posted on July 7, 2003 08:43:07 AM new
a speech by a brave and couragous U.S. senator
The following speech was delivered by Senator Robert C. Byrd (D-WV) on the Senate floor.
May 21, 2003
"Truth, crushed to earth, shall rise again, - -
The eternal years of God are hers;
But Error, wounded, writhes in pain,
And dies among his worshippers."
Truth has a way of asserting itself despite all attempts to obscure it. Distortion only serves to derail it for a time. No matter to what lengths we humans may go to obfuscate facts or delude our fellows, truth has a way of squeezing out through the cracks, eventually.
But the danger is that at some point it may no longer matter. The danger is that damage is done before the truth is widely realized. The reality is that, sometimes, it is easier to ignore uncomfortable facts and go along with whatever distortion is currently in vogue. We see a lot of this today in politics. I see a lot of it -- more than I would ever have believed -- right on this Senate Floor.
Regarding the situation in Iraq, it appears to this Senator that the American people may have been lured into accepting the unprovoked invasion of a sovereign nation, in violation of long-standing International law, under false premises. There is ample evidence that the horrific events of September 11 have been carefully manipulated to switch public focus from Osama Bin Laden and Al Queda who masterminded the September 11th attacks, to Saddam Hussein who did not. The run up to our invasion of Iraq featured the President and members of his cabinet invoking every frightening image they could conjure, from mushroom clouds, to buried caches of germ warfare, to drones poised to deliver germ laden death in our major cities. We were treated to a heavy dose of overstatement concerning Saddam Hussein's direct threat to our freedoms. The tactic was guaranteed to provoke a sure reaction from a nation still suffering from a combination of post traumatic stress and justifiable anger after the attacks of 911. It was the exploitation of fear. It was a placebo for the anger.
Since the war's end, every subsequent revelation which has seemed to refute the previous dire claims of the Bush Administration has been brushed aside. Instead of addressing the contradictory evidence, the White House deftly changes the subject. No weapons of mass destruction have yet turned up, but we are told that they will in time. Perhaps they yet will. But, our costly and destructive bunker busting attack on Iraq seems to have proven, in the main, precisely the opposite of what we were told was the urgent reason to go in. It seems also to have, for the present, verified the assertions of Hans Blix and the inspection team he led, which President Bush and company so derided. As Blix always said, a lot of time will be needed to find such weapons, if they do, indeed, exist. Meanwhile Bin Laden is still on the loose and Saddam Hussein has come up missing.
The Administration assured the U.S. public and the world, over and over again, that an attack was necessary to protect our people and the world from terrorism. It assiduously worked to alarm the public and blur the faces of Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden until they virtually became one.
What has become painfully clear in the aftermath of war is that Iraq was no immediate threat to the U.S. Ravaged by years of sanctions, Iraq did not even lift an airplane against us. Iraq's threatening death-dealing fleet of unmanned drones about which we heard so much morphed into one prototype made of plywood and string. Their missiles proved to be outdated and of limited range. Their army was quickly overwhelmed by our technology and our well trained troops.
Presently our loyal military personnel continue their mission of diligently searching for WMD. They have so far turned up only fertilizer, vacuum cleaners, conventional weapons, and the occasional buried swimming pool. They are misused on such a mission and they continue to be at grave risk. But, the Bush team's extensive hype of WMD in Iraq as justification for a preemptive invasion has become more than embarrassing. It has raised serious questions about prevarication and the reckless use of power. Were our troops needlessly put at risk? Were countless Iraqi civilians killed and maimed when war was not really necessary? Was the American public deliberately misled? Was the world?
What makes me cringe even more is the continued claim that we are "liberators." The facts don't seem to support the label we have so euphemistically attached to ourselves. True, we have unseated a brutal, despicable despot, but "liberation" implies the follow up of freedom, self-determination and a better life for the common people. In fact, if the situation in Iraq is the result of "liberation," we may have set the cause of freedom back 200 years.
Despite our high-blown claims of a better life for the Iraqi people, water is scarce, and often foul, electricity is a sometime thing, food is in short supply, hospitals are stacked with the wounded and maimed, historic treasures of the region and of the Iraqi people have been looted, and nuclear material may have been disseminated to heaven knows where, while U.S. troops, on orders, looked on and guarded the oil supply.
