And while we’re giving the NYT sh*t for not printing the whole wiretapping story before the election, let’s give some love to Congressional Dems who, while perhaps not entirely aware of Bush’s plans, seemed to know enough to be “concerned” and yet came out and said nothing until the story finally broke. That Daschle should be one of those is NO surprise.

Oliver said:

“The response to the Swift Boat Vets on the left was to talk about the details of the incidents they talked about in mind numbing detail. That was a loser. So was Kerry s response of talking about the issues.”

Which got this reply:

“Kerry couldn t respond, cause it was true.”

That sounds like an attack on Kerry’s service to me. Now I don’t care about anyone’s service right now because it’s not the subject (stop changing…eh, you know where I’m going). The subject is the violation of the 4th article of the Bill of Rights by one George W. Bush, which means the words “Vietnam” “Carter” or “Clinton” are all smokescreens to change the debate.

Schumer isn’t the only one who blew it, btw (no surprise). Head on over to http://www.liberaloasis.com (no comments there, sorry trolls) for a better look at the weak Dem response to the emperor Bush in the media this past Sunday.

I just finished stating no one questioned J.F’ing Kerry’s service, but you repeat that ignorant statement back again. As far as I can tell, no one HAS questioned my service, which I think is smart coming from a group of people who couldn’t tell a Master Chief Petty Officer from a Lance Corporal.

This lie and repeat business that OW has you convinced is a winning strategy….it isn’t. Don’t try to be it’s poster boy “Fact”Check

There still are questions raised about your service- post your DD214 online- what have you got to hide? Remember, it was Republicans who said it was ok to question and malign someone’s service, I’m just expecting you to live with it.

Still, his rants do serve a purpose. Notice how my calling Bush on his pathetic excuse for “service” must therefore mean I think ALL servicemen and women who aren’t in the line of fire aren’t serving their country. Putting aside the utter stupidity of such a comment and notice the shift from defending Bush to attacking me. It’s much the same as the fascist attacks on dissenters and their patriotism. Like I said before, it’s classic “stop changing the subject” material. Why defend Bush when you can call people “asshole.”

Back to the Dems, though. Anybody catch Sen. Chuck Schumer on Fox News Sunday? Ack, what a meandering, weak kneed response to the whole wire tapping scandal.

GOP Sen. Mitch McConnell said:

“But here, where clearly we’re talking about intercepts with people who are communicating internationally and potentially plotting another 9/11, they don’t have apparently the same kind of outrage.”

So what’s Schumer’s response to all this b.s.? Does he ask how, exactly, this is “clearly” about stopping another 9/11 (when in doubt, go to the “9/11″ well)? Why Bush couldn’t go get the warrants during the 72 hour grace period? How come Bush felt the need to tap into major communications arteries and listen in on the conversations, emails, etc. of millions of Americans? How about a quick “I don’t think there’s any merit to the argument that our President feels he must destroy our cherished freedoms to save them.” Maybe a “stop changing the subject and trying to turn the administration’s irresponsible outing of a CIA agent working to stop terrorism into an excuse to sidestep debate over the President’s violation the Constitution.”

Nope.

Instead Schumer rambles at length about how the President just needed to come to Congress and let everyone know what was up and, gosh, then nobody would have minded if he wanted to shred an article or two of the Constitution. My favorite Schumer line:

“And the problem here is that the president thought there was a problem. That’s legitimate.”

The President’s “problem,” was Congress, FISA, the Constitution, and those jerks who continue to believe in checks and balances and won’t just give him his crown and scepter. That’s not “legitimate,” Schumer, you dolt.

Freakin’ Dems, what’s your ball-less problem with siding strongly with the majority who think Bush is a reckless cowboy that needs to be reigned in? Yeah, we know you don’t control Congress, so the odds on seeing any major perp walks is nill, but you might want to start building momentum for ‘06 and ‘08 rather than laying down in traffic.

You and your ilk just continue to make completely unsubstantiated statements, in fact statements that have been throughly refuted again and again.

By all means, just repeat the proven lies again and again, that is a fabulous foundation for democracy.

Factcheck, I am tired of repeating myself so here is my response from a few lines above

So Bill, if you are in the military, but not in a war zone or fighting, you haven t served our country? What kind of an asshole are you? Are you disrespecting all of our military folk that stand post all over the world, but aren t getting actively shot at? Bush served, he was a fighter pilot& .done. Now, are you trying to say the same retarded thing Factcheck? As I stated before, I was forward deployed when 9/11 happened, never in a combat zone (specialist surgeons rarely are). My two years forward deployed was EASILY as valuable as J.F’ing Kerry’s 3 months on a swift boat. Next question coward?

You served your time in what branch of the service?

In other words, “stop changing the subject.”

Now if only the Dems could grasp the concept of staying on message and not getting into pointless minutiae or side debates, we might actually have a democracy in this country again…someday.

You guys set the bar, I’m just following your lead. Where did you spend your time? Was it some champagne unit or somewhere hostile?

Let the Tourette’s begin!

Grumble…grumble…RATHER!….grumble….grumble…

I have to hand it to you though, the leftists here definately took to heart the lessons that old Joe Stalin put out. You just keep repeating lies, eventually someone will start to believe. Though you DID notice the trouble that RATHER got into with that!

By what common definition? Now you leftards are going to suggest that someone not serving in combat hasn’t served?

Yes, a lie. I received a nice letter from the POTUS thanking me for my service when my ten years as a naval officer was up, I never “served” in a combat zone. If you aren’t “in danger” you haven’t served? How much danger? Have you ever flown a high-performance fighter? Are you aware of the danger there? So now the standard is danger?

Do you honestly believe that a sensible human being with more than a room-temperature IQ would read your post and be at all convinced?

We’re back to the “it depends on what the definition of is, is”….and we know how well THAT went over with the american people

Nope. No lie. Bush didn’t serve by a common definition, so he doesn’t believe it to be a lie. Bush really should have been in line for ‘Nam, and if his last name was anything but Bush, he would have been. And was he REALLY in danger in his service? Did he serve out his obligation with TANG? Questions have been raised, and not adequately answered.

Geez, Oliver, what is up? Your trolls are getting more stupid everyday.

We “guys” never questioned Kerry’s service, we “questioned” his war hero status and his attempt to dishonor his brethren in arms after the fact.