But that’s exactly the difference. Obama had to win the nation, she had to win a little slice of Wingnuttia.

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).

That’s like praising the Philadelphia Phillies. They did win, it should be easy to come up with sometime positive to say about them.

Or Oliver would say something good about President-elect Obama!

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!

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

Anh “Joseph” Cao, an attorney and community organizer, defeated Jefferson in the 2nd Congressional district race. He will become the first Vietnamese-American elected to Congress.

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?

I’m looking hard for the contrast…still looking…and looking.

I think perhaps you were being silly, eh?