Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why push for censure?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
whitestarz Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 02:42 PM
Original message
Why push for censure?
Why push for censure if it isn't going to accomplish anything very much? Bush isn't running again, thus he'd be a lame duck whether he gets censured or not, Senate/Congress/SCOTUS is already on his side--so what would it accomplish long-term?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
fooj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 02:43 PM
Response to Original message
1. THE PRESIDENT BROKE THE LAW.
Period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. ...and attention to the fact that HE BROKE THE LAW. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
politicaholic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 02:54 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. Exactly, he's a criminal not only for that, but also a murderer...
the US doesn't recognize the world court for the reason that Bush, Cheney, Rummie, Condi, and Powell can be tried for war crimes. At the very least the American people can teach history that this behavior WILL NOT BE TOLERATED!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClassWarrior Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 02:44 PM
Response to Original message
3. Ya gotta shoot that first pebble to topple the house of cards.
Call your Senators and demand they answer the Magic Question.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Then pass it on.

NGU.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 02:46 PM
Response to Original message
4. Read today's posts here
It's been covered fairly extensively for the past few days.

The main thing, I think, is public and legislative awareness. Bush will not be any wiser because of it, that's a given. I think this makes people aware, makes them talk, starts a groundswell of support that can be used later for impeachment. In means nothing legally, of course, but it means a hell of a lot emotionally for all of us who are sick of this bastard's evil and illegal ways.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whitestarz Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. OK
Well, let me do some more reading up on this--sometimes it's too easy to get behind on things. Exactly what law did he break? Let me start with reading the law....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. There is a legal way to spy on people. Mrbush chose to not do that.
He chose to spy on people NOT by following the law. This is called breaking the law, illegal, wrong. No one is above the law. Not even the president.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whitestarz Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #8
13. I thought....
Edited on Wed Mar-15-06 03:08 PM by whitestarz
I thought he could wiretap for any reason...or were there certain circumstances when he could waive the laws about it, or what? Given all the media has said about this, I don't have it straight in my head. And this is about wiretapping people talking overseas? (ostensibly talking with muslim 'terrorists')? Did it involve people talking to others inside the USA? And does that matter?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #13
19. There are no laws against tapping suspected al Qaeda
during overseas phone calls. And no one is saying there should be a law to prevent that or that this is anything but a very good idea. It's the fact that he admitted he skirted the laws "because they would slow their investigations down" that really got to me. The laws state that he can do whatever wiretapping he wants to do as long as he has a warrant. And he can get that warrant up to 72 hours after the actual wiretapping. So how the hell does that slow him down?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #13
21. Questions for you about if you think it is ok to wiretap people:
1. people in the USA
2. "ostensibly talking with muslim terrorists"
3. without following the law and getting permission to wiretap?


--------
Now, to reply to your questions.
It is the law that anyone, even the president, must get permission to wiretap. There is a way for the president to get permission, the president has never been denied permission, yet he chose to not ask permission and just do it. Does that matter to you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whitestarz Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. And with all that...
Bush doesn't think he broke the law??????????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. He says he doesn't care, that he can do whatever he wants as...
"we are at war". Now, who declared war? And even if we were at war, he still has to follow the law.

Asking again, do you think it is ok to wiretap:

1. people in the USA
2. "ostensibly talking with muslim terrorists"
3. without following the law and getting permission to wiretap?


It is the law that anyone, even the president, must get permission to wiretap. There is a way for the president to get permission, the president has never been denied permission, yet he chose to not ask permission and just do it. Does that matter to you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whitestarz Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #25
27. Is THAT all he said about it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. Asking again, do you think it is ok to wiretap:
1. people in the USA
2. "ostensibly talking with muslim terrorists"
3. without following the law and getting permission to wiretap?


