Diatribune - Abuse of power - Comments

Democrats more often stand

sloopman111 — Mon, 03 Sep 2007 07:38:47 -0600

Democrats more often stand up for the Bill of Rights and the Constitution than do any modern Republican's.

Most of the authors of The Constitution and of the Bill of Rights, were anything but Christian. They were free thinkers, Masons, and with few exceptions non-bible toting men.

Christ would have disliked the Christians of today. "Love thy neighbor, turn the other cheek, the meek will inherit the earth" etc., have been lost in "Christian" bigotry and ethnocentricism. We have returned to the Dark Ages.

Republicans have trashed the New Testament, most of The Bill of Rights and the Constitution. While I agree that some Democrats have fallen in step, I know that, for the most part, they still believe in Democracy.

Money is the, not so covert, voice of politics. Greed and power propel people into cold, calculated trickle down economics. This round of corruption started with "The Gipper" a demented man without scholarship or intellect. His closed mind was the result of his own ego and his susceptability to the brainwashing of the far right.

GWB picked up the ball, and threw it farther to the right, and the right-wing Christian's and covert fascists fell in line.

This was not unlike the coups of Adolph Hitler and or Joseph Stalin. (right meets left) All we have to do is ask the other developed countries of the world.

We are no longer a symbol of freedom. We are a symbol of greed, destruction, and power.

In the USA, Democracy has suffered under the rule of these intellectually limited EGOMANIACS. Reagan,(clueless) Nixon, (cunning) and GWB (blithering idiot). When will the American people learn?

The current administration has set America back so far that only a miracle can bring her back. One thing is for sure, I will vote for the Democratic nominee warts and all. Republicans are now and always will be anti the middle class and the poor.

M. King Albuquerque

Nice point. We haven't

epppie — Sun, 26 Aug 2007 00:19:58 -0600

Nice point. We haven't abandoned them. They've abandoned us.

Subject: Fw: How Long Does A

Catzoned — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 21:18:10 -0600

Subject: Fw: How Long Does A Republic Last? (This is a post made by someone from the "retired" AOL blog).

How long does a Republic last?

About the time our original 13 states adopted their new constitution, in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years prior:
"A democracy is always temporary in nature;
A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship."
"The average age of the worlds civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, Nations always progressed through the following sequence:
1. From bondage to spiritual faith;
2. From spiritual faith to great courage;
3. From courage to liberty;
4. From liberty to abundance;
5. From abundance to complacency;
6. From complacency to apathy;
7. From apathy to dependence;
8. From dependence back into bondage "

Comment from wjeretidwell - 7/15/06 8:08 PM

I peruse a lot of Internet

Justanothercoverup — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 18:08:47 -0600

I peruse a lot of Internet sites, particularly The Smirking Chimp, BuzzFlash, RAW Story for alternative News, and whatever else that comes-up while researching a topic. I read all of the time, and it's amazing how many people are now of the belief that the Bush administration is blackmailing Congress - much the way J. Edgar Hoover did against his political rivals.

I wrote about this in 2006 after interviewing a Democratic candidate for the Senate who voiced exactly those fears; back then, it was judged to be so controversial and due to Mr. Robert's request, I didn't publish anything until after the election (which turned-out to be a mistake IMO) - and even then, only when I felt it was germane to the current political situation. Looking at things today, it looks like Joe Roberts hit it on the head - and might have won if he wasn't so worried about stirring the pot. It seems that too many of our elected and soon-to-be elected officials are adverse to taking on tough and/or highly controversial issues - issues that are now becoming extremely popular while a nation scratches it's collective head in disbelief while the Chief Executive seems bent on our destruction.

There has to be something the American people don't know. The only other alternative I can think of is that so many of the top GOP Senator's and House Reps who have dirty hands know they too will face indictment when all is said and done if this matter is investigated properly. There has been so much coordinated effort that it points to a pretty far ranging conspiracy - and the RICO Statutes are designed for a situation that is exactly what we face, which is nothing less (or more) than a highly organized crime.

Judging by the mood on the Hill, a Constitutional showdown is bound to happen, and sooner rather than later. Personally, I think Congress going on F**king vacation right now is a slap in our faces, allowing Bush and Co. a month to do whatever damage control they can. (Including but not limited to falsifying evidence, losing important emails or documents - or flat stone-walling Congress as if they were nothing.)

Let's face it, something has to give, and it has to happen soon. I think we all need to remember this article when the crap starts, because I don't believe it will be long. There's way too much "chatter" as the intelligence community likes to put it - and it likely adds-up to Americans being deceived again. Or, alternatively, attacked and hurt badly because of a wide-open southern border and what almost appears to be a welcome sign for terrorists to enter the country. Anyone with a brain that read the last NIE knows that Bush has made us much more vulnerable to attack, and most of us know that if we would have concentrated on eliminating Al Queda in Afghanistan and Pakistan instead of attacking Iraq - there would be a huge dent on terror everywhere.

Bush made it worse, much worse.

JAC

The Dems seem to ignore the

epppie — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 09:31:59 -0600

The Dems seem to ignore the huge difference between now and 1998(?). They had no legitimate basis for impeaching Clinton, and we have no legitimate basis for not impeaching Bush.

Thanks for posting this

Jacob Freeze — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 08:50:30 -0600

Thanks for posting this article.

I agree with Mr. Partridge about the possibility of a coup d'etat, but it may be sufficient for Bush-Cheney to rig the next election with paperless voting machines. It's easy to rig the machines and hard to detect. We could lose the Republic without even knowing it.

I think that the best

kerry — Thu, 26 Jul 2007 08:31:04 -0600

I think that the best argument for impeachment is that it would bring all of this administrations improper and illegal conduct to light. I think what we actually know about these guys is just the tip of the iceberg and only impeachment hearings will get the rest of it out.

You know they probably

kerry — Wed, 25 Jul 2007 22:15:41 -0600

You know they probably haven't. The sad part though is how many would understand it those documents today? This is why the vast majority of Americans still think he has broken any laws. Blow jobs they get. This is a bit deep.

The brazen-ness of this

epppie — Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:10:51 -0600

The brazen-ness of this anti-constitutional stuff is amazing. It tells you that they feel they can count on most Americans NEVER READING THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE OR THE CONSTITUTION.

Don't know if you will get

kerry — Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:33:33 -0600

Don't know if you will get the pony but I got a kick out of this, especially,

The teacher sings out "Where does the legislative branch belong?" and the children sing back in unison "Down on all fours!"

really funny and very true from the perspective of the Unitary Executive

How interesting that

epppie — Mon, 23 Jul 2007 00:02:49 -0600

How interesting that Feingold would choose this moment to try to stamp out impeachment fervor.

This is an excellent

Jacob Freeze — Mon, 09 Jul 2007 15:16:05 -0600

This is an excellent overview! It's too much for me to absorb at one sitting, but there's a lot here that I didn't know. The comparison between a signing statement and a line-item veto is right on the money!

Executive Privileges High

Betsy L. Angert — Mon, 09 Jul 2007 13:09:27 -0600

Executive Privileges
High Crimes and Misdemeanors . . .

"getting to the bottom of

Betsy L. Angert — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 19:06:32 -0600

"getting to the bottom of it"
If convicted of a crime will George W. Bush take care of you?

There is a converse that we

epppie — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 17:30:04 -0600

There is a converse that we don't talk enough about. Not only are we the greatest danger to ourselves, but if we were to live up to our ideals - THAT would be our greatest strength and the greatest discouragement to enemies.