Will George Bush be impeached part 2?

[Lavoruis]

So with a new congress & some of his ex loyal republicans
siding with most democrats ,
about how Bush has messed everything up.
Or do think its grand" standing?

[spammityspam]

I don't think he'll be impeached. They won't think it's worth the effort; with as far ahead of itself as politics is moving these days, he was a lame duck the second he won his second term.

'Course, the man I really want to see impeached right now is Cheney and his magical fourth branch of the U.S. Government. Is he serious?

[Gentlemen Death]

All I got to say is this...He was voted in on a second term, leave it at that...:cool:

[DarkJedi]

Why would George Bush be impeached?

Look. Even as a Texan, I understand he can be mighty annoying (He is annoying)...But even I know he can't wait till 2008-2009. He can't wait till he's done and some other dipshit we vote in takes over the job. I can't wait till he's back home and some other dipshit we vote in takes over just so I don't have to hear how bad Texas sucks...(lmao).

It doesn't really matter to me.

We're still not progressing our space program enough in the next 30-60 years. We're still screwed.

lol Basically, Mankind is totally fucked.

We need more private companies to tell the world..."Hey, fuck you, we'll be on Mars and asteroids & we'll be mining minerals by 2018...Try to catch up!" before we get off our lazy asses and do something.

As sad as it sounds, I say.....If we don't do something by 2,120...Mankind is royally fucked.

[Nostromo]

Bush is dieing a slow, messy political death and he's taking the Republican party with him. Why risk impeachment proceedings which will be viewed by some as the Dems on a witch hunt. Dubya tied the noose and threw it over the tree branch. The horse he's riding on will bolt soon enough. Voters and the writers of history will do the rest.
N

[DarkJedi]

Yeah....right.

Let me tell you, Nost...that both the Republicans AND the Democrats are both full of shit.

(This is coming from a Republican.)

[tstone]

Believe you me, if mankind is screwed, the corporations, here or in space, aren't our saviors.

Just look at their history for the truth of the matter.

We aren't screwed, though. We are just going through a dark time. These happen, and we will get through it.


Why would George Bush be impeached?

Look. Even as a Texan, I understand he can be mighty annoying (He is annoying)...But even I know he can't wait till 2008-2009. He can't wait till he's done and some other dipshit we vote in takes over the job. I can't wait till he's back home and some other dipshit we vote in takes over just so I don't have to hear how bad Texas sucks...(lmao).

It doesn't really matter to me.

We're still not progressing our space program enough in the next 30-60 years. We're still screwed.

lol Basically, Mankind is totally fucked.

We need more private companies to tell the world..."Hey, fuck you, we'll be on Mars and asteroids & we'll be mining minerals by 2018...Try to catch up!" before we get off our lazy asses and do something.

As sad as it sounds, I say.....If we don't do something by 2,120...Mankind is royally fucked.

[Outsydr]

As for whether or not an impeachment would be considered a wated effort, remember: the Clinton impeachment hearings were held in the second year of his second term. And the circumstances of his impeachment movement were (I feel) for far less substancial impact than what George W. Bush could be accused of having done.

But I agree with spammity. Chaney's shadow governing is something far more disturbing. If anyone should be made to answer for his actions.

[spammityspam]

Clinton's impeachment was also under different conditions than Bush is currently under. Clinton had Crazy Ass Ken Star to work around, and it also wasn't wartime. Whether or not a leader is completely nuts, during a wartime people would rather chew off their own legs than kick out of the bear trap. We usually like to be consistent, even if it's consistently bad.

Besides, if he were to be impeached, I'd be terrified to have Cheney in that much real power, even just for a year. Nancy Pelosi I like, but she'd polarize people really badly -- I think she's a little too liberal for the presidency, which really needs a moderate person to run things efficiently. I don't know if anyone would pull a gun on her, because the people who do that I'd think usually wouldn't shoot a woman point blank, but then again they might. That's my major fear for Barack Obama, who's definitely my favorite for the presidency in 2008. He's gonna get shot.

[Outsydr]

I don't think he'll get shot. I think he'll get smeared. That's already started with this bullshit terrorist link that people are trying to attach to him.

[Lavoruis]

Be careful for what you wish, for DJ more private companies
I think were controlled enough, in my opinion.
no thanks.
Space exploration is a joke, it always has.
If you believe in the notion, in other people like us from different
galaxies coming here then, theres no point to further space
exploration.
The New Dark Ages started in the 1990's
and we are right in the middle of it.

[spammityspam]

I think there's still a lot to be gained from space exploration, and not necessarily, like, LET US ENSLAVE OTHER CIVILIZATIONS AND MAKE THEM DO OUR BIDDING MUAHAHA LASERS. I think our oil's going to run out before we come up with cheap, clean alternative resources (that aren't nuclear power, because people still freak out about it), and if we were to find it something to keep us truckin' on another planet, well, that could be cool. 'Course, the planet would have to have had life on it, so not much chance of that, but the stuff we learn about other planets can help us understand our own better -- and with enough mirrors, we can terraform Mars, which might need to happen. We keep trying to raise third-world countries out of poverty, but since we're giving them money but not birth control, we're coming up fast on that awkward "population explosion" phase before they start having their own social movements again. The space program's mostly a joke because we won't freakin' fund it, like most other things we don't fund.

Outsydr, you've probably got a point. It's so much more effective, too -- mudslinging doesn't have the side effect of martyrdom. The Wahabi school isn't going to look good, even if he's, you know, not a terrorist, which he isn't, and the best man for the job, which he is. I just don't know if the country's ready for a president who's not white and perceived to be strongly Christian. And I have the nasty feeling he's going to pull Hillary aboard as a VP, because we're still more ready for a black Muslim than we are for Hillary Clinton, but even as number two she'll kill the ticket. I think, anyway.

Of course, my economics teacher from last year has accurately predicted the outcome of every presidential election since 1972, and she says it's Barack, but... I have my doubts, still.

[Gentlemen Death]

Speaking of Presidential hopefulls....Who are you guys interested in right now??

[Space Tycoon]

Speaking of Presidential hopefulls....Who are you guys interested in right now??

Ron Paul. (http://www.ronpaul2008.com/) My favourite Texan. :anismirk:

I am not going to explain my reasons why. Those of you who waste your time reading my stuff know the reasons why what Dr. Paul says totally resonates with me.






.

[dsilva]

I donno if it'l actually happen or not but i sure as hell hope they throw the book at him. He is a disgrace and does'nt deserve to be spared for the mess he created.
{I appologise if i hurt anyone sentiments with my comment but this is how i honestly feel.}

[Space Tycoon]

The Bush administration is guilty of one of the greatest crimes imaginable; starting a war based on lies, leading to the deaths of thousands upon thousands of innocent Iraqis, not to mention American and British soldiers

I'd be happy to see either him or his neocon advisers in prison for life.

I would advise far harsher sentencing recomendations... but you never know who else may be reading this. :OhWell:




.

[tstone]

Dems-Barak Obama, though I think Hil would make a better prez than some might give her cred for. And it would piss off the annoying fanatical types in the right wing, which is always fun.

GOP-Mitt Romney, and I would consider Rudy.

[whitetemplar78]

You know, I love the A.D.D problem this country has.......the Clintons were one of the most powerful shadow Presidents we had, my god, he made Kennedy look like a saint, and some of the shit he got away with.......lordy.....Whitewater, Travel-gate....buttt cause he was sooo charming, and had a nice smile for the camera, he got away with it. He's remembered as a nice President, because he always went with the polls! if the wind blew this way one day, so did he, and if it changed, so did he!! He was blessed with being president when the policies of several of his predecessors came to fruit, and heeeee got the credit....

And now people want to put his wife, the real President back in power??...sorry she had her 8 years, my god most of the smear campaign that’s hitting Obama is coming from her camp!!, this is how the Clintons play politics, as much as I like Obama, I don't know if he can beat the Clinton machine....

So my hopes are that Thompson, or Rudy make it, cause if they make it to the general election they have the weight to beat her. We can't forgot that a huge majority of normal Americans are moderate, and lean more conservative then anything.......over 50 million voted W back into office, even in the face of growing proof that alot of what we knew may have been false.

And as low as Bush's numbers are, Congress, the true batch of incompetents are even lower....like in the 20's...

[Nostromo]

The one guy who should run says he isn't. Too bad for America.
N

http://www.nysun.com/article/56809

[Kaeos]

So my hopes are that Thompson, or Rudy make it, cause if they make it to the general election they have the weight to beat her. We can't forgot that a huge majority of normal Americans are moderate,

I really try to stay out of these things nowadays, but seriously man, Rudy? Your basically saying Clinton ran and governed on a smile and a wink. Yet you think Rudy has substance? Rudy's entire platform is "I was there on 9-11" Right. You were there in front of the camera's looking calm and cool and getting zero done. He was ordering the loaders in to scoop up debris and take it to the landfill when there were still 300 + firefighters missing.

Thompson? He's an actor. He was a 1 term politician. He's if i am not mistaken nearly 80 years old. He's a poster boy who carries no clout or qualifications. You got your eggs in the wrong basket man.

and lean more conservative then anything.......over 50 million voted W back into office, even in the face of growing proof that alot of what we knew may have been false.

Lean moderate? yes. Lean Conservative? I don't think so. If what you assert is true, then there should be no reason MTV, NBC, MSNBC, Youtube, pornography, and pretty much all mainstream movies and media are as succesfull as they are. Moderate? Sure. Conservative? Not even close. Over 50 million is will be FOREVER disputed and none of the alligations of election fraud have ever been proven false.

Even if they are - 50% voted conservative. 49% voted liberal. That's anot a very big margin. a "huge majority of Americans are moderate..." Yes I am with you there. "and lean more conservative." No disrespect intended, but your dreaming.

[spammityspam]

I think he's saying they lean more populist than conservative. They're fine with porn and MTV and economic conservatism, but they don't like gay marriage, abortion or healthcare, you know?

[Nostromo]

and let's not forget the atheist vote. Who's courting that? N :wink:


http://www.startribune.com/462/story/1291147.html

[tstone]

[QUOTE=whitetemplar78;75526]You know, I love the A.D.D problem this country has.......the Clintons were one of the most powerful shadow Presidents we had, my god, he made Kennedy look like a saint, and some of the shit he got away with.......lordy.....Whitewater, Travel-gate....buttt cause he was sooo charming, and had a nice smile for the camera, he got away with it. He's remembered as a nice President, because he always went with the polls! if the wind blew this way one day, so did he, and if it changed, so did he!! He was blessed with being president when the policies of several of his predecessors came to fruit, and heeeee got the credit....

