Slashdot Mirror
White House E-mail Scandal Widens
Spamicles alerts us to a report just issued (PDF) by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. At least 88 White House officials used Republican National Committee email accounts for government business. The RNC has destroyed at least some of the emails from 51 of those officials. Law requires emails sent by officials to be stored or recorded. There is evidence that White House lawyers and the (current) Attorney General knew of this but did not act to stop it. From the article: "These e-mail accounts were used by White House officials for official purposes, such as communicating with federal agencies about federal appointments and policies... Given the heavy reliance by White House officials on RNC e-mail accounts, the high rank of the White House officials involved, and the large quantity of missing e-mails, the potential violation of the Presidential Records Act may be extensive."
For a moment\ and are just way oveRr
So the USA is a large country in almost every way you can measure it. Lots of land, lots of people, etc
So I have an honest question for those of you that live in geographically-smaller countries: "Do all regions of your country generally have the same values?"
In the United States, we have this interesting area known as the "South." While most of the Northeast, Mid-West, and Coastal Western States are left-leaning, the South (and the south-west and non-coastal west) has a right-leaning attitude. And lots of people live in these states. And I'm not trying to make a political statement here, but generally speaking, the south has lower salaries, a lower-skilled and less-educated populace, more children per household, more religious tendancies, and a host of other features you could probably guess.
Pretty much, its because of the SOUTH that the current administration was re-elected. Oh, that and the democratic ticket in the last election, John Kerry, wasn't exactly the most likable guy you've ever met.
So thats why we have Bush. Now, impeachment is a huge deal and probably not gonna happen. However, save impeachment, we HAVE DEMANDED A CHANGE IN GOVERNMENT. The last American elections in November, the Democrats won both chambers in Congress. So we've done pretty much everything we can do in the last 2 years besides impeaching the president and nuking the South.
The last time we had such a corrupt president (8 years ago), his approval ratings were something like 127%.
Considering that the current corrupt president's approval ratings are only 20-something percent, we must be getting better.
The democrats are not willing to do anything to correct this, because they know they need the same kind of violations when their president sits in white house in 2009.
Its like the two sides of a coin: One side can't claim the other is bad without falling apart.
So expecting democrats to censure or impeach Bush will simply not happen even if there is a second Boston tea party (which will be broken up violently after being classified as terror threat).
The Democrats are afraid to even present bills for the same, since if they get passed their own president will not have the ability to violate like Bush did.
Since democrats have betrayed our trust by failing to pull out our troops, we should respond by electing a Republican president once again.
Democrats are so smug that their candidate will win. It is time we showed them it is not possible.
Yes i agree it is like cutting off the hand to prevent an infected wound from killing me, but still it will send a lesson to democrats and republicans that cheating electorate will not produce results.
If Ron Paul wins the election am sure he will be a much intelligent, world-wise president than the single digit IQ, Toxic Texan we have as president now.
"Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
Clinton's staff DELETED ALL of their e-mail, and not a peep was made out of it. This was in response to an investigation about using the white house for fundraising.
This is my sig.
They do hate America.
America is a nation based on historical European culture, a capitalist meritocracy, a revolution in private ownership that seeks to spread that revolution to the rest of the world because the people that founded it, inherited and run it today think that results of that revolution are better.
Liberals condemn European culture, deplore capitalism, prefer a stabler society to the dynamism of individual accomplishment, think it is morally wrong to seek to advance one's values, and disagree that any culture can better than another and hate those that feel that way. If that's not hating America, then what is?
Liberalism USED to be all of the above, and it is endlessly ironic that George W Bush has picked up the liberal torch where Wilson and FDR left off. FDR had no problem saying that American democracy was BETTER than Nazism or Japanese militarism, and there is no problem in saying that American democracy is better than an islamic society.
Money is freedom, and liberals don't believe in money and certainly not the individual right to have it. If you did believe in private ownership, then, why have the GPL? Who is really more free, the guy who wrote the first Wizard at Microsoft and retired off of his stock, or Richard Stallman or any of the other open source people, who are hamstrung by the constant need to beg for money and form a consensus. I'll give you a hint. You aren't free when you have to enslave yourselves to a committee.
So, yeah, Bush screwed up the war in Iraq, and the gay marriage amendment was bullshit. But, his tax cuts and consistent deregulation were an excellent thing to do that no genuine liberal would be in favor of. Go ahead, put Hitlery in the White House, if you can, and cheer as she takes money from other people to do the things you want to do, because you can't do them for yourselves. At the end of the day, liberals aren't about freedom, because, to do what they want, they have to enslave the whole of the nation in taxes and political correctness.
This is my sig.
If we let kittens walk our streets with their heads still attached, surely the terrorists have won.
Anyway, think of the children! Do you really want your children to be exposed to kitty porn and pussy on the street? Besides, those kittens have teeth, and they may be carrying rabies!
"It should be noted that the "real world human effects" of free trade, while hurtful to middle class Americans, were probably very positive for the citizens of the countries that now have our jobs."
And they're the ones he represents right?
"The "Don't As Don't Tell" policy was progressive for 1993."
Bullshit. It was a cowardly kludge and there was no lack of opinion stating so. You're apologist streak is showing.
"But he did give us..."
And congress had nothing to do with any of those right? RIGHT?
"I'd say top 10, easy"
Of course you would, you're an apologist. Why would we expect you to even attempt to develop an informed opinion?
People like you disgust me. Every time politics come up, you use the opportunity to lavish praise upon your guy, completely at odds with history and overlooking anything negative. Worse, in your case you attempt to twist a large, profound negative into a positive. Think about why you'd do that.