Patterico's Pontifications

1/12/2012

Ace Ripping Romney All Day Long

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 8:18 pm



Just go and scroll.

I’m torn on this. First, let me just clearly say this:

Perry would be better.

Perry would be better.

Perry would be way, way, WAY better.

Yeah, yeah, he’s inarticulate, he reminds people of Bush, blah blah blah. He has run a state well and he is conservative. He would be better than Mitt Romney.

OK. Now that that’s off my chest:

We probably are stuck with Romney. Now, I will not lie about the guy. I know someone who worked for him who says he has no core principles. At all. And this video, while it has some crap claims in it, is quite well done and reveals some real contradictions in Romney’s record:

As Ace says:

Some of these are bs (supporting a stimulus is not the same thing as supporting Obama’s failed stimulus; 95% of elected Republicans favored their own style of tax-cut-heavy stimulus; saying “TARP ought to be ended” is not the same as reversing himself on supporting it for the first two years), but others — on abortion, assault weapons, and Reagan — are troubling.

Indeed. The guy really doesn’t stand for much. And in terms of his electability, what has he won? Not much.

All that being said:

If he ends up being our guy, he beats Obama hands down. Maybe he has no principles. But (unlike Obama) he may end up responding to us. If we demand solid Justices, he may listen. If we demand fiscal responsibility, he may listen.

Obama won’t listen to us. He will listen to them.

And once he doesn’t care about getting re-elected, Lord knows what he’ll try to do.

So.

South Carolina? Vote for Perry. Please.

But if we can’t get him? Go to the polls in November and pull the lever for Romney.

833 Responses to “Ace Ripping Romney All Day Long”

  1. I think, no matter what, folks need to put this in what I call “Obama Perspective.” There is an awful lot of absolutism in this process, and it works against us in the general election.

    You say that you believe that “Romney has no principles.” That is an absolute statement.

    I prefer this: “Romney has more principles than Obama.”

    So does Perry. Santorum. Even Gingrich. Heck, Glenn Reynold’s syphilitic camel does.

    But you need to keep that in the front of your mind, to avoid Four Worse Years.

    Unless you don’t mind that prospect.

    Simon Jester (54d408)

  2. You say that you believe that “Romney has no principles.” That is an absolute statement.

    I don’t think I did.

    Read the post again, carefully.

    Patterico (d508e7)

  3. I don’t think we are saying anything very different, Simon.

    Patterico (d508e7)

  4. The important thing is that this election send a message about the wisdom of electing phony flash-in-the-pan juvenile job-hating dirty socialist marketing gimmicks like Obama.

    Whether it’s another Obama or a Palin or whatever the next piece of fluff is named, they need to know that this story doesn’t end well.

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  5. I know some folks who worked at Bain (a couple still are) and on the 2002 Winter Olympics, Patterico. They had radically different experiences from your acquaintances. Perhaps we could compare notes?

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  6. I certainly have been hearing an awful lot of absolutist statements about Romney, Patterico. You were reporting what you heard, to be sure. But this whole flawed process is about narrative and appearance now. It should not be, but it is.

    I can think of a long, long list of people I like better than Romney.

    But all this absolutist stuff is going to give us another four years. I know you see that, Patterico.

    Simon Jester (54d408)

  7. Colonel, that is the issue: narrative. It’s all about reducing a candidate to a bumper sticker or tweet. It’s dangerous.

    In the final analysis, for good or for ill, it’s up to the candidate to present him or herself properly.

    Unless it is Obama. He gets a pass, and a special deal with the press and punditry. Keep that in mind, folks.

    Simon Jester (54d408)

  8. the key to electing romney is to not oversell him I think

    he shouldn’t try to represent anything more than base competence

    when he tries to hit reagany notes he’s not fooling anyone and he looks like a plucky overgrown cub scout

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  9. I think criticizing Romney………..is racist against whites.

    /Sarcasm off

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  10. Ace is in his whiny butt hurt blogger mode right now. Sometimes that produces good stuff, sometimes it doesn’t.

    Thanks for the Democrat video.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  11. Racial profiling is wrong……………except when Eric Holder is the one who commits it.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  12. McCain was more electable.

    JD (318f81)

  13. I wonder what if Eric Holder starts profiling white people as terrorists……….is that racial profiling?

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  14. Mr. Feet, wouldn’t you be ecstatic with “base competence” from the fellow in the Oval Office now?

    Except the press agrees that he is one of the four best Presidents in history. Gulp.

    Anyway, I agree with you. The focus needs to be not on Paragon of Conservative Virtue. It needs to be on Better Than The Current Incompetent and Dangerous Guy.

    Call it damned by faint praise if you like. I’ll take four years of that faint praise in heartbeat.

    Simon Jester (54d408)

  15. And while we are on the subject of comparing candidates…

    So, the Post says:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-wont-romney-show-his-money-trail/2012/01/11/gIQAcSZ5qP_story.html

    And I am thinking: why won’t the President release his transcripts? Or his medical records? Or…

    But of course, that’s different. It always is, when it comes to BHO.

    Simon Jester (54d408)

  16. ancingczars.wordpress.com/2012/01/12/obama-has-decided-not-to-bestow-the-purple-heart-upon-the-wounded-and-the-fallen-at-the-ft-hood-massacre/

    narciso (87e966)

  17. I would rather they focus on what I meantioned earlier, rather than ephemera, which is what we have been focusing on;

    http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/01/12/u-s-israel-split-assassinations-iran-scientists/

    narciso (87e966)

  18. I am *really* trying to see the upside here.

    If we’re stuck with Romney, then I urge conservatives to make a conscious effort to refocus on congressional candidates. In primaries especially. Learn about any challengers in a district near you and actually volunteer and donate and help get push the GOP to the right.

    Romney is, at least, better than Obama in some fundamental ways. I am very worried about his electability, but then, what the hell do I know? I thought Perry would rock the primary, for God’s sake.

    Dustin (cb3719)

  19. Having nothing else to do before going to bed, I was flipping channels and ran across Rachel Maddow’s show.

    Her lead story was about Romney putting his dog in a carrier on the roof of his car for a trip.

    I have two dogs. I love my dogs. I would never do what Mitt did.

    Nonetheless, I have to say to myself: Self, that’s all they’ve got?

    Then myself says: What could be worse than four more years of Obama?

    And myself says: Being subjected to four more years of the topsy-turvy world of leftist ineptitude.

    My only conclusion is to vote for Romney’s confused dog or the next best thing. As long as it’s not Obama.

    Ag80 (ccff59)

  20. And I am thinking: why won’t the President release his transcripts? Or his medical records? Or…

    But of course, that’s different. It always is, when it comes to BHO.

    Comment by Simon Jeste

    That’s the thing. Obama should release his transcripts and any relevant records. The people do have a moral reason to know more about their presidential candidates because of the extreme trust.

    And those who worried about how little we know about Obama are likely to hope the GOP candidate impresses them with full disclosure.

    Sadly, this is a huge problem for Newt I’m guessing, given his reaction to Pelosi’s little hint. Apparently it’s a problem for Romney.

    So we’re screwed.

    Dustin (cb3719)

  21. A car is speeding towards a cliff at 100 mph. One party looks on and says that car can go much faster, and if you just give us your money and votes, we can make that car fly. One party says they would slow the car down to 75 mph, by tinkering around the edges, and slowing down the rate of acceleration. Pardon me for not being comforted by that.

    Put on the brakes.

    JD (318f81)

  22. you can’t get “base competence” after you do “cash for clunkers” where you pay people to destroy their cars

    four out of five dentists agree

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  23. oh. two car comments in a row.

    that’s probably not an optimal distribution of car comments

    my bad

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  24. I agree with Pat.

    I’d rather have Perry than Romney, but Romney is better than Obama (I hope!).

    Dave Surls (46b08c)

  25. __________________________________________

    I know someone who worked for him who says he has no core principles.

    That sounds really bad, although such a definition of Romney isn’t clear enough for me. However, I’m guessing — and am very worried that — “no core” means Romney is full of liberal biases. I’d be very surprised if he instead had innate sentiments that were truly, strongly of the right.

    Left-leaning emotions tend to stomp and crunch on the common sense of most people (eg, I still think that’s the main force behind generally right-leaning folks being soft-hearted about same-sex marriage). There may be a few instances — in particular, at the purely local level — when conservative preferences will make people nonsensical or short-sighted, but certainly in the context of the Western world (and not in societies like Egypt), that’s very much the exception to the rule.

    A Romney presidency will need its ears punched on a continuous basis in order to keep it, and its leader, from getting teary-eyed on too many occasions and being a variation of Arnold Schwarzenegger or Rudolph Giuliani.

    As for the notion of Barry Obama remaining in the Oval Office after 2012? Two words (from Barack’s good buddy): “Goddamn America!”

    Mark (411533)

  26. Jehova Witnesses don’t vote. I wonder if they are accepting applicants?

    sickofrinos (44de53)

  27. LOL @ sickofrinos

    Dustin (cb3719)

  28. “And in terms of his electability, what has he won? Not much.”

    Heh, past votes and dead people only count for Democrats.

    I don’t understand this talking point. How does electability get measured? Job approval in a conservative state? Running as a conservative in a conservative state? Elections from a decade ago? Current polling?

    It seems like there’s a rush to blame Romney or some mysterious establishment for the failure of some more perceived conservative candidate to emerge from the pack of Republican contenders. That’s pure BS. Romney has nothing to do with the failure of other candidate capture more than the temporary attention of the voting public. People like Ace and Eric Erickson should be focused on promoting the candidates of their choice rather than ripping another Republican down if they feel so strongly about it. The inability or incompetence of the other candidates or campaigns to sustain leads or attention and fight off negative campaigning that will certainly come later from Democrats speaks volumes about the strength of the field, as does the amount of sour grapes and whining.

    The stoopid party is certainly earning its name this year.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  29. “I know someone who worked for him who says he has no core principles.”

    Interesting, I’ve never met a Mormon with no core principles.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  30. Perry is flat as a pancake at 5% in SC for weeks.

    Yes, I could live with him, but the fact is the Right isn’t going to unify.

    If low 40th percentile isn’t enough we’re going to have to think outside-the-box.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  31. I can’t wait for all these people that are calling others stupid, and blaming hypothetical Obama wins on others to stomp their feet and DEMAND that everyone else cast aside their principles and fall in line behind an unprincipled candidate. Because of the purity.

    JD (318f81)

  32. Mormons don’t practice polygamy anymore………leftards.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  33. For the first time … ever … Romney sounded pretty good after winning NH the other night.

    Steven W. (22e6c8)

  34. Support the candidate you believe in. Or don’t. Vote for whoever wins the nomination. Or don’t. Line up behind the candidate. Or don’t.

    Just stop the sumb*tchin whining.

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  35. National Soros Radio which had a category five twister aneurysm over abu ghraib, suddenly discovers context when American soldiers piss on dead muslims, and blames that gosh-durned new-fangled internet

    Desecration of enemy corpses during war is something that goes back at least as far as The Iliad. But with modern social media, the crime can burst into the public consciousness, around the globe, within hours.

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  36. “I can’t wait for all these people that are calling others stupid, and blaming hypothetical Obama wins on others to stomp their feet and DEMAND that everyone else cast aside their principles and fall in line behind an unprincipled candidate.”

    JD – I can’t wait for all these people blaming Romney for the crappy performance of other candidates realize their anger is misdirected. I think I’ll have a longer wait.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  37. Yes, everyone that doesn’t agree with you is a whiner. Thank you for making my point so very clear Colonel.

    JD (318f81)

  38. Where have I blamed Romney for other people’s crappy performance, Daley? It is quite possible to not like Romney independent of that, no?

    JD (318f81)

  39. re: post 30. A lot of these people get their exposure to what they think are Mormons by watching re-runs of Big Love on HBO, daley. Don’t rock the boat.

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  40. I think I’ll have a longer wait.

    Really? Haiku and others do so routinely. A variant was used in the first comment of this thread, suggesting that some may want 4 worse years.

    JD (318f81)

  41. Bill Paxton is very America I think

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  42. I will go back to not commenting for a while longer. This crap is tiresome.

    JD (318f81)

  43. maybe when Romney is president he won’t be a cowardly unprincipled whore

    Here’s hoping!

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  44. Honestly, some of these purists are like… lemme see… ever seen the Zappa movie 200 Motels? Those “Plaster Caster” groupie characters Flo n’ Eddie play (in drag) who give the musicians at the door the once over and then sniff – nose in the air… and declare, “8 inches or less”.

    Some folks just don’t pass their test. But Newt and Rickie do. Tiger Beat!

    G’night all.

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  45. Sorry you are upset with me, JD. But the fact is, there have been been people posting on this very site who said that very thing in 2008, and now again. I didn’t make that, or those people, up.

    Their hatred of a given candidate not being sufficiently acceptable to them is apparently greater than their disagreement with the current occupant of the Oval Office…and the need to get this current gang out of the White House.

    I have been misrepresented and called names repeatedly when I have made these points. I am the one who shouldn’t be commenting on this blog, not you.

    Simon Jester (54d408)

  46. You tell ’em, Simon. Good on ya.

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  47. I know someone who worked for him who says he has no core principles.

    He made that glaringly obvious when he said, during this campaign (?!?!), that the individual health care mandate was conservative.

    I don’t know what could possibly be less conservative forcing people into the collective and onto the long march toward socialized medicine.

    And he went on to further lower the collective IQ of the country by declaring that the individual health care mandate was an exercise in personal responsibility.

    No. Personal responsibility involves paying for your own health care. It is the furthest thing from personal responsibility for the government to force the citizenry into a wealth transfer scheme (who could forget a slurring Max Baucus gloating on the Senate floor that ObamaCare was nothing more than an exercise in wealth redistribution; that is, who can forget that hadn’t been indulging in the same liquid lunch along with Baucus) so that the young and healthy have to subsidized the health care of others who expect to get these services for free.

    Not only doesn’t Mitt Romney have no core principles, I don’t believe he has any concept of what a core principle is.

    Which is a good thing.

    He’s a political chameleon. It strikes me that he’d be a gumby toy in the hands of whoever is manipulating him at the moment. In Taxachussets that would have been liberal democrats. So he was a liberal democrat. Surround him with conservatives, and I’m sure he’ll blend right in.

    Better a squish than a committed leftists. Say what you want about RINOs, but their one redeeming quality is that they can be pushed around.

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  48. Obama is a SCOAMF.

    Mittens will not be mush better, which is, at best very cold comfort.

    Questions for the locals: does anyone see Ear Leader *not* being a landslide here in California for re-election, regardless of what happens in the other fifty six states?

    redc1c4 (403dff)

  49. “mush” is either a typo, or a wry joke by my sub-conscious… take your pick. 8)

    redc1c4 (403dff)

  50. i think our hispanic friends are pretty sick of all things obama

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  51. Comment by redc1c4 — 1/12/2012 @ 10:50 pm

    Questions for the locals: does anyone see Ear Leader *not* being a landslide here in California for re-election, regardless of what happens in the other fifty six states?

    There are only 51 places that cast Electoral votes. 50 states and the District of Columbia.

    There are 57 delegations at the Democratic Convention, but they don’t participate in the general election.

    The others are:

    52. Puerto Rico

    53. Virgin Islands

    54. Guam

    55. American Samoa

    56. Northern Marianas

    57. Democrats Abroad. The Republicans don’t have a category like this, so they only have 56.

    District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands Islands, Guam, American Samoa and Northern Marianas were the state quarters for 2009. There were six that year, not five. Congress authorized it in 2007. The legislation was signed on December 26, 2007 by President Bush.

    They are not seen too much, because starting in he fall of 2008 a lot fewer quarters were minted, for two reasons: The recession caused less spending, and with that a smaller demand for small change, and people were using debit and credit cards more and more.

    Sammy Finkelman (9a6ee5)

  52. Comment by Steve — 1/12/2012 @ 10:39 pm

    Mitt Romney have no core principles, I don’t believe he has any concept of what a core principle is.

    Which is a good thing.

    He’s a political chameleon. It strikes me that he’d be a gumby toy in the hands of whoever is manipulating him at the moment. In Taxachussets that would have been liberal democrats. So he was a liberal democrat. Surround him with conservatives, and I’m sure he’ll blend right in.

    That would assume he has no brain. He may have some real thoughts, it is just that he’s keeping them to himself.

    And he won’t necessarily be surrounded by conservatives, or worried about losing their support. He won’t need them again. Incumbent presidents rarely have difficulty winning re-nomination and even then only if they also would have some trouble in the general election.

    RINOs…one redeeming quality is that they can be pushed around.

    It’s different for members of Congress.

    Presidents only worry about the general election.

    Sammy Finkelman (9a6ee5)

  53. “Where have I blamed Romney for other people’s crappy performance, Daley?”

    JD – I did not accuse you of anything. You have not been part of the negativity chorus here.

    My big question is why aren’t these obviously superior candidates doing better?

    A typical answer is Romney conspiracy, establishment conspiracy or the unspoken alternative of the voters are dumb and do not recognize the obvious superiority of the other candidates. Never considered is the possibility that the people voting or likely to vote do not share the opinions voiced here or other places on the internet, that would just be crazy talk.

    Pick your poison.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  54. It’s Rick Perry who may be a gumby toy.

    Sammy Finkelman (9a6ee5)

  55. “Perry would be better.”

    A BMW Alpina would be better than my current ride, but it’s just not happening right now.

    I’m over it.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  56. That would assume he has no brain. He may have some real thoughts, it is just that he’s keeping them to himself.

    I may have been overbroad in the conclusions I’ve drawn about Romney, Sammy.

    I doubt it. But I may have.

    I strongly suspect that if Romney has real thoughts all his own that he decided he’d better keep to himself, there was a certain amount of cost-benefit analysis that went into the calculation.

    Is that an unreasonable thing for me to surmise?

    Those of us who remain unkilled by the Lemming-like charges over the cliffs can debate these things, I suppose.

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  57. More homework, less emotion. Perry;

    * Lied to our faces about his support for TARP.

    * Called Tom Tancredo a racist for supporting the enforcement of our own immigration laws.

    * Publicly ridiculed Gov. Jan Brewer for SB1070 in trying to protect her state from being overrun by illegal aliens.

    * Signed a totally unsupervised DREAM Act in Texas and having the audacity of a dope to call Americans ‘heartless’!

    * Pushed his plan to build a US-Mexican Highway on stolen eminent domain land!

    Rick Perry not a true conservative by Tancredo http://politi.co/pv9OnW

    The Phony Right-Wing, Part 5: James Richard ‘Rick’ Perry http://bit.ly/qRJo3B

    Rick Perry’s dangerous Muslim compromise: http://bit.ly/qGCjjR

    Rick Perry AGREES with Obama: Open Borders for America http://bit.ly/qfmWli

    Winghunter (aae941)

  58. Romney RINOs: Herbert Hoover Was a Successful Businessman and Manager,Too http://bit.ly/ADayHV

    Willard Romney “My views are Progressive” http://bit.ly/rZL1pE

    Mitt Rewrites The History of RomneyCare http://bit.ly/uqehL6

    “Mitt Romney will make McCain look like a conservative five minutes after getting the nomination…” http://bit.ly/yxuuD6

    Romney’s Bad Advice http://bit.ly/zl7wa8

    Romney believes sexual perversion is not just for the bedroom anymore http://bit.ly/uUui4G

    Willard: “that’s not going to make me the hero of the NRA. I don’t line up w/ a lot of special interest groups” http://bit.ly/z55SiU

    Romney signs off on permanent assault weapons ban http://www.iberkshires.com/story.php?story_id=14812

    Ann Coulter Could Not Be More Wrong http://bit.ly/sZLdqB

    We will pay the price for giving Romney a free pass http://legalinsurrection.com/2011/12/we-will-pay-the-price-for-giving-romney-a-free-pass/

    Romney’s electability is overblown http://legalinsurrection.com/2011/12/romneys-electability-is-overblown/

    The Romney Scorecard: RINO http://bit.ly/706p7k

    Romney’s Record on Appointing Leftwing Lunatic Judges http://bit.ly/sOdOuF

    Romneycare faces financial meltdown http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=379485

    [note: fished from spam filter. –Stashiu]

    Winghunter (aae941)

  59. 1. I don’t know about this.

    2. Tancredo probably is a racist, though I don’t remember Perry calling him one.

    3. He did no such thing. He said he didn’t think such a bill was wanted in Texas.

    4. What does this act do? Give people green cards?! Obviously not. So it’s not a DREAM act. If you’re referring to not charging Texas residents the out-of-state surcharge for their education, why on earth should they pay it? And he did not call Americans heartless, he correctly called heartless people heartless. You’re probably one of them.

    5. “Stolen”?! If it’s taken by eminent domain, then how is it stolen?

    6. What exactly is “conservative” about closing borders and preventing peaceful people from moving to better themselves? That’s a cruel, heartless, and anti-capitalist policy. If there’s one thing conservatives must be about it’s free trade, and that means goods, services, and people. Border controls are unfortunately necessary because we live in a dangerous world, but anyone who celebrates them is not a friend of liberty.

    7. “The Bilderbergers, Trilateralists, and Council on Foreign Relations, along with many other organizations are the groups implementing the New World Order.” Oookay. Now we know where you’re coming from. Get the f*** out of the conservative movement and go back to the swamp you climbed out of. If Perry is the kind of person you’re against, then he’s good enough for me.

    8. So he’s friends with the Aga Khan. What on earth is wrong with this? Unless, of course, you’re a f***ing Xian bigot.

    9. No factual information in this link. Pure invective.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  60. Murky won on a write-in campaign, there’s still hope for Amerikkka in a five-way. The Blue Staters have all the other candidates to fight over, Dead Meat, Romany, Paul and America Elect.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  61. Simon:

    why won’t the President release his transcripts?

    Dustin:

    Obama should release his transcripts

    This comes up a lot, even though Obama has released everything that has typically been released by other presidents.

    Some people seem to think that presidents routinely release their college transcripts, but that’s not the case. No prior president or candidate has shown us college transcripts or test scores. Transcripts for Bush, Gore and Perry were leaked, not released voluntarily. And Kerry released his, but only after he was no longer a candidate.

    Regarding GWB, see here: “they [GWB’s transcripts] were leaked to the press—and the Bush campaign complained.”

    It would be great if you could show me where I can find the hidden transcripts for Reagan and Bush I. Extra credit if you can show a single example of anyone (at the time) demanding that they release their transcripts.

    Also, I’m sure this group that is obsessed with transcripts is going to require Romney to release his tax returns. It is not routine for candidates to release transcripts, but it is routine for candidates to release tax returns.

    Hopefully someone can explain why this “transcripts” thing keeps coming up even though it’s bogus.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  62. You really want to rely on him, Colonel, who was it who made the electability argument over principle again,

    http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2011/07/14/candidate-romney-is-trouble-for-private-equity/

    narciso (87e966)

  63. Leftist claims Obama is the smartest President EVAH.

    The Right says there is no evidence of same. Maybe his grades from Columbia and Harvqrd would prove that for you.

    Leftist goes on mini rant about how nobody else released transcripts and calls people racist for even asking.

    JD (318f81)

  64. He’s the juiceboxhero, got Barcky’s junk in his eyes.

    JD (318f81)

  65. Cocktailers got their man now they complain about eating the dog food?

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    ODB (dcf97e)

  66. Haiku:

    http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2012/01/12/the-bain-bomb-fizzles/

    Here we go again. Notice what he says:

    Romney left Bain in 1999 and had no operational role thereafter. … DDI didn’t file for bankruptcy until two years after its IPO, and two years after Bain had already sold all of its shares.

    Just like McCarthy (link), Primack is choosing to not notice that Mitt is taking credit for job gains that took place long after he was no longer involved. Heads I win, tails you lose.

    =============
    JD:

    Leftist claims Obama is the smartest President EVAH. The Right says there is no evidence of same.

    “In traditional academic terms, Obama did better in school than any president in the last 40 years.”

    You must think that Jim Lindgren, Orin Kerr, Bradford Berenson and Michael McConnell are all leftists. Link, link.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  67. Hugh Hewitt: “All right, Mr. Ambassador, you surprised a lot of people yesterday with your endorsement of former Massachusetts Governor, Mitt Romney, to be the next president. Can you tell us why you did that?”

    John Bolton: “Well, I tried to follow the William F. Buckley, Jr. test in what I think is the most important presidential election in, perhaps in a century, and that is because of the importance of defeating Barack Obama and making sure he doesn’t get another four years to take our country in the wrong direction. And the Buckley test is you want to elect the most conservative candidate who can actually get elected. And that is the calculus, both in terms of the scale of conservatism and a scale of electability. And my judgment was that Mitt Romney had demonstrated on issues that are key to me, particularly national security, that he’s just as conservative as most of the other Republican candidates. I exclude Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman. And I think that he can get elected. I think he’s got the kind of approach that will succeed in November. And so when I put that together, I’m enthusiastically in support of it. Does it mean that he’s as conservative as I am on every issue? No, but then, neither is Newt Gingrich or Rick Perry or some of the other candidates. So you know, everybody’s got his own judgment. Mine is that combination of conservatism and electability that matches best for the time we need is Mitt Romney.”

    http://www.hughhewitt.com/blog/g/57b6ae15-6103-488b-9bc6-7a76eaf0b365

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  68. “In traditional academic terms, Obama did better in school than any president in the last 40 years.”

    Proof, please. I don’t think you realize you just proved my point.

    JD (318f81)

  69. Do you really not know who made that statement? It’s in quote marks because it wasn’t me.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  70. So now statements are facts? You are a clown. Where is the evidence for said statement?

    JD (318f81)

  71. Juiceboxscum said true free marketeers tear down the system while being rewarded handsomely from said system.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  72. So now statements are facts? You are a clown.

    So now namecalling is an argument?

    Where is the evidence for said statement?

    The person who made the statement explained the basis for the statement. I see you need to be spoon-fed. Please explain what you know that he doesn’t. Likewise for the other people I cited: Orin Kerr, Bradford Berenson and Michael McConnell. Like I said, you must think they’re leftists.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  73. Obama is smart but Palin is dumb.

    You have no room to complain about namecalling.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  74. Where did I say Palin is dumb?

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  75. Obama illustrates on a continuous basis, his ignorance of economics,(profit/earnings) history, (even in his own state)geography, (57 states) law, that’s not arguable,

    narciso (87e966)

  76. People making statements is not evidence of him being a brilliant academic. Your OTB link offers nothing to prove that either, it offers a squishy political analysis of why it shouldn’t be raised as an issue.

    JD (318f81)

  77. I’ve seen him on Joyner’s Palin bashing threads, almost always bereft of facts

    narciso (87e966)

  78. Hey, narciso… you sure you want to go with that Bain advised the Obama Administration meme?

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/288038/withdrawn-cnbc-report-bain-advised-obama-administration-auto-company-bailout-has-been-

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  79. 77. Joyner, Hewitt, Coulter, Rubin, Sununu, Rove, J. Bush, Hinderaker, Allah, Morrissey, Krauthammer,…

    No, no that tent isn’t for me, sorry.

    gary gulrud (1de2db)

  80. Blue states will have their hands full choosing among Ogabe, Romany, Nor Luap and America Elect(Bloomberg?).

    Time for a Red State write-in campaign. We can settle on a name later.

    gary gulrud (1de2db)

  81. Sammy Finkelman, please report to Lost & Found: we have recovered your clue.

    ask the SCOAMF about the “fifty seven states” thing… you know, the smartest man to ever be in the Oval Office?

    redc1c4 (403dff)

  82. narciso:

    57 states

    Snopes:

    He was trying to express the thought that in all the time he had spent on the campaign trail so far in 2007-08, he had visited all (48) of the states in the continental U.S. save for one (i.e., “one left to go,” excluding Alaska and Hawaii), but in his weariness he slipped up and started off with “fifty” instead of “forty.” (Note the long pause in the video clip between the words “fifty” and “seven.”)

    By the way, do you really think Obama doesn’t know how many states there are? Just curious. Because I’ve run into a bunch of conservatives who don’t believe that anyone could possibly think that.

    I’ve seen him on Joyner’s Palin bashing threads, almost always bereft of facts

    The one who is “bereft of facts” is you. What I have pointed out there is her track record as a proven liar (link, link). If you can show where my facts are wrong, that would be helpful. I’ll be waiting patiently.

    And I’m still waiting for Dohbiden to back up his claim that I said Palin is dumb. Lots of people around here like to make lots of things up.

    =============
    JD:

    People making statements is not evidence of him being a brilliant academic.

    I cited multiple prominent and knowledgable Rs talking about how smart he is, and how they know. You still haven’t told us why they’re wrong. All you’re doing is demonstrating how committed you are to ignoring all inconvenient facts.

    Your OTB link offers nothing to prove that either, it offers a squishy political analysis of why it shouldn’t be raised as an issue.

    My link cites their statements, and you’ve offered nothing to indicate why their statements should be ignored.

    You said this:

    Leftist claims Obama is the smartest President EVAH. The Right says there is no evidence of same.

    I cited knowledgable people on “The Right” who say “there is … evidence of same.” Still waiting for you to explain why anyone should think that you’re right and they’re wrong.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  83. “Perry would be way, way, WAY better.”

    Today he again forgot which 3 departments to eliminate.

    fscott (a009b2)

  84. “All you’re doing is demonstrating how committed you are to ignoring all inconvenient facts.”

    jukeboxgrad – Please provide a list of facts you have presented on this thread. It should not take long.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  85. Making a statement then linking to someone else making a statement is proof, Daley.

    Kerry and Gore were smarter than Bush.

    JD (392f2d)

  86. jukebox,

    It is a joke to note how Obama stutters and generally sounds like a moron when he’s off the teleprompter, with many gaffes such as the 57 states one.

    If you read his writing, such as his poetry, he comes across as an idiot, too.

    The man had no experience justifying his candidacy, was not an effective Senator, and so a cult of personality had to build him up in other ways.

    Your claim Obama did better in school than any president in 40 years, without offering any grades, kinda marks you as a ridiculous fanboy.

    And anyway, on performance and speech, it’s clear enough that George W Bush was probably significantly more intelligent.

    Dustin (cb3719)

  87. And snopes is not a reliable source.

    Dustin (cb3719)

  88. “Making a statement then linking to someone else making a statement is proof, Daley.”

    JD – My bad.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  89. Hey, if Heather Higginbotham succeeds Jake Lew at OMB we’ll have yet another member of the Democrat Socialists of America at the highest ranks of the Obama Administration.

    How is that for Suh-weetness?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  90. Wasn’t Lew yet another evil WallStreeter 1%er?

    JD (392f2d)

  91. If he ends up being our guy, he beats Obama hands down.

    Patrick, it encourages me that you say this, as I’m skeptical regarding anyone’s chances against obama, other than perhaps Ryan or Christie, both of whom as everyone knows are not in the race. I’m surprised that no one here has asked you about your prediction, which I certainly hope will come to fruition. Nevertheless, I remain convinced that obama is going to be reelected in a walk. Am I too pessimistic? What is driving you to the conclusion you cite, which I take assumes there is no third party candidate? thanks, chuck

    dhmosquito (644bd0)

  92. JD – A perfesser and union buster.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  93. “Nevertheless, I remain convinced that obama is going to be reelected in a walk. Am I too pessimistic?”

    dhmosquito – Possibly. I suggest you keep an eye on private sector job creation stats over the next few months. I think upticks will signal improvements in business confidence that Obama will be defeated and that the gimmicky short-term tax breaks he has sponsored and other uncertainty inducing regulations he created will be ended with a GOP takeover of the Senate and White House.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  94. I’ve been for Perry all along, recognizing his screwups. But if Perry doesn’t place (3d, that is) in SC, then I need to recognize I’ve backed another Fred!, and move on, probably to Mitt.

    Mitch (341ca0)

  95. Leftist claims Obama is the smartest President EVAH. The Right says there is no evidence of same.

    “In traditional academic terms, Obama did better in school than any president in the last 40 years.”

    You must think that Jim Lindgren, Orin Kerr, Bradford Berenson and Michael McConnell are all leftists. Link, link.
    Comment by jukeboxgrad — 1/13/2012 @ 6:45 am

    Both links are to the same story. I see you made a bunch of posts and that quote appears in your comments.

    From Googling, I can’t find any original source where Orin Kerr says “In traditional academic terms, Obama did better in school than any president in the last 40 years.” or the rest of the quote you attributed to him in the comments. It does come up in a number of websites, but only in the comments where YOU posted it. In fact he couldn’t possibly know such a thing. As far as I can see you made it up unless you can provide the original source.

    Likewise, the quote you attribute to Lindgren in your comments,

    Barack Obama is smart enough and writes well enough to be a tenured law professor at any law school in the country.

    seems not to have any original source. It comes up in several websites, but when I look at the website, it’s always YOU who posts the quote.

    The McConnell quote was (apparently) attributed to him by Douglas Baird a U. of Chicago professor. There’s no record of him ever saying that publicly. The claim that Baird said that has as its source an article in The New York Times by Janny Scott. Well at least you didn’t make it up.

    The Berenson quote does appear to be genuine as far as I can tell.

    Gerald A (9d78e8)

  96. “Your claim Obama did better in school than any president in 40 years, without offering any grades, kinda marks you as a ridiculous fanboy.”

    I followed the link to find out he was magna cum laude at HLS. I had not heard that before, but then again I’m not so resistant to the idea that a guy who got himself from HLS to Chicago Law and got to write his book and teach for a bit would be sharp and evaluated as such by the people who gave him those opportunities.

    fscott (a009b2)

  97. I followed the link to find out he was magna cum laude at HLS.

    That’s part of the apparently fictitious Lindgren quote he made up. No one has any way to know he was Magna Cum Laude.

    Gerald A (9d78e8)

  98. “It comes up in several websites, but when I look at the website, it’s always YOU who posts the quote.”

    Gerald A – Heh. That is a beautiful thing. jukeboxgrad’s own quotes are the source of his “facts.”

    Can anybody say twatwaffle?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  99. Gerald – well stated. You showed the troll is just making shlt up, and how willing fscott is to be lead around by the nose. I just assumed it.

    JD (392f2d)

  100. “Gerald A – Heh. That is a beautiful thing. jukeboxgrad’s own quotes are the source of his “facts.””

    The McConnell praise of Obama is not new.

    http://www.wattscookinblog.com/2011/01/deseret-news-feature-story-michael-mcconnell/

    Not getting why people are so resistant to accept that Obama just might be a sharp guy. 57 states? Really?

    fscott (a009b2)

  101. Hear hear.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  102. dayleyrocks: “… and that the gimmicky short-term tax breaks he has sponsored and other uncertainty inducing regulations he created will be ended with a GOP takeover of the Senate and White House.”

    Damn, if that happened I’d be drunk for a week. Only thing better would be for that to happen and SCOTUS fully supporting Judge Vinson’s opinion on obamacare (i.e., “unseparability” of the individual mandate). You guys are really starting to give me some confidence! thanks.

    dhmosquito (644bd0)

  103. anyone who has had the misfortune of listening to the SCOAMF talk off teleprompter has all the evidence needed that his brain is untrained and that therefore he wasn’t much of a scholar, at best.

    regurgitated platitudes and all the “um, ah, well, um, ah…” ad infinitum ad nauseam are the signs of a mediocre mind, passed along by social promotion and the soft racism of lowered expectations.

    having read all of the First Klingon’s college paper i could stand, she is no shining example of advanced education either, given that her command of the english language seems limited to leading it on suicide charges against strawmen.

    so, unless and until someone can produce transcripts, etc, or even classmates who remember either of these allegedly educated cyphers, i call bull on their proclaimed intellectual credentials.

    redc1c4 (403dff)

  104. Ah yes being unable to klll your baby via abortion because it embarrasses you is bringing back America into the Dark Ages………………………..screw you leftys and Flip Flopney.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  105. Comment by fscott — 1/13/2012 @ 10:11 am

    The McConnell quote at your link,

    “He was an unusually good editor,” McConnell recalls. “He entered into the project in a way that I think helped me to make it a better article from the point of view of what I wanted it to be. He had some very intelligent organizational suggestions and was just very impressive.”

    is not the one that jukeboxgrad is touting. Is that supposed to indicate he’s one of the most brilliant minds ever in the White House? REALLY?

    Gerald A (9d78e8)

  106. “….or even classmates who remember either of these allegedly educated cyphers, i call bull on their proclaimed intellectual credentials….”

    Yeah, that is weird, isn’t it? You would think people would be all over this, for National Enquirer money (“I dated Barack Obama in College…”).

    Maybe he was too busy studying and striking his professors with awe.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  107. You are all just bitter clingers, scared of people that don’t look like you.

    JD (392f2d)

  108. I’m sure he had straight A’s at Occidental.

    JD (392f2d)

  109. Well, some professors liked him as a “B” student:

    http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/08/obamas-oxy-professor-reports-he-still-didnt-agree-about-that-grade.html

    Notice the President was still irritable about not getting that “A” grade.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  110. Comment by jukeboxgrad — 1/13/2012 @ 6:12 am

    but it is routine for candidates to release tax returns.

    Bill Clinton did. Of course he only went back to 1984, so nobody in 1992 knew about Cattlegate.

    But they did find out about WhiteWater. The New York Times noticed something peculiar.

    http://www.nytimes.com/books/98/06/07/reviews/mcdougal-whitewater.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=Clinton%20tax%20returns%201984&st=cse

    March 8, 1992

    THE 1992 CAMPAIGN: Personal Finances; Clintons Joined S.& L. Operator In an Ozark Real-Estate Venture

    By JEFF GERTH

    …The complicated relationship between Mr. McDougal and the Clintons came to light in an investigation by The New York Times of the Clintons’ tax records and business relationships.

    It raises questions of whether a governor should be involved in a business deal with the owner of a business regulated by the state and whether, having done so, the governor’s wife through her law firm should be receiving legal fees for work done for the business.

    Confusion Is Cited

    Asked about these matters, the Clintons retained two lawyers to answer questions. The lawyers said the improper tax deductions were honest errors, made because there was confusion over who really owned a certain piece of Whitewater property and who was responsible for the loan taken out to buy it, Whitewater or the Clintons.

    The deed for the land and the loan papers are all in the Clintons’ names.

    The lawyers said they were not in a position to answer questions about where the money that went into Whitewater came from. But generally, they said they thought neither the Clintons nor Mr. McDougal had profited from the venture. They also said the Clintons were once liable for about $100,000 in bank loans that financed Whitewater’s original purchase of land. But the lawyers have only been able to find original documents showing $5,000 that the Clintons paid.

    Some questions about the relationship and the Clintons’ role in it may be difficult to resolve because of differing accounts and the missing records.

    This was never resiolved. Everybody pointed at everybody else to explain how the records vanished.

    Sammy Finkelman (d3daeb)

  111. Whoops, JD. We cross posted.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  112. “there was confusion over who really owned a certain piece of Whitewater property and who was responsible for the loan taken out to buy it, Whitewater or the Clintons.

    The deed for the land and the loan papers are all in the Clintons’ names.”

    Sammy – I hate it when things are all confusing like that.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  113. Actually, the only thing we really know about Obama’s grades is from Obama’s own memoirs.

    Amid the fake jive talk, he explains he was a very poor student at Columbia when he was on the road to being a junkie, snorting smack and whatever else, and then found himself at Harvard anyway.

    He says himself he was not a good student. He conceals his grades. Then his fanboy says he’s some kind of remarkable genius.

    Yeah, that’s BS.

    I can’t say I’m all that impressed by grades, and I’m even less impressed by a man who is still so lame, well into a term of his presidency, that his accolades are crap like ‘he won a prize from liberals’ or ‘he probably got good grades’.

    That is pathetic.

    I may not like Mitt very much, but he sure as hell doesn’t need to run on his GPA at this point in his life.

    Dustin (cb3719)

  114. And yet it didn’t matter, they did a wonderful round of stalling, ‘look squirrel’ misdirection,
    and outright demonization,

    Primack as I’ve pointed out, is as trustworthy as Krugman,

    narciso (87e966)

  115. It’s always the coverup that tells the tale, Dustin. Like Dennis Miller says about the guy: it’s not the color of his skin, but its thinness, that concerns him.

    He should be laughing off old grades. Instead of letting himself be fluffed by the MSM.

    My guess is that his wife had better grades, and she just might say so given the right circumstances.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  116. “Is that supposed to indicate he’s one of the most brilliant minds ever in the White House? REALLY?”

    No. Just that he’s a pretty sharp guy and impressive to a conservative legal scholar. The Lindgren quote about “40 years” is on the Volokh blog. It’s linked from jukeboxgrad’s comments on the other blog. The ones that are accused of being his “own quotes.” Lindgren also talks about Obama graduating magna cum laude.

    fscott (a009b2)

  117. Just because Daleyrocks is outraged and pissed at Palin doesn’t mean she did anything wrong.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  118. Obama is not smart you POS.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  119. Why, fscott, why wouldn’t the President release those records, then?

    I mean, he doesn’t strike me as the most humble of people, and the MSM would LOVE to trumpet his Latin honors.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  120. The Lindgren quote about “40 years” is on the Volokh blog.

    It’s on the Volokh blog in the comments section, where jukeboxgrad posted it. If that’s not what you’re talking about, give me a link.

    Gerald A (9d78e8)

  121. Also, no, he didn’t graduate from Columbia with Latin Honors.

    http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_were_Barack_Obama's_grades_in_college

    He did from law school at Harvard (upper 10% of students). I haven’t been to law school, so I don’t know how they set up grades.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  122. Fscott – if he is such a great editor, he should have applied at Time, or Media Matterz

    JD (392f2d)

  123. “fscott”

    JD (392f2d)

  124. He did from law school at Harvard (upper 10% of students). I haven’t been to law school, so I don’t know how they set up grades.

    Comment by Simon Jester

    Is it clear that Magna at HLS means upper 10%?

    Also, we would need to see what classes he took. Some law schools have a lot of seminars ‘Law and Education’ ‘Law and Basketweaving’ ‘Alinki and the Law’ that are easy As and break whatever class rank system should be there.

    If Obama was taking Admiralty, Corporations, Wills and Estates, Bankruptcy, advanced procedure, etc, and graduated above median at Harvard, that’s impressive. The fact is, Obama doesn’t have that kind of drive. He couldn’t even hold hearings when he had a subcommittee.

    It’s always the coverup that tells the tale, Dustin. Like Dennis Miller says about the guy: it’s not the color of his skin, but its thinness, that concerns him.

    He should be laughing off old grades. Instead of letting himself be fluffed by the MSM.

    Good point. Exactly.

    Dustin (cb3719)

  125. “It’s on the Volokh blog in the comments section, where jukeboxgrad posted it. ”

    The post says it is by Lindgren, on a thread started by Lindgren. I think you’re confused because jukebox links to one comment section, and then in that comment section, there’s a link to the volokh blog. Follow that link to see Lindgren making the claim. Twice. Including qualifying it by saying that Obama is possibly bested by Clinton.

    fscott (a009b2)

  126. Oh, Obama is the greatest genius of our times… except for Clinton?

    Well, Rick Perry had a negative 6.0. If genius = Obama level performance, it’s time to head in the exact opposite direction.