[QUOTE]


How sad with all this stuff he supposedly was getting away with, according to the Rush Limbaughs and the friggin' cottage industry based around it, the only thing you could get him on was lying about a BLOW JOB.

And this, after a fishing expedition that had nothing to do with it.

:lol:

[Gentlemen Death]

IMO...Clinton was a moron....End of story for me, and I will not get into it....Or, try not too...:Smirk:


I personally, will probably go for McCain or Rudy.....:rolleyes:

[Outsydr]

IMO...Clinton was a moron....End of story for me, and I will not get into it....Or, try not too...:Smirk:

You commented. You're in it.

[Outsydr]

Look, before this turns into something, let me just say this: George W. Bush and Bill Clinton are two very different men who have had two DRASTICALLY different presidencies. Apples and oranges may have a better chance at being compared. I'm sorry that I even brought it up. So let's all try to agree to not even go there.

The string is about Bush, and whether or not we think he'll be impeached. My answer is no. I agree. Impeachment of ANY president is always going to be resisted. A wartime president, moreso. So no, it probably won't happen. My feeling is we'll have to ride out this disaster of an adminstration, and hope that whatever follows will arrive with wisdom and insight.

2008 is going to be a great year for many reasons. I have a financial plan that will see fruition that year. I'll be fully vested in my 401K. But, most of all, I'll get to vote again.

[spammityspam]

And for the first time ever, I'll get to waste my vote due to a mixture of geography and the ridiculous way the electoral college is set up! Hurrah!

[Al-Dog]

I admit I haven’t paid a lot of attention to Cindy Sheehan. But does she really think that she is popular enough to force Pelosi to introduce articles of impeachment against Bush?

Cindy Sheehan to Pelosi: Impeach Bush, or I’ll Run Against You ( http://www.nytimes.com/cq/2007/07/09/cq_3034.html)

[Nostromo]

Musings from Illinois. N

Charges added against 2 who held anti-Bush banner
Sign was held on highway overpass

By Art Barnum
Chicago Tribune staff report

July 16, 2007, 12:05 PM CDT

Two DuPage County residents charged in May with disorderly conduct after displaying a political banner on a highway overpass and allegedly dropping something on the roadway were charged with two more misdemeanors Monday: reckless conduct and unauthorized display of a sign on a highway.

Jeff Zurawski, 39, of Downers Grove and Sarah Hartfield, 45, of Naperville have said they placed the sign that read, "IMPEACH Bush and Cheney—LIARS" on the Great Western Trail over Interstate Highway 355 on May 6.

The maximum penalty for the original charge is a 3-month County Jail sentence, while the maximum penalty for the latest charges is a year in jail.

The defendants had asked last month for a hearing seeking to dismiss the original charge but dropped that effort. DuPage Judge Elizabeth Sexton reassigned the case to Judge Ronald Sutter on July 30 to set a date for a jury trial.

Both Zurawski and Hartfield, accompanied by about 15 supporters, said Monday they believe a jury will acquit them.

DuPage court records indicate that the original charges were made after a Carol Stream trucker said traffic had to swerve to avoid hitting unknown objects thrown on the road. The defendants said they took down the sign after state police requested they remove it.

abarnum@tribune.com
Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune

[whitetemplar78]

sigh.......gotta love these debates, where everyone entrenches in their ideas, and no one will give a inch.....

How sad with all this stuff he supposedly was getting away with, according to the Rush Limbaughs and the friggin' cottage industry based around it, the only thing you could get him on was lying about a BLOW JOB.

And this, after a fishing expedition that had nothing to do with it.

Whitewater, Travelgate, as I mentioned before, renting out rooms in the White House, murky campaign funding from China, for Gore.....yahhhh, because the man was never FOUND guilty, doesn't mean he wasn't, just like this present impeachment talk, Clinton was never punished for his wrong doing, because of politics. My God the list of politicians that get away with stuff everyday would shock this country to the core, not just Bush, or Clinton. And im sorry but to sit here and defend Clinton as a good man, and non corrupt President is just foolish. Second to sit here and say he was a good President is also foolish......what great legacy did he leave, what great imprint did he leave on American Society???.....his foreign policy was a joke, Bosnia?....how many missed opportunities to nail Osama???.......letting India, and Pakistan gain nukes, after decades of policy stopping nuke arsenal's from spreading. And as for his domestic policy, he was great at it, CAUSE HE HAD NONE!, my god the economy was doing great, and most prices were low, so he just kinda sat there and let things roll on with a tweak here and there, and because of his laid back actions, its no surprise when it all popped after he left office.

as for thinking most Americans are conservative, I don't mean it in a rightwing nutjob way, more as family based, simple lifestyle with good government needs kind, middle of the road type people that don't want to shake the boat too much. That’s what I meant, nothing more, nothing less

[Outsydr]

You just couldn't resist, could you. You HAD to turn this into a mudslinging. Couldn't just debate the question of whether or not Bush will be impeached. You had to go pulling up some sorry, knee-jerk defense tactic, tossing out a bunch of half-considered theories about the Clinton administration.

