9-11 Blogger's Republican Insiders
Apparently don't know their House from their Senate. In a call for investigations (preliminary to impeachment, of course), Reprehensor taps the "experts":
Indeed, the scoop from Republican insiders before the election was that the biggest fear was Waxman being in the majority party, since he is such an investigative bulldog (the other main fear was Conyers being in the majority party in the Senate and initiating impeachment proceedings).
I don't know anybody who feared Conyers being in the majority party in the Senate and initiating impeachment proceedings, mainly because Conyers isn't in the Senate. He's the (incoming) Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, which is where impeachment proceedings begin.
The real scoop from Republican insiders is to watch out for new Senate Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi. ;)
posted by Pat @ 7:03 AM
15 comments
15 Comments:
Geniuses.
We'll see what happens. They very well may start impeachment proceedings, but I doubt it.
Rhetoric is one thing, but reality is another.
As a republican, I feel pretty bad about the :Thumping" we took on Tuesday. But here's the thing. I trust and believe in the government. Whether its democrats or Republicans who are in control. I believe in the government, by the people and for the people.
I've known a few politicians from both sides of the aisle. Without exception, they have ALL been good honest people who truly believe that they are doing what they think is best for the country. I believe that about almost all politicians. Yes, there are exceptions, on both sides. Thats actually what I really love about GWB. You can love him or hate him, but the one thing most any sane person can agree on is that he is doing what he truly thinks is best for the country. You may certainly disagree, that is your right. I may disagree with you vehemently, but who is to say who is really right in matters of polittics and speculation?
What will the Dems do? I don't know, we'll see. But the only thing I am confident about is that the government will go on.
What I really see is the left fringe is made up of mostly kids that don't understand how government really works. They believe the president is a King, and not an Executive. They see the congress as at once the opposing force to the king and his patsys.
They don't understand federalism at all, and believe government is some all powerful entity capable of both hauling them to concentration camps and wiping their little tushies.
Me, I believe that we in the US have a government by consent of the governed, by the people and for the people.
The difference between Republicans and Democrats is that Republicans think Democrats are naive, whereas Democrats think Republicans are evil.
Check out this post from that thread.
Jews gain in U.S. Congress
Jews increased their numbers by two in the U.S. Senate and at least four in the House of Representatives.
Rep. Bernie Sanders, an independent who was backed by the Democrats, won Vermont�s Senate seat.
Rep. Ben Cardin, also a Democrat, took Maryland�s seat. Sen. Joseph Lieberman, an independent in Connecticut who has pledged to vote with the Democratic caucus, also won.
Another two Jewish incumbent senators won re-election: Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Wis.).
The wins raise Jewish representation in the Senate to 13, the most Jewish members that body has had.
There were 26 Jews in the House in the last Congress.
Six Jewish Democrats � in Florida, Tennessee, Wisconsin, Arizona, Kentucky and New Hampshire � won freshman bids.
That means at least 30 Jews will serve in the House in the next Congress
No, they aren't anti-semitic.
I pretty much agree with "jujigatami," although I define myself more as an anti-Democrat. The Republican Party didn't deserve to win on Tuesday, having failed to support Bush on Social Security reform or produce a meaningful immigration bill. The runaway spending and rampant corruption made a mockery of the GOP's traditional criticism of the Dems. Yes, it is galling that a monster like Ted Kennedy can rack up his usual 70% of the vote--do these moral idiots grasp the idea that he escaped a submerged car that contained a still-living woman, swam to shore, AND WENT HOME TO SLEEP?!?! He did not bang on any doors or yell for help. He allowed a trapped woman to drown slowly and the next morning, he gathered his advisors and worked out a strategy to preserve his "viability," a strategy that involved a massive cover-up.
Jujigatami's observation about internet denizens is right on the money: the lefties seem utterly clueless about the nuts-and-bolts of politics. But, then, what do they actually understand?
Ron,
I'm definetly a republican, but I sure believe they didn't deserve to win. Though I'm actually shocked they lost the senate.
There were only 2 elections that I really believe were "wrong" Menendez is one. That NJ elected this scum is testament to the states reputation. I've had personal dealings with his corruption, and I just can't believe he actually won anything. He shouldn't be elected dog catcher.
The second one is Steele. He was without a doubt, the best candiate running for elected office anywhere in the country from any party, and he ran a fantastic campaign. The fact he lost truly saddens me.
Other than that, I think its 6 0f one, half dozen of another. Tester, Mccaskill, even Casey are fine public servants who I believe will do their level best for their constitunts.
Of course I disagree with what they feel is best, but I don't believe for a second that they are doing anything but what they feel is the best for the country.
