W gave dumb a bad rep. 80% want change.
Posted By: We'll try smart this time. No brainer. nm on 2008-09-10
In Reply to: Life experience tells me 90% over 8 years = - 4 more years. Common sense. Yes? szq
su
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Honestly, it was dumb....twaddle dumb....
x
Change and Hope: Obama wants your change and hopes you enjoy starving.... sm
...while he's partying like a rock star with the glitterati.
Meanwhile, some little old lady is hoping he doesn't get a dog and sends her the dog food instead.
Yes, they're all nuts. The change they'll get is not the change they thought
I want change. Chump change. I'm voting for Obama as far as the pollsters go.
Obama is change you can believe in until you have to take it to the bank.
Our jobs have been offshored until now because of greed. Under Obama and his taxation of small businesses, they will be offshored not because of greed but because of survival.
You could make a difference for our country by not voting for Obama, but instead, if you vote for him, you are selling out to deception. You are embracing a socialist, a communist, a Marxist, a liar, a cheat, and someone who legally cannot run as President of the U.S., much less the Illinois senate. But, you make your choice. You believe the consumate liar and his lies who sat for 20 years under the teachings of a black racist preacher filled with hatred for the U.S., whose association with Bill Ayers is recent and documented down to the fact that Ayers himself wrote Obama's best-selling book (best-selling in the eyes of far left liberals that is), who is a documented member of the socialist party, whose friends and close allies are extremists who not only bomb innocent people and are unrepenetent but who intend to eliminate (kill) 25 million Americans who they cannot "re-educate" in communist ideaology (gosh dog it, those dreadful capitalists), who refuses to hand over a certified copy of his birth certificate and educational records (my goodness, don't you have to provide your birth certificate to any number of entities who want to know if you are legal, i.e., social security, DMVs, etc., and your educational records would show if you had received aid as a foreigner and in 1963 would have shown you were a negro instead of an African-American which Obama's falsified record shows, please speck up on history), and who thinks Joe the Plumber is so stupid not to realize that if he wants to achieve the American dream, he is going to achieve it only if he lets Obama take what he makes to give to those WHO WILL NOT WORK. I'd like to see you, liberals, give a share of your 7.5 cpl to those who don't work as hard as you, but then with Obama, that's what you will have to do. Don't be fooled by his rhetoric that only those making over $250,00 will be taxed. We will all be taxed, and there will be no incentive to work for any of us because we will all have to give up a piece of our pie so those who do not work can have a piece of our pie.
Here is the dividing line, folks. We are at a crossroads in our history. The Lord Jesus puts it this way, "Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction; and there are many who go in by it."
Choose which gate you enter, the wide or the narrow. It not only determines your eternal destination, but it determines the destination of this country. If anyone here calls themself a Christian and can vote for Osambo, I daresay you are a liar and cheat just as he. One cannot be a Christian and vote for a party and a political candidate who is in total rebellion to God's Word. That is a fact, and if you think any differently, then you, too, like the Obamanation, call God a liar. May He have mercy upon your soul. As He makes the rain fall on the just and the unjust because He is no respector of persons, we will all suffer as this country is destroyed and our Constitution that guarantees our freedoms is trampled just as Bill Ayers is pictured standing upon our flag in total disrespect, and we will thank you liberals that we are all in bondage, reduced to third world status, just as the Israelites were in Egypt. Only Obama ain't no Moses but a Muslim and has no favor with God, and there will be no one to lead us to the Promised Land coming from the Democratic party.
I agree with change....change to socialism...
NO THANKS.
Let me dumb it up for you then.
Original thread, second paragraph:
Democrats Robert Wexler of Florida, Luis Gutierrez of Illinois and Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin on Friday distributed a statement, A Case for Hearings, that declares, The issues at hand are too serious to ignore, including credible allegations of abuse of power that if proven may well constitute high crimes and misdemeanors under our constitution. The charges against Vice President Cheney relate to his deceptive actions leading up to the Iraq war, the revelation of the identity of a covert agent for political retaliation, and the illegal wiretapping of American citizens.
Below are 2 bills I pulled in regards to the articles of impeachment submitted to the judiciary committee.
