“Admitting” a “Cover-up?”
October 7th, 2006 – 4:25 PM by Eric BlackIn an interview yesterday on his radio program, my new best friend Hugh Hewitt accused me of various crimes against truth ranging from cowardice (unwilling to call a lie a lie) to partisanship (trying to win the election for Patty Wetterling). And he seemed to be saying at the very end (when he compared me to an athlete who’s been paid to throw a game, but who can’t afford to make it too obvious) that I have lain low for years, trying to establish a reputation for accuracy and fairness, just so that I could throw it away at this key moment in this key race by giving Wetterling a pass and allowing her lie to stand.
Imagine my embarrassment at having my scheme, after so many years of careful planning, unmasked in front of a national radio audience.
The act of betrayal to for which I have been laying the groundwork all these years was an article, displayed very prominently in the Friday Strib, headlined “Wetterling ad overstates facts of Foley’s messages to pages.” The subhead reads: “The TV spot by the Sixth District candidate is wrong in stating that members of Congress admitted to a coverup - none has.”
The story quotes Wetterling’s current ad as saying: “Congressional leaders have admitted covering up the predatory behavior of a congressman who used the Internet to molest children.” Then, in my own voice, it states: “No member of Congress has admitted covering up evidence of salacious e-mails and instant messages that Foley sent to teenage congressional pages.”
Wetterling, the ungrateful wretch, has not called to thank me for any of these compliments I showered upon her at the cost of my former reputation.
My new best friend Hewitt believes that the world would be a better place if more people called more false statements “lies.” I’m not sure this is true.
As a matter of practice, I have not used the word “lie” to describe any of the false, misleading or deceptive statements that have come across my desk in the course of the “Is That a Fact?” series. And there have been some beauts, from both parties. I reserve the word “lie” for those rare cases in which there is clear evidence that a clear falsehood has been told with intent to deceive, with knowledge that it was false.
Against that admittedly high standard, I don’t have the evidence I would need to call the Wetterling ad a lie.
My new best friend expressed no interest in whether any false or misleading statements had been made against Wetterling by Republicans, nor whether I had applied the same practice of describing the inaccuracies with words other than “lie.”
The case at hand comes down to two word choices.
Is there anything in the Foley case that could be called a “cover-up?”
I say no. For me, a coverup is an action, rather than an inaction. But there are several people who have produced definitions that suggest that failure to disclose something in the hopes that it will not become known can also be called a cover-up.
Some have alleged that the failure of the Republicans on the committee that oversees the Congressional page program to inform the Democrat on the committee of the concerns about Foley and his emails, for example, looks like a coverup. I disagree. I actually agree with what I take to be Hewitt’s view of the word. But, unlike him, I am not so sure I am right and that those who think something has happened that could be called a coverup are wrong. Certainly not enough to call anyone had that view a liar.
The next word is “admit.” The Wetterling ad says that the congressional leaders have “admitted covering up.” The way I understand that word, they have not confessed to a cover-up. And I said so in my story. But various leaders have disclosed various actions that they took or failed to take in the year since suspicion fell on Foley’s communications with pages. I will confess that I am not the master of this set of facts. But in the absence of a clear statement by a congressional leader that he participated in a coverup, I believe the Wetterling ad is an exaggeration that goes beyond the known facts in the case.
Initerestingly, among those who disagree with me is the columnist George Will, who said in is Friday column that Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert “seems to be not just confessing a cover-up, but also complaining that a cover-up was undone by bad manners.”
My new friend and I a disagree with George will, but I brought it up to him Friday and asked whether he was calling George Will a liar. He said he was not, because he hadn’t read the column, but would look into it. I look forward to his ruling. He also said that whatever Will said was irrelevant.
To me, the relevance is this: not only can views differ about whether congressional leaders have admitted to cover-up, but apparently you don’t have to be a lying, cowardly, liberal Democratic operative to believe that these words apply.
My new best friend described himself during our interview as “very objective,” but acknowledged that he freely allows partisan and ideological loyalties color his objectivity. We’re in pretty deep water here, folks. Is it possible to call yourself objective while admitting that you freely allow your partisan and ideological loyalties to guide what you think and what you say?
Might have to look in several dictionaries to find a definition of objectivity that fills this bill.
But I don’t accuse Hugh Hewitt of lying here, just making a poor word-choice that he can’t really defend according to a strict definition of the term.
Thank you Hugh Hewitt
I appreciate Hugh Hewitt allowing me time on his program to defend myself against his calumnies. He is smart and tough. I thought he pulled a couple of cheap tricks on me, but he gave me plenty of time to talk and didn’t edit anything out, and these are important elements of fairness. I’m especially grateful to whoever typed the transcript for leaving out all my umm’s and er’s. When I heard myself on the radio, I was horrified at how I sounded. And the quaking in my boots came out as quavering in my voice.
Still, I would agree to go on the show again if Hewitt would be willing to follow up on any of the issues raised on this post or some others raised in the interview. I tried to tell him, though I’m not sure he got it, that I agree with him about the impossibilty of objective journalism. I’m just not sure that his alternative, of freely allowing his partisan and ideological biases to color what he says, is the best that can be done.
And since he was fair enough to me, I'’ll offer to post, unedited if he leaves out dirty words and online poker ads, any reply he wants to make to this post on the website of what I take to be his second-least-favorite newspaper.
My new best friend purports to care about the precise meaning of words.
My new best friend wrote a 2004 book titled:
” If It’s Not Close, They Can’t Cheat: Crushing the Democrats in Every Election and Why Your Life Depends on It.”
I regret that so much of our discourse is conducted in these tones. Word choices like these make it hard to remain rational and try to listen to all sides of the argument in the context of an election.
Reading this title the way my friend reads the script of the Wetterling ad, I conclude that he has made the following case. Democrats cheat. Republicans do not. If the Republicans fail to crush the Democrats in every election, you and I will die.
Democrats have won some elections since then, but let’s cut Hewitt some slack (would he do the same for me?) and assume he means presidential elections. I’m in my 50s. Who knows, perhaps I will live long enough to see
a Democratic president. If this presidency does not cost me my life, is my new best friend a liar?
I say no. What do you think?
p.s. I’m taking tomorrow (Sunday) off.
270 Responses to "“Admitting” a “Cover-up?”"
Eric,
Mitch Berg mentioned on his radio show today that you appeared on “The Spew Spewitt Program” (his words). The Patriot 1280 radio show hosts had previously stated that you were the most objective reporter on the StarTribune staff but remained strangely silent now that Spew tried to put the hammer on you. I also found it humorous when Spew raised James Lileks’ hackles when he clearly tried to bait James into questioning your credentials and reputation for fairness (especially funny when Spew called him “Jim”, no accident that one).
He clearly has an agenda and I find it embarassing to listen to a desperate talk show host continuing to ask journalists whether they are for or against abortion! I feel you held your own but should I ever get into a similar position of defending my right to political privacy, I would change the subject to say that the vast majority of educated people tend to vote Democratic or progressive. For example, last I heard, it was >90% Democratic among professors. Can you imagine the long term implications of removing the smartest 90% of the faculty among our nation’s research universities? So why ask the question when you know STATISTICALLY the answer?
Ultimately, the interesting question that needs answering is this: Why do these right-wing talk-show hosts have such a vendetta against intelligent professionals? My own theory is that they want to grab some of the old glory of being captains of their high-school debate team. Spew desperately wants to debate someone/anyone to show off his sharp rhetorical skills, and get his daily dose of ego gratification.
how many threads did webster hubble cut and paste this to?
“No member of Congress has admitted covering up evidence of salacious e-mails and instant messages that Foley sent to teenage congressional pages.”
Of course there is one. One Mark Foley, who was a member of Congress, and admitted to covering up evidence of salacious e-mails by resigning. He has without a question covered up this evidence by not going to the confession booth (i.e. his voters) the past several years and professing to what he has done. If Patty uses that rhetorical trick, she has won the debate. Her only exaggeration is to make that into the plural. When some other “congressional leader” besides Foley resigns from a post, she is vindicated on her predictive assertion.
And a much better argument than Clinton’s “meaning of the word ‘is’ is”.
team ramrod, Sorry I mistakenly entered into the wrong thread, an honest mistake.
BTW, What’s the point about promoting the latest Scorcese movie on Eric’s blog? In the old Usenet days, we would call that “hijacking a thread”, i.e. changing the subject.
Yeah, it occurred to me that what Hugh was expecting you to do was accept his definition of “lie” in this case, and ignore the fact that there were legitimate opinions that differed on these definitions.
I would be interested in having you go back on, to see what his approach would be upon reflection and after having read your post here.
I think it’s worth noting that on HH’s blog right now, an update to the post about your conversation links to the local evidently conservative blog “Bachmannvwetterling” that, as he says, gives your high marks, and thinks your reasoning bested Hewitt’s on the matter.
http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/g/13b43bc5-857c-4c92-a5e7-626452b00320?comments=true#commentAnchor
I think Hugh’s typical strategy of aggressiveness led him astray yesterday and actually does harm to his own larger issues. In going after you so hard, he does himself no credit by failing to realize that your work is not the problem at the Star Trib, and it goes beyond editorial page versus news division.
For example, at this point in time the Strib is nakedly vulnerable on the way they’ve absolutely failed to acknowledge and investigate the flaws in Ellison’s account concerning his relationship with the Nation of Islam. That’s the scandal in the news end of the Strib these days, and in going after your stuff in the blunderbuss way he did, he misfires and harms his own credibility should he choose to go after the real story.
My new best friend expressed no interest in whether any false or misleading statements had been made against Wetterling by Republicans, nor whether I had applied the same practice of describing the inaccuracies with words other than “lie.â€
I guess this is what HH meant when he acknowledged that he freely allows partisan and ideological loyalties color his objectivity
It seems rather silly in one breadth to call yourself “very objective” and then in the next admit partisan and ideological loyalties get in the way. You can’t have it both ways.
EB at least you’re clear about your definition of ‘lie’ and apply it to all. I may not agree with your definition but I can’t fault you as unfair in its application. I can live with that in a journalist. I don’t expect to agree with everything journalists say but I do expect fairness.
I do wish you would reconsider your definition of coverup though. The link you provided for def. of objectivity is the one I used for the def. of coverup. I think your standard is too high b/c it is unreasonable to expect anyone involved in a coverup would ever explicity state they were. Which means you must look to action or inaction to determine. And in this case I think the inactions over a year or likely more make the determination obvious.
Wow, Mr. Black:
That’s a long post. Very self-referential, too, but it’s probably justified in this case.
Eric Black wrote:
“…in the absence of a clear statement by a congressional leader that he participated in a coverup, I believe the Wetterling ad is an exaggeration.”
I’m sorry, but that’s just a stupid statement. I was afraid that that was your thinking, Mr. Black. Often you are right, but you’re flat out wrong on that one. You do yourself and your readers a disservice if you stand by that one, Mr. Black.
A person can admit to a cover up without using the words “I admit to a cover up” in the same way that a person can admit to robbing a bank without using the words: “I admit to robbing a bank.” (e.g. the accused can say: “I walked into the bank, I pulled a gun on the teller, I told her to give me the money or I’d kill her”–all of that is an “admission.”)
A congressman admits to a cover up when he admits to conduct that constitutes a cover up (they admit they failed to warn the pages and their parents about Foley after his “over-friendly emails”, they admit they failed to use their access to the press to publicize Foley’s “over friendly” behavior.)
The Wetterling campaign doesn’t have to wait for the suspects to use the magic words “I admit to” any more than you do, or I do, or George Will does. Their admission of their failure to act and their failure to inform the public is an admission of a cover up. This was all explained to you before, by me, I think.
By the way–about the self-referential stuff in your post: why are you sounding so outraged about the way you were smeared by Hewitt? I told you it was going to happen before it happened, the conservative readers here knew it was going to happen before it happened (though they were damned if they were gonna warn you, this was too good to pass up)–so why did you go, if you knew you were gonna be treated like that?
Do you *enjoy* going on the air with a guy whose going to smear your integrity and that of your paper? That’s part of what that guys like Hewitt do for a living, Mr. Black, they smear people on the air. You were told that, yet you went; now you know that, but you’re thinking about going again.
That’s not bravery, that’s trying to walk through the same closed door two times in a row. I’m not going to support anyone who does that. No wonder so many of these guys have contempt of the professional news media.
Going on conservative talk radio to talk about how the media does its job is like going to see Tony Soprano after you learn he’s got a contract out on you. So why go? To beg for mercy?
Now can you print something in the paper about how Michele Bachmann’s an evangelical candidate? It’s okay for the Strib to say that now; the Washington Post has identified her as the evangelical candidate in the 6th district race.
“Listeners should rejoice right now, because there are believers all across your listening area that are praying now. And I would say that if you can’t attend the rally, you can pray. And God calls us to fall on our faces and our knees and cry out to Him and confess our sins. And I would just ask your listeners to do that now. Cry out to a Holy God. He wants to hear us, He will hear us if we will confess our sins and cry out to Him.†— Senator Michele Bachmann, appearing as guest on radio program “Prophetic Views Behind The Newsâ€, hosted by Jan Markell, KKMS 980-AM, March 6, 2004.
“Wow, Mr. Black:
That’s a long post. Very self-referential, too, but it’s probably justified in this case.” says bill p.
excuse the pun, but that is like the pot calling the kettle mr black.
as far as talking about the scorcese movie, something we brought up a while ago was that people would not fight as much if they just got along better on other subjects. sorry if i offended anyone by not just continuing the inane and repetitive taunts and accusations like everyone else. i will commence to post like the other partisan robots beginning…. now.
Dora, the obvious counter question is this: can you possibly keep your deepfelt political ideals from coloring your reporting? Do you factcheck everything at the same level or do you look harder to disprove items that disagree with your worldview? Do you seek out experts from both sides to comment on items? Does your worldview prevent you from thinking about questions that would occur quite naturally to someone from the other side of the aisle?
I think Eric works very hard to avoid these pitfalls but the dangers are pretty obvious. From what I’ve read of him I think he’d agree. And I disagree that someone can’t be both partisan and objective. You have an obvious partisan slant. Are you saying that you can’t be objective about information?
Eric you have been had by the media. The media is not based in facts that are objective and consistent — instead it is based in a system of sophistries that are based in creating momentary victories. These are soon replaced with new temporal ‘facts’ – gotchas — that create new victories. The system is designed to never encourage anyone to look backward and come to some stable objective option. The arguments you raise here are so ’last news-cycle.’ You were ‘nailed!’ For you to actually question the nature of facts on which you ‘lost’ your argument just proves you are a bad loser – Sore-Loserman! Sore-Loserman! Sore-Loserman! Come-on, everyone chant with me!
Hewitt has moved on. The truth of your rebuttal is irrelevant to him and his ilk.
The saddest thing of all is that you don’t understand the strength of Hewitt’s channel. The Radio-Internet media, devoid of any of the restraints of integrity of the arcane journalism that preceded it, need not dwell in inconvenient truths. The effect is a constant reinforcement of a certain ideology — not an objective truth, not the Ten Commandments, instead a series of pranks that reinforce a certain sense of reality.
You live in print. If I wanted to, I could carefully analyze anything you have written in the last 30 years. The fact is that Hewitt really doesn’t have to defend his last utterance if he chooses not to – he just changes the subject. In Hewitt’s world, you are a dinosaur among mammals.
Peder, Your questions are good ones. And we should all ask them of ourselves. I would be a fool to pretend that my worldview doesn’t color my thinking. My worldview is made up of my experiences, my beliefs, my continued learning and influenced by my emotions. Just as everyones is, including journalists.
I do believe that journalists should work hard at avoiding the pitfalls as apparently so do you. But if HH says he “freely” allows his partisan and ideological views to color his objectivity then I’d conclude he isn’t working hard at it but should. And as a listener or reader of HH’s work how would I know when he’s being objective and when his objectivity is being colored?
Yes someone can be both partisan and objective. But if they know their partisan or ideological views are coloring their objectivity they should say so. For example, in the thread about torture I did say I wasn’t open minded on it. But that didn’t stop me from challenging others who support it. I think this holds for media people too.
That doesn’t mean that every person in the media should disclose who s/he has voted for the last 10 years or who they’ve given money to or their view on various issues. I think that is overkill.
What I don’t agree with is pretending your objective when clearly you’re not and a rudimentary factcheck proves it.
Replace ‘option’ at the end of sentence four in paragraph one above with ‘opinion’ — sorry.
“…most objective reporter on the Star Tribune staff…” That’s like saying:
[you finish the joke]
On the question of why conservatives have it in for the Strib, it has been so bad for so long, that we tend to overlook moments of clarity that are actually fair reporting.
I propose a series of stories that examine the top 10 or so conservative gripes about the Strib. No easy ones like calling NOW a women’s group and calling Concerned Women for America a “conservative” group. I’m talking the real deal. No junk about how there is a firewall between the editorial page and the newsroom, either.
Why was it OK to go after Grunseth’s marital infidelities (NOT talking about the pool party, but the pictures and hotel records evidencing an affair with an adult woman) but it wasn’t fair to go after President Clinton’s post-60 Minutes affairs/perjury?
What about the Minnesota Poll? Oh, I forgot, Republicans always surge in the last couple days before the election (including 2000 after the drunk driving revelation).
What about the endorsements? Sure, the paper endorses republicans here and there, but never in a close race (where it could make a difference), and never for president. I know, I know. That’s separate from the newsroom. Big deal. Address the concern anyway.
Dan Cohen, Dan Cohen, Dan Cohen. Is shoplifting a newsworthy crime?
1990. Two letters to the Jewish community. One from one campaign, one from the other. Why was only one publicized?
The series of stories should not attribute conservative gripes to “you can’t handle the truth” or “You only think I’m a bad columnist ’cause you disagree with what I wrote” (as Amy’s dad used to rationalize) or some sort of mental diagnosis like Clinton Derangement Syndrome.
Monopoly. My law school roommate couldn’t move up from copy aide in the sports department at the Strib. So he went the easier route of becoming a lawyer. Does the explosion of blogs have anything to do with how it is hard for anyone new, especially a conservative, to break into the news business? Do you have to “know stuff” like Nick Coleman? Or just know the right people?
Jim Boyd. Nuff said.
Fighing Irish (OK), Fighting Sioux (not OK).
There are so many others. The “most objective reporter” on the Star Tribune staff could earn serious points by addressing them in a fair way. Neither Gelfand nor the new reader’s rep. is up to the task.
Former televangelist Jim Bakker admitted that he was wrong, even writing a book with that title. Could the Strib do the same?
I really appreciated what “Team Truth” said. It reminds me a lot about sports teams and their fans. The most fervent and loyal, upon seeing their team defeated, will commiserate for a nanosecond and then say “Wait till next year!”. They will not dwell for too long, except to form long-lasting opinions toward their most despised adversaries.
Hewitt demonstrates this attitude both in his politics and his sports observations. In particular, he compulsively denigrates Pittsburgh Steelers fans at every turn, to the point of insulting certain of his guests from that part of the country. I know this is a minor observation and perhaps a bit of macho steel-country posturing, but it does tell a lot about his competitive streak and win-at-all-costs attitude.
I often wonder why Hewitt concentrates on Minnesota so much and why he gets such a disproportionate number of callers to his nationally syndicated show. I know all his blogging buddies are from Minnesota, but this does not explain much because blogging and radio audiences don’t have much of a common cross-section.
My own crass political opportunist theory is that he goes after states, i.e. Minesota, that are not in the bag for election fraud. As Eric mentions, his book is called “If It’s Not Close, They Can’t Cheat: Crushing the Democrats in Every Election and Why Your Life Depends on It.” which shows the typical projection of one who doth protest too much. Anybody that so obviously projects like that is framing the argument and innoculating himself of misdeeds by his own party.
Peter A. Swanson,
About the Minnesota Poll, here’s an idea. What you ought to do is calibrate the Minnesota Poll for biases you see, add the correction factor to eliminate the bias and then sell that poll to customers. If you are correct in your assertion, there should be a systematic Democratic bias in all the results that you can add in to the Minnesota Poll results without much extra effort.
You should be able to make a bunch of money off this idea, because customers want cheap and accurate polling results, and it eliminates the costly expense of doing your own polling!
… oh wait, if this is such a good idea, why hasn’t anybody done it? Probably because there are no systematic biases and, IIRC, the surprise victory of Wellstone over Boschwitz was not correctly called by the Minnesota Poll!
Drats, back to square one.
So Eric when are you going to disect the latest RNC ad running against Wetterling? Still waiting for you to disect Bachmanns ad on her supposed work on lowering taxes in MN, and what was her real role is ’saving’ The Disabled Vetrans Camp’ as she states in her newest flier that I received today?
The reason he focuses on Mn so much I would guess is that the Strib is nationally renowned being a very liberal paper. The editorial page is ranked near the top for basic dishonesty. The news pages are not nearly as bad, but like I said before, it’s quite remarkable how poor of a job they’re doing at the Ellison story.
The reason Mn is such a hot bed of conservative blogging is the same thing, I’d guess. Which is kind of funny, that that’s the reward the Strib gets.
(There would be no way to be a news editor with integrity and tell yourself you’ve done a thorough job on the Ellison-NOI background, so I don’t really no what’s going on there. At what point does a conscious decision get made? What do they tell themselves they’re doing?)
“No” what’s going on there - ? Good Lord.
Anyway, all the liberals who dislike Hewitt here are combining the undeniable fact of what can be his overly aggressive attitude with their highly subjective opinions on his insincerity and dishonesty. They combine those three to create the monster in their heads, and of course their beliefs about the deep stupidity and venality of his audience also enter into the mix.
But when you believe, in contrast, that Hewitt is to some extent sincere and usually basically honest, and that the same goes for his audience and that they’re not particularly dumber or smarter than the average DFLer, your basic perception of Hewitt and his aggressiveness changes a bit. Then it just becomes - oh come on Hugh, calm down.
Dora, the reason I can know when he’s letting his biases get the better of him is that I have many sources of information beyond Hugh Hewitt - in fact, even beyond conservative radio hosts supporting me in my deep hatred for anything unfamiliar and non-white.
Good for you Paul. Must be nice to read everybody as accurately as you. But not everybody has that ability or is as widely read as you.
Dora, that’s true, but it’s true on both sides. (And I’m choosing to take your congratulations at face value.)
Hugh Hewitt, like pretty much all prominent GOP operatives, is a projectionist on the order of Bell and Howell. He knows the media deck is stacked in favor of the conservatives and the Republicans — as Billmon posted today, a conservative or Republican can say pretty much anything, no matter how bogus, and be confident they will never be called on it in real time — yet he continues to whine about the nonexistent “liberal media” like Dudley Dursley being turned down for a fifth helping of chocolate cake.
Oh, and Eric:
This is why coddling these guys doesn’t work. They see it as weakness on your part — and as you’ve already found, their response is to attack you that much harder, to see if you’ll knuckle under totally. Don’t give them that satisfaction. Give them the back of your hand instead.
Well, I’m for bed. At the risk of irritating the topicofascists, I’ll leave you all with a homemade personal pan pizza. G’night!
Webster,
90% can’t do, so they teach!
Eric,
I hope you enjoy your day off on Sunday.
Thanks for trying to stick to the truth. Once people get a truthful look at the big picture regarding the issues, Michele Bachmann will be the clear choice. I’m afraid that Patty Wetterling will just be a rubber stamp for extreme leftists like Betty McCollum (DFL), and that would be a step in the wrong direction for America in our war on terror and our need to control our borders.
Web,
You have to go back to 1990 to find an example of the Republican not doing better than the last Minnesota Poll. Maybe the letter referenced in my comment had something to do with it. But the drunk driving revelation in 2000 lowered GWB’s actual numbers vs. the last poll numbers everywhere in the country — except those of the Minnesota Poll. Rob Daves admits the discrepancy, but he attributes it to voter behavior rather than flaws in his methodology.
But let’s not have some anonymous commenter decide the merits of this and other claims of Strib bias. Let’s have the “most objective reporter” in the newsroom look at it.
Parry and Gelfand are apologists. Of course Daves is going to say that his polling is not biased. There are numerous reasons why moderates and conservatives have problems with the Strib.
Hewitt is really deranged.
Different topic (not that we hadn’t already reached one), but has everyone seen the payattention.org commercials encouraging you to vote for “Bag of Leaves” or one of a number of other great candidates this election year? This is apparently the Ad Council. Great idea, effort to turn young people eligible to vote into young voters. Wouldn’t it be nice if all campaign ads were designed to get people to vote, rather than to get people not to vote (for a particular candidate). A good friend of mine told me this week that all the Kennedy, Wetterling and Bachmann ads had made her 18-year-old daughter decide not to vote. Ouch!
Eric,
You did a fine job in your appearance. I feel sorry, sometimes, for print guys trying to do radio (either hosting or as interview subjects) - it’s a different way of approaching a discussion - but you presented yourself well.
And yes, the deck was stacked against you (as it is, indeed, in all talk radio interviews by ANY host); the host controls the agenda, the volume of the phone feed, everything (sort of like the Strib controls what it puts in the Letters section). Above all, talk radio - while it slums with a bit of journalism and reporting - is entertainment. And hearing the good guy beat on the bad guy IS entertainment. Sad, perhaps, but a fact. Trying to “win” in a talk radio interview (or, for that matter, an interview with most newspaper reporters) is like trying to beat the house in Vegas.
Oh, Webster? You’re conflating a two different conversational threads. I noted Mr. Black’s appearance, and also (separately) that some lefty bloggers, showing that famous keen leftyblogger wit, call Hugh “Spew Spewitt”.
Phoenix? I suppose if you consider “Billmon” a dispositive source, then your perspective MIGHT be warped enough to think that conservatives get undeserved breaks in the mainstream media. Say “hi” to Billmon the next time you meet under that glowing purple sky.
I think the slip is showing, Minneapolis Star Tribune. How about some evenhandedness?
http://powerlineblog.com/archives/015484.php
Eric - I’d challenge you to cover Michele Bachmann’s Hugh Hewitt interview - that is more news, than his interview with you. Reporters, blog/talk radio spats/ or blog/blog spats are not news - and when your blog focuses on this, in my opinion, it’s getting away from the real focus - which should be on the 6th District race. Most of Hewitt’s listeners don’t live in the area here - and so aren’t familiar with the different reporters at the Strib, and basically don’t know squat. They also don’t know that the political editor - Doug Tice - is someone who politicly agrees with the Hewitt crowd - and there should be more disclosure of that - and there certainly are questions there - does Tice spike stories that are unfavorable to Bachmann? Does Tice let his political leanings get in the way of his editing?
In the Hugh Hewitt interview, Michele presented herself quite differently than she does when she interviews with mainstream reporters.
Also - it’s worth covering why some of her family members are so angry with the way she has been campaigning. Michele Bachmann lies regularly - about everything.
Take a look on the Strib’s debate tracker:
http://www.startribune.com/blogs/debates/?p=15
http://dumpbachmann.blogspot.com/2006/10/michael-lafave-michele-bachmann-uses.html
Why is Michele Bachmann saying one thing to Hugh Hewitt and another to mainstream reporters such as yourself?
Why is Michele Bachmann backing down from her hardline anti-Northstar position (which helped get her the party endorsement)?
http://www.hometownsource.com/capitol/2006/October/5bachmann.html
But Bachmann argues she is not anti-transit.
While saying she opposed the Northstar Commuter Rail line as senator - Bachmann voted against $37.5 million and $60 million in Northstar funding in 2005 and 2006, respectively - Northstar is here, explained Bachmann.
Michele Bachmann is still making the claim that she IS a tax litigation attorney - from the Hugh Hewitt interview:
http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/Transcript_Page.aspx?ContentGuid=7195712f-28cd-411d-974a-8babda9149d5
MB: No, not that we’ve seen. We haven’t seen that happen yet. As a matter of fact, her last ad that she had out…here I am. I’m a federal tax lawyer. I’ve spent my career cutting taxes. My career in the State Senate for six years, cutting taxes. I was the chief sponsor of the taxpayer’s bill of rights. I hate any tax there is out there, and I want to cut it. And she put an ad out saying that I wanted to increase taxes 23%. It was false and fraudulent. We hand delivered a letter last week, on Friday, to tell her, get your ad off the air. Cease and desist. It’s a lie. And our local media covered that, and said she’s lying, she’s absolutely lying. And she refused to take that ad off the air. So really, Hugh, this isn’t surprising. She lied on her last ad, saying I wanted to increase taxes, when in fact, I want to cut them. She’s lying on this one about what’s happening with our leaders in Congress. So that’s where she’s coming from.
http://www.pattywetterling.com/issues/bachmann/taxexpertise.php
Re the liberal bias of the Strib. What to say about Katherine Kersten? A person with no journalistic credentials, but great conservative ones, and given a non-editorial page regular column. A token conservative, a meaningless gesture? The core question, of course, is how do you measure the liberal bias, and how would you know if it has been balanced? (No negative answers please, in the form of, ‘when they stop…’)
Eric,
I think those who challenge your fairness and objectivity should read your articles on the Bachman-Wetterling-Binkowski race in today’s Strib.
As usual after reading your articles, I could not venture a guess as to which side you support. Congratulations again, for treating us like adults who actually might be left to make up our own minds.
The rest of today’s issue I found hopelessly left of left as usual. (Will we see “What would Reagan say” on next Sunday’s opinion front page?) If the rest of the Strib could get up to your standards, perhaps the “liberal” moniker would subside.
John, please be specific. What did you see that makes you conclude that it was hopelessly liberal? Start with the front page.
Sorry, I was gone for a while…
Page one:
Another feel good article about how my tax dollars are going to give free transportation to people who don’t pay their traffic tickets. I had to go back to work after retiring to pay all my increased taxes, but nobody wants to give me free ransportation to anything.
I guess I missed the feel good article about the other two candidates in the sixth district congressional race?
Another “hazard” article about another good company, pointing out in the first sentence who the “guilty” party is.
And finally, as one who does not worship in the “Church of the Twin Serpents”, another dismaying article about how you can now e-mail your doctor — FOR A COPAY FOR EACH E-MAIL!
how about this for bias, did anyone else notice the pictures of kennedy, klobuchar and fitzgerald all week on the issues comparison page. klobo had a normal smile, kennedy was draped in shadows for a evil overtone, and fitzy has a straight from the asylum lunatic wide open mouth smile. i complained to numerous people at the strib for two days until it changed kennedys pic on firday, the last day of five.
Tommie, I’d say that Kersten belongs in a different category. Her viewpoints are well known. The same thing is true for Nick Coleman. Both of them use obvious ideology in their writing.
You want a front page example? Yesterday’s piece on Alan Fine is almost textbook. You can check the Powerline link in the post above for complete details.
The Strib printed a front page story about a fifth degree asault charge that occured more than a decade ago. The charges were dropped and Fine had his record sealed. The details are murky and amount to he said/she said. Of note is that the court system awarded Fine custody of their child. Worth front page coverage? Maybe.
Proof of bias? Fine’s opponent Ellison had similar charges filed against him last summer. He faces a motion for a restraining order later this month. Heard about that in the Strib? Seen any front page stories regarding that? Me neither. Seems that someone at the Strib thinks the personal lives of Republicans are more fair game than Democrats.
watch out peder, dora is going to call you a bigot for saying the truth.
What to say about Katherine Kersten?
Tommie - Kersten is a columnist, not a reporter. Different rules.
Granted, she’s the only conservative columnist (against Grow and Sturdevant, who may as well be full-time DFL PR agents, as well as Coleman, Syl Jones, and of course the institutional editorial voice, which is relentlessly left-of-center).
Team Ramrod,
Great observation about the Strib’s pictures of canditates. It’s true that they bend over backwards to show the most least flattering photos as possible of the Republican canditates while constantly changing and choosing the best photos of democrats. I complained several times to the Strib reader representative about Michele Bachmann photos, but nothing was done until recently.
You will also notice that the Strib tries to help DFL, Nation of Islam, and Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) endorsed candidate Keith Ellison with very coy, all smiles pictures.
No wonder the Star Tribune is well known as the “enemy newspaper”.
No ramrod, I don’t call people bigots for telling the truth. I only point out the full story when others only give part of it or when they only use cherry picked quotes that are shown to be misleading by a rudimentary google search.
I don’t know if the Strib carried a story about Ellison’s restraining order but it sure did make the rounds of the blogs.
One blog gave the part that peder referred to here and you in the other thread. Another blog gave this part and had the same copies of the judges order that the first blog only showed a part of: the Judge denied the woman’s petition b/c it “failed to allege an immediate and present danger of harassment†and then the judge immediately granted a restraining order to Ellison against the woman. Apparently she requested a hearing on it and that’s what the upcoming court case is about.
The Strib certainly has carried articles about Ellisons unpaid parking tickets and all the rest of his legal issues. They carried Fines attack on Ellison after the primary. So I do think peder overstates that the Strib is only concerned with the lives of Republicans.
Dora has called me a racist for telling the truth. Don’t feel bad about being called a bigot. It no longer means anything when spewed by liberals like Dora.
the strib only attacked ellison before because they wanted erlandson to win. now that ellison is the candidate, they can only grin, bear it and try to help him now. not many negative stories on him since, is there?
Hey dare, Ususlly when you tell the truth about the left she claims you are “smearing” them. It is so obvious that ANY criticism of the always results in name calling
dare2, i like the red star and sickle. or the star libune.
I just hope that liberals (like Dora)can start accepting facts, even if they don’t like them, and quit calling people “racist” or “bigot” if they can’t come up with a logical response.
Sorry fellas but we’ve seen what you call “truth”. dare2 has hate filled diatribes against Ellison and Brian calls Ann Coulter’s smear that the 9/11 widows enjoy their husbands deaths “truth”.
Interesting you guys are so concerned about what I say that you need to snipe at me. But I’m not surprised you would do so because you don’t like your “truths” exposed for what they are. I do a little google search and post a link that counters your claims and you start whining. Oh boo-hoo, Dora’s being mean to me.
Dora, I’m quite willing to believe that there’s more to the story regarding possible assault from Ellison. I’m just pointing out that the Strib gave prominent coverage in the Fine case. In a similar (or even worse) case featuring the Dem, it goes unreported. That suggests bias to me. A paper that was playing it right down the middle would have reported both or neither. That we have to go to the blogs for that kind of balance is a sign of failure on the part of the Strib.
Ramrod, making up derisive nicknames can be fun but it turns people off from any argument you’re making. Keep that in mind if you want to convince anyone of anything.
Since the story said they found it in a routine records check perhaps they felt given all the coverage of Ellisons legal issues they were playing it down the middle. I don’t know. They did run the story of Fine asking them to pull it and why they stood behind it today but I suppose that doesn’t really satisfy anyone who thought it shouldn’t have run at all. Is there ever a candidate (or supporters) in either party that doesn’t think the news coverage of them is biased?
I agree wholeheartedly that when you have to go to blogs for information to balance out what you’re reading in the newspapers that it’s a failure. But that applies to all of them not just to the Strib.
Here is the truth, (or am I smearing Dora), when I say that she never seems to get the point of your argument. she only takes pieces out of it and ignores the rest. It is like Coulter’s comments of the 4 widows that were profiting from their husbands deaths. The other few thousand are in mourning. Coulter doesn’t pussyfoot around. See I never said they “enjoy” their husbands deaths and neither did Ann.
Peder, you will get exhausted debating her, trust me!
Dora, that makes no sense. You’re not really suggesting that they wouldn’t report on possible assault because they published stories about parking tickets are you? Surely you can do better than that.
Dora,
If you want to call my concerns about a potential candidate for the United States Congress having ties to an Islamic terrorist supporting group and a racist organization headed by Louis Farrakkan “hate filled”, so be it. You need to open up your eyes and see what’s going on in the world.
It’s politically correct views like yours and restrictions on security that allowed 9-11 to happen in the first place.
Brian, exhaustion is certainly possible but engaging the other side in dialouge is extremly important. I hate how angry the discussion between right and left is today. I hate it when people only argue for their side rather than looking for some kind of objective truth. I hope that talking calmly and as honestly as I can will add some measure of help.
Political correctness hijacked planes and crashed them into the World Trade Center. Dare2sayit said so, it must be true.
Brian here’s your link to Ann’s statement: http://tinyurl.com/o485l You wanted an example of a smear and that’s the one I gave you and you said Coulter had every right to question them.
I didn’t say it made sense Peder but you know it does happen. They think they need to provide balance if they’ve gotten lambasted from the other side. And they did get lots of complaints about their coverage of Ellison. It’s not right and it doesn’t make sense but it happens.
Right dare2, views like mine caused 9/11? Who is the ‘blame America first’ crowd again? I thought 9/11 happened because of terrorists. Are you suggesting I’m a terrorist?
They are profiting from their husbands deaths? And since Coulter wrote a book about them is she too profiting from their husbands death.
So does that mean that anybody who becomes an activist on an issue as a result of personal tragedy ia profiting from that tragedy?
So is John Walsh, Polly Klaas father and Patty Wetterling profiting from their tragedies? I think that’s a pretty twisted view.
Dora,
Of course terrorists caused the 9-11 attack, it’s just that liberal policies and politicians make their goals much easlier to accomplish. Thanks, ACLU!
It’s all the ‘liberals’ fault. Right dare2. That report out last week from the 16 intelligence agencies saying the policies of the last 6 years have made terrorism worse is no doubt a ‘liberal’ conspiracy in your mind.
Dora,
If you have a hornets nest by your home, you will stir things in the process of destroying it, but it needs to be done.
The same thing applies to Islamic terror. You can’t ignore it or surrender like many liberals demand because the problem won’t go away and will get much worse with surrender.
You can’t blame Bush for terrorism. Islamic nuts have been trying to kill us for decades and have actually been more successful under Clinton’s liberal policies.
I have asked you this before dare2 and you’ve ignored it. Name one liberal who has said we should “ignore” or “surrender” to terrorism. One person with a link please.
Dora,
Name one liberal from Minnesota who doesn’t call for withdrawl (SURRENDER) from Iraq before we defeat the jihadist terrorists.
Peder wrote:
Ramrod, making up derisive nicknames can be fun but it turns people off from any argument you’re making. Keep that in mind if you want to convince anyone of anything.
Peder–I must disagree with the point you are making, there. “Making up derisive nicknames” turns off reasonable people who care about the truth. People who are interested in getting at the truth are indeed turned off by people who make up derisive nicknames for the people they disagree with.
But “making up derisive nicknames” turns ON the present generation of conservatives. They love that stuff. You must realize that and expect that from the conservatives who write in to this and other blogs. They get that from conservative talk radio, from conservative icons in the media. They are modelling themselves on their conservative heroes, when they make up derisive names for their opponents.
Engaging in the “derisive nickname” thing doesn’t cost them an ounce of credibility with other conservatives–in fact, it shores up their credibility with other conservatives. Liberals may be ashamed of siding with other liberals who engage in that childish nonsense of making up funny names for their opponents, but the rules of conservative political discourse are different. They don’t even mind the occasional joke about killing liberals. (There’s an old conservative rhyme about liberals, dating back at least to the 1960s: “If liberals had feathers, gee! What a hunter I would be.” This is an example of conservative humor.)
I hope this helps you understand the situation you put yourself in, when you come into these blogs and try to discourage people from namecalling. Nice try, though.
Dora,
Sorry to cut this short, but I’m going to have dinner and go to bed. You’ll have to attack someones else’s views now.
Good Night!
i have made no derisive nicknames for any one here. i simply made an alternate name for the deserving star tribune.
i, on the other hand, have been called by the liberals here, the following:
nazi
bigot
racist
liar
wacko
but, bill, you say repubs are more guilty of this behavior from your obseravtions of talk radio. is this really a quality indicator? i go by what i see and here i see dems attackings everything the repubs print.
it is interesting whenever there is a positive repub story in the strib, which is rare in itself. they always include a negative response from the dems in the article. on the other side, they rarely include a repub response, or they say that messages were not retuned in time for print.
Eric,
There has to be way the Strib (or you personally?) can stop threads from getting like this. What is it, four or more people ganging up on one? A vibrant round of calling the Star Tribune names? Fun stuff. Interesting, too. I really learned a lot. People right of center think people left of center want to destroy America. People left of center think people right of center are destroying America. Now, let’s all try to figure out why people don’t vote, or why the state Legislature can’t get anything done, or why the people who make it into Congress are very often sleazeballs.
New topic ( … or is this the old one?), What do you think constitutes a lie, and at what point does bending the truth reflectly poorly on your character? I think anytime you’re willing to be loose with your words (Wetterling’s anti-Foley ads a perfect example) it shows that you aren’t too worried about the truth, or that you are willing to do more to win than I’m comfortable with.
i wrote before..
“it is interesting whenever there is a positive repub story in the strib, which is rare in itself. they always include a negative response from the dems in the article. on the other side, they rarely include a repub response, or they say that messages were not retuned in time for print. ”
just to check this, i reread the amy and mark bios the strib has ran the last 2 wkends. nearly 1/4 of marks 1st day story had rebuttals and atttempts to link him to negatives. amy got a virtual pass with not a negative thing written. fair, i think not.
This fits your new/old topic question Aaron. Is dare2 lying when he says that “many liberals demand” that we “ignore” or “surrender” to terrorism? I politely asked him to name one liberal who says this and provide a link. He left and threw a nasty remark back that I’ll have to “attack someone else” Is he lying? Is he bending the truth? Since he’s done it before does that reflect poorly on his character? Or does this only matter if you’re a candidate for office?
Webster,
90% can’t do, so they teach!
Yea, that’s why students come here from all over the world to attend our universities, and our uni research labs pump out medical and technology breakthroughs, and .. on and on.
aaron, what i learned yesterday was that these people have no respect or interest in the others. i offer a innocent remark about a remarkable movie and am told i was hijacking the thread and basically told to not be friendly and get back on the attack. the people in this forum think their side is always right and have no real interest in what others have to say unless it agrees with them. even then, i think it disappoints them not to have someone to namecall or argue with. they are political adrenaline junkies.
Dora and all your allies:
To repeat the basic point: I think a great deal of your worldview depends on believing that there is almost nothing of value in the modern conservative set of beliefs, and its defenders are almost all stupid or cruel or both.
I think you’d have to agree that on this blog, there are at least a few conservatives or semi-conservatives who are at least not totally stupid.
So now your task is to prove that they are irretrievably cruel.
If they’re not, then your worldview may need a little work. But, maybe they are.
Oh as for your question Dora: the Star-Tribune’s current refusal to treat the question of what sort of organization CAIR really is kind of slides toward dare’s assertion about liberals ‘ignoring’ terrorism.
I’m not saying CAIR is definitely a terrorist-supporting organization in a meaningful way. I don’t know. But neither does the Star-Tribune.
And I am definitely saying there are things worth talking about, on a whole range of issues related to the central question of just what exactly should we expect from an American Islamic group that calls itself the main force for moderation? CAIR is controversial, even among American Muslims: why?
The question is on the table - and the Strib doesn’t want to talk about it.
(One answer justifying the current approach is that Keith Ellison’s candidacy no more raises CAIR as an issue than does CAIR’s relationship with other politicians including W; and in fact asserting that it does mean more is actually racist etc. etc.
(I disagree, I think it’s a dumb argument that works to justify the avoidant attitude that’s just so much easier for liberals it seems. But more to the point: that question is part of the discussion I’ve love to have.)
Paul I’ve never said anything of the sort. Neither am I trying to prove anybody is “irretrievably cruel”.
think you’d have to agree that on this blog, there are at least a few conservatives or semi-conservatives who are at least not totally stupid.
What a way to phrase that. It’s like the ‘when did you stop beating your wife’ kind of question. Of course there are conservative or semi-conservative posters here who think as Peder said “engaging the other side in dialouge is extremly important” (I prefer the way he put it than the way you framed it).
I find it amazing that so many of you cry foul when your claims are challenged. You seem to interpret that to mean you are being attacked like dare2 does or as ramrod says “have no real interest in what others have to say unless it agrees with them”. If someone presents their view as fact or as everybody believes this or cherry picks quotes from an article then I want to see a link to the full story that backs up their claim. You don’t seem to want to back up your claims. Why is that?
That is not what dare2 said Paul. He wasn’t talking about ‘organizations’ he was talking about people. And to say that CAIR has some kind of relationship to what liberals say about terrorism simply makes no sense to me. Sorry.
I love how you throw in your little digs about how avoidance is so much easier for liberals. It’s your opinion. You’re welcome to it. I don’t think there’s much evidence for it myself. We can agree to disagree.
You’re not saying directly that CAIR is a terrorist supporting organization but you sure are implying it. But again, that’s your viewpoint and you’re welcome to it.
Sure there’s alot of things to talk about. Wouldn’t it be nice if all the innuendos and implications and little digs could be eliminated from the discussion. We’d all get alot farther. And yeah Paul, I do it too. Will you admit that you do?
Sure, sometimes.
But I think what gets me in the ongoing discussion, Dora, and the reason for my (and others’) irritation, is actually on display in your answer on the CAIR topic: it appears to me that many of the liberals here are experts at sliding around the actual issues presented, and further doing it in a way that makes the person presenting the issue seem - once again - a closet racist or hater or something. It’s what leads me to strongly suspect that that conclusion is almost always one part of the agenda.
Your answer on CAIR barely grazed what I was saying, and then you go on to try to turn the tables on me by accusing me of strongl yimplying something I was being very careful not to: that I believe CAIR should be considered a terrorist-supporting organization.
I don’t know. It may well be not true in a meaningful sense. But I do knew there are serious questions out there, having to do (for instance) with their organizational roots, the affilations of some of the staff and board members especially but not totally in the past, and with their predilection to suing to silence people who criticize them or Islam.
I want this stuff talked about. I think it’s overridingly important. I think an extreme hesitation to talk about it is cowardly and couterproductive and not at all helpful to moderate Muslims, who want to talk about it. I think Europe offers a cautionary tale on what can happen over the long term when the automatic attitude becomes “let’s not talk about it, it might be racist.”
That’s what I said and am saying again. It’s in that sense that PCness does not help in the need to confront radical Islam (and again: I’m not saying CAIR is unacceptably radical for sure).
And not that it matters much, but I think it does have something to do with what dare is talking about.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_Council_on_American-Islamic_Relations
Not a set of absolute truths bit a convenient rundown of some criticisms and critics.
I’ve seen this referred to a number of places so I suspect it’s trus, although there are always surprising explanations popping up on any topic:
“Shortly after the 9/11 attacks, CAIR’s website solicited donations for what it called the “NY/DC Emergency Relief Fund.” However, clicking on the donation link led to a website for donations to the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), a charity whose assets were later frozen and confiscated by the United States Department of the Treasury because, according to United States Secretary of the Treasury Paul O’Neill, HLF “masquerade[d] as a charity, while its primary purpose [was] to fund Hamas.”‘
“many liberals demand” anything is a non-statement statement, so it’s not a lie or a truth. It’s like saying ‘many Republicans enjoy war mongering’. How many is many? It seems unlikely that there’s been a poll on this subject, so we can’t say most or a majority. It’s just an opinion, and what’s omitted (the ‘It seems to me that’ at the beginning) has to be assumed. The best way to respond to opinions like that is to say, “Interesting. You know, I’m liberal-minded and I don’t feel like we should give in to terrorists; let me tell you where I think we should start.”
As far as the above comments, we all like to feel personally attacked. It gives us a chance to be morally outraged, and let’s face it, that’s just fun. So we read more into comments than is there. At the same time, we all like to be clever with our words, don’t we? I didn’t write that you are stupid or elitest or blind to your own blindness … but I wanted to and you are.
Disagreeing (I think) with Eric here, I believe there are such things as lies of intent and lies of omission. People have a moral (and I mean that in the Kantian sense, not the Christian one) duty to say what they mean, say what needs to be said, and to do both as plainly and clearly as possible. Every time a word comes out of your mouth (or keyboard), the disclaimer “I’m telling you the truth” comes with it. Tricking people with your words is lying, no matter how many facts you use to do it.
I teach my 5-year-old to ask himself a question before he does anything to another person. “Why am I doing this?” Am I trying to get something? Am I trying to hurt this person? Am I trying to show off? Am I acting out of anger? Am I helping? I think that’s a good question for us adults, too. Good night everyone. Get some sleep.
Thanks for including the Wiki link Paul. I have no problem with you raising questions about CAIR. What I do have a problem with however is when dare2 only links CAIR to Ellison and you only link your concern about CAIR to liberals. That is what I object to.
In your link it says Bush was endorsed by CAIR in 2000, included CAIR in several public functions after the 2001 attacks and that Jeb Bush sent a letter of commendation to CAIR “praising it for its “protection of civil rights and freedom of religion” .
So how can you say the “current refusal to treat the question of what sort of organization CAIR really is kind of slides toward dare’s assertion about liberals ‘ignoring’ terrorism”? Couldn’t the same thing be said of GW and Jeb Bush? Aren’t they ignoring “what sort of organization CAIR really is”?
That’s also why dare2 is criticized for his constant negative swipes at Ellison for accepting an endorsement from CAIR when GW did the same. Why is that not indicative of an agenda as you accuse the left of having?
This is where the discussion goes south. When the raising of issues is used to show only one side in a negative light when it’s not really the whole picture then the other side will point out that it’s not the whole picture and say they are being dishonest. And yes, it works both ways.
This gets back to Peders point earlier and I’m in complete agreement when he says: I hate it when people only argue for their side rather than looking for some kind of objective truth
How do you ever get to any objective truth if the full truth isn’t presented?
ramrod says:
but, bill, you say repubs are more guilty of this behavior from your obseravtions of talk radio. is this really a quality indicator? i go by what i see and here i see dems attackings everything the repubs print.
It’s okay to “attack” stuff that the other side prints. You gotta expect that in the political debate, right?
But about the “addiction to insulting names” thing–
Yeah, I really do think talk radio is a quality indicator, when it comes to the conservative notion that it’s okay to make up derisive nicknames for people. (I’ll take your word for it that you don’t do that to people in this discussion.)
I think that conservative talk radio has set the standard for conservative political discourse in America. I think that’s pretty clear, and I’ve argued that here before. And I think that the “insulting nicknames” thing has become a conservative tradition.
For example: throughout the 80s’ Rush promoted all his little nicknames for folks-environmental wackos, treehuggers, feminazis, etc. And I was watching on television when the newly elected GOP majority made him an honorary member of Congress. So they’re not exactly running from the “let’s make up derisive names for the opposition” thing, are they?
It seems to me that by honoring Rush that way, they are holding him up as a role model for presenting the conservative message–and that, apparently, includes making up the insulting nicknames for people who disagree with you.
Yeah, I think that conservative talk radio is a quality indicator, on this “insulting nicknames” thing.
I’m sympathize with you about being called names, ramrod. Because I’m a liberal–conservatives call me names all the time, tell me I hate America, that kind of stuff.
It would probably be better if folks limited themselves to criticism of each other’s remarks. For example, if you made some remark that someone here thinks is racist, it’s probably better for a critic to point it out this way: “that was a racist remark”
than this way:
“Ramrod is a racist.”
But I don’t think that system will ever catch on with American conservatives. As the evidence I gave above indicates–they’re addicted to the “insulting name” thing, and it gets the semi-official seal of approval from conservative officials when they go on the radio and tell the hosts what a great job they’re doing.
Politicians are excepted from my personal name-calling rule, of course–I think people should call politicians names, if the names fit and the evidence is there. It doesn’t matter if it’s you calling Clinton “Slick Willie” or me calling Michele Bachmann a “nut.” Politicians are powerful, they chose public life, and the democratic tradition of casting aspersions on politicians’ character is a good one–if you can back up the insult with facts.
But yeah, I think conservative talk radio is a very good indicator on where rank-and-file conservatives stand on the “insulting names for the opposition” issue.
Paul S–you made one of your generalized claims about people posting to this blog again–you wrote to Dora:
“I think a great deal of your worldview depends on believing that there is almost nothing of value in the modern conservative set of beliefs, and its defenders are almost all stupid or cruel or both.”
I just want to go on record here and say that I don’t believe that. I believe that there is a lot of stupidity and cruely inherent in conservatism, but I know many conservatives personally that have traits that I admire.
As for the “value of the modern conservative set of beliefs,” the only two consistent conservative principles that I’ve ever been able to derive from all my twenty five years of study of modern American conservatives are the following:
1) lower the taxes on the rich people.
2) despise the liberals.
Those are the only two principles that the American conservative movement never seems to abandon. The rest of the conservative “principles”–smaller and less powerful government, balanced budgets, fiscal responsibility, less government regulation, belief in the operation of the free market–those are regularly jettisoned (in practice) by conservative polticians and pundits, whenever it’s politically convenient to do so.
They keep talking about those principles, but it’s really just talk. Talk radio, mostly.
Anyway–more news about the GOP cover up for Foley tonight. A Congressman Kolbe of Arizona claims to have confronted Foley about inappropriate contacts with a page way back in 2000.
Eric,
On the off-chance you see and respond to this, I do have a question for you - one that you and Hugh touched on briefly during the interview, but didn’t really explore.
You said that you prefer the “American” system of political journalism - where reporters’ biases are ostensibly silenced by a professional ethic of detachment and standard of balance - to the “European” system, in which the reporter may or may not be fair or balanced, but their biases are on open display (for example, one knows when reading the Guardian, Le Monde or the Die Zeit that there’s a left-of-center slant, while The Times Of London and Frankfurter Allgemeine are right of center).
It seems to me that the American system is predicated on trust (or caring) on the part of the consumer that balance and detachment are being achieved. And in the wake of things like Rathergate, it’d seem that trust is fading (at least among 51% of the public).
You think the American system is better. Fair enough. Do you think the media have done anything to abuse, violate or erode that trust in “your” detachment, “objectivity” and balance?
this is interesting…if true, amy should be ashamed.
It seems that Amy Klobuchar’s Ashamed ad that she is using in her US Senate campaign could be tampering with potential jurors in the retrial in of Tyesha Edwards’ “alleged†killer that her own Hennepin County Attorney’s office is prosecuting. You may be aware that Amy Klobuchar is the Hennepin County Attorney who is responsible for the case, and took credit for it with the ad.
In Klobuchar’s US Senate campaign ad, the mother of Tyesha Edwards said:
“when our little girl Tyesha was murdered, Amy saw to it that those gang members were put awayâ€
Well, two of those gang members were plea bargained, but that isn’t the kicker here.
The one who went to trial for pulling the actual trigger, was convicted, but had the conviction thrown out by the MN Supreme Court so it must be retried. Myon Burrell has a case up on appeal right now. One of the points of the appeal is whether or not expert testimony should be allowed on gang activity. Shouldn’t Klobuchar the Hennepin County Attorney Klobuchar know not to call the defendant a gang member in her US Senate Campaign ad on an active case up for appeal before her? Especially one in her own jurisdiction where there judges say not to do that.
The very fact that it is up for appeal should give Klobuchar second thoughts as to whether or not she should actually use this case for her ad. Simply calling Burrell a gang member is enough to cause another mistrial.
Right now Klobuchar’s Senate campaign ad is affecting the potential jury pool for the trial by referring to the defendent as a gang member. This ad is being seen by thousands and thousands of potential jurors in and around the Twin Cities. If Klobuchar “really cared†about putting Tyesha’s killer behind bars, she should pull the ad.
This doesn’t seem like a wise move from a Chief Prosecutor. Not only is the ad misleading, it could be leading the witness.
I thought that it was disappointing how little work Hewitt obviously did in preparation for the interview. He must have figured that it’d be easy to score some quick points, that he’d knock around this reporter from the “far-left” Star Tribune, and that’d be the end of it. Instead, Eric challenged him and exposed him as a partisan hack. I hadn’t listened to or heard anything about Hewitt before this interview, and I was very sorely disappointed. Some of the people on this blog were talking about his reasonableness and objectivity, neither of which he displayed on Friday.
I’d say give him one more interview if he asks, and if Hewitt is so ill-prepared as the last one, have that be the last one.
Bill P -
Your answer to my assertion about what many liberals tend to believe about modern consvertism is essentially: although there are some conservatives who have personal traits I admire, I do in fact believe their philospophy is morally bankrupt.
If someone actually supports a philosophical point of view that consists only of ‘lower taxes on the rich’ and ‘hate liberals,’ how can that person be anything but stupid or, if not cruel, utterly morally empty? That’s one question.
But beyond that, your answer on my view that many liberals view modern conservatism as offering nothing of value is essentially “Yes, you’re right, and that’s because it’s true.” So to paraphrase Prager, okay, we have clarity.
By the way, I do not at all believe liberals are wrong about eveything. I think they’re right about a number of things, even perhaps most things, or another way of thinking about it is 70% or so right about most things. But it’s the creeping absolutism that gets me.
All politicians and perspectives of all stripes regularly ‘jettison’ their supposedly core beliefs from time to time.
Final thought: you’ve got me thinking seriously about Michelle B; I think you have a point that the Star-Trib could be doing a better job covering some of her organizational relationships and statements. Since it’s right up their liberal alley, I’m not sure why they aren’t. I think you think they’re cowed somehow; I can’t even begin to conceive of what exactly might be cowing them.
However, I still beleive that the best liberal tactic agsinst Bachmann and against the anti-gay-marriage movement would be total honesty and generosity is assenting to the idea that at least some of the anti-gay-marriage proponents are sincere, and raise some issues at least worth addressing. It’s not enough to just call such people obvious bigots, which is mostly what the response to them seems to boil down to in many cases.
MR -
I wouldn’t blame you for that assessment if that was your only exposure to HH. Like I say, he’s not my favorite of the genre and a real aggressive attitude is his style. But like I said somewhere above, he’s also acknowledging on his blog that some people are saying Eric basically won. And I’ll be curious to see what he says on the show today regardless of whether Eric is on or not.