    Anyway, Lingren saw Obama’s transcripts? That’s very newsworthy.

    Dustin (cb3719)

  127. If Lindgren thinks he is smart well that is just case closed.

    JD (392f2d)

  128. The post says it is by Lindgren, on a thread started by Lindgren.

    I already asked you for a link. I’m still waiting.

    Gerald A (9d78e8)

  129. Notice how juiceboxhero bolted when Gerald called out his dishonesty? And how we now have “fscott” around peddling a defense of sophistry with more sophistry?

    JD (392f2d)

  130. Yeah I think fscott and jukeboxgrad may have the same IP address.

    Gerald A (9d78e8)

  131. No, Lindgren thinks they have the greatest IP addresses of the last 40 years. Not because he saw them, but shut up.

    Dustin (cb3719)

  132. (btw, I don’t think they are the same person)

    Dustin (cb3719)

  133. More like a Dum and Dummerer routine

    JD (392f2d)

  134. “I already asked you for a link. I’m still waiting.”

    It’s from jukebox’s comment:

    http://volokh.com/posts/1216449447.shtml

    Did you even try to look for it? You did follow Jukebox’s links to outsidethebeltway.com in this thread, right? There I got the link to the volokh.com thread. Did you not see links there?

    fscott (a009b2)

  135. The new Newt attack ad is funny towards the end. It shows a clip of Mitt Romney saying “je m’appelle Mitt Romney” in his French speech to the Olympic committee, and notes that he speaks French “just like John Kerry.” The Kerry clip shows him saying “Laissez les bon temps roulez,” which is the unofficial slogan of New Orleans. I guess Newt is safe in assuming that most primary voters don’t speak french, but the two clips viewed by themselves don’t prove that either candidate speaks the language.

    I’d like to see a Republican ad saying attacking a Democratic candidate who speaks Spanish “just like Ted Kennedy Fidel Castro.”

    carlitos (49ef9f)

  136. Anyone recognize the mendoucheous condescending tone?

    JD (392f2d)

  137. Carlitos – doesn’t Newt speak French too?

    JD (392f2d)

  138. That Volokh link was to an open thread, where this seems to be the only relevant comment:

    With or without the LSAT, it seems pretty clear that he’s one of the smartest presidential candidates in modern history. The energy devoted to trying to chip away at this reality is a vivid indication that his opponents have very little to work with.
    7.22.2008 9:33am
    (link) jukeboxgrad

    carlitos (49ef9f)

  139. “where this seems to be the only relevant comment:”

    It’s kind of sad how step by step this has to be. Try using ctrl-f to find the “40 years” quote.

    fscott (2debc8)

  140. doesn’t Newt speak French too?

    I’m not sure. It looks like his Spanish-language Twitter account “http://twitter.com/GingrichEspanol” went away since the last campaign. Maybe he remembered when he said that Spanish was the “language of the ghetto” some years back.

    carlitos (49ef9f)

  141. It’s kind of sad how step by step this has to be impossible it is to see who says what in the comments at Volokh.

    But yes, it appears that someone named Lindgren said that in the comments linked.

    carlitos (49ef9f)

  142. He did understand it enough for his thesis, 40 years ago,

    narciso (87e966)

  143. Comment by fscott — 1/13/2012 @ 11:43 am

    At the link Lindgren does say

    This emphasizes just how extraordinary Obama’s graduating magna cum laude at Harvard is. In traditional academic terms, Obama did better in school than any president in the last 40 years.

    On the other hand the claim he’s non-liberal is based solely that he’s got some connection to Volokh’s blog. I can’t tell really tell what his politics are.

    Gerald A (9d78e8)

  144. Maybe he remembered when he said that Spanish was the “language of the ghetto” some years back.

    Comment by carlitos

    WTF?

    WTF?

    What the F?

    God damn this primary. I am so sick of these losers.

    Dustin (cb3719)

  145. But yes, it appears that someone named Lindgren said that in the comments linked.

    Comment by carlitos — 1/13/2012 @ 12:13 pm

    Yes that format is a little weird, but even assuming it is Lindgren, it’s a leap to say what his politics must be. He’s a law professor. Volokh is a legal blog.

    Gerald A (9d78e8)

  146. 140. “It’s kind of sad how step by step this has to be”

    Painful, in fact. It isn’t just the average IQ, its being they’re being raised by Game Boy.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  147. A lot of people have noted Obama was a terrible student. Obama would have certainly released a transcript by now to counter that claim… if it didn’t show how terrible he was.

    Those saying this isn’t true have never offered evidence.

    This is a great excuse to drag out my favorite poem.

    UNDERGROUND

    Under water grottos, caverns
    Filled with apes
    That eat figs.
    Stepping on the figs
    That the apes
    Eat, they crunch.
    The apes howl, bare
    Their fangs, dance,
    Tumble in the
    Rushing water,
    Musty, wet pelts
    Glistening in the blue.

    Tell me, is the author of this poem one of the greatest presidents of the last 40 years, or an idiot?

    Dustin (cb3719)

  148. “On the other hand the claim he’s non-liberal is based solely that he’s got some connection to Volokh’s blog. I can’t tell really tell what his politics are.”

    Given how long it took you to follow two links, I can tell it will take a while for you to figure that out. But nobody is really waiting.

    fscott (c19f7f)

  149. Given how long it took you to follow two links, I can tell it will take a while for you to figure that out. But nobody is really waiting.

    Comment by fscott —

    We’re discussing a provable factual matter. Where Obama’s grades high or not?

    There is only one way to intelligently say, and Obama hides that way (his transcripts).

    Appeals to authority in such cases are stupid. You don’t ask a philosopher if it’s raining… you just look out your window.

    That you would base this on the authority of someone who doesn’t even have any in this matter is even funnier.

    Dustin (cb3719)

  150. Newt said that four year ago, in one of his ‘Delta’ moments,

    narciso (87e966)

  151. I see Lindgren writes for NRO sometimes. He’s not liberal I assume.

    All Lindgren said basically was Obama graduated with honors at Harvard Law. He also made a comment about how high Obama’s grades were, which he would have no way of knowing unless he assumed that he couldn’t have earned honors without a certain GPA, which must be what he did. In the Volokh thread, he compared Obama’s grades to Clinton’s.

    Gerald A (9d78e8)

  152. Anyone recognize fscott yet?

    JD (392f2d)

  153. After you get your first job out of college, grades are pretty moot, in my opinion. I’ve never asked someone about their college grades in an interview, unless they were just graduating.

    carlitos (49ef9f)

  154. “Why, fscott, why wouldn’t the President release those records, then?”

    You can be the most open and transparent administration in the history of the world, or you can be modest and humble.

    Obviously, the New Messiah is going for modest and humble.

    😉

    Dave Surls (46b08c)

  155. What’s the original source of the 10%?

    Yeah, I agree grades are pretty unimportant after a certain number of years. People don’t really talk anymore about how smart Obama is, do they? Wasn’t that kind of talk from the President Elect Barack Obama era?

    MayBee (081489)

  156. Well you wouldn’t have had to worry about interviewing Big Zero, as he’s never held a job in the private sector, Carlitos.

    He’s a public teat man.

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  157. Wasn’t that kind of talk from the President Elect Barack Obama era?

    It really is pathetic that anyone would cite Obama’s GPA after he’s most of the way through a term as US President. It speaks to his lack of accomplishments.

    I mean, they can’t just cite Obamacare, can they? We hate it. They can’t cite economic recovery or world peace… we’ve headed in the wrong direction on those.

    So I think you will be hearing a lot of these same silly entry level arguments that Obama needed in 2008. He’s a nice guy. He promises a lot of stuff. He is really charming. Super smart. They liked his book.

    It speaks volumes. Just not what they think it says.

    Dustin (cb3719)

  158. There is no original source, MayBee. It is a fable that became accepted wisdom.

    JD (318f81)

  159. Obama isn’t even intelligent enough to see that he’s his own worst enemy. And that’s saying something, because in that respect, he’s just another “face in the crowd”.

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  160. Anyway, George H.W. Bush graduated Phi Beta Kappa from Yale in just 2-1/2 years. So I’d have to say in traditional academic terms, Bush did better in school than any president in the last 40 years. Certainly better than Obama.

    Gerald A (9d78e8)

  161. Don’t forget the dulcet tones of his melodic baritone while reading from TOTUS, Dustin.

    JD (318f81)

  162. 150. I saw an argument based on the late 80’s honors criteria, the fact Jughead wasn’t a National Merit mention, which assigned him an IQ of perhaps 125.

    Intelligent for a POTUS but a couple dozen in every hundred are as smart.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  163. That makes you a racist denier, Gerald.

    JD (318f81)

  164. Anyway, George H.W. Bush graduated Phi Beta Kappa from Yale in just 2-1/2 years.

    DAMN.

    That is very impressive. I bet he wasn’t writing his memoirs upon graduation, either.

    Interestingly, his son was not at the same level academically but was a better leader in many respects.

    Dustin (cb3719)

  165. “Tell me, is the author of this poem one of the greatest presidents of the last 40 years, or an idiot?”

    Wow! Who knew that the Great Black Dope was such an accomplished wordsmith? No wonder they say he’s a master of the English language.

    If you’re not moved to tears by the majesty and grandeur of El Jefe’s description of wet, musty apes, you simply have no soul!

    Dave Surls (46b08c)

  166. If you’re not moved to tears

    I bet his poetry teacher was… in a manner of speaking.

    Dustin (cb3719)

  167. Interestingly, his son was not at the same level academically but was a better leader in many respects.

    Comment by Dustin — 1/13/2012 @ 12:54 pm

    Other than a physical resemblance they don’t seem that similar.

    Gerald A (9d78e8)

  168. “Well you wouldn’t have had to worry about interviewing Big Zero, as he’s never held a job in the private sector, Carlitos. ”

    He met his wife while at Sidley Austin. He was an associate at Miner Barnhill & Galland for four years.

    fscott (c19f7f)

  169. Fscott hearts domestic terrorists, drug smugglers, and people that file numerous frivolous lawsuits to harass people.

    JD (318f81)

  170. I don’t see why people have to obsess over President O’Blameless’s grades when he is obviously One Of The Four Greatest Presidents EVAR, in his own opinion.

    Frad Briedman (bf33e9)

  171. Ear Leader is an immodest man, with no accomplishments to be modest about.

    his only accomplishment so far is to make Jimmuh Karter look almost competent.

    JEFH, otoh, is a SCOAMF.

    redc1c4 (403dff)

  172. Ace is off his meds again.

    Beldar (1d6209)

  173. Ewok doesn’t get his Valurite, goes on a bender.

    narciso (87e966)

  174. Dustin:

    Your claim Obama did better in school than any president in 40 years

    I didn’t make that claim. Someone else made that claim. Do you know who?

    without offering any grades

    The person who made that claim indeed based it on grades. Obama graduated HLS magna cum laude, which is based on grades, which are blind. If you had bothered to read the linked material, you would already know this.

    on performance and speech, it’s clear enough that George W Bush was probably significantly more intelligent

    Several hundred Bushisms can be found here. If Obama had a mouth even remotely like GWB’s, you guys wouldn’t have to beat that tired old “57 states” horse to death over and over again. You would have new material to work with on a daily basis.

    And when you do desperately beat that horse, you bring to mind this obvious comparison, which demonstrates the opposite of what you’re trying to demonstrate.

    It’s also a good idea to keep this in mind:

    “You can make any public figure sound like a boob, if you record everything he says and set hundreds of hostile observers to combing the transcripts for disfluencies, malapropisms, word formation errors and examples of non-standard pronunciation or usage… Which of us could stand up to a similar level of linguistic scrutiny?”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bushism

    Everyone produces mistakes like that. Just some more than others.

    snopes is not a reliable source.

    They provided a logical explanation for what happened. If you can explain why their explanation is wrong, that would be helpful. What are you waiting for? There’s no time like the present.

    Actually, the only thing we really know about Obama’s grades is from Obama’s own memoirs.

    Actually, that’s complete bullshit, because his magna cum laude is based on grades.

    Is it clear that Magna at HLS means upper 10%?

    According to Kerr, 15%.

    Also, we would need to see what classes he took. Some law schools have a lot of seminars ‘Law and Education’ ‘Law and Basketweaving’ ‘Alinki and the Law’ that are easy As and break whatever class rank system should be there.

    You obviously don’t know anything about HLS, and you’re also choosing to ignore the statements I cited from people who don’t have that problem.

    Anyway, Lingren saw Obama’s transcripts?

    No. He just knows what HLS magna means. Obviously you do not.

    I can’t say I’m all that impressed by grades

    If grades don’t mean anything to you, why did you say he needs to release his transcript?

    It really is pathetic that anyone would cite Obama’s GPA after he’s most of the way through a term as US President.

    You’re amazing. This all started with you saying this: “Obama should release his transcripts.” And now that I’ve demonstrated that there’s no need to do that, because we effectively know his HLS grades, you’re saying it’s “pathetic” to talk about his grades. Really? So why did you ask? Because you’re pathetic?

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  175. Gerald:

    Both links are to the same story.

    Wrong. They are to two different comments in the same thread.

    I can’t find any original source where Orin Kerr says “In traditional academic terms, Obama did better in school than any president in the last 40 years.”

    That’s because he didn’t say that. Someone else said that. Kerr made a different comment praising Obama’s academic performance. You need to read more carefully.

    As far as I can see you made it up unless you can provide the original source.

    I did provide links to the original sources, via the links in my original comment (66). Like I said, you need to read more carefully. But since you seem unable to do so, I’ll spoon-feed you.

    Link:

    This emphasizes just how extraordinary Obama’s graduating magna cum laude at Harvard is. In traditional academic terms, Obama did better in school than any president in the last 40 years.

    Link:

    If you don’t know how Obama performed academically, then you’re not paying much attention.

    At Harvard Law School in the 1990s, magna cum laude was awarded to students with grades above a specific cutoff: a 5.8 on Harvard’s 8 point scale, or basically an A-. Approximately 15% of the class had grades that high, and it was considered an extremely significant accomplishment among students to graduate magna: In a class of academic gunners, who were stars enough to get into Harvard, students who graduated magna cum laude were in the top 15% of the class.

    Barack Obama went to Harvard Law, and in addition to being elected President of the Law Review, which must have been extremely time-consuming, he also graduated magna cum laude. So we know he was somewhere in the top 15% percent of Harvard Law students just based on his grades.

    Still want to claim I “made it up?”

    And there is more of this if you follow the links I provided in my original comment (66).

    Likewise, the quote you attribute to Lindgren in your comments … seems not to have any original source.

    Your reading comprehension sucks.

    Link:

    Barack Obama is smart enough and writes well enough to be a tenured law professor at any law school in the country.

    All these links were already available to you if you followed the links I provided my original comment (66).

    That’s part of the apparently fictitious Lindgren quote he made up.

    I didn’t make up any quotes. You can apologize anytime.

    No one has any way to know he was Magna Cum Laude.

    The Harvard Crimson: “The presidential hopeful graduated magna cum laude from the Law School.”

    Do I also have to show you that Fox News reported the same fact?

    It’s on the Volokh blog in the comments section, where jukeboxgrad posted it.

    The links I provided are to comments in the VC comments section that were posted by Lindgren and Kerr, not by me. One more time:

    http://volokh.com/posts/1232395994.shtml#519388
    http://volokh.com/posts/1217470913.shtml#408078

    Are you stupid, a liar, or both?

    On the other hand the claim he’s non-liberal is based solely that he’s got some connection to Volokh’s blog. I can’t tell really tell what his politics are.

    You seem wholly incapable of figuring out anything on your own. A good start would be to notice how often he has been cited by Glenn Reynolds (link). That might help you “tell what his politics are.”

    Next up, I suppose I’ll need to tell you who Glenn Reynolds is.

    it’s a leap to say what his politics must be. He’s a law professor. Volokh is a legal blog.

    It’s not just “a legal blog.” It’s a highly conservative legal blog. Duh.

    He also made a comment about how high Obama’s grades were, which he would have no way of knowing unless he assumed that he couldn’t have earned honors without a certain GPA, which must be what he did.

    You’re finally starting to catch on. It certainly took you long enough.

    And it’s not about something that was “assumed.” It’s about understanding that HLS magna has a specific meaning, and what it means is the achievement of high grades. In a system that uses blind grading.

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  176. carlitos:

    That Volokh link was to an open thread, where this seems to be the only relevant comment

    Click here: http://volokh.com/posts/1216449447.shtml

    Find the comment with this stamp: 7.21.2008 9:13pm.

    That comment is Jim Lindgren saying (in part) this:

    In traditional academic terms, Obama did better in school than any president in the last 40 years. And he writes extremely well, better than most of us Volokh Conspirators.

    You can also go directly to that comment by using this link:

    http://volokh.com/posts/1216449447.shtml#402826

    And if you use this link:

    http://volokh.com/posts/1217470913.shtml#408078

    You will find Lindgren saying this:

    Barack Obama is smart enough and writes well enough to be a tenured law professor at any law school in the country. I wish I wrote as well.

    Same person. Different day, different thread, different comment. In both cases, high praise for Obama’s intelligence from a knowledgable Republican legal scholar who is highly anti-Obama. And Lindgren is just one of several people I cited, along these lines.

    It’s truly mindblowing that you folks have no idea how to follow simple links. Or (as fscott said) how to use a simple Find command to search for relevant text on a page.

    Or maybe it’s just that you’re deeply allergic to any and all inconvenient facts.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  177. fscott:

    I’m not so resistant to the idea that a guy who got himself from HLS to Chicago Law and got to write his book and teach for a bit would be sharp and evaluated as such by the people who gave him those opportunities.

    FWIW, the people I cited are not “the people who gave him those opportunities.” And HLS uses a system of blind grading, so his grades were not based on someone knowing who he was and how he was given “opportunities.”

    ==========
    redc1c4:

    so, unless and until someone can produce transcripts, etc, or even classmates who remember either of these allegedly educated cyphers, i call bull on their proclaimed intellectual credentials.

    His magna cum laude is based on grades. Tell us why you still need a transcript.

    And I already cited a classmate, Bradford Berenson. You’re doing a great job of demonstrating that you aren’t paying attention.

    ==========
    Simon:

    Why, fscott, why wouldn’t the President release those records, then?

    Here’s one reason: because his magna cum laude already establishes his grades. Here’s another reason: because no other candidate or president ever did so, and it would be silly for him to be the first.

    ==========
    JD:

    If Lindgren thinks he is smart well that is just case closed.

    If you think it’s possible for a non-smart person to reach the top 15% at HLS, under a system of blind grading, then you’re just telling us how little you know about HLS. And the wonderful thing is not just how ignorant you are, but how you are also determined to ignore a bunch of Republicans I cited who definitely aren’t ignorant.

    Notice how juiceboxhero bolted when Gerald called out his dishonesty?

    Do you never take a break? How peculiar.

    And how we now have “fscott” around peddling a defense of sophistry with more sophistry?

    What would I possibly gain by posting under a different name?

    ==========
    Haiku:

    he’s never held a job in the private sector

    Are you talking about Obama? Teaching at the University of Chicago is definitely “a job in the private sector.” Likewise for authoring books. And this is aside from the law firms that fscott mentioned.

    ==========
    MayBee:

    What’s the original source of the 10%?

    Orin Kerr said 15%. I cited that statement.

    ==========
    JD:

    There is no original source, MayBee. It is a fable that became accepted wisdom.

    I’d love you see you head over to VC and tell Kerr that the statement he made is “a fable.” And you must know, because you know so much about HLS. What year did you graduate?

    ==========
    gary:

    I saw an argument based on the late 80′s honors criteria, the fact Jughead wasn’t a National Merit mention, which assigned him an IQ of perhaps 125.

    “Saw” where? Written on the wall at the bus station? Citation, please.

    ==========
    daleyrocks:

    Please provide a list of facts you have presented on this thread.

    Do you know how to read? I guess not.

    Here’s one fact: Hewitt made a prediction about how Mitt would handle this problem, and the prediction turned out to be quite wrong. Let me know if I need to explain to you why this matters.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  178. ^ LOL

    Dustin (cb3719)

  179. I guess that’s your way of letting us know that you’re too much of a coward to take responsibility for all the things you said that were wrong.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  180. JD:

    Chuck – trying to talk to this serial troll is pointless.

    For some strange reason you nevertheless posted several comments addressing me. I guess you like doing things that are pointless.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  181. Sorry, wrong thread.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  182. Perry’s dead in the water. Newt is the only not Romney. He’s not good enough, I know. But he’s better than Romney

    SarahW (b0e533)

  183. “Please provide a list of facts you have presented on this thread.

    Do you know how to read? I guess not.”

    JBG – I did not see any, that’s why I asked you to point them out. You seem to have a problem differentiating opinion from fact, but so do most people of your ilk.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  184. I did not see

    You could have stopped right there. What you choose to not see is your problem, not mine.

    You seem to have a problem differentiating opinion from fact

    You seem to have a problem with making unsubstantiated accusations. To support your accusation, you have presented an impressive number of examples: zero.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  185. “What you choose to not see is your problem, not mine.

    To support your accusation, you have presented an impressive number of examples: zero.”

    JBG – Right, to support your claim to have presented facts, you can list zero. I’ve got it.

    Thanks for playing.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  186. to support your claim to have presented facts, you can list zero

    I addressed this silly challenge of yours at the bottom of #178. Maybe you didn’t notice.

    Thanks for playing.

    I guess this is your way of admitting that you’re not going to show a single example of me doing what you accused me of doing: not “differentiating opinion from fact.”

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  187. no honest person believes that Ear Leader wrote those books. the most likely suspect is Bill Ayers.

    as for him supposedly being “magna cum laude”, anyone can claim anything. the way it w*rks in the real world is that you produce certified transcripts and they are reviewed.

    so,(and i’ll type this slowly so you have a chance to get it this time) until someone produces a certified transcript, there is no proof that the SCOAMF even graduated from any school let alone with honors.

    while we’re at it: i want to see his records from when he was in school in Indonesia too.

    HTH.

    redc1c4, proud AoS moron (403dff)

  188. So can anyone ‘splain why Romany’s great ambition is to lose to the worst POTUS in Amerikkkan history, con artiste and fellow Hahvahd Law grad?

    Thomas Dewey, make way.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  189. Every body has his dream Gary, the idea that Obama would not take to this, like a duck to water, sheer
    lunacy;

    http://blogs.ajc.com/jamie-dupree-washington-insider/2012/01/13/obama-jumps-on-romney/

    narciso (87e966)

  190. until someone produces a certified transcript, there is no proof that the SCOAMF even graduated from any school let alone with honors.

    Yes, the Harvard Crimson (#176) is obviously part of the grand conspiracy to falsify his magna cum laude. And even though Bradford Berenson was in class with him and personally attested to his performance, Berenson is also part of that grand conspiracy.

    By the way, do you realize that there’s no actual proof that Obama was ever actually even born? The Afterbirthers are onto him, though:

    “All we are asking is that the president produce a sample of his fetal membranes and vessels—preferably along with a photo of the crowning and delivery—and this will all be over,” said former presidential candidate and Afterbirthers spokesman Alan Keyes, later adding that his organization would be willing to settle for a half-liter of maternal cord plasma. “To this day, the American people have not seen a cervical mucus plug, let alone one that has been signed and notarized by a state-certified Hawaiian health official. If the president was indeed born in the manner in which he claims, then where is his gestation sac?” Keyes said that if Obama did not soon produce at least a bloody bedsheet from his conception, Afterbirthers would push forward with efforts to exhume the president’s deceased mother and inspect the corpse’s pelvic bone and birth canal.

    Anyway, thanks for giving us a wonderful illustration of Poe’s Law.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  191. When Kerry’s grades were released, it turned they were slightly lower than W’s, Obama absorbed much
    of the anti knowledge of Derrick Bell, hence in the famous Jodi Kantor story, it showed him teaching Alinsky power relationships, not actual
    legal casework,

    The highlighted section;

    As part of its July 2010 audit report, SIGTARP interviewed individuals with whom the Treasury Auto Team consulted. As stated in the report, the Auto Team noted that its conversations with the individuals were “off-the-record” and “not documented.”

    One of these individuals identified himself to SIGTARP as being with Bain Consulting, which was how SIGTARP referenced the company in the report.

    It appears that the gentleman is a representative of Bain & Company, Inc., the consulting firm.

    The identification of Bain Consulting in SIGTARP’s audit report was imprecise.

    narciso (87e966)

  192. Business Insider has the better link, but it’s all tied to the TARP IG, Barovsky (sic)

    narciso (87e966)

  193. 191. Great, Rush characterized the climbdown as repudiation.

    Another circling of the wagons, with the highwayman hiding in the plowgirls skirts.

    ‘Half his brain tied behind his back.’

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  194. This is another performance artiste. I did not suggest you were fscott, numbskull, in fact, I suggested you were not.

    JD (392f2d)

  195. narciso:

    hence in the famous Jodi Kantor story, it showed him teaching Alinsky power relationships, not actual legal casework

    Are you high? “The famous Jodi Kantor story” doesn’t mention Alinsky. Likewise for a quite detailed followup article here (“Inside Professor Obama’s Classroom”). And University of Chicago Law School is the last place where anyone could get away with “teaching Alinsky power relationships, not actual legal casework.”

    It’s a hoot to hear pronouncements about HLS and University of Chicago Law School from a bunch of clowns who obviously know less than nothing about either place.

    ==============
    JD:

    I did not suggest you were fscott

    Then it must have been an entirely different JD who said this:

    Notice how juiceboxhero bolted when Gerald called out his dishonesty? And how we now have “fscott” around peddling a defense of sophistry with more sophistry?

    Oddly enough, Gerald responded to that other JD by saying this:

    Yeah I think fscott and jukeboxgrad may have the same IP address.

    He might be a bit confused by the various JDs contradicting each other.

    Also confused is Dustin, who felt a need to then say this:

    (btw, I don’t think they are the same person)

    I can’t imagine why Gerald and Justin both thought that someone named JD was suggesting that I was fscott.

    But I guess there’s a pretty simple explanation for all this. Someone named JD has a sockpuppet named JD, and JD and JD like to contradict each other.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  196. For the first 2011 CR Boehner promised us the $38 Billion were “real cuts”.

    In the end it was a $400 Million easing off the accelerator.

    Romany sycophants call easing off the full forward flight stick a clear improvement, “all we can get”, while installing a Senate majority for McConnell to work with.

    The debris field will photograph better and the forensic grid won’t be so dense.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  197. It’s such a damn gorgeous day here in central texas.

    Dustin (cb3719)

  198. Poor Debbie Poodleman Shultz(DNC)…

    http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/135303/

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  199. Interesting Hewitt piece with Rick Santorum…

    http://www.hughhewitt.com/blog/g/ee14a382-c8b4-48cb-9274-7661ca5c765a

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  200. Perry would be better.

    Perry would be better.

    Perry would be way, way, WAY better.

    “Social conservatives back Santorum at Texas meet…”

    That’s the way they do it in Texas… Bowie knife in the back.

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  201. You apparently quit reading, or ignored the comment right after Dustin’s, that you quoted, where I noted that I thought there were 2 voices, Dum and Dummerer.

    JD (392f2d)

  202. So, your simple explanation is that you are a dishonest douchenozzle, and a serial troll. Same act, every time, juiceboxhero.

    JD (392f2d)

  203. He’s very dense isn’t he, the first picture, is not about law, something akin to political philosophy,
    the syllabi specially in the Civil Rights course,
    focus on Derrick Bell, the Jeremiah Wright of legal
    theory,

    narciso (87e966)

  204. Yeah, JD clearly indicated he agreed with me.

    Pretty stupid thing for Juiceybox to whine about, though. Who gives a crap?

    Dustin (cb3719)

  205. Juiceboxgrad is the same obot that said Palin called Obama a sambo………….even though she did not.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  206. So, your simple explanation is that you are a dishonest douchenozzle, and a serial troll. Same act, every time, juiceboxhero.

    Peurile namecalling is a good way to announce to everyone that you have nothing with any remote resemblance to an actual argument.

    Still waiting for you to show up at VC so you can tell Kerr that what he stated is “a fable.”

    I noted that I thought there were 2 voices

    You thought there were two voices after you thought there was one voice. Like I said, you’re having a hard time making up your mind. JD needs to have a chat with JD.

    JD clearly indicated he agreed with me

    He agreed with you after he didn’t agree with you.

    Pretty stupid thing for Juiceybox to whine about, though.

    Except that I didn’t whine about anything. I just asked him why he thought I might have a reason to switch names. It’s a fair question.

    the first picture, is not about law

    Yes, the University of Chicago Law School is famous for presenting courses that are “not about law.”

    Juiceboxgrad is the same obot that said Palin called Obama a sambo

    Link? I never did any such thing. You’re a liar. You fit in well here.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  207. This coming from the same idiot who said Palin smeared Romney………….and then you proceed to smear Romney.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  208. Another lie. Where did I say “Palin smeared Romney?”

    and then you proceed to smear Romney.

    I’ll be waiting patiently while you go find a single false statement I made about Willard.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  209. Idiot as soon as you give me proof Romney is a vulture capitalist.

    You need to go back to Puffho.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  210. I never suggested one voice, liar. I noted that after you fled, fscott picked up where you left off. The fact that both are dissembling sophists was simply a coincidence.

    What year did you graduate HLS?

    JD (392f2d)

  211. He doesn’t even come up with the right example,

    http://blendedpurple.blogspot.com/2009/09/obama-and-business-international.html

    but that is a fairly short instance, in the big scheme of things, his only management experience
    was on the board of the CAC.

    narciso (87e966)

  212. proof Romney is a vulture capitalist

    A good place to start is here and here.

    Now it’s your turn to show proof for your claims. Where did I say “Palin smeared Romney?” Where did I say “Palin called Obama a sambo?”

    You need to go back to Puffho.

    I have never posted there.

    I never suggested one voice

    Naturally. The statements by Gerald (“yeah I think fscott and jukeboxgrad may have the same IP address”) and Dustin (“I don’t think they are the same person”) in response to you are a complete mystery.

    What year did you graduate HLS?

    None of your business.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  213. Where did you graduate HLS?

    None of your buisness but I wanna know where you graduated?

    Hypocritical fool.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  214. Where did you graduate HLS?

    Are you saying you don’t know where HLS is located?

    None of your buisness but I wanna know where you graduated?

    Huh? What? Next time try to construct an actual sentence.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  215. Good Allah. Are you being intentionally obtuse, or maybe I should type slower, or use flashcards?

    JD (392f2d)

  216. I wasn’t addressing you. Try to keep up.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  217. At least my political party doesn’t have grammar nazis who fail to practice what they preach.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  218. Who was 212 directed to?

    JD (392f2d)

  219. And anyway county exec Mangano needs to go…………..I don’t appreciate
    RINOS such as himself allowing teachers to keep their exuberant salaries.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  220. He was talking to me.

    Anyway the left are such purile hypocrites.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  221. At least my political party doesn’t have grammar nazis who fail to practice what they preach.

    It’s not that you used bad grammar. It’s that you were completely incoherent. I’m still waiting for you to explain what you were trying to say.

    Also, I do practice what I preach, because I generally avoid writing sentences that are completely incoherent, and I also don’t dodge the question when people ask me to explain what I meant. So, as usual, you’re completely full of shit.

    And I’m still waiting for you to show proof for your claims. Where did I say “Palin smeared Romney?” Where did I say “Palin called Obama a sambo?”

    Who was 212 directed to?

    212 was posted by JD, so I think JD should ask JD. Those two seem to be having some trouble communicating.

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  222. Naturally. The statements by Gerald (“yeah I think fscott and jukeboxgrad may have the same IP address”) and Dustin (“I don’t think they are the same person”) in response to you are a complete mystery.

    I was joking with Gerald about you, you humorless idiot. What about my comment suggested I was responding to JD? Why about this issue matters at all? Why do you pretend JD said the opposite of what he said, and why do you feel so concerned about something so stupid?

    Probably because Obama is a buffoon and you want to troll the conversation in another direction.

    Dustin (cb3719)

  223. They insist that privatizing Social Security……….will lead to not one person getting their checks.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  224. Juxeboxgrad is Charles Johnson.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  225. Leftys are damn crooks. They put profit and cronyism and gorebullshat warming before the country.

    Social Security is in the mess it is in now is because of fraud and government using the money for themselves.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  226. I was joking with Gerald about you

    You were responding to Gerald, who was responding to JD, who was implying that fscott was my sockpuppet. That’s exactly what JD was doing when he said this:

    Notice how juiceboxhero bolted when Gerald called out his dishonesty? And how we now have “fscott” around peddling a defense of sophistry with more sophistry?

    We know what Gerald thought that meant. What did you think it meant? Why do you think he used quote marks around only one of the three names he referenced?

    Why about this issue matters at all?

    It’s just another helpful example of how certain people like to make shit up, and then refuse to take responsibility for their falsehoods. Here’s a nice example of you doing that:

    the only thing we really know about Obama’s grades is from Obama’s own memoirs.

    That statement is false. When are you going to take responsibility for it?

    Juxeboxgrad is Charles Johnson.

    That makes perfect sense, especially when you consider that right around the time that Johnson was gaining fame for his role in the Killian memos controversy (link), I was arguing the other side (link, link).

    Congratulations on your excellent sleuthing.

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  227. This comes up a lot, even though Obama has released everything that has typically been released by other presidents.

    How about his medical report?

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  228. Link, link.

    Next time do your own googling.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  229. Your second link confirms that unlike McCain and unlike all recent presidents and presidential candidates Obama did not release his medical report in 2008. A one-page letter from his doctor is not at all the same thing.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  230. So much for transparency, than again does it serve any purpose, except for angles of attacks from the papers.

    On May 23, Mr. McCain, who has had extensive surgery for a malignant melanoma on his face, allowed a small number of reporters to sift through more than 1,100 pages of records from the Mayo Clinic for three hours. His doctors answered a limited number of questions in a teleconference in which they said his health was robust.

    narciso (87e966)

  231. unlike McCain and unlike all recent presidents and presidential candidates Obama did not release his medical report

    As narciso has helpfully pointed out, you have an odd concept of “release.” I’ll highlight some important words from the text he cited:

    allowed a small number of reporters to sift through more than 1,100 pages of records from the Mayo Clinic for three hours

    Yup, that’s quite a “release.” Do you need help with the math? That’s less than 10 seconds allowed to look at each page. Putting aside the problem of multiple reporters contending for what was probably one set of records. And as far as I know no doctors were allowed in the room, which is what the reporters would need to evaluate the information.

    A one-page letter from his doctor

    As the article pointed out, the letter is short because the man is healthy, and has been healthy. Unlike McCain who is old and sick. Duh.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  232. Hey, let’s try this: A heavy smoker under stress is rarely healthy.

    Response: But, but, Obama quit smoking.

    Whatever.

    Ag80 (ccff59)

  233. Obama quit smoking and tobacco, but probably not nicotine.

    Sammy Finkelman (9a6ee5)

  234. A heavy smoker under stress is rarely healthy.

    Smoking will eventually kill you, but I think it can often take many years for the serious effects to emerge. So him being a smoker is not inconsistent with him having a short health record.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  235. No, he obviously didn’t really think there were 57 states, but he did really think Austrian is a language, and he really didn’t know that the S in “corpsman” is silent, and he probably did think that Hawaii is in Asia. I don’t know what he was thinking when he put down 2008 as the date.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  236. McCain is not sick, and wasn’t in 2008. He was probably in better health than Obama. And yes, he’s older, but given their respective heredity the difference in age is not significant. Obama is a black man whose parents died at 46 and 54, one from cancer, and he’s a smoker. That makes him at least as suspect as a white non-smoker with one parent who lived to 70 and another who’s still going at 96, even with the cancer in his past.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  237. he did really think Austrian is a language

    Link.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  238. It would be silly to expect him to make the longer statement: ‘I don’t know what the term is in the Austrian dialect of German.’

    Yes, that would be silly. But what anybody who knew what they speak in Austria would have said was “I don’t know what the term is in German”, or even “I don’t know how you say it auf Deutsch” if he wanted to show off a bit.

    One would only say “I don’t know what the Austrian term is: if one were discussing a German term that’s used in some other German-speaking place. One might say “In Pennsylvania they call it ‘feilschen’, but I don’t know what the Austrian term is”. But one would not say this about an English term.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  239. People like Ace think it ridiculous that some suppose the WH Lawn Jockey is the antiChrist.

    The Debil incarnate ‘would be smart’.

    Rubes, ignorant, nihilistic incompetence is frosting on the cake, a loving goose right up the sigmoid.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  240. No, he obviously didn’t really think there were 57 states, but he did really think Austrian is a language, and he really didn’t know that the S in “corpsman” is silent, and he probably did think that Hawaii is in Asia. I don’t know what he was thinking when he put down 2008 as the date.

    Milhouse, Obama has talked about the “intercontinental railroad” at least twice. I have no idea which other continent he believes he can take the train and visit.

    I suppose anyone can make the occasional gaffe, but Obama is gaffe-tastic. And I’m talking about the idiocy he says on purpose in his prepared speeches (including one of those mentions of the intercontinental railroad that Lincoln built during the civil war).

    Take the howler Obama delivered in Cairo:

    As a student of history, I also know civilization’s debt to Islam. It was Islam – at places like Al-Azhar University – that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe’s Renaissance and Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed. Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation.

    Barack Obama managed to fit a lifetime of ignorance into just one brief paragraph.

    Here’s a list of things the “student of history” doesn’t know.

    Christian priests and monks in North Africa and the Middle East had preserved the “light of learning” for centuries (just as they did in monasteries in Europe) before the Muslims started invading their countries. Muslims had little to do with it; it was mostly the non-muslims who transliterated the works into Arabic from Greek, which the early Muslim conquerors had little interest in learning.

    The history of algebra dates back to the second millenia BC in Egypt. A lot of people developed algebra before the Muslims arrived on the scene to take credit for what they learned from Indians. The Muslims actually subtracted from the sum total of mathematical knowledge when they took the backward step of rejecting the negative numbers the Indians taught them.

    Non-Muslim Chinese invented the magnetic compass and printing.

    What tools of navigation does Obama imagine the Muslims invented? The quadrant. I guess Obama’s never heard of Ptolemy.

    Islamic cultures certainly contributed nothing to the science behind celestial navigation. The reason being that the concept of fixed physical laws is heresy per leading Muslim theologians. Things happen because Allah wills them to happen, not because of some silly “natural law” some blaspheming astronomer or physicist dreamed up.

    If you doubt me, google up a list of all muslim recipients of the Nobel Prize for science. There are two. And neither did the work that got them the prize in a Muslim country. One was a Pakistani physicist who left Pakistan when his sect, which accepts science, was declared heretical and non-Muslim by the Pakistani legislature. The other is chemist who’s a naturalized US citizen.

    That group that keeps shooting up Christian churches in Nigeria has a name that captures the traditional muslim attitude toward the sciences. Boko Haram, or western education is a sin.

    Oh, and ancient Mesopotamia and Rome had quite a lot to do with developing and building the arch, long before we were “given” those by Islamic culture.

    I think this is why people want to see his college transcripts. He’s obviously not much of a student, and he certainly isn’t as bright as he’s made out to be.

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  241. Well that really was more the work of Dean Rhodes, who is his emaneusis, he spoke at Al Azhar, which includes those sterling moderates like Abdel Rahman
    and the late Tantawi, he denounced ‘Abu Ghraib and
    Gitmo’ in screaming distance of the Citadel, where Syed Qutb gave his last breath,

    narciso (87e966)

  242. I suppose anyone can make the occasional gaffe, but Obama is gaffe-tastic.

    Yes, that’s why the list contains literally hundreds of examples. Oops, sorry, that was Bush.

    He’s obviously not much of a student.

    Jim Lindgren:

    In traditional academic terms, Obama did better in school than any president in the last 40 years.

    Who to believe, Steve or Jim Lindgren? Tough choice. Lindgren’s wiki page is here. His Northwestern Law page is here. Information about Steve can be found … um … err … I’ll have to get back to you on that.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  243. Phi Beta Kappa in 2 1/2 years from Yale, or Teh Won at Occidental?

    JD (d5e24e)

  244. He’s from here, I’m given to understand

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2008/07/obama_ignorance_watch_1.asp

    then there is that misunderstanding about Hirohito.

    narciso (87e966)

  245. JD, this one doesn’t care about facts or honest disagreements. It’s just that portmandeau between “astroturf,” “snotty,” and “weeble.”

    Astsnowee?

    He feels large and in charge…on the internet.

    Simon Jester (68a1c1)

  246. He feels large and in charge…on the internet.

    Still waiting for you to post your mailing address.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  247. What so you can make mafiaesque threats?

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  248. Phi Beta Kappa in 2 1/2 years from Yale

    That was an entirely different Bush. Maybe you don’t realize there’s more than one.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  249. What so you can make mafiaesque threats?

    I’m just wondering why he wants to “feel like Da Man in a safely anonymous way.”

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  250. You said the last 40 years, clown.

    What year did you graduate from HLS?

    JD (318f81)

  251. Apparently, juiceboxhero thinks it is civil to demand only HLS grads comment on peole that are HLs grads, demand people’s home address, and otherwise act the douchenozzle, then whine about peole being big fat meanies.

    JD (318f81)

  252. this one doesn’t care about facts

    If you can show a single instance where I’ve posted incorrect facts, that would be helpful. I’ll be waiting patiently.

    You said the last 40 years

    No, I didn’t say that. Someone else said that. This is one of many examples of how you like to make things up.

    And I’m pretty sure the person who said that already knows about Bush I.

    What year did you graduate from HLS?

    When did I say I graduated from HLS?

    demand people’s home address

    I asked for his home address to point out his lack of self-awareness in making a complaint about someone else being “safely anonymous.”

    thinks it is civil to demand only HLS grads comment on peole that are HLs grads

    I asked you when you graduated HLS because you said Orin Kerr’s statement was “a fable.” Since you haven’t told us how you know more about HLS than Orin Kerr, I assume you’re a graduate. If you’re not, then you should tell us how you know that what Kerr said about HLS is “a fable.”

    whine about peole being big fat meanies

    I have pointed out that namecalling is a poor substitute for argumentation. That’s not “whine about peole being big fat meanies.”

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  253. I’m curious how he did in Contracts, a course he clearly either never understood or forgot about,
    He’s kind of fuzzy on Con Law, as well, re Heller
    for instance,

    narciso (87e966)

  254. You have used a quote that Teh Won is better in traditional academic accomplishment than any President in the last 40 years. Despite no objective evidence of that being the case, and much to the contrary. Now, I posit that a Bush that graduated Phi Beta Kappa from Yale in 2 1/2 years is better than Teh Won at Occidental, and ou try to claim you did not advance that claim, you just repeatedly pushed that meme. You are invested in that meme. You don’t like playing by the standards you set forth, do you?