Now, with that said, Kennedy, Kerry, The Clintons, Delay, all seem to be governing out of a personal agenda. I don't for a second believe that they feel that they are doing what is best for the country. Just what is best for their agenda and power.
I was really sad when Kerry was the nominee in 04. The dems had a chance to put up a truly good candidate (there were a few... even Dean, while I think he is crazy, and I disagree with every word out of his mouth, at least he had the strength of his convictions). Instead they put up Kerry.
Hopefully this will usher in a new era of politics. 08 will be interesting.
The truely amazing thing, is that so many people, with so many differing political views, can actually come together on an issue like 9/11, and fight these idiot wingnuts that are the truth movement.
I myself, a Canadian, in terms of political "sides" would probably sit somewhere slightly left of center. Here, that would make me a Liberal, but since they were completely full of corruption, and the conservative alternative too extreme the other way, I actually went with NDP (very left), but mainly because of the local candidate, not my belief system.
That said, I always seem to favor the Conservative side of most arguments...go figure.
TAM
Jeezus TAM, the NDP may as well be called the Canadian Communist Party.
Ah well, if the local candidate was the best, I suppose I'd probably do the same thing. But he'd have to be DAMN good. Like, Steele good.
The Republicans got a well-deserved spanking. Rule #1 ought to be, don't start unneccessary and unwinnable wars. I have no illusions about the Democrats but I gave $ to Jim Webb. He will be a voice of maturity in the Senate Democratic caucus. Btw, ConsDemo is short for "Conservative Democrat".
I've been banned from 911Blogger (apparently for dissing their hero Bob Bowman, he was one "Democrat" who definitely didn't deserve to win). Anyhow, the nuts over there are encouraging their members to deluge the new Congress to "investigate" 9/11. Someone might want to tell them there isn't a snowball's chance in hell of that happening.
Rule #1 ought to be, don't start unneccessary and unwinnable wars.
*sigh*
Yeah, the US helped win WW2, and gave South Korea it's independence, but Iraq? Hell no! Totally unwinable. After all, they have Allah on their side. How do you fight against that?
Alex, when is "victory" in Iraq going to be achieved? The best case scenario seems to be more of the same. How many much more blood and treasure should be lost on something that doesn't seem to be working?
Alex, when is "victory" in Iraq going to be achieved?
It'll take time. How long were American troops in Germany? Bosnia? Korea? A lot longer than they've been in Iraq, that's for sure. More importantly, we're facing a different type of enemy this time, and aren't willing to conduct indiscriminate killings like we were in the past. That makes it harder. But not impossible. The only way you can lose is to give up.
How many much more blood and treasure should be lost on something that doesn't seem to be working?
It all depends on how much you want it. In WW2, defeat wasn't an option. Nobody wanted to be ruled by Germany. These days, for most people, defeat is the easiest option. Give up, go home, let the brown people kill eachother for a while, but just get "our boys" home. It's "none of our business". Me, I don't see it that way. Neither do most of the soldiers there now. They keep going back because they believe it's a cause worth fighting for. They're willing to place their lives on the line - all YOU are asked for is some money.
Alex, with all due respect, most Iraqis (outside of Kurdistan) want the Americans out. The violence has gotten worse, not better. This is feeding the jihadist rage and doing incredible damage to America's standing in the world.
The whole idea was dumb from the git-go. Whatever Muslim Arabs think of their own leaders it was incredibly naive to think they would "welcome Americans as liberators".
Default is right, there aren't any easy answers. Simply saying "stay the course" isn't an answer.
it was incredibly naive to think they would "welcome Americans as liberators".
They actually did greet as liberators.
Then the honeymoon was over and religious fanatics and fascists started blowing up car bombs everywhere.
There might have been handfuls of people who greeted Americans as liberators but the majority never did. The postwar planning assumed the occupation force would drop to 35K in months, that shows how naive they were. This was THE most ill-conceived military exercise in U.S. history and HUGE strategic blunder.
Alex, with all due respect, most Iraqis (outside of Kurdistan) want the Americans out.
Really? How many of them did you talk to?
Whatever Muslim Arabs think of their own leaders it was incredibly naive to think they would "welcome Americans as liberators".
The only incredibly naive thing here is your apparent belief that an American withdrawal would decrease the violence instead of massively increasing it. Look at Vietnam if you want an example of what would happen if the US pulled out early.
There might have been handfuls of people who greeted Americans as liberators but the majority never did.
Wow, you were able to tell that from the comfort of your La-Z-Boy, huh? What do you do for an encore? Maybe you can predict next weeks lottery numbers?
This was THE most ill-conceived military exercise in U.S. history and HUGE strategic blunder.
It seems you've never read anything at all about WW2.
Post a Comment
<< Home