Meanwhile, lucrative contracts to rebuild Iraq's infrastructure and refurbish its oil industry are awarded to Administration cronies, without benefit of competitive bidding, and the U.S. steadfastly resists offers of U.N. assistance to participate. Is there any wonder that the real motives of the U.S. government are the subject of worldwide speculation and mistrust?
And in what may be the most damaging development, the U.S. appears to be pushing off Iraq's clamor for self-government. Jay Garner has been summarily replaced, and it is becoming all too clear that the smiling face of the U.S. as liberator is quickly assuming the scowl of an occupier. The image of the boot on the throat has replaced the beckoning hand of freedom. Chaos and rioting only exacerbate that image, as U.S. soldiers try to sustain order in a land ravaged by poverty and disease. "Regime change" in Iraq has so far meant anarchy, curbed only by an occupying military force and a U.S. administrative presence that is evasive about if and when it intends to depart.
Democracy and Freedom cannot be force fed at the point of an occupier's gun. To think otherwise is folly. One has to stop and ponder. How could we have been so impossibly naive? How could we expect to easily plant a clone of U.S. culture, values, and government in a country so riven with religious, territorial, and tribal rivalries, so suspicious of U.S. motives, and so at odds with the galloping materialism which drives the western-style economies?
As so many warned this Administration before it launched its misguided war on Iraq, there is evidence that our crack down in Iraq is likely to convince 1,000 new Bin Ladens to plan other horrors of the type we have seen in the past several days. Instead of damaging the terrorists, we have given them new fuel for their fury. We did not complete our mission in Afghanistan because we were so eager to attack Iraq. Now it appears that Al Queda is back with a vengeance. We have returned to orange alert in the U.S., and we may well have destabilized the Mideast region, a region we have never fully understood. We have alienated friends around the globe with our dissembling and our haughty insistence on punishing former friends who may not see things quite our way.
The path of diplomacy and reason have gone out the window to be replaced by force, unilateralism, and punishment for transgressions. I read most recently with amazement our harsh castigation of Turkey, our longtime friend and strategic ally. It is astonishing that our government is berating the new Turkish government for conducting its affairs in accordance with its own Constitution and its democratic institutions.
Indeed, we may have sparked a new international arms race as countries move ahead to develop WMD as a last ditch attempt to ward off a possible preemptive strike from a newly belligerent U.S. which claims the right to hit where it wants. In fact, there is little to constrain this President. Congress, in what will go down in history as its most unfortunate act, handed away its power to declare war for the foreseeable future and empowered this President to wage war at will.
As if that were not bad enough, members of Congress are reluctant to ask questions which are begging to be asked. How long will we occupy Iraq? We have already heard disputes on the numbers of troops which will be needed to retain order. What is the truth? How costly will the occupation and rebuilding be? No one has given a straight answer. How will we afford this long-term massive commitment, fight terrorism at home, address a serious crisis in domestic healthcare, afford behemoth military spending and give away billions in tax cuts amidst a deficit which has climbed to over $340 billion for this year alone? If the President's tax cut passes it will be $400 billion. We cower in the shadows while false statements proliferate. We accept soft answers and shaky explanations because to demand the truth is hard, or unpopular, or may be politically costly.
But, I contend that, through it all, the people know. The American people unfortunately are used to political shading, spin, and the usual chicanery they hear from public officials. They patiently tolerate it up to a point. But there is a line. It may seem to be drawn in invisible ink for a time, but eventually it will appear in dark colors, tinged with anger. When it comes to shedding American blood - - when it comes to wreaking havoc on civilians, on innocent men, women, and children, callous dissembling is not acceptable. Nothing is worth that kind of lie - - not oil, not revenge, not reelection, not somebody's grand pipedream of a democratic domino theory.
And mark my words, the calculated intimidation which we see so often of late by the "powers that be" will only keep the loyal opposition quiet for just so long. Because eventually, like it always does, the truth will emerge. And when it does, this house of cards, built of deceit, will fall.
posted on July 8, 2003 07:51:56 AM new
Ah yes the same couragous senator which was a proud card carrying member of the KKK. Here is a past quote from this great man::
Byrd, who was 28 when he wrote this letter, saying he would never fight in an integrated armed forces.
"Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds,"
posted on July 8, 2003 07:56:14 AM new
Here is another great accomplishment and the winner of the KKK lifetime achievment award is _________ ROBERT BYRD
“The Lifetime Achievement Award reflects individuals at the pinnacle of their respective fields who’ve made significant contributions to the success of the KKK," Cracker said. "Senator Byrd exemplifies this prestigious award; no living person has worked as hard as he has to keep the black man dependant on, and subservient to, the white man. Not to mention his outstanding work against Jews and Catholics.”
Senator Byrd’s legislative accomplishments, as well as his ascension as the only KKK alumnus to serve as the Majority Leader of the US Senate, a post he served in for six years (1977-80, 1987-88), made him an obvious choice for this year’s Lifetime Achievement Award. “This distinction, awarded to those who advance the ideals of the KKK through personal achievement and service to all people of Caucasian and protestant heritage, accurately describes the contributions Senator Byrd has made to our racially pure organization,” Cracker said.
Born in 1917 in North Wilkesboro, North Carolina, Robert Byrd was orphaned when his mother was killed in a tragic sausage making accident. Taken to West Virginia by his Auntie Belham and Uncle Peduncle, the future KKK Lifetime Achievement recipient grew up mastering life's early lessons, like learning the proper way to tie a noose. Unable to receive a taxpayer-funded college education, Senator Byrd sought to make a buck wherever he found an opportunity—pumping gas at a filling station, working as a white sheet salesman, and then becoming a “Kleagle” in the Klu Klux Klan—picking up new skills as he advanced. One of those skills—recruiting other white, protestant bigots for the KKK—was in demand at the time, and he worked during the war years of the early 1940’s building the rank and file of the Klan.
After WWII came to an end, Byrd had a vision of what his state and nation should be: a bastion of ignorant, inbred, government-subsidized, white racists. In 1946, in his first attempt at elected office, he was elected to the West Virginia House of Delegates. After that he went on to serve in the US House of Representatives and the US Senate. He has served longer in the United States Senate than anyone else in West Virginia's history, an indication of the moral depravity and lack of work ethic of most West Virginians.
In presenting the award to Senator Byrd, Billy Bob Cracker remarked, “Senator Byrd is living proof that being a member of the KKK is not an insurmountable obstacle, so long as you are resolved to push forward against decency and realize your dreams. He filibustered the 1964 Civil Rights Act. He opposed the nominations of the only Negro justices of the Supreme Court. And he fought valiantly against integrating the military when he wrote, ‘I vow never to fight with a Negro by my side. Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds.’ That is why I am honored to salute Senator Robert Byrd as this year’s KKK Lifetime Achievement Award recipient.”
In accepting the award, Byrd reflected on his years serving the interests of Klan members and remarked, "The Klan is needed today as never before and I am anxious to see its rebirth in every state in the Union."
posted on July 8, 2003 09:44:39 AM new
I was waiting for someone to bring this up.
For starters, that little "news item" came from this website and tomyou left out the most important line:
DISCLAIMER -- 1) In case you couldn't tell, the "news" stories on this site are not meant to be taken seriously.
Now for the truth: Sen. Byrd was a member of the Klan. He did filibuster the 1963 Civil Rights legislation. But look at his last 20 years in the Senate: He's been a fiery supporter of civil rights, he is held in high esteem by every reputable civil-rights organization and he has publicly repented again and again for his Klan involvement. That doesn't stop ultra-right-wingers from dragging it up all the time, as if it can somehow cancel out his life's work. (The worst was Coulter wannabe Michelle Malkin, who has several times claimed that Byrd "never apologized" for his statements. Which is a lie.)
-------------------
We do not see things as they are. We see them as we are.
------------The Talmud
[ edited by msincognito on Jul 8, 2003 09:46 AM ]
posted on July 8, 2003 10:14:15 AM new
It's just as serious as half the stuff posted on this board and serves my point well. goes right along with the quote in another post of skylites " we get just on bottle of water a day". Any post can be found cut and pasted and to some of you it's factual as long as it's represents your side regardless of it's origion and truth.
Byrd voted against the first gulf war as well. Hell, following his line of thinking Iraq would have conquered half the mid-east by now.
