Ford, Cheney, Checks and Balances

posted by John Nichols on 01/02/2007 @ 02:22am

Email
Print
Share
- Buzzflash
- del.icio.us
- Digg
- Facebook
- Mixx it!
- Reddit
What is this?
Take Action
Comments (71)

Subscribe Now

There has been much discussion over the past several days about the many contributions former President Gerald Ford made to the American political experiment.

Surely, his was a steady hand at the helm of a ship of state that Richard Nixon had steered into turbulent waters. And, surely, the grand old Republican's moderation was a necessary corrective against the sort of ideological abuses committed by too many of his fellow partisans.

But Ford's greatest contribution involved the respect he showed for the system of checks and balances that the founders established in order to protect and maintain the Republic. A man of Congress who came to the Oval Office by the accident of appointment rather than the design of candidacy, Ford moved in the first months of his presidency to renew proper relations between the executive and legislative branches.

Critics may suggest that Ford exceeded his powers as president with his decision to pardon his scandal-plagued predecessor.

While presidents are afforded the authority to grant pardons, it is certainly reasonable to disagree with the decision to clear Richard Nixon before Congress and the courts were done with him.

It is impossible, however, for anyone who cares about the right working of the federal government to disagree with what Ford did next.

After he pardoned Nixon "for all offenses against the United States which he... has committed or may have committed or taken part in" while his disgraced predecessor occupied the Oval Office, the 38th president voluntarily appeared before a subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee to testify under oath regarding his decision.

Contrast Ford's respect for Congress with the belligerent disregard for the institution shown by members of the current administration. Vice President Cheney, Ford's former White House chief of staff, has been particularly foul � not to mention foul-mouthed � in his rejection of congressional oversight.

In mourning Ford's passing, Cheney referred to the former president as his "mentor." Fair enough. If the current vice president has honest regard for the model established by his former boss, Cheney should honor Ford's legacy by accepting the invitation of incoming House Judiciary Committee chair John Conyers, D-Michigan, and several of his colleagues to testify before Congress regarding the role played by the Office of the Vice President in 2003 moves to punish former Ambassador Joe Wilson.

The request came last year, when it was revealed that Cheney was actively engaged in efforts to undermine Wilson's credibility after the veteran diplomat revealed that the White House had inflated the "threat" posed by Iraq before the U.S. invasion of that country, there. Those efforts appear to have included a move to expose the identity of Wilson's wife, Valarie, as a CIA operative.

"In response to significant public scrutiny, President Gerald R. Ford came to Capitol Hill on October 17, 1974 to testify before the House Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Criminal Justice on why he pardoned President Richard M. Nixon," Conyers, incoming House Government Reform Committee chair Henry Waxman, D-California, and New York Democrat Maurice Hinchey wrote to Cheney last year. "At the time of President Ford's appearance before Congress, you served as his Deputy Chief of Staff and later became his Chief of Staff. With that precedent in mind, we respectfully request that you make yourself available to appear before Congress to explain the details and reasons for your office's involvement -- and your personal involvement � in the disclosure of Valerie Wilson's identity as a Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) operative."

Ford knew he owed the Congress � and, by extension, the American people -- an explanation for his actions in 1974, and he provided it. By willingly offering that explanation in testimony under oath to members of the House who had the authority and the position to question him respectfully but frankly, he undid at least a measure of the damage done by Nixon during the Watergate years.

Cheney and other members of the Bush administration owe the Congress � and, by similar extension, the American people � an explanation for their actions not just in 2003 but since 2001. Without a show of respect for Congress similar to that provided by Ford three decades ago, the damage done to the system of checks and balances by the Bush-Cheney White House will deepen and darken into not just a cancer on the presidency but a threat to the Republic itself.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

John Nichols' new book, THE GENIUS OF IMPEACHMENT: The Founders' Cure for Royalism has been hailed by authors and historians Gore Vidal, Studs Terkel and Howard Zinn for its meticulous research into the intentions of the founders and embraced by activists for its groundbreaking arguments on behalf of presidential accountability. After reviewing recent books on impeachment, Rolling Stone political writer Tim Dickinson, writes in the latest issue of Mother Jones, "John Nichols' nervy, acerbic, passionately argued history-cum-polemic, The Genius of Impeachment, stands apart. It concerns itself far less with the particulars of the legal case against Bush and Cheney, and instead combines a rich examination of the parliamentary roots and past use of the "heroic medicine" that is impeachment with a call for Democratic leaders to 'reclaim and reuse the most vital tool handed to us by the founders for the defense of our most basic liberties.'"

