Orrin Hatch: 1991 Sotomayor Appointment Was A Moynihan Pick

A "one for one" deal? She was "picked by Senator Moynihan"? I call bullshit. I'm sure that Moynihan made a suggestion, but you can't have it both ways to strengthen your current position. The final decision is the President's and to rewrite history to suggest that George H.W. Bush had no say in his final decision to choose Sotomayor as his nominee in 1991 is too far-fetched to believe. How stupid does he think the public is to believe that Bush 41 could care less who was chosen as long as the ranking Senators on both sides made the decisions? If that's the case, then G.H.W. Bush committed a serious dereliction of his duties as President.

_____________________________________________________________
(*Note - the original title of this post noted the year 1998, when Sotomayor was nominated by Bill Clinton for the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. George H.W. Bush nominated her for the US District Court of New York's Southern District.)

Another Smear E-mail: Democrats Kill More Soldiers

Ok, this is a good one. My friend sent me this email he received from a relative who was doubting its validity and forwarded it to me since he knows I've been checking these things out lately. But this one is a doooooozy!

The e-mail claims that you'll be shocked, SHOCKED I TELL YOU!, at the statistics of US military losses by any cause. And that's the kicker. ANY CAUSE. But let's play their little game. Here's part of the e-mail:

Military Losses, 1980 thru 2007

Whatever your politics, however you lean, and however you feel about the current administration, this report should open some eyes. As tragic as the loss of any member of the US Armed Forces is, consider the following statistics: The annual fatalities of military members while actively serving in the armed forces from 1980 through 2006 - by any cause.

1980 .......... 2,392 (Carter Year)
1981 .......... 2,380 (Reagan Year)
1984 .......... 1,999 (Reagan Year)
1988 .......... 1,819 (Reagan Year)
1989 .......... 1,636 (George H W Year)
1990 .......... 1,508 (George H W Year)
1991 .......... 1,787 (George H W Year)
1992 .......... 1,293 (George H W Year)
1993 .......... 1,213 (Clinton Year)
1994 .......... 1,075 (Clinton Year)
1995 .......... 2,465 (Clinton Year)
1996 .......... 2,318 (Clinton Year)
1997 ............ 817 (Clinton Year)
1998 .......... 2,252 (Clinton Year)
1999 .......... 1,984 (Clinton Year)
2000 ...........1,983 (Clinton Year)
2001 ............ 890 (George W Year)
2002 .......... 1,007 (George W Year)
2003 .......... 1,410 (George W Year)
2004 .......... 1,887 (George W Year)
2005 ............ 919 (George W Year)
2006............. 920 (George W Year)
2007............. 899 (George W Year)

Clinton years (1993-2000): 14,107 deaths
George W years (2001-2007): 7,932 deaths

Well, that seems interesting doesn't it? And some would wonder how this can possibly be? The answer: because it's a lie.

If you Google the title of the list "Military Losses 1980-2007," the first site you come to is FreeRepublic.com, a right wing website and a post titled "VERY Surprising Military Death Statistics, 1980 - 2007". The e-mail is basically a cut and paste of this webpage with a little added commentary to force a false discussion and skew it towards a neoconservative viewpoint.

What these imbeciles hope to accomplish is that all these "amazing" statistics will be so shocking to you that you'll just forward the e-mail in disbelief. After all, if they provide a link to the stats that they're using, then there's no need to double check, right? ... Right?

Take a look at the list again. Why is 1982-83, and 1985-87 missing from the list? Maybe this line in the in the e-mail will give us a clue:

"And, I was even more shocked when I read that in 1980, during the reign of President (Nobel Peace Prize winner) Jimmy Carter , there were 2,392 US military fatalities! From what? How?"

Well, as in most hazardous jobs around the country and around the world, there's a little something called "accidents" that people deal with in their daily lives. Here's the listing of the reasons for 1980's casualties:

Accident: 1,556
Homicide: 174
Illness: 419
Self inflicted: 231 (I'm guessing this one is suicide or it would be listed as accidental.)
Terrorist Attack: 1
Undetermined: 11

That's how President "Nobel Peace Prize" Carter ended his "reign" - with one soldier's death caused by a terrorist attack.

Now let's look at the missing Reagan years:

1982 - 2,319 Deaths, 1,495 accidental
1983 - 2,465 Deaths, 1,413 accidental
1985 - 2,252 Deaths, 1,476 accidental
1986 - 1,984 Deaths, 1,199 accidental
1987 - 1,983 Deaths, 1,172 accidental

All these numbers show that Carter's 1980 number is not an anomaly, it's the average. But let's take a look at another breakdown - during Reagan's years the number of military deaths by hostile action was 58. The number of deaths by terrorist attack was 293.

