Friday, February 10, 2006

Society of Subversion

I have decided to coin a new term for the Democratic Party and their actions. I like it and I think it fits well.

Democrats = Society of Subversion

A “society” with the intent of “subversion” - a systematic attempt to overthrow or undermine a government or political system by persons working secretly from within.

The symptoms of this are the continuous outright lies we see from that sphere of non-influence. Let’s look at some facts:

Harry Reid claims over and over again that the money he received from Abramoff and his clients was not tainted. Yet, the more information that is gathered, the more we find just how extensively Reid and his office are tied to Abramoff. Check this article at (and before you say….well it’s Breitbart….it is a copy of an article from the Associated Press). Some highlights:

Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid wrote at least four letters helpful to Indian tribes represented by Jack Abramoff, and the senator's staff regularly had contact with the disgraced lobbyist's team about legislation affecting other clients.

The activities _ detailed in billing records and correspondence obtained by The Associated Press _ are far more extensive than previously disclosed. They occurred over three years as Reid collected nearly $68,000 in donations from Abramoff's firm, lobbying partners and clients.

So not only are Reid’s constant claims of innocence incorrect, he makes the claims knowingly. Hence – he lies. There’s more:

Reid, D-Nev., has led the Democratic Party's attacks portraying Abramoff's lobbying and fundraising as a Republican scandal.

But Abramoff's records show his lobbying partners billed for nearly two dozen phone contacts or meetings with Reid's office in 2001 alone.

But he has no close contact…right….

Hillary Clinton, who usually tries to portray herself as centrist, told a packed church in Harlem that the House of Representatives is run like a “plantation”. The noted icon, the Reverend Al Sharpton later claimed that Ms. Clinton didn’t make that statement in a Harlem church:

Sharpton's theater of the absurd reached its apotheosis when he claimed that Hillary "did not make the comments at a Harlem church". Even the New York Times had to admit that she had spoken in "at the Canaan Baptist Church of Christ in Harlem," and Hardball rolled footage of her speaking at a lectern in the church draped with fabric decorated with a cross.

Responded Matthews, not even attempting to suppress an amused look: "You're kidding me, Reverend. I don't understand why you're defending her. Do you think she would have used that word with a Jewish group, an Italian group?  She used that phrase, 'you know what I'm talking about.' What's that supposed to mean?  She was pandering."

And this guy has the title Reverend?

And what about Senator “Splash” Kennedy? He spent hours of time, on our dime, reading the same passage over and over again, from the magazine published by the Concerned Alumni of Princeton. The visually and maybe mentally aging Senator Kennedy tried to use the passage to paint Justice Alito as a bigot, racist, and chauvinist during the embarrassing Democratic spectacle erroneously called Confirmation Hearings. In relation to Justice Alito’s affiliation with the club the Senator said:

“…affiliation with an organization that fought the admission of women into Princeton calls into question his appreciation for the needs for full equality in this country.”

And yet, it turned out that “Splash” belonged to a similar club at his own alma mater – and not only that, but his club was tossed from campus for discrimination against women. Interestingly enough, Kennedy’s club was in violation of laws that the Senator himself wrote. But to add to this the fact that after his association with a male-only club was published Kennedy quickly dropped his membership.

Want more? Let’s add in Al Gore’s speech on Martin Luther King Day. In the early part of his speech he said:

…As we begin this new year, the executive branch of our government has been caught eavesdropping on huge numbers of American citizens…

Let’s see – I think the obvious words here are “caught” and “huge”. Caught? Mr. Gore must have meant when the NYT illegally published the information about the NSA program in their newspaper. He does not mention that this was a “secret” program and the administration regularly briefed the proper members of Congress. But even more disingenuous is the word “huge”. What is that? It sure makes it sound like thousands and thousands of people have had phone calls listened to. But the fact is, that is not true.

I could go on and on and on. Just look at John Rockefeller who is now under investigation for leaking the NSA details to the NYT. I truly think the title of “Society of Subversion” is well deserved.