Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 12 of 12
  1. #11  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    FT Belvoir, VA
    West is the left's worst nightmare. He is immune to the race card and utterly fearless. He not only speaks his mind, but he is informed, articulate and willing to speak uncomfortable truths. This is why they are targeting him this year.

    BTW, for those who can't get to the article, here's the text:

    U.S. Rep. Allen West accused fellow Congressman Alcee Hastings of “political elitism” over comments Hastings made to an online media site about an alleged Chick-Fil-A incident.

    Hastings told the Huffington Post that West had offended the entire Congressional Black Caucus about six months ago, when he brought in chicken and biscuits from Chick-Fil-A when it was his turn to provide lunch at a weekly meeting.

    Responding to Hastings comments, West said today he did not recall any controversy over the meal in question, adding that there was nothing left of the food when the meeting was over. He questioned Hastings’ motives, calling it a case of “political elitism.”

    West had not read the article -- partly, he said, because it was in the Huffington Post, a publication he has publically ridiculed in the past. He made it clear that he was not trying to send any kind of message to the caucus, as Hastings suggested.

    “It is the American taxpayers’ dollars being used,” West said. “I don’t feel like it’s my responsibility to go out and get steak and lobster tails for the members of the Congressional Black Caucus.”

    I suspect that at least some of this has to do with the fact that the food came from Chik-Fil-A, and they are the left's current bete-noire, but Alcee Hastings is also desperate to attack any black Republican. He undermines the CBC's unity and partisanship, so they have to attack him on anything that they can. Also, remember who Hastings is. One of the commenters gave his history as an impeached judge:

    EditorJP says:
    Alcee Hastings belongs in jail: In 1981, Hastings was charged with accepting a $150,000 bribe in exchange for a lenient sentence and a return of seized assets for 21 counts of racketeering by Frank and Thomas Romano, and of perjury in his testimony about the case. In 1983, he was acquitted by a jury after his alleged co-conspirator, William Borders, refused to testify in court (resulting in a jail sentence for Borders).[1] In 1988, the Democratic-controlled U.S. House of Representatives took up the case, and Hastings was impeached for bribery and perjury by a vote of 413-3. He was then convicted in 1989 by the United States Senate, becoming the sixth federal judge in the history of the United States to be removed from office by the Senate. The Senate, in two hours of roll calls, voted on 11 of the 17 articles of impeachment. It convicted Hastings of eight of the 11 articles. The vote on the first article was 69 for and 26 opposed,[2] providing five votes more than the two-thirds of those present that were needed to convict. The first article accused the judge of conspiracy. Conviction on any single article was enough to remove the judge from office. The Senate vote cut across party lines, with Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, voting to convict his fellow party member, and Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania, voting to acquit.[3] The Senate had the option to forbid Hastings from ever seeking federal office again, but did not do so. Alleged co-conspirator, attorney William Borders went to jail again for refusing to testify in the impeachment proceedings, but was later given a full pardon by President Bill Clinton on his last day in office.[4] Hastings filed suit in federal court claiming that his impeachment trial was invalid because he was tried by a Senate committee, not in front of the full Senate, and that he had been acquitted in a criminal trial. Judge Stanley Sporkin ruled in favor of Hastings, remanding the case back to the Senate, but stayed his ruling pending the outcome of an appeal to the Supreme Court in a similar case regarding Judge Walter Nixon, who had also been impeached and removed.[5] Sporkin found some "crucial distinctions"[6] between Nixon's case and Hastings's, specifically, that Nixon had been convicted criminally, and that Hastings was not found guilty by two-thirds of the committee who actually "tried" his impeachment in the Senate. He further added that Hastings had a right to trial by the full Senate. The Supreme Court, however, ruled in Nixon v. United States that the federal courts have no jurisdiction over Senate impeachment matters, so Sporkin's ruling was vacated and Hastings's conviction and removal were upheld.[7]
    August 08, 2012 at 06:10 PM |

    Keep Hastings' criminal past in mind whenever you hear him impugn anyone else's reputation.
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  

  2. #12  
    Senior Member Gina's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Western MI
    Keep Hastings' criminal past in mind whenever you hear him impugn anyone else's reputation.
    Also keep in mind that Pelosi stood up for him not too long ago when he was in trouble with the ethics committee. She would have considered herself racist if she didn't help him.
    Good men sleep peaceably in their beds at night because
    rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

    Real superheroes don't wear capes. They wear dog tags.
    Reply With Quote  

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts