Drudge Retort: Red Meat for Yellow Dogs
Saturday, July 07, 2007

Nearly half of the US public wants President George W. Bush to face impeachment, and even more favor that fate for Vice President Dick Cheney, according to a poll out Friday. The survey by the American Research Group found that 45 percent support the US House of Representatives beginning impeachment proceedings against Bush, with 46 percent opposed, and a 54-40 split in favor when it comes to Cheney.

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Subscriptions

Author Info

keith204

MORE STORIES

Special Features

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

The BIG difference between us today and 1930s Germany: we have (pretty) free speech. This is because the corporocracy knows that it doesn't matter who says what. The facts are all out there. We're too numbed to act. herm

In this society, you are allowed to complain - so far. Come the next election, American boobus will vote to support the two party system.

WAY too late. We could not get it done before the next election cycle.

Help Final Push to Impeachment

It's time! ImpeachForPeace.org is traveling to Washington DC at the end of this month to deliver thousands of Do-It-Yourself Impeachment Memorials to key representatives in the House!

Support for impeachment is building. As of this writing, 14 reps are supporting Dennis Kucinich's resolution to impeach Dick Cheney (H. Res. 333).

Even if you've sent them to your congressperson before, send us your DIY Memorials before we go:
impeachforpeace.org

You may not realize that the only thing standing between where we are today and a nationally televised impeachment investigation is the House Judiciary passing this resolution, which is currently awaiting consideration in their
committee. The head of this committee, John Conyers, has said recently that he supports the national impeachment movement.

All we need to push it over the edge is public support, and that's where we come in.

Video of our trip will be posted on our website shortly upon our return. We'll let you know when it's up!

Click here to be a part of this:
impeachforpeace.org

Here's a funny video about this unique strategy:
www.youtube.com

Hehehe.... the liberal media too is trying to popularise the idea of impeaching Bush. For some it will be revenge for impeaching Hillary for pretending not to know her brother's greed, er.. I mean for impeaching Bill. While some others will consider it a catharsis for all their anger and frustrations against Bush.

But God said....

Bush will never be impeached. Just wait and see.

Bush can sing: 'catch me if you can' and retire in peace, if not high approval rating.

But God said....

Bush will never be impeached. Just wait and see.

Bush can sing: 'catch me if you can' and retire in peace, if not high approval rating.

Posted by takitez at 2007-07-07 04:27 PM | Reply | Flag:Wow.


God said that to you did he?

Did you have to buy the Pat Robertson Sooper Sekret Dekodr Ring for the low low "donation" of 29.95 before God would talk to you?

Or are you just naturally apeshit crazy and don't need no stinkin decoder ring?

No to impeachment. Just wait till Dubyas out of office with very low approval ratings, then prosecute them for their crimes.
If anyone should be impeached, it should be be the real president Cheney.

Dennis Kusinich (hope thats spelled corectly) is on the side of the angels in every issue that is important to me.
Take a look at him and you will find a guy who is calling bullshit where he ses it.
Hilliary Schmillary, Obamma, yo mamma.
check the short guy out. He has some Balls and aint afraid to use the power of the Legislative Branch.
If W uses every ounce of power invested in his office, then so must he lgislative
body.
Cut off unds for war.
Impeach.
Congress must Use the power that it weilds just as shamelessly as the Decider does.
Lets not show up with a pocketknife to a political gun fight.

Check out Kusinich.

What the Hamas-left have to understand is the breakdown of the numbers within the poll:

of the people polled:

38% were democrat
29% were republican
33% were independent(great unwashed, liberals)

So this is a poll designed to seek a desired outcome---in other words its a bullshit poll

Check out Kusinich.

Oh, wait, same thing

More Americans support impeaching Bush now than supported impeaching Clinton when he was actually being impeached.

And third, I think Matt Yglesias is right about the larger political dialog: [I]nsofar as Bush appears determined to use his constitutionally granted authority to shield his subordinates from the consequences of breaking the law, I would say that removing him from the office which grants that authority is something that should be discussed."

Are there 67 votes in the Senate for removing Bush from office? Almost certainly not, a fact that seems unlikely to change anytime soon. For that matter, the prospect of a President Cheney is, shall we say, disconcerting.

But given the circumstances, there's no reason to dismiss the notion as some radical flight of fancy. Reasonable people, debating in good faith, can disagree about the utility, implications, and grounds for impeachment, but as Yglesias put it, the concept should probably "enter the mainstream conversation."
-- Steve Benen


www.talkingpointsmemo.com

And the answer is:

If the Democrats have any respect for the mandate they got last November and the Constitution they swore to uphold, they must impeach Dick Cheney. For if Cheney is not impeached, the precedent will be forever set that the U.S. is a country of "men" and not of laws. And the aforementioned Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution will forever be rendered moot. This is no longer a debate about the War in Iraq. It is about the utter disregard of the law done openly by Cheney and Bush.