You people were all over thurmond after he was dead and he had repented but he didn't follow your views so his repent was a false one, of course byrd does so he must have been sincere. This guy isn't, dead he wants to lead the country for gods sakes and we should give him a free pass ?
Here is another one for your enjoyment about this hero of the people:
The poor's sense of class superiority over the rich is getting out of hand.
At a Senate Budget Committee hearing last week, Sen. Robert Byrd, who was named after a bridge in West Virginia, viciously attacked Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill for having made a success of himself. Claiming to speak for worthless layabouts, Byrd snippily informed O'Neill: "They're not CEOs of multibillion-dollar corporations. ... In time of need, they come to us, the people come to us."
Evidently what the people-in-need are asking for is a lot of federal projects named after Senator Byrd.
Some items funded by taxpayers – but still somehow named after "Robert C. Byrd" – are: The Robert C. Byrd Highway; the Robert C. Byrd Locks and Dam; the Robert C. Byrd Institute; the Robert C. Byrd Life Long Learning Center; the Robert C. Byrd Honors Scholarship Program; the Robert C. Byrd Green Bank Telescope; the Robert C. Byrd Institute for Advanced Flexible Manufacturing; the Robert C. Byrd Federal Courthouse; the Robert C. Byrd Health Sciences Center; the Robert C. Byrd Academic and Technology Center; the Robert C. Byrd United Technical Center; the Robert C. Byrd Federal Building; the Robert C. Byrd Drive; the Robert C. Byrd Hilltop Office Complex; the Robert C. Byrd Library; the Robert C. Byrd Learning Resource Center; the Robert C. Byrd Rural Health Center.
And then it got late, and I had to stop researching. But it appears that every slab of concrete in West Virginia is named after Bob Byrd.
Really warming to his class-envy tirade, the King Tut of the Senate further informed O'Neill: "I haven't walked in any corporate boardrooms. I haven't had to turn any millions of dollars into trust accounts. I wish I had those millions of dollars." Instead, Byrd had to scrape by with billions of dollars forcibly extracted from the taxpayers to build grotesque banana republic tributes to himself.
At least the money O'Neill "turn[ed] into trust accounts" came from his own pocket. Coincidentally, the money Byrd turned into eponymous monuments also came from O'Neill's pocket. A humble display of gratitude might have been more appropriate.
An astonished O'Neill responded to the harangue: "I started my life in a house without water or electricity. So I don't cede to you the high moral ground of not knowing what life is like in a ditch."
And then the hearing spun totally out of control as Senator Tut redoubled his own sob story: "Well, Mr. Secretary, I lived in a house without electricity, too, no running water, no telephone, a little wooden outhouse." (Though Byrd was manifestly enamored of these fascinating particulars of his life story, he unaccountably skipped the part about his youthful membership in the Ku Klux Klan.)
When did a lack of money and accomplishment become a mark of virtue? Some rich people may be swine, but so are some poor people. A lot of rich people work harder, are more creative, and are a lot nicer than the poor. Paul O'Neill was never in the Klan. Paul O'Neill never filched taxpayers' hard-earned money to build a vast complex of shrines to himself.
More perplexingly, when did a scoundrel whose only source of capital comes from other people's paychecks assume the "high ground" over a rich man who dispersed paychecks? O'Neill is rich, I'm not, oh well. At least he didn't dip into my earnings.
Every society must have concentrations of wealth in order to build and create. Even the Soviet Union of beloved memory had concentrations of wealth – but it was in the government, rather than in corporations. It's called capital. Capital is needed to launch society's most important projects – factories, inventions, bridges, skyscrapers and telescopes named after Bob Byrd.
O'Neill's concentration of money came to him through the voluntary decisions of investors and consumers. Byrd's far larger concentration of money came to him by force. Send in half your paycheck to the government or go to jail.
The specious core of the liberal mantra on tax cuts – "tax cuts for the rich" – is that unless taxes are cut across the board, it never happens. As loaded Hollywood liberals are always reminding us, they don't "need" a tax cut. The rich we shall always have with us, kind of like the poor. At least conservatives defend the right of middle-class people to keep their money, too.
The only rich people deserving of malice are rich liberals who express bemusement at the non-rich's desire for a tax cut. They want the middle class to pay more in taxes and they use the lumpen poor as a battering ram against these hated, acquisitive, coupon-clipping climbers.
