Barr as the one who launched the Congressional investigation, you resort to denigrating that newspaper instead of at least acknowledging that the investigation was launched by a Republican representative.

When asked to back up your claims, you resort to ad hominem insults, questioning the other poster's integrity rather than simply quoting the relevant information that, according to you, is so "obvious".


What you present is a pathetic excuse for a discussion, based on lies, smears and personal insults.


Ironically, you're building the case against you all by yourself. Let me post the opening paragraph from the GAO report you just linked:



You will note that the report was written specifically in reply to the request by Bob Barr.

At this point, an apology would be the only appropriate reply. However, given your usual mode of operation, the only thing I expect you to do is to pout and sulk, claim that I took your statements out of context and/or act insulted and accuse me of starting the barrage of ad hominems.

Convention Against Torture, signed and championed by Ronald Reagan, Article II/IV:

No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat or war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture. . . Each State Party shall ensure that all acts of torture are offences under its criminal law.

As word of Souter's retirement spread, conservative groups seemed to be laying the groundwork for a fight.

"Obama's own record and rhetoric make clear that he will seek left-wing judicial activists who will indulge their passions, not justices who will make their rulings with dispassion," said Ed Whelan, president of the conservative Ethics and Public Policy Center.

[Jonathan Adler, November 8, 2008 at 11:43am] Trackbacks
Sen. Kyl Threatens Filibuster of Court Nominations:

The Phoenix Buisness Journal reports that Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ) warned that he would attempt to filibuster any Supreme Court nominations that he deemed too liberal.

I apologize if I hurt your feelings.

The left screams nothing of the sort. You're attempting to construct an argument for someone else to defend to make you point valid.

I've heard many arguments against nuclear weaponry, none of which has been that it's illegal.

What about the fact that we prosecuted Japanese solders for doing it? The legality of waterboarding has been long established as illegal. Perhaps you think there is a difference in the legality based on the nationality/ethnicity of the person doing the act?

Hey, I'm half Japanese, maybe it's illegal if I waterboard someone.

Even if many legal scholars think this, the laws are on the books LV. Many legal scholars can decide jaywalking i not a crime, but until the laws change, their opinion means nothing.

You are the one asking for the rule of law to be bent. And I ask, for what? Pride? You must not think our laws that sacred if you'd bend them for a bunch of people who you don't know and who didn't have a real respect for the law either.

If you really believed in the rule of law, you'd want it enforced regarudless of political loyalty.

No, they didn't pursue it, because it didn't happen.

What a lame-ass comeback that was on your part, seriously. You created a Strawman, Appealed to Authority, and put forth an Ad Hominem argument all in the same post, along with outright an outright factual error. Terrible effort.

Cycloptichorn

Damage at White House Offices Being Handed Over to the Bush Administration from The Clinton Staff-Truth!

Summary of eRumor:
When George W. Bush took over the presidency in 2001, his new staff arrived in the offices of the White House to find that there had been widespread pranks and vandalism by the departing Clinton staff. Published reports said computers were left unusable, pornography was found on both computers and walls, and telephone systems were trashed by the cutting of cables and wires.

The Truth:
The final, official report from the Government Accounting Office was released on June 11, 2002. The 220 page document says there was damage, although not as much as some of the early reports had suggested. The GAO says the damage included 62 missing computer keyboards, 26 cell phones, two cameras, ten antique doorknobs and several presidential medallions and office signs. The damage estimate was about $20,000. Clinton critics say the report proves that the departing Clinton staff members acted recklessly and disrespectfully. Clinton supporters say the report shows that the allegations of vandalism were exaggerated and that there were similar incidents when Clinton took over the White House from the staff of George Bush.

The GAO report concludes that even though damage was verified and that some of it appeared to have been intentional, there was not clear evidence of who was responsible for it.

This has been a subject of contention since President Bush took office. There were reports of vandalism, graffiti, and obscene messages in White House offices by outgoing Clinton staffers. Bush downplayed the reports saying he wanted to move on with the presidency. Clinton supporters, however, charged that the story was not true and that the Bush forces had made up the story to make Bush's staff look better than Clinton's. Former President Clinton offered to pay for any damage and his supporters called for an investigation.

May 18, 2001 the General Accounting Office issued a three-page letter that said that it was unable confirm the damage largely to a lack of records from the White House. The letter also said that the condition of the White House offices was "...consistent with what we would expect to encounter when tenants vacate office space after an extended occupancy." As to any details of damage, the GAO letter said For supporters of former President Clinton, that seemed to end the matter. They proclaimed victory, called the whole story an urban legend, and asked the White House to apologize.

In response, White House press secretary Ari Fleischer outlined the details of the damage, most of which was in the Eisenhower Execitive Office Building adjacent to the White House. On June 3, 2001 The Washington Post quoted Fleischer as saying that the damage included the removal of the letter "W" from 100 computer keyboards, five missing brass nameplates with the presidential seal on them, 75 telephones with cover plates missing or apparently intentionally plugged into the wrong wall outlets, six fax machines relocated in the same way, ten cut phone lines, two historic door knobs missing, overturned desks and furniture in about 20 percent of the offices, obscene graffiti in six offices, and eight 14-foot loads of usable office supplies recovered from the trash. According to Fleischer, there was one incident in the White House itself, a photocopy machine that had copies of naked people hidden in the paper tray so they would come out from time to time with other copies.