Both Bush and Cheney must be laughing at the Democrats lame attempts to demand that Cheney comply with subpoenas and other legal demands that all other citizens must comply with for fear of criminal prosecution. I was particularly amused at Rahm Emanuel's rediculous proposal to cut off funding for the VP when Cheney's lawyers argued that the VP is not a part of the executive branch. They have broken the laws of this nation frequently and they have participated in open and notorious criminal conspiracies.

The impeachment process will cleanse the nation by exposing this President and Vice President with a daily media story that Clinton had to face in 1998. And it will give the Congress the ability to present its case to the American people in an organized and understandable way. The country at large must know what these criminals have done and the impeachment process will allow those Americans who are not particularly political to be aware of their utter disregard of the law. Perhaps then, the real outrage will come.

www.huffingtonpost.com

"Everybody loves der Feuhrer, except for some crazy jews und communists."

The Third Reich.

Maybe Fred Thompson can help out Bush. He tried and failed to save Nixon.

If it comes down to it, Rudy has some lovely evening gowns to wear to the hearings and Mitt can marry Laura to take a load off George's plate. McCain will scour the Baghdad markets for the best lawyer he can find.

Ooo the Hamas-Left.

Another piece of shit Conservative calling their fellow American's terrorists.

And we're supposed to take you seriously, why?

You have to admire the NeoConservative New American values. If you don't agree with them you must be a terrorist!

How many of you hope we are arrested for our crimes against New America? How many of you would line up to see us hung by the neck until dead for our Treasonous act of dissent with the New American Ideology?

Don't be shy, now.

29% were republican
That is all they could find. The rest of the country has decided to stop following incompetent neo-cons.

Navy,

The last thing anyone wants to do is to start a precedent for prosecuting presidents after they leave office. Other than the obvious fun with Cliton, think of what could be done to the Hildebeast!

Wasn't Scooter prosecuted because he testified he didn't remember and someone convinced a jury he was lying? Wouldn't Testilying to Congress that you didn't remember (as the Hildebeast did) regarding the files that she hid from Congress when they were subpoenaed?

IMPEACH

New poll shows majority of Americans think Cheney should be impeached

rawstory.com

I'd say that is about every democrat out there.

You know you are doing something right to piss this many dems off.

Scooter was prosecuted because he was lying!!!
So your are saying that no matter what crimes a goverment official commits they should get away with it?
Hillary did not swear to defend and protect the constitution, she was not a goverment official. Dubyas gang did swear and they lied with their hand on the Bible.

Scooter was prosecuted because he was lying!!!
lying about what exactly
So your are saying that no matter what crimes a goverment official commits they should get away with it?
i guess richard armitage did cause the special prosecuter knew he leaked plames name and yet went after libby?

why has not richard armitage been prosecuted?

You know you are doing something right to piss this many dems off.


Posted by YouKnewWho at 2007-07-07 05:18 PM

So tell us- I'm a registered independent who voted for Bush the first time- what they have done right.

I'll wait.



blather, blather bullshit.

Call 500 people on the phone and they will favore nuclear war. Just more horseshit for the perennial desperate Liberals.

Go jerk off on a tree.

Posted by vernon




Easy there Vernon, remember the Blood Pressure, Deep Breaths.

Polls can be very deceiving. Without know the size of the group polled, the margin of error, and the source behind the poll you can not believe any. A margin of 3.00 or greater is considered trash by most trained statistical analysis professionals. In the mean time let's impeach the Speaker of the House for giving aid and comfort to the enemy in a time of war

In the mean time let's impeach the Speaker of the House for giving aid and comfort to the enemy in a time of war


Posted by Dreadnaught at 2007-07-07 06:06 PM

I agree. We all know that "Bandar Bush" wasn't hanging with DUUUUHbya on the evening of 9/11.

Right?

Feed Rcades Hate Machine. The true energy conversion is your hate to Rcades wallet. Never forget that.

For what would we impeach Bush or Cheney? What impeachable crimes have they committed? I always hear "impeach, impeach" but never hear for what? I know most here think Bush and Cheney act criminally, but more is needed than just accusations of crimes. You need to show which law or laws have been broken. So which are they?

Loony,

They STOLE two elections from the Democrats. They had the audacity to follow Bill Cliton into office (after it was properly fumigated and cleaned). They have continually OUTSMARTED the dems. Finally, they are somehow also responsible for the embarassment that has continued to make the last democrat president into little more than the punchline of a joke. The list of crimes goes on and on. The punishment requires a continual fabricatrion of stories about the President, from fabricating evidence as to his military service, to telling stories about his lack of intellect, to attempting to convince themselves that this dim bulb engineered the war in Iraq in Texas shortly after the elections in order to make himself and his oil buddies rich.

You must believe that. Don't ask for proof...just believe...and don't stop thinkin' about tomorrow...

