Ding Dong the Don is Dead!!!! (Rumsfeld Resigns!) (1233 hits)
Category: NoneLabels: ets_sociopolitical_commentary
Rating: 0.15 on 69 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (View user info) at 2006-11-08 13:48:23 EST
http://www.fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2006/112006/11082006/1108rumsfeld
Can you say "coward"?
Can you say "investigate his ass anyway"?
Can you say "where's the $2.3 TRILLION DOLLARS you announced was missing on, conveniently, SEPTEMBER 10, 2001"?
Can you say "why is it your former companies seemed to benefit off of our national crisis at every turn, be it the bird flu scare or the North Korean nuclear technology"?
I say if you let this snake get away, you're only encouraging more to arise and take his place. Make an example of the bastard! Chase him down and crush him once and for all.
INVESTIVATE! TRY! HANG IF NECESSARY FOR CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY!
Now is the time for the democrats to earn my votes. Now is the time to investigate this slime and give them the justice they deserve.
This is just one of what I hope will be a long line of casualties in this criminal administration, but my realism tells me it's all for show. They will create their patsies and cut them loose. They are expendable. Bush, even Chaney is expendable, just as Nixon was expendable in the end.
This will be an interesting time in American history. Keep your eyes peeled.
User Reviews
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-11-13 11:01:00 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
yeah, i read that three days ago. what's your point?
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-11-13 10:37:00 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
http://www.time.com/time/nation/printout/0,8816,1557842,00.html
Submitted by FiveStarGeneral (user info) at 2006-11-10 12:30:47 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Common sense: simple majority from the HoR sends impeachment to trial in the senate where a 2/3rd majority must vote to convict and remove the president/vice president from office.
It ain't going to happen, sir.
Submitted by FiveStarGeneral (user info) at 2006-11-10 12:29:43 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003379813
Read it and cry like the bitch you are.
Submitted by Wildman (user info) at 2006-11-10 02:29:25 EST (#)
Ranking: -1
commentary on old news is like a waterlogged turd that someone forgot to flush
Submitted by DCWoody (user info) at 2006-11-10 02:13:30 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
"Others who are much smarter and well-versed than you have tried,"
Why thanks Jay.
Fivestar, he made some global warming bets about the number of Class 3 hurricanes this year...I'm pretty certain he lost, and I don't think he paid up...
Submitted by wardy (user info) at 2006-11-09 11:34:34 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
No Comment
Submitted by FiveStarGeneral (user info) at 2006-11-09 09:11:25 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by jgreening (user info) at 2006-11-08 19:55:38 (#)
Ranking: 0
5-Star, dude, lemme tell ya, stop now.
Seriously.
You can't win.
Others who are much smarter and well-versed than you have tried, and it doesn't matter. Brad is who Brad is, and you're just aruing with him for the sake of arguing.
I should know.
We've made each other go damn near postal numerous times, and all I got out of it was a headache and a few new insults for his wife, which really wasn't that big of a deal.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks for the warning. I suppose you are right. I think it is pretty sad that this guy is the one calling people close-minded and he is the most close-minded person around.
The things I am saying are not conspiracy theories or far-flung truths. The mostly are common sense. I haven't gotten into any real discussions over anything that really require much intelligent thought.
I did find it funny that he lumped myself in with his enemies right away because I didn't say what he wanted to hear. I am pro-choice, not against embryonic stem cell research, understand evolution as fact, etc. This guy doesn't know me. I vote democrat when I like the candidates and there are certain decent democrat candidates. I'm not beholden to any political party.
Submitted by FiveStarGeneral (user info) at 2006-11-09 08:59:37 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Dismiss your critics as idiots or "not knowing what they talk about" when they certainly know more than you.
I know how people like you work. You minimalize those with different opinions other than yours by calling them idiots. It doesn't mean anything as you haven't proven a damn thing.
The fact is, I am right. I knew Rumsfeld would resign. I wish I would have posted about it before it happened... it was a certainty. Hastert will take a lesser role. Some republicans have actually wanted these things to happen, but the leadership ignored them.
I'm sure you are a sucker buying into the media frenzy about "change in America" right now. Of course, those same people are ignoring several states which banned gay marriage. Does that mean we want change to ban gay marriage? Yes. An overwhelming majority of Americans are against gay marriage and not so much against gay civil union. These are facts, facts that are proven by lots of polling and election results.
If the democrats try to minimalize republicans as dinosaurs and believe they are history, you will see a resurgent GOP in 2008, or maybe later as Bush has too much control and he is unpopular among even many republicans. But, as Arnold says, they "will be back."
Why don't you take a prozac and calm down and talk like a reasonable person? Is this beyond your capability? Seriously, sir. You have some hate issues.
You don't win votes by calling republicans idiots. I think the democrats are figuring this out. How much did you hear Howard Dean pre-2006 elections? The media ignored him. Why is that? Common sense to me: he polarizes and has made those blanket statements on republicans that only appeal to the most liberal, usually young people, folks. Which is fine when you need to appeal to that base, but not fine when you need votes outside of that.