Despite his maudlin self-flattery, Robert Byrd and the rest of his party don't resent the rich on behalf of the poor. They resent the rich on behalf of the government. There may still be a toilet in West Virginia that is not yet named for Bob Byrd.
posted on July 8, 2003 10:20:34 AM new
what the hell, one more for good measure from a west virginian that knows:
Sticks, stones and words that hurt
Roger Banks
Athenaeum Guest Columnist
" did you hear what Senator Byrd said on TV?" That's all I was able to pick up from the conversation I overheard where I work. So, out of curiosity, I went to the Web to research what our distinguished senator of the past 42 years had been up to. I have to admit I've never been particularly fond of either the politician or the man.
My voting behavior, however, stands in stark contrast to my dislike of the senator. I've voted for Byrd in every election he has run in since I was old enough to vote. Who else was I supposed to vote for? Nobody runs against the mighty, all-powerful Fiddlin' Bobby Byrd. Just look at how much in West Virginia is named after him. I actually expect the name of our state to be changed to "Byrdonya" when he dies. My recent research has led me to conclude that West Virginia Republicans should hang their heads in shame for not targeting Byrd's many vulnerabilities.
I was able to determine what all the current commotion was about. The senator, in a recent Fox news interview, made an ass of himself. More importantly, he disgraced the state he claims to serve so honorably. In the interview, Byrd stated, while expressing his views on U.S. race relations, he had met "white niggers" in his lifetime. The context in which Byrd made this shocking statement was an absurd attempt by the senator to remind us of the great strides our country has made in improving race relations. The Senator's inappropriate use of an offensive racial slur has, for me, had the opposite effect.
Senator Byrd's insensitive use of this word is proof of the great amount of work still awaiting us as a nation in healing the wounds inflicted on race relations by hundreds of years of hatred. The very concept of "nigger" is one born of white bigotry and ignorance. It is a word that should be used sparingly and with concern given its horrible history and inflammatory nature. Senator Byrd, by his glib use of the word “nigger,” gave clear indication that he, also, stands to benefit from overdue work on his own stance on race relations.
As stunning as the senator's use of this word was, my research uncovered still more. I was shocked to learn that Senator Byrd has a dark, yet strangely under-scrutinized past. Senator Byrd was a member of the Ku Klux Klan, a deplorable organization responsible for unknown numbers of murders and ruined lives. My shock turned to disgust when I read an excerpt from a letter ex-Klansman Byrd wrote to a U.S. senator of the day. The future honored and venerated senate historian, keeper of Constitutional integrity, wrote that he would rather die than to serve in a racially desegregated military, a bad idea, he wrote, promoted by "race mongrels." My disgust was magnified when I learned of the champion pork barrel politician's long-lived opposition to early civil rights legislation.
In trying to excuse himself, Byrd has, on the few occasions his KKK membership has been raised as an issue, suggested his membership was the result of bad judgment and youthful indiscretion, even though he was in his mid-twenties. Byrd has at least acknowledged the inappropriateness of his views and membership in the KKK, which, he reminds everyone, occurred a long time ago.
I cannot accept the senator's anemic excuses for his past behavior. I'm not suggesting the Senator should not be forgiven. However, as we all know, sometimes saying you’re sorry and making excuses for yourself isn't enough. My mother always taught me that sometimes my bad behavior has consequences even though she always forgave me. Had I researched Robert Byrd's life and background, I would never have voted for him. I find myself wishing I could take back my past votes for Byrd. I apologize to those my vote for Robert Byrd violated. As restitution, I vow never to vote for him again, now that I know the truth.
I would also like to ask to ask all of us how we feel about having Robert Byrd's life memorialized by naming so much in our state after him, including schools and federal buildings. In particular, I want to know how we feel as a University community about having the entire WVU Health Sciences campus named after a former Klansman. I believe we should examine the appropriateness of naming public institutions after a former member of a hate group. If we don't, I'm convinced people in other states will start thinking that West Virginians must be a bunch of inbred, backward racists to have a former Klansman as our U.S. senator and hero.
So, Byrd's past actions can be added to my ever-growing list of political embarrassments that include such gems as the Watergate tapes, Ollie North's and Ronnie Reagan's lies, Monica's stained dress and the Florida election farce. This collection constantly reminds me I can't take my eyes off any politician. I've also learned I can't trust the politicians or the media to tell the trusth about themselves or their agendas.
