Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 123456
Results 101 to 116 of 116
  1. #101  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    If your 28 year old son commits armed robbery should you go to jail?
    No. What's your point?
  2. #102  
    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray
    That said, every tyrant justifies his abuse on the basis that others do worse.
    No. Most tyrants don't think that way.
  3. #103  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    If your 28 year old son commits armed robbery should you go to jail?
    I assume that the colonel was older than 28, though there have been exceptions. He is being held criminally accountable.

    I assert that there were ambiguous messages coming from the White House. The Commmander-in-chief is beyond criminal accountability but he should not be beyond political accountability. It is a legal decision as to whether or not the colonel is criminally culpable for what happened at Abu Ghraib. It is a political decision as to whether or not he thought that he was carrying out the wishes of his superiors.
  4. #104  
    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray
    The Commmander-in-chief is beyond criminal accountability but he should not be beyond political accountability.
    He is when he is on his way out of office, with no vice president succeeding him. He could pretty much do just about anything.

    Sleep well.
  5. #105  
    Quote Originally Posted by theBlaze74
    He is when he is on his way out of office, with no vice president succeeding him. He could pretty much do just about anything.

    Sleep well.
    I agree that a lame duck is less accountable than one on the rise. That is one of the reasons that I regret the decline of the political parties. However, it has been a long time since a political party has been as strong as this Republican Party, a long time since we have seen party discipline so strong. This party and this president are one and each can and should be held accountable for the other. For the first time since 2001, the Republican Party is now pushing back against this president. They are doing so both in the Congress and in the states. It is a little late but it demonstrates that there is still some accountability.

    I never vote for incumbents in any case; it just makes them arrogant. However, in this election I hope that others will join me.
    Last edited by whmurray; 04/29/2006 at 11:40 AM.
  6. #106  
    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray
    For the first time since 2001, the Republican Party is now pushing back against this president.
    If you would have heard in October 2001, that the the Reupublican Party would be "pushing back against this president". What would you assume had happened?
  7. #107  
    Quote Originally Posted by theBlaze74
    If you would have heard in October 2001, that the the Reupublican Party would be "pushing back against this president". What would you assume had happened?
    Business as usual. Perhaps that the President was acting as a "compassionate conservative," or standing for freedom of religion or speech. However, it has taken outrage piled on outrage to provoke the "base." Even now, they seem more upset by the spike in oil and gasoline prices than by the erosion of liberty.
    Last edited by whmurray; 04/29/2006 at 11:36 AM.
  8. #108  
    About a decade ago I sat next to Duke Cunningham on a coast-to-coast flight. I concluded that we were very lucky to have such a hero represent us in Congress. So much for my judgment.
  9. #109  
    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray
    About a decade ago I sat next to Duke Cunningham on a coast-to-coast flight. I concluded that we were very lucky to have such a hero represent us in Congress. So much for my judgment.
    What did you give him?
    Freedom of some speech in the US, through someone in the UK.
  10. #110  
    Quote Originally Posted by geatches
    What did you give him?
    Who?
  11. #111  
    Quote Originally Posted by whmurray
    Who?
    Duke.
    Freedom of some speech in the US, through someone in the UK.
  12. #112  
    there is such a thing as a lame duck Prez (one who can not be elected again) and such a thing as a lame duck administration (where the VP also is not planning to run). we have the latter at this time. look for an announcement of Cheney to step down for health reasons before the beginning of the Libby trial and a new VP who will be the party choice to be graced with the nomination in 2008 and get the benefit of incumbancy.

    take it to the bank...
  13. #113  
    Quote Originally Posted by gharrod
    there is such a thing as a lame duck Prez (one who can not be elected again) and such a thing as a lame duck administration (where the VP also is not planning to run). we have the latter at this time. look for an announcement of Cheney to step down for health reasons before the beginning of the Libby trial and a new VP who will be the party choice to be graced with the nomination in 2008 and get the benefit of incumbancy.

    take it to the bank...
    As a conservative, I would welcome the change. This administration has become weak and ineffective, we can't afford to have a President with little or no respect from the country.
    Freedom of some speech in the US, through someone in the UK.
  14. #114  
    Quote Originally Posted by geatches
    Duke.
    Never heard of him.
  15. #115  
    Quote Originally Posted by gharrod
    there is such a thing as a lame duck Prez (one who can not be elected again) and such a thing as a lame duck administration (where the VP also is not planning to run). we have the latter at this time. look for an announcement of Cheney to step down for health reasons before the beginning of the Libby trial and a new VP who will be the party choice to be graced with the nomination in 2008 and get the benefit of incumbancy.

    take it to the bank...
    If you are right, I hope the benefit of incumbency proves to be minimal, not to say negative.
  16. #116  
    Quote Originally Posted by geatches
    As a conservative, I would welcome the change. This administration has become weak and ineffective, we can't afford to have a President with little or no respect from the country.
    lol
Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 123456

Posting Permissions