Common sense: You have voted republican before, but now you have some gray-haired lunatic saying republicans haven't worked a day in their life? Well, other than this being far from the truth... it doesn't win votes across party lines. Can you understand that? The democrats need to get politically smart like the Republicans were in 2002, 2004. I think they are doing so and that's nice to see for a change.
Do you care to wager some $ cash money $ on whether Bush stands trial for his "war crimes"? I'll slap down $10,000 right now on the table. Will you? I think 4 years after his administration ends is a good end time for this bet.
Put your money where your mouth is, sir.
Submitted by BranDo (user info) at 2006-11-09 07:34:57 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
they found a worthy replacement already....
Submitted by Scott_James (user info) at 2006-11-09 06:34:43 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
Can only be a good thing. The bad news? The Cowboy is trying to bring in Robert Gates as Rumpy's successor.
Hmmmmmmmnn....
Submitted by williamson (user info) at 2006-11-09 05:11:39 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
http://www.newstarget.com/019192.html
Submitted by Phallic_Cymbals (user info) at 2006-11-09 04:55:09 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
If you were in power Mother Earth would get AIDS.
Submitted by Kent_Weirdo (user info) at 2006-11-08 23:00:32 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
They're afraid to give you good ratings because they don't want to get arrested by the secret police.
Submitted by HotWillie (user info) at 2006-11-08 21:24:54 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
No Comment
Submitted by iddqd (user info) at 2006-11-08 20:09:17 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
"Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-11-08 13:52:40 (#)
Ranking: 0
Robert Gates, his replacement is...*GASP*...a former CIA director and member of the board of VoteHere, a company that created voting machine software.
Nice. "
you were expecting anything else?
i mean, come on.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-11-08 20:04:01 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Everything you ever wanted to know about FiveStarGeneral
User id: 26281
Registered on or around: 2006-04-05 10:26:44
# Messages posted: 0
# Reviews written: 15
# Times these posts have been reviewed : 0
# Hits: 0
Average rating of all messages: 0.00
Seriously...just get lost. You have no idea what you're talking about, and you sure as hell have no idea what I'm talking about.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-11-08 20:02:11 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Thanks Snark. Good article. You've made my point for me. Unless we chase down Rumsfeld and hold him AT LEAST accountable for the $2.3 TRILLION he managed to LOSE before 9/10/01, we will get more of the same...over and over again. And we already are.
Submitted by TheUniter (user info) at 2006-11-08 19:56:44 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by jgreening (user info) at 2006-11-08 19:55:38 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
5-Star, dude, lemme tell ya, stop now.
Seriously.
You can't win.
Others who are much smarter and well-versed than you have tried, and it doesn't matter. Brad is who Brad is, and you're just aruing with him for the sake of arguing.
I should know.
We've made each other go damn near postal numerous times, and all I got out of it was a headache and a few new insults for his wife, which really wasn't that big of a deal.
Submitted by FiveStarGeneral (user info) at 2006-11-08 19:45:37 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
I see you are of the thought that if one doesn't believe conspiracy theories, they are mindless folks. You are removed from reality, sir.
You are arrogant as well. Placing yourself high up on your ivory tower above all the rest of us "idiots" for not believing the things you consider fact.
Bookmark this response and 2 years from now look it up and see who is right in picking what history holds for Bush. You're going to look like the idiot you accuse everyone else on this site for not believing your crap.
Submitted by Snark (user info) at 2006-11-08 19:36:57 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
Gates Has History of Manipulating Intelligence
By Jason Leopold
t r u t h o u t | Report
Wednesday 08 November 2006
Robert Gates, the former director of the CIA during the presidency of George H.W. Bush, and who was tapped Tuesday by the president to replace Donald Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense, is part of Texas's good ol' boy network. He may be best known for playing a role in arming Iraq's former dictator Saddam Hussein with American made weapons in the country's war against Iran in the 1980's.
Gates, who currently is president of Texas A&M University, came under intense fire during confirmation hearings in the early 1990's for being unaware of the explosive situation in Iraq in the 1980's, and the demise of the Soviet republic.
Gates joined the CIA in 1966, and spent eight years there as an analyst before moving over to the National Security Council in 1974. He returned to the CIA in 1980, and a year later was appointed by Ronald Reagan to serve as deputy director for intelligence. Five years later, he was named deputy director for the agency, the number two post in the agency. In 1989, he was appointed deputy director of the National Security Council and in 1991, when the first Bush administration was in office, he was named director of the spy shop.
During contentious Senate confirmation hearings in October 1991 - that are bound to come up again - Gates's role in cooking intelligence information during the Iran-contra scandal was revealed. It was during those hearings that senators found out about a December 2, 1986, 10-page classified memo written by Thomas Barksdale, the CIA analyst for Iran. That memo claimed that covert arms sales to the country demonstrated "a perversion of the intelligence process" that is staggering in its proportions.
The Barksdale memo was used by Gates's detractors to prove he played an active role in slanting intelligence information during his tenure at the agency under Reagan. Eerily reminiscent of the way CIA analysts were treated by Vice President Dick Cheney during the run-up to the Iraq war three years ago, when agents were forced to provide the Bush administration with intelligence showing Iraq being a nuclear threat, Barksdale said he and other Iran analysts "were never consulted or asked to provide an intelligence input to the covert actions and secret contacts that have occurred."
