Desiree’s (sure to be) Bad Day

Tomorrow morning at 10am on the third floor of the Cannon House Office building, Homeland Security Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson will convene a hearing examining “the security breach at the White House State Dinner on Tuesday, Nov. 24. The committee will look at deficiencies in security planning, actions taken to correct vulnerabilities and any management failures at the Secret Service.”

Testifying before the panel will be Mark Sullivan, director of the U.S. Secret Service; the party crashers, Tareq and Michaele Salahi; and, most interestingly, White House Social Secretary Desiree Rogers. As Michael Scherer pointed out, there have been a lot of questions this week about Rogers’ role — or lack there of — in the breach. Two former White House social secretaries have said that she should’ve been working the event, instead of attending it as a guest. So far, the White House has defended Rogers, blaming the incident on the Secret Service.

While the committee will be looking at “management failures at the Secret Service,” the decision to allow Rogers to testify is a significant one: I can’t think of a White House Social Secretary that has submitted to congressional grilling. And you can be sure that the panel’s Republicans will take advantage of their rounds of questioning to do their utmost to pin the blame on Rogers and embarrass her.

Update:
As I was writing this Scherer tells me White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was just telling reporters at the briefing that, in fact, Rogers won’t testify, “based on separation of powers,” a familiar excuse often cited by President Bush protecting Karl Rove, Josh Bolten and Harriet Miers (all of whom have since agreed to testify before the House Judiciary Committee). Though, Bush usually cited that protection so that staff might speak freely when giving crucial advice on issues of national importance — not sure how much crucial advice the social secretary usually gives. Any way, some one should probably tell Thompson’s committee not to expect her.

Subscribe to Jay Newton-Small on Facebook
Related Topics: desiree rogers, house homeland security committee, oversight hearing, party crashers, white house security breach, Congress, Democratic Party, Republican Party, White House
  • Latest on Swampland

    Obama Stumbles? Why the President’s Right to Talk About Bain

    The meme of the day in journo-world is that President Obama has stumbled at the outset of the general election campaign. The evidence for this? Well, uh, there isn’t very much, really–except that a few Democrats have criticized his campaign’s attacks on Mitt Romney’s record at Bain Capital and that Obama’s fundraising is merely humongous, instead of obscenely humongous. The two phenomena are linked, of course: Obama isn’t getting the usual haul from Wall Street because he has outrageously–outrageously!–tried to regulate the bankers who did so much to crash the economy in 2008. The handful of Democrats squawking are people who either (a) get money from private equity firms or (b) have retired and joined Mondo Casino. But there is another side to this story:

    Lewis Eisenberg, Major Romney Donor, Accuses Obama Of Demonizing Wall StreetHuffPost Politics

    Morning Must Reads: Haunted

  • spob

    Lots of typos–and it’s Miers, not Myers.
    .
    I wouldn’t call Bush’s (and Clinton’s too, by the way) reticence to allow testimony an “excuse”. The deliberative process of the Executive Branch is harmed by forcing advisers to testify.
    .
    While I have you, why isn’t there a Swampland post about Matthews’ “enemy camp” comment? It’s patently offensive.

  • http://www.twitter.com/jnsmall Jay Newton-Small

    spob,
    fixed the typos. thanks. And tell me, what in the deliberative process would be harmed by the social secretary testifying before congress? On what crucial issues does she advise the president?
    JNS

  • hellslittlestangel

    Much nothing about a do.

  • spob

    JNS, I didn’t say that. I doubt there are any issues there. My point was that in addition to characterizing the Obama Admin’s pushback as an “excuse”, you did so for Bush. The reality is that the Executive Branch can be harmed by Congressional fishing expeditions, and Presidents are right to push back.
    .
    In this case, though, it’s just an excuse.
    .
    Still curious your take on Matthews. If Rush gets attention in here from Swampland reporters, don’t Matthews’ comments rate a post? Calling West Point an “enemy camp” is offensive on many levels, not the least of which is the imputation of hostility towards the Commander-in-Chief. My brother is a West Point grad, so it’s a bit personal to me too.

  • spob

    Unless, of course, a party crasher causes harm . . . .

  • deconstructiva

    Thanks, Jay. Will you or other swampcolleagues be there? I’m wondering if that couple presented fake invites, badges, etc. or tried other less-honest ways to get in …if they talk (will they stonewall?). On a gossipy note, I was looking forward to seeing what Desiree would’ve worn.

  • spob

    “And you can be sure that the panel’s Republicans will take advantage of their rounds of questioning to do their utmost to pin the blame on Rogers and embarrass her.”
    .
    As if Dems wouldn’t do the same were the shoe on the other foot?

  • square1

    Let me say, initially, that I find this whole hullabaloo to be a complete joke. The party crashers passed through Secret Service metal detectors to get in.

    The argument appears to be that these party crashers could have stabbed Obama with a salad fork after having gained entry. While I suppose that is true, I have never been under the impression that the President spends 4 (or 8) years beyond arms reach of anyone without an FBI background check.

    Am I missing something? Do not Presidents occasionally bump into ordinary citizens bearing cutlery?

    Anyway, if the Secret Service wants to lose even more of my respect, I would suggest that they try and blame their lapse on the White House Social Secretary.

    Blame Rogers all you want for breaching the Royal White House protocols, but security? Please.

  • bitterpill8

    Spob’s point is noted. Rogers is being called to feed the hungry and I am glad the WH is not playing. By all means have an investigation of her role. If she is a prima donna as opposed to a social secretary the Obamas had better address that as an in-house matter. Job security for ego driven fashionistas is a no, no.

