Another Massachusetts Moonbat

A very wise and well known religious figure told us "out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks." I find this is a wonderful guide for judging our leaders.

Recently, one of our Congressmen put his brain on hold and spewed forth what was in his heart. John Olver D-Massachusetts described Republicans in this way - "They are nihilists. They are jihadists."

What inspired this vitriol? Here is part of the article from CQ.com:

This year’s appropriations tug-of-war between a new majority in Congress and a president of the opposing party does not appear to be headed for a government shutdown, but a rhetorical taboo was lifted when the word became part of the partisan message of the moment.

“The obvious plan of the Democrats is to not do appropriations bills but put everything together in a giant omnibus appropriations bill in a kind of legislative blackmail with all of the policy and increased spending, to in effect threaten the president to either sign the bill or be accused of shutting down the government,” Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona, the chairman of the Republican Conference, said Wednesday.

President Bush has threatened to veto seven appropriations bills because together they would exceed his discretionary spending limit by more than $20 billion.

Congressional veterans are certain the two sides are headed for a whopper of a fight over a catchall, omnibus appropriations bill.

Democratic leaders insist, however, that they really want separate bills to pass and that they prefer to avoid an omnibus.

“That is not our intention at all,” said Senate Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin, D-Ill. “If they want to cooperate with us and bring the bills to the floor, we have six or seven bills that have cleared committee. We’re ready to move.”

So, because Republicans won't bend over and take the Democrat koolaid on spending, Olver thinks they are Jihadists? What an ignorant man. Here is his voting record as a Representative. Here's more on his voting record. He's also been a Representative since 1991 - that makes him a poster child for term limits, too!

Here is something else John Olver believes:

He is deeply concerned whether we will actually have an election in Nov. '08, as he believes this administration will likely strike Iran from the air, declare a national emergency, and cancel the '08 elections.

Moonbat, anyone??

Do you ever feel sorry for the citizens of Massachusetts? They have Kennedy, Kerry, ......and Olver!

Radiant

A big whiff of a double standard

Despite Ann Coulter's recent verbal faux pas, she makes a point about something that has had me wondering for a while. Why do prominent Democrats get off the hook when they commit crimes, and Scooter Libby has to do hard time for not remembering who gave him information about a covert agent who was not covert? Is it that we expect Democrats to ride on a list of shady and unethical behavior, and that we expect Republicans to have clean reputations?

The list of Democrats is long and notorious: Teddy Kennedy abandoning his "girl of the night" and letting her drown, Patrick Kennedy's wild ride under the influence of booze and meds, William Jefferson's $90,000 of bribe money in the freezer, Harry Reid's questionable land deals in which the 'take' was larger than Abramoff's, or Sandy Burger's deliberate and poorly hidden plot of stealing classified materials and stuffing them in his underwear and socks so he could destroy them.

Why the double standard? Even in academia, those who espouse liberal causes get away with saying the most outrageous things, whereas conservatives are drummed down and even out.

Are the American people so cowed and fearful that we might offend others if we stand against obvious ethical lapses? Or have we lost our will to care and to correct this imbalance?

I would love to hear what you think.

UPDATE:
Good Follow Up Reading:

A Verdict on the Wilson Affair

More Than a Little Presumptuous

An interesting story came across the news wires today. Some top Democratic leaders are already planning a continuing political career for Bill Clinton should his wife, Hillary, become the President of the United States. Paul Begala and Larry Sabato believe Bill would make a wonderful senatorial replacement in New York as Hilary would have to vacate her seat in the middle of a term.

This possibility should raise not a few eyebrows. There are several things to consider:

Isn't this presumptuous of Democratic leadership? What about the will of the people of New York? The governor of New York, Eliot Spitzer, is the one who will make the choice - not the DNC or the Clinton machine.

From the article:

So far, speculation about potential successors has focused on New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo and environmental lawyer Robert F. Kennedy Jr., whose father once held the same Senate seat.

The other concern is the compromise of the balance of powers in American government. If Hillary is chosen by the American people to be President, and Bill is appointed to finish her Senate term, there will be the appearance of nepotism. Also, will Bill's fellow senators be afraid of working with him because of the power he may wield as the husband of the President? He will never be treated like a freshman Senator. There is no precedent for this type of situation. Additionally, senators who were involved in the impeachment proceedings are still in office in the Senate. What will his relationship with them be like? In the Senate, it is necessary to work out compromises for legislation to be passed. The rules of the Senate foster a spirit of debate. Senators need a sense of collegiality to work together, and it is likely that giving Bill Clinton a Senate seat would stifle the process because of the fear and awe he would inspire. Mostly fear, unfortunately.

I would not be pleased with this situation if it were happening with a Republican presidential hopeful and spouse.

I would love to know what my readers think about this. Please leave a comment.