109th CONGRESS
2d Session
H. RES. 1106
Articles of Impeachment against George Walker Bush, President of the United States of America, and other officials, for high crimes and misdemeanors.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
December 8, 2006
Ms. MCKINNEY submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
RESOLUTION
Articles of Impeachment against George Walker Bush, President of the United States of America, and other officials, for high crimes and misdemeanors.
Resolved, That George Walker Bush, President of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following Articles of Impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate:
Articles of Impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in the name of itself and of all the people of the United States of America, against George Walker Bush, President of the United States of America, and other officials, in maintenance and support of its impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanors.
Be it resolved by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled that:
ARTICLE I. FAILURE TO PRESERVE, PROTECT AND DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION
In violation of the oath of office, which reads: `I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States', George Walker Bush, in his conduct while President of the United States has demonstrated a pattern of abuse of office and of executive privilege, and disregard for the Constitution itself.
This conduct includes the following:
Manipulating Intelligence and Lying To Justify War
In violation of the separation of powers under the Constitution and his subsequent obligation to share intelligence with the Congress, George Walker Bush, while serving as President of the United States of America, in preparing the invasion of Iraq, did withhold intelligence from the Congress, by refusing to provide Congress with the full intelligence picture that he was being given, by redacting information by, for example, removing portions of reports such as the August 6, 2001, Presidential Daily Brief, and actively manipulating the intelligence on Iraq's alleged weapons programs by pressuring the Central Intelligence Agency and other intelligence agencies to provide intelligence such that `the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy' as revealed in the `Downing Street Memo'. To this end, President George Walker Bush and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld created the Office of Special Plans inside the Pentagon to override existing intelligence reports by providing unreliable evidence that supported the claim that Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction posed an imminent threat to the United States of America. By justifying the invasion of Iraq with false and misleading statements linking Iraq to the attacks of September 11, 2001, and falsely asserting that Iraq had a nuclear weapons program for which it was importing aluminum tubes and uranium, these assertions being either false, or based on `fixed' intelligence, with the intent to misinform the people and their representatives in Congress in order to gain their support for invading Iraq, denying both the people and their representatives in Congress the right to make an informed choice, George Walker Bush, President of the United States, did commit and was guilty of high crimes against the United States of America.
ARTICLE II. ABUSE OF OFFICE AND OF EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE
In violation of his oath to `faithfully execute the office of President of the United States', George Walker Bush, in his conduct while President of the United States, has consistently demonstrated disregard for that oath by obstructing and hindering the work of Congressional investigative bodies and by seeking to expand the scope of the powers of his office.
This conduct includes the following:
Failure To Uphold Accountability
In abrogation of his responsibility under the oath of office to take care that the Laws be faithfully executed, by which he agreed to act in good faith and accept responsibility for the overall conduct of the Executive Branch, a duty vested in his office alone under the Constitution, George Walker Bush, failed to take responsibility for, investigate or discipline those responsible for an ongoing pattern of negligence, incompetence and malfeasance to the detriment of the American people.
Those whom George Walker Bush, as President of the United States of America, has failed to hold to account include but are not limited to the following top-level officials in his administration:
(a) RICHARD CHENEY- In violation of his oath of office to support and defend the Constitution, Richard Cheney, Vice President of the United States of America, played a key role in manipulating intelligence in the interest of promoting the illegal invasion of Iraq by pressuring analysts at the Central Intelligence Agency to `fix' their intelligence estimates of the danger posed by Iraq in relation to weapons of mass destruction, whereby Richard Cheney, Vice President of the United States, did commit and was guilty of high crimes against the United States of America.
(b) CONDOLEEZZA RICE- In violation of her Constitutional duty to share and provide accurate and truthful intelligence information with the Congress, as former National Security Advisor to the President, did play a leading role in deceiving Congress and the American public by repeating and propagating false statements concerning Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction program, including false information that the purchase of aluminum tubes demonstrated that Iraq was pursuing a nuclear weapons program, false information that Iraq was seeking to purchase uranium and false information that Iraq sought help in developing a chemical and biological weapons program; whereby Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of State of the United States of America, did commit and was guilty of high misdemeanors against the United States of America.
By neglecting to superintend the conduct of these officials and to hold members of the Executive Branch responsible for their negligence or violations of law, George Walker Bush, President of the United States, did commit and was guilty of high misdemeanors against the United States of America.
