Bush's Iraq Plea Fails

posted by John Nichols on 01/23/2007 @ 10:36pm

Email
Print
Share
- Buzzflash
- del.icio.us
- Digg
- Facebook
- Mixx it!
- Reddit
What is this?
Take Action
Comments (56)

Subscribe Now

The most pained look of the night on which George Bush delivered the most difficult State of the Union address of his presidency swept across the face of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice midway through the speech.

The President had just delivered the key lines from the foreign-policy section of a speech that -- despite much emphasis on domestic issues such as health care, education and immigration and -- would be judged primarily on the effectiveness of his remarks regarding the Iraq War.

This was the point at which Bush needed to convince a skeptical Congress. And he gave it his all -- or, at the very least, all that his speechwriters could muster.

"If American forces step back before Baghdad is secure, the Iraqi government would be overrun by extremists on all sides. We could expect an epic battle between Shia extremists backed by Iran, and Sunni extremists aided by al Qaeda and supporters of the old regime. A contagion of violence could spill out across the country -- and in time the entire region could be drawn into the conflict," said Bush, who was making the case for his surge of 21,500 additional troops to Iraq. "For America, this is a nightmare scenario. For the enemy, this is the objective. Chaos is their greatest ally in this struggle. And out of chaos in Iraq, would emerge an emboldened enemy with new safe havens... new recruits ... new resources ... and an even greater determination to harm America."

Then, again seeking to forge the clumsy link between the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and his war of whim in Iraq, Bush declared: "To allow this to happen would be to ignore the lessons of September 11 and invite tragedy. And ladies and gentlemen, nothing is more important at this moment in our history than for America to succeed in the Middle East ... to succeed in Iraq ... and to spare the American people from this danger."

The carefully crafted applause line brought Rice to her feet, and she scanned the House chamber to see if it had connected with a Congress that has in recent weeks heard bipartisan expressions of opposition to the president's scheming to expand the war. There was little question that she was hoping for a signal that members of the House and Senate were prepared to give Bush the time he was pleading for in a speech that featured the line: "Our country is pursuing a new strategy in Iraq--and I ask you to give it a chance to work."

The response to the "nothing is more important" line on Iraq was anything but enthusiastic, as many -- perhaps most -- members remained seated. The Congress was not convinced by a repetition of tired rhetoric from a president who has repeatedly misjudged and misguided the war on terror.

Senator Barack Obama, D-Illinois, explained after the speech was done that, "The pall over the room was Iraq."

Rice did not need Obama's analysis. She knew exactly how heavily that pall hung over the chamber as she settled back into her seat Tuesday night.

The Secretary of State was seen grimacing almost as agonizingly as when she was tried to make the case earlier this month for Bush's surge in an excruciating appearance before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee -- during which she was grilled not just by Democrats but by Republicans.

Rice recognized that the job of selling the surge had not been made any easier by this State of the Union address.

Indeed, if there was an expression of the sentiments of the Congressional majority -- made up of Democrats and a growing number of dissenting Republicans -- it came in the response to the president's speech by Senator Jim Webb, D-Virginia.

"The President took us into this war recklessly. He disregarded warnings from the national security adviser during the first Gulf War, the Chief of Staff of the Army, two former commanding generals of the Central Command, whose jurisdiction includes Iraq, the director of operations on the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and many, many others with great integrity and long experience in national security affairs. We are now, as a nation, held hostage to the predictable--and predicted--disarray that has followed," the Reagan Republican turned Democratic Senator explained.

"The war's costs to our nation have been staggering. Financially. The damage to our reputation around the world. The lost opportunities to defeat the forces of international terrorism. And especially the precious blood of our citizens who have stepped forward to serve.

"The majority of the nation no longer supports the way this war is being fought; nor does the majority of our military. We need a new direction. Not one step back from the war against international terrorism. Not a precipitous withdrawal that ignores the possibility of further chaos. But an immediate shift toward strong regionally based diplomacy, a policy that takes our soldiers off the streets of Iraq's cities, and a formula that will in short order allow our combat forces to leave Iraq."

Those are the words that, had they been spoken before the Congress Tuesday night, would have brought the chamber to its feet and earned the response Rice had hoped Bush would receive. They are, more significantly, the words that polls suggest the great mass of Americans long to hear not merely from one senator from Virginia but from a Congress that is prepared, finally, to restore the system of checks and balances and force this president to change course.

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

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 (56)

Message wipe?

Okay...I'll re-state it.

So what? She may be grimmacing, but she WON, didn't she?