The subject is George W. Bush and HIS issues, not how to deflect attention FROM George W. Bush and his issues. If you want your debating to be taken seriously, stay on topic. Okay? Thanks.

[whitetemplar78]

lol, relax there was no mudslinging going on here, at no point did i sling mud at anyone on this board.

Earlier I had used the Clinton adminstration as a example for impeachment, since it was last one that is close to the present adminstration. I showed how clinton was not impeached for his actions as a President, and his actives on the side, both moral, and legal. Then someone else responded about my point, and debated it, soooo I in turn responded to his, not with half truths, or uhh....knee jerking, everything I pointed out is part of history, and was all over the news at that time, if he was guilty, or not, in my "opinion" was never really proved, most of what Clinton had leveled against him, got buried in the fun world of Politics where you can bury most anything with out the truth ever being a factor.

The worst thing I ever said, was calling people foolish in believing that Clinton is a angel, or by anyway a good man, thats my believe, and in foolish, I don't mean it in the terms of stupid, or dumb, just confused.

In the end, im sorry my post made you upset, it was not my intention, I don't believe that Bush has done anything worthy of impeachment, and no I don't like him, I think he was mislead, and refuses to see that.......if thats a crime, then man the Jails are gonna be full. So there I have CLEARLY stated my views on the stated topic of this thread. So please next time, breath, and don't assume everything thing is blue and red shall we say......lol. my lame attempt at humor.

[rappites]

I agree with Outy.

Stop comparing W. Bush to Clinton. There is no comparison to be had here.


This is about our current president. The good, bad and ugly.

Let go of Clinton. Just let it go.

[Intelligent_Design]

If Obama isn't the canidate I'm gonna do 1 of two things, take election day off from work and play PS3 all day, Or vote republican out of spite.....and I'll do it too.:Tongue:

[tstone]

sigh.......gotta love these debates, where everyone entrenches in their ideas, and no one will give a inch.....


Hey, pot? Yeah, kettle? Like yer paint job, dude.




Whitewater, Travelgate, as I mentioned before, renting out rooms in the White House, murky campaign funding from China, for Gore.....yahhhh, because the man was never FOUND guilty, doesn't mean he wasn't, just like this present impeachment talk, Clinton was never punished for his wrong doing, because of politics.


No, because real evidence of most of this crap was never produced. It was fuel for right wing talk radio and not much more. The right wing blowhards and their sheep were baaing for thing guy from day one.


My God the list of politicians that get away with stuff everyday would shock this country to the core, not just Bush, or Clinton.


It's easy to slam the political class as sport. No one likes politicians. But just because you accuse them of being corrupt, doesn't mean all of them are. Some of them are hardworking, civic minded people trying to do the right thing. Do they serve in a badly mangled system? Granted. But that doesn't automatically tar them all with the same brush.



And im sorry but to sit here and defend Clinton as a good man


I've seen worse. He didn't send us to war on a pack of lies/bad info.



, and non corrupt President is just foolish.


Bring proof of his corruption. Did he make some foolish policy decisions, and even more foolish personal ones? Hell yes. But that doesn't make him corrupt. Just human.



Second to sit here and say he was a good President is also foolish......what great legacy did he leave, what great imprint did he leave on American Society???


Peace? Prosperity? Bush wishes he had it so good.


.....his foreign policy was a joke, Bosnia?


The region is stable. We've turned the last major military US/NATO installation over to them in the last two weeks.

Yeah. Bosnia.



....how many missed opportunities to nail Osama???


Meanwhile, this "urgent" problem saw Bush spending a huge amount of time on VACATION until 9/11.

And even now...it's Where's Waldo writ large.


.......letting India, and Pakistan gain nukes,


So...how's Clinton going to stop them, exactly? Obviously can't take a page from the Bush book.


And as for his domestic policy, he was great at it, CAUSE HE HAD NONE!, my god the economy was doing great, and most prices were low, so he just kinda sat there and let things roll on with a tweak here and there, and because of his laid back actions, its no surprise when it all popped after he left office.


Well, besides a major welfare overhall, a tweak here and tweak there sometimes marks prudent leadership. What, you are a conservative, gonna bitch about government activism. A Dem DOESN'T do that, and you COMPLAIN?

Exactly what Clinton got from some of you. No matter what he did, or did not do, he couldn't win. He was a Democrat, a charismatic, likable one as well.

So you had/HAVE a mad-on that won't go away.


as for thinking most Americans are conservative, I don't mean it in a rightwing nutjob way, more as family based, simple lifestyle with good government needs kind, middle of the road type people that don't want to shake the boat too much. That’s what I meant, nothing more, nothing less

"Conservatives" don't have a lock on family based, simple lifestyles.

Man, part of me does hope Hillary gets elected. Watch the few remaining hard core right wing nuts have heart attacks.

[whitetemplar78]

Let me make this clear, im not comparing Bush and Clinton, I simply used Clinton as a example of why a impeachment won't happen to Bush, because something along the same lines did happen to Clinton, rightwing called for his head, alot of political drama happened, and in the end nothing came of it. The only comparsion I made between the two is that the same thing will happen to Bush, simple as that, and its the truth, NOTHING will come of this impeachment talk, much like nothing came of Clintons.