The attitude and approach would in my view be perfectly appropriate to a number of people at the Strib. But not Eric, which he’d been told, and I too was a little pissed that he decided to ignore that.
Dora -
I didn’t get into details on why, and this is becoming a long conversation and it’s easy just to skim the other’s posts for the main points, but I’ve already indicated that I just don’t buy the argument that the fact of many politicians’ cursory relationships and statements of support of CAIR means it’s illegitimate to point to Keith’s relationship and saying that now, CAIR has to be examined and discussed.
Which is what I’m saying. I’m not saying Keith’s relationship is more worthy of suspicion than W’s - necessarily, although I do think it’s disingenuous to dismiss such an idea as racist or knee-jerk anti-Muslim or something.
CAIR has gotten itself accepted as the go-to moderate Muslim group in the US. That, as far as I can tell, is the context of almost every politician’s relationship, including W’s handful of photo ops and statements.
But now with Keith, almost undoubtedly set to be the first Muslim member of Congress, it’s an entirely new context; plus, they’ve donated to his campaign in a way that I believe is nearly unmatched in their history when it comes to support for a non-incumbent; plus, Keith and Nihad Awad have a long relationship; and so on.
I do think it’s to be expected that any politician in Keith’s inevitably symbolically important position would be strongly supported by CAIR. But I also think it’s to be expected that in that context, a non-PC-cowed press would recognize the need to really talk about and look into the controversies around CAIR.
Like I’ve said before: CAIR claims to be the most important moderate Muslim group in the US. Okay. What are they, actually? What do they do? What do they say? Do they act and talk in a way that satisfies a reasonable idea of what that would mean?
We have to be able to talk about topics like this. They’re incredibly important. By and large, the conservative side is the only side raising them (and also the only side pointing to trends in Europe as worthy of attention). And the too-common liberal response is to dismiss the concerns as just more conservative fear-mongering or racism or some such.
(Fine hasn’t done a good job himself of raising them, I don’t think. The issues are subtle and the blunderbuss approach only serves to make that liberal response more likely and appear more justified.)
Paul,
I honestly had less problem with his aggressive style and more problem with the fact that he was so obviously unprepared. Aggressive interviewing is fine if you know what you’re talking about. Hewitt simply hadn’t done the work beforehand, and didn’t seem to care that he hadn’t done the prep work. Clearly he’s a bright guy but if he’s that unprepared for all of his interviews, listening would just be a waste of my time.
After reading the transcript, I would have to agree with MR… Clearly Hewitt was not prepared- comments like:
HH: “correct me if I am wrong but Klobuchar has refused to do more than one recorded debate.”
EB: “Your wrong.”
Hewitt may be a smart guy. The few times I have listened to him I have been turned off by his tendancy to have the most wacko liberals he can find on to parade them infront of his conservative listeners so they can be reassured that liberals really are crazy- it reminded me of the FOX news pre war “debates” when they would invite some college dropout with long hair, a hemp necklace and a tie-dyed shirt arguing the anti-war side, and a clean cut expert with actual credientals arguing for the war. Both Hewitt and Fox have a tendancy to orcastrate what are essentally liberal minstral shows…
EB easily won the debate on the show- HH’s arguments on “objectivity” are laughable.
What prep are you talking about in particular? Just curious.
Ryan -
He does have non-wacko liberals pretty often. He has regular guests who fit that category. He has a regualr Friday feature I think he calls “the smart guys” with two lawyers, one liberal, one conservative. That’s usually a pretty interesting discussion.
Good example of non-prep, though.
MR -
The combination of non-prep with over-aggressiveness is particularly unappealing, though.
dare2sayit dared to say “If you have a hornets nest by your home, you will stir things in the process of destroying it, but it needs to be done.”
Depends on how you go about it. Taking it out by bashing it with a stick or throwing stones is likely to provoke the insects & may result in the assailant being stung. On the other hand, if you wait for dark, you can wrap the nest in a plastic bag, remove it from the branch / eaves / wherever & dispose of as you wish.
It all depends on your approach. Sometimes using sticks and stones means you’re gonna get stung.
Ryan pointed out the most obvious lack of background work. “Correct me if I’m wrong…” “You’re wrong.”
It sounded like Hewitt was all over the place just trying to score some points about the STrib being unfair, but he never had enough information about any particular issue to do so. Maybe he did about the Ellison thing or the Klobuchar thing, but Eric was right to say “I don’t know–talk to someone else at the paper” to those questions.
But he easily could have looked at Eric’s coverage of the other ads in the 6th and had something to say about them. Eric called him out when Hewitt was accusing him of bias, saying that you’d have to look at his whole body of work with regards to the 6th to determine if he’s been unfair to either candidate, and Hewitt hadn’t. As far as I know, Eric was brought on to talk about an ad in the 6th, and Hewitt believed that the coverage was unfair. But he hadn’t bothered to do more research to determine if his conclusion was true. That’s just lazy.
Paul S says “We have to be able to talk about topics like this. They’re incredibly important. By and large, the conservative side is the only side raising them (and also the only side pointing to trends in Europe as worthy of attention). And the too-common liberal response is to dismiss the concerns as just more conservative fear-mongering or racism or some such. ”
A similar, open discussion of Bachmann’s association with the group focused on schooling is also long overdue. I don’t recall the name of the organization, but what I do recall is that they basically want to eliminate public funding for education. Ms. Bachmann has close ties to the group and portrays herself has ‘considering education reform a high priority’ or something comparable. Have any journalists bothered to dig a little deeper and find out just what kinds of reforms she’s promoting? Is asking for this kind of investigation & reporting just another knee-jerk liberal hysteria or a reasonable question for voters to ask?
MR says “But he hadn’t bothered to do more research to determine if his conclusion was true. That’s just lazy.”
And, dare I say it, typical of his kind.
b -
Not always typical of his kind. And Hewitt is being open on his blog about differing opinions.
bsimon,
While it wouldn’t entirely surprise me if it were typical of other hosts, I can’t jump to that conclusion or I’d be guilty of doing what I just accused Hewitt of–not bothering to do more research to determine if a conclusion was true.
Paul S.- now that you mention it, “The Smart Guys” is actually somewhat interesting… the rest of his show blends into the right wing noise machine- and is rather unremarkable.
MR- right on, there is no excuse for having a serious journalist on to question their professonalism on a national radio show- and not doing any research on his body of work. Black’s response to the Foley ad was very comperable to his response to the NRCC’s mailings- he argued they were both misleading and false. He needed to have more evidence to support his claim other than his opinion on the use of the word “lie” and his views on the biases of the Star Trib.
Sadly this is the type of garbage where many Americans get their news and views.
sorry for the poor grammar… my pronouns are all over the place.
Speaking of grammar, I know I read the transcripts, which is different than hearing it, but what is with all of the apositives?
“do you, Eric Black…?” or “I think the Strib and you, Eric Black..”
What is with that? Is he trying to buy time, intimidate his guests, or what?
Paul by saying this: I just don’t buy the argument that the fact of many politicians’ cursory relationships and statements of support of CAIR means it’s illegitimate to point to Keith’s relationship and saying that now, CAIR has to be examined and discussed you are arguing for a statement I never made while glossing over what I did say.
Perhaps if the conservative side raised the issues about CAIR in a way that excluded personal attacks the liberal response wouldn’t be to hear fear-mongering and racism in the tone. Tone is as important as what is said. With highly charged and emotional topics tone may be more important. I see you do say Fine hasn’t done a good job but using the word ‘blunderbuss’ just downplays his tone. I’d use the word ’shocking’ to describe his post primary comments.
I hear the same tone in dare2’s comments as in Fines. In almost every thread you can count on a post or more blasting Ellison as unfit for Congress b/c of his CAIR contribution and ties to Nation of Islam. (Interestingly, there’s an article in todays Strib that addresses other people with “ties” to Nation of Islam: http://tinyurl.com/ho6gx) I read in another Strib article the contribution was $2000 from Awad and $1000 from another CAIR employee. Perhaps that’s “nearly unmatched in their history”, I really don’t know.
I don’t buy that it’s only conservatives raising questions. I read a City Pages article that Progressive Jews were concerned too. But many have been able to accept Ellison’s articulation of his views and repudiation of Farrakhan. Not everybody to be sure. And so he is ridiculed for it by his detractors saying that people just don’t suddenly change. I don’t know how sudden his change has been because I don’t know him. But others have said it isn’t sudden at all. And I’m not cynical enough to say that people can’t change.
I am not as certain as you are Paul that criticism of Ellison isn’t coming from some who are reacting more to him being a Muslim. And that the reaction is a result of fearing all Muslims are terrorists. It’s not an illegitimate point to make given what happened to the Japanese Americans after Pear Harbor.
As I originally said, I have no problems with exploring the questions you raise about CAIR. That Wiki link you provided raises some interesting points. I can do without the attacks on Ellison and liberals in the context of the discussion though.
Dora -
I wasn’t glossing over or misrepresenting your points, or intending to; I was clarifying my point, which I perhaps mistakenly thought you had missed.
You’re right, there are statements on this blog that Ellison’s connections with CAIR make him unfit. I don’t quite agree with that, although I also can see the reasons someone might believe that, especially given Ellison’s less-than-forthcoming statements about all of this.
As for the contributions from CAIR-related individuals, there’s evidence that such contributions are considerably more than those two, including ‘bundled’ contributions totaling perhaps $10,000. And the fundraiser Awad headlined raised $15,000 at least, from what I’ve read.
There’s nothing particularly secret about this; it’s all over the blogs. Why is the Strib just ignoring it? (If they’ve looked into it and decided it isn’t true, I haven’t seen it. And the fact they mention the issue of CAIR-related donations at all means they’ve agreed that it’s worth mentioning.)
The NOI article is interesting. First, the quote that opens the article - “Almost every black man in leadership in Minnesota had a connection to that march” - simply reinforces the Strib’s acceptance of Ellison’s’ explanation of his connection, and as with the donations, there is much evidence that he’s not being totally honest.
It isn’t so much that a larger connection would make him automatically unfit, it’s the idea that he’s not being honest (and the idea that the Strib is deciding not to pursue the matter at all).
The rest of the article gets into territory that’s really fascinating: basically presenting the liberal case that the NOI is really not as condemnable as people say (or as Ellison himself has been saying). That they’re a good group that occasionally and understandably is given to overblown rhetoric.
Again, I can kind of see that opinion, and truthfully I suspect it’s an opinion that may explain the Strib’s lack of curiosity on the relationship: the reporters and most of their editors simply don’t buy the basic premise that it’s a troublesome relationship.
But that’s the gateway to a real interesting discussion in itself, having to do with the need for liberals to recognize the ugliness that can arise within their own brethren and sistren; and recognize that the fact of good works doesn’t come close to excusing that ugliness. (In my mind it perhaps makes it worse, but I haven’t sorted out that instinct yet.)
Here’s a nice compendium of things Farrakhan has said.
http://www.adl.org/special_reports/farrakhan_own_words2/farrakhan_own_words.asp
Here’s one example of dozens there:
“I’m warning you America. You better get rid of them neo cons. That’s the synagogue of Satan. They have made America weak. You’re a weak nation now, and your country has been taken from you by the synagogue of Satan. They own congress. That’s why the congress ain’t right.”
Saviours’ Day, Chicago, Illinois, 2/26/06
To me, the fact that so many local African American and liberal leaders can blissfully close their eyes to this is perhaps the larger underlying scandal.
Paul S.–If someone actually supports a philosophical point of view that consists only of ‘lower taxes on the rich’ and ‘hate liberals,’ how can that person be anything but stupid or, if not cruel, utterly morally empty?
They don’t have be stupid or cruel to support some of the goals of conservatism. I think you are looking for insults where none were intended, Paul S.
For the rank-and-file conservative, it’s the attraction to the “disposable” conservative principles–the lower tax burden that’s promised, the balanced budget that’s promised, the smaller government that’s promised,the spending cuts that are promised, a government that cares about family values that’s promised, reform of government corruption that’s promised: the rank and file conservative–the guy who listens to talk radio, etc–is attracted by that part of the message. (Even though the conservatives never seem to deliver on that part of the message, once they’re in power.)
Rank-and-file conservatives aren’t stupid or cruel because they want those things. What most of them don’t realize is that their conservative leaders don’t really care about those principles–no matter how much they talk about them.
Rank-and-file conservatives don’t *realize* that there are in reality only two core prinicples in the conservative movement (”lower the taxes on the rich” and “hate the liberals”.) Most of them like that second prinicple, because it feeds their anger addiction, but they also think conservative leaders and pundits mean the things they say about the other principles (smaller government, etc.)
For the conservative leaders and icons, it’s about money and power, I suppose. Their ability to herd rank-and-file conservatives along, feed their anger addiction, and re-convince them that the conservative leadership is not going to jettison the principles again after the next election–AGAIN.
We are all free to come to our own conclusions about the intelligence of people who continue to believe in such leadership and such media. I don’t call people names here, and if you feel insulted by my remarks, Paul S., I cannot help that. I think the things I’ve said about American conservatives are demonstrably true, and you’ve said and argued nothing to dispel that–just stuff about me being “disingenous” and accusations that you’ve later had to drop. In fact, some of what you’re arguing here *proves* what I’m arguing–including that fact that you continue to quote talk radio guys.
Paul S. wrote:
All politicians and perspectives of all stripes regularly ‘jettison’ their supposedly core beliefs from time to time.
A sweeping generalization and therefore suspect. Also, a lack of clarity in sentence and sentence structure problem (”regularly” and “from time to time” cancel each other other and make your point equivocal.)
It is probably true that:
All politicians, from to time to time, will jettison a core principle.
It is true that:
Sometimes a politician will refuse to jettison a core priniciple even when he understands that it would be politically expedient to do so.
It is certainly true that:
Some politicians regularly jettison principles that they insist are their core principles. A large number–perhaps the majority–of conservative politicians supported by the conservative voters fall into this category.
The liberals have not jettisoned their core principle, which I would define as follows:
When too many people go without some necessity of life because the private sector is failing to provide that necessity (a lack of employment, income for retirees, vaccinations for poor kids, etc.), the government should intervene and use the law to fulfill the need.
Liberals still believe in that principle and act on it–even when it’s cost them elections. That’s the throughline I see in liberal policy; you will see it consistently in liberal politics.
And what are the consistent conservative principles at the end of the day?
1) lower the taxes on the rich people
2) hate the liberals
By the way–I’m surprised that no one wrote in and defended Eric Black when I told him he got it wrong on the Wetterling ad. I explained that when the GOP leadership admitted they did nothing to inform the public about Foley before the IM messages, they were admitting to a cover up.
You guys really don’t want to go near this “phony dishonesty charge against the Wettetling” ad, do you?
I wrote an email to EB, and posted my thoughts on another blog that I will not advertise here, saying basically that contrary to Hewitt’s biased view, EB is being too GOP friendly, and is being unduly hard on Wetterling - because of the truth. What Wetterling said - the gist of her analysis, is totally true.
No, there was not a confession. Yes clear conduct was mentioned and admitted to. Yes, that amounts to most people’s view of a coverup.
Use the standard of the average reasonable Sixth District High School principal, or because of there being a housing arrangement for pages, the standard of a boarding school principal.
That happens, you end it ASAP, or you get fired when the public learns. Any school administrator knows that.
If there are channels, you pursue channels. Senior party leadership representatives and their senior staff are held to a much higher standard of smarts and honesty, than a regional school official never having to show statewide appeal, or appeal in a Congressional election. Deny that, and we cannot analyze things together.
Nixon never CONFESSED to a coverup, but his actions, taking the pardon and giving up top gun, was an admission, no matter how you slice it.
Enron and Arthur Anderson execs being found guilty of crimes, where they admitted certain conduct, is the same. There never was the confession, we intended to screw employees trusting us for a pension and investors trusting our numbers to not be cooked - they did not CONFESS, but their actions were the circumstntial evidence to convict, in the absence of a confession.
Actions speak louder than words - and history cannot be manipulated while today’s explanations can always be cast in self-serving words.
If the only standard EB applies is confession, rather than admission of actions that together lead a rational person - as a juror - to conclude there was a failure to meet a known reasonable duty and a suggestion of intent to keep a secret could be inferred from the obviousness of what reasonably should have been done applied as a measure against what was done showing the discrepancy between what would have been right but an immediate embarassment to what was half-a***d and obviously, but which avoided scrutiny - if you do not want the compelling view of being in a coverup you certainly knew [or should have known] you go through proper page governing procedures and inform the FBI, a step now taken, in case there was crime using communication channels of interstate commerce. Short of that, you are keeping the Sunshine off the situation, sweeping it under the rug, looking the other way.
In short if you do not want the Sunshine you know how to avoid it. Brandeis said in 1914, “Sunshine is the best disinfectant,” and Hastert and Tom Reynonds of RNCC who had Fordham on staff and dumped him immediately, must he held to have heard and understood the meaning of that adadge. Fact is, if you infer reasonably, they did not want to disinfect they wanted to disarm the downside PR and acted that way.
It clearly was, circumstantially, a coverup. And jury instructions are that circumstantial evidence is as good to support an inference as direct evidence.
Moreover, coverup is debating a detail. They should resign form endangering pages needlessly, under a standard of ordinary negilgence, or gross negligence, never mind intentional coverup.
But intent can be inferred from circumstances or else half or more of the criminals at trial would go free when guilty if an eywitness to the shooting was not found, but the circumstances wes cops finding the perpatrator standing over the still warm and bleeding body holding the smoking gun. That’s enough - without an eyewitness, without a confession, to convict - to prove an ultimate fact by its circumstnces.
In this instance each of us is a juror. Was the evidence sufficient to prove a coverup? I say yes, EB said no, and Hewitt says not if it’s my guys doing it. Who’s right? And if it’s that close is there ANY BLAME OR FAULT in Wetterling’s seeing it from her more experienced child-protective status, for what most of us objectively would agree with? I say no and that EB trashed her reputation and election chances by being needlessly hypertechnical and not using common sense.
Bill, if you look carefully in the long discussion above you’ll see me agreeing with you on the Wetterling ad, I think, at least to the extent that it can’t be fairly called a blatant lie.
The first half of your post seems like a long exercise in verifying what you keep saying and I keep saying you’re saying: Conservative leaders are morally bereft, in that it’s all about money and power; and their followers are too simple to understand what their leaders are up to but go along with it because they get their rage addiction fed.
I don’t see that as disputing my observations about what you believe. I see you explaining why it’s perfectly reasonable to believe it.
And I think it’s a fair characterization to summarize that opinion as one of conservatives being either morally craven or stupid. How is it not?
I haven’t tried to dispute the reasonableness of your opinion. I’m just trying to clarify what seems to be your starting point and ending point in every debate. And, I haven’t used the word ‘insult’ in describing your beliefs. That’s your word. I’m just describing your beliefs and you seem to be agreeing with me that yes, that’s what you believe. Fine.
The second half is getting too esoteric for the current state of my head.
The only reason I can see for a Strib person to go on that show is to get the ticket punched; i.e., having the schmuck accuse you of being too easy on Wetterling as a means of avoiding scrutiny for being far, far too harsh and unreasonable.
I see it as a cleansing attempt, a ploy.
Have rightwing talk radio say you were too easy and cozy with PW, and then hope to defuse people saying you were hypertechnical and not going with the gist of Wetterling’s ad, or with the notion of circumstantial proof and reasonable inference - and insisting, no confession using the phrase “I admit i intentionally engaged in a coverup for banal and partisan reasons,” means that a coverup was not admitted to. Hastert admits he knew of facts that would make a reasonable person inquire further and take proper steps, and yet he kept it hushed up. What do you call it if not a coverup? Corey Day was correct in telling EB, only one wanting to get into hypertechnical harisplitting would not see it for what it was - a clear coverup.
Robert Novak mentions today that Congressman Reynolds had a part in convincing Foley to run again for Congress this year. The same Reynolds that already knew about Foley’s inappropriate communications with pages. A coverup or incompetence?
http://www.suntimes.com/news/novak/87799,CST-EDT-novak08.article
Recall how George Will began his column, an instance of getting caught red handed, but not CONFESSING TO THE TRUTH - A COVERUP:
Thursday, Oct. 5, 2006
“The Reverend Elmer Gantry was reading an illustrated pink periodical devoted to prize-fighters and chorus girls in his room at Elizabeth J. Schmutz Hall late of an afternoon when two large men walked in without knocking.
” ‘Why, good evening, Brother Bains — Brother Naylor! This is a pleasant surprise. I was, uh — Did you ever see this horrible rag? . . . I was thinking of denouncing it next Sunday. I hope you never read it.’ ‘’
– Sinclair Lewis,
“Elmer Gantry'’
The entire book, Elmer Gantry was about pious deceit; and that seems to fit the GOP-Dobson-Bachmann GOP equals God’s Our Partner rhetoric; coupled with an unwillingness to see any self-contradictory dimension to not “seeing the obvious,” a coverup and criticizing it for what it is, a coverup.
Bachmann took in hundreds of thousands of campaign dollars from having DC muck-a-mucks show up for “give bucks for photos” sessions; including a session with Dennis Hastert in St. Cloud. Bachmann does not want to be confronted about, “Given the coverup and a taint to that money, what about showing your family values by giving it up to a child protection or child advocacy charity, such as the Jacob Wetterling Foundation - or its equivalent?” Hence, she sees no coverup in the facts, and it would be more inconvenient for her if she said, “Yes, I see it as a coverup.” And Strib gives her a free ride on that.
I say, Michele Bachmann, give the money to a suitable charity, or be cast as one comfortable with a moral coverup, with that for “family values,” a coverup the predatory conduct, face that view if you keep it and keep a “see no evil” attitude. Again, it is a matter of inference and judgment, because Bachmann confesses no falseness in saying she sees Hastert as having not breached any duty.
One more thought. This of a thread-hijacking nature.
Do people generally believe the conventional wisdom that, if you have bad news to deliver, the time to deliver it is Friday afternoon - as it won’t get picked up by the regular news cycle?
Somewhat of interest is that a White House staffer resigned on Friday afternoon. She’d been an exective assisant to Jack Abramhoff, prior to going to work for Karl Rove. While working for Rove, she received ‘questionable gifts’ from Abramhoff, who’d visited the White House several hundred times during the Bush administration.
Conspiracy or Coincidence?
bsimon - Tom Reynolds is a more natural target than Hastert, because his election role is to foster and oversee the NRCC negative advertising such as was used in the Sixth District against Wetterling.
The more his credibility is tarnished, the more he has to defend his own seat, and hence the less vitriol into the Sixth District, or the less it will be believed.
Given how NRCC is attempting to cheapen opposing candidates, cheapening Reynolds by pointing out what he’s about, is helpful to encouraging fairer play in the future.
I haven’t seen reports of other contributions. Does that come from his campaign finance reports?
You mention several times that he’s not being honest in this post and others. And you imply you know more so what is it that you have evidence of?
This is an interesting statement on a couple of levels: the need for liberals to recognize the ugliness that can arise within their own brethren and sistren; and recognize that the fact of good works doesn’t come close to excusing that ugliness. (In my mind it perhaps makes it worse, but I haven’t sorted out that instinct yet.)
First I wonder why you felt the need to insert the word ‘liberal’ because of course it’s not just liberals that need to recognize this. Your point would have been made without it.
On the second level it seems you are saying that no matter what ugliness people have committed they can’t atone for it or renounce it and resolve to do better. And that surprises me given you have said you are a Christian. That is not what I learned during my Christian education. And reading the City Pages article and the NDJ letter calling on Fine to cease attacking Ellison many Jews are saying that they accepted Ellisons apology and repudiation of Farrakhan. I know by what dare2 has said that is not enough for him and it seems you are implying the same.
Interesting quote of Farrakhans you pull out of the compendium. Because there are others who say something similar about the neo-cons. And while I haven’t seen them go so far as to call them the synagogue of Satan they lay out reasons for why the neo-con policies have been pretty disastrous for America. But that’s an entirely different topic of discussion.
MSNBC - Newsweek has two good current articles online:
On Iraq:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15075326/site/newsweek/
On Foley facts related to the “admitted” a “coverup” thread - facts and analysis:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15178112/site/newsweek/
Each is worth reading.
To be clear my last post was to Paul.
bsimon–
It’s a cover up, it’s not just incompetence, for reasons I’ve already outlined more than once on this blog. And they have admitted to a cover up–de facto admissions of what they failed to tell the cops, the press, etc, and this piece you’ve got here about Reynolds convincing the sick SOB to run for Congress again.
So Mr. Black got it wrong this time–how many days before he takes the sarcastic quotation marks off the words “cover up” and “admits” publically what every other reporter in the country already knows?
Paul S–
You’re right. I totally failed to acknowledge that you’re moving on this Bachmann issue and the Wetterling ad. I should have acknowledged that, but the stuff I’m writing here is already way too long.
Next–Paul, I can explain to you what I think. I can’t give you the power to interpret what I say in the way that I want it to be interpreted. It seems that I can’t even give you the power to understand what I am saying, since your paraphrases of my point of view do not actually reflect my point of view.
I’ll try one more time, phrasing things in a different way. American conservatives have been misled about the real goals of the conservative political movement and philosophy. The American conservatives have been misled, but despite that fact–a lot of convsevatives continue to follow the conservative leaders and icons, because those leaders and icons will supply their anger addiction.
And the conservative leaders and icons continue to mislead them, because there’s money and power in it–they are cynics who don’t really care about what they’re doing to the country.
There’s only two ways a conservative icon could get himself “expelled from” the movement. One way: regularly advocate an increase in taxes that affect the richest Americans. Second way: Regularly criticize other conservative icons for publishing and broadcasting their hatred of the liberals; regularly telling his audience that it’s wrong to do that and it will not be permitted in his forum.
Because doing either of those two things would be a violation of the actual principles of the conservative movement.
I cannot explain to you why intelligent and sincere people would continue to follow such a movement. All I know is–many of the conservatives I know are intelligent and sincere about their own views which go far beyond the two immutable principles I’ve named.
eric z., good articles. The overall sense from both of them is just one of utter incompetance and willful blindness on their part. Just like the handling of Katrina. Stunning.
Again, all of this is conjecture.
The facts are that are known is that some IM messages between a page and Foley came to the public’s attention and Foley resigned.
Dora -
I almost hesitate to provide links, because they go inevitably to sources you might consider not worthy of being treated seriously: this not based on much you say, just based on very frequent responses one sees when the name “Powerline” comes up.
It isn’t that Powerline is the only place doing research, but they’ve become a very convenient repository for the news I’m talking about.
Here’s a search of the site on “Ellison†– it’s a shortcut to a pile of links:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/mt/mt-search.cgi?IncludeBlogs=1&search=Ellison
I’m not endorsing every conclusion either on fact or on the significance of these facts, and I’m sure you’ll find some things – some statements and some tone – that piss you off. I’m just talking about what seem to be facts contained here. The series toward the middle where they had a guest writer named Joel Mowbray contains a lot of it, including I think the donations thing.
On his affiliation with the nation of Islam, the accumulated evidence is that his repeated statements that his involvement with the Nation of Islam lasted for a duration of 18 months around the time of the Million Man March, in 1995 I believe that was, and that he did not adequately scrutinize the statements of Farrakhan at the time, doesn’t square with facts of his life. Most simply, he was penning editorials using an NOI-related name that among other things defended Farrakhan against charges of anti-Semitism in the late 90’s; he was running under a similar though different name and seeming to acknowledge a continuing membership the first time he ran for office, in 1998.
All this isn’t in itself disgraceful or disqualifying. I’m not trying to smear the man Joe McCarthy-style with a laundry list of “is it true†questions. All I’m saying is that the length of his identification and perhaps membership with the NOI seems to be a lot longer than he says, and also incidentally a lot longer than would make sense for one who never bothered to realize what he now calls the anti-Semitism of Farrakhan.
I also must say, this stuff is such common knowledge in the conservative blog world locally that it actually caught me by surprise that you might think I was “implying†something while failing to give backup. But it makes sense that you would ask for it. Here it is. Welcome to my hell. (Oh, that’s overstating it.)
I do know some Jewish people and groups have endorsed him; I also know some equally serious people and groups have doubts.
Of course people can atone. It gets thrown into doubt when the people doing the atoning aren’t honest.
The point of the quote I provided wasn’t the claim that Israel has too much power in our government, though that’s a topic worth talking about in terms of who’s making it and what they’re saying and is it ever a disguise for something ugly. But the point was the phraseology: the “synagogue of Satan.” Seems at least a little borderline to me.
And, Bill P’s “immutable principles” are a load of crap. For example, he claims that conservatives support lowering taxes on rich people. The facts are that conservatives and Republicans support lowering taxes on ALL people.
The term “conservative” is a misnomer. The “liberals” pretend that conservative means “sticking with precedent” but that is far from the truth. In today’s political enviroment it is clearly the “LIBERALS” that are the forces of the status quo and the “conservatives” the forces of chane.