Wherefore, by their aforementioned conduct, George Walker Bush, Richard Cheney, and Condoleezza Rice warrant impeachment, trial, and removal from office.
ARTICLE III. FAILURE TO ENSURE THE LAWS ARE FAITHFULLY EXECUTED
In violation of his duty under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution of the United States of America to `take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed', George Walker Bush, during his tenure as President of the United States, has violated the letter and spirit of laws and rules of criminal procedure used by civilian and military courts, and has violated or ignored regulatory codes and practices that carry out the law.
This conduct includes the following:
Illegal Domestic Spying
In violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) [50 U.S.C. Chapter 36], George Walker Bush did clandestinely direct the National Security Agency and various other intelligence agencies, in secret and outside the lawful scope of their mandates, for purposes unrelated to any lawful function of his offices, to conduct electronic surveillance of citizens of the United States on U.S. soil without seeking to obtain, before or after, a judicial warrant, thereby subverting the powers of the Congress and the Judiciary by circumventing the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) courts established by Congress, whose express purpose is to check such abuses of executive power, provoking the presiding judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to file a complaint and another judge to resign in protest, the said program having been subsequently ruled illegal (ACLU vs. NSA); he has also concealed the existence of this unlawful program of spying on American citizens from the people and all but a few of their representatives in Congress, even resorting to outright public deceit as on April 20, 2004, when he told an audience in Buffalo, New York: `any time you hear the United States Government talking about wiretap, it requires . . . a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so', whereby said George Walker Bush, President of the United States, did commit and was guilty of high crimes against the United States of America.
In all of this, George Walker Bush has repeatedly and unapologetically misled the American people and has sought to undermine the system of checks and balances established by the Founding Fathers. Wherefore George Walker Bush, by such conduct, and in the interest of saving our Constitution and our democracy from the threat of arbitrary government, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
<BGCOLOR=#FFFFFF"
THIS SEARCH THIS DOCUMENT GO TO
Next Hit Forward New Bills Search
Prev Hit Back HomePage
Hit List Best Sections Help
Contents Display
Resolved, That Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to... (Introduced in House)
HRES 333 IH
110th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. RES. 333
Impeaching Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
April 24, 2007
Mr. KUCINICH submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
RESOLUTION
Impeaching Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.
Resolved, That Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate:
Articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in the name of itself and of the people of the United States of America, against Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States of America, in maintenance and support of its impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanors.
Article I
In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States by fabricating a threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to justify the use of the United States Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security interests, to wit:
(1) Despite all evidence to the contrary, the Vice President actively and systematically sought to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States about an alleged threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction:
(A) `We know they have biological and chemical weapons.' March 17, 2002, Press Conference by Vice President Dick Cheney and His Highness Salman bin Hamad AL Khalifa, Crown Prince of Bahrain at Shaikh Hamad Palace.
(B) `. . . and we know they are pursuing nuclear weapons.' March 19, 2002, Press Briefing by Vice President Dick Cheney and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in Jerusalem.
(C) `And he is actively pursuing nuclear weapons at this time . . .' March 24, 2002, CNN Late Edition interview with Vice President Cheney.
(D) `We know he's got chemicals and biological and we know he's working on nuclear.' May 19, 2002, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.
(E) `But we now know that Saddam has resumed his efforts to acquire nuclear weapons . . . Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt that he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us.' August 26, 2002, Speech of Vice President Cheney at VFW 103rd National Convention.
(F) `Based on intelligence that's becoming available, some of it has been made public, more of it hopefully will be, that he has indeed stepped up his capacity to produce and deliver biological weapons, that he has reconstituted his nuclear program to develop a nuclear weapon, that there are efforts under way inside Iraq to significantly expand his capability.' September 8, 2002, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.
(G) `He is, in fact, actively and aggressively seeking to acquire nuclear weapons.' September 8, 2002, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.
(H) `And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.' March 16, 2003, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.
(2) Preceding the March 2003 invasion of Iraq the Vice President was fully informed that no legitimate evidence existed of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The Vice President pressured the intelligence community to change their findings to enable the deception of the citizens and Congress of the United States.
