If Cheney's Talking, He Should Talk to Congress

Vice President Dick Cheney should get used to testifying under oath.

It is expeacted that he will start talking soon, as part of a self-serving effort to defend a former aide. But once the vice president's done giving that testimony, how hard would it be for him to head over to Capitol Hill and respond to all the questions that members of Congress have been preparing to ask?

It was revealed Tuesday that Cheney will be called to testify on behalf of his former chief of staff, I. Scooter Libby.

Libby stands accused of perjury and obstruction of justice in an upcoming trial involving issues that arose from alleged efforts by the Vice President's office to punish former Ambassador Joe Wilson and his wife, former CIA operative Valarie Plame, for revealing that the Bush-Cheney administration had manipulated intelligence to make the "case" for invading and occupying Iraq.

Cheney, who resisted testifying before the 9/11 Commission until the bitter end, is reportedly willing to take the stand in Libby's defense.

William Jeffress, one of Libby's attorneys, says of the vice president: "We don't expect him to resist."

Lea Anne McBride, a spokeswoman for the vice president, seemed to confirm that sentiment when she told reporters that, "We've cooperated fully in this matter and will continue to do so in fairness to the parties involved."

Since schedules and notes -- some in the vice president's own handwriting -- confirm that Cheney was involved in conversations about using his office to discredit Wilson, his willingness to testify in the Libby case becomes particularly significant.

Of course, the vice president will make it his purpose to protect his former chief of staff, the loyal retainer who has been described as "Cheney's Cheney." But his openness to testifying under oath about this matter would seem to open the door for him to testify before Congress regarding the matter.

Gerald Ford, while serving as president, testified before a Congressional committee about his 1974 pardon of his scandal-plagued predecessor, Richard Nixon. So there is a clear precedent. And members of the House have already requested that Cheney come clean.

A little more than a year ago, three key members of the House -- Michigan Democrat John Conyers, the incoming chair of the Judiciary Committee; California Democrat Henry Waxman, the incoming chair of the Government Reform Committee; and New York Democrat Maurice Hinchey, one of the most outspoken critics of the administration's misuse of intelligence during the period before the Iraq War began -- sent a letter to the Vice President's office in which they asked the Cheney to "make yourself available to appear before Congress to explain the details and reasons for your office's involvement -- and your personal involvement -- in the disclosure of Valerie Wilson's identity as a Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) operative."

At the time the letter was sent, Hinchey said, "We are going to do everything we can to force this administration and this Congress to face up to the truth and to face up to their responsibility under the Constitution."

The congressman explained that, "The people who wrote the Constitution that set this government up knew what they were doing. They knew what would happen if you let a regime go its own way without oversight. That's why they set up the system of checks and balances. This Congress has shunned its responsibility, tossed its obligations under the Constitution aside – allowing the administration to do whatever it chooses, even to the point of looking aside when the administration lies to Congress and violates federal laws. That's got to stop. We cannot have a monolithic government. We have to restore some balance, where the legislative branch is a part of this process. And we think that one way to do that is by asking the vice president, in light of the questions that have arisen with regards to his actions, to come to Congress and answer the questions that are on the minds of the American people and their representatives."

Cheney showed little regard for Congress when Republicans were in charge of the House and Senate. And no one expects him to display any more respect for the system of checks and balances now that Democrats are in control.

But if the vice president is willing to testify in Libby's trial, then surely Congress has not just the right but the Constitutional duty to suggest that Cheney must also take questions from the Congress.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

John Nichols' new book, THE GENIUS OF IMPEACHMENT: The Founders' Cure for Royalism has been hailed by authors and historians Gore Vidal, Studs Terkel and Howard Zinn for its meticulous research into the intentions of the founders and embraced by activists for its groundbreaking arguments on behalf of presidential accountability. After reviewing recent books on impeachment, Rolling Stone political writer Tim Dickinson, writes in the latest issue of Mother Jones, "John Nichols' nervy, acerbic, passionately argued history-cum-polemic, The Genius of Impeachment, stands apart. It concerns itself far less with the particulars of the legal case against Bush and Cheney, and instead combines a rich examination of the parliamentary roots and past use of the "heroic medicine" that is impeachment with a call for Democratic leaders to 'reclaim and reuse the most vital tool handed to us by the founders for the defense of our most basic liberties.'"

