News-Record.com

If all this illegal stuff you talk about, saves one Americans life, I am all for it.

With a few minor tweaks, this letter could have been written about every Congress, POTUS and SCOTUS since FDR.

Licentia requiro vigilance

'Forget' this Ms. Simmons?:

December 20, 2005, 9:46 a.m.
Clinton Claimed Authority to Order No-Warrant Searches
Does anyone remember that?

In a little-remembered debate from 1994, the Clinton administration argued that the president has "inherent authority" to order physical searches — including break-ins at the homes of U.S. citizens — for foreign intelligence purposes without any warrant or permission from any outside body. Even after the administration ultimately agreed with Congress's decision to place the authority to pre-approve such searches in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court, President Clinton still maintained that he had sufficient authority to order such searches on his own.

"The Department of Justice believes, and the case law supports, that the president has inherent authority to conduct warrantless physical searches for foreign intelligence purposes," Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee on July 14, 1994, "and that the President may, as has been done, delegate this authority to the Attorney General."

What about this law-breaker?:

Bill Clinton registers for the draft on September 08, 1964, accepting all contractual conditions of registering for the draft.

Selective Service Number is 3 26 46 228.

Bill Clinton classified 2-S on November 17, 1964.

Bill Clinton reclassified 1-A on March 20, 1968.

Bill Clinton ordered to report for induction on July 28, 1969.

Bill Clinton refuses to report and is not inducted into the military.

Bill Clinton reclassified 1-D after enlisting in the United States Army Reserves on August 07, 1969, under authority of Col. E. Holmes.

Clinton signs enlistment papers and takes oath of enlistment.

Bill Clinton fails to report to his duty station at the University of Arkansas ROTC, September 1969.

Bill Clinton reclassified 1-A on October 30, 1969, as enlistment with Army Reserves is revoked by Colonel E. Holmes and Clinton now AWOL and subject to arrest under Public Law 90-40 (2)(a) registrant who has failed to report...remain liable for induction.

Bill Clinton's birth date lottery number is 311, drawn December 1, 1969, but anyone who has already been ordered to report for induction is INELIGIBLE!

Bill Clinton runs for Congress (1974) while a fugitive from justice under Public Law 90-40.

Bill Clinton runs for Arkansas Attorney General (1976) while a fugitive from justice.

Bill Clinton receives pardon on January 21, 1977, from Carter.

Bill Clinton FIRST PARDONED FEDERAL FELON ever to serve as President of the United States . All these facts come from Freedom of Information requests, public laws, and various books that have been published, and have not been refuted by Clinton.

what's your point nCon?

Wow. I've been gone for a while, but it's good to see things haven't changed. It took me less than 30 seconds to de-bunk the garbage that neocon is slinging, merely by checking an internet hoax web site. Makes me wonder why he even bothers printing these lies. Does he think others don't know how to use Google, or does he not know how?

Amazing.

Howie,

So share with us which items neocon listed that are lies and the documentation to support they are lies. The list appears to have been well-documented previously. And, what's the "debunker" that you used, DailyKOS?

Howie, do you recall the old adage; the more things change, the more they stay the same?

Welcome back, hope your absence has not been for any reason other than just being away.

Lastly, Ms. Simmons; EXCELLENT Counterpoint!

Shalom

I find myself in agreement with both the lte and the posts afterward.

I agree that I don't want to live in an autocracy or theocracy. I agree that there should be a balance of powers. However, I find the letter writer is narrow-sighted by implying that the 'current' administration is the only one guilty of trying to assert their power.

We've seen it in history and we've also seen it currently with a congress and a judicial branch that tries to cross the line and grab power that isn't theirs.

I will say that I also agree with the lte that Bush has been very agressive in how he has claimed executive privilege. I think it is fair to say that some of this has been justified by the events of September 11. Some has not. I think part of it is also a reaction to democrats who are so bent on trying to go after one witch-hunt after another over items that are petty in the larger scheme of things.

I'm willing to say that two wrongs don't make a right and Bush has done things I don't feel comfortable with. In some ways, I truly feel he is preparing the way for our next president, Obama. I say this with complete certainty and am willing to eat my words come Inauguration day, Obama will be president. And when he is, we'd better hope there is a balance of power.

nit, would you clarify this last comment; "And when he [Obama] is, we'd better hope there is a balance of power."

