PDA

View Full Version : Impeachment Threat Very Real, conservatives say



Psychoblues
03-27-2007, 02:24 PM
I don't think this is going away!!!!!!!


“Former Republican Congressman Joe Scarborough had me on his MSNBC show Monday night to talk about impeachment. It was smart, civil discussion that treated the prospect of impeaching the president as a serious matter.

Scarborough took the lead in suggesting that Bush's biggest problem might be that Republicans in the House and Senate who — fearful of the threat Bush poses to their political survival — do not appear to be rallying 'round the president. The host's sentiments were echoed by two other guests, columnist Mike Barnicle and Salon's Joan Walsh.

The impetus for the show was Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel's ongoing discussion of the impeachment prospect — Hagel's not quite a supporter of sanctioning Bush, more a speculator about the prospect — and a new column by Robert Novak that suggests Bush has dwindling support within the congressional wing of the GOP.,,,,,,,,

,,,,,,,,No, Scarborough is not jumping on the impeachment bandwagon.

He is simply treating the prospect seriously, as did CNN's Wolf Blitzer earlier in the day.

What I told Scarborough is what I have been saying in public forums for the past several weeks: We are nearing an impeachment moment. The Alberto Gonzales scandal, the under-covered but very real controversy involving abuses of the Patriot Act and the president's increasingly belligerent refusals to treat Congress as a co-equal branch of government are putting the discussion of presidential accountability onto the table from which House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has tried to remove it.”

More: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/27/opinion/main2612221.shtml

A video link: http://video.msn.com/v/us/msnbc.htm?g=1d3f21a2-a647-49d0-a63d-346a7f086f48&f=00&fg=email


Finally we are beginning to see a congress that shows signs of knowing what their job is all about.

5stringJeff
03-27-2007, 02:43 PM
I still have not seen a specific charge under which Bush would be impeached.

Psychoblues
03-27-2007, 02:54 PM
Like you, Jeff, I haven't seen any charges yet but I notice you used the words "would be impeached." I think almost any even casual observation of the policies and actions of the current administration indicate hundreds and possibly thousands of charges that "could" be used as grounds for impeachment.




I still have not seen a specific charge under which Bush would be impeached.

We'll see how it all comes down now that we have a congress that indicates some restraint on being a rubber stamp provider for the misquided ambitions of the lil' one.

5stringJeff
03-27-2007, 02:58 PM
Like you, Jeff, I haven't seen any charges yet but I notice you used the words "would be impeached." I think almost any even casual observation of the policies and actions of the current administration indicate hundreds and possibly thousands of charges that "could" be used as grounds for impeachment.

Hundreds or thousands of policies the Democrats don't agree with does not equal hundreds or thousands of impeachable charges.

Psychoblues
03-27-2007, 03:05 PM
Sorry to inform you, Brother, it's not just Democrats that are now observing the responsibilities of congress to remove a sitting pResident by means of impeachment. Apparently you haven't been keeping up with the news lately, have you? Did you read through the article or follow the video link? I doubt it.



Hundreds or thousands of policies the Democrats don't agree with does not equal hundreds or thousands of impeachable charges.


We'll see how the flight suit cowboy handles all this. Should be a great show worthy of primetime coverage.

5stringJeff
03-27-2007, 03:31 PM
Sorry to inform you, Brother, it's not just Democrats that are now observing the responsibilities of congress to remove a sitting pResident by means of impeachment. Apparently you haven't been keeping up with the news lately, have you? Did you read through the article or follow the video link? I doubt it.

We'll see how the flight suit cowboy handles all this. Should be a great show worthy of primetime coverage.

Yes, I read the opinion column, from the Nation via CBS news - two quite liberal media sources. I'm not convinced in the least.

Psychoblues
03-27-2007, 03:43 PM
Actually, the aricle and the video link lead you to MSNBC, ultraconservative Joe Scarborough and Republican Senator Chuck Hagel.



Yes, I read the opinion column, from the Nation via CBS news - two quite liberal media sources. I'm not convinced in the least.

See?!?!?! I didn't think you read any of it or did you just forget to include that in your condemnation of the premise?

OCA
03-27-2007, 04:11 PM
Actually, the aricle and the video link lead you to MSNBC, ultraconservative Joe Scarborough and Republican Senator Chuck Hagel.




See?!?!?! I didn't think you read any of it or did you just forget to include that in your condemnation of the premise?


ULTRACONSERVATIVE JOE SCARBOROUGH! LAUGH MY FUCKING ASS OFF!:laugh2: :laugh2: :laugh2: :laugh2: :laugh2:

OCA
03-27-2007, 04:14 PM
Sorry to inform you, Brother, it's not just Democrats that are now observing the responsibilities of congress to remove a sitting pResident by means of impeachment. Apparently you haven't been keeping up with the news lately, have you? Did you read through the article or follow the video link? I doubt it.





We'll see how the flight suit cowboy handles all this. Should be a great show worthy of primetime coverage.

I've got 2 acres of prime coastline property in Greece and 20,000+ checking account that says not 1 charge will he ever be convicted on, hell none will even be brought against him!

stephanie
03-27-2007, 04:16 PM
ULTRACONSERVATIVE JOE SCARBOROUGH! LAUGH MY FUCKING ASS OFF!:laugh2: :laugh2: :laugh2: :laugh2: :laugh2:

My exact thoughts...:laugh2:

You know..

Wishing for something hard enough, doesn't make it so..

You know if the Democrats had anything on President Bush.....You can bet your sweet a** they would of used by now..

theHawk
03-27-2007, 04:22 PM
Good, impeach Bush because he isn't a true conservative.
And let the Cheney administration begin...

Gaffer
03-27-2007, 04:37 PM
Good, impeach Bush because he isn't a true conservative.
And let the Cheney administration begin...

I kinda like that idea.

stephanie
03-27-2007, 04:45 PM
I kinda like that idea.

Me too..:coffee:

avatar4321
03-27-2007, 05:24 PM
Of couse impeachment is a real threat. The Democrats in the House are power mad. They will manufacture charges to impeach the President on if they can. Its essentially what they have been promising since the President was reelected.

