Daily Archives: November 1, 2005

Howard Dean – Alito, Libby and Cheney

Alan Colmes interviewed Howard Dean on Hannity and Colmes last night.

My comments in maroon, all italics mine.

Political teen has the video

Alan Colmes: What’s your reaction to the nomination of Alito?

Howard Dean: Ah, a couple of reactions. First of all I think it shows the President’s weakness. The extreme right of the party seems to be driving the judicial nominations process and I think that’s unfortunate. Secondly, we still wonder when the President’s going to ask Karl Rove to resign since he’s now been identified by the special prosecutor as the person who leaked the name. So, this all comes, uh, as kind of a, at kind of a difficult time. Uh, I don’t. I think the President’s really using this as a distraction right now to get away from his ethical troubles.

{Mr. Dean, what does Karl Rove have to do with reaction to Alito’s nomination? You just cited one reaction to Alito and then went off on a total tangent. Also, when did Patrick Fitzgerald identify Karl Rove as the person who leaked the information? I checked the Special Prosecutor’s website again and there are no new press releases there. Just the links for the indictments and the press release of Friday, October 28, 2005. I did a search of both documents and Karl Rove’s name does not appear in either.}

Alan Colmes: I want to get to Rove and the indictment in a moment, but I want to ask you what, do you know the level of consultation this administration had, with democrats, before the nomination?

Howard Dean: None. Ah, I’ve talked to Senator Reid and apparently there was no consultation whatsoever with any democrat that we know of. So I think it’s, this nomination is going to be in trouble. Um, ah, Judge Alito is apparently a nice person, but he’s got some pretty extreme rulings. For example, he, uh, in a dissent said that he didn’t think congress had the right to regulate the sale of machine guns. Ah, he held that, ah, in a very specific search warrant, where the police went in, could search a house and a guy suspected of something, they also strip searched his ten-year-old daughter and his wife, which was not in the warrant and Judge Alito didn’t see much trouble in that. A lot of sexual harassment cases and disability cases where the judge raised a very, very high standard of proof, including some really gross discrimination, so I won’t read it on your show.

{Julian Sanchez of Reason has rebuttals to most of these talking points which are also being used by Think Progress and the Center for American Progress}

Alan Colmes: Do you expect there could be a filibuster in this case?

Howard Dean: I think it’s much too early to tell that. I think we need to know a lot more. But the preliminary findings are that Judge Alito is well outside the mainstream of what most Americans believe the courts should be doing. And I think we’ll have to see to learn more about that.

{As I said in a post below, the dems and media are defining mainstream to mean anything that agrees with their worldview}

Alan Colmes: What could he say during confirmation hearings to convince you and other democrats that he is worthy of the job?

Howard Dean: Well I think he, we should find out if he believes that, uh, the courts ought to be used for, to stop discrimination against people. I think we ought to find out to what extent he believes that the police have a right to do anything they want. I think we ought to find out to what extent he thinks firearms ought to be regulated by the federal government, if at all. And I think we ought to find out whether he believes that a woman has a right to make up her own mind about her healthcare, or whether the government should do that for her.

{a woman’s healthcare = abortion on demand, any time, for any reason, at any age}

Alan Colmes: Is it your belief that the President chose today to make this choice as a distraction from the indictment news?

Howard Dean: Oh sure. But the indictment is not going to go away. The President promised he would fire anyone who leaked. Karl Rove has now been shown to have leaked, even though he wasn’t charged with a crime. This is a big ethical problem for the President. The President gave us his word that he would fire anyone who leaked. So far he hasn’t done that. We’re waiting to see if the President will keep his word.

{Hey Howie, do you have the press release? It still isn’t on the Special Prosecutor’s website}

Alan Colmes: Well, there have been three different standards. First, McClellan said anybody involved in, then he said if anybody leaked, then if anybody committed a crime. Are you calling for the resignation of Karl Rove?