    As for Tweety: he should be called to account. Maligning West Point is simply wrong. Too often, he lets his mouth get ahead of his brain.

  • square1

    That should be “or eight”, not or smileyface.

  • spob

    Apparently, you’ve never heard of layered security measures.

  • deconstructiva

    …it looks like the smiley face is wearing shades – Secret Service smiley face?

  • spob

    I guess JNS isn’t going to answer the question about Matthews. Any other Swampland reporter going to answer the question? If Rush is fair game, isn’t Matthews?

  • cfukara

    ” .. never heard of layered security measures.
    Ahhem.
    I wonder when my layer will be called upon to tetify. After all I am a taxpayer and hence somewhat responsible for that security .. and if i had availed myself at the gates, then maybe ….

  • cfukara

    JNS:
    Many will be called upon to testify. And being called upon to testify may not imply much.
    But somehow you pick on Desiree of the wonderful dresses.

    Can we read sexism (or anti-fashionism) in your choice of targets?

  • cfukara

    What is bugging you?
    Why don’t YOU say something about Mathews?

  • queencersei

    The Case of the Social Secretary…it sounds like a bad Nancy Drew mystery.
    Question: If the Secret Service or whoever was manning that initial checkpoint wasn’t given a guest list, shouldn’t they have at least asked for one?
    Whether or not Rogers should have been attending the party herself or not seems beside the point. It is the job of security to make sure that only invited guests get in and that they behave themselves after they do. That is why they are called security…to secure.

  • spob

    Here’s a great stunt:
    .
    http://michellemalkin.com/2009/12/02/introducing-the-geithner-penalty-waiver-act/
    .
    The beauty of this is that it is impossible to defend a vote against it.

  • spob

    What bugs me is the double-standard.

  • deconstructiva

    …spob, you forgot that Jay and Karen appear on Matthews’ shows. Either one can really let him have it on air if the opportunity is there …or fire off an “enemy camp” zinger that flies over his head while he’s interrupting everyone. But we’ll notice.

  • cfukara

    That those who owe back taxes pay nothing?
    Why not pursue what geithner ‘owes’ in taxes instead?

    Do the wingnuts intend to fund the wars they love to wage?

    [ They don't. Paying to wage wars seems never to have crossed Bush#43-Cheney's wonderful intellect ..]

  • spob

    Well, then let them say so. Or admit that there are ulterior considerations about what gets posted around here.
    .
    Maybe one of them should go on Rush’s show. I don’t listen to the guy (I refuse to support someone who calls a pre-teen a “dog” to millions of people.), but I may make an exception for that.
    .
    http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/12/lieberman-praises-obama-for-bucking-his-own-party.php
    .
    Joe throws a haymaker.

  • spob

    The issue, cfukara, is the penalty.

  • cfukara

    square1: “Do not Presidents occasionally bump into ordinary citizens ..”

    ‘Occassionally’? Yes, that is a hazard inherent in the job. That is scary enough.

    But in this case, the guest were SURE to bump into POTUS.
    So there is room for premeditation. And that really scares us, eh, shirtless.

  • spob

    Not all typos fixed–”there of” should be one word.

  • freeinpa

    “Do the wingnuts intend to fund the wars they love to wage?”

    If the sanctimonious left paid their taxes that they love to heap on everybody (Geithner, Rangel among others), the deficit may be smaller.

  • freeinpa

    “Either one can really let him have it on air if the opportunity is there …or fire off an “enemy camp” zinger that flies over his head while he’s interrupting everyone.”

    That’s funny. Jay Karen or Joe appear regularly on Mathews show (he usually has more panel than audience). They spend more time kissing each others backsides and bashing conservatives than disagreeing with Chris Tingles.

  • spob
  • spob

    And further to that–remember, Rahm got caught fibbing about Afghanistan . . . .

  • cfukara

    freeinpa, are you a wingnut?

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    I’m still trying to figure out if spob and I find Chris Matthews’ comments grossly offensive for the same reasons or the opposite reasons. He takes them as maligning the cadets for being the ‘enemy’ of their CinC and I take it as maligning Obama for being the ‘enemy’ of the cadets.

    In either case it is indeed grossly offensive and I’d love to see it get more ink.

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    What request for troops are you talking about?
    .
    This one:
    .
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/16/AR2009081602304_pf.html

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks
  • freeinpa

    cfukara

    I would guess you consider anyone to the right of Jerry Brown, Saul Alinsky, Jeremiah Wright and Van Jones to be a wing-nut.

  • stuartzechman

    The lack of meritocracy in professional journalism is really producing an aristocracy of dunces.
    .
    It’s shocking that these are educated people.

  • spob

    Hmmmmmm. Didn’t Obama say “repeated”, and wasn’t Bush outgoing by summer of 2008? And they did a big review, which they passed along to Obama (and Rahm fibbed about that).
    ,
    Kinda funny that Gates was SecDef back then—tossed under the bus by Gibbs. Wow.

  • freeinpa

    SZ:

    One should never confuse a college degree for an education

  • spob

    I think it’s wrong on many levels. The bottom line is that it’s fair to ask JNS et alia why Rush gets pilloried in here, but Matthews gets a free pass. It’s not like Joe Klein doesn’t yap about all sorts of right wing people, and it’s not like media types who supported Polanski didn’t get the stink eye in here.