    JD (318f81)

  255. I’m curious how he did in Contracts

    HLS needs to hire you to revamp their grading system, because it was obviously an error to give him grades in the top 15%.

    Despite no objective evidence

    I can’t find the place where you explain how his magna cum laude is something other than “objective evidence.”

    Now, I posit that a Bush that graduated Phi Beta Kappa from Yale in 2 1/2 years is better than Teh Won at Occidental

    Yes, and Jim Lindgren posits something else. All you have to do is tell us what you know that he doesn’t.

    ou try to claim you did not advance that claim

    No, I didn’t claim that I did not advance that claim. I just pointed out that it was a quote, not my own statement. You are not the only person in this thread who doesn’t understand the difference.

    You are invested in that meme.

    I’m invested in being touch with reality. This includes understanding that his grades were in the top 15%. It also includes understanding that Republicans who are in a position to understand his academic performance are impressed with it.

    Certain people (like you) are in denial about all this. But please continue, because your inadvertent public service is considerable.

    You don’t like playing by the standards you set forth, do you?

    As usual, you’re being completely incoherent. I have no idea what you’re trying to say.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  256. Zippy showed his stock market acumen with his “profits and earnings” statement. I was duly impressed. So much so, that I would like to use jbg’s mouth with which to pleasure the cic, ala Larry Sinclair!

    ∅ (721840)

  257. profits and earnings

    Keep going. You only need a few hundred more to catch up with this.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  258. Jukebox is a arrogant moron.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  259. Again your being incoherent.

    Translation-How dare you expose me.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  260. Well it’s like with the Solon of Scranton’s ‘recovery summer’ and the promise that unemployment
    would not go above 8% if the stimulus passed.

    narciso (87e966)

  261. How dare you expose me.

    Like I said, if you can show a single instance where I’ve posted incorrect facts, that would be helpful. There’s no time like the present. What are you waiting for? Surely there must be a lot to “expose.”

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  262. the promise that unemployment would not go above 8%

    Wait, you mean a politician made a prediction that turned out to be wrong? Stop the presses. This has never happened before.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  263. a juke box zero
    got barcky’s nads in his eyes
    a juke box zero

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  264. I’ll take that as your admission that you can’t find any factual errors in any of my comments. But it would be better if you had the guts to admit that plainly.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  265. Just ridicule the silly troll, Colonel. He is just here to try to “score points” and has no interest in real discussion, or honest disagreement. Look at his manner.

    Weebles wobble, but they don’t fall down.

    Simon Jester (b7d8e0)

  266. and the very next day I bought a beat-up six string in a second-hand store didn’t know how to play it but I knew for shore

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  267. no interest in real discussion

    Oh good, someone comes along who is allegedly interested “in real discussion.” Finally! What took you so long? Now all you need to do is indicate where I’ve made any factual errors. See, that’s my idea of “real discussion.”

    Then again, your idea of “real discussion” might be to talk about “weebles.”

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  268. he just put ’em in
    his mouth and he rolled ’em around
    a jukebox zero

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  269. Oh good, some more “real discussion.”

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  270. jukebox zero say
    it feels like the first time but
    ya know it’s a lie

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  271. He had one guitar, Mr. Feet.

    With one chord he knew.

    It was a second hand troll.

    He had one guitar.

    Needlessly slung low.

    He didn’t have any tickets.

    It was sold out show.

    Simon Jester (b7d8e0)

  272. he won’t spit ’em out
    cuz he’s a dirty white boy
    a dirty white boy

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  273. And the usual suspects assume the position they find most comfortable.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  274. hah nice work Mr. Jester

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  275. and nice coinage Mr. Colonel

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  276. Heh heh. He said “position.”

    You really are sour this afternoon. It makes people wonder, why so angry?

    Simon Jester (b7d8e0)

  277. barcky’s nads in his eyes
    he wants to know what love is
    got double vision

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  278. Actually, this is funny in context, all on its own:

    “Bought a beat up meme, at a secondhand Kos site

    Didn’t know how to research it, but he knew for sure

    That one cut and paste, felt good in his hands, didn’t take long, to understand

    Just one meme, slung way down low

    Was a one way ticket, only one way to go

    So he started trollin’, ain’t never gonna stop

    Gotta keep on trollin’, someday gonna make it to Politico”

    Simon Jester (b7d8e0)

  279. Colonel, yours is much funnier.

    Simon Jester (b7d8e0)

  280. Heh heh. He said “position.”

    I’m glad you’re so easily amused.

    why so angry?

    Have you always had a hard time understanding the difference between people who are having fun and people who are angry? Or maybe it’s just projection.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  281. now he’s hot-blooded
    barcky say “I’ll check your oil… all right?”
    zero say “no… no, barcky… not tonight.”

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  282. cuz he’s a zero
    in da jukebox with da blues
    I hear him moan… I hear him moan… I hear him mo-OO-OO-an

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  283. colonel thinks jukebox is just dustin havin’ fun…

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  284. Top 15% of law school is better than Phi Beta Kappa in 2 1/2 years? How did he do at Occidental? Columbia?

    JD (318f81)

  285. Hey, Colonel:

    “..Have you always had a hard time understanding the difference between people who are having fun and people who are angry? Or maybe it’s just projection…”

    Isn’t that right up there with the now-infamous “I work here is done”?

    I’m having fun—the song lyrics were great. This guy, not so much. A bitter clinger, I guess.

    Simon Jester (b7d8e0)

  286. But you are not advancing that meme, or defending that position, are you? Nope. Not at all. So much so, in fact, that you have spent 2+ days not doing so. Quit Froma-ing yourself.

    JD (318f81)

  287. Top 15% of law school is better than Phi Beta Kappa in 2 1/2 years?

    Like I said, you don’t know much about HLS. That’s a problem Jim Lindgren doesn’t have.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  288. Yep. He is having mad fun, JD!

    Simon Jester (b7d8e0)

  289. And I’m still waiting for you to explain why you said Kerr’s statement was “a fable.”

    And why you said magna cum laude is not “objective evidence.”

    You have quite a track record of bizarre statements that you refuse to explain.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  290. He is having mad fun

    No, just fun.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  291. Well, you have an odd definition of fun. Seriously, go do something fun today, rather than sneer at the computer screen.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9j_j-cUwKc

    Simon Jester (b7d8e0)

  292. Teh Won did not graduate from Columbia with honors, so GPA was less than 3.5?3.3? what was it at Occidental?

    JD (318f81)

  293. Objective evidence? Make a claim, back it up. Show us the transcript.

    JD (318f81)

  294. The fable is that Barcky is the smartest President, the most academically accomplished in the last 40 years. I don’t care who said it. Apparently who said it matters to you, I suspect that the deference you give to said person is dependent on your agreement with same.

    JD (318f81)

  295. “I’m smaht…not like everybody says… like dumb… I’m smaht and I want respect!:

    – Fredo Obama

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  296. KosKiddiez are so transparent.

    JD (318f81)

  297. he’s a wacky guy, Simon… for sure.

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  298. How lobg before jukebox goes on a jew hating tirade?

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  299. go do something fun today

    Something more fun than laughing at you?

    Objective evidence?

    His magna cum laude is “objective evidence.” Duh.

    Make a claim

    He graduated magna cum laude.

    back it up.

    I already did (#176).

    Show us the transcript.

    For people who are in touch with reality, there’s no need to see a transcript, because it would only tell us what we already know: that his grades were in the top 15%.

    Columbia … Occidental

    His academic record pre-HLS is irrelevant, because his HLS performance tells us everything we need to know about his academic capabilities. That is, for everyone who knows how to tell the difference between reality and “a fable.”

    The fable is that Barcky is the smartest President

    No, that’s not what you called “a fable.” Let’s review. MayBee said this:

    What’s the original source of the 10%?

    (She should have said “15%.” That error was hers.)

    You responded as follows:

    There is no original source, MayBee. It is a fable that became accepted wisdom.

    You were claiming that it is “a fable” that his grades were in the top 15%. Why did you claim that? Because it’s your regular practice to deny plain facts and make shit up. And your latest lie is to pretend that your statement (“a fable”) was intended to mean something other than what it actually meant.

    Apparently who said it matters to you

    Who said it matters to me because the person who said it is, unlike you, knowledgable and credible. And several other people said essentially the same thing, so in your denial you need to ignore more than just him.

    I suspect that the deference you give to said person is dependent on your agreement with same.

    I suspect that the lack of deference you give to said person is dependent on your disagreement with same.

    How lobg before jukebox goes on a jew hating tirade?

    Since thousands of my comments are readily available, you should be easily able to find such a thing, if it exists. But of course that would require you to be interested in the real world, not your imaginary world.

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  300. How lobg before jukebox goes on a jew hating tirade?

    Didn’t zippy want billionaires to pay the same tax rate as a Jew? juiceboxgrad, chalk up another “won” for me!

    ∅ (721840)

  301. Anyone know how to translate that into English?

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  302. Palin is running. Plame was a covert agent outed for political reasons. Bush lied people died.

    JD (d5e24e)

  303. Zippy stating that children with asthma wouldn’t need to go to the emergency room if they were provided breathalyzers. GENIUS!

    ∅ (721840)

  304. Palin is running.

    I thought she would. I was wrong.

    Plame was a covert agent outed for political reasons.

    Correct.

    Bush lied people died.

    Correct.

    Still waiting for you to explain your “fable” lie.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  305. “The Middle East is obviously an issue that has plagued the region for centuries.”—The Zipster, Historical Super Genius!

    ∅ (721840)

  306. Keep going. You only need a few hundred more to catch up with this.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  307. Plame was an attention-seeking twat outed by the feckless and cowardly obamawhore Colin Powell.

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  308. Gee, that’s a twist. The name that usually comes up is Armitage.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  309. She was burned by Aldrich Ames, ten years before, by the Swiss Interest Section to the DGI, eight years before.

    narciso (87e966)

  310. Armitage was just a simpering Powell toady Mr. jukebox

    it’s a thing

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  311. Lola, JD?

    Simon Jester (b7d8e0)

  312. Aldrich Ames

    That theory has a few problems.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  313. “Cinco de Cuatro”—Cero,Bilingual Genius!

    ∅ (721840)

  314. I would think outing the interrogators of KSM, the contractors involved in rendition, were much more significant to the war effort;

    http://newsbusters.org/blogs/ken-shepherd/2010/11/13/outed-former-cia-operative-valerie-plame-get-over-yourself

    narciso (87e966)

  315. Jukeboxgard — 1/13/2012 @ 9:03 am:

    By the way, do you really think Obama doesn’t know how many states there are? Just curious. Because I’ve run into a bunch of conservatives who don’t believe that anyone could possibly think that.

    He was a United States Senator. There are 100 Senators, two for each state and 100 divided by 2 is 50. There is no way he would not know that.

    So why did he say 57? Because there were 57 delegations to the Democratic National Convention.

    The real question is: Why did he not explain himself? Why did nobdy explain it this way?

    I guess they thought this would spread the story, or perhaps they didn’t want people to realize that places like American Samoa had a role to play in he selection of a president or perhaps they thought this still made hm look foolish.

    Other people didn’t explain it this way because a lot gets missed by the media.

    Sammy Finkelman (9a6ee5)

  316. Somebody I think offered Heinz’s 57 varieties. I think this was missed because the make-up of the convention was not covered in detail by 2008., because for a generation or more there had been no contest by the First Ballot and now Presidential candidates were picking their vice-president before the convention opened.

    Sammy Finkelman (9a6ee5)

  317. newsbusters

    Get real.

    Because there were 57 delegations to the Democratic National Convention.

    I suppose this is possible, but I think the snopes explanation (83) is more plausible.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  318. Zippington the Lesser referred to the British Embassy as the “English Embassy.”

    In case the president is unaware, England forms part of Great Britain, which also includes Scotland and Wales, though not Northern Ireland, which is part of the United Kingdom. There is no such thing as an “English” embassy anywhere in the world, and there hasn’t been one for several centuries.

    Oh well, genius!

    ∅ (721840)

  319. The relevant part of the letter;

    In 1978, my CIA affiliation was exposed by Philip Agee in his book “Dirty Work II.” I’m nothing special; more than a few colleagues have been exposed at one time or another. I went on to serve nearly 34 years.

    As luck would have it, I was at one point charged with looking into possible damage in one location caused by Valerie Plame’s outing. There was none.

    So enough with the overwrought claims of injury that “Fair Game” suggests. Those claims devalue the resolve of the officers who have overcome truly dangerous exposure, and they cheapen the risk from laying bare their very real achievements.

    It was wrong to expose Plame. It was ludicrous for her to claim that the exposure forced an end to her career in intelligence. In the words of my favorite poet, A.E. Housman: ” ‘Tis sure much finer fellows have fared much worse before.”

    narciso (87e966)

  320. How long before jukebox and the others call for Tebow to be hung for praying

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  321. Yeah your supposed to link to Froma Harrop while she is in the throes of having an orgasm….than Jukeboxgrad will accept your link.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  322. Who to believe, Steve or Jim Lindgren? Tough choice. Lindgren’s wiki page is here. His Northwestern Law page is here. Information about Steve can be found … um … err … I’ll have to get back to you on that.

    Jukebox,

    Can you ask Jim Lindgren which other continent we’re connected to by that intercontinental railroad Obama keeps talking about?

    Also, ask him if we’ve reached the point where it’s just easier to rewrite the history books rather then proofread Obama’s speeches?

    We wouldn’t want you to confront all those pesky facts that Obama gets flat wrong or apparently has never heard about. If we rewrite history, then the new, improved, officially sanctioned set of what passes for facts will support your knee-jerk credentialism.

    Not that ignoring the facts seems to be a problem for you.

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  323. Jukebox believes Obama is a god and to criticize him is to commit treason.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  324. Jukebox believes Obama is a god and to criticize him is to commit treason.

    Well, if Obama’s god perhaps he can build a high-speed intercontinental railroad.

    I don’t think Lincoln managed to pull off any sort of intercontinental railroad. But, hey! If Jim Lindgren says so…

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  325. “Who to believe, Steve or Jim Lindgren?”

    Steve – It is a fact that Lindgren wrote what he wrote. The problem is that what Lindgren wrote was merely an opinion and certainly not a fact.

    These nuances are tough for JBG to grasp.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  326. juiceboxgerd has the slate trump link to counter all obama gaffes. As if someone else’s verbal gaffes somehow make zippy a genius.

    If you speak in public enough, you’ll eventually say something stupid, incoherent, or worse. On the other hand, the zipster needing a teleprompter to speak in front of sixth graders was a bit much, but hey, genius

    ∅ (721840)

  327. Of course the apples to apples comparison would be Yale to Columbia, Harvard Law to Harvard Business.

    narciso (87e966)

  328. Hey why don’t the left use public transportation?

    They don’t wanna mix with us lowly peons.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  329. It is a fact that Lindgren wrote what he wrote. The problem is that what Lindgren wrote was merely an opinion and certainly not a fact.

    That’s true. This is an opinion:

    In traditional academic terms, Obama did better in school than any president in the last 40 years.

    That opinion is based (in part) on this fact: that Obama was magna cum laude at HLS, which means his grades were in the top 15%.

    The main problem with the Einsteins here is not that they reject Lindgren’s opinion. It’s that they also reject the underlying fact. That’s exactly what JD was doing when he called it “a fable.” A lie he still refuses to acknowledge. He wasn’t talking about the opinion. He was talking about the fact. And then he lied about this, too.

    Of course the apples to apples comparison would be Yale to Columbia, Harvard Law to Harvard Business.

    There are problems with that approach, but putting those problems aside, who are you thinking of who ranked in the top 15% at HBS?

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  330. And so polite! Which why it is hard to see how it is fun, but does illustrate the anger. Nasty little Weeble.

    I think it’s nice folks like to engage the troll, but it does waste your time, get you all muddy, and the troll likes it.

    Likes it a LOT, it would appear.

    Mr. Feet, if you are there please share your best recipe for salsa and guacamole. Spicey and fun loving recipes only, please.

    Simon Jester (b7d8e0)

  331. He is the default at Joyner and Mataconis’s blog,
    whereas as he is the outlier,

    narciso (87e966)

  332. I explained my fable position above. You chose to not read it. Or were unable to understand. Or unwilling.

    JD (d5e24e)

  333. That is the same with the Hot Air trolls.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  334. It’s interesting the wiki, refers a Guardian article in May 2007, as the source for his class standing

    narciso (87e966)

  335. Palin is running.

    I thought she would. I was wrong.

    — Just as you were wrong about her attacking Romney for being a vulture capitalist. That makes you 0 for 0.

    Icy (c1ca31)

  336. How dare you put words back into his mouth.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  337. The CIA operated on the assumption that Valerie Plame’s cover was blown, whether it was in fact or not, so she was no longer “covert”

    Sammy Finkelman (9a6ee5)

  338. And so polite! Which why it is hard to see how it is fun, but does illustrate the anger.

    Naturally, because politeness is a sign of anger. Makes perfect sense.

    Which why it is hard to see how it is fun

    How interesting that you find it “hard to see” how it’s possible to be polite and have fun at the same time. Remarkable.

    I explained my fable position above.

    What you did is you told a lie. You pretended that your statement (“a fable”) was about something other than what it was actually about. I explained this already (#302).

    Just as you were wrong about her attacking Romney for being a vulture capitalist.

    I didn’t say that she called him “a vulture capitalist.” I said that she called on him to back up his job-creation claims. If you don’t see that as an attack, that’s your problem.

    Later on when Democrats make that same demand, it’s going to be harder for him to ignore it, because Palin has legitimized it.

    How dare you put words back into his mouth.

    That’s not what he did. He pretended I said something I never said. And of course that’s what you like to do, too. I’m still waiting for you to explain why you said this:

    Juiceboxgrad is the same obot that said Palin called Obama a sambo

    Where’s the link? That’s a brazen lie, and you’re a brazen liar. You fit in well here. I never said that.

    It’s interesting the wiki, refers a Guardian article in May 2007, as the source for his class standing

    Why would you imply that the wiki relies only on that source? It doesn’t.

    The Obama wiki page (link) doesn’t just reference that Guardian article (link) “as the source for his class standing.” It also references Encyclopædia Britannica (link).

    And aside from those sources, I already cited Harvard Crimson as a source for his class standing (#176). Let me know if you also need to see it in Fox News. It’s been reported there, too.

    Yes, I know, all this isn’t enough because you need to personally examine the placenta.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  339. Comment by Winghunter — 1/13/2012 @ 3:17 am

    Rick Perry…

    * Called Tom Tancredo a racist for supporting the enforcement of our own immigration laws.

    Of course this was wrong. It’s not racism – it’s pure heartlessness without the saving grace of racism.

    Sammy Finkelman (9a6ee5)

  340. Well Palin never called Romney a vulture capitalist. And even if she did your one to complain.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  341. The tools on the Ron Paul right think Tancredo is a nazi.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  342. The CIA operated on the assumption that Valerie Plame’s cover was blown, whether it was in fact or not, so she was no longer “covert”

    Link.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  343. You don’t read very carefully, do you? Nor is irony obvious to you, apparently. And to think you first started reading this blog seven years ago!

    Who knew?

    Simon Jester (b7d8e0)

  344. You explained nothing in 302. Liar. I explained my position quite clearly. You won’t accept that. Doesn’t make me a liar.

    JD (d5e24e)

  345. You don’t read very carefully, do you?

    No, actually I do read very carefully.

    Well Palin never called Romney a vulture capitalist.

    Correct. When did I say she did? Icy pretended I said something I never said.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  346. Palin is running.

    I thought she would. I was wrong.

    Plame was a covert agent outed for political reasons.

    Correct.

    Bush lied people died.

    Correct.

    Still waiting for you to explain your “fable” lie.

    Comment by jukeboxgrad — 1/15/2012 @ 12:51 pm

    Liar.

    JD (d5e24e)

  347. You explained nothing in 302.

    Maybee said this:

    What’s the original source of the 10%?

    You responded as follows:

    There is no original source, MayBee. It is a fable that became accepted wisdom.

    Tell us exactly what you meant by “it is a fable.”

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  348. Why is it that the troll refuses to address Occidental, and Columbia? Doesn’t fit in the narrative, perhaps?

    JD (d5e24e)

  349. I already answered that question (302). But I realize how eager to are to avoid answering this question: tell us exactly what you meant by “it is a fable.”

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  350. No, she was ‘outed’ by Armitage, because they couldn’t explain why they had sent Joe Wilson who had no intelligence experience, to Niger, and why Valerie kept interfering in the INR’s business, it
    was David Corn, who revealed she was a NOC,

    narciso (87e966)

  351. I explained the fable above. You continue to choose to not read it. Or are unable. I was speaking to someone I know, an honest person.

    JD (d5e24e)

  352. I quoted your comment 302 above. In its entirety. It does not say what you claim. Invisible pixels, perhaps?

    JD (d5e24e)

  353. Yesterday you tried to claim I said one thing when it was clear I was saying the exact opposite. You seem to enjoy telling others what they meant.

    JD (d5e24e)

  354. C’mon, JD. Weebles wobble but they don’t fall down. Reading carefully? It is to laugh.

    Silly little troll. I’ll bet she likes cilantro.

    Simon Jester (b7d8e0)

  355. Off to the pool. Be nice to the oh so kind troll.

    JD (d5e24e)

  356. It is like nishi, but complete sentences.

    JD (d5e24e)

  357. We know the DGSE, the SVR the Rgyptian and Jordanian Mukharabats all thought Saddam had WMD’s,
    he had used them after all, wikileaks points out hundreds of incidents when said materials were used against Coalition forces, where is the proof of their disposal again, instead of dispersal.

    narciso (87e966)

  358. she was ‘outed’ by Armitage

    You’re implying there was only one leaker. Trouble is, there were at least three leakers. Yes, Armitage outed Plame to Novak. But Rove outed Plame to Cooper, and Libby outed Plame to Miller. Three wrongs don’t make a right. Fitzgerald knew that.

    they couldn’t explain why they had sent Joe Wilson who had no intelligence experience, to Niger

    Here’s one reason it made sense to send him: because they had sent him before, on a similar mission. You really didn’t know that?

    David Corn, who revealed she was a NOC

    IIPA does not apply to the press. You really didn’t know that?

    where is the proof of their disposal

    Yes, they’re buried in the desert and will be found one day. Keep hope alive.

    I explained the fable above.

    Maybee said this:

    What’s the original source of the 10%?

    You responded as follows:

    There is no original source, MayBee. It is a fable that became accepted wisdom.

    Tell us exactly what you meant by “it is a fable.”

    I quoted your comment 302 above.

    In your 349 you quoted my 307, not 302. Try again.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  359. Yep, the year “sanity” wasn’t on the ticket. Buhbye Jon!

    tifosa (b7835c)

  360. Tifosa kill yourself now.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  361. Well, Ann Coulter said it best…

    tifosa (b7835c)

  362. LOL @ kynow. hahahahahaha!

    tifosa (b7835c)

  363. Tifosa likes to get anally raped by jukeboxgrad.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  364. Mahahahahahahahaha.

    You Harry Belamarx?

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  365. americanthinker

    Clarice Feldman citing an anonymous source on 3/13/06:

    She wasn’t an NOC

    CIA Director Hayden (a Bush appointee), cited in 2007:

    Ms. Wilson was covert

    Fitzgerald (a Bush appointee), cited in 2007:

    Ms. Wilson “was a covert employee”

    Tough contest.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  366. Peter Fitzgerald is a justice-perverting nazi not unlike other nazis you may know

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  367. Who’s Peter Fitzgerald?

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  368. No, that would be Pat, Peter was a fairly sensible sort, we couldn’t have that in Washington.

    narciso (87e966)

  369. Why did Bush hire a Nazi?

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  370. Anyway, George H.W. Bush graduated Phi Beta Kappa from Yale in just 2-1/2 years.

    He had enlisted right after graduating High School in 1942. During the war years colleges established accelerated programs, and ths contiunued after the war.

    Bus had been accepted at Yale before he enlisted and he enrolled in an accelerated program after the war. This was not that unusual.

    Sammy Finkelman (9a6ee5)

  371. sorry I meaned patrick my bad they both start with a p so I got confuzzled there

    I am so sorry

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  372. So why did Bush hire a Nazi?

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  373. Yes, just like they dubbed the Wimp, even though he was a verified war hero, in circumstances much more treacherous than Kerry, of course Sidney Blumenthal tried to float a defamatory story about that, just
    like they went after Dole in ’96, a man who had lost his arm in Italy, the Greatest Generation only mattered in ’98 two years later,

    narciso (87e966)

  374. Bush hired a Nazi cause of old Bush family ties I believe

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  375. Why does jukeboxscrunt like to fling the nazi card like a shuriken?

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  376. Happyfeet you referring to your mom?

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  377. Bush hired a Nazi cause of old Bush family ties I believe

    Can’t argue with that. Link.

    Why does jukeboxscrunt like to fling the nazi card like a shuriken?

    Oh, the irony. You were the first person in this thread to use that word. And then you used it again. And then happyfeet used it. All before I used it in response to happyfeet. Hilarious.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  378. there were nazis in the girl wif the dragon ball z tattoo

    nazi industrialists

    the very worst kind I believe

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  379. Yeah its hilarious how you can get away with calling Patterico a liar.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  380. Who did that?

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  381. No it was called the girl with the Palin 2012 tattoo.

    😀

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  382. You called me a liar and said I’m in good company with Patterico.

    Stop feigning innocence you cur.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  383. Comment by Milhouse — 1/14/2012 @ 11:48 pm

    No, he obviously didn’t really think there were 57 states, but he did really think Austrian is a language,

    Yes, but it is kind of a reasonable mistake to make, the way people in Russia can think Canadian is a language.

    Now there actually is a difference but there’s no language called Austrian. The pronunciation spoken in Austrian, and other areas more toward the fringes of where German is spoken, is much closer to Yiddish than what is spoken in Germany.

    This is also the place anti-semitism was prevalent – still there in 1984.

    That’s because it is much closer to the original German, rather than Prussian dialect that became German.

    and he really didn’t know that the S in “corpsman” is silent,

    As you said, that’s forgiveable, you and I would probably make the same mistake, like we both did with misled. Since I read your mistake I’m wondering if maybe we were right and somewhere it is pronounced that way. It’s not my mistake alone.

    But you could say Obama should have picked things up by the time he made that error, if he was really as familiar with the military as he tried to pretend.

    But that’s not the only S he got wrong. Obama thinks or thought almost all “S’ should be pronounced like an S.

    Most people pronounce the S in cats like an s and the s in dogs like a z.

    But not Obama, unless he has since corrected himself.

    If you listen a little bit more carefully to the video from the Naval Air Station in Jacksonville from 2009 you will hear a little bit after “Corpseman” ….he says “dogs” – with a
    real s.

    It might be here:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1DO388jsf8

    He does this all the time. I haven’t checked, but he probably refers to himself as the “precedent” well, probably not quite like that.

    You mostly will not notice it. I didn’t. It really has to be pointed out. Jay Nordlinger noted pronunciation of the letter “s” on “The Corner” on National Review Online at the time of the State of the Union Message in 2010.

    and he probably did think that Hawaii is in Asia.

    Well, let’s see. He would know that Hawaii was originally settled by Polynesians, who came from Asia or near Asia. (Their actual original origin was Taiwan. Hawaiians are actually furthest away, and the language has lost almost all of its phonemes.)

    Furthermore he would know that in the U.S. Census categories, native Hawaiians, are put together with Asians.

    But Hawaii is not Asia, and that’s not just because of the International Date Line. It doesn’t belong to any continent.

    It’s in the middle of the Pacific Ocean.

    Not every place has to belong to a continent.

    I think he didn’t have any basic geographical concepts.

    I don’t know what he was thinking when he put down 2008 as the date.

    Date of what?

    Sammy Finkelman (9a6ee5)

  384. the year he signed the date book,

    narciso (87e966)

  385. Dohbiden:

    You called me a liar and said I’m in good company with Patterico.

    Gosh, you just can’t stop making shit up. Amazing. What I actually said is this:

    You’re a liar. You fit in well here.

    I said that because there are plenty of liars here, and I’ve shown proof of that. That’s not the same thing as saying that Patterico is a liar. Which means that when you said this … :

    Yeah its hilarious how you can get away with calling Patterico a liar.

    … you were making shit up.

    On the other hand, his credibility isn’t that much better than yours. Link.

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  386. The lwftys like Maobama do not take Public Transportation but they expect us too?

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  387. Okay. Switched browsers, because my iPhone quoted juiceboxhero in 302 and it claimed that was inaccurate. He also referenced 307, which is a comment by narcisco on both my iPhone and iPad.

    Palin is running.

    I thought she would. I was wrong.

    Plame was a covert agent outed for political reasons.

    Correct.

    Bush lied people died.

    Correct.

    Still waiting for you to explain your “fable” lie.

    Comment by jukeboxgrad — 1/15/2012 @ 12:51 pm

    So, is my browser wrong? Or do you wish to continue to tell me what I meant?

    JD (318f81)

  388. Prescott Bush was a Nazi financier.

    JD (318f81)

  389. No, he wasn’t, he was an American investor in German like IBM’s Watson, GM’s Sloane, Standard Oil et al, (that’s the Rockefeller nest egg)

    narciso (87e966)

  390. The main problem with the Einsteins here…

    Don’t you mean the “little Eichmanns?” I believe that’s more likely the term the Marxist professors who numbered among his carefully chosen college friends with whom he discussed neo-colonialism, eurocentrism, and the patriarchy would have used.

    I realize the fact that Obama regularly says stupid things won’t won’t make a dent in your conviction that Obama’s a genius and a brilliant student.

    I will concede that in some ways Obama must be at least an able student. He certainly appears to have learned well at Rashid and Mona Khalidi’s kitchen table. Going by the sheer volume of patronizing platitudes, untruths, half-truths, and distortions with which he larded ups his historically illiterate Cairo speech. It appears the former PLO spokesman made an impression on Obama.

    Perhaps it’s harmless that he believes the crap he says. If he ever gets to Segovia, Spain, he’ll take a look at the aqueduct and explain, “What a beautiful example of Muslim engineering.” Just like maybe it’s harmless that he thinks there’s an intercontinental railroad, or Austrian’s a language, etc.

    If he weren’t President that is. It’s dangerous for a President. For instance, he thinks Kennedy’s Vienna meeting with Khrushchev was a shining example of direct diplomacy. That is asinine. Nobody who was there shared that opinion, including Kennedy who realized it was a disastrous meeting and having stepped in it he had a huge problem going forward.

    Kennedy Talked, Khrushchev Triumphed

    Unlike Khrushchev, Ahmadinejad doesn’t have to meet with President “open hand” Obama to form a low opinion of him. Kennedy at least had the good sense to humiliate himself in a hotel room and out of public view.

    Obama can’t learn; that’s what makes him dangerous. CEOs of companies like Caterpillar, AT&T, et al told Obama of the huge accounting charges they’d have to declare to their shareholders per SEC regs if ObamaCare passed into law. From what little grasp Obama had of what they were telling him he gleaned only enough to accuse them of lying.

    They weren’t. It wasn’t just Obama; Waxman and Stupak provided much unintended comedy. But then, no one’s ever tried to convince me those two were geniuses.

    And then that Cairo speech. Nothing good imaginable could, and nothing good has, come from that silly talk in which he put his stamp of approval on various pathologies, self-serving and undeserved sense of victimhood, and made what his audience took as promises he’s not keeping.

    I found it symbolically fitting he invited people associated with Anwar Sadat’s assassination to be his guests. It’s fitting that he invited people who had a hand in killing the man who signed the peace treaty, and now who’ll now kill off the peace treaty with Israel.

    Genius!

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  391. You are not part of the credentialed elite, Steve, so what you said means nothing.

    JD (318f81)

  392. Franklin Marshall Davis’ bastard was a privileged but feral street kid.

    Granddad’s vocation was ‘salesman’, avocation bohemian, think Maynard G. Krebs, loser. Ann followed in Grannies footsteps-was a bank consultant specializing in microloans in Indonesia and Pakistan.

    The Manchurian was their ward for good at 10.

    Soetoro Sr. must have been bright cause half sister be verbally brilliant in contrast to Ummummummummumm.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  393. JD:

    So, is my browser wrong?

    You’re right that it’s a browser issue (at least in part). Now I see that the comment numbering changes depending on which browser I use. And it’s worse than that. It looks like certain comments just don’t appear. Take a look at this screenshot.

    On the left is a chunk of this thread in Firefox (Mac). On the right is a chunk in Safari. At the top of each you can see Dohbiden’s 1/15/12 12:26 pm. But then what follows is different. On the right is what I’ve been calling my 302, which apparently you’ve never seen. On the left “302” references a different comment of mine.

    What’s going on? Is the site choking because the thread is too long? I’m not here much, but maybe you regulars have seen this problem before. It’s definitely a big problem.

    Anyway, the following is the relevant portion:

    MayBee said this:

    What’s the original source of the 10%?

    (She should have said “15%.” That error was hers.)

    You responded as follows:

    There is no original source, MayBee. It is a fable that became accepted wisdom.

    You were claiming that it is “a fable” that his grades were in the top 15%. Why did you claim that?

    ==============
    Steve:

    Rashid and Mona Khalidi

    Link.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  394. The leftists desperately want to talk about things like transcripts, etc … Primarily because they cannot talk about jobs, the economy, taxes, declining workforce masking unemployment, etc …

    JD (318f81)

  395. The leftists desperately want to talk about things like transcripts

    That’s hysterically funny, since this all started with Simon saying this:

    why won’t the President release his transcripts?

    And Dustin saying this:

    Obama should release his transcripts

    That was before I said anything. I had no idea Simon and Dustin are “leftists.”

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  396. It is uncivil to note that Barcky has a relationship with Khalidi and Ayers.

    I already explained what i was referencing about the fable, above. Your continued refusal to read or address that demonstrates your desire to be mendoucheous.

    JD (318f81)

  397. It is uncivil to note that Barcky has a relationship with Khalidi and Ayers.

    It’s not that it’s uncivil. It’s that it’s dishonest to leave out this.

    I already explained what i was referencing about the fable

    What you did is attempt to claim that you meant something other than what you actually said. And you’re still ducking the question.

    Maybee said this:

    What’s the original source of the 10%?

    You responded as follows:

    There is no original source, MayBee. It is a fable that became accepted wisdom.

    Tell us exactly what you meant by “it is a fable.”

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  398. leftys*

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  399. I did above. You do not get to determine the meaning of my words,especially when I am speaking o someone I know. Now, I can see how a dishonest interlocutor such as yourself would arrive at a position such as yours, but an honest person would allow for intent, which I have explained.

    JD (318f81)

  400. Linking to volokh to boost your lie about how Khalidi and Ayers are misunderstood peace lovers?

    please leave this site.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  401. This one is a textbook KosKiddie.

    JD (318f81)

  402. See what I mean, JD? It’s just a game. Laugh at whoever this person is, instead. The person is pretty silly, and I can almost promise you that he or she doesn’t have the wonderful things in their life that you and I do.

    Truth.

    Simon Jester (b7d8e0)

  403. an honest person would allow for intent

    Maybee said this:

    What’s the original source of the 10%?

    You responded as follows:

    There is no original source, MayBee. It is a fable that became accepted wisdom.

    Now you’re claiming that your “intent” was not to claim that “the original source of the 10%?” is “a fable?” Really? What you plainly said is that “there is no original source” for the claim that he had top grades. And now you’re trying to pretend you didn’t say that. Classic.

    Linking to volokh to boost your lie about how Khalidi and Ayers are misunderstood peace lovers?

    That’s not what I said here. As usual, you can’t deal with what I actually said, so you’re pretending I said something else.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  404. Yes these are the same people who think Clarence Thomas deserves to die from a cholestrol introduced myocardial infraction.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  405. The linking to it’s own comments at other sites is priceless. I wonder if it speaks of itself in the 3rd person too?

    JD (318f81)

  406. Meta is beyond your capability?

    JD (318f81)

  407. The linking to it’s own comments at other sites is priceless

    Do you understand how the internet works? I guess not. I’m linking to that comment because it contains links to other sources. But since you need to be spoonfed:

    McCain’s support for Khalidi is documented here: http://huff.to/3EMZQ4
    You probably didn’t know much about McCain’s history of “palling around with terrorists.”

    More about Khalidi here (where he is praised by a major Zionist):
    http://www.tnr.com/blogs/the-spine?page=119&bset=0005

    Just more proof of how you can’t deal with inconvenient facts.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  408. cholesterol*

    Any the way Jukeboxscum AKA zuch makes the most derogatory heinous comments about Palin 3 seconds after calling for republicans to be civilized.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  409. What does McCain have to do with Barcky’s relationships with Khalidi and Ayers?

    If you want to link someone, do it. linking to comments of your own left at other sites with a link contained therein is just funny.

    JD (318f81)

  410. Linking to TNR where a labor zionist[which is just another word for pro-islamic self hating jewicidals] doesn’t do much for your credibility.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  411. Dude don’t you get it besides Golda Meir who got it even though she was a labor zionist,Khalidi is best friends forever with the labor zionist movement.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  412. Aggressively mendoucheous

    JD (318f81)

  413. Goodnight

    JD (318f81)

  414. “…The linking to it’s own comments at other sites is priceless. I wonder if it speaks of itself in the 3rd person too?…”

    There is another explanation, JD.

    I’ll bet this troll is all about the cilantro, as well.

    Simon Jester (b7d8e0)

  415. Golda Meir despite her imperfections at least exposed the threat of the fakeistinians.

    Unlike Jukeboxskeetshot who wears his Obama undies with pride.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  416. Any the way Jukeboxscum AKA zuch makes the most derogatory heinous comments about Palin

    There you go again, making shit up. How come you never show links to support these accusations? Where did I say what you’re claiming I said?

    What does McCain have to do with Barcky’s relationships with Khalidi and Ayers?

    It has to do with your hypocrisy. Show me where you ever complained about McCain’s support for Khalidi.

    If you want to link someone, do it. linking to comments of your own left at other sites with a link contained therein is just funny.

    It’s a way to save innocent pixels, and it works fine except for folks like you who need to be spoonfed.

    Linking to TNR where a labor zionist

    I’m pretty sure Peretz’s Zionist credentials are better than yours.

    Goodnight

    I guess this is your way of letting us know that you’re still going to deny the plain meaning of what you said about “a fable.”

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  417. whenever anyone writes about cilantro I always read it in the voice of Ricardo Montalban

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  418. tmi?

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  419. Wow, seriously Dohbiden, you need help dude. Your anal obsession matches limbaugh’s, & that’s bad news.

    tifosa (b7835c)

  420. With such civility, I expect Froma Harrop to show up shortly.

    Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (3f4a04)

  421. The funny part, Bradley, is that they really do think that they are civil.

    Simon Jester (b7d8e0)

  422. Mr. Feet, you should always refer to it as “the cilantro” for the full multicultural impact.

    Simon Jester (b7d8e0)

  423. Or “made with fine Corinthian cilantrol”?

    Simon Jester (b7d8e0)

  424. ¡el cilantro!

    happyfeet (3c92a1)

  425. Yes, but it is kind of a reasonable mistake to make, the way people in Russia can think Canadian is a language.

    No, it’s not a reasonable mistake for an educated person to make. People who know something of the world know what main languages are spoken in at least the larger Western countries, such as Austria and Canada. It’s certainly a lot less reasonable than W Bush not knowing the demonym for people from Kosovo, or using a correct demonym for people from Greece, but one that’s not commonly used nowadays.

    The pronunciation spoken in Austrian, and other areas more toward the fringes of where German is spoken, is much closer to Yiddish than what is spoken in Germany.

    I don’t know about that; the German spoken in Frankfurt is close enough to Yiddish that I had almost no problem having conversations with people there.

    and he really didn’t know that the S in “corpsman” is silent,

    As you said, that’s forgiveable

    No, I don’t think it is forgiveable; not in someone who is those corpsmen’s commander in chief.

    I think he didn’t have any basic geographical concepts.

    And that is something educated people are expected to have. How much stick did Palin get over the false rumour that she thought Africa was a country?

    Date of what?

    The visitors book at a UK tourist site, that he signed in 2011 with a date in 2008.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  426. Prescott Bush was a Nazi financier.

    No, he wasn’t, he was an American investor in German like IBM’s Watson, GM’s Sloane, Standard Oil et al, (that’s the Rockefeller nest egg)

    Exactly. His partner was a financial backer of the Nazi Party until he realised what they were up to, and quit. He spent most of the war in prison.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  427. Mr. Feet, it is very raw, and NSFW but YouTube up “Epic Meal Time,” and in particular, their “Taco Night.”

    And marvel at the “El Gigante” burrito.

    I always wondered what would happen if you gave drunken 25-30 year old guys a kitchen, money, and booze. Wonder no more.

    I marvel at their salsa and guacamole.

    Simon Jester (b7d8e0)

  428. I wasn’t aware Limbaugh was obsessed with anal rape?

    And yes leftys we’re racist cause we believe paycheks are superior to food stamps……………………not.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  429. It is uncivil to note that Barcky has a relationship with Khalidi and Ayers.

    It’s not that it’s uncivil. It’s that it’s dishonest to leave out this.

    Jukebox, that’s just pathetic. It’s already been discredited, at least to the point of McCain knowing anything about Khalidi.

    Both McCain and Obama had a relationship with Khalidi via the grant writing process. Which is to say, no evidence of a relationship at all. Although, to the IRI’s credit, they vetted the CPRS with the Israeli government before granting any money to ensure the money wouldn’t be misused. They said the Israeli government had no issues.

    Perhaps Obama’s organization should have done some vetting of their own.

    Anyway, had I posted something about the money Obama helped funnel to the Khalidi’s Arab American Action Network when Obama was a paid director at the Woods Fund, your objection wouldn’t be completely irrelevant.

    But I didn’t. I brought up a personal relationship that the Obama’s had with the Khalidis that Barack Obama admits shaped his views on the Middle East.

    When McCain goes on record, as did Obama, to reminisce about being a frequent dinner guest at the Khalidis and the conversations they had that formed his views, you’ll have a point.

    Once he makes an inane speech in Cairo that could have been written by Khalidi, that is.

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  430. Although Imam Rauf, Columbia ’69, actually did take credit for it,

    narciso (87e966)

  431. Both McCain and Obama had a relationship with Khalidi via the grant writing process. Which is to say, no evidence of a relationship at all.

    Link:

    It turns out that McCain is treading on tricky ground when he cites the Khalidi case as an example of Obama consorting with terrorist sympathizers. The Obama campaign was quick to point out that an organization co-founded by Khalidi has received large sums of grant money from the International Republican Institute, chaired by McCain since 1993. One such grant was for $448,873 in 1998 to assist the Center for Palestine Research and Studies in its work in the West Bank.

    The Pinocchio Test
    This is a case of guilt by association gone haywire. Both President Bush and Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice have had extensive dealings with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who is much more closely identified with the PLO than Rashidi ever was. Verdict: the McCain camp has wildly exaggerated the significance of the Obama-Ayers-Khalidi triangle.

