Yea. But my favorite is the NE Patriots spygate. All week long, before the Super Bowl, I listened to a lot of NFL talk radio on Sirius. The consensus of the talk show hosts was that this is a non-issue. This included the ex-football players who now work there.

I think it was Tim Ryan (ex-Bear D line) who had Arlen Spector on his show to ask him why he wanted to hold congressional hearings on this topic. It all came down to the rumors of what NE taped of the Phila Eagles before thier SB a couple yrs ago.

Ryan kept on asking Spector if there wasn't more impt things for him to be doing while in Congress. But Spector felt that holding these hearings was the most impt thing he could do for his consituents back in PA.


>>I've not seen any comments from congressmen along this line. I have seen some talk of impeachment that started with cheney because of this.
>>
>>The constant refrain that I've heard when impeachment talk comes up is that the dems are worried:
>>1) Somehow it will look like political grandstanding. Personally I still don't understand this one at all. Considering the ringer the repubs put Clinton thru.
>>
>>2) Somehow these congressmen think they are working on some really impt stuff. And spending lots of time on impeachment would reduce the amt of time that is available to spend on what they consider more impt.
>
>Like steroids in baseball?
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>>http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=4631535
>>>
>>>I guess the Democratic congress was more worried about his replacement. Doesn't explain how Bush managed to violate the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, a felony, and the Fourth Amendment without being impeached. Or his "signing statements" to turn inoperative over 800 laws or parts of laws passed by Congress. Cheney can hardly take credit for all that. All of these done under his powers as Commander in Chief during a 'time of war.'