Second Tstone, it was my PERSONAL believe that Clinton was guilty of moral crimes, he took a office which has a certain level of respect, and honor attached to it, and he made it a joke, not just with his sexual conduct, but also the renting of the Lincoln Bedroom to give you two examples.....I believe the price was around $50,000. As for legal aspects of his behavior, I do believe that he did do something wrong with Whitewater, and funding issues with China, since when does foreign Countries get to pay for the office of the President???.......was proof produced?......lol whatever truth may have been attached to these issues got buried under Starr's ego, Clintons excuses and that scum pond we call our nations capital. But again so im clear, its my believe that he did do something wrong, he just never got caught.

Again let me make it clear, im not comparing the two men, only the impeachment issue that was common to both their terms. Also let me make it clear that im NOT a Bush supporter, or even a Republican. I've voted both ways many times in my life, and to be honest i think both parties are broken. But also let me be clear.........I bear no personal ill will toward Bush, or hate for that matter. My anger is at Congress which is suppose to be our true ruling body, and it has failed all Americans, and for that I do feel anger. As for Bush, let him go, let him fade into history, and let history judge him, for that is the true measure of a mans service.

[Space Tycoon]

I'm mostly staying out of this one. Suffice to say, comparing Clinton's presidency with Bush's is like choosing between constipation and explosive diarreah. Neither is really all that desirable; however the former is the lesser of two afflictions.

Templar is right about Clinton. He was an embarrassment to the country through his indecent personal behaviour, his corrupt associations with Asian business interests, his brutal attacks against Afghanistan, Sudan, and especially Iraq, usually timed in such a way as to deflect attention from his domestic woes. Like Bush, Clinton had many opportunities to get Osama bin Laden, and failed. In some cases, he simply passed them up, not unlike Dubya. And his much-touted peace efforts in the Middle East were simply more of the same: pandering to Israel's right wing while making token concessions the the Palestinians.

He inherited a booming tech-based economy that was the product of years of research and development that he had largely nothing to do with. His globalistic trade policies began the de-industrialization of America which has only accellerated under Bush--destroying the heartland while allowing foreign countries to plunder America's wealth. And then there's that broken border with Mexico, which again, was largely ignored under Clinton.

Clinton used the threat of terror attacks from far-right groups to impose anti-terror legislation that restricted the civil liberties of all Americans--again, just like Bush. Ruby Ridge and Waco were assaulted by the ATF and FBI, leading to many civilian deaths and creating blowback in the form of the Oklahoma City bombing.

And yes, Clinton lied about the oral sex. Apparently, that's not a big deal. Although some of us think that our elected officials should either tell the truth--particularly under oath in front of a grand jury--or face the same punishments anyone else would. Some of us hold higher standards for our elected officials. Some of us think that when you take a vow in front of God and country, it should count for something.

Clinton was an overrated sleazebag who lowered the bar for everyone, enabling the success of a new generation of used-car salesmen masquerading as "compassionate" leaders.

Okay, so I haven't really stayed out of this one. :anismirk:






.

[tstone]

Kidding about HIllary getting elected, by the way. Want someone else, not a Bush, not a Clinton. Time for some new blood.

[Space Tycoon]

I'm curious to know, Tstone, as a military guy and a contrarian, what do you think of the possibility of Senator Chuck Hagel running as a third party candidate? The idea's been floated for awhile.






.

[tstone]

I might be interested in him. He'd be a solid military/foreign policy guy, I'm pretty sure. And a guy with those kinds of bones will be sorely needed the next eight years.

But third party candidacies are always problematic in this country...wish they weren't.

:(

[spammityspam]

Yeah -- third parties just can't get the funding they need. I think the party in question has to have something like 5% of the vote the election before the election they want to run in if they want their campaign funding doubled, rigt? Again, hurrah for the electoral college and, really, the whole electoral system.

God, why won't my US Gov class get out of my head.

[Bill_the_Pony]

Well, if impeachment isn't in the cards, prosecution and imprisonment (and/or what China did recently :Mwahaha: ) for much of the current administration is an interesting thought. Then we could all have pie after the deed is done. :Smirk:

[rappites]

I want ice cream with my pie.

[whitetemplar78]

You know Spacey...its really not fair, im trying to fit alot of my responses in breaks, or between work, and sleep, so im rushing around getting ready, while im typing, so I don't have time to really explain how I wanted to.......so I guess in a round about way, thank you for your MUCHHHHHH better attempt.

But also, I really was not trying to compare Bush and Clinton, those two are on two different sides of the spectrum. I wanted to show that like Clintons impeachment attempt, that any made on Bush would have the same result. If anything I believe that old Dicky boy needs to be drawn and quartered, cause he is the true evil behind the throne as they say. To be honest this President reminds me alot of Grants terms in office, a man that meant well, but was surrounded by several staff members that were corrupt beyond belief.......*coughdickcheneycough*...... While I think Bushes worst crime is not admiting when he took the wrong course of action, Cheney in my belief has a nice long laundry list of misdeeds......contrat deals for KLM, Haliburton, the Scooter Libbly scape goat.......uhh i mean trial, his poor use of fire arms....lol, his neocon agenda that he uses his puppet Bush to ram down everyones throat.

So what are your thoughts?......do you believe that Cheney is more in need of a nice impeachent, and jail term?....cause from where im sitting he's the real power behind this BS. Tstone, do you agree on this?......whats your point of view?

and Spammy i agree with you, we do need a third party, but like you, I don't think its gonna happen, maybe a reformed Republican party?.......or maybe a break in the party??........something?...........or like when the Democratic Republicans became just the plain ole Democrats we know today??.........I think something like that is more likey to be honest.

[tstone]

Impeach whoever they can get the goods on.

Bush as an example of stupid people who see the world through the prism of comic books and "24" should not be given any real power.

Cheney for being a corporatist fatass scumbag.

Seriously, if there are crimes warranting impeachment, impeach 'em. But I don't see it happening, to be honest. Too much other stuff to get done between now and November 08.

[Space Tycoon]

You know Spacey...its really not fair, im trying to fit alot of my responses in breaks, or between work, and sleep, so im rushing around getting ready, while im typing, so I don't have time to really explain how I wanted to.......so I guess in a round about way, thank you for your MUCHHHHHH better attempt.
You are welcome.

So what are your thoughts?......do you believe that Cheney is more in need of a nice impeachent, and jail term?....cause from where im sitting he's the real power behind this BS.
Absolutely I think Cheney should be indicted along with Bush and a few others. The only reason the Democrats aren't pushing for it-- opting for censure (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=a6RBOFNygHQA&refer=us) instead-- is that it would raise questions about their authorizing the war in the first place.

Also, isn't it interesting that the US is now preparing to attack Pakistan (http://www2.irna.ir/en/news/view/menu-239/0707234236174945.htm) and Iran (http://www.pr-inside.com/u-s-sending-new-aircraft-carrier-to-r169093.htm), and the Democrats, yet again, have nothing to say about it?

They just want to be on the side that's winning and offers the least resistance, which is why they can't govern.



.

[Still Crazy]

Or maybe the Dems are giving the GOP enough rope to hang themselves.

As for Cheney, he has admitted he is the evil behind the plans. Yet for all of his influence, the world knows very little about Dick Cheney. The most powerful vice president in U.S. history has also been the most secretive and guarded of all public officials. "Am I the evil genius in the corner that nobody ever sees come out of his hole?" Cheney asked rhetorically in 2004. "It's a nice way to operate, actually."

http://www.harpercollins.com/books/9780061337017/Cheney/index.aspx

I have said from the beginning both Bush and Cheney would do more harm than good.

For the record I am an Independant. Do I think the Dems could do more, who knows, possibly. Is more going to be done, not likely. But at least gays can't get married, so the world is saved.:rolleyes:

[Space Tycoon]

Or maybe the Dems are giving the GOP enough rope to hang themselves.

Nope. I don't think so. They're just afraid to be seen as "unpatriotic," or "not supporting the troops," or whatever other smears can be thrown their way by the war fanatics.

The Democratic Party leadership are cowards, plain and simple. The Bushies, for all of their lunacy, at least believed in what they were doing. Democrats believe in whatever sells, which is why I can't make excuses for them.

If Iraq had been somewhat of a success--say, with about 300, 000 troops and a better cover story for going in to begin with-- the Democrats would probably be singing a different tune.

Of course, there are very principled exceptions like Rep. Murtha, Sen. James Webb and Dennis Kucinich. But for the most part they have become a party of followers, not leaders.

I'd rather put my support behind gadflies like Ron Paul and Chuck Hagel who at least haven't sold out their principles for the sake of polls.





.

[Still Crazy]

I'd rather put my support behind gadflies like Ron Paul and Chuck Hagel who at least haven't sold out their principles for the sake of polls.

.

Wait.

[Gentlemen Death]

Quick question....So, if people who think Bush is stupid, evil, the devil, retarded, etc.....Then what are you saying about the American people? Was he not voted back into office? When you and whomever voices their opinion by saying Bush is a moron and what have you, what do you think you are saying about the people, and America itself?......Just curious....:headscratch:

[Space Tycoon]

What it tells us is that the American people have been "entertained into a stupor," to quote Oliver Stone.

The mass media have done an excellent job ramming sensationalism and simple-minded slogans down the throats of an increasingly bewildered, uninformed, and unengaged public. And I'm not just talking about Fox News, although they get the brunt of the criticism, much of it justified. There really is no-one on the tube who is really telling you the truth about the Middle East, or terrorism, or Islam, or Israel, or anything else of importance.

To get to the truth you have to dig deeper. But those of us who read books find ourselves outnumbered by those who get their politics from manufactured and mass-marketed soundbites. We live in an age when the person with the loudest voice wins the debate, not the one with the strongest argument.

And, of course, we have all let it happen. The problem with democracy is that you truly get the government you deserve. America is travelling down the same road trodden by previous centuries' empires, and it's a sad thing to watch.





.

[spammityspam]

Look at what people prized in this last election, or even the one before. You can sit down and have a beer with Bush. Bush is a good old boy from a red-blooded American family. Bush is a regular Joe.

The American public, yes, voted Bush in two terms in a row (sort of, but let's not get into that). The American public made a mistake, because the American public is fairly easily cowed and for the most part, as was said above, massively uninterested in politics. A person is smart. People are dumb. The American public is the freest, most powerful and one of the best-educated proto-lynch mobs in the world, sure, but it still acts on its instincts before anything else, and it shows in the last few administrations we've had come through. What's wrong with saying the American public is dumb? It is. Every public is dumb. America itself? America itself is being retarded recently. And will quite likely continue that way for a while.

