Screen Shot 2018-12-16 at 12.31.37 PM
Your host, PM 'Papa' Carpenter
Biden

***

  • ***

********


« The "Thirty Years War" is taken | Main | Tonight's report cards »

April 26, 2007

Comments

WELL SAID

NOW... AS I WILL DO... EVERYONE WHO READS THIS SHOULD SEND A COPY TO THEIR SENATORS AT

http://www.senate.gov/

our leaders need to know what we believe and what we expect, they ARE politicians, leading our parade

done!

Done -- Senators Kennedy and Kerry. Shall we go for a full set?

Well said indeed. And here's a collateral attack germane to the Cause Progressive: a pathetically simple question that, thus far, has gone utterly "unasked". Why? Not even "our side" seems motivated or interested. Why? Can you imagine if the issue favored the Wingnuts? They'd have beaten "us" senseless with it.

LESS MISS MANNERS, MORE TOM PAINE!

THE QUESTION IS THIS (TO BE ASKED "FOR THE RECORD" OF THE BUSH WAR CABINET AND ALL POTENTIAL IN$IDE PLAYA$ ONE BY ONE: "Yes" or "No" (Tennet, Rove, Bremer, Card):

WOULD YOU AGREE, FOR LIFE, TO SURRENDER ON DEMAND, ANY PERSONAL PROFIT, CONNECTED TO ANY WAR OR BLOODSHED ON YOUR WATCH, DISCOVERED OR EXPOSED, 'DELIBERATE' OR "UNINTENTIONAL" (re: "anybody want some wood" --Bush in debate (nervously) on potential confict-of-interest question / presidential portfolia)?

'YES' OR 'NO'...

Why can't this question be even editorially or 'rhetorically' posed? are we progressives that polite, submissive, passive-aggressive? is it (an ongoing) failure of imagination? of nerve? can no one savor at least the "awkwardness" of Cheney "cornered" on having to respond? even if only "indirectly"--i.e., Bluff Quitzer (aka Wolf Blitzer) asking: "would you share your thoughts on the CONCEPT sir...for example, do you feel this would violate your rights as a Public Servant in a Free Market Economy?

WARJONE$: DEBAIT THE HOOK

Yes or No (For Life)

TRUTH TO POWER:

Healthy for the Media,
Good for Democracy--

Bad for "Our Due" Mind$et
Public Servants

MORAL MULTI-TASKING:

~A Question of Courage
in a Measure of Character~

~For the Asking!

Reposted July '06 @:

http://www.kyndmusic.com/2006/07/01/artist-general-warning-recusal-question-bad-for-bush/

Well said indeed. And here's a collateral attack germane to the Cause Progressive: a pathetically simple question that, thus far, has gone utterly "unasked". Why? Not even "our side" seems motivated or interested. Why? Can you imagine if the issue favored the Wingnuts? They'd have beaten "us" senseless with it.

LESS MISS MANNERS, MORE TOM PAINE!

THE QUESTION IS THIS (TO BE ASKED "FOR THE RECORD" OF THE BUSH WAR CABINET AND ALL POTENTIAL IN$IDE PLAYA$ ONE BY ONE: "Yes" or "No" (Tennet, Rove, Bremer, Card):

WOULD YOU AGREE, FOR LIFE, TO SURRENDER ON DEMAND, ANY PERSONAL PROFIT, CONNECTED TO ANY WAR OR BLOODSHED ON YOUR WATCH, DISCOVERED OR EXPOSED, 'DELIBERATE' OR "UNINTENTIONAL" (re: "anybody want some wood" --Bush in debate (nervously) on potential confict-of-interest question / presidential portfolia)?

'YES' OR 'NO'...

Why can't this question be even editorially or 'rhetorically' posed? are we progressives that polite, submissive, passive-aggressive? is it (an ongoing) failure of imagination? of nerve? can no one savor at least the "awkwardness" of Cheney "cornered" on having to respond? even if only "indirectly"--i.e., Bluff Quitzer (aka Wolf Blitzer) asking: "would you share your thoughts on the CONCEPT sir...for example, do you feel this would violate your rights as a Public Servant in a Free Market Economy?

WARJONE$: DEBAIT THE HOOK

Yes or No (For Life)

TRUTH TO POWER:

Healthy for the Media,
Good for Democracy--

Bad for "Our Due" Mind$et
Public Servants

MORAL MULTI-TASKING:

~A Question of Courage
in a Measure of Character~

~For the Asking!

Reposted July '06 @:

http://www.kyndmusic.com/2006/07/01/artist-general-warning-recusal-question-bad-for-bush/

The comments to this entry are closed.