Are we talking about the same Laura I.?

I've heard her be very harsh on people -- in particular I remember this interview with a member of Code Pink. By the time Ingraham was done with her, the woman was absolutely sputtering and couldn't say anything intelligible because Laura defeated every single one of the woman's lame arguments and actually got the woman to contradict herself. Laura is harsh and cold if she wants to be. But she was still respectful during the entire interview. She has a lot of tact.

But to say that's how she is in general, give me a break! I listen to her every morning, and she is a warm, witty, intelligent, and caring woman. But I suppose if you get on her bad side and she beats you in a debate you may have that view of her. It's called being a sore loser.

Last week she visited Iraq. I recommend everyone read her Iraq Journal.

It was Comedy Central's Indecision/Politically Incorrect show, and Chris was 'reporting' from the floor of the Republican Convention. It was one of the few times I've ever seen her shut her mouth for more than two seconds.

(Chris was just commenting on her rant against liberals, welfare and such- not engaged in a conversation with her).

Yes, numerous investigations at the taxpayers expense to the tune of millions of dollars. All but the last one, led absolutely nowhere. The last one led to a blowjob.

Care to compare that to the investigations of Scooter, Cheney, Delay, Frist, Abramoff, Cunningham, and a whole bunch of others?

Culture of corruption indeed.

I'll take on the culture of corruption. I just get in trouble for bringing up such things from past administrations. I could post some very interesting figures on the number of Clinton associates and business partners who were indicted and or convicted. I could post links about Reno and Espy and Cisneros and Gore....well, you get the idea.

MBC, you say the investigations during the Clinton adminstration led to nowhere, but then point to investigations in this adminstration that have led to...well....nowhere, and in fact included Abramoff in the list, who was involved with both parties. So...if you want I can post the numbers of indictments and convictions and a historical perspective of other administrations and special investigations.

Don't you think that it is just a tad premature to say that the current investigations have led nowhere?

Sorry - I figured "as of yet" was implied in my statement. Of course it is premature to say nothing is going to come of them.

So a guilty plea is nowhere?

The sad part is that, it doen't matter what the party affiliation is, the corruption is previlent throughout. I think we get bogged down in who is better or, rather, who is more corrupt when, really does it matter. There really shouldn't be sizable corruption at all.

Yes, and this IS the best of all possible worlds, Dr. Pangloss. :rolleyes:

You refer to Abramoff? I beleive that's nowhere only in terms of it being a republican scandal. The current "culture of corruption", as put forth by the dems, is saying that it is the republicans who are at the heart of it. As has been posted in other threads, one of those shouting the loudest about this is Harry Reid, and the links from him to Abramoff's money and staff are prevalent. Now, Reid says they are completely legit, and they may be. He doesn't seem to afford anyone else the same benefit of the doubt.

I demand that a feeding tube be inserted ASAP.