Thomas wrote:... meanwhile, somewhere in Canada, a desperate Setanta is crying his heart out. He had insisted with usual clarity and unusual niceness that we stay on topic. It was a simple, common sense request. Yet most posters here have proved too rude or too dumb to heed it.
Why bother attempting to control the thread to such a degree? All it causes is problems.
As long as people are talking about Libby and the pardon, the thread is on topic. Attempting to keep conversations from drifting is rather futile.
Cycloptichorn
I'd say too dull-witted. There are any number of threads in which people can post their silly screeds. But i'm not crying my heart out . . . i give up. I fought the good fight, and enjoyed a brief triumph. But i've been online for many, many years. I knew at the outset how hopeless this all is.
Perhaps you've not been paying attention, Cyclo. I started this thread a month ago, before we knew that the Shrub would commute Libby's sentence, before we knew if he would pardon Libby. It was only after the Shrub issued the commutation that other people jumped all over the topic.
And there are plenty of such threads at which people can post, for example, some idiotic comments which Snow made about Clinton.
Setanta wrote:Perhaps you've not been paying attention, Cyclo. I started this thread a month ago, before we knew that Shrub would commute Libby's sentence, before we knew if he would pardon Libby. It was only after the Shrub issued the commutation that other people jumped all over the topic.
And there are plenty of such threads at which people can post, for example, some idiotic comments which Snow made about Clinton.
Oh, I know. I went back and re-read the thread today.
The 'plenty of other threads' is the same line pulled by the Bush Supporters in the Aftermath thread. I'm against attempting to herd cats no matter where it takes place at; peeps are going to post what they want no matter how much you ask them not to.
Cycloptichorn
I have never posted in one of the "Bush Aftermath" threads. I don't go piss on other people's playgrounds, unless i am certain they are nut cases. I hope they won't do it to my threads. I took on Woiyo with a certain degree of savagery today precisely because i wanted to chase away the "look what Clinton did" crowd.
Cycloptichorn wrote:Why bother attempting to control the thread to such a degree? All it causes is problems.
I have an opinion about this, but I won't discuss it here because it would be off-topic for this thread. Instead, I have started
a separate thread for this.
Case in point regarding my earlier statement, Hannity just spent his time on MSNBC discussing the cost of John Edwards haircut, Bill and Hill, blah, blah, blah.
Chris Mathews is just starting and mentioned Hillary's response to the commutation, Bill's statement, ... Ahh, but he's gonna finish this little segment and move on to his interview with Bruce Willis.
Anaconda, Angelina, Bruce... same difference. Let's move along folks.
squinney wrote:Case in point regarding my earlier statement, Hannity just spent his time on MSNBC discussing the cost of John Edwards haircut, Bill and Hill, blah, blah, blah.
Chris Mathews is just starting and mentioned Hillary's response to the commutation, Bill's statement, ... Ahh, but he's gonna finish this little segment and move on to his interview with Bruce Willis.
Anaconda, Angelina, Bruce... same difference. Let's move along folks.
Different time zones I guess, I just got to "and next we have Bruce Willis" so I went out to the garage for a smoke and to get the trash ready for pick-up tomorrow morning.
dyslexia wrote:squinney wrote:Case in point regarding my earlier statement, Hannity just spent his time on MSNBC discussing the cost of John Edwards haircut, Bill and Hill, blah, blah, blah.
Chris Mathews is just starting and mentioned Hillary's response to the commutation, Bill's statement, ... Ahh, but he's gonna finish this little segment and move on to his interview with Bruce Willis.
Anaconda, Angelina, Bruce... same difference. Let's move along folks.
Different time zones I guess, I just got to "and next we have Bruce Willis" so I went out to the garage for a smoke and to get the trash ready for pick-up tomorrow morning.
Just to get the thread a little more off topic.......Bruce's new Die Hard flick is good stuff.
Quote:July 06, 2007
POLL: ARG Pardon/Impeachment
A new American Research Group national survey of 1,100 adults (conducted 7/3 through 7/5) finds:
* 31% of approve of "President George W. Bush commuting the 30-month prison sentence of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby while leaving intact Mr. Libby's conviction for perjury and obstruction of justice in the CIA leak case;" 64% disapprove.
* 11% favor a complete presidential pardon for Libby; 84% oppose.
* 45% favor "the US House of Representatives beginning impeachment proceedings against President George W. Bush;" 46% oppose.
* 54% favor "US House of Representatives beginning impeachment proceedings against Vice President Dick Cheney;" 40% oppose.
Impeachment isn't a joke. It is polling quite highly. It won't take more for those numbers to go up, either.
Cycloptichorn
It seems most people have the right idea about where to target impeachment proceedings; Cheney. That's surprising, considering the simple fact that I didn't think Americans were that well informed.
cicerone imposter wrote:It seems most people have the right idea about where to target impeachment proceedings; Cheney. That's surprising, considering the simple fact that I didn't think Americans were that well informed.
And where do things stand now on Cheney's impeachment? Bush's impeachement? How's it going with getting Bush a dishonorable discharge from the National Guard?
Brandon, You probably haven't noticed, but this congress' rating is lower than Bush's. Just because most Americans want something doesn't mean this congress will comply. You're behind the times.
Brandon9000 wrote:cicerone imposter wrote:It seems most people have the right idea about where to target impeachment proceedings; Cheney. That's surprising, considering the simple fact that I didn't think Americans were that well informed.
And where do things stand now on Cheney's impeachment? Bush's impeachement? How's it going with getting Bush a dishonorable discharge from the National Guard?
There is a bill in the House with 11 co-sponsors, specifically for the purpose of impeaching Cheney. That number has risen, and will continue to rise in the upcoming months.
Cycloptichorn
i have to tell ya, the only thing that keeps me from really enjoying the mental image of cheney (and bush for that matter) being kicked to the curb is the thought of those whom would be likely replacements.
thereby becoming the last minute encumbant and available to run on that and continue the current agenda.
i'm more than a little suspicious that will happen anyway, "for medical reasons".
why help rove with his fiendish plans ?
In fact, if you got rid of the Shrub and Uncle Dick, Nancy Pelosi would be President. (See the 1947 Presidential Succession Act, which lists the Speaker of the House of Representatives after the Vice President in the succession.) However, that would only work if both the Shrub and Cheney were kicked out at the same time. The 25th Amendment provides the President the opportunity to appoint a Vice President (even if this were an Acting President). The 25th Amendment is rather long, but the first two sections read:
Section 1. In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.
Section 2. Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.
So, if you impeach the Shrub, but not Cheney, Cheney becomes Prez and can nominate a Vice President. If you impeach Uncle Dick, but not the Shrub, the Shrub can nominate a Vice Prez.
Set, That knowledge about succession is good, but I don't give our congress any hope of proceeding with impeachment of both Bush and Cheney; even one impeachment would be a big surprise.
Spare me the lecture, C.I.--you as much as or more than anyone else are responsible for derailing my thread.
I only posted the information in response to DTOM's comment about who would become President if Bush and Cheney were "kicked to the curb."
right, that's where i was going. it's not likely at all that ya could get a twofer on bushie and grampa dick simultaneously.
for a bunch that loves to complain about trawl lawyuhs and lawyers in general, the bush bunch is quite good at utilizing every cheesy legal tactic in the book to slow things to a crawl and run out the clock.
they must be scraping the barrel though. cheney's alternate claims of executive priviledge and not being part of the exec branch totally smells like a hail mary to me...
That's a lecture? Give me a f....g break!