I still love it and there's no place I'd rather have been born and raised, but that doesn't make it perfect. It makes it the least imperfect. Like George Washington said, it's not treasonous to criticize the country or the government or anything else. It's treasonous not to, because there's no way for it to improve.

[Bill_the_Pony]

American Public is SEVERELY retarded, and it's something I have to accept and let go everytime I step outside. Either that, or I go mad. :mad:

I've ALWAYS thought this.

There ARE places that are worse, of course. I won't name any place in particular, but most places are.

But enough of this lollygagging. Let's all enjoy some deep-fried Coca-Cola. :Smirk:

[rappites]

Deep-fried twinkes, deep-fried oreos, deep-fried snickers, deep-fried hotdogs and funnel cakes.

[Gentlemen Death]

Deep-fried twinkes, deep-fried oreos, deep-fried snickers, deep-fried hotdogs and funnel cakes.

With a side order of salad....I am on a diet...Oh, and no salad dressing...:D

[Bill_the_Pony]

Secret FEMA Plan To Use Pastors as Pacifiers in Preparation For Martial Law (http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/may2006/240506femaplan.htm)

Pastor has come forward to blow the whistle on a nationwide FEMA program which is training Pastors and other religious representatives to become secret police enforcers who teach their congregations to "obey the government" in preparation for a declaration of martial law, property and firearm seizures, and forced relocation.

In March of this year the Pastor, who we shall refer to as Pastor Revere, was invited to attend a meeting of his local FEMA chapter which circulated around preparedness for a potential bio-terrorist attack, any natural disaster or a nationally declared emergency.

The FEMA directors told the Pastors that attended that it was their job to help implement FEMA and Homeland Security directives in anticipation of any of these eventualities. The first directive was for Pastors to preach to their congregations Romans 13, the often taken out of context bible passage that was used by Hitler to hoodwink Christians into supporting him, in order to teach them to "obey the government" when martial law is declared.

It was related to the Pastors that quarantines, martial law and forced relocation were a problem for state authorities when enforcing federal mandates due to the "cowboy mentality" of citizens standing up for their property and second amendment rights as well as farmers defending their crops and livestock from seizure. It was stressed that the Pastors needed to preach subservience to the authorities ahead of time in preparation for the round-ups and to make it clear to the congregation that "this is for their own good."



More rollicking fun at the link up top. :eek:

[spammityspam]

I swear, the more I pay attention to the news, the more I want to move to Canada. Maybe you have to wait three years for surgery, but hell, it's better than this shit. If only I could keep my thin Southern blood from freezing over, I'd be set.

[Space Tycoon]

Secret FEMA Plan To Use Pastors as Pacifiers in Preparation For Martial Law (http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/may2006/240506femaplan.htm)


It was stressed that the Pastors needed to preach subservience to the authorities ahead of time in preparation for the round-ups and to make it clear to the congregation that "this is for their own good."

That blew me away. It brings to mind not only Nazi Germany, but the Soviet Union.

When Stalin's henchmen weren't busy purging Orthodox and Catholic leaders who dared to resist the Bolsheviks, they were co-opting those priests who were willing to serve the state. The Eastern Orthodox Church in particular became a propaganda and spying arm of the security appartus, actually working for the NKVD and KGB. In fact, it got to the point where the Communist Party itself was writing or editing the sermons presented by religious leaders.


The Sovietization of America continues.




.

[Scotia]

Our Media Is Missing the Story of the Century
From Firedoglake (http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/07/23/our-media-is-missing-the-story-of-the-century/)


This morning, the White House is supposed to respond to the latest subpoenas from the House Judiciary Committee directing the White House to provide documents relating to Congress’ investigation into the mismanagement of the Department of Justice and White House interference in the political purging of US Attorneys. No doubt the White House’s Nixon-era impeachment attorney, Fred Fielding will eventually get around to telling the HJC that it will defy its subpoenas, just as the White House has already defied subpoenas for other documents and for the appearance and testimony of Harriet Miers and other White House officials. Yet there was virtually no mention of this on Sunday’s talking head shows.

More ominously, on Friday the WH told Congress it will order the Justice Department to disregard Congress if it tries to hold recalcitrant Administration officials in contempt, even though Congress has every right under the Constitution to expect the Department of Justice to enforce Congressional subpoenas. We need to be very clear about what this latest WH defiance means: the White House believes the Justice Department does not have an obligation to uphold the law on behalf of the Congress of the United States; instead, DoJ exists solely as a legal arm to shield the President and his staff from all efforts to hold them accountable under the law. Of course, the Attorney General, a man without honor or sense of his legal obligations to the American people, will do nothing to overturn the WH capture of America’s Justice Department.

As the New York Times lead editorial recognized Sunday, the Bush White House is now in complete and open defiance of all lawful Congressional efforts to hold the executive accountable for misconduct and possible crimes committed by members of the White House staff. Just as Bush claimed he had an inherent right to disregard Congressional statutes (e.g., FISA, the Geneva Conventions, signing statements) and the First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments, or to cover up WH complicity in crimes (via commuting Scooter Libby’s prison term), the President is now claiming he can ignore any Congressional oversight of White House misconduct.

I’ve almost given up waiting for the media’s most public faces to express outrage over what is happening. The Administration has so systematically undermined the Constitution’s established checks and balances and means of accountability via Congressional and judicial oversight that there is virtually nothing left to check their lawless excesses except impeachment and removal from office. Fielding’s moves suggest that Bush and Cheney just want to “bring it on.”

The traditional media can’t seem to get their heads around how dangerously unAmerican this is and how serious a threat it poses to our constitutional framework. And there are too many in the media like the editorial writers at the Washington Post who pretend that the Administration might be more cooperative if only the Congress would be less insistent and simply offer the WH a face-saving compromise.

So I’m going to appeal to whatever remaining instincts the journalists in our media might still have as news people, and as Americans. There’s a story here, folks; a really big story. The details may be hard to follow, but the basics are simple: we are already deeply into a constitutional crisis deliberately provoked by a brazenly lawless Administration, a regime that is violating the laws with impunity because it regards itself as above the law, and a regime that is openly daring Congress to impeach it. Can any of you smell a story here?

Too many in the media seem either in denial or blissfully ignorant that we are headed for an unavoidable showdown to determine whether the constitutional principle of checks and balances will survive. That’s the principle that stands between democratic government that respects the limits of government power so as to safeguard individual liberties against government encroachment, and a very different concept of government that recognizes no limits on the executive’s ability to slide into potential tyranny. In this showdown America will decide whether the rule of law applies to the executive or whether we move inexorably towards an unaccountable executive — in essence, a monarchy in which there is no meaningful check on the President’s power and no meaningful oversight of his actions while he remains in office. And if that doesn’t interest you as political news people, you’re in the wrong profession.

Hello, Tim Russert and Katie Couric! Hello Wolf Blitzer and PBS NewsHour! The biggest political story in a century is unfolding right in front of you, and you’re not reporting it; you’re missing the forest and just barely covering a few trees. Wake up and do your jobs, because we need you and it’s your country too.


Americans should be very concerned about the state of their democracy and the figures at the top who are working diligently to undermine it. Similar to what ST was saying, mainstream media remains woefully ignorant to the ongoing abuses and oversights committed by this administration. For some reason that absolutely escapes me, the public remains fascinated with Britney and Paris and the apparent endless supply of husbands who murder their pregnant wives. It’s a tragic and baffling phenomenon.

Now, I don’t quite see a Stalinist or some other totalitarian regime taking hold anytime soon, but the slope toward something more authoritarian has been solidly established. That’s what executive misconduct and a blatant disregard for congressional checks and balances can do.

[Bill_the_Pony]

Martial Law Threat is Real: Lucky the Military is Breaking Down (http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_dave_lin_070727_martial_law_threat_i.htm)


"If ordered to turn their guns and bayonets on their fellow Americans, would our “heroes” in uniform follow their consciences, and their oaths to “uphold and defend” the Constitution of the United States? Or would they follow the orders of their Commander in Chief?

It has to be a plus that National Guard and Reserve units are on their third and sometimes fourth deployments to Iraq, and are fuming at the abuse. It has to be a plus that active duty troops are refusing to re-enlist in droves—especially mid-level officers.

If we are headed for martial law, better that it be with a broken military. Maybe if it’s broken badly enough, the administration will be afraid to test the idea.
"


What I would hope to see are the soldiers turning around and firing upon the administration.

[Bill_the_Pony]

Less than 270 Days to the official beginning (May 2008) of the REAL ID ACT of 2005 (http://www.realnightmare.org/), and many states are defying it or drawing up bills to do exactly that.

The Real ID Act is a law signed by President Bush in May 2005, which, if it is accepted by and carried out by the states, would turn state driver’s licenses into a genuine national identity card and impose numerous new burdens on taxpayers, citizens, immigrants, and state governments.

MORE..... (http://www.realnightmare.org/about/2/)

[spammityspam]

Here's the one thing I don't understand: why don't state drivers' licenses count as a national ID card in and of themselves? They all require about the same information and you can't get one without citizenship, can you? So what's the point of Real ID?

[sickness]

You absolutely can get one without citizenship. A driver's license or state ID card's primary function is as identification. Anyone capable of obtaining a bank account, obtaining credit or conducting any transaction which requires ID can get one. This includes citizens, permanent resident aliens and anyone here on a work visa.

[Gentlemen Death]

Here's the one thing I don't understand: why don't state drivers' licenses count as a national ID card in and of themselves? They all require about the same information and you can't get one without citizenship, can you? So what's the point of Real ID?

I agree. I never understood having to have the two...Well, I GET IT...But just scratching my head....More money for the DMV's?:headscratch:

[BeauButabi]

and you can't get one without citizenship, can you?
I don't know if it's true, but I've heard somewhere you can get a driver's license in Oregon without citizenship.

[Gentlemen Death]

I know here, in this great state of California, that an ilegal alien can go to school and get free tuition and get what a resident here should get , but I, homegrown here in America, has to pay more because I moved out of state for less then a year... And not I get to pay shit ton and they are saying I am not a resident even though I have lived here for a year.....Gotta love it. :cool: