Impeaching of Cheney and Possibly Bush 2007

anybody else notice how un-republican the current administration has been on a few issues? For example; partial birth abortions as of last week are banned and it's constitutional and they want to ban gay marriage federally. While these are both seemingly conservative things to do, the FEDERAL ban is baffling for a supposed republican administration. I thought that part of being a republican meant that you were for state's rights and a SMALL federal gov't. Just doesn't make much sense.
 
ya, I've noticed a few things like that which ahve happened. they seem to have their own viewpoints on many issues.
 
No. The US is a superpower because of its economic power and influence on other countries.

China might be a superpower in a few years, but its nowhere close right now. Its getting there in economic strength, but the US still absolutely owns it in terms of global influence, effective military and production. China's government needs to get their shit together if they want to really exert power in the global arena.
 
Another example of the government lieing. The Pat Tillman case.

Look it up for yourself. Government claimed at first he was killed in enemy fire and told people to hush up about it that saw it, he was actually killed by friendly fire. Yep, this "war" is soooo worth it. Tillman sure found that out the hard way.

Look up your own link cause you will prob just claim that my link is not legit or some bs....
 
im probably gonna get some stupid shit for this but whatever.

i cant stand everyone here who tries to put all this blame and shit on Bush. Yes, he has made a lot of bad decisions, but weren't we the ones who elected him? Do you actually think Kerry woulda been better? HELL NO! And i can gauruntee that about 95% of the people who have posted or read this thread agreeded to enter the war after 9/11 because our country was attacked. Now that the war is being publicized and is marked as a horrible decision, we turn on our President, on our soldiers, and on our country.... Like that one guy said before me, if you want something to change, then stop bitching and moaning and do something. Most of us can vote in 2008, so start finding out information about each presidential candidate. All this bitching and moaning makes other countries laugh at us even more... We decided as a country to go into Iraq, NOT BUSH. He had a 90 day period to do so before Congress made the final decision. And who elects congress? thats right we do... we cant just pull out of Iraq because Iran is waiting to walk right in, or a civil war will start. Yes, we are in a bad place because we are losing more and more soldiers every day.

Just think about what i said, hopefully all the narrow minded democrats in here will think a little more before they start bashing Bush.......
 
Thats the army doing its thing, I would love to see how you attribute that directly to anyone in the current administration. While I would find myself voting much as you would, I really disagree with your reasoning when it comes to these issues.
 
we, as a country (generalization, I know), supported the attack of Afghanistan for justifiable reasons. Some of the country supported the war in Iraq because of the WMD's they 'had.'
 
Alright, lets give it a shot. 50 people posted here (about), and I didnt agree with our going to war with Afganistan, or Iraq. If 3 more people agree with me on this who have posted before, you're wrong.

A lot of the country didn't approve of the invasion of Iraq, and many more people would have disagreed had the administration not fabricated information about Iraq's chemical and biological weapons programs.
 
Alright then, here we go;

From my perspective, the whole Clinton 'scandal' was just the media and the people of the USA starved for something to go wrong in Clintons Presidency.

Ok. Clinton Lied. He got Impeached.

Did anyone die when Clinton lied? Maybe his interns actually will live a little longer when they swalloed his sperm. So you could say he may have helped people live longer rather than die.

Now, I definately dont know enough about Clintons period in office because a couple things. I was like in middleschool/highschool and didnt follow everything that closely. Apparently listening to some radio shows, he too was a criminal pulling stunts that went 'unheard' of. I dont know any details, listen to Alex Jones sometimes.

So, if we impeached Bush right now and took him into the courtroom and under oath and all this shit, he would never tell a single lie no matter what question I asked? Or would he plead the fifth like a little bitch? If he did, he obviously has something to hide. Why should he have secrets about what he is doing with our country and our people and our money?

Im 23 years old, n00b.

 
This goes to show how well the media control what we know. It's very surprising how bias and one sided the major news channels are.

I agree very much with the guy you quoted, but I can't find his post.
 
well shit, with that attitude, lets place army bases in every fucking country in the world just incase they decide to attack us one day, im sure every country will love when we do that.....
 
if i am as uninformed, close minded, and immature (n00b) when i'm 23, i'll go to iraq myself wearing nothing but a fucking american flag for a robe. we arent starved for things wrong in clintons presidency. selling nuclear secrets to china. special forces having osama bin ladens head in the crosshairs, but not being about the get the go-ahead from clinton becuase he was playing golf. he would not pick up his cell phone. now, there is one huge fundamental difference between the presidencies of clinton and bush. Clinton was faced with no hard decisions, and he chickend out of any that he was faced with. now, i said a lot more, argue that too please, because you havent said anything worthwhile about anything i have said yet.
 
well fuck, you got me there, he did make a decision. umm, honestly, i think he did a rather shitty job. i say "he" knowing that the president is not really 100% responsible for how shit like that goes down, but it was handled very poorly. we got straight smacked down by a rag-tag group of "fighters." extremely parallel to iraq actually
 
Extreme? How do you think alot of people in Iraq feel?

