That Dick!

joefromchicago wrote:

Lash wrote:
Immediately after the apology, Sen. John McCain (news, bio, voting record), an Arizona Republican and former prisoner of war, spoke in Durbin's defense. "All of us, I believe, who have had the opportunity to serve in public life from time to time have said things that we deeply regret. I know that I have. I would like to say that the senator from Illinois, he did the right thing, the courageous thing, and I believe we can put this issue behind us."

___

Not.

Why not?

Because it's on tape. It will be played over and over (the louder and more often, the better), especially when the '06 elections are in full swing.

His fake 'cry' is good, but not nearly as good as Clinton's fake 'cry'.

0 Replies

rayban1 wrote:

This then is the basis for the decision and I would have chosen the same course of action even knowing that my critics in the press would probably try to turn it into a debate with never ending intellectual ramifications which is exactly what you and all the sob sisters on this forum want to do.

You have critics in the press?

rayban1 wrote:

Furthermore, your platitudes regarding healthy debate are absolutely meaningless this far into the game.........debate causes divisiveness which is exactly what the our enemies are hoping for as in the case of the lost war against the communists in North Vietnam. Walter Cronkite sealed the loss in his Feb 1968 broadcast (after a few days in Vietnam) in which he concluded that the US was "Mired in Stalemate" and that the war was "unwinable". I hope never again to see the power that he wielded during that evening broadcast. Endless debates by intellectuals have never yielded anything but divisiveness but that is the price we pay for living in freedom and that is the foundation for my rage that you commented about. The destructiveness of endless "debate" creates a sense of frustration which results in a feeling of rage against those who are so blinded by an ideology that says "ALL WAR IS BAD" and if only we stick our heads in the sand and debate it, it will just go away.

So, in other words, debate is fine in principle, as long as no one actually takes a contrary position.

0 Replies

JustWonders wrote:

Because it's on tape. It will be played over and over (the louder and more often, the better), especially when the '06 elections are in full swing.

I have no doubt that Durbin's opponents will try to use this in future. But that's not my point. I'm not interested in what people will do about this issue, but what they should do. McCain said that, with the apology, we can put this issue behind us. I'm asking: why shouldn't we?

JustWonders wrote:

His fake 'cry' is good, but not nearly as good as Clinton's fake 'cry'.

What excellent vision you must have that you can see into the souls of men.

0 Replies

Joefromchicago wrote:

So, in other words, debate is fine in principle, as long as no one actually takes a contrary position.

Debate in all mundane subjects is worthwhile and even humorous at times ........during war time, debate should be confined to planning and activities conducted prior to decision making.

Nothing succeeds like success and even as inept as Eisenhower appeared at times he made the decision that ultimately led to victory......THE NORMANDY INVASION. The debate was confined to activities PRIOR to that decision......end of discussion.

If you think there is any doubt that this president wants victory in the war against these insane long bearded fanatics........then I suggest you take another look. After taking that long look you may find your assumptions lacking. While it is true that he is a "Political animal" his difficult decisions are made with the intent to protect the interests and citizens of this country and to hell with the consequences if they appear not to agree with his critics. Most of the time, the consequences are merely controversial and not substantive but of course only history can make that final judgement.

_________________

0 Replies

I am informed by the erudite Joe from Chicago that Richard Posner is NOT the chief judge US court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, I must abjectly beg the erudite Joe From Chicago's pardon.

Richard A, Posner WAS the chief Judge of the US court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

But I hope that Joe From Chicago does not feel that this lessens, in any way, Judge Posner's legal brilliance and expertise in the finer points of the law.

BECAUSE IT DOESN'T.

I am sure that the erudite Joe From Chicago knows that the writer of "An Affair of State" eviscerated the former president Clinton by pointing out Clinton's legal problems and his adolescent evasions.

Indeed, Judxge Posner states( P. 54)

QUOTE

"Even if, as I do not for a moment believe, none of President Clinton's lies under oath amounted to perjury in the strict technical sense, they were false and misleading statements designed to derail legal proceedings, and so these were additional acts of obstruction of justice--as well as additional overt acts of a conspiracy to obstruct justice involving Clinton, Lewinsky, Currie, and possibly Jordan and others as well, such as Blumenthal. An imaginative prosecutor could no doubt add counts of wire fraud, criminal contempt, the making of false statements to the government and aiding and abetting a crime....A conservsative estimate of the punishement a person might receive who committed the series of crimes sketched( ignoring perjury in Clinton's answers to the questions put to him by the House Judiciary Committee and certain other peripheral offenses would be a prison sentence of thirty to thirty seven months"

end of quote.

