Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Those were the days: House Republican statements on Clinton's impeachment

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 (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
EarlG ADMIN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 10:57 AM
Original message
Those were the days: House Republican statements on Clinton's impeachment
Edited on Tue Dec-20-05 11:19 AM by EarlG
It's interesting how these statements read in light of recent events...

Rep. Marge Roukema (R-N.J.):

And we all share in the emotional trauma getting back to our subject of this constitutional crisis in which we are ensnared. But this cup cannot pass us by, we can't avoid it, we took an oath of office, Mr. Speaker, to uphold the Constitution under our democratic system of government, separation of powers, and checks and balances.

And we must fulfill that oath and send the articles of impeachment to the Senate for a trial. Now I say personally, and all of you who know me, and a lot of you do, I've been around a long time; I bear no personal animosity towards the president. But we in the House did not seek this constitutional confrontation.

Rep. J.C. Watts (R-Okla.):

How can we expect a Boy Scout to honor his oath if elected officials don't honor theirs? How can we expect a business executive to honor a promise when the chief executive abandons his or hers?

Rep. Richard K. Armey (R-Tex.):

How did this great nation of the 1990s come to be? It all happened Mr. Speaker, because freedom works. . . . But freedom, Mr. Speaker, freedom depends upon something. The rule of law. And that's why this solemn occasion is so important. For today we are here to defend the rule of law. According to the evidence presented by our fine Judiciary Committee, the president of the United States has committed serious transgressions.

Among other things, he took an oath to God, to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. And then he failed to do so. Not once, but several times. If we ignore this evidence, I believe we undermine the rule of law that is so important that all America is. Mr. Speaker, a nation of laws cannot be ruled by a person who breaks the law. Otherwise, it would be as if we had one set of rules for the leaders and another for the governed. We would have one standard for the powerful, the popular and the wealthy, and another for everyone else.

This would belie our ideal that we have equal justice under the law. That would weaken the rule of law and leave our children and grandchildren with a very poor legacy. I don't know what challenges they will face in their time, but I do know they need to face those challenges with the greatest constitutional security and the soundest rule of fair and equal law available in the history of the world. And I don't want us to risk their losing that....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/c...


Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI):

The framers of the Constitution devised an elaborate system of checks and balances to ensure our liberty by making sure that no person, institution or branch of government became so powerful that a tyranny could be established in the United States of America. Impeachment is one of the checks the framers gave the Congress to prevent the executive or judicial branches from becoming corrupt or tyrannical.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/c...


Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas):

When someone is elected president, they receive the greatest gift possible from the American people, their trust. To violate that trust is to raise questions about fitness for office. My constituents often remind me that if anyone else in a position of authority -- for example, a business executive, a military officer of a professional educator -- had acted as the evidence indicates the president did, their career would be over. The rules under which President Nixon would have been tried for impeachment had he not resigned contain this statement: "The office of the president is such that it calls for a higher level of conduct than the average citizen in the United States."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/c...


Rep. Charles Canady (R-Fla.):

Many have asked why we are even here in these impeachment proceedings. They have asked why we can't just rebuke the president and move on. That's a reasonable question. And I certainly understand the emotions behind that question. I want to move on. Every member of this committee wants to move on. We all agree with that.

But the critical question is this: Do we move on under the Constitution, or do we move on by turning aside from the Constitution? Do we move on in faithfulness to our own oath to support and defend the Constitution, or do we go outside the Constitution because it seems more convenient and expedient?

...

Why are we here? We are here because we have a system of government based on the rule of law, a system of government in which no one -- no one -- is above the law. We are here because we have a constitution.

A constitution is often a most inconvenient thing. A constitution limits us when we would not be limited. It compels us to act when we would not act. But our Constitution, as all of us in this room acknowledge, is the heart and soul of the American experiment. It is the glory of the political world. And we are here today because the Constitution requires that we be here. We are here because the Constitution grants the House of Representatives the sole power of impeachment. We are here because the impeachment power is the sole constitutional means granted to Congress to deal with the misconduct of the chief executive of the United States.

In many other countries, a matter such as this involving the head of government would have been quietly swept under the rug. There would, of course, be some advantages to that approach. We would all be spared embarrassment, indignity and discomfort. But there would be a high cost if we followed that course of action. Something would be lost. Respect for the law would be subverted, and the foundation of our Constitution would be eroded.

The impeachment power is designed to deal with exactly such threats to our system of government. Conduct which undermines the integrity of the president's office, conduct by the chief executive which sets a pernicious example of lawlessness and corruption is exactly the sort of conduct that should subject a president to the impeachment power.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/c...


