On Deck : Government Universal Health Care

[aquaadverse]

so to recap, your assertion on the staff not having "spent much time in washington" is wrong, and clearly you do not know who is a "close advisor" and who is not.

And neither do you. But I'll stick to the results, or lack there of. You're right, he has a bunch of well seasoned people who are giving him great advice.

hmm, all that and you still cannot refute my point..it is the president, and ONLY the president, who makes the decision of granting a pardon.

I don't need to refute your point because it's meaningless. Doesn't matter if Clinton signed the Rich pardon or not.You said opening an investigation into the interrogation at this time was not politically motivated, he is just doing his job. Because it's time.

I was commenting on Holder's opinion and recommendation. As did Congress in 2001 and during his confirmation hearing. You want to continue to maintain he's apolitical, I say you're wrong and gave an example. What's wrong is your inability to see Holder's conduct of bypassing the normal procedures of the Justice Department and taking it directly to the White House way wrong.

Not informing Mary Jo White, the US attorney who had the warrants for Rich and didn't learn of his pardon until after it was granted. There's much more, but he obviously can or could be less than independent.

what I've noticed is when you are shown to be wrong, you just ignore what you had been wrong about and go off on some long winded discourse.

you are wrong about pardons, and you were wrong about obama's staff.. just live with it and stop the attempts at sidestepping.

And what I've noticed is you get stuck on picayune details and slap condescending blinders on. Obama is making huge strategic errors and has backed himself into a corner and it was all avoidable. Easily. Go ahead and sidestep my point that Bush came into office with a fraction of the backing and goodwill Obama has, the Democrats had the majority in both Houses and he was getting it done.
Obama has a bunch of Washington insiders who are just inept.

Better?

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by aquaadverse

And neither do you.

the difference of course is that I never acted as though I have knowledge of who is a "close advisor".

I don't need to refute your point because it's meaningless. Doesn't matter if Clinton signed the Rich pardon or not.You said opening an investigation into the interrogation at this time was not politically motivated, he is just doing his job. Because it's time.

I was commenting on Holder's opinion and recommendation. As did Congress in 2001 and during his confirmation hearing. You want to continue to maintain he's apolitical, I say you're wrong and gave an example. What's wrong is your inability to see Holder's conduct of bypassing the normal procedures of the Justice Department and taking it directly to the White House way wrong.

Not informing Mary Jo White, the US attorney who had the warrants for Rich and didn't learn of his pardon until after it was granted. There's much more, but he obviously can or could be less than independent.

so you are backtracking by attempting to say that holder's failure to prevent the rich pardon, which of course as I have correctly pointed out over and over he absolutely, with no qualification, could NOT stop, is by your rationale something that shows he cannot make a fair decision on the cia case?

yuck yuck yuck.

that's almost as ridiculous a saying he is a left handed person, so he can't make a fair decision on a right handed suspect...

newsflash: there is no connection.

And what I've noticed is you get stuck on picayune details and slap condescending blinders on. Obama is making huge strategic errors and has backed himself into a corner and it was all avoidable. Easily. Go ahead and sidestep my point that Bush came into office with a fraction of the backing and goodwill Obama has, the Democrats had the majority in both Houses and he was getting it done.

what? congress was majority republican during bush's first term, and in his second term he got nothing accomplished...except the bailouts at the end.

bush was successful prior to 9/11 by taking democrat positions (esp on nclb). obama has a much more difficult job managing congress, esp the left side of the party.

post 9/11 he used the tragedy to his political davantage.

Obama has a bunch of Washington insiders who are just inept.

Better?

accurate in its phrasing.