Bush WILL get "the Surge" and Speaker Nancy and Harry Reid apparently aren't going to stop it...are they?

Posted by Mask at 01/23/2007 @ 10:37pm
Posted by MASK 01/23/2007 @ 10:37pm |

message wipe? whew! thought i was losing it.

Posted by ibbleblibble at 01/23/2007 @ 10:47pm
Posted by IBBLEBLIBBLE 01/23/2007 @ 10:47pm

just happened again....WTF?

Posted by Mask at 01/23/2007 @ 10:50pm
actually, it was a good speech.

Posted by john maasch at 01/23/2007 @ 10:52pm
Posted by JOHN MAASCH 01/23/2007 @ 10:52pm

No offense, JOHN....but let's wait for the polls.

If there's an up-tick, it was a good speech. If nothing, it didn't help.

Actually, if there's an up-tick...it was a GREAT speech!...hehe

Posted by Mask at 01/23/2007 @ 10:53pm
Posted by MASK 01/23/2007 @ 10:50pm |

who knows? maybe its the gnomes of zurich...

bedtime for bonzo.

Posted by ibbleblibble at 01/23/2007 @ 10:54pm
Screw the pollss...I thought it was a good speech...I don't need no stinkimng polls to tell me what to think....unlike afew people who shall remain sseleman.

Posted by john maasch at 01/23/2007 @ 11:06pm
I didn't watch the speech. We were eating dinner and switched on "Ugly Betty" on the DVR. The sound of Bush makes my wife ill and I've heard him before. Same shit, different day. Why would any one other then a political talking head from Faux News waste their time when they could be enjoying dinner with their family and watching "Ugly Betty" instead of watching "The Stupid president".

"If we ever pass out as a great nation we ought to put on our tombstone, 'America died from a delusion that she has moral leadership." Will Rogers

Posted by COProgressive at 01/23/2007 @ 11:57pm
Bush WILL get "the Surge" and Speaker Nancy and Harry Reid apparently aren't going to stop it...are they?

Posted by MASK 01/23/2007 @ 10:37pm

only if they can figure out who the speedy delivery man is mask

Posted by Will C. at 01/24/2007 @ 12:07am
After watching this speech, I'm convinced Bush is right. He is forcing us to sacrifice as a nation by making us watch him on TV! I hope, at least, his military eligible daughters were forced to sit through the whole speech too. In his mind, I'm sure that would be equivalent to one year of military service.

Posted by D1od1o at 01/24/2007 @ 12:36am
I don't need no stinkimng polls to tell me what to think....unlike afew people who shall remain sseleman.

Posted by JOHN MAASCH 01/23/2007 @ 11:06pm | ignore this person

??????

:-)

Posted by Lillian at 01/24/2007 @ 12:56am
...I thought it was a good speech...

Posted by JOHN MAASCH 01/23/2007 @ 11:06pm | ignore this person

Maybe...if I'd had those 2 glasses of wine before the speech...like John...I'd have thought it was a "good speech" too...

:-)

Posted by Lillian at 01/24/2007 @ 01:04am
Screw the pollss...

Posted by JOHN MAASCH 01/23/2007 @ 11:06pm | ignore this person

Right on John!

:-)

Posted by Lillian at 01/24/2007 @ 01:06am
I don't need no stinkimng polls to tell me what to think....unlike afew people who shall remain sseleman.

Posted by JOHN MAASCH 01/23/2007 @ 11:06pm

Who the hell said they thought you were thinking at all, with or without help?

Numbskullamatic Republican par excellence.

Posted by fromredbird at 01/24/2007 @ 01:08am
Pelosi SUCKS almost as much as Hillary Clinton. But the hardcore pseudofeminists who seem to carry the day are still extolling her and the bright future she harbingers for the country. Gag me with a spoon!

Posted by chinpoko at 01/24/2007 @ 01:11am
I missed the speech. Someone told me that Bush said Iraq is now the central front in the Vietnam War. WTF!?! Are we fighting Charlie in Iraq so we don't have to fight him here?

And Dick Cheney STILL has a deferment?

Someone's pulling my leg, right?

Right?

Posted by fromredbird at 01/24/2007 @ 01:15am
If I had written the Democratic response I would have paraphrased one of Clint Eastwood's lines in Unforgiven - "Who's the owner of this shithole?"