  • constantweader

    Really, you people are so thoughtless. I feel sure if the social secretary were forced to testify, the committee would compel her to reveal important state secrets, like how many forks to use at a vegan dinner.

    Think about it. Do YOU know how many forks are used at a vegan dinner? Of course you don’t. It’s a state secret.

    I rest my case.

    The Constant Weader at http://www.RealityChex.com

  • stuartzechman

    freeinpa:
    .
    One should never confuse a college degree for an education
    .
    Given all of the affirmative action programs in place at universities for the wealthy, I suppose it really can’t be that shocking that Luke Russerts are the result.

  • deconstructiva

    “Do YOU know how many forks are used at a vegan dinner? Of course you don’t.”
    .
    That reminds me of the Pretty Woman dinner scene and Julia Roberts’ quote, “That’s the fork I knew.”

  • http://www.simonvinkenoog.nl/beeld/Yogi%20-%20Annelies%20Rigter.jpg yogi

    Booooooooooooooooooobama! Booooooo! Set Desiree free!

  • constantweader

    Now Republican Rep. Peter King, ranking member of the committee, blasts the White House for stonewalling. I hate it when I agree with Peter King.

    Constant Weader

  • nflfoghorn

    Dang, Spoob, I told you at least ONE liberal media person denounced Matthews’ comments but it’s still eatin’ at ya 120 comments later. What gives?

  • nflfoghorn

    On topic, I don’t think Desiree (or the OA) helps herself by not offering to testify, even if the net result is less than, say, trying to find out who disclosed the name of a CIA operative.

  • freeinpa

    SZ:

    “Given all the affirmative actions for the wealthy”"

    For all the affirmative actions period you have the Roland Martins, Rich Sanchezs and Soledad O’Briens among others.

  • jcapan

    Intentionally OT, b/c the above is a journalistic pap smear.

    Congressman Dennis Kucinich:

    “The United States is going deeper and deeper into debt. We have money for Wall Street and money for war but we don’t have money for work…for healthcare. We have to start asking ourselves, ‘Why is it that war is a priority but the basic needs of people in this country are not?’”

    Lest we forget, he was the unserious candidate for the democratic nomination.

  • nflfoghorn

    Who made him be irrelevant I wonder? Not tryin’ to be snarky, just asking.

  • jcapan

    “It’s shocking that these are educated people.”
    .
    SZ, you’re playing Claude Rains right? It’s not in the least shocking, nor is it a new phenomenon. It’s not the degree but how you willfully go about applying the education you receive. Discounting the less than gifted with legacy degrees and cush gigs, DC is strewn with overeducated, brilliant folks intellectually slumming (embraced slumming), b/c the perks are too good to resist.
    .
    In your former life, you surely observed this all the time–the village and the music industry aren’t that different are they?

  • shepherdwong

    “The bottom line is that it’s fair to ask JNS et alia why Rush gets pilloried in here, but Matthews gets a free pass.”
    .
    Because Limbaugh is a lying, right-wing traitor and Matthews is merely a sexist, “centrist” lunatic? I’m guessing.

  • freeinpa

    jcapan

    It is a product of a pampered generation who became “overeducated” as a way to avoid working for living. Many are recovery law school graduates who believe they have something to say and find that easier than having a full-time job with responsibility and accountability.

  • stuartzechman

    We have a winner!

  • freeinpa

    SZ:

    You misspelled “weiner”.

    Matthews is not a centrist anything. He is a left wing lunatic who shares many of the same thoughts and deranged values that are present in much of the Swampland

  • spob
  • shepherdwong

    “Matthews is not a centist anything. He is a left wing lunatic who shares many of the same thoughts and deranged values that are persent in much of the Swampland.”
    .
    That’s what makes him a “centrist”, pinhead. If he had traditional humanist moral values, he’d be a liberal and if he had no discernable values at all, that would make him a “conservative”.
    .
    But thanks just the same, I haven’t been called a hot dog in years (as far as I know).

  • http://phd9.blogspot.com Paul Dirks

    So that we can have a discussion about how the ‘boys with toys’ syndrome accompanied by taboos against actual cost-benefits analysis results in gross mispending of defense dollars and is just as responsible for defecit spending as any misguided social program.
    .
    Sure, why not?

  • freeinpa

    Sorry here is the math: left wing lunatic = liberal mentally exhausted and morally bankrupt,

    And by weiner I meant a d*ck

  • 53_3

    You know something?
    .
    Say that there were 6,000,000 Black voters who would dearly love to vote their values, and fly GOP.
    .
    They listen, they consider, and they observe. Worth it? Hmmm, maybe…
    .
    But, after running into their local freetopee knockoff, still stuck in 1980s bellowing empty headed anti minority rhetoric, they make a decision:
    .
    Why the hell would any self-respecting Black American even want to rub elbows with these nuts?

  • 53_3

    “And by weiner I meant a d*ck”
    .
    Why be so shy about spelling Dick Cheney’s name freetopee?