Barksdale added that Gates was the pipeline for providing "exclusive reports to the White House" intelligence that was "at odds with the overwhelming bulk of intelligence reporting, both from U.S. sources and foreign intelligence services."
In testimony before the Senate on October 1, 1991, Harold P. Ford, former vice chairman of the National Intelligence Council, described an aspect of Gates's personality that mirrors many of the top officials in the Bush administration today.
"Bob Gates has often depended too much on his own individual analytic judgments and has ignored or scorned the views of others whose assessments did not accord with his own. This would be okay if he were uniquely all-seeing. He has not been ...," Ford said.
At the hearing, other CIA analysts said Gates forced them to twist intelligence to exaggerate the threat posed by the former Soviet Union. Analysts alleged a report approved by Gates overstated Soviet influence in Iran that specifically led the late President Ronald Reagan into making policy decisions that turned into the Iran-contra scandal.
Jennifer Glaudemans, a former CIA analyst, said at the 1991 Gates confirmation hearings that she and her colleagues at the CIA believed "Mr Gates and his influence have led to a prostitution of (Soviet) analysis."
Melvin Goodman, Glaudemans former boss at the CIA, also said that under Gates, the CIA was "trying to provide the intelligence analysis ... that would support the operational decision to sell arms to Iran."
Gates testified at his confirmation hearing in October 1991 that he was aware the United States was selling arms to Iran in exchange for hostages. But he denied that he had any knowledge that Oliver North, the former National Security aide, was diverting money from arms sales to Iran to secretly aid the Nicaraguan contras.
But White House memos released at the time showed that North and John Poindexter, the national security adviser at the time, engaged in classified briefings with Gates on numerous occasions about Iran-contra. Poindexter testified that he discussed the situation with Gates, but Gates said at his Senate confirmation hearings he had "no recollection" about those conversations.
Alan Fiers, a former CIA officer who served as an agency liaison along with North and met weekly with Gates, testified at Gates's confirmation hearings that he discussed specific details of the covert operation with Gates.
"Bob Gates understood the universe, understood the structure, understood that there was an operational - that there was a support operation being run out of the White House," and "that Ollie North was the quarterback," Fiers said at Gate's confirmation hearing in 1991. "I had no reason to think he had great detail, but I do think there was a baseline knowledge there."
If confirmed, Gates would arguably be overseeing a war that removed a dictator he personally helped to prop up. Tom Harkin, a senator from Iowa, described Gates's role in intelligence sharing operations with Iraq during a time when the United States helped arm Saddam Hussein in Iraq's war against Iran.
"I also have doubts and questions about Mr. Gates's role in the secret intelligence sharing operation with Iraq," Harkin said during Gates's confirmation hearings on November 7, 1991. "Robert Gates served as assistant to the director of the CIA in 1981 and as deputy director for intelligence from 1982 to 1986. In that capacity, he helped develop options in dealing with the Iran-Iraq war, which eventually evolved into a secret intelligence liaison relationship with Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Gates was in charge of the directorate that prepared the intelligence information that was passed on to Iraq. He testified that he was also an active participant in the operation during 1986. The secret intelligence sharing operation with Iraq was not only a highly questionable and possibly illegal operation, but also may have jeopardized American lives and our national interests. The photo reconnaissance, highly sensitive electronic eavesdropping, and narrative texts provided to Saddam may not only have helped him in Iraq's war against Iran, but also in the recent gulf war."
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-11-08 18:59:51 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by thorpe (user info) at 2006-11-08 18:49:34 (#)
Ranking: 2
If you should be able to put anyone to death, it's someone like him.
------------
You're goddamn right.
You wanna stop the terrorist hate? How about we stop our globalist ambitions. How about we spread the seeds of goodwill by showing our willingness to prosecute those who have wronged others in OUR NAME!
How about we stop dropping bombs on nations of brown people because the sand they walk on contains enough oil to make 10 CEOs multi-billionairs? You wanna truly stop this so-called "war on terror"? Let's all take a good hard look in the fucking mirror.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-11-08 18:54:28 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by bananas (user info) at 2006-11-08 18:34:12 (#)
Ranking: 0
Fox news said Bush's popularity poll was the lowest since Richard Nixon - it was something in the %30's. Nixon opened relations with China, and had the opportunity to cut the Cold War twenty years short. Nobody remembers Nixon for that; but they do remember Watergate.
It's amusing that you're waiting for any form of justice to come out of Washington. Over half our nation hates Bush, and over half the nation hated Nixon; and both negated what they had to offer to the global political whether CNN or the BBC makes it look good or not.
Do you really think the Democratic party is better or more honest? Do you really think the problems of our country come from one man?
----------------
You're not doing a very good job of reading between the lines, are you?
I don't trust these fuckers as far as I could throw them. But you know what...I MIGHT if they would DO THEIR JOB and investigate 9/11, investigate the cause of the Iraq and Afghan disasters, and bring justice to bear on those that deserve it.
