The ’sweet pea monologues’ day tres – this is longer than I thought, we may need a day four, hahaha…again, my words in bold italics.
Anonz, did I mention elsewhere that G.W. Carver’s biography was a book I read when I was nine or did you just happen to throw his name out there?? I could not figure out why the man wasn’t more famous, ah yes, bc he’s black, that didn’t make any sense to me then nor does it now. Sorry I deleted that other remark, responded on the far side though, think you understand, check it.
…and you and anyone else can ‘talk’ ‘rant’ or ‘comment’ for as long as you want here, just uh, please use a safe place to do that…
On another note, and bc it’s my blog I’ll add this: last night I decided to pass on another night out, just wasn’t in the mood. I caught a videocast about a brain researcher, Jill Bolte Taylor, who had a stroke resulting in a ‘powerful stroke of insight.’ It was just amazing/touching/all that. I love the study of the brain/function, I also enjoy talking with people who have one ; ) figuring out what makes us all tick, etc, etc…she descibes the left/right brain detail from the inside out so conversationally, and had the unique opportunity to research her own brain, very powerful. I’d would love to meet her. It was fascinating…check it @ www.ted.com
Ok, now for more of Anonz’s words…it’s long but well worth the read.
‘…Now let’s examine the Republican non lawyer names you have put forward.
1. President Bush - I predict that soon after leaving office lawyers will become his best friends. He will be charged with so many crimes for what he and his administration did while he was in office that he will be spending a lot of time with lawyers. Probably the only crime he will avoid is being tried as a war criminal, the one crime that I have come to believe he is surely guilty of. But what do I know, I am not a lawyer. hahaha, you know a lot, anonz, and GWB is probably meeting and retaining atty’s as we speak/write so the games will be over before they’ve even begun, it’s unfortunate but not beyond the Bush family and its fellow repug’s connections though, now is it?
2. Vice President Cheney - Yes Cheney is a businessman. Perhaps that’s why he knows the value of a few good no-bid contracts. A little lawyer knowledge might have alerted him to the illegality of it all. ah, but he’ll have a heart attack and die soon, although he made it through his lastest incident…and the one before that…
3. Newt Gingrich - Yes, he was a history professor. Too bad he didn’t appreciate the axiom that if one doesn’t learn the mistakes of history, he is destined to repeat them. He would have gotten a lawyer to help him hide his 1994 $4 million book bribe. He was paid back by those he orchestrated legislation for to benefit their corporation or personal enrichment. Fox paid him off for his services. Had he been a lawyer maybe he could have claimed the $4 million as a legal fee. As it was he was given a $4 million dollar advance on a book that everyone knew might sell 8 copies to people outside his family. he’s such a whore for $’s
In 1997 he was fined and accepted a $300,000 penalty for violating the House ethics rules. I mean, there is no end to the greed of these scoundrels. He already had made more that $10 million in bribes since 1994, yet here he was still taking whatever he could get his greedy little hands on. Every rich man knew under his leadership, the American government was for sale to the highest bidder.
Before you make an argument for this thief remember his quote “To the degree I have made mistakes, they have been errors of implementation but never of intent,” you think he sought the advice of a good lawyer before he made that statement? to the degree that I have knowledge, the ambigious usage of this statement was designed by a well paid attorney
A year later, 1998, his own cronies recognized that his greed was drawing too much attention to their on larceny ways and they forced his out. Wanna bet he couldn’t have used a good lawyer to argue his case. he’s such a whore for $’s, oh wait, I already said that : )
4. Tom Delay - Yes he was an exterminator. So I guess he was familiar with the exterminating process the American people had to go through to rid themselves of his services. Be honest, if ever a man needed some good legal advice it was this crook. the way you turn a phrase totally amuses me, have I told you that?2005 House Majority Leader Tom DeLay was indicted by a Texas grand jury Wednesday on a charge of conspiring to violate political fundraising laws, forcing him to temporarily step aside from his GOP post. He is the highest-ranking member of Congress to face criminal prosecution. These guys just enter politics to fleece the American people. What do you admire most about Tom? The amount of graft he was able to get, or the poker face he maintained after every charge while continuing to make crooked deals for a few dollars more. Tell me who your heros are and I’ll know who you are. oof, babe, I just love it when you get tough like that, ‘I’ll know who you are,’ rrooaarrr…hee hee
2006 WASHINGTON, Jan. 7 – Having secured a guilty plea from the lobbyist Jack Abramoff, prosecutors are entering a new phase of the corruption investigation in Washington and are focusing on a lobbying firm that has even closer ties to Tom DeLay, the former House majority leader who is under scrutiny in the scandal. – You think this Tom hates or loves lawyers about now. I guess it would depend on how much jail time they can help his avoid. repubs never get jail time or I mean, never DO jail time, do they?!
