| NYT | 0 | |
| Miami Herald | 0 | |
| Don Surber | 0 | |
| AP | 0 | |
| WaPo | Obama Urges Groups to Stop Attacks [on Dems who oppose ObamaCare] |
0 |
Audacity of Truth
"Change" You Can Believe In:
"Nixon didn’t try to do that. They couldn't control (the media). They didn’t try. [...] What the hell do they think we are, puppets?"
- Liberal opinion writer Helen Thomas, describing the Obama admin's penchant for heavily scripting public appearances & press conferences - 7/1/09
Dems throw red meat to the base
… and pledge a “probe” (but not impeachment – whew! wipes brow) if they take control of Congress in the fall elections:
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Democrats will launch a series of investigations of the Bush administration if they take control of Congress in November but are not out to impeach President George W. Bush, a top Democrat said on Sunday.
House of Representatives Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi said Democrats would hold hearings on the use of intelligence in the lead-up to the Iraq war and investigate the high price of energy and prescription drugs if they win the extra 15 seats they need for a House majority in the mid-term elections.
But Pelosi denied Republican claims that her party would move quickly to impeach Bush.
“I said we’d be having hearings on the war, we’d have hearings. But I don’t see us going to a place of impeachment,” Pelosi said in an interview on NBC’s Meet the Press. “Investigation does not equate to impeachment. Investigation is the requirement of Congress. It is about checks and balances.”
Riiiiiiiiight. “I don’t see us going to a place of impeachment.” Now that’s rather presumptuous of Rep. Pelosi, don’t you think? What she’s saying here is that “we’ll have a probe, but I don’t see us impeaching the President.” But aren’t probes of politicians generally designed to find out if there has been any willful wrongdoing on the part of the politician and whether or not he needs to be censured, hauled up on charges, and/or impeached? My translation of what Pelosi said is “we know he hasn’t done anything to impeach him over, but we’ll “probe” him to make the base happy.” Either that, or she’s lying when she says they aren’t looking to impeach the President in order to fool people who might actually take her at her word.
I hope the Republicans run with this and use it in their campaigning, just to show that the Dems plan to “probe” the President even though the House minority leader apparently either doesn’t believe Bush has done anything wrong or is pulling a fast one on the American people. Take your pick.
(Hat tip: Right Wing News)
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Trackbacks
17 Responses to “Dems throw red meat to the base”
Comments
Blogads
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of ST's advertisers, nor do their opinions necessarily reflect ST's. Stats
Eh, the last time they tried to see if they had enough for support for an ‘impeachment’, they caught some blowbaack.
It looks as if they’ve learned at least a small measure of caution. Now they won’t use the word itself until they actually think they might have a chance, and they’re not going to think that until they gather the proper intel first. Or so they seem to imply here….
Fortunately for the Big Boss, their sources of information are often each other or those that say the nicest things about them. Not the most… accurate of information.
But I hear that the move to impeach may gain momentum if they can get someone to say Bush made unwanted sexual advances. Everyone knows that sex is the only real impeachable offense. Corruption, Cronyism and Incompetence just don’t rise to the level of oral sex.
Clinton wasn’t impeached for oral sex, but for obstruction of justice and perjury. Get that straight, and regardless of the fact he didn’t get removed from office for it, he did get disbarred. Obviously someone, even lawyers, felt he had been proven guilty of something serious enough to yank his law license over.
Democrats are still whining and pissing about this, and they won’t be satisfied until they get “even” (in the childlike way they have of thinking) by ginning up an impeachment of a Republican president regardless of the validity of the charges. To them, it’s all about the childish, immature thought of “wah , the Repubs were mean to us so we need to get back at them!”
What would be the results of said “investigations”? If Bush is considered guilty of something like negligence or lying what will the Democrats do? Just say it in a report or go further?
Has anyone else noticed the similarity in tactics between the Dems election recounts and the continual reinvestigation of Bush? In elections, they keep recounting until they get the result they want, by whatever nefarious means necessary, then they don’t want any further recounts. In this, apparently, despite the numerous investigations and panels that have looked into prewar intel and such coming up with no evidence of lying or obsfucation, they want to keep investigating until they find what they want, or until they get a biased enough group to come up with the conclusion they want. Same thing with the Democratic prosecutor after Delay, keep going to different grand juries until you find one that will do what you want.
Cynical, partisan power politics at it’s finest.
I can’t wait till there’s accountability in this government.
Good catch. When they aren’t happy with the results they can’t be wrong. They must not have to change their message or thought process….
Yeah, andrew. I can’t wait for Kennedys to get thrown in jail when they drive under the influence like everyone else. I also can’t wait for Democrats to be forced out of congress on a mere allegation, too.
“…and investigate the high price of energy and prescription drugs…”
What on Earth does the Congress have to do with either of those things? This is not a Soviet, or Socialist economy. Thay have no right to “investigate” such things. What will the Dumocrtas do? Raise, once again, the bogus cry of “Price Gouging”?
When will Americans get off their knees and throw these mini-Tyrants out of office?
Ah yes, endless re-investigations into Iraq prewar intel, let’s throw the 2000 election in to boot!
Todays Democrats, attacking yesterday’s problems tomorrow!
- Interesting Factoid…. according to the latest cable TV polls more Democrats/Liberals watch FOX news than CNN. Aside from the fact that Blitzer looks like an escapee from a funeral home, no doubt even they get tired of the monotonous drone of “get Bush” lies, and feel compeled to get the truth once in awhile when the yammering noise inside the “star chamber” gets too much for even them.
- Bang
“I can’t wait for Kennedys to get thrown in jail when they drive under the influence like everyone else.”
Oh. That’s personal accountability. That can wait till another day.
Isn’t the last throes of desperation bargaining? Doesn’t this seem just smack of desperation on the Dems part??
“elect us and we will probe the President” 
At least this President isn’t probing interns, or getting sued in sexual harassment cases, and then lying to grand juries, just to set the record straight on exactly why the previous guy was impeached. If this guy was a CEO and a major Republican donor, they would of howled for his blood, but since it was Billy Bob our first black President it is only about sex. Riiiighhht – Lorica
Also didn’t 3 Dems get indicted last week on criminal charges of bribery?? William Jefferson, Dem LA, got his due or is about to for his scams??? Yes personal responsiblity I can’t wait until the rest of the criminals get charged in their bribery scams.
andrew, thank you for confirming that Democrats only believe in getting the opposition and that their own have no laws to be accountable to. Democrats are only a totalitarian regime in waiting.
Comment moved to the most recent thread on this issue. –ST