DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: sirs on November 09, 2006, 12:43:11 PM
-
How fast should we expect to see Impeachment proceedings? 1st week. 1st month at the latest right?
I mean, that was the big mantra from Dems, time and time again, both on their stump speeches & in the AM talk shows. So obviously they meant what they said, right?
I mean, it wouldn't have been a political ploy, maligning the president during a time of war, just for the hope of scoring policitial points, right? That'd be pretty disgusting if it were. Perhaps some good fodder for 2008 campaign speeches by the right, even
-
I have heard again and again to my chagrine Nancy Pelosi say that she won't seek an impeachment of Bush.
John Conyers, who I believe has said that W should be impeached, is going to head the committee that makes those decisions, I believe. Now, how they can reconcile their "promises" is beyond me.
You know where I stand but I don't get to vote on that. I will urge my newly-elected congressman Steve Cohen (who replaced the Bush-rubberstamping, torture-bill-signing HArold Ford) to vote for impeachment proceedings. He's a progressive but I don't think that he's going into it wanting to rock boats but he's a feisty sort.
The real concern for Reps like you is that the Dems will conduct actual oversight rather than good ole boy oversight and they'll jail those who broke laws. And when it winds up that Bush was ok with all the hands in the cookie jar and that he told lie after lie and resigns in shame to be pardoned by his toothless replacement, you will look like a fool.
That's a valid concern. For you.
-
I have heard again and again to my chagrine Nancy Pelosi say that she won't seek an impeachment of Bush.
Then obviously she didn't mean what she said regarding her claims of Bush & the war, and doesn't believe he actually did lie us into the war. In other words, she disgustingly used her rhetoric merely to score political points :(
-
How fast should we expect to see Impeachment proceedings? 1st week. 1st month at the latest right?
I mean, that was the big mantra from Dems, time and time again, both on their stump speeches & in the AM talk shows. So obviously they meant what they said, right?
I mean, it wouldn't have been a political ploy, maligning the president during a time of war, just for the hope of scoring policitial points, right? That'd be pretty disgusting if it were. Perhaps some good fodder for 2008 campaign speeches by the right, even
We are saving Bush for the Hague. We dont want to warn him by impeaching him, tho , you silly goose.
-
Maybe.
We'll see.
Having a bad day? Angry the nation is showing you that it is not happy with your cult leader? I understand. I was angry when Dean lost the primaries.
Don't give up.
-
Then obviously she didn't mean what she said regarding her claims of Bush & the war, and doesn't believe he actually did lie us into the war.
Actually, Pelosi was one of the few Dems that has (apparently) never claimed that Bush "lied us into war." At least, I've never a quote from her making that claim.
-
Actually, Pelosi was one of the few Dems that has (apparently) never claimed that Bush "lied us into war." At least, I've never a quote from her making that claim.
Perhaps not specifically "lied us int war", but pretty much everything else, including most recently how "dangerous" Bush was. I can find some quotes for you later this evening, if you wish Ami
-
Oh, it is so sad to see sirs having to backtrack.
What is the world coming to? A world (so clearly "conservative" and supporting the war) is voting Democrat and not happy with the way the war is going and SIRS is having to backtrack on some hyperbole.
Wonders never cease.
-
Oh, it is so sad to see sirs having to backtrack. What is the world coming to? A world is voting Democrat and not happy with the way the war is going and SIRS is having to backtrack on some hyperbole.
What the frell? Is not Pelosi the speaker of the House for the Dems? Is Pelosi the ONLY person I was referring to in my initial query? Is there not a throng of DC Dems who have perseverated on the "Bush lied..people died" form of accusations?
Are you now backtracking as what the Dems were saying?
-
Is lying to the American people a crime?
Personally, I think they ought to start with opening up Cheney's Energy meetings and go through all the Veep's records. He's deep in it and they'll find out what once they get to searching.
-
I was just talking about how you were having to backtrack on your Pelosi statement about her saying "Bush lied us into the war".
That's all.