2007 DeLay is facing criminal charges stemming from political contributions to Republican candidates in Texas, and two of his former aides have pleaded guilty in a wide-ranging corruption probe of disgraced GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff. – I’m guessing that if you could have found better examples of good honest Republicans to use as examples of why non lawyers are better representatives of the people you would have used them. But damn this is pathetic. So far all you have presented us with are crooks, scoundrels, would be crooks, as yet un-convicted crooks and everyone of them in need of a lawyer good or otherwise.
5. Boehner – House Minority Leader was a plastic manufacturer. Maybe that why his pretense to working for the people seems so plastic.
The blatant hypocrisy on display here is stunning.
When ordinary Americans were being wiretapped, Boehner’s attacked them and their right to privacy, claiming “I believe (phone companies) deserve immunity” from the law. But when Boehner himself was being wiretapped, he had no hesitation to claim his own right to privacy, claiming “no one is above the law.”
When ordinary Americans are victimized, Boehner’s taken every opportunity to caricature their representatives at EFF and ACLU as “unscrupulous trial lawyers” who are “trying to find a way to get into the pockets of the American companies.” But when Boehner himself is the victim, suddenly defense attorneys don’t seem so unscrupulous to him, and he has no problem employing his own litigators to receive a $1.1 million reward.
Related Issues: NSA Spying, Privacy
Again the question arises, is this the best you have to offer? About now lawyers are looking pretty good. So far, all you have given us are thieves, opportunists, hypocrites, and liars. All, I might add, have sought the services of the very profession that you and them purport to despise. I guess until you need one, you just keep them in a pile of shit. hmmm, no wonder why BC is underground, I think you scared him off, hahaha
6. Bill Frist - Yes, Bill is a heart surgeon. Perhaps that’s why when you see his voting record, you will understand why he seems so heartless when it comes to the ordinary citizen’s plight. The striking thing is how often he blatantly sells out to the big corporations at the expense of the people he is supposed to represent. Here’s a man who does not want to go to jail for taking bribes so he votes to allow lobbyist to give “gifts” to Congress(see Bill on government reform below). One would think if he had asked a lawyer he would have learned the difference between a “gift” and a bribe. He voted on keeping “soft” money contributions. Guess he hasn’t yet met a bribe he doesn’t like. I present his voting record, you be the judge.
Bill Frist on Government Reform. sorry, I edited, not good, ‘nuff said Okay so how did he vote on helping the little people who need help paying their medical bills? You guessed it. He voted against the people in every instance when their interest opposed the “gift” giving corporations.
Bill Frist on Health Care. sorry, I edited here again & cut to the chase, his quotes and votes? All bad… I could quote more instances of this shyster ripping off the American people while quoting god and wearing the flag on his lapel. But you get the picture. (dig the word ‘shyster’)
Bill, you say that “The Lawyers’ Party sees these sorts of people, who provide goods and services that people want, as the enemies of America.” I say that the people should be able to receive the goods and services that they want without price manipulation and being poisoned by those goods and services, or having their environment poisoned by the production or disposal of them.