The Genius of Impeachment can be found at independent bookstores and at www.amazon.com

Comments (59)

1. And so it begins; what the Constitution always seemed to mandate: oversight of the executive branch by the branch of government that actualy makes the laws. The power of a subpoena is a mighty sword; wave it high.

   Posted by The Goods at 12/19/2006 @ 5:38pm

2. and miss usa got to keep her crown! good news all over!

   Posted by ibbleblibble at 12/19/2006 @ 6:53pm

3. "But if the vice president is willing to testify in Libby's trial, then surely Congress has not just the right but the Constitutional duty to suggest that Cheney must also take questions from the Congress."

   Well, John Nichols, until the Judiciary Committee officially calls for Cheney to "make himself available to appear before Congress", it ain't gonna happen because the House changed hands.

   Waxman will probably go after the fat cats who are profiting from the war. They smell corporate blood.

   Posted by ACook at 12/19/2006 @ 7:24pm

4. I surely hope there's some accounting with the incoming Democratic majority and their committee chairpersonships, especially Conyers.

   The obfuscating legalisms used to deny us the names of the "energy task force" at the start of this mess of an administration would be a good starting place to begin "negating the negation" (Marx), IMHO.

   Posted by lewwelge at 12/19/2006 @ 9:07pm

5. Oh, come on Mr Nichols...this isn't about "testifying before Congress"...this is about...

   "The Genius of Impeachment can be found at independent bookstores and at www.amazon.com"

   No Bush/Cheney impeachment (which Pelosi, CONYERS, etc said was "off the table")...your book ends up in the $1 bin. With it...sequel time....maybe movie rights (I'd get the whole cast from "9/11 DC" in it).

   Posted by Mask at 12/19/2006 @ 9:41pm

6. Oh, come on Mask...this isn't about "actually having a relevant point"...this is about...

   "The Genius of Mask can be found at the begining of every Nation blog and before he thinks to hard"

   Posted by Malcontent at 12/19/2006 @ 10:13pm

7. Cheney under oath... that would be a sight to see.

   Surely he has nothing to hide. why resist?

   (Who dares disturb the Great Oz?!)

   Posted by crabwalk at 12/19/2006 @ 11:36pm

8. Posted by MALCONTENT 12/19/2006 @ 10:13pm

   Eric, you taking over the "MASK Obsessive" job since LILLIAN got embaressed out of the job last week???

   Posted by Mask at 12/20/2006 @ 07:18am

9. Plame? Why? She wasn't covert.

   Posted by woodyee at 12/20/2006 @ 08:47am

10. Posted by RIO BRAVO 12/19/2006 @ 8:17pm

    it's a good thing you don't find yourself in a 3 sided box, you could be stuck for weeks.

    Posted by crabwalk at 12/20/2006 @ 09:21am

11. How about Atta in the Czeck republic? or aluminum tubes? Or "there is no doubt saddam is reconstituting his nuclear program"?

    I bet if cheney put his hand on a bible one of them would burst into flames.

    Although congress is a lot like the caged birds Cheney like to "hunt". Clipped wings and all.

    Posted by crabwalk at 12/20/2006 @ 09:31am

12. I am still waiting for the truth on Hillarys billing records, travel office, stock trades....

    Posted by john maasch at 12/20/2006 @ 09:34am

13. Hey Eric,

    From a previous post...what do you do or what business do you own/run and sweep out at the end of the day? Where do you live?(what state?)

    Posted by john maasch at 12/20/2006 @ 09:36am

14. Posted by JOHN MAASCH 12/20/2006 @ 09:34am

    Yea, those are huge constitutional issues. that an independent prosecutor spent years looking into. And what did he find? Squat.

    Posted by crabwalk at 12/20/2006 @ 10:08am

15. This is just sick!!! SICK SICK SICK!!!

    Goldman's co-presidents, Gary D. Cohn, 46, and Jon Winkelried, 47, each received $25.7 million in restricted stock and options. John L. Weinberg, co-head of investment banking, was awarded $15.2 million in restricted stock and options.

