Because in this case the Republican was running against the crooked William Jefferson. A guy like Jefferson shouldn’t be in our government, and considering the Dem margin of control in the House, we can afford to add a wingnut for a couple years.
Ah, Louisiana.
Related
McCain Campaign Says Obama Would Cause A Holocaust
Michael Steele’s Minstrel Show
Rudy Giuliani Conveniently Forgets That 9/11 Happened On The Republican’s Watch
“A guy like Jefferson shouldn’t be in our government, and considering the Dem margin of control in the House, we can afford to add a wingnut for a couple years.”
So, a vile, corrupt scumbag like William Jefferson is tolerable as long as he has the right letter after his name to keep the D majority solid, but once he’s superfluous, THEN it’s all right to dump his ass?
Contrast with Republican scumbags like Stevens, Craig, Cunningham — the GOP was eager to dump them and replace them with another Republican, but didn’t try to keep them in office just to preserve the seat.
Very, very telling, Oliver.
J.
Christ on a cracker, Tea… do you really think that’s what Oliver meant? You’re a fucking wackjob.
I think it’s clear that OW was saying that Jefferson was gone, period. The second part of that statement seems very colloquial to me, and not to be taken absolutely fucking literally.
Plus, if you look back, OW has posted about Jefferson before, and has continually called for his ouster.
You’re a petty little bitch.
What Mambo said. Reading is fundamental, Jay; you old enough to remember that slogan? The first part of the sentence stands on its own. It so happens that the damage inflicted by one lonely bitchy wingnut doesn’t matter, but even if it did, Oliver is saying (and I agree) that Jefferson “shouldn’t be in our government.”
Just remember: to wingnuts it doesn’t matter what you really said. What matters is how they can twist and prune and mutilate what was actually said in order to shove it into one of the cubbyholes that make up the wingnut version of “discourse.” This time, Jay thought he saw a way to carve up Oliver’s post so it would fit into the “Democrats are the REAL partisans!!!!!” hole.
“So, a vile, corrupt scumbag like William Jefferson is tolerable as long as he has the right letter after his name to keep the D majority solid, but once he’s superfluous, THEN it’s all right to dump his ass?”
How fucking stupid are you?
How have you not accidentally killed yourself before now?
God, I’m so glad your party is irrelevant now. Hell, there are those in the upper levels of leadership that are already writing off 2012, and considering their supporters are people like you, it’s a smart move.
It also occurs to me that the Rethuglicans were so “eager” to get rid of Stevens that they waited until the election took them off the hook.
Two more notes…
1.) First Vietnamese American in Congress. Yeah!
2.) I believe in innocent until proven guilty, but politicians should live up to a higher standard. Indicted should be enough to get your ass thrown out.
2.a) And if someone gets an indictment for political reasons, their ass should be thrown in jail.
You’ve been around here long enough to know Oliver has made it known on many occasions that Jefferson needed to go. I know you hate to give up the opportunity for fake moral outrage, but c’mon.
the GOP was eager to dump them and replace them with another Republican
Yes, the GOP was just so quick to remove Tom DeLay from his position of power.
And Mark Foley, once they found out about his little hobby.
Oh wait, no they didn’t.
“And Mark Foley, once they found out about his little hobby.
Oh wait, no they didn’t.”
They even asked Foley to stick around after he wanted to retire, because they needed his vote.
I wonder what Jay Tea thinks of that. I don’t think we will find out, as after being ripped apart as a complete liar, I don’t think he’s going to return here.
“Contrast with Republican scumbags like Stevens, Craig, Cunningham — the GOP was eager to dump them and replace them with another Republican, but didn’t try to keep them in office just to preserve the seat.”
I’m looking hard for the contrast…still looking…and looking.
I think perhaps you were being silly, eh?
Jay Tea, please give evidence that the GOP was “eager to dump” Stevens, Craig, and Cunningham and “replace them with another Republican”.
Oooh this is good. According to an article quoted by John Cole, Jefferson’s Republican challenger is…
My oh my. A minority and an attorney and a community organizer. Amazing that the Republicans will let unaccomplished riff-raff like this in their party, eh?
Oliver, my apologies. You have been consistent about getting rid of Jefferson, and I was mistaken. I’ll join you in saying that it’s good Jefferson was defeated, but the people of Louisiana shoulda dumped him years ago.
Re: Mark Foley… and odd case. An utter scumbag and someone who should never have been anywhere near a position of power and trust, but he stayed within the letter of the law.
Tom DeLay… another odd case. As despicable as he is, if anyone should have gotten a pass, he should have. The prosecutor was on a personal crusade. The first grand jury refused to indict, and the second only managed its indictment by violating the Constitution.
Hey, anyone seen this list of the top ten political scandals of 2008? It’s kinda fun, counting how many (D)s and (R)s show up.
J.
“Oliver, my apologies. You have been consistent about getting rid of Jefferson, and I was mistaken.”
Learn from this mistake. You are frequently wrong, yet you are confident in making claim that have no basis in fact.
“…but he stayed within the letter of the law.”
No he didn’t. He sent sexually explicit messages to many pages, some of which were underage depending on jurisdictions. Additionally, sending unwanted sexual advances is also again the law.
“The prosecutor was on a personal crusade.”
Ha!
“The first grand jury refused to indict, and the second only managed its indictment by violating the Constitution.”
Whose ass did you pull that out of?