(A) Vice President Cheney and his Chief of Staff, Lewis Libby, made multiple trips to the CIA in 2002 to question analysts studying Iraq's weapons programs and alleged links to al Qaeda, creating an environment in which analysts felt they were being pressured to make their assessments fit with the Bush administration's policy objectives accounts.
(B) Vice President Cheney sought out unverified and ultimately inaccurate raw intelligence to prove his preconceived beliefs. This strategy of cherry picking was employed to influence the interpretation of the intelligence.
(3) The Vice President's actions corrupted or attempted to corrupt the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate, an intelligence document issued on October 1, 2002, and carefully considered by Congress prior to the October 10, 2002, vote to authorize the use of force. The Vice President's actions prevented the necessary reconciliation of facts for the National Intelligence Estimate which resulted in a high number of dissenting opinions from technical experts in two Federal agencies.
(A) The State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research dissenting view in the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate stated `Lacking persuasive evidence that Baghdad has launched a coherent effort to reconstitute it's nuclear weapons program INR is unwilling to speculate that such an effort began soon after the departure of UN inspectors or to project a timeline for the completion of activities it does not now see happening. As a result INR is unable to predict that Iraq could acquire a nuclear device or weapon.'.
(B) The State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research dissenting view in the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate also stated that `Finally, the claims of Iraqi pursuit of natural uranium in Africa are, in INR's assessment, highly dubious.'.
(C) The State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research dissenting view in the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate references a Department of Energy opinion by stating that `INR accepts the judgment of technical experts at the US Department of Energy (DOE) who have concluded that the tubes Iraq seeks to acquire are poorly suited for use in gas centrifuges to be used for uranium enrichment and finds unpersuasive the arguments advanced by others to make the case that they are intended for that purpose.'.
The Vice President subverted the national security interests of the United States by setting the stage for the loss of more than 3300 United States service members; the loss of 650,000 Iraqi citizens since the United States invasion; the loss of approximately $500 billion in war costs which has increased our Federal debt; the loss of military readiness within the United States Armed Services due to overextension, lack of training and lack of equipment; the loss of United States credibility in world affairs; and the decades of likely blowback created by the invasion of Iraq.
In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore, Vice President Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.
Article II
In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, purposely manipulated the intelligence process to deceive the citizens and Congress of the United States about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda in order to justify the use of the United States Armed Forces against the nation of Iraq in a manner damaging to our national security interests, to wit:
(1) Despite all evidence to the contrary, the Vice President actively and systematically sought to deceive the citizens and the Congress of the United States about an alleged relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda:
(A) `His regime has had high-level contacts with Al Qaeda going back a decade and has provided training to Al Qaeda terrorists.' December 2, 2002, Speech of Vice President Cheney at the Air National Guard Senior Leadership Conference.
(B) `His regime aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaeda. He could decide secretly to provide weapons of mass destruction to terrorists for use against us.' January 30, 2003, Speech of Vice President Cheney to 30th Political Action Conference in Arlington, Virginia.
(C) `We know he's out trying once again to produce nuclear weapons and we know that he has a long-standing relationship with various terrorist groups, including the Al Qaeda organization.' March 16, 2003, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.
(D) `We learned more and more that there was a relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda that stretched back through most of the decade of the ྖs, that it involved training, for example, on biological weapons and chemical weapons . . .' September 14, 2003, NBC Meet the Press interview with Vice President Cheney.
(E) `Al Qaeda had a base of operation there up in Northeastern Iraq where they ran a large poisons factory for attacks against Europeans and U.S. forces.' October 3, 2003, Speech of Vice President Cheney at Bush-Cheney ཀ Fundraiser in Iowa.
(F) `He also had an established relationship with Al Qaeda providing training to Al Qaeda members in areas of poisons, gases, and conventional bombs.' October 10, 2003, Speech of Vice President Cheney to the Heritage Foundation.
(G) `Al Qaeda and the Iraqi intelligence services have worked together on a number of occasions.' January 9, 2004, Rocky Mountain News interview with Vice President Cheney.
(H) `I think there's overwhelming evidence that there was a connection between Al Qaeda and the Iraqi government.' January 22, 2004, NPR: Morning Edition interview with Vice President Cheney.
