Comments on: Scrapple and Pelosi http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/20/scrapple-and-pelosi/ Fri, 15 Jul 2011 20:48:32 -0500 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: klynn http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/20/scrapple-and-pelosi/#comment-160239 klynn Thu, 21 May 2009 11:34:08 +0000 http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/20/scrapple-and-pelosi/#comment-160239 <p>Very good catch Sara. Fits with the “finds” in the previous post.</p> Very good catch Sara. Fits with the “finds” in the previous post.

]]> By: MadDog http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/20/scrapple-and-pelosi/#comment-160180 MadDog Thu, 21 May 2009 02:37:40 +0000 http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/20/scrapple-and-pelosi/#comment-160180 <p>Fantastic catch Sara!</p> Fantastic catch Sara!

]]> By: ratfood http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/20/scrapple-and-pelosi/#comment-160156 ratfood Thu, 21 May 2009 01:51:47 +0000 http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/20/scrapple-and-pelosi/#comment-160156 <p>Nighters.</p> Nighters.

]]> By: eCAHNomics http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/20/scrapple-and-pelosi/#comment-160155 eCAHNomics Thu, 21 May 2009 01:51:27 +0000 http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/20/scrapple-and-pelosi/#comment-160155 <p>‘nite Raven.</p> ‘nite Raven.

]]> By: ratfood http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/20/scrapple-and-pelosi/#comment-160154 ratfood Thu, 21 May 2009 01:51:26 +0000 http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/20/scrapple-and-pelosi/#comment-160154 <p>They gave us Condi Rice. Oh wait, that’s not a good thing…</p> They gave us Condi Rice. Oh wait, that’s not a good thing…

]]> By: Raven http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/20/scrapple-and-pelosi/#comment-160150 Raven Thu, 21 May 2009 01:50:25 +0000 http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/20/scrapple-and-pelosi/#comment-160150 <p>and with that, I bid thee goodnight</p> and with that, I bid thee goodnight

]]> By: Raven http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/20/scrapple-and-pelosi/#comment-160148 Raven Thu, 21 May 2009 01:48:59 +0000 http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/20/scrapple-and-pelosi/#comment-160148 <p>You know why the trees in Georgia lean to the west?</p> <p>Cuz Alabama sucks!</p> You know why the trees in Georgia lean to the west?

Cuz Alabama sucks!

]]> By: eCAHNomics http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/20/scrapple-and-pelosi/#comment-160147 eCAHNomics Thu, 21 May 2009 01:48:36 +0000 http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/20/scrapple-and-pelosi/#comment-160147 <p>Nice find. Taking a break from online to read books is definitely worth the effort.</p> Nice find. Taking a break from online to read books is definitely worth the effort.

]]> By: ratfood http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/20/scrapple-and-pelosi/#comment-160145 ratfood Thu, 21 May 2009 01:45:59 +0000 http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/20/scrapple-and-pelosi/#comment-160145 <p>See your <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/05/20/alabama.police.beating/" rel="nofollow">neighbors</a> to the west are up to no good.</p> See your neighbors to the west are up to no good.

]]> By: eCAHNomics http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/20/scrapple-and-pelosi/#comment-160144 eCAHNomics Thu, 21 May 2009 01:45:51 +0000 http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/20/scrapple-and-pelosi/#comment-160144 <p>To be sure. But the gasoline added to the fire was Panetta’s statement. I got folks here twisting my knickers for suggesting that Marcy’s sophisticated interpretation was BS, because Panetta’s plain language said she was wrong. For the moment, I side with the Rs that Obama was behing Panetta’s statement. If he didn’t want to pillory Pelosi, but wanted to gain the luv of his minions, he could have simply said something like: There is some disagreement about the records which will be sorted out in due course by the appropriate people. “We” are confident that the CIA has behaved appropriately and urge everyone to continue the spectacular performance that has been “our” hallmark. Or words to that effect.</p> To be sure. But the gasoline added to the fire was Panetta’s statement. I got folks here twisting my knickers for suggesting that Marcy’s sophisticated interpretation was BS, because Panetta’s plain language said she was wrong. For the moment, I side with the Rs that Obama was behing Panetta’s statement. If he didn’t want to pillory Pelosi, but wanted to gain the luv of his minions, he could have simply said something like: There is some disagreement about the records which will be sorted out in due course by the appropriate people. “We” are confident that the CIA has behaved appropriately and urge everyone to continue the spectacular performance that has been “our” hallmark. Or words to that effect.

]]>