It is the law that anyone, even the president, must get permission to wiretap. There is a way for the president to get permission, the president has never been denied permission, yet he chose to not ask permission and just do it. Does that matter to you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whitestarz Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #28
33. Answer
Edited on Wed Mar-15-06 03:40 PM by whitestarz
1. people in the USA--no, the law has to be followed. We are a nation of laws that we're guaranteed. They can't simply be jettisoned.


2. "ostensibly talking with muslim terrorists"--I might be willing to accept a deviation from the law IF there was enough proof, and IF something as serious as 9/11 were going to happen. However, I don't think the gov. COULD be that sure, so this would be a slippery slope, so no.


3. without following the law and getting permission to wiretap?--no, laws must be followed with ALL American citizens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #33
35. So, Mrbush broke the law.
He chose to not follow the legal way of wiretapping. Should there be any consequence for that, regardless of whether or not HE is able to run again?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whitestarz Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:46 PM
Response to Reply #35
38. There should be...
...consequences for anyone who breaks the law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:48 PM
Response to Reply #38
39. Hence, censure
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Not Me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. All that, and...
It paves the way for future presidents to interpret their powers as widely as this asshat does. Censure would call him on his crimes. (Of course, the next logical step would be to try him and remove him from office.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:01 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. He wiretapped American citizens
Calls from Americans to Americans... there were no international calls, no calls from suspected al Qaeda members... just Quakers and normal old everyday run of the mill Americans. That is against the law. FCC laws state you cannot listen in without a warrant, you cannot tape a conversation on the telephone unless the other person is aware it is being taped, or you have a warrant. Its all very simple, really. He broke the law. He thinks he is above the law. He needs smacked down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whitestarz Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:12 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. QUAKERS?
Good Lord! What on earth did he think THEY were doing wrong? They are some of the most law-abiding people in America...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JuniperLea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. There were some peace activists involved
That's right. Peaceniks. Pacifist peaceniks. Someone you could trust with your life... or the life of your child... and they are on the list. Stupid, isn't it? That bit of info might lead one to believe they are spying on anyone who refuses to drink the Kool Aid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYCGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 02:58 PM
Response to Original message
7. Because it's the right thing to do. NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bridget Burke Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:02 PM
Response to Original message
11. Because Bush & his minions broke the law.
On a less elevated plane, we have elections coming up this year. Republicans have already begun to scurry away from Bush. It's fun to watch!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:07 PM
Response to Original message
12. Think of a stain on a blue dress. Now think of American citizens
being wiretapped WITHOUT their knowledge or consent.

Clinton was censured over something between two consenting adults.

In this argument, it's George Bush giving "consent" vs. the entire US Citizenry.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:09 PM
Response to Original message
14. I think Senators need to back Russ up.
Since he made the play we need to show some unity. I would probably not have been in favor of the censure for the reasons you site plus the fact it will distract the public from issues we are clearly kicking ass on now and lead to some distate among disenchanted repukes who still love then some dubya but think he is off-track.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoYouEverWonder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
16. Only one other President has ever been censured
so it is a big deal.

It is also the first step toward prosecuting the Bush WH for their high crimes and misdemeanors.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whitestarz Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. Which one other?
And for what?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fooj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. Andrew Jackson
Peace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #18
22. Andrew Jackson, like in that other post you replied to about it and him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whitestarz Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:27 PM
Response to Reply #22
24. What other post?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. this one
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whitestarz Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:35 PM
Response to Reply #26
30. What are you referring to?
I don't have a post on that page...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #30
34. ?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

I"'m not really up on it...
What did he do to get himself in such hot water? "
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whitestarz Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #34
36. I do not have a post on that page.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #34
42. is this another whitestarz?
click on the link and look. Did someone else post this using your DU poster person?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whitestarz Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #34
43. Oh, sorry...
That WAS mine...I wanted to know what he did....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #24
29. Donors to DU have the ability to use the "search" feature.
It's an amazingly useful tool.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #29
31. yes, isn't it.
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whitestarz Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #31
37. I'm not sure what you think you've found but...
...have the mods ban that person. Simple. Then we'll know who is here and who isn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #37
44. ah, but that post is benign, simple...
no problem with that post. The mods don't ban people simple because I ask them too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whitestarz Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #44
47. LOL!
Edited on Wed Mar-15-06 03:59 PM by whitestarz
Just how dangerous do you think someone is going to be asking for information about ANDREW JACKSON?