But who is this jurist who, as the learned Joe From Chicago( who I note has time to make posts on this venue---Do successful lawyers have time to post on Able2know?) tells us is no longer the Chief Judge of the Appealate Court- Seventh Circuit.

Well, to begin with, he is still an Appealate Court Judge; a graduate of Harvard Law School- MAgna Cum Laude-President of the Law Review, Senior Lecturer at University of Chicago Law School, Law Clerk to Justice William J. Breenan, Jr. ; Assistant Solicitor General of the United States; and author of many many important and acclaimed books including- "Overcoming Law"

Perhaps, someday, if Joe From Chicago is very good, Judge Posner will allow Joe to serve him some coffee.

0 Replies

rayban1- The main reason why Durbin wept crocodile tears when he abjured his statements was that he knew that the big man- Mayor Daley - who calls the shots on who runs and who doesn't, had just created another anus for him. Daley excoriated Durbin for his "disrespect" to our soldiers.

I don't know how old Joe From Chicago is but I can tell him that Durbin's comments would have caused him to be ridden out of town on a rail during World War II.

0 Replies

joefromchicago wrote:

JustWonders wrote:
Because it's on tape. It will be played over and over (the louder and more often, the better), especially when the '06 elections are in full swing.

I have no doubt that Durbin's opponents will try to use this in future. But that's not my point. I'm not interested in what people will do about this issue, but what they should do. McCain said that, with the apology, we can put this issue behind us. I'm asking: why shouldn't we?

Because he didn't actually apologize. Read his comments carefully.

0 Replies

rayban1 wrote:

Debate in all mundane subjects is worthwhile and even humorous at times ........during war time, debate should be confined to planning and activities conducted prior to decision making.

And afterwards, everyone is free to debate as long as they all share the same opinion.

Thanks, that clears things up.

0 Replies

Rayban 1- Joe doesn't really like to debate. He just wants to trumpet his own ideas, make a smarmy comment about the fact that judge is no longer a "chief judge" and then, when he gets a spanking, is unable to handle it.

I thought Joe From Chicago was a legal wizard!!

I am disapppointed.

0 Replies

chiczaira wrote:

But I hope that Joe From Chicago does not feel that this lessens, in any way, Judge Posner's legal brilliance and expertise in the finer points of the law.

The position of chief judge rotates among the circuit judges on the basis of seniority, so it is an honor that is granted to those whose sole merit is that they have managed to live long enough to receive it. Some day even Dan Manion will be chief judge of the seventh circuit, and on that day I will think no less of his legal skills than I do now.

chiczaira wrote:

I am sure that the erudite Joe From Chicago knows that the writer of "An Affair of State" eviscerated the former president Clinton by pointing out Clinton's legal problems and his adolescent evasions.

Posner has written many things, including a few that might have been relevant to the topic of this thread.

chiczaira wrote:

But who is this jurist who, as the learned Joe From Chicago( who I note has time to make posts on this venue---Do successful lawyers have time to post on Able2know?) tells us is no longer the Chief Judge of the Appealate Court- Seventh Circuit.

As I've mentioned before, chiczagato: for you, I make the time available.

chiczaira wrote:

Perhaps, someday, if Joe From Chicago is very good, Judge Posner will allow Joe to serve him some coffee.

I doubt that I'll ever be that good -- or that desperate for human companionship.

0 Replies

chiczaira wrote:

... Do successful lawyers have time to post on Able2know?

No ... we don't.

0 Replies

Thank you Joe From Chicago. Now, perhaps, you will learn that you cannot denigrate an entire post because of an irrelvant error.

I note that although you deprecate Posner, you take no time to rebut his statements on Clinton.

Why not? A brilliant jurist like you should be able to show how Posner's statements on Clinton( which I quoted) are egregiously mistaken.

Could it be that although your idiology does not allow you to compliment Posner in any way, you are quite unable to show how he is wrong in his statements about Slick Wilie?

0 Replies

JustWonders wrote:

Because he didn't actually apologize. Read his comments carefully.