Critics of the Bush administration said they didn't trust the White House report.

On June 5, 2001, the General Accounting Office announced that it had launched an investigation into the matter, which was released on June 11, 2002.

There was a companion story that Air Force One had been the victim of the outgoing Clintons and that numerous items from aboard the plane had been pilfered. President Bush himself told reporters aboard Air Force one on February 12, 2001, that the report was not true. According to Salon Washington correspondent Jake Tipper, Bush brought up the subject because the chief steward aboard Air Force One told him the allegations were false.

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/t/trashingthewhitehouse.htm

As far as "computer wires and electrical outlets" being ripped from the walls, the GAO said that White House employees had reported observing several telephone wires that had been ripped from the walls, but a repair request to the GSA did not refer to the wires as being "ripped." Instead, the request asked repair staff to "organize all loose wires and make them not so visible." The GAO concluded that "even though the staff made these observations ... we did not know when and how the wires became separated from the walls."

And the GAO reported that "at least $9,324 was spent to repair and replace items that were observed broken or missing in specific locations and for cleaning services in offices where observations were made." But there was no mention of "damage [of] several thousand dollars worth of furniture in the White House master bedroom," as the e-mail alleges. According to the GAO, its report focused on "observations that were made in the West Wing of the White House and the EEOB [Eisenhower Executive Office Building] during the transition, and not the White House residence or the NEOB [New Executive Office Building]."

Also, damage to the White House master bedroom wasn't among the incidents reported by the Washington Post's Mike Allen, who, on June 2, 2001, received a copy of the list of damage compiled by the White House from press secretary Ari Fleischer. According to Allen's report, the list included: "obscene graffiti in six offices, a 20-inch-wide presidential seal ripped off a wall, 10 sliced telephone lines and 100 inoperable computer keyboards." Also reported were "pornographic or obscene greetings" on telephones in the vice president and White House counsel offices. Allen wrote that incidents described by Fleischer reportedly occurred mainly in the Executive Office Building next door to the White House.

Hey, haven't talked with you in a while.

Quote:

The left screams nothing of the sort. You're attempting to construct an argument for someone else to defend to make you point valid.

I've heard many arguments against nuclear weaponry, none of which has been that it's illegal.

A few links where progressives accuse the US of war crimes for dropping the bomb on Japan:

http://books.google.com/books?id=WBfB5208LBgC&pg=PA113&lpg=PA113&dq=japan+atomic+bomb+crime&source=bl&ots=ZLmd_kR9E6&sig=oIpB6PJiF61EMGaY4YQsgdfDNOU&hl=en&ei=JoT8SZnrBp-4tgPG3aHrAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debate_over_the_atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki

http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:YqgkajhYx7YJ:www.newscientist.com/article/dn7706+japan+atomic+bomb+war-crime&cd=13&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us\

Of course, that is just three of thousands, not including individual blogs.

Quote:

What about the fact that we prosecuted Japanese solders for doing it? The legality of waterboarding has been long established as illegal. Perhaps you think there is a difference in the legality based on the nationality/ethnicity of the person doing the act?

Hey, I'm half Japanese, maybe it's illegal if I waterboard someone.

Being half Japanese, what do believe should have happened to FDR admin officials who placed US citizens in interment camps? I pointed out earlier that those who believe in the rule of law should agree that those people should be hunted down and prosecuted, just as Germany today still hunts Nazis.

I've found some here only believe in the rule of law only as it applies to the right.

Japanese soldiers did, indeed, waterboard Americans in WWII. They also committed violent acts towards them, including starving them, burning with cigarettes, beatings with sticks, they broke bones, and other atrocities.

You and others use this argument as if waterboarding was the worse act the Japanese committed against their prisoners. That's disingenuous, don't you think?

Quote:

Even if many legal scholars think this, the laws are on the books LV. Many legal scholars can decide jaywalking i not a crime, but until the laws change, their opinion means nothing.

You're correct; their opinion means nothing to the left. I agree.

Quote:

You are the one asking for the rule of law to be bent. And I ask, for what? Pride? You must not think our laws that sacred if you'd bend them for a bunch of people who you don't know and who didn't have a real respect for the law either.

If you really believed in the rule of law, you'd want it enforced regardless of political loyalty.

I, like many others, do not believe water boarding is necessarily a crime in time of war, any more than playing obnoxious music or other psychological methods, especially when its use is as strictly enforced as it was.

It was used, what, on three terrorists? I would hardly call that routine.

I would love, actually, to see all rules of law enforced. I just wish the left wouldn't be so selective in their perceived enforcement of the law.

Anyway, I enjoy discussing these issues with you; glad you responded...

The Bush administration should be investigated.

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html
Article II
Section 1.
…
The President shall …
Before he enter on the execution of his office, he shall take the following oath or affirmation:--"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
…
Section 4. The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html
Amendment X. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.