    Your double standard is self evident.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  432. Link:

    Wednesday’s Jerusalem Post has an article about the Times’ refusal to make the clip public. But the news story reports exactly what Obama did say about Khalidi, and frankly it is utter pabulum. Read for yourself. I assume that my Zionist credentials are not in dispute. And I have written more appreciative words about Khalidi than Obama ever uttered. In fact, I even invited Khalidi to speak for a Jewish organization with which I work. Moreover, the Israelis are trying to live cooperatively and in peace with Palestinians whose unrelenting positions make Khalidi almost appear like a Zionist.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  433. In retrospect, Peretz would like to take that paragraph back,

    narciso (87e966)

  434. at least to the point of McCain knowing anything about Khalidi

    What are you saying? That McCain handed him $448,873 despite not “knowing anything about Khalidi?” Makes perfect sense.

    Or that it’s OK to hand him $448,873 but not OK to be friends with him? Also makes perfect sense.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  435. In retrospect, Peretz would like to take that paragraph back

    How do you know, and why hasn’t he?

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  436. “What are you saying? That McCain handed him $448,873 despite not “knowing anything about Khalidi?” Makes perfect sense.”

    JBG – McCain handed Khalidi a check? Link please.

    Or did the organization of which McCain serve as temporary head award a grant to an organization of which Khalidi is listed as one of something like eight founders?

    Please clarify.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  437. JBG – Are you saying it was McCain’s personal money and it went directly into Khalidi’s pocket? Again, please clarify.

    How many meals did McCain share with the Khalidis compared to the Obama’s or the Obama’s with the Ayers. Please clarify.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  438. the organization of which McCain serve as temporary head

    Yes, it’s so “temporary” that he’s still the Chairman. Link.

    Do you have to make it so easy?

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  439. Typical Obot with their you did it too rhetoric.

    🙄

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  440. Typical Obot with their you did it too rhetoric.

    There you go again, making shit up. Where did I say McCain’s connection to Khalidi is wrong? I didn’t. What’s wrong is McCain’s hypocrisy.

    McCain’s Shameful Slur – The Republicans’ appalling attack on Rashid Khalidi.
    By Christopher Hitchens

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  441. Daley, it is like he or she never gets tired:

    http://youtu.be/OcLjLEOzsus

    Simon Jester (9d3a20)

  442. it is like he or she never gets tired

    More of your impressive self-awareness. Still waiting for you to post your mailing address.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  443. I didn’t say that she called him “a vulture capitalist.” I said that she called on him to back up his job-creation claims. If you don’t see that as an attack, that’s your problem.

    — You said she “joined the attack”. You lumped her comments in with Perry & Gingrich’s. Your entire tone was that this was legitimizing ‘proof’ of Newt’s outrageous claims.

    Context is important. Sarah Palin has not said ANYTHING against Bain Capital’s business practices. Nothing.

    Icy (0a3ca0)

  444. Why should he?

    And your ilk stereotype the south as racist even though ther eis racism in the north as well.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  445. there is*

    And the only racists in the south are southern leftys who treat Herman Cain like shat but he doesn’t count.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  446. he doesn’t count in your eyes.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  447. She is so silly, Icy. So very silly.

    It’s like bad tennis.

    And so very angry. Just make fun of her or him.

    Simon Jester (9d3a20)

  448. You said she “joined the attack”. You lumped her comments in with Perry & Gingrich’s. Your entire tone was that this was legitimizing ‘proof’ of Newt’s outrageous claims.

    What I actually said is this:

    Conservatives who want to stop Mitt now are also in a serious bind. They realize this is their last chance at stopping him, so they are motivated to press this attack (hence, for example, Palin joining in the attack). But they also realize they might only weaken him, without stopping him, and of course that’s a big favor to Obama.

    She wants to stop Mitt, just like they do. That’s why she attacked Mitt (by indicating that he hadn’t done enough to support his claims). I didn’t say the attacks are identical, but they are related.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  449. JBG – You’re just performance art. Like your happy horsesh*t about Veronica Flame being an NOC. Henry Nosrtildamus presents a second hand conversation with the CIA at a hearing and everyone is supposed to be satisfied? Guess again.

    Look for the missing words. Was Plame covert in accordance with the meaning of the IIPA. Not there. Did anybody from the CIA ever make that representation? If you have it, please provide a link. The fact that Fitzgerald ignored a Judge’s instructions and talked about her status says nothing. No determination was ever reached. Nobody was ever prosecuted for violating the IIPA, which speaks volumes about her status, as does her driving to work at Langley every day.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  450. Why should he?

    Follow the link and see if you can figure it out.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  451. Henry Nosrtildamus presents a second hand conversation with the CIA at a hearing

    If Hayden was misquoted so visibly on such an important matter, he needed to speak up. He didn’t.

    Nobody was ever prosecuted for violating the IIPA, which speaks volumes about her status

    OJ was acquitted. This obviously means he was innocent.

    as does her driving to work at Langley every day.

    Except that you don’t actually know how often she actually drove to Langley. But thanks for this excellent example of how wingnuts routinely confuse speculation with fact.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  452. What I actually said is this:
    — So sorry! Didn’t mean to misquote. Especially since “joining in the attack” makes it look EVEN MORE like you were associating her comments with a condemnation of Bain’s business practices.

    She wants to stop Mitt, just like they do. That’s why she attacked Mitt (by indicating that he hadn’t done enough to support his claims). I didn’t say the attacks are identical, but they are related.
    — Palin supports Perry. Her comments were an attempt to defend his attacks on Mitt. And lest we forget, the first thing she said was a defense of capitalism.

    Icy (0a3ca0)

  453. if OJ were a white southern and his girl were black the acquittal would have been seen as racism.

    The racism isn’t as bad in the south as it is with you northern libturds.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  454. Southerners*

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  455. Leftys like LBJ did not originally support the CRA but did when he saw the blacks voting for him.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  456. Especially since “joining in the attack” makes it look EVEN MORE like you were associating her comments with a condemnation of Bain’s business practices.

    Palin’s comments were an attack on Romney in connection with Bain. She wasn’t attacking “Bain’s business practices,” but she was suggeting that Mitt/Bain didn’t create as many jobs as claimed.

    Palin supports Perry.

    That’s not entirely clear, but it’s beside the point. Either way, she has a motive to attack Mitt.

    the first thing she said was a defense of capitalism.

    So what? I also defend capitalism. You not understanding the difference between capitalism and theft is your problem, not mine.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  457. You defend crony capitalism.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  458. Juiceboxhero’s give me your address thing is ridiculous, especially after what has happened to the host, AW, etc.

    JD (d5e24e)

  459. Redefining theft again. And lying.

    JD (d5e24e)

  460. I love how communists infiltrated hollywood but J.Edgar Hoover was evil for pointing it out………..if he had just blacklisted consevratives from hollyweird than all would be ok.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  461. Juiceboxhero’s give me your address thing is ridiculous

    Then you must agree with Justin that only certain people have the right to be “safely anonymous.”

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  462. Jukeboxskeetshooter thinks the FBI was racist for ensnaring those innocent hollyweirdos and not going after Chileans.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  463. And lying.

    That reminds me. Maybee said this:

    What’s the original source of the 10%?

    You responded as follows:

    There is no original source, MayBee. It is a fable that became accepted wisdom.

    You lied. There is a source for Obama’s magna cum laude. It’s not “a fable.” And then after lying, you lied about lying. Classic.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  464. I think you are a vile dissembling cretin who fancies himself as superior.

    JD (d5e24e)

  465. Hey you lie all the time so turnabout is fair play you psychotic slob and you probably think LBJ is a hero.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  466. Again, you do not get to determine my intent. I stated it quite clearly.

    JD (d5e24e)

  467. LBJ supported the CRA to cover his ass.

    Remember he said that he would keep those N words voting democraps for 200 years.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  468. you do not get to determine my intent.

    You do not get to pretend that you said something other than what you actually said.

    I stated it quite clearly.

    What you stated “quite clearly” is that Obama’s class rank is “a fable.” That makes you this: a liar.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  469. Hey you lie all the time

    Still waiting for you to present a single example. By the way, here’s an example of you lying:

    Juiceboxgrad is the same obot that said Palin called Obama a sambo

    Link?

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  470. I also accused you of sock puppetry by specifically stating I did not think you were doing so. I guess you know what I intended better than I.

    JD (d5e24e)

  471. I also accused you of sock puppetry by specifically stating I did not think you were doing so.

    You said you did not think I was doing so after you said you did think I was doing so. That’s what you were doing when you said this:

    Notice how juiceboxhero bolted when Gerald called out his dishonesty? And how we now have “fscott” around peddling a defense of sophistry with more sophistry?

    You have a charming habit of repeatedly running away from your own words.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  472. “…fancies himself…”

    Probably true on that one, JD. Probably true.

    Simon Jester (9d3a20)

  473. “If Hayden was misquoted so visibly on such an important matter, he needed to speak up. He didn’t.”

    JBG – Read my words and read Waxman’s words, I did not claim either were misquoted. If you have any evidence somebody from the CIA directly stated Plame qualified as covert for the purposes of the IIPA, please present it. I cannot recall ever seeing any.

    This should be easy for you, right?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  474. What, still no mailing address?

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  475. I clarified that within 8 minutes. Yet you continue to conflate them. I noted that fscitt picked up where you left off, and then clarified I thought it was a Dum and Dummerer act, hence 2 voices. You are apparently unable to read, or unwilling to listen. Either way, your act was tired 7 years ago.

    JD (d5e24e)

  476. His mailing address is none of your beeswax you bastage.

    Jukeboxbigot has a strange habit of projecting.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  477. Performance art

    JD (d5e24e)

  478. More likely a different agenda that one would suspect. For someone just having “fun” and having been around for seven years or so.

    Laugh and move on.

    Simon Jester (9d3a20)

  479. Is it true that MLK and LBJ butted heads over the vietnam war?

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  480. If Andrew Sullivan says Trig is not Sarah’s son it must be true. Right? Everything anybody ever says in print is true, is fully verified and must be believed by all–forever. No “fables” are possible if they’re in print. Right?

    elissa (252cbf)

  481. elissa – Eleventy!!!!!!!!!

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  482. Well Jukeboxpussys friends at Puffho said J.Edgar Hoover had MLK killed to cover up his role in the 9-11 attacks over 30 years later even though he was already dead by the time it happened.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  483. If you have any evidence somebody from the CIA directly stated Plame qualified as covert for the purposes of the IIPA

    Hayden said she was covert. If you think that means ‘covert but not covert for the purposes of the IIPA,’ the burden is on you to prove that. Are you familiar with Occam’s Razor? Here’s the plain meaning of covert: ‘covert for all intents and purposes.’

    Still waiting for you to prove your claim about “driving to work at Langley every day.”

    I clarified that within 8 minutes.

    No, you didn’t ‘clarify’ it. You changed your mind because Dustin said he thought you were wrong.

    I noted that fscitt picked up where you left off

    One more time, this is what you said:

    Notice how juiceboxhero bolted when Gerald called out his dishonesty? And how we now have “fscott” around peddling a defense of sophistry with more sophistry?

    The quote marks around his name give you away.

    His mailing address is none of your beeswax

    Then you must agree with Justin that only certain people have the right to be “safely anonymous.”

    If Andrew Sullivan says Trig is not Sarah’s son it must be true. Right? Everything anybody ever says in print is true, is fully verified and must be believed by all–forever. No “fables” are possible if they’re in print. Right?

    Someone else who won’t be convinced until they can personally sniff the placenta.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  484. Idiot.

    Wow jukeboxscum your trying to say Palins daughter had an incestual affair with her father to create Trig.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  485. She wasn’t attacking “Bain’s business practices,” but she was suggeting that Mitt/Bain didn’t create as many jobs as claimed

    Not much of an attack: she was calling on Mitt to back up his claim. Kinda like a teacher telling a student to show his work.

    But if that’s an attack to you, then we have different definitions of the word.

    Chuck Bartowski (3bccbd)

  486. We have poor healthcare thanks to Obamaromneydingadong care.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  487. Not much of an attack: she was calling on Mitt to back up his claim.

    Which is exactly what the Dems are going to be doing. With friends like that, he doesn’t need enemies.

    Wow jukeboxscum your trying to say Palins daughter had an incestual affair with her father to create Trig.

    I think you misunderstood. I was talking about this:

    “All we are asking is that the president produce a sample of his fetal membranes and vessels—preferably along with a photo of the crowning and delivery—and this will all be over,” said former presidential candidate and Afterbirthers spokesman Alan Keyes, later adding that his organization would be willing to settle for a half-liter of maternal cord plasma. “To this day, the American people have not seen a cervical mucus plug, let alone one that has been signed and notarized by a state-certified Hawaiian health official. If the president was indeed born in the manner in which he claims, then where is his gestation sac?” Keyes said that if Obama did not soon produce at least a bloody bedsheet from his conception, Afterbirthers would push forward with efforts to exhume the president’s deceased mother and inspect the corpse’s pelvic bone and birth canal.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  488. the Civil Rights movement has been poisoned by Jessie Jackwagon,Al Sharpdick and Jeremiah Wrong.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  489. You are a clown. I put quotes around fscott because it is another serial troll, repeatedly banned. That you and he are both sophists does not suggest I think you are the same. For someone that has read here for 7 years, you don’t learn much.

    JD (d5e24e)

  490. ” If you have any evidence somebody from the CIA directly stated Plame qualified as covert for the purposes of the IIPA

    Hayden said she was covert.”

    JBG – This is stale info. I don’t care what Waxman claimed Hayden said. You can stop repeating yourself. I can read my words and your words as well as you can.

    I am asking something different. It is a different standard of proof based on how the CIA describes its own people. Clearly you have no answer.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  491. Daleyrocks – for the purposes of the IIPA, aren’t there some pretty specific criteria that all must be met for a covert classification?

    I like how it conflated not being charged with acquitted

    JD (d5e24e)

  492. The democraps need to look in the mirror if they tell someone to back up their claims.

    And I don’t think magnet bombs are the Mossad’s cup of tea.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  493. That you and he are both sophists does not suggest I think you are the same.

    Naturally. That’s why Gerald responded to you as follows: “yeah I think fscott and jukeboxgrad may have the same IP address.” What an odd thing for him to say, since you were not trying to suggest that.

    For someone that has read here for 7 years

    I never said I “read here for 7 years.” More making shit up.

    It is a different standard of proof based on how the CIA describes its own people.

    Hayden was DCI. We know how he described Plame: “covert.” Sorry you can’t deal with that.

    Clearly you have no answer.

    Clearly you have no answer to this question: where’s your proof about “driving to work at Langley every day?”

    I like how it conflated not being charged with acquitted

    I guess your point is that “not being charged” is proof there was no crime. Brilliant.

    for the purposes of the IIPA, aren’t there some pretty specific criteria that all must be met for a covert classification?

    I guess your point is that outing a covert agent as fine, as long as it might be theoretically possible to construct a legalistic argument that they are not covert “for the purposes of the IIPA.” I’m glad your standards are so high.

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  494. I could have sworn that jukeboxgrad was banned.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  495. How dare the right try to reform Schools think about teh children.

    /Jukeboxbeeyotch

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  496. I could have sworn that jukeboxgrad was banned.

    I would hate to be the last to know.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  497. Oh wait I forgot if the teachers are right wingers they don’t deserve federal aids.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  498. Cuomo complaining about the bureaucracy is highly ironic.

    I swear Juiceboxgrad should hang out where he is accepted.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  499. But everyone is being so polite and civil towards me. Why would I think I’m not accepted here?

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  500. I love it when mendoucheous twatwaffles whine about civility. This one likes to Froma itself.

    JD (d5e24e)

  501. The only people whining about civility are the people who have accused me of not being civil.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  502. Froma

    JD (d5e24e)

  503. Jukeboxgrad-The only people whining about civility are the people who have accused me of not being civil.

    Froma Brothel is that you?

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  504. JD, you’ve always got a good fix on the idiot trolls. Don’t let them get under your skin, though. They aren’t worth even a second of your time.

    The ‘you said I was fscott’ thing is simply a troll. He sees you’ll correct the record about what you said, so he’s going to continue bringing that up. All he wants is a reaction from an intelligent person. It probably makes him feel better about what is surely a pathetic existence.

    It was interesting how that Yelverton dweeb would moan about how great he is (remember those leisure class comments?). It’s also amazing how this current troll asserts himself into demanding addresses and other information.

    These trolls don’t bother me as much anymore. They are just so lost in life that this ‘get a reaction’ mission is the best they’ve got when it’s time to make their mark on the world.

    Like I said, not worth the time.

    Dustin (cb3719)

  505. What are you saying? That McCain handed him $448,873 despite not “knowing anything about Khalidi?” Makes perfect sense.

    Or that it’s OK to hand him $448,873 but not OK to be friends with him? Also makes perfect sense.

    I don’t know if you’re being deliberately obtuse.

    The problem is we have a President whose tiers mondiste instincts have been tutored by the likes of a mouthpiece for the PLO (and don’t try to claim Khalidi never was; he not only was identified as such in reporting at the time, but he continued to claim the link until it became a liability) and a charlatan who is considered by some to be a historian.

    Here’s a YouTube video of the man himself discrediting himself by claiming that Leon Uris’ book “Exodus” (later a Paul Newman flick) was essentially the product of a hidden Jewish conspiracy. Masterminded, he claims, by a man who is in Khalidi’s words sometimes considered “the founder of public relations in the United States,” Edward Gottlieb. According to Khalidi Gottlieb secured Uris’ funding, and scored such a coup that he “deserves his place in the public relations pantheon.”

    All complete fiction, which is Khalidi’s type of history. Two men vie for the title of “founder of PR;” some think it’s Ivy Ledbetter Lee, but most credit Edward Bernays. Nor did Uris get his funding from Gottlieb; he was already a successful screenwriter. You may have heard of his work. He secured his funding by selling the movie rights before heading off to write the book. And, yes, he does deserve his place in the “pantheon” of PR. He has none. He has no place in the pantheon. He doesn’t rate a mention; not even his own wikipedia article (try it; you’ll get “Mr. Basketball”).

    Khalidi’s the real PR genious. That’s why I suppose the PLO hired him.

    Dealing in lies is what he does. One which finally caught up with him (somewhat) is the whopper that the Israeli Minister of Defense Moshe Ya’alon once said that “the Palestinians must be made to understand in the deepest recesses of their consciousness that they are a defeated people.”. Note that the NYT admits they removed that quote from Rashidi’s op ed because they say it’s never been verified. As the Columbia Journalism Review observed, the NYT was being itslelf deceptive as it’s weak retraction could leave many readers thinking the quote might be true. In fact, it’s been thoroughly debunked as Mr. Ya’alon said the exact opposite; that the Palestinians had to be made to understand they could never defeat the Israelis through terrorism.

    Major newspapers have been forced to issue retractions concerning this since 2004. This has not stopped Khalidi from using it in his books, op-eds, essays, and interviews. The op-ed I cited is from 2009, and he wrote another (after the NYT issued its reaction) in the LA Times again using the same quote.

    As newspaper editors have observed, retractions don’t matter to such people as Khalidi the PLO shill. It fits the agenda. The important thing is to get the propaganda past the editors. The readers will see that, not the retraction days or weeks later.

    He remains in the business of rewriting and distorting history, facts be d****d, such as in this <a href="

    What are you saying? That McCain handed him $448,873 despite not “knowing anything about Khalidi?” Makes perfect sense. Or that it’s OK to hand him $448,873 but not OK to be friends with him? Also makes perfect sense.

    I don’t know if you’re being deliberately obtuse. The problem is we have a President whose tiers mondiste instincts have been tutored by the likes of a mouthpiece for the PLO (and don’t try to claim Khalidi never was; he not only was identified as such in reporting at the time, but he continued to claim the link until it became a liability) and a charlatan who is considered by some to be a historian. Here’s a YouTube video of the man himself discrediting himself by claiming that Leon Uris’ book “Exodus” (later a Paul Newman flick) was essentially the product of a hidden Jewish conspiracy. Masterminded, he claims, by a man who is in Khalidi’s words sometimes considered “the founder of public relations in the United States,” Edward Gottlieb. According to Khalidi Gottlieb secured Uris’ funding, and scored such a coup that he “deserves his place in the public relations pantheon.” All complete fiction, which is Khalidi’s type of history. Two men vie for the title of “founder of PR;” some think it’s Ivy Ledbetter Lee, but most credit Edward Bernays. Nor did Uris get his funding from Gottlieb; he was already a successful screenwriter. You may have heard of his work. He secured his funding by selling the movie rights before heading off to write the book. And, yes, he does deserve his place in the “pantheon” of PR. He has none. He has no place in the pantheon. He doesn’t rate a mention; not even his own wikipedia article (try it; you’ll get “Mr. Basketball”). Khalidi’s the real PR genious. That’s why I suppose the PLO hired him. Dealing in lies is what he does. One which finally caught up with him (somewhat) is the whopper that the Israeli Minister of Defense Moshe Ya’alon once said that “the Palestinians must be made to understand in the deepest recesses of their consciousness that they are a defeated people.”. Note that the NYT admits they removed that quote from Rashidi’s op ed because they say it’s never been verified. As the Columbia Journalism Review observed, the NYT was being itslelf deceptive as it’s weak retraction could leave many readers thinking the quote might be true. In fact, it’s been thoroughly debunked as Mr. Ya’alon said the exact opposite; that the Palestinians had to be made to understand they could never defeat the Israelis through terrorism. Major newspapers have been forced to issue retractions concerning this since 2004. This has not stopped Khalidi from using it in his books, op-eds, essays, and interviews. The op-ed I cited is from 2009, and he wrote another (after the NYT issued its reaction) in the LA Times again using the same quote. As newspaper editors have observed, retractions don’t matter to such people as Khalidi the PLO shill. It fits the agenda. The important thing is to get the propaganda past the editors. The readers will see that, not the retraction days or weeks later. He remains in the business of rewriting and distorting history, facts be d****d ” target=”_blank”>Chicago Tribune opinion piece.

    The problem is, this polemicist is the man who Obama chooses to tutor his tiers mondiste instincts. (Like Rashidi, when needs be Obama lies about his own past and portray intimate friends who impacted his thinking as merely casual associations when those friends become liabilities.) Every single one, which are too many too go into here, of Rashidi’s falsehoods and distortions would not be out of place in one of Obama’s speeches.

    Actually, some of Khalidi’s falsehoods and distortions have made it into some of Obama’s speeches (particularly when he was a Senator).

    On some issues one might be able to draw some distinction between the two men. But on others, such as Obama’s bizarre position of the Israelis building apartments in Jerusalam, Khalidi’s influence (and Edward Said’s) is unmistakable.

    No one who is familiar with Khalidi’s work was at all surprised when Obama dug in his heels on “settlements” which aren’t really settlements, his administration’s insistence the Muslim Brotherhood is “largely secular,” his reluctance to condemn the Iranian government’s violence following the 2009 election, his obstinate insistence that Bashar Assad was a reformer, etc., etc., ad infimitum.

    That’s the problem. The self-proclaimed “student of history” was indoctrinated by, amongst others, a Palestinian polemicist at numerous intimate dinner parties. And now, given the President’s constitutional powers to put his own individual stamp on foreign, when it comes to the middle east the credulous Obama’s foreign policy bears Khalidi’s stamp.

    I suppose, jukebox, since you’ve dedicated yourself to obfuscating on Obama’s behalf it probably does help to be deliberately unfamiliar with Khalidi’s ideology. That way you can pretend my point has to do with some sort of arms-length relationship that (if you studiously avoid the differences) you can claim is really no different than McCain’s.

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  506. Sorry for the cut-&-paste error. My optical mouse seems to have it in for me. Usually I catch it when it selects and then cuts or copies text before I send or submit, but this time it blew up on me.

    I was referring to this opinion piece Khalidi wrote last summer for the Chicago Tribune when I wrote that Khalidi’s distortions and falsehoods wouldn’t be out of place in Obama’s speeches.

    Also, the above link to Edward Bernays obituary doesn’t work. This one links to an article on the history of public relations on the Buffalo State College website. It’s perhaps better as not only does it identify Bernays as the founder of the public relations profession in the US, but once again you can see that, despite the ersatz historian Khalidi’s unsupported and unsupportable claims to the opposite, you simply won’t find Edward Gottlieb mentioned in the history of PR. He not only doesn’t have a place in the “pantheon,” he’s not even a footnote.

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  507. Just think Froma Brothel could be something but instead she opened her legs for our trolls.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  508. You not understanding the difference between capitalism and theft is your problem, not mine.

    — And you not providing a shred of evidence that Romney committed the crime of “theft” is yours.

    Icy (0a3ca0)

  509. I suppose I should provide some evidence to support the fact that Rashid Khalidi was indeed a PLO spokesman.

    The Gun and the Olive Branch – The PLO

    It is, as you will see summarized at the link, an archived 1979 radio “documentary on the history, development, and ideology of the PLO. Includes interviews with PLO spokesman Rhashid Khalidy and TV director Ehud Ya’ari.”

    It’s quite interesting to hear the official PLO spokesman Khalidi in his own words justifying the use of bombs to kill innocent men women an children.

    Of course, when he found it convenient to reinvent himself as a moderate he did what he always does with history. He rewrote it meet his shifting professional needs.

    A lot of people will believe one thing one day, the opposite the next. Some people can even believe one thing and the opposite thing at the same time.

    Think Froma Harrop.

    Such people aren’t always attracted to journalism. Politics attracts them as well.

    I strongly believe this about Obama, but I don’t think his relationship with Khalidi is evidence of it.

    As he’s demonstrated numerous times, he’s so clueless about history that I’m sure he has no clue what was going on in the wider universe that wasn’t centered on him back in the late ’79s/early ’80s.

    And like jukeboxgrad’s blind faith in Mr. Lindgren, if the “respected scholar” Khalidi tells him what he wants to believe he’ll believe it.

    After all, Khalidi’s an Ivy League perfesser!

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  510. Khalidi was another one of the late Christopher Hitchens’s blindspots.

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  511. And yes Obama is continuing Bushs pro-bailout policies so he ain’t cleaning shit.

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  512. In light of the bringing up of Laszlo Pasztor, he was the Hungarian national who was involved with
    the Arrow Cross in his youth, it’s instructive to know that Arafat’s uncle Haj Amin Husseini, was Hitler and Mussolini’s man in the Levant, and raised
    the Handschar (Scimitar)SS division, to fight in the Balkans and Central Europe, He had been so instrumental in that threatre of operations, that
    it was seriously considered to have him in th dock in Nuremberg, by the way, Pazstor is a big Ron Paul fan,

    narciso (87e966)

  513. In order to reduce Gorebull Warming which doesn’t exist you can use solar panels never mind you’ll be screwed at night.

    /Brian Williams

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  514. Newsweek comes to its senses…

    http://t.co/TIRExHgM

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  515. or more like beaten senseless…

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  516. If we don’t make Gorebull Warming a part of the GOP campaign the world will end in 2012…………..now if you mind me I need to go to Monaco on my private plane.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  517. /Al Gore

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  518. not providing a shred of evidence that Romney committed the crime of “theft”

    Forbes Magazine:

    In one get-rich-quick scheme, a dividend recap let Bain Capital turn an $18 million stake in faltering kb Toys into $85 million in cash–but left kb itself in much weaker shape.

    Next up, you’ll explain how it’s OK that it was a “get-rich-quick scheme,” as long as it wasn’t technically “theft” according to the IIPA. You guys have high standards.

    JD, you’ve always got a good fix on the idiot trolls.

    Wow, one liar defending another liar. What a surprise. Dustin, here’s one of my favorite lies of yours:

    the only thing we really know about Obama’s grades is from Obama’s own memoirs.

    That statement is false. When are you going to take responsibility for it?

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  519. Anything said about Palin is gospel in your eyes.

    Get laid.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  520. Isn’t it telling that PETA and leftys care more about certain animals than the death of the babies.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  521. Funny how jukeboxgrad’s standards are so high for others and yet so low for himself.

    Well, not funny really.

    I could have sworn he was banned …

    SPQR (26be8b)

  522. I’m watching off the rockers it is funny despite me not agreeing with Betty White.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  523. Hard to say, SPQR.

    I’m always bemused by folks who get banned and return over and over again (imdw comes to mind). Though the Returning Trolls usually are awfully tempery. Maybe the banning stuff is why. Still, no matter. Reactive trolls are reactive trolls. The goal is to stir people up and get them scurrying about.

    I much prefer to laugh at them. Because they really are pretty silly.

    Simon Jester (9d3a20)

  524. Money and the supreme court are trying to run roughshod for teh GOP……………..by doing Obamas dirty work

    /Brian Williams

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  525. Leave it to the left to conflate nazism and communism in order to go after the FBI.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  526. But everyone is being so polite and civil towards me. Why would I think I’m not accepted here?

    People tend to get what they dish out here. Sometimes mostly polite people get worse than they dish out, and when that happens I try to intervene. But I do not intervene for people who act like jerks, calling people liars without bulletproof facts to back up the assertion, or demanding addresses from people and such.

    Guess which category you fall in, jukeboxgrad?

    Simon Jester has a track record here, jukeboxgrad. You do not. You want to come in guns a-blazing despite your lack of earned credibility, be my guest . . . but don’t come whining when you get the treatment you have asked for.

    I’m not above moderating people who persist in being assholes. Is that what you’re angling for? If so, just say the word and I’ll arrange it.

    Patterico (d508e7)

  527. Yes nazism and communism are two sides of the same coin but the left love to accuse those who oppose communism as being nazis.

    And why do the left insist that da jews were warned abut 9-11 when they weren’t?

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  528. And yes da jooooooooooos look after each other and don’t care about others………..I frickin hat ehow the left project their views on to others via anti-semetic stereotypes.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  529. Next up, you’ll explain how it’s OK that it was a “get-rich-quick scheme,” as long as it wasn’t technically “theft” according to the IIPA. You guys have high standards.

    — My standard is this: profits = good, stealing = bad. Of course (of course!) you’re trying to play it both ways: calling it “theft” and then falling back on “immoral” when challenged to provide evidence of a crime.

    Icy (0a3ca0)

  530. hate how*

    Doesn’t Nancy ghettolosi get rich via get rich quick schemes?

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  531. Social Conservatives are not racist no matter how much the shatheads on the left such as yourself say so Juiceboxlesbian.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  532. And not only that truther leftys only 5 israelis died. Which is more than zero Juiceboxbigot.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  533. not providing a shred of evidence that Romney committed the crime of “theft”

    Forbes Magazine:

    In one get-rich-quick scheme, a dividend recap let Bain Capital turn an $18 million stake in faltering kb Toys into $85 million in cash–but left kb itself in much weaker shape.

    Next up, you’ll explain how it’s OK that it was a “get-rich-quick scheme,” as long as it wasn’t technically “theft” according to the IIPA. You guys have high standards.

    What has this got to do with Romney? Whether it was right or wrong, it happened after he left Bain, so it’s irrelevant.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  534. Wow, one liar defending another liar. What a surprise. Dustin, here’s one of my favorite lies of yours:

    the only thing we really know about Obama’s grades is from Obama’s own memoirs.

    That statement is false. When are you going to take responsibility for it?

    There’s much talk on Obama’s grades on this comment thread. I just want to see what courses this guy took.

    I don’t much care what grades the instructors gave him in “The History of Colonization and Capitalist Imperialism,” “Race, Gender, and Economics,” “Palestinians in Literature and Theater,” or “Socialist Criminology: Marx, Engels, Lenin, and other theorists on the Root Causes of Crime and Terrorism.”

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  535. My standard is this: profits = good, stealing = bad.

    And, presumably, that people are responsible for what happens at companies they control, not at companies they merely hold shares in.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  536. And, presumably, that people are responsible for what happens at companies they control, not at companies they merely hold shares in.

    Not necessarily. I wouldn’t say that Cathy Zoi, Obama’s Assistant Secretary of Energy and Assistant Secretary or Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy was entirely innocent of the theft of tax payer dollars by Serious Materials and Landis+Gyr. Or rather, she directed the theft of taxpayer dollars by directing the spending of stimulus funding and advocating (including testifying before Congress) and overseeing programs that directly benefited those companies.

    Especially when her husband was a VP at Serious Materials, and together they owned 120,000 shares of stock, and she had $265K invested with Landis+Gyr.

    Both Serious Materials and Landis+Gyr are privately traded, and don’t have to issue financial reports, so I don’t know how much Cathy Zoi and her husband made on their investments during her tenure.

    It wasn’t just Steve Spinner that were directly involved stimulus spending decisions, etc., that benefited themselves and their family members.

    And friends. Al Gore’s Abengoa energy got a huge grant from DOE, courtesy of Zoi, who moved from her job as CEO of Mr. Gore’s climate advocacy Green Group to join the Obama admin. And that’s just one company in which he was heavily invested and on the board that benefited from grants that Zoi administered.

    She’s not at DOE anymore. She exited through the Obama administration’s revolving door to join George Soros when he started Silver Lake Kraftwerk, a cleantech investment fund. She’s part of what green investors are calling the “dream team” that Soros created since she has more inside information on potential new subsidy recipients.

    At the very least these are “can’t lose” investments as we all know from the Solyndra experience, the investors are first in line if they don’t take off. I’m sure the Obama administration and all those who benefit from his philanthropy want to see Cathy Zoi and her boss do well.

    So, no, I don’t think you have to necessarily be at the actual helm of the company to be held responsible for theft.

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  537. calling people liars without bulletproof facts to back up the assertion, or demanding addresses from people and such.

    I did present “bulletproof facts” regarding all that, and I can’t find the part of your comment where you show otherwise.

    And just to pick one of many examples, maybe you can explain why anyone should view the following statement as something other than a lie:

    Juiceboxgrad is the same obot that said Palin called Obama a sambo

    I suggest you start with this google: jukeboxgrad palin sambo. Is that “bulletproof” enough for you?

    On the other hand, maybe it’s perfectly OK with you if I assert that you said all sorts of things that you never actually said.

    By the way, what word would you use to describe someone who falsely claims that a lie is something other than a lie? Because that’s what you’re doing.

    Whether it was right or wrong, it happened after he left Bain, so it’s irrelevant.

    I addressed this in the other thread. And here’s something I didn’t mention: he’s still collecting payments from Bain, even now, which makes him at least partially responsible for how the money is earned.

    Also, what is his current ownership interest? Do you know? What was it at the time? Do you know? Because that also is a factor that makes him responsible.

    And, presumably, that people are responsible for what happens at companies they control, not at companies they merely hold shares in.

    Yes, that will be a very convincing argument. ‘I’m not responsible for bad acts by the company I built, but I’m perfectly happy to keep living off the fruits of those bad acts.’ Hopefully Mitt will be smart enough to try that one.

    I don’t much care what grades the instructors gave him in “The History of Colonization and Capitalist Imperialism,” “Race, Gender, and Economics,” “Palestinians in Literature and Theater,” or “Socialist Criminology: Marx, Engels, Lenin, and other theorists on the Root Causes of Crime and Terrorism.”

    Thanks for revealing yourself as someone else who knows nothing about Harvard Law School.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  538. F-Harvard and all the laws students.
    If attorneys were to disappear from this earth, God would smile.

    sickofrinos (44de53)

  539. F-Harvard and all the laws students.

    What a shame that you’re about to nominate someone else who graduated from Harvard Law School.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  540. Not me. Fool.

    sickofrinos (44de53)

  541. Then I assume you’re planning to vote Libertarian. Just curious.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  542. I don’t much care what grades the instructors gave him in “The History of Colonization and Capitalist Imperialism,” “Race, Gender, and Economics,” “Palestinians in Literature and Theater,” or “Socialist Criminology: Marx, Engels, Lenin, and other theorists on the Root Causes of Crime and Terrorism.”

    Thanks for revealing yourself as someone else who knows nothing about Harvard Law School.

    Here’s a handy fun fact for you, jukebox!

    He’d had to have an undergraduate degree from somewhere other than Harvard Law School in order to get into Harvard Law School, genius.

    Rumor has it he went to Occidental College and Columbia Univerity. Not many people know this, but they keep records known as “transcripts.”

    And since you apparently don’t know what goes on at Harvard Law School, I thought I’d provide a link to their Application Checklist. If you can count that high, take a gander at item no. 3.

    Thanks for clearing up one of the things I said I was uncertain about earlier.

    You are definitely not being deliberately obtuse; you seem to have a natural aptitude for it.

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  543. Steve, it is just like whack a mole, or a Weeble, with this person. She or he only posts to fight, sneer, move goalposts, split hairs, and then sneer some more.

    Odd sort of “fun”.

    Better to laugh. Because this one has to clean the spittle of her or his screen very often. Kind of sad, come to think of it.

    How is this approach different from trolls like imdw, truthnjustice, etc?

    Simon Jester (9d3a20)

  544. But I guess some people like that sort of thing, on reflection. I mean, I do appreciate seeing some of the links and arguments that people make in this situation.

    And it was fun to see “Newsbusters” (which had a link to the original article) made fun of, while the fun-maker was posting things from Kos and similar sites.

    Sigh. Politics has gotten pretty nasty. Same as it ever was, I suppose.

    Simon Jester (9d3a20)

  545. Next up, you’ll explain how it’s OK that it was a “get-rich-quick scheme,” as long as it wasn’t technically “theft” according to the IIPA. You guys have high standards

    One assumes, therefore, that you are actively working to eliminate state lotteries everywhere, since those are “get-rich-quick schemes”, and you think that’s somehow wrong.

    Or do you not hold yourself to the same high standards you hold everyone else?

    Chuck Bartowski (3bccbd)

  546. CB, I once read an article by a progressive that called the lottery “an involuntary tax on the poor.”

    You see, the poor blighters just can’t help themselves! They need government to tell them what to do.

    That is the worm at the core of the progressivist flower: they itch to control others.

    Simon Jester (9d3a20)

  547. I love cilantro, you haters.

    Leviticus (300e0a)

  548. ________________________________________________

    What a shame that you’re about to nominate someone else who graduated from Harvard Law School.

    Personally, I’m not as curious about the scholastic background of a person — president or otherwise — as much as I’m curious whether the following does or doesn’t apply to him or her:

    If you’re not a liberal at 20 you have no heart, if you’re not a conservative at 40 you have no brain.

    BTW, Obama turned 50 last year, and I’d be surprised if he were much less leftwing (if at all) now than he was during his days in grade school or college.

    Even whiz kids on campus can be “mentally challenged” when it comes to their level of common sense. But they’re truly deficient in that regard — intrinsically so — if they never philosophically evolve and mature as they go through life.

    Mark (411533)

  549. SJ, I once talked with a woman who said the same thing. She was opposed to lotteries, casino gambling, horse racing…any form of gambling, because it hurt the poor. She was a far left-wing Democrat by her own admission.

    It’s always the Dems who claim to know best for the people. People can’t be trusted to spend their own money the right way. People can’t be trusted to earn money the right way. People can’t be trusted to educate their children in the right schools, or drive the right cars, or eat the right foods.

    [note: fished from spam filter. –Stashiu]

    Chuck Bartowski (3bccbd)

  550. Apparently, I am in moderation, and have no idea why.

    Chuck Bartowski (3bccbd)

  551. “Next up, you’ll explain how it’s OK that it was a “get-rich-quick scheme,” as long as it wasn’t technically “theft” according to the IIPA. You guys have high standards”

    Chuck – JBG was just butt hurt when I pointed out he has not produced anyone on record from the CIA saying Valerie Plame was covert for the purposes of the IIPA. You would think they could produce even a written statement to that effect.

    Passive investors are always responsible for the conduct of their investees? This must be a new legal requirement. I would need to see the legal citation for that assertion by JBG.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  552. C’mon, Leviticus. You are a young dude. It’s “h8rs.”

    As in “don’t drink the h8r-ade,” or “quit taking the ele-h8r.”

    And I like cilantro, too.

    Simon Jester (9d3a20)

  553. “I addressed this in the other thread.”

    JBG – I addressed it by saying it was simimlar to other transactions he completed at Bain of which you offered no evidence.

    I invited you to describe such transactions.

    You served up the example of Dade Behring. Romney left Bain three months before the recapitalization of Dade Behring.

    Another FAIL on your part.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  554. Daley, I saw that thread. I was just amused that JBG would cite an article claiming something was a get-rich-quick scheme as evidence that it was wrong.

    Tom Cruise makes $20 million for working on a movie 9 months. By any reasonable measure, that’s a get-rich-quick scheme (a lot of money in a relatively short time, and judging by Cruise’s activing talents, no extraordinary effort). But nobody complains about its immorality.

    But let a company make a bundle of money on something that isn’t actually illegal, and JBG whines about it.

    Chuck Bartowski (3bccbd)

  555. Daley, thank you for continuing. You know how PJ O’Rourke once described government? A bore-in; the people awake at the end of the session get to spend the tax money.

    Trolls are like that; they shuck and jive and play word games—the goal is to get people to do the heavy lifting and run back and forth. And when folks inevitably get tired, they shrill their victory.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  556. Apparently, I am in moderation, and have no idea why.

    Comment by Chuck Bartowski

    I guarantee it’s got nothing to do with you personally. I bet something in your comment triggered the spam filter, and sometimes it’s hard to say (I would name a few examples, but then you wouldn’t be able to see my comment).

    Happens to everybody.

    Dustin (7362cd)

  557. Why, Chuck! Mr. Cruise has to make all that money to support Scientology!

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  558. Occidental College and Columbia Univerity.

    I already addressed that silliness here. Try to keep up.

    while the fun-maker was posting things from Kos and similar sites.

    As usual, you’re having trouble getting your facts straight. I used a Kos link precisely once, here, and it was strictly for the purpose of proving that Dohbiden’s idiotic statement (“Juxeboxgrad is Charles Johnson”) was idiotic. I rarely cited left-wing sites. Mostly I’ve cited sites like these:

    hughhewitt.com
    american.com (AEI)
    nypost.com
    wsj.com
    britannica.com
    forbes.com

    Yes, that’s quite a collection of leftists.

    In any case, if there’s an error in anything I’ve cited, you’ve presented an impressive number of examples: zero.

    it was fun to see “Newsbusters” (which had a link to the original article) made fun of

    More baloney. The newsbusters item had no link any “article.” It linked to a letter-to-the-editor written by some clown no one ever heard of, making unsubstantiated claims. That’s not an “article.”

    One assumes, therefore, that you are actively working to eliminate state lotteries everywhere, since those are “get-rich-quick schemes”, and you think that’s somehow wrong.

    No, a lottery is not a “get-rich-quick scheme.” It’s an honest game of chance. When Forbes described Bain’s “get-rich-quick scheme,” they weren’t describing something honest.

    And aside from that, whether or not I’m “actively working to eliminate state lotteries” is deeply irrelevant. I’m not making any claims about lotteries, and I’m not even making any general claims about “get-rich-quick schemes.” I’m making a point about Willard’s political vulnerabilities. Forbes Magazine describing a Bain deal as a “get-rich-quick scheme” is not going to help him. And there’s going to be a lot more where that came from.