    It has been a good year to be on Wall Street and an even better one to be running the show. John J. Mack, chief executive of Morgan Stanley, received a $41.1 million bonus last week -- also a record, but a record that lasted less than a week. He is also entitled to $5.2 million in 2006, part of a five-year signing bonus, bringing his total 2006 compensation to $46.6 million.

    Richard S. Fuld Jr., chairman and chief executive of Lehman Brothers, is also having a good year. The bank recently disclosed that he would be paid $189 million over 10 years as a result of changes in options grants precipitated by the firm's stock appreciation. He was also awarded $11 million in options last week

    ----

    Making sacrifices while the nation is at war. While they move companies to China and Mexico. I say outsource these Fat, greedy Robber Barons. Oh no. we have laws against the.

    Posted by crabwalk at 12/20/2006 @ 10:11am

16. Chimpy Live: incoherent, say nothing. Obfuscate, dodge, avoid. Spin.

    He is "listening". But does he hear?

    Posted by crabwalk at 12/20/2006 @ 10:14am

17. "We are in the BEGINNING of a conflict"-chimp.

    The beginning? i thought it was "mission accomplished". Flip, flop.

    Posted by crabwalk at 12/20/2006 @ 10:18am

18. You know what those guys at Lehman need? Tax breaks. They don't keep enough of their take-home pay.

    Posted by crabwalk at 12/20/2006 @ 10:25am

19. The important thing here is that every American girl and boy realizes that becoming a fat cat who makes millions for doing next to nothing is a noble and realistic dream to have. What they don't need to know (and will probably never care to know) is that for every Cohn, Winkelried and Mack there one thousand million people eeking out an existence on less than a dollar a day, and another thousand million getting by with under two dollars a day. But hey, see no evil, know no evil. Besides, being in bad shape economically is increasingly equated to being bad in general according to the blasé evaluations of humanity conducted these days in the US of A. Go for the gold and fuck everyone else.

    Posted by chimichenga at 12/20/2006 @ 10:42am

20. As usual, Nichols gets it 180 degrees wrong. There is this little principle that has bode our nation well throughout it's history; it's called the Separation of Powers. In the case of Cheney that is specifically called Executive Privilege.

    LL, you need to take a closer look at your links. None of the cases there deal with a Congressional subpoena of Executive Branch conversations. The prior litigation re Cheney's Task Force doesn't provide much clarity either. The GAO dropped its litigation so we don't really have anything on point re the power of a Congressional subpoena re claims of Executive Privilege. The suits pressed by The Sierra Club and Judicial Watch involved discovery requests by private litigants and don't raise the separation of powers issues that a Congressional subpoena would raise.

    Posted by brunowe at 12/20/2006 @ 11:45am

21. I am still waiting for the truth on Hillarys billing records, travel office, stock trades....

    Posted by JOHN MAASCH 12/20/2006 @ 09:34am | ignore this person

    you're living in the past. the future awaits, the present requires your attention.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 12/20/2006 @ 11:47am

22. Go for the gold and fuck everyone else.

    Posted by CHIMICHENGA 12/20/2006 @ 10:42am

    Or move to Colombia and bitch about how rotten the US is...either way, you're not changing anything.

    Posted by Mask at 12/20/2006 @ 12:05pm

23. JM living in the past???

    No, no, no. The guy has been thinking and reformulating opinions based on a changing world, changing data, right JM?

    Cheney and his back room 1930's style skullduggery politics will have him doing jail time (unless he dies of heart complications before the judicial system unravels his enormous ball of bullshit).

    Posted by freedomplease at 12/20/2006 @ 12:10pm

24. "if cheney's talking"...he's talking out the side of his mouth...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 12/20/2006 @ 12:18pm

25. Cheney and his back room 1930's style skullduggery politics will have him doing jail time

    Posted by FREEDOMPLEASE 12/20/2006 @ 12:10am

    How much would you bet on that, FP? (yep, asked before)...kid's college tuition?....house payment?.....cable TV payment?....loose change?

