kevbone Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 Anyone see the Democratic fiasco yesterday? What a joke. The Dems had a good chance to at least debate possible impeachment of Cheney. Nancy Pelosi is weak. So to sum up the last 7 years: Bush/Cheney……. We have a war that was sold to us on false information. We have the congress and the White House endorsing torture (if you say anything but “ITS WRONG” that would be endorsing it). You have illegal wiretapping. You have Habeas Corpus (your right to due process) thrown out the window. You have a President who has complete disregard for the Constitution and a war monger. He is the president who tried to make us safe but instead has turned the world against us and let Osama Bin Laden get away. We attacked a country that never attacked us, simply for oil. Let’s not forget we have two armies now…..the army we all know and the private army called Blackwater. Blackwater has complete amunity from there actions. WTF……. Did we not vote in the Dems in to make a change? Why are they stalling? Does anyone else have concern for this? Bush stated in 2003 "major combat operations in Iraq have ended”. What a lying piece of shit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bug Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 Anyone who thinks this is a "Republican" problem is ill-informed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bug Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 Follow the money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted November 7, 2007 Author Share Posted November 7, 2007 Anyone who thinks this is a "Republican" problem is ill-informed. So true Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chucK Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 Case in point Democrats split on whether to tax hedge-fund managers as much as ordinary wage earners Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 I wouldn't wipe my ass with a Democrat. Shit doesn't seem to stick to them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joblo7 Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 politicians work for us. lets not elect warmongering animals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bug Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 politicians work for us. lets not elect warmongering animals. NO. That's the problem. Politicians work for the corporations that give them the money to run big marketing campaigns. Just try to run against that machine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 politicians work for us. lets not elect warmongering animals. Definition of irony: V7 calling someone else an "animal" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted November 7, 2007 Author Share Posted November 7, 2007 Our current congress is just as corrupt as the White House. How lame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 Didn't the Republicans move to bring the measure to a vote or something like that, only to have the Democrats shut it down? Maybe a Kucinich follower can give a blow-by-blow with all of the correct parliamentary terminology. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chucK Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 The democrats are scaredy cats playing a prevent defense. Just like Al Gore in 2000 (oops). They think they're ahead and are just hoping to run out the clock. It may be good strategy, but it's sure not inspiring. Perhaps they are hoping that once they have the presidency, then it will be easier for them to get things done. Let's hope that is part of their plan along with the just getting their butts reelected part of the paln. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted November 7, 2007 Author Share Posted November 7, 2007 Didn't the Republicans move to bring the measure to a vote or something like that, only to have the Democrats shut it down? Yes....that is the crazy part..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 I definitely think it's their election to lose at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted November 7, 2007 Author Share Posted November 7, 2007 So true again. Question is will Hillary help the Reb take the White House again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crux Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 The end result of yesterday's motion by Kucinich to introduce House Resolution 333, Articles of Impeachment Relating to Vice President Richard B. Cheney, is that a majority of the House of Representatives agreed the issue should remain under consideration by Congress. In my view, this is not a bad thing. The way the politics unfolded in the House was hard to follow, but at the end of the day the following is a synopsis, based on scarce news accounts: 1. Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D- Ohio) moved to introduce Resolution 333. 2. As expected, under back-room agreement with majority leadership, Representative Steny Hoyer (D- MD) quickly moved to table the motion; if successful, this would effectively kill the resolution as wanted by Democratic leadership. (On preceding days, Kucinich had reported this move to table his resolution was in the works, as he asked voters to advance pressure on members of the House to support him.) 3. Unexpectedly, House Republicans voted against the move to table the Kucinich resolution, thereby keeping it alive. (This forced a vote on the Resolution 333 itself, forcing Democratic leadership to change its strategy for keeping impeachment from taking the floor in Congressional debates.) 4. Resolution 333 now formally introduced, Representative Hoyer then rallied with a move to send it to the Judiciary Committee In the following vote on this motion, Democrats overwhelmingly voted for sending the motion to committee, while Republicans voted against. (Only three Republicans voted for moving it to committee. Only five Democrats, including Kucinich, voted against.) In summary, there is much room for analysis of what happened. Background facts include the following: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D- CA) has consistently asserted that "impeachment is off the table." There has been a range of speculation on why she opposes impeachment proceedings, and most Democratic representatives who speak out on this say its because impeachment would be a dubious undertaking at best, and point out the other important work that is, indeed, on the table. But public pressure to impeach has mounted, and now Kucinich has done what seemed by many to be impossible only a few days ago. Kucinich has successfully introduced articles of impeachment against Dick Cheney. This is not over. Right now Resolution 333 is in the hands of House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D- MI). From here, it will go one of two directions. The resolution will either get buried by inaction, or it will get a hearing in the Judiciary Committee. Conyers is in a difficult position. There are four major issues already before the Judiciary Committee next week. Also, rumors are that if Conyers schedules the resolution for debate, he will be doing so under threats from Pelosi to remove him from the chair position, effectively erasing the schedule. Like it or not, what's next is what We The People do now. Pressure is being brought to bear on Congress. That's what happening now. If you are inclined to be similarly involved, you can call or write your representative. You can call or write John Conyers. You can find contact information for representatives at http://www.house.gov , and phone numbers for Congress, including toll-free numbers, are posted front-center at http://CallCongress.org . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prole Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 Norman Podhoertz and now Pat Robertson. That's a winner of a foreign policy team! Where's Richard Perle and Daniel Pipes? [Pat] Robertson, the founder and chairman of the Christian Broadcasting Network, said in endorsing Mr. Giuliani in Washington, that he believed “the overriding issue before the American people is the defense of our population from the blood lust of Islamic terrorists”-- NYT 11/7/07 Should be fun! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 The end result of yesterday's motion by Kucinich to introduce House Resolution 333, Articles of Impeachment Relating to Vice President Richard B. Cheney, is that a majority of the House of Representatives agreed the issue should remain under consideration by Congress. In my view, this is not a bad thing. The way the politics unfolded in the House was hard to follow, but at the end of the day the following is a synopsis, based on scarce news accounts: 1. Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D- Ohio) moved to introduce Resolution 333. 2. As expected, under back-room agreement with majority leadership, Representative Steny Hoyer (D- MD) quickly moved to table the motion; if successful, this would effectively kill the resolution as wanted by Democratic leadership. (On preceding days, Kucinich had reported this move to table his resolution was in the works, as he asked voters to advance pressure on members of the House to support him.) 3. Unexpectedly, House Republicans voted against the move to table the Kucinich resolution, thereby keeping it alive. (This forced a vote on the Resolution 333 itself, forcing Democratic leadership to change its strategy for keeping impeachment from taking the floor in Congressional debates.) 4. Resolution 333 now formally introduced, Representative Hoyer then rallied with a move to send it to the Judiciary Committee In the following vote on this motion, Democrats overwhelmingly voted for sending the motion to committee, while Republicans voted against. (Only three Republicans voted for moving it to committee. Only five Democrats, including Kucinich, voted against.) In summary, there is much room for analysis of what happened. Background facts include the following: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D- CA) has consistently asserted that "impeachment is off the table." There has been a range of speculation on why she opposes impeachment proceedings, and most Democratic representatives who speak out on this say its because impeachment would be a dubious undertaking at best, and point out the other important work that is, indeed, on the table. But public pressure to impeach has mounted, and now Kucinich has done what seemed by many to be impossible only a few days ago. Kucinich has successfully introduced articles of impeachment against Dick Cheney. This is not over. Right now Resolution 333 is in the hands of House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers (D- MI). From here, it will go one of two directions. The resolution will either get buried by inaction, or it will get a hearing in the Judiciary Committee. Conyers is in a difficult position. There are four major issues already before the Judiciary Committee next week. Also, rumors are that if Conyers schedules the resolution for debate, he will be doing so under threats from Pelosi to remove him from the chair position, effectively erasing the schedule. Like it or not, what's next is what We The People do now. Pressure is being brought to bear on Congress. That's what happening now. If you are inclined to be similarly involved, you can call or write your representative. You can call or write John Conyers. You can find contact information for representatives at http://www.house.gov , and phone numbers for Congress, including toll-free numbers, are posted front-center at http://CallCongress.org . Knew we could count on you to monitor this one with the requisite intensity, Crux. The only question left unanswered is, "Where is Karl Rove in all of this?" Maybe not the only question. It will be amusing to watch Subcommandante Conyers deal with the attempts by the party leadership to park this one in committee indefinitely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joblo7 Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 Norman Podhoertz and now Pat Robertson. That's a winner of a foreign policy team! Where's Richard Perle and Daniel Pipes? [Pat] Robertson, the founder and chairman of the Christian Broadcasting Network, said in endorsing Mr. Giuliani in Washington, that he believed “the overriding issue before the American people is the defense of our population from the blood lust of Islamic terrorists”-- NYT 11/7/07 Should be fun! fear mongering, maybe a little, easy there , mr. 'christian' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joblo7 Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 politicians work for us. lets not elect warmongering animals. Definition of irony: V7 calling someone else an "animal" ok , 'your righteousness', you got me!! i made love to a few chicks in this lifetime. i also run , climb and bike like an animal, however, i never killed anyone . get a grip. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archenemy Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 That which does not kill you Was a tactical error Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archenemy Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 That which does not kill you Was a tactical error Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 ok , 'your righteousness', you got me!! i made love to a few chicks in this lifetime. i also run , climb and bike like an animal, however, i never killed anyone . get a grip. more irony: the post above follows this one: "fear mongering, maybe a little, easy there , mr. 'christian'" note "christian" in quotes. such a smug little hindu/guru/whatever the hell you are. keep on "failing" while sanctimoniously denouncing others, you dirty little animal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joblo7 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 robertson is as christian as a mf'r Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaskadskyjKozak Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 robertson is as christian as a mf'r and you are morally superior to him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.