I BELIEVE, A Citizen, I Believe!!!

Call 500 people on the phone and they will favore nuclear war. Just more horseshit for the perennial desperate Liberals.

Go jerk off on a tree.

Posted by vernon at 2007-07-07 04:44 PM


yes you are correct again......and may I add..

you can get a whole bunch of liberals and left wing kook socialists and put them in with the liberal media and have that media hammer the country with nothing but negative shit for years and years.......then 46 % us pretty fuckin low....

whats wrong with you wackos.,,,,falling down a little lately...

hee hee

and now for a turd...I mean bird calling lesson,....


the call of the lilly livered yellow bellied liberal sapsucker.


"the election was rigged.

IMPEACH IMPEACH

the election was rigged..........ca ca caaaaaa"


dont you leftys get tired of that same old tired horseshit.........

Thanks for the reasoned talking points, BLT. Got anything more persuasive? herm

yeah how about this one...


big fuckin deal LOL

but now to something more important..

have to make the call to the ....uh.....man who I call right before a big sporting event.

who will win tomorrow..

federer or nadal?

THE EROSION OF INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS

A series of Executive Orders, internal governmental departmental laws, unpassed by Congress, the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 and the Violent Crime Control Act of 1991, has whittled down Constitutional law substantially. These new Executive Orders and Congressional Acts allow for the construction of concentration camps, suspension of rights and the ability of the President to declare Martial Law in the event of a drug crisis. Congress will have no power to prevent the Martial Law declaration and can only review the process six months after Martial Law has been declared. The most critical Executive Order was issued on August 1, 1971. Nixon signed both a proclamation and Executive Order 11615. Proclamation No. 4074 states, "I hereby declare a national emergency", thus establishing an economic crisis. That national emergency order has not been rescinded.

The crisis that changed the direction of governmental thinking was the anti-Vietnam protests. Fear that such demonstrations might explode into civil unrest, Executive Orders began to be created to allow extreme measures to be implemented to curtail the demonstrations. The recent Los Angeles riots after the Rodney King jury verdict only reinforced the government's concern about potential civil unrest and the need to have an effective mechanism to curtail such demonstrations.

Here are the later Executive Orders:

* EXECUTIVE ORDER 11049 assigns emergency preparedness function to federal departments and agencies, consolidating 21 operative Executive Orders issued over a fifteen year period.

* EXECUTIVE ORDER 11921 allows the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency to develop plans to establish control over the mechanisms of production and distribution, of energy sources, wages, salaries, credit and the flow of money in U.S. financial institution in any undefined national emergency. It also provides that when a state of emergency is declared by the President, Congress cannot review the action for six months.

* EXECUTIVE ORDER 12148 created the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) that is to interface with the Department of Defense for civil defense planning and funding. An "emergency czar" was appointed. FEMA has only spent about 6 percent of its budget on national emergencies, the bulk of their funding has been used for the construction of secret underground facilities to assure continuity of government in case of a major emergency, foreign or domestic.

* EXECUTIVE ORDER 12656 appointed the National Security Council as the principal body that should consider emergency powers. This allows the government to increase domestic intelligence and surveillance of U.S. citizens and would restrict the freedom of movement within the United States and granted the government the right to isolate large groups of civilians. The National Guard could be federalized to seal all borders and take control of U.S. air space and all ports of entry. Many of the figures in the Iran-Contra scandal were part of this emergency contingent, including Marine Colonel Oliver North.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency has broad powers in every aspect of the nation. General Frank Salzedo, chief of FEMA's Civil Security Division stated in a 1983 conference that he saw FEMA's role as a "new frontier in the protection of individual and governmental leaders from assassination, and of civil and military installations from sabotage and/or attack, as well as prevention of dissident groups from gaining access to U.S. opinion, or a global audience in times of crisis."

The Violent Crime Control Act of 1991 provides additional powers to the President of the United States, allowing the suspension of the Constitution and Constitutional rights of Americans during a "drug crisis". It provides for the construction of detention camps, seizure of property, and military control of populated areas. This, teamed with the Executive Orders of the President, enables Orwellian prophecies to rest on whoever occupies the White House. The power provided by these "laws" allows suspension of the Constitution and the rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights during any civil disturbances, major demonstrations and strikes and allows the military to implement government ordered movements of civilian populations at state and regional levels, the arrest of certain unidentified segments of the population, and the imposition of Martial Law.

Once a major disaster occurs (whether it is a real event or manufactured event does not matter) Martial Law is hurriedly put in place and we are all in the hands of the government agencies (FEMA) who thus portray themselves as our protectors. Yet what happens when we question those in authority and how they are taking away all of our freedoms? Will we be the ones detained in these camp sites? And who are they going to round up? Those with guns? Those who ask questions? Those that want to know what's really going on? Does that include any of us? The seekers of truth?

When first coming across this information I was in a state of total denial. How could this be? I believed our country was free, and always felt a sense of comfort in knowing that as long as we didn't hurt others in observing our freedom we were left to ourselves. Ideally we treated everyone with respect and honored their uniqueness and hoped that others did likewise.

It took an intensive year of searching into the hidden politics to discover that we are as free as we believe we are. If we are in denial, we don't see the signs that are staring at us, but keep our minds turned off and busy with all the mundane affairs of daily life.

We just don't care enough to find out the real truth, and settle for the hand-fed stories that come our way over the major media sources television, radio, newspaper, and magazines. But it's too late to turn back to the days of blindfolds and hiding our heads in the sand because the reality is becoming very clear. The time is fast approaching when we will be the ones asking "What happened to our freedom? To our free speech? To our right to protect ourselves and our family? To think as an individual? To express ourselves in whatever way we wish?"

www.sonic.net

www.apfn.org

IMPEACH!

Remove him and his toadies, cuffed, shackled, and frogmarched out of our Capital.

How much longer can we call ourselves a free Nation? How much longer can we call ourselves free men? How much longer can we even call ourselves men? Most of us were born free, but will we die free? Are we willing to die free?

Are we willing?

I, for one, do not plan on dying a "subject" of any delusional tyrant. I'd much rather go down fighting then live under the yoke of any Master.

Pelosi on Impeachment and Defending the Constitution: It's Just Not Worth It
by Dave Lindorff

www.commondreams.org

Calif: We've been betrayed by both parties. The only hope is a strong 3rd Party candidate that will listen to the will of the people.

Well folks, seems we've been Executive-ly Ordered to death...Unless you pledge allegiance to the great exec...

Executer...that is

Calif: We've been betrayed by both parties. The only hope is a strong 3rd Party candidate that will listen to the will of the people.

Posted by briwo at 2007-07-07 09:00 PM

That is, if the Decider allows the 2008 elections to take place at all briwo.

I, for one, do not plan on dying a "subject" of any delusional tyrant. I'd much rather go down fighting then live under the yoke of any Master.

Posted by briwo at 2007-07-07 08:51 PM |


and I can say the same thing.......I do not plan on dying a 'subject' of cultural engineers who think that gay marriage is proper and people like nambla can coexist with normal people and all the other trash of liberaliam.....I would much rather go down fighting......oops....wait a minute........we win elections so I dont have to worry about being under the yoke of any master.......

but nice words though........

in the words of the sherrif from blazing saddles......

'you use your tongue prettier'n a 10 dollar whore'

AND DAMNIT TO HELL.......did you intercept this mornings oders from karl rove.......the one where he told us that not to worry about the next election ...that they were going to outlaw all elections.......damn.,,,,,I thought that was a secret.......

last portion of course was for calif/steve

BLT: When we RISE, your ilk will be the first we come after.
Remember that.

RISE
Posted by briwo at 2007-07-07 10:07 PM

Be nice to BootLickerToo.

He doesn't recognize the big words.

Just like his "Hero".

heney may feel the heat 1st: news.yahoo.com

Cheney may feel the heat 1st: news.yahoo.com


heney may feel the heat 1st: news.yahoo.com

Posted by townncountry at 2007-07-07 10:23 PM | Reply

I know My Hiney felt the Heat 1'st when I done wrong growing up. It's only fitting Cheney does now.

Larry

I don't think Cheney is capable of feeling. The only thing he feels is when the light beeps to tell him the batteries need charging.

And btw for those who keep pointing to the huge bulge in his pants- that's where they keep the batteries.

Bush will not be impeached for anything that we currently know about him.

President's don't get impeached based on speculation, accusations, and low poll ratings. They don't get impeached for making decisions based on intel which turned out to be wrong.

They don;t get impeached for firing employees that serve at their pleasure, or for commuting prison sentences. They don't even get impeached for ignoring subpoenas from Congress which are in violation of the separation of powers or for circumventing the FISA statute during wartime in defense of this country.

They don't get impeached for any of the above because Bush is acting in accordance with the powers of the Executive branch established by the Constitution and over 200+ years of precedent set by the actions of previous presidents.

What law CAN'T the president break?

They don't get impeached for any of the above because Bush is acting in accordance with the powers of the Executive branch established by the Constitution and over 200+ years of precedent set by the actions of previous presidents.

Some people, including some Republicans, think Bush and Company have been playing fast and loose with the Constitution and the Justice Department.

BILL MOYERS: You're also angry in here about the Justice Department under Gonzalez and boys, why?

VICTOR GOLD: I think it's a corrupted justice department. When I say "corrupted," I don't mean dollars and cents. I mean corrupted in terms of the values of our con-- our constitutional values. And I think you've heard some of the prosecuting attorneys who were fired speak out and the-- some of the investigation-- the investigations bringing out exactly what's going on up there. And when you corrupt the justice system, the Justice Department, that's the most important department of government in terms of protecting our constitutional values. One of the reasons I wanted the Democrats to win was because I knew the yo-yo Republicans on the Hill were not going to investigate even those they-- we-- we claim we are the constitutionalists. We are the ones concerned about the Constitution. We want strict constructionist judges. We don't want to over-- over-- overreaching-- overreaching federal government. The fact is the-- I knew there would be investigations. And I-- I-- I want these investigations to go on 'cause they weren't going on when the Republicans were in control of Congress.


www.pbs.org

Seems to me those might be grounds for impeachment.

Seems to me those might be grounds for impeachment.

Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2007-07-07 11:26 PM


Two words...........Therapy

What law CAN'T the president break?

That's just it. he hasn't broken any law. At least not one that's proveable at this time. I mean thre is 300 investigations going on right now initiated by the Democrats and you can be sure if they find any real evidence of lawbreaking they would run with it.

But so far, all of the things the Democrats call criminal are either speculative, alledged, political or well within the powers of the Executive branch.

Seems to me those might be grounds for impeachment.

Gal, A justice department which makes the priorities of the sitting President its priorities is the norm for all administrations.

But The democrats in Congress are trying to criminalize the political and so far have been unsuccesful in finding anything which would constitute an egregious abuse of power. And the Attorney firings don't reach that level.

Gonzalez is a moron who would be gone already if the democrats didn't make him a pawn in a separation of powers issue between them and the WH. But impeaching the President over it -- I don't see it.

Bowa-
"circumventing the FISA statute" is known as knowingly, and repeatedly, breaking the law.

And bush lied about that law breaking too, going well out of his way to say that ther patriot act had 'changed nothing' and that 'roving wiretaps still required a court order'.

Lies.

ITMFA.


BLT: When we RISE, your ilk will be the first we come after.
Remember that.

Posted by briwo at 2007-07-07 10:07 PM


when you say your ilk......you must be referring to tax paying patriots who support our country in its battle against islamic extremists and the global war on terror.....and our ilk who believe in God and family and values........those people...

well thank you for including me in that "ilk"


and lets see......a hardhitting expose by bill moyers and pbs.......damn......well I guess I have been wrong all this time........please.......next thing you know we will be reading quotes straight out of the NY times.

And before Bowa the propogandist goes and compares W to Lincoln and FDR again...(laughs)

Lincoln was assassinated by a man who thought him a tyrant for his circumvention of the constitution. Many men agreed with that idea, if not the act to correct it.

The US govt apologized for FDR's internment of the japanese, which also violated the constitution horribly.

Yes, the Nation was then at war, struggling for its survival and it's not for us today to pass judgment upon those who may have made mistakes while engaged in that great struggle. Yet we must recognize that the internment of Japanese-Americans was just that: a mistake. For throughout the war, Japanese-Americans in the tens of thousands remained utterly loyal to the United States. Indeed, scores of Japanese-Americans volunteered for our Armed Forces, many stepping forward in the internment camps themselves. The 442d Regimental Combat Team, made up entirely of Japanese-Americans, served with immense distinction to defend this nation, their nation. Yet back at home, the soldier's families were being denied the very freedom for which so many of the soldiers themselves were laying down their lives.

. . .

The legislation that I am about to sign provides for a restitution payment to each of the 60,000 surviving Japanese-Americans of the 120,000 who were relocated or detained. Yet no payment can make up for those lost years. So, what is most important in this bill has less to do with property than with honor. For here we admit a wrong; here we reaffirm our commitment as a nation to equal justice under the law.



-Ronald Wilson Reagan.

Should this apology be retracted, or is Gitmo also wrong?

circumventing the FISA statute" is known as knowingly, and repeatedly, breaking the law.

Posted by Boyd at 2007-07-08 12:47 AM | Reply |


okay...if it is as cut and dried as this.,,,,,,,just like the vote to get out of iraq..

bring it on.....if its that simple where is the proceedings......surely conyers and schumer would be happy to get it rolling..........dem majority in congress shouldnt cause a kink......why arent they doing it...
or would it make the accusation come true for all to see.......one reason for low ratings of dem congres is that all they have to offer is....'its governence by investigation'

BLT on rye- They dont have the votes to impeach Bush. Doesn't matter what he does, most of the republicans believe that allowing him to be impeached would destroy their party since the admin is so dirty, and those repubs have been complicite for so long.

Once again, it will require the bravery of a few moral republicans to take down one of their own, like they did with Nixon.

The fact that no charges have been brought doesn't prove anything other than "rich people have a different set of rules than the rest of us."

Here's bush on teevee admitting he broke the law.

edition.cnn.com

More than THIRTY times by his own admission.

Make that "over thirty times" he re-authorized this secret order, which spied on thousands of americans WITHOUT A COURT ORDER, and WITHOUT PERMISSION FROM FISA, ALLOWED EVEN 72 HOURS AFTER THE FACT, AS BY LAW!