  • michaelfury

    Why was there never a Congressional hearing to examine this “security breach”?

    http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/2008/10/09/the-protection-racket/

  • 53_3

    I refrained from commenting on the issue because the biggest concern was exactly what Chris Matthews said.
    .
    Now I know. By “enemy camp” he is referring to the political definition, which he refers to extensively.
    .
    I think that it is entirely possible to be offended, and maybe, rather than arguing the fine points, give spob a W on his comments.
    .
    But that begs the other question:
    .
    What is different between Chris Matthews and Rush Limbaugh?
    .
    First, lets address quantity:
    Rush Limbaugh consistently and regularly incites racial hatred. That is his shtick, his meat-on-the-hook attractiveness and it has earned him millions. It’s not the only form of hatred that Rush has indulged in either.
    .
    Chris Matthews may occasionally transgress, but I haven’t heard very much from him that indicates that he’s a wholesale trader in any sort of hatred.
    .
    As for quality:
    His career is based on keeping hatred alive, and does not bother with any degree of accuracy. Like Hannity and Beck, he has no concern that he makes true statements or not.
    .
    Generally Chris Matthews has stuck pretty close to reality in his commentary, though his spin may not please one side or another.
    .
    So, as far as I’m concerned, Rush Limbaugh by definition deserves no pass whatsoever, and maybe Chris Matthews’ comments should be discussed.
    .
    What I would do, though, spob, is to pick a better hero than Rush if you want real dialogue…

  • stuartzechman

    He is a left wing lunatic
    .
    Given that he is apparently a pathological personality, how so?
    .
    How do you know that Tweety is left-wing?

  • freeinpa

    IQ0.0
    You are a**hats pretending to be relevant. No wonder you are big Obama fans. Equally arrogant and brutally inept and not worth any further response on anything.
    You can continue your moronic rants about Bush, Beck and Palin and giggle to yourself over your brilliance. I will admit reading your both responses does strengthen arguments for abortion.

    Nothing has changed

  • freeinpa

    SZ:

    Is this a trick question?

    I doubt anyone who worked for Tip O’Neal or Carter who believes in bigger government, higher taxes, government involvement in most aspects of our lives, on demand abortion, among other things can be considered anything but liberal.

    His pathological personality does however demand a need for medication.

  • http://zg48.wordpress.com zg48

    This breach is very very serious. First this couple has been all over the place where our President and First Lady are in attendance. Plus, they are up close and personal. Take a look at the picture where Ms. Salahis is shaking the Preisdent’s hand with her hand in total control of our President’s hand. If the intent to use biological chemicals, then, he has been had along with the India’s Prime Minister. There is a Pentagon staffer that is the trail blazer for the Salahis. That person should be “called out”. If this Pentagon risk the President and First Lady and other dignitaries–THIS NEEDS TO BE HANDLED RIGHT NOW!!!!!! What else has this Pentagon staffer breached? The social secretary is not the scapegoat. No, she didn’t need to be at the entrance–the Secret Service had all their information and instructions to keep our President and the invitees to the State Dinner safe from hurt and harm. QUESTION: Has damage been done to the relationship of the Prime Minister of India or does anyone know?

  • http://zg48.wordpress.com zg48

    Lets try to be respectable on the issues. Lets not get personal because of race or ethnicity. We are all Americans. Lets attack ways we can bring unemployment out of the sink hole and bring respect back from other countries. Divided America…we will fall like “humpty dumpty” who couldn’t be put back together!!

  • freeinpa

    zg48

    Good luck with that. If one has a conservative view here the majority of responses we receive are pejorative and have no merit based on any logical reasoning.

    Conservative are constantly accused of not being tolerant and the race card is de rigueur argument for liberals and yet the truly intolerable remain on the left.

    I will tolerate the intolerance no more

  • abdullah69

    OK, f%%% off then. Think you will be missed?

  • abdullah69

    Even based upon a 0.1% probability of fatality the President has just sentenced thirty Americans to die in a foreign land that no one gives a crap about and you write about this stuff?

  • jpl9

    “Though, Bush usually cited that protection so that staff might speak freely when giving crucial advice on issues of national importance -”
    Ha,Ha,Ha,Ha,Ha,Ha
    Karl Rove was protected because he gave crucial advice on issues of national importance..
    Ha,Ha,Ha,Ha,Ha,Ha

  • freeinpa

    abdullah69

    and the pond scum never faiil to prove a point

  • Cliff

    RE: Chris Matthews
    .
    No, you probably won’t read anyone on Swampland discussing his recent statements. Or his old statements for that matter.
    .
    Nor will you read them remarking on how half of children will be put on food stamps at some point in their lives, or how one out of eight adults are on food stamps currently.
    .
    Nor will you read about the criminal that Huckabee pardoned killing four cops in Washington.
    .
    Nor will you read about a million million other pressing items, because the Swampers are too busy turning this site into a celebrity news venue to discuss anything worthwhile.

  • Cliff

    For my last paragraph, you can substitute any one of a dozen complaints we’ve voiced about the media as the reason.
    .
    Too superficial
    Too lazy
    Too stupid
    Too arrogant
    Too cowardly
    Too comfortable
    etc.
    etc.
    etc.

  • stuartzechman

    anyone who worked for Tip O’Neal or Carter…can be considered anything but liberal.

    Hmmm…so people don’t change?

    David Joel Horowitz (born January 10, 1939) is an American conservative writer, thinker, and policy advocate. The son of two life-long members of the Communist Party, and a former supporter of Marxism as well as a former member of the New Left in the 1960s, Horowitz later renounced his “left-wing political radicalism” and became an advocate for conservatism.