Of course on the plus side, if they try it Americans are going to get sick of it and they will essentially waiste the rest of the Presidents administration which will prevent them from passing any bad laws the President might agree with.

Which means higher chance for Republicans to get power back in the House by 2008.

stephanie
03-27-2007, 05:29 PM
Of couse impeachment is a real threat. The Democrats in the House are power mad. They will manufacture charges to impeach the President on if they can. Its essentially what they have been promising since the President was reelected.

Of course on the plus side, if they try it Americans are going to get sick of it and they will essentially waste the rest of the Presidents administration which will prevent them from passing any bad laws the President might agree with.

Which means higher chance for Republicans to get power back in the House by 2008.

That's why......in some small way I'm glad to see the Dems. go crazy like they are...The American people WILL get tired of it.. And see them for what they are..:dance:

Gaffer
03-27-2007, 05:30 PM
Of couse impeachment is a real threat. The Democrats in the House are power mad. They will manufacture charges to impeach the President on if they can. Its essentially what they have been promising since the President was reelected.

Of course on the plus side, if they try it Americans are going to get sick of it and they will essentially waiste the rest of the Presidents administration which will prevent them from passing any bad laws the President might agree with.

Which means higher chance for Republicans to get power back in the House by 2008.

Yes that's true. It can only hurt the dems in the long run. As long as it doesn't detract from the war effort. They have proven repeatedly they are power mad.

Little-Acorn
03-27-2007, 05:30 PM
The Democrats were circulating the first impeachment petititons in December 2000, before Bush had even taken office.

Looks like nothing has changed. Their wishful thinking remains as abject as ever.

(yawn)

CockySOB
03-27-2007, 05:42 PM
Even though impeachment is not strictly tied to criminal charges, the only times I can find where a Federal official has been impeached and convicted has been when criminal charges were proffered. I would imagine that the only way the Democrats will successfully impeach GWB is if they can find him in violation of some criminal code.

Yurt
03-27-2007, 08:15 PM
This is a farce, a smokescreen, just like dems scare and taunt about global warming to scare people into their party, so are they doing this with impeachment.

There is no impeachable acts. None. Stop fooling yourselves libs.

Psychoblues
03-27-2007, 08:37 PM
Everybody keeps saying "Dems" or "liberals". The article points to self avowed traditional and ultra conservatives, elected as conservatives and continue to project themselves as conservatives.



This is a farce, a smokescreen, just like dems scare and taunt about global warming to scare people into their party, so are they doing this with impeachment.

There is no impeachable acts. None. Stop fooling yourselves libs.

Impeachment is not a partisan consideration at this point.

Gaffer
03-27-2007, 08:45 PM
Everybody keeps saying "Dems" or "liberals". The article points to self avowed traditional and ultra conservatives, elected as conservatives and continue to project themselves as conservatives.




Impeachment is not a partisan consideration at this point.

Your talking about rino's not conservatives. rino's are the ones allowing the dems to get away with what they have so far.

Impeachment is purely a partisan consideration.

Little-Acorn
03-27-2007, 08:56 PM
Hundreds of liberal hysterics (the number of leftist hysterics is growing all the time) have screamed for impeachment since before W took office.

One Republican says it could happen, a thousand don't.

Uh-huh, sounds "bipartisan" to me all right. Ayup.

:rolleyes:

Psychoblues
03-27-2007, 09:29 PM
There are several threads on this board about how the conservatives and otherwise values voters are abandoning the lil' one. Others allude to the fact he cares about as much for them and other American values that have escaped him altogether. I dunno. I knew about him 7 years ago. I haven't seen any surprises.



Hundreds of liberal hysterics (the number of leftist hysterics is growing all the time) have screamed for impeachment since before W took office.

One Republican says it could happen, a thousand don't.

Uh-huh, sounds "bipartisan" to me all right. Ayup.

:rolleyes:

loosecannon
03-27-2007, 10:12 PM
Hundreds of liberal hysterics (the number of leftist hysterics is growing all the time) have screamed for impeachment since before W took office.

One Republican says it could happen, a thousand don't.

Uh-huh, sounds "bipartisan" to me all right. Ayup.

:rolleyes:


What IS bipartisan is that the repubs in Congress are backing away from Bush and begining to talk about ending the war and impeachment.

Bush will be impeached. Be prepared.

manu1959
03-27-2007, 10:20 PM
What IS bipartisan is that the repubs in Congress are backing away from Bush and begining to talk about ending the war and impeachment.

Bush will be impeached. Be prepared.

what charges?

Yurt
03-27-2007, 10:25 PM
Everybody keeps saying "Dems" or "liberals". The article points to self avowed traditional and ultra conservatives, elected as conservatives and continue to project themselves as conservatives.




Impeachment is not a partisan consideration at this point.

Since you posted the article, I presumed you read it. Let us see how "partisan" this is and how logical your premise is:



The impetus for the show was Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel's ongoing discussion of the impeachment prospect — Hagel's not quite a supporter of sanctioning Bush, more a speculator about the prospect — and a new column by Robert Novak that suggests Bush has dwindling support within the congressional wing of the GOP.

We have Chuck, basically a one man show against Bush and the war in Iraq. Fair enough. The next thought proposes that...wait, and "suggests" that... Bush has dwindling support.


Novak wrote "The I-word (incompetence) is used by Republicans in describing the Bush administration generally. Several of them I talked to described a trifecta of incompetence: the Walter Reed hospital scandal, the FBI's misuse of the Patriot Act and the U.S. attorneys firing fiasco. 'We always have claimed that we were the party of better management,' one House leader told me. 'How can we claim that anymore?'"

Maybe you should read the word in bold. Because that is the crux of the article. Not impeachment.



Then their hypo:


No, Scarborough is not jumping on the impeachment bandwagon.

He is simply treating the prospect seriously, as did CNN's Wolf Blitzer earlier in the day.



Should I expect better from you? Let us not get the blues, rather, let us actually read what is being said.