(I) `First of all, on the question of--of whether or not there was any kind of relationship, there clearly was a relationship. It's been testified to; the evidence is overwhelming.' June 17, 2004, CNBC: Capital Report interview with Vice President Cheney.
(2) Preceding the March 2003 invasion of Iraq the Vice President was fully informed that no credible evidence existed of a working relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda, a fact articulated in several official documents, including:
(A) A classified Presidential Daily Briefing ten days after the September 11, 2001, attacks indicating that the United States intelligence community had no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the September 11th attacks and that there was `scant credible evidence that Iraq had any significant collaborative ties with Al Qaeda'.
(B) Defense Intelligence Terrorism Summary No. 044-02, issued in February 2002 by the United States Defense Intelligence Agency, which challenged the credibility of information gleaned from captured al Qaeda leader al-Libi. The DIA report also cast significant doubt on the possibility of a Saddam Hussein-al-Qaeda conspiracy: `Saddam's regime is intensely secular and is wary of Islamic revolutionary movements. Moreover, Baghdad is unlikely to provide assistance to a group it cannot control.'.
(C) A January 2003 British intelligence classified report on Iraq that concluded that `there are no current links between the Iraqi regime and the al-Qaeda network'.
The Vice President subverted the national security interests of the United States by setting the stage for the loss of more than 3,300 United States service members; the loss of 650,000 Iraqi citizens since the United States invasion; the loss of approximately $500 billion in war costs which has increased our Federal debt; the loss of military readiness within the United States Armed Services due to overextension, lack of training and lack of equipment; the loss of United States credibility in world affairs; and the decades of likely blowback created by the invasion of Iraq.
In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
Wherefore, Vice President Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, is guilty of an impeachable offense warranting removal from office.
Article III
In his conduct while Vice President of the United States, Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has openly threatened aggression against the Republic of Iran absent any real threat to the United States, and done so with the United States proven capability to carry out such threats, thus undermining the national security of the United States, to wit:
(1) Despite no evidence that Iran has the intention or the capability of attacking the United States and despite the turmoil created by United States invasion of Iraq, the Vice President has openly threatened aggression against Iran as evidenced by the following:
(A) `For our part, the United States is keeping all options on the table in addressing the irresponsible conduct of the regime. And we join other nations in sending that regime a clear message: We will not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon.' March 7, 2006, Speech of Vice President Cheney to American Israel Public Affairs Committee 2006 Policy Conference.
(B) `But we've also made it clear that all options are on the table.' January 24, 2007, CNN Situation Room interview with Vice President Cheney.
(C) `When we--as the President did, for example, recently--deploy another aircraft carrier task force to the Gulf, that sends a very strong signal to everybody in the region that the United States is here to stay, that we clearly have significant capabilities, and that we are working with friends and allies as well as the international organizations to deal with the Iranian threat.' January 29, 2007, Newsweek interview with Vice President Cheney.
(D) `But I've also made the point and the President has made the point that all options are still on the table.' February 24, 2007, Vice President Cheney at Press Briefing with Australian Prime Minister in Sydney, Australia.
(2) The Vice President, who repeatedly and falsely claimed to have had specific, detailed knowledge of Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction capabilities, is no doubt fully aware of evidence that demonstrates Iran poses no real threat to the United States as evidenced by the following:
(A) `I know that what we see in Iran right now is not the industrial capacity you can [use to develop a] bomb.' Mohamed ElBaradei, Director General of International Atomic Energy Agency, February 19, 2007.
(B) Iran indicated its `full readiness and willingness to negotiate on the modality for the resolution of the outstanding issues with the IAEA, subject to the assurances for dealing with the issues in the framework of the Agency, without the interference of the United Nations Security Council'. IAEA Board Report, February 22, 2007.
(C) `. . . so whatever they have, what we have seen today, is not the kind of capacity that would enable them to make bombs.' Mohamed El Baradei, Director General of International Atomic Energy Agency, February 19, 2007.
(3) The Vice President is fully aware of the actions taken by the United States towards Iran that are further destabilizing the world as evidenced by the following:
(A) The United States has refused to engage in meaningful diplomatic relations with Iran since 2002, rebuffing both bilateral and multilateral offers to dialogue.
(B) The United States is currently engaged in a military buildup in the Middle East that includes the increased presence of the United States Navy in the waters near Iran, significant United States Armed Forces in two nations neighboring to Iran, and the installation of anti-missile technology in the region.
(C) News accounts have indicated that military planners have considered the B61-11, a tactical nuclear weapon, as one of the options to strike underground bunkers in Iran.
(D) The United States has been linked to anti-Iranian organizations that are attempting to destabilize the Iranian government, in particular the Mujahideen-e Khalq (MEK), even though the state department has branded it a terrorist organization.
(E) News accounts indicate that United States troops have been ordered into Iran to collect data and establish contact with anti-government groups.
(4) In the last three years the Vice President has repeatedly threatened Iran. However, the Vice President is legally bound by the U.S. Constitution's adherence to international law that prohibits threats of use of force.
(A) Article VI of the United States Constitution states, `This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land.' Any provision of an international treaty ratified by the United States becomes the law of the United States.
(B) The United States is a signatory to the United Nations Charter, a treaty among the nations of the world. Article II, Section 4 of the United Nations Charter states, `All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.' The threat of force is illegal.
(C) Article 51 lays out the only exception, `Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.' Iran has not attacked the United States; therefore any threat against Iran by the United States is illegal.
The Vice President's deception upon the citizens and Congress of the United States that enabled the failed United States invasion of Iraq forcibly altered the rules of diplomacy such that the Vice President's recent belligerent actions towards Iran are destabilizing and counterproductive to the national security of the United States.
In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
Wherefore Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
Did I say they were dumb?
I just have a problem with women (even Oprah) demeaning themselves for a pageant that is really just for men to drool over women. Oooh, look at me - I'm purdy.
I suggest some of you go to the following link and read what the people are thinking. I read just about all of them and the one that strikes me is a Canadian making a comment about this election.
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/08/29/1307122.aspx
I may be dumb s/m
but I'm smart enough to read the handwriting on the wall.
VOTING FOR LOU DOBBS FOR PRESIDENT!!!! Add T. Boone Pickens for VP!!!!!
now you are just being dumb
You are putting words in my mouth. You know nothing about me. I asked for some backup when people post things. You finally provided it, after whining in 3 other posts. I never ever claimed to be an ACORN fan. I just was trying to get the point across that if you post backup, you look a little smarter, but I guess it took you a while to get that ... Big shock.
How could someone so dumb
do so many good things for her state? If she was that stupid, her state would be bankrupt like California is.
dumb statement
she gets what she deserves? All the woman wants is to meet with the person who is supposed to be our servant, the person WE put into office. That is not asking too much, in my opinion. It is not like he is a king or dictator. He is supposed to be working for US. If he had met with her, she would have went home and none of this shooting guns, crashing into crosses, etc., would have happened. He is the reason she is getting all this press coverage. Gets what she deserves? What a dumb statement. He should get what HE deserves, impeachment, a criminal trial and imprisonment for this illegal immoral war of his.
I felt dumb because
I had to look up officiousness. But then I found this:
"Officiousness is used about 3 times out of a sample of 100 million words spoken or written in English" and then I did not feel so dumb. LOL
It is perfect though.
More dumb stuff.
x
Really dumb, 57 states out of 58!!
xx
No, I am not dumb, and I am not "assuming"
the same things you obviously are. How do you explain starting at the bottom? Do you think he thinks the middle class is the bottom? You really think that?
I think we are beating a dead horse here. You have your opinion, not going to change. I have my opinion, not going to change. I do regret that you think someone must be "dumb" to have my interpretation, or that I am acting "deliberately dumb." Thank you so much for that assessment.
Thank you! Maybe America isn't so dumb after all.......nm
x
Why do those who call others dumb object so much...
..to having their own dumbness actually demonstrated in an undeniable way? You start that nonsense, it's going to come back and bite you on the butt. And usually, it's just too easy to make that happen.
Oh and by the way, who's avoiding the issue by launching a personal attack on someone else? Oh my, the very person who is complaining about someone else skirting the issue? Very typical. In fact, I didn't skirt anything. I was actually alive during the Gulf of Tonkin incident and my brother was in line for the draft at the time. My family was following events quite closely and even now continue to read and research the events of the VN war. You, my dunderhead, are out of line - and as usual, display a regrettable lack of character and credibility.
