Tuesday, December 16, 2008

Who's Pet Goat?

Steve Chapman is calling it Obama's "My Pet Goat" moment.

But Gov. Blagojevich is hardly a airliner crashing into the World Trade Center.

Which means his taking so long to respond to Blago's indictment reflects even more poorly on the President Elect.

6 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Steve Chapman's an idiot to make such a comparison. Obama has been asked by the Justice Dept to hold back as it could interfere with the investigation.
Compare that to Bush who claimed no one in his Administration was involved in the Plame leak. Except they were and the fought the investigation.

December 16, 2008 at 12:48 PM 
Blogger steve mcdonald said...

OK, now that we got anon-iano's changing of the subject comment out of the way, my turn...


When all is said and done, I think we're going to find that Obama had zero involvement in this one. Sure, he sent the governor's office a memo recommending some approved suitors, but what's wrong with that? It's normal party politics as far as I'm concerned, and its not as if the governor was going to select a Republican, anyway.

My only wish is that that scumbag Rahm Emmanuel is somehow involved. Man, I'd love to get him in a boxing ring...

December 16, 2008 at 1:15 PM 
Anonymous r said...

The reaction from fellow Illinois Democrats was swift and severe.

Was.
Now it’s looking like they’re backpedaling and could let him fill the seat after all just to prevent the Repubs from maybe taking it in a special election.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=ajp3kuscJCn0

Ah, LibDems, always viciously partisan at the expense of the nation…

December 16, 2008 at 1:40 PM 
Anonymous Aaron Proctor said...

Oh yeah, 9/11.

The Liberal Media made me almost forget about it.

That's the day that Bush became supreme ruler of the world and forced people to go to church, right?

December 16, 2008 at 7:15 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Keeping the seat in the hands of a Democrat with Obama's policies (rather than risking a Republican elected in a backlash) isn't "at the expense of the nation". It's in the best interest of the Illinois voters that wanted Obama as their Senator originally, and in the best interests of the nation.

December 17, 2008 at 12:23 AM 
Anonymous r said...

Such a "backlash" would just represent change people want, much as they voted for Obama as backlash against Bush. ;)

Anyway, the point once again is that the Lying LibDonkeys said one thing and then went back on it and will do the opposite out of raw partisanship. And that's not very change-y or bi-partisan unity-y.

December 17, 2008 at 12:34 PM 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home