    Tweety probably was a Jack Kennedy liberal from the 1960′s, when it was cool, “ask not what your country can do for you”, marching against segregation, youth-y stuff. The second Reagan took office, whatever remained of Tweety’s old liberalism was hurriedly thrown into the garbage with his bell-bottoms. He was probably one of the very first Villagers to be painfully embarrassed by connections to Jimmy Carter’s “malaise”. It’s that same silly, late, desperate trendster-ism that led to that “tingle up my leg” Obama bandwagon-jumping moment of shame.
    .
    Tweety plays the part of Reagan Democrat…or at least the Village’s thirty-year old image of it. He assumes the persona of Tip O’Neill Democrat, whose working-class, Irish-Catholic roots inform his “radical middle”, everyman-style Broderism.
    .
    Tweety’s image isn’t of movement conservative, it’s of the centrists’ mythical “regular guy” moron who likes his politics marketed to him like Bud Light. Saint Russert was from the same cloth, so is Brian “working class background” Williams. It appears GE’s NBC broadcast network has a technique for branding its news division’s product in the laughable formula of a “regular Catholic guy interviews savvy reporters and fiery conservatives” premised sitcom. They work hard not to let the idiot public in on the joke that they all summer on Nantucket with the rest of the swells.
    .
    You’d be correct to say that Tweety isn’t Chuck Norris to Mike Huckabee, but that’s only because Chris Matthews is fundamentally a creature of the old, industrial, urban North East political machine –not the Baptist South. Tweety’s fading memories of the Reagan revolution and the decline of his old boss are the last pre-Beltway images he has of ordinary people, before he started to live in the establishment journalists’ privileged bubble. Tweety’s no rightist, because he doesn’t see movement conservatism as “normal”, and therefore doesn’t believe that adding that recent, somewhat alien patois helps his “regular voter” schtick –for which GE pays him 5 million dollars a year.
    .
    You’d be an idiot to say that Tweety’s a dirty f*cking hippie, though. He’s as left-wing as Tom Daschle, or Dick Gephart, or Hillary Clinton…or Barack Obama.

  • sacredh

    Wouldn’t all of these legal questions about the forks fall under the Hate Tines bill?

  • freeinpa

    SZ

    “You’d be an idiot to say that Tweety’s a dirty f*cking hippie, though. He’s as left-wing as Tom Daschle, or Dick Gephart, or Hillary Clinton…or Barack Obama.”

    I take it from your general verse that you believe these to be centrists. Not by a long shot. They may be professional politcians or elite class who would sell their own mother to retain their chosen spot in life but they will never be confused with the hopes, dreams and values of Middle America.

    Matthews, like the used car saleman of a VP, try to give the impression of being an everyday working man. Neither has worked a day in their life. Liberals always try to paint conservatives as greedy rich people out of touch with the common man. The left follows the Clinton “I feel your pain” doctrine when in fact “they are our pain”. Self righteous, arrogant and always know better how people show live, spend thier money and who and how they should associate with people.

    If you believe that any of the folks you mentioned are any where close to centrist in nature, it is the left that has completely lost touch with reality. It should also not come as a surprise when the truth about the left’s agenda becomes apparent the majority of the populace react with shock and anger. To get any part of the left’s agenda passed it is by subterfuge. It is far more devastating, and extreme than any centrist or “right wing” agenda could ever be.

    Life liberty and the pursuit of happiness is not a guarantee based on redistribution of rights or wealth to achieve some social construct of fairness or social justice. It is equal opportunity not equal outcome that has driven this country for over 200 years.

  • shepherdwong

    It should also not come as a surprise when the truth about the left’s agenda becomes apparent the majority of the populace react with shock and anger. To get any part of the left’s agenda passed it is by subterfuge. It is far more devastating, and extreme than any centrist or “right wing” agenda could ever be.

    It should also not come as a surprise that you’re a paranoid loon. Seek professional help before it’s too late.

  • shepherdwong

    A very fascinating analysis, SZ. Thank you.

  • stuartzechman

    shepherdwong:
    .
    Thanks for reading.

  • Cliff

    Liberals always try to paint conservatives as greedy rich people out of touch with the common man.
    .
    I thought we always tried to paint conservatives as illiterate wife-beating meth-smoking racist hillbillies.

  • stuartzechman

    freeinpa:
    .
    What you’re seeing now from the Democrats in power is not the left’s agenda.
    .
    I don’t have time right now to give you proper evidence to consider, but maybe I can when I have time, and it’s topic-relevant.
    .
    Consider this, though:
    .
    What if there were people in leadership positions in the Democratic party whose whole idea was that big government was wonderful -just as long as big business and big finance were in on the spoils, and whose dishonest way of selling that to the American people was to proclaim “The era of big government is over!” (meaning big government acting alone instead of with big corporate and financial interests) and “An end to welfare as we know it!” (without mentioning that it would continue, just not as we had known it, meaning that industry would get welfare, too)?
    .
    What if there was something worse than liberals who championed big government as a check on big business?
    .
    What if there were people who believed in big government and big business, and who constantly tried to put together a coalition of incumbent Democrats and Republicans committed to perpetuating that partnership of elites, because they think that institutional elites know best for the country?
    .
    What if there were a worse kind of Democrat than a liberal, not because they were Marxists, but because they were something else that loved big government and big business acting to rule the country and plunder the treasury together?
    .
    I haven’t offered any evidence to you here, freeinpa, so I don’t expect you to agree with me, I’d just appreciate it if you were to consider the possibility…look at the Democrats in power now in that light for a few moments without that “they’re the hated liberals” preconception, and ask yourself “What if they’re not liberals –or Euro-socialists? What if they’re something worse?”.
    .
    Thanks for considering this.