Rep. Bob Ingliss (R-S.C.):

I think is important to point out here is that we have a constitutional obligation, a constitutional obligation to act. And there are lots of folks who would counsel, Listen, let's just move along. It's sort of the Clinton so-what defense. So what? I committed perjury. So what? I broke the law. Let's just move along. I believe we've got a constitutional obligation to act.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/c...


Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.):

Mr. Chairman, this is a somber occasion. I am here because it is my constitutional duty, as it is the constitutional duty of every member of this committee, to follow the truth wherever it may lead. Our Founding Fathers established this nation on a fundamental yet at the time untested idea that a nation should be governed not by the whims of any man but by the rule of law. Implicit in that idea is the principle that no one is above the law, including the chief executive

Since it is the rule of law that guides us, we must ask ourselves what happens to our nation if the rule of law is ignored, cheapened or violated, especially at the highest level of government. Consider the words of former Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, who was particularly insightful on this point. "In a government of laws, the existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. If government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for the law. It invites every man to become a law unto himself."

Mr. Chairman, we must ask ourselves what our failure to uphold the rule of law will say to the nation, and most especially to our children, who must trust us to leave them a civilized nation where justice is respected.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/c...


Rep. Steve Buyer (R-Ind.):

You know, there are people out all across America every day that help define the nation's character, and they exercise common-sense virtues, whether it's honesty, integrity, promise-keeping, loyalty, respect, accountability, they pursue excellence, they exercise self-discipline. There is honor in a hard day's work. There's duty to country. Those are things that we take very seriously.

So those are things that the founders also took seriously. Yet every time I reflect upon the wisdom of the founding fathers, I think their wisdom was truly amazing. They pledged their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor to escape the tyranny of a king. They understood the nature of the human heart struggles between good and evil.

So the founders created a system of checks and balances and accountability. If corruption invaded the political system, a means was available to address it. The founders felt impeachment was so important it was included in six different places in the Constitution. The founders set the standard for impeachment of the president and other civil officers as treason, bribery, and other high crimes and misdemeanors.

The House of Representatives must use this standard in circumstances and facts of the president's conduct to determine if the occupant of the Oval Office is fit to continue holding the highest executive office of this great country.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/c...


Rep. Asa Hutchinson (R-Ark.):

In the next few days I will cast some of the most important votes of my career. Some believe these votes could result in a backlash and have serious political repercussions. They may be right. But I will leave the analysis to others. My preeminent concern is that the Constitution be followed and that all Americans, regardless of their position in society, receive equal and unbiased treatment in our courts of law. The fate of no president, no political party, and no member of Congress merits a slow unraveling of the fabric of our constitutional structure. As John Adams said, we are a nation of laws, not of men.

Our nation has survived the failings of its leaders before, but it cannot survive exceptions to the rule of law in our system of equal justice for all. There will always be differences between the powerful and the powerless. But imagine a country where a Congress agrees the strong are treated differently than the weak, where mercy is the only refuge for the powerless, where the power of our positions govern all of our decisions. Such a country cannot long endure. God help us to do what is right, not just for today, but for the future of this nation and for those generations that must succeed us.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/c...


Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.):

I suggest impeachment is like beauty: apparently in the eye of the beholder. But I hold a different view. And it's not a vengeful one, it's not vindictive, and it's not craven. It's just a concern for the Constitution and a high respect for the rule of law. ... as a lawyer and a legislator for most of my very long life, I have a particular reverence for our legal system. It protects the innocent, it punishes the guilty, it defends the powerless, it guards freedom, it summons the noblest instincts of the human spirit.

The rule of law protects you and it protects me from the midnight fire on our roof or the 3 a.m. knock on our door. It challenges abuse of authority. It's a shame "Darkness at Noon" is forgotten, or "The Gulag Archipelago," but there is such a thing lurking out in the world called abuse of authority, and the rule of law is what protects you from it. And so it's a matter of considerable concern to me when our legal system is assaulted by our nation's chief law enforcement officer, the only person obliged to take care that the laws are faithfully executed.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/c...


On edit: how could I miss Tom DeLay?

Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Tex.):

I believe that this nation sits at a crossroads. One direction points to the higher road of the rule of law. Sometimes hard, sometimes unpleasant, this path relies on truth, justice and the rigorous application of the principle that no man is above the law.

Now, the other road is the path of least resistance. This is where we start making exceptions to our laws based on poll numbers and spin control. This is when we pitch the law completely overboard when the mood fits us, when we ignore the facts in order to cover up the truth.

