Text 7112, 181 rader
Skriven 2008-08-13 18:17:00 av JIM HOLSONBACK (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av BOB KLAHN
Ärende: Coulter's Column
========================
-=> On 08-10-08 18:03 BOB KLAHN wrote to JIM HOLSONBACK <=-

 -=>> On 08-09-08 01:48 BOB KLAHN wrote to JIM HOLSONBACK <=-

 BK>> ...

 JH>> May as well dust it off, Tim.  You can stick a fork in
 JH>> Silky now - - he's done.  No speech at the convention, no
 JH>> more running for Pres or even Veep, and he can forget about

 BK>>  It was a waste of time anyway.

 JH> What was a waste of time, posting Coulter's column?  I

 BK>  No, the Edwards speech thing and all that.

It was an interview.  But I agree that it was a waste of time in that
his statements in the interview raised even more questions, and more
claims of Edwards lying by the press, and even Rielle's family members.

 BK>  ...

 JH>> that pipe dream of being appointed Attorney General by
 JH>> Obambi.

 BK>>  There was no chance of that to beging with.

 JH> Awhile back, JohnJ posted he thought it was a good idea,

 BK>  Edwards lacks the experience.

 JH> along with Biden for SecState.

 BK>  Biden is not near diplomatic enough.

 JH> Did you bother to tell JohnJ how wrong he was.

 BK>  Yes, I did. In the *other* echo.

Ah, so _that's_ why he hasn't been posting there much.  Have to handle
that old gent with kid gloves.  His feelings are easily hurt.

 JH> But I agree with you that there is
 JH> _no way_ Edwards would be a good choice for Attorney
 JH> General.

 BK>  Not now. twenty years from now, maybe, I wouldn't hazard a
 BK>  guess.

Nah, he won't get the needed experience in the interim.  He'll probably
go back to chasing ambulances, or consulting for a hedge fund, something
like that.  Besides, 20 years from now he'll be 76 yrs old and decrepit.


 JH>> Can you imagine what the MSM would have done along with
 JH>> this story if Edwards had been a Repub?

 BK>>  Just about as much as they did with Hastert, Barr, Gingrich, etc
 BK>>  etc etc. 15 minutes of infamy.

 JH> None of those men you cite were porking a bimbo while
 JH> running for President.

 BK>  Edwards was not carrying on a witch hunt in an attempt to
 BK>  sabatoge a presidency while screwing their bimbos.

Reliably, you try to convey another false impression - - How many of
those you name were "screwing their bimbos" during the 98-99 impeachment
thing? One out of three, right?

Hee.  You just can't get over Clinton's disgracing himself.  Heck, this
case with Edwards is in some ways similar to Clinton's back in '98-'99 -
- it would never have gotten _this_ far if the arrogant, egotistical
sonovabitch had just been honest from the start, and hadn't tried to lie
his way out of it, and gotten caught lying.

 JH> And in which of those cases did the Liberal MSM spike the
 JH> story for ten months, whining that they couldn't prove
 JH> anything?

 BK>  How do you spike it and whine anything at the same time?

They spiked the story by not looking into it hard enough for those
months, and the whining that they sat on it because they couldn't prove
anything is what they're doing now.  Unnerstan?

 BK> If you whine they will hear it and the story will get out.

The story did get out, but no thanks to the whining of the
incompetent liberal reporters in the MSM.

 JH> (Thus proving that they are less competent than
 JH> the tabloid rag National Enquirer)?

 BK>  You have been paying too much attention to the Men in Black.

Not me, I generally stay away from Catholic priests. [;-D.

 JH> Lack of proof didn't stop the NYT from running a front-page
 JH> story trying to tie McCain romantically to an attractive
 JH> blond lobbyist, Vicki Iseman, did it?

 BK>  McCain was in a position to steer government money in the
 BK>  millions or, maybe billions, on a company the bimbo lobbied for.

You didn't address my complaint - their unsubstantiated insinuation of a
romantic affair.

And did he in fact steer millions or billions of government money to a
company Ms. Iseman worked for?  Cite(s) and facts, please.  Not a whole
lot came out of the NYT story.

 BK>  Edwards was only in a position to steer his own campaign money
 BK>  to his chosen plaything.

And did he do so?  Looks like we can't count on the LaTimes to ferret
out the facts, even though those secretive rendezvous with the bimbo in
question were happening under their very noses, at the Beverly Hilton.
$15K is a bunch of bucks per month of hush money.  If that is found to
have come from campaign money, there will be more trouble.

 BK>  The company got that money, the only question was, did McCain do
 BK>  something dishonest in getting it to her? As I see it, if he was
 BK>  helping get government money to the company, then he should not
 BK>  have been screwing the whore. If he was screwing the bimbo, then
 BK>  he should not have lifted one finger, or one vote, to give money
 BK>  to her employer.

You gotta lotta "ifs" in there, Bob.  Like the NYTimes, you haven't
explicitly alleged that an affair took place.  This is just more red
herring stuff. It's clear you really don't want to talk about this
Edwards scandal.

 JH> A story it ran with
 JH> no proof at all, and un-named sources, and stuff that may
 JH> or may not have happened eight years ago. So why did the

 BK>  The Washington press went with stories from unnamed sources,
 BK>  about the betrayal of a CIA covert operative, and her front
 BK>  organization, which allowed the Bush administration to cover up
 BK>  their guilt.

What guilt?  Nobody was ever charged for leaking the info that she
worked for CIA.  This is just more red herring stuff.  Sorry, I ain't
got time to go on a fool's errand.  Did you catch report this week that
the Federal appeals court just threw out Plame/Wilson's lawsuit against
Cheney, Rove, Libby, Armitage, etc?

 BK>  So what's your point?

My point was and is that there is no proof at all to the insinuation
that there was a romantic relationship between McCain and Iseman back
in 2000.  Your point seems to be that you don't want to discuss the
Edwards scandal.

 JH> NYT hold back in Edwards case? Please tell me, if you can,
 JH> how there is no double-standard there.

 BK>  If you are spending your campaign money it's much less of a
 BK>  problem than if you are spending millions of govt money.

Au contraire, if it's a Democrat like Edwards, it's not a problem at
all for the NYTimes.

 BK>  None of it's good, spending the govt money is much more corrupt.

Small comfort there for you - to claim that your side's corruption is
much less corrupt than the corruption you allege on the other side.

But the main money question left in the Edwards scandal is over
setting Rielle and baby up in a mansion in CA and those alleged hush
money payments of $15,000 per month.  If any of that is shown to have
come from campaign funds, it isn't unlikely that somebody will do time
in the pokey.

- - -  JimH.

... A taxpayer voting for Obama is like a chicken voting for COL Sanders

--- MultiMail/Win32 v0.47
 * Origin: Doc's Place BBS Fido Since 1991 docsplace.tzo.com (1:123/140)