Jay = laugh riot
Jay Tea: Oliver, my apologies. You have been consistent about getting rid of Jefferson, and I was mistaken.
This is the one thing that Jay Tea does that the others (Amused O, Jay, jmcann, et al) do not. On occasion he’ll admit he was wrong.
He’ll water it down in the very next sentence and spend the remainder of the post explaining how he was actually right in everything else, but he will sometimes admit a mistake and IMHO that’s cause for hope that, in JT at least, we’re dealing with someone where the mind might be open at least a crack.
Strowbridge, I’m going to take a break from reflecting your “STFU” policy and actually answer you.
1) Foley did NOT break any laws. Just check with the prosecutors, who said that they could not charge him with anything, despite their personal desire to do so.
2) Ronnie Earle took his evidence against DeLay to a grand jury, and they refused to indict. He took it to a second one, which did indict, but the indictment was thrown out when someone noticed that the specific acts were committed in the year before they were made illegal — a clear-cut violation of the Constitution, which specifically forbids ex post facto laws.
Oh, and I forgot that danged list of top 10 political scandals of 2008 — http://www.nypost.com/photos/galleries/news/nationalnews/pp_20081203_top_ten_political_scandals/photo01.htm
I think the list is flawed — I’d dump Kernell, Palin, and McGreevey off it (Kernell is merely the son of a public official, Palin was exonerated, and McGreevey’s offenses all took place in prior years). And Jefferson ought to be on it. Hell, I’ll even toss in David Vitter, even though his mess broke last year. With that nine, it’s still 2/3 Democrats.
J.
Let’s not forget Diaper Dave Vitter. The Republicans are practically shouting themselves hoarse trying to get rid of that guy, aren’t they?
Oh come now Quaker, a smattering of them did rather sternly say they disapproved, which is just as good, right?
“1) Foley did NOT break any laws. Just check with the prosecutors, who said that they could not charge him with anything, despite their personal desire to do so.”
There’s a difference between not breaking laws, and not being able to prove he broke the law. Not having the IMs means no prosecution. That doesn’t mean they were legal.
“2) Ronnie Earle took his evidence…”
Do you even read what you write? Go back and check your original claim, asshole.
Fucking hell, it’s like I’m arguing with a retarded puppy dog.
“Palin was exonerated,”
No she wasn’t. She was found guilty of ethical violations. Just because she said she was exonerated doesn’t make it true.
And with that you prove you are a fucking ‘tard and your opinion means zero.
I don’t trust a word you say, because you are a fucking idiot.
“He took it to a second one, which did indict, but the indictment was thrown out when someone noticed that the specific acts were committed in the year before they were made illegal”
By the way, he is still under indictment. The prosecution is still moving forward.
I don’t know where you get your ‘facts’ from, but they are as stupid or as dishonest as you are.
Now shut the fuck up.
Jeez…
I was going to see if anyone had commented on Cao, after reading the article from the Times that Sullivan linked to:
instead, I find a flame war going on over the first (stupid) comment.
Maybe we should all post ” JT, we’re ignoring you” and move on to discussing Cao– the real subject, after all.
He doesn’t sound so bad, for a Republican. He actually sounds a lot better than some of the conservative Democrats (I’m lookin’ at YOU, Bobby Bright in Alabama) that are in the new bunch.
Freshman don’t usually get to do much, so we’ll just have to see if he votes like he talks, or rubber stamps the party line.
So, a vile, corrupt scumbag like William Jefferson is tolerable as long as he has the right letter after his name to keep the D majority solid, but once he’s superfluous, THEN it’s all right to dump his ass?
A Republican’t clutching their faux pearls and (falsely) whinging about Democratic politicians doing what Republican’ts have been doing since the dawn of time! What an immense surprise! Never saw that coming…
Contrast with Republican scumbags like Stevens, Craig, Cunningham — the GOP was eager to dump them and replace them with another Republican, but didn’t try to keep them in office just to preserve the seat.
Which would be why, even now, Stevens is a newly electorated senator! And why Larry Craig has graciously declined to remove himself from office, despite the eagerness with which the rest of the Republican’ts (and the treacherous, evil, liberal media!) have arisen en masse and deluged the airwaves with nonstop calls for him to step down!
Very, very telling, Oliver.
Almost as telling as the Reich Wing bloviations coming from Jay Tea on a daily basis that pollute this comments thread are.
Nice to see that you admitted you were wrong, Jay – for about two seconds, until you had to start in with the insults again.
Wolverines!
I’m SHOCKED that the New York Post would say a majority of political scandals were the result of Democrats. Shocked, I say. The next thing you know, the Nation might say something bad about Newt Gingrich.
“The next thing you know, the Nation might say something bad about Newt Gingrich”.
Or Oliver would say something good about President-elect Obama!
“Or Oliver would say something good about President-elect Obama!”
That’s like praising the Philadelphia Phillies. They did win, it should be easy to come up with sometime positive to say about them.
“They did win, it should be easy to come up with sometime positive to say about them”.
That doesn’t work for me when it comes to Michelle Bachmann (although it does give me a little comfort that she had to struggle for her victory in a staunchly Republican district).
Of course all of this pales in comparison to the great political scandal of the century.
“That doesn’t work for me when it comes to Michelle Bachmann (although it does give me a little comfort that she had to struggle for her victory in a staunchly Republican district).”
But that’s exactly the difference. Obama had to win the nation, she had to win a little slice of Wingnuttia.