And don’t expect the DNC MSM to helpfully remind them of it, either. They always cover for one of their own.

However, if it were a Republican in that situation, it would lead all the evening telecasts and be “above the fold” for those damned newspapers.

Scribes, Pharisees and hypocrites all.

Regards,
Peter H.

So assuming all that is true, my problem is still not with Barney Frank, although he would be deserving of all the blame that you suggest he deserves. And I think this post is starting to get to the real problem. Frank is one of 435 Representatives in the House. The fact that the rules in both houses in Congress to allow a member to have an extremely high disproportionate amount of power is wrong, and needs to be changed. It doesn’t matter to me that he is the chair of the Finanacial Services committee. His voice, his votes, etc., should not have any more weight than the other 434 Representatives.

If that was the case, then it wouldn’t have mattered how stupid Frank was regarding the issue, who he dated three years ago, when perhaps more oversight should have occurred, or how much an egomaniac Frank is.

Anytime we allow one person in Congress to set policy we’re in for trouble. It obviously didn’t work with Frank’s power regarding this issue. It didn’t work in the Senate all those years when blowhard Robert Byrd was given the power he had to derail policy. Why on earth isn’t this problem addressed first, before in another year or two, we start blaming one single Congressman for another failed policy? If it’s because that Congress has no intention of changing the rules, then I say that all 535 members of Congress are equally to blame for any failed policy. In fact, I hold all 535 members of Congress equally for the mortgage crisis.

Either way, they’re screwed. Deeeeeeeeliciousssssssss!

Then go to it. Pelosi is there, Reid is there, and both of them were clearly present. Heck, Obama himself has continued the Bush administration policies that you dislike so much.

For what are you waiting?

new troll, or old troll in a new skin?

Anyway, the issue is if the boosh boogyman you fight in your dreams was all this evil you say, then it was bipartisan. The liberals are cowards, running from a ‘demon’ they had a hand in creating pointing to the hand in the cookie jar while ignoring the crumbs on their own faces.

Don’t worry, Bruce and Dan won’t delete this post, it’s too good an example of liberal rantings.

your defense of his claims are even more rediculous then his claims

““On a bipartisan basis, we asked if the CIA needed more support from Congress to carry out its mission against al-Qaeda.“

so this means somehow to you and to porter that they can….DESTROY OUR NATIONAL SECURIT?

remove our ability to broker treaties?

remove our ability to gather actionable inteligence?

do you somehow think this is a blank check?

*where do these people come up with this garbage*?

“In their zeal to “get” Republicans, they forget their own past support of programs they now lambaste their partisan adversaries for supporting.”

in case you didn’t know it, those “on the left” want democrats prosecuted as much (if not more) then they want republicans

you guys spewing the talking poionts from these criminals need to get out more