And just where the hell was the media on this one? And don't think I'm not wondering how the Democratic Party, the party which claims to be the best hope for human dignity, equality and self-worth could allow and support Robert Byrd as a Democratic Party member.
This incident has taught me to look carefully and to research thoroughly the backgrounds of people I vote for. I must accept the harsh responsibility of being a cynic of the present shame that is U.S. politics. I must also accept the responsibility of being a participant in taking our government back from people like Robert Byrd.
posted on July 8, 2003 10:24:58 AM new
Yep he is even above the law (1999) :
In early May, Senator Robert C. Byrd, a longtime and powerful Democrat from West Virginia, was following a van too closely on U.S. Route 50 in Fairfax, Virginia, when the van stopped for traffic.
Byrd's 1999 Cadillac slammed into the rear of the van. It took a tow truck more than an hour to pry the vehicles apart.
Byrd's car was not drivable and suffered an estimated $7,000 in damage. The driver of the 1990 Ford Econoline van, Chris Lee, 42, a house painter from Fairfax, said he didn't hear any sounds indicating that Byrd hit the brakes or swerved.
"Just boom," Lee said.
The Fairfax County police officer who investigated the accident had started to write the 81-year-old Senator a traffic ticket when Bryd pulled a copy of the U.S. Constitution out of his pocket and pointed to a section that he said the cop prevented the cop for ticketing him for anything because he, as a member of Congress "shall in all cases, except treason, felony and breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest" both while attending a session and traveling to or from the Capitol.
Byrd spokeswoman Ann Adler says the Senator, an acknowledged Constitutional scholar, "almost always has one (the Constitution) in his pocket."
Byrd was taken to the nearby Fair Oaks police station where the shift commander put in a quick call to Fairfax Commonwealth's Attorney Robert F. Horan. Horan told the cop that if the Senator wanted to claim Congressional immunity for the ticket, the cops would have to honor it. With everything else that had happened in Washington in recent months, a traffic accident probably couldn't be classified as "treason, felony or breach of the peace."
Horan said he was familiar with the immunity clause -- Article 1, Section 6, of the Constitution -- because he had encountered it once before during his 32 years in office. Another member of Congress, also from West Virginia, invoked the clause to escape a speeding ticket 20 years earlier.
The constitutional provision was written in 1781 to protect members of Congress from harassment as they traveled across the country (usually by horseback), and to discourage people from trying to prevent the members from casting unpopular votes.
Constitutional scholars say that while the law has little use in modern times, it is often used by Washington area police as a way to avoid arresting members of Congress.
"It's a common misconception that it (the law) prevents ticketing," says Georgetown University professor Paul Rothstein. "Police departments in this area are frequently under that misapprehension. I think it's a way to do a favor for people of influence and stature, but it does smack of unequal treatment under the law."
When did Thurmond repent? Strom Thurmond only changed his behavior when it was politically expedient to do so.
We could argue endlessly about the sincerity of each Senator's repentance. You could continue to post reams of irrelevant information from dubious sources which nobody will read.
Instead, let's focus on the speech. Is there any idea in Byrd's speech that you object to?
posted on July 8, 2003 11:10:52 AM newtomyou said: It's just as serious as half the stuff posted on this board and serves my point well.But it's not true. Doesn't that count for anything with you?
And: Any post can be found cut and pasted and to some of you it's factual as long as it's represents your side regardless of it's origion and truth.Clearly, you're speaking for yourself, Bubba.
I never claimed Byrd was a saint. No saint could stay elected two terms to the U.S. Senate, let alone half a century. Certainly, Byrd has earned his title as "King of Pork." But acting as if he regularly dons the white hood and robes even now is just flat-out misleading.
Let's see, what other slams can you come up with?
Oh, my God. He was raised poor. Well, that does it, then. How dare he aspire to the U.S. Senate?
And whoa. He beat a traffic ticket. Yowza. (Well, let's qualify that statement. He beat a traffic ticket according to one source - an outfit called "Capitol Hill Blues" - the same group known for claiming that 29 members of Congress are guilty of spouse abuse. There's not a single source or scrap of corraboration to be found anywhere, which is why even ultra-right-wingers have to hold their nose when posting this one (and why it doesn't show up very often. Man, you were really scraping the bottom of the barrel, weren't you?)