    Posted by Mask at 12/20/2006 @ 1:09pm

26. SINCE MOST OF THE THINGS THAT COME OUT OF BUSH AND CHANEYS MOUTHS ARE LIES, AND NO ONE QUESTIONS THEM (IT'S AGAINST THE RULES)JUST HOW WILL THIS SWORN TESTAMENT BE VERIFIED.GET REAL, THIS IS GOING TO BE AS BIG A JOKE AS THE ELECTIONS THEY STOLE

    Posted by SAMBO at 12/20/2006 @ 3:56pm

27. Eric, you taking over the "MASK Obsessive" job since LILLIAN got embaressed out of the job last week???

    Posted by MASK 12/20/2006 @ 07:18am | ignore this person

    Embarassed? I pointed out yet more examples of Mask making up 'quotes' and claiming other people said them and/or claiming other people hold political opinions based, not on anything THEY actually said but on his own pure fantasies. And yet, rather than be embarrased himself for filling the board with these kinds of steaming, smelling piles he pulls directly from his anus, he somehow thinks I'm embarrased?!?!

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

    Now THAT'S funny!

    (And talk about obsession!!! I've been too busy to actually post much lately but obviously Mask noticed AND COMMENTED on my absence!! Poor baby!)

    Posted by Lillian at 12/20/2006 @ 5:46pm

28. steaming, smelling piles he pulls directly from his anus,

    Posted by LILLIAN 12/20/2006 @ 5:46pm

    you know, lillian, some exremely disturbed folks get into that stuff...i read somewhere that hitler was like that...

    you're not crushin' on the old maskarooni, are you?

    ;)

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 12/20/2006 @ 7:22pm

29. ooooh - stinking smelling piles!

    lol

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 12/20/2006 @ 7:25pm

30. Posted by LILLIAN 12/20/2006 @ 5:46pm

    Okay....here we go---LILLIAN on "quoting" JOHN MAASCH---

    "Not those words exactly Thrawn. More a combination of many posts over the year or so I've been around here."

    ---Posted by LILLIAN 12/08/2006 @ 10:39am

    --BLOG | Posted 12/08/2006 @ 12:01am Only a Rainbow Will Win--Katrina vanden Heuvel

    Posted by Mask at 12/21/2006 @ 09:04am

31. Posted by MASK 12/21/2006 @ 09:04am

    Regardless of your view on Lil's opinion of Maash, I don't see where she made up any quotations, on his behalf.

    She gave her perception, right or wrong, of Maash's point of view, based on what he actually posted.

    If you tried that, you might get responses to your arguments, instead of repeated posts, where people deny saying the words you put in their mouths, while cussing you.

    Move on. Get a point, before you try to make one.

    Me obsessed? I just put a pot of boiling water on, for you and your cat...but other than that.... ( I prefer my men to be less full of shit...makes a mess).

    Eric

    Posted by Malcontent at 12/21/2006 @ 10:04am

32. While MASK is about as creative as a cucumber and as steady as a pussywillow, he does indeed possess a flamboyance when it comes to demonstrating his talent for spluttering from his ass, which has a voice with no other pretension than to fill the air with squalid noise...

    Posted by chimichenga at 12/21/2006 @ 10:25am

33. She gave her perception, right or wrong, of Maash's point of view, based on what he actually posted.

    If you tried that, you might get responses to your arguments, instead of repeated posts, where people deny saying the words you put in their mouths, while cussing you.

    Eric

    Posted by MALCONTENT 12/21/2006 @ 10:04am

    OK, Eric....you asked for it....

    "That would be exactly the point Thrawn. Having and/or flaunting affluence is NOT evidence of "knowing how money works." Yet John regularly conflates the two, flauting his wealth as defacto proof that he "knows how money works.""

    Posted by LILLIAN 12/07/2006 @ 11:35pm

    I hate to get into a personal feud, but this has honestly bugged me. Can you produce a specific post where John says "I have lots of money, ergo I alone know how money works"?

    Posted by THRAWN 12/08/2006 @ 01:17am

    Now, explain the "subtle differences" (hehe) between your attack on ME for "quotes" and your defense of LIL for "quotes"?!?!??

    Posted by Mask at 12/21/2006 @ 10:41am

34. Posted by CHIMICHENGA 12/21/2006 @ 10:25am

    Okay now try it in the native tongue of the country you're a citizen of, CHIMI....

