George W. Bush -a clear and present danger to the United States
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message


HoustonChronicle.com -- http://www.HoustonChronicle.com | Section:
National
Dec. 16, 2005, 1:30PM

Bush secretly OK'd eavesdropping

Oh, puh-leez (as you mght say)......

Bush's poll numbers are rebounding, the economy is humming, the Iraqis have,
for the third time in a year, demonstrated a greater passion for
representative government [in the face of death threats] than many Americans
do.......

.....and the best the NYT can come up with is a year-old story about NSA
wiretapping, which they -- oops! -- forgot to mention was approved by the
Senate committee, and -- oops! -- forgot to point out just happened to
coincide with the author's book publication. Yet somehow the myth carries
forward that the Old Grey Lady still has some credibility! Sad,..... so
sad.

George W. Bush -a clear and present danger to the United States
 

On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 21:59:36 -0500, "John Gaquin" wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message


HoustonChronicle.com -- http://www.HoustonChronicle.com | Section:
National
Dec. 16, 2005, 1:30PM

Bush secretly OK'd eavesdropping

Oh, puh-leez (as you mght say)......

Bush's poll numbers are rebounding, the economy is humming, the Iraqis have,
for the third time in a year, demonstrated a greater passion for
representative government [in the face of death threats] than many Americans
do.......

....and the best the NYT can come up with is a year-old story about NSA
wiretapping, which they -- oops! -- forgot to mention was approved by the
Senate committee, and -- oops! -- forgot to point out just happened to
coincide with the author's book publication. Yet somehow the myth carries
forward that the Old Grey Lady still has some credibility! Sad,..... so
sad.


,,,and happened to be published on the day the Senate was scheduled to vote on stopping the debate
on the Patriot Act, thus giving the Dems something they could read on the floor. (Those that could
read, that is.)
--
John Herring

Hope your Christmas is Spectacular!
....and your New Year even Better!

George W. Bush -a clear and present danger to the United States
 

On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 21:59:36 -0500, John Gaquin wrote:


Bush secretly OK'd eavesdropping

Oh, puh-leez (as you mght say)......

Bush's poll numbers are rebounding, the economy is humming, the Iraqis
have, for the third time in a year, demonstrated a greater passion for
representative government [in the face of death threats] than many
Americans do.......

And, in case you didn't notice, *if* this story pans out true, this
President committed an impeachable offense.

George W. Bush -a clear and present danger to the United States
 

On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 06:45:38 -0500, Harry Krause wrote:


And, in case you didn't notice, *if* this story pans out true, this
President committed an impeachable offense.


It really doesn't matter. The GOP-controlled House isn't going to take up
impeachment hearings against Bush no matter what. And even if the Dems
capture the House next fall, they're not going to do it either. The best
we can hope for is Bush being bottled up somewhat for the remainder of his
sentence.

Oh, I'm not naive enough to think that he will be impeached, but I am
saying that if this story pans out to be true, it is an impeachable
offense, and publicly noted. As for a GOP controlled House, if this were
to reach critical mass, enough Republicans could bail on this President,
if for no other reason than to cover their own tails. Impeachment
proceedings need to at least look bipartisan. Personally, I believe that
if Hyde had sought more bipartisan support, instead of ramrodding the
Democrats, Clinton might have been convicted.

George W. Bush -a clear and present danger to the United States
 

On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 07:29:13 -0500, Harry Krause wrote:

The way you are separating your comments from mine, two dashes and a
space, is the standard signature delimiter. My newsreader reads your
comments as a signature and cuts them.



Bailing on Bush is all I hope for, though by bailing I simply mean not
supporting him in lockstep as most Repubs in the House have been doing
for the past five years.

What is interesting to me is how the Repubs are reinventing systems,
procedures and rules in Congress to push their agendas, while boobus
Americanus sits home and snores.

I'm more than disappointed. Spying on Americans has been an ongoing fight
between various administrations wanting to take the easy way, and civil
liberties. I don't like it, but I can't say Bush is the first, but an
American President defending torture? I didn't think I'd ever see the day.


