<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Blagatrocious</title>
	<atom:link href="http://pjmedia.com/blog/blagatrocious/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/blagatrocious/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 08:12:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rachel Peepers</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/blagatrocious/#comment-169113</link>
		<dc:creator>Rachel Peepers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Dec 2008 05:10:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=41328#comment-169113</guid>
		<description>Than was then. 

Remember during the Democratic primaries when Barack said he&#039;d get all American troops out of Iraq within 16 months after elected? Where did that figure, 16 months, come from? Was Obama so smart he figures things out to the second? 

This is now.

&quot;Oh, did I say 16 months and the troops would leave? I meant combat troops. Some combat troops.&quot; 

The that was then, this is now game can be played over and over. That is Barack&#039;s style. 

With the Blago scandal, though, it doesn&#039;t take Barack months to tweak his protestations, giving people time to forget what was actually said.

Now, he plays his verbal games, but makes the changes within hours. 

&quot;Neither I nor members of my staff had contacts with, Blago, the new third rail of Democratic politics,&quot; contradicting Axelrod, who emphatically said they had. 

What your President Elect Obama really means when he says &quot;Had&quot; is within the last five days. He defines had as &quot;very recent contact&quot;. 

Almost simultaneously, Axelrod says Axelrod misspoke about the contact with Blago, the discussion about who to replace Barack as senator. 

My point being, Barack is playing with words. They&#039;re really bold faced lies, but his media slaves conveniently ignore them. Barack thinks he can continue to skate on thin ice. But the ice is getting thinner and thinner. And, unlike Chicago temperatures, the political kitchens are heating up. 

Luckily for Barack, the Dems started leaking the story of Pat Fitzgerald&#039;s wiretaps and we&#039;re ready to give it all to the papers. Which effectively neutered the wiretaps, hence the investigation was compromised.

Did anyone understand what Fitzgerald meant when he said the Feds decided to arrest Blago now before this gets out of hand? I didn&#039;t. 

The Dems ruined the investigation. If they hadn&#039;t acted,
Pat would have gotten all kinds of Barack people on tape talking about illegal, dirty deals. 

You may ask: &quot;Why didn&#039;t Fitz scream to the papers about the Dems ruining the investigation?&quot;

Because, obviously, Barack offered to keep him on after Jan. 20 and told Pat that he and his selected people would have a prominent place in the Obama administration.

This, my friends, is the way government works. 

Fitzgerald&#039;s rationalization: Catching Barack red handed was probably impossible, and catching his people on tape could be delt with case by case. If Rahm has to resign, he would have.

The big rationalization, of course, was that getting Barack caught up directly in the scandal would do too much damage to the country. 

Politics. It&#039;s a dirty business, but, I guess, somebody has to do it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Than was then. </p>
<p>Remember during the Democratic primaries when Barack said he&#8217;d get all American troops out of Iraq within 16 months after elected? Where did that figure, 16 months, come from? Was Obama so smart he figures things out to the second? </p>
<p>This is now.</p>
<p>&#8220;Oh, did I say 16 months and the troops would leave? I meant combat troops. Some combat troops.&#8221; </p>
<p>The that was then, this is now game can be played over and over. That is Barack&#8217;s style. </p>
<p>With the Blago scandal, though, it doesn&#8217;t take Barack months to tweak his protestations, giving people time to forget what was actually said.</p>
<p>Now, he plays his verbal games, but makes the changes within hours. </p>
<p>&#8220;Neither I nor members of my staff had contacts with, Blago, the new third rail of Democratic politics,&#8221; contradicting Axelrod, who emphatically said they had. </p>
<p>What your President Elect Obama really means when he says &#8220;Had&#8221; is within the last five days. He defines had as &#8220;very recent contact&#8221;. </p>
<p>Almost simultaneously, Axelrod says Axelrod misspoke about the contact with Blago, the discussion about who to replace Barack as senator. </p>
<p>My point being, Barack is playing with words. They&#8217;re really bold faced lies, but his media slaves conveniently ignore them. Barack thinks he can continue to skate on thin ice. But the ice is getting thinner and thinner. And, unlike Chicago temperatures, the political kitchens are heating up. </p>
<p>Luckily for Barack, the Dems started leaking the story of Pat Fitzgerald&#8217;s wiretaps and we&#8217;re ready to give it all to the papers. Which effectively neutered the wiretaps, hence the investigation was compromised.</p>
<p>Did anyone understand what Fitzgerald meant when he said the Feds decided to arrest Blago now before this gets out of hand? I didn&#8217;t. </p>
<p>The Dems ruined the investigation. If they hadn&#8217;t acted,<br />
Pat would have gotten all kinds of Barack people on tape talking about illegal, dirty deals. </p>
<p>You may ask: &#8220;Why didn&#8217;t Fitz scream to the papers about the Dems ruining the investigation?&#8221;</p>
<p>Because, obviously, Barack offered to keep him on after Jan. 20 and told Pat that he and his selected people would have a prominent place in the Obama administration.</p>
<p>This, my friends, is the way government works. </p>
<p>Fitzgerald&#8217;s rationalization: Catching Barack red handed was probably impossible, and catching his people on tape could be delt with case by case. If Rahm has to resign, he would have.</p>
<p>The big rationalization, of course, was that getting Barack caught up directly in the scandal would do too much damage to the country. </p>
<p>Politics. It&#8217;s a dirty business, but, I guess, somebody has to do it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kevin c</title>
		<link>http://pjmedia.com/blog/blagatrocious/#comment-168916</link>
		<dc:creator>kevin c</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Dec 2008 19:32:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pajamasmedia.com/?p=41328#comment-168916</guid>
		<description>GENE WOJIEHOWSKI AT ESPN DID AN INTERVIEW WITH BLAGO AT A CUBS-REDS GAME IN APRIL 2004. AT THE TIME BLAGO TOLD WOJO THAT HE WAS AHUGE FAN OF GEN GEORGE S PATTON. WELL, AS WOJO SAID TODAY IN AN ESPN.COM ARTICLE, &quot;PATTON WOULD SLAP BLAGO SILLY IF HE WERE ALIVE TODAY. ONLY ONE PROBLEM WOJO. PATTON WOULD HAVE SLAPPED EVERY DUMWIT POL IN CHICAGO SILLY. MIGHT EVEN HAD BLITZKRIEGED THE CITY IF HE EVER MER EITHER MAYOR DALEY.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>GENE WOJIEHOWSKI AT ESPN DID AN INTERVIEW WITH BLAGO AT A CUBS-REDS GAME IN APRIL 2004. AT THE TIME BLAGO TOLD WOJO THAT HE WAS AHUGE FAN OF GEN GEORGE S PATTON. WELL, AS WOJO SAID TODAY IN AN ESPN.COM ARTICLE, &#8220;PATTON WOULD SLAP BLAGO SILLY IF HE WERE ALIVE TODAY. ONLY ONE PROBLEM WOJO. PATTON WOULD HAVE SLAPPED EVERY DUMWIT POL IN CHICAGO SILLY. MIGHT EVEN HAD BLITZKRIEGED THE CITY IF HE EVER MER EITHER MAYOR DALEY.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