  • Cliff

    1) What you’re seeing now from the Democrats in power is not the left’s agenda.
    .
    He’s not going to believe you.
    .
    2) they were something else that loved big government and big business acting to rule the country and plunder the treasury together
    .
    This is what I, and perhaps other commenters here, think is the modern definition of conservative.

  • constantweader

    The White House Disses Desiree:

    “After reviewing our actions, it is clear that the White House did not do everything we could have done to assist the United States Secret Service in ensuring that only invited guests enter the complex.” — Jim Messina, Deputy White House Chief of Staff

    The Constant Weader

  • freeinpa

    You are a**hats pretending to be relevant. No wonder you are big Obama fans. Equally arrogant and brutally inept and not worth any further response on anything.
    You can continue your moronic rants about Bush, Beck and Palin and giggle to yourself over your brilliance. I will admit reading your both responses does strengthen arguments for abortion.

    Nothing has changed

  • bitterpill8

    SZ: I think it is fair to say that Democrats hew to the left to get power then go into center right mode to “cling” to power. In the process they sell out their “principles” – meaning the stuff they spew to get our vote. When Rahm became COS the game was revealed,

    On Tweety: recall that he joined the Peace Corps and went off to Swaziland thus “avoiding” service in Nam.

    Tweety is but one of an Irish Mafia that has got the “media” by the throat. That they are mostly Irish Catholics under NBC protection says some thing about the Village Derangement Syndrome.

  • 53_3

    “For all the affirmative actions period you have the Roland Martins, Rich Sanchezs and Soledad O’Briens among others.”
    .
    Freeinpa, this is not a “conservative view”. This is straight up Southern Strategy. This is the ’80s anti minority rhetoric I was referring to.
    .
    And, on top of that, what I played was the reality card, not the race card, because the scenario I described happens every election!
    .
    As I told you before, freetopee, you aren’t even knowledgeable enough about the Black community to understand anything about it.
    .
    And, in particular, for “conservatives” like you, consider it a lesson unlearned.
    .
    53_3…………….4
    freeinpa………..0

  • 53_3

    Hey, freetopee!
    .
    19.20 was a cut and paste insult tossed at me and another commenter a couple threads ago!
    .
    At least be original! Damn.
    .
    About the only nifty thing you’ve accomplished so far is to lose a lot of arguments and zero out my name.
    .
    Not bad for a wannabe…

  • 53_3

    “Life liberty and the pursuit of happiness is not a guarantee based on redistribution of rights or wealth to achieve some social construct of fairness or social justice. It is equal opportunity not equal outcome that has driven this country for over 200 years.”
    .
    This is freetopee’s way of saying, while draping the American flag around his shoulders:
    .
    I got mine so fock you all!

  • 53_3

    I think that the underlying malaise you point to SZ is the same malaise that powers the phrase:
    .
    “… power corrupts, but absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
    .
    I still have a bit of faith that Obama is not going to indulge himself in trying to benefit by tweaking the levers of government. I don’t feel that the pharma deal is the main driver in hist HCR stand, but it is an unpleasant possibility.
    .
    On the other hand, K street is an excellent example of the type of malaise that can rapidly infect those whose ideologies are more permissive.
    .
    I refer to freetopee’s comments at 19 regarding “freedom and liberty”, as well as comments on a previous thread regarding the impacts of ACORN vs K-street.
    .
    His attitude toward these type of transgressions is typical of the “conservative”* view.
    .
    *I’m reluctant to remove the quotes from the word as there is a lot of baggage attached to the current concept of what a conservative is.

  • 53_3

    “Conservative are constantly accused of not being tolerant and the race card is de rigueur argument for liberals and yet the truly intolerable remain on the left.

    I will tolerate the intolerance no more
    .
    This is quite an interesting statement in response to z948′s reasonable request, but what you are really trying to imply here is that I’m “intolerant”?
    .
    Of what? Hate rhetoric? You have a good point there. I am intolerant of that. Of race? All I’ve seen from you is Southern Strategy talking points – hence my responses, which will continue. You won’t go unchallenged when you spout that cr@p.
    .
    I have said before, and I will say it again, you know nothing about the Black community.
    .
    However, it might be a good idea to keep in mind that you have been tangling with a scientist with 40 years of experience in the Black community…

  • freeinpa

    SZ:

    I have considered your thoughtful piece. As I have said before, I may not agree with things that you write, they are always well-thought, well reasoned narratives (unlike the 2 wonder-dummies below {not you bitter}. Although we probably disagree on the mode of action, I think we have similar values to approach some intractable problems.

    I think what you describe as Democrats wanting Big Government as long as business and corporates share the “pie” is not limited to Democrats. Republicans are as guilty, albeit in reverse order. Where we might differ is that I do not believe government can solve many of the problems for the very same reason in that all parties (not political ones) need to be bought off. You end up with bloat and waste.

    Some of the problem is related to the tax code itself where idiotic behavior is rewarded (tax credits or allowances) while positive behavior (savings, investing) is taxed. It creates on one hand, liberals who want to hand out that cash and the right that wants convoluted tax schemes to favor an industry or entity.

    You also mention elites on the right and left that try to perpetuate this farce. I agree. Here however, is one area where are solution differs. Many here and in the MSM denigrate the Rights movement (tea-baggers I believe they are called). It is no different than the Lefts movement (can I name them do**he baggers?). Aims are the same; a more efficient, more responsive federal government. The means are quite different. I believe, that regardless of the intent of a Big Government, it will always lean to be corruptible and thus reduce rights and freedoms because it needs to do so to stay in power. As long as the power to tax exists, that bounty can and will be used by a Big Government to stay that way.