    I was just amused that JBG would cite an article claiming something was a get-rich-quick scheme as evidence that it was wrong.

    The only mystery is why you’re not in charge of Mitt’s campaign. This would be a brilliant statement for him to make: ‘my wealth was buit by get-rich-quick schemes, but that’s not wrong.’

    Tom Cruise makes $20 million for working on a movie 9 months.

    The point of the article is not just that Bain made a lot of money quickly. The point of the article is that Bain made a lot of money quickly by doing something underhanded. Duh.

    But let a company make a bundle of money on something that isn’t actually illegal, and JBG whines about it.

    Not everything that’s legal is ethical. Duh. Again, you demonstrate your high standards.

    he has not produced anyone on record from the CIA saying Valerie Plame was covert for the purposes of the IIPA

    I guess your point is that outing a covert agent as fine, as long as it might be theoretically possible to construct a legalistic argument that they are not covert “for the purposes of the IIPA.” I’m glad your standards are so high.

    Passive investors are always responsible for the conduct of their investees?

    I hope you and your little straw man are having lots of fun together. Where did I say “always?” I didn’t. What’s relevant is not “always.” What’s relevant are the facts of this instance, and it’s a problem for Mitt that he’s hiding those facts. How much is he currently collecting from Bain? How much has he collected over the years since he left? How much of the company does he own? How much does he participate in management decisions? How much detail is reported to him?

    Do you know the answers? Because lots of people are going to be asking these questions. And sane people are going to understand that the answers are a lot more relevant than Obama’s grades at Occidental.

    Romney left Bain three months before the recapitalization of Dade Behring.

    You’re ignoring what I already told you: he maintained a controlling interest in Bain after he left.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  559. Actually, I think Tom Cruise is a great actor. I really liked that recent Mission Impossible movie.

    He’s no expert on psychiatry, but he’s a good action movie hero.

    Dustin (7362cd)

  560. Wow. Such typing skills!

    Say: how about listening to Patterico? It’s kind of his blog, you know? I would normally point out that your snottiness and insults take away from your arguments.

    But you are just posting here to fight. And to be so very, very angry.

    Which is quite, quite interesting.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  561. Dustin, I liked the last movie, too. But he had a lot of reverses of late, so I was glad to see his getting back to his game.

    #559 was in response to Wall O’ Text #3 of the day.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  562. how about listening to Patterico?

    What did he say that I’m not listening to?

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  563. No, a lottery is not a “get-rich-quick scheme.” It’s an honest game of chance. When Forbes described Bain’s “get-rich-quick scheme,” they weren’t describing something honest

    Exactly what did Bain do that was illegal?

    Chuck Bartowski (3bccbd)

  564. Where did I say that Bain did something illegal?

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  565. Proving my point yet again, angry person. Such a troll. But you know what? There are lovely, wonderful things all around you. Enjoy those things.

    Fighting isn’t fun.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  566. I’ve been out on personal stuff for 5 days, which is just when jukeboxgrad started back in. Bad timing, sorry. I’m still getting caught up which will take me into late tonight at least. I will say that I remember jukeboxhero from a couple of years ago. Too bad he didn’t stay gone.

    Stashiu3 (601b7d)

  567. Proving my point yet again, angry person.

    Some people understand that responding when addressed is usually considered polite. Not responding is what would usually be considered angry. Things on your planet might be different, though.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  568. Stashiu3, was this person as angry and insulting before as now? I mean, it’s almost parody.

    If I didn’t know better, I would have thought that this is one of the Usual Banned Suspects, trying to Speak Truth to Power again.

    But we usually find out, if true.

    Still, I found it amusing that this one actually used the word “polite” without bursting into Flames of Hypocrisy.

    Better to laugh at him or her. Silly.

    More to the point, Stashiu3, I hope that things are going okay. I always appreciate your thoughts and input, and not just while you are on the thankless task of Troll Patrol.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  569. Stashiu–good to see you. Attempting to hijack a thread and discouraging/frustrating sane commenters from even trying to carry on a relatively reasoned conversation seems to be the dealio. Unfortunately it’s been working all too well.

    elissa (252cbf)

  570. Stashiu3, was this person as angry and insulting before as now?
    Comment by Simon Jester — 1/17/2012 @ 9:56 am

    Yes.

    Stashiu3 (601b7d)

  571. I agree, elissa. Except when daley and others patiently respond to the Argument Room Troll, there is often some interesting reading involved.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  572. Thank you, Stashiu3. The tone and language sure sounds familiar to me.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  573. I will say that I remember jukeboxhero from a couple of years ago.

    It could be that I missed something, but I’m pretty sure that the last time I was here was almost three years ago, on one thread (link). And there was another thread in 2008 and another thread in 2005. I think that’s everything. But I’m glad that was enough to make an impression on you.

    Stashiu3, was this person as angry and insulting before as now?

    Now you have the links so you can go see for yourself.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  574. Ah, irony abounds.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  575. Yes Simon. Don’t we all keep track of every post we have ever left on every discrete site on the internet over the period of a decade? And be able to link to them at a moment’s notice?

    Cue twilight zone music.

    elissa (252cbf)

  576. I would exercise caution, elissa. There has been a LOT of odd stuff around here the last year or so, right?

    My spider-sense is tingling, and not in a Chris Mathews way.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  577. Don’t we all keep track of every post we have ever left on every discrete site on the internet over the period of a decade? And be able to link to them at a moment’s notice?

    They’re rare, but I guess there are still a few people who have no idea how to use google.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  578. 563.Where did I say that Bain did something illegal?

    Nowhere, and that’s the point.

    The only thing you said was that Forbes Magazine called it a get-rich-quick scheme, and that it was somehow unethical. If what Bain did was so horrible, why not pass a law to make it illegal?

    The other problem I have with this is that in the 1990s, I learned that it was okay for a President to to unethical things as long as they weren’t actually illegal. But I guess you were out there calling for Clinton’s head at the time?

    Chuck Bartowski (3bccbd)

  579. In the 2009 thread I posted only 6 comments, and in the 2005 thread I posted only one. But in the 2008 thread I posted several dozen. Which led to someone making this remarkable statement at the end of the thread:

    You seem interested in actually talking about this topic in depth which I appreciate because most of those who say there were no links wont’ even debate it. Thanks for your comments.

    Another sockpuppet, obviously.

    If what Bain did was so horrible, why not pass a law to make it illegal?

    The nice thing about Mitt running is that a lot of people are going to be thinking about that question, and other similar questions. The GOP would prefer for these questions to not come up, but at this point it’s pretty unavoidable.

    But I guess you were out there calling for Clinton’s head at the time?

    Here’s a surprise for you: I never voted for Clinton. But let me know if you have any other irrelevant questions based on stupid assumptions.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  580. Here’s a surprise for you: I never voted for Clinton. But let me know if you have any other irrelevant questions based on stupid assum

    Non sequitur. I didn’t ask whether you voted for Clinton, and who you voted for was immaterial. Nice try, though.

    The nice thing about Mitt running is that a lot of people are going to be thinking about that question, and other similar questions.

    So, Bain didn’t actually do anything illegal, and no one in the years since has thought to make what Bain did illegal. But somehow that’s a bad thing for Romney. Ooooookaaaaaay.

    Chuck Bartowski (3bccbd)

  581. Hey, MayBee, elissa? I loved this character quoting someone else saying something nice about him.

    Most of us don’t need that kind of thing. It’s like she or he has utterly no idea how she or he appears.

    Vanity Smurf wouldn’t care what other people think enough to remember and find something complimentary from a couple of years prior. So maybe he or she isn’t quite as self-confident as it might appear.

    Still a silly angry troll. And after that one, I would add “funny.”

    Simon Jester (f225fb)

  582. And THIS is particularly funny, in an ironic way:

    “….I guess there are still a few people who have no idea how to use google….”

    Right? Wow.

    Simon Jester (f225fb)

  583. Jukeboxnazi is an idiot.

    By the way sorry for posting 5 things consecutively.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  584. I didn’t ask whether you voted for Clinton

    Your irrelevant question was based on your incorrect assumption that I supported Clinton.

    So, Bain didn’t actually do anything illegal

    We don’t actually know that. We just know there are some things that look rotten, so questions are going to be raised.

    and no one in the years since has thought to make what Bain did illegal

    Uh, no. There have been attempts to regulate that kind of scheme, but of course the GOP has blocked those attempts. But thanks to Mitt, voters who never thought much about these issues are going to be thinking about these issues. Not something the GOP wants. Hence the hysterical reaction to Newt to get him to shutup as quickly as possible.

    But somehow that’s a bad thing for Romney.

    Yes, voters wondering why that kind of get-rich-quick scheme is still legal is a bad thing for Romney. And the GOP.

    I loved this character quoting someone else saying something nice about him.

    You think that was someone else? I told you, it was obviously a sockpuppet.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  585. Your irrelevant question was based on your incorrect assumption that I supported Clinto

    “Supported” does not equal “voted for”. Do you need that explained to you?

    What I was questioning was whether you were up in arms about a President doing something unethical while not necessarily illegal. You keep defecting that.

    Chuck Bartowski (3bccbd)

  586. Wait. Maybe he or she is Vanity Smurf!

    Lighten up, silly troll. Lighten up.

    Simon Jester (f225fb)

  587. “Romney left Bain three months before the recapitalization of Dade Behring.

    You’re ignoring what I already told you: he maintained a controlling interest in Bain after he left.”

    JBG – You told me nothing. You presented a link to somebody claiming Romney had a controlling interest in Bain after he left. When asked what that meant, you said it meant that he had a “controlling interest.” A big help you were in explaining your own attempt to claim Romney harmed companies when you cannot even explain his role at the firm.

    Can you tie him to the decision making in the Dade Behring recap or not? So far you have not.

    Yet another FAIL on your part.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  588. “I guess your point is that outing a covert agent as fine, as long as it might be theoretically possible to construct a legalistic argument that they are not covert “for the purposes of the IIPA.” I’m glad your standards are so high.”

    JBG – My point is that anybody can claim Valerie Plame was covert at some point in time. When called upon to prove it legally, the evidence is scarce. I’m glad your standards are so low.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  589. The people lying about Romney and Bain are the same people who say Peak Oil exist which it does not.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  590. “In any case, if there’s an error in anything I’ve cited, you’ve presented an impressive number of examples: zero.”

    JBG – You have a very short memory. You claimed we had Michael Hayden’s words supporting Valerie Plame’s status as covert. That was factually incorrect. What you provided was a link to a hearing in which Henry Waxman purported to relay the substance of a conversation he and Sly Reyes had with Hayden about Plame. We actually have no assurance such a conversation took place or that Waxman recounted its substance accurately.

    The above is just another example of why I stated early on that you have an issue understanding when something is actually a fact.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  591. Do we have to hear 24 hours of Jukeboxgrads hypocrisy?

    I don’t think I could take a day of him and his fluffed out ego.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  592. “What’s relevant are the facts of this instance, and it’s a problem for Mitt that he’s hiding those facts.”

    JBG – This is rich. You claim Romney is responsible for the Dade Behring recap but are now acknowledging that you don’t know the facts?

    That constitutes an EPIC FAIL on your part.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  593. This isn’t democracy you sack of OWS craps.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  594. And aside from those sources, I already cited Harvard Crimson as a source for his class standing (#176). Let me know if you also need to see it in Fox News. It’s been reported there, too.

    I asked not because it hasn’t been reported, but because I wondered what the original source of that info was.
    Kinda like the way reports about Bill Richardson kept saying he was drafted by the Kansas City A’s.

    Now, I’m not saying it isn’t true that Obama graduated in the top 15% of HLS. It is true that a lot of stuff about Obama’s biography that isn’t really true, or is at best murky, also gets printed as fact.

    MayBee (081489)

  595. Wow gotta love the class envy the left hurl against Romney ZOMG the rich will benefit from him……..Romney and anyone who makes more than the left will be villified.

    Still do not like Romney.

    Hypocritical leftys supporting a tax break holiday for payrolls but demonize the rich.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  596. Why not make it a crime for the wealthy to run for president…………you know you want to leftys.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  597. How could Obama have graduated 176th in his class and been in the top 15%? Doesn’t that actually put him around 30%?

    Or is my math wrong?

    MayBee (081489)

  598. Payroll Tax cuts=good when Obama does it Bad when a Republican does it.

    Tax cuts for the wealthy-Bad when Bush does it Good when Obama does it.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  599. MayBee, if you look into University/Greek Honors in the Ivies, you will be surprised. Law School may be different. But we kind of know that POTUS didn’t set the academic world on fire as an undergraduate.

    The grade thing is a red herring, I think, except for all the “smartest guy in the room” business.

    Simon Jester (f225fb)

  600. I know how to improve the enviroment………………you gotta pimpslap Al Gore.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  601. Yeah, Simon. I agree it is a red herring, and I also think people have for the most part dropped the fawning “smartest guy” garbage.

    MayBee (081489)

  602. But again, I’m not claiming to be the smartest girl… if HLS has a graduating class of between 500-600 students, graduating #176 doesn’t put you in the top 15%, right?

    MayBee (081489)

  603. MayBee, it depends on the definition of “is”!

    And don’t discount the game of Psychological Twister his fan base must play! I’m sure Andrew Sullivan thinks the fellow is brilliant!

    Simon Jester (f225fb)

  604. Since when is cooking oil good for the enviroment?

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  605. You know thank god I’m moving out of NY…………..I don’t appreciate being forced to use heating oil that pleases the environazis.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  606. We know this was one of his professors, and he was part of the upper division post modern jibjab;

    http://www.sott.net/articles/show/202681-Obama-vs-Einstein

    narciso (87e966)

  607. Occidental College and Columbia Univerity.

    I already addressed that silliness here. Try to keep up.

    You are full of bovine excrement. You are the comment thread version of Robert “I addressed that yesterday” Gibbs.

    I once thought your tactic of claiming to have addressed something, then linking to a comment thread (in Gibbs’ case, referring back to the transcript) was just laziness. But then I realized it’s the same ineffective propaganda technique used by the White House press office. In both cases, once you wade through the BS, one discovers that, no, you haven’t addressed it at all. Of course you both have different reasons for claiming to have addressed something you never addressed; you do it to deflect attention away from the fact you’re embarrassing yourself.

    It’s obvious to everyone, except you, that I can’t believe Obama ever took an actual history course. Of course, I realize he must have. But I hope he he didn’t actually learn anything; he just sat through it imagining he knew more than the professor because the marxists he was smoking pot with back in the dorm were giving him the real scoop, and just barely eked out a passing grade. Because if he did take history courses, and actually got high marks for learning what they were teaching, I’d like to know where because they filled his head with garbage that resulted in several abortions of a speech. And I’d like to make sure none of my progeny or any of my nieces and nephews ever go there.

    So if you know what specific courses this guy took, and where, spit it out.

    But of course, you don’t know. So you resort to the ever so effective Robert “Baghdad Bob” Gibbs technique.

    I realize I humiliated you by pointing out that only an idiot would have thought I was talking about Harvard Law School when I speculated about the classes Obama probably took instead of a real history class. Here’s another fun fact for you. “Palestinians in Literature and Theater” is an actual undergraduate course at Columbia. I made up the Criminology course whole cloth; the others are riffs on other actual undergraduate courses offered at Columbia. Such adding the word “Race” to their “Gender and Economics” course.

    An intelligent person, if given the choice of which of the three college transcripts to examine to find out where Barack Obama could have studied “Palestinians in Literature and Theater” …

    A) Occidental College
    B) Columbia University
    C) Harvard Law School
    D) A and B

    …would not have chosen C.

    You chose C.

    You saw that list and said I didn’t know anything at all about Harvard Law School. Uhh, no. I know those courses aren’t offered at Harvard Law. You merely demonstrated you don’t know anything about Columbia. We’ll just have to add that to the growing list of things you don’t know about, but think you do.

    You seem to enjoy giving the impression that you’re a Harvard Law graduate. If you are a Harvard Law graduate, your pathetic attempts to dodge well deserved criticism when you demonstrate you don’t know what you’re talking about simply confirms that, yes indeed, just like your fellow self-designated expert-on-all-things, someone can come out of that school thinking there’s an intercontinental railroad.

    Is the lobotomy included in the price of tuition at Harvard Law? I can see no other reason why both you and Obama could hallucinate that you’re saying anything intelligent.

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  608. Better to laugh. Because this one has to clean the spittle of her or his screen very often. Kind of sad, come to think of it.

    Simon, I am laughing. My talk about the Chicago Messiah’s transcripts has been sarcastic. I thought I was being blatantly, obviously sarcastic when I put this list of courses together.

    I don’t much care what grades the instructors gave him in “The History of Colonization and Capitalist Imperialism,” “Race, Gender, and Economics,” “Palestinians in Literature and Theater,” or “Socialist Criminology: Marx, Engels, Lenin, and other theorists on the Root Causes of Crime and Terrorism.”

    Jukebox actually took it seriously. Seriously enough that thought it revealed something about my level of knowledge of Harvard Law School.

    Whoa! That led me in my previous post to inquire about the lobotomy.

    I’m unconcerned about what courses this guy, Obama, took in college. He may well have taken a course in history. He may well have taken a course in Middle Eastern history. So what? He didn’t learn anything about Middle Eastern history. He’s demonstrated that.

    He’s also demonstrated he knows nothing about economics, so I don’t care how many econ courses the guy sat through not really listening as the instructor droned on in a language that sounded, to Obama, like what the “Peanuts” kids hear when adults talk. And I don’t care about his grades.

    He flunks in the real world “lab” portion of the test.

    My list above is a comment on the subjects in which Obama has been thoroughly indoctrinated. That stuff he’s learned by heart and demonstrates he truly believes.

    I don’t really believe he signed up for formal classes in the subjects. Although I admit it would be amusing to find that he really did take a bunch of courses from the ethnic studies department and thought he was learning actual history as opposed to a politicized, slanted perversion of it.

    That would fit the puzzle. Note how his nominal history mentor, Khalidi, confuses (deliberately) what was always advertised and sold as a work of fiction with successful propaganda. And like all successful propaganda it isn’t just one man, the “fruit” of Uris’ “loins” alone as Khalidi put it, but the hidden hand of “someone you’ve never heard of.” The international Jewish cabal.

    If you can believe what Khalidi’s BS, you’re probably the type who’d believe that the same author’s screenplay for Gunfight at the O.K. Corral was intended to pass as a serious historical examination of the old west. And it’s “common knowledge” that the Joooozzz control Hollywood, so clearly there’s a deeper, darker purpose involved than viewers ever suspected. If Khalidi can figure out how to stitch some story together about that into his pro-Palestinian propaganda and advance the cause, I’m sure Columbia’s “Edward Said Professor of Modern Arab Studies” will work it into his lectures, if not offer a complete course on it.

    (Note that I’m not so lazy as to just link to this thread, but to the actual sites I want to refer you to. That’s because I do in fact want you to see the information, and not just pretend “I’ve already addressed” something or other.)

    This isn’t to say that Khalidi believes his own fabrications. But based upon what Obama’s done in office, the self-styled “student of history” is actually gullible enough to buy it.

    So maybe he really did take a course in “Palestinians in Literature and Theater.” Then, like the informal “Middle East and the Palestinian Struggle in Fiction” course he attended at his frequent dinners at the Khalidi home, confused it with history.

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  609. Steve, I think you hit the nail on the head: the goal of trolls is to get other people to scurry around and look things up and check it over…so that they can say “nuh-uh,” and insult and move on.

    The goal is to irritate and obfuscate.

    Which is why trolls like that are silly.

    Simon Jester (f225fb)

  610. Well he did take Said’s literature course, and that was as rife with post colonialist dependency as anything else, It is unclear if he had Brezinski’s class on Eastern Europe,

    WE know he had Bell, as one of his professsors, he used his hornbook for his classes at U Chicago, Tribe which I’ve mentioned before,

    narciso (87e966)

  611. You all sound like typical white people.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  612. Daley, it’s not fair (it’s been a long time since he graduated), but check this out:

    http://www.oxy.edu/x9582.xml

    Especially CTSJ#180

    Simon Jester (f225fb)

  613. With Obamas payroll tax cut the lefty middle class will save $980 but the righty middle class will save $400……..just using their rhetoric.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  614. There’s a course in that, lol.

    narciso (87e966)

  615. Simon – It’s good to know the grievance industry is still alive and well on American college campuses.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  616. chuck:

    “Supported” does not equal “voted for”.

    More irrelevant pablum. I did neither.

    What I was questioning was whether you were up in arms about a President doing something unethical while not necessarily illegal.

    Tu quoque is not an argument.

    daley:

    You presented a link to somebody claiming Romney had a controlling interest in Bain after he left. When asked what that meant, you said it meant that he had a “controlling interest.” A big help you were in explaining your own attempt to claim Romney harmed companies when you cannot even explain his role at the firm.

    You not understanding the meaning of the term “controlling interest” is your problem, not mine.

    Can you tie him to the decision making in the Dade Behring recap or not? So far you have not.

    The burden of proof is not where you think it is. Because Mitt chose to brag about his Bain resume (in fact, it’s the heart of his campaign), his critics do not have the burden of proving he did something wrong. As a political reality, Mitt has the burden of proving that questionable cases (Dade, Ampad et al) were handled morally. As a political reality, his critics only have to show that there are good reasons to wonder. Forbes Magazine describing a Bain deal as a “get-rich-quick scheme” is a good example of such a reason.

    You’re trying to look at this as if it’s a matter in a court, and all Mitt has to do is avoid conviction. But it’s not a court matter. It’s a political matter.

    You claim Romney is responsible for the Dade Behring recap but are now acknowledging that you don’t know the facts?

    Enough facts are known to understand that he has a political problem, and that stonewalling (his current strategy) is not going to work.

    My point is that anybody can claim Valerie Plame was covert at some point in time. When called upon to prove it legally, the evidence is scarce.

    But that claim wasn’t made by just some random “anybody.” It was made by two Bush appointees: Hayden and Fitzgerald. If you want to assert that “covert” doesn’t mean “covert,” even though they both said “covert,” that burden is on you.

    And speaking of “the evidence is scarce,” where’s your proof about “driving to work at Langley every day?” You dodging this question repeatedly tells us everything we need to know about the quality of your argument, and about your practice of treating speculation as fact.

    You claimed we had Michael Hayden’s words supporting Valerie Plame’s status as covert. That was factually incorrect. What you provided was a link to a hearing in which Henry Waxman purported to relay the substance of a conversation he and Sly Reyes had with Hayden about Plame. We actually have no assurance such a conversation took place or that Waxman recounted its substance accurately.

    You mean you’re claiming Hayden was misquoted? That’s odd, since earlier you said this: “I did not claim either were misquoted.” Here’s an idea: pick one story and stick with it. Then again, maybe more than one person is using the name “daleyrocks.”

    It’s not plausible that Hayden was misquoted. As I said, if Hayden was misquoted so visibly on such an important matter, he needed to speak up. He didn’t.

    maybee:

    Now, I’m not saying it isn’t true that Obama graduated in the top 15% of HLS.

    That’s good. It’s too bad that JD called that “a fable,” and won’t admit that he called it “a fable.”

    It is true that a lot of stuff about Obama’s biography that isn’t really true, or is at best murky, also gets printed as fact.

    A significant example would be helpful. Unless you’re talking about the claims that he was born in Kenya. I already know about those.

    How could Obama have graduated 176th in his class and been in the top 15%?

    Who said he “graduated 176th in his class?” That sounds like a nice example of “stuff about Obama’s biography that isn’t really true.”

    dohbiden:

    Why not make it a crime for the wealthy to run for president

    That’s pretty ironic, since Mitt suggested “that those who need to win an elected office to pay their bills shouldn’t run.”

    steve:

    only an idiot would have thought I was talking about Harvard Law School when I speculated about the classes Obama probably took instead of a real history class. … I know those courses aren’t offered at Harvard Law.

    Let’s review. Dustin said this: “the only thing we really know about Obama’s grades is from Obama’s own memoirs.” I responded to him as follows:

    Actually, that’s complete bullshit, because his magna cum laude is based on grades. … That statement is false. When are you going to take responsibility for it?

    Then you responded to me as follows:

    There’s much talk on Obama’s grades on this comment thread. I just want to see what courses this guy took.

    I don’t much care what grades the instructors gave him in “The History of Colonization and Capitalist Imperialism,” “Race, Gender, and Economics,” “Palestinians in Literature and Theater,” or “Socialist Criminology: Marx, Engels, Lenin, and other theorists on the Root Causes of Crime and Terrorism.”

    I was obviously making a statement about Obama’s HLS grades. If your comment was not about HLS, how was it responsive to what I said about his HLS grades?

    And if you want to talk about his pre-HLS grades, I already explained why that’s silly. His academic record pre-HLS is irrelevant, because his HLS performance tells us everything we need to know about his academic capabilities.

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  617. Where did I say that Bain did something illegal?
    Comment by jukeboxgrad — 1/17/2012 @ 9:43 am

    — Uh, when you used the word “theft”. But that’s okay. Remember, next quarter you’ll be facing the “immoral” goal post again.

    Icy (1e0775)

  618. he’s still collecting payments from Bain, even now, which makes him at least partially responsible for how the money is earned.

    How so? How can someone be responsible for decisions other people make?

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  619. ‘I’m not responsible for bad acts by the company I built, but I’m perfectly happy to keep living off the fruits of those bad acts.’

    Sure, why not? What, do you think the money is somehow tainted? Should he get rid of it because it’s cursed? Don’t be daft or superstitious.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  620. If you’re not a liberal at 20 you have no heart, if you’re not a conservative at 40 you have no brain.

    That’s just silly. Of course the original version was “Not to be a republican at 20 is proof of want of heart; to be one at 30 is proof of want of head.” Whether that’s silly too, I’ll leave up to you.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  621. Uh, when you used the word “theft”.

    Not all forms of theft are illegal. Bain seems to have made deals that amount to a form of legal theft.

    How can someone be responsible for decisions other people make?

    If I build a company based on certain questionable business practices and then continue to make lots of money even after I leave the company because my pals are doing a good job of following in my footsteps, that makes me at least partially responsible for what they’re doing.

    Especially if I have knowledge of what they’re currently doing, and if I have an ownership interest.

    How much of Bain does Mitt still own? Is it a controlling interest? If not, when did he stop having a controlling interest? Let me know when you find out the answers to all these questions.

    Sure, why not? [be perfectly and admittedly happy to keep living off the fruits of those bad acts]

    Because it’s political suicide.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  622. How much is he currently collecting from Bain? How much has he collected over the years since he left?

    Why is this relevant?

    How much of the company does he own?

    As I understand it it’s a partnership, so the answer would appear to be “none”. But maybe I misunderstand.

    How much does he participate in management decisions?

    To the best of my knowledge, the answer is “not at all”. From what I can find, it appears that when he left “he gave up all management control and operational responsibility over the firm and its investments.”

    How much detail is reported to him?

    Again, how is this relevant? Since he’s entitled to a share of the profits on various deals, I assume he gets detailed reports on those deals, not so much on others. But I don’t know and neither do you.

    You’re ignoring what I already told you: he maintained a controlling interest in Bain after he left.

    Really? How do you know? For that matter, since when did he ever have a controlling interest, even before he left? To the best of my knowledge he was only one of several founding partners.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  623. How could Obama have graduated 176th in his class

    Where’d that come from?

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  624. If I build a company based on certain questionable business practices

    Stop right there. If I build a company based on certain questionable business practices, then you wouldn’t have to look for examples from after I left. You’d have enough examples to pin on me from when I actually ran the place. If you have to cite examples from after I left, then that’s conclusive proof that I’m not responsible for those examples.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  625. Sure, why not? [be perfectly and admittedly happy to keep living off the fruits of those bad acts]

    Because it’s political suicide.

    Only because moral perverts like you make it so. Why should we play along with that propaganda?

    I am very much not a Romney fan. But this is not a legitimate avenue of attack.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  626. I was obviously making a statement about Obama’s HLS grades. If your comment was not about HLS, how was it responsive to what I said about his HLS grades?

    And if you want to talk about his pre-HLS grades, I already explained why that’s silly. His academic record pre-HLS is irrelevant, because his HLS performance tells us everything we need to know about his academic capabilities.

    I will make sure I spell things out for you and use short words as I do.

    You may have put up a post about his law school grades. I did not.

    Nor did I aim my post at just you; did I quote what you had to say to make you think it was just for you? I will break my “use short words” rule and point out what I said:

    There’s much talk on Obama’s grades on this comment thread.

    Back to only short words. You saw that and thought, “that must just mean me and what I had to say just now?”

    My post was of “grades” and how all his grades are old news. You think the grades he got at the last school he went to are a big deal. They are not.

    Please note: I do not want to talk of this guy’s grades.

    I will again break my “use short words” rule and quote what I said:

    I don’t much care what grades the instructors gave him in “The History of Colonization and Capitalist Imperialism,” “Race, Gender, and Economics,” “Palestinians in Literature and Theater,” or “Socialist Criminology: Marx, Engels, Lenin, and other theorists on the Root Causes of Crime and Terrorism.”

    Back to the “use short words” rule. Get it through your head; I do not care what his grades were.

    At some point in the past some guy or gal put crap in his head. What’s his name thinks that crap is like gold, and that we need that crap to be the law of the land and guide us in how we deal with other states over the seas and to our north and south.

    He spews that crap he has in his head out all the time, and thinks it makes him look smart. He thinks he is one of the top four guys to be in the job he has now.

    This is not good for the rest of us.

    People who do not like us and run he show where they live can not help but point and laugh.

    They did not think GWB had much in the way of smarts, but GWB did scare them. GWB would bomb those who did not play nice with us. Things were quite clear with GWB.

    Now, it is not just that they do not think BHO is all that smart, but he does not scare them. Things now, too, are quite clear. But the wrong way. BHO is just a threat to those who DO play nice with us. As long as one does not play nice with us, BHO would like to shake hands and be friends.

    What sane “strong man” would want to be our friend when BHO hits our friends the back of his hand, but wants to make deals and spoon with those who hate us?

    I would like to know who put all this crap in that grape of his. There is more than one, of course. I know, and you know, who I think put much of it in.

    When people find out the Dear Won has bad friends he has one trick up his sleeve. The same trick each time: he tries to act as if he has lots of friends. The tale goes “he is just some guy who lives near me” or “he is just some guy I don’t know real well from work” and (each time) “our kids go to the same school.” It doesn’t mean he likes what they think, he says, or thinks the same way they do.

    But this is a case, though, he has shown that he and his friend he wants us not to talk about do in fact think the same way. This man, who the Dear Won wants us to think is just some guy he does not know well, could write a speech for him and we would not know. The Dear Won has said, near word for word at times, since they met what his not-really-a-friend has said for tens of years.

    The Dear Won would once brag what a good friend this man was. They would share meals at his home, and this man, he said, taught him a lot and made him change his mind and how he thinks and looks at the world. Most of all the Mid-East.

    There is one thing, and just one thing, I would like to learn from the Dear Won’s school file. If there was some class he may have sat in on that could have put that crap in his head.

    If not, then we can say the odds are as close to a sure thing as can be in this life that it is that friend he used to be close to, but now claims was not a real friend but “just some guy” he said hi to in the hall at work, that is the source of that crap.

    The main thing is to know what makes this guy we have in the White House tick. The bad guys have a fair grasp on that, it seems. Then we can know what dumb move he plans to make, and how the bad guys plan to play him. In the vain hope that there is some force on this earth that can stay his hand and not let him make that dumb move or let the bad guys play him for a fool.

    But I do not want, I do not need, to look at his school file to learn if he is smart or not. The mess he makes from the White House, here at home and to all the ends of the Earth, tells me he is not. Which is why I do not care what his grades were.

    There it is, and all in nice, simple, (there is a long word for it) single-sound words.

    If there is no other choice, then it

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  627. I’m still enjoying the “legal theft” business. There is nothing, and I mean nothing, funnier than trolls pulling Clintonian verbal Twister to keep from “losing.”

    Sillier and siller.

    Stashiu3, at least assure me that this isn’t one of the Previously Banned Trolls of fame. The Walls O’ Text are awfully familiar.

    As is the spittle-flecked sneering.

    Simon Jester (f225fb)

  628. Ogletree, was the other professor I was fishing for;

    http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/02/10/obama

    narciso (87e966)

  629. Why is this relevant? [How much is he currently collecting from Bain? How much has he collected over the years since he left?]

    To the extent that he is currently collecting a lot from Bain (as a proportion of his own income and/or as a proportion of Bain’s profits) there is going to be a tendency to associate him with Bain’s current acts and consider him responsible for those acts.

    Especially if there is still an ownership interest, and especially if there is reason to believe he is aware of certain details regarding current operations.

    What will also tend to aggravate the situation is if bad acts after he left are done by people he hired and trained. A track record of hiring unethical people is not something most people want in a president.

    It doesn’t matter if you don’t like this or if you think it’s wrong. It’s just a political reality.

    As I understand it it’s a partnership, so the answer would appear to be “none”. [How much of the company does he own?] But maybe I misunderstand.

    Yes, you misunderstand the word “partnership.” Partnership is a form of ownership.

    From what I can find, it appears that when he left “he gave up all management control and operational responsibility over the firm and its investments.”

    How exceptionally sleazy of you to cite that text without providing a source. You would like readers to think you are citing some objective authority, when in fact you’re citing Mitt’s campaign. Because everyone knows Mitt’s campaign has a record only telling the truth, right? Hilarious.

    There’s plenty of evidence that you statement you cited is false. Example:

    Romney had gone to Salt Lake City in early 1999 to run the Winter Olympics. But he signed the SEC’s necessary documents for Bain when his company – and he as an individual shareholder – sold their stakes in DDi in the fall of 2000 and in the winter and spring of 2001. SEC records indicate that Romney remained well into 2001 as a general partner in three of the four Bain funds that are involved in the DDi transactions.

    Why is a person with no “operational responsibility” signing key documents?

    Again, how is this relevant? [How much detail is reported to him?]

    If he is hearing details about shady deals, and then accepting profits from those deals, that’s relevant. Do I really need to spell this out for you?

    Since he’s entitled to a share of the profits on various deals, I assume he gets detailed reports on those deals, not so much on others. But I don’t know and neither do you.

    Yes, we don’t know, and that’s a problem. Refer to what I said above about burden of proof, which you have not lifted a finger to address.

    Really? How do you know? [he maintained a controlling interest in Bain after he left.]

    You posted in the other thread. I thought that meant you read it: “Romney owned a controlling stake in Bain Capital between approximately 1992 and 2001.”

    since when did he ever have a controlling interest, even before he left?

    I can tell you don’t know much about Romney and Bain Capital.

    If I build a company based on certain questionable business practices, then you wouldn’t have to look for examples from after I left.

    It’s not about “have to.” There are troubling examples from both before and after he left. The latter are easier to investigate and document, for this obvious reason: they are more recent, which means it’s easier to find witnesses and documents. There is also an abundance of cases after he left because the company was getting much bigger.

    If you have to cite examples from after I left, then that’s conclusive proof that I’m not responsible for those examples.

    What a nice example of a complete non sequitur. I just explained multiple reasons why you might be held responsible (politically, if not legally) for bad acts after you left. Yes, it’s nice if I can prove bad acts while you are there, but if I refrain from doing so, that doesn’t automatically inoculate you from responsibility for bad acts later. Why would it?

    this is not a legitimate avenue of attack.

    I’m sure you and a certain portion of the GOP are going to continue to view it that way. Too bad that’s not enough votes to elect Mitt.

    You may have put up a post about his law school grades. I did not.

    Here’s an idea: if you want your post to be understood as not about his law school grades, don’t put up your post as a response to a post about his law school grades.

    Stashiu3, at least assure me that this isn’t one of the Previously Banned Trolls of fame. The Walls O’ Text are awfully familiar.

    I don’t know why you’re acting like there’s some big mystery. I showed where all my prior comments here can be found.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  630. Well Obama’s hired a Bain man to do the ‘book keeping,’ they gave him more money that their
    wunderkind, so what does that tell you.

    narciso (87e966)

  631. I just wanted to see if you would write a giant angry snide Wall of Text again. You like trying to get people to jump through hoops, after all.

    Can’t wait to see daley spank you. Again. Even though you insist that you are the Winnah, eternally.

    I guess it is one like “legal theft.” Or “jumbo shrimp.”

    Or “honest trolls.”

    Just plain silly.

    Simon Jester (f225fb)

  632. Narciso you just put yourself on the Romneybot shat list.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  633. 638. “Obama’s years on the University of Chicago’s faculty”

    He was invited to lecture and mess up the blackboard so’s the tenured Professors of Cleaned and Hygenic Bowels of Enlightened Humanity could atone for their lives outside the Seventh Heaven.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  634. I forgot Palin is dumb but Obama and his navy corpsemen comment were an inadvertent mistake.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  635. 645. Sell, they had but one day of loss in 2010.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  636. Who said he “graduated 176th in his class?” That sounds like a nice example of “stuff about Obama’s biography that isn’t really true.”

    That came from this comment:

    And aside from those sources, I already cited Harvard Crimson as a source for his class standing (#176). Let me know if you also need to see it in Fox News. It’s been reported there, too.

    Yes, I know, all this isn’t enough because you need to personally examine the placenta.

    Comment by jukeboxgrad — 1/15/2012 @ 6:18 pm

    It’s possible I’m reading that wrong, but I don’t see a link and I thought the 176 applied to his class standing.

    MayBee (081489)

  637. 644. The Shinola Spokesmodel was contracted to author a treatise pertaining to some arcana of Constitutional Law to be published under the auspices of the U of Chi-Town.

    He submitted a second autobiography. Late.

    gary gulrud (d88477)

  638. Jukeboxgrad loves to smell its own farts.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  639. MayBee, I cannot think of a more vivid illustration of why trolls shouldn’t troll.

    The person didn’t even remember her or his own posts.

    You are very polite to trolls, which is admirable.

    But he or she is going to be angry that you made him or her look like…well, a troll.

    Nicely done.

    Simon Jester (f225fb)

  640. Can’t wait to see daley spank you.

    Don’t hold your breath.

    Yup, he sure spanked me by making this claim:

    as does her driving to work at Langley every day.

    And then refusing to show a shred of proof. Yup, that’s a great spanking, alright.

    MayBee:

    It’s possible I’m reading that wrong, but I don’t see a link and I thought the 176 applied to his class standing.

    MayBee, I apologize for the confusion. That was entirely my fault, careless writing on my part. When I said this …

    I already cited Harvard Crimson as a source for his class standing (#176).

    … I was trying to indicate that my comment #176 is where I “already cited Harvard Crimson as a source for his class standing.”

    At the time, it didn’t occur to me that this would be misunderstood, but now that I look back at it, I see that your interpretation makes perfect sense. Sorry about that.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  641. Jukeboxgrad thinks we’re all dumb.

    Ignore Kimberlins thug.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  642. Juiceboxgrad’s mommy is upset we’re hurting his ego.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  643. No, I don’t think you’re all dumb. However, I do think you’re dumb. I figure that’s why you stated this blatant falsehood:

    Juiceboxgrad is the same obot that said Palin called Obama a sambo

    Then again, maybe you said it because you’re a liar. Which is it?

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  644. I don’t think your dumb but I think your dumb?

    :/

    You have a lot of nerve to be complaining about lying.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  645. I don’t think your dumb but I think your dumb?

    See if you can find the word “all” in the following passage:

    No, I don’t think you’re all dumb. However, I do think you’re dumb.

    Let me know if you need help understanding what it means.

    And thanks for proving my point.

    You have a lot of nerve to be complaining about lying.

    I guess you mean that I’ve lied. You have presented a stunning number of examples: zero.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  646. “as does her driving to work at Langley every day.

    And then refusing to show a shred of proof. Yup, that’s a great spanking, alright.”

    JBG – I’ve never encountered a progtard dumb enough to dispute it. Seriously, there is a difference between having “Official Cover” and being an “NOC” without the benefit of diplomatic immunity.

    “In 1997 she returned to CIA headquarters and joined the Counterproliferation Division. (About this time, she moved in with Joseph Wilson; they later married.) She was eventually given a choice: North Korea or Iraq. She selected the latter. Come the spring of 2001, she was in the CPD’s modest Iraq branch. But that summer–before 9/11–word came down from the brass: We’re ramping up on Iraq. Her unit was expanded and renamed the Joint Task Force on Iraq. Within months of 9/11, the JTFI grew to fifty or so employees. Valerie Wilson was placed in charge of its operations group.”

    “When the Novak column ran, Valerie Wilson was in the process of changing her clandestine status from NOC to official cover, as she prepared for a new job in personnel management.”

    I question the above. It’s tough to be an NOC when you are running a desk at CIA headquarters.

    Nice lefty source for you:
    http://www.thenation.com/article/what-valerie-plame-really-did-cia

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  647. I don’t think your all dumb but some of you are.

    Piss off.

    You said Romney is a vulture capitalist.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  648. Let’s see if you can figure out the difference in meaning between these two statements:

    A) She had a job that was somehow based at CIA headquarters.

    B) She drove to work at Langley every day.

    You don’t know the details of how her job was organized, and whether it involved activities at Langley or at some other known or unknown CIA location, and you don’t know how often she showed up at Langley, or at any other location.

    This is aside from the fact that unsupported claims by one reporter are not exactly proof of anything. This is true whether the reporter is left, right or neither.

    So thanks once again for letting us know that you don’t understand the difference between fact and speculation.

    there is a difference between having “Official Cover” and being an “NOC” without the benefit of diplomatic immunity.

    How remarkable that you know so many things that Hayden doesn’t know.

    You said Romney is a vulture capitalist.

    I don’t think I ever actually said that, but I don’t mind saying it. Prove I’m wrong.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  649. Daley – you are a liar. Some days she drove to Starbucks, not Langley. You don’t know her daily schedule. And if Hayden didn’t dispute it, it is therefore true.

    JD (7f6bca)

  650. Other than insinuation, and repeatedly stating opinion as fact, is there evidence of immoral or unethical conduct by Bain?

    JD (7f6bca)

  651. Daley – you are a liar.

    It’s not what I would call a lie, and I didn’t call it a lie. It’s an instance of someone not understanding the difference between fact and speculation.

    You don’t know her daily schedule.

    Correct. That’s why he shouldn’t pretend that he does.

    is there evidence of immoral or unethical conduct by Bain?

    There may not be enough evidence to reach a definitive conclusion, but there’s definitely enough evidence to raise questions that Mitt really doesn’t want to answer, and is going to put a lot of effort into not answering. The stonewalling is going to be fun to watch.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  652. LOL. You mean your comment at #176?

    https://patterico.com/2012/01/12/ace-ripping-romney-all-day-long/#comment-894192

    Well, jukeboxgrad, at least daley remembers what he posts, and when asked about his own posts, doesn’t get all snide about who posted it.

    You are such a prat, and you take yourself ever so seriously.

    Hilarious.