Its' just an election, dude. Nobody's going to send you to a gulag or anything.
-
Oh, it is so sad to see sirs having to backtrack.
What is the world coming to? A world (so clearly "conservative" and supporting the war) is voting Democrat and not happy with the way the war is going and SIRS is having to backtrack on some hyperbole.
Wonders never cease.
Dont discourage him , Brass. I expected and am truly enjoying his incessant loser whining.
-
Is lying to the American people a crime?
But if people died as a result of these "lies" is not that an impeachable offense?
-
I was just talking about how you were having to backtrack on your Pelosi statement about her saying "Bush lied us into the war".
I NEVER said Pelosi said ANYTHING, outside of her claims of Bush & the war. YOU brought Pelosi into the discussion
-
For going to war?
What would you charge someone with for that, if you actually believed it were true?
Some people said that about Clinton and Kosovo as well. Jay (wonder where he is now) who used to be around and then ran that blog with Jane used to have a litany of reasons why Kosovo was a war Clinton lied us into. Even if you believe it, what charge are you going to use?
-
For going to war?
If it was founded on a littany of lies, and that our men & women in uniform who were put at risk and died as a result of such lies, not to mention all the collateral death, why wouldn't it?
What would you charge someone with for that, if you actually believed it were true?
Let's ask Tee & Brass
Some people said that about Clinton and Kosovo as well.
I wasn't one of them
-
Isn't Lying to Congress a crime?
Wouldn't it at least be considering a "misdemeanor" as in "high crimes and..."?
-
For going to war?
What would you charge someone with for that, if you actually believed it were true?
Some people said that about Clinton and Kosovo as well. Jay (wonder where he is now) who used to be around and then ran that blog with Jane used to have a litany of reasons why Kosovo was a war Clinton lied us into. Even if you believe it, what charge are you going to use?
My old buddy, Jay < gave up political blogging (probly cause he was never correc, but alway right) and the last time I heard gone into sports blogging. He is the reverse Keith Olberman.
-
I think Jay gave up on political blogging because he didn't have the stomach that RR and Sirs have for carrying the GOP's garbage.
-
I think Jay gave up on political blogging because he didn't have the stomach that RR and Sirs have for carrying the GOP's garbage.
Left's lies of the right's garbage is the world's reality :-\
-
I think Jay gave up on political blogging because he didn't have the stomach that RR and Sirs have for carrying the GOP's garbage.
Maybe he just got sick of being called a Nazi and decided to avoid those slinging insults?
-
Maybe he just got sick of being called a Nazi and decided to avoid those slinging insults?
You mean, he became a liberal?
-
You mean, he became a liberal?
I didn't say he wanted to become one of those people slinging insults. Where did you get that from?
8)
-
Maybe he just got sick of being called a Nazi and decided to avoid those slinging insults?
He must not comment on College Football in the South then.
-
http://www.popandsports.com/
-
How fast should we expect to see Impeachment proceedings? 1st week. 1st month at the latest right?
They won't impeach and they won't end the war.
They will simply change vendors.
-
They won't impeach and they won't end the war.
They will simply change vendors.
See, now I don't really believe that either. The people who were elected, a goodly number of them, were anti-war. I don't think that impeachment really is the goal for a lot of them but I DO think that they will startmaking some real decisions on how to get out of Iraq. And if they can't think of a way out, they won't say it. Expecially if they're running for re-election.
-
They won't impeach and they won't end the war.
BT, I agree. The total number of congress is fixed at 435. Only 31 have been replaced. Of the upper house there are 100 and only six of those have been replaced. The fact is the greater majority of both houses voted to grant Bush his ever desire. I'd say everyone on the hill is terrified of the possible domino effect if Bush is impeached. I believe, President Bush will be protected by those who were corrupted by the Bush Administration. I believe, The New World Order, has undermine the U.S. Constitution and both parties, Dems and Reps are guilty of duplicity. I also believe, this is no longer a "conspiracy theory" there is overwhelming evidence that will show foreign governments and multinational corporations are dictating to the house. The 37 new representatives are freshman, they will have little to no influence in the new congress. We need oversight, if the Democrats fail to deliver that oversight, we need to hang one lantern in the old north church in Boston.
-
One of the main fellas that led the Bush lied us into war diatribes apparently doens't think it's a big deal now. I guess it really was simply to score political points. Can't get much more disgustingly pathetic, in my book
Howard Dean to Jon Stewart: We Won't Impeach Bush
By E&P Staff
Published: November 08, 2006
NEW YORK Appearing on Comedy Central's "The Daily Show" tonight, Democratic Party chief Howard Dean told host Jon Stewart, "I know half your audience wants us to impeach the president" -- this drew wide cheers -- "but it's not going to happen."
Stewart apologized to Dean, and admitted he was wrong, for telling him on a previous appearance that the Democrats could not possibly win unless they staked out a clear policy on Iraq and other issues. (sirs; which is apparent that they didn't, and which also helps validate that this wasn't so much the Dems that beat the Republicans, it was much more that the Republicans who beat themselves)
He also noted the two key breakups announced Wednesday: Britney and KFed and Bush and "DFeld," as Stewart called Donald Rumsfeld.
Stewart also said that President Bush seemed a bit humbled during his press conference today and perhaps was ready to compromise and work with the Democrats. Dean reminded him that this was the same person who brought us "Rumsfeld and Cheney."
Later, on the Colbert Report, host Stephen Colbert noted the election success enjoyed by nearly everyone who had appeared on his show this year, such as Rep. Eliot Engel of New York -- who had let him comb his moustache.
John Hall, who won a stunning upset, also in upstate New York -- after getting what Colbert called "The Colbert Bump"-- returned to the show and the two sang a rousing version of "The Star Spangled Banner." They had done the same in Hall's first visit, but it was cut from the show-- but ended up on YouTube. So this one was for everyone. Hall is the former leader of the rock group Orleans.
http://editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003379813&imw=Y
-
It is beyond obvious that Juniorbush and Cheney both lied like orange shag throw rugs to get the US into this useless and unwinnable war. Both of them deserve impeachment, conviction, removal from office and major prison time for all the evil crap they did as well as their gross incompetence.
But they will probably get away with their crimes, simply because what the country needs is an end to this foolish war and a return to decent democratic government.
-
It is beyond obvious that Juniorbush and Cheney both lied like orange shag throw rugs to get the US into this useless and unwinnable war. Both of them deserve impeachment, conviction, removal from office and major prison time for all the evil crap they did as well as their gross incompetence.
But they will probably get away with their crimes, simply because what the country needs is an end to this foolish war and a return to decent democratic government.
And let the rationalizations begin
-
What rationalizations?
Are you aware that you have yet to convince a single soul that Juniorbush and Cheney did not lie?
It does not require any sort of argument to know that people died as a result of this useless war. About 3,000 dead and over 20,000 wounded and counting.
I was merely stating my speculation that Junioorbush abd Cheney, who DESERVE major prison time, will not have to do any, because returning the nation to the pre-W state is far more important to everyone.
-
Are you aware that you have yet to convince a single soul that Juniorbush and Cheney did not lie?
Funny, I thought it was up to the people making the contention that they did lie to provide the evidence.
As BT opined, being wrong does not a liar make.
If it did, I have provided evidence that you are a liar, since I have shown you to be wrong several times.
-
What rationalizations?
Those that now try to explain away why supposedly "lying us into war", "outing CIA agents", "illegally listening in to innocent american's phone calls", "supporting torture", yada, blah, etc, is now not worthy of impeachment procedings, by the folks who were red faced in their accusations of such. If that's what DC Dems believed, then it's their constitutional duty to impeach him. Brass has already listed several "charges" that supposedly can be applied
Unless of course, they didn't believe it, but used it 24/7 to finesse the electorate to perceive such, and that it was all just to pathetically attempt to score political hatchet points. My hats off, it worked