Howard Dean: Absolutely. Karl Rove has no business having a security clearance having now been established as a leaker by the special prosecutor. As I say, he wasn’t charged with a crime, what he did was, not, certainly unethical. And he ought not to have a security clearance and he ought not to be working and being paid for by the taxpayers’ money.

{Howie, it still isn’t on the Special Prosecutor’s website}

Alan Colmes: What do you think the democrats need to do? I mean, the argu, the criticism of democrats is usually well there’s no vision, no unified message. What do the democrats need to do at this point to convince the American people that their vision is a better vision?

Howard Dean: Oh I think we do have a vision and we do have a unified message. The first vision is we want honesty in government. We have seen a culture of corruption that’s been brought to Washington and by state capitols like California and Minnesota, uh, and, uh, uh others. Ohio being the worst, by republican governments. We need to change that, we will change that. We’ll put in tough ethics legislation that will have to be complied with by people in our party, not just the re, opposite party.

Secondly, we want a balanced budget. We want jobs in this country to stay in this country. We want somebody to balance the books. We haven’t seen a republican do that for forty years.

Third, we want a healthcare system that covers everybody.

Fourth, we want a strong public education system and we want, we want a strong defense. We want a real strong defense that depends on telling the truth to our allies and telling the truth to the parents of soldiers who are being sent abroad to fight for America.

{Firstly, see No Agenda and Gateway Pundit to see the culture of corruption that exists in the democrat party. I would be happy to see tough ethics legislation if I could be absolutely sure that it would also cover democrats. Let’s start with stopping the fight over requiring picture ID to vote.

Secondly, a balanced budget would be great, but you dems would have to give up a lot pork and entitlements.

Thirdly, healthcare for everyone. Well. As noted above women’s healthcare means abortion, so you want abortion for everyone? Does that include the aborted?

Fourthly, we want a strong public education system too. That means actually teaching our children and getting rid of teachers that can not do that.

Fourthly part two, a real strong defense equals telling the truth to allies and the parents of soldiers?

UPDATE: I have to add something here. Why is it that only the parents of soldiers are indicated here? Why not the spouses and children of soldiers? Oh yeah, it’s the Cindy Sheehan wing speaking. All soldiers are just little kids that have been misled into volunteering in the United States Armed Forces. All the soldiers are children first.}

Alan Colmes: Do you think there should be a broader investigation, we’ve had Gerald Nadler on our show for example, referring to criminal statutes that call, that basically state, that you are prohibited from making false and fraudulent claims to congress. Some democrats have said that there should be a larger investigation to the conspiracy to move us toward war. Do you believe that should be the case?

Howard Dean: Well, I’m not so sure about that although if there is such a thing, it’ll be in the Vice President’s office. And I do think there needs to be more investigation in the Vice President’s office. One of the things established by the special prosecutor in the indictment is that Vice President Cheney was the source of Scooter Libbity’s, Libby’s knowledge about who the CIA agent was. The question is, did the Vice President instruct Scooter Libby to reveal that name. If he did, the Vice President probably is criminally negligent and that he ought to be indicted as well. I think we’d better find that out because I suspect that, Fitzgerald has a reputation of being ruthless, relentless and totally non-political and I think that’s just the kind of person you want this position.

Alan Colmes: Are you calling for a broader investigation of the Vice President?

Howard Dean: Oh, I think there should be. I suspect strongly that, frankly that the prosecutor’s already doing that because he, himself identified the Vice President as a source of some of the information that got leaked.

{Mr. Dean, Vice President Cheney had every right to know that information and he had every right to discuss it with his chief of staff/national security advisor Scooter Libby. That is NOT a crime of any kind whatsoever.}

Alan Colmes: Chairman Dean, we thank you very much for being with us tonight. Good to see you.

Howard Dean: Alan. Thanks for having me on.

Alan Colmes: Thanks very much.

Welcome readers of A Lady’s Ruminations and Gateway Pundit (He’s found a old speech of Wilson’s)! Please look around.

Lettori Benvenuti Di Ideazione!

mm-5
Featured Links

TagVillage.com
Free Global Shipping!
Affiliate Banner