The real reason ABC dropped Bill Maher's show
ABC dropped "Politically Incorrect" soon after Maher's idiotic comment about American military forces being "cowards" (because we use cruise missiles versus jihadists who commit suicide). More fundamentally, ABC dropped his show because Maher is a fool.
Case in point: I had finished watching the latest Sopranos episode tonight on HBO On Demand, and when I switched to the main HBO channel, I caught Maher blabbering about the "Karl Rove attack arm" of the White House. He claimed that "previous administrations" never used these "tricks" such as "outing a spy" and firing federal prosecutors, because "they had too much integrity."
Say this in your best Captain Kirk voice: "Right." (From the scene in Star Trek VI where he answers Chang and Kerla with the dryness of a properly made martini.) If Maher believes his own rubbish that previous administrations never resorted to political tricks and games, he's either incredibly stupid or incredibly naïve. I lean toward the former.
I'm not saying the Bush administration is guiltless, but these are ridiculous accusations when there are worse things to worry about. Valerie Plame was so well-known as a non-covert CIA employee that the only resulting conviction was Scooter Libby for the trumped-up charge of "lying to investigators." That's the new trick these days, which worked all too well with Martha Stewart: when no other charge will stick, file a trumped-up charge of "lying to investigators," get a bunch of witnesses to give fuzzy testimony, and get a jury to convict based on how much they hate the person instead of whether the person is guilty of an actual crime.
Also, the nature of federal prosecutors' jobs is that they are employed at the pure pleasure of the executive branch. The firings need to be justified, well, as much as any of our superiors need to justify letting us go. And if the America people don't accept "performance reasons," then they can demonstrate it at the ballot box. The moonbats accuse the Bush Administration of firing prosecutors to shut down investigations of Republicans, conveniently omitting that, uh, Duke Cunningham was still convicted.
The firings are perhaps the biggest red herring yet about the Bush Administration. Let's be candid: Bush & Co. did well to push for tax cuts, but they've committed many sins against the Constitution, not the least of which is the NSA's warrantless surveillance. Gonzales has defended the wiretapping and should be booted for just his comments, since as the federal government's chief prosecutor he should be completely familiar and compliant with the Constitution. Or is the oath to "protect and defend the Constitution" meaningless?
Case in point: I had finished watching the latest Sopranos episode tonight on HBO On Demand, and when I switched to the main HBO channel, I caught Maher blabbering about the "Karl Rove attack arm" of the White House. He claimed that "previous administrations" never used these "tricks" such as "outing a spy" and firing federal prosecutors, because "they had too much integrity."
Say this in your best Captain Kirk voice: "Right." (From the scene in Star Trek VI where he answers Chang and Kerla with the dryness of a properly made martini.) If Maher believes his own rubbish that previous administrations never resorted to political tricks and games, he's either incredibly stupid or incredibly naïve. I lean toward the former.
I'm not saying the Bush administration is guiltless, but these are ridiculous accusations when there are worse things to worry about. Valerie Plame was so well-known as a non-covert CIA employee that the only resulting conviction was Scooter Libby for the trumped-up charge of "lying to investigators." That's the new trick these days, which worked all too well with Martha Stewart: when no other charge will stick, file a trumped-up charge of "lying to investigators," get a bunch of witnesses to give fuzzy testimony, and get a jury to convict based on how much they hate the person instead of whether the person is guilty of an actual crime.
Also, the nature of federal prosecutors' jobs is that they are employed at the pure pleasure of the executive branch. The firings need to be justified, well, as much as any of our superiors need to justify letting us go. And if the America people don't accept "performance reasons," then they can demonstrate it at the ballot box. The moonbats accuse the Bush Administration of firing prosecutors to shut down investigations of Republicans, conveniently omitting that, uh, Duke Cunningham was still convicted.
The firings are perhaps the biggest red herring yet about the Bush Administration. Let's be candid: Bush & Co. did well to push for tax cuts, but they've committed many sins against the Constitution, not the least of which is the NSA's warrantless surveillance. Gonzales has defended the wiretapping and should be booted for just his comments, since as the federal government's chief prosecutor he should be completely familiar and compliant with the Constitution. Or is the oath to "protect and defend the Constitution" meaningless?
posted by Perry Eidelbus at
11:34 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home