I freely concede that what Durbin issued was in the nature of an "unpology." As he stated:

I sincerely regret if what I said caused anyone to misunderstand my true feelings...That's not saying that he was sorry for what he said, but rather that he was sorry for the effect that his words had on others. Those are two entirely different things: it's the difference between saying "what I said was wrong" and "what you heard and felt was wrong." In my opinion, that's less an admission than an evasion of responsibility.

But then that's the standard type of apology in modern American political discourse. As apologies go, Durbin's wasn't much different from every other politician's apology. We'll never get any genuine admission of responsibility from any politician, so we have to be content with their unpologies. Furthermore, John McCain, who knows a thing or two about military service and torture, accepted that apology and said that we can now put the issue behind us.

So why can't you?

0 Replies

chiczaira wrote:

Thank you Joe From Chicago. Now, perhaps, you will learn that you cannot denigrate an entire post because of an irrelvant error.

I didn't denigrate your entire post because of an irrelevant error. I pointed out an error of fact (a rather surprising one, considering your encyclopedic knowledge of all things Posner). As for the rest of your post, res ipsa loquitur.

chiczaira wrote:

I note that although you deprecate Posner, you take no time to rebut his statements on Clinton.

Why not? A brilliant jurist like you should be able to show how Posner's statements on Clinton( which I quoted) are egregiously mistaken.

Because any discussion of Clinton in this thread would be off-topic.

chiczaira wrote:

Could it be that although your idiology does not allow you to compliment Posner in any way, you are quite unable to show how he is wrong in his statements about Slick Wilie?

I have no problem complimenting Posner, and I have done so before in this forum:

In general, I find many of [Posner's] judicial opinions to be quite solid, as well as entertainingly written (a rare combination). I find his theoretical works on the economic underpinnings of the law to be thought-provoking, but ultimately unpersuasive.Surely you must remember that discussion, chiczagato.

0 Replies

Of course, Joe From Chicago, you need not be persuaded by Posner's Economic Theories. I know many people who are not. Some of them do not have the ability to read and understand what he is saying.

You comment that this thread was not about Clinton. You are apparently unaware that my reference to Clinton was made when someone decried the fact that we are losing "high moral ground".
If you don't think that the inclusion of Clinton's destruction of the American Presidency does not belong as a response to someone who is moaning about the loss of "high moral ground" in our treatment of prisoners at Gitmo, I would suggest that your ability to link causes and outcomes is indeed restricted.

0 Replies

joefromchicago wrote:

JustWonders wrote:
Because he didn't actually apologize. Read his comments carefully.

I freely concede that what Durbin issued was in the nature of an "unpology." As he stated:
I sincerely regret if what I said caused anyone to misunderstand my true feelings...
That's not saying that he was sorry for what he said, but rather that he was sorry for the effect that his words had on others. Those are two entirely different things: it's the difference between saying "what I said was wrong" and "what you heard and felt was wrong." In my opinion, that's less an admission than an evasion of responsibility.

But then that's the standard type of apology in modern American political discourse. As apologies go, Durbin's wasn't much different from every other politician's apology. We'll never get any genuine admission of responsibility from any politician, so we have to be content with their unpologies. Furthermore, John McCain, who knows a thing or two about military service and torture, accepted that apology and said that we can now put the issue behind us.

So why can't you?

I've already put it behind me. Durbin will forever be associated with what he said about Guantanamo and he knows it. A more sincere apology was in order, but he couldn't even manage that. He's finished. He'll spend the rest of his life continuing to make excuses for what he's done and perhaps even believes it in his own mind. But...it will follow him around (as it should) until his dying day.

No matter what you (or Durbin) think about the war, none of those serving deserved his remarks, and it won't be John McCain people are thinking about when that tape is played back...over and over again.

0 Replies

chiczaira wrote:

I wonder if Dont Tread on Me has ever scrutinized the "moral high ground" belonging to the fanatic dirtbags who decapitate innocent men and women who are not combatants and display thier heads on Arab TV.

I am sure that Dont Tread on Me would say that we cannot become like our enemies.

My brother, who was in Iraq, and has returned, Thank God, says that idiots who talk about the "moral high ground" never rode in trucks that came close to hidden bombs planted by Muslim cowards.

<sighhhh...> did you even bother to read or think about what i wrote ?

in your zeal to ream out "uh libbb-uh-rullll" and get to frothing at the keyboard about clinton, which has exactly nothing to do with the topic, i think not.

so here, try it again;

[quote="DontTreadOnMe"]the prisoners need to be charged with a crime. formally.

while the administration toys around with semantics, america is losing it's moral high ground.

it's time to quit playing games with this stuff. charge 'em or cut 'em loose. if ya find 'em coming at ya again... blow 'em away.[/quote]

you're right. i do say we cannot become like our enemies. we are america, not the murderous freakin' holy rollers that want us dead. and because we are better than them, we must act better than them. in all ways. otherwise, america is lost. period.

is that what you want ? clearly you hate america and what it stands for in your claim that america has no moral high ground.

i'm glad that your brother is back safe from iraq. he has earned the right to his opinion that i know nothing about iraq.

but since you apparently needed his input to respond to me, please pass this along so that he gets what i'm talking about;

i've never been in the military. but i was raised by a father that was a combat vet of 2 wars(ww II and korea ) and additionally served as a drill instructor and finished out many years of reserve duty. growing up, i was surrounded by men who had similar experiences as my father. if you think that the violence and viciousness of the nazis and the north koreans was any less horrible than what's going on with the beheadings and car bombs, you really need to rethink it.

let me give you some perspective. over the years i've had to deal with a lot of gangs here, crips, bloods, piru, diesiocho, white fence, rebels, stoners, armenian power, toonerville, etc. along the way, i've had a gun put to my head, knives put to my throat and to my gut. been shot at, been jumped a couple of times, had my wife threatened, and, almost humorously, been attacked with a freakin' sharp pencil by a teenager i was trying to help get straightened out.

if you don't think that there was more than one time that i really thought about going home, getting the gatt and finding a couple of those nimrods and unloading on them, you are wrong. i may have taken great enjoyment from splashing their dumb asses.

and then i would have become what i despised about them. an ignorant, rabid animal.

i chose to remain myself. to keep to the higher moral ground.

are ya gettin' it ?

as far as scrutinizing the islamist thugs ? damn right i scrutinize them. i was scrutinizing them when reagan let lebanon (where i had family in the military...) off the hook, but backed hussein. i scrutinized them when bush senior let hussein off the hook. i scrutinized them when clinton didn't get it done and everybody pretended that the taliban didn't exist (well, actually, unocal knew they existed because of the pipline negotiations ). i scrutinized them the whole first 9 months of the bush jr. administration that they did absolutely nothing about bin laden, failing to even convene a meeting of the terrorist task force cheney was assigned to lead in february of 2001.

i continued to scrutinize the islamists on the morning of 9/11 as i was putting up the first u.s. flag on our street.

i am scrutinizing them today. i despise what they do and what they represent. they are murderous thugs with no conscience and a misguided ideology of hatred against those not like them. all in all, they suck.

i don't want to be anything like them. no way, no how.

i don't want my country to act like them. period.

now, do you get it ?

0 Replies

JustWonders wrote:

I've already put it behind me.

I see no evidence for that.

0 Replies

joefromchicago wrote:

JustWonders wrote:
I've already put it behind me.

I see no evidence for that.

No, I suppose not. I have no other evidence to offer other than the fact that I'm catching an early morning plane bound for vacation and have no thoughts of Durbin and his self-made 'plight' and won't for some time.

Judging from reports that he was deluged with emails and phone calls from angry citizens demanding an apology, he has far more important worries than whether or not I put it behind me.

I shall be lying in the sun, drink and good book in hand, and I assure you, Dick Durbin will be the last thing on my mind Smile

0 Replies

chiczaira wrote:

rayban1- The main reason why Durbin wept crocodile tears when he abjured his statements was that he knew that the big man- Mayor Daley - who calls the shots on who runs and who doesn't, had just created another anus for him. Daley excoriated Durbin for his "disrespect" to our soldiers.

I don't know how old Joe From Chicago is but I can tell him that Durbin's comments would have caused him to be ridden out of town on a rail during World War II.

Yes......I took note of the fact that after Daley created a new anus for Durbin, he (Durbin) issued his "sort of " apology, choking and shedding crocodile tears. I sincerely hope Daley intends to end Durbin's political career and he should, considering the pathetic nature of the wording in the "sort of" apology.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know