    Simon Jester (f28533)

  653. And the snottiness while your pants are down is the metaphorical cherry on top.

    Pretension, thy name is…

    Simon Jester (f28533)

  654. LOL. You mean your comment at #176?

    There’s a problem with the comment numbering here. I proved that here. If you can help me figure out what’s causing it, that would be great. So far no one has tried to do that.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  655. Well, jukeboxgrad, at least daley remembers what he posts

    Uh, no. He doesn’t. He forgot that he said this: “I did not claim either were misquoted.” See here.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  656. The bottom line is that in prosecuting Libby, the government never tried to prove that Plame was “covert” for the purposes of the statute. The US Attorney tried later to introduce the claim in a sentencing memorandum against Libby without any evidence.

    jukeboxgrad writes: “And if you want to talk about his pre-HLS grades, I already explained why that’s silly. His academic record pre-HLS is irrelevant, because his HLS performance tells us everything we need to know about his academic capabilities.

    Since Democrats tried to make claims about George W. Bush’s undergrad record to support false claims of Bush’s supposed stupidity, this statement by jukeboxgrad is rather emblematic of jukeboxgrad’s lack of … well, that’s pretty obvious, isn’t it?

    SPQR (26be8b)

  657. “You don’t know the details of how her job was organized, and whether it involved activities at Langley or at some other known or unknown CIA location, and you don’t know how often she showed up at Langley, or at any other location.”

    JBG – So you are now throwing your hands up in the air admitting you have nothing to support the community-based reality’s narrative that Plame was covert at the time of the Novak and Corn articles? That’s good, admitting you have a problem is the first step in recovery.

    In fact, admitting you have no evidence is preparation for the next piece of evidence I will give you, a brief filed collectively by the media to support the release of Judith Miller of the New York Times from incarceration for her refusal to divulge sources premised on the fact that Plame’s covert status was compromised years before to both Russia and Cuba. Andy Mcarthy discusses the brief at length and provides a link to it in the piece below. It’s funny how the liberal media and the community-based reality never made much of a deal about it, isn’t it, cupcake?

    http://old.nationalreview.com/mccarthy/mccarthy200507180801.asp

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  658. “Well, jukeboxgrad, at least daley remembers what he posts

    Uh, no. He doesn’t. He forgot that he said this: “I did not claim either were misquoted.” See here.”

    JBG – I did forget that. Did Hayden submit a statement to Waxman’s hearing, yes or no? Did Waxman claim to quoting exact sentences and context, yes or no?

    We do not have Hayden’s words, moron, we have Waxman’s. Was Waxman under oath? I have no proof he actually met with Hayden, do you?

    I am glad your standards are so low.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  659. Daley – she didn’t drive to Langley on Saturdays or Sundays, therefore you are a liar. Also, off site meetings. Wing nut.

    JD (318f81)

  660. “…If you can help me figure out what’s causing it..”

    What? A supersmart Defeater of Right Wing Blogs and Master Debater can’t figure something out?

    Tell me it ain’t so.

    The real question, of course, is why you post. The answer is simple: to pick fights and be a jerk.

    Mission accomplished.

    Simon Jester (f28533)

  661. “Daley – you are a liar. Some days she drove to Starbucks, not Langley. You don’t know her daily schedule.”

    JD – You are correct. Some days her car was probably in the shop and she she probably had to get a ride with somebody else, so scratch those days off.

    Also, isn’t there a Metro stop under the CIA building where all the covert agents can disembark and the other passengers can pretend not to notice who is getting off, so double naught secret agents like Valerie can attend the meeting people testified in court she attended at CIA Headquarters?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  662. There you go, daley, with all that naughty talk.

    Simon Jester (f28533)

  663. Simon – The weapons grade stupid is emerging in full bloom and it’s not even Spring time.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  664. My favorite part, daley, was the shuck and jive about his or her own comment. Regardless of numbering, he or she didn’t recognize her or his own freaking comment…to say “…it wasn’t his class rank, it was a comment I made…”

    He or she went instead right for the snottery.

    Which is because this person is ALL about reactive trolling and trying to act all tough.

    And smart, apparently.

    This is “I work here is done” level hilariousness.

    Simon Jester (f28533)

  665. “The real question, of course, is why you post.”

    Simon – Any idea what the going rate for trolling conservative blogs is these days?

    I suspect the infestation this cycle will be greater than in 2008.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  666. I think they do it allll for free, daley. It’s a service-learning experience for progressives. They get to speak twoof to powder.

    Simon Jester (f28533)

  667. “Daley – she didn’t drive to Langley on Saturdays or Sundays, therefore you are a liar. Also, off site meetings. Wing nut.”

    JD – Good points. She might also have worn sunglasses driving there which would mean nobody could recognize her, follow her car or trace her license plates. I learned that from Jethro Clampett on the Beverly Hillbillies.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  668. Dude I do not like Romney but I hope Jukeboxgrad gets run over by a train.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  669. #678 s.b. Jethro Bodine, not Clampett. My mistake.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  670. The bottom line is that in prosecuting Libby, the government never tried to prove that Plame was “covert” for the purposes of the statute.

    The bottom line is that this does nothing to establish that Plame was not covert for the purposes of the statute. Fitzgerald explained why he did what he did:

    … let me tell you a little bit about how an investigation works. Investigators do not set out to investigate the statute, they set out to gather the facts. It’s critical that when an investigation is conducted by prosecutors, agents and a grand jury they learn who, what, when, where and why. And then they decide, based upon accurate facts, whether a crime has been committed, who has committed the crime, whether you can prove the crime and whether the crime should be charged … And what we have when someone charges obstruction of justice, the umpire gets sand thrown in his eyes. He’s trying to figure what happened and somebody blocked their view.

    Fitzgerald was responding to this question (as he paraphrased it himself): “why is this a leak investigation that doesn’t result in a charge?” Answer: because Libby obstructed the investigation by lying. Fitzgerald called it “blocked their view.”

    Since Democrats tried to make claims about George W. Bush’s undergrad record to support false claims of Bush’s supposed stupidity

    If GWB had been magna at HLS (or the equivalent at HBS), that attack would have been dumb and wrong. Trouble is, he wasn’t. That’s why your analogy doesn’t work.

    So you are now throwing your hands up in the air admitting you have nothing to support the community-based reality’s narrative that Plame was covert at the time of the Novak and Corn articles?

    If you define the statements by Hayden and Fitzgerald (that she was covert) as “nothing,” then I have nothing. But I can’t imagine why a sane person would do that.

    a brief filed collectively by the media to support the release of Judith Miller

    Your link is broken, but it doesn’t matter because I’m quite familiar with that brief.

    NYT had a legal obligation to do everything they could to get their employee out of jail. That doesn’t mean that every argument they threw against the wall for that purpose is an effective or true argument.

    Anyway, I guess you’re impressed by that amicus brief. Too bad Hogan wasn’t. If he had been, Miller wouldn’t have gone to jail. This is a pretty good indication that the arguments in that brief didn’t add up to much.

    We do not have Hayden’s words, moron, we have Waxman’s. Was Waxman under oath? I have no proof he actually met with Hayden, do you?

    I already addressed this multiple times, and you insist on ignoring what I said. It’s not plausible that Hayden was misquoted. As I said, if Hayden was misquoted so visibly on such an important matter, he needed to speak up. He didn’t.

    What? A supersmart Defeater of Right Wing Blogs and Master Debater can’t figure something out?

    There are lots of things I can’t figure out. For example, I can’t figure out what makes you think that any sane person would take you seriously.

    Regardless of numbering, he or she didn’t recognize her or his own freaking comment…to say “…it wasn’t his class rank, it was a comment I made…”

    I recognized my own comment as soon as she quoted the text. But that’s not what she did at first. At first she just said this:

    How could Obama have graduated 176th in his class and been in the top 15%?

    I didn’t recognize that number. I remembered what I had said, but I hadn’t memorized that exact number. If she had cited my text (which she eventually did later) I would have understood the problem right away.

    Any idea what the going rate for trolling conservative blogs is these days?

    If you bump into Soros you should tell him I coud use a raise.

    I hope Jukeboxgrad gets run over by a train.

    Conservatives are so friendly.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  671. Little Moonbat please go eff yourself.

    If you even tried to start a revolution against the rich………you’d be shot.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  672. As I understand it it’s a partnership, so the answer would appear to be “none”. [How much of the company does he own?] But maybe I misunderstand.

    Yes, you misunderstand the word “partnership.” Partnership is a form of ownership.

    And when you’ve left the firm and are no longer a partner?

    You posted in the other thread. I thought that meant you read it:

    What other thread? There are lots of threads here. How am I supposed to know which one you refer to?

    “Romney owned a controlling stake in Bain Capital between approximately 1992 and 2001.”

    Says who? Am I supposed to take your word for it? I don’t believe you.

    Milhouse (d7842d)

  673. jukeboxgrad,

    I don’t know if the Harvard Crimson accurately reported President Obama’s degree — it could certainly be true he graduated magna cum laude — but student grades have been confidential under FERPA since 1974. I assume Harvard Law School complied by keeping Obama’s grades private, both in the 1980’s and to the present, and it makes me wonder how the Harvard Crimson managed to avoid FERPA’s restrictions.

    However, assuming Obama graduated magna cum laude, I don’t think it proves he graduated in the top 10-15% of his class. According to this 1999 LA Times‘ article, HLS’s policy for honors graduates became more restrictive after Obama graduated. The article indicates honors graduates comprised 76% of all graduates for some period prior to 1999 (probably including when Obama attended HLS), and my guess is that put him in the top 40% of his graduating class.

    That’s still good, of course, just not as good as your hypothesis suggests and neither confirms Obama actually graduated with honors. Nor does it tell us what courses Obama took or what grades he made in them. I’d really like to know what he made in Con Law.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  674. Assuming he even took Con Law, since it was a recommended but not a required course when he attended HLS.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  675. DRJ, as you know, there is evidence that BHO isn’t quite the brainiac the MSM and lackeys suggest. For a place to start, check out Roger Boesche’s experience with him in Los Angeles.

    As for this silly little troll, with yet another Wall O’ Text:

    “…Conservatives are so friendly….”

    That registers pretty high up on the irony meter, given his or her behavior on the site, from day one…and according to Stashiu3, he or she has always been that way.

    Which is not surprising.

    Simon Jester (f28533)

  676. 🙄 Yes Jukebox your ilk have hurled vitriol against the right too bad so sad.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  677. Do check your e-mail, DRJ. I just sent you a note.

    Simon Jester (f28533)

  678. “I already addressed this multiple times, and you insist on ignoring what I said. It’s not plausible that Hayden was misquoted.”

    “If you define the statements by Hayden and Fitzgerald (that she was covert) as “nothing,” then I have nothing.”

    JBG – I see no statements by Hayden in anything you linked, no quotes anywhere. If I don’t see any quotes, why would I claim they are being misquoted? Waxman is merely repeating a conversation he claims to have had. You keep claiming we have Hayden’s words. Please point them out. I have addressed this multiple times.

    Are you a high school graduate?

    That doesn’t mean that every argument they threw against the wall for that purpose is an effective or true argument.

    Beautiful. Same goes for Fitzgerald’s closing argument in which he was not supposed to discuss Plame’s status.

    Do you always argue against yourself?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  679. JBG has established a new standard of truth on the thread here. Only those things he/she/it wishes to be true are true. All other things remain under a curtain of doubt.

    Relativism – Let’s play two!

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  680. Hey daley:

    “…Do you always argue against yourself?…”

    I think I fixed that for you.

    Simon Jester (f28533)

  681. “Anyway, I guess you’re impressed by that amicus brief. Too bad Hogan wasn’t. If he had been, Miller wouldn’t have gone to jail.”

    JBG – Based on your comments on this and the other thread you appear to have no legal training, which gives you absolutely zero basis for the above conclusion.

    Clown.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  682. Just because volcanoes are active doesn’t mean they will always erupt every day.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  683. By the way Jukeboxbutthead needs to get his head out of his arse.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  684. Daleyrocks – Waxmam is a twoof teller.

    Interesting how our fearless little wanker ignores the statutory criteria for the covert designation.

    JD (7f6bca)

  685. If he didn’t dispute it, it is true!!!!!!!

    JD (7f6bca)

  686. Simon,

    I don’t know how to evaluate Obama academically. He certainly went to some fine schools and he may very well have graduated from HLS with honors, like most of the students who attended during that period. But I can evaluate how he has performed as President, and I suspect socialists and progressives are far more impressed with his performance than I am.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  687. MAN-MADE CLIMATE CHANGE CAUSES DROUGHTS

    /Jukeboxdictator at the top of his lungs

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  688. A) She had a job that was somehow based at CIA headquarters.

    B) She drove to work at Langley every day.

    You don’t know the details of how her job was organized, and whether it involved activities at Langley or at some other known or unknown CIA location, and you don’t know how often she showed up at Langley, or at any other location.

    …So thanks once again for letting us know that you don’t understand the difference between fact and speculation.

    I’ll try to keep a civil tongue. There is no speculation involved. Valerie Plame was not “undercover.” She was not “covert,” and she most certainly not a “NOC.” NOC means non-official cover. That means no connection to the US government.

    Her own bio, as she revealed to the David Corn at The Nation in the article daleyrocks linked to reveals:

    1. She worked at Langley as an analyst on the Greek desk following her training.

    2. Her first overseas assignment was posing as a DoS employee in Greece.

    3. In 1997 she returned to the United States and began working at the CIA in Langley.

    4. From a different source we can learn she had previously revealed her status to her then boyfriend/fiancee and later husband Joe Wilson while still overseas in 1997 during a “heavy make-out session.”

    Why is this important? Let’s look at the IIPA statute.

    SEC. 601. [50 U.S.C. 421] (a) Whoever, having or having had authorized access to classified information that identifies a covert agent, intentionally discloses any information identifying such covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent’s intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

    (b) Whoever, as a result of having authorized access to classified information, learns the identity of a covert agent and intentionally discloses any information identifying such covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent’s intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

    SEC. 606. [50 U.S.C. 426] (2) The term “authorized”, when used with respect to access to classified information, means having authority, right, or permission pursuant to the provisions of a statute, Executive order, directive of the head of any department or agency engaged in foreign intelligence or counterintelligence activities, order of any United States court, or provisions of any Rule of the House of Representatives or resolution of the Senate which assigns responsibility within the respective House of Congress for the oversight of intelligence activities.

    (3) The term “disclose” means to communicate, provide, impart, transmit, transfer, convey, publish, or otherwise make available.

    (4) The term “covert agent” means-

    (A) a present or retired officer or employee of an intelligence agency or a present or retired member of the Armed Forces assigned to duty with an intelligence agency-

    (i) whose identity as such an officer, employee, or member is classified information, and

    (ii) who is serving outside the United States or has within the last five years served outside the United States;

    1. Plame returned to the states in 1997. The US was taking no affirmative action to conceal her intelligence relationship to the United States. She was working at CIA HQ in Langley. It doesn’t matter if it was full time, it doesn’t matter if it’s part time; the USG was making no attempt to conceal her intelligence relationship to the US.

    2. She was no longer serving outside the US; she was stationed stateside. Libby did not learn of her name until midsummer 2003. Per this timeline the date was 13 June 2003, so he couldn’t have revealed it to anyone until some point after that. That’s over 5 years.

    She was not a covert agent when Scooter Libby was accused in the court of public opinion of “disclosing” her identity.

    This is why Fitzgerald did not accuse him of “disclosing” her identity in an actual court of law. Nor did he allow the Libby defense to bring the matter up; the issue would have worked in his favor. Thus Fitzgerald successfully argued before the judge that it was immaterial to his case whether she was “covert” or not. Because there is no way he could have established that she was. They didn’t want the question to come up, because any she wasn’t covert. They, meaning Fitzgerald & the CIA, made meaningless public statements that she was, but that that was merely so Fitzgerald could insinuate throughout the trial she was covert, while the Libby could not defend himself against the insinuation. The court never determined and did not allow any evidence as to Plame’s status within the CIA. This is why Fitzgerald didn’t charge Libby with violating the IIPA. He would have been acquitted.

    By leaving it an open question Fitzgerald was free to pretend Libby had violated the IIPA and ask for a harsher sentence as if he had proved it.

    Fitzgerald never went after Armitage, because he never violated the IIPA, either.

    Who did? Valerie Plame. The keyword is “access.” the rawest Seaman Recruit who has gotten his clearance knows that there are two elements that are required for access: the appropriate clearance level and need to know.

    When she was still overseas as a NOC officer, she disclosed her classified identity to someone who had no need to know. It is not up to her to decide “need to know.”

    The article excuses her behavior appeals to the uninformed perhaps. He had a TS clearance, they were in love, it was a moment of passion, etc., yadda yadda.

    Anyone who would reveal classified information on that basis doesn’t deserve to can’t be trusted to have a clearance let alone work as a NOC officer for the CIA.

    Jason Lonetree was in love, too, and I’m sure experienced his share of moments of passion. He got sent to prison for 30 years for revealing information classified at a lower level than Plame’s identity.

    Joe Wilson was probably not a spy (the intelligence motto: in God we trust! All others we monitor) although you never really know. Robert Hannsen spied for years as an FBI counter-intelligence agent. Which means he passed his initial Special Security Background Investigation as well as more than one fiver year update. And polygraphs.

    Even if he isn’t a spy, love doesn’t always last forever. Or even until morning. That’s why it’s up to someone else, higher up the chain that isn’t necking on a sofa with a guy trying to undo her bra, who decides if he has a need to know.

    Anyway, she might be getting in the rack with the kind of guy who’d write an OP-ED piece to brag about his inside info.

    So, no, there’s no room for speculation. She wasn’t a NOC officer. Nor should she ever been. She worked as an OFFICIAL COVER officer in the embassy in Athens, for the love of, whomever. It’s asinine to take an OC officer and make them a NOC officer.

    Then, if we are to believe Plame’s story, she somehow was intended to go back out as a NOC officer at some point in the future.

    This thing was so amateurish from the start, both on the boneheaded thinking of the CIA bouncing people back and forth between the two fields, to the female “spy” blowing her own cover, it goes a long way to explain why the CIA misses teensy little things like the collapse of the USSR or the Iranian revolution. They’re really just playing at the “spy” game but they work real hard trying to keep up the public facade that they’re a serious intelligence agency.

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  689. And when you’ve left the firm and are no longer a partner?

    How do you know he’s no longer a partner? How do you know when he stopped being a partner? We already know that he had a controlling interest even after he supposedly “left the firm,” and we also know he was signing legal documents for the firm after he supposedly “left the firm.” Which means that “left the firm” doesn’t really mean “left the firm.”

    What other thread? There are lots of threads here. How am I supposed to know which one you refer to?

    The thread about Bain. It’s the only recent thread here with “Bain” in the title. You commented in that thread, so I thought you read it.

    Says who? Am I supposed to take your word for it? I don’t believe you.

    It would be better if you didn’t need to be spoonfed. Even if you can’t manage to find the only thread here about Bain (despite the fact that you commented on that thread), all you have to do is google this phrase: “Romney owned a controlling stake.”

    it makes me wonder how the Harvard Crimson managed to avoid FERPA’s restrictions.

    They didn’t publish his grades. They stated that he was magna cum laude. Not the same thing. I’m glad you think the latter is a FERPA violation, but they apparently disagree with you. Likewise for a bunch of other news outlets (including Fox) that published the same information. Also, it’s possible that he specifically permitted HLS to release this information.

    According to this 1999 LA Times‘ article, HLS’s policy for honors graduates became more restrictive after Obama graduated.

    Indeed. The article you’re citing says this:

    Under a system implemented three years ago that first took effect with this year’s class [1999], Harvard Law said it will limit magna cum laude degrees to the top 10% of the class

    Kerr said this:

    At Harvard Law School in the 1990s … students who graduated magna cum laude were in the top 15% of the class

    10% is indeed quite a bit “more restrictive” than 15%. The number getting this honor was cut by one third.

    my guess is that put him in the top 40% of his graduating class

    For some strange reason you’re completely ignoring Kerr’s statement even though I’ve referenced it repeatedly. You’ll forgive me if I take an explicit, emphatic claim by Orin Kerr as more convincing than a “guess” by “DRJ.”

    just not as good as your hypothesis suggests

    I didn’t offer a “hypothesis.” I cited specific statements by people who are in a position to know, like Kerr, Lindgren and others.

    neither confirms Obama actually graduated with honors

    Sorry, you’re not being clear. Now you’re claiming he didn’t graduate magna cum laude? Even though Harvard Crimson and many other news outlets reported that he graduated magna cum laude? And even though Kerr et al accept this as an established fact? I hope you’ll tell us what you know that they don’t.

    I’d really like to know what he made in Con Law.

    He was a professor of constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School. This strongly implies that he did well in that course. It’s the sort of thing they would look into before they hired him. Also, it would be unlikely for anyone to reach a grade average in the top 15% at HLS if they did poorly in even a single course.

    Assuming he even took Con Law, since it was a recommended but not a required course when he attended HLS

    Harvard Law School stated that he took that course.

    he may very well have graduated from HLS with honors, like most of the students who attended during that period

    Do you not understand the big difference between cum laude and magna cum laude, or are you just being dishonest?

    there is evidence that BHO isn’t quite the brainiac the MSM and lackeys suggest. For a place to start, check out Roger Boesche’s experience with him in Los Angeles.

    Boesche gave him a B (link, link, link). So what? This is your smoking gun that proves Obama is a dope?

    That registers pretty high up on the irony meter, given his or her behavior on the site, from day one…and according to Stashiu3, he or she has always been that way.

    Aside from this thread, all my prior comments at this site can be seen here, here, here and here. Anyone who cares can see for themselves, without relying on you or Stashiu3.

    I see no statements by Hayden in anything you linked, no quotes anywhere. If I don’t see any quotes, why would I claim they are being misquoted? Waxman is merely repeating a conversation he claims to have had.

    Yes, and if Waxman’s report of that conversation was not correct, Hayden would have let us know. He didn’t.

    Same goes for Fitzgerald’s closing argument in which he was not supposed to discuss Plame’s status.

    I have no idea what you’re talking about.

    Based on your comments on this and the other thread you appear to have no legal training, which gives you absolutely zero basis for the above conclusion.

    If the arguments in the amicus brief were solid and convincing, why did Hogan send Miller to jail?

    Interesting how our fearless little wanker ignores the statutory criteria for the covert designation.

    If you think that Hayden and Fitzgerald meant something other than “covert” when they said “covert,” the burden is on you to prove that. Still waiting.

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  690. The things that you forget when you retire. The acronyms are the first to go. An SSBI is a single scope background investigation. Also sailors don’t get their clearances while still seaman recruits.

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  691. Maybe you’re thinking of another thread.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  692. jukeboxgrad compounds his hypocrisy with this: “If GWB had been magna at HLS (or the equivalent at HBS), that attack would have been dumb and wrong. Trouble is, he wasn’t. That’s why your analogy doesn’t work.”

    Your ignorance of George W. Bush’s post graduate degree at Harvard Business School only reinforces the dishonesty of your argument.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  693. As for Plame’s covert status, Fitzgerald has made several unsubstantiated claims. But the bottom line remains that he never even tried to prove it in court.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  694. he’s jukebox zero
    got barcky’s nads in his eyes
    ewwwwwww double VISion

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  695. JBG – With regard to your Waxman hearing. Open your good eye:

    “WASHINGTON — Republican Rep. Peter Hoekstra could hardly believe what he heard last Friday on television as he watched a House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearing. Rep. Henry Waxman, the Democratic committee chairman, said his statement had been approved by the CIA director, Gen. Michael Hayden. That included the assertion that Valerie Plame Wilson was a covert CIA operative when her identity was revealed.

    As House Intelligence Committee chairman when Republicans still controlled Congress, Hoekstra had tried repeatedly to learn Plame’s status from the CIA but got only double talk from Langley. Waxman, the 67-year-old, 17-term congressman from Beverly Hills, may be a bully and a partisan. But he is no fool who would misrepresent the Director of Central Intelligence (DCI). Waxman was correctly quoting Hayden. But Hayden, in a conference with Hoekstra Wednesday, still did not answer whether Plame was covert under the terms of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act.

    The former CIA employee’s status is critical to the attempted political rehabilitation of former Ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife. The Democratic target always has been Karl Rove, President Bush’s principal adviser. The purpose of last week’s hearing was to blame Rove for “outing” Plame, in preparation for revoking his security clearance.

    Claims of a White House plot became so discredited that Wilson was cut out of John Kerry’s presidential campaign by the summer of 2004. Last week’s hearing attempted to revive a dormant issue. The glamorous Mrs. Wilson was depicted as the victim of White House machinations that aborted her career in secret intelligence.

    Waxman and Democratic colleagues did not ask these pertinent questions: Had not Plame been outed years ago by a Soviet agent? Was she not on an administrative, not operational, track at Langley? How could she be covert if, in public view, she drove to work each day at Langley? What about comments to me by then CIA spokesman Bill Harlow that Plame never would be given another foreign assignment? What about testimony to the FBI that her CIA employment was common knowledge in Washington?

    Instead of posing such questions, Waxman said flatly that Plame was covert, and cited Hayden as proof. The DCI’s endorsement of Waxman’s statement astounded Republicans whose queries about her had been rebuffed by the Agency. That confirmed Republican suspicions that Hayden is too close to Democrats…………….”

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/03/was_valerie_covert.html

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  696. Good example, daleyrocks, which shows more evidence that the whole Plame thing was an attempt by the CIA to attack President Bush politically.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  697. JBG – With respect to Fitzgerald, for some strange reason, he would not share with Libby’s defense the referral memorandum from the CIA requesting an investigation into the leak of Plame’s identity.

    Fitzgerald’s inclusion of her alleged status in his Libby sentencing memorandum consisted of 27 out of 30 pages composed of transcripts from that Waxman show hearing you referenced earlier. His conclusion is as much of a joke as your’s.

    “On 1 January 2002, Valerie Wilson was working for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) as an operations officer in the Directorate of Operations (DO). She was assigned to the Counterproliferation Division (CPD) at CIA Headquarters, where she served as the Chief of a CPD component with responsibility for weapons proliferation issues related to Iraq.”

    “But there’s good and bad news in all of this. The good news is this: there’s no need to worry. The fact of the matter is that, contrary to what the Summary states, Plame wasn’t really “covert” for purposes of the IIPA when she was working at the CPD, nor was the CIA taking any particular measures to conceal her intelligence relationship to the United States. That was just a story they made up to help Fitzgerald nail a high level neocon–so there’s hope that the CIA’s “tradecraft” isn’t that bad. As Andrea Mitchell stated, “everyone” knew that Plame was CIA. And there’s more. Victoria Toensing is the attorney who drafted the IIPA. She, too, testified before Waxman’s committee, and she had handy the Senate Report on the IIPA, that spelled out what the Act was intended to cover. Referring to page 16 of the Senate Report Toensing stated (under oath): “Notably, the legislation limited coverage of U.S. citizen informants or sources (agents) also to situations where they “reside and act outside the United States.” Toensing then quoted Joe Wilson’s (self) absorbing autobiography to show that Plame had returned to the US in 1997 and had never “resided and acted” overseas again.”

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/05/fitzgerald_plame_cia_director.html

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  698. … at least assure me that this isn’t one of the Previously Banned Trolls of fame.
    Comment by Simon Jester — 1/18/2012 @ 5:02 am

    Best I can tell, jukeboxgrad has posted under his own screen name only for every comment he has made at the site.

    Stashiu3 (601b7d)

  699. I showed where all my prior comments here can be found.
    Comment by jukeboxgrad — 1/18/2012 @ 6:37 am

    Technically, no. You showed where some of your prior comments could be found, not all. Since you like nit-picking so much. 😉

    Stashiu3 (601b7d)

  700. “Notably, the legislation limited coverage of U.S. citizen informants or sources (agents) also to situations where they “reside and act outside the United States.”

    And, as I mentioned earlier, Valerie Plame illegally blew her own cover while residing and acting outside the United States.

    This isn’t a case of her telling on herself. Her cover wasn’t created for her benefit or amusement. Considerable resources and effort go into creating a non-official cover, and the purpose is to gather intelligence for the US. If she wanted to reveal some personal secret, fine, but her cover is not a personal secret, nor is the fact that she is under-cover for the US. Disclosing her cover compromises not only herself but the US. She simply doesn’t have the right or the authority to do that all on her lonesome.

    I thought I’d quote from the relevent Director of Central Intelligence Directive (don’t worry, it’s a superceded and declassified version)on the matter:

    DCI Directive 6/4
    Personnel Security Standards and Procedures
    Governing Eligibility for Access to
    Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI)

    5. Personnel Security Standards.

    Criteria for security approval of an individual on a need-to-know basis for access to SCI are as follows:

    a. The individual requiring access to SCI must be a US citizen.

    b. The individual’s immediate family must also be US citizens.

    c. Members of the individual’s immediate family and any other persons to whom he or she is bound by affection or obligation should neither be subject to physical, mental, or other forms of duress by a foreign power or by persons who may be or have been engaged in criminal activity, nor advocate the use of force or violence to overthrow the Government of the United States or the alteration of the form of Government of the United States by unconstitutional means.

    10. Determinations of Access Eligibility.

    The evaluation of the information developed by investigation of an individual’s loyalty and suitability will be accomplished by trained professional adjudicators under the cognizance of the SOIC concerned. When all other information developed on an individual is favorable, a minor investigative requirement that has not been met should not preclude a favorable access determination by an authorized adjudicative authority. In all evaluations, the protection of the national security is paramount. Any doubt concerning personnel having access to SCI should be resolved in favor of the national security, and the access should be denied or revoked. The ultimate determination of whether the granting of access is clearly consistent with the interest of national security will be an overall common sense determination based on all available information. The adjudicative guidelines for determining eligibility for access to SCI are contained in Annex C.

    If you have the stomach to link to the article mentioning the Wilson/Plame necking thangy, you’ll see that Wilson was attached to EUCOM in Brussels as political adviser to the commander, GEN Joulwan. There is nothing that leads me to believe that anyone in that job would have had or needed a TS/SCI clearance.

    The security procedures are clear. What they describe are complete and total disregard for security.

    Sure, he said he had a TS. And my bartender in Singapore was ex-special forces. And even if he had a TS that doesn’t automatically mean SCI. There are people who handle the transmittal and verification of security clearances. Plame ain’t it. And Plame wasn’t a professional adjudicator.

    Plame was clearly guilty of violating the IIPA, but no one else involved in the political lynching of Libby was.

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  701. Resist we much.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  702. The goal of trolls is to tangle things up. But I’m glad people are keeping track.

    Simon Jester (f28533)

  703. Good example, daleyrocks, which shows more evidence that the whole Plame thing was an attempt by the CIA to attack President Bush politically.

    It wasn’t the first time under Hayden’s tenure at the CIA they did so.

    And it wasn’t the last time. If your memory can go all the way back to 2007 you may remember this blast from the past: National Intelligence Estimate: Iran: Nuclear Intentions and Capabilities

    Key Judgements
    A. We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons
    program 1

    (1 For the purposes of this Estimate, by “nuclear weapons program” we mean Iran’s nuclear weapon design and weaponization work and covert uranium conversion-related and uranium enrichment-related work; we do not mean Iran’s declared civil work related to uranium conversion and enrichment.)

    C. We assess centrifuge enrichment is how Iran probably could first produce enough fissile material for a weapon, if it decides to do so. Iran resumed its declared centrifuge enrichment activities in January 2006, despite the continued halt in the nuclear weapons program.

    Key Differences Between the Key Judgments of This Estimate on Iran’s Nuclear Program and the May 2005 Assessment

    2007 National Intelligence Estimate

    Judge with high confidence that the halt
    was directed primarily in response to increasing
    international scrutiny and pressure resulting from exposure of Iran’s previously undeclared nuclear work.

    Man, the Bushies got raked over the coals for their warmongering. The sanctions and international scrutiny were working, we were told, and the neo-cons wanted to go to war over nothing. The Iranians had given up their drive for nuclear weapons and their covert fuel enrichment operations.

    NPR: NIE Report on Iran Contradicts Bush Claims

    Well, that was that, wasn’t it?

    Err, not really. Qom ring a bell?

    CIA: Israel helped expose covert Iran nuclear facility

    Published 04:19 08.10.09

    Subtitled:

    Agency director Panetta: U.S. knew of the recently-exposed nuclear facility near Qom for over 3 years.

    So that means the CIA knew about it before August 2006. Over 15 months prior to releasing the NIE stating publicly that Iran had suspended all it’s covert nuclear enrichment activities and was only continuing its declared enrichment activities for its civil nuclear program.

    Classified products contain an “ICOD.” That’s an information cut off date. Sanitized, unclassified products do not. But over 15 months is not at all reasonable for a product that is released every 24 months.

    There are lots of good reasons for not including the existence of this new secret enrichment facility in the publicly distributed report.

    But making public an assessment, with High Confidence no less, that the Iranians had ceased all their nuclear weapons-related uranium enrichment-related work, and claiming partial credit for that fact for exposing earlier secret facilities, was a pure political hit job by the CIA.

    But, hey, Hayden’s a General and all. He’d never say one thing publicly that could be contradicted by certain inconvenient facts the CIA chooses to withhold from the public. That kind of stuff never happens with the CIA.

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  704. Oh, and thank you, Stashiu3. The snottiness, bobbing and weaving, reactive language, and attempts to get e-mail addresses made me wonder about some of our Previous Hit Parade.

    Simon Jester (f28533)

  705. Switching gears and going back to the ever-so-popular “Barack Obama must be some kind of super genius playing three dimensional chess while everyone else is playing checkers because he graduated Magna Cum Lauda from Harvard Law,” here are two items that we can add to the long list of boneheaded moves that give us reason to say that ain’t so. One funny, one not. Funny one first.

    I suppose in an attempt to show just how much he’s in touch with the 99 percenters and totally unlike Mitt Romney who’s beholden to the evil financiers, either he or the DNC has decided to move his convention speech to Charlotte North Carolina’s Bank of America Stadium

    Apparently the thinking was that with it’s private luxury boxes, this venue would allow the DNC to increase it’s fundraising efforts from wealthy donors.

    But the hits keep coming. A contractor that helped build the stadium and also happens to be the spokesman for an anti-labor right-to-work business organization praised the DNC for holding its signature event there. He called it a monument to non-union labor and what can be done with very little government “investment.” That’ll appeal to the base.

    Now, the not funny at all. Iran is bragging to the press that the Obama administration sent them a “secret letter” proposing direct talks. The Obama administration admits it has proposed direct talks, but denies it sent this proposal in the form of a letter. Natch, The AP came up with this misleading headline that would make you think the Obama admin didn’t propose direct talks.

    Iranian lawmaker: Obama proposed talks; US denies

    Per Fox the WH admits it sent a “message,” just not a letter. It described the contents pretty much the same as the Iranian lawmaker. Both the WH and the Iranians said it started off by making threats if Iran crosses our red lines, then pitches an offer for dialogue in the second half.

    Whether or not message was sent in the form of a letter (which is the only minor disagreement) this is Iran b****-slapping the Obama administration and getting away with it with a “thank you may I have another. Pretty please.”

    They’re publicly peeing on the threats and the offer. And to make matters worse, the Obama admin is merely (and unconvincingly) denying it used that means of communication before meekly reiterating it really does still want to talk. And, in the process shooting itself in the foot when the WH spokesman Carney refers to the letter, confirming the Iranian version and destroying its own denial. I don’t believe the WH spokesman’s words can be copyrighted by a new agency, so here’s how he put it:

    “If the Iranians are serious about restarting talks, then they need to respond to that letter”

    Clearly, the super-genius super-president is way out of his depth. Even Kennedy, who got destroyed by Khrushchev when he tried his hand at direct diplomacy, was smarter than this. He at least didn’t try public diplomacy. But Obama thinks the Vienna meeting was a smashing success.

    Obama has far too much respect for the Iranian revolution; that’s what he’s been indoctrinated to believe the “Arab Spring” is supposed to look like in a post-colonial, anti-western-imperialism Middle East. I don’t know what it’s going to take for these guys to absorb the lesson that the Iranians aren’t serious about restarting talks.

    If they were, they wouldn’t be publicly mocking the threats and the offer. They want to humiliate Obama admin and make it look like he’d crawl on his belly through a sewer pipe wearing a jockstrap just to get the Iranians to the negotiating table. And judging by the Obama admin’s response, he would do just that. I’m sure the Obama and his team would put tough “preconditions” on that sewer-crawl. They’d insist on board shorts at first, so they could wind up in the middle by agreeing to a speedo.

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  706. Sabre Rattling morons.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  707. jukeboxgrad’s attempted defenses of the Food Stamp President are well debunked by Steve. Good work.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  708. Barack Hussein Obama believes that more jobs will be created by extending the reduced FICA tax and unemployment benefits than opening the Keystone XL pipeline.

    That the way this guy thinks and it’s one more reason why he needs to be sent packing in November.

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  709. I agree with Ron Paul about the drug wars but too bad he is a jackoff on foreign policy.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  710. And now Newt Gingrich’s ex-wife is going to dish during the campaign?

    I mean, I think he is not the most admirable man, but this stinks.

    Who is behind this?

    Simon Jester (f28533)

  711. ABC News is Simon.

    http://www.drudgereport.com/flash2.htm

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  712. Yes, but they are just the vehicle, who’s really behind this.

    narciso (87e966)

  713. Yeah, I keep thinking about who leaks tawdry personal stuff to force people out of elections.

    But then, I am paranoid.

    Funny how personal issues don’t seem to matter when there is a “D” after your name (remember how the press actively covered up John Edwards’ nonsense?).

    Simon Jester (f28533)

  714. When it’s a Republican, it’s one of the alphabet networks. When it’s a Democrat, they leave it to the Enquirer.

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  715. Actually, that’s not exactly true, the Inquirer has put out stories, based on rumor and innuendo as well
    with Republicans,

    narciso (87e966)

  716. “If the Iranians are serious about restarting talks, then they need to respond to that letter”

    What that means is that they shouldn’t mock it – the way t be serious is to respond to that note (apparently the state Department has some kind of ranking f messages: Note, letter, who knows what else.

    Iran is trying to say they don’t take anything that comes from this administration seriously.

    I said some sort of war would happen by March or April. Not because the Administration would start anything so soon, but because Iran would.

    Although the sanctions don’t really take effect till the end of June, before that they lose money, and the Administration has this idea of gradually ratcheting things up, thinking that will make an Iranian cave-in more likely.

    The truth is, Iran would have to change it’s entire foreign policy. That is not easy, however much sense it may make for them.

    Sammy Finkelman (68a4ee)

  717. jukeboxgrad,

    Thank you for the link showing Obama took Con Law from Prof Tribe at HLS. I also appreciate you re-linking the comments by Lindgren and Kerr, although I read them in your earlier links and I’d seen them before. Did you read my link to the LA Times’ article explaining how the HLS honors system changed in the late 1990s — changes that indicate magna cum laude honors were only restricted to approximately 15% of graduates in 1999?

    As for Obama’s magna cum laude ranking, I acknowledge it could well be true but I’d still like to see some kind of proof. Has anyone published online the HLS letter that reportedly confirms Obama graduated magna cum laude? I’ve seen references but I can’t find the actual text. In addition, you’d think Obama would have announced his graduation honors at some point in his campaign(s) but, again, I can’t find that he did. Perhaps he’s a modest man but I can’t find any evidence of that, either.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  718. Oh, and I don’t think it’s a FERPA violation to publish the names of honors graduates if HLS made those names public. I’m just curious how the Harvard Crimson confirmed Obama was an HLS honors graduate.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  719. Actually, that’s not exactly true, the Inquirer has put out stories, based on rumor and innuendo as well with Republicans,

    Comment by narciso

    I did not write that the Enquirer didn’t write stories about Republicans, narciso, I intimated that you will not see a negative story about a Democrat broken at a major media outlet. That’s the difference.

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)

  720. The thread about Bain. It’s the only recent thread here with “Bain” in the title.

    And therefore? This thread does not have “Bain” in the title, and yet here we are discussing it. Saying “the other thread” and expecting people to guess which thread you mean is just asinine.

    But OK, now I know which thread you mean, and which comment of yours you are referring to. Let’s see how that goes, shall we? In that other thread you write:

    The NY Post is also not generally known as a commie rag.

    True. But it also isn’t generally known as a rag that does any fact checking. In fact it has admitted in open court that it employs no fact checkers, and relies on each reporter to check their own facts. Now who is the reporter who makes this claim, that he was told by someone else that Romney had a controlling interest in the firm until 2001? Josh Kosman, who refers in this very article (in the words you elided) to “my Penguin book, The Buyout of America: How Private Equity Is Destroying Jobs and Killing the American Economy“. Here’s one view of that book’s credibility. And here he is at Zuccotti Park (not exactly a bastion of capitalism lately) explaining to PBS (not exactly a capitalist establishment) why his predictions have so far failed. I’m not sure why his word is to be taken as gospel, let alone his word about what he was told by someone else who might have his own reasons to lie.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  721. Le•gal theft, n: the selling off of assets by a business entity that holds a controlling interest — for profit. See Also: capitalism, free market, liquidity, cash flow, profit motive

    Icy (1e0775)

  722. We need to hammer the Anti-Israel left for their bigoted rhetoric comparing Israel to East Germany.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  723. spqr:

    Your ignorance of George W. Bush’s post graduate degree at Harvard Business School only reinforces the dishonesty of your argument.

    Your reading comprehension needs work. One more time, this is what I said:

    If GWB had been magna at HLS (or the equivalent at HBS), that attack would have been dumb and wrong. Trouble is, he wasn’t. That’s why your analogy doesn’t work.

    I know Dubya has a Harvard MBA. Where did I claim otherwise? I didn’t. What I pointed out is that he didn’t graduate with honors. Are you claiming he did?

    Fitzgerald has made several unsubstantiated claims.

    Are you saying he can’t be trusted? Like Hayden, he is a Bush appointee. Maybe your point is that Bush appointees can’t be trusted.

    the bottom line remains that he never even tried to prove it in court.

    He explained why, and I already pointed this out, and no one has addressed what he said or what I said.

    the whole Plame thing was an attempt by the CIA to attack President Bush politically

    Naturally. And the best part is the way the CIA used mind control to force Libby and Rove to out Plame to multiple reporters. Even though they knew, at the very least, that she was a CIA employee and therefore may have had a covert status, and therefore they had a duty to inquire about this before blabbing about her to reporters. Yup, that must have been some powerful CIA mind control, to force them to not even lift a finger to verify her status before deciding to blab about her.

    ==============
    daley:

    Waxman, the 67-year-old, 17-term congressman from Beverly Hills, may be a bully and a partisan. But he is no fool who would misrepresent the Director of Central Intelligence (DCI). Waxman was correctly quoting Hayden.

    Which is what I’ve been saying all along. I’m glad you’re finally coming to your senses.

    Also it’s funny to recall that you said this:

    I see no statements by Hayden in anything you linked, no quotes anywhere. If I don’t see any quotes, why would I claim they are being misquoted? Waxman is merely repeating a conversation he claims to have had. You keep claiming we have Hayden’s words.

    You were suggesting that Waxman wasn’t actually quoting Hayden. And now you’re citing a source that says this:

    Waxman was correctly quoting Hayden.

    Here’s an idea: pick one story and stick with it.

    But Hayden, in a conference with Hoekstra Wednesday, still did not answer whether Plame was covert under the terms of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act.

    So what? Who cares? He was under no obligation to answer that question, and no conclusions can be drawn from the fact that he didn’t answer that question.

    How could she be covert if, in public view, she drove to work each day at Langley?

    What a surprise that Novak, like you, likes to pretend to know things that he doesn’t actually know.

    The DCI’s endorsement of Waxman’s statement astounded Republicans whose queries about her had been rebuffed by the Agency. That confirmed Republican suspicions that Hayden is too close to Democrats

    Naturally. That explains why Bush picked him to run the CIA.

    By the way, is anyone supposed to believe that Novak is a neutral observer?

    Referring to page 16 of the Senate Report Toensing stated (under oath): “Notably, the legislation limited coverage of U.S. citizen informants or sources (agents) also to situations where they “reside and act outside the United States.” Toensing then quoted Joe Wilson’s (self) absorbing autobiography to show that Plame had returned to the US in 1997 and had never “resided and acted” overseas again.”

    The AT article making this claim doesn’t bother to provide a link to Toensing’s testimony. How odd. But I’ll provide that link for you (link, link). I can’t find the place where she says what you’re claiming she says. Can you? Also, Wilson’s book is searchable at Amazon (link), and I can’t find the phrase you’re claiming it contains (“resided and acted”). Can you?

    Is it possible that American Thinker [sic] is inventing their own facts? I’m shocked.

    ==============
    Stashiu3:

    You showed where some of your prior comments could be found, not all.

    This is what I said:

    Aside from this thread, all my prior comments at this site can be seen here, here, here and here.

    What thread did I omit? On what other thread on this site can my comments be found?

    ==============
    steve:

    Plame illegally blew her own cover

    You haven’t shown this, but even if she had, that doesn’t change anything. It doesn’t give someone else the right to do the same thing.

    SF-312 stipulates that information is not automatically declassified just because there’s a leak. Even if there’s been a prior leak, you are violating SF-312 if you disclose classified information, unless the information has been officially declassified.

    Iran: Nuclear Intentions and Capabilities … Bank of America Stadium

    I know this is already a wide-ranging discussion, but it would still be better if you sort of stayed on topic.

    ==============
    simon:

    attempts to get e-mail addresses

    Try to get your facts straight. I asked you for your mailing address, not your email address. And I had a good reason for doing so. It has to do with your strange belief that only certain people have the right to be “safely anonymous.”

    ==============
    DRJ:

    I also appreciate you re-linking the comments by Lindgren and Kerr, although I read them in your earlier links and I’d seen them before.

    If you’d seen them before it’s awfully hard to understand why you contradicted them without even acknowledging what they said. And you’re still not addressing the contradiction.

    Did you read my link to the LA Times’ article explaining how the HLS honors system changed in the late 1990s — changes that indicate magna cum laude honors were only restricted to approximately 15% of graduates in 1999?

    I read it, but it looks like you didn’t. That article says this:

    Under a system implemented three years ago that first took effect with this year’s [1999] class, Harvard Law said it will limit magna cum laude degrees to the top 10% of the class.

    (Emphasis added.) Your reading comprehension sucks. Badly. One more time: pre-1999, magna meant top 15% (read what Kerr said). Post-1999, magna meant top 10%.

    Do I need to use thicker crayons? I think crayons thick enough haven’t been invented yet.

    As for Obama’s magna cum laude ranking, I acknowledge it could well be true but I’d still like to see some kind of proof.

    Yes, and you also want to personally sniff the placenta (link).

    Has anyone published online the HLS letter that reportedly confirms Obama graduated magna cum laude?

    Who said anything about an “HLS letter that reportedly confirms Obama graduated magna cum laude?” You have a vivid imagination.

    It was reported in the Harvard Crimson and many other news outlets, including Fox. But I’m sure that’s all a hoax, just like the moon landing.

    In addition, you’d think Obama would have announced his graduation honors at some point in his campaign

    That would have been completely pointless, since so many news articles included that information. You don’t have to beat a drum when a lot of other people are beating it for you.

    I’m just curious how the Harvard Crimson confirmed Obama was an HLS honors graduate.

    Here’s the logical assumption: they asked HLS. It’s a local phone call, only cost a dime.

    ==============
    milhouse:

    Saying “the other thread” and expecting people to guess which thread you mean is just asinine.

    You would have a point if you hadn’t commented in that thread. Which means you knew there was a thread about Bain.

    I’m not sure why his word is to be taken as gospel, let alone his word about what he was told by someone else who might have his own reasons to lie.

    Yes, Kosman’s claim might be wrong. So let’s hear Mitt contradict it.

    Also, for some strange reason you’re pretending that Kosman’s article is the only evidence I presented. But it’s not the only evidence I presented. I also showed that Mitt signed official documents after he supposedly “left the firm.” You are conveniently failing to address that.

    ==============
    icy:

    Le•gal theft, n: the selling off of assets by a business entity that holds a controlling interest

    No, the legal theft wasn’t “the selling off of assets.” It was the dividend recaps that sank the companies while supporting huge payoffs for Bain. After about 700 comments it’s pretty amazing that you still don’t get this.

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  724. Even if it really was meant to be secret that Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA, it was evidently so secret that nobody at the White House knew about it. There’s no way Libby could have known she was covert (if indeed she was), so he had no reason to think he shouldn’t tell anyone.

    Milhouse (9a4c23)

  725. Oh, and about Romney taking credit for all the jobs at Staples now, rather than at the date he left Bain? It’s very simple: without Romney’s work at Bain there wouldn’t be a Staples today, and none of those jobs would exist.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  726. milhouse:

    Even if it really was meant to be secret that Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA, it was evidently so secret that nobody at the White House knew about it

    WP:

    Plame’s Identity Marked As Secret – A classified State Department memorandum central to a federal leak investigation contained information about CIA officer Valerie Plame in a paragraph marked “(S)” for secret, a clear indication that any Bush administration official who read it should have been aware the information was classified …

    The paragraph identifying her as the wife of former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV was clearly marked to show that it contained classified material at the “secret” level, two sources said. The CIA classifies as “secret” the names of officers whose identities are covert, according to former senior agency officials.

    … The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday that the memo made it clear that information about Wilson’s wife was sensitive and should not be shared.

    WSJ:

    A classified State Department memo that may be pivotal to the CIA leak case made clear that information identifying an agent and her role in her husband’s intelligence-gathering mission was sensitive and shouldn’t be shared, according to a person familiar with the document.

    By the way, that memo is here: pdf.

    Yes, we can’t prove exactly who saw the memo, but there’s ample reason to believe it was circulated at the White House. At this time, Cheney was keenly interested in finding out everything he could about Plame and Wilson.

    Many CIA employees have a covert status. At the very least, Libby/Rove et al knew she worked at the CIA. At the very least, they had an obligation to at least inquire about her status, to confirm she was not covert, before blabbing about her. They didn’t lift a finger to do so. How anyone can defend this behavior is a mystery to me.

    There’s no way Libby could have known she was covert (if indeed she was), so he had no reason to think he shouldn’t tell anyone.

    That’s 100% nonsense. Yes, there is a “way Libby could have known she was covert.” All he had to do was ask the CIA. He didn’t.

    so he had no reason to think he shouldn’t tell anyone

    Yes, he did have a “reason to think he shouldn’t tell anyone.” He knew she worked for the CIA, which means he knew there was a distinct possibility that her status there was covert. The idea that he was entitled to assume otherwise, without even asking, is nuts.

    Oh, and about Romney taking credit for all the jobs at Staples now, rather than at the date he left Bain? It’s very simple: without Romney’s work at Bain there wouldn’t be a Staples today, and none of those jobs would exist.

    If it makes sense for him to take credit for job gains that took place after he was no longer involved, does it also make sense for him to be blamed for job losses after he was no longer involved? Or is the rule heads I win tails you lose?

    You’re also not addressing the problem that jobs taken from competitors are not ‘jobs created.’

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  727. Eff you.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  728. Now that’s what hard to find on the internet: erudite, substantive argumentation.

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  729. In addition, you’d think Obama would have announced his graduation honors at some point in his campaign(s) but, again, I can’t find that he did. Perhaps he’s a modest man but I can’t find any evidence of that, either.

    Now, DRJ, You know Obama isn’t one to stand on titles, awards, or distinctions.

    Whenever he introduces his Secretary of Energy, for instance, it’s always, “Steve” (no relation). I bet you’ve probably never heard that Steve Chu earned a doctorate in physics, let alone received a Nobel Prize for Science for his work in that field.

    Some people are just naturally informal or humble. Take John Kerrey. You’d never know he served in Vietnam.

    Iran is trying to say they don’t take anything that comes from this administration seriously.

    I said some sort of war would happen by March or April. Not because the Administration would start anything so soon, but because Iran would.

    Why should they take us seriously, making concession after concession for nothing in return except more demands for more concessions is our new negotiating style when bullied.

    (I thought it was especially tasteful that Obama announced we were abandoning the Czech and Polish missile defense sites in response to Russia’s hardline stance on the day of the 70th anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Poland, didn’t you?)

    Look at the great job the Obama admin did when the Norks sank the Cheonan in March 2010. We sprang into action and rushed to South Korea so we could stand shoulder to shoulder with our ally. Just to we’d be in a better position to restrain them just in case they might want to do something stupid like respond to the North’s agression. After first glancing quickly toward Beijing and giving them an embarrassed grin that said “Sorry for my friend, he just got a little hot when your buddy at the bar killed 45 of his friends; we don’t want trouble. Tell you what, we’ll pick up your tab & leave. How much for the torpedo?” we firmly ruled out bilateral action. We resolutely demanded a response from the international community or nothing. And got both, as usual. A sternly worded declaration of condemnation of the party who sank the Cheonan in a most cowardly fashion. Whoever the hell that might have been, because that part was left out. And we thanked our lucky stars we were wise enough to cancel that bilateral naval exercise when Beijing told us we couldn’t play in their neighborhood anymore, because then we might have gotten a mere statement of concern instead. But at least we left the NORKs with a new level of respect for US resolve and our commitment to our ally, the ROK.

    They demonstrated this new level of respect by shelling the ROK’s Yeonpyeong islands in November of the same year, killing 16 including 2 civilians.

    Yup. Nobody does deterrence like Obama. He does it just like they taught him to do it at Harvard Law.

    I don’t think they’re going to start anything, though. Iran’s got a ton of oil but no refineries. Well, not literally true, but they import petroleum, diesel, & kerosene. So they’d be hurt more by closing the Strait than anyone else.

    I think they just want to get Obama to the poker negotiating table. They look north to their buds in Moscow and say, “you guys got all that from Obama for free?” Then look east to their weapons and nuke tech suppliers in Pyongyang and say, “Wow! Obama let you get away with murder?” They just want a piece of that action.

    In return for concessions on proposed sanctions, they’ll agree not to shut the Strait of Hormuz which they really didn’t want to do anyway.

    And if it’s anything like Vegas they’ll give Obama a bus ticket. And he’ll get off the bus wearing a fertilizer bag with holes cut out for his head and arms because they took him for everything except his shorts, waving a big bill still owed saying “Peace in our time!”

    [note: fished from spam filter. –Stashiu]

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  730. Yes, we can’t prove exactly who saw the memo, but there’s ample reason to believe it was circulated at the White House.

    What reason would that be? It’s a State Dept memo; Powell probably saw it, and got his information from it, which he passed on to Armitage, who passed it on to Novak. Maybe Powell should have speculated that the secret information in that paragraph was the trivial fact that Mrs Wilson worked at the CIA, rather than the substantive information that it contained, particularly whatever was in the part that remains blacked out. Or maybe not. But that’s for Powell and/or Armstrong to answer; it’s not relevant to anyone at the White House.

    At this time, Cheney was keenly interested in finding out everything he could about Plame and Wilson.

    He was interested in finding out about Wilson, since the press were running with this cock-and-bull story that Cheney had personally sent him to Africa, and then ignored his report. Since he had in fact never heard of the fellow, he naturally wanted to know who he was and how he came to be making these claims. It hardly follows that he’d ask the State Dept, and be given this memo. Why would he ask the State Dept about a CIA mission?

    Many CIA employees have a covert status.

    And many more don’t. Novak, who published the story, assumed that she wasn’t covert, because the CIA spokesman he confirmed it with didn’t make more than a pro forma effort to stop him from publishing it. And if Libby’s information did by some chance come from this memo, it says she was a WMD manager, which is not a job that one would expect to be at all secret.

    At the very least, Libby/Rove et al knew she worked at the CIA. At the very least, they had an obligation to at least inquire about her status, to confirm she was not covert, before blabbing about her.

    Why would they have such an obligation? What law imposes it? Why should it even have occurred to them? Surely if it were a secret then whoever told them it would have warned them, wouldn’t he?

    In any event, have it your way. Let’s suppose, just for a moment, that they were negligent, and should have thought to ask. Still, not knowing that her job was secret (still supposing, as we are, that it actually was), how could they possibly have intended the “leak” to harm her or her husband, in supposed “revenge” for his disclosures? And there goes the entire paranoid structure that the Wilsons have built up.

    If it makes sense for him to take credit for job gains that took place after he was no longer involved, does it also make sense for him to be blamed for job losses after he was no longer involved?

    Of course not. In what sense could he be to blame for decisions he didn’t make? If I construct a building then I have provided a home for every person who lives there, even 100 years later. If it falls down due to a flaw in my design, then I’m responsible for that too. But if some arsonist sets fire to it, how is that my fault?

    You’re also not addressing the problem that jobs taken from competitors are not ‘jobs created.’

    Do you mean that if Staples didn’t exist then some other company would have filled the niche and everyone who now works for Staples would instead be working for that competitor? How could you possibly know that? That amounts to saying that entrepreneurs add nothing to the economy, because anyone could do what they do, and if they didn’t do it someone else would. That may be true for manual labourers, who are indeed replaceable, but it’s certainly not true for entrepreneurs, whose expertise is a scarce resource.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  731. Every time Israel defends itself the useful idiots on the left whine about anti-muslim bigots who cant stand muslims praying differently. Never mind a palestinian went on a rampage killing a family.

    The GOP needs to hammer this home.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  732. Why does jukeboxclown all of a sudden give a crud about the CIA?

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  733. OMFG! OMFG! You just holed yourself amidships, JBG, and blew your own argument out of the water. You and the WSJ have no F, N clue what you just read and instead of proving your point, it proves the opposite. She was travelling with her husband, a former US ambassador (together, HELLO!).

    This memo? This is the one you linked to, right? http://wid.ap.org/documents/libbytrial/jan23/DX71.pdf

    Let me transcribe the pertinent paragraph (it’s on page 5/9 in case anyone wants to sing along).

    Meeting apparently convened by Valerie Wilson, a CIA WMD Managerial Type and the wife of Amb. Joe Wilson, with the idea that the agency and the larger USG could dispatch Joe to Niger to use to use his contacts there to sort out the Niger/Iraq uranium sale question. Joe went to Niger in 1999 in regard to Niger’s uranium program apparently with CIA support.

    Two CIA WMD analysts seem to be leading the charge on the issue, (redacted) the other guy’s name not available. They appear to believe that the embassy will be unable to ferret out the truth on the Niger/Iraq matter. INR made it a point to, gently, tell them that the Embassy has very good contacts and the Ambassador is a Tandja confidante. Later when the WMD guys failed to get the hint they were informed, a little less gently, that the Embassy was a reliable interlocutor and could be trusted to protect US interests.

    Your a loveable type of troll, JBG. You hate to be proven wrong so, demonstrating exemplary initiative, you prove yourself wrong.

    You want to know why no one at the WH needed to call and ask if Valerie Plame Wilson was a NOC or not?

    Here’s why.

    Because the CIA sent them a memo telling everyone who read that memo she’s not.

    You didn’t read anything I linked to about what constitutes non-official cover, did you? Or is it just like with this memo; you read it but you didn’t understand it?

    Non-official cover means no connection to the USG. That’s kind of hard to pull off when you’re traveling with your husband, the AMBASSADOR and the F, N US EMBASSY is acting as your ever-lovin’ INTERLOCUTOR looking out for Uncle Sugar’s interests, wouldn’t you say?

    No, perhaps you wouldn’t, because just like Lindgren told you Obama’s got a 75lb brain and Hayden told you she’s “covert,” and I’m just some guy going by the name “Steve” on the interwebs, if they tell you the sky is glowing lime-green and I say I just looked out and said “no, it’s pretty early in the morning and it’s almost pitch black,” you’re going with them.

    So let us turn to the scripture. All rise for a reading from the book of the IIPA.

    SEC. 601. [50 U.S.C. 421] (a) Whoever, having or having had authorized access to classified information that identifies a covert agent, intentionally discloses any information identifying such covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent’s intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

    (b) Whoever, as a result of having authorized access to classified information, learns the identity of a covert agent and intentionally discloses any information identifying such covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent’s intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

    For all the reasons I listed above, we already know the USG is taking zero, zip, nada, in the way of affirmative measures to conceal that covert agent’s intelligence relationship to the United States, she’s not even covert. This doesn’t even fit the definition of an official cover (‘member, that’s when she was pretending to be a DoS employee instead of a CIA employee), let alone a non-official cover type of job.

    It’s an overt collection mission. Nobody is hiding their identities or their connection to the USG; the US Embassy is in charge of the itinerary.

    But that isn’t the best part. Here’s the best part.

    They identify her as a CIA employee. You can not be working undercover and be identified as a CIA employee at one and the same time. What’s more, they identified her as exactly what type of CIA employee. She’s a “CIA WMD Mangerial type” of CIA employee. She’s not a paper pusher. Oh, no. She manages those CIA WMD analysts they talk about in the second paragraph as they push paper.

    Now, I know you’re going to close your eyes, put your fingers in your ears, and and start chanting, “I believe Hayden, I believe Hayden, I believe Hayden, …” through the night.

    But there it is, in plain English. She’s not a NOC. And unlike what jerk the WSJ talked to, there’s no reason to believe Valerie Plame Wilson, her connection to the CIA, or the USG is sensitive. It’s the content concerning what they’re doing, what they hope to find, and how they intend to do it.

    Methods. And sources. Like who’s a confidante of who. And agencies involved. I’m sure they didn’t tell the people in Niger Val was with the company. But the CIA told everyone in the White House she was, and she worked for the CIA with no cover whatsoever. Not official, not non-official, but as a plain, vanilla manager over run-o-the-mill analysts.

    If you’re impressed with the classification level, don’t be. The CIA classifies its toilet paper at a higher level than that.

    Keep digging, JBG. I hope you come up with more.

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  734. My bad; she obviously wasn’t traveling with the AMBASSADOR. Just in on the planning. Forgot the details of history as I observed the incredible spectacle of everyone who had a hand in putting this incredible document together telling the WH in the way of a big neon sign that Valerie Plame Wilson is a CIA WMD Manager (she’s listed as such again in the last paragraph on the first page) and not a NOC.

    So belay my last. Sort of. She didn’t blow her cover by traveling with Joe to Niger. She didn’t have a cover to blow.

    A play: “Pillow Talk,” starring Valerie Plame Wilson and Amb. Joe Wilson.

    Val: Joe, I’ve been keeping a secret from you. And I’ve finally worked up the courage to tell you.

    Joe: What is it, babe? You can tell me anything.

    Val: I’ve been leading a double life. I secretly work for the CIA.

    Joe: What do you mean secretly working for the CIA? I know you work for the CIA. Remember? You came by my office at Foggy Bottom and helped plan my Niger trip?

    Val: Yes, but no one knows what I do at the CIA.

    Joe: We all know what you do at the CIA. After we left the breakfast bar with our coffee and donuts we went around the table and introduced ourselves. You stood up and said you were a WMD manager at the CIA; that’s why you were planning my trip. We’re supposed to look for evidence of an Iraqi WMD program.

    Val: that’s just what they think I do. Secretly, I work under deep cover for the CIA; I just tell people I work for the CIA so they won’t guess what my real mission is.

    Joe: What the hey? Your cover story is that you work for the CIA so they won’t guess you work for the CIA? I’m getting a headache.

    Val: If you travel abroad and tell people straight up you work for the CIA, no one will think you’re a spy?

    Joe: Everyone will think you’re a spy!

    Val: No, they’ll think you’re too stupid to be a spy. It’s like, psychology.

    Joe: I never got this official cover crap.

    Val: No, it’s my non-official cover. If I tell them I work for the CIA, not only won’t they think I’m a spy, they’ll never guess I work for the government.

    Joe: My head’s splitting. I can’t take any more. I’ll be in my study with my whiskey and a revolver.

    And Joe put a bullet in his brain, lived, but couldn’t find any yellowcake. THE END.

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  735. Steve, the memo isn’t from the CIA, it’s from the State Dept. And it didn’t go to the White House. We don’t know what the CIA told the White House she did; they may not have said anything. It’s possible that she was covert, because in addition to her normal work on WMD, which there’d be no reason to hide, she went on occasional secret missions overseas. Perhaps when she decided she wanted to give up the full-time spy life and become a wife and mother they said “OK, you can come be an analyst at Langley, but you have assets who know and trust you so you’ll still have to go out and meet them occasionally”. If this were so, then she’d still be covert, because they wouldn’t want it known that she worked at the CIA in any capacity. But the people who worked with her every day might not know that; they might not wonder where she went on her occasional “vacations”, and why. They would be expected not to blab about the fact that they worked with her because they’re expected not to blab anything, just on general principles.

    And the State Dept person who wrote this memo would have no need to know so he wouldn’t be told; perhaps he should have been told not to mention her name or include it in any memo, but perhaps nobody who knew this thought of it. Or perhaps he was told, but didn’t appreciate just how secret it was supposed to be. Ditto for whoever at the CIA told the White House that she worked there; he may not have known that it was supposed to be secret, or he may have known but didn’t convey this well, just as Novak said the person who confirmed her employment to him didn’t properly convey that it was a real secret.

    The advantage of this is that it would perfectly explain why when this seemingly innocuous fact was published everyone went into panic mode and started flinging accusations.

    This is of course all speculation. It’s equally possible that nobody was told she was covert because she wasn’t, and both Wilson’s apparent panic and the CIA referral were cynical political moves to help defeat Bush in 2004.

    Milhouse (ea66e3)

  736. Talking about those traitors, the Wilsons, eh?

    I wonder if they were actually on Hussein’s payroll or if they were just helping the Butcher of Baghdad out of the goodness of their hearts.

    Either way they ought to be drawn and quartered and then hung (I know it’s usually done in a different order, but I’m willing to make an exception in their case).

    Dave Surls (46b08c)

  737. Well Wilson was businesspartners with the fabulous Alamaoudi Bros, who had a common charity along with Hillary, the Golden Chain,

    narciso (87e966)

  738. milhouse:

    [there’s ample reason to believe the INR memo was circulated at the White House.] What reason would that be? It’s a State Dept memo; Powell probably saw it, and got his information from it, which he passed on to Armitage, who passed it on to Novak. Maybe Powell should have speculated that the secret information in that paragraph was the trivial fact that Mrs Wilson worked at the CIA, rather than the substantive information that it contained, particularly whatever was in the part that remains blacked out. Or maybe not. But that’s for Powell and/or Armstrong to answer; it’s not relevant to anyone at the White House.

    The INR memo was not “relevant to anyone at the White House?” Really? Are you sure? Even though it was written specifically at Libby’s request?

    Before posting on this subject, it would be good if you learned about the basic facts of the case, and a good start would be to read what Fitzgerald told the court:

    I want to start by talking a little bit about Marc Grossman, the first witness you heard from. Mr. Grossman told you — I remind you, the number-three person at the State Department, Under Secretary for Political Affairs — he told you how, on may 29th, outside a Deputies committee meeting, he was approached by Mr. Libby who wanted information about a trip by an ambassador to Niger. He wanted to know what Mr. Grossman knew about that trip. Mr. Grossman didn’t know anything about that trip. He had never heard of it, and it bothered him that he didn’t know about it because here he was being asked by the chief of staff of the vice-president of the United States something which he should have been aware of in his own mind.

    So he goes back to the State Department. He tells Mr. Libby he is going to look into it. He digs around and he finds out some information. He finds out that there was an ambassador who went. His name is Joseph Wilson. He went to Niger. He reported back. And Mr. Grossman calls and tells mr. Libby that information that day. Mr. Grossman is not satisfied that he has all the information and wants a report. He wants something on paper. He goes on foreign travel. He comes back. And July [sic] 10th or 11th, he is handed from Carl Ford, from the state department’s Intelligence and Research Branch, what’s been referred to as the I.N.R. memo, dated June 10th.

    This memo contained a paragraph which referred to Valerie Wilson, Joseph Wilson’s wife, and indicated that she worked at the C.I.A. and that she had a role in sending her husband, Mr. Wilson, on the trip to Niger. And as you will recall, Mr. Grossman told you that this fact leaped out at him. It was really remarkable to him. He thought it verged on the edge of impropriety. He thought it was somewhat bizarre.

    He sees Mr. Libby again within a day or two — most likely June 12th — and he sees Mr. Libby outside, again, a deputies committee meeting, and he tells Mr. Libby, I have some more information for you. I owe you this information. I have looked into it. I have looked into the question that you asked me. And I found out, yes, an ambassador went. It was Joseph Wilson, he did report back. And then Mr. Grossman said another thing. He said, there is something else that you should know. Wilson’s wife works at the agency. She works at the C.I.A. Mr. Grossman thought that this was important that he tell this to Mr. Libby. And why wouldn’t he? He had already been caught short, in his own mind — Mr. Grossman’s mind — not knowing about the ambassador.

    He looks into it. He is reporting back to the vice-president’s chief of staff, and he is going to hold back this piece of information? No. He remembers telling this to Mr. Libby. And I suggest to you, ladies and gentlemen, when Mr. Grossman told this to Mr. Libby on June 12th, it was the fourth time in two days that Mr. Libby had been told about ambassador Wilson’s wife. The fourth time.

    Link, link. Still want to argue that the INR memo was not “relevant to anyone at the White House?”

    Steve, the memo isn’t from the CIA, it’s from the State Dept. And it didn’t go to the White House.

    Thanks again for making it clear that you paid no attention to the trial.

    And the State Dept person who wrote this memo would have no need to know so he wouldn’t be told

    You’re ignoring what I already said: that her classified status was indicated in the memo.

    He was interested in finding out about Wilson, since the press were running with this cock-and-bull story that Cheney had personally sent him to Africa, and then ignored his report. Since he had in fact never heard of the fellow, he naturally wanted to know who he was and how he came to be making these claims. It hardly follows that he’d ask the State Dept, and be given this memo. Why would he ask the State Dept about a CIA mission?

    More ignorance about basic facts. You’re trying to suggest that Cheney had no interest in Plame, but a handwritten note by Cheney demonstrates his interest in Plame. “Cheney Penned Note About Plame, Filing Shows.” Link. And this is aside from Grossman’s testimony, as summarized above by Fitzgerald.

    Why would he ask the State Dept about a CIA mission?

    You need to ask Libby that question. He was the one who decided to ask Grossman for information “about a CIA mission.” Here’s one possible answer: maybe it’s routine for State to act as a liaison between White House and CIA. Here’s another possible answer: Libby had a personal relationship with Grossman and trusted Grossman to do a good job of answering the question. That’s speculation on my part.

    Novak, who published the story, assumed that she wasn’t covert, because the CIA spokesman he confirmed it with didn’t make more than a pro forma effort to stop him from publishing it.

    Novak’s role is secondary. Novak did not sign SF-312.

    Why would they have such an obligation [to at least inquire about her status, to confirm she was not covert, before blabbing about her]? What law imposes it?

    More ignorance. Take a look at the SF-312 briefing booklet (link), which contains this relevant passage: “I understand that if I am uncertain about the classification status of information I am required to confirm from an authorized official that the information is unclassified before I may disclose it.”

    Yes, not everyone who works for the CIA is covert. But many are. A reasonable person knows that if someone works at the CIA, there’s a significant chance that person might be a covert agent: “as many as one-third of the CIA’s approximately 20,000 employees are undercover or have worked in that capacity at some point in their careers” (link).

    Therefore, as called for by SF-312, they had an obligation to check first, unless they were sure she was not covert. And this is aside from what I already mentioned: that the section of the INR memo discussing her was marked Classified.

    Surely if it were a secret then whoever told them it would have warned them, wouldn’t he?

    The section of the INR memo discussing her was marked Classified. Grossman probably assumed he didn’t need to tell Libby what that word meant.

    how could they possibly have intended the “leak” to harm her or her husband, in supposed “revenge” for his disclosures?

    By ending her career, which it did. Duh.

    If it falls down due to a flaw in my design, then I’m responsible for that too. But if some arsonist sets fire to it, how is that my fault?

    If the company fails because I burdened it with debt in order to be able to cut myself a huge check, explain how that’s not “my fault.”

    Do you mean that if Staples didn’t exist then some other company would have filled the niche and everyone who now works for Staples would instead be working for that competitor? How could you possibly know that?

    No, that’s not what I said at all. It’s not about some other hypothetical company that “would have filled the niche.” It’s about the existing companies that did fill that niche, and were either put out of business by Staples or absorbed by Staples. For companies put out of business by Staples, those job losses need to be accounted for. For companies absorbed by Staples, those are not jobs created by Staples. Mitt’s analysis accounts for none of this.

    =============
    steve:

    You want to know why no one at the WH needed to call and ask if Valerie Plame Wilson was a NOC or not? Here’s why. Because the CIA sent them a memo telling everyone who read that memo she’s not.

    You’re ignoring what I already said: that her classified status was indicated in the memo. You’re not just dead wrong: you put an enormous number of words into being dead wrong.

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    jukeboxgrad (609ca0)

  739. So what? Who cares? He was under no obligation to answer that question, and no conclusions can be drawn from the fact that he didn’t answer that question.

    Only conclusions can be drawn by you from his silence, like when he did not refute Waxman’s claims, making them true.

    JD (318f81)

  740. I’m just curious how the Harvard Crimson confirmed Obama was an HLS honors graduate.

    DRJ, as far as I can tell from the Harvard Crimson, they are just saying the same bio line that everyone else says, that Obama graduated magna. It’s just kind of a chatty report, not an in-depth fact finder.

    I’m with you, I think, in that we both are perfectly willing to believe it’s true, but we all know of biographical details that get repeated over and over without the reporter really knowing.

    I can see how his HLS grades would be substantially better than his other work, both Tribe and other classmates have said he was not expected to do the same kind of work. Story of his life.

    MayBee (081489)

  741. They sent the INR analyst, Rohn who wrote the memo, to Islamabad, I don’t think they considered that a promotion,

    narciso (87e966)

  742. One more time: pre-1999, magna meant top 15%

    People cited sources above that refute this idea. You ignored them.

    JD (318f81)

  743. Yes, and you also want to personally sniff the placenta

    That is a lie, and you are a liar.

    JD (318f81)

  744. 751 comments? Is that a record?

    getreal (ffcc96)

  745. He can’t tell the difference between the Onion and real news, he probably thinks Stewart and Colbert are the real deal.

    narciso (87e966)

  746. Note: it’s a shame that the management here is trying to block my posts while also being too cowardly to admit they’re doing this, and too cowardly to even state that they want me to stop posting.

    And if you see no further comments from me, you should ask them why they’re blocking me.

    milhouse:

    [there’s ample reason to believe the INR memo was circulated at the White House.] What reason would that be? It’s a State Dept memo; Powell probably saw it, and got his information from it, which he passed on to Armitage, who passed it on to Novak. Maybe Powell should have speculated that the secret information in that paragraph was the trivial fact that Mrs Wilson worked at the CIA, rather than the substantive information that it contained, particularly whatever was in the part that remains blacked out. Or maybe not. But that’s for Powell and/or Armstrong to answer; it’s not relevant to anyone at the White House.

    The INR memo was not “relevant to anyone at the White House?” Really? Are you sure? Even though it was written specifically at Libby’s request?

    Before posting on this subject, it would be good if you learned about the basic facts of the case, and a good start would be to read what Fitzgerald told the court:

    I want to start by talking a little bit about Marc Grossman, the first witness you heard from. Mr. Grossman told you — I remind you, the number-three person at the State Department, Under Secretary for Political Affairs — he told you how, on may 29th, outside a Deputies committee meeting, he was approached by Mr. Libby who wanted information about a trip by an ambassador to Niger. He wanted to know what Mr. Grossman knew about that trip. Mr. Grossman didn’t know anything about that trip. He had never heard of it, and it bothered him that he didn’t know about it because here he was being asked by the chief of staff of the vice-president of the United States something which he should have been aware of in his own mind.

    So he goes back to the State Department. He tells Mr. Libby he is going to look into it. He digs around and he finds out some information. He finds out that there was an ambassador who went. His name is Joseph Wilson. He went to Niger. He reported back. And Mr. Grossman calls and tells mr. Libby that information that day. Mr. Grossman is not satisfied that he has all the information and wants a report. He wants something on paper. He goes on foreign travel. He comes back. And July [sic] 10th or 11th, he is handed from Carl Ford, from the state department’s Intelligence and Research Branch, what’s been referred to as the I.N.R. memo, dated June 10th.

    This memo contained a paragraph which referred to Valerie Wilson, Joseph Wilson’s wife, and indicated that she worked at the C.I.A. and that she had a role in sending her husband, Mr. Wilson, on the trip to Niger. And as you will recall, Mr. Grossman told you that this fact leaped out at him. It was really remarkable to him. He thought it verged on the edge of impropriety. He thought it was somewhat bizarre.

    He sees Mr. Libby again within a day or two — most likely June 12th — and he sees Mr. Libby outside, again, a deputies committee meeting, and he tells Mr. Libby, I have some more information for you. I owe you this information. I have looked into it. I have looked into the question that you asked me. And I found out, yes, an ambassador went. It was Joseph Wilson, he did report back. And then Mr. Grossman said another thing. He said, there is something else that you should know. Wilson’s wife works at the agency. She works at the C.I.A. Mr. Grossman thought that this was important that he tell this to Mr. Libby. And why wouldn’t he? He had already been caught short, in his own mind — Mr. Grossman’s mind — not knowing about the ambassador.

    He looks into it. He is reporting back to the vice-president’s chief of staff, and he is going to hold back this piece of information? No. He remembers telling this to Mr. Libby. And I suggest to you, ladies and gentlemen, when Mr. Grossman told this to Mr. Libby on June 12th, it was the fourth time in two days that Mr. Libby had been told about ambassador Wilson’s wife. The fourth time.

    Link, link. Still want to argue that the INR memo was not “relevant to anyone at the White House?”

    Steve, the memo isn’t from the CIA, it’s from the State Dept. And it didn’t go to the White House.

    Thanks again for making it clear that you paid no attention to the trial.

    And the State Dept person who wrote this memo would have no need to know so he wouldn’t be told

    You’re ignoring what I already said: that her classified status was indicated in the memo.

    He was interested in finding out about Wilson, since the press were running with this cock-and-bull story that Cheney had personally sent him to Africa, and then ignored his report. Since he had in fact never heard of the fellow, he naturally wanted to know who he was and how he came to be making these claims. It hardly follows that he’d ask the State Dept, and be given this memo. Why would he ask the State Dept about a CIA mission?

    More ignorance about basic facts. You’re trying to suggest that Cheney had no interest in Plame, but a handwritten note by Cheney demonstrates his interest in Plame. “Cheney Penned Note About Plame, Filing Shows.” Link. And this is aside from Grossman’s testimony, as summarized above by Fitzgerald.

    Why would he ask the State Dept about a CIA mission?

    You need to ask Libby that question. He was the one who decided to ask Grossman for information “about a CIA mission.” Here’s one possible answer: maybe it’s routine for State to act as a liaison between White House and CIA. Here’s another possible answer: Libby had a personal relationship with Grossman and trusted Grossman to do a good job of answering the question. That’s speculation on my part.

    Novak, who published the story, assumed that she wasn’t covert, because the CIA spokesman he confirmed it with didn’t make more than a pro forma effort to stop him from publishing it.

    Novak’s role is secondary. Novak did not sign SF-312.

    Why would they have such an obligation [to at least inquire about her status, to confirm she was not covert, before blabbing about her]? What law imposes it?

    More ignorance. Take a look at the SF-312 briefing booklet (link), which contains this relevant passage: “I understand that if I am uncertain about the classification status of information I am required to confirm from an authorized official that the information is unclassified before I may disclose it.”

    Yes, not everyone who works for the CIA is covert. But many are. A reasonable person knows that if someone works at the CIA, there’s a significant chance that person might be a covert agent: “as many as one-third of the CIA’s approximately 20,000 employees are undercover or have worked in that capacity at some point in their careers” (link).

    Therefore, as called for by SF-312, they had an obligation to check first, unless they were sure she was not covert. And this is aside from what I already mentioned: that the section of the INR memo discussing her was marked Classified.

    Surely if it were a secret then whoever told them it would have warned them, wouldn’t he?

    The section of the INR memo discussing her was marked Classified. Grossman probably assumed he didn’t need to tell Libby what that word meant.

    how could they possibly have intended the “leak” to harm her or her husband, in supposed “revenge” for his disclosures?

    By ending her career, which it did. Duh.

    If it falls down due to a flaw in my design, then I’m responsible for that too. But if some arsonist sets fire to it, how is that my fault?

    If the company fails because I burdened it with debt in order to be able to cut myself a huge check, explain how that’s not “my fault.”

    Do you mean that if Staples didn’t exist then some other company would have filled the niche and everyone who now works for Staples would instead be working for that competitor? How could you possibly know that?

    No, that’s not what I said at all. It’s not about some other hypothetical company that “would have filled the niche.” It’s about the existing companies that did fill that niche, and were either put out of business by Staples or absorbed by Staples. For companies put out of business by Staples, those job losses need to be accounted for. For companies absorbed by Staples, those are not jobs created by Staples. Mitt’s analysis accounts for none of this.

    =============
    steve:

    You want to know why no one at the WH needed to call and ask if Valerie Plame Wilson was a NOC or not? Here’s why. Because the CIA sent them a memo telling everyone who read that memo she’s not.

    You’re ignoring what I already said: that her classified status was indicated in the memo. You’re not just dead wrong: you put an enormous number of words into being dead wrong.

    =============
    jd:

    Only conclusions can be drawn by you from his silence, like when he did not refute Waxman’s claims, making them true.

    Take your complaint to daleyrocks, who cited Novak who said this:

    Waxman was correctly quoting Hayden.

    =============
    maybee:

    I’m with you, I think, in that we both are perfectly willing to believe it’s true, but we all know of biographical details that get repeated over and over without the reporter really knowing.

    Naturally, just like all the reporters who reported a moon landing “without the reporter really knowing.”

    I can see how his HLS grades would be substantially better than his other work, both Tribe and other classmates have said he was not expected to do the same kind of work.

    You should show us where “Tribe and other classmates” said that. And you’re ignoring this fact, even though I’ve mentioned it several times: HLS uses a system of blind grading.

    =============
    jd:

    People cited sources above that refute this idea. You ignored them.

    No, the LA Times article did not “refute this idea.” It just said that in 1999, magna meant 10%, and this was stricter than before. This contradicts nothing I said or cited.

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    getreal (ffcc96)

  747. @getreal–

    not even close.

    elissa (28c05d)

  748. Why does Jukeboxgrad want to sniff Sullivan’s placenta?

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  749. Milhouse, the memo was from the DoS but it included CIA attatchments.

    It’s possible that she was covert, because in addition to her normal work on WMD, which there’d be no reason to hide, she went on occasional secret missions overseas.

    No. That isn’t possible.

    https://www.cia.gov/news-information/press-releases-statements/press-release-archive-2007/transcript-of-general-haydens-interview-with-wtop.html

    General Hayden: I’m not comfortable talking a great deal about it. But let me share with you something I shared with the members of the House of Representatives as they were about to hold open hearings a month or two ago. And that’s simply this: The people in our Agency are either not undercover or they are undercover, they are either overt or covert. And then that’s a binary choice for us.

    It’s not possible. But that’s what was put forth as an argument.

    Undercover travel
    The unclassified summary of Plame’s employment with the CIA at the time that syndicated columnist Robert Novak published her name on July 14, 2003 says, “Ms. Wilson was a covert CIA employee for who the CIA was taking affirmative measures to conceal her intelligence relationship to the United States.”

    Plame worked as an operations officer in the Directorate of Operations and was assigned to the Counterproliferation Division (CPD) in January 2002 at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.

    The employment history indicates that while she was assigned to CPD, Plame, “engaged in temporary duty travel overseas on official business.” The report says, “she traveled at least seven times to more than ten times.” When overseas Plame traveled undercover, “sometimes in true name and sometimes in alias — but always using cover — whether official or non-official (NOC) — with no ostensible relationship to the CIA.”

    And that’s what finally makes this so simple.

    This will please JBG, but I’m finally quoting GEN Hayden. “The people in our Agency are either not undercover or they are undercover, they are either overt or covert.” But the Plames went on a PR blitz to claim both. And thus GEN Hayden squares the circle for us.

    To prove a violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982, Pub. L. No. 97-200, 1982 U.S.C.C.A.N. (96 Stat. 122) 145 (codified at 50 U.S.C. §§ 421-426 ) (the “Act”) (Tab A), the government must establish the following elements:
    The United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal a covert agent’s intelligence relationship to the United States;

    The covert agent whose identity was disclosed is an employee of an intelligence agency;

    The covert agent whose identity was disclosed has a relationship with such agency that is classified;

    At the time of the disclosure, the covert agent whose identity was disclosed was serving outside the United States or had done so within five years of the disclosure;

    The person disclosing the identity of that covert agent must be authorized, directly or indirectly, to have access to classified information that identifies the covert agent;

    The person disclosing the identity knows that the government is taking affirmative measures to conceal the relationship;

    The person disclosing the identity knows that the information so identifies the covert agent;

    The disclosure is intentional; and

    The identity is disclosed to a person not having authorization to receive such information.

    Valerie Plame can go on MSNBC and claim that she could travel under some form of “cover” abroad, work overtly for the CIA while at home. She gives the game away when she says she’d sometimes travel under official cover, sometime non-official cover. Because wtf does MSNBC know about cover details. And for that matter, what do they know about what constitutes “affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent’s intelligence relationship to the United States.”

    Hayden knows, it’s a binary choice; you are either a one or a zero. So, Hayden gives an interview at the CIA and describes what constitutes good fieldcraft. Plame goes onto MSNBC and describes piss poor awful field craft

    She regularly traveled? Did she regularly travel to the same place? Using different covers? It is difficult to establish a cover for an covert officer to move into; it takes time, money and resources. It can even be dangerous for those establishing the cover. Why did you need 7 to 10 covers a year? You don’t think such questions would come up in court? What she’s describing is so much more likely to blow her cover than just having one and sticking with it, and then not coming out from undercover to work overtly at Langley.

    The first thing they’d have to prove, not just assert, but prove is what affirmative steps, exactly, was the USG taking to conceal the intelligence relationship between the covert agent and the US.

    The answer is “none.”

    They couldn’t get past the first element.

    This is from wikipedia, (Google “Plame Affair) but I’m just using it for convenience as it’s the same audiotape that was entered into the court record by Bob Woodward.

    WOODWARD: But it was Joe Wilson who was sent by the agency. I mean that’s just —
    ARMITAGE: His wife works in the agency.
    WOODWARD: Why doesn’t that come out? Why does —
    ARMITAGE: Everyone knows it.
    WOODWARD: — that have to be a big secret? Everyone knows.
    ARMITAGE: Yeah. And I know Joe Wilson’s been calling everybody. He’s pissed off because he was designated as a low-level guy, went out to look at it. So, he’s all pissed off.
    WOODWARD: But why would they send him?
    ARMITAGE: Because his wife’s a [expletive] analyst at the agency.
    WOODWARD: It’s still weird.
    ARMITAGE: It — It’s perfect. This is what she does she is a WMD analyst out there.
    WOODWARD: Oh she is.
    ARMITAGE: Yeah.
    WOODWARD: Oh, I see.
    ARMITAGE: Yeah. See?
    WOODWARD: Oh, she’s the chief WMD?
    ARMITAGE: No she isn’t the chief, no.
    WOODWARD: But high enough up that she can say, “Oh yeah, hubby will go.”
    ARMITAGE: Yeah, he knows Africa.
    WOODWARD: Was she out there with him?
    ARMITAGE: No.
    WOODWARD: When he was ambassador?
    ARMITAGE: Not to my knowledge. I don’t know. I don’t know if she was out there or not. But his wife is in the agency and is a WMD analyst. How about that [expletive].

    It was the worst kept secret in the world. These yayhoos transferred her information to the American interests section in the Swiss Embassy in Cuba labelled Confidential. The Cuban intel guys were there. The Swiss didn’t get the message to hold back the Confidential stuff, and the Cuban’s read everything.

    CIA officer named prior to column

    I realize some might think it’s irresponsible to rely on the press as a source, but in this trial the press was the source. The CIA would try to claim that they took “affirmative measures” to conceal Plame’s relationship to the CIA, and the first defense witness would be Robert Novak saying he called his contact in the press office, and he not only confirmed Plame was a CIA employee but he never thought to mention she was covert and not to print the story.

    This is why Libby was never charged. This is why Fitzgerald never wanted the question to come up.

    And it wasn’t just that they were out to get Bush. There was some of that, but how much that was Fitzgerald’s bloodlust and how much was he playing to a liberal DC jury’s instincts I don’t know. This is the simplest thing in the world to understand. The CIA screwed up; they’re lazy and incompetent and this time it bit them on the buttocks in a public way.

    Their usual techniques are to choose between deception and stupidity. If they can cover it up, they choose deception. If they can’t but think they can get through it, they’ll choose stupidity. This was too big, so they circled the wagons and said what ever they needed to say.

    And who has the most reason to lie. The guy who is inferred to in the Unclas summary quoted in the MSNBC report:

    “Ms. Wilson was a covert CIA employee for who the CIA was taking affirmative measures to conceal her intelligence relationship to the United States.”

    GEN Hayden is CIA and he screwed the pooch. CYA is a more apt acronym for that crowd, and Hayden proved worthy of being the top dog. Libby had to take the fall or he would have. Not Cheney, or whomever the guys at the Daily Kos think would have.

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  750. JBG is like a perverted version of Joseph Mccarthy.

    Who by the way did not call people nazis so quit putting words in his mouth.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  751. Note: this is jukeboxgrad.

    It’s a shame that the management here is blocking my posts while also being too cowardly to admit they’re doing this, and too cowardly to even state that they want me to stop posting.

    And if you see no further comments from me, you should ask them why they’re blocking me.

    Have fun with your echo chamber.

    [note: fished from spam filter. –Stashiu]

    nowwhat (754dce)

  752. Note: this is jukeboxgrad.

    It’s a shame that the management here is blocking my posts while also being too cowardly to admit they’re doing this, and too cowardly to even state that they want me to stop posting.

    And if you see no further comments from me, you should ask them why they’re blocking me.

    Have fun with your echo chamber.

    [note: fished from spam filter. –Stashiu]

    getrealagain (fa4a67)

  753. Hayden was previously NSA, and remember what a bang up job they did, he was one who tried to make the agency ‘more friendly’ after watching ‘Enemy of the State,’

    narciso (87e966)

  754. It’s a shame that the management here is blocking my posts while also being too cowardly to admit they’re doing this, and too cowardly to even state that they want me to stop posting.

    And if you see no further comments from me, you should ask them why they’re blocking me.

    Have fun with your echo chamber.

    [note: fished from spam filter. –Stashiu]

    onceagain (9742a3)

  755. 🙄 What a bunch of mediocre sub-par knuckleheads.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  756. I wonder if anyone else has noticed that jbg isn’t posting anymore.

    Rick (d529e1)

  757. It’s a shame that the management here is blocking his posts while also being too cowardly to admit they’re doing this.

    Rick (d529e1)

  758. It is a shame “Rick” can’t read very well.

    JD (318f81)

  759. I wonder if your projecting?

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  760. Jbg last comment was at 10:00 PST. That is 1:00 AM Eastern. So, no comments from a scattershot troll for 10 hours, and “Rick” drops by to get his faux outrage on over something he cannot possible know. Bugger off.

    JD (318f81)

  761. Rick- maybe he’s at work.

    MayBee (081489)

  762. His comments are being blocked.

    Rick (a2ea4f)

  763. I know that because this is jbg, using a different IP.

    rick (ffcc96)

  764. milhouse:

    [there’s ample reason to believe the INR memo was circulated at the White House.] What reason would that be? It’s a State Dept memo; Powell probably saw it, and got his information from it, which he passed on to Armitage, who passed it on to Novak. Maybe Powell should have speculated that the secret information in that paragraph was the trivial fact that Mrs Wilson worked at the CIA, rather than the substantive information that it contained, particularly whatever was in the part that remains blacked out. Or maybe not. But that’s for Powell and/or Armstrong to answer; it’s not relevant to anyone at the White House.

    The INR memo was not “relevant to anyone at the White House?” Really? Are you sure? Even though it was written specifically at Libby’s request?

    Before posting on this subject, it would be good if you learned about the basic facts of the case, and a good start would be to read what Fitzgerald told the court:

    I want to start by talking a little bit about Marc Grossman, the first witness you heard from. Mr. Grossman told you — I remind you, the number-three person at the State Department, Under Secretary for Political Affairs — he told you how, on may 29th, outside a Deputies committee meeting, he was approached by Mr. Libby who wanted information about a trip by an ambassador to Niger. He wanted to know what Mr. Grossman knew about that trip. Mr. Grossman didn’t know anything about that trip. He had never heard of it, and it bothered him that he didn’t know about it because here he was being asked by the chief of staff of the vice-president of the United States something which he should have been aware of in his own mind.

    So he goes back to the State Department. He tells Mr. Libby he is going to look into it. He digs around and he finds out some information. He finds out that there was an ambassador who went. His name is Joseph Wilson. He went to Niger. He reported back. And Mr. Grossman calls and tells mr. Libby that information that day. Mr. Grossman is not satisfied that he has all the information and wants a report. He wants something on paper. He goes on foreign travel. He comes back. And July [sic] 10th or 11th, he is handed from Carl Ford, from the state department’s Intelligence and Research Branch, what’s been referred to as the I.N.R. memo, dated June 10th.

    This memo contained a paragraph which referred to Valerie Wilson, Joseph Wilson’s wife, and indicated that she worked at the C.I.A. and that she had a role in sending her husband, Mr. Wilson, on the trip to Niger. And as you will recall, Mr. Grossman told you that this fact leaped out at him. It was really remarkable to him. He thought it verged on the edge of impropriety. He thought it was somewhat bizarre.

    He sees Mr. Libby again within a day or two — most likely June 12th — and he sees Mr. Libby outside, again, a deputies committee meeting, and he tells Mr. Libby, I have some more information for you. I owe you this information. I have looked into it. I have looked into the question that you asked me. And I found out, yes, an ambassador went. It was Joseph Wilson, he did report back. And then Mr. Grossman said another thing. He said, there is something else that you should know. Wilson’s wife works at the agency. She works at the C.I.A. Mr. Grossman thought that this was important that he tell this to Mr. Libby. And why wouldn’t he? He had already been caught short, in his own mind — Mr. Grossman’s mind — not knowing about the ambassador.

    He looks into it. He is reporting back to the vice-president’s chief of staff, and he is going to hold back this piece of information? No. He remembers telling this to Mr. Libby. And I suggest to you, ladies and gentlemen, when Mr. Grossman told this to Mr. Libby on June 12th, it was the fourth time in two days that Mr. Libby had been told about ambassador Wilson’s wife. The fourth time.

    Link, link. Still want to argue that the INR memo was not “relevant to anyone at the White House?”

    Steve, the memo isn’t from the CIA, it’s from the State Dept. And it didn’t go to the White House.

    Thanks again for making it clear that you paid no attention to the trial.

    And the State Dept person who wrote this memo would have no need to know so he wouldn’t be told

    You’re ignoring what I already said: that her classified status was indicated in the memo.

    He was interested in finding out about Wilson, since the press were running with this cock-and-bull story that Cheney had personally sent him to Africa, and then ignored his report. Since he had in fact never heard of the fellow, he naturally wanted to know who he was and how he came to be making these claims. It hardly follows that he’d ask the State Dept, and be given this memo. Why would he ask the State Dept about a CIA mission?

    More ignorance about basic facts. You’re trying to suggest that Cheney had no interest in Plame, but a handwritten note by Cheney demonstrates his interest in Plame. “Cheney Penned Note About Plame, Filing Shows.” Link. And this is aside from Grossman’s testimony, as summarized above by Fitzgerald.

    Why would he ask the State Dept about a CIA mission?

    You need to ask Libby that question. He was the one who decided to ask Grossman for information “about a CIA mission.” Here’s one possible answer: maybe it’s routine for State to act as a liaison between White House and CIA. Here’s another possible answer: Libby had a personal relationship with Grossman and trusted Grossman to do a good job of answering the question. That’s speculation on my part.

    Novak, who published the story, assumed that she wasn’t covert, because the CIA spokesman he confirmed it with didn’t make more than a pro forma effort to stop him from publishing it.

    Novak’s role is secondary. Novak did not sign SF-312.

    Why would they have such an obligation [to at least inquire about her status, to confirm she was not covert, before blabbing about her]? What law imposes it?

    More ignorance. Take a look at the SF-312 briefing booklet (link), which contains this relevant passage: “I understand that if I am uncertain about the classification status of information I am required to confirm from an authorized official that the information is unclassified before I may disclose it.”

    Yes, not everyone who works for the CIA is covert. But many are. A reasonable person knows that if someone works at the CIA, there’s a significant chance that person might be a covert agent: “as many as one-third of the CIA’s approximately 20,000 employees are undercover or have worked in that capacity at some point in their careers” (link).

    Therefore, as called for by SF-312, they had an obligation to check first, unless they were sure she was not covert. And this is aside from what I already mentioned: that the section of the INR memo discussing her was marked Classified.

    Surely if it were a secret then whoever told them it would have warned them, wouldn’t he?

    The section of the INR memo discussing her was marked Classified. Grossman probably assumed he didn’t need to tell Libby what that word meant.

    how could they possibly have intended the “leak” to harm her or her husband, in supposed “revenge” for his disclosures?

    By ending her career, which it did. Duh.

    If it falls down due to a flaw in my design, then I’m responsible for that too. But if some arsonist sets fire to it, how is that my fault?

    If the company fails because I burdened it with debt in order to be able to cut myself a huge check, explain how that’s not “my fault.”

    Do you mean that if Staples didn’t exist then some other company would have filled the niche and everyone who now works for Staples would instead be working for that competitor? How could you possibly know that?

    No, that’s not what I said at all. It’s not about some other hypothetical company that “would have filled the niche.” It’s about the existing companies that did fill that niche, and were either put out of business by Staples or absorbed by Staples. For companies put out of business by Staples, those job losses need to be accounted for. For companies absorbed by Staples, those are not jobs created by Staples. Mitt’s analysis accounts for none of this.

    =============
    steve:

    You want to know why no one at the WH needed to call and ask if Valerie Plame Wilson was a NOC or not? Here’s why. Because the CIA sent them a memo telling everyone who read that memo she’s not.

    You’re ignoring what I already said: that her classified status was indicated in the memo. You’re not just dead wrong: you put an enormous number of words into being dead wrong.

    =============
    jd:

    Only conclusions can be drawn by you from his silence, like when he did not refute Waxman’s claims, making them true.

    Take your complaint to daleyrocks, who cited Novak who said this:

    Waxman was correctly quoting Hayden.

    =============
    maybee:

    I’m with you, I think, in that we both are perfectly willing to believe it’s true, but we all know of biographical details that get repeated over and over without the reporter really knowing.

    Naturally, just like all the reporters who reported a moon landing “without the reporter really knowing.”

    I can see how his HLS grades would be substantially better than his other work, both Tribe and other classmates have said he was not expected to do the same kind of work.

    You should show us where “Tribe and other classmates” said that. And you’re ignoring this fact, even though I’ve mentioned it several times: HLS uses a system of blind grading.

    =============
    jd:

    People cited sources above that refute this idea. You ignored them.

    No, the LA Times article did not “refute this idea.” It just said that in 1999, magna meant 10%, and this was stricter than before. This contradicts nothing I said or cited.

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    rick (ffcc96)

  765. See jukeboxdumbass it ain’t my fault your mom is a nagging beeyotch.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  766. milhouse:

    [there’s ample reason to believe the INR memo was circulated at the White House.] What reason would that be? It’s a State Dept memo; Powell probably saw it, and got his information from it, which he passed on to Armitage, who passed it on to Novak. Maybe Powell should have speculated that the secret information in that paragraph was the trivial fact that Mrs Wilson worked at the CIA, rather than the substantive information that it contained, particularly whatever was in the part that remains blacked out. Or maybe not. But that’s for Powell and/or Armstrong to answer; it’s not relevant to anyone at the White House.

    The INR memo was not “relevant to anyone at the White House?” Really? Are you sure? Even though it was written specifically at Libby’s request?

    Before posting on this subject, it would be good if you learned about the basic facts of the case, and a good start would be to read what Fitzgerald told the court:

    I want to start by talking a little bit about Marc Grossman, the first witness you heard from. Mr. Grossman told you — I remind you, the number-three person at the State Department, Under Secretary for Political Affairs — he told you how, on may 29th, outside a Deputies committee meeting, he was approached by Mr. Libby who wanted information about a trip by an ambassador to Niger. He wanted to know what Mr. Grossman knew about that trip. Mr. Grossman didn’t know anything about that trip. He had never heard of it, and it bothered him that he didn’t know about it because here he was being asked by the chief of staff of the vice-president of the United States something which he should have been aware of in his own mind.

    So he goes back to the State Department. He tells Mr. Libby he is going to look into it. He digs around and he finds out some information. He finds out that there was an ambassador who went. His name is Joseph Wilson. He went to Niger. He reported back. And Mr. Grossman calls and tells mr. Libby that information that day. Mr. Grossman is not satisfied that he has all the information and wants a report. He wants something on paper. He goes on foreign travel. He comes back. And July [sic] 10th or 11th, he is handed from Carl Ford, from the state department’s Intelligence and Research Branch, what’s been referred to as the I.N.R. memo, dated June 10th.

    This memo contained a paragraph which referred to Valerie Wilson, Joseph Wilson’s wife, and indicated that she worked at the C.I.A. and that she had a role in sending her husband, Mr. Wilson, on the trip to Niger. And as you will recall, Mr. Grossman told you that this fact leaped out at him. It was really remarkable to him. He thought it verged on the edge of impropriety. He thought it was somewhat bizarre.

    He sees Mr. Libby again within a day or two — most likely June 12th — and he sees Mr. Libby outside, again, a deputies committee meeting, and he tells Mr. Libby, I have some more information for you. I owe you this information. I have looked into it. I have looked into the question that you asked me. And I found out, yes, an ambassador went. It was Joseph Wilson, he did report back. And then Mr. Grossman said another thing. He said, there is something else that you should know. Wilson’s wife works at the agency. She works at the C.I.A. Mr. Grossman thought that this was important that he tell this to Mr. Libby. And why wouldn’t he? He had already been caught short, in his own mind — Mr. Grossman’s mind — not knowing about the ambassador.

    He looks into it. He is reporting back to the vice-president’s chief of staff, and he is going to hold back this piece of information? No. He remembers telling this to Mr. Libby. And I suggest to you, ladies and gentlemen, when Mr. Grossman told this to Mr. Libby on June 12th, it was the fourth time in two days that Mr. Libby had been told about ambassador Wilson’s wife. The fourth time.

    Link, link. Still want to argue that the INR memo was not “relevant to anyone at the White House?”

    Steve, the memo isn’t from the CIA, it’s from the State Dept. And it didn’t go to the White House.

    Thanks again for making it clear that you paid no attention to the trial.

    And the State Dept person who wrote this memo would have no need to know so he wouldn’t be told

    You’re ignoring what I already said: that her classified status was indicated in the memo.

    He was interested in finding out about Wilson, since the press were running with this cock-and-bull story that Cheney had personally sent him to Africa, and then ignored his report. Since he had in fact never heard of the fellow, he naturally wanted to know who he was and how he came to be making these claims. It hardly follows that he’d ask the State Dept, and be given this memo. Why would he ask the State Dept about a CIA mission?

    More ignorance about basic facts. You’re trying to suggest that Cheney had no interest in Plame, but a handwritten note by Cheney demonstrates his interest in Plame. “Cheney Penned Note About Plame, Filing Shows.” Link. And this is aside from Grossman’s testimony, as summarized above by Fitzgerald.

    Why would he ask the State Dept about a CIA mission?

    You need to ask Libby that question. He was the one who decided to ask Grossman for information “about a CIA mission.” Here’s one possible answer: maybe it’s routine for State to act as a liaison between White House and CIA. Here’s another possible answer: Libby had a personal relationship with Grossman and trusted Grossman to do a good job of answering the question. That’s speculation on my part.

    Novak, who published the story, assumed that she wasn’t covert, because the CIA spokesman he confirmed it with didn’t make more than a pro forma effort to stop him from publishing it.

    Novak’s role is secondary. Novak did not sign SF-312.

    Why would they have such an obligation [to at least inquire about her status, to confirm she was not covert, before blabbing about her]? What law imposes it?

    More ignorance. Take a look at the SF-312 briefing booklet (link), which contains this relevant passage: “I understand that if I am uncertain about the classification status of information I am required to confirm from an authorized official that the information is unclassified before I may disclose it.”

    Yes, not everyone who works for the CIA is covert. But many are. A reasonable person knows that if someone works at the CIA, there’s a significant chance that person might be a covert agent: “as many as one-third of the CIA’s approximately 20,000 employees are undercover or have worked in that capacity at some point in their careers” (link).

    Therefore, as called for by SF-312, they had an obligation to check first, unless they were sure she was not covert. And this is aside from what I already mentioned: that the section of the INR memo discussing her was marked Classified.

    Surely if it were a secret then whoever told them it would have warned them, wouldn’t he?

    The section of the INR memo discussing her was marked Classified. Grossman probably assumed he didn’t need to tell Libby what that word meant.

    how could they possibly have intended the “leak” to harm her or her husband, in supposed “revenge” for his disclosures?

    By ending her career, which it did. Duh.

    If it falls down due to a flaw in my design, then I’m responsible for that too. But if some arsonist sets fire to it, how is that my fault?

    If the company fails because I burdened it with debt in order to be able to cut myself a huge check, explain how that’s not “my fault.”

    Do you mean that if Staples didn’t exist then some other company would have filled the niche and everyone who now works for Staples would instead be working for that competitor? How could you possibly know that?

    No, that’s not what I said at all. It’s not about some other hypothetical company that “would have filled the niche.” It’s about the existing companies that did fill that niche, and were either put out of business by Staples or absorbed by Staples. For companies put out of business by Staples, those job losses need to be accounted for. For companies absorbed by Staples, those are not jobs created by Staples. Mitt’s analysis accounts for none of this.

    [note: released from moderation. –Stashiu]

    rick (ffcc96)

  767. milhouse:

    [there’s ample reason to believe the INR memo was circulated at the White House.] What reason would that be? It’s a State Dept memo; Powell probably saw it, and got his information from it, which he passed on to Armitage, who passed it on to Novak. Maybe Powell should have speculated that the secret information in that paragraph was the trivial fact that Mrs Wilson worked at the CIA, rather than the substantive information that it contained, particularly whatever was in the part that remains blacked out. Or maybe not. But that’s for Powell and/or Armstrong to answer; it’s not relevant to anyone at the White House.

    The INR memo was not “relevant to anyone at the White House?” Really? Are you sure? Even though it was written specifically at Libby’s request?

    Before posting on this subject, it would be good if you learned about the basic facts of the case, and a good start would be to read what Fitzgerald told the court:

    I want to start by talking a little bit about Marc Grossman, the first witness you heard from. Mr. Grossman told you — I remind you, the number-three person at the State Department, Under Secretary for Political Affairs — he told you how, on may 29th, outside a Deputies committee meeting, he was approached by Mr. Libby who wanted information about a trip by an ambassador to Niger. He wanted to know what Mr. Grossman knew about that trip. Mr. Grossman didn’t know anything about that trip. He had never heard of it, and it bothered him that he didn’t know about it because here he was being asked by the chief of staff of the vice-president of the United States something which he should have been aware of in his own mind.

    So he goes back to the State Department. He tells Mr. Libby he is going to look into it. He digs around and he finds out some information. He finds out that there was an ambassador who went. His name is Joseph Wilson. He went to Niger. He reported back. And Mr. Grossman calls and tells mr. Libby that information that day. Mr. Grossman is not satisfied that he has all the information and wants a report. He wants something on paper. He goes on foreign travel. He comes back. And July [sic] 10th or 11th, he is handed from Carl Ford, from the state department’s Intelligence and Research Branch, what’s been referred to as the I.N.R. memo, dated June 10th.

    This memo contained a paragraph which referred to Valerie Wilson, Joseph Wilson’s wife, and indicated that she worked at the C.I.A. and that she had a role in sending her husband, Mr. Wilson, on the trip to Niger. And as you will recall, Mr. Grossman told you that this fact leaped out at him. It was really remarkable to him. He thought it verged on the edge of impropriety. He thought it was somewhat bizarre.

    He sees Mr. Libby again within a day or two — most likely June 12th — and he sees Mr. Libby outside, again, a deputies committee meeting, and he tells Mr. Libby, I have some more information for you. I owe you this information. I have looked into it. I have looked into the question that you asked me. And I found out, yes, an ambassador went. It was Joseph Wilson, he did report back. And then Mr. Grossman said another thing. He said, there is something else that you should know. Wilson’s wife works at the agency. She works at the C.I.A. Mr. Grossman thought that this was important that he tell this to Mr. Libby. And why wouldn’t he? He had already been caught short, in his own mind — Mr. Grossman’s mind — not knowing about the ambassador.

    He looks into it. He is reporting back to the vice-president’s chief of staff, and he is going to hold back this piece of information? No. He remembers telling this to Mr. Libby. And I suggest to you, ladies and gentlemen, when Mr. Grossman told this to Mr. Libby on June 12th, it was the fourth time in two days that Mr. Libby had been told about ambassador Wilson’s wife. The fourth time.

    Link, link. Still want to argue that the INR memo was not “relevant to anyone at the White House?”

    rick (ffcc96)

  768. I managed to push that one through, but it’s a pain.

    It’s a shame that the management here is blocking his posts while also being too cowardly to admit they’re doing this, and too cowardly to even state that they want me to stop posting.

    And if you see no further comments from me, you should ask them why they’re blocking me.

    Have fun with your echo chamber.

    rick (ffcc96)

  769. I said “his,” I meant mine.

    rick (ffcc96)

  770. Changing your name and using a different IP is a sure way to get blocked, sock puppet. There are a variety of ways to get moderated, words, links, etc …

    JD (318f81)

  771. His comments are being blocked.

    Comment by Rick — 1/19/2012 @ 8:33 am

    Sock puppet

    JD (318f81)

  772. =============
    steve:

    You want to know why no one at the WH needed to call and ask if Valerie Plame Wilson was a NOC or not? Here’s why. Because the CIA sent them a memo telling everyone who read that memo she’s not.

    You’re ignoring what I already said: that her classified status was indicated in the memo. You’re not just dead wrong: you put an enormous number of words into being dead wrong.

    =============
    jd:

    Only conclusions can be drawn by you from his silence, like when he did not refute Waxman’s claims, making them true.

    Take your complaint to daleyrocks, who cited Novak who said this:

    Waxman was correctly quoting Hayden.

    =============
    maybee:

    I’m with you, I think, in that we both are perfectly willing to believe it’s true, but we all know of biographical details that get repeated over and over without the reporter really knowing.

    Naturally, just like all the reporters who reported a moon landing “without the reporter really knowing.”

    I can see how his HLS grades would be substantially better than his other work, both Tribe and other classmates have said he was not expected to do the same kind of work.

    You should show us where “Tribe and other classmates” said that. And you’re ignoring this fact, even though I’ve mentioned it several times: HLS uses a system of blind grading.

    =============
    jd:

    People cited sources above that refute this idea. You ignored them.

    No, the LA Times article did not “refute this idea.” It just said that in 1999, magna meant 10%, and this was stricter than before. This contradicts nothing I said or cited.

    rick (ffcc96)

  773. Steve – no leftist is ever willing to address the actual criteria you cited above.

    JD (318f81)

  774. Changing your name and using a different IP is a sure way to get blocked, sock puppet. There are a variety of ways to get moderated, words, links, etc …

    No, that’s not it. They blocked my name and IP. Cowards.

    rick (ffcc96)

  775. So you are admitting to changing names and IP addresses?

    JD (318f81)

  776. What I’m doing is proving that they blocked me for no reason, and without saying they were doing do.

    If you want to turn this into a reason for blocking me, you just have to believe in time travel.

    rick (ffcc96)

  777. You’re ignoring what I already said: that her classified status was indicated in the memo.

    Lie. Nowhere did that memo claim she was covert, for purposes of IIPA. Steve outlined the criteria above. To help you out …

    To prove a violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982, Pub. L. No. 97-200, 1982 U.S.C.C.A.N. (96 Stat. 122) 145 (codified at 50 U.S.C. §§ 421-426 ) (the “Act”) (Tab A), the government must establish the following elements:
    The United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal a covert agent’s intelligence relationship to the United States;

    The covert agent whose identity was disclosed is an employee of an intelligence agency;

    The covert agent whose identity was disclosed has a relationship with such agency that is classified;

    At the time of the disclosure, the covert agent whose identity was disclosed was serving outside the United States or had done so within five years of the disclosure;

    The person disclosing the identity of that covert agent must be authorized, directly or indirectly, to have access to classified information that identifies the covert agent;

    The person disclosing the identity knows that the government is taking affirmative measures to conceal the relationship;

    The person disclosing the identity knows that the information so identifies the covert agent;

    The disclosure is intentional; and

    The identity is disclosed to a person not having authorization to receive such information.

    JD (318f81)

  778. Anyone notice that no one has posted a comment about Ace Ripping Romney All Day Long for, like, 600 comments?

    Anyway, to shift back to the multitudinous disasters of Obama, the Cook County Messiah is off to Orlando to the “Happiest Place On Earth” to announce his new initiative to boost travel and tourism. It’s the latest in his “We Can’t Wait” campaign.

    Orlando’s Channel 13 News is reporting that his magic economic touch is already having its usual effect.

    There will be road closures near all the attractions.

    Main Street U.S.A. will be shut down entirely.

    And employees can’t use their passes to get into the Magic Kingdom.

    Does this guy know how to do PR or what!

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  779. It’s funny relying on Grossman, as Sibel Edmonds points to him, ‘fingering’ Brewster Jennings to the ISI back in 2001.

    narciso (87e966)

  780. I love it when trolls self destruct under the weight of their own dishonesty.

    JD (318f81)

  781. And they did that stupid thing where I could see my own comments but no one else could. Hilarious.

    rick (ffcc96)

  782. Naturally, just like all the reporters who reported a moon landing “without the reporter really knowing.”

    Or all the reporters who said Valerie Plame was a super secret spy and Cheney was really out to get her.

    You should show us where “Tribe and other classmates” said that. And you’re ignoring this fact, even though I’ve mentioned it several times: HLS uses a system of blind grading.

    It’s in the Kantor article from the time of the last election. I don’t really feel like I need to repeat to you things that have been discussed here for 3 years. DRJ knows what I’m talking about, and my comment was addressed to her.

    Also, just as friendly advice, if you don’t want “management” here mad at you, you should probably avoid doing things like calling DRJ a placenta-sniffer. She has been harassed in the past, and the management has very little patience with people who say stupid s&%# to her.

    MayBee (081489)

  783. That could be the auto-filter.

    JD (318f81)

  784. That could be the auto-filter.

    No. They banned my name and IP, and they were too cowardly to even ask me to leave or admit they were banning me. And it’s a pain to post this way, I’m not going to do it for long. Like I said, have fun with your echo chamber.

    rick (ffcc96)

  785. no leftist is ever willing to address the actual criteria you cited above.

    I know JD.

    Ok, boneheads, quiz time.

    It’s not just paragraphs that have markings.

    Here’s the memo’smemo’s Subject line:

    Subj: Niger/Iraq Uranium Story and Joe Wilson (S)

    What’s Joe Wilson’s name classified?

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  786. No. They banned my name and IP, and they were too cowardly to even ask me to leave or admit they were banning me. And it’s a pain to post this way, I’m not going to do it for long. Like I said, have fun with your echo chamber.
    Comment by rick — 1/19/2012 @ 8:59 am

    You haven’t been banned and the only reason you keep going into moderation is because of the length of your text and the number of links (near as I can tell from scanning). Patterico works during the day and I have commitments that only give me time to moderate a couple of times a day usually. Also, I do this for free as a volunteer.

    Every single one of your comments has or will appear. Cut down on the links or wall-o-text responses and most of them will appear immediately. If you hit a keyword that the filter doesn’t like it may need to be released, but that will happen as soon as I can get to it. No sooner or later than anyone else here. You are not banned or in moderation, so please get over yourself.

    Stashiu3 (601b7d)

  787. Juiceboxhero – when do you plan on apologizing to the hosts for having smeared them? Liar.

    JD (318f81)

  788. No. They banned my name and IP, and they were too cowardly to even ask me to leave or admit they were banning me. And it’s a pain to post this way, I’m not going to do it for long. Like I said, have fun with your echo chamber.
    Comment by rick — 1/19/2012 @ 8:59 am

    Lie

    JD (318f81)

  789. And they did that stupid thing where I could see my own comments but no one else could. Hilarious.
    Comment by rick — 1/19/2012 @ 8:54 am

    A comment in moderation will only appear to the person making it, this is inherent in the software here. That’s why I always use the quote function to reference another comment, not the comment number.

    Stashiu3 (601b7d)

  790. JBH, that happens to everybody.

    Good grief, dude. Folgers makes a tasty decaf if you’re interested.

    I have no idea how much work is involved with the moderation of this enormous blog. These days, even the conservatives are fighting tooth and nail.

    If you’re going to come here and have a bunch of fights, the least you can do is cut the mods a little slack.

    Dustin (7362cd)

  791. In more news of Multitudinous Disasters that only the kind of genius that only an attorney who graduated Magna Cum Laude from Harvard Law could wreak, the Iranian News agency Mehrnews is revealing new details about the letter Obama sent to the Government of Iran.

    Apparently there were three letters or messages.

    One was delivered via the Swiss Ambassador in Tehran, another by the Iraqi President, and then our UN Ambassador handed a letter to Iran’s UN Ambassador. The first half of the letter contained a series of threats, according to one Iranian member of Parliament, while the second half of the letter was full of pleas for negotiations.

    I tend to believe MP because, when you step back and look at it, isn’t that exactly how some jilted 13 year old girl would handle this sort of rejection?

    Steve (1f4b7c)

  792. If you’re going to come here and have a bunch of fights, the least you can do is cut the mods a little slack.
    Comment by Dustin — 1/19/2012 @ 9:19 am

    It’s only me here looking at the comments usually, Patterico has said he rarely does. I went out of town for a few days and when I returned there were 3500 spam messages and thousands of regular comments to sift through. I didn’t tell anyone beside Patterico I was going to be out because that would have invited someone like imdw or Hax to try and get around their bans for the umpteenth time.

    It doesn’t matter to me if jukeboxgrad wants to comment or leave, that’s up to him. I will say that he hasn’t been treated any differently than a regular poster here. I would normally try to figure out exactly why someone keeps going into spam or moderation, but I only have time to fix it for right now, not investigate. If that is too frustrating for some, my apologies. I do the best I can with the time I can spare.

    Stashiu3 (601b7d)

  793. First, Stashiu3 has the patience of Job.

    MayBee: agree with you 100%

    As for Trollio, I think he was pretty familiar with name changes and IP changes. Also, very knowledgable about banning. I have a feeling he is pretty used to it.

    And gosh, everyone is so mean to him, and afraid of his ideas getting out there. All he needs is to be rolling some ball bearings around in his hands as he writes still more Walls-O-Text. Twoof to Powder!

    He sure sounds like some of the Seminar Trolls in the past here.

    Dustin: decaf won’t help for this one. There is apparently a very large axe he needs to grind, to match the Everest size chip on his shoulder.

    Simon Jester (ea9dff)

  794. “Waxman was correctly quoting Hayden.”

    rick – That’s pulled out of context. I don’t have enough information to judge whether Waxman was rehashing his alleged conversation with Hayden correctly or not and neither do you. That’s why I added the subsequent qualifier that I was not saying Waxman was micharacterizing the conversation. I can’t say he’s accurate or innaccurate and neither can you. Those are the facts and they are not in dispute.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  795. First, Stashiu3 has the patience of Job.

    Amen.

    MayBee (081489)

  796. That was the other Seminar Troll’s name: Hax vobiscum. Silly and angry fellow, who also liked Walls-O-Text!

    Thank you for helping out in general, Stashiu3. A lot of us appreciate it.

    Simon Jester (ea9dff)

  797. There is apparently a very large axe he needs to grind,

    If all he wants to do is rattle on and on about politics, that’s fine with me. Accusing people of censorship without justification takes it to douchebag territory.

    It says right there under the comment box to email the proprietor before assuming you’ve been banned. Why would they put that there if it wasn’t an ongoing issue?

    People need to cut other people slack these days. Our political class is really, really awful, so everybody interested in politics, from any side, is going to be prone to arguments and frustration. It’s miserable enough without douchey accusations, people screaming others are gay, people claiming folks are dishonest, knowing they weren’t, walls of text copied and pasted, link spam, etc.

    A lot of axes are being ground to dust these days. And frankly, GOOD. Good for people who give a crap and aren’t willing to settle. But don’t assume you’re a victim for no reason.

    Dustin (7362cd)

  798. Since he has openly and so helpfully admitted to posting under the names Rick and JBG, perhaps he’d also be willing to brag some more and share with us what other names he’s used to post comments here.

    elissa (28c05d)

  799. Stashiu has the patience.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  800. Why are you so scared of dissenting voices in your echo chamber?

    JD (7f6bca)

  801. 😆 I like your snarky witticisms.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  802. Elissa – he only did that because he was banned.

    JD (7f6bca)

  803. It is a familiar turn of phrase, isn’t it, JD? And Elissa makes a very good point.

    Simon Jester (ea9dff)

  804. Dustin, I suspect some projection is in play with that comment of his or hers. You are correct about the information at the bottom of the web page.

    Simon Jester (ea9dff)

  805. Dustin, I suspect some projection is in play with that comment of his or hers.

    Yeah, you might be right about that. I’ve had a hard time presenting my point of view on several lefty blogs. Generally, the banners are the same guys who assume they’ve been banned or will be banned.

    That said, I’ve also found several lefty blogs to be quite pleasant (And they even have right wing trolls!).

    Dustin (7362cd)

  806. We get it ricky Christians are nutjobs in your eyes.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  807. Simon – it is a common refrain, yes. But, this one is not one of those that you mentioned.

    JD (7f6bca)

  808. Do I need to use thicker crayons? I think crayons thick enough haven’t been invented yet.*

    — Ask your mom for the ones that are too big to fit inside your mouth.

    — NOTES: The above comment* by sluiceboxnads was directed at DRJ, and therefore is rude and unnecessary.
    After denying that he has ever posted under a different name he then proceeds to do just that.
    He also refers to himself in the 3rd person; never a good sign.
    Falsely claiming to have been put into moderation for the content of his comments when he actually put himself there due to the structure of his ramblings: priceless!
    Isn’t it curious how he is so sure of his facts that he has to punctuate every response to those that question those “facts” with an insult?

    Icy (7e3286)

  809. ______________________________________________

    It’s only me here looking at the comments usually, Patterico has said he rarely does.

    I don’t know about him, but I don’t relish going through most of the threads here — certainly one that’s over 800 messages in length — because they’re visually too much like huge blocks of text that lack paragraph breaks. But in this case, it’s the absence of a graphic “handrail” to easily and quickly identify (and separate) one individual post from another one that’s the problem.

    I’ve yet to see any other online forum configured this way. Makes me think the web designer of patterico.com must have had his (or her) eyes poked out at birth.

    As for Gingrich, Romney, Perry, etc, they all pretty much suffer from big egos, which I imagine most politicians (regardless of party or ideology) have no lack of. So in too many instances, it’s all about “me, me, me!,” damn the party, damn the cause, damn the statistics, damn the electorate, damn how it may cloud one’s own judgment.

    Mark (411533)

  810. As for Gingrich, Romney, Perry, etc, they all pretty much suffer from big egos, which I imagine most politicians (regardless of party or ideology) have no lack of. So in too many instances, it’s all about “me, me, me!,” damn the party, damn the cause, damn the statistics, damn the electorate, damn how it may cloud one’s own judgment.

    I think Perry saw what was best for the cause and that’s why he dropped and endorsed the most conservative candidate who can win. He’s also going to campaign for the tenth amendment. I don’t think he has a future in national politics (just a guess). I think this is not selfish on Perry’s part. He genuinely wants to make this federal government less consequential and onerous.

    Same reason he was in the military. He is a bona fide patriot and a good man. Slick politician, no. And my recollection is that he was drafted because of a lack of conservative governors running.

    I don’t think he belongs in the ‘they are all selfish’ category.

    He’s been standing up to Obamacare and other abuses for a few years now and seems to be a governor who happens to be a Tea partier to me.

    I am a bit baffled that people cared so much for polish instead of actual conservative performance. And I think this is driving our party into a dark place where trolls will screech that they think people are dicks and then explain they didn’t mean it personally… as though they have a mental illness.

    Dustin (7362cd)

  811. You can’t handle the twoof!
    Our president graduated magus cum lightworker.

    Icy (7e3286)

  812. You can’t handle the twoof.

    I can.

    By the way Michelle Obama turns 938 today.

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  813. ______________________________________________

    I think Perry saw what was best for the cause and that’s why he dropped

    Dustin, I imagine it has just as much to do with his not getting enough traction in polling data, and, in turn, facing the task of fundraising getting tougher and tougher. I don’t say that as a put-down, btw, and I certainly don’t think Perry’s feet of clay are any greater than those of the other Republicans, including Mitt “Govt-can-force-people-to-pay-for-health-insurance” Romney.

    The fact I am not confident at this late date in any of the Republican candidates beating what’s currently in the White House is more a reflection of my lack of confidence in a good percentage of the electorate, and not necessarily the idiosyncrases of Perry, Romney, Gingrich, Santorum, etc. IOW, so much of the populace is so damn soft on liberals and liberalism, that even a “Goddamn America!” leftwinger gets far more benefit of the doubt from more Americans than he deserves.

    Mark (411533)

  814. I’m with Icy in comment #819. I smell a serial Seminar Troll.

    It’s interesting to see the things that get said in the heat of anger from trolls.

    Simon Jester (ea9dff)

  815. You smelled him?

    Why?

    Dohbiden (ef98f0)

  816. I don’t say that as a put-down, btw

    Of course not. I pretty much only discuss this stuff with people who are better than that. There are so many trolls lately.

    The fact I am not confident at this late date in any of the Republican candidates beating what’s currently in the White House

    Me neither

    is more a reflection of my lack of confidence in a good percentage of the electorate,

    That is exactly where the problem is.

    I imagine it has just as much to do with his not getting enough traction in polling data

    Of course this is true. He’s dropping at a specific time, though. He was going to press on through SC and Florida and I believe he had the money to do that. His timing seems to help Newt at time when Newt badly needs the help (And not to make him sound desperate… he is starting to edge back into the lead).

    But he’s been pretty good about policy before he seemed to even dream of being a presidential candidate, and he’s still going to be campaigning for the cause after he knows he won’t be president. I don’t really see how he can be promoted beyond governor of Texas, either.

    Call me naive, but I think for all his flaws, he is actually a rare breed of politician who actually cares about conservatism itself, rather than just pretending to for politics.

    Dustin (7362cd)

  817. jukeboxgrad,

    Perhaps these Harvard Crimson articles from 1996 and 1999 will help. They state HLS honors graduates were reduced from 76% to 40% in 1999. That means there were almost half as many honors graduates in 1999 as there had been in prior years. I realize you’re relying on former students’ recollections but these articles indicate the 1999 changes to HLS’s honors system significantly impacted cum laude and magna cum laude percentages.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  818. ==I’ve yet to see any other online forum configured this way. Makes me think the web designer of patterico.com must have had his (or her) eyes poked out at birth==

    Mark, I would normally not presume to address a technical issue, but I notice that you have made similar comments about site format several times before. I am now wondering if you may actually be seeing things differently on the threads from what some others of us see. (Browser issue maybe) What I see is that each post is clearly numbered on the left–each comment is indented to the right of that number in paragrapgh form–and each comment has a space between it and the next one. I notice that you always add a long line before you start copy. That’s fine, of course. We always know it’s you about to speak!

    Just thought I’d mention this in case it’s something you can experiment with at your end.

    elissa (28c05d)

  819. Racists. You are all clearly against the mixing of the races.

    JD (7f6bca)

  820. Trust me I’ve seen other formats js-kit, Discus, this is ‘the best of all possible worlds’

    narciso (87e966)

  821. I think this is driving our party into a dark place where trolls will screech that they think people are dicks and then explain they didn’t mean it personally… as though they have a mental illness.

    — You should kick those people out of your party.

    Icy (d7eedf)

  822. What he said.

    Colonel Haiku (b486eb)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.5318 secs.