    I also agree that many Democrats in power (and Republicans) are something worse that the “classical Liberal”. The only god they have is power and remaining in power. I also believe that many of the programs set up by the current liberals harms not only the country but the people they claim to aid. I also feel there are programs created by the right that do the very same thing. The government should focus on ensuring freedoms for all as well as equal opportunity and not equal outcome.

    I would hope you consider the possibility that there are things worse than being a conservative even though I have not offered you any evidence as well.

    Bitter: You assessment of Tweety is spot on!

  • 3xfire3

    freeinpa 53-3 and the rest
    while reading all the comments by the 90% liberals piling on against freeinpa, the one person that makes any sense on this website, show how wacky you liberals really are.
    freeinpa states the views believed by the vast majority of Americans and the rest of you loons speak for the small minority of the extreme left. Problem for you is that you are too wacky to realize that you are a small minority.
    53_3 Being black doesn’t give you the right to be a black racist. You are educated and have achieved a higher standard of living in the USA than 90% of the people in Africa. You will ask me for facts. I’ve been to Africa and I have first hand seen the standard of living there. I’m white with a black son-in-law and I have 10 grandchildren 5 of which are biracial or Hispanic. I’m working to improve the lives of people in Africa. Are You or is been an arrogant racist your primary job.

  • sacredh

    I think we’re all agreed that both party’s leadership is populated by snakes. We each just choose the snake that comes closest to our own political beliefs. I’m pretty far to the left but I realize that a candidate that shares my beliefs doesn’t have a chance to be elected so I wind up voting for a centrist. To me, Obama is a centrist. I voted hoping that Obama would be more to the left. I’m disappointed in many of the positions he has taken but I would vote for him again in a heartbeat because I still think he’ll come closest to what I want. You can’t always get what you want.

  • 53_3

    “53_3 Being black doesn’t give you the right to be a black racist.”
    .
    First off, I’m white*! Caucasian, if you will. And I would like you to identify exactly where in my statements that I’m racist. Put up, man!
    .
    “You are educated and have achieved a higher standard of living in the USA than 90% of the people in Africa. You will ask me for facts. I’ve been to Africa and I have first hand seen the standard of living there.”
    .
    Why are you talking about Africa, for God’s sake. I’m talking about here. Black Americans have a far higher standard of living, and what you learned in Africa has almost nothing to do with the state of race relations here!
    .
    “I’m white with a black son-in-law and I have 10 grandchildren 5 of which are biracial or Hispanic.”
    .
    Well I have black freinds too! And family. And mothers in laws. And fathers in laws. And nephews. And nieces. And sons. Daughers, too! See above on my ethnicity.
    .
    ” I’m working to improve the lives of people in Africa. Are You or is been an arrogant racist your primary job.”
    .
    What are you talking about Africa for? I have freinds, family and relatives all over our country, and, I know what I’m talking about when it comes to the Black community. I’ve also done volunteer work, and other work besides, but that’s neither here nor there.
    .
    It seems to me that you are the one who has tossed the word ‘racist’ around. Reading your commentary, it’s clear that if I disagree with Southern Strategy talking points, and point out their fallacies, then you automatically assume I’m a racist Black man!
    .
    Wow, just how many times can you go wrong in a single response…
    .
    *There is no “white”. The history of a Norwegian has little to do with the history of someone from say, Italy. Or Germany, other than by a few middle age wars.

  • freeinpa

    I agree and feel your pain.I find it somewhat amusing that you find Obama to be a centrist. I find him to be more far left. Coincidentally, I found McCain to be a centrist and I will suppose you would not.

  • 3xfire3

    freeinpa and sz and sacredh
    It’s refreshing to see you guys commenting with ideas instead of the usual garbage that most people write on this website. There is no room for hatred in our country. Way too many commenters simply throw out hate and demonize those who have sincere beliefs that are different then theirs.
    KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK.
    70 year old Navy Vet and proud to be an American. With all our faults there’s no better place to live then the USA. I have traveled the world and have some first hand knowledge that many of you do not have.

  • sacredh

    I would have voted for McCain in 2000 because I did feel that he was a centrist then. I feel that he moved too far to the right in order to get the nomination in 2008. I think he was well aware that he had to move to the right to secure the nomination and that he choose Palin in order to secure the base, but IMHO he had to adopt positions to win the primary that doomed him in the general election.

  • 3xfire3

    53_3 Did I hit a nerve?
    You have just proven that you have the intelligence to give a response that is not full of hate and arrogance. Good job.
    Use your intelligence to argue with ideas instead of garbage.

    Read Posting 26.5

  • freeinpa

    McCain, as the majority of politicians, respond to its base. I don’t believe he truly accepted much of the right and which is why Palin was nominated. Folks can say what they will about Palin, she injected life into McCain’s campaign when it was essentially DOA. Her appeal to the right base was(is) far more genuine than McCains.