EVEN TWICE IN ONE DAY! (And I still don't know what the guy did!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 04:08 PM
Response to Reply #47
53. Beware asking about Peter Jackson though.
:sracasm: :evilgrin:

google search might help.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurovski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #37
45. Just like recent ex-member " I give"?
This is what is found: You already responded to a post stating Andrew Jackson was censured, and here you are claiming to not know anything about it.

You're not building trust with moves like that, is the upshot of all this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whitestarz Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #45
46. Sheesh
I've been distracted planning my wedding--you all can either understand something like that or not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #46
48. Many of us are distracted, but you are not building trust here
People come here with the purpose of disrupting, not discussing, learning about or working on issues. Saying you did not post something you did, and refusing to give your opinion on hot topics does not build trust.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whitestarz Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #48
52. Quit overreacting.
The emphasis you're putting on this is ridiculous. The page your link led to the first 3 times I went there did not show my post--it just showed a page full of 'latest' or whatever--NOT under my name. And I most certainly DID give my opinion on this issue of censure once I understood what was involved. You folks need to get a grip.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #52
54. hmm, the link works for me, everytime I tried it
thank you for giving your opinion. I am sorry that you do not like my explanation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurovski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #46
50. Picking your bouquet as you lead up the garden path?
Bye. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DoYouEverWonder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:48 PM
Response to Reply #18
40. It was President Andrew Jackson
but I'm not sure for what.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:37 PM
Response to Original message
32. What part of "bush broke the law" don't you get?
NT!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whitestarz Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #32
41. I don't simply believe something...
...because someone has said it on a message board. I've needed some background, needed to know the issues involved.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurovski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #41
55. You're on the internet. Do some research. DU is not a tutoring society.
Edited on Wed Mar-15-06 04:13 PM by Kurovski
There are some basics everyone is expected to come on board with.

Take a citizenship class if you need to. It is rude to expect to be hand-fed, and it is a time-waster, which I'm suspecting is the point.

Bye. God be with you. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whitestarz Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #55
56. You
You need to learn to deal with your anger issues--and not take them out on people you don't know on a message board. I know potshots like that may be fun for you to do, but you're only hurting the Democratic party by being so petty. Learn how to be a community BUILDER.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurovski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #56
58. Thank you for ascribing so much power to me, would it were true!
Would that most of what you say were true.

Peace be with you, Christ be with you.

Bye. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whitestarz Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 04:28 PM
Response to Reply #58
59. Everyone has power.
It's up to them whether they use it positively or negatively.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurovski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #59
60. Groovy. Amen.
We're all magnets in this together. May the path rise up to meet you.

Bye. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whitestarz Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #60
63. Just ask yourself everytime before you post...
'What am I trying to accomplish here?' Then ask yourself what you DID accomplish.

Many of your posts you make for the sole reason of being nasty to someone--and that's a lousy way to spend your life.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurovski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 05:24 PM
Response to Reply #63
65. Modify that, and then tell it to your president.
Edited on Wed Mar-15-06 05:25 PM by Kurovski
And if you ever "run into" "ex"-DU disruptor "I give", be SURE to say...bye! :hi:

Peace on earth, goodwill to all. :hug:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Minnesota Libra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 04:02 PM
Response to Original message
49. If lieing about sex gets impeachment, surely violating the Constitution...
.....warrants censure at the very least. :spank: :banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurovski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 04:06 PM
Response to Original message
51. Because Democrats believe in the rule of law, The Constitution,
and The Bill Of Rights, while Republicans believe (and expect US to believe) whatever expedient, self-serving crap they make up on the spot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
azmouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 04:20 PM
Response to Original message
57. Because someone needs to stand up to the idiot in the WH.
He broke the law. And the American people have had enough from * as proven by his 33% approval rating.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 05:08 PM
Response to Original message
61. Why oppose it? If Bush did nothing wrong, let him clear his name. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whitestarz Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 05:12 PM
Response to Reply #61
62. I wasn't opposing it...
I just wanted some firm reasons to SUPPORT it. It seems there's plenty of reasons that this should be investigated and justice meted out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bouncy Ball Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 05:20 PM
Response to Original message
64. Because NO PRESIDENT should ever break the law.
I would be supporting this (albeit with a heavy heart) even if this were a lame-duck DEMOCRATIC president.

Because wrong is WRONG. What he did (and is doing!) was and is illegal. Congress should stand up for what is RIGHT and send a message to bush AND to any future presidents.

It's called a system of checks and balances for a REASON. Sometimes you have to do something because it's the RIGHT THING TO DO, not just because it's politically expedient.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whitestarz Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #64
66. I agree.
Did you support Clinton's impeachment?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurovski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #66
67. She's not a dimtard, so probably...no.
70% of America figured out that it wasn't a "High crime".

But I really should let her answer.

Please pardon me, bouncyball.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bouncy Ball Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #67
69. Hey no problem!
Glad to know you know I'm not a dimtard, LOL!

And yeah, what you said. Fucking ridiculous.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #69
79. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Bouncy Ball Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 07:59 PM
Response to Reply #79
80. Is that all you've got?
One-liners?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 08:40 PM
Response to Reply #80
82. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Bouncy Ball Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #66
68. ROFL, what law did he break, buddy boy?
And no I fucking didn't. It was stupid-ass shit. Cheating on his wife is between him and his wife. He didn't fuck the American PEOPLE over the way bush has been and IS doing now.

My God, that was the biggest fucking waste of time and taxpayer money I have EVER seen in my life. How did that blowjob hurt you? Or anyone else but his wife?

bush lies, people die.

If there were justice in the world, Clinton (and the rest of the US) would have never been put through all that and bush and his cronies would be frog-marched out of the White House for taking a massive shit on the US Constitution.

I would imagine, since you are here, that you agree, no?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 06:01 PM
Response to Original message
70. It makes it a bigger issue in the 2006 elections
Keeping quiet about Bush breaking the law until after the '06 elections doesn't help us at all. The more noise we make, the more Democrats look like the good guys.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 06:27 PM
Response to Original message
71. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Kurovski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #71
72. Switching hands? Have you seen whitestarz anywhere?
Just kidding! It's commadee. Jump right in, lover!

Welcome.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #72
73. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
blondeatlast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 06:52 PM
Response to Reply #73
74. Hollywood too boring, is it? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 06:55 PM
Response to Reply #74
75. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Kurovski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 07:06 PM
Response to Reply #73
78. Every thread that mentions President Knuckleschmuck is a clown thread.
Edited on Wed Mar-15-06 07:07 PM by Kurovski
You gotta work with what you got.

EDIT: To get George Bush's stage name right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 06:56 PM
Response to Reply #72
76. Looks like Whitestarz "bit" the dust......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurovski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 06:58 PM
Response to Reply #76
77. "Whitestarz" has a tendency to re-emerge.
Kinda like a yeast infection in that regard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 08:32 PM
Response to Original message
81. Why push for *anything*? Lets all just sit on our hands and do nothing.
Edited on Wed Mar-15-06 08:35 PM by w4rma
Eventually voters will notice how bad things are and will wake up and realize on their own that Republicans have total power so voters should start voting for the other party. You know, that invisible party that hasn't been doing or saying anything.
:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Magistrate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-15-06 08:41 PM
Response to Original message
83. Locking
The O.P. is no longer among us....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Oct 25th 2014, 06:33 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC