[Liberator]

mik, as I'm sure you are aware, he was simply trying to make an old man feel good on his birthday, Mr. Thurmond is 100 after all.  

I'm not defending it, but I understand the spirit in which it was used.  

Mr. Lott was crucified by his opposition for the statement, there are few on the Right that would do the same.

[mikhael]

You say that--and I agree with it: Lott was just trying to make the old guy feel good. What happened to Lott wrong. He should have stayed right where he was, but politics took him down, but it wasn't PARTISAN politics.

If you look at the record, it was the GOP that excoriated Lott first, not the Democrats. Further it was the GOP that was calling for him to be removed from his position of authority, not the Democrats.   Lott was pulled down by GOP infighting, plain and simple. But hey, why let a little thing like the facts get in the way of declaring the Right would never do such a thing?

None of that, however, obviates the point made: he should have known what Thurmond stood for when running for President. His ignorance, is no excuse. By the same token, Shrub's protestations of ignrance are likewise no excuse. He should have known better. He should have done his research better. In short: he should have done his job better.

[Rictor]

To put it simply, Clinton got impeached for getting a blowjob.

Now, Dubya:

Quite obviously stole the election. Crimes enough for impeachement right there. But, lets go on. Presided over the largest deficit in American history, after inheriting a nice, fat surplus from Clinton. He quite possibly KNEW that thousands of Americans were about to die, and did nothing. Perhaps you say he didn't KNOW, well know we realize that even if we take this more charitable stance, he still *should* have known. Personally I hold the former to be true, but either one is very, very damning. He then proceeded to to invade Afghanistan, and failed to catch the man who he claimed was responsible for 9/11. But there's more.

After failing top catch bin Laden, he decides to finish his daddy's war and invade Saddam. We are given literally mountains of evidence to show that Saddam has biological and chemical, as well as nuclear weapons. He fails to get any significant international support, and simply invades anyway.

Next, we have one year of occupation, which kills over 600 Americans, as well as thousands of Iraqis. But, still no WMD are found. He then backtracks, trying to weasel out of his outlandish claims about WMD stockpiles, and the press cooperates as always. Right, then the Kurds hand over Saddam, and everyone has a nice few days. Yay! But still no weapons.

Now, over the past several months, we have more and more evidence coming to light that Dubya knew full well there were no WMD, and lied to the American people, Congress as well as the international community. Not to mention that little spying fiasco at the United Nations. Through all this, over 15,000 innocent Iraqis have died, but who cares about them, right?

________

I'm leaving quite a bit out, like the Enron and Worldcom scandals, as well as such tasty tidbits as the illegal detention of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay, and Dubya attrocious environmental policies (Kyoto etc).

This has got to be one of the worst track records for any US President, ever. And you're telling me he shouldn't be impeached? While Billy was bad, compared to **** he's an angel.

No, Dubya should not be impeached. Of this, I am certain. he should be raped, shot and burned at the stake, and his execution broadcast to every corner of the Earth, so that the people of this world can at least have some hope in justice. Once Kerry of whoever takes over, the normal process of being ****ed up the ass will resume, but by slightly less cruel tormentors, if nothing else.

[diamondgeezer]

Purely out of curiosity, do the self-proclaimed political exparts here reckon Shrub will be re-elected one way or the other?

[Rictor]

I'm not self-proclaimed, how dare you! I'll have you know, I got a "Terrific Tiger" award in my history class in Grade 12. I'de like to see your credentials Mr. Know it all.

:D

I think he will be re-elected. When they lift the curtains and out comes bin Laden, he'll get his crucial advantage. Either way, he's got the whole setup rigged again, via Diebold and a million other little kinks I don't know about. I mean, if he can be as bad a President as I''ve outlined above, and still get high approval ratings, that speaks volumes about the people who are supposed to be voting in November. Nevermind that his opponent is, well, obviously. He's Kerry, for which I give him slightly better odds at winning the elections than I do my cat.

As I said, I'm hoping he does get re-elected or atleast manages to steal it again, hopefully with a big scandal and so forth.

[Janos]

I wonder what he will make when re-election no longer matters?
Outlaw condoms? [see the recent "outlaw porn" attempt, lol]