Why should the people hope for balance with the next President that has not been had for the past 6 1/2 years? Why should it be expected of another and not the current one?

Please elude on this.

Thanks in advance.

Shalom

Forgive me, Howie.

Here ya go, ORR:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/felon.asp

.. looks really familar, huh?

Slick? Yea ..aren't they all?

Some truth? Yes, the best lies are based on true.

The rest .. just spin.

what I cannot figure out is whether Meow actually believes all this crap - he sure slings a lot - or if he is just a smart guy pulling strings.

Thanks, JDR. I was in a meeting and didn't get a chance to reply. And ORR, since neocon's list "appears to have been well documented", can I assume that't the reason you didn't ask him to cite his sources? Just curious why I was held to a different standard.

JDR, those are the questions of inquiring (seeking) minds!

However, I am doubtful that any truthful answers will ever be known!

Shalom

Ho, hum...another left wing nutcase afflicted by Bush Derangement Syndrome.
You lost, get over it.

Brilliant retort.

re: Brilliant Retort

ORR / JCa / Meow:

ya know it'd be really nice to exchange information and productively share viewpoints based on reality or at least based on something other then endless smear ... but you guys more often that not just spread venom against a phantom enemy that is the same species as those you lay roses upon.

Now I'm not saying anyone is perfect - but my goodness put the show in the other foot and look in a mirror and all that jazz - Jeeze.

'Snopes.com'?

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

And does 'Snopes.com' have anything on slick willie and his minion Jamie Gorelick arguing for warrantless break-ins?

BTW, does anybody doubt slick willie being a draft dodger who "loathed the military"?

I know this is a feather in his cap to many of you.

why don't YOU check, kitten?

.. from what I've read .. ALL "presidents before George W. Bush, including Clinton, held the position that they had the authority to do what they believed was necessary to defend the United States against foreign attack."

http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200512211147.asp

.. and I think we are all OK with that ..

We should also agree that while Bill claimed that right - however he didn't use it. As an example - I reserve the right (and accept the consequences thereof) to drive down the highway at 90 mph in the case of unspecified emergencies - but usually I abide by both FISA rules and Police Regulations.

The deal with the Bushy's is they didn't have a great excuse for not at least getting in the queue - all that said was "trust us" .. and they have said "trust us" countless times and been wrong. When does one stop believing they have all the answers exclusively?

==

Like I said: you are spreading venom against a phantom enemy that is the same species as those you lay roses upon.

== btw - if you throw Bushie in that same pile of military loathers, sure we can agree.

Thanks for backing me up cRock-o-...feller.

neocon,

Since the source JDR cited was not satisfactory, why don't you back up your claims with a reputable source. I'll wait patiently. Unless the same double standard applies in your mind as well.

No problem, dude. I really do try to be fair.

Consider the loosingest team in baseball history really needs to accept constructive criticism.

Wasn't sure whether to put this under Michael Vick or under Accountability. Interesting who is expected to attend the conference....

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/13815031/detail.html

SCLC Plans Honor For Vick

POSTED: 1:17 pm EDT August 3, 2007

ATLANTA -- While he waits for his trial related to dogfighting charges to start, Michael Vick will be honored by the Southern Christian Leadership Conference.

TELL US: What Do You Think Of SCLC's Plan To Honor Michael Vick?

SCLC President Charles Steele announced Thursday during a news conference that the group will find a way to honor Vick during its national convention that began Friday.

"We will recognize Vick for being an outstanding human being," said Steele. "We will work with anyone who opens their heart and arms to us."

Steele said he did not know if Vick will attend any of the events at the conference.

Former President Bill Clinton is a scheduled speaker and will cut the ribbon of the SCLC's new headquarters. Presidential candidates Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) , Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) , Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee are also expected to attend.

The 27-year-old Vick has pleaded not guilty to charges of sponsoring a dogfighting operation. His trial begins November 26.

Co-defendant Tony Taylor changed his plea to guilty earlier this week in a deal with prosecutors. He is expected to testify against Vick.