    Would it start???? "Mientras que la MÁSCARA es alrededor tan creativa como un pepino y tan constantemente como un pussywillow..."???

    or no change?

    Posted by Mask at 12/21/2006 @ 10:43am

35. What do our resident apologists think of the signing statement "President" Bush put on the India nuclear deal?

    Yeah your "President" shows once again that he doesn't consider Congress to be an equal branch of government.

    HAIL TO KING GEORGE. BOW DOWN AT HIS FEET YOU WORTHLESS MORTALS.

    Posted by freedomplease at 12/21/2006 @ 10:56am

36. Having now ignored the here ignoble miasmatic marauder per Johannsrolf's prompting some week or so ago, I find myself satisfyingly stronger at this site.

    Posted by lewwelge at 12/21/2006 @ 11:03am

37. Posted by MASK 12/21/2006 @ 10:43am | ignore this person

    Rey de Cabrónes,

    No soy ciudadano de este lindísimo país hasta que me case con la paisa de mis sueños aunque sí he echado raíces acá. Es mala la traducción arriba pero será porque lo hiciste por la compu (claro no hablas otro idioma sino el del imperio). Que sigas esputando la misma mierda de simpre en tu estilo tan rayado...

    Posted by chimichenga at 12/21/2006 @ 11:05am

38. Dammit, Chime! Now you have to post the translation, too!

    Posted by brantl at 12/21/2006 @ 11:32am

39. Make the Vice President swear to tell the truth, make the President swear to tell the truth. They will raise objections, they'll say if you dont drop this oath shhit I wont even talk, but MAKE THEM swear to tell the truth. No handlers, no earpieces, check the "men" for earpieces before they talk, if they drag their feet about it just be rude. These are terrible people who are killing Americans needlessly and making us less safe.

    Posted by LiberalPride at 12/21/2006 @ 11:37am

40. Posted by LIBERALPRIDE 12/21/2006 @ 11:37am | ignore this person

    As George Carlin so aptly put it, "If honesty were suddenly introduced into American life, the whole system would collapse!"

    Posted by chimichenga at 12/21/2006 @ 11:47am

41. CHIMI,

    Obviamente, Máscara es un payoso y pesado muy fuerte, especialimente en sus comentarios con respecto de los hechos de EEUU en el mundo extranjero de su terra. Sin embargo, hay blancos mucho más divertido para pegar dentro de esto pagína. Mi blanco favorito es Juan Maasch, el hombre PECHO-PELO-ISIMO, gordo, sin cerebro, fanitico por la patria (que en el realidad, odia), bufon de la derecha, que necisita un sujetador. Como un pobre mascota (quizá perro, sin los huevos y con "sanchez sucio"), Juan pueda hacer solomente los reflejos segun del voz de su dueño. Si Juan Maasch cambiaría su tiempo a la teclado por otros actividades pisicos -- ej., para andar, o correr, o nadar -- el no será Señor Pecho-Pelo. Pero, en esta caso, será un otro universo a donde los cerdos vuelen.

    Brazos, espero que estas muy bien ...

    Posted by Glenn Lemon at 12/21/2006 @ 12:05pm

42. CHIMI,

    Obviamente, Máscara es un payoso y pesado muy fuerte, especialimente en sus comentarios con respecto de los hechos de EEUU en el mundo extranjero de su terra. Sin embargo, hay blancos mucho más divertido para pegar dentro de esto pagína. Mi blanco favorito es Juan Maasch, el hombre PECHO-PELO-ISIMO, gordo, sin cerebro, fanitico por la patria (que en el realidad, odia), bufon de la derecha, que necisita un sujetador. Como un pobre mascota (quizá perro, sin los huevos y con "sanchez sucio"), Juan pueda hacer solomente los reflejos segun del voz de su dueño. Si Juan Maasch cambiaría su tiempo a la teclado por otros actividades pisicos -- ej., para andar, o correr, o nadar -- el no será Señor Pecho-Pelo. Pero, en esta caso, será un otro universo a donde los cerdos vuelen.

    Brazos, espero que estas muy bien ...

    Posted by GLENN LEMON 12/21/2006 @ 12:05am | ignore this person

    gosh, I love that kind of talk.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 12/21/2006 @ 12:08pm

43. JOHANNES,

    OK, although I rather like the occasional exchanges here in German just to see what -- if anything -- I can decipher. Answer: Surprisingly little, particularly since English and German are ostensibley part of the same family of languages. But Latin is more fun.

    ¡Brazos paratí tambien!

    Posted by Glenn Lemon at 12/21/2006 @ 12:12pm

44. particularly since English and German are ostensibley part of the same family of languages.

    nothing ostensible about it. German underwent a consonant shift or two. once you understand that, the similarity between english and german will be much clearer.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 12/21/2006 @ 12:17pm

45. our languages are also related to Sanskrit, hence the indo-germanic languages. we learend the "our father" in gothic, atta unsar, tui in himinam....

    Posted by johannesrolf at 12/21/2006 @ 12:18pm

46. JOHANNES,

    At the expense of "losing the thread" and burdening you and your knowledge, can you give a couple of examples of the "consonant shift or two"?

    Posted by Glenn Lemon at 12/21/2006 @ 12:20pm

47. JR,

    No biggie, just some analysis of the clown MAASCH B'GOSH and what an easy target he makes being the "neutered canine with a Dirty Sanchez" he is, wagging his tail at every comment from his masters.

    Posted by chimichenga at 12/21/2006 @ 12:24pm

48. CHIMI left out the part about "la sujetador" (je je) ...

    Posted by Glenn Lemon at 12/21/2006 @ 12:31pm

49. GLEN LEMON,

    Looks like you can speak and write some español (unlike MASK who uses an extremely lousy internet translator that makes him sound as insensible in latin lingo as in his mother tongue). Is MAASCH in fact a fleshy faux bonhomme as you say?

    Posted by chimichenga at 12/21/2006 @ 12:35pm

50. Glenn, it would be my pleasure. water to Wasser, there are of course many. the south of germany underwent two consonant shifts, the north only one. in the dialect in Hamburg, it's Water instead of Wasser. it's all pretty interesting linguistics. the only languages in europe that aren't part of that glorious indo germanic are the Finno Ugric languages, ie Finnish and Hungarian.

    by the way I was not complaining, merely joking

    Posted by johannesrolf at 12/21/2006 @ 12:39pm

51. JOHANNES,

    Putting aside some other novel and nearly dead Euro-tongues like Cornish and Frisian -- What about Euskera, the alleged Basque language?

    CHIMI,

    No había visto los pechos de Juan-i, gracias a dios. Pero, el dijo que el lo tiene. ¿Por que? Creo porque el piensa que todo la gente de esta lugar tiene intrés en sus problemas, su histronismo y sus fracasos varios. Entonces, supongo es verdad que Jaun-i tiene pechos, el es el experto. Y, sabes, es muy, muy facile para provocar un estado de humor malo en Juan-i, la mascota de la derecha, con commentarios con respecto de su aspecto fatal. Sin duda, el aspecto es un mezclada del pelo del cuerpo masculino -- y bustos enormes. ¡Joder!

    Posted by Glenn Lemon at 12/21/2006 @ 12:52pm

52. Frisian is a Germanic group of closely related languages, spoken by about half a million members of Frisian ethnic groups living on the southern fringes of the North Sea in the Netherlands and Germany. Frisian languages are the most closely related living European languages to English - indeed, it is said that someone from northern Britain who concentrates very hard would be able to understand some Frisian{citation}. It has also been asserted that fishermen from Great Yarmouth, in Norfolk, could understand fishers from Harlingen in Friesland. Although on the whole English and Frisian are unintelligible to each other, there are similarities to both Dutch and Danish, whose speakers are able to understand some spoken Frisian.

    The Cornish language (in Cornish: Kernowek, Kernewek, Curnoack) is one of the Brythonic group of Celtic languages

    all of these appear to be indo germanic

    Posted by johannesrolf at 12/21/2006 @ 1:22pm

53. as a yout I spent some time in Wangerooge, a Frisian isle.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 12/21/2006 @ 1:23pm

54. JOHANNES,

    Very interesting posts above - I too enjoy the history of languages and the changes they undergo during their lifetime. I remember reading years ago that of the world's 6000 or so languages, 1000 are spoken in Papua New Guinnea. Wild stuff. BTW, do you know when the roots of German began to sprout and where?