This whole thing is dumb and idiotic
you just go back several months and pull out an obscure post from somebody passionately talking about their support. She didn't sign any dotted line for you. You all are OBSSESSED to the point it's scary. Maybe she will go back...gosh this is sooooooo freakin' stupid.
You seem to be enjoying your dumb little games.
Illustrates the high intellectual functioning behind your posts.
That and the fact that you have been too many times to recount to not bash on this board and to be respectful. In looking at other postings I see you are unable to follow this very very simple request from the moderator.
Is'n't it time to grow up a little, Nan and AG?
I think privatizing SS is a dumb idea and
you think it's a dumb idea but, hey, I guess all the rabid Republican posters on this board are so wealthy they don't need to worry about mundane things like Social Security, affordable insurance,homes, jobs and stuff like that. Guess they're like their hero and own so many houses they've lost count.
Dumb and uneducated followers?
Most Americans do not want to take that step back 50 years to buy into the bigotry you are promoting. Others never left it behind them, or simply passed it along to their children. Either way, that kind of thinking belongs WAY behind us back in the annals of some of the most shameful days US history ever recorded.
I hope that Hillary isn't dumb enough
to accept the job as SOS. It would be political suicide. In four, maybe eight years, Obama will be just as hated as Bush is right now and anyone associated with his administration might as well have the plague. I'm hoping she realizes this and stays in her senate job for now.
You said DUMB AS A GOURD. That's bashing.
Raed your own message, R-tard.
Yes, we know who is pulling the strings on the dumb
marionette puppet.
Yes, we know who is pulling the strings on the dumb
marionette puppet.
Because they're not dumb enough to be sucked in
Perhaps, eh?
Playing dumb is not your strong suit. nm
nmnmnm
Obiously. Dumb and blind to boot.
need some substance here....white matter gymnastics, intelligence, logic, coherehnce, pertinence. Bye-bye, dead thread deadhead.
Why are you starting these dumb @$$ threads on the liberal board?
x
Yep, pretty dumb to claim you have foreign policy experience from 3 weeks in Pakistan!!!...
Obama started off saying he was confident in his FOREIGN POLICY experience ("Foreign policy is the area where I am probably most confident that I know more and understand the world better than Senator Clinton or Senator McCain"). He then proceeded to talk about his visit to Pakistan.
SO WHAT? I visited and lived in several foreign countries, too. Does that mean I understand foreign policy better than someone who may have spent less time but has had actual interaction and policy discussions with those countries' leaders? And with the leaders of 80 countries?
If 3 weeks in Pakistan is the extent of Obama's foreign policy credentials, then I am way more qualified on the "foreign policy" front.
My point is that Obama's claim is ridiculous. Better that he stick to his "better judgement" mantra, since the "3 weeks abroad = foreign policy experience" is just pathetically weak.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/04/obamas-college.html
How about the one God gave us?
*You reap what you sow.* That's what they've done.
Anyhoo, thought you said you were leaving. Hmmmmmmmm.... they didn't have a real high regard for the truth, either.
To anyone else reading this: This person isn't even trying to hide the fact that he/she is baiting us. Let's not permit them to do to the Liberal board what they did to the Conservative board.
Just don't read this person's posts any more. They said they were leaving. They aren't doing that, and their only intention is to incite. Let's take the high road and not fall for their crap!
You just gave yourself away, gt. SM
LMFAO = gt and a whole lot of other posters. You don't fool me.
Yes, and he said he gave her a ZERO.
nm
Oh, you just gave me the goosebumps!
We would indeed be better citizens of the world :o)
it gave me chills to see it on TV
x
if someone gave kc a pop quiz
miserably - ha
What if they gave an election and nobody came?
Do you think this will be a high voter turn-out year? Voter registrations are waaaay up this year. (Barring, of course, the fraudulent registrations which will hopefully have been resoved by election day.)
It's certainly been the most hotly contested campaign season I can recall - and I've been voting since the late 70s. There's so much bravado and blustering coming from both camps, and the media clearly chose their darling many moons ago, it seems like people will either be so sick of it, or apathetic about the outcome, that a lot of folks simply won't bother to show up.