Copyright 2007 by WSBTV.com. All rights reserved. This

While waiting patiently, I searched for about half an hour for a reputable source of the "draft dodger" chronology. All I saw was a bunch of crackpots regurgitating the same list. Makes me even more anxious to see neocon's legitimate source. I can hardly wait. I'll return to waiting patiently (though with this building excitement, it will be hard to maintain my patience).

Darryl: "Please elude on this"

Got no problem with that.

Elude away, I shall.

Have a nice weekend.

Howie, how's slick willie for a source?:

DODGING THE DRAFT

In 1969, Clinton evaded induction into the military by convincing Col. Eugene Holmes, the director of the ROTC program at the University of Arkansas, to allow him to sign up for ROTC there, as an alternative to being drafted. But Clinton never attended Arkansas law school or enrolled in ROTCafter writing a letter to Holmes rationalizing his deceptions. Here is how he explained the sequence of this betrayal to ABC's Ted Koppel.

Koppel: [starting by reading from Clinton's letter to Holmes ]: " `First I want to thank you . . . for saving me from the draft . . ' Gov. Clinton, back to the letter again and the timing. You wrote this letter on December 3rd of 1969. December 1st of 1969 is when your number came up in the lottery. You initially told reporters that you weren't aware of the fact that you had a high number in the lottery, then later on you told my colleague Jim Wooten that you probably did know. Which was it? Have you refreshed your memory on it?"

Clinton: "I honestly don't remember, but I think that in this day and age of instantaneous communications most people would find it difficult to believe that I did not know. I don't know whether I knew or not. If you assume I did or I didn't, it doesn't really change the letter, since I had lost my draft deferment several weeks before. I just don't know"

Koppel: "The reason I ask, Governor, is because the next day, on the 2nd of December, is when you sent off your application to the Yale Law School, and then the day after that, the 3rd of December, is when you sent this letter to Colonel Holmes. And there does seem to be a sense about those two actions of someone who knew, or at least was fairly confident at that point, that he was not going to be drafted:" Clinton: "Well, I don't think that's right."

-ABC's "Nightline"' Feb. 12, 1992
*****************************************

Note Howie, CLINTON'S WORDS to Holmes:
`First I want to thank you . . . for saving me from the draft . . '

"saving me from the draft"... perhaps you can find a 'snopes.com', 'mother jones', or 'daily koz' article where it will be shown beyond any doubt that William Kristol typed this in slick willie's letter to Holmes, then hypnotized the Waco kid and made him believe it was indeed him who wrote this?

... wait a second, Meow .. the issue was NOT did Slick dodge the draft - the issue was did he become a FELON - or break ANY laws - through draft dodging.

try again, spinmeister - we'll wait.

JDR, way to keep the temperature turned up and keeping the issue focused on the specifics!

nit, that was in very poor taste when I asked a simple question at 9:38 AM and there were at least two posts made after I ask for the elucidation. I can tell that it is getting even more difficult to carry on any meaningful dialogue on the blogs. How sad.

See Howie, things have not really changed, they remain all the more the same.

Shalom

"In 1969, Clinton evaded induction into the military by convincing Col. Eugene Holmes, the director of the ROTC program at the University of Arkansas, to allow him to sign up for ROTC there, as an alternative to being drafted. But Clinton never attended Arkansas law school or enrolled in ROTCafter writing a letter to Holmes rationalizing his deceptions."

"But Clinton never attended Arkansas law school or enrolled in ROTC"...at that point he broke the law cRock-o-...feller.
( and subject to arrest under Public Law 90-40 (2)(a))
Just because he wasn't apprehended and jailed doesn't make it legal to dodge the draft by pleading with Holmes to spare him, then reneging on his commitment.

But as I say, this is a feather in his cap to the leftists who, along with slick willie, "loathe the military".

Neocon,
Why don't you just admit that what you cut and pasted in as your information was a lie. You can still return to your normal tactics of dodging the point of the letter by bringing up another completely irrelevant point concerning something completely off topic. But at least by admitting that you lied would establish a small measure of credibility. If you are unwilling to admit that what you wrote:
"Bill Clinton runs for Congress (1974) while a fugitive from justice under Public Law 90-40.

Bill Clinton runs for Arkansas Attorney General (1976) while a fugitive from justice.

Bill Clinton receives pardon on January 21, 1977, from Carter.

Bill Clinton FIRST PARDONED FEDERAL FELON ever to serve as President of the United States", are lies, then you deserve absolutely no respect. They are just plain lies, and regardless of how many times you read it on the internet, it does not make it any more true.

Howie, one question: Do you believe Bill Clinton went through channels (Holmes) in order to avoid getting drafted and sent to Vietnam?

Oh, and Howie, "establishing credibility" with you liberals is not one of my life's goals, in case you haven't figured this out. I don't give a damn what you or anyone else thinks of me.

neocon,
I'm still waiting (patiently) for you to answer my question from about nine hours ago. Still looking for any reputable source that lists him as a fugitive, felon, or pardoned. But I'm beginning to think I'll never see it.

And I have another question (that I think I know the answer to): do you have the capacity to admit that you were wrong?

"Do you believe Bill Clinton went through channels (Holmes) in order to avoid getting drafted and sent to Vietnam?"

Of course he did, neocon - that is the way of the wealthy or well connected. No one is arguing that point.

Do you believe GWB DIDN'T go through channels in order to avoid getting drafted and sent to Vietnam? No one is arguing that point.

Of course he did, that is the way of the wealthy or well connected.

The question is this: Did they do anything ILLEGAL? We are arguing THAT point.

I think when most of us miss-post or just say something stupid learn from it, appologize publicly, then move on. You posted it so either put up or shut up. Where's all the "accountability" you alway seem to throw up?

"I don't give a damn what you or anyone else thinks of me."

Fine. The real question is what does Neocon think of Neocon.

Possible answers:

1) I'm am man of integrity - I live what I say.
2) I'm a lying sack of doggie poop.

Yes Howie, I have the ability to admit I was wrong. The last time I was wrong, was back in the 60s when I hailed LBJ and his 'war on poverty'.
I quickly learned what the liberals meant by their rhetoric: steal money from someone else and pass it along to those who produce nothing and they will vote for you en mass. :] Today's liberals were born into that mindset and they think it perfectly natural for someone who is elected by the public to steal other people's money and pass it along to someone who does nothing to earn it.

But slick willie evaded the draft and there were laws against that.

I answered your question. I noticed you never answered mine.

cRock-o-...feller..."A lying sack of doggie poop"...? You sound like THE LIBERAL CANADIAN 'lite'.

Did slick willie evade the draft? cRock-o-...feller says "Of course he did neocon, that is the way of the wealthy".
But we have been told by an adoring and fawning media that slick willie 'grew up in poverty' and worked his way to the top by pure ambition and hard work. Which is it?
Poor, hardworking chap who achieved great things on his own through hard work and ambition...or rich kid who evaded the draft through connections and never showed up to ROTC training, thereby breaking the law?

I say he is a draft dodger who broke the law by evading the draft.
Believe what you like.

Oh, and I still don't give a damn about you or anyone else thinks of me.

That said, I'm outta here. There are fish waiting to be caught.

While certainly some do - it is really stupid to say "ALL" liberals steal money from someone else - all of anything is always wrong ... and I guess it's OK for non-liberals to steal money from someone else? Only liberals steal?

But would't it be nice if you simply addressed your own question? The fact that something is WRONG does not make it ILLEGAL - a sad reality I often bring up in this blog. But did Clinton break any law? The answer is clearly NO - you know it but you won't admit it - although you stated above he was a Felon. This facts make your "accountability" rhetoric about just a bunch of dog poop.

So go fish - I hope you fall in, maybe it'll wash off some poop.

Howie & JDR, a question I have is why is Bill Clinton in this discussion anyway? Is that not a diversionary tactic used when seeking to divert attention?

And Howie, remember, never to expect answers from some. As JDR and yourself well know, admission of error, etc. by some will not happen in this life. I wonder if some of these people have any communication with a higher power, supreme being, deity, God, etc.? If so, I can only imagine how that would be!

Shalom

Okay, a little more for the Old Man and the Sea -- but where to start?
"Yes Howie, I have the ability to admit I was wrong. The last time I was wrong, was back in the 60s..."
Really, this was the last time you admitted you were wrong? I probably made some mistakes already this morning, but most certainly this week. But to have a forty year streak of not admitting fault makes you either 1) grossly delusional, or 2) Jesus. I think we can now see the answer to that one.

"I answered your question. I noticed you never answered mine."
No you didn't. Is that another lie for which you refuse to accept responsibility (that's at least 2 in 24 hours -- hardly 40 yuears)? The question I asked you for was a source for your charge that Clinton was 1) a felon, 2) a fugitive, and 3) pardoned. And you have provided none of them.

You chastised JDR for providing a detailed chronology from a source that you deemed unacceptable. And for twenty hours, we've been asking you for your reputable sources that your charges are legitimate. And all you've done is skirt the issue and divert attention to something other than the lies you apparently aren't man enough to own up to. Your evasion and elusiveness is especially noticeable in a thread that has "accountability" in the title. It draws even more attention to your hypocrisy.

Darryl,
Just read your post. Looks like we are on the same page. I consider myself in good company.
Have a good day.
HG

Howie, thanks for the compliment. I must concur that wear are most definitely "on the same page!"

Shalom

"I say he is a draft dodger who broke the law by evading the draft."

==

In December 1969, the Selective Service System held its first lottery drawing. Those born on December 25 - like Karl Rove - received number 84 - sure to be drafted.

On February 17, 1970, Rove was reclassified as 2-S, a deferment from the draft because of his enrollment at the University of Utah in the fall of 1969. He maintained this deferment until December 14, 1971, despite being only a part-time student in the autumn and spring quarters of 1971 (registered for between six and 12 credit hours) and dropping out of the university in June 1971.

Rove was a student at the University of Maryland, College Park in the fall of 1971; as such, he would have been eligible for 2-S status, but registrar's records show that he withdrew from classes during the first half of the semester. In December 1971 he was reclassified as 1-A. On April 27, 1972, he was reclassified as 1-H, or "not currently subject to processing for induction".

The draft ended on June 30, 1973.

==

Just think, kitty cat, if Rove hadn't been a DRAFT DODGER he could have been patrollin' the swamps of 'nam right along 'side you.

Opps - forgot this tidbit:

In June 1971, Rove dropped out of college to take a paid position as the Executive Director of the College Republican National Committee.

Rove then becabe a "student" at the University of Maryland, College Park in the fall of 1971 .. but registrar's records show that he withdrew from classes during the first half of the semester. In December 1971 he was reclassified as 1-A. On April 27, 1972, he was reclassified as 1-H, or "not currently subject to processing for induction".

Do ya think having a a paid position as the Executive Director of the College Republican National Committee had anything to do with that 1-H clsssification?

"But we have been told by an adoring and fawning media that slick willie 'grew up in poverty' and worked his way to the top by pure ambition and hard work. Which is it?"

Can't he have done both? adopted chap who achieved connections through smarts and ambition, THEN evaded the draft?

" .. never showed up to ROTC training"

BTW - afaik ROTC is an elective curriculum you take along with other college classes. Since when is not going to class breaking the law?

So it's been over 48 hours. Do you guys think he's ever going to answer my question? The waiting patiently takes a lot longer than I thought it would. You don't think he's run from this argument do you?

BTW, if skipping classes is against the law, campus police would have been chasing me around a lot more when I was in college.

Howie, the questions in the first paragraph above need not be answered. If you do not know the answer at this point, no one else need attempt to answer!

And now you bring up skipping class as being illegal. Darn it, now my alma mater is going to want more $$$ from me! Does my last donation not cover those skipped classes? LOL

Shalom

"You don't think he's run from this argument do you?"

Running from what...snopes.com? Don't make me laugh. Slick willie got pardoned by the spineless jimmie carter with his 'blanket pardon' for the tambourine playing, dope smokin', military loathing draft dodgers.
*******************************************

sweet pea, you truly are becoming more and more pathetic. All you post is 'you speak my mind' and add your support to the last bit of liberal drool that litters this blog.
You need to go get laid dude.