There Are No Democrat Scandals!

Per this thread at Liberal Avenger, I decided to go check up on those angelic Democrats and find out if they really have always been so spic-and-span squeaky clean.

Of course, they haven't.

At Boycottliberalism.com, there's a list of scandals involving Democrats, ranging from merely the titilating (Jesse Jackson's love child) to the felonious (Daniel Rostenkowski's misuse of public funds).

Some of the things on this list are scandals in the loosest sense of that word, such as Gary Conditt's affair with Chandra Levy. And many of the offenders listed are at the state level (Gloria Davis and Bolley "Bo" Johnson, for instance). And yes, more than a few of the people listed are from the 1970s (such as the many Congressmen caught up in the Abscam scandal). But there's a surprising number of offenders from the 1990s, particularly from the Clinton administration, including William Jefferson Clinton himself, Sandy Berger, the Democratic National Committee, Hazel O'Leary, Melvin Reynolds, and Henry Cisneros.

So, the next time you run into a liberal who wants to claim, for instance, that Jack Abramoff only gave money to Republicans and therefore only Republicans are corrupt, just keep this page bookmarked for ammunition.

P.S.--I suspect I'm not long for the Liberal Avenger world. "Laine" has resorted to saying I'm "degrading and mean" because I said that the only way this war would be considered worse than Vietnam is if liberals and the press continue to paint it that way. There's the obligatory "you hijack my threads!" whine, which I've come to realize means that I offered an opinion that causes more comments than the poster's original pedantic thread. Sound familiar?

I'm really surprised at the thin-skinned behavior of these so-called "thoughtful" blogs. Isn't the point of having comments so that people can give divergent points of view? And if one dislikes a comment, is it just calling for too much maturity to expect them to ignore it? It's becoming evident that many of these blogs are just grown-up (in the loosest sense of that term) temper tantrums. Hey, they won the election. Why does that mean we can't challenge their conventional wisdom?