  • sacredh

    I agree that McCain absolutely had to appeal to the base to get the nomination. I also agree that Palin appealed far more to the base than McCain did and enegized his campaign. I also feel that Palin alienated the moderates and independents that McCain needed to win. I’m just voicing my own opinion here, but I think Mccain would have put the screws to the evangelical base if he got elected and would have moved back toward the center and tried to form a relationship that was bi-partisanship in nature. He didn’t like or trust the evangelicals and I feel that he just viewed them as a means to an end.
    .
    OT, but I’m so glad my vacation is almost over. I’m whipped. We’ve either been decorating 10-11 hours a day for a week or else been shopping. We left the house at 10 in the morning yesterday and didn’t get home until midnight. Gotta run again. It’s been interesting talking to you. Have a good one.

  • freeinpa

    It was refreshing to have a reasonable conversation for a change. They are few and far between here.

    I do agree with your assessment of McCain. I do believe the feeling from the evangelicals was mutual. In the end I think it was a combination of mistrust of the independents and base that fried the McCain campaign

    Keep that economy going !

  • freeinpa

    3xfire3

    I tend to respond in kind. I have little patience for uninspired thinking or rote rubbish. There are several posters here that are deranged beyond hope and I will respond no further to them.

    We will all disagree from time to time and the rhetoric will be heated (or impassioned depending on your view). That has what made this country what it is.

    I have traveled the world as well but I suspect not under the same circumstances as you might have. I agree it is the greatest country and we should be proud and not ashamed of it.

    My father is an old Navy man as well. Thank you for your service.

  • 3xfire3

    freeinpa
    You might might find postings 19.24-19.27 interesting.

  • 3xfire3

    53_3
    I got the impression that you were black because you keep saying the rest of us mere mortals can not possibly understand the black communities. You also seem to bring up race in a lot of your comments.
    Also since it is inappropriate for a participant to keep the score, I thought I would help out here.

    freeinpa………..4
    53_3…………….0

  • 3xfire3

    Maybe you guys have started the elevation of this website to a new level of rational discussion.
    Several of you have shown real intelligence and maturity.
    please keep up the good work. You will make our country a better place by rational discussion of the issues rather than trying to win points by demonizing each other.

  • freeinpa

    3xfire3::

    I love an optimist LOL

  • freeinpa

    3xfire3:

    I did read 19.24-19.27. I will admit you are a better man than I. You understand first hand of those I speak.

  • 53_3

    “I got the impression that you were black because you keep saying the rest of us mere mortals can not possibly understand the black communities.”
    .
    You seem to be avoiding the issue of Southern Strategy talking points.
    .
    I can say with confidence that no, you don’t know what motivates that Black community, and neither does freetopee. You talk about Africa and this has nothing to do with Africa. You can’t get your information from Rush Limbaugh or the other talking heads, or spout about issues that were identity politics hot button issues and try to pass that off as “knowledge”. It simply isn’t.
    .
    “You also seem to bring up race in a lot of your comments.”
    .
    I keep running into that Southern Strategy bullsh!t that freetopee keeps serving up. It’s nonsensical and it has nothing to do with reality. If you want reality, take a look at my post at 19.21. It describes a lesson that neither of you have learned and you still havn’t.
    .
    Your ramblings show basic ignorance of a community that you know virtually nothing about. Hell, listening to you and freetopee, one would think that the Black community is composed of nothing butAl Sharpton worshipers and affirmative action afficianados – and absolutely neither is true. You don’t even realize that somewhere around 40% of the Black community is conservative, but will not touch the GOP due to the constant barrage of anti minority rhetoric
    .
    You claim that freetopee won this round, but he has yet to show I’m wrong about the Black community and it’s issues. I’ve pointed out he is and I know it because I live within it every day!
    .
    “Also since it is inappropriate for a participant to keep the score”
    .
    It is also completely inappropriate in 2009 (or ever) to keep using Southern Strategy talking points to cast aspirations on a community you (or freetopee) knows nothing about!.

  • 53_3

    See 19.29.

  • sacredh

    Good God. Me intelligent and mature. The End of Days is upon us.

  • sacredh

    Way OT, but if anyone else is tired of getting up on a ladder and hanging icicle lights etc., we went to alternating red and green flood lights around the house. It takes 20 minutes, no ladders, no lights getting blown up on the roof and the house stands out. We’re getting far more compliments on the house than we ever did when it looked like the Griswalds.

  • sacredh

    Yesterday we took off early. I sat my snowmen, Santa and boxes of lights at the end of the driveway and put “Free!” on them. They were gone when we got home (boxes and all). There was a fifth of Crown Royal in my mailbox this morning with a “Thanks Dude” card.

  • freeinpa

    Nice trade. I watched the Griswolds last night. Still makes me giggle.

  • cfukara

    Indeed.
    Are you giving away all your earthly possessions?
    Can I have the house? [And the nice MIL?]

  • sacredh

    Three houses and timeshare in Orlando. Life’s been good to me so far. Can you HAVE the MIL? Saints preserve us. I’ll PAY you to take her. Do with her what you will.

  • sacredh

    We gave up hard liquor years ago. We both have some serious pain meds and that whole “might not wake up thing” made us cautious. The mailman gets the Crown.

  • sacredh

    We watch Lampoon’s Christmas a few nights ago. Fred Claus was the night before last. The Santa Clause is on tap for this evening. We’re waiting for snow for the classics. We also have almost every Disney short since he started making them.

  • http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2009/12/09/desirous-to-speak-with-desiree/ House Panel Moves to Subpoena Salahis, But Not Rogers – Swampland – TIME.com

    [...] the White House and the committee chairman,” King said in an interview. The White House invoked separation of powers to prevent Rogers from testifying, a move that raised many eyebrows on the Hill, especially after [...]

blog comments powered by Disqus