04/01/09 Public Square


April Fools’ Day or All Fools’ Day, though not a holiday in its own right, is a notable day celebrated in many countries on April 1. The day is marked by the commission of hoaxes and other practical jokes of varying sophistication on friends, enemies and neighbors, or sending them on fools’ errands, the aim of which is to embarrass the gullible.


Filed under Republicans, The Public Square

23 responses to “04/01/09 Public Square

  1. fnord

    I know, I know — TWO opens.

    I am woman. I couldn’t make up my mind which one I liked.

    Maybe we could use this one just to reminisce (not so fondly perhaps) about bush the lessor!? Everyone is good for something — even if it’s only as a bad example!

  2. fnord

    “Silence propagates itself, and the longer talk has been suspended, the more difficult it is to find anything to say.”
    Samuel Johnson (1709 – 1784)

    I think this quote is so true. Don’t be silent, join in!

  3. prairiepond

    Uh-oh. This sounds like a joke, but unfortunately, it’s not.

    Eric Holder and the Justice Department are ASKING to drop the corruption charges against Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens. Really. No kidding. Not April Fool’s. The reason? Prosecutor misconduct. It seems the government prosecutors withheld evidence from Steven’s defense team. The prosecutors are under investigation.

    Dammit, dammit, DAMMIT!

    But I bet hell will freeze over before Don Seigelman gets a break for Justice Department misconduct.

    But in good news, or maybe bad news for those who really WANT the moose dresser to be the republican nominee in 2012….

    There is a kerfuffle going on with the Congressional Fundraising dinner that invited her to be a headline speaker. She apparantly dissed them, accepted, then withdrew, just like she did with CPAC. The “boys” organizing the dinner are furious with her.

    So.. they invited… wait for it…Newt to be the headline speaker.

    Uh-oh. It lives.

    Dammit, dammit, dammit, DAMMIT!

    I guess I shouldnt worry too much. Newtie will be sure to commit something unfortunate or make a gaffe in some way before he gets the nomination.

    What a day in news. The real news looks like a joke and the jokes look like real news. Only in America!

  4. prairiepond

    A link to the Ted Stevens story


    And a link to the Palin dis-invite story. Yeah, sorry. It’s fux news. Of course they’d be the first to post it!


  5. lilacluvr

    The last I heard about that dinner was Palin stating she knew nothing about it? Of course, this is her spin on the matter and just one wave, one wink and one ‘you betcha’ will get Sarah a pass with her loyal supporters.

    As for the thread’s picture – what can I say? A picture is worth a thousand words.

    George W. Bush is like one of my teenage daughter’s previous boyfriends – you can dress him up, take him out but just don’t let him speak. One word out of his mouth and the whole world knew he was an idiot.

  6. The situation with the Stevens case is unfortunate. FWIW, I’ll commend the DOJ for doing the correct thing in requesting dismissal (that is refreshing, to me; the DOJ doing the correct thing, given the recent history of the department).

    I would tell everyone not aware of “the rules” that such misconduct on the part of the prosecution would result in the conviction being overturned on appeal (if shown to exist, and from the appearance of it, there’s no question it existed) with, at best, a retrial ordered. So, a lot of money has been saved, with a result that might well obtain on retrial.

  7. prairiepond

    heheheh lilacluvr!

  8. I don’t recall the name of the SCOTUS opinion on this, but it has been settled law for decades that any and all evidence (especially exculpatory evidence, as it appears in the Stevens case existed) must be provided the defense by the prosecution. IIRC, in the instance of exculpatory evidence, the same must be made available to the defense as soon as it is obtained/known, whether or not the defense has requested, through the criminal discovery process, the same.

    Query: the DOJ attorneys that tried the case. Were they some long-term career prosecutors, or were they some attorneys who came to the U.S. Attorney office in Alaska (I’m making an assumption here) hired by the Bush Administration appointed U.S. Attorney? And, did they pass the loyalty test to get their job? Did they graduate from Liberty University Law School?

    I know, I know; but those are pertinent questions, IMHO.

  9. lilacluvr

    6176 – In the Stevens case, his conviction was voided – correct? Exactly what does that mean?

    Can he be retried? But if the same evidence is used, will it even be a case worth pursuing?

    But I agree with you, begrudgingly, that AG Holder did the right thing. If the prosecutors are not held to the standards of the rules, then everything connected to the case would be considered suspect.

    The worst thing to come out of this is that now Republicans might try to say Stevens was innocent and was just a political sacrificial lamb.

    There is a difference between being innocent and getting off on a technicality.

  10. Technically, the DOJ has filed a motion with the Court to have the conviction vacated and the indictment dismissed. I believe jeopardy attached, and thus he could not be retried on these charges, even if a new grand jury handed up an indictment. That does not mean that there could not be separate charges that could be brought independent of those involved in the trial.

    I cannot see how anyone could argue with a straight face that Stevens was innocent and just a political sacrificial lamb. One must remember that the trial occurred during the second Bush administration, and it is difficult to me to see how this could be converted into a partisan (e.g., Democrats vs. Republicans) political issue.