Btw, don't believe every headline you come across.

loosecannon
03-27-2007, 11:15 PM
what charges?

since this is asked and answered at least 3 times already on this board all I am gonna offer is that the constitution says pres, VP and officials SHALL be impeached for treason high crimes and misdemeanors.

High crimes and misdemeanors are anything at all Congress decides they are.

A Reeeeeeally desperate congress might even impeach over lying about a blowjob.

Compared to Clinton Congress is just begining but probably already has 100 times the gravity of charges to levy against Bush.

loosecannon
03-27-2007, 11:17 PM
Btw, don't believe every headline you come across.

And don't believe that Bush won't be impeached, he will.

stephanie
03-27-2007, 11:22 PM
So say's the magic 8 ball..:cool:

Psychoblues
03-28-2007, 12:42 AM
Sorry, yurt, you lost me.



Since you posted the article, I presumed you read it. Let us see how "partisan" this is and how logical your premise is:




We have Chuck, basically a one man show against Bush and the war in Iraq. Fair enough. The next thought proposes that...wait, and "suggests" that... Bush has dwindling support.



Maybe you should read the word in bold. Because that is the crux of the article. Not impeachment.



Then their hypo:





Should I expect better from you? Let us not get the blues, rather, let us actually read what is being said.

Btw, don't believe every headline you come across.

Now, what were you saying?

CockySOB
03-28-2007, 07:18 AM
since this is asked and answered at least 3 times already on this board all I am gonna offer is that the constitution says pres, VP and officials SHALL be impeached for treason high crimes and misdemeanors.

High crimes and misdemeanors are anything at all Congress decides they are.

A Reeeeeeally desperate congress might even impeach over lying about a blowjob.

Compared to Clinton Congress is just begining but probably already has 100 times the gravity of charges to levy against Bush.

WJC committed perjury by lying under oath. Get it right. And yes, if GWB goes under oath and lies, throw the book at him too (just like Libby).

You really are a partisan tool.

Psychoblues
03-28-2007, 07:29 AM
I agree with CSOB wholeheartedly on this issue.



WJC committed perjury by lying under oath. Get it right. And yes, if GWB goes under oath and lies, throw the book at him too (just like Libby).

You really are a partisan tool.

But I maintain that presidential blowjobs are far different than presidential and national security breaches of law and trust.

loosecannon
03-28-2007, 08:33 AM
WJC committed perjury by lying under oath. Get it right. And yes, if GWB goes under oath and lies, throw the book at him too (just like Libby).

You really are a partisan tool.


Perjury means lying under oath

Obstruction of Justice is a secondary charge for the same offense, lying.

Bill lied about a blowjob, sed he didn't have sex with that woman.

That's it.

That is how low the standard is for impeachment. Bush's crimes are 100 times more substantial.

Enjoy the Impeachment. Itsa comin round the bend.

Psychoblues
03-28-2007, 08:42 AM
Perjury means lying under oath

Obstruction of Justice is a secondary charge for the same offense, lying.

Bill lied about a blowjob, sed he didn't have sex with that woman.

That's it.

That is how low the standard is for impeachment. Bush's crimes are 100 times more substantial.

Enjoy the Impeachment. Itsa comin round the bend.

No, no. 10,000 times to the umteenth power more substantial.. But, they didn't get it in 1998 and they forget about it in 2007. No surprise. Good Republicans have very short memories.

Little-Acorn
03-28-2007, 11:27 AM
Enjoy the Impeachment. Itsa comin round the bend.
The leftist hysterics have been saying that since the day W took office, if not before. I see nothing's changed.

The likelihood of impeachment is also unchanged from that time.

:laugh2:

avatar4321
03-28-2007, 05:53 PM
Impeachment is a very real threat from the left, but then so is assasination.

I wouldnt put either past the lunatics who hate Bush.

Gaffer
03-28-2007, 06:10 PM
Impeachment is a very real threat from the left, but then so is assasination.

I wouldnt put either past the lunatics who hate Bush.

It may have been tried but the media hushed it up. with all that hatred out there I too am surprised there havn't been a bunch of attempts. Would probably only make the news if it was a rightwing nut.

CockySOB
03-28-2007, 08:22 PM
I agree with CSOB wholeheartedly on this issue.
It's nice that you agree with me, but why try the neg-rep thing 1) if you agree, and 2) if you have no rep-power to actually affect my rep? Not a big issue at all, but I was curious.


But I maintain that presidential blowjobs are far different than presidential and national security breaches of law and trust.
Again I say, "irrelevant!" A violation of the criminal codes is a violation of the criminal codes regardless of the reasoning or rationalization of the person who committed the crime. Frankly had WJC simply admitted his sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky, rather than lie, nothing would have happened to him (well, excepting Hillary's reaction of course). And yes, WJC could have worked a deal to seal his testimony which would have hidden his affair from the public.

As to your allegations of "security breaches of law and trust" you really need to substantiate the allegations citing criminal or civil codes which were violated, and in what manner they were violated. This is the basis of law which our nation is supposed to be founded upon. You cannot simply rely on hysterics, you have to make the case and provide the support required to prosecute. After all, isn't that one of the allegations against GWB regarding the WOT in Iraq - that he prosecuted a war without sufficient evidence? If you lower the standard to make your case, you erase any validity your claims against GWB held (regarding his low threshold of evidence for prosecuting the WOT).

loosecannon
03-29-2007, 12:55 AM
After all, isn't that one of the allegations against GWB regarding the WOT in Iraq - that he prosecuted a war without sufficient evidence?

perhaps. The main allegation is that he LIED to the world and the nation and the CONGRESS about the evidence he knew he didn't have.

As to your fairy tale pretense that i need to.....

The Courts and Congress will, and with the force of law.

You wouldn't listen to a word i said about Bush crimes if I were God in a burning bush and you were on fire.

You simply do not want to know the truth.

But the Congress does:finger3:

loosecannon
03-29-2007, 01:00 AM
It may have been tried but the media hushed it up. with all that hatred out there I too am surprised there havn't been a bunch of attempts.

Oh really? You think numerous attempts on the pretzledent have occured but the liberal press managed to keep it off the intarweb and the MSM news and the Rush limpjock, shock squack channels?