Bill you say “Against whom do Hillary and Obama rail? Pharmaceutical companies, oil companies, hospitals, manufacturers, fast food restaurant chains, large retail businesses, bankers, and anyone producing anything of value in our nation.” I ask you how many of these groups have to be guilty of price manipulation, providing bad goods and services, and polluting the environment? Are you saying that the people can’t have one without the other? Psst…whisper…yes, I think he is, anonz…
Bill, lawyers do what they are trained to do. They represent both sides. Everyone of your businesses have lawyers. Most of the time they employ them to write contracts that give them the upper hand over the little guy who will purchase their goods and services. Why would you deprive the purchaser of a lawyer to insure that he gets what the business man hired a lawyer to say that he is getting. It seems that you are arguing for lawyers for only one side.
Bill, take a breath. Stop for a moment, resist parroting the spiel that the Republican party puts out for the little republican-wanna-be-big-business-man-so-he-impress-his-woman and think for yourself. However, to do that you will FIRST have to read that Constitution that you keep alluding to. Is that why men do dumb s**t, to impress their women?? Seriously??
If you do, you will find that it is about establishing a country of LAWS. Yes, Virginia, the Constitution is about LAWS. Laws that establish how we, the people, will allow our government to govern us. It is not about getting rid of the lawyers, the laws, or the freedoms that those laws are meant to protect.
As for this pathetic spiel “Today, we are drowning in laws; we are contorted by judicial decisions; we are driven to distraction by omnipresent lawyers in all parts of our once private lives. America has a place for laws and lawyers, but that place is modest and reasonable, not vast and unchecked. When the most important decision for our next president is whom he will appoint to the Supreme Court, the role of lawyers and the law in America is too big. When lawyers use criminal prosecution as a continuation of politics by other means, as happened in the lynching of Scooter Libby and Tom Delay, then the power of lawyers in America is too great. When House Democrats sue America in order to hamstring our efforts to learn what our enemies are planning to do to us, then the role of litigation in America has become crushing.” shame on you for not giving credit to the Republican party for providing you with it. I personally helped write some of that bullshit (oh, I’m sorry to hear that…)
By-the-way, the Supreme Court appointments are so important because the Republicans want to legislate from the bench what they can’t get passed in both house of the legislature. Using their judicial appointees they seek to protect their asses from going to jail, to ensure that if the lower courts find against the big money interest, big corporate punitive damages, jerry rigging elections, pole taxes, vote fraud, and ripping the Constitution apart, the bought and paid for Supreme Court appointees will over turn them. This is EXACTLY why I’m voting for Obama…even if it were the only reason, it’s still a great one.
OK, guess we’re going one more day of the ‘sweet pea monologues’ I could end it here, 3 days of good stuff is 3 days of good stuff, but I don’t believe that nonsense of too much of a good thing isn’t good for you…that’s BS, so one more day, I’ll wrap on Friday with comments and maybe some q & a if necessary…
You know how to reach me, or maybe could you post a comment right here? Just click on comments and do your thing, your all anonymous to me. It’s just a thought…and yesterday, I threw that stalking thing in as a spoof/goof, uh yeah, who’d admit that if they really were doing it? Good catch, anonz ; )
Posted by edgy1 
Posted by edgy1 
Posted by edgy1 
Repeating Mr ‘Bill Clinton’s’ remarks…just an FYI…
July 12, 2008On July 3rd I ran an entry that was titled: ‘Your voting 2008, Madaline’s views, and yours?’ I’m running one of the comments today, it was written by ‘Bill Clinton’ (code for republican).
I wanted you to read the entry and this comment first so you have context for the ’sweet pea monologues’ series starting on Monday…
‘Sweet pea’ would be Anonz and he responds to Mr. Bill thoroughly, and bc I want you to enjoy the whole political diatribe in its entirety I wanted you to be able to read BC’s comments first, just so you know where anonz is coming from later next week.
Get ready for some info you all should (and maybe do) know, but the depth of it all is just too good for me to keep to myself : ) thanks anonz for your OK to use your words next week…I did not ask BC for his permission, he’s been kind of quietly absorbing your words I suspect.
…July 3, 2008 at 3:11 am – BC said: The Democrat Party has become the Lawyers’ Party. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are lawyers. Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama are lawyers. John Edwards, the other former Democrat candidate for president, is a lawyer, and so is his wife, Elizabeth. Every Democrat nominee since 1984 went to law school (although Gore did not graduate). Every Democrat vice presidential nominee since 1976, except for Lloyd Bentsen, went to law school. Look at the Democrat Party in Congress: The Majority Leader in each house is a lawyer.
The Republican Party is different. President Bush and Vice President Cheney were not lawyers, but businessmen. The leaders of the Republican Revolution were not lawyers. Newt Gingrich was a history professor; Tom Delay was an exterminator; and, Dick Armey was an economist. House Minority Leader Boehner was a plastic manufacturer, not a lawyer. The former Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist is a heart surgeon.
Who was the last Republican president who was a lawyer? Gerald Ford, who left office 31 years ago and who barely won the Republican nomination as a sitting president, running against Ronald Reagan in 1976. The Republican Party is made up of real people doing real work. The Democrat Party is made up of lawyers. Democrats mock and scorn men who create wealth, like Bush and Cheney, or who heal the sick, like Frist, or who immerse themselves in history, like Gingrich.
The Lawyers’ Party sees these sorts of people, who provide goods and services that people want, as the enemies of America. And, so we have seen the procession of official enemies, in the eyes of the Lawyers’ Party, grow.
Against whom do Hillary and Obama rail? Pharmaceutical companies, oil companies, hospitals, manufacturers, fast food restaurant chains, large retail businesses, bankers, and anyone producing anything of value in our nation.
This is the natural consequence of viewing everything through the eyes of lawyers. Lawyers solve problems by successfully representing their clients, in this case the American people. Lawyers seek to have new laws passed, they seek to win lawsuits, they press appellate courts to overturn precedent, and lawyers always parse language to favor their side.
Confined to the narrow practice of law, that is fine. But it is an awful way to govern a great nation. When politicians as lawyers begin to view some Americans as clients and other Americans as opposing parties, then the role of the legal system in our life becomes all-consuming.
Some Americans become ‘adverse parties’ of our very government. We are not all litigants in some vast social class-action suit. We are citizens of a republic that promises us a great deal of freedom from laws, from courts, and from lawyers.
Today, we are drowning in laws; we are contorted by judicial decisions; we are driven to distraction by omnipresent lawyers in all parts of our once private lives. America has a place for laws and lawyers, but that place is modest and reasonable, not vast and unchecked. When the most important decision for our next president is whom he will appoint to the Supreme Court, the role of lawyers and the law in America is too big. When lawyers use criminal prosecution as a continuation of politics by other means, as happened in the lynching of Scooter Libby and Tom Delay, then the power of lawyers in America is too great. When House Democrats sue America in order to hamstring our efforts to learn what our enemies are planning to do to us, then the role of litigation in America has become crushing.
We cannot expect the Lawyers’ Party to provide real change, real reform, or real hope in America. Most Americans know that a republic in which every major government action must be blessed by nine unelected judges is not what Washington intended in 1789. Most Americans grasp that we cannot fight a war when ACLU lawsuits snap at the heels of our defenders. Most Americans intuit that more lawyers and judges will not restore declining moral values or spark the spirit of enterprise in our economy.
Perhaps Americans will understand that change cannot be brought to our nation by those lawyers who already largely dictate American society and business. Perhaps Americans will see that hope does not come from the mouths of lawyers but from personal dreams nourished by hard work. Perhaps Americans will embrace the truth that more lawyers with more power will only make our problems worse.
Commenters, if you have your own thoughts on this I’d be happy to add them in next week, but perhaps I will hold off on responding until the series is finito so don’t think I’m ignoring you. Are we all good with that?
As per usual, Lmdevin@att.net and/or Lillian@lilliandevin.com, if you would – please use one or the other, thank you!
Have a great weekend and have your thinking caps ready on Monday…Anonz will blow you away ; )