Cheney

[WillyBWright]

Re: Cheney

There is just one simple question that comes to mind when it comes to everyone blindly defending Cheney's refusal to cooperate with an oversight function regarding proper handling of YOUR country's most guarded secrets. What possible justification is there??? I haven't seen one single solitary offering of a plausible explanation for this BS! All the rest is just so much endless Hot Air that never addresses this one simple question! All I'm asking is for a logical reason and I haven't heard one from anybody anywhere. Just the usual mindless rhetoric and finger-pointing to redirect the attention from THIS ONE SIMPLE QUESTION. Why SHOULDN'T Cheney cooperate, Hmmmmm? It's the Natrional Freaking Archives for crying out loud! Glorified LIBRARIANS! There is nothing remotely politically partisan about the National Freaking Archives. Except maybe in the minds of the Perpetually Paranoid Neocons.

 

[POINTER94]

Re: Cheney

I haven't seen a reasonable explaination for the investigation! Liberals always feel entitled to whatever they ask for, the problem is, not everyone wants to play their little game. And that little thing called separation of powers, just gets in the way. Unlike separation of church and state, this one is for real! Puppetmasters who squeel like schoolgirls when people won't dance to their music, and then feign the moral highground, shouldn't be taken seriously. I think the whole thing is funny.

 

[BoatBuoy]

Re: Cheney

I seethingly detest Cheney. As far as I'm concerned, the wrong one got shot on that bird hunting trip a couple of years ago. But in all fairness, this was a Presidential executive order, not a law passed by Congress. It seems to me, that all that has to happen is for POTUS to amend his own order to exempt his and the VP's office.

 

[12Footer]

Re: Cheney

I do too, as does Cheney, no doubt. A litigious joke.. typical liberal harrasment. Why ANYONE would submit themselves to the office of president or VP with this band of trolls lurking in the halls is beyond me.

 

[WillyBWright]

Re: Cheney

You Neocons are really sadly MISinformed about this. This was an EXECUTIVE ORDER by PRESIDENT GEORGE WALKER BUSH! It IS NOT a Congressional function. It IS NOT a Supreme Court function. It IS NOT a DNC function. It IS NOT a MSM function. IT IS YOUR VERY OWN LEADER'S FUNCTION! Any President with any kind of guts would fire any subordinate that categorically refuses to follow an EXECUTIVE ORDER! But hey, we're talking about Dubya here. Cheney's flunky, obviously. This is just one more act of defiance to prove it beyond any shadow of doubt. Any other conclusion is Pure Fantasy!

Everybody with working brain cells should be POd about this. Especially you Bush supporters! Cheney repetedly thumbs his nose at Dubya and obviously has his own agenda. You die-hard Bushies especially should be calling Cheney "Traitor"! But I suppose that would leave Bush actually in charge and things are strange enough already. OOPS! I almost forgot about President Rove.

 

[12Footer]

Re: Cheney

Your opinion is apparent, and it logically follows the course of your gihaad againt the present admin.. sick and twisted, but logical in a sick and twisted way. "Dang the torpeedees and the constitution -- FULL SPEEED AHEAD!!!" LOL
I would expect no less from you.

 

[POINTER94]

Re: Cheney

I think Willy forgot that President Bush is HIS President. On that bright side that makes Richard Cheney Willy's Vice President.

 

[treedancer]

Re: Cheney

Quote 12footer


Your opinion is apparent, and it logically follows the course of your gihaad againt the present admin.. sick and twisted, but logical in a sick and twisted way. "Dang the torpeedees and the constitution -- FULL SPEEED AHEAD!!!

President Bush, when he was sworn in had his hand on the bible and stated he would defend and uphold the Constitution, now he has made it clear that he will not let the Constitution get in the way of expanding the powers of his office. In my opinion loyalty to your country means alliance to the Constitution, the bill of rights and the separation of powers.