Since the author of this e-mail took the added measure of comparing Bush's numbers to Clinton's, let's look at the ACTUAL numbers taken from the link provided by the very creator of this e-mail. Here are the discrepancies:

Clinton's years -
1993 - Author's Number 1,213
1994 - Author's Number 1,075
1995 - Author's Number 2,465 -- Actual Number 1,040
1996 - Author's Number 2,318 -- Actual Number 974
1997 - Author's Number 817
1998 - Author's Number 2,252 -- Actual Number 827
1999 - Author's Number 1,984 -- Actual Number 796
2000 - Author's Number 1,983 -- Actual Number 758


That makes Bill Clinton's grand total 7,500.


Now let's take a look at George W. Bush's numbers according to the author's own link:

2001 - Author's Number 890 -- Actual Number 891
2002 - Author's Number 1,007 -- Actual Number 999
2003 - Author's Number 1,410 -- Actual Number 1,228
2004 - Author's Number 1,887 -- Actual Number 1,874
2005 - Author's Number 919 -- Actual Number 1,942
2006 - Author's Number 920 -- Actual Number 1,858
2007 - Author's Number 899 -- Actual Number not listed in link as it ends in 2006.

The Pentagon has not released figures for 2007 yet, but according to other sources, the US casualty rate for 2007 was 1, 014.


So Clinton's EIGHT (1993-2000) year total =7,500
George W. Bush's SEVEN year (2001-2007) total = 9,804
And 2008 seems like a very long year.

By the way, here are Reagan's and GHW Bush's totals:

Reagan's EIGHT year (1981-1988) total = 17,201
George HW Bush FOUR year (1989-1992) total = 6,223


Military deaths under the eight years Clinton Administration caused by hostile action or terrorist attack = 76

Military deaths under the six years (2001-2006) GW Bush Administration caused by hostile action or terrorist attack = 2,658

Further research shows that this e-mail is not so new. It's probably been circulating for about a year and a half. Here are the Snopes.com and Urban Legends debunking of the numbers, similar to what I did above.

The kicker is one of the final statements toward the end of the e-mail:

I hope that during the time between now and November, intelligent Americans can decipher: the facts from the spin, the spinners from the leaders, those who seek even more power from those that seek justice, and the dividers from the uniters.

Over the next months let's be good listeners and see and hear who tries to divide our nation; and who wants to unite our nation. Who wants to control how our money is spent and who wants our money spent the way we would spend it. Who seeks power and who seeks justice? Who spins the facts and who is genuine.

With that statement I couldn't agree more. All that needed to be done was about 10 minutes worth of research to see that these numbers are false, skewed to favor partisan politics and ultimately and unfortunately an abomination and an insult to those that have lost their lives doing what they've been told to do and defending what they believe in.

So please, do what the author says - but don't just listen to what our candidates for President have to say, follow it up with some research of your own from credible sources. I know you'll be surprised by what you find.

Fiscal Conservatives

(H/T C&L)

T Minus 222 Days

Happy 84th Birthday George H.W. Bush.

"I am not one who - who flamboyantly believes in throwing a lot of words around."

Wow, George & Barbara's birthdays within a week of each other. Thanks for spawning Satan's son.

Good Riddance To Bad Rubbish

Bill and H.W. On The Road? Not A Chance

Yesterday, I had a bit of a heartstopping moment when Bill Clinton had this to say if Hillary became the next White House resident in 2009:

Well, the first thing she intends to do, because you can do this without passing a bill, the first thing she intends to do is to send me and former President Bush and a number of other people around the world to tell them that America is open for business and cooperation again.

... and I thought, "WHAT THE FUCK?!" The last thing I want as an American citizen is having ANY Bush galavanting around the world in the name of American foreign policy.

Well it didn't take long for Pappy Bush to answer Bill's claim:

Former President Bush wholeheartedly supports the President of the United States, including his foreign policy. He has never discussed an "around-the-world mission" with either former President Bill Clinton or Senator Clinton, nor does he think such a mission is warranted since he is proud of the role America continues to play around the world as the beacon of hope for freedom and democracy.
...President Bush is excited about several of the excellent Republican candidates running for President, and looks forward to supporting their candidacy once the Republican nominee is determined.

Well I can now breathe again. So Pappy is proud of his son's record including foreign policy? Jesus H. Christmas! At least it's a relief to know he's not interested in promoting Hillary and America after Chimpy gets booted out on his ear. He'll support any Republican candidate. The Jesus freak, the cross dressing fascist, the guy wearing the magic underwear, hell, even the bored actor for all Pappy cares, as long as he's a Republican!

Get these lying, criminally insane bastards as far away from Washington as humanly possible. Good riddance to bad rubbish.