I know there's been a massive push to register young voters. Our college campus has been crawling with people trying to stir up support for a certain candidate. My daughter and her friends are apporached every time they attend an event, from football games to local band open mic nights. But do you think everyone will actually turn up on election day?
And this may be totally UN-PC, but I'm not so sure everybody SHOULD vote. I mean, if you're too lazy to register, are you really going to be doing your due diligence and educating yourself about each candidate's policies and proposals?
What do you all think about it?
I did that below. Also gave the name of the site.
.
Exactly, he never gave a definitive
answer to one question tonight. For that matter, he never does. It is always beat around the bush and then "lets talk about the issues people want to hear" and then never tell us anything. You never get a straightforward answer from him or from any of his constituents. No one can tell you what he plans to do or how he plans to do it.
Huh? What do you mean cases? He gave me...sm
his opinion, very simple case he said, open and shut. He is my brother, I didn't ask for a $500 legal consultation. Good grief.
Well now....who do you think gave them that authority?
That would be your democratically controlled congress. Before the bill, the secretary of the treasury couldn't do squat. So if Bush IS making all these decisions, it is because YOUR dem congress allowed him to. So why not go hold THEIR feet to the fire??
Just who gave Indonesia the right
to denounce a U.S. citizen's AMERICAN citizenship. Who cares what Indonesia did. At the time Obama was a kid for crying out loud and the school or government could put whatever they wanted on whatever they wanted. This citizenship non-issue gets more absurd with every post about it.
Oh, please, I gave as much as I could for Obama and I
am not a member of ACORN. You people just will not give up and know - yes we can and did!!!
OMG, you gave me a big laugh. And what about
the black/red dress Michelle wore when O held his victory speech in Illinois? Comments were: Different, astonishing etc......????
I gave you a joke......maybe you should
aim your bile at the first poster. While picking up ammo for my handgun last weekend - the salesman said "better stock up before the brownies come for us" - that's a redneck...............aka a$$hole
Hey, I gave you a pass on
'most of the people there was'. Or was that intentional?
We don't usually rag on hurried typo errors because we have no spell check on this forum. But not bothering to look up a spelling or making a rookie grammatical error are both noteworthy.
Now that gave me cold chills. SM
Mostly because I feel this very sentiment oozing from this board. Man, I hope none of the terrorists read here.
In the case you gave if the teacher said...sm
*I'm not in any way trying to tell you what you should believe of think but I am going to put this out there for you thing about...Some people believe Jesus Christ died and was born again for the sins of man.*
I still wouldn't see the problem. You have to listen to the entire statement. He said pointedly that he was not trying to tell the students how they should believe. But, if all you got over the newswaves were the butt end *Jesus died and was born again for the sins of man* then the entire point would be lost anyway.
That said, I think this teacher needs to find a job in a political science class where his comments would be more appropriate. I don't think he should be fired but a) moved to a political science class or b) told to stick to the cirriculum. I don't think either will be enough for those out for blood on this case.
I gave you two facts which you discounted...
a video that is a fact and a 747 that is a fact. If you want to think it just appeared in the desert for no good reason...that is up to you. If you see a video that is obviously Muhamed Atta and a man identified by all intelligence sources as being part of Hussein's government, and that they were probably just old buds having tea, that is also up to you. Both of those were reported on CNN, which is NOT a far right wing anything, much the opposite. Even dear old Wesley Clark admitted to both, and he is about as far left as you can get. And, my friend, your bias causes you to discard fact simply because it does not fit your agenda. What you are posting is your opinion based on what you accept or do not accept from what you read, just like mine is. What I have not discounted is video evidence and a 747. Makes me wonder what it will take to open your eyes if 9-11 did not do it. Oh yeah. I forgot. 9-11 had nothing to do with Saddam Hussein. Yeah. Uh huh. I had almost forgotten how condescending you can be in your postings. Thanks for reminding me. Good day!
Ok, I was wrong...gave you too much credit.
Go ahead and Bush-bash. Probably giving someone else a rest.
I gave source in first line of
post. Also said if you believe they are reliable on John Edwards, then you must believe they are reliable on SP. hence, goose, gander.
|