It doesn't get any god damn clearer than that.

www.harpers.org

Here's Bush several years ago, while he was wiretapping Americans without a warrant, in secret:

"Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way.

www.whitehouse.gov


BLT-

re: "bring it on.....if its that simple where is the proceedings......surely conyers and schumer would be happy to get it rolling..........dem majority in congress shouldnt cause a kink......why arent they doing it..."

Congress has issued subpoenas, which the Bush administration are resisting.

Do you live on the moon, or what?

"dem majority in congress shouldnt cause a kink......why arent they doing it..."

Are you familiar with Robert's Rules of Order?

Grounds for impeaching Bush.....

for defeating Al Gore...

for defeating John Kerrey...

for not listening to the Jersey Girls...

for being ashamed that the Dixie Chicks were from Texas...

for not allowing Monica Lewinsky to enter the White House....

for not converting the Lincoln room into 'Bed and Breakfast' for the rich like Clinton did...

for providing good food and freedom of religion to the gitmo residence...

need I go on??????

Please do, EZ.

I think he's proven his stupidity for one night, boyd...

IN Cog-
Well, I hope not. I was looking forward to more.

EZ-
re : " for not allowing Monica Lewinsky to enter the White House.... "

Did that happen before or after Bush blew Cheney?

Military experts will tell you that failing to understand your enemy is a prescription for broader failure. (www.nytimes.com) And the administration seems to always be unclear about who the country's enemy really is. It speaks as if the "enem" is monolithic and centered in places like Iraq, Iran and North Korea, and Damascus, Gaza, the West Bank, and Khartoum. It rarely distinguished between Shiite and Sunni, secular and theocratic. How can the administration be so publicly dumb about such an important national security issue???

Bottom line: GW Bush and Dick Cheney are rank amateurs when it comes to understanding America's threats and enemies. And while Dick is by far the better informed of the two, he came into office with too many prejudices and preconceived notions about how to make the USA the world's hegemon, that he was caught blind by the effectiveness at grass roots anti-US and anti-West terrorists, and remained blind in the face of an overwhelming professional corps of analysts warning him of their growing danger. No, instead, he used this intel to build a case around his preconceptions. Bad to the point of dereliction. But Bush, the sock-puppet of Cheney's neoconservative takeover of government, was plain ignorant.

The price is paid every day in US lives and treasure, and in diminished US prestige. Had one asked Cheney what the world would be like 6 1/2 years into his shadow leadership of the US national security machinery, he likely would have expected the US and its allies to have overthrown Iraq, Iran and North Korea by now, and have seen the old USSR freely pumping crude oil into US tankers at Vladivostock. (Just read the AEI papers and PNAC proclamations from 1997 on.)

Then again, maybe those rosy pictures were just his way od duping the US militarists into pumping $100s of billions into the Haliburton war contracting machine, and have caused the energy industry to reach record profits as Middle East turmoil finally drove consumers' energy costs to record highs. And of course, that would always help his energy extraction industry friends who financed his shadow takeover of the government.

Military experts will tell you that failing to understand your enemy is a prescription for broader failure. (www.nytimes.com)

And the administration seems to always be unclear about who the country's "enemy" really is. It speaks as if the "enemy" is monolithic terms and has "IT" centered in places like Iraq, Iran and North Korea, and Damascus, Gaza, the West Bank, and Khartoum. It rarely distinguished between groups that are Shiite and Sunni, secular and theocratic. How can the administration be so vahgue and publicly dumb about such an important national security issue???

Bottom line: GW Bush and Dick Cheney are rank amateurs when it comes to understanding America's threats and enemies. And while Dick is by far the better informed of the two, he came into office with too many prejudices and preconceived notions about how to make the USA the world's hegemon, that he was caught blind by the effectiveness at grass roots anti-US and anti-West terrorists, and remained blind in the face of an overwhelming professional corps of analysts warning him of their growing danger. No, instead, he used this intel to build a case around his preconceptions. Bad to the point of dereliction. But Bush, the sock-puppet of Cheney's neoconservative takeover of government, was plain ignorant.

The price is paid every day in US lives and treasure, and in diminished US prestige. Had one asked Cheney what the world would be like 6 1/2 years into his shadow leadership of the US national security machinery, he likely would have expected the US and its allies to have overthrown Iraq, Iran and North Korea by now, and have seen the old USSR freely pumping crude oil into US tankers at Vladivostock. (Just read the AEI papers and PNAC proclamations from 1997 on.)

Then again, maybe those rosy pictures were just his way od duping the US militarists into pumping $100s of billions into the Haliburton war contracting machine, and have caused the energy industry to reach record profits as Middle East turmoil finally drove consumers' energy costs to record highs. And of course, that would always help his energy extraction industry friends who financed his shadow takeover of the government.

A final point -- In all the wars that America won, there was general clarity around the identity of who "the enemy" was. (E.g., in the Spanish American War, it was Spain for whatever trumped up reasons Hearst and the McKinley government contrived; in WWI, it was the Kaiser's German army and its allies in Europe; In WWII, it was Hitler's Germany, Tojo's Japan, and Mussolini's Italy, a true "axis" of aligned and cooperating enemies.) Without clarity, there can be no victory.

Why cannot this administration get its enemies straight? (More at:
www.drudge.com)

Here's what Ron Paul thinks about impeachment.

if there are so many people all worked up over impeachment, then it will happen.....I dont think it will not because of not enough votes but becaus enough people understand that its just the libs plan for one last big blast at the pres.

if there are so many people all worked up over impeachment, then it will happen.

Well, that's true. A president can theoretically be impeached for anything if the Congress can get the votes.

If anything, The case against Bush for impeachment resembles that of the first attempt to impeach Andrew Johnson in which the Congress presented a laundry list of complaints against the 17th president. That impeachment failed 108-57.
en.wikipedia.org

Ironically enough, Johnson was impeached on the 2nd attempt for attempting to get rid of one of his own cabinet members - Edwin Stanton- against the wishes of Congress, while an impeachment of George W. Bush might well be prompted by his keeping of one of his cabinet members - Alberto Gonzalez -- against the wishes of congress.

Good post Bowa!

Call us if the polling reaches around 66%-that's 20% more than now

Good post Bowa!

Thanks Town.

I was curious as to what the complaints were that led to the first impeachment proceedings and I found them. So for those who are interested:

Here is the laundry list of charges which were in the House resolution giving the Judiciary Comittee the power to investigate the Andrew Johnson prior to his first appeachment in 1867:

"I charge him with usurpation and violation of law:
In that he has corruptly used the appointing power
In that he has corruptly used the pardoning power
In that he has corruptly used the veto power
In that he has corruptly disposed of public property of the United States
In that he has corruptly Interferred in elections and committed acts which in contemplation of the Constitution are high crimes and misdemeanors,.. therefore be it resolved that the committee on the judiciary are hereby authorized to inquire into the official conduct of Andrew Johnson...President of the United States...and report to the house whether in their opinion ...Andrew Johnson..has been guilty of acts which are designed to overthrow, subvert or corrupt the governemnt of the United States"
books.google.com

This first impeachment failed to pass in the House 108-57.

A 2nd appeachment, based on a charge of violating a specific law (the Tenure in Office Act) passed but was rejected by a single vote in the senate.
www.crf-usa.org

and look at what the dems are doing with the executive priviledge issue coming to a head tomorrow apparently.....
the white house has given over 10,000 pages of documents about the firings and over 200,000 pages all together,.....
just how much can they decipher anyway?
and isnt it just a political ploy to discredit anyting republican? as we move towards 08.......I think that it is.....

thanks bowa....as I got into the points of the johnson impeachment, I thought you were talking about clinton....

lets see....pardon misuse
appointing power.....new usa's after he fired the old ones were his cronies from law school

Bush is under no threat of being impeached. He's one of their own unless he gets involved in a sex scandal.

since conyers just quoted this poll on little georgie's show it should be said that he seems to have only one person who can compete with him on speeches......
sheets byrd.....

what a load of crap..

If Cheney wasn't VP Bush would have been toast by now.

Leave him there. And by all means don't impeach him. He's a perfect poster boy for the end of the 'conservative era'. What a bunch of BS that was.

Democratic leaders will never pursue an impeachment of the President or Vice President for many reasons, the biggest being that as much as we Republicans rail against Pelosi and Reid, they are not stupid. They know that while they could possibly get the impeachment through the House there is no way in the firey pits of hell they will get 15 Republicans plus Joe Lieberman to vote for conviction in the senate. It just won't happen, and then you will have an entire party rallying around this president instead of backing away from him like they are now. In 1998, the GOP went too far and pushed for Impeachment, when they should have gone for Censure, they were rightly bitch slapped in the proceeding elections.

Personally I hope they are stupid enough to go for Impeachment, but I really don't think they are.

If Cheney wasn't VP Bush would have been toast by now

Further proof that Democrats and Liberals (at least the ones here anyways) are more interested in Politics then the Law. If Bush is so terrible, if he's breaking so many laws and trampling on the Constitution, then Impeach him, throw him out of office in disgrace. But you're not going to do that, because you disagree with Cheney more then you disagree with Bush...

Politics before justice... thanks for the confession AllAmerican...

Nice try ROB

No one wants Dick Cheney as the 'official' President of The United States.

The Bush administration should perform an honorable act and commit group sepuku.

46% favor impeachment.
And if we exclude brain dead Republicans (the type STUPID enough to vote for Bush TWICE) I am sure the number jumps up to at least 75%.

The "brain dead" voted for a Yalie frat boy in the last election. I wonder what fraction of the remaining 2% want to see another Mussoliniesque outcome?

They STOLE two elections from the Democrats. They had the audacity to follow Bill Cliton into office (after it was properly fumigated and cleaned). They have continually OUTSMARTED the dems. Finally, they are somehow also responsible for the embarassment that has continued to make the last democrat president into little more than the punchline of a joke. The list of crimes goes on and on. The punishment requires a continual fabricatrion of stories about the President, from fabricating evidence as to his military service, to telling stories about his lack of intellect, to attempting to convince themselves that this dim bulb engineered the war in Iraq in Texas shortly after the elections in order to make himself and his oil buddies rich.


Funniest post I've seen in some time...definitely sums up the Lib La-La Land. (Of course you left out a few conspiracy theories - Bush materminded 9/11, invaded Iraq to get revenge for elder Bush, etc.)

*masterminded

If W goes, Cheney has to go first!
Read --
www.unbossed.com)

There's plenty of time, don't kid yourself.

If we could sex up the call to war, we could certainly remove these knuckleheads from office.

Liberal media.... original.

G

Oh...the agony...the agony...

Bush retiring from his second term to continue his inalienable right to pursue happiness. No impeachment to give closure to the rabid left...only cold turkey withdrawal when they can only rail at his legacy since he will be out of their reach.

boo hoo.

"Bush retiring from his second term to continue his inalienable right to pursue happiness. No impeachment to give closure to the rabid left...only cold turkey withdrawal when they can only rail at his legacy since he will be out of their reach."

Yes, a man who wasted 3600 American servicemen's lives and who emptied our treasury over lies will get away with it.

What a happy day for you.

Traitor.

""They know that while they could possibly get the impeachment through the House there is no way in the firey pits of hell they will get 15 Republicans plus Joe Lieberman to vote for conviction in the senate.""

Time will tell. I doubt Bush will face impeachment but a scapegoat could be made of Darth before the REthugs face reelection battles. Then the installation of a moderate REthug for 08....not that impossible.

Hilarious thread. Love the lib posts, love em!!! How deranged.

"Then the installation of a moderate REthug for 08"

Don't understand...are you predicting a Rudy win in '08? Awesome!

"Bush retiring from his second term to continue his inalienable right to pursue happiness. No impeachment to give closure to the rabid left...only cold turkey withdrawal when they can only rail at his legacy since he will be out of their reach."

Yes, a man who wasted 3600 American servicemen's lives and who emptied our treasury over lies will get away with it.

What a happy day for you.

Traitor.

Posted by Sully at 2007-07-09 11:15 AM | Reply | Flag:

Well, Sulky,

If pointing to the inanity of Bush bashers here make me a traitor (after more than 39 years of faithful service to the nation), go ahead and paint the sky in your world any color you choose.

Mac - 39 years of emptying the trash and cleaning the toilets at the Post Office hardly qualifies as "faithful service to the nation." Get over yourself.

Funny: www.courant.com

REASONS FOR IMPEACHMENT

1) Advocating for and enabling the use of torture of enemy combatants in custody. A violation of U.S. laws and a War Crime under the Geneva Convention.

2) Holding people for indeterminate amounts of time in custody without the right to trial.

3) Engaging in the extradition U.S. held foreign combatants to facilities in third countries for the purposes of torture.

Start with that. The only thing that set the U.S. apart from other countries is we adhered to the rule of law. Maybe this is the strategy. If we behave in barbaric and brutal ways, why would you be jealous to want to bomb us. Sounds like an O'Reily talking point.

"Well if we don't don't fight them there, they'll follow us home. And if the liberal feminati wouldn't get in our way, we could make it so no one would ever want to bomb us again. We'll make everybody so miserable and poor they'll be happy to live in that god forsaken desert. Hey check out that Factor mug, nice huh? It'd make a great Furhers Day gift..."

Mac - 39 years of emptying the trash and cleaning the toilets at the Post Office hardly qualifies as "faithful service to the nation." Get over yourself.

Posted by mOntecOre at 2007-07-09 04:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

What is this facination you have with cleaning toilets, MonkeyCore?

Potty training must have scarred you for life.

And if it were 83 percent, then 94 percent, our lawmakers would STILL sit on their hands. A bush in the White House will be worth a Demo landslide of unparalleled proportions next year, if the corporocracy allows a vote at all. And it may only cost another thousand American lives or so. Right now I chalk the Demo inaction up to laziness and political acumen rather than cozying up to the asshole in chief. But by the end of the year I could change my tune. herm

"Hey check out that Factor mug, nice huh? It'd make a great Furhers Day gift..."

Nice post and a FF fer Chuck It!

Be Well.

Comments are closed for this entry.

Drudge Retort

Home | News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | Copyright 2009 World Readable