OK Kewl. The liberal media also squelched all the legitimate stories about Bush having anal sex with Martians atop the White House, and Karl Rove doing voodoo rituals in the rose garden complete with Santeria priests and the holy baptismal of Cheney in a warm pool of freshly squeezed Iraqi children's blood.

Just sayin (you are a friggin lunatic)

Baron Von Esslingen
03-29-2007, 03:43 AM
That's why......in some small way I'm glad to see the Dems. go crazy like they are...The American people WILL get tired of it.. And see them for what they are..:dance:

Oh, I think it will be a while before the people are will get as tired of the Democrats as they are sick and tired of Republicans and all their scandals.

Hey! It's almost Friday! Ready for another scandal?

stephanie
03-29-2007, 03:48 AM
Oh, I think it will be a while before the people are will get as tired of the Democrats as they are sick and tired of Republicans and all their scandals.

Hey! It's almost Friday! Ready for another scandal?

Too bad, your made up scandles aren't working..

The American people aren't as stupid as you ALL think they are...:clap:

CockySOB
03-29-2007, 07:26 AM
Oh, I think it will be a while before the people are will get as tired of the Democrats as they are sick and tired of Republicans and all their scandals.

Hey! It's almost Friday! Ready for another scandal?

Could you explain then why Congressional approval ratings are consistently lower than the Presidential approval ratings?

http://www.pollingreport.com/CongJob.htm
http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm

And correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this Congress a Democrat-controlled/Democrat-majority Congress?

avatar4321
03-29-2007, 10:41 AM
Oh, I think it will be a while before the people are will get as tired of the Democrats as they are sick and tired of Republicans and all their scandals.

Hey! It's almost Friday! Ready for another scandal?

Dont you think its alittle bit wrong that Democrats break Republican "scandals" during the weekend so they can talk it up all weekend with little response. I think its disengenous because if they really cared about anything other than making the Republicans squirm and if there is any truth to the scandals, they wouldnt wait till the weekend. They would seek justice immediately.

lily
03-29-2007, 01:32 PM
Dont you think its alittle bit wrong that Democrats break Republican "scandals" during the weekend so they can talk it up all weekend with little response. I think its disengenous because if they really cared about anything other than making the Republicans squirm and if there is any truth to the scandals, they wouldnt wait till the weekend. They would seek justice immediately.

You know...........that's exactly how I felt when Bush and Co. "leaked" the story about Sadaam getting uranium for Africa and Cheney and Rice took advantage of all the Sunday moring talk shows.

lily
03-29-2007, 01:33 PM
Originally Posted by CockySOB
WJC committed perjury by lying under oath. Get it right. And yes, if GWB goes under oath and lies, throw the book at him too (just like Libby).

You really are a partisan tool.

You know, tha't one thing you can say about this administration, they learned from Clinton's mistake. Never EVER testify under oath!

lily
03-29-2007, 01:36 PM
Perjury means lying under oath

Obstruction of Justice is a secondary charge for the same offense, lying.

Bill lied about a blowjob, sed he didn't have sex with that woman.

That's it.

That is how low the standard is for impeachment. Bush's crimes are 100 times more substantial.

Enjoy the Impeachment. Itsa comin round the bend.

Seriously, this country is divided and in enough trouble without doing more harm to it by impeaching Bush. If the Democrats holding the House and the Senate can't reign him in, then they need to find another job. This is what the American people voted for........not for impeachment.

stephanie
03-29-2007, 01:43 PM
I don't think the American people voted for all the hearings, investigations, and the waste of their money for these...

I'm all for it.

It REMINDS the American people just who and what the Democrats are..

:dance:

lily
03-29-2007, 02:02 PM
On the contrary, the American people want answers. As I've said many times before, I know it's hard when there has been no oversite and this administration could do whatever it pleases and now it can't.. If this administration would have not ignored the questions asked and refused documents when asked for in the first place, then we wouldn't be having this investigations and hearings NOW.

You may not like it and may not be used to it, but the president is NOT a king.

America does want to know if it's been lied to. Americans do want to know how we got into this war and how it got this bad. Americans do want to know where billions upon billions of $$$ went in Iraq that can't be accounted for, before handing over more. Americans do want to know if members of this administration lied to congress. Americans do want to know just how much of their freedoms have been taken away because of "mistakes". True Americans want to know so that things can be dealt with problems can be solved and we can get on to being real Americans.

stephanie
03-29-2007, 02:22 PM
On the contrary, the American people want answers. As I've said many times before, I know it's hard when there has been no oversight and this administration could do whatever it pleases and now it can't.. If this administration would have not ignored the questions asked and refused documents when asked for in the first place, then we wouldn't be having this investigations and hearings NOW.

You may not like it and may not be used to it, but the president is NOT a king.

America does want to know if it's been lied to. Americans do want to know how we got into this war and how it got this bad. Americans do want to know where billions upon billions of $$$ went in Iraq that can't be accounted for, before handing over more. Americans do want to know if members of this administration lied to congress. Americans do want to know just how much of their freedoms have been taken away because of "mistakes". True Americans want to know so that things can be dealt with problems can be solved and we can get on to being real Americans.

Bla, bla, bla

I believe you all will find out in long run...
You all we're given a chance in 06, and it only took 4 months to show just exactly what the Democrat Congress Are...

Keep up the investigations, talking about impeachment while our troops are fighting a war, waste our money, keep voting for bills that prove how weak you are on defending OUR country..

Then the TRUE AMERICANS will speak again in 2008..

:dance:

lily
03-29-2007, 08:38 PM
Bla, bla, bla

You know, I might say the same for you.


I believe you all will find out in long run...
You all we're given a chance in 06, and it only took 4 months to show just exactly what the Democrat Congress Are...

Toots........it's a new day.


Keep up the investigations, talking about impeachment while our troops are fighting a war, QUOTE]


Damn....do you people here only have one pat answer to every post? I have no idea what the talk about impeachment (which if you would have bothered reading I am against) is somehow undermining the troops.

[QUOTE]waste our money, keep voting for bills that prove how weak you are on defending OUR country..

Wasting money.......now that's a hoot! Hey, all the president has to do is what he said he was going to do WORK WITH CONGRESS and the bill will get past. It's a nice talking point, but it's pretty empty. There are funds, this isn't life or death. He's already spent the last "supplimental spending" he asked for and there is enough money to last the troops. He's grandstanding.


Then the TRUE AMERICANS will speak again in 2008..

Oh.....I see........TRUE AMERICANS are only Republicans.:salute:

Gaffer
03-29-2007, 08:56 PM
You know, I might say the same for you.



Toots........it's a new day.

[QUOTE]Keep up the investigations, talking about impeachment while our troops are fighting a war, QUOTE]


Damn....do you people here only have one pat answer to every post? I have no idea what the talk about impeachment (which if you would have bothered reading I am against) is somehow undermining the troops.

Yes it is undermining the the troops.


Wasting money.......now that's a hoot! Hey, all the president has to do is what he said he was going to do WORK WITH CONGRESS and the bill will get past. It's a nice talking point, but it's pretty empty. There are funds, this isn't life or death. He's already spent the last "supplimental spending" he asked for and there is enough money to last the troops. He's grandstanding.

I other words all he has to do is giving in to the lib demands. That's what they libs mean by "working with congress". The money runs out mid April, congress, which doesn't support our troops, is is not moving to provide the money needed. Congress needs to understand there are not 365 commanders in chief. There is ONE.


Oh.....I see........TRUE AMERICANS are only Republicans.:salute:

Wellllll...YES! :salute:

lily
03-29-2007, 09:08 PM
Yes it is undermining the the troops.

Please explain to me how talk of impeachment is underminding the troops. I would think that they have more important things on their minds. I also don't think that they are the bunch of wimps you Republicans think they are and people talking (freely I might add) is going to somehow demoralize them so much that they can't do the job that they are sent over there to do.





I other words all he has to do is giving in to the lib demands. That's what they libs mean by "working with congress".

Um....the working with Congress were Bush's words. If he truely meant them, then he'd sit down and comprimise......but that's not a word he's familiar with. Much like Newclear.


The money runs out mid April, congress, which doesn't support our troops, is is not moving to provide the money needed. Congress needs to understand there are not 365 commanders in chief. There is ONE.

You should expand your reading, Gaffer.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070328/ap_o...bQHb134T0D


One key Democrat with longtime ties to the Pentagon, Rep. John Murtha (news,
bio, voting record), D-Pa., said Bush was exaggerating, and he estimated the
real deadline for a fresh infusion of funds was June 1.

Gordon Adams, a former Clinton administration official specializing in
defense issues, said the Pentagon has authority to transfer existing funds
between accounts. "So into June, while it's painful, it's possible" for the
military to maintain operations, he said.





Wellllll...YES!

Nice.:salute:


Edited to add:


Congress needs to understand there are not 365 commanders in chief. There is ONE.

And he's doing a heck of a job Brownie.

manu1959
03-29-2007, 09:19 PM
can someone link me to the charges?

stephanie
03-29-2007, 09:30 PM
can someone link me to the charges?

No..There all stored in their heads..:poke:

manu1959
03-29-2007, 11:04 PM
I still have not seen a specific charge under which Bush would be impeached.

anything yet?

Baron Von Esslingen
03-30-2007, 01:53 AM
Dont you think its alittle bit wrong that Democrats break Republican "scandals" during the weekend so they can talk it up all weekend with little response. I think its disengenous because if they really cared about anything other than making the Republicans squirm and if there is any truth to the scandals, they wouldnt wait till the weekend. They would seek justice immediately.

You know...........that's exactly how I felt when Bush and Co. "leaked" the story about Sadaam getting uranium for Africa and Cheney and Rice took advantage of all the Sunday morning talk shows.

Damn! Lily picked up on the subtle nature of Republican scandal mongering that I was making reference to...

You're good, lady!

I guess what avatar is saying is that since the Republican congress never investigated all the scandals that broke in the first six years of this presidency, they were not interested in justice for the aggrieved because the GOP did not seek justice immediately. Thanks for clearing that up for me. :clap: :clap: :clap:

Psychoblues
03-30-2007, 04:51 AM
I wanted to post, but I thought surely someone else would get it as well. Thanks, BVE!!!!!!!!!



Damn! Lily picked up on the subtle nature of Republican scandal mongering that I was making reference to...

You're good, lady!

I guess what avatar is saying is that since the Republican congress never investigated all the scandals that broke in the first six years of this presidency, they were not interested in justice for the aggrieved because the GOP did not seek justice immediately. Thanks for clearing that up for me. :clap: :clap: :clap:

Some understand and others have agenda. The agenda jerks just crack me up!!!!!!!!!

stephanie
03-30-2007, 05:10 AM
:lol: Yeah right.....
Like everyone doesn't have an agenda...

Except of course........You all on the Left...

How dare we challenge that.........What's up with us stupid rednecks, we should know that what the lefty liberals say...... is the the WORD...:laugh2:

stephanie
03-30-2007, 05:32 AM
Damn! Lily picked up on the subtle nature of Republican scandal mongering that I was making reference to...

You're good, lady!

I guess what avatar is saying is that since the Republican congress never investigated all the scandals that broke in the first six years of this presidency, they were not interested in justice for the aggrieved because the GOP did not seek justice immediately. Thanks for clearing that up for me. :clap: :clap: :clap:

Either of you hear, or care, about the Dianne Feinstein Scandal getting ready to break???

How about William Jefferson, the cash in the freezer guy.??
How about Murtha and Abscam??
How about your very own admitted Pedophile? Stubbs that got elected how many time's after...
How about Barny Franks and his partner and their house of love..
How about Byrd....the admitted and known KKK head honcho, and against the civil rights movement...
How about Marion Berry...caught in the act, served time and still came out and got reelected..
How about Pelosi? And her favor for her tuna scam...
How about.....Ah, never mind.....
We all know how you all overlook those...
They we're just.......MISUNDERSTOOD...:coffee:
I'm ashamed of any Republican who is caught in a scandal and stand behind them being ousted...

