House Democrats issued a strongly worded motion condemning Rep. Darrell Issa for his thuggish behavior. If you haven’t heard about it already, Dana Milbank provides detailed account of what happened yesterday at the House Oversight and Government Reform panel at which Issa made goons seem genteel.
Joan Walsh provides some information I did not know:
Issa had once again called former IRS supervisor Lois Lerner to testify before the committee, knowing she was going to again use her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. But what Issa didn’t reveal is that Lerner’s attorney had offered last month to share her answers to the committee’s questions via what’s called a “proffer.†That’s when the subject of an investigation reveals the rough outlines of what they know, which can also help determine whether they deserve immunity from prosecution (in order to get them to share more). But Issa rejected the proffer and staged a show trial designed to have Lerner take the Fifth again, in front of television cameras and a packed hearing room.
The Republicans ought to be embarrassed, but of course, they aren’t.
Embarrassment requires having a conscience; having a conscience requires being human; they don’t qualify.
Let’s not be so hard on Issa; he gives hope to all car thief/insurance fraudsters that there’s (lucrative) life after their lives of crime.
That was not a good show for Issa. I would figure that no matter what side of the political divide a person falls on, that that kind of obnoxious and arrogant behavior displayed by Issa wouldn’t be viewed favorably by anybody who has any respect for basic decency.
I might be carrying some perception baggage from the 60’s, but I don’t think it will bode well for Issa to be seen beating down the cries of a man who only asks to be heard. And especially of a man of Elijah Cummings stature whose history is steeped in the struggle for justice and to give voice to those who historically have been denied their voice in America. Bad move in my eyes, Issa!
Issa seems to be the point man in the GOP pseudo-scandal patrol. “When I die, I’ll go to heaven, because I have served my time on the Benghazi investigation committee”
This is a trend among conservatives I find more disturbing than their deeds – suppressing dissenting views. This a galaxy apart from presenting your view with nl the evidence that supports your position. Politicos have done that since before Caesar. Parliamentary procedure – the process by which meetings are conducted, is built around the cardinal concept tat all views should be heard before a vote is cast. The cloture rule (and filibuster) stem from this concept.
My grown nephew is switching jobs from 3 terms in the Army to studying with Liberty U – and be a minister. he unfriended me on Facebook for putting up a differing view when he was conducting evangelizing via posts. Those of you who are familiar with my tripe know I am polite – no surprise to you that I often used New Testament verses to make my point, or asked for verses to support a bigoted opinion. Save thinks he’s open because he will entertain private discussion, but he is opposed to public dissent.
“Uncle Doug, I’ve already told you that you can contact me personally to have a theological talk. I’ve been polite. Now I’m telling you:
STOP INJECTING YOUR RELIGIOUS OPINIONS INTO MY POSTS
This is your last chance. I’ve been patient.”
On this point we must push back – in any public discussion, it’s wrong – seriously wrong to suppress a dissenting view. The move to quash public opinions or facts which contradict the narrative is deliberate and a serious threat. It’s more exciting to discuss the subject than process, but if we lose on this point of process, we will find it hard to win on any critical subject.
Issa:
A Minor League politician.
A Major League Asshole.
A Hall of Fame sociopathic Douche-canoe.
Grand Theft Issa wanted to be governor of California a decade ago. He engineered the recall movement against Gray Davis, planning that he would be the Repuke default candidate to ride the wave into office when it succeeded. Instead the Repukes ditched him for Arnold.
Wow, that’s a creepy statement. It reeks of patriarchal arrogance and total stupidity to boot. Evidently they have no concept of what constitutes a marital relationship. If they are implying that virginity holds any real value beyond it’s expiration date then they are in for a big surprise. Enter into and maintain? What kind of a Taliban fantasy is that?
Today I am celebrating 39 years of marriage. So I think I can speak with some authority about desired martial relationships. If any couple enters into a relationship with the idea that accountability to that relationship should extend to a point prior to the formation of that relationship…Then you’ll never succeed in that relationship. Simply because you’re trying to control something that never belonged to you and never can belong to you.
How’s that for some heavy duty thinking? See, now you know why I’m the Swami. 🙂
CONGRATS TO SWAMI AND HIS MRS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
How she was able to stand him for 39 years, is a testimony to her as a loving and caring person! 😉