Otherwise, they are a bunch of do-nothing, corruptable pussies.
I have been saying all along that our salvation lies in a third party and, barring that, an all-out armed revolution. I'm going to give these people the benefit of the doubt, but I am realistic enough to know they aren't going to do what they SHOULD do. They aren't gonna investigate jack shit. They will make a good show of it and nothing will change. The left-right paradigm will continue to destroy us and none of you will even remember it. HEY LOOK! It's a nuclear ambitious Iran! Oh noes!
Submitted by thorpe (user info) at 2006-11-08 18:49:34 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
If you should be able to put anyone to death, it's someone like him.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-11-08 18:46:25 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by FiveStarGeneral (user info) at 2006-11-08 18:29:36 (#)
Ranking: -2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-11-08 18:25:37 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by beauxjizzle (user info) at 2006-11-08 17:31:24 (#)
Ranking: -2
i feel your anger but your reasoning is just not logical. you are arguing that people should be punished for punishing people who deserved to be punished. i don't like bush but it's not because of some retarded conspiracy that, what all the nutbag libbys fail to realize, HE IS TOO STUPID TO ACCOMPLISH.
----------------
You're right. He IS too stupid to accomplish it...on his own!
That's why we need a REAL fucking investigation once and for all. I am no lawyer and even *I* feel confident I could prove there was a conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt, AND I feel equally confident I could get a prosecution against at least one individual...your sitting vice president. He took control of NORAD in the months leading up to 9/11, and HE is the one that made them stand down on that day.
As for the rest of them, they are entitled to a trial, but I am also confident that they could be prosecuted for crimes against humanity in an international court or before a military tribunal. They were complicit in both 9/11 AND the lies that led up to the Iraq war. Anything less than a full on INDEPENDENT investigation and subsequent trials for these individuals would be a blemish on our country and our history.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Great. A conspiracy theory loon! I should have guessed it. Expect to be disappointed!
------------
Great, another short-sighted asshole without the capacity for abstract thought. I expect nothing less.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-11-08 18:45:28 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by FiveStarGeneral (user info) at 2006-11-08 18:13:47 (#)
Ranking: 0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-11-08 14:56:53 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by FiveStarGeneral (user info) at 2006-11-08 14:25:55 (#)
Ranking: 0
I am just offering a bit of advice from here on earth.
Nancy Pelosi and the democrats will not impeach Bush. It would play too much into the hands of their political opponents and if you want to see the D column longer than the R one in 2008, you might want to agree that this is the smart way to go.
---------------
I honestly couldn't give a fuck less. This should be about justice, not partisan politics. This is what's wrong with our country. We're too goddamned concerned with these illusory allegiances and not enough so with doing what's right. The people running this administration are criminals and they should be treated as such.
Besides, you're assuming the people wouldn't support impeachment proceedings. I think the election you just saw flies in the face of that pseudo-pundit logic.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Look, I don't know you but you certainly sound like a raving lunatic. What do you really think is going to happen to folks in the Bush administration? I guess in your lunatic dreams they get carted off to prison in shackles. The real world is something else. Did Nixon spend time behind bars? Did Clinton ever face anything for his lies outside of constant ridicule that continues to this day?
You are an unreasonable madman.
---------------
I say it's YOU who are the 'unreasonable madman' if you think it's "ok" to simply let the guilty go because it's what we've always done.
It is pussy fuckers like you who think more of politics than you do of doing what's right is the core of the problem in this country.
Take a good long look at Lady Justice sometime, my friend. She's wearing a blindfold for a reason.
Furthermore, your logic is fundamentally flawed. You use Clinton as an example when his 'crimes' - at least the ones he was being impeached for - weren't even CLOSE to what the Bush and Nixon administrations did. And I don't say that out of any kind of party affiliation because I have no more commitment to the democrats as I do the republicans because as a collective, they BOTH have blood on their hands; I say it because it's the fucking truth. 650,000 dead Iraqis and 1,000,000 dead Vietnamese and Cambodians cannot even testify to the horrors of what these two presidents did. Instead, they have been mowed down with the billion dollar machines of war and the power of neo-colonialist conquest.
History will judge them harshly... So should we! Why wait?!
NOW is the time. We are ALL living on the cusp of history, I suggest we start acting like it lest we be ashamed to have our children call us their forefathers.
Submitted by bananas (user info) at 2006-11-08 18:34:12 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Fox news said Bush's popularity poll was the lowest since Richard Nixon - it was something in the %30's. Nixon opened relations with China, and had the opportunity to cut the Cold War twenty years short. Nobody remembers Nixon for that; but they do remember Watergate.
It's amusing that you're waiting for any form of justice to come out of Washington. Over half our nation hates Bush, and over half the nation hated Nixon; and both negated what they had to offer to the global political whether CNN or the BBC makes it look good or not.
Do you really think the Democratic party is better or more honest? Do you really think the problems of our country come from one man?
Submitted by FiveStarGeneral (user info) at 2006-11-08 18:29:36 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-11-08 18:25:37 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by beauxjizzle (user info) at 2006-11-08 17:31:24 (#)
Ranking: -2
i feel your anger but your reasoning is just not logical. you are arguing that people should be punished for punishing people who deserved to be punished. i don't like bush but it's not because of some retarded conspiracy that, what all the nutbag libbys fail to realize, HE IS TOO STUPID TO ACCOMPLISH.
----------------
You're right. He IS too stupid to accomplish it...on his own!
That's why we need a REAL fucking investigation once and for all. I am no lawyer and even *I* feel confident I could prove there was a conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt, AND I feel equally confident I could get a prosecution against at least one individual...your sitting vice president. He took control of NORAD in the months leading up to 9/11, and HE is the one that made them stand down on that day.
As for the rest of them, they are entitled to a trial, but I am also confident that they could be prosecuted for crimes against humanity in an international court or before a military tribunal. They were complicit in both 9/11 AND the lies that led up to the Iraq war. Anything less than a full on INDEPENDENT investigation and subsequent trials for these individuals would be a blemish on our country and our history.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Great. A conspiracy theory loon! I should have guessed it. Expect to be disappointed!
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-11-08 18:25:37 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by beauxjizzle (user info) at 2006-11-08 17:31:24 (#)
Ranking: -2
i feel your anger but your reasoning is just not logical. you are arguing that people should be punished for punishing people who deserved to be punished. i don't like bush but it's not because of some retarded conspiracy that, what all the nutbag libbys fail to realize, HE IS TOO STUPID TO ACCOMPLISH.
----------------
You're right. He IS too stupid to accomplish it...on his own!
That's why we need a REAL fucking investigation once and for all. I am no lawyer and even *I* feel confident I could prove there was a conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt, AND I feel equally confident I could get a prosecution against at least one individual...your sitting vice president. He took control of NORAD in the months leading up to 9/11, and HE is the one that made them stand down on that day.
As for the rest of them, they are entitled to a trial, but I am also confident that they could be prosecuted for crimes against humanity in an international court or before a military tribunal. They were complicit in both 9/11 AND the lies that led up to the Iraq war. Anything less than a full on INDEPENDENT investigation and subsequent trials for these individuals would be a blemish on our country and our history.
Submitted by RandomJose (user info) at 2006-11-08 18:23:15 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
I think investigating him might not be the right thing for the democratic party to do if they're worrying about their image...
...but it shouldn't be about image, it should be about justice.
Submitted by FiveStarGeneral (user info) at 2006-11-08 18:18:34 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Also, you said: I'm sorry, but I love my country too much for that.
But you have wished death on American troops and repeatedly called them terrible names. You are a liar, sir.
Submitted by FiveStarGeneral (user info) at 2006-11-08 18:13:47 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-11-08 14:56:53 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by FiveStarGeneral (user info) at 2006-11-08 14:25:55 (#)
Ranking: 0
I am just offering a bit of advice from here on earth.
Nancy Pelosi and the democrats will not impeach Bush. It would play too much into the hands of their political opponents and if you want to see the D column longer than the R one in 2008, you might want to agree that this is the smart way to go.
---------------
I honestly couldn't give a fuck less. This should be about justice, not partisan politics. This is what's wrong with our country. We're too goddamned concerned with these illusory allegiances and not enough so with doing what's right. The people running this administration are criminals and they should be treated as such.
Besides, you're assuming the people wouldn't support impeachment proceedings. I think the election you just saw flies in the face of that pseudo-pundit logic.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Look, I don't know you but you certainly sound like a raving lunatic. What do you really think is going to happen to folks in the Bush administration? I guess in your lunatic dreams they get carted off to prison in shackles. The real world is something else. Did Nixon spend time behind bars? Did Clinton ever face anything for his lies outside of constant ridicule that continues to this day?
You are an unreasonable madman. Even the people considered the wacky left wouldn't acknowledge you, and for that I am glad. Mark my word; there will be no convictions of any Bush administration officials.
Criminals? Seriously. You're either a lunatic or an idiot! Should Clinton be hauled before an international court for the murders of some Chinese workers? In your world: Yes.
You're nuts!
Submitted by strwbryfanatic (user info) at 2006-11-08 17:52:43 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
I like the new thing you're doing here with the conspiracy theories.
Submitted by beauxjizzle (user info) at 2006-11-08 17:31:24 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
i feel your anger but your reasoning is just not logical. you are arguing that people should be punished for punishing people who deserved to be punished. i don't like bush but it's not because of some retarded conspiracy that, what all the nutbag libbys fail to realize, HE IS TOO STUPID TO ACCOMPLISH.
i won't say he is the worst president we've ever had, but has he accomplished ANYTHING positive? how could he possibly mastermind some kind of conspiracy to take this country to war by planning some ingenious airline takeover plot, getting past both the house and the senate, without SOMEONE catching wind of what was going on? bush didn't know anything more than anyone else in this country; libs, neocons,... nobody. he is an idiot alright, and he needs to be replaced, but if you want to accuse him of some kind of criminal act then you need to show the evidence that you have, that apparently the entire democratic party does not have, otherwise he would have been impeached already.
if bush needs to be punished for taking us to war, then saddam needed to be punished for ruling his country the way he did, which then creates a rift in the space/time continuum since if saddam deserved to be punished then what bush did was warranted.
in the years since the iraq war started i've lived in DC for a few years and new orleans for the rest of the time, and it seemed like every night at least 2 or 3 people are murdered in those cities. should we blame the democrats who run those cities? yes. can we criminally charge them with anything? no.
that being said, we need to start withdrawing from iraq, and pretty much anywhere else we dont belong, restrengthen our country from the inside, and stop fighting other people's wars.
Submitted by rad1101 (user info) at 2006-11-08 17:07:39 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
while my language was convoluted the meaning, I hope, was clear.
Submitted by rad1101 (user info) at 2006-11-08 17:07:07 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-11-08 16:42:23 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by jgreening (user info) at 2006-11-08 15:06:17 (#)
Ranking: 0
Rummy gone, Santorum gone, Allen gone (probably).
Man. This has been like Christmas in November.
Oh, and don't think of just now, and what people want now, ETS. If they try to inpeach Bush with the Senate at BEST 50-49-1 (basically 51-49) it will basically be Clinton-esque. Think long-term. Put forward an agenda and stick to it that will lead to MORE gains in 08 in the Senate, AND the White House. There are 4-5 winnable seats in the Senate in 08, and that's WITHOUT some possible Senator retirements.
Slow and steady wins the race, my man.
--
I appreciate the strategic thought and I think you're coming from a good place with it, but I'm not interested in a long-term democratic control of our government. I AM interested in having people represent us that have the human capacity to know basic right from wrong, to be able to spot lies and misrepresentations of facts without having to wait till it's too late. (If you'll remember, those that were against the war from the outset were ridiculed as "unpatriotic". Now, of course, we know they were right.)
I want representatives that will not only do the bidding of their constituents, but will educate and explain to them what's really going on with this or that bill and put it in historical terms so that more people understand what it is they're really asking for when they scream for their representative to vote for this or that bill - the truth, the WHOLE truth, and nothing but the truth. And I don't think it's too much to ask to have justice in this country. I don't think it's too much to ask to have a little accountability for the lies and crimes perpetrated by this administration or ANY administration upon the people of this country and the WORLD. We cannot excuse such actions on the basis of 'moving forward', for a wound left untended will fester and grow septic, eventually turning the whole system gangrenous again.
Bush might be a lame duck for the remainder of his presidency, but that doesn't even come close to making up for the misdeeds of his administration. When an estimated 650,000 innocent civilians have lost their lives in a war in which the initial reasoning was entirely fabricated, there needs to be justice. For him, for Chaney, for Rumsfeld, for George Tenet of the CIA, for Colon Powell, for Condi Rice, and for anyone else who has both the blood of Iraqis and the blood of Americans on their slimy hands. Nevermind 9/11 and the obvious conspiracy there, let's talk about the things we can agree on. The Iraq war is and was always a criminal enterprise. There is $2.3 TRILLION of our money missing from the DOD. Vanished. Gone. Poof!
Why do we insist on standing by, resting on our laurels, when there's so much yet to be done before this legal revolution is over. I have always been of the mind that if you're gonna do something, you might as well not waste your time and do it right! Why stop short of real justice for no other reason than fear? Call it 'strategy' all you like, I call it COWARDICE. To stop short of real justice now would only welcome the same offenses in the future...and next time, who knows, it could be a democrat we have to watch out for.
That IS moving forward. In my book, it's the only way to move forward. I am not about right or left. I am about right and wrong, and I was brought up to believe that rewarding wrongfulness with apathy and ignorance only encourages its spread.
I'm sorry, but I love my country too much for that.
================
be careful with the language you are using.
somebody might mistake you for a real patriot.
Submitted by Anansie (user info) at 2006-11-08 16:49:23 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-11-08 16:42:23 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by jgreening (user info) at 2006-11-08 15:06:17 (#)
Ranking: 0
Rummy gone, Santorum gone, Allen gone (probably).
Man. This has been like Christmas in November.
Oh, and don't think of just now, and what people want now, ETS. If they try to inpeach Bush with the Senate at BEST 50-49-1 (basically 51-49) it will basically be Clinton-esque. Think long-term. Put forward an agenda and stick to it that will lead to MORE gains in 08 in the Senate, AND the White House. There are 4-5 winnable seats in the Senate in 08, and that's WITHOUT some possible Senator retirements.
Slow and steady wins the race, my man.
--
I appreciate the strategic thought and I think you're coming from a good place with it, but I'm not interested in a long-term democratic control of our government. I AM interested in having people represent us that have the human capacity to know basic right from wrong, to be able to spot lies and misrepresentations of facts without having to wait till it's too late. (If you'll remember, those that were against the war from the outset were ridiculed as "unpatriotic". Now, of course, we know they were right.)
I want representatives that will not only do the bidding of their constituents, but will educate and explain to them what's really going on with this or that bill and put it in historical terms so that more people understand what it is they're really asking for when they scream for their representative to vote for this or that bill - the truth, the WHOLE truth, and nothing but the truth. And I don't think it's too much to ask to have justice in this country. I don't think it's too much to ask to have a little accountability for the lies and crimes perpetrated by this administration or ANY administration upon the people of this country and the WORLD. We cannot excuse such actions on the basis of 'moving forward', for a wound left untended will fester and grow septic, eventually turning the whole system gangrenous again.
Bush might be a lame duck for the remainder of his presidency, but that doesn't even come close to making up for the misdeeds of his administration. When an estimated 650,000 innocent civilians have lost their lives in a war in which the initial reasoning was entirely fabricated, there needs to be justice. For him, for Chaney, for Rumsfeld, for George Tenet of the CIA, for Colon Powell, for Condi Rice, and for anyone else who has both the blood of Iraqis and the blood of Americans on their slimy hands. Nevermind 9/11 and the obvious conspiracy there, let's talk about the things we can agree on. The Iraq war is and was always a criminal enterprise. There is $2.3 TRILLION of our money missing from the DOD. Vanished. Gone. Poof!
Why do we insist on standing by, resting on our laurels, when there's so much yet to be done before this legal revolution is over. I have always been of the mind that if you're gonna do something, you might as well not waste your time and do it right! Why stop short of real justice for no other reason than fear? Call it 'strategy' all you like, I call it COWARDICE. To stop short of real justice now would only welcome the same offenses in the future...and next time, who knows, it could be a democrat we have to watch out for.
That IS moving forward. In my book, it's the only way to move forward. I am not about right or left. I am about right and wrong, and I was brought up to believe that rewarding wrongfulness with apathy and ignorance only encourages its spread.
I'm sorry, but I love my country too much for that.
Submitted by jgreening (user info) at 2006-11-08 16:16:48 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Indo, if he did it before the election, the Dems would have latched onto it as a "Look, even THEY know they've been doing something wrong. If you vote them back in, it'll be more of the same."
I'm still giddy today, though.
I loved last night. And Bush this morning was saying some of the right things, but MAN you could see in his eyes that he was thinking "I swear to fucking God on high, I will kill a reporter if he pushes me too far."
Submitted by ParlorTrick (user info) at 2006-11-08 16:06:50 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
The Emperor has no clothes (again).
Submitted by DudeThatsBOSH (user info) at 2006-11-08 15:40:07 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
i wonder if people would vote for me..
I would represent the 'BOSH' party.
Submitted by DudeThatsBOSH (user info) at 2006-11-08 15:39:00 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by JonnyX (user info) at 2006-11-08 15:20:27 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Nixon was expendable? expendable to whom?
dude, you would have LOVED to work for Nixon - he was your kind of crazy.
btw, have you read any of his books? They're pretty good, actually.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-11-08 15:20:20 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-11-08 14:30:39 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-11-08 14:12:30 (#)
Ranking: -2
Could it possibly be an olive branch to Pelosi?
----------------
An olive branch? Are you fucking stupid or just dumb and gullible?
-------------------------
He is a lame duck president who wants to get something done, and has an agenda in Iraq, he can do very little without the dems approval.
Pelosi has called for Rumsfield to get the ax on several occasions, and it isn't like he couldn't find a dozen people do to Rummy's job, why not ax him?
the only thing that suprises me is that he didn't do it before the election to act like he is "doing something".
Submitted by MANICMOTHER (user info) at 2006-11-08 15:12:05 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by jgreening (user info) at 2006-11-08 15:06:17 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Rummy gone, Santorum gone, Allen gone (probably).
Man. This has been like Christmas in November.
Oh, and don't think of just now, and what people want now, ETS. If they try to inpeach Bush with the Senate at BEST 50-49-1 (basically 51-49) it will basically be Clinton-esque. Think long-term. Put forward an agenda and stick to it that will lead to MORE gains in 08 in the Senate, AND the White House. There are 4-5 winnable seats in the Senate in 08, and that's WITHOUT some possible Senator retirements.
Slow and steady wins the race, my man.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-11-08 14:56:53 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by FiveStarGeneral (user info) at 2006-11-08 14:25:55 (#)
Ranking: 0
I am just offering a bit of advice from here on earth.
Nancy Pelosi and the democrats will not impeach Bush. It would play too much into the hands of their political opponents and if you want to see the D column longer than the R one in 2008, you might want to agree that this is the smart way to go.
---------------
I honestly couldn't give a fuck less. This should be about justice, not partisan politics. This is what's wrong with our country. We're too goddamned concerned with these illusory allegiances and not enough so with doing what's right. The people running this administration are criminals and they should be treated as such.
Besides, you're assuming the people wouldn't support impeachment proceedings. I think the election you just saw flies in the face of that pseudo-pundit logic.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-11-08 14:30:39 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-11-08 14:12:30 (#)
Ranking: -2
Could it possibly be an olive branch to Pelosi?
----------------
An olive branch? Are you fucking stupid or just dumb and gullible?
Submitted by FiveStarGeneral (user info) at 2006-11-08 14:25:55 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
I am just offering a bit of advice from here on earth.
Nancy Pelosi and the democrats will not impeach Bush. It would play too much into the hands of their political opponents and if you want to see the D column longer than the R one in 2008, you might want to agree that this is the smart way to go.
Two years. Two tiny years. If the democrats make fools of themselves in those two years, they will lost all they have gained. They won primarily on the failures of the republicans rather than the success of the democrats. Now is the time for the democrats to have success of their own and not be seen as vindictive, mean-spirited folks. I could be wrong and they might shoot themselves in the foot. I hope not, though.
They could easily have went after Rumsfeld because he was unpopular with everyone and not just democrats. Now, why do they have to? It only hurts them. It was a wise move to do this now. I'd say the democrats can go out in public and claim victory for this cause right away rather than wait and have some delayed investigations. Wouldn't you think so?
Think smart if you want to progress further. Nothing is going to happen to Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, or anyone else. A firing? That's it.
Submitted by beauxjizzle (user info) at 2006-11-08 14:23:32 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
in your race to be the first to make a post about this, which i concede you won, you left us with a link and a drunken ramble.
i commend you sir!
Submitted by firefly (user info) at 2006-11-08 14:19:05 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by FiveStarGeneral (user info) at 2006-11-08 14:17:29 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Perhaps a -2 was a bit harsh. I apologize. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
Submitted by FiveStarGeneral (user info) at 2006-11-08 14:16:45 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Wow there are some real crazies around here! Do many people believe this guy?
So Bush & Team were supposed to hold on to Rumsfeld to the very end where the only outcome would be a resignation after months of expensive and time-consuming debates? God, I hope they don't pre-empt daytime TV for my mother's sake for that tripe.
I think many republicans are glad Rumsfeld is gone.
Now, I will try to make your writing worthwhile by including what is possibly the most interesting thing to show up in weeks in the media!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIVw6p9lCgg&eurl=
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-11-08 14:12:30 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by FartSmeller (user info) at 2006-11-08 14:02:10 (#)
Ranking: -2
Let's go down to South Chicago and get some homeboys to take any future jobs that open up in our government. Ray Ray: National Security Advisor, Big Weezy: Communications Director. Or maybe some radically left-wing conspiracy theorists like you.
------------------
Hahaha!!!!!!!
ETS, your stupidity continues to suprise me. How is he a coward? If he is going to be investigated for or has committed any wrongdoing, how would stepping down help him? Could it possibly be an olive branch to Pelosi? Bush and Pelosi will have to work together for the next two years which will cause a change in policy in Iraq, plus Rumsfield ain't that popular.
Submitted by Crystle (user info) at 2006-11-08 14:08:31 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
'Please feel free to add any extra comments'
no
Comment comment comment comment comment comment comment comment comment comment comment comment comment comment comment comment comment comment comment comment comment comment comment comment comment comment comment.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2006-11-08 14:06:29 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
your 'realism'?
LMAO
Submitted by FartSmeller (user info) at 2006-11-08 14:02:10 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-11-08 13:52:40 (#)
Ranking: 0
Robert Gates, his replacement is...*GASP*...a former CIA director and member of the board of VoteHere, a company that created voting machine software.
Nice
--------------------------
Oh my goodness! He's on the board of directors from some company! Here's how it went down: He's actually the head guy in both rigging the supposed plane crashes on 9/11 AND getting voting machines to randomly throw out Democratic votes AND getting GW elected in Florida.
How strange that an accomplished intellegence director with corporate ties and business savvy would be installed in some government position. That makes him way different from, well, ninety percent of all government officials from both major parties.
Let's go down to South Chicago and get some homeboys to take any future jobs that open up in our government. Ray Ray: National Security Advisor, Big Weezy: Communications Director. Or maybe some radically left-wing conspiracy theorists like you.
Submitted by BLITZKREIG_BOB (user info) at 2006-11-08 13:58:19 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
If you really think about it, anyone is expendable in a system so large.
Submitted by KindaNews (user info) at 2006-11-08 13:57:59 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
He cut and ran.
Submitted by Axolotl (user info) at 2006-11-08 13:57:28 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by rennfahrer (user info) at 2006-11-08 13:56:09 (#)
Ranking: -2
No Comment
------
Auto +2 -2bot alter
Submitted by St_Jimmy (user info) at 2006-11-08 13:57:08 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
God damn it! You beat me!
Submitted by rennfahrer (user info) at 2006-11-08 13:56:09 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
No Comment
Submitted by Shlongy (user info) at 2006-11-08 13:56:03 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Yeah...OK...Who are the Raiders playing this weekend?
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-11-08 13:53:28 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Axolotl (user info) at 2006-11-08 13:51:14 (#)
Ranking: 1
And hanging Rumsfeld would make it all better?
------------
I wouldn't shed any tears over him. Put it that way.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-11-08 13:53:01 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
http://www.infowars.com/print/misc/blackbox.htm
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2006-11-08 13:52:40 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Robert Gates, his replacement is...*GASP*...a former CIA director and member of the board of VoteHere, a company that created voting machine software.
Nice.
Submitted by Axolotl (user info) at 2006-11-08 13:51:14 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
And hanging Rumsfeld would make it all better?
Submitted by goferforhire (user info) at 2006-11-08 13:49:47 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
The democrats don't want your vote.