    Posted by chimichenga at 12/21/2006 @ 1:39pm

55. from wiki

    The history of the German language begins with the High German consonant shift during the Migration period, separating South Germanic dialects from common West Germanic. The earliest testimonies of Old High German are from scattered Elder Futhark inscriptions, especially in Alemannic, from the 6th century, the earliest glosses (Abrogans) date to the 8th and the oldest coherent texts (the Hildebrandslied, the Muspilli and the Merseburg Incantations) to the 9th century. Old Saxon at this time belongs to the North Sea Germanic cultural sphere, and Low Saxon should fall under German rather than Anglo-Frisian influence during the Holy Roman Empire.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 12/21/2006 @ 2:12pm

56. german is now full of english words, almost unrecognizably so, and sometimes hilarious.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 12/21/2006 @ 2:12pm

57. Posted by CHIMICHENGA 12/21/2006 @ 11:05am

    Thought so. I figure as much as you bad mouth America and Americans...you're hanging onto that citizenship for dear life. Like I said, expect your novia de la futura to WANT you to hang onto it. Of course, you may be honest and recind your American citizenship as soon as you can....but I doubt it.

    BTW, I figured a computer translation would work just as well....artificial Spanish for an artificial Hispanic.

    Posted by Mask at 12/21/2006 @ 2:37pm

58. Posted by LVLIBERTY1 12/21/2006 @ 3:30pm

    Sorry, LL....T.E. Lawrence doesn't analogize to this guy. Colonel Nicholson is trying to build up a GOVERNMENTAL army to put down a civil war amongst Sunnis and Shiias, by primarily training a Sunni army to fight their fellow "Iraqis" who are Shiia.

    Lawrence was training an OPPRESSED Arab population to FIGHT a Governmental army (that of the Ottomans).

    There's no analogy. No disparagement against the colonel, but it don't hold water to compare the two.

    Posted by Mask at 12/21/2006 @ 3:50pm

59. Now, explain the "subtle differences" (hehe) between your attack on ME for "quotes" and your defense of LIL for "quotes"?!?!??

    Posted by MASK 12/21/2006 @ 10:41am | ignore this person

    Wow Mask. I'm sorry but you have proven yourself over and over again to be an absolute utter mororn when it comes to the use of quotes, haven't you.

    Take a look again at what Thrawn posted...

    I hate to get into a personal feud, but this has honestly bugged me. Can you produce a specific post where John says "I have lots of money, ergo I alone know how money works"?

    Posted by THRAWN 12/08/2006 @ 01:17am

    I've bolded the part you need to pay attention to, just so you can follow along. Now look at what I posted...

    That would be exactly the point Thrawn. Having and/or flaunting affluence is NOT evidence of "knowing how money works." Yet John regularly conflates the two, flauting his wealth as defacto proof that he "knows how money works."

    Posted by LILLIAN 12/07/2006 @ 11:35pm

    You see how that works? When someone actually says the words, you get to place quotes around them when you repeat them...for the intellectually challenged like you Mask, we call that 'quoting' someone.

    Now notice how, when I was talking about John's comments...no quotes. By not placing quotes around the words, I indicate to readers that I'm communicating my perception and interpretation of his words and comments. If I had placed quotes around my perception and interpretation of his comments (which is something YOU constantly do), I would be communicating that I was quoting his exact words, which, in the world of debate, would be a rhetorical lie...which is why everyone considers YOU Mask to be a bald faced liar!

    While everyone else gets it Mask, I'm sure the distinction will continue to elude your pitiful intellect. I have no doubt that you'll continue to pull out of your anus your own perceptions and interpretations of other people's words, place 'quotes' around them, and try to pass them off as the words that others actually said...which is a MAJOR reason why everyone will continue to consider you to be utterly dishonest!

    Poor Mask.

    hehe

    Posted by Lillian at 12/23/2006 @ 01:45am