pat_k
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-25-06 05:56 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
| 19. It is more counter-productive NOT to discuss it now. . . |
| -Forget the pledge: Why Pelosi is wrong on impeachment.... |
marmar |
Oct-25-06 01:20 PM |
#0 |
-
You know... |
wryter2000 |
Oct-25-06 01:26 PM |
#1 |
 -
If she turned it down when it got to her who would it go to then? |
goddess40 |
Oct-25-06 01:28 PM |
#3 |
  -
Exactly |
wryter2000 |
Oct-25-06 01:31 PM |
#8 |
   -
Actually, they can prove this isn't a "partisan coup" from the outset. . . |
pat_k |
Oct-25-06 05:54 PM |
#18 |
  -
See Post #16. It's up to Bush/Cheney to spare us "disruption" and keep Repub Pres. . . |
pat_k |
Oct-25-06 05:53 PM |
#17 |
  -
Our Constitution is BROKEN.. |
Tellurian |
Oct-26-06 07:58 AM |
#35 |
 -
I don't disagree with you at all... |
marmar |
Oct-25-06 01:29 PM |
#6 |
  -
Okay |
wryter2000 |
Oct-25-06 01:29 PM |
#7 |
  -
Actually, they are making a monumental mistake -- trapping themselves. . . |
pat_k |
Oct-25-06 05:58 PM |
#20 |
 -
Bush/Cheney can keep Pres. Republican -- all Dems need to do is point it out. . .. |
pat_k |
Oct-25-06 05:45 PM |
#16 |
 -
It is more counter-productive NOT to discuss it now. . . |
pat_k |
Oct-25-06 05:56 PM |
#19 |
-
She was right. Give it a rest. |
Richardo |
Oct-25-06 01:28 PM |
#2 |
 -
Hey, Richardo |
wryter2000 |
Oct-25-06 01:34 PM |
#9 |
  -
Behaved well? What the....? |
Richardo |
Oct-25-06 01:37 PM |
#11 |
 -
You can't be too careful |
wryter2000 |
Oct-25-06 03:00 PM |
#13 |
 -
Actually, she handed them a bunch of them. . . |
pat_k |
Oct-25-06 05:59 PM |
#22 |
-
?? |
Richardo |
Oct-26-06 07:59 AM |
#36 |
-
There is a great answer should could have given. . . |
pat_k |
Oct-26-06 11:20 AM |
#40 |
-
Pelosi's statement takes impeachment off the table for the Repigs! |
zulchzulu |
Oct-25-06 01:29 PM |
#4 |
 -
Hey, you're scary |
wryter2000 |
Oct-25-06 01:36 PM |
#10 |
 -
Downside of pledge is guaranteed, And they mythical backlash beast. . . |
pat_k |
Oct-25-06 06:08 PM |
#23 |
-
Rep. Pelosi's Position, Sir |
The Magistrate |
Oct-25-06 01:29 PM |
#5 |
 -
They should have been running on impeachment. . . |
pat_k |
Oct-25-06 06:09 PM |
#24 |
-
Nancy Pelosi was damn smart to say it!! |
LynneSin |
Oct-25-06 01:41 PM |
#12 |
 -
The price they will pay for this pledge is FAR higher |
pat_k |
Oct-25-06 06:12 PM |
#25 |
 -
I was saying that a month ago, |
elocs |
Oct-25-06 06:57 PM |
#30 |
-
By failing to run on impeachment, they set themselves a trap. . . |
pat_k |
Oct-26-06 11:37 AM |
#42 |
-
If Speaker Carl Albert had announced in 1972 that the Dems planned |
beaconess |
Oct-25-06 05:20 PM |
#14 |
 -
Why? |
pat_k |
Oct-25-06 06:13 PM |
#26 |
-
Because in 1972, there was no stomach for impeachment - as |
beaconess |
Oct-25-06 09:16 PM |
#32 |
-
. . and letting Reagan/Bush off the hook gave us Bush I . . |
pat_k |
Oct-26-06 07:40 AM |
#34 |
-
Who's said anything about letting them off the hook? |
beaconess |
Oct-26-06 09:57 AM |
#37 |
-
Precisely what she is doing with the pledge. . . |
pat_k |
Oct-26-06 11:08 AM |
#38 |
-
Imagine if there was no impeachment-- |
elocs |
Oct-25-06 05:38 PM |
#15 |
 -
It's the nuked constituion I'm more worried about. .. |
pat_k |
Oct-25-06 06:14 PM |
#27 |
-
where do you get the 60 votes needed to impeach Bush?? |
Imagevision |
Oct-25-06 05:58 PM |
#21 |
 -
By failing to accuse Bush, they are giving the fascists cover. . . |
pat_k |
Oct-25-06 06:17 PM |
#28 |
 -
67 votes are needed in the Senate after the House votes to impeach. |
elocs |
Oct-25-06 06:47 PM |
#29 |
-
She's already exonerated them, so no worries about that. . . |
pat_k |
Oct-26-06 11:29 AM |
#41 |
-
Only 2 years left... |
Infinite Hope |
Oct-25-06 07:12 PM |
#31 |
 -
And in that 2 years, Dems have to get something done to help the American |
beaconess |
Oct-25-06 09:20 PM |
#33 |
-
Happy renovation on a house that is still knocked off its foundation? |
pat_k |
Oct-26-06 11:11 AM |
#39 |
-
Wow! I just checked the replies to my posts here at DU. |
elocs |
Oct-26-06 05:38 PM |
#43 |