The Genius of Impeachment can be found at independent bookstores and at www.amazon.com

Comments (71)

Why should a President or V.P. whom the Demoncrat party and its Congressional members have shown no respect for, in turn respect congress? Get a grip!

Posted by RIO BRAVO 01/01/2007 @ 11:53pm

The superficial aspect of respect of the President is not required of the Congress nor is the superficial aspect of respect of Congress required of the President. However they are both required to respect the law and if there is any fault on the part of the Democratic members of Congress it is that they afford the lawbreaking, Constitution-abusing Bush administration too much of a respect it does not come close to deserving.

It is also not the least bit surprising that a Presidency which has no respect for the law will also display a churlish demeanor toward the branches of government intended by our Constitution to restrain it's lawbreaking.

It's unfortunate indeed that America must bear within it's own breast the like of RIO BRAVO and his ilk whose governmental and legal precepts are coined from the same wellspring of imagination as that of the Moqtada Posse [tinyurl.com].

Posted by fromredbird at 01/02/2007 @ 01:20am
Fre did you borrow the great (lv?l) antichrist's rose colored glasses again? Whats wrong with a little credibility from our current conservative "leaders" .

Posted by dycel8r at 01/02/2007 @ 02:11am
Yeah, sorry, but gotta go with RIO and his hypocrisy charge.....

ANY chance I can find a similar John Nichols' article about how the Clinton Administration "wasn't respecting" the Republican Congresses in the 90s?!??!!??

"Oh, that's completely different!".....yeah...always is when it's "your side", isn't it???

Posted by Mask at 01/02/2007 @ 07:16am
WAHHHH!!! I saw an article with a liberal slant on a liberal web site! WAHHH!

Posted by Left is Right at 01/02/2007 @ 07:38am
CNN ran a graphic yesterday "mistakenly" using the words "Where's Obama?"

Take the time required to go to google video and watch the three-part speech of David Icke entitled "Secrets of the Matrix."

Take the time. Watch and learn. There are NO coincidences. What is the name of the person who typed in the graphics? What is the name of his boss who ordered this be done?

Those in the CIA-controlled media must be held to account and revealed when they take it upon themselves to BECOME THE STORY.

THE STORY is the Manipulation of the American People by the CIA-CONTROLLED MEDIA.

Call them out by name and demand truthful answers for the intentional manipulation of your mind.

http://www.ringnebula.com/project-censored/2007/2007-story14.htm

Homeland Security Contracts KBR to Build Detention Centers in the US

Let's make "Swift Luck Greens" famous! What do you think it will take for Lou Dobbs and Keith Olbermann to get these images featured on their nightly shows and demand an explanation of Michael Chertoff? I want to see national TV news crews there at this location with cameras in hand. We paid for them - Cheney's KBR built them - let's see them on TV! Aren't they proud?

http://www.democracyforums.com/showthread.php?tid=297

Latitude: 41.92 Longitude: -106.521944

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_Inmate_Labor_Program

Wikipedia: Civilian Inmate Labor Program

Prison camps: The regulation also sets forth policy for the creation of prison camps on Army installations. These would be used to keep inmates of the labor programs resident on the installations.

http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/47/17936

Bush's Mysterious 'New Programs'

http://tinyurl.com/y48vxo

http://209.157.64.201/focus/f-bloggers/1607403/posts

Posted by plunger at 01/02/2007 @ 08:11am
Posted by LEFT IS RIGHT 01/02/2007 @ 07:38am

LOL.