You did make your point, however, and that point is this:
Ultra=rightists can't find any legitimate way to deal with the harsh truth that Byrd is dishing out. So they dig up every bit of muck that they can and fling it out there, hoping something sticks. They can't deal with the fact that Americans are actually listening to, and admitting the truth of, Byrd's statements, or that in the twilight of his political career he has found the courage to say what so many others are afraid to voice: That this adminstration is wrong, that the Democratic leadership is wrong to remain silent, that we are headed down a path to disaster.
-------------------
We do not see things as they are. We see them as we are.
------------The Talmud
[ edited by msincognito on Jul 8, 2003 11:12 AM ]
posted on July 8, 2003 11:29:19 AM new
Gee helen looks like you read it. Give yourself some credit, even you rank a little bit above nobody.
I didn't get a chance to read bubba's post he must have deleted it before I got back in here. To bad it sounds like it was a good one !
I could care less about who's side who is on and obviously you know nothing about my political views msincognito. Just because I post something you don't like, you can tell how I politicaly inclined to view and vote ? NOT ! I have said time and time again I have never voted party lines and never will and I've said right now I couldn't tell you who I am voting for and bush isn't leading the pack. I would like Clinton or Clark to enter but we shall wait and see.
Anyways Bubba will you please repost for me so I can see what you said
posted on July 8, 2003 11:48:19 AM new
and I can see your point helen, why should we look at the view of an indvidual from byrd's homeland of west virgina. How ludicrous is that ! He may actually have some insight and we sure don't want that on here!! Here Here I say, no one from West virginia should have their thoughts posted on this subject. Do I hear a second to that motion, Hey maybe Bubba will give me second on that one. NAH ! he sounds pretty Ultra=rightists I read a post of his once and came to that conclusion
posted on July 8, 2003 12:12:00 PM new
These Weapons of Mass Destruction cannot be displayed
The weapons you are looking for are currently unavailable. The country might be experiencing technical difficulties, or you may need to adjust your weapons inspectors mandate.
Please try the following:
Click the Regime change button, or try again later.
If you are George Bush and typed the country's name in the address bar, make sure that it is spelled correctly. (IRAQ).
To check your weapons inspector settings, click the UN menu, and then click Weapons Inspector Options. On the Security Council tab, click Consensus. The settings should match those provided by your government or NATO.
If the Security Council has enabled it, The United States of America can examine your country and automatically discover Weapons of Mass Destruction.
If you would like to use the CIA to try and discover them,
click Detect weapons
Some countries require 128 thousand troops to liberate them. Click the Panic menu and then click About US foreign policy to determine what regime they will install.
If you are an Old European Country trying to protect your interests, make sure your options are left wide open as long as possible. Click the Tools menu, and then click on League of Nations. On the Advanced tab, scroll to the Head in the Sand section and check settings for your exports to Iraq.
Click the Bomb button if you are Donald Rumsfeld.
posted on July 8, 2003 01:05:49 PM new
Hey I thought you weren't reading my post. you stop that. I can come to my points or views any way I like and my point is in my view I have not misrepresented anything you said. If you disagree feel free to join your nobody clan that doesn't read my posts. Yes this is fun ! I am so glad evil tom decided to hang on a few more days. Sidenote: the economy is getting better. Great month in the market, $100 a week more in spouses check, $$$ Refund on the way. Using the extra income to buy a car and have hired a part timer to do some of the grunt work so I can spend even more time with the kids ! Now back to saltmines with all of you!!!!!
[ edited by tomyou on Jul 8, 2003 01:07 PM ]
posted on July 8, 2003 03:16:33 PM new
When did Thurmond repent? When he was 99!!
What difference would it make anyway.
You are a bunch of hypocritical leftist.
You'll never see the truth in front of you. You'll use a quote by anyone that seems to represent your way of thinking. Without checking said statement out or checking the background of who said what.
Morons, lonely little people without a life of their own. sad people. People that should be pitied. Pick the one that make you feel the best.
posted on July 8, 2003 03:19:51 PM new
Spoken like a true neo fascist. Do real republicans exsist anymore. Seems like most of them have turned too fascism
