Say Anything Blog

I recall meeting Kent Conrad two times.

I wouldn’t be at all surprised that he had no recollection of the events.

With all due respect to The Whistler, I suspect that Abramoff enjoys a slightly higher profile with the political bigwigs than does he. My impression is that Abramoff’s relationship with Rove is/was much tighter than with Bush but for the President to say that he doesn’t know him is a bit much to swallow.

Ideology aside, the biggest problem I see with the current Administration is its apparent unwillingness to play it straight with the facts. I find it difficult to give Bush and his team the benefit of the doubt whether the story is significant or not because they seem to value truth and accountability less than political gamesmanship.

It would seem as though someone is lying, but it is hard to know who. But really, why would either lie?

The irony of this statement, I tell ya.

Hey righties, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck…

It’s probably...a big fat fucking Duck!

I’m curious that some of you assume the President is assumed to be lying, rather than the accused felon who is trying to sell out everyone he can to lighten his sentence. Could it be that some of you are biased?  Just asking. Perhaps you have brainwashed yourselves with that “lied to get us into war” meme.

Perhaps you have brainwashed yourselves with that “lied to get us into war” meme.

Maybe it’s because, among many, many lies that have tumbled out of George Bush’s mouth - we’ve heard this one before.

Remember Ken Lay? As soon as Enron went down, the President claimed be “barely knew Mr. Lay”, despite a letter from Bush to Lay referring to Lay as “Kenny Boy”. And Lay’s relationship to Bush, having been his largest contributor by far. Whose jet did the President’s parents fly in on to attend their son’s inauguration? Ken Lay’s - the man Bush jr. claims he “barely knows”.

It tickles me reading yours and others’ posts as you struggle with your devotion to the cult of Bush. Abramoff is one of the biggest, if not the biggest players in Republican donor circles. He bundled more than $100,000 for Bush/Cheney in the last presidential campaign.

You cling to the notion that Bush is being completely straight with you when he says that he doesn’t know the man, while the preponderance of the evidence points to the exact opposite.

If Bush came out and said the Sun revolved around the Earth, you’d be on SA tomorrow with a post agreeing with him.

Unlike you and your allegiance to the cult of the left, mcair, I had eight years of a pathological liar, under whose aegis Enron was born and prospered, and then went broke under our present President. I bear no special allegiance to GW, since he is soft on liberals, but I do appreciate a leader.  I don’t respect followers. I came to my own political conclusions before you were in training pants, and they certainly predate the present Presidency.  Try facts instead of spew next time.

Ha-ha! Bring on your facts Bob!

According to you, since Enron was incorporated while Clinton was in the WH, it must be Clinton that caused their downfall, even though they contributed to Republicans like it was going out of style and financed Bush in 2000.

OK, Bob, I think you’re onto something with this line of reasoning - in an alternate reality, that is.

Ken Lay was a big money political supporter of Bush the Greater and Bush the Lesser.

Both lefties: Smear by association, eh? You didn’t like it by McCarthy, but now it’s OK?  I never said Clinton had anything to do with Enron, but it is quite a coincidence, don’t you agree?  You imply that both Bushes did favors for Enron, but give no evidence, and the fact that Enron went broke under GW doesn’t exactly bolster your case, does it?  Maybe Ken Lay should get his money back, or maybe there is no cause and effect relationship.  You have to come up with a real cause and effect relationship, not just a coincidental one.  I know from experience that almost all big corps contribute to both political parties.  That way they cover their bets.  It still doesn’t spell corruption, except for you leftie smear merchants.

"Leftie Smear merchants”. The subject is “did Bush lie when stating he didn’t know Abramoff”.

I originally referenced Enron to show that Nush had a similar relationship with the disgraced Ken Lay, a corrupt villian who again, Bush denied knowing when the shit hit the fan. I didn’t make any accusations about quid-pro-quo between Enron and Bush - you chose to read that into it.

So is Bush lieing about his relationship with Abramoff? The evidence thus far is pointing to that.

Mike:

Ideology aside, the biggest problem I see with the current Administration is its apparent unwillingness to play it straight with the facts.

I share your frustration, but perhaps for different reasons.  I often wish the President would come right out and address his critics and their criticisms rather than playing everything off for so long.  I often think the President is in the right but allows the media/left to distort things by failing to mount a strong response.

When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

When G W Bush says he doesn’t remember, one has to believe him. His memory is shot from all the dope and booze he did when he was younger. The man is not a lier, he just does not remember. I don’t remember, is not the same as I never met Abramoff.