    Sen. Stevens didn’t get off on a technicality, as such, IMHO. Unless one considers prosecutor misconduct a technicality.

    I could see a “conspiracy theory” based on purposeful misconduct, knowing the conviction would be eventually overturned on appeal, to try to make this into a partisan argument. It would go something like this. The Democratic majority in the Congress wanted to gain additional seats in the 2008 election; so much public pressure was brought on the DOJ to bring the charges, to satisfy the pressure prosecution was commenced, with the intent to “throw the game”, so that Stevens would be cleared and then run again when the next senate seat is up for election. This, of course, presumed that a Republican would win the 2008 election for Stevens’ seat.

  11. annie_moose


    G20 protests: Riot police, or rioting police?

    At the G20 protests in London only one group appears to be looking for violent confrontation – and it’s not the protesters

  12. wicked

    On 6’s query: I seem to be hearing strains of “The Twilight Zone Theme”. Not because I think the idea is so far out there, but because I’m beginning to believe we do live in some sort of weird zone. Stranger things have happened, 6. Just look at the 2000 and 2004 elections.

  13. lilacluvr

    The weird zone?? I believe in karma and someday, somehow, both Bush and Cheney will be justly rewarded.

    This is purely selfish on my part, but I would like to see it happen sooner than later…

  14. QnofHrts

    I read on MSN news that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and someone else (name escapes me now) were being turned over to the Hague for War Crimes.

  15. Well, well (and no, this is not an April Fool’s prank/joke/whatever). Kansas.com is running two separate updates on the recession and its effects on Kansas. One, the Creighton study, shows that Kansas will suffer more and longer than the rest of the region; the other, from WSU, predicting a “tough six months ahead”. Gee, didn’t WSU (about the first of the year) release a study that told us things were going to be better here (in a relative sense), based upon the “strength of the aircraft industry”? Seems to me that the forecasters kinda missed, huh.

    Neither of these reports should come as any surprise to any individual not in a coma. The lack of diversification in the local economy, plus the effect of the recession on lower commodity prices, strikes a heavy blow to Wichita. Yes, the downturn came later here than elsewhere, but any upturn will also come later, much later IMHO.

    Wonder if the good folks over at the placethatshallnotbenamed (especially a certain female business owner) have decided this is cannot be true, and is just the liberal press distorting the truth, which as they all know, is that everything is really just fine. I might have to break my promise to myself, don a hazmat suit, and wander over there to look around.

  16. fnord

    Don’t do it, “6,” it’s too toxic!

    Hey, blogging friends, I’m finished for this session and you’re stuck with me full time again beginning tomorrow. Well, I do need a few hours to tackle some things I’ve neglected.

  17. lilacluvr

    fnord…..it’ll be good to have you back full time tomorrow. you were missed.

  18. Too late, fnord. My hazmat suit has now been classified as an extreme environmental hazard under the appropriate regulations and statutes, and must be disposed of only at a certified EPA hazardous waste disposal site. Then, after dealing with that, I had to go through a series of decontamination showers, and someone just drew blood to check for genetic abnormalities. Shoulda known.

  19. On a happier note, I’m unwinding a bit by listening to “Unaccompanied Company” on my favorite college radio station. Love to listen to the recordings of various college a cappella groups the host plays. They are quite remarkable. There’s about another hour left in the show for anyone interested (it is on from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. Central time on Wednesday evenings during the academic year); go to http://wmhb.org and enjoy.

  20. wicked

    I donned my flame resistant underwear and headed “over there”. I’ve had it up to my eyeballs with certain somebodies, especially one who claims to be from the state south of us. Bush inherited Clinton’s recession? Funny, but the years between Bush I and II list no recession. In fact, according to a list on Wikipedia, over the past 35 years, only 1 Democrat president was in office during a recession, and that was Carter. That 1980-1982 recession also belonged to Reagan.

    Yes, yes, I know. The early 2001 recession was caused, first, by the dotcom bubble bursting, but quickly followed by 9/11, and then by accounting scandals. According to the graphs, that was a mild recession. Now we have the current and ongoing recession, thanks to the collapse of the housing market, which led to bank collapses. I’d just love for one republican to tell me when and how Bush II made things better.

    Oh, yeah, Dubya did a bang up job on the economy…like a stick of dynamite. Poor, poor, Georgie. It was all Clinton’s fault.

  21. lilacluvr

    wicked….that blog is a haven for all who refuse to listen to facts and they take delight in devouring anyone with the audacity to question their intelligence. But, what really burns my gears is when these same people are the ones who preach to others about how Christian they are and what a great moral Christian man George W. Bush is.

    If that is being Christian and moral, then I’ll take the heathens any day of the week.

  22. wicked

    Oh, I know, lilac, but I guess I want to be a bit of an irritant to them. At this point, I couldn’t care less what they think of what I have to say.

    BTW, lilacs are one of my favorite flowers. The house where I grew up had a row of 4 or 5 huge lilac bushes along the driveway, and I’d pick bouquets for the neighbors every year. I should drive by and see if those bushes are still there. Probably not, considering what became of the neighborhood. 😦