Posted by fromredbird at 01/24/2007 @ 01:20am
Beautiful, the only thing anyone on the left and in the Demoncrat congress can do is hate the Bush administration! They offer no plans for further success in the "war on terror" against Islamic facist aggression worldwide, nothing substantial to safeguard american intrests domestic or foreign. They have no plan for Iraq and Afganistan except to defund and cut and run! Now we can look forward to two more years of this.

Posted by RIO BRAVO 01/24/2007 @ 02:42am

Yeah, don't you just hate it when that happens? After six years of flawless government policy -- with that immaculately planned and executed Iraq war as the icing on the cake -- along come the Democrats to fuck everything up. Thankfully, though, the president doesn't have to rely solely on Democrats to secure Total Victory in Iraq. He's given the Iraqi government a good telling off, you know, so we can be sure that they'll pull their weight from now on.

Posted by Amsterdam69 at 01/24/2007 @ 05:37am
Well, it's reassuring to know that some things in this crazy world are constant - death, gravity, taxes, and the imbecilic march of the reactionary lemmings to the oldies but goodies that the commando in chief was spewing last night. How many times did he bring up 9/11? I thought at least four. And that had what to do with the debacle in Iraq? The economy is strong? Yeah, for the oligarchy that runs the country. How many new jobs? And should we be celebrating the fact that WalMart and McDonalds are going great guns? That's the engine of American industry? Cheap crap made in Southeast Asia and food that is part and parcel to the growing numbers of obesity and diabetes that, if 20,000 is a surge, is an avalanche.

And how is sending more troops to the Baghdad a "new" strategy? He sounded like a pitch-man on an infomercial.

"Try the 'new and improved' Iraq War! 20,000 more soldiers! Guaranteed or your country back! They'll clean Baghdad - no problem! How much would you pay for this? $20 billion? $30 billion? But wait, there's more! When you order the 'new and improved' War in Iraq, you get as a bonus gift increasing tensions with Iran! That's right, Iran! Those crazy Shia in Iran are in our sights, and if you call now, we'll guarantee more bloodshed before Christmas! And, if you order the 'new and improved' War in Iraq before midnight tonight, we can deliver another 500 American casualties before June 1! Don't delay! Neo-con operatives are standing by! Just call 1-800-NEW-PLAN!"

Posted by Turk33 at 01/24/2007 @ 08:30am
Posted by WILL C. 01/24/2007 @ 12:07am

WILL...what the hell does that mean?!?!?!?

(Or were you just confused by the fact that we AGREE on something?)

Posted by Mask at 01/24/2007 @ 08:49am
Posted by RIO BRAVO 01/24/2007 @ 02:42am

Seriously, isn't it about time somebody said "Want a plan? Okay, how about a plan to STOP getting American GIs killed versus a plan to get MORE American GIs killed?"

Posted by Mask at 01/24/2007 @ 08:51am
TURK33:

herewith a plan:

Send the 20,000 McDonalds obese to Baghdad, and get them killed before they becomme to expensive in public health expenses.

Just call 1-800-NEW-PLAN/kill-an-obese

This is the ultimate American Dream

Posted by areyouok at 01/24/2007 @ 09:15am
I don't need no stinkimng polls to tell me what to think....unlike afew people who shall remain sseleman.

Posted by JOHN MAASCH 01/23/2007 @ 11:06pm | ignore this person

??????

:-)

Posted by LILLIAN 01/24/2007 @ 12:56am |

i think maasch was up a little late...then and early morning are when i tap out my most incomprehensible babblings....

Posted by ibbleblibble at 01/24/2007 @ 09:30am
Posted by AREYOUOK 01/24/2007 @ 09:15am

hell no! keep 'em here...BIODIESEL!!!

Posted by ibbleblibble at 01/24/2007 @ 09:32am
IBBLEBLIBBLE

hell no! keep 'em here...BIODIESEL!!!

IBBLE, that is a good initiative, seen that we only need the bodies to make the biofuel, let them go, we anyhow are getting the bodies back........!

Posted by areyouok at 01/24/2007 @ 09:37am
WILL...what the hell does that mean?!?!?!?

Posted by MASK 01/24/2007 @ 08:49am

retard

Posted by Will C. at 01/24/2007 @ 09:40am
if you read the speech, and deconstruct it line by line, you'll notice that bush has yet to follow through on about 75% of the promises. for instance, he has mentioned "energy independence" for 6 straight years, but has done nothing about it.

anyone who thinks it was a good speech is clearly not doing their research.