Posted by RIO BRAVO 01/01/2007 @ 11:53pm

Because this is not Iraq. Or Somalia, or Haiti, or Cuba, or Turkmenistan, or Uzbekistan, or Khazikstan,. It is the great USA, where we used to have law and respect for it.

Posted by FREIHEIT 01/02/2007 @ 12:52am

Have you ever heard of any other VP telling a Senator to "go fuck yourself" on the floor of the Senate?

--

what are you neo's afraid of, again? If his hand does not burn off when he puts his hand on the holy book, why not have him show up and answer questions from the MAJORITY party. One more time, if he did nothing wrong, he has nothing to hide. Just like the "most dangerous" at Gitmo and Bagram.

So, the most religious love executions, the most conservative hate laws and oversight. funny world we live in. The sky is a lovely purplish brown today.

Posted by crabwalk at 01/02/2007 @ 09:01am
I do solemnly swear [or affirm] that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."- Richard (mind if we call you Bruce) Cheney, Jan 20, 2001, jan 20, 2005.

that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion- Got it? Get it.

Posted by crabwalk at 01/02/2007 @ 09:27am
The biggest dif is that Ford was defending 'his own' actions as president, Cheney would most likely implicate his (in theory) boss and his boss is viewed as very weak, not solid, rather below average-- NOT a 'Ford'. Remember that Nixon went into the Watergate scandal coming off of a 60% approval election. Unless Cheney has something to say that would up hsuB's numbers 'substantially', he'll just have to continue to say, "go fuck yourself" as it would be way way too easy for a congress finding illegal substantiation to tell Cheney-- "no you're fucked".

USA Today/Gallup Poll. Dec. 8-10, 2006. N=1,009 adults nationwide. MoE � 3..

"How do you think each of the following presidents will go down in history -- as an outstanding president, above average, average, below average, or poor? . . . ."

Outstanding/Above___Average___Below/Poor___Unsure

The current president, George W. Bush

_____19______________27_____________54__________-

Bill Clinton

_____45______________29_____________25__________-

George H. Bush

_____32______________50_____________18__________-

Ronald Reagan

_____64______________26_____________10__________1

Jimmy Carter

_____38______________38_____________22__________3

Gerald Ford

_____23______________60_____________12__________5

Posted by hsuBfools at 01/02/2007 @ 09:55am
Posted by HSUBFOOLS 01/02/2007 @ 09:55am

Hmmmmmm?

Outstanding/Above___Average___Below/Poor___Unsure

Ronald Reagan

_____64______________26_____________10__________1

Posted by Mask at 01/02/2007 @ 10:11am
Masky-- leave it to you to veer off the point! Reagun's numbers are very understandable-- he never really got 'fully' investigated and brought to justice, he 'apologized' for what did come out, and more 'sympathetically'-- he got Alzheimer's and died... Nancy keeps asking for 'brainstem research', which because of 'anti-hsuB feelings-- ups Reagun's numbers!' AND the new cons believe their own tooting horn 'wall' hype... Oh duh, don't play dumb. None of which ultimately helps hsuB from getting impeached.

Posted by hsuBfools at 01/02/2007 @ 10:32am
"Have you ever heard of any other VP telling a Senator to "go fuck yourself" on the floor of the Senate?"

no, and it was over due..Leak prone Leahy needed an FU years ago and needs it even more now...

Posted by john maasch at 01/02/2007 @ 10:39am
Posted by HSUBFOOLS 01/02/2007 @ 10:32am

Ahhhh....so Reagan's numbers are "false", but Bush-43's are "real" but you'll quote both in the same poll.

LOL!

Posted by Mask at 01/02/2007 @ 10:47am
Posted by JOHN MAASCH 01/02/2007 @ 10:39bm

Thus you're saying neither hsuB nor Cheney are very articulate...

Posted by hsuBfools at 01/02/2007 @ 10:49am
Ahhhh....so Reagan's numbers are "false", but Bush-43's are "real" but you'll quote both in the same poll.

Posted by MASK 01/02/2007 @ 10:47bm

Masky, you're "false",

I said-- "Reagun's numbers are very understandable", and so are hsuB's-- hsuB's getting impeached-- accept it.

Posted by hsuBfools at 01/02/2007 @ 10:52am
Masky, are you having an illicit affair with hsuB or is it Cheney? Sounds like hsuB. Or is he just paying you to post here to defend him from talk of impeachment?

Posted by hsuBfools at 01/02/2007 @ 10:57am
Masky are you going to go insane when hsuB gets impeached or just get have to get another job?

Posted by hsuBfools at 01/02/2007 @ 11:02am
Masky and "false" in the same sentence-- now that's a LOL. An anti-oxymoron!!!!

Posted by hsuBfools at 01/02/2007 @ 11:08am
er, ??????? or just meant MORON. Ah.

Posted by hsuBfools at 01/02/2007 @ 11:10am
:)

Posted by hsuBfools at 01/02/2007 @ 11:10am
Hey, HSUB.....I got an idea...

Why not run down what USA Today/Gallup's numbers on public support of impeachment are?!?!??!

Posted by Mask at 01/02/2007 @ 11:58am
Wonder where that poll is...you might also want to take a poll and see who is tired of polls...muchless having to by pass them here constantly..

Posted by john maasch at 01/02/2007 @ 12:17pm
Posted by JOHN MAASCH 01/02/2007 @ 10:39am |

Is there an American institution you don't despise, other than POTUS when there is someone you tolerate?

Posted by crabwalk at 01/02/2007 @ 12:32pm
Have you ever heard of any other VP telling a Senator to "go fuck yourself" on the floor of the Senate?

Posted by CRABWALK 01/02/2007 @ 09:01am

Things like that happen when some Americans can't get their personal attitudes satisfyingly enough projected onto the social landscape without electing sociopaths to public office. Problem is that the electorate at large then realizes exactly what got elected and recoil in disgust.

Posted by fromredbird at 01/02/2007 @ 12:50pm
The best policy is to ignore MASK's irrelevant, parakeet-like screeching.

Posted by fromredbird at 01/02/2007 @ 12:51pm
Anyone want to make bets on whether or not RESE and PLUNGER are going to take down The Nation's servers?

Posted by fromredbird at 01/02/2007 @ 12:55pm
Hey, HSUB.....I got an idea...

Why not run down what USA Today/Gallup's numbers on public support of impeachment are?!?!??!

Posted by MASK 01/02/2007 @ 11:58am

Hey I got the greatest IDEA on the subject-- Let's see what happens when congress puts out the investigated information showing all the shit hsuB/Chaney did! Wanna see a poll then? Hhahaha--- Mas-kyn-sanity!

And Masky-- you never answerred any of my legit questions about why you defend hsuB so devotely, like it's an affair or something-- what's the glue keeping you stuck to the guy. Not that there's anything wrong with having a relationship with the guy... Well, if Laura is ok with it. But you really need to come clean. Start the new year--- coming out! Maybe you won't go crazy when hsuB gets impeached... Really, I hope you don't go too crazy, simply as a humanitarian type that I am.

Posted by hsuBfools at 01/02/2007 @ 12:58pm
"Is there an American institution you don't despise"

HUH?

Posted by john maasch at 01/02/2007 @ 1:00pm
"The best policy is to ignore MASK's irrelevant, parakeet-like screeching."

I wonder who is on more ignore lists.... FROMALWAYSANTIEVERYTHING or MASK...Mask always has something to say and is always entertaining and ready at the type...from FROMANTIISRAELIEVERYTHING,we get something exciting as reading the dictionary to us...boring and useless...yet predictable.

Posted by john maasch at 01/02/2007 @ 1:07pm
Posted by JOHN MAASCH 01/02/2007 @ 1:00pm

You hate the schools, the "activist" judges, the unions, the Clinton presidency, the Carter presidency, the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments, elections that don't go your way are a terrorist win. Oversight is unwelcome, even though mandated by our Owners Manual. Now A senator was long overdue for a VP to tell him to intercourse himself.

I repeat, is there any American institution that you don't despise? (other than the FDIC)

Posted by crabwalk at 01/02/2007 @ 1:08pm
Posted by JOHN MAASCH 01/02/2007 @ 1:07pm

Mask always has something to say? So do we all. Mask just usually says something unrelated to the topic, or pounds one topic ten feet into the ground when no one else cares.(see David Corns books and his desire to sell them on his blog, an inexcusable affront to society)

Posted by crabwalk at 01/02/2007 @ 1:11pm
Posted by HSUBFOOLS 01/02/2007 @ 12:58am

Odd, "I" say that impeachment is a distraction and Dems should (as they are) steer clear of it and I'm "defending hsuB".

DAVID CORN of "The Nation" says the same thing and HSUBFOOLS' response to him is......?!?!???

Posted by Mask at 01/02/2007 @ 1:16pm
CRAB, would you explain in DETAIL how my first post here (Posted by MASK 01/02/2007 @ 07:16am) is off-topic....

OR how in responding to HSUB's off-topic spam C&P poll, it's ME (not him) who's "pound(ing) one topic ten feet into the ground when no one else cares"

Posted by Mask at 01/02/2007 @ 1:18pm
"So do we all."

Not true...some just lecture......to anyone who might listen and then think they are teaching something or saying something profound, when in fact...it jusy another opinion droning on......

Posted by john maasch at 01/02/2007 @ 1:23pm
This is an example of just plain silliness

"Posted by CRABWALK 01/02/2007 @ 1:11pm'

try anything from FROMREDNUTS OR WILL to get an example of someone thinking they are profound and the rest here are just waiting for their tidbits of nonsense...

Posted by john maasch at 01/02/2007 @ 1:25pm
Posted by HSUBFOOLS 01/02/2007 @ 12:58am

Odd, "I" say that impeachment is a distraction and Dems should (as they are) steer clear of it and I'm "defending hsuB".

DAVID CORN of "The Nation" says the same thing and HSUBFOOLS' response to him is......?!?!???

Posted by MASK 01/02/2007 @ 1:16pm

So are you saying both you and Corn don't want congressional oversight? If not, then the dems are investigating and if corruption and illegality ensue and are substantiated to implicate the hsuB/Cheney regime, you are then saying to let them skate? But you said it was right for congress to have persued Nixon. So either you and Corn are wrong or is it just you? Spell out what you-- Mask, do not want congress to do. Stop 'hiding' behind Corn, Get some balls and just say that you're simply in love with hsuB. You just can't quit the guy... There really isn't any other logical explanation for your behavior.

Posted by hsuBfools at 01/02/2007 @ 1:51pm
OR how in responding to HSUB's off-topic spam C&P poll, it's ME (not him) who's "pound(ing) one topic ten feet into the ground when no one else cares"

Posted by MASK 01/02/2007 @ 1:18pm

It wasn't just cut and paste and it wasn't off topic. You are "false".

A false Mask is an insane Mask! (Is that just all too oxymornic?)

Posted by hsuBfools at 01/02/2007 @ 1:56pm
.some just lecture......to anyone who might listen and then think they are teaching something or saying something profound, when in fact...it jusy another opinion droning on......

Posted by JOHN MAASCH 01/02/2007 @ 1:23pm

Of course-- that's only your opinion...

Posted by hsuBfools at 01/02/2007 @ 2:27pm
Posted by FROMREDBIRD 01/02/2007 @ 12:55am

34 of 66. In Chimpy math that is almost 1/2. How much more time off does the Rese/Plunger have?

Better bet, how many copies of the original draft of The Protocols of Zion do you think he has purchased over the years?

Posted by crabwalk at 01/02/2007 @ 2:37pm
Posted by HSUBFOOLS 01/02/2007 @ 1:51pm

HSUB, your obsession with Bush grows and grows.

Again, I'm not saying anything different from what DAVID CORN of "The Nation" said in his commentary on Air America a few weeks back.

Is HE "in love with hsuB", too?!??!??!

Or are you just a total wacko who lives and dies by what happens, will happen, or WON'T happen to a politician?!?!?!?

Posted by Mask at 01/02/2007 @ 2:39pm
Again, I'm not saying anything different from what DAVID CORN of "The Nation" said in his commentary on Air America a few weeks back.

Posted by MASK 01/02/2007 @ 2:39pm

Again, still hiding behind Corn and can't answer the question. You are a sad weak Mask.

Posted by hsuBfools at 01/02/2007 @ 2:45pm
Is HE "in love with hsuB", too?!??!??!

Posted by MASK 01/02/2007 @ 2:39pm

I don't know Mask, I asked if you were. Mask is obviously too embarressed to admit it... It's ok Mask, that's not what's going to keep you out of heaven.

Posted by hsuBfools at 01/02/2007 @ 2:49pm
are you just a total wacko who lives and dies by what happens, will happen, or WON'T happen to a politician?!?!?!?

Posted by MASK 01/02/2007 @ 2:39pm

That's what I asked you, but I didn't put it as loony as you did. Meds are another thing that won't keep you out of heaven, it's ok to take them.

Calm down. I'm sure hsuB won't get impeached for another 2-3 months, at least.

Posted by hsuBfools at 01/02/2007 @ 2:54pm
Mask you seem to get crazier and crazier everytime I post the word "impeach". Are getting paid for everytime that the word "impeach" is NOT used? I could help you out and spell "impeach" differently?

Posted by hsuBfools at 01/02/2007 @ 3:03pm
Naw. Impeach, impeach, impeach, impeach, impeach, impeach, impeach, impeach, impeach,... ad infinitum. :�)

Posted by hsuBfools at 01/02/2007 @ 3:06pm
Posted by HSUBFOOLS 01/02/2007 @ 3:06pm

Well, let's just put it down to ....

I've got David Corn on my side....

you've got FROMREDBIRD on yours!

LOL!

Posted by Mask at 01/02/2007 @ 3:23pm
Well, let's just put it down to ....

I've got David Corn on my side....

Posted by MASK 01/02/2007 @ 3:23pm

And hsuB on your other side-- THat makes it a MASK SANDWICH!!!!

No wonder Mask sounds happier. Although, for my taste it's more of an Angela one side and an Ashley on the other. Working my way up the alphabet again.

Posted by hsuBfools at 01/02/2007 @ 3:33pm
Okay, HSUB...let's keep it simple....give me a post I can save and bring back at the appropriate time....

When (ballpark it to within a month or two, if you like) do the Bills of Impeachment come out of the US House of Representatives?

Posted by Mask at 01/02/2007 @ 3:36pm
Masky, you are one crazy plastic shell of a face.

Posted by hsuBfools at 01/02/2007 @ 4:14pm
One more member of The Greatest Generation cashing in the chips. Sad.

Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 01/02/2007 @ 4:14pm
But since you are crazy:

February: Feb 2007: 1st/ 9th/ 17th/ & 28th

Information leading to more on:

Apr 2007: +1st / #6th / + 12th / * 22nd

May 2007: #2nd / +9th / *19th / #29th

Summer rewriting begins:

June 2007: + 5th / *16th / #26th

July 23rd

Meetings:

August 1 - 19th

Sept 2007: +5th / #15th / +23th

Rerewrites:

Oct 2007: *3rd / #12th / +20th / *30th

Posted by hsuBfools at 01/02/2007 @ 4:15pm
Posted by HSUBFOOLS 01/02/2007 @ 4:15pm |

Okay...translated.....you're calling for Bills of Impeachment out of the House of Reps by late October 2007?

yes?

Posted by Mask at 01/02/2007 @ 4:18pm
Sounds about right. Or is that left to you?

Posted by hsuBfools at 01/02/2007 @ 4:20pm
Masky, not that this isn't a little fun but I only have another week left on my vacation plans and I'm starting on the 'B's. Buen dia, Bye, Bon voyage, Beatrice, Belle, Bianca...

Posted by hsuBfools at 01/02/2007 @ 4:26pm
Posted by JOHN MAASCH 01/02/2007 @ 1:00pm

You hate the schools, the "activist" judges, the unions, the Clinton presidency, the Carter presidency, the 1st, 4th and 5th amendments, elections that don't go your way are a terrorist win. Oversight is unwelcome, even though mandated by our Owners Manual. Now A senator was long overdue for a VP to tell him to intercourse himself.

I repeat, is there any American institution that you don't despise? (other than the FDIC)

Posted by CRABWALK 01/02/2007 @ 1:08pm

If we could figure out some way to harness the natural gas MAASCH generates we would be energy independent. Everyone would then be encouraging him to post.

Posted by fromredbird at 01/02/2007 @ 7:58pm
Posted by FROMREDBIRD 01/02/2007 @ 12:55am

34 of 66. In Chimpy math that is almost 1/2. How much more time off does the Rese/Plunger have?

Better bet, how many copies of the original draft of The Protocols of Zion do you think he has purchased over the years?

Posted by CRABWALK 01/02/2007 @ 2:37pm

The Protocols? Have they been posting that? Are they the same person? Someone is probably going to tell me to unignore them but that isn't going to happen.

Posted by fromredbird at 01/02/2007 @ 8:03pm
Posted by LVLIBERTY1 01/02/2007 @ 5:58pm

Eeeew! Caca!

The American Branch of the Moqtada Posse [tinyurl.com] checks in.

Posted by fromredbird at 01/02/2007 @ 8:09pm
"Why not run down what USA Today/Gallup's numbers on public support of impeachment are?!?!??!"

Posted by MASK 01/02/2007 @ 11:58am

Why not run down the reason why, in spite of the mumurings, blogs and the fact that pelosi had to articulate the idea of impeachment being "off the table", there have been no MSM polls on this topic.

That would be a far more interesting idea, than looking for non-existant polls by corporate media on whether we should impeach the corporate plutocracy.

Eric

Posted by Malcontent at 01/02/2007 @ 9:27pm
"...we get something exciting as reading the dictionary to us...boring and useless...yet predictable."

Posted by JOHN MAASCH 01/02/2007 @ 1:07pm

The dictionary is boring and useless. Hmmm...It's all becoming clearer.

(How did anti-intellectualism become so preponderant in "conservative" thought)?

Was that post "profound" or " jusy another opinion droning on.."?

Eric

Posted by Malcontent at 01/02/2007 @ 9:32pm
Once again we see the rationalizations of the great antichrist lv?l!

Just what seperation of powers are you refering to ? for the last five years they have been blatantly molded into the power of one!

A trueism from wanker massch:

Not true...some just lecture......to anyone who might listen and then think they are teaching something or saying something profound, when in fact...it jusy another opinion droning on......

Posted by JOHN MAASCH 01/02/2007 @ 1:23pm | ignore this person

A classic example of massch cluelessness! preaching to the choir again - drone on oh wise one drone on, you might want to pull your head out once and a while and really look at the world as it is.

Whats a jusy?

Posted by dycel8r at 01/02/2007 @ 11:12pm
opps! wrong thread!

Posted by Malcontent at 01/02/2007 @ 11:18pm
Posted by JOHN MAASCH 01/02/2007 @ 1:23pm | ignore this person

A classic example of massch cluelessness! preaching to the choir again - drone on oh wise one drone on, you might want to pull your head out once and a while and really look at the world as it is.

Whats a jusy?

Posted by DYCEL8R 01/02/2007 @ 11:12pm

Jusy: I think that's what this gasbag calls his particularly volumnious natural gas releases which occur just at the time his ass is sitting on his shoulders.

Posted by fromredbird at 01/03/2007 @ 01:25am
Posted by CHIP THORNTON 01/02/2007 @ 4:14pm

everyone dies...

Posted by ibbleblibble at 01/03/2007 @ 08:24am
Posted by MALCONTENT 01/02/2007 @ 9:27pm

"Corporate Plutocracy/Media!""Corporate Plutocracy/Media!""Corporate Plutocracy/Media!""Corporate Plutocracy/Media!""Corporate Plutocracy/Media!""Corporate Plutocracy/Media!""Corporate Plutocracy/Media!"

So powerful, so all-encompassing, so dominant over our Government and Media....

yet somehow....

they're going to let Bush and Cheney be impeached??!!?!!!!!?!?

You and HSUB need to figure out a less contradictory paranoia, Eric!

Posted by Mask at 01/03/2007 @ 09:09am
Posted by CHIP THORNTON 01/02/2007 @ 4:14pm

everyone dies...

Posted by IBBLEBLIBBLE 01/03/2007 @ 08:24am

Even RINOS. For that would be his title were he to run now.

Posted by crabwalk at 01/03/2007 @ 09:41am
Posted by FROMREDBIRD 01/03/2007 @ 01:25am | ignore this person

perhaps you could include Maasch in your pledge of civil discussion. this pretty much includes many here.

Posted by johannesrolf at 01/03/2007 @ 09:48am
Posted by FROMREDBIRD 01/03/2007 @ 01:25am

perhaps you could include Maasch in your pledge of civil discussion.

Posted by JOHANNESROLF 01/03/2007 @ 09:48am

MAASCH's "discussion" may be polite but it isn't civil. But I should ignore him even when he seeps through on someone else's posts.

Posted by fromredbird at 01/03/2007 @ 11:39am
MAASCH's "discussion" may be polite but it isn't civil.

I don't see a distinction between polite and civil, perhaps you do, and perhaps you can share that distinction with us. but you are correct, judicious use of the ignore function helps.

Posted by johannesrolf at 01/03/2007 @ 11:43am
perhaps you could include Maasch in your pledge of civil discussion. this pretty much includes many here.

Posted by JOHANNESROLF 01/03/2007 @ 09:48am

Not to be expected...FROMREDBIRDSHIT treats everyone the same....with contempt....

Posted by john maasch at 01/03/2007 @ 11:49am
But I should ignore him even when he seeps through on someone else's posts.

Posted by FROMREDBIRD 01/03/2007 @ 11:39am

Better watch yourself, MAASCH....FRB might put you on his Ignore List for one, maybe two days...before, uh, "accidentially" removing you from it!

Posted by Mask at 01/03/2007 @ 12:19pm
You and HSUB need to figure out a less contradictory paranoia, Eric!

Posted by MASK 01/03/2007 @ 09:09am

Er, what? Mask, speaking of paranoia-- you're the one that keeps asking when things in the future are going to happen-- like hsuB's impeachment. And then again there are powerful idiots born to wealth or become sick after achievement and then there are those evil intelligent people MASKeraiding as good old average Joes-- one should not mix up definitions that are not necessarily contradictary just to confuse the issue. Unless you are, confused that is...

Posted by hsuBfools at 01/03/2007 @ 8:11pm
Posted by MASK 01/03/2007 @ 09:09am

"So powerful, so all-encompassing, so dominant over our Government and Media...."

How clueless can you possibly be? Do you actually read other peoples posts? Or do you have a preformulated response (like my congressman does) to every question, that you just throw out, regardless of whether it has any relevance?

Are you saying large corporations don't have way more influence on policy, than "we the people"?

"yet somehow....

they're going to let Bush and Cheney be impeached??!!?!!!!!?!?

You and HSUB need to figure out a less contradictory paranoia, Eric!"

Reiterating someone else's point, as though it were your conflicting point of view, is not debate. Exactly what was contradictory (in my post, not your response)?

You ask for polls. I point out, it is not in the best interests of the folks who do polls, to have one...and you ask me why they would?

Don't you think such a poll would be "newsworthy", regardless of it's outcome? Wouldn't it sell papers/airtime/fill space on cnn? Aren't we a bunch of opinionated, self-centered weirdos, who like to share our views and gossip about others? Wouldn't one party or the other, depending on the outcome, kill for those numbers to toss around?

Don't know where Lillian got her "box" theory from. You talk in circles.

Eric

Posted by Malcontent at 01/03/2007 @ 8:41pm