Shall we follow the rule of law and do our constitutional duty no matter unpleasant, or shall we follow the path of least resistance, close our eyes to the potential lawbreaking, forgive and forget, move on and tear an unfixable hole in our legal system? No man is above the law, and no man is below the law. That's the principle that we all hold very dear in this country.

http://www.bluegrassreport.org/bluegrass_politics/2005/...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cry baby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:02 AM
Response to Original message
1. That was all Sept. 10th logic...times are different now.
Breaking the law is necessary for Daddy W to protect us from dying from a terrorist bomb. :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #1
7. a dirty bomb at that!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wicket Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:02 AM
Response to Original message
2. Wow
Just wow. Nice collection! :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Imagevision Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #2
94. Excellant Post - Bush/Gonzalez make up the LAW as they go along
Iraq must have this type of Democracy and freedoms...!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LearnedHand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:04 AM
Response to Original message
3. AWESOME compilation! k&r!!! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Supersedeas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #3
18. I'll second that...nice work!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tsiyu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:05 AM
Response to Original message
4. Gonna eat them words
Doesn't it seem so absurd, how they soberly played with impeachment OVER A BLOWJOB?

Now, our nation is in deep peril, our Constitution and rule of law are in the toilet, and these same "patriots" are silent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CornField Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:07 AM
Response to Original message
5. Thank you for this post -- K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:07 AM
Response to Original message
6. reco'd
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Synnical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:08 AM
Response to Original message
8. Nice Work, Earl. Thanks n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cry baby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:11 AM
Response to Original message
9. Pretty stupid of them to set the "impeachment bar" so low.
But they did set the bar...lying about a personal matter - impeachable? OK!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
long_green Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:14 AM
Response to Original message
10. Maybe you don't remember so well
but the president got a blowjob!
Maybe where you're from it's a big deal to lie your way into a war but here in flyover country we know what's important. :sarcasm:

Asa Hutchinson said: "But imagine a country where a Congress agrees the strong are treated differently than the weak (shouldn't that be "from"?), where mercy is the only refuge for the powerless, where the power of our positions govern all of our decisions. Such a country cannot long endure..."

couldn't agree more, Asa.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PegDAC Donating Member (906 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 09:21 PM
Response to Reply #10
96. Grammar doesn't matter
in Arkansas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lpbk2713 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:14 AM
Response to Original message
11. Well done.


And I'm sure this is only the tip of their hypocritical iceberg.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stop the bleeding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:15 AM
Response to Original message
12. Are we gonna get a list of Senator's???
K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EarlG ADMIN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #12
16. I don't think I have time to do that today
But I'm sure there are plenty more statements out there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #16
22. Senators are SUPPOSED to keep silent until the Articles are tried.
When the House was considering Articles of Impeachment against Clinton, Senators on both sides of the aisle typically avoided comment. Not so this time. They're going on record in prejudgment. It's appalling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 08:22 PM
Response to Reply #16
80. EarlG, here's a Senator from back then...
Edited on Tue Dec-20-05 08:24 PM by Hissyspit
"We have been fortunate that this damaged presidency has occurred during a time of relative peace and prosperity. In times of war or national emergency it is often necessary for the President to call upon the nation to make great economic and personal sacrifices. In these occasions, our President had best be trustworthy--a truth teller whose life of principled leadership and integrity we can count upon... We must believe him and trust him if we are to follow him."

- Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Indiana) in his FEBRUARY 1999 statement on impeachment process released into the Congressional Record, calling for President Bill Clinton's REMOVAL FROM OFFICE, - not during war, but during a time of relative peace - because he felt the President WAS NOT HONEST AND TRUSTWORTHY ENOUGH, and someday might be in a time of war or national emergency.

REF: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/c ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gemini Cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:16 AM
Response to Original message
13. It's only a national crises if a Democratic president gets a hummer.
The rule of law must be upheld if that occures. Millions of dollars must be spent to investigate the matter!!
That was a SERIES matter!11111!! :sarcasm:

I miss President Clinton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mopinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:17 AM
Response to Original message
14. it is my fondest hope that one dem senator steals one of these
speeches, word for word, to read during * impeachment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PegDAC Donating Member (906 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 09:26 PM
Response to Reply #14
99. The R's
are going to deny ever having said any of this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Walt Starr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:17 AM
Response to Original message
15. For informational purposes, the section of US Law Bush violated
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherine Vincent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:23 AM
Response to Original message
17. I've said it before and I'll say it again...
Un-Impeach President Clinton dammit!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RobertSeattle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:26 AM
Response to Original message
19. Rule of Law*
...Except when it is inconvenient for the GOP to follow or uphold.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #19
37. I count 15 "rule of law"'s in that collection alone!
IOKIYAR rule now in effect....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RobertSeattle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #37
42. Thanks for counting
After reading the first couple of "Rules of Law" statements I couldn't stomach it anymore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FearofFutility Donating Member (764 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:28 AM
Response to Original message
20. K & R ! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
myrna minx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:28 AM
Response to Original message
21. Rule of Law Rule of Law.
I seem to remember that mantra quite well. I guess it only applies to Democrats. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SharonRB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:34 AM
Response to Original message
23. What can I say?
It's all right there. Such hypocrites.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mwb970 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:42 AM
Response to Original message
24. The DeLay quote is incredible.
Now, the other road is the path of least resistance. This is where we start making exceptions to our laws based on poll numbers and spin control. This is when we pitch the law completely overboard when the mood fits us, when we ignore the facts in order to cover up the truth.

Gosh, that sounds familiar.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Patsy Stone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #24
36. Yep. Our problem is
at the time, we didn't realize he was setting forth a list of "actionable items".

:mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:51 AM
Response to Original message
25. Oh the hue manatee
Are you saying there are hipcrites among us? I am shocked.
An elephant really is the wrong symbol for these cretins. A hippopotamus would be much more appropriate.

Brilliant post Earl. Very good thinking.

And you do realize that the Daily Show is watching. Those clips will no doubt be run.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CornField Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:55 AM
Response to Original message
26. Four are still on the House Judiciary Committee
Hyde, Inglis, Goodlatte, & Sensenbrenner
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewJeffCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:55 AM
Response to Original message
27. Great post - recommended
If only I hadn't sent in my LTTE on this before reading DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oceansaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:59 AM
Response to Original message
28. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
loudsue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 12:27 PM
Response to Original message
29. OK, DUers!!! YOU KNOW WHAT TO DO!!!!
:woohoo: BRILLIANT, EarlG!!! :applause:

We need to send this post, as it is, to ALL of those people whose quotes you provided, AND to ALL the major and minor newspapers and mediawhores.

It's high time we media-blasted this all over the world. We need to let the republicans know we are NOT going to sit by and let this go unnoticed.

:kick: :kick: :kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibDemAlways Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 12:28 PM
Response to Original message
30. Thanks. And to think this was about
personal behavior and had nothing to do with Presidential duties and responsibilities. Now we've got a criminal in the WH who considers the Constitution toilet paper and these same hypocrites will defend him to the death.

The quotes you've unearthed here are as good a window into the cesspool of corruption and lies that is the republican party as anything I've ever seen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
november3rd Donating Member (653 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 12:32 PM
Response to Original message
31. Blind leading the Blind
How could the pontificating, self-righteous pharisees of just 6 or 7 years ago not have foreseen the pit they were walking into while leading the rest of the gullible, Fox/CNN viewing, "Sunday" Christians of America?

The pit is a yawning abyss now, and all those hypocrites and fools are tumbling over the edge for all the world to see in their helpless screaming, flailing and denial.

Ha! Ha! Ha!

Look at these creeps. This government must be purged, if not dissolved, and reformed by common people with a willingness to stand for common decency, common sense, and common justice.

Matthew 15:14 "Let them alone; they are blind guides of the blind. And if a blind man guides a blind man, both will fall into a pit."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
moondust Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 12:34 PM
Response to Original message
32. Ask nonSensenbrenner
Edited on Tue Dec-20-05 01:07 PM by Xap
if gaveling a hearing closed without allowing members of the minority opposition and unflattering witnesses to speak is something he would consider tyrannical.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PurpleChez Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 12:35 PM
Response to Original message
33. I'm really starting to think that some Republicans might be hypocrites.
;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SammyWinstonJack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #33
59. LOL!
:rofl: Oh Yeah, Big Time! :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PegDAC Donating Member (906 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #33
100. Gee.
Ya think? ;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueEyedSon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 12:39 PM
Response to Original message
34. Bl*wj*b= Constitutional Crisis
LMFAO!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wysiwyg Donating Member (167 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #34
43. Phony Constitutional Crisis
Edited on Tue Dec-20-05 01:09 PM by wysiwyg
There we had attorneys deposing President Clinton who, thanks to Linda Tripp, knew exactly what he had done with Ms. Lewinsky. Those same attorneys then specifically defined what they meant by "sexual relations" to EXCLUDE what they knew President Clinton had done with her. They didn't want an admission of guilt they wanted something that sounded like perjury to give the GOP an excuse to impeach.

Now we have a president who admits to breaking the law on television but that's not as important. The Republicans can't even pretend to care about the rule of law now but they'll no doubt find their commitment as soon as a Democrat is president again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cawe24 Donating Member (20 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 12:40 PM
Response to Original message
35. How funny must this be to Clinton?!?
I'd be laughing my tail off if I were him. All these idiot Congressmen and women in their indignation and revulsion that the Executive Branch had been usurped by such a morally reprehensible denigrate. 'Rule of law' this and 'Constitutional responsibility' that - outraged that the President had the AUDACITY to tell a lie!! The pig!!

What will they all say now? It was taken out of context?! No. Situation was different?! Well, yes, in that instead of a little hanky panky, the lies are responsible for, well, we'll just say at least plus one the number of deaths that Clinton's "scandal" cost.

We just need to keep trotting these quotes out in response to their blustering talking points.

On a related note, the new menu at the Congressional cafeteria has been released:

HEAPING PLATES OF CROW!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chiyo-chichi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #35
49. I'd like to see the Big Dawg step up
and say just that... in his own eloquent way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oasis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 12:58 PM
Response to Original message
38. "Let freedom reign"----Chimpboy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Protagoras Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 01:01 PM
Response to Original message
39. So will anyone beyond KO
actually mention any of this on the um...NATIONAL NEWS? how about Cafferty? It's time to spread it around like butta.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wysiwyg Donating Member (167 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 01:01 PM
Response to Original message
40. Is there ANYTHING Bush could do to get him impeached?
So what happens if we find out Bush has been using wiretaps on journalists and anti-war political activists? If the Bush administration orchestrated a cover-up of a break-in at the Democratic HQ by GOP operatives would that get him impeached by this Congress? I doubt it.

If the GOP retains the House and Senate in 2006 what can be done to hold this administration accountable? Do the Democrats refuse to participate, or what?

Since the GOP has control of both houses and Congress and, to a some extent, the judiciary, do we have to rely on Republicans to stand up to the Bush administration?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PegDAC Donating Member (906 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 09:32 PM
Response to Reply #40
101. I think
he could probably perform human sacrifice in the Rose Garden and the R-controlled legislative branch would not agree to impeach the SOB.
:puke: :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mac56 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 01:04 PM
Response to Original message
41. Remember at all times -
Republicans are less troubled by hypocrisy than normal people are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ktowntennesseedem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 01:10 PM
Response to Original message
44. Wow! Them Repubs sure can make some pretty speeches!!!
Time to make the EAT those words, and see if they enjoy them as much the second time around!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreedomAngel82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 01:13 PM
Response to Original message
45. We need to use their words against them
Show how they're hypocrites. Only one person has done that and it was Walter Jones using Bush's victory means exit strategy quote from when he was running for president.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
milkyway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 01:13 PM
Response to Original message
46. But didn't you hear? 9/11 changed everything.
We're a nation at war, damn it! (And a permanent war at that.)

It says right in the constitution that a republican president can suspend the constitution whenever we suffer an attack. Democracy and individual rights are good in theory, but they just get in the way during wartime.

And we are a nation at war. Uncle Dick says this war could last fifty years (which, coincidentially, is when the ay-rabs will run out of oil).

So people need to watch what they say and watch what they do (because if you don't, we will).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PegDAC Donating Member (906 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 09:35 PM
Response to Reply #46
102. I seem to recall
that this is what Perot wanted if he had been elected.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Initech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 01:15 PM
Response to Original message
47. Wow. The hypocrisy meter must have done a complete 180.
So they can (for lack of a better term) nail Clinton for so much as lying about a blow job. But when Bush gets 2100 of our soldiers killed for god knows what reason, that's fine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chovexani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 01:17 PM
Response to Original message
48. All that over a freakin' blowjob
Meanwhile we're facing the death of the Republic as we know it, and these SOBs ain't sayin' shit.

How typical.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iamahaingttta Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 02:09 PM
Response to Original message
50. Beautiful!
Personally, I believe that every one of these hypocrites needs to be hung by their heels from the courthouse flagpole!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PegDAC Donating Member (906 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 09:39 PM
Response to Reply #50
103. I'd prefer that
they be hung by their genitalia.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Julius Civitatus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 02:52 PM
Response to Original message
51. Big, Fat HYPOCRITES!!! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 02:55 PM
Response to Original message
52. Kick
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bballny Donating Member (456 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
53. As steve Martin
would say Well! EXCUSE ME!!!!!!!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skidmore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
54. Ahh, Tom Delay, who chose to journey down the path of least
resistance with eyes closed. Karma bites.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wysiwyg Donating Member (167 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #54
65. The path of least resistance leads to crooked rivers and crooked men. (nt)
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
InkAddict Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #65
82. Are you hinting about the Diebold voting irregularities in
Cuyahoga county? Cuyahoga=crooked river

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:24 PM
Response to Original message
55. Wow, all those Republicans sure do love our Constitution, don't they?
:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emald Donating Member (718 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:29 PM
Response to Original message
56. liars and opportunists
that is what repukes are. I am so sick of hearing that this was nothing so great as to require impeachment, a statement I heard on fux news hear recently, though I don't remember who it was.
"No big deal"

Yes it is a big deal, the biggest in a hundred years I believe. Because if GWButugly walks without punishment for his crime(s)we are a nation of fat bellied fools who will be surprised when they come to take us away.

"Among other things, he took an oath to God, to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. And then he failed to do so. Not once, but several times. If we ignore this evidence, I believe we undermine the rule of law that is so important that all America is. Mr. Speaker, a nation of laws cannot be ruled by a person who breaks the law. Otherwise, it would be as if we had one set of rules for the leaders and another for the governed. We would have one standard for the powerful, the popular and the wealthy, and another for everyone else."
Armey

One standard for the powerful, the popular and the wealthy, and another for everyone else. I think anyone would have trouble arguing that we don't have that now. Rich corporations and people can hire a lobbyist and get whatever they want. Poor people can watch the storms wipe them out.

We have become a fucked up country under this GOP administration. We have become the terrorists. What a fate.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jaysunb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:42 PM
Response to Original message
57. Full Page ad in the WaPo tomorrow is what
needs to happen, with this post intact.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
akarnitz Donating Member (303 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:45 PM
Response to Original message
58. From the mouths of boobs........
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blueeyedpupil Donating Member (19 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 03:49 PM
Response to Original message
60. Accountability Accountability Accountability
For five years we have been watching the culture of corruption and unabated power that happens when you have republicans controlling all branches of government. We need to concentrate on 2006 and taking back congress. We need new progressive blood to address the real needs and concerns of the american people.

Tony Trupiano is running for congress in Michigan's 11th district. The incumbent is McCotter a bushie follower. Tony has a real chance to unseat this moron.

Heres part of what tony said on his blog today about the spying nsa issue:

I believe when you read this link you will see that, as Sen. Jay Rockefeller so profoundly stated in a handwritten note to the White House, that there was more than just concern:

http://thinkprogress.org/2005/12/19/rockefeller-letter /

Yet, these concerns were 100% ignored.

Why?

I know why and so do you. Because legal counsel would have never let the President do this, if that legal counsel were someone other than now Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez. Since we are not winning the war on terror, and we are not safer today than we were five years ago and too many people have become suspicious and agitated with this government, maybe my call for accountability for weeks now will not be ignored much longer. Remember, its not what you knowits what they dont want you to know. Now, the question is simple: What more dont we know, and what does it mean to you and me?

Certainly questions that deserves answers, and thats just for starters.

Congressman McCotter, your thoughts? Concerns? Questions?

Read the rest of Tony's blog at

We need to support these candidates who are real life people who care about what we care about and are willing to listen to their constituents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newyawker99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #60
67. Hi blueeyedpupil!!
Welcome to DU!! :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClintonTyree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 04:00 PM
Response to Original message
61. Great compilation, EarlG, but you've forgotten one thing......
the laws and rules that apply to Democratic Presidents do not apply to Republican Presidents. They are the only true interpretors of laws and the Constitution, just as they are the keepers of all things moral and godly in our country. This is not a double standard, mind you, it is purely accepted fact; in Republican circles anyway. It's alright for them to break laws and trample the Constitution because they OWN it! They are the only TRUE keepers of the flame of liberty. :puke: They would never do anything that wasn't with the best interests of our country in mind. :sarcasm:

You're absolutely correct, of course. It will be very interesting to see how these same guardians of the Constitution react to bush's blatant trampling of it. I'm inclined to believe that my original screed will be somewhat accurate in the Republican's reaction to this most heinous of deeds. They'll remain loyal to the idiot king until he becomes too much of a liability to their own cushy positions. Then they'll abandon him and claim that they've been wary all the time, that they knew he was up to no good. Hopefully their Democratic contenders will not allow their constituents to forget the Republicans toadying ways.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Webster Green Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 04:01 PM
Response to Original message
62. Brilliant!.....Can we get this to the dems on the Senate floor?
I would so love to see them take turns reading these quotes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PATRICK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 04:31 PM
Response to Original message
63. How about more?
The more circumspect arguments of the Dems who reluctantly agreed to the impeachment or tried to point out the actual scale of the "crime" as redefined by the GOP bullies. I point this out not just for a comparison to what the GOP will start to say but also as a spur to our own Dems who may have set the bar for impeachment hypocritically high when they didn't even back their own guy all the way.

In other words, in their own words, why does Bush get such a bigger pass among Dems than Clinton or Nixon?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UrbScotty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 04:36 PM
Original message
Flip-floppers (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ramapo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 04:36 PM
Response to Original message
64. Marge Roukema
My former "representative". A "moderate" Republican who felt it necessary to throw in with the other nuts. I wish I had kept her letter sent in reply to my letter expressing my disappointment in her impeachment vote. She was really into that whole "rule of law" thing. What might she say now???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arcane1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 05:35 PM
Response to Original message
66. hell YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maestro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
68. Great stuff!
Send it to all editorial boards of all the major newspapers!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ulysses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 05:54 PM
Response to Original message
69. EXCELLENT, Earl.
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
obxhead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 06:07 PM
Response to Original message
70. The rule of law - voided by the Presidential Pardon....
Rep. Charles Canady (R-Fla.):

"We are here because we have a system of government based on the rule of law, a system of government in which no one -- no one -- is above the law."


If you receive a Presidential Pardon, without serving any part of a sentence, for a crime that you have been proved to have committed, then you are above the law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
walldude Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 06:09 PM
Response to Original message
71. The saying "Don't shit where you eat" comes to mind n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
InkAddict Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #71
83. I have a vision of * holding hands w/Saudi king
Perhaps shari'a law could be a good thing here - just clip off their right-wings - wipe/eat/wipe/eat :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 06:09 PM
Response to Original message
72. I remember those days well
Edited on Tue Dec-20-05 06:10 PM by Solly Mack
...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geckosfeet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 06:21 PM
Response to Original message
73. Where have all these eloquent speakers of truth gone? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal In Texas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 06:49 PM
Response to Original message
74. DEM LEADERS!!! It's time to throw their own words BACK AT THEM! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stubtoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 07:05 PM
Response to Original message
75. Nicely done!
I'm especially gratified to see all these attributed quotes on the front page, where everyone can see 'em.

Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 07:08 PM
Response to Original message
76. Here are some more!
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/02/12/senat...

Kit Bond

...it is incumbent upon the Senate to exercise very thoroughly and carefully the responsibility under the Constitution to make the difficult decision on whether the President has committed high-crimes and misdemeanors warranting his removal from office. If we are to have a government of laws and not of men and not of public opinion polls, then we must judge the President on the evidence presented to us. I believe that the acts that he committed constitute high-crimes and misdemeanors warranting his conviction.


http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/18/trans...

Jim Talent (who was in the House at the time)

Thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I don't think the question before the House is whether the president has acted with integrity in this matter. With all due respect, I think in our hearts we all know the answer to that.

The question is whether we have the integrity to do our duty under the Constitution laws and to stand up for what is right or whether by failing to do that, we are going to become part of what is wrong.

Public officials commit private wrongs. We know that happens. The issue is whether when they are called to account for it in some form, they act honorably and live up to the consequences of what they do, or at least they act according to the minimum standards that we are entitled to expect and insist upon from people who occupy positions of trust.

Mr. Speaker, on this record, it is impossible not to conclude that the president obstructed justice, that he perjured himself, that he flouted his oath of office, that he abused the powers of his office, that he manipulated other high officers of government, and he did all these things first to obstruct a sexual harassment lawsuit against him, and then to cover up the fact that he had committed perjury.

I repeat again -- Can I have an additional 30 seconds? Impeachment is a hard thing, Mr. Speaker, but again, what is at stake here is our integrity. If we do not stand up for something that is clearly right when we have an inescapable obligation under the Constitution to do it, we become part of what is wrong.

I'm not going to vote for these articles because I want to. I'm going to vote for them because I see no other honorable alternative for me to follow than to support these articles calling for the impeachment of the president. And I yield back the balance of my time.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoFederales Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 07:36 PM
Response to Original message
77. Verbatim! Every Democrat should read verbatim from the Republican
scripts about Clinton only filling in gaps as they would currently apply to BushCo. I would PAY to watch the cheesy bastards have their own hypocritical words flung back at them as an affront to *. Too bad they're all so like casper milquetoasts; it'll never happen.

NoFederales
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 07:44 PM
Response to Original message
78. I have emailed or fax'd everyone on this list
whose still hanging on in the House..

I headed the page "Your Best Quote" and sent it right out to them. Craven crooks...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pinto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 08:03 PM
Response to Original message
79. Thanks EarlG.. Rep. Hyde's snip is particularly eerie:
"The rule of law protects you and it protects me from the midnight fire on our roof or the 3 a.m. knock on our door. It challenges abuse of authority. It's a shame "Darkness at Noon" is forgotten, or "The Gulag Archipelago," but there is such a thing lurking out in the world called abuse of authority, and the rule of law is what protects you from it. And so it's a matter of considerable concern to me when our legal system is assaulted by our nation's chief law enforcement officer, the only person obliged to take care that the laws are faithfully executed."

:think:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TankLV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 08:56 PM
Response to Original message
81. The HYPOCRICY and SILENCE is simply astounding.
But I am hardly at all surprised by these partisan bastards, who see no wrong in something that is a million times more criminal and damaging to our country just because THEY are doing it!

Simply astounding.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
InkAddict Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 09:12 PM
Response to Original message
84. K&R
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radio_Lady Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 09:18 PM
Response to Original message
85. EarlG, that's an amazing job of researching you've done!
How about a letter or petition to all Congress revealing these comments. It would make a heck of an impression, don't you think?

Already "Greatest" -- I'll add my voice to that.

Thanks for your work.

In peace,

Radio_Lady
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Andromeda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 09:24 PM
Response to Original message
86. This shows what hypocrites they are.
If the "rule of law" is so important to them they should start applying it to themselves.

Thanks for posting this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Old and In the Way Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 09:37 PM
Response to Original message
87. Amazing, they were lying then....and don't give a shit now.
The most unethical bunch of people I have ever seen......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-20-05 11:17 PM
Response to Original message
88. We must impeach Bush so a Boy Scout will honor his oath.
Inspiring words from Mr. Watts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud2BlibKansan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 12:17 AM
Response to Original message
89. What a great quote from DeLay!
"Shall we follow the rule of law and do our constitutional duty no matter unpleasant, or shall we follow the path of least resistance, close our eyes to the potential lawbreaking, forgive and forget, move on and tear an unfixable hole in our legal system? No man is above the law, and no man is below the law. That's the principle that we all hold very dear in this country."

:rofl: :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Usrename Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 02:13 AM
Response to Original message
90. Fine words..
There are probably some relevant quotes concerning file-gate too. Or may be file-gate wasn't a big deal..

:thumbsup: :yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kimahru Donating Member (2 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 09:10 AM
Response to Original message
91. Hypocrisy of congress Republicans and the Administration
Just looking at their voting record, statements and actions, they show support of kidnapping and torture, serfdom, theocracy, senseless war, they act immoral in addition to acting incompetent, they seeks to turn police work into a war on this, war on that.
Because police work represents law and order, you must be able to think to solve crime and act coherently to prevent crime, law and order do not serve authoritarianism and tyranny.

War represents chaos it allows us to do anything we want to win, even if the concept makes no sense, war on terror is like saying war on tactics, you need fear and hate to get everyone on your war.

It follows something like this eventually.

The tacticians are evil beings and obviously they do things simply out of spite, because they hate our way of life, they are evil and must done away with, as well as anyone associated with them, those against this course of action are obviously with the tacticians, they must be done away with as well.

Some links pro-democracy people could really need to see
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html
http://www.rockridgeinstitute.org /
http://www.freespeech.org/fscm2/contentviewer.php?conte...
http://www.justacitizen.com /
http://disgruntledmass.v2.nl /
http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/whycare.html
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/persuader...
http://www.politicalstrategy.org/archives/001185.php
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Binka Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #91
93. Great Post! Welcome To DU. You Rock!
Thanks for the links.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rd_kent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 10:44 AM
Response to Original message
92. We need to throw this in their face
At every opportunity!!!! Do NOT let them forget how well put, strong and important their words were when they felt to President had violated the constution by lying about a blowjob. Now, I know that spying on American Citizens is not NEARLY as important as lying about a blow job, but it's still in violation of the Constitution. THEY MUST BE REMINDED!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DarkTirade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 09:18 PM
Response to Original message
95. Oh the irony...
and it's not even made of ferrous materials.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PegDAC Donating Member (906 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 09:25 PM
Response to Original message
97. Getting a BJ
in the Oval office violated the Constitution HOW??

:shrug: :wtf: :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 09:25 PM
Response to Original message
98. Why all the strangers? Let's hear from W:

Asked in 1999 about Clinton's impeachment by the House, Bush responded, "I would have voted for it. I thought the man lied."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NVMojo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-21-05 10:11 PM
Response to Original message
104. if only our Dem leaders could get as impassioned about Bush's
alleged wrongs as the right wing whackjobs did about Clinton's alleged wrongs and his traveling willbury.
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 Mon Jul 24th 2017, 11:17 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) 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