Posted by darladoon at 01/24/2007 @ 09:54am
the fact is that the neocons and their programs are ultimately failures. they have been a cancer on the republican party as well as the nation and the world.

read PNAC - its online for all to see (unlike returning caskets from iraq and the underfunded, backwater front WHERE OBL WAS REALLY REALLY HIDING, afghanistan). their goal has been american domination of the world, pure and simple. military, economic, cultural...they intend this to be, as stated in its very title, an american century.

problems...

1. they are not competant enough to carry out their own plans...

2. although i dont doubt america can lead the world, if our motives are PURELY selfish and self agrandizing, and if we go about our business with the type of arrogance and stupidity the neocons possess, we are doomed.

the way this could have been an american century is if we had behaved in an honorable, morally laudable, humble, "default 1st among equals" manner. instead we got in people's faces, called them bad names, bullied, and violated our own most cherished priciples.

how can we now lecture ANYONE about their shortcomongs? there is no more moral high ground. we torture and violate people's privacy and threaten to use our vast stockpile of doomsday weapons exactly as we fear iran will do. our political leaders have behaved in the most reprehensible manners imaginable, robbing schmuk nation, not even reading important legislation which they have to vote upon, eschewing even the most cursory examination of the situation when authorizing their president to use force, and aiding and abbetting in our slide down to the barbaric level of our "enemies"...

we cant in good faith heckle anyone else on democracy or fair elections. we cannot in good faith condemn others for torture. we cannot in good faith lecture others on starting wars nor using government to further enrich the already rich while marginalizing the poor and midle class.

thank you neocons for really really really screwing the pooch.

we had the opportunity to REALLY lead the world into a brighter future. instead we have made the world a worse place than it was before as a result of our arrogant foolishness. when the giant rolls over the lilliputions get crushed.

almost the entire world prays these evil incompetants get voted out of office. i pray for the same. i also pray that eventually justice is done and they are held responsible for the vile words and deeds they have vomited upon the world and us.

impeachment? too good. but ms. pelosi, go ahead and use our leverage to ram through as much watered down progressive legislation as possible and when the investigations stumble across stuff that simply cannot in good faith be ignored by even the most reclusive ostriches...maybe we get some justice after all...

Posted by ibbleblibble at 01/24/2007 @ 09:55am
Posted by AREYOUOK 01/24/2007 @ 09:37am

FLABBOSUCTION!!!!!

Posted by ibbleblibble at 01/24/2007 @ 09:56am
Posted by WILL C. 01/24/2007 @ 09:40am

WILL in a pissy mood today.

Must have been a pop quiz in Mrs. Hufnagel's Algebra-I class yesterday!

Posted by Mask at 01/24/2007 @ 10:01am
IBBLEBLIBBLE 01/24/2007 @ 09:55am

Your post is excellent.

I believe the rest of the world would like to see America leading humanity, as it has done several times in several issues, but, as you say, these neocon regime is staining the perception the world has of America, pity, such a small minority destroying a large mayority of excellent Americans (be them reps or dems).

Posted by areyouok at 01/24/2007 @ 10:02am
what sort of health care plan was that? tax cuts? hilariously stupid idea!

jesus christ, man, why can't americans just imitate other western democracies with respect to health care? we're headed there anyway (see california), so what the f*ck is bush thinking?

Posted by darladoon at 01/24/2007 @ 10:07am
Posted by IBBLEBLIBBLE 01/24/2007 @ 09:55am

HSUB predicts October this year for bills of impeachment, IBBLE.

That means the Senate trial first of January 2008. Then Cheney becomes President and gets to pick his Veep. Any attempt at impeaching him BEFORE that Veep gets sworn in, results in a Constitutional crises due to Line of Succession (basically Pelosi using the legislative power of impeachment to elevate herself to the Presidency (i.e. Executive)) and JOHN ROBERTS, Alito, Scalia, Thomas and maybe Souter or Kennedy can vote it down.

So, then with "Vice-President Condi" sworn in (best pick, forces Dems to support her...or come out against the "first female and first African-American Vice-President" JUST in time for the 2008 elections), they can try to go after Cheney.

That eats up most of 2008...and the Dems go into the 2008 Elections with NO accomplishments, except making their BASE (and ONLY the base) happy.

Karl Rove couldn't dream up a better strategy for Republican resurrection.

Posted by Mask at 01/24/2007 @ 10:07am
MASK 01/24/2007 @ 10:07am

I must accept that you statement is very, very probable to happen.

Posted by areyouok at 01/24/2007 @ 10:12am
DARLADOON 01/24/2007 @ 10:07am

Sorry, forgot the only superpower has no public health system.....

Posted by areyouok at 01/24/2007 @ 10:13am
I must accept that you statement is very, very probable to happen.

Posted by AREYOUOK 01/24/2007 @ 10:12am

There IS an alternative...and despite the Blogosphere desire, it's the one that Pelosi and Reid are following-

Don't impeach Bush. Embaress him, embaress Cheney, embaress the Administration, heck, embaress "neo-conservatism"...with investigations showing they were incompetent and foolish.

Meanwhile, pass POPULAR legislation, with maybe 10-20-30% of Republicans signing off on them as well, and DARE Bush to veto it, while his own Party breathes down his neck saying "Sign the damn bill, else it will KILL us in 2008!".

It nails the lid shut on any chance of a Republican Congress in 2008, pretty much nails the lid shut on a Republican White House (even with Hillary as nominee), and Bush leaves office and heads back to Crawford in January 2009, less popular than Lyndon Johnson in 1969.

Or...they could listen to the "We Want Bush's Head on a Pike" Crowd and risk blowing their first chance at power in 12 years.

Posted by Mask at 01/24/2007 @ 10:23am
the most telling moment of the "speech" was when bush mentioned why all americans need health care (smattering of applause), and then immediately followed with "we don't need to raise taxes to pay for it" (uproarious applause).

what planet is bush living on? that had to have been the dumbest thing i have ever heard in a state of the union address. but, is that really a surprise when you've got the dumbest president in modern history up at the podium?

Posted by darladoon at 01/24/2007 @ 10:25am
mask, i actually agree with you, and this is precisely why zero is moronically stupid. he's the 'head on a pike' type.

Posted by darladoon at 01/24/2007 @ 10:26am
Posted by RIO BRAVO 01/24/2007 @ 02:42am

pure, unadulterated bullshit. Why do you insist on posting lies on this site day after day?

Posted by crabwalk at 01/24/2007 @ 10:30am
E. Howard Hunt is dead. ding Dong, Howard hunt is dead. Let the bells ring.

Probably a neo con hero. A failure like all their other heroes.

Posted by crabwalk at 01/24/2007 @ 10:38am
MASK 01/24/2007 @ 10:23am

Again agree with that version.

I feel it will now depend on the best strategist, lets see, nevertheless, we could also expect a mix of both possibilities, resulting on a poor strategy application by both sides.

Posted by areyouok at 01/24/2007 @ 10:38am
I bet chimpy pardons him posthumously.

Posted by crabwalk at 01/24/2007 @ 10:39am
mask, i actually agree with you....

Posted by DARLADOON 01/24/2007 @ 10:26am

OMG! It must be the Apocalypse then!

Hey, maybe that's where LVLIB is....Rapture!...hehe

Posted by Mask at 01/24/2007 @ 10:41am
"I found out the CIA was just infested with Democrats," he told Slate magazine in 2004.

sounds like our resident preacher-man. I wonder if Luvvy will eulogizing the felon?

his wife died in a plane crash, she had $10,000 in her satchel, widely believed to be part of the hush money given to those in the know to keep quiet about watergate. the scandal that tought the recent crop of neo's to behave like they do, deny, obfuscate, lie, cheat, bribe, classify everything, lie, cheat, steal.

Posted by crabwalk at 01/24/2007 @ 10:43am
Posted by AREYOUOK 01/24/2007 @ 10:38am

The Dems aren't stupid, but they're not that strategically smart enough either to pull off BOTH a positive legislative agenda AND go through 18 months of "dual impeachments".

Even if you wouldn't consider it a basis for tactics, they saw how the Clinton Impeachment blew up in the faces of the Republicans...and they don't have the luxury of risking losing a few seats over going after Bush.

And basically they tell the Blogosphere and Base to "lump it" come 2008. They might get pissed at the Dems for not impeaching Bush...but...where are they going to go? Nader? "Greens"? Naw.

Hillary knows that too. The liberal base may not like her, but once she gets the nomination, they'll vote for her over McCain or the "greater of two evils".

Posted by Mask at 01/24/2007 @ 10:45am
Posted by CRABWALK 01/24/2007 @ 10:38am

CRAB do some damn history research, huh? There was barely even an idea of "neo-conservatism" in the early 70s (in fact they began as part of the "Scoop Jackson Democrats"!).

Nixon, much less Hunt, supported a domestic agenda that included creating the EPA, pushing affirmative action, and wage and price controls.

Hardly what "neo-cons" would go for today!

Posted by Mask at 01/24/2007 @ 10:48am
Posted by MASK 01/24/2007 @ 10:48am

or you could take reading comprehension 101.

Posted by crabwalk at 01/24/2007 @ 10:54am
MASK 01/24/2007 @ 10:45am

Yes, and the neocons are very smart, and know to hit hard and quick, hope the whole comming situation will not work too bad out for the american people and they interests.....

Posted by areyouok at 01/24/2007 @ 10:54am
I guess I was premature in removing MASK form the iggy pile. SOS, different day.

Posted by crabwalk at 01/24/2007 @ 10:58am
I think that the threat of impeachment would get the job done, the administration would realize that the deeper you dig the more and more evidence against them would surface. We dont need a dual-impeachment I think all we need is the balls to call these guys out, they are smart, they would cut their losses and step down before any real damage was done.

Posted by Mogar at 01/24/2007 @ 11:18am
a redux of a Quantas Airline pilot/mechanic "gripe sheet"

P: Noise coming from under the podium. Sounds like a midget pounding on something with a hammer. S: Took hammer away from the midget, returned it to the president.

Posted by crabwalk at 01/24/2007 @ 11:45am
OK thanks...was feeling inspired there...

MASK

i understand what you are saying and agree in the most part. but however this is done, anger and desire for bloody vengeance aside, i am afraid that to let them off scot free would be dangerous for our country. we let nixon off the hook, we let reagan off the hook in iran-contra...

not only have the actions of this group of suited sociopaths made iran contra look penny ante (which it was not) they have actually rivaled and perhaps exeeded the nixon adminstration in terms of vileness and disregard for the law of the land.

if no one high up in govenrment ever gets punished for their illegal wickedness...

whats the freakin point? in a legal system based on precedent, what kind of precedent are we establishing in terms of the executive branch of government?

so, you know, if the articles of impeachment come down the week before the 08 election, so what? actually that would be great in many ways...

but then perhaps the best option IS to wait until they are out of office and then string them up. might be easier and more effective, and 2 more years of evil incompetance can only hurt them and any who believe in/support them and their nihilistic methodology.

Posted by ibbleblibble at 01/24/2007 @ 11:45am
but then perhaps the best option IS to wait until they are out of office and then string them up.

Posted by IBBLEBLIBBLE 01/24/2007 @ 11:45am

Not likely either, IBBLE. A round of "Christmas 2008" pardons would keep the lower level guys quiet....and even Hillary with her legendary "Enemies List" mentality, isn't going to try to "go after" Bush and Cheney post-Presidency....nothing to gain from it.

Sorry if this raises a sense of "no justice in the Universe", but it's the nature of politics.

And here's WORSE news...Bush CAN be "rehabilitated" in history. It's not impossible, highly unlikely, but not out of the realm of reality.

Look at Lyndon Johnson. Vietnam an utter disaster, but he still gets "points for trying" with the "Great Society" and civil rights.

Posted by Mask at 01/24/2007 @ 12:07pm
they would cut their losses and step down before any real damage was done.

Posted by MOGAR 01/24/2007 @ 11:18am

Could you explain the LOGIC of that?

Bush and Cheney will resign before "any real damage is done to them"!?!?!?!?!?

Posted by Mask at 01/24/2007 @ 12:08pm
I think that the threat of impeachment would get the job done, the administration would realize that the deeper you dig the more and more evidence against them would surface. We dont need a dual-impeachment I think all we need is the balls to call these guys out, they are smart, they would cut their losses and step down before any real damage was done.

Posted by MOGAR 01/24/2007 @ 11:18am | ignore this person

No offense Mogar, but what administration have you been watching the past six, long years? There have been numerous, obvious, provable offenses that they have denied, spun, ignored, covered up, twisted, etc. etc. This brand of animal runs on faith, and faith doesn't allow them to see anything other than their version of reality.

I personally believe that Congress should have hearings to determine the extent to which Bushco has violated this country's citizens and its laws. That being said, I don't think impeachment, as valid as it might be, is really a viable option.

What is the procedure for prosecution in the UN for war crimes? Can citizens of a country initiate those proceedings? Because it is in this way that I believe lies the only hope for justice.

Posted by Turk33 at 01/24/2007 @ 12:40pm
"This is not the fight we entered in Iraq, but it is the fight we are in." (Bush)

How dare the Media not hold Pres. Bush accountable for that statement because this IS the fight that we had brought about!

And how dare the Media not hold itself accountable for letting that statement go without addressing its absurdity

Posted by bohdan yuri at 01/24/2007 @ 2:27pm