Democrats Do A 180 On Presidential Papers

The House of Representatives stunningly (well, not really) voted to overturn an executive order that President Bush put in place soon after he took office in 2001.  I recall the action to be part of his ‘new tone’ in Washington.  He did it to squash the flood of inquiries  and petitions to delve into the just ended Clinton administration.    But, true to form, the current congress, now a democrat majority, wants to overturn that and claiming that it was done to protect his father’s administration, Bush 41.   Another attempt to re-write history.

The presidential papers bill nullifies a November 2001 order, criticized by historians, in which Bush allowed the White House or a former president to block release of a former president’s papers and put the onus on researchers to show a “specific need” for many types of records.

Among beneficiaries of the Bush order was Bush’s father, George H.W. Bush, a former vice president and president.

Lets see, who was president after Bush 41 and before Bush 43?  They somehow left out an important ‘beneficiary.’  And there’s this gem from Mr. Investigation himself, Henry Waxman, D-Calif., the lead sponsor of the bill.

“Historians and scholars need access to presidential records so that there’s an accurate record of a president’s term in office and not an alleged version based on what the president chooses to share.”

Henry please, where were you in 2001?  Who in their right mind can’t see that they want it overturned so they can pry into the current administration’s papers.  The ‘Bush lied people died’ crowd is destined to take their hatred to the grave. 

How quickly they forget. 

Here Comes The Race Card

The Congressional Black Caucus is being pressured to reject the FOX news network in any and all presidential debates by labeling the TV network itself as racist.  The rabid left in the blogosphere represented by websites like the Daily KOS and the Huffington Post are on board with this as well.  They can’t, and won’t, discern the difference between people expressing a different opinion than their own and the network that puts it out there.   They react as though it is FOX’s opinion. For example, here’s what a website called says about it:

Here’s a sampling of the kind of offensive messages that are put out on Fox:

  • Commenting on Hannity & Colmes about the speakers at Coretta Scott King’s funeral, featured guest Mary Matalin said, “I think these civil rights leaders are nothing more than racists” who are keeping “their African-American brothers enslaved.”
  • Jesse Lee Peterson, a regular guest who is Black said: “Kwanzaa is a racist, pagan, Marxist holiday” and then claimed that the “so-called seven principles of Kwanzaa are socialist, Marxist, separatist ideas… if a white man started a white holiday, seven-day white holiday, black folks would be burning down America.”
  • Erik Rush, another Black guest, labeled Sen. Obama’s church as cultish and separatist for espousing values of black unity and black empowerment (Fox regularly selects Black guests it knows will undermine Black causes). Rush said he replaced the word “black” with “white” in the church’s mission statement and “Suddenly, I was looking at this really scary doctrine. You know, it was something that you’d see in more like a cult or an Aryan Brethren church… I would go beyond saying they’re Afrocentric. They’re African centric. They refer to themselves as an African people and that somewhat disturbs me from the viewpoint of well, do they consider themselves Americans? Do they consider themselves Christians?”
  • On Hannity and Colmes, David Horowitz said: “The only lynch mob in America that is allowed to exist in America is a black lynch mob.”

Obviously, news outlets like CBS, NBS, ABS, CNNBS, and MSNBS don’t show the ‘other side’ of an argument to let ‘you decide.’  They all speak with one voice and one message, theirs.  Fox doesn’t need defending by me.  They are the only news outlet that makes an attempt to show you opinions from all sides of an issue.  It is the addition of the ‘other side’ that causes them to whip out the race card.  It becomes the next best tool to censorship for stifling debate.  

If you think that there is no connection between these blogs and democrat party operatives then I have this bridge I’d like to sell you.  Oh that’s right, these blogs are the democrat party operatives.  It was pressure from them that caused Democrats to cancel FOX’s participation in the Nevada primary debates just last week.  This after having signed on to do it.  Whats in play now is page three in the democrat’s playbook.  The entire book is three pages long.  Page one says, never respond to an opposing viewpoint.  Don’t participate in the arena of ideas.  Stay on your message only.  Page two is demonize the opposition.  If that doesn’t work, page three is use the race card.  Thats all they need, it’s all they have, it is what guides them.

If the purpose of participating in a debate is to connect to people via effective debate and persuasion, then FOX is the choice.  If they’re looking for an echo chamber where they can preach to the choir and a minuscule audience, then CNN would be the best choice.  It remains to be seen what action, if any, the CBC will take.  Based on the recent history of the purity of the Congressional Black Caucus, as in ‘no whites allowed,’ the odds are that they’ll follow suit.  I hope I’m wrong on this but time will tell.