Alot of them are jealous of the US and never wanted us there in the first place.

There are people over there currently and for the last 5 years who have been suicide bombing the US troops they want us out that bad. For fucks sake, when can we get the message.

Reality check for the USA: PEOPLE ALL AROUND THE WORLD THINK DIFFERENTLY AND HAVE TOTALLY DIFFERENT IDEAS ON HOW ONE SHOULD LIVE HIS/HER LIFE.

Maybe I missed the email that asked if I wanted to the country to go to war in Iraq? Personally, I, nor any one of you guys had any say whatsoever if we went to war or not. Its all decided before you can even open your mouth.

Basically, instead of talking out an agreement, we are using brute force, like we are some sort of Texas cowboy who rustles cows and "WE AINT BACKIN DOWN, YA HERREE"

 
I didn't mean to 'get you,' I was just curious of your thoughts, as your opinions often differ from mine.

What constitutes his dealing with Somalia poorly handled? (again, just curious on an opinion)
 
im not even going to start on this kid. conceptkid you are the most uninformed and immature person i have ever seen on this site (yes worse than FTP). i honestly hope you are in an accident and are rendered unable to speak or type for the rest of your life.
 
haha, no, i'm glad you did get me, it shows im not the only person here thinking. I love it when people can INTELLIGENTLY argue with me (not that you are), or prove me wrong. From what I know about it, we went in there without a game plan. Given, it was a hard situation since no one was exactly wearing team jerseys. It seems like we could have possibly handled it better when in there militarily.
 
good reasoning - I don't know enough about it to make a sound argument, but I got a similar same feeling when reading up about it.
 
the government had absolutely nothing to do with either Pat Tillman or Jenny Linch. Both were directly assosiated with a couple leaders of their platoons who boasted their deaths. Yes this is wrong. Pat Tillman was a hero just for leaving the NFL to go to the war. Jenny Linch was not necessarily a hero, im not too sure about her case, but i do know she never fired her weapon. But the most important piece is that the government was not involved, so stop trying to find other ways to bash them.
 
and i mean, when i read what i wrote, it slapped me in the face how similar it is to iraq. practically identical, just with iraq being more long term and more committed.
 
So is the Military that stupid that they need Clintons fucking "yes" to kill him? IF so, thats not fucking his fault at all, the military has their own "intelligence" to take out dangerous people and I guarantee it happens all the time. Golf is fucking dope anyway and would have ruined a good game. Plus, they could have found osama later anyways fuck its not that complicated.

I cant really argue the fact that nothing 'extreme' happened during Clintons era, but since you are 23 too, than I bet you truly do not know as much as you do now about Bush since its current. Clinton im sure knew about some fucked up things going on in the middle east, but he wasnt about to just go to 'war' with them. Time solves alot of problems. 9/11 was a serious deal. You cant tell me that something like that wasnt bound to happen someday. Hrmmm planes and really tall buildings.....they go great together. Our country was like in a super state of laxness as far as flying on planes and national security. People flew all over with drugs and shit on them /prob guns all the time too and got away with it.

"WE ARE WHERE WE ARE!!" That is a quote from Cheney from last night on Comedy Central. One of the gayest quotes ever too, I hate quoting it because it sounds like something a fucking caveman would say.

 
oh my god, i cant read this and not laugh! you dont get how the military works. obviously it WAS that hard to find him again, as they havent still. but i cant argue that the president of the united states of america should completely disregard his duties while playing something as "fucking dope" as a round of golf. who said 9/11 wasnt bound to happen? did i? no... and what relevance does this have to the thread? and thank god you get your political discussion fodder from comedy central.
 
Dear lord, Ron Paul hit the nail directly on the head. Read this, he explained it way better than I or anyone could. Hes running for president in 2008. I would elect him in a heartbeat just from reading this, nothing else......

Ron Paul: Government Cannot Protect Us



Infowars.com |April 25, 2007

Ron Paul



The senseless and horrific killings last week on the campus of Virginia

Tech University reinforced an uneasy feeling many Americans experienced

after September 11th: namely, that government cannot protect us. No

matter how many laws we pass, no matter how many police or federal

agents we put on the streets, a determined individual or group still

can cause great harm. Perhaps the only good that can come from these

terrible killings is a reinforced understanding that we as individuals

are responsible for our safety and the safety of our families.

Although

Virginia does allow individuals to carry concealed weapons if they

first obtain a permit, college campuses within the state are

specifically exempted. Virginia Tech, like all Virginia colleges, is

therefore a gun-free zone, at least for private individuals. And as we

witnessed, it didn't matter how many guns the police had. Only private

individuals on the scene could have prevented or lessened this tragedy.

Prohibiting guns on campus made the Virginia Tech students less safe,

not more.