Welkome to Republican Amerika.

Fortunately, not all Republicans. This regime shall also pass into
history, the sooner the better.

George W. Bush -a clear and present danger to the United States
 

On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 08:00:28 -0500, thunder wrote:

On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 07:29:13 -0500, Harry Krause wrote:

The way you are separating your comments from mine, two dashes and a
space, is the standard signature delimiter. My newsreader reads your
comments as a signature and cuts them.



Bailing on Bush is all I hope for, though by bailing I simply mean not
supporting him in lockstep as most Repubs in the House have been doing
for the past five years.

What is interesting to me is how the Repubs are reinventing systems,
procedures and rules in Congress to push their agendas, while boobus
Americanus sits home and snores.

I'm more than disappointed. Spying on Americans has been an ongoing fight
between various administrations wanting to take the easy way, and civil
liberties. I don't like it, but I can't say Bush is the first, but an
American President defending torture? I didn't think I'd ever see the day.


Does it bother you that Democrats were involved from the get-go? Do you think those Democrats are
just conservatives in disguise, or could they have had a rationale for their decision? Perhaps there
is more to the story than meets the eye?

BTW, here is a great Christmas gift for some of your buddies.

http://gop.com/store/Detail.aspx?id=15
--
John H

**** May your Christmas be Spectacular!****
*****...and your New Year even Better!*****

George W. Bush -a clear and present danger to the United States
 

On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 09:13:36 -0500, JohnH wrote:


Does it bother you that Democrats were involved from the get-go? Do you
think those Democrats are just conservatives in disguise, or could they
have had a rationale for their decision? Perhaps there is more to the
story than meets the eye?

Bull****, John, Congress wasn't involved, Democrats or Republicans, and
unless you are aware of what exactly was said during that briefing, they
may not have even known. If Congress was involved, it would be a
different story. They have the Constitutional authority to make law. Of
course, any law would be up for judicial review, but that didn't happen
either, did it?

George W. Bush -a clear and present danger to the United States
 

On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 10:28:16 -0500, thunder wrote:

On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 09:13:36 -0500, JohnH wrote:


Does it bother you that Democrats were involved from the get-go? Do you
think those Democrats are just conservatives in disguise, or could they
have had a rationale for their decision? Perhaps there is more to the
story than meets the eye?

Bull****, John, Congress wasn't involved, Democrats or Republicans, and
unless you are aware of what exactly was said during that briefing, they
may not have even known. If Congress was involved, it would be a
different story. They have the Constitutional authority to make law. Of
course, any law would be up for judicial review, but that didn't happen
either, did it?

I posted, yesterday, the paragraph from the NY Times story showing they *were* involved, at least
the Senate Intelligence Committee. I believe I even highlighted the 'both parties' phrase from the
paragraph. Did you miss that?

And, unless you were there, you don't know any more than I do.
--
John H

**** May your Christmas be Spectacular!****
*****...and your New Year even Better!*****

George W. Bush -a clear and present danger to the United States
 

"thunder" wrote in message

And, in case you didn't notice, *if* this story pans out true, this
President committed an impeachable offense.

If what you posit is true -- and I'll stipulate for the moment -- then he
will have to be impeached side by side with at least a majority of the
Senate Intelligence Committee seated at that time, as they approved the
surveillance activity as essential security measures. Personally, I don't
think this event would meet the High Crimes test.

George W. Bush -a clear and present danger to the United States
 

"thunder" wrote in message

...but an
American President defending torture? I didn't think I'd ever see the
day.

Pres Bush was not defending torture, as the press so gleefully loves to
portray. What he was defending was the use of distastefully coercive
interrogation techniques. Surely someone as smart as you can see the
distinction. [If you deny seeing the distinction, I would have to ask who
operates your computer for you.] Torture has been banned by US law for some
time. What the McCain bill does is take political correctness to the
highest level yet achieved.

God knows, we wouldn't want to make our captured enemies feel uncomfortable
now, would we? No demeaning words or actions now, it just wouldn't be
right!