Re: A-P Homework for Larry
- becca111@... wrote:
RS. You don't think there were some extenuating circumstances for the Dems? Especially until say..06 or maybe beyond? I do. Can we say Anthrax? And, as we know Biden tried in 07 to get more money for the FBI but they stopped it.. Bec
Yes, extenuating. But "extenuating" and "oaths of office" don't mix. They should have made the
attempt and by not doing it they add to the impression that they themselves are above the Constitution
too, which is ironic, because the Constitution gave them their jobs, not the other way around.
Pelosi (Tahitian pearls while she tells us we need to tighten our belts) and Hoyer (with Henry Hyde and
other extreme rightwingers attempted to repeal term limits for the President), need to be watched closely
or they'll screw us again.
Here's the bottom of one of one of Hoyers speeches on the subject removing term limits for the president.
REPEAL 22ND AMENDMENT TO U.S. CONSTITUTION -- (Extensions of Remarks - February 18, 2005)
We do not have to rely on rigid constitutional standards to hold our Presidents accountable. Sufficient power resides in the Congress and the Judiciary to protect our country from tyranny. As the noted attorney and counsel to Presidents, Clark Clifford, said:
I believe we denigrate ourselves as an enlightened people, and our political process as a whole, in imposing on ourselves still further disability to retain tested and trusted leadership. The Congress and the Judiciary are now and will remain free to utilize their own countervailing constitutional power to forestall any executive overreaching.
Someone as dismally out of touch as the Speaker and her #2 should be on the other side of the aisle.
All the accusations about them being liberal are apparently a smoke screen. But who could orchestrate such a bilateral bullshit scam as this?
Conclusion: The Miltary Industrial Complex.
Now that we've defeated the Republicans we have to defeat ourselves, Bec.
- Well, I read it a bit hastily but I did read it twice.
I think you were pretty right on there, actually.
> RS,It's all probably part of a single "goal" if you could call it that.
> Yes...I've been talking about the economy... because I think it's the
> number one issue...and the war crimes anger me..
> The numbers on Whitewater hits verses the Downing Street Memo...are veryWhat I though was interesting about it was the Democrats lack of any
> telling aren't they.. It shows that fanatical thinking produces
> obsessive behavior ....
There were a few attempts to get the word out through non-media
Ryan and Meeks did a great job of pulling the sheets off of Bush's cuts
to vet benefits even
as he was sending them off to war. And there were some others (notably
the women's clan
so to speak ;-), but Ryan and Meeks and I think Floyd (?) were
outstanding and kept it up
the longest, exposing "the midnight express" voting bs and secret memos
to va admins not
to tell vets what they are eligible to receive until they ask for it.
Saving money? Or just making sure everyone suffers as much as possible.
The "goal", whatever it was, apparently wasn't reached, and brainiac
from mars forgot
Let that be a lesson to the sire of the next human-animal recombinant
they try to put in the whitehouse.
Here's GW. "My dog ate the pardons, honest."
> Much like they're acting out...with regard to Obama..By now it seems that way.
> Whitewater was about pretty much nothing...at the end of the day.
> Maybe now, with Obama in office the Dems will get more brazen and learnKerry did mention it once.
> how to tough it out against the repu's... But, I haven't heard many Dems
> discuss The Downing Street Memo.....go figure?
Ted Kennedy said we should be hearing this news from our own newspapers,
not by way of
downing street, and in the context it was stated, it was a "memos" hit.
Conyers mentioned it a few times, quoting newspapers. Not his own
work. I credited that
as courage... back in those days. But that was before and this is
after, and now what's his
excuse? (Ray McGovern got taken for a ride too. Wonder how he's
feeling about it.)
> I suspect our reps feelThis is the problem.
> they may be blamed in some way... Well, I wouldn't blame them....if it
> isn't the Dem's fault...then, all parties are innocent or just made a
> choice, never mind that a "choice" can tank a country financially...but,
> that's life and "ok"...according to repu's as long as their guy did it.
The can read.
They took an oath to uphold the US Constitution and we know that we
value that document even
more than we value the individual lives of our troops. And by
extension, then, that constitution is
more valuble than an entire generation of jackasses that has used it for
This congress has no "excuse". They could have an explanation. But the
risky moves they are
making, if they don't pay off, amount to barely more than aiding and
abetting known enemies
of the united states, and not to sound too "conservative" about it,
that's the definition of treason.
And that's also why the fifty-megaton finger-pointing bomb was set
off... a smoke screen, because
you can bet your ass, Bush or hid dad knew exactly what they were
pulling off here.
> The lack of accountability over the last 8 years ....especially with warEasy. If they play it right.
> crimes and, now also with the economy are massive from every angle....
> How can all these things be investigated and not take the next 20 years?
Condi is currently ready to crack.
> I think we have lot's of great reps...as well as Senators that are wellI hope you're right but I'm not so optimistic. George Wallace was a
> meaning...but, as you say about watching what they're doing...Things
> like doing away with presidential term limits or whatever... either side
> could do that type of damage...as we're well aware from the last 8
> years. But, overall, I feel relaxed and think we'll see more light
> shed on all of these things as the months go by..and I believe the Dems
> are fully aware that "we" are all watching and aren't willing to stick
> our heads in the sand..one more time just because they are Dems. :)