The president has ignored habeas corpus, on top of that he claims unconstitutional powers to arrest and detain someone indefinitely, with no warrant, and not presenting charges to a judge. In my opinion this is the most dangerous abuse of all. Quite a few citizens are not concerned because they think that anything goes to get at the terrorist. This is faulty thinking as the administration has admitted many of the detainees are not terrorist. Many are innocent people kidnapped by tribal leaders that got pissed off at them for who knows what, and gave them to the U.S. for a bounty.

Here is another thing the Bush Administration is doing that is unconstitutional. The President claims that as CIC, he can ignore the law and spy on the citizenry of this country, and warrants be damned. This is another case of the citizens thinking my ox isn’t getting gored why should I worry. This attitude misses the point in a large way. You are seeing an example of that happening now, with Vice President Cheney, he thinks that he can ignore something that the President established in 2003,and the President says its OK ****, have at it, the Constitution don’t apply to us, after all its only a piece of paper.,

Now how about his use of the "signing statements", Under Bush this practice has exploded. President Bush has used signing statements more times all of the previous presidents combined. President Bush uses the statements not to protect presidential powers, but to nullify acts of Congress, such as Senator McCain's law against torture. Bush is using signing statements to turn the presidency into a dictatorship in which the executive is not accountable to laws passed by Congress. So what’s next announcing that the President is not accountable to elections either?

It’s About A Lot More Than A Piece of Paper"

 

[12Footer]

Re: Cheney

It's getting even better
Treedancer, understand that it's not just the silliness of the attacks, but the grotesque rage of the left, and their zeal here.
I guess Cheney aint no Rove who will simply bend-over and take one for the team. This should be good

 

[treedancer]

Re: Cheney

Quote 12footer


I guess Cheney aint no Rove who will simply bend-over and take one for the team. This should be good


This we can agree on, think now would be a good time to get some Orville Redenbacher stock?

 

[QC]

Re: Cheney

I seethingly detest Cheney. As far as I'm concerned, the wrong one got shot on that bird hunting trip a couple of years ago. But in all fairness, this was a Presidential executive order, not a law passed by Congress. It seems to me, that all that has to happen is for POTUS to amend his own order to exempt his and the VP's office.

Thank you BoatBouy for applying the law instead of emotion. I don't think the wording requires any changes as is, but at least you understand that this is nothing Constitutional, or Congressional, or Judicial or warrants any media coverage.

BTW, as one of Willy's and treedancer's brethren, could you please volunteer to hold a training session by Private Message? Quickly please as this might alleviate a lot of silly threads . . . Thanks.

 

[WillyBWright]

Re: Cheney

I can't help but notice that nobody has offered a reasonable answer to the one simple question.
Wutta suprise!

 

[RubberFrog]

Re: Cheney

Perhaps it's because you are seeking an answer to an unreasonable question.

 

[POINTER94]

Re: Cheney

Cheney's kickin' puppies, Cheney's kickin' puppies. Look!! Look!!!

 

[WillyBWright]

Re: Cheney

"Why shouldn't **** Cheney comply with an Executive Order" is Unreasonable? Huh???

It's not unreasonable. Just unfathomable by the politically inclined. It's too dang simple. How can you apply side-stepping and stonewalling to a Simple Question? Simple Questions and Politics are diametrically opposed concepts. Asking a politician to answer a simple question is like expecting a cop to understand the concept of Sarcasm. It just don't compute! The brain cells just aren't aligned in such a manner as to comprehend.

Oh, wait a minute. I get what you're saying. Requiring **** Cheney to conform to anything legal is Unreasonable. Now I get it. How Neocon of you.

I think this is the perfect example of Bush Administration Hypocracy! Not only do they not feel compelled to conform to the laws placed upon them by our founding fathers, they don't even feel compelled to conform to their own placed upon themselves. Just one more example that makes the Bush Administration an American Humiliation of epic proportion! Shame On US For Tolerating It!

 

[QC]

Re: Cheney

Yawn . . .

 

[RubberFrog]

Re: Cheney

Do I fart now, or later?

 

[WillyBWright]

Re: Cheney

Not til you walk in front of Nancy Pelosi's office. For her "Impeachment is off the table" stance, save-up a few and let 'em fly. I have a great recipe for baked beans.