You all stand behind yours and reelect them to office...

So LET'S TALK..:laugh2:

avatar4321
03-30-2007, 05:47 AM
You know, tha't one thing you can say about this administration, they learned from Clinton's mistake. Never EVER testify under oath!

No, Clinton's mistake was to lie and obstruct justice by creating false depositions.

The Bush administration has done neither.

But then the Bush administration doesn't have to do either for them to be guilty. Look at Libby. The guy forgets something. And the Democrats get the man convicted when they knew the crime which he was being asked about never occured within the first days of the investigation before they even knew his name.

Yet for some reason, Democrats here seem to think that the justice department should be allowed to target people they dont like politically and ask them questions about crimes they know never happened for days on end. And that if said person forgets a detail, or in otherwords shows any sort of human tendency, they should be thrown in jail.

Somehow, this is supposed to be justice?

avatar4321
03-30-2007, 05:50 AM
Damn! Lily picked up on the subtle nature of Republican scandal mongering that I was making reference to...

You're good, lady!

I guess what avatar is saying is that since the Republican congress never investigated all the scandals that broke in the first six years of this presidency, they were not interested in justice for the aggrieved because the GOP did not seek justice immediately. Thanks for clearing that up for me. :clap: :clap: :clap:

What the heck are you talking about. Every so called scandal was investigated. That's just it. They were investigated and nothing was found. Because nothing was wrong to begin with.

Of course for Democrats, it doesnt matter if a crime actually occured, its the seriousness of the charges. Atleast if its a Republican. If its a Democrat, bury the scandal on page 8.

Psychoblues
03-30-2007, 06:11 AM
Clinton lied about a blow job. Short, sweet and simple. The very implication there is a comparison will be laughed at eternally by future generations. Think not? Think again!!!!!!!!!

stephanie
03-30-2007, 06:16 AM
Clinton lied about a blow job. Short, sweet and simple. The very implication there is a comparison will be laughed at eternally by future generations. Think not? Think again!!!!!!!!!

Well......He was an IDIOT for that one........Wasn't he......:laugh2:

Liar liar pants on fire...

Or maybe it was his zipper on fire...

Psychoblues
03-30-2007, 06:24 AM
Nope. He was a weak man in that instance. He was offered a knob job by a bitch that went there intending on it and he took it.



Well......He was an IDIOT for that one........Wasn't he......:laugh2:

Liar liar pants on fire...

Or maybe it was his zipper on fire...

I can't say that I would have behaved differently. Sometimes 2 heads are not better than one.

stephanie
03-30-2007, 06:28 AM
Nope. He was a weak man in that instance. He was offered a knob job by a bitch that went there intending on it and he took it.




I can't say that I would have behaved differently. Sometimes 2 heads are not better than one.

Awwwwwww. it's so nice how you all excuse a 50yr old man in a Powerful position taking advantage of a women the same age of his daughter..

It shows your alls true character....

I'm still amazed by the MEN and WOMEN who still defends this mans behavior..
But not so much surprised, anymore

Sickening...

Psychoblues
03-30-2007, 07:24 AM
It wasn't so much the knob job as it was the impeachment nuts. I'll try and get a memo to you in your afterlife.


Awwwwwww. it's so nice how you all excuse a 50yr old man in a Powerful position taking advantage of a women the same age of his daughter..

It shows your alls true character....

I'm still amazed by the MEN and WOMEN who still defends this mans behavior..
But not so much surprised, anymore

Sickening...

History will shit their pants on the comedy of this argument.

stephanie
03-30-2007, 07:34 AM
Your sounding like a rambling idiot right now...

Do yourself a favor.......Have another drink and go to bed...

Ill try channeling to you in your dreams.........OK...:poke:



It wasn't so much the knob job as it was the impeachment nuts. I'll try and get a memo to you in your afterlife.



History will shit their pants on the comedy of this argument.

Psychoblues
03-30-2007, 08:20 AM
Don't hang around on my cloud, baby.


Your sounding like a rambling idiot right now...

Do yourself a favor.......Have another drink and go to bed...

Ill try channeling to you in your dreams.........OK...:poke:

You got your own cloud 9. STAY THERE.

stephanie
03-30-2007, 08:27 AM
Don't hang around on my cloud, baby.



You got your own cloud 9. STAY THERE.

:laugh2: :rock:

I have named my cloud........And it ain't #9
How about you???
What's your clouds name???

Psychoblues
03-30-2007, 09:23 AM
Psychoblues



:laugh2: :rock:

I have named my cloud........And it ain't #9
How about you???
What's your clouds name???

That's the name and that's the game. You rockin' or you rollin'?

I'm groovin' and that's a natural fact.

loosecannon
03-30-2007, 10:38 AM
Well Bush is cornering himself quickly.

Now that the congressional record demonstrates that Gonzales lied to congress and fired his own top aide for political purposes he is death to the admin unless they fire his ass.

If Bush goes to the wall now and claims executive priv, he gets a fast pass to impeachment. It is set in stone.

lily
03-30-2007, 11:02 PM
[QUOTE=avatar4321;32622]
But then the Bush administration doesn't have to do either for them to be guilty. Look at Libby. The guy forgets something. And the Democrats get the man convicted when they knew the crime which he was being asked about never occured within the first days of the investigation before they even knew his name.
QUOTE]

You know.....and I mean this in all seriousness......they should have someone come in and check the air quality in the White House. So many people are forgetting what they said. There has to be something wrong with the ventilation system or something.......that's the only thing I can think of.:salute:

manu1959
03-30-2007, 11:18 PM
Clinton lied about a blow job. Short, sweet and simple. The very implication there is a comparison will be laughed at eternally by future generations. Think not? Think again!!!!!!!!!

no worse than lying about a crime that did not happen....not sure that is even logically possible....but lets not let logic get in the way of a good lie

CockySOB
03-31-2007, 12:38 AM
[QUOTE]

You know.....and I mean this in all seriousness......they should have someone come in and check the air quality in the White House. So many people are forgetting what they said. There has to be something wrong with the ventilation system or something.......that's the only thing I can think of.:salute:

You forgot your snark tags for the comment.... :)

Baron Von Esslingen
03-31-2007, 01:27 AM
no worse than lying about a crime that did not happen....not sure that is even logically possible....but lets not let logic get in the way of a good lie

Make sure, in the future, when you are quoting Bush or Cheney that you put their words in quotation marks. It makes it easier for the lurkers to spot them, OK?

"...but lets not let logic get in the way of a good lie." ~George W Bush

FIXED!

lily
03-31-2007, 03:01 PM
[QUOTE=lily;32933]

You forgot your snark tags for the comment.... :)

Cocky........I'm serious as a heart attack. It started with Reagan. We later found out he had Alzheimers........I'm just trying to look out for the Republicans. I mean look at all the memory problems they are having now. :salute:

Gaffer
03-31-2007, 03:11 PM
[QUOTE=CockySOB;32956]

Cocky........I'm serious as a heart attack. It started with Reagan. We later found out he had Alzheimers........I'm just trying to look out for the Republicans. I mean look at all the memory problems they are having now. :salute:

The alzheimers didn't happen until after he was out of office. It didn't affect his presidencey.

In most cases the advisors and others are dealling with important matters and little things like what you said in an off handed remark two months ago is not important enough to any working on real issues that involve peoples lives. Only dems will make issues out of nothing.

Did finstein forget her husband was a military contractor when she was sitting on that commitee and approved his bids? "Oops I forgot".

lily
03-31-2007, 03:20 PM
Are you asking me, or Cocky as you quoted?

I honestly don't know what Feinstein has to do in a thread about impeachment of the president.........hey........you're not breathing in that air are you? You've got me concerned.:salute:

stephanie
03-31-2007, 03:24 PM
Are you asking me, or Cocky as you quoted?

I honestly don't know what Feinstein has to do in a thread about impeachment of the president.........hey........you're not breathing in that air are you? You've got me concerned.:salute:

Well hell...

Just how does President Reagan fit in here???:poke:

lily
03-31-2007, 03:34 PM
Post #61, Stephanie. Avatar mentioned Libby's forgetfulness and I was concerned. I mean Reagan forgot a lot, I think we can both admit that. As I said the only thing I can think of is there is something wrong with the air ventilation in the White House.......unless you think it may be in the water?

Seriously........this matter needs looking into! I mean, Reagan, then Libby and now Gonzales....it could lead right up to Bush!! We wouldn't want his memory impaired, would we? Someone might just want to impeach him for something he said and forgot!:salute:

stephanie
03-31-2007, 03:39 PM
Post #61, Stephanie. Avatar mentioned Libby's forgetfulness and I was concerned. I mean Reagan forgot a lot, I think we can both admit that. As I said the only thing I can think of is there is something wrong with the air ventilation in the White House.......unless you think it may be in the water?

Seriously........this matter needs looking into! I mean, Reagan, then Libby and now Gonzales....it could lead right up to Bush!! We wouldn't want his memory impaired, would we? Someone might just want to impeach him for something he said and forgot!:salute:

Everyone dreams, you just keep on with yours...:laugh2:

Baron Von Esslingen
04-01-2007, 01:10 AM
As I said the only thing I can think of is there is something wrong with the air ventilation in the White House.......unless you think it may be in the water?

It's the methane they are breathing, not the air, dear. They've been that way for years... something about a reagan revolution is where it started...

stephanie
04-01-2007, 01:23 AM
It's the methane they are breathing, not the air, dear. They've been that way for years... something about a reagan revolution is where it started...

:lame2:

lily
04-01-2007, 04:32 PM
:lame2:

:lame2: I don't have anything to say either, but I want to get my post count up too.

stephanie
04-01-2007, 04:36 PM
:lame2: I don't have anything to say either, but I want to get my post count up too.

I don't know what your fixation is with my post count??

But I find it.........:lame2:

:laugh2:

lily
04-01-2007, 04:56 PM
:lame2: Are you stalking me?:lame2:
:dance:

WOOOOOHOOOO #94 for me!:poke:

LiberalNation
04-01-2007, 05:02 PM
lol

Psychoblues
04-01-2007, 07:01 PM
Impeachment. Very Real. Lies on war, environment, domestic tragedy, etc. must be reckoned with.

I was just a Texas drugstore cowboy can only last so long as a defense. The shrub can be dragged off his throne the same as he was dragged upon it.

loosecannon
04-01-2007, 07:25 PM
Impeachment. Very Real. Lies on war, environment, domestic tragedy, etc. must be reckoned with.



More than that we can not afford anymore of the incompetence.

This administration manages to always have the resources and energy to politicize everything.

Whether it is covering up Tillman's death by freindly fire, outing A sensitive undercover operative who tracks WMD, manufacturing a story about a female soldiers rape and rescue, or staging the collapse of a statue, or a mission accomplished moment, they are ON IT.

But when it comes time to Actually Govern, to make sure that the FBI is following the law regarding patriot act powers, addressing the needs of Americans like bargaining for better presc. prices, or getting the required warrants for eavesdropping on citizens or managing the aftermath of Katrina they are abysmal failures and no shows.

This admin at best governs the way Billy Joel drives. At worse they have "other priorities" when it comes time to represent the people who elected them. Priorities that are concerned with their agendas, not ours.

Americans want the war ENDED! Americans know that we gave Iraqis every opportunity to get their own government on it's feet.

We have succeeded, and at a cost of $400 billion and 3000 lives. We can not, and will not support the Iraqis forever if they will not govern themselves.

We are tired of throwing good money, and our soldiers lives after bad!

Americans do NOT want the Supplemental Budget vetoed, because it supports our troops. It is another $80 billion earmarked for the troops who have accomplished everything we asked of them.

Why is Bush defunding his own war? Why is Bush refusing to fund the troops?

Why isn't Bush even trying to let his own surge succeed? Why is he derailing our soldiers efforts in midstream?

If Bush isn't in this to succeed, we need him to resign the CIC position and get somebody else in who will either succeed, or get out.

Bush seems unwilling and unable to do either.

Baron Von Esslingen
04-02-2007, 01:08 AM
Congress passed the bill with the money in it. If he vetoes it, HE'S the one who fucked over the troops. No one else. The days of demanding something from Congress and having the weak-kneed simps who USED to run the place just meekly hand it over are gone. Democrats are in charge now and you either learn the REAL meaning of bipartisanship or you go home with nothing. Someone send Chimpy a DVD of the Weakest Link. Maybe he'll get the picture then.

avatar4321
04-02-2007, 01:31 AM
Congress passed the bill with the money in it. If he vetoes it, HE'S the one who fucked over the troops. No one else. The days of demanding something from Congress and having the weak-kneed simps who USED to run the place just meekly hand it over are gone. Democrats are in charge now and you either learn the REAL meaning of bipartisanship or you go home with nothing. Someone send Chimpy a DVD of the Weakest Link. Maybe he'll get the picture then.

The bill is unconstitutional period. If he doesnt veto it he is breaking his oath of office.

stephanie
04-02-2007, 01:36 AM
But you can see the games that the Democrats are playing Politics with our military men's and women's lives...Baron spoke them in his post..

Set up this bill this way so President Bush has to Veto it, and then they turn around and blame it on him....And don't forget.....Our OWN MEDIA is involved in this with the Democrats...

Democrats are a disgusting bunch....:pee:

avatar4321
04-02-2007, 01:40 AM
But you can see the games that the Democrats are playing Politics with our military men's and women's lives...Baron spoke them in his post..

Set up this bill this way so President Bush has to Veto it, and then they turn around and blame it on him....And don't forget.....Our OWN MEDIA is involved in this with the Democrats...

Democrats are a disgusting bunch....:pee:

I agree. It is sick. We need to change things in this nation. And I guess the first step is to change ourselves.

stephanie
04-02-2007, 04:29 AM
I agree. It is sick. We need to change things in this nation. And I guess the first step is to change ourselves.

I agree with you on that my friend, but I'm afraid it's not going to be that easy... We have an Enemy Within and I believe things are going to get worse, before they get better...

That's just my 2 cnts on things..
A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself."
Tullius Cicero (106-43 BC)

avatar4321
04-02-2007, 10:42 AM
I agree with you on that my friend, but I'm afraid it's not going to be that easy... We have an Enemy Within and I believe things are going to get worse, before they get better...

That's just my 2 cnts on things..
A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself."
Tullius Cicero (106-43 BC)

We definitely need to cleanse the inner vessel. But that only comes through humility and much education and work on the part of those doing the cleansing.

Psychoblues
04-02-2007, 09:28 PM
I'll buy this part and parcel. So where do we start cleansing? Political, ideological, party dissolution, environmental, right to organize, voter registration movements, ethnic, racial, just how does the "cleansing" start and where does it end?



We definitely need to cleanse the inner vessel. But that only comes through humility and much education and work on the part of those doing the cleansing.

I would like the cleansing to start with American voters that know so little about the process of legislative process and care so little about American values that they scream bloody murder when people like Mann Coulter and Rush Limpdick are called out for what they are. Maybe then we can get something done for the American values that I believe in.

Baron Von Esslingen
04-03-2007, 12:33 AM
The bill is unconstitutional period. If he doesnt veto it he is breaking his oath of office.

First, he's already done that and hasn't been impeached for it so Bush doesn't care.

Secondly, when Democrats do the same thing to legislation that the last umpteen Republican Congresses have done and none of those bills were deemed unconstitutional, you don't have a leg to stand on.

Finally, Bush is in a hurry for this money. If he vetoes it, he shoots himself in the foot and gives every Democrat a point to holler back at him in return for all the hollering he's been doing the last few weeks. It will take more time than he wants to use to get the money BACK into the pipeline if he vetoes it and Congress fails to override the veto. The process starts all over again and who was the person that the American public will point the finger at for failing to support the troops? George W Bush for using his veto on the bill that would have given him the money he needed to wage war.

Baron Von Esslingen
04-03-2007, 12:35 AM
Democrats are a disgusting bunch....:pee:

Take a wild guess how we feel about you all... :slap:

Psychoblues
04-03-2007, 12:44 AM
I think you are at least correct in theory, BVE. The power and monies of the adversaries will prevail, I am so afraid.




First, he's already done that and hasn't been impeached for it so Bush doesn't care.

Secondly, when Democrats do the same thing to legislation that the last umpteen Republican Congresses have done and none of those bills were deemed unconstitutional, you don't have a leg to stand on.

Finally, Bush is in a hurry for this money. If he vetoes it, he shoots himself in the foot and gives every Democrat a point to holler back at him in return for all the hollering he's been doing the last few weeks. It will take more time than he wants to use to get the money BACK into the pipeline if he vetoes it and Congress fails to override the veto. The process starts all over again and who was the person that the American public will point the finger at for failing to support the troops? George W Bush for using his veto on the bill that would have given him the money he needed to wage war.


Actually, I am not afraid. I am anticipating every move they might make and have a plan to bring more actual truth to the subject. I hope you are thinking ahead as well. Knee-jerking is for neocons and otherwise rEpublicans. The rest of us delve more clearly and responsibly in American values and principles.

Baron Von Esslingen
04-03-2007, 12:51 AM
Reid said today that if Bush vetoes this bill then he will initiate a measure to cut off all funding for the war and force a showdown.

After that move, count on some of the more disgruntled Democrats to launch impeachment proceedings. It will knock the Race for 2008 right off the front pages.

stephanie
04-03-2007, 01:34 AM
Reid said today that if Bush vetoes this bill then he will initiate a measure to cut off all funding for the war and force a showdown.

After that move, count on some of the more disgruntled Democrats to launch impeachment proceedings. It will knock the Race for 2008 right off the front pages.

LETS ROLL..:dance:

Take your all's chances...

stephanie
04-03-2007, 01:52 AM
Take a wild guess how we feel about you all... :slap:

I should of clarified that.......
The Democrats in Congress are a disgusting bunch...:pee:

You....................I could probably like.............someday. J/k:laugh2:

I think your a fine fellow.. :cheers2: