The Michigan Republican Party announced it has hired Hartland Township resident Allan Filip as the new director of field operations.
Livingston County residents will remember Filip as the chair of the Livingston County Republican Party, and in the two years he was the chair the political debate in Livingston County took a decidedly ugly turn since Filip took over as chair of the party. It began when he was named as the chair and the press was barred from the county GOP convention.
Under his “leadership,” he attempted to politicize nonpartisan elections, improperly tried to influence a bond issue and made a false accusation that the county Democrats carried signs depicting “hate speech” in the Melonfest parade.
We see what it takes to succeed in the GOP.
17 comments:
Gotta luv that wingnut welfare.
It just shows that the nastier and less truthful you can be moves you up the GOP ladder.
Speaking of moving up the ladder with lies and nastinest, when are you going to try your spin on the Nancy Pelosi disaster?
Seems Pelosi was OK with waterboarding...that is before she was against it.
Watching her try to squirm out of this one is similar to how Billy Bubba Clinton tried to parse the meaning of "is" and said "I did not have sex with that woman."
She seems to be basing her entire defense on the fact that a) she wasn't in the room when she was told there was waterboarding, and b) when she was in the room, they only said it was approved.
So one of her close aides told her in 2003 that waterboarding was going on and she knew herself that it was approved and she immediately expressed outrage -- 6 years later.
What a clown. She is a disaster for this country.
I already addressed that under the thread where the chair of the county GOP defends torture that shut you up, brett.
One more time for you, brett:
Turns out you are wrong again, brett. Pelosi was told only that “enhanced interrogation techniques” - whatever that is - could be used, not that they already had been used, and that it was legal. The lesson here is never trust or believe a Bush. Pelosi never knew the bushies were using weatherboarding until the public knew.
Here’s a link, even though you never supply one:
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/05/08/1926903.aspx
I stand by what I wrote about Murphy’s disgusting defense of torture. Those that authorized it should be brought to justice.
“Billy Bubba Clinton?” Gee, why am I not surprised you have a delusional hatred of Nancy Pelosi, brett.
Are you not keeping up on your reading? An aide of Pelosi's was told in 2003 that waterboarding was being used. That aide told Pelosi. That's why she -- ala Clinton -- is parsing her words so carefully. She is careful to say that she was never in a hearing room when she was specifically told that waterboarding was being used. But she knew, because her aide was in the hearing and her aide told her.
I think you are stretching things when you criticize an undersheriff, who has no control over torture, and ignore the involvement of the now Speaker, who could have done something.
She is covering her behind...and you lemmings will accept her lies.
Even if what you are claiming is true, what could she have done to stop it? Second, I was under the impression these were classified briefings and revealing what was said was classified until it was declassified.
No, I stand by what I wrote about the chair of the county GOP: anyone who condones and defends torture is disgusting and un-American.
Pelosi has said repeatedly that she never knew that waterboarding was going on. But she was lying. She knew since 2003. I know it doesn't matter to you when Democrats lie, but it should.
She wouldn't take a stand because she was either in favor or it, and now switches her position for the sake of popularity...or she was not brave enough to make a stand 6 years ago when she first learned of it. In that way, she's like Hillary who voted for the war because she didn't want to take a chance that it would be successful and a "no" vote would have killed her political ambitions. About as cynical as you can get.
But you go ahead and get worked up about a guy who seems to have written the letter solely to yank your chain.
By her silence, nancy pelosi condoned torture. By your definition, she is disgusting and un-American. Finally, we can agree.
Man, talk about twisted logic, brett; your ridiculous argument is a textbook example.
Speaker Pelosi has said repeatedly that she never knew that waterboarding was going on, and that is true. You are, again, the one who is lying, brett.
Like I said, even if your lie were true, she was not able to divulge the content of a classified briefing. When you say Hillary, I’m assuming you mean the Secretary of State. Secretary Clinton made the mistake too many peoples made in her vote: believing Bush.
I’m flattered that the chair of the Livingston County Grand Oil Party wrote a letter just to “yank my chain,” but that’s just not true. He defended torture, and that is disgusting and un-American.
Ah yes, good ol' Murph.
That editorial was a hoot! He threw in every Limbaugh National Committee talking point into it and made himself look like a complete ass.
Yep, the party of failure has some original thinkers, as long as someone is telling them how to think.
You have way too big of an ego. I didn't mean that he was trying to yank your chain specifically. I meant that he was yanking the chains of nonthinking Democratic clones of which you are one.
I'm not defending waterboarding or torture. Heck, even Jesse Ventura says it was torture and he says it was not effective.
But you conveniently buy in to Pelosi's spin. She knew about it...so did numbers of leading Democrats. One of which...a rival of Pelosi's...wrote a letter of protest. Pelosi not only didn't write such a letter; she declined to have her name associated with it.
Here's the deal. These Dems were silenced because the administration successfully used the threat of another 9/11 to justify torture and to suppress dissent. Pelosi and a number of her equally lame colleagues willingly gave in, and in so doing forfeited their oversight responsibilities, both as members of Congress and as loyal members of the opposing party.
Now that it's safe, Pelosi is coming out of her coward's hole to say that she is shocked -- shocked -- to learn that there was waterboarding going on. She knew it all the time.
That administration's use of fear to justify the un-justifiable is not new. In World War II, your patron saint FDR kidnapped thousands of people, stole their homes and imprisoned them for years. Their sin? They were American citizens but their skin color wasn't as white as the president's. The justification? The Japanese had bombed Pearl Harbor and were our enemies. Notice that he didn't have any similar treatment for our German (white-skinned) enemies.
I don't accept governmental abuse from either party. You are fine with it as long as a Democrat is in control. Bid difference.
What? That’s exactly what I said: I don’t have a big ego because I said “I’m flattered that the chair of the Livingston County Grand Oil Party wrote a letter just to “yank my chain.” You could have said to yank our chains, brett, but you didn’t. Your hero Murphy’s letter was just a rehash of talking points to try and justify the Bush war crimes, not to yank any chains.
Your line of reason is incorrect. First, The Speaker was told it may be used. Second, look at the flack President Obama is taking for releasing the memo confirming torture was used. He’s being accused of making the country less safe by releasing the fact torture occurred, like your boy Murphy you continue to defend. Murphy wrote, “According to The Weekly Standard, Obama has released classified intelligence to our enemies regarding the amount of coercive interrogation tactics the United States is willing to use.”
Could you imagine the backlash against Nancy Pelosi if she had said anything about how the bushies planned to legalize torture? After the world already knows, Obama is being called a traitor by idiots like Murphy for telling us what we already know.
I disagree with your spin on FDR, and who ever said he was a saint? It was a fear held by the entire country. The Justice Department refused to allow illegal searches of Japanese Americans, and the FBI concluded that the security threat was only a perceived one. However, public opinion didn’t support that view, and the fear of espionage led to Japanese-Americans on the west coast being removed. It was wrong, but I don’t see what it has to do with the debate on torture or the chair of the county party being promoted for lies and spin.
Give me a break. You defend every single misdeed by your bankrupt party.
Still more lies from the guru:
1. my "bankrupt party?" Which party would that be? I don't recall ever stating a party preference. Your paranoia leads you to label as a Republican anyone who disputes some of your silly claims. You can be an idiot, and I can be a Democrat, a Republican or a Socialist.
2. "Defend every single misdeed?" Name one misdeed I've defended. When I note the callous lying and spinning of Pelosi, that's not the same thing as defending torture. That's merely pointing out the crass and craven nature of the House speaker.
Speaking of Ms. I-was-fine-with-waterboard-before-I-was-against-it...I've lost track of her current position. Is she still calling the CIA a bunch of liars, or has she switched that position? Has she explained why her colleague could oppose waterboarding but not her? For that matter, who do you think spoke out against waterboarding first: Pelosi or McCain (the same one you made fun of because of his age). The guy you called Grampy spoke out publicly against waterboarding years before your beloved Pelosi.
She wouldn't go out on a public limb because either a) she was scared of what the terrorists might do next, b) she didn't want to be on the wrong side in case torture worked or there was another attack, c) she waited until it was politically safe to take a stand. Answer: d) all of the above.
1. Stop playing dumb, brett; you really don’t have to.
2. Torture.
Nancy Pelosi has been very consistent in her position opposing torture. She’s not calling the CIA liars, she said they were mistaken. After all, who could ever believe a spy agency could not tell the truth.
The conservative media reports are based on CIA records describing a September 4, 2002, briefing that, according to the news, “show Pelosi was given a description of the particular enhanced interrogation techniques that had been employed on Al Qaeda operative Abu Zubaydah.” But CIA Director Leon Panetta said in a letter accompanying the report that the documents may not be "an accurate summary of what actually happened.
http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/2009-05-06-reyes-eit-letter0001.pdf
My problem with Grampy McSame was he was too old to run the country, and his policies were the same as the person who put the country into the mess. As a career Navy professional, I have always respected his service, just like John Kerry’s. He was right about speaking out about weatherboarding years before Pelosi. It was torture in World War II, during the Vietnam era and today. When McCain spoke out against it, no one knew it was going on.
It took you long enough, but you admitted that McCain criticized torture long before Pelosi and that she was late to the party. Congrats on that.
Pelosi is spinning so fast I'm amazed she can stand up...you too. She clearly criticized the CIA and then, realizing her error, later said people shouldn't be criticizing the CIA; they should be critical of Bush. Nice try, but she blew it. (Argument collapsing on itself...she said don't criticize CIA when she was the one doing it.)
She knew about it. You all but concede that when you try to justify her silence because it was a classified briefing.
She and several Dems knew about it but either approved or didn't have the courage to make a stand until they knew which way the wind was blowing. Typical of politicians. Unfortunately, backboneless Dems such as Pelosi and Clinton are now in key positions.
I can accept your not liking McCain's positions, but why do you nail his age? Is it your position that anyone his age or older is too old for important political positions? Sounds like ageism to me. Do you hold Dems to the same standard?
I knew your type was anti-black and anti-woman...now you don't like old people either. Wow.
Wow, talk about spin and jumping to conclusions based on your own imagination. This is over the top even for you, brett. It “took me long enough?” McCain has been against torture and water boarding since the ‘70s, so I’m not sure what I “finally admitted.” I never denied it, you did. Most civilized people are against torture, but not Bush and Cheney and people like you and Murphy defending it.
Once again, she said the CIA was mistaken, and that possibility was supported by the CIA Director. The fact is this is just a side issue trying to divert attention away from the fact that the Bush Administration authorized torture.
Even if Democrats knew it was going on, how would they have stopped it?
McCain was applying for the most stressful job in the world. I didn’t think he was up to it, and I still don’t. His age was just one factor. But the biggest factor was his opponent.
I am neither anti-black, anti-woman or anti-age, and that is just one more example of you making stuff up out of thin air.
I thought you weren’t going to comment here anymore, brett, after the whining and crying you did over at LivingBlue.
You are amazing. You say McCain was too old and his policies were too much like G.W. Bush. But you were so happy when Arlen switched parties that you wet your pants.
But Arlen is older than McCain and, if anything, is closer to Bush policies than McCain has ever been.
So your big victory in PA is to get a so-called Democrat who is actually more republican than the great American you dismissed because of your age discrimination.
Had you been a POW, Nancy Pelosi would have been against your torture...but not until 7 years after you were tortured. She's a brave lady.
You are amazing, brett. You want to keep bring up old shit. Like I said before, McCain was applying for the most stressful job in the world. I didn’t think he was up to it, and I still don’t. His age was just one factor. But the biggest factor was his opponent. I wouldn’t vote for Arlen Specter either, unless he was running against George Bush. If John McCain wanted to join the Democratic Caucus, I would welcome him with open arms. Democrats have a big tent, and there is room for lots of people. There are pro-Choice Democrats and pro-Life Democrats. Try and find a Pro-Choice Republican. I’m sure there are some out there but the head of the GOP is trying to get rid of them.
Both McCain and Specter are moderates, and I don’t agree with them on much. But I would prefer them in our tent pissing out than outside pissing in.
I was happy that Specter joined the Democrat Party, like so many other Americans who dumped the Grand Oil Party, but I was “so happy when Arlen switched parties that you wet my pants” is ridiculous.
Your last sentence makers no sense, brett. She was against it when she found out about it, and she had as much power to stop the NVA from torturing as she had in stopping the bushies, the real criminals.
Post a Comment