The Virginia Tech tragedy may not lead

directly to more gun control, but I fear it will lead to more people

control. Thanks to our media and many government officials, Americans

have become conditioned to view the state as our protector and the

solution to every problem. Whenever something terrible happens,

especially when it becomes a national news story, people reflexively

demand that government do something. This impulse almost always leads

to bad laws and the loss of liberty. It is completely at odds with the

best American traditions of self-reliance and rugged individualism.

Do

we really want to live in a world of police checkpoints, surveillance

cameras, and metal detectors? Do we really believe government can

provide total security? Do we want to involuntarily commit every

disaffected, disturbed, or alienated person who fantasizes about

violence? Or can we accept that liberty is more important than the

illusion of state-provided security?

I fear that

Congress will use this terrible event to push for more

government-mandated mental health programs. The therapeutic nanny state

only encourages individuals to view themselves as victims, and reject

personal responsibility for their actions. Certainly there are

legitimate organic mental illnesses, but it is the role of doctors and

families, not the government, to diagnose and treat such illnesses.

Freedom

is not defined by safety. Freedom is defined by the ability of citizens

to live without government interference. Government cannot create a

world without risks, nor would we really wish to live in such a

fictional place. Only a totalitarian society would even claim absolute

safety as a worthy ideal, because it would require total state control

over its citizens' lives. Liberty has meaning only if we still believe

in it when terrible things happen and a false government security

blanket beckons.

 
1. thats irrelivent to any point made.

2. i was banned because i was trying to learn how to post pics and do bold and some other things in a dead cult and when the mods saw it it looked like i was postwhoring, so fuck off.
 
Apparently Youtube video is not credible now? If it werent for infowars you would have never seen that footage probably. Its not like the video was 'photoshopped'.

I dont feel that infowars is biased at all, its just that they report on all the ugly/secret shit that no one else does for fear of being harassed by the government.

What makes infowars biased? Honestly, explain that in a long post, not a lazy one liner......

Some of their shit is definately out there, but they dont tell you, you have to believe it. And if you think they are soo biased, what is their motive then? What do they intend to do? Take over the US?

 
I dunno, why are there so many crazy conspiracy theorists out there? How the hell should I even begin to guess what anyone who believes 9/11 was planned by our government is thinking? I'm not a psychiatrist, but its probably just for attention, or boredom. There are a lot of crazy people out there. Check out the Westboro Baptist Church if you need further convincing. Just because someone can make a youtube video and run a half-assed website doesnt give them instant credibility, at least to me.

Yes, its always important to keep the system we empower from overpowering us. But seriously, sometimes people bat so far left (or right) field they start hitting fouls. I'm not going to tell you what credible sources are, as I think thats something everyone needs to decide for themselves, but I'd ask you to at least entertain the possibility that life isn't a Mel Gibson thriller.
 
Hey FYI:

These people were suicide bombing BEFORE we were there.

And who says we're completely dictating every second of their lives?

No where close.

Does it make sense to you to let innocent people die when you know for a fact you can do something about it?
 
gay ass troops?

and lol pull out...

wow I don't really know where to start

First of all... have some respect for the troops, they don't choose the war they follow orders so calling them gay ass's is simply just a mark of your overwhelming lack of intelligence and on top of that, you may not support the war in Iraq, but that does not mean that we should have soldiers driving around in out of date humvees. You may not like the war but sending these "gay ass troops" to there deaths in broken down, poorly armored humvees is not the answer.

Second of all, when one is trying to make an intellectual point, as I believe you were trying to do, laughing at pull out does not help your arguement... it merely shows that any half decent point you raise is simple luck, as chat language and bawdy humour

fail to demonstrate any intellectual prowess you may think you have.

I enjoy the intellectual debate on this site, please do not ruin it, come back with your point of view once your past grade 8.

and just incase the bawdy reference was lost on you...

bawd·y play_w("B0121500")

(bô
prime.gif
d
emacr.gif
)adj. bawd·i·er, bawd·i·est 1. Humorously coarse; risqué.

2. Vulgar; lewd.

That is all... good day

 
Conceptkid, It is unbelievable how incredibly stupid you are. I wish I could go pick apart everything you have been wrong about and still managed to keep defending it. Rowen and some others have already done a good job of showing you that.

Look, Iraq did have weapons of mass destruction. How do I know this? Well let's just check the military budget in the years of 1983-1985. What I'm talking about is when we funded biological warfare for Iraq. We knew they had weapons, and that was just an excuse. They moved them out before we got there and Bush was left flabbergasted.

I am by no means for the Iraq war, but they did have weapons. Scuds, biological warfare, and other chemical weapons are means of mass destruction.

Also, you've never been to China. You're an idiot if you think they are the current superpower and are more "technologically advanced" than us. Go read about modern day China, please do yourself a favor. They have no economic influence on the world and their cities have shitty life quality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top