Consider education. The Republicans have supported charter schools, school choice, school vouchers, merit pay for teachers, enhanced testing of students, tieing funding to results, and allowing talented professionals to help in teaching. The Democrats, because of its entrenched interests have opposed all of these initiatives without proposing anything new. Their solution is more money for the existing cadre of teachers. Everyone is disappointed with our education system.
Conservatives have pushed most of the economic changes in the past 30 years. The Earned Income Credit was conceived by conservative Milton Friedman. Jack Kemp pushed entitlement zones to help inner city business development. Pollution markets, which have been tremendously successful in combating pollution problems such as “acid rain” are another “conservative”, market driven idea that have been radically succesful. Welfare reform has been a tremendous success.
What is the “liberal” “progressive” positions on these issues? More senseless regulations, more entitlements, and just plain more money spent on the same old.
Only an ignoramous believes what Bill P. is spewing.
CORRECTION: the editorials I mentioon were the lat 80’s. Not the late 90’s. His law school years, that is.
And Dora -
The reason I chose the wording that “liberals” must acknowledge the ugliness within their own is because my point relates to the liberals.
Of course everyone including conservatives has to do that. But my point is that liberals seem to be comfortable pointing it out in other people, but are very resistant to recognizing it in groups or people related to their worldview.
And the NOI is a prime example. To me it’s absolutely obvious that Farrakhan’s words have long been and continue to be frequently seriously ugly; and for liberals to be all sensitive about that because hey, after all, his statements and politics are on the cutting edge of the all-important politics of resistance to something, well, I just think they at least need to realize how it looks.
Two interesting blog posts and one LTE, first one that fit Prendergast’s last post:
“Racism has kept the big tent Republicans together, and by racism I mean anti-non-white, anti-gay, anti-Muslim — the anyone who doesn’t look like us politics of hate. What else could get farmers to vote with bankers, evangelicals to vote with Jews, workers to vote with owners?
“Glue is a funny thing. Once you’re done building your party, hardly anyone can see what’s holding it together. Now that it’s coming apart, it’s pretty obvious.
“The Republican game plan has been to selectively bash gays, blacks, Muslims, Latin-Americans, students, the media, academics — whatever trips your trigger, well they’re mad at those people too!
“Now that the rubes are seeing just how many gays it takes to run a party of hate, they don’t like what they’re seeing (or figuring out about themselves).
“This Republican party cannot come back from Foley. Either they reinvent themselves, or they become totally marginalized, getting fewer and fewer votes with each passing election until they Whig out in the 2020s.
“Keith Ellison will take the oath of office on a Koran. If you can’t deal with that, the world has passed you by, and that’s your problem.”
For entire article:
http://www.norwegianity.com/index.php?itemid=782
***
On the human condition underlying circle the wagons, and don’t do the right thing do the thing that provides continuity [aka coverup or under-react]:
http://greatdivide.typepad.com/across_the_great_divide/2006/10/embracing_my_in.html#comments
***
This one for all of the Michele Bachmann critics who have had numerous LTEs igonred by LTE editors, causing or feeding feelings of paranoia; the paper in Buffalo prints the “letter asking the big questions” - somebody’s doing it, and in safe-incumbent NRCC head honcho Tom Reynolds’ district, where there now is disenchantment despite his websites touting how he delivers pork:
http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20061008/3064988.asp
[Google him for his websites - campaign and official govt.]
***
So, the GOP fundie voting block may wake up to being hoodwinked, Norweigianity argues; and who of all the candidates for federal office in Minnesota this year most fits the hoodwinking charge - Sixth District GOP candidate Michele Bachmann. She’s manipulated all the levers, days of prayer, abortion fund cuts, birth certificates for stillborn, marriage amendments, even naming everything in the Twin Cities after Ronald the Gipper Reagan; and, coincidentally has taken Hastert cash support up in St. Cloud via his photo-op visit, and now she is so myopic from counting the cash close up, I guess, that she can see no coverup - again, an inference from the pattern that there’s a causal link, for she has not ‘fessed up to me about any such conflict-of-interest awareness even, much less motive in fact, or in theory.
Keith Ellison is as much of a left wing kook as Michelle Bachman is a right wing kook. Ellison is the candidate in such a liberal district that his views are mainstream there. They do not care and will cast their vote for them. That is their privilege.
And yes, Bill Prendergast and I are 100% in agreement. Take the unneeded quotation marks off of “admitting” and “Cover-up”.
A jury would have the sense to do so, and why is that not a good standard?
And notice the fundie organizers, such as Dobson, being distressed that the fundie followers are starting to hear a second drumbeat, and wondering why the two are not in synch. Yes!
Mark - I’m not tied to either major party, but I’d vote for Ellison before I’d vote for you, and I think from comments here over multiple threads I have a basis for judgment. That’s not a glib insult, it’s from what you’ve said. I view you as further on the fringe than Ellison and if you doubt it as true or not, ask around. You are core GOP, not fundie GOP, I give you credit there, but I expect taxes is your hot-button more than any other issue.
Yes/no? If no, is there one?
Of course, everyone is resistant to pointing out ugliness within their own. What I’m saying is that it’s inherently more difficult for liberals to do, since their self-identification is as the party that embraces generosity and acceptance and love and all that.
One of the pillars of the worldview is “they are selfish and greedy, we are not.” (Apologies for plagiarizing Bill P there.)
Of course taxes are my major economic issue. We have shown that lower taxes increases investment and work. These two fundamentals create growth. Growth creates jobs and security. To that there is absolutely no argument.
The reason he did not is because the Reagan Republican Economic Principles WORK! Make marginal tax rates as low as possible, manage money with the goal of containing inflationary pressures, and manage fiscal policy with deficit spending to match the “priorities” of the electorate.
Again, this has worked. Bill Clinton had 8 years to dismantle the system and never did. He barely moved marginal tax rates (about the same as George Bush 41), retained the Reagan appointed Chairman of the Federal Reserve Alan Greenspan, and managed to “balance” the budget when defense expenditures reached the lowest point as a percentage of GDP since before WWII.
Further, I am not a candidate. The only political office I would ever “run” for is dictator, or maybe emporer. I have little interest in being a candidate because they have to be too nice.
Ellison - He’s going to win the district, will take his oath of office on a Q’ran, and that’s fine with me. I don’t mind a man of faith, so long as he’s not trying a cramdown of his faith on me or others - which appears to not be his thing.
Bachmann - She may win the Sixth, but I fervently hope not. Wetterling is a real decent and legitimate human being. Bachmann does not provide family business or campaign workers with health coverage. Wetterling does. Bachmann’s talked being against pork-barrel and has a limited partnership in Bachmann Family Farms, something like that in name, which appears to have gotten ag. subsidies, aka “pork.” Bachmann wants a big say in public school management, and has homeschooled her children. Etc.
Kline - He’ll win, Rowley’s a better person; Kline ran some real dirty stuff against Bill Luther in the past - NRCC having the fingerprints on it, Kline gaining and insufficiently distancing himself from all I’ve seen. It’s a pattern.
Oberstar/Ramstad/McCollum - No contest for any of them.
Klobuchar/Kennedy - Say goodnight, Mark.
Mark - David Stockman called it nothing but simple trickle down, and voodoo economics; and he engineered a good part of it.
It works, in keeping your taxes lower than otherwise, not, however, doing jack for most of the rest of us.
Paul S says “To me it’s absolutely obvious that Farrakhan’s words have long been and continue to be frequently seriously ugly; and for liberals to be all sensitive about that because hey, after all, his statements and politics are on the cutting edge of the all-important politics of resistance to something, well, I just think they at least need to realize how it looks.”
Do you have examples of people who don’t view Farrakhan as “frequently seriously ugly?” You claim some liberals are overlooking that, which I think is flat-out wrong. What liberals are supporting him & are they on the fringe, or meanstream? If I’m not mistaken, even the fringe people that used to hang with Farrakhan don’t do so anymore.
Top 11 Democratic Reponses To The North Korean Atomic Bomb Test
11. “Karl Rove engineered this to distract from the Foley scandal.â€
10. “There was no nuclear test; Dick Cheney planted the TNT – just like he did on 9-11.â€
9. “This is what happens when you fail to follow the wisdom Clinton and Carter.â€
8. “At least North Korea isn’t covering up inappropriate Instant Messages to pages.â€
6. “There was no test. The seismic activity coincided with Ted Kennedy’s and Dennis Hastert’s annual sumo wrestling match.â€
7. “The seismic activity was caused by Global Warmingâ€
5. “Yeah, yeah, nuke tests are bad. Now let’s move on to something important, like finding a way to protect our children from gay Republican Congressmen.â€
4. “I demand a full investigation into whether Foley IM’d Kim Jong Il.â€
3. “If this keeps us from retaking the House and Senate, Kim Jong Il will have finally gone too far!â€
2. “If we would have set up midnight basketball leagues in North Korea, their scientists would have had something to do besides build nukes.â€
1. “It’s the Foley scandal, stupid!â€
Rod, remind me again which of the members of the Axis of Evil isn’t a bigger pain in our collective ass now than they were back when Bush first used the term?
“David Stockman called it nothing but simple trickle down, and voodoo economics”
David Stockman wrote his book in 1986. He was upset because there was not spending cuts to offset the tax reductions in the Kemp-Roth tax cut, and higher deficits.
By the time Stockman wrote his book, it was an obsolete. Economic growth was beginning, inflation was being quickly reduced, and unemployment was dropping. Looking back over 20 years it is clear that the United States has prospered and had tremendous growth. No other country has matched these results.
As far as “not doing jack” for the rest of us is a ridiculous claim. Right before Ronald Reagan became President of the United States the former president, Jimmy Carter declared that the United States era in the sun was over and that we faced a very bleak prospect for the future. Based on the facts he was probably correct. The country faced double digit inflation, double digit unemployment, an energy crisis, and foreign policy crisis. More telling is that the country had no solution for these problems.
Reagan came to office and chose to implement the tax cuts and defense build up.
You can make up your own reasons why, but the fact is that on both domestic and foreign policy fronts everything Reagan predicted happened. Everything his critics predicted did not happen. The economy boomed for 25 consecutive years. The Soviet Union collapsed into a pile of rubble. The Cold War ended with victory.
Again, if you want to make up the actual mechanisms why this happened, be my guest. Lots of people want to take credit away from Reagan. But the simple fact is, again, well….Everything he said would happen, happened.
Mark,
I remember a recession around 1990 or so–”It’s the economy, stupid” and all of that. I also had always given more credit to Paul Voelcker’s tight monetary policy than Reagan for the economic turn around.
There has been two very minor recessions in 25 years. But the trend is still there.
Paul Volcker did a fine job on monetary policy in the early 1980s. However, Keynsian economic predicted that low inflation meant higher unemployment. After the implementation of the Reagan policies we had lower inflation and lower unemployment, something the previous econimic team could not figure out.
More revisionist history coming from the right. “25 consecutive years.” What a joke.
i think it was almost prophetic that bush said north korea, iran and iraq were the axis of evil. pretty much right on the money, but i still think we should throw in france just for the hell of it.
And, like I said, regardless of who you “creedit” the fact is that in 1981 Reagan’s opponents claimed that his policies would lead to disaster, both domestically and foreign policy wise.
Instead of disaster we had tremendous and long term success. I think that speaks volumes.
“i think it was almost prophetic that bush said north korea, iran and iraq were the axis of evil. ”
Prophetic in the same way that your hornet nest example is a good predictor of getting stung.
“More revisionist history coming from the right. “25 consecutive years.†What a joke. ”
Well, I will include you as the first volunteer to go back to 1980 then.
If you want to experience the pleasure and make your claims, put your money were your mouth is. Obtain a 1980 tax form and file your taxes using it and pay the result. Remember, before Reagan tax brackets and other measures were not even indexed so you probably will be in well into the 50% marginal tax bracket. Your personal exemptions will be limited to the same value as 1981 (remember no bracketing). There is not an exemption for IRAs or 401(k) plans.
Have fun!
“Instead of disaster we had tremendous and long term success. I think that speaks volumes. ”
Maybe I’m just too pessimistic. My take on the current economic outlook is not positive. Seems like we’re perpetually on the edge of a big economic hit, be it the instable price of oil, the housing market, stagnant job growth, the pending baby boom retirements, etc. Bush is spending like he still has a coke habit, with no end in sight. It just doesn’t make sense that existing fiscal policy can continue long term; at some point the politicians will have to start making hard choices. When they do, I suspect the people will agree on resuming some of the taxes that have been cut, rather than aggressively cutting programs.
that wasnt my hornet nest example.
“Well, I will include you as the first volunteer to go back to 1980 then. ”
You have a time machine?
I’m impressed!
How does the Star Tribune not compare the Gerry Studds page affair with the FOLEY ISSUE.Studds was re-elected 5 more times after his acknowledged affair with a 17 year old male page and the Speaker of the House during his exposure was Tip O Neal who did not vote for censure of Studds. The issue should be dealt with, no matter what, but does the side of the aisle that one sits on make that big of a difference. How does Patty Wetterling feel about how her party handled this issue in Congress?
“that wasnt my hornet nest example.”
My mistake! The analogy stands however. If I could edit my post, I would credit dare2sayit properly. it would look something like:
Rod says “i think it was almost prophetic that bush said north korea, iran and iraq were the axis of evil. ”
Prophetic in the same way that dare2sayit’s hornet nest example is a good predictor of getting stung.
bsimon -
Good question: whatI mean is: well, first, I do think a serious article like the Star Trib printed today would include some idea of the undeniable details of and sheer volume 9as in examples) of Farrakhan’s ugliness. The impression it gives is some occasional things that go too far; it’s a lot more than that and it continues today.
So that’s a form of playing it down, which has the function if not the intent of making it easier to just blithely contend that what Farrakhan says (as well as other leaders) really has nothing to do with the NOI is all about.
Which I think is the basic idea. Maybe it’s true. But just accepting that as the obvious truth without really looking into it is what I was talking about. Going really easy on your own in a way you would not allow the right to do.
Robert,
There was an article in the first few days of the Foley issue discussing the scandal in 1983 about both Studds and Crane (the republican who was involved). Crane ran for re-election, but lost. As you point out, Studds got re-elected 5 times.
“Bush is spending like he still has a coke habit”
Ok, name your spending cuts you would make. I will listen. Remember, you need to make spending cuts that are politically viable. You have to get those cuts through both the House and the Senate.
“stagnant job growth”
Unemployment is at 4.6%. The BLS just revised the number of new jobs created in the previous 12 month study period up 810,000 (that is 67,500 more jobs per month in additional the previously reported job growth).
In fact, this even be the LOWEST end estimate of jobs. The BLS measure is a very conservative survey process that is still being done basically the same way it was done 30 years ago. But the economy has changed. More jobs are created in small business and more people are self employed in ways never imagined by the BLS surver. The more expanive household surveys suggest that job growth may have been even more stunning over the past few years than what is measured in the BLS reporting. There are something on the order of 100,000 people who make their full time living trading on E-bay, an example of something not measured in the BLS statistics.
“When they do, I suspect the people will agree on resuming some of the taxes that have been cut,”
Again this assumes a static relationship between tax rates and revenues.
If you are honest about cutting the deficit you must talk spending cuts more than tax increases. The only real problem with deficits are nto the spending, but what you are spending the money on. Fiscal policy is a political matter. The electorate sets its priorities on spending. If we are not getting high priority spending with government spendin then we are wasting our money regardless of its funding sources.
And, as far as long term, I have demonstrated how a succesful and well managed corporation like General Electric have a much higher debt level than the United States government (their long term debt is twice their annual revenues). No one considers them to be bankrupt.
The question is “Why Not”. And the answer is obvious. It matters WHAT the money was spent on, not how it was financed. If GE borrowed the money to purchase assets that will improve profitibility as well as service the incurred debt, shareholders are happy. If they spent it lavishing Jack Welch’s mistresses then they would not be happy because future performance would deteriorate.
The same is true with the United States government. If we are spending money on important things: education, defense, transportation, poverty programs, then how we finance the spending is relatively unimportant. They will give us a rate of return later that will more than compensate for the interest expense on the borrowing.
If we are wasting our money on useless spending like the Robert Byrd Memorial Highway Project Number 3768 which puts sixteen lanes of freeway in the middle of no where West Virginia (check this out sometime because it is essentially true) then we need to be concerned about the deficit.
But Crane at least apologized for the transgression. Studds never did.
Mark: I see you’re doing your revising your history books again.
Mark says:
Bill P’s “immutable principles†are a load of crap. For example, he claims that conservatives support lowering taxes on rich people. The facts are that conservatives and Republicans support lowering taxes on ALL people.
They support that? Really? Than how come they never do it, when they get the chance?
I mean, they DO lower the taxes on the rich, whenever they get the chance. But the taxes on everyone else go UP every time conservative politicians outspend the incoming tax revenue–right?
I am talking about deficit spending here, in case you missed it. Candidate Ronald Reagan was FOR a balanced budget, because economists like the ones you name (e.g. Milton Friedman) explained to Reagan that deficit spending was actually a “hidden tax”–it would have to be paid back by taxpayers in the future.
But President Ronald Reagan was a deficit spender–he deficit spent like hell, and the hell with the balanced budget principle and the “lowering people’s taxes”. The jobs created in the Reagan era weren’t the result of the tax cuts that benefitted the rich–they were the result of deficit spending that would have warmed the heart of any liberal economist.
And as for paying it back with tax hikes to keep up with the spending Reagan did–well, Reagan said the hell with that, that’s the next few guys’ problem.
The policy of endless spending without making payments did lead to disaster–the Bush I recession and tax hikes, which helped to put Clinton in office.
Paradoxically:
1)the conservatives blamed Bush I for ending Reaganomics with his tax hikes. They said that Bush I had killed any chance of quick recovery from the recession with his tax hikes.
2) After Clinton was elected, conservatives tried to give Bush I CREDIT for the economic prosperity we began to enjoy under the Clinton years, saying it was really Bush I’s wise economic policies that had stimulated the recovery and prosperity. (Never mind that this was theoretically impossible, if you believe the conservative principle that a country cannot “tax its way to properity–if the conservatives were right in given Bush I credit, then Bush I did exactly that, by raising taxes to make good on Reagan/Bush I deficit spending.)
It’s no problem for a rank-and-file conservative to maintain both of these contrary positions at the same time in their minds; it’s an example of conservative double-think, and it gives them another excuse to despise Clinton and the liberals. But Reagan’s Keynesian deficit spending to stimulate the economy is one of my favorite examples of a core “conservative principle” being jettisoned as soon as the conservative gets into power.
The rich and the upper middle class did well out of Reagan, but the working families got stuck with the tax bill for his eight years in office–it got them twelve years of tax hikes under Bush I/Clinto, and much of income from the unprecedented growth under Clinton, to pay back what RR had spent.
There are plenty of other examples of conservatives abandoning their principles in the face of policy realities, or for short term poltical gain. Another one of my favorites was when I watched family values advocate Dan Quayle go on TV announce that abortion was a “big tent” issue for the GOP–in other words: “I think abortion is murder, but we welcome people who back a woman’s right to choose “murder” into the GOP, because, at this point in time, we can win elections without them.”
I stand by my analysis of the two immutable principles of conservatism, Mark. That’s really what the “philosophy” comes down to, in practice–even if you can’t or won’t see it.
As for my opinion being a bunch of “crap” and your contention that anybody who believes it is an ignoramus–well, we must put those contentions in the box where they belong: the Mark box.
Eric Z–don’t worry too much about Eric Black removing the quotes from the words “admit” and “cover up.” He will not remove the quotes from the word “admit” because to Eric Black, a de facto admission does not count as an admission.
He will almost certainly omit the sarcastic quotes from the words “cover up” as the weeks roll on, and ever more evidence of a GOP cover up is produced.
Mr. Black and the Star Tribune have positioned themselves at the rear of the journalistic “herd”; they will eventually follow wherever it leads them, and news reporters are already calling it a cover up without the saracastic quote marks around the phrase.
Mr. Black and the Strib will catch up the reality shortly. They are just terrified of being the first to deal with the reality of the situation.
“they DO lower the taxes on the rich, whenever they get the chance”
Really? When Bush lowered taxes he did it in a way that gave a much high tax cut in proportion to what they paid to lower income tax payers than high end. The changes included a new 10% marginal tax bracket, the extension of the income levels on the 15% tax bracket, the extention of the $1000 child tax credit, and lowered rates on the other brackets.
I see no basis to your claim that OTHER people’s taxes went up. It is just rhetoric without a basis in fact.
Deficit spending is not a “hidden tax”. Future generations can balance their own budgets if they choose and just service the existing debt by refinancing it. Just as our generation did with the debt we inherited. Debt has been at an almost constant level since the 1930’s, spiking in the 1940’s due to WWII. The national debt as a percentage of GDP is lower today than it was in 1962.
“But Reagan’s Keynesian deficit spending to stimulate the economy is one of my favorite examples of a core “conservative principle†being jettisoned as soon as the conservative gets into power.”
It was “jettisoned” because of the political process. It was going to be impossible to get any budget cuts through the Democratically controlled House of Representatives. Reagan prioritized his objectives and choose to cut taxes and increase defense spending.
Every Keynsian opposed Reaganomics because they claimed it was impossible to reduce inflation and unemployment simultaneously. The “Phillips Curve” and all. “Supply Side” economics was a major pardigm shift even if people like Bill P. do not understand it.
“I think it was almost prophetic that bush said north korea, iran and iraq were the axis of evil”
Self-fulfilling prophecy is prophecy nonetheless… I guess I would have to agree team ramrod.
Oh, and arguing economics with Mark is as fun as slamming your face into the wall over and over. He concedes nothing and just keeps repeating over and over “cutting taxes creates investment and work.” Like a CEO who “invests” in a new Jag with his new tax break- or the son of a wealthy businessman that “works” on spending his new money on a carribean vacation. See if we shift all the resources in this country to a smaller percentage of people, they will spend more money than the masses- then companies will pop up that pay the rest of us minimum wage (hell, why even have that) to make new gold plated toliet seats that are being demand by the ultra wealthy since they have more money. I concede that the arguments make sense in an econ textbook- but after Hoover, Reagan, Bush Sr. and Bush Jr- I think we can put to bed any actual belief that they “WORK” for the majority of Americans. Conservatives stick with supply-side economics even though there is no evidence that this actually works in our complex modern economy unless we give Reagan all of the credit for the 90’s booming economy.
Mark - Supply side guru George Gilder is at Discovery Institute now, with the Intelligent Designers, because nobody else thought his gobledygook was intelligently designed. Legitimate academia ran him out, or am I wrong? Was he ever accorded a place in legitimate academia?
“Conservatives stick with supply-side economics even though there is no evidence”
Really? I see. When Ronald Reagan took office in January 1981 the rate of inflation was 13.48% and increasing. The unemployment rate was 7.5% and increasing. When Reagan left office unemployment was 5.2% and inflation was 4.8%. The basic way the economy was described was “Stagflation”…high inflation, slow or no growth. The word STAG was well chosen because everywhere it looked like the economy was stagnant and nobody had answers.
Before “Supply Side” economics the standard way to increase employment was by loose fiscal and monetary policy. The problem with this presecription was inflation.
The way to control inflation was to have tight fiscal and monetary policy, which would increase unemployment.
The problem in 1980 was that there was both. President Carter initiated the squeeze on inflation by installing Volcker into the Fed. The tight monetary policy in 1981-82 put the economy in a major recession.
The unemployment problem was solved by changing to the Supply Side paradigm which created the investment level to create jobs, reducing unemployment.
The Reagan ecomomic policies have not been changed since. The top marginal tax rate under Clinton was 39.6% instead of 70% when Reagan took office. Bush lowered this down to 35%.
If you compare the economic performance of the United States to the other developed nations you will see what a difference a paridigm shift makes.
Well, Ed Prescott won the Nobel Prize for Economics in 2005. I can link you to his paper on how reducing the marginal tax rates enhanced the number of hours worked in the United States while the nations of Europe stagnated.
If you think times have been bad in the US, since 1982 we have had but 16 months of recession. The French 43 months and the Germans 80.
The most succesful aspect of the “Supply Side” econmic theory is not its fiscal policy. It is not the Laffer Curve. It is the fact that this concept correctly concludes that growth comes from the free market that will innovate and invest if given the right incentives. A marginal tax rate of 70% is not an incentive to invest in the economy. But then, that was not very obvious to people like Ted Kennedy and Jimmy Carter.
Let me ask this question to Ryan and others. What do you CONCEDE?
Your arguments are based on anecdotes and claims. You provide absolutely no basis for your arguments. It is just what you think, and basically, what you have been told by the liberal media. It is very apparent you have absolutely no historical basis for your claims and little understanding of economic theory, and the history of such thought.
For example, you can claim that Reagan’s economic success was caused by a Keynsian Fiscal Policy, but then you would be wrong. Keynes would have predicted massive increases in inflation if growth would have been from Keynsian deficits. The reason for this is that running a deficit does not increase output in any way. The only way you can increase growth is to finance a deficit with new money injected into the economy. More money means higher rates of inflation. Inflation decreased throughout this period instead of increased. Money supply was drastically contracted in 1981-82 instead of being expanded.
Nothing predicted by the neo Keynsian theorist was correct about the expansions in the 1980s.
Paul, Oh Powerline links. Well, since they are known to be an extremely partisan RW blog they have as much credibility with me as the extremely partisan left blogs would with you.
You confirm my thought that you reject Ellisons comments about the length of his NOI affiliation and repudiation of Farrakhan. Your reasoning is because it “seems to be a lot longer than he says” and it “doesn’t square with facts of his life”. And then you throw in that people can atone but you doubt it when the people “aren’t honest”. It looks as though you’re basing this on the “common knowledge in the conservative blog world”. There’s nothing particularly wrong with that but I’d say you should cut the same slack to those basing their opinions on what they find in the liberal blogosphere.
And about your view that “liberals seem to be comfortable pointing it[ugliness] out in other people, but are very resistant to recognizing it in groups or people related to their worldview.” It’s an interesting point because I feel the same way about conservatives in fact we had this discussion before about the extremist Christian group running the Jesus Camp. I believe I said something like ‘it’s easy for many people to condemn radical Islam but not so easy for them to do the same of radical Christianity’. I suppose we both should be more sensitive to the beam in our own eyes first.
I would have to disagree with this though: “everyone is resistant to pointing out ugliness within their own, What I’m saying is that it’s inherently more difficult for liberals to do, since their self-identification is as the party that embraces generosity and acceptance and love and all that.” I could point out that I think it’s more difficult for conservatives because they align with a party that self identifies as the party of God and that the president they revere says he was tapped by God to lead this nation. I think that gives many conservatives the idea that they therefore can do no wrong so would have a harder time recognizing the ugliness within their own. I think a good example is how James Dobson has called the Foley emails just a prank and how many conservatives are trying to shift the blame onto others. This does not mean that all conservatives think this way anymore than all liberals think the way you state.
Mark said: But Crane at least apologized for the transgression. Studds never did.
Not true. He [Studds] acknowledged that it had been inappropriate to engage in a relationship with a subordinate, and said his actions represented “a very serious error in judgement”.
Robert, why should Wetterling be obliged to say anything about what Congress did 20 years ago?
Ryan said this in another thread and I think it is spot on: In order to run for office do we need to stand up and apologize or denounce every mistake anyone in our party has ever made?
dora, how come you don’t live by the same standard you expect every one else to go by with affixing sources to “quotes and facts” you supply?
is there something in particular you’re referring to ramrod? I typically do as you know very well. If it’s the Studds thing I just posted I’ve linked to it before in another thread but you’re right, I shouldn’t expect that everyone will have seen it or remember it so here it is again: http://tinyurl.com/rrtuu But perhaps it’s something else you’re referring to?
Dora - please tell me you’re not refusing to look into the facts of what I’m saying because I’m referring you to them via Powerline links? That’s beneath the Dora I thought I was talking to.
You seem to be stooping to inferring that I’m being purposely vague with language; and I guess you’re doing that to pre-decide that what I’m saying has no substance.
Laura: Stop it. I’m not saying it’s “common knowledge in the conservative blog world and therefore it’s true.” And you know that. Did you have a bad afternoon or something?
I was simply saying that in order to convey the anger and confusion in that world over the Strib’s stonewalling on investigating or publishing.
If you will read those links, maybe you need to take out a crucifix or somethign as you do it, you will find very specific allegations about why it’s possible Ellison’s afiliation and identification with the NOI was both longer and deeper than he says. And, you will find specifics on his relationship with CAIR, especially the fundraising associated with it in this election.
If you think somethings’s not true, tell me why. If you think it doesn’t matter, tell me why.
Short version: deal with it. I’m seriously angry at this, Dora. That’s asinine, to reject something like this based on your received opinion about Powerline.
If you told me there was something ostensibly factual and important I should check out at Kos, I would do it.
What you’re doing here is acting 100% precisely like I describe the angry left acting.
I’m not inferring anything Paul, you are inferring based on what I said.
You want me to read what Powerline says because it supports what you’re saying. I said that because I view Powerline as an extremely RW partisan blog what it says is suspect in my mind. There’s nothing “angry” about me saying that. I’m giving you an honest response.
But you acknowledge that it makes you angry. I can only guess you might be angry b/c you want to sway my thinking but I don’t trust the source you’re pointing to. We all make judgements based on our perception of the sources of information provided.
Just because I don’t trust Powerline as a source does not mean I wouldn’t check out other conservative blogs. It really comes down to how inclusive the blog is of other viewpoints.
I find it interesting that I referred to extremely partisan left blogs and you named Kos. There are a number of different frontpagers and any member can post a diary on Kos. Membership is not restricted to liberals or Democrats. I’ve read diaries by moderates and conservatives and I haven’t read diary comments yet that didn’t include comments by people representing all political spectrums. I don’t consider Kos to be extremely partisan left because of that.
That is not the case on Powerline. There is no comments section and the main bloggers are 3 well known RW partisans. That is why I don’t trust PW as a definitive source. If that disappoints you there is nothing I can do about that.
By calling my opinion asinine and making a generalized statement that this is precisely the way the angry left acts it looks to me like your anger got the best of you.
Big question taking bets
Yeah, I know, don’t argue with Mark. I know, I know how he operates, so does practically everybody else who reads this blog. I coulda picked any number of examples to illustrate my point about conservatives abandoning core principles once they get into power. I just picked Reaganomics because I like it when steam shoots out Mark’s ears.
Anyway, that’s not the important thing. The important thing is: who wants to make a little money out of Eric Black’s take on this GOP Foley cover up thing?
What I’m suggesting here is that each of us put in twenty bucks, and everybody picks an upcoming day on the calendar—the date on which that person thinks that Eric B will take the “ironic quotes†off the words “cover up†when he’s referring to the GOP role in the Foley scandal.
When Black does that, he will totally caving, he and the Strib will be officially acknowledging that the doubts that Eric Black had about whether there was a “cover up†were kind of stupid in the first place.
Everybody picks a day, sends me their twenty bucks, and I hold it all in one big pot for the winner until Black uses the phrase cover up—without putting it in quotes to signify that he thinks it’s premature to use that expression. Black and the Strib will use the phrase cover up; sooner or later they’ll acknowledge what the rest of the press has already acknowledged—we just don’t know exactly when, and that’s how you make a bet out of this, and maybe a little money. “Weasel word†from Black—like “alleged cover upâ€, sans quotes—don’t count. It’s got to be cover up, no quotes, no qualifiers, no stories about him and his dog.
Whoever wins gets the whole pot, if five people play that’s about a hundred bucks for the winner, minus my ten per cent rake. Who wants a piece of that?
To show you my heart’s in the right place, I won’t even pick a day, myself. I’ll just referee, I’ll just take a ten per cent rake out of the pot because I’m making book on this. (I can’t place a bet and pick a day, because Black would refuse to acknowledge a cover up whatever day I pick, just to screw me.)
Okay, who wants a piece of this? Ramrod? You think the paper’s got a liberal bias, you’re sure they’ll cave, so I’m putting you down for tomorrow (Tuesday the 11th.) You got Tuesday, Ramrod, send me the twenty bucks. Paul S.—I’m putting you down for Friday, you have some doubts about the Strib’s coverage of Bachmann.
Eric Z , you’ll take the long odds, you’re sure the paper’s got a conservative bias on the Bachmann Wetterling Binkowski race–I’ll put you down for next Wednesday. Dora, you want in on this too, you’re not afraid of anything. What day do you want? Mark, it doesn’t matter what day you pick, if you lose you’ll say it never happened, so I’m not going to take your marker; cash up front from you—write down what day you want, wrap it around a Jackson, and send it to me snail mail. Peder, you think Black is principled, so I’m putting you down for “next Thursdayâ€â€”the long shot.
Come on now, that’s “The Big Question†this week,—when will Black crack and start calling it a cover up, instead of a “cover up?†Somebody gets a bundle when we find out the answer to that “Big Question.†What days do you guys want?
Bill, sure I’m in! I would’ve taken the Friday afternoon news dump but I see you’ve given that to Paul. So I’ll take Saturday then.
at least now i know what you do in your free time (probably a lot of that too), bill.
Okay, Dora, Saturday…writing that down…
Okay, who’s next? When will Black cave and admit there was a cover up? He probably still hasn’t read the relevant news stories yet–if he had, he never would have put the words cover up in quotes, it’s all there in the papers and the broadcast media since the end of September.
Get your bets down before he reads the news!
ramrod–
yeah, this is what I do in my free time, I grew up in jersey.
anyway, look. I gave you “tomorrow”, I hope that’s okay. The clock starts ticking for you, starting tonight at midnight. If Black uses the phrase cover up to refer to the GOP cover up for Foley (without the quotes around the phrase)–you win! (Whatever is in the pot by midnight tonight, minus my ten per cent.)
Dora, our conversation is in danger. You’re being disingenuous and condescending all in one beautiful combo.
I honestly can’t believe the tack you’re taking: refusing to look at the links. Stunning. Your integrity has essentially vanished. Disgusting actually, more than stunning.
You don’t like the liberal site I chose for some reason? Fine. Whatever. Name a site. If you told me there was something factual and interesting at that site, I’d check it out.
Powerline has no comments? That’s true. Evidently that leaves you absolutely powerless to determine if what they’re saying has validity.
There are blogs on right and left without comments, of course. Josh Marshall’s doesn’t; I respect his site anyway. I have a very strong suspicion that your absolute rule on that isn’t really all that absolute. And if it is - it’s a stupid rule.
The facts/assertions in the Powerline links don’t come out of thin air, Dora. There is documentation. The fact that they’re on Powerline is meaningless.
One more note: What you’re doing is letting us know that if the assertions I describe are true, it bothers you. So you’re finding a way to ignore them.
Bill - I’m not interested in your little game. For a number of reasons that I have no interest in describing because frankly I’m fed up with both of you. Stripes are showing like neon tonight.
Time’s up! It’s past midnight. No more bets.
Let’s see what’s in the pot. Hmmm…
Twenty bucks pledged by Dora. That’s it. Ten per cent of that for me is…two bucks. Hardly worth the typing.
Sorry, Dora, it looks like all you can win is your own money. Keep it. It’s just as well, I think they outlawed internet gambling this week, I would have had to pay off in Monopoly money anyway.
But I kept track of the names and days assigned, and now I will run this thing on a “Fantasy When Will Black Crack” basis: when Black starts referring to the cover up as a cover up, I will tell you who won, if anyone.
In the meantime, keep an eye out for whatever the GOP can dredge up on Dems currently serving who’ve made come-ons to pages. All they need is one kid to come forward and say he was winked at by a Dem, and the GOP is back in business this year.
The object now for the GOP is to disgust as many of the voters as possible with new revelations before election day, so that the vast majority of them give up on the electoral process and stay home. That way, only the hardcore right–the guys who are willing to vote back in a pedophile protection service, cause a voice on the radio told they should–will show up at the polls. And the present leadership will continue in power!
Either that, or bomb Iran. One of those will work.
gotta laugh …. having Mr. Black parse the meaning of lie, cover-up reminds me of recent remarks by Sec. State Rice, who claimed the Clinton Admin did NOT LEAVE A PLAN to deal with Al Quada …. only a set of actionable statements …..
the GOP leadership covered up a sexual harassment scandal, and unfortunately it is not the biggest of their sins against our national interest, only the latest
Dora - a final thought (and that’s a promise): I’m relatively sure you will check the links out. I think even you couldn’t completely ignore the weight of your own cowardice.
“He [Studds] acknowledged that it had been inappropriate to engage in a relationship with a subordinate, and said his actions represented “a very serious error in judgementâ€.
Not really. He said he never broke any laws and brought the page he molested to a press conference. It was all consensual, he claims. Some moral authority. Imagine dragging the child you molested into public and claiming “it was just a private relationship”.
As for Keith Ellison, his support for Kathleen Soliah makes him an unsuitable member of Congress. He characterized her as a similar to a “black gang member” implying she is being politically persecuted.
Regardless, the liberals in the 5th District can send whatever character they want. It is their pickings.
Paul,
Dora is not a coward, she is just not able to understand anything outside of what she reads in the DailyKos.
But she is just typical of the leftist on this board. Read their comments about “arguing economics with Mark” for example. When you do that, look at my posts. My postings actually have some data to them and some argument.
They just say stuff. “The economy sucks” for example and we are supposed to agree with them. If we do not then we are arrogant and will not concede a point.
They are laughable and provide me with much entertainment.
Instead of writing a few hundred more self-absorbed words about how someone else covered your coverage of the cover-up, how about something new? Like an “Is That a Fact” check on Bachmann’s tax-cutting ad. Bachmann cites three bills that prove she’s a tax cutter. How far did she advance those bills she cites in her ad? What did she do to get a hearing for her Taxpayers Bill of Rights? Talk to Larry Pogemiller. What’s Bachmann’s overall legislative success record?
Enough with the semantics exercises.
karl, how about how much did amy do for the 48 hr hospital stay? did she write the new bill or awas she merely one of dozens of witnesses that testified? for every bachmann question, i will throw you a amy question.
Mark -
Who knows. The reason it actually upsets me is it’s one more example of the armadillo mindset afflicting the left and damaging American politics. And here it is, on Eric’s unique attempt at a cross-differences discussion blog, making its presence known like a dead skunk on a nice country highway. “No. I won’t read it, it’s bad. They’re Republicans and they don’t take comments. Ick.”
It’s just depressing.
Well Paul, if your view of my integrity rests on me accepting what three well known extremely partisan RW bloggers allege then I’ll just have to learn to live with that.
Powerline has no comments? That’s true. Evidently that leaves you absolutely powerless to determine if what they’re saying has validity.
Actually what it means to me is that I don’t just take one view to be the gospel truth. I like the ability to include multiple points of view in my thinking. I’ve found over the years that I make better decisions that way. I won’t comment on what it means to you b/c I wouldn’t want to pretend I know what you think.
I’m not sure what you mean by my “absolute rule”. I never said I don’t read blogs that don’t have comments but I did say that “We all make judgements based on our perception of the sources of information provided.”
I can’t change what you think I’m letting you know. But what I did let you know is that I’m more inclined, as apparently are other people, to give Ellison the benefit of the doubt based on what he’s said, and based on what I’ve read in City Pages articles that other people who know him well have said, and based on what those people who know him well have said about his actions over more than 10 years time over what 3 RW partisan operatives say. You’ve made it clear you don’t believe him. I see it as a difference of opinion. I won’t attack you over it. It doesn’t make me angry as it seems to make you.
An interesting observation I’ve made about the internet is that you can find justification for any position one may take on any matter you can think of. We all have to make our judgements as to how we sift through that. I’ve given you my criteria. You choose to call me “disgusting” and a coward. It makes me wonder why the over-reaction to me not agreeing with you? I have an idea but I won’t speculate.
Dora: what makes me angry is your refusal to check out the assertions I’ve read. And as I said just above, it’s less anger at you than anger at the mindset: over and over, when I get into these discussions, as things get more uncomfortable even intelligent liberals find a way to not just start avoiding, but to act imperious in doing it.
Go to Powerline, read what they say and why they say it, and see if there’s a reason to think it’s not true, or why it doesn’t mean what it seems to mean to me.
As far as I can tell - I may be wrong - the fact that it comes from Powerline is irrelevant, unless they’re elaborately lying, literally making up newspaper articles and candidate filings, and making up the reports and research of other people along the way. So far I haven’t see those allegations anywhere.
When I saw your response yesterday, I was actually shocked. I couldn’t believe what I was reading.
I’d be willing to get into a discussion of some examples of why Powerline can’t be trusted. It’s fine. You gotta be willing to go absolutely anywhere, and I want to believe that credo still defines the left and liberalism.
And yes, I believe a pattern of refusal to entertain the most difficult alternative assertions and facts is disgusting. Not your pattern; the overall pattern, of which this is one example.
Mark says “Ok, name your spending cuts you would make. I will listen. Remember, you need to make spending cuts that are politically viable. You have to get those cuts through both the House and the Senate. ”
Why do I have to name spending cuts? I’m not the guy arguing for continued cuts to revenue (i.e. tax cutting). My criticism is of those that continue to both cut taxes and increase spending - i.e. the GOP that’s in control of the House, Senate & White House. The problem is these liars promote the fallacy that tax cuts will increase revenue, then go out and spend as though revenue really is up. The borrow-and-spend, trickle-up economics of the GOP is bad policy. Its time for someone capable of some fiscal restraint to get into office. I don’t care if its old-school republicans that can actually control spending, or Clinton-Democrats that at least balance spending with revenue. Putting off paying the piper for another day / generation is bad policy and its gonna hurt more when the bills start showing up, than it would if we’d just live within our means now.
Paul says: You gotta be willing to go absolutely anywhere, and I want to believe that credo still defines the left and liberalism.
No I don’t Paul. And what makes you think that’s the “credo” that defines the left and liberalism? I’ve never seen that credo stated anywhere myself.
I believe a pattern [the overall pattern] of refusal to entertain the most difficult alternative assertions and facts is disgusting
You’re overgeneralizing again based on my refusal to entertain PW.
See Paul what you seem to be missing, maybe I’m not being clear enough, is that other things besides what I read on the blogs about him lead me to be able to give him more of a benefit of the doubt than you are willing to do that he is a different person than he was 10 years ago and that he has repudiated Farrakhan.
What I did neglect to say above is that one of the people quoted in City Pages happens to be a friend. Someone whose opinions and instincts I have learned to trust over the years. I don’t think it unreasonable for me to put more weight into what my friend knows about him than what 3 RW partisan operatives say. I’ve read PW in the past. I came away with a different judgement about its merits than you. Again, we all make different judgements about the source of information we receive. I’ll point you back to what you said to me: so deal with it.
it’s less anger at you than anger at the mindset
I guess the name-calling threw me off.
Oh and you guys who were whining about the liberals calling you names, please take note.
I blew off your whines because all of you threw your own stone at one time or another. I didn’t believe the ‘walmart greeter’ reference, for example, was intended as a positive comment. I chose to ignore it.
At any rate, there’s no need for faux outrage about name-calling. People usually do that when they’re extremely frustrated or angry. The emotion takes over. We’re all guilty of it from time to time.
Dora, what you’re missing is: I am not saying that the facts (if they are that) I’ve read mean he isn’t capable of having changed or expanded his mind. I think I’ve said that already.
But if they are facts, it seems to mean he’s not being honest about his assoication and identification with the NOI. It’s perfectly possible he’s doing that not because he feels he needs to politically, in fact that’s the likely explanation.
But it’s not the guaranteed explanation; and thre’s at least some indication of a discrepancy that the Star-Tribune would be digging into like a badger going after a rat if it involved a conservative’s past ties to some group they see as a hate group.
That’s a key point. One thing I may not have been clear on is that this issue is far more about the Star Tribune than it is about Ellison, at this point anyway.
The left means open-mindedness, I always thought. I also always thought that meant aggressive open-mindedness, eagerly checking one’s perceptions. I guess I was wrong.
The exploding left attitude of wrapping up in a ball and refusing to investigate its cherished beliefs is, yes, disgusting. I honestly was coming to believe that you were a trailblazer.
Your attitude about Powerline is widespread, of course. I believe it’s not well-founded, and it’s one little strand in the larger run-and-hide attitude. Arguably the most widely-read and influential conservative blog is some sort of taboo. Pathetic.
And you’re right, I’m extremely frustrated. I think I’m being pretty clear on why.
dora equates nazis and racists with walmart greeters? there are gentle jibes and there are hateful terms, nazi, racist and bigot are hateful. but go ahead and downplay those comments since they were made by fellow dems.
Paul S. I just have to go back to Oct 8 at 8:39 pm, “Peder, you will get exhausted debating her, trust me!”
I was speaking of Dora that is. He quit soon after too.
You may be right, Brian. There’s just something so tempting about it. And once in a while there’s a hint of communication - but then comes the “Shields up!” moment.
Bill Prendergast: “Eric Z , you’ll take the long odds, you’re sure the paper’s got a conservative bias on the Bachmann Wetterling Binkowski race–I’ll put you down for next Wednesday. […]”
Bill, I speak for myself.
My bet is the Strib will have to admit Predatorgate has legs. Let’s say it that way. Within two weeks is my bet. Likely not sooner. They are cautious, even if not as GOP-biased as I read things.
Strib might be encouraged to admit there was/is/will be an ongoing story of coverup AND deceit, possibly sooner than later, if pressed. We need to do that.
Now Bill, rather than a time, I will take a different approach: When, if ever, might Strib report on other RightWing hyprocisy - on whether there’s a public domain record of other GOP and bible beater types who also dallied wrongly with youngsters, beyond the high profile Mr. Foley. Others perhaps of lesser community stature, outside of Florida possibly, but of an idelogical bent that is inconsistent with NOT respecting child abuse law.
And I would expect Strib to report any Dem comparable problems, if there’s any for comparison. The thing is, the Dems don’t preach “family values” other than education, economic security, health care worries, ridding DC of crooks and money changers, etc.
Dems seem committed to the real lasting family values that do NOT require debasing the name of Jesus or anyone else’s god, gods, prophet, or sage, in exchange for garnering unthinking emotionally charged votes.
There may be Dems who may be weak in their private dealings with their own children or children of others, YET WITHOUT the galling hypocrisy and posturing, the holier than thou miming, while liking kids or seeing a sexual appeal there.
The pedophile who embraces and gets a punched tickit to ride the GOP family values train, without having the real values, is in that sense worse than the pedophile that does not pontificate before or while misbehaving.
I think it’s out there.
I have seen a site linked to - a purported catalog of GOP and bible beaters who pontificated, and were since caught, and since convicted. If that catalog is at all legitimate, some news source will break the story, I think.
It looks as if the Foley situation was quiescent until ABC picked it up and ran with it, and then a shower of data quickly surfaced, after Oct. 1.
Are there other GOP and rightwing religious folks caught in not walking the talk who might not be as prominent as Foley? Is there someone with an agenda to keep the matter frontburner? Who gets disgusted and stays home could influence some races - MN 6 being a key.
So call a coverup a coverup.
A spade a spade.
And, finally, many probably pay attention because it is salacious.
The point is not that, the point is it is salacious about the holier than thou false prophets for profits - the GOP bleaters on religion and family values, when they’ve none in private.
It’s staggering how people can say one thing and then act as they act not as they say.
That’s what’s a “lie.” Living a “lie” and it’s ultimately quite unhealthy.
If a paycheck requires a GOP loyalty or slant, that’s bending to the wind, and the tree that bends with the wind does not snap. But it’s entirely a different thing to aggressively go out and evangelize “family values” and to not mean it. It’s Elmer Gantry, redux.
In fairness, there’s a few hundred million people in the US of A now, and this Foley situation is one individual in Congress where there’s 500+ reps. It most certainly is not a random sample, in any statistical sense. But what’s out there, random sampled or biased to show a theme. Is there more of a story?
Have we only seen a clear and high profile tip to a larger seamier iceberg? An iceberg of deceit?
Paul S says “One thing I may not have been clear on is that this issue is far more about the Star Tribune than it is about Ellison.”
I think you’re onto something there, though I believe (I haven’t reviewed the whole thread) you’re alleging a partisan bias on the part of the paper. I think it may instead be a resource problem. For instance, while the paper hasn’t done an in-depth analysis of Ellison, neither has it done an in-depth analysis of Bachmann. The woman is a loon, who’s said some pretty outlandish things, none of which the paper is publishing. Maybe the logic is that strib readers are urban, not suburban, but its still a disservice, in my opinion.
bsimon–
you have cut through thousands of words of petty back-and-forth “this is what’s wrong with you” nonsense, to reach the heart of the issue.
Bachmann is a loon who’s said some pretty outlandish things (understatement there)–AND THE PAPERS ARE NOT REPORTING IT.
Neither is the broadcast media.
It’s documented fact; it’s crazy stuff straight from the horse’s mouth, but the Strib and the PiPress and the other papers *spike it*, as soon as it gets sent to their desks.
It’s not just frustrating and stupid, it’s dangerous. Because when she gets elected, she will be the same paranoid hateful nut that she has been during her last six years in political life.
Eric Black won’t even go to print with the fact that she’s an “evangelical political candidate.” THAT, for him, would be telling them too much of the truth.
It is disgraceful, but I, for one will keep the pressure on Black and MPR and other papers to report the truth about Bachmann. She is a dangerous stealth candidate and nut, one of a national number of stealth candidates and nuts, and if she wins, her victory will pave the way for more stealth candidates and nuts in office.
Perhaps the most ironic thing of all: this stuff about Bachmann, that Eric Black and MPR and the PiPress, etc are spiking every day–
it’s a Pulitzer Prize winning *story*, the story of Bachmann’s candidacy and probable victory, and her connections to a national political movement–it’s a story, that these guys are putting on the spike every time someone sends them more evidence.
ramrod, I’m not equating anything. I didn’t go through the laundry list of all the things I was called and I wouldn’t characterize those you just read from Paul as ‘gentle jibes’. But you can hang onto you view of suffering greater insults if you want to.
Brian, if you get exhausted because you think I should just accept what you’re saying that’s your problem. If defending your position or explaining what you’re saying is exhausting to you then don’t bother to respond. I won’t be offended. It’s alot easier to communicate with people who agree with you.
What’s tempting about it Paul is the same thing that’s tempting about responding to anybody else. There’s a challenge in it. You strike me as a person that likes a challenge. Perhaps I was wrong though.
I’ll try one more time Paul and if you don’t get what I’m saying there’s no use in continuing the discussion.
He believes he has already addressed the facts. Other people including my friend accept his explanation. I already told you I give more credibility to my friend’s judgment and others who know him than to PW. I don’t think I can be any clearer than that.
However it appears that you are over generalizing what I am saying about this particular subject into a variety of criticisms aimed at liberals, the left, the Strib, and me. And the only reason I can gather from your posts is because I don’t accept PW as an authoritative source. Even you say you don’t know if they are providing facts but “if†they are you apparently want me, the Strib, and Ellison to refute them. Let me say again, he believes he has addressed the facts. It’s a possibility that the Strib has done its own research and is not able to substantiate what PW is saying. I don’t know that for sure but it certainly is a possibility. The Strib would have to address that. I’ve already been clear on my position. I really don’t know what more you want.
It’s no different than others here who refuse to accept what is provided is enough even if you believe you have been clear and have cited alternative sources. Sometimes no matter what is said or what is provided that backs up what is said it’s not accepted because it’s not what they want to hear or they have some kind of hidden agenda.
I’m not saying you have a hidden agenda, Paul. I just don’t know how much convincing it takes for you to accept things.
B –
I’m kind of alleging a partisan bias behind the decision on a lack of coverage of the flaws in Ellison’s account, though I am somewhat confused, because I’ve always perceived the main problem at the Strib to be the editorial pages far more than the news pages. For example, while I think it’s ridiculous for people to deny that there has been an odd pattern of the Mn Polls making mistakes in favor of the Democratic candidates, it’s not a universal pattern, and based on my background in public affairs I find it almost impossible to believe that a professional pollster would consciously skew results, especially over the long term.
On Wetterling, you’re right – I’m not sure myself why they haven’t done the kind of piece you’re talking about. Maybe it’s still coming. City Pages has done it, I think, recently even.
Yeah, last week –
http://www.citypages.com/databank/27/1348/article14760.asp
Maybe it’s because they would then have to do a similar piece on Wetterling, who has also I believe some associations that some voters in her district might not be thrilled by? So maybe it’s a can of worms they’d rather not open.
On the Ellison story, I’m really not sure what’s up. I know that DJ Tice, the editor with a conservative tinge, would not be okay with such a conscious lack of coverage
It might be that they’ve got themselves now in a corner they can’t get out of. Their reporters have meekly passed along Ellison’s version, and it’s happened repeatedly. How do they start digging at this late date? And if they did, would it be seen as a hit piece by the local liberal and African American political worlds?
Interesting.
The totality of the Strib response is what counts for me, though. It’s actually outrageous. No attempt to get into this; refusal to print Fine’s rebuttal editorial (did you know about that?); and then the odd article about Fine’s expunged police record.
As someone pointed out above, it really is interesting to ponder: how did they hold of this expunged police report? If what Powerline opines today is true (I’m so sorry Dora, but please note the “ifâ€), expunged records are not supposed to be public unless there’s some kind of investigation needing it (at least that’s what I think they’re saying).
bsimon, I don’t know if Paul was asking that the Strib do an indepth analysis of Ellison. Maybe he was but it started off as a much more focused discussion that morphed into that I guess.
But what you and Bill just said that neither is Ellison nor Bachmann being covered to any great degree shows that either side can charge bias because of it.
I think you’re right, maybe the Strib thinks if they cover neither they’re being ‘balanced’. It would be far more ‘balanced’ to cover both. Then again, if they think each is fairly representing the makeup of their districts maybe they see it as a waste of time. But that attitude is a disservice to everybody else that lives in those districts.
Another interesting avenue to explore is why the media is acting this way.
Dora -
Mainly what the Powerline links present are public record articles by and interviews with Ellison. That’s it. I sent you there only because it was the most convenient way to do it. I’ve tried to say that repeatedly. Unless you’re assuming that Powerline would mock up articles and interviews (and campaign finance reports), the fact that Powerline is reporting them is totally irrelevant to their validity.
It’s such a simple point, it seems to me. I’d be glad to have a discussion in general on problems you see with Powerline. But on what I’m pointing you to, the articles and interviews and finance reports, it’s almost impossible to conceive how your problems would have anything to with assessing them and reading them.
The only reason I say things like “I don’t guarantee the accuracy or validity of every single fact and opinion” is because - well, you never know, on facts; and I don’t agree with every single opinion and interpretation Powerline offers, on this or anything. I don’t agree with their assessment that what they present means Ellison is unfit for office (I think that’s a fair summary of what they believe).
I do know it’s unreasonable to somehow take those words as evidence that I secretly understand Powerline can’t be trusted on anything.
“Another interesting avenue to explore is why the media is acting this way.”
Staffing. There just aren’t enough resources to cover every story. For instance, I haven’t seen one story on the Hennepin County Commissioner races. At least, not since the primary. There was a quick blurb about the primary results, but nothing since. I don’t think its part of a great conspiracy, but rather that there just isn’t enough space in the paper or reporter resources to do the stories. Couple that with reader interest, and you can see why CJ is still around, but there’s not a lot of local political coverage.
Dora–
I haven’t a clue about the Ellison 5th District thing; not following it at all.
Perhaps the two races are more different than you think, though. In the case of Ellison, do you have hatemongering quotes, paranoid worldview statements, right from the candidate’s own mouth?
If you don’t then, you can’t say the two cases are analogous. With Bachmann, the nutty hateful statement stuff is there on record, we’ve got the recordings, there’s no running away from the fact that these *are* her views.
And that’s what the media won’t report.
Incidentally: advice you didn’t ask for–I think you’re a very tough person to put up with all the insults you received here and keep coming back for more–but you must understand that one of the main reasons that these guys you are debating came here, is so that they can insult people like you and me.
My advice to you is not to let them dictate the issue to you, because the issue will always come around to “my opponent’s lack of character and intelligence.” If they reviewed their own posts they would see that that is true.
I think it’s a waste of your prodigious energy to help them fulfill their sad “need.” But you didn’t ask me, so I’ll shut up about it now.
I do know it’s unreasonable to somehow take those words as evidence that I secretly understand Powerline can’t be trusted on anything.
I wasn’t trying to imply that.
Dora -
I really wasn’t clear at the beginning, I don’t think, on my focus on the Strib versus Ellison. Yes, his inconsistencies worry me a but; but the lack of coverage in the Strib is much more interesting to me.
You may not believe me, but I may still vote for the guy. It may be that he’s the perfect person to introduce moderate Muslim-ness to the national political stage; I’m pretty sure that if he lost, the conclusions on why in the Mpls left would not be pleasant for any of us; and his presence in Congress may open the door for the conversations I keep saying we need to have.
I went to his party the night of the primary. I came away with two impressions: These are wonderful caring welcoming people who believe they are on a Mission from (G)(g)od; and these are people who rarely suspect they might be seriously wrong about anything.
Okay.
Yes Dora I do like a challenge, and I do like debate. But I do not care for stalemate. Plus I have been really busy since I returned from vacation. I do enjoy out arguments at times, I jsut get frustrated when you bypass my main discussion points,
See ya later.
“Why do I have to name spending cuts?”
Because you think deficits are bad. If they are bad we must be spending our money on some programs that are not very important and should be cut.
“The borrow-and-spend, trickle-up economics of the GOP is bad policy.”
Why? You claim that someone is going to have to “pay the piper” but that is not really true. YOu have had lots of opportunities to explain why a budget deficit is bad. You never had. The fact that someone in the future is going to have to pay the debt is not a negative about debt. That is just a truism…debt=repayment.
If there were economic problems associated with the US debt level we would see many negative economic trends. We see none.
Again, you say we must “live within our means”. THe electorate has spoken and said that they wanted lower taxes by electing Republicans to control the government. If your income is what it is, living within your means requires you to reduce spending.
What a several generations of politicians have learned in Washington, DC is that it is impossible to reduce spending. Governments are bureacracies that have an impetus to spend and lots of friction to cut spending. When they are confronted with spending cuts they will not cut the most obvious programs because these are the pet projects of some Senator or Congressman. They will offer, at best, very unattractive solutions to the electorate in the attempt to shift the debate from cutting spending to the craziness of cutting such valuable programs.
On the Ellison matter it really is unimportant. He is in essentially an uncontested race.
What is interesting about the race, however, is that the Strib would unearth dropped charges that have been expunged against Alan Fine while completely ignoring Keith Ellison’s mixed background; unpaid tickets, violations of campaign finance rules, and the ties to the Nation of Islam.
Like I have posted before, reporting on Fine’s transgressions is similar to what happened in Massachussets in 2000 during the US Senate election. The Republicans ran a nobody named Jackie Robinson against Kennedy.
During the campaing the Democrats made charges of carpetbagging against Robinson. Robinson, you see, had lived for the past several years in CT while he ran his business but was a MA native. Of course, these charges of carpetbagging were being made while Hilary Clinton was running for US Senate in New York, of all places.
THen, it turned out that Robinson had a conviction for reckless driving, and during a telephone interview discussing the subject actually had a fender bender. It was great comedy, but the greater comedy is imagine you are running against Ted Kennedy and THEY ARE MAKING AN ISSUE OF YOUR DRIVING RECORD. Mike Barnicle was probably the only media guy in the area to notice, stating “They are not going ot make this a referendum on driving records, are they?”
So, this type of coverage is done everywhere.
“If there were economic problems associated with the US debt level we would see many negative economic trends. We see none. ”
The question that remains to be answered is at what level debt becomes a problem. Your argument implies that if a little debt is ok, then more must be ok too. How do you know when there’s too much?
Your argument is also short-term in nature. Kindof like the corporate boards that chase stock price and make great money on their options, but end up running the company into the ground by failing to plan for the future.
Bill P -
“In the case of Ellison, do you have hatemongering quotes, paranoid worldview statements, right from the candidate’s own mouth?”
Not hatemongering, exactly, but paranoid worldview statements? I think some reasonable people would find that in his 2000 speech on Soliah/Olson. Like, say, this:
“In the minds of the people who want to prosecute Sara Jane Olson, these people feel that the gains that we made have got to be beat back, and the very idea of, say for instance, black people having civil rights, has got to be obliterated with (obviously) the criminal justice system and incarceration.”
It’s this speech specifically that gives me the most pause on how much he really has changed, and whether I want a mind that produces that opinion and others contained in the speech to represent me in Congress.
Another bit:
“The idea that the people who want to prosecute Sara Jane Olson have, well,they have a “June Cleaver” concept of what women are supposed to be about. They have a “June Cleaver” idea that Sara Jane Olson, women in general, were supposed to be in the kitchen cooking -SOMETHING. Right? And are NOT supposed to be engaged in political protest, laying out political thought, and certainly not breaking out of some concrete stereotype or image that they had.”
You two may not find this somewhat indicative of a paranoid mind at work. I do.
Of course there is also more thoughtful stuff in there. It is disturbing, the number of young black men in prison. But I resist the leaps, quite strongly; and this is only six years ago.
The best link I can find at the moment is this:
http://presslord.com/speech.htm
This page will give some of you the willies, but it contains the whole transcript. The link to the official transcript, edited inder Keith’s supervision, doesn’t seem to work these days; it did a few weeks ago. I don’t know why. The guy behind this page believes it may be just inherent bugginess in web sites that try to archive ancient material.
But anyway, this speech transcript has been around for weeks, and I’ve never heard anyone challenge its validity.
Wait, I reread that. You see no negative economic trends?
Everything’s rosy?
No causes for concern at all?
Paul S says
“It’s this speech specifically that gives me the most pause on how much he really has changed, and whether I want a mind that produces that opinion and others contained in the speech to represent me in Congress.”
Take the quotes from Bachmann about how schools will soon be teaching kids to “give homosexuality a try” and I’ll respond just like Paul did to Ellison. The woman’s elevator don’t go all the way to the top.
mark says “What is interesting about the race… is that the Strib [is] completely ignoring Keith Ellison’s mixed background; unpaid tickets, violations of campaign finance rules, and the ties to the Nation of Islam.”
More revisionist history. It was all covered before the primary. If you’re going to try to make a point, try to keep it factual.
b -
Yeah, the tickets and campaign finances were well-covered. The NOI stuff is the bone of contention.
Eric,
Any way the blog could be edited to allow a max of three blogs from any one writer?
Get’s kind of boring seeing the same few people take over the blog.
On any one topic, I mean.
john, your two posts are done, you only get one more.
If Black adopts the system you propose, John E. I, you have just used up two of your three posts.
And none of them have to do with the topic of this thread (did Wetterling go too far in charging that the GOP leaderships “admitted” to a “cover up.”)
Your next comment had better be a doozy, John, because when you send it, you will have maxed out your own suggested limit to this thread.
Psst- John already posted on this thread, way back. We shouldn’t hear from him again.
Bsimon, I agree it’s not part of a great conspiracy but is probably more due to resources. I don’t think there’s anybody that hasn’t faced this in their own place of employment. There’s always somebody who’s going to think that their issues isn’t getting enough coverage.
Bill says: “In the case of Ellison, do you have hatemongering quotes, paranoid worldview statements, right from the candidate’s own mouth?†There are people who would say that he has. Which is a big part of the debate. They use divisive things he wrote 10 years ago as a law student and are not willing to accept that he apologized and worked to change those views. So I do think they’re similar although Bachmann’s views are current and she’s introduced legislation to make her views law.
Thanks for your concern Bill but the insults don’t really bother me. They are more a reflection on the person doing the insulting. For the most part I think they want to change minds to their way of thinking. I think to them it’s a win/lose proposition. So when they’re challenged to back up their claims or holes are poked in what they’re saying by showing a different viewpoint (in my case posting links) or when you just say to them I don’t agree they get upset. And when they’re upset they lash out by insults, name-calling, and by trying to belittle with the ‘my opponent’s lack character and intelligence’ kind of statements. I don’t take it personally. I’ve said this before, I’m not trying to change anybody’s mind here. I’m just putting out another point of view, pointing out other sources of information. It’s up to each person to determine if they accept it or not.
Brian says: But I do not care for stalemate. Sometimes people just see things differently and they must agree to disagree.
I jsut get frustrated when you bypass my main discussion points, Could be I’m just not agreeing with your premise, then again could be I’m not clear on your main point.
Hey John or anybody else for that matter that may be thinking the same, just jump right in.
Dora, if you’re referring to me in your little post: do you honestly still not get it? That what frustrates me is your weird refusal to check out a link, nased on the utterly irrelevant “moral” reason or something that you don’t like the web site where the old articles are found? And then you don a hairshirt of martyrdom that you must put up with the resulting anger?
And then Bill joins your in your tragic pathos…
You people are weird, and possibly the same person, as I and evidently others have guessed already.
It’s also quite odd that you feel free to remark sadly on the insults coming from others.
Paul, It was a generalization and didn’t apply to any one particular person. I was giving an opinion so you could have ignored it but instead you internalized it.
“hairshirt of martyrdom”, “tragic pathos”? you are certainly prone to exaggeration. You’re actually proving Bill’s point.
You people are weird, and possibly the same person, as I and evidently others have guessed already.
And you’re calling me weird? That’s actually funny.
Maybe you were just tired after a long day b/c that’s one of your more ridiculous posts.
I “get it” Paul I’m just not buying it.
You’ve said in several follow up posts now that it was more about the Strib than Ellison. Yet you continue to try to belittle me for my views of PW and totally gloss over the reasons I’ve given you.
All of your words to the contrary you are fixated on PW which is really a very minor distraction that you want to use to continue to critize me.
Stick to the issue at hand Paul and don’t let your anger and frustration get the best of you.
The issue that was being addressed is about the bias of the Strib not sufficiently covering Ellison and to what extent Ellison is tied to the NOI. It’s not that I won’t look at PW links.
“Bachmann’s views are current and she’s introduced legislation to make her views law.”
And, again, lets not forget what this really means. She has introduced or supported legislation that would prohibit same sex marriage.
This is the position that has the left wingers in an uproar. This is why they call her “crazy” and call her “hateful”.
But this position, banning gay marriage, is held by at least 60% of the state. When they make these charges against Bachmann they make them against the majority of the adults in the state. But, this is not unexpected by people who consider themselves to be elitist and know better than everyone else.
All the names and shouting is just to cover an unpopular position. Instead of coming out and saying….”Hey I support gay marriage and always have”, which is a losing political position everywhere save the most liberal of precincts, they try to act like a person who opposes gay marriage is “out of the mainstream”.
THis works because the media is liberal and sees nothing wrong with this view.
Mark, there you go again. Ignoring the meat of the story.
For Ms. Bachmann, the existing law banning same-sex marriage isn’t enough. Instead, she needs an amendment of the state constitution to satisfy her goals, though such a change likely would only postpone, not eliminate the inevitable legality of same-sex marriage. The part of the story that really gets people’s dander up, is when Ms. Bachmann equates the failure of her bill with schools “being forced to teach that homosexuality is ok and that maybe kids should try it.” Absolutely nobody of sound mind could possibly believe such a thing. This is where her lack of rational thinking is most readily apparent. She also equates homosexuality to not only sin, but some kind of evil or devil-ness and the like. Its crazy talk. This is why people describe her as crazy, and equate her opinions and motivations to hate and hatefullness. She has, so far, failed to offer any rational explanation for why homosexuality and same-sex marriage are a danger to the sanctity of marriage, particularly when compared to the divorce rate. From what is she ’saving’ marriage?
The answer is her own fears.
Mark also says “THis works because the media is liberal and sees nothing wrong with this view. ”
That tired line again. What bupkis. I suppose you feel like it was relevant to ignore the fact that most Minnesotans are in favor of civil unions that allow same-sex couples the same benefits as marriage. It is because the Michele Bachmanns of the world don’t want to allow such a compromise that they will fail in their goal to codify bigotry in the law. It has nothing to do with the so-called ‘liberal’ media.
“For Ms. Bachmann, the existing law banning same-sex marriage isn’t enough.”
Your statement is true in its entirety. The fact is that if you want to ban same-sex marriages the existing law will not prevent it because it can simply be bypassed, as happened in Massachussets, by judicial fiat.
The only real way to prohibit is constitutional changes.
” What bupkis”
Suppose that a Republican politician claimed that opposing the war on terror was a lunatic position not supported by the American mainstream. The press would scream at such a claim. Yet, this is identical to the claims made against Bachmann. Only by the collusion of the press is such a position tenable.
As is the continued claims of Bush “going it alone” foreign policy. Yet, the entire Democratic criticism against Bush on North Korea is based on the fact that he insists upon multi-lateral approaches to North Korea and rejects the FAILED bilateral approach practiced under Bill Clinton.
Which is it? To Cowboy or not to Cowboy. The Democrats do not seem to have a consistent program here. And, the press never points out this inconsistency.
Ballot initiatives amending state constitutions to prohibit same sex marriage was on the ballot in ten states. It passed by at least 57% of the vote in each of the ten states. Those states are Arkansas 75%, Georgia 76%, Michigan 59%, Mississippi 86%, Montana 67%, North Dakota 73%, Ohio, 62%, Oklahoma 76%, Oregon 57% and Utah 66%.
That is a lot of hateful people out there.
“That is a lot of hateful people out there.”
Sure ‘is’, though actually the statement is a bit hasty, without actually looking at the language of each proposal.
The question is, do you believe in equality or not? Do same-sex couples deserve the same rights & privileges as opposite-sex couples or not? I, so far, have not heard a compelling argument for treating them differently. What is it (the compelling argument)?
Even with ballot initiatives, the laws are likely to fail on Constitutional grounds. In some jurisdictions, it may take a while, but its frankly inevitable. A couple in Rhode Island married in Mass, which is going to force the issue in Rhode Island. Once a marriage is obtained, can it be dissolved? What happens when a MA couple moves to RI or MN? Thanks to the Equal Protection Clause, the issue is dead. Some people may not want to believe it, but thats the reality. They may want to postpone it, but will be unable to stop the juggernaut of progress and justice.
The democrats might want to be careful when they call for everyone who knew about Foley to resign. It seems that quite a few Democratic operatives have had the story for months and wanted to release it 10 days before the election. Does this mean Nancy Pelosi will call for their resignation too? I doubt it.
Politics is all about timing. Apparently, the liberals behind Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), the group that received information about Mark Foley’s sexual instant messages as far back as April, originally planned to unleash its blockbuster a bit later in the 2008 election cycle. The American Spectator reports that a political consultant with ties to the Democratic National Committee told the magazine: “I’m hearing the Foley story wasn’t supposed to drop until about ten days out of the election. It was supposed to be the coup de grace, not the first shot.”
But as another Democratic operative told the magazine, the political climate at the end of September was suddenly turning ominous. “Bush’s national security speeches were getting traction beyond the base, gas prices were dropping, economic outlook surveys were positive. Republicans were back to [holding enough House] seats for a 15-seat majority. In the Senate, it looked like a wash.” All that may have played a role in prompting Democratic partisans to speed up the use of opposition research on Mr. Foley that had been put aside for later in the campaign. “Republicans had to have known we’d be looking to change the national debate,” says a House Democrat leadership aide.
The practical effect of the Foley revelations is that it helps yank away two traditional GOP advantages: integrity and competence. After Hurricane Katrina and Iraq, the Foley missteps make the GOP look hapless and hopeless in the eyes of many voters. “The Republicans were hoping to make up a point or two in the generic ballot for Congress every week until Election Day,” says Tony Blankley, editorial page editor of the Washington Times. “But now the Foley issue has stalled that momentum and they can’t get their message out in the earned media. Paid advertising can help, but if it doesn’t resonate with the rest of what the media is talking about, it can only do so much.”
Yeah it’s all a big Democratic conspiracy. Here’s an interesting piece from Harper’s called “The Foley scandal is no October Surprise” http://tinyurl.com/odges
A quote from the article: “If this was all a plot to hurt the G.O.P.’s chances in the midterm elections, why did the original source for the story begin approaching media outlets a full year ago? If either of the Florida papers had gone to press with the story last year, or if Harper’s had published this spring, as the source hoped, the Foley scandal would have died down long ago.”
dora, for the hundredth time, it wasnt a story then becuz the emails, while wierd, were not considered abusive at that point.
No that’s not why it wasn’t a story. You can repeat it a hundred times but it isn’t going to make it so.
Why don’t you read the links once in a while: “I tried to contact the page who received Foley’s emails and the boy’s parents, but got no reply to my inquiries.”
Recall that the parents said they wanted Foley to stop but they didn’t want to get involved in a media circus. I’m not surprised they didn’t call him back. Once those original emails were published all the other stuff came out and the other pages came forward.
You just don’t get it, or don’t want to. If they would have done just a little bit of investigation all of it would’ve been known. It was their version of “don’t ask, don’t tell”.
if the repubs would have thrown foley out for salacious emails, the left would be calling them gaybashers now instead of coveruppers.
“if the repubs would have thrown foley out for salacious emails, the left would be calling them gaybashers now instead of coveruppers.”
Sorry, that dog don’t hunt. Dems, and any reasonable person regardless of affiliation, would support the removal of a sexual predator. It wouldn’t matter whether Foley was straight and hitting on girls, or gay and hitting on boys. Being gay doesn’t excuse predation. Being molested as a child doesn’t excuse becoming a molester.
If Hastert and company had dealt with this waay back when it was first apparent what was going on, they wouldn’t have ended up shooting themselves in the foot now.
Also, let’s not pretend this is only about a few emails. Every day we find out more info on Foley’s inappropriate behavior, his sex with an ex-page, his emails with several pages going back years, his drunken attempts to get into the page dorm. There were plenty of warning signs going back ten years.
If Hastert was truly out of the loop when all of this was happening, then he is incompetent. The fact that he can’t keep his story straight, and that there are staff members and other Congressmen who have contradicted his statements, indicate that he is probably lying. The only way he can begin to put an end to this is to come clean on what he knew and when he knew it, apologize, take ful l responsibility and perhaps to step down. If he doesn’t, this story isn’t going to die anytime soon.
since that one didn’t work try this one next ramrod: it’s all due to the cabal of gays covering up for their own. They kept it from the GOP leadership so it’s not their fault.
so now i am the gay basher, dora? you are so funny.
geoff-
his sex with an ex-page (21 years old), his emails with several pages going back years (emails have not shown sexcapades yet, the ims discovered last week did), his drunken attempts to get into the page dorm (still being investigated-speculation).
That’s the latest GOP talking point ramrod. Did your fax machine jam?
i guess since i am not in my golden years yet, i do not have the time to get all the talking points like you. its a good thing the dfl sends out the star trib newsletter to you.
[…] y behavior of a congressman who used the internet to molest children.†Even the best the Strib’s lefty blogger could say when cross examined by Hugh Hewitt was that he didnR […]
Avatars
Free avatar download, free avatars download for message boards, forums, blogs. Anime, movie and music avatars.
moderate reportedly!logins octane afflict hearing disparage preserves
Quakerizes.chided Scandinavian,turquoise trifle anarchical - Tons of interesdting stuff!!!
venom excessively preoccupy tested sparking dwarf .
chloroplasts adjourned cutout Jaeger helm kissed?.
raze,serenely inwardly shipped delusion prejudices!ubiquitously….
Link
Americans will put up with anything provided it doesn’t block traffic
Link
i can’t go back to yesterday, because I was a different person then
Ping
In Einstein’s theory of relativity the observer is a man who sets out in quest of truth armed with a measuring-rod. In quantum theory he sets out with a sieve
Link
Unless a life is activated by sustained purpose it can become a depressingly haphazard affair
Follow
Let’s not kid ourselves. Whatever we diagnose, most patients, if they don’t die, get well by themselves. Our job is mainly to try to make them feel better; do no harm
Readed
All human situations have their inconveniences. We feel those of the present but neither see nor feel those of the future; and hence we often make troublesome changes without amendment, and frequently for the worse
Link
A book tightly shut is but a block of paper
Readed
There are three intolerable things in life - cold coffee, lukewarm champagne, and overexcited women
Readed
If you see a snake just kill it. Don’t appoint a committee on snakes
Linked
It is better to be hated for what you are than to be loved for what you are not
Link
Freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed
diabetes hypoglycemia
Information source about diabetes hypoglycemia.
t mobile usa
Actual news on t mobile usa category.
dudley horse tack
Features of dudley horse tack.
fashion doll furniture pattern
Search results for ‘fashion doll furniture pattern’.
kfc menu price
abrikoskos 2062241 The best of kfc menu price.
06 cheat madden psp
abrikoskos 2062241 The best of 06 cheat madden psp.
free redhead tgp
abrikoskos 2062241 Advantages of free redhead tgp.
body shop clothing
abrikoskos 2062241 Catalogue of body shop clothing.
health
abrikoskos 2062241 Modern view of health .
exercise articles
abrikoskos 2062241 exercise articles info and more
free sex porn gallery
abrikoskos 2062241 Value source for free sex porn gallery.
College Soccer Forum
John
igogogo
igogogo
pisatel
pisatel
buy tamiflu; swine flu symptoms prevention Tamiflu Baxter "generic for tamiflu" swine flu masks? Relenza Tamiflu Online tamiflu uk shop? tamiflu on line What Types Of Methods Of Prevention To The Spanish Flu tamiflu stomach flu Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. Oculo And Tamiflu flu treatments without tylenol! "post-exposure tamiflu dosing" Flu Vaccine For Parkinsons Treatment home treatment of the flu tamiflu alcohol Great Swine Flu Epidemic relenza vs tamiflu tamiflu hemorrhoid Live Virus Flu Shoot tamiflu flu tamiflu dosage Tamiflu Antiviral Stockpiling Stomach flu and treatments stomach flu asprin tylenol 642. acheter tamiflu Swine Flu California what are some treatments of swine flu flu symptoms headache Veternarian Tamiflu flu shoots companys Swine flu swine flu 1976 147. Depo Provera Flu Interfere buy tamiflu without a prescription tamiflu antiviral stockpiling; Case Study Of Tamiflu tamiflu suspension no prescription tamiflu without a prescribtion Rumsfelds Growing Stake In Tamiflu Fort Detrick flu medication tamiflu swine flu protection Swine Flu Florida tamiflu adverse events molen flu shoots Tamiflu At Parvo cdc + swine flu treatment swine flu in ohio Swine Flu School Closings tamiflu for bird flu and 2007; tamiflu shelf life Tamiflu And Parvo tylenol flu night time tamiflu and effectiveness and safety Tamiflu In Cairo Egypt tamiflu in dogs! tamiflu for only 4 days Does Tamiflu Work ingridients of tamiflu intestinal flu Dangers Of Tamiflu number needed to treat for tamiflu "medwatch form for tamiflu" Swine Flu Australia wiki tamiflu tamiflu otc Swine Flu Locations
tamiflu recalls swine flu virus; Tamiflu Manufacturer Gilliad tamiflu manufacturer gilliad swine flu mask; Tamiflu Wikipedia panleukopenia and tamiflu rebate on tamiflu, Swine Flu Cartoons depo provera flu interfere! tamiflu and seizure Stomach Flu Treatments Symptoms swine flu conspiracy aids tamiflu flu; Breastfeeding Tamiflu tamiflu nausea tamiflu invent Swin Flu Precations
prevention of flu
cautions pediatric use tamiflu! Treatment For Stomach Flu gilead science donald rumsfeld tamiflu tamiflu and parvo Tamiflu Ingredian prophylactic tamiflu tamiflu roche Prozac Withdrawal Flu Symptoms swine flu death toll tamiflu roche dick cheney? Flu Affecting Blood Tests flu prevention signs who invented tamiflu Flu Shot While On Prednisone rogaine flu symptoms pravachol nexium actos phentermine tamiflu Swine Flu Prevention Postersflu shot and tylenol,
rumsfeld's growing stake in tamiflu fort detrick Swine Flu Symptoms And Treatments Swine Flu does tamiflu work influenza a tamiflu Flu Shoot Clinics Northwestern Pa aids tamiflu flu; 2009 flu multnomah county oregon Chimney Flu rumsfeld's growing stake in tamiflu fort detrick pediatric tamiflu Veterinary Use Of Tamiflu buy tamiflu; swine flu wisconsin? Tamiflu Brand "generic for tamiflu" swine flu incubation tamiflu uk shop? tamiflu medical Herbal Homeopathic Treatment For Swine Flu tamiflu stomach flu Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. Tamiflu Is Dangerous Drug flu treatments without tylenol! philadelphia flu shoots Flu Shoot Clinics Erie Warren Pa home treatment of the flu tamiflu alcohol Tamiflu And Swine Flu Immunity relenza vs tamiflu tamiflu hemorrhoid Flu Shot And Depakote tamiflu flu tamiflu dosing instructions Tamiflu Cdc Stomach flu and treatments stomach flu asprin tylenol 642. acheter tamiflu Flu Vaccine And Ibuprofen what are some treatments of swine flu flu symptoms prilosec Tamiflu Related To Disasters flu shoots companys Swine flu swine flu 1976 147. Soap Note For Tamiflu buy tamiflu without a prescription tamiflu antiviral stockpiling; Tamiflu Reaction tamiflu suspension no prescription tamiflu where can you buy online There Is No Treatment For Swine Flu flu medication tamiflu swine flu symptoms and treatments Tamiflu Roche Dick Cheney tamiflu adverse events molen flu shoots Swine Flu Maps cdc + swine flu treatment swine flu in ohio Tamiflu Used Since tamiflu for bird flu and 2007; tamiflu shelf life Valtrex Flu tylenol flu night time tamiflu and effectiveness and safety Tamiflu Warnings tamiflu in dogs! tamiflu for only 4 days Flu Symptoms Prilosec ingridients of tamiflu intestinal flu Russian Tamiflu number needed to treat for tamiflu "medwatch form for tamiflu" Treating Parvo With Tamiflu wiki tamiflu tamiflu otcTamiflu Pros Cons tamiflu recalls swine flu virus; Tamiflu And Rumsfeld tamiflu manufacturer gilliad
swine flu mask; What Can You Get For Treatments Of The Flu panleukopenia and tamiflu price of tamiflu Tamiflu Long Term Damage depo provera flu interfere! tamiflu and seizure Is Tamiflu By Prescription Only swine flu conspiracy aids tamiflu flu; Tamiflu And Bird Flu tamiflu nausea tamiflu interfears with immune system How Long Will Tamiflu Last Storage prevention of flu chilli cold and flu treatment Rumsfelds Growing Stake In Tamiflu gilead science donald rumsfeld tamiflu tamiflu and parvo Rogaine Flu Symptoms prophylactic tamiflu tamiflu roche Tamiflu Indications swine flu death toll tamiflu roche dick cheney? Swine Flu Death flu prevention signs who invented tamiflu Are There Treatments For The Spanish Flu
rogaine flu symptoms
parvo with tamiflu Tamiflu For Children flu shot and tylenol, stock ticker who makes tamiflu Pharmacist Role In Flu Prevention Tamiflu does tamiflu work influenza a tamiflu Flu Medication Tamiflu aids tamiflu flu; 2009 flu multnomah county oregon Tamiflu Otc rumsfeld's growing stake in tamiflu fort detrick pediatric tamiflu Achat Tamiflu buy tamiflu; swine flu wisconsin? Over The Counter Tamiflu "generic for tamiflu" swine flu masks? Children Tylenol Flutamiflu uk shop?
tamiflu medical Tamiflu Related To Pan Epidemic Outbreak tamiflu stomach flu Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. Flu Shoots Baltimore flu treatments without tylenol! philadelphia flu shoots Tamiflu Generic home treatment of the flu tamiflu 60 mg Flu Shoots Copanys relenza vs tamiflu tamiflu hemorrhoid Shelf Life Of Tamiflu tamiflu flu tamiflu dosing instructions Tamiflu Pregnancy Stomach flu and treatments stomach flu asprin tylenol 642. acheter tamiflu Does Tamiflu Contraindicate With Acetaminophen what are some treatments of swine flu flu symptoms headache Tylenol Flu Med flu shoots companys stopped tamiflu early Chaep Tamiflu Without Prescription buy tamiflu without a prescription tamiflu antiviral stockpiling; Tamiflu Z-pack tamiflu suspension no prescription tamiflu without a prescribtion Parvo Tamiflu flu medication tamiflu swine flu symptoms and treatments Donald Rumsfeld Tamiflu tamiflu adverse events molen flu shoots 2009 Flu Season Update cdc + swine flu treatment swine flu in ohio Tamiflu Flu tamiflu for bird flu and 2007; tamiflu shelf life Pandemic Flu Home Care Kits tylenol flu night timetamiflu and effectiveness and safety
Tylenol Flu Shot tamiflu in dogs!tamiflu drinking alcohol; Tramadol For Flu Symptoms ingridients of tamiflu how long does the flu last Alberta Coverage Tamiflu number needed to treat for tamiflu "medwatch form for tamiflu" Lipitor And Flu Like Symptoms wiki tamiflu tamiflu otc Can Pets Get The Swine Flu
tamiflu recalls swine flu virus; Swine Flu Veracruz tamiflu manufacturer gilliad swine flu mask; Flu Mask P95 panleukopenia and tamiflu rebate on tamiflu, Tamiflu Disorientation Dizziness depo provera flu interfere! tamiflu and seizure Swine Flu News swine flu conspiracy aids tamiflu flu; Tamiflu Dosage tamiflu nausea tamiflu interfears with immune system Flu Shot And Flagyl prevention of flu chilli cold and flu treatment Flu Shot gilead science donald rumsfeld tamiflu tamiflu and parvo Swine Flu Symptoms Treatment prophylactic tamiflu tamiflu roche Medication Tamiflu swine flu death toll tamiflu roche dick cheney? Swine Flu Symptoms And Treatments flu prevention signs who invented tamiflu Coumadin Flu Shot rogaine flu symptoms pravachol nexium actos phentermine tamiflu
Babies Tamiflu
flu shot and tylenol, rumsfeld's growing stake in tamiflu fort detrick Tamiflu For Children 2008 does tamiflu work influenza a tamiflu Wki Tamiflu aids tamiflu flu; 2009 flu multnomah county oregon Bird Flu rumsfeld's growing stake in tamiflu fort detrick pediatric tamiflu Order Tamiflu For Dogs buy tamiflu; swine flu wisconsin? False Negative Girl Died Avian Tamiflu "generic for tamiflu" swine flu locations Treatment Protocol For Family Members With Flu tamiflu uk shop? tamiflu on line Flu Shoots Dallas tamiflu stomach flu Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. Swine Flu Incubation Period flu treatments without tylenol! "post-exposure tamiflu dosing" Reactions To Flu Shoots home treatment of the flu tamiflu alcoholTamiflu Length Of Storage
relenza vs tamiflu tamiflu flu Tamiflu For Acute Influenza A tamiflu flu tamiflu dosing instructions Treatment For The Flu Stomach flu and treatments stomach flu asprin tylenol 642. acheter tamiflu Is Tamiflu A Vaccine what are some treatments of swine flu flu symptoms prilosec How Does Tamiflu flu shoots companys Swine flu swine flu 1976 147. Procter And Gamble Tamiflu For Staff buy tamiflu without a prescription tamiflu and supply chain Japanese Star Anise Tamiflu tamiflu suspension no prescription tamiflu without a prescribtion What Is Swine Flu flu medication tamiflu swine flu protection How Is The Swine Flu Transmitted tamiflu adverse events Medication tamiflu avian bird flu medicine tamiflu 964. Tamiflu Immune System cdc + swine flu treatment swine flu in ohio Bestel Tamiflu tamiflu for bird flu and 2007; tamiflu shelf life Flu Shoots Companys tylenol flu night time tamiflu and effectiveness and safety Moin Flu Shootstamiflu in dogs!
tamiflu drinking alcohol; Tylenol Or Aspirn For Flu ingridients of tamiflu intestinal flu Buy Tamiflu Onlinenumber needed to treat for tamiflu is tamiflu over the counter Tamiflu And Purchase wiki tamiflu tamiflu otc Flu Protection tamiflu recalls tamiflu Swine Flu Mexico tamiflu manufacturer gilliad swine flu mask; Lemon Cold And Flu Treatment panleukopenia and tamiflu rebate on tamiflu, Reactions To Tamiflu depo provera flu interfere! tamiflu and seizure Lipitor Flu Like Symptoms swine flu conspiracy aids tamiflu flu; New Swine Flu Cases tamiflu nausea tamiflu interfears with immune system Swine Flu Origin prevention of flu
chilli cold and flu treatment
No Rx Tamiflu gilead science donald rumsfeld tamiflutamiflu abnormal behaviour description!
Swine Flu Information prophylactic tamiflutamiflu producer
Tamiflu Cheap Without Prescriptionswine flu death toll
tamiflu parov canine Molen Flu Shoots flu prevention signs Why is it called swine flu wiki tamiflu 309. Swine Flu Map reactions to tamiflu pravachol nexium actos phentermine tamiflu Tamiflu Scam flu shot and tylenol, stock ticker who makes tamiflu Flu Treatments does tamiflu work influenza a tamiflu Comprar Tamiflu aids tamiflu flu; 2009 flu multnomah county oregon Tamiflu Singapore Stockpile rumsfeld's growing stake in tamiflu fort detrick pediatric tamiflu Tamiflu Coupon buy tamiflu; swine flu wisconsin? Tamiflu Rumsfield "generic for tamiflu" swine flu masks? Topamax And Flu Like Symptoms tamiflu uk shop? tamiflu on line Treatment For Swine Flu tamiflu stomach flu Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. Wirksamkeit Tamiflu flu treatments without tylenol! "post-exposure tamiflu dosing" Why Is It Called Swine Flu home treatment of the flu tamiflu alcohol Stomach Flu Asprin Tylenol relenza vs tamiflu tamiflu hemorrhoid Swine Flu Prevention tamiflu flu tamiflu dosing instructions Tamiflu Ingredients Stomach flu and treatments stomach flu asprin tylenol 642. acheter tamiflu Cold Vs Flu Symptoms what are some treatments of swine flu flu symptoms headache Cancun Swine Flu flu shoots companys stopped tamiflu early Triphala Cold Flu buy tamiflu without a prescription tamiflu antiviral stockpiling; Alternative Treatment For Bird Flu tamiflu suspension no prescription tamiflu without a prescribtion Tamiflu Cardiac Problems flu medication tamiflu swine flu symptoms and treatments Swine Flu Cases tamiflu adverse events molen flu shoots Treatments For Flu cdc + swine flu treatment swine flu in ohio Flu Vaccine Treatment For Multiple Sclerosis tamiflu for bird flu and 2007; tamiflu shelf life Alberta Prescription Tamiflu tylenol flu night time tamiflu and effectiveness and safety Symptoms Of The Swine Flu tamiflu in dogs! tamiflu for only 4 days Buy Tamiflu Obtain Your Prescription Onlineingridients of tamiflu how long does the flu last Prevention Of Flu number needed to treat for tamiflu "medwatch form for tamiflu" Swine Flu Hoax wiki tamiflu tamiflu otc Cdc Swine Flu tamiflu recalls tamiflu Baxter Avian Flu Vaccine Europe tamiflu manufacturer gilliad swine flu mask; Receive Flu Shoot Alabaster Al panleukopenia and tamiflu rebate on tamiflu,
Swine Flu Alternative Treatments Health depo provera flu interfere! tamiflu and children, Tamiflu Oral Suspension Expiration swine flu conspiracy aids tamiflu flu; Canada Pharmacy No Prescription Required For Tamiflu tamiflu nausea tamiflu invent Medwatch Form For Tamiflu prevention of flu chilli cold and flu treatment Swine Flu 2009 gilead science donald rumsfeld tamiflu tamiflu and parvo Tamiflu Otc Switch prophylactic tamiflu tamiflu roche Generic Version Of Tamiflu swine flu death toll tamiflu roche dick cheney? Does Tamiflu Interfer With Immune System flu prevention signs who invented tamiflu Tamiflu Without A Prescribtion rogaine flu symptoms pravachol nexium actos phentermine tamiflu Ibuprofen After Flu flu shot and tylenol, stock ticker who makes tamiflu Claritin Flu does tamiflu work influenza a tamiflu Flu Symptoms Fever aids tamiflu flu; 2009 flu multnomah county oregon Tamiflu New Zealand rumsfeld's growing stake in tamiflu fort detrick pediatric tamiflu Tamiflu Maker buy tamiflu; swine flu wisconsin? Flu Shoot Maryland Location "generic for tamiflu" swine flu masks? Child Didnt Finish All Tamiflu tamiflu uk shop? tamiflu on line Prednisone And Flu Shots tamiflu stomach flu Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. Swine Flu Deaths flu treatments without tylenol! philadelphia flu shoots Tamiflu Fierce home treatment of the flu tamiflu alcohol Flu Like Symptons With Lexapro 20mg relenza vs tamiflu tamiflu hemorrhoid Can Nursing Homes Dispense Tamiflu tamiflu flu tamiflu dosing instructions What Are Flu Symptoms Stomach flu and treatments stomach flu asprin tylenol 642. acheter tamiflu Flu And Prednisone what are some treatments of swine flu flu symptoms prilosec Problems With Tamiflu flu shoots companys Swine flu swine flu 1976 147. Tamiflu Mercury buy tamiflu without a prescription tamiflu antiviral stockpiling; Swine Flu Mexico Tamiflu tamiflu suspension no prescription tamiflu where can you buy online Swine Flu And Tamiflu flu medication tamiflu swine flu symptoms and treatments Albertsons Central Forida Flu Shoots tamiflu adverse events Medication tamiflu avian bird flu medicine tamiflu 964. Swine Flu Texas cdc + swine flu treatment swine flu in ohio Best Flu Treatments tamiflu for bird flu and 2007; tamiflu shelf life Swine Flu H1n1 tylenol flu night time "tamiflu and dangers" Tamiflu Swf tamiflu in dogs! tamiflu for only 4 days Map Of Swine Flu ingridients of tamiflu intestinal flu Tamiflu Stock number needed to treat for tamiflu "medwatch form for tamiflu" Cdc Swine Flu Treatment wiki tamiflu tamiflu otc Occulo Tamiflu 60 Mg tamiflu recalls tamiflu Flu Tracker
tamiflu manufacturer gilliad swine flu in texas Avian Flu And Tamiflu panleukopenia and tamiflu rebate on tamiflu, History Physical Template For Tamiflu depo provera flu interfere! tamiflu and seizure Bird Flu Tamiflu swine flu conspiracy aids tamiflu flu; Where To Buy Allison-c For Bird Flu Prevention tamiflu nausea tamiflu invent Tamiflu 75 Mg Bulk Purchase Online prevention of flu chilli cold and flu treatment How Can I Buy Tamiflu gilead science donald rumsfeld tamiflu tamiflu and parvo Pig Flu prophylactic tamiflu tamiflu roche Rebate On Tamiflu swine flu death toll tamiflu roche dick cheney? Most Effective Antiviral For The Flu flu prevention signs Why is it called swine flu wiki tamiflu 309. H1n1 Flu Pandemic reactions to tamiflu pravachol nexium actos phentermine tamiflu The Swine Flu flu shot and tylenol, stock ticker who makes tamiflu Tamiflu Online Purchase does tamiflu work influenza a tamiflu Wiki Tamiflu aids tamiflu flu; 2009 flu multnomah county oregon Tamiflu Rumsfeld rumsfeld's growing stake in tamiflu fort detrick
panleukopenia and tamiflu Swine Flu Canada buy tamiflu; swine flu symptoms prevention Depo Provera Flu Shot "generic for tamiflu" swine flu masks? Medication Tamiflu Avian Bird Flu tamiflu uk shop? tamiflu on line When To Take Tamiflu tamiflu stomach flu Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. Treatment Of Swine Flu flu treatments without tylenol! "post-exposure tamiflu dosing" Where Can You Buy Tamiflu home treatment of the flu tamiflu alcohol Government Purchase Of Tamiflu relenza vs tamiflu tamiflu hemorrhoid Shoud Businesses Stockpile Tamiflu tamiflu flu tamiflu dosing instructions Teens Abusing Tamiflu Stomach flu and treatments stomach flu asprin tylenol 642. acheter tamiflu Drug Interactions Tamiflu what are some treatments of swine flu flu symptoms prilosec H1n1 Flu Symptoms And Treatment flu shoots companys Swine flu swine flu 1976 147. Tamiflu Nausea buy tamiflu without a prescription tamiflu antiviral stockpiling; Buy Tamiflu tamiflu suspension no prescription tamiflu where can you buy online Avian Bird Flu Tamiflu flu medication tamiflu swine flu symptoms and treatments Swine Flu Vaccine tamiflu adverse events molen flu shoots Who Owns Tamiflu cdc + swine flu treatment swine flu in ohio Flu Tamiflu Powder tamiflu for bird flu and 2007; tamiflu shelf life Flu Shoots Az tylenol flu night time tamiflu and effectiveness and safety Kop Tamiflu tamiflu in dogs! tamiflu for only 4 days Roche Tamiflu ingridients of tamiflu intestinal flu What Is The Scientific Name For The Swine Flu number needed to treat for tamiflu "medwatch form for tamiflu" Diovan And Flu Like Symptoms wiki tamiflu tamiflu otc Tamiflu Cod tamiflu recalls tamiflu Tamiflu Hemorrhoid tamiflu manufacturer gilliad swine flu mask; Swine Flu Mask
panleukopenia and tamiflu prozac withdrawal symptoms flu; Ibuprofen And Flu Shots depo provera flu interfere! tamiflu and seizure Is Tamiflu An Anitbiotic swine flu conspiracy "12 mg tamiflu" Swine Flu Incubation tamiflu nausea tamiflu invent Cautions Pediatric Use Tamiflu prevention of flu chilli cold and flu treatment Swine Flu Italy gilead science donald rumsfeld tamiflu tamiflu and parvo Purchase Of Tamiflu prophylactic tamiflu tamiflu roche China Has Done Tamiflu To Death swine flu death toll tamiflu roche dick cheney? Swine Flu And Symptoms flu prevention signs who invented tamiflu Tamiflu Children rogaine flu symptoms pravachol nexium actos phentermine tamiflu Flu Shoot flu shot and tylenol, stock ticker who makes tamiflu H1n1 Flu Treatment does tamiflu work influenza a tamiflu Tamiflu Resistance In Avian Flu aids tamiflu flu; 2009 flu multnomah county oregon Tamiflu Uk Shop rumsfeld's growing stake in tamiflu fort detrick pediatric tamiflu Flu Symptoms Muscle Aches buy tamiflu; swine flu wisconsin? Tylenol Cold And Flu Severe "generic for tamiflu" swine flu masks? Swine Flu Humor tamiflu uk shop? tamiflu on line Tamiflu Cheney tamiflu stomach flu tucson flu shoots Swine Flu Prevention Video flu treatments without tylenol! "post-exposure tamiflu dosing" Roche Relenza Tamiflu home treatment of the flu tamiflu alcohol Stock Ticker Who Makes Tamiflu relenza vs tamiflu tamiflu hemorrhoid Tamiflu How It Works tamiflu flu tamiflu dosing instructions Tamiflu Avian Flu Stomach flu and treatments stomach flu asprin tylenol 642.
what are some treatments of swine flu
Tamiflu Injections flu symptoms prilosec flu prevention pamphlet Flu Treatment For PediatricsSwine flu swine flu 1976 147.
bird flu tamiflu Flu Shoot Clinics Jamestown New York tamiflu antiviral stockpiling; tamiflu suspension no prescription Treatment For Equine Flu tamiflu without a prescribtionflu medication tamiflu
Who Manufactures Tamiflu swine flu symptoms and treatments symptoms of the swine flu Cold And Flu Prevention And Treatment molen flu shoots cdc + swine flu treatment Symtoms Of Swine Flu swine flu in ohio tamiflu for bird flu and 2007; Cold And Flu Remedy tamiflu shelf life tylenol flu night time Tamiflu Off The Shelf tamiflu and effectiveness and safety tamiflu how it works What Are The Symptoms Of Swine Flu tamiflu for only 4 days ingridients of tamiflu At This Time What Is The Best Treatment For Swine Flu intestinal flu number needed to treat for tamiflu Actos Flu Symptoms None S Objection "medwatch form for tamiflu" wiki tamiflu Tamiflu Pharmaceutical tamiflu otc tamiflu recalls Phenergan For Flu tamiflu tamiflu manufacturer gilliad Tamiflu Is Made From swine flu mask; panleukopenia and tamiflu Intestinal Flu rebate on tamiflu, depo provera flu interfere! Flu Symtoms tamiflu and seizure swine flu conspiracy California Flu aids tamiflu flu; tamiflu nausea Ordering Tamiflu tamiflu invent prevention of flu Mexico Swine Flu chilli cold and flu treatment gilead science donald rumsfeld tamiflu Swine Flu San Antonio tamiflu and parvo prophylactic tamiflu H1n1 Deaths Were They On Tamiflu tamiflu roche swine flu cartoons Who Invented Tamiflu tamiflu roche dick cheney? flu prevention signs Swine Flu Natural Treatments who invented tamiflu rogaine flu symptoms Tamiflu Revlu pravachol nexium actos phentermine tamiflu flu shot and tylenol, Tamiflu And Breastfeeding stock ticker who makes tamiflu does tamiflu work Swine Flu Symptoms influenza a tamiflu acme philadelphia flu shoots acme Buy Tamiflu No Perscription 2009 flu multnomah county oregon rumsfeld's growing stake in tamiflu fort detrick Tamiflu And Effectiveness And Safety pediatric tamiflu buy tamiflu; Roche And Employer Stockpiling Tamiflu swine flu wisconsin? "generic for tamiflu" Swine Flu Treatments swine flu masks? tamiflu uk shop? Stopped Tamiflu Early tamiflu on line tamiflu stomach flu Treatment For Flu Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. flu treatments without tylenol! Alternative Flu Prevention "post-exposure tamiflu dosing" home treatment of the flu Survived H1n1 Without Tamiflu tamiflu alcohol relenza vs tamiflu Does Tamiflu Fight Avian Flu tamiflu hemorrhoid tamiflu flu Role Of Np Flu Tamiflu tamiflu dosing instructions Stomach flu and treatments stomach flu asprin tylenol 642. Tamiflu Cystic Fibrosis acheter tamiflu what are some treatments of swine fluFlu Map
flu symptoms prilosec flu prevention pamphlet Order Tamiflu No PrescriptionSwine flu swine flu 1976 147.
bird flu tamiflu Tamiflu Brain Virus tamiflu antiviral stockpiling; tamiflu suspension no prescription Taking Tamiflu As A Precaution tamiflu without a prescribtion flu medication tamiflu Tamiflu Adverse Reactions Recent News swine flu symptoms and treatments tamiflu adverse events Thermisol In Tamiflu molen flu shoots cdc + swine flu treatment Flu Pandemic Declared swine flu in ohio tamiflu flu Swine Flu Treatment tamiflu shelf life tylenol flu night time Counterfeit Tamiflu tamiflu and effectiveness and safety tamiflu in dogs! Avian Flu tamiflu for only 4 days ingridients of tamiflu Tamiflu Roche intestinal flu number needed to treat for tamiflu Rumsfeld Tamiflu "medwatch form for tamiflu" wiki tamiflu Tamiflu And Avian Flu tamiflu otc tamiflu recalls Tamiflu Use In Avian Flu tamiflu tamiflu manufacturer gilliad Flu Shoot Radition Treatment swine flu mask; panleukopenia and tamiflu Tamiflu Effective rebate on tamiflu, depo provera flu interfere! Tamiflu And Pregnancy tamiflu and seizure swine flu conspiracy Tamiflu Medicene aids tamiflu flu; tamiflu nausea Number Needed To Treat For Tamiflu tamiflu invent prevention of flu Tamiflu Resistance chilli cold and flu treatment gilead science donald rumsfeld tamiflu Search Results Tamiflu tamiflu and parvo prophylactic tamiflu Flu Season tamiflu roche swine flu death toll Flu Portland Or tamiflu roche dick cheney? flu prevention signs Tamiflu Danger who invented tamiflu rogaine flu symptoms Tamiflu For Swine pravachol nexium actos phentermine tamiflu flu shot and tylenol, Food Poisoning Vs Flu stock ticker who makes tamiflu does tamiflu work California Swine Flu influenza a tamiflu aids tamiflu flu;Ibuprofen And Flu Vaccine 2009 flu multnomah county oregon remedy for stomach flu The Spanish Flu pediatric tamiflu buy tamiflu; Flu Headache Aleve swine flu wisconsin? "generic for tamiflu" Does President Obama Have Stock In Tamiflu swine flu masks? tamiflu uk shop? Duration Of Flu Symptoms tamiflu on line tamiflu stomach flu Swine Flu Protection Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718.
flu treatments without tylenol!
H1n1 Swine Flu "post-exposure tamiflu dosing" h1n1 flu symptoms Tamiflu Parov Canine tamiflu alcohol relenza vs tamiflu Homeopathic Treatments For Stomach Flu tamiflu hemorrhoid tamiflu flu Tamiflu Manufacturer tamiflu dosing instructions Stomach flu and treatments stomach flu asprin tylenol 642. Whats In Tamiflu acheter tamiflu weaponized swine flu; Buy Tamiflu W No Prescription flu symptoms prilosec flu shoots companys Swine Flu Facts Swine flu swine flu 1976 147. buy tamiflu without a prescription Chilli Cold And Flu Treatment tamiflu antiviral stockpiling; tamiflu suspension no prescription Tamiflu Invent tamiflu without a prescribtion flu masks Tamiflu Oseltamivir Phosphate swine flu symptoms and treatments tamiflu adverse events Flu Strain In Idaho molen flu shoots cdc + swine flu treatment Flu Remedies swine flu in ohio tamiflu flu Flu Prednisone Shot tamiflu shelf life tylenol flu night time Flu Treatment For Children tamiflu and effectiveness and safety tamiflu in dogs! Cheapest Tamiflu tamiflu for only 4 days ingridients of tamiflu Swine Flu Statistics intestinal flunumber needed to treat for tamiflu
Singulair Flu Shot "medwatch form for tamiflu" what if i don't finish tamiflu Natural And Alternative Bird Flu Treatments tamiflu otc tamiflu recalls Treatment For The Avian Flu tamiflu tamiflu manufacturer gilliad Stomach Flu Symptoms swine flu mask; panleukopenia and tamiflu Over The Counter Flu Prevention rebate on tamiflu, depo provera flu interfere! Buy Tamiflu Without Prescription tamiflu and seizure swine flu conspiracy Tamiflu Canine Parvovirus aids tamiflu flu; tamiflu nausea Swine Flu In Texas tamiflu invent prevention of flu Latest Reports On Swine Flu chilli cold and flu treatment gilead science donald rumsfeld tamiflu Flu Prevention tamiflu and parvo prophylactic tamiflu Government Tamiflu tamiflu roche swine flu death toll Got Better H1n1 Without Tamiflu tamiflu roche dick cheney? flu prevention signs Avian Flu Treatment who invented tamiflu rogaine flu symptoms Philadelphia Flu Shoots pravachol nexium actos phentermine tamiflu flu shot and tylenol, Star Anise In Tamiflu stock ticker who makes tamiflu does tamiflu work North Carolina Swine Flu influenza a tamiflu aids tamiflu flu; Flu Symptoms 2009 flu multnomah county oregon rumsfeld's growing stake in tamiflu fort detrick Bird Flu Pandemic pediatric tamiflu buy tamiflu; Swine Flu Course Progression Duration Treatment Tamiflu swine flu wisconsin? "generic for tamiflu" Order Tamiflu swine flu masks? tamiflu suspension Tamiflu Dose For Influenza tamiflu on line tamiflu stomach flu Swine Flu Test Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. flu treatments without tylenol! Swine Flu In Cancun "post-exposure tamiflu dosing" home treatment of the flu Health Care Flu Shoot tamiflu alcohol relenza vs tamifluSwine Flu Prevention Kits
tamiflu hemorrhoid tamiflu dosing instructions Swine Flu Death Toll tamiflu dosing instructions Stomach flu and treatments stomach flu asprin tylenol 642. Tamiflu Or Relenza acheter tamiflu weaponized swine flu; Tamiflu Dangers flu symptoms prilosec flu shoots companysTamiflu Sale
Swine flu swine flu 1976 147. bird flu tamiflu Tamiflu Suspension No Prescription tamiflu antiviral stockpiling; tamiflu suspension no prescription Flu Shoots Pittsburgh Pa tamiflu without a prescribtion flu medication tamiflu Tamiflu American Pediatric Association swine flu symptoms and treatments tamiflu adverse events Acheter Tamiflu molen flu shoots cdc + swine flu treatment Tamiflu Sign Guidlines swine flu in ohio tamiflu flu Flu Vaccine Tylenol tamiflu shelf life tylenol flu night time Hiv Flu tamiflu and effectiveness and safety tamiflu how it works Influenza A Tamiflu tamiflu for only 4 days ibuprofen for children after flu Tamiflu Contains Mercury intestinal flunumber needed to treat for tamiflu
Flu "medwatch form for tamiflu" "when to take tamiflu" Tamiflu Bestellen tamiflu otc tamiflu recalls Counterfeit Tamiflu Avian Bird Flu tamiflu tamiflu mexico; Tylenol Severe Fluswine flu in mexico!
ontario tamiflu & immunosuppressed patients? Online Tamiflu rebate on tamiflu, depo provera flu interfere! Tamiflu Banned Japan tamiflu and seizure swine flu conspiracy Tamiflu And To Relenza. aids tamiflu flu; tamiflu medical San Luis Potosi Swine Flu tamiflu invent prevention of flu How Long Does The Flu Last chilli cold and flu treatment gilead science donald rumsfeld tamiflu Tylenol Flu Pregnant tamiflu and parvo prophylactic tamiflu Herbal Tamiflu Recipe tamiflu roche swine flu death toll Tamiflu Safety Elderly tamiflu roche dick cheney? flu prevention signs Swine Flu Tamiflu who invented tamiflu rogaine flu symptoms Mexico Flu pravachol nexium actos phentermine tamiflu flu shot and tylenol, Tamiflu During Pregnancy stock ticker who makes tamiflu does president obama have stock in tamiflu Gilead Tamiflu Stocks Value influenza a tamiflu aids tamiflu flu; Tamiflu Interfears With Immune System2009 flu multnomah county oregon remedy for stomach flu Swine Flu Masks pediatric tamiflu buy tamiflu; Tamiflu Wonkette
swine flu wisconsin?
flu vaccine! Tamiflu Orders No Prescription swine flu masks? tamiflu uk shop? Tamiflu Order Without A Prescription tamiflu on line tamiflu stomach flu Que Es El Tamiflu Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. flu tracker How Fast Does Tamiflu Work "post-exposure tamiflu dosing" home treatment of the flu Flu Shot While Taking Prednisone tamiflu alcohol relenza vs tamiflu Oculo Tamiflu 60 Mg tamiflu hemorrhoid tamiflu flu Flu Shot Side Effects tamiflu dosing instructions star anise in tamiflu Tamiflu Black Box acheter tamiflu what are some treatments of swine flu Remedy For Stomach Flu flu symptoms prilosec flu shoots companys Flu Vaccine And Coumadin Swine flu swine flu 1976 147. buy tamiflu without a prescription Bactrim And Tamiflu Together tamiflu antiviral stockpiling; tamiflu suspension no prescription Buy Tamiflu Without A Prescription tamiflu without a prescribtionflu masks
Tamiflu Donald Rumsfield swine flu symptoms and treatments symptoms of the swine flu Pravachol Nexium Actos Phentermine Tamiflu molen flu shoots cdc + swine flu treatment Drug Trials For Tamiflu swine flu in ohio tamiflu for bird flu and 2007; Canine Tamiflu tamiflu shelf life tylenol flu night time Pediatric Tamiflu Approved For Pandemic Purchase tamiflu and effectiveness and safety tamiflu in dogs! Tamiflu Suspension tamiflu for only 4 days ingridients of tamiflu What Are The Ingredients intestinal flunumber needed to treat for tamiflu
Tamiflu Adverse Events "medwatch form for tamiflu" "when to take tamiflu" Tamiflu By Vbulletin tamiflu otc tamiflu recalls Drug Treatment For Swine Flu tamiflu tamiflu manufacturer gilliad Buy No Online Prescription Tamiflu swine flu mask; panleukopenia and tamiflu Motrin Cold And Flu rebate on tamiflu, depo provera flu interfere!Safeway Flu Shoots
tamiflu and seizure
still died after taking tamiflu Veterinary Tamiflu aids tamiflu flu; tamiflu nausea Cold And Flu Prevention tamiflu invent prevention of flu Tamiflu Abnormal Suicidal Behaviour chilli cold and flu treatment gilead science donald rumsfeld tamiflu Bird Flu Treatment tamiflu and parvo prophylactic tamiflu Tamiflu Without A Prescription tamiflu roche swine flu cartoons Purchase Tamiflu tamiflu roche dick cheney? flu prevention signs Coumadin And Flu Shot who invented tamiflurogaine flu symptoms
Stomach Flu And Treatments pravachol nexium actos phentermine tamiflu flu shoot clinics northwestern pa Tamiflu In Vaccine stock ticker who makes tamiflu does tamiflu work Tamiflu Where Can You Buy Online influenza a tamiflu aids tamiflu flu; Tamiflu Capsules 2009 flu multnomah county oregon rumsfeld's growing stake in tamiflu fort detrick Swine Flu 1976 pediatric tamiflu buy tamiflu; Cold Flu Motrin swine flu wisconsin? "generic for tamiflu" Dosing Tamiflu swine flu masks? tamiflu uk shop? Swine Flu Symptoms Prevention tamiflu on line tamiflu stomach flu Swine Flu Symptons Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. flu treatments without tylenol! Tamiflu Singapore Tender "post-exposure tamiflu dosing" home treatment of the flu Swine Flu Syptoms And Treatments tamiflu alcohol relenza vs tamiflu Tamiflu And Seizure tamiflu hemorrhoid tamiflu flu Flu Prevention Salt tamiflu dosing instructions Stomach flu and treatments stomach flu asprin tylenol 642. Tamiflu Recalls acheter tamiflu what are some treatments of swine flu What Is The Swine Flu flu symptoms prilosec flu shoots companys The Truth About Swine Flu Swine flu swine flu 1976 147. buy tamiflu without a prescription Nose Bleeds And Tamiflu tamiflu antiviral stockpiling; tamiflu suspension no prescription False Flu Security tamiflu without a prescribtion flu medication tamiflu Tamiflu Relenza swine flu symptoms and treatments tamiflu adverse events Tamiflu Histori molen flu shoots canine tamiflu Prozac Withdrawal Symptoms Flu swine flu in ohio tamiflu for bird flu and 2007; Anthony Fauci Tamiflu tamiflu shelf life tylenol flu night time Tamiflu Purchase tamiflu and effectiveness and safety tamiflu in dogs! Treatment Swine Flu tamiflu for only 4 days ingridients of tamiflu Swine Flu Symptom intestinal flu no rx tamiflu Avian Bird Flu And Tamiflu "medwatch form for tamiflu" wiki tamiflu Swine Flu Treatment Recommendations tamiflu otc tamiflu recalls The Flu tamiflu tamiflu manufacturer gilliad Tamiflu Prescribing Directions For Swine Flu swine flu mask; panleukopenia and tamiflu Tamiflu Generic Name rebate on tamiflu, depo flu provera symptom Tamiflu Abnormal Behaviour Description tamiflu and seizure swine flu conspiracy Tylenol Cold And Flu aids tamiflu flu; tamiflu nausea Generic For Tamiflu tamiflu invent prevention of flu Increased Effexor Rx Flu Like Symptoms chilli cold and flu treatment gilead science donald rumsfeld tamiflu Complete Entire Treatment Of Tamiflu tamiflu and parvo prophylactic tamiflu Swine Flu Wisconsin tamiflu roche swine flu death toll Tamiflu Abnormal Behaviour Documentation tamiflu roche dick cheney? flu prevention signs Flu Symptoms And Treatment who invented tamiflu rogaine flu symptoms Tamiflu Side Effects pravachol nexium actos phentermine tamiflu flu shot and tylenol, Soap Note On Tamiflu stock ticker who makes tamiflu does tamiflu work Cdc Flu Shot Tylenol influenza a tamiflu aids tamiflu flu; Tamiflu For Bird Flu And 2007 2009 flu multnomah county oregon rumsfeld's growing stake in tamiflu fort detrick Tamiflu Recent News pediatric tamiflu buy tamiflu; Tamiflu And Children swine flu wisconsin? "generic for tamiflu" Tamiflu Influenza A swine flu masks? tamiflu uk shop? Tamiflu No Prescription tamiflu on line tamiflu stomach flu Signs Of Swine Flu Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. flu treatments without tylenol! "post-exposure tamiflu dosing" h1n1 flu symptoms Flu Treatment tamiflu alcohol relenza vs tamiflu Tamiflu Pediatrics tamiflu hemorrhoid tamiflu flu Find Buy Tamiflu Ebay tamiflu dosing instructions Stomach flu and treatments stomach flu asprin tylenol 642. N1h1 Flu Prevention N95 Respirator Guidelines acheter tamifluwhat are some treatments of swine flu
Swine Flu Conspiracy flu symptoms prilosec flu map? Fda Recommendations Using Tamiflu With Children Swine flu swine flu 1976 147. buy tamiflu without a prescription Ambien Flu tamiflu antiviral stockpiling; tamiflu suspension no prescription Tamiflu And Seizure And Class Action tamiflu without a prescribtionflu medication tamiflu
H1n1 Flu Symptoms swine flu symptoms and treatments symptoms of the swine flu Alternative Treatment Swine Flu molen flu shoots cdc + swine flu treatment Oseltamivir Tamiflu Benefits Risks Community swine flu in ohio tamiflu for bird flu and 2007; Pandemic Tamiflu tamiflu shelf life tylenol cold and flu severe Who Makes Tamiflu tamiflu and effectiveness and safety tamiflu in dogs! Hsbc Tamiflu Tablets Flu Pandemic tamiflu for only 4 days ingridients of tamiflu Tamiflu Suspension Without Prescription intestinal flu number needed to treat for tamiflu Post-exposure Tamiflu Dosing "medwatch form for tamiflu" wiki tamiflu Swine Flu Info tamiflu otc tamiflu recalls Tamiflu Japan tamiflu tamiflu manufacturer gilliad Natural Swine Flu Prevention swine flu mask; panleukopenia and tamiflu Fda Tamiflu rebate on tamiflu,depo provera flu interfere!
Tamiflu Synovitis tamiflu and seizure swine flu alternative treatments health? Dog Flu aids tamiflu flu; tamiflu nausea 12 Mg Tamiflu tamiflu invent prevention of fluSwine Flu Death Victems On Tamiflu
chilli cold and flu treatment flu vaccine! Pediatric Tamiflu tamiflu and parvo prophylactic tamiflu Lexapro Flu tamiflu roche swine flu death toll Central Forida Flu Shoots tamiflu roche dick cheney? flu prevention signs Swine Flu Epidemic who invented tamiflu reactions to tamiflu Tamiflu Alcohol pravachol nexium actos phentermine tamiflu flu shot and tylenol, Can You Get Better From H1n1 Without Tamiflu stock ticker who makes tamiflu does tamiflu work Tamiflu Liquid influenza a tamiflu aids tamiflu flu; Stomach Flu Duration 2009 flu multnomah county oregon rumsfeld's growing stake in tamiflu fort detrick Swine Flu History pediatric tamiflu buy tamiflu; Tylenol Flu Pills swine flu wisconsin? "generic for tamiflu" Tamiflu Bird Flu Virus swine flu masks? tamiflu uk shop? Bactrim For Sinus Infection Flu tamiflu on line tamiflu stomach flu Flu Like Symptoms From Prilosec Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. flu treatments without tylenol! Tamiflu Prophylaxis "post-exposure tamiflu dosing" home treatment of the flu Tamiflu Gilead Rumsfeld tamiflu alcohol relenza vs tamiflu Medience Tamiflu Children tamiflu hemorrhoid tamiflu flu I Get Tamiflu tamiflu dosing instructions Stomach flu and treatments stomach flu asprin tylenol 642. Mexican Flu acheter tamiflu what are some treatments of swine flu How Did Swine Flu Start flu symptoms prilosec flu shoots companys Swine Flu Jokes Swine flu swine flu 1976 147. buy tamiflu without a prescriptionSwine Flu In Ohio
tamiflu antiviral stockpiling;
tamiflu price Flu Shot Treatment For Multiple Sclerosis tamiflu without a prescribtion flu masks Tamiflu Cpt Code swine flu symptoms and treatments tamiflu adverse events Tamiflu Oral Suspension molen flu shoots cdc + swine flu treatment Tamiflu From Canada swine flu in ohio tamiflu for bird flu and 2007; 2009 Flu Multnomah County Oregon tamiflu shelf life tylenol flu night time How Long Do I Take Tamiflu tamiflu and effectiveness and safety tamiflu in dogs! Philadelphia Area Flu tamiflu for only 4 days ingridients of tamiflu Flu Remedy Tamiflu intestinal flu no rx tamiflu What Organism Causes The Swine Flu "medwatch form for tamiflu"wiki tamiflu
Buy Tamiflu Lowest Cost tamiflu otc tamiflu parvo Bird Flu Symptoms tamiflutamiflu manufacturer gilliad
Tamiflu Cost Comparison swine flu mask; ontario tamiflu & immunosuppressed patients? Tylenol Cold And Flu Recall rebate on tamiflu, depo provera flu interfere! Symptoms Swine Flu tamiflu and seizure swine flu conspiracy Hong Kong Flu aids tamiflu flu; tamiflu nausea Swine Flu tamiflu invent prevention of flu Antiviral Tamiflu chilli cold and flu treatmentgilead science donald rumsfeld tamiflu
Tamiflu Efficacy tamiflu and parvo parvo tamiflu Tamiflu Buy tamiflu roche swine flu death toll Swine Flu Preventions tamiflu roche dick cheney? flu prevention signs Tylenol Cough And Flu who invented tamiflu reactions to tamiflu How To Prepare For Swine Flu pravachol nexium actos phentermine tamiflu flu shot and tylenol, Swine Flu Ohio stock ticker who makes tamiflu does tamiflu work Swine Flu Update influenza a tamiflu aids tamiflu flu; Treatment Of Flu 2009 flu multnomah county oregon rumsfeld's growing stake in tamiflu fort detrick Tamiflu On Line pediatric tamiflu buy tamiflu; Tamiflu Ontario swine flu wisconsin? "generic for tamiflu" Tamiflu For Treating Parvo In Puppies swine flu masks? tamiflu uk shop? Flu Treatments Without Tylenol tamiflu on line tamiflu stomach flu Fle Vaccinations Tamiflu Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. flu treatments without tylenol! Otc Tamiflu "post-exposure tamiflu dosing" home treatment of the flu Tamiflu Longer Than 2 Days tamiflu alcohol relenza vs tamiflu Tamiflu Oseltamivir tamiflu hemorrhoid tamiflu flu Tamiflu Cost tamiflu dosing instructions Stomach flu and treatments stomach flu asprin tylenol 642. Alendronic Acid Tamiflu acheter tamiflu what are some treatments of swine flu Ibuprofen For Children After Flu flu symptoms prilosec flu shoots companysHow Does Tamiflu Work
Swine flu swine flu 1976 147. bird flu tamiflu National Guard Dispatched To Protect Tamiflu Suppliestamiflu antiviral stockpiling; tamiflu revlu Triazolone Tamiflu tamiflu without a prescribtion flu medication tamiflu Tylenol Flu swine flu symptoms and treatments tamiflu adverse events Panleukopenia And Tamiflu molen flu shoots cdc + swine flu treatment On-line Tamiflu Prescreening For Prophylaxis swine flu in ohio tamiflu for bird flu and 2007; What Is The Action Of Tamiflu tamiflu shelf life tylenol flu night time Cold Vs Flu tamiflu and effectiveness and safety tamiflu in dogs! Texas Swine Flu tamiflu for only 4 days ingridients of tamiflu Swine Flu Pictures intestinal flu no rx tamiflu What Are Some Treatments Of Swine Flu "medwatch form for tamiflu" wiki tamiflu Tamiflu Elderly tamiflu otc tamiflu recalls Tamiflu Not Effective H5n1 tamiflu tamiflu mexico; Symptons Of Swine Flu swine flu in mexico! panleukopenia and tamiflu Relenza Vs Tamiflu rebate on tamiflu,
depo provera flu interfere!
Flu Prevention Signs tamiflu and seizure swine flu alternative treatments health? Tamiflu Influenza aids tamiflu flu; tamiflu nausea Flu Vaccine Tylenol Cdc tamiflu invent prevention of flu Photos Of Tamiflu chilli cold and flu treatment gilead science donald rumsfeld tamiflu Disposal Expired Tamiflu tamiflu and parvo prophylactic tamiflu Zoloft Interact Cold Flu tamiflu roche swine flu death toll Tamiflu For West Nile Virus tamiflu roche dick cheney? flu prevention signs Cold And Flu Treatments who invented tamiflu rogaine flu symptoms History Of Swine Flupravachol nexium actos phentermine tamiflu
flu shoot clinics northwestern pa Home Remedy For Swine Flu stock ticker who makes tamiflu does tamiflu work Where Can I Get Tamiflu influenza a tamiflu aids tamiflu flu; Bronchitus Tamiflu 2009 flu multnomah county oregon rumsfeld's growing stake in tamiflu fort detrick Tamiflu When Pregnant pediatric tamiflu buy tamiflu; Tamiflu For Only 4 Daysswine flu wisconsin?
flu vaccine! Swine Flu Vaccination swine flu masks? tamiflu uk shop? Mercury In Flu Shots tamiflu on line tamiflu stomach flu History Of Flu Vaccination Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. flu treatments without tylenol! Swine Flu Virus "post-exposure tamiflu dosing" home treatment of the flu Cdc Indications For Tamiflu tamiflu alcohol relenza vs tamiflu Tamiflu Melbournetamiflu hemorrhoid
tamiflu dosing instructions Swine Flu Containment Treatment tamiflu dosing instructions Stomach flu and treatments stomach flu asprin tylenol 642. Not Completing Tamiflu For 5 Days acheter tamiflu what are some treatments of swine flu Tamiflu Online flu symptoms prilosec flu shoots companys Reactions To The Flu Shoot Swine flu swine flu 1976 147. buy tamiflu without a prescription How Long Does The Flu Usually Last tamiflu antiviral stockpiling; tamiflu suspension no prescription Flu Shot And Symmetrel tamiflu without a prescribtion flu masks What If I Dont Finish Tamiflu swine flu symptoms and treatments tamiflu adverse events Flu Shoot Locator molen flu shoots cdc + swine flu treatment Tamiflu High Blood Pressure swine flu in ohio tamiflu for bird flu and 2007; Tamiflu 15 Million Ecological Disaster tamiflu shelf life tylenol flu night time Stomach Flu 2009 Boulder County Schools tamiflu and effectiveness and safety tamiflu how it works Tamiflu Purchase Avian Bird Flu tamiflu for only 4 days ingridients of tamiflu Pharmacist Role In Flu Tamiflu intestinal flu number needed to treat for tamiflu Flu Medicine Tamiflu "medwatch form for tamiflu" wiki tamiflu Tamiflu Prescription Drug tamiflu otc tamiflu recalls Tamiflu Warning tamiflu tamiflu manufacturer gilliad Flu Shoots Dallas Locations swine flu mask; panleukopenia and tamiflu Bird Flu Prevention rebate on tamiflu, depo provera flu interfere! Lexapro And Flu Symptons tamiflu and seizure swine flu conspiracy Tamiflu Purchase Mexico aids tamiflu flu; tamiflu nausea Differential Smear Of Flu Patient tamiflu invent prevention of flu Tamiflu Reactions chilli cold and flu treatment gilead science donald rumsfeld tamiflu Depo Provera Flu Shot Interfere tamiflu and parvo prophylactic tamiflu Still Died After Taking Tamiflu tamiflu roche swine flu cartoons Tamiflu Iingredientstamiflu roche dick cheney?
flu injection vs plavix Mail Order Tamiflu who invented tamiflu rogaine flu symptoms Tylenol Flu Severe pravachol nexium actos phentermine tamiflu flu shot and tylenol, Order Tamiflu Paypal stock ticker who makes tamiflu does tamiflu work Prednisone And The Flu Shot influenza a tamiflu aids tamiflu flu;Tamiflu Drug Interactions 2009 flu multnomah county oregon
remedy for stomach flu
Swine Flu Precautions pediatric tamiflu babies tamiflu Tamiflu Dry Syrup swine flu wisconsin? "generic for tamiflu" Ap News Tamiflu swine flu masks? tamiflu uk shop? Swine Flu Symptoms Incubation Time tamiflu on line tamiflu stomach flu Tamiflu Canada Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. flu treatments without tylenol! Depo Flu Provera Symptom "post-exposure tamiflu dosing" home treatment of the flu Tamiflu Shelf Life tamiflu alcohol rebate on tamiflu, Newsday Counterfeit Tamiflu tamiflu hemorrhoid tamiflu flu Tamiflu Prescribing tamiflu dosing instructions star anise in tamiflu Flu Valtrex acheter tamiflu what are some treatments of swine flu Is Tamiflu Over The Counter flu symptoms prilosec flu shoots companys Voltarol Flu Like Symptom Swine flu swine flu 1976 147. buy tamiflu without a prescription Swine Flu April 26tamiflu antiviral stockpiling; tamiflu revlu Symptoms Treatment For The Flu tamiflu without a prescribtion
flu georgia
Swine Flu Updates swine flu symptoms and treatments symptoms of the swine flu Childrens Tylenol Plus Flu molen flu shoots cdc + swine flu treatment Newborns And Tamiflu swine flu in ohio tamiflu flu Tamiflu And Supply Chain tamiflu shelf life tylenol flu night time Blue Cross Tamiflu Nebraska tamiflu and effectiveness and safety tamiflu in dogs! Merck Tamiflu tamiflu for only 4 days ibuprofen for children after flu Swine Flu Cdc intestinal flu no rx tamiflu Flu Injection Vs Plavix "medwatch form for tamiflu" wiki tamiflu Flu Symptons From Lexapro tamiflu otc tamiflu recalls Tamiflu Tender Singapore tamiflu tamiflu manufacturer gilliad How Long Is The Flu Contagious swine flu mask; panleukopenia and tamiflu Tamiflu Sales rebate on tamiflu, depo provera flu interfere! Tamiflu Swine Flu tamiflu and seizure swine flu conspiracy Cdc Swine Flu Prevention aids tamiflu flu; tamiflu nausea Prevention Swine Flu tamiflu invent prevention of flu Flu Vaccine And Prednisone chilli cold and flu treatmentgilead science donald rumsfeld tamiflu
Flu Mask tamiflu and parvo pharmacist role in flu tamiflu Bird Avian Flu Prevention, Treatment Tamiflu tamiflu roche swine flu death toll Philadelphia Flu Shoots Acme tamiflu roche dick cheney? flu prevention signs How Does Flu Affect Hearing who invented tamiflu rogaine flu symptoms Swin Flu pravachol nexium actos phentermine tamiflu flu shot and tylenol, Tamiflu Parvo stock ticker who makes tamiflu does tamiflu work Tamiflu Vaccines And Antiviral Drugs influenza a tamiflu aids tamiflu flu; Tamiflu Inf 2009 flu multnomah county oregon rumsfeld's growing stake in tamiflu fort detrick Flu Masks pediatric tamiflu buy tamiflu; Tamiflu Mfg swine flu wisconsin? "generic for tamiflu" Tamiflu Infants Powder swine flu masks? tamiflu suspension Tylenol Severe Cold Flu tamiflu on line tamiflu stomach flu Tamiflu Available By Prescription Only Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. flu treatments without tylenol! Tamiflu Symptoms For A Week "post-exposure tamiflu dosing" home treatment of the flu Swine Flu Outbreak tamiflu alcohol relenza vs tamiflu Weaponized Swine Flu tamiflu hemorrhoid tamiflu flu How Tamiflu Works tamiflu dosing instructions Stomach flu and treatments stomach flu asprin tylenol 642. Who Should Stockpile Tamiflu acheter tamiflu what are some treatments of swine flu Home Treatment Of The Flu flu symptoms prilosec flu shoots companys Swine Flu Cartoon Swine flu swine flu 1976 147. buy tamiflu without a prescription Ontario Tamiflu Immunosuppressed Patients tamiflu antiviral stockpiling; tamiflu suspension no prescription Origin Of Swine Flu tamiflu without a prescribtion flu medication tamiflu Swine Flu In Illinois swine flu symptoms and treatments tamiflu adverse events Tamiflu Ordering molen flu shoots cdc + swine flu treatment Tamiflu For Parvo swine flu in ohio tamiflu for bird flu and 2007; Get A Flu Shoot In Nyc tamiflu shelf life tylenol cold and flu severe Acme Philadelphia Flu Shoots Acme tamiflu and effectiveness and safety tamiflu in dogs! Avian Resistance Tamiflu 2008 tamiflu for only 4 days ingridients of tamiflu Tamiflu Lost Voice intestinal flu number needed to treat for tamiflu Tamiflu Adverse Reaction "medwatch form for tamiflu" wiki tamiflu Tamiflu In Dogs tamiflu otc tamiflu recalls Feline Panleukopenia Tamiflu tamiflu tamiflu mexico; Pediatric Tamiflu Pyschiatric swine flu in mexico! panleukopenia and tamiflu Swine Flu Outbreak Map rebate on tamiflu, depo provera flu interfere! Tamiflu Drinking Alcohol tamiflu and seizure swine flu conspiracy How To Store Tamiflu aids tamiflu flu; tamiflu nausea Symptoms Of The Flu tamiflu invent prevention of flu Rder Tamiflu For Dogs chilli cold and flu treatment gilead science donald rumsfeld tamiflu Tamiflu And Weight Gain tamiflu and parvo prophylactic tamiflu Cdc Tamiflu tamiflu roche swine flu cartoons How To Give Tamiflu Vaccine tamiflu roche dick cheney? flu prevention signs Mexican Flu Prevention Vancouver who invented tamiflu rogaine flu symptoms Swine Flu In Mexico pravachol nexium actos phentermine tamiflu flu shot and tylenol, Swine Flu Symtoms stock ticker who makes tamiflu does tamiflu work Tamiflu Stockpile Singapore influenza a tamiflu acme philadelphia flu shoots acme Tylenol Cold And Flu Medicine 2009 flu multnomah county oregon rumsfeld's growing stake in tamiflu fort detrick Flu Prevention Pamphlet pediatric tamiflu buy tamiflu; Swine Flu Cover Up swine flu wisconsin? "generic for tamiflu" Tamiflu Expiry Date swine flu masks? tamiflu suspension Spainish Flu tamiflu on line tamiflu stomach flu Facts On The Flu Shot Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. flu treatments without tylenol! Swine Flu Methotrexate "post-exposure tamiflu dosing" home treatment of the flu Immunity Low After Tamiflu tamiflu alcohol rebate on tamiflu, Tamiflu For Sale tamiflu hemorrhoid tamiflu flu Can You Buy Tamiflu Otc tamiflu dosing instructions Stomach flu and treatments stomach flu asprin tylenol 642. Gastric Flu Treatment acheter tamiflu weaponized swine flu; Tamiflu En Espana flu symptoms prilosec flu shoots companys Tamiflu What Abnormal Behaviour Was Exhibited Swine flu swine flu 1976 147. buy tamiflu without a prescription Flu Vaccine tamiflu antiviral stockpiling; tamiflu suspension no prescription Parvo With Tamiflu tamiflu without a prescribtion flu medication tamiflu Tamiflu 60 Mg swine flu symptoms and treatments tamiflu adverse events Pros And Cons Of Tamiflu molen flu shoots cdc + swine flu treatment Tylenol Cold Flu swine flu in ohio tamiflu for bird flu and 2007; Oseltamivir Tamiflu tamiflu shelf life tylenol cold and flu severe Tamiflu Nyquil tamiflu and effectiveness and safety tamiflu in dogs! Tamiflu Recall tamiflu for only 4 days ingridients of tamiflu Flu Shoot Baltimore Location intestinal flu number needed to treat for tamiflu Roche Tamiflu Government "medwatch form for tamiflu" wiki tamiflu Flu Activity tamiflu otc tamiflu recalls Purchase Tamiflu No Prescription tamiflu tamiflu manufacturer gilliad Where To Buy Tamiflu swine flu mask; panleukopenia and tamiflu Motrin Cold Flu rebate on tamiflu, depo provera flu interfere! What Is Tamiflu tamiflu and seizure swine flu conspiracy Map Of Swine Flu Cases aids tamiflu flu; tamiflu nausea Will Tamiflu Help Reduce Fever tamiflu invent prevention of flu Stop Tamiflu Make Flu Worse chilli cold and flu treatment gilead science donald rumsfeld tamiflu Publics Florida Flu Shoots tamiflu and parvo prophylactic tamiflu Swine Flu In Florida tamiflu roche swine flu death toll Tamiflu Withdrawal tamiflu roche dick cheney? flu prevention signs Tamiflu Stomach Flu who invented tamiflu reactions to tamiflu Tamiflu From Mexico pravachol nexium actos phentermine tamiflu flu shot and tylenol, Is The Swine Flu Bullshit stock ticker who makes tamiflu does tamiflu work Tamiflu Producer influenza a tamiflu aids tamiflu flu; Flu Virus 2009 flu multnomah county oregon rumsfeld's growing stake in tamiflu fort detrick Swine Flu Syptoms pediatric tamiflu buy tamiflu; swine flu wisconsin? flu vaccine! Tamiflu swine flu masks? tamiflu uk shop? Tamiflu Excretion tamiflu on line tamiflu stomach flu Flu Fosamax Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. flu treatments without tylenol! Obama Tamiflu"post-exposure tamiflu dosing"
h1n1 flu symptoms Swine Flu In California tamiflu alcohol rebate on tamiflu, Tamiflu Over The Countertamiflu hemorrhoid
tamiflu dosing instructions Tamiflu History tamiflu dosing instructions star anise in tamiflu H1n1 Flu acheter tamiflu what are some treatments of swine flu Price Of Tamiflu flu symptoms prilosec flu shoots companys Tamiflu And Extended Shelf Life Program Swine flu swine flu 1976 147. buy tamiflu without a prescription Flagyl Flu Symptoms tamiflu antiviral stockpiling; tamiflu suspension no prescription Tamiflu And Relenza tamiflu without a prescribtion flu masks Cost Of Tamiflu swine flu symptoms and treatments tamiflu adverse events Tamiflu Dosing Instructions molen flu shoots cdc + swine flu treatment Swine Flu North Carolina swine flu in ohio tamiflu for bird flu and 2007; Swine Flu And Steroid Treatment tamiflu shelf life tylenol flu night time Donald Rumsfield Tamiflu tamiflu and effectiveness and safety tamiflu in dogs! Swine Flu Indiana tamiflu for only 4 days ingridients of tamiflu Who Swine Flu intestinal flu number needed to treat for tamiflu Flu Shot And Tylenol"medwatch form for tamiflu"
"when to take tamiflu" Tamiflu Medical tamiflu otc tamiflu recalls Tamiflu Price tamiflu tamiflu manufacturer gilliad Swine Flu Funny swine flu mask; panleukopenia and tamiflu Flu Shoots Essex County Ny rebate on tamiflu, depo flu provera symptom Cipro Tamiflu Drug Interaction tamiflu and seizure swine flu conspiracy Tamiflu Dosing aids tamiflu flu; tamiflu nausea Stomach Flutamiflu invent
pediatric tamiflu
Swine Flu Treatment For Uninsured chilli cold and flu treatment flu vaccine! Side Effects Of Tamiflu tamiflu and parvo prophylactic tamiflu Aids Tamiflu Flu tamiflu roche swine flu death toll How Long Does Swine Flu Lasttamiflu roche dick cheney?
flu injection vs plavix Flu Georgia who invented tamiflu rogaine flu symptoms Donations Of Tamiflu pravachol nexium actos phentermine tamiflu flu shot and tylenol, Tamiflu Yeast Infections stock ticker who makes tamiflu does tamiflu work Tamiflu And Dangers influenza a tamiflu aids tamiflu flu; Pandemic Flu2009 flu multnomah county oregon remedy for stomach flu Rosuvastatin Flu Treatment pediatric tamiflu buy tamiflu; Tamiflu Mexico swine flu wisconsin? "generic for tamiflu" Incubation Period For Swine Flu swine flu masks? tamiflu uk shop? Prophylactic Tamiflu tamiflu on line tamiflu stomach flu Stomach Flu Treatment Tylenol flu pregnant tylenol flu severe 718. flu treatments without tylenol! Swine Flu Outbreaks "post-exposure tamiflu dosing" home treatment of the flu Gilead Science Donald Rumsfeld Tamiflu tamiflu alcohol rebate on tamiflu, Tamiflu Orders tamiflu hemorrhoid tamiflu flu Flu Shoots tamiflu dosing instructions star anise in tamiflu Spanish Flu acheter tamiflu what are some treatments of swine flu Flu Pandemic flu symptoms prilosec flu shoots companys Drug Interactions With Tamiflu Swine flu swine flu 1976 147. buy tamiflu without a prescription State Purchase Of Tamiflu tamiflu antiviral stockpiling; tamiflu suspension no prescription Medicine Tamiflu tamiflu without a prescribtion flu medication tamiflu Tucson Flu Shoots swine flu symptoms and treatments tamiflu adverse events Tamiflu In North Carolina molen flu shoots cdc + swine flu treatment Tamiflu Experience swine flu in ohio tamiflu for bird flu and 2007; Tamiflu Availabilty tamiflu shelf life tylenol flu night time Prevention Of Swine Flu tamiflu and effectiveness and safety tamiflu in dogs! Can Celexa Cause Flu Like Symptoms tamiflu for only 4 days ingridients of tamiflu Flu Shots intestinal flu no rx tamiflu Swine Flu Pandemic "medwatch form for tamiflu" wiki tamiflu Swine Flu Cancun tamiflu otc tamiflu recalls Tylenol Flu Night Time tamiflu tamiflu manufacturer gilliad Government Buys Tamiflu swine flu mask; panleukopenia and tamiflu Flu Symptoms Headache rebate on tamiflu,
This is a place where open-minded critical thinkers of all political persuasions encounter information and arguments that both support and challenge their preconceptions. The goal is not to eliminate differences but to narrow and clarify them. We begin with a bedrock agreement that the search for insight and clarity is important, serious - and fun.
We ask commenters to be civil and substantive and, if possible, good humored. We reserve the right to delete comments that disregard this request.
Do you use Twitter? Follow The Big Question.
Subscribe to The Big Question
Learn more about RSS
Politically Connected Blogs
Archives
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
Categories
- 1st District (3)
- 2nd District (2)
- 3rd District (9)
- 4th District (2)
- 5th District (5)
- 6th District (1)
- Al Franken (27)
- Amy Klobuchar (1)
- Barack Obama (7)
- Collin Peterson (1)
- Conventions (7)
- economy (9)
- Erik Paulsen (2)
- Fred Thompson (2)
- health care (15)
- Hillary Rodham Clinton (6)
- House (3)
- In Congress (1)
- Iraq (14)
- John Edwards (3)
- John Kline (2)
- John McCain (11)
- Keith Ellison (1)
- Main (1225)
- Michele Bachmann (22)
- Mike Ciresi (10)
- Mike Huckabee (1)
- Mitt Romney (3)
- Norm Coleman (33)
- Presidential (26)
- Presidential Democratic (16)
- Presidential Republican (19)
- Ron Paul (4)
- Rudy Giuliani (2)
- San Brownback (1)
- Senate (17)
- State (11)
- Tim Pawlenty (13)
- Tim Walz (1)
- Tom Tancredo (1)