| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"KT" |
| Date: |
07 Feb 2006 06:32:48 AM |
| Object: |
Gonzales: Bush is above the law |
Los Angeles Times
February 7, 2006
Gonzales Also Ends Up Defending His Credibility
Senate Democrats accuse the attorney general of previously misleading
them on the domestic surveillance program.
By Richard B. Schmitt, Times Staff Writer
WASHINGTON — A year ago, even Democrats in Congress viewed newly
minted Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales as a breath of fresh air. After
years of battling his hard-edged predecessor, John Ashcroft, the
quiet, self-effacing former judge was seen as marking a new era of
open and harmonious relations.
Gonzales' appearance Monday before the Senate Judiciary Committee
showed what a difference a year can make.
Testifying about the domestic spying program that President Bush
secretly approved after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, Gonzales found
himself defending not only the legal rationale of the program but also
his own credibility.
Before Gonzales could utter a word of his opening statement, members
of the panel wrangled over whether he should have to swear to tell the
truth to the committee. Democrats were armed with a DVD that they said
featured misleading statements by Gonzales and Bush about the program
before its existence was disclosed in December by the New York Times.
"This is really not a very good way to begin this hearing," said the
Judiciary Committee chairman, Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.).
The panel voted along party lines to give Gonzales a pass on the oath,
even though he said he would take one.
The Democrats were forced to show their video to reporters outside the
hearing room after Specter ruled that reading a transcript of the tape
was adequate.
Still, Gonzales found himself repeatedly on the defensive, having to
justify what Democrats alleged were evasions.
Sen. Russell D. Feingold (D-Wis.) accused him of giving a misleading
answer to a question about the scope of presidential power — the
linchpin of the debate over the eavesdropping program — during his
confirmation hearing last January.
At the time, Feingold asked Gonzales a question that seemed to touch
on the then-secret program — whether he believed that Bush had the
power to authorize warrantless wiretaps of Americans "in violation of
the criminal and foreign intelligence surveillance statutes of this
country."
Gonzales responded that the question was hypothetical, but added that
it was "not the policy or the agenda of this president to authorize
actions that would be in contravention of our criminal statutes."
On Monday, Feingold said that answer was misleading. Gonzales said the
earlier response was accurate because the administration had always
believed that the eavesdropping program was legal and authorized by
Congress.
"Senator, I've told the truth then; I'm telling the truth now,"
Gonzales said.
"Mr. Chairman, I think the witness has taken mincing words to a new
high," Feingold said.
Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) cited another exchange during the
confirmation hearing, when Gonzales declared that Bush had never
exercised his authority to conclude that a law was unconstitutional
and refused to comply with it.
Durbin said Monday that the administration was doing just that in the
domestic spying program, and was skirting a 1978 law — the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act — that established procedures for a
court to consider the sorts of domestic eavesdropping that the
administration undertook.
"So how can your response be valid today in light of what we now
know?" Durbin asked.
"Oh, it's absolutely valid, senator," Gonzales replied.
Gonzales said the administration believed a joint congressional
resolution after the Sept. 11 attacks effectively supplemented the
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act by giving Bush the power to take
all necessary action to protect the country — implicitly including
electronic surveillance without warrants.
The credibility attacks left Gonzales acting as defender-in-chief for
the president.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said Bush had misled the public
during a 2004 speech in Buffalo, N.Y., in which he sought to ease
fears about the Patriot Act by stressing the role that courts played
in authorizing wiretaps.
" 'Any time you hear the United States government talking about
wiretap, it requires — a wiretap requires a court order,' " Feinstein
quoted Bush as saying. " 'Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're
talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a
court order before we do so.' "
"Mr. Attorney General, in light of what you and the president have
said in the past month, this statement appears to be false," Feinstein
said. "Do you agree?"
Gonzales said the statement was taken out of context, and that Bush
was addressing a particular kind of wiretap.
"I take great issue with your suggestion that somehow the president of
the United States was not being totally forthcoming with the American
people," he responded.
Feinstein asked Gonzales whether the administration believed that the
post-Sept. 11 congressional resolution was so all-encompassing that it
gave officials the authority to give "false or misleading answers" if
the president thought the truth might hinder his ability to function
as commander in chief.
"Absolutely not, senator," Gonzales replied. "Of course not."
The parrying goes to a major concern about Gonzales, who has been part
of the Bush inner circle since Bush's days as governor of Texas.
His defenders say he is conscientiously doing all he can to protect
the country from attack. Gonzales stressed during his confirmation
hearing last year that he recognized he would have a broader
constituency as attorney general, compared to his job as White House
counsel, serving the nation rather than just Bush.
"Atty. Gen. Gonzales is candid and honest when giving legal advice —
as every good and capable lawyer should be with their client," said
Justice Department spokeswoman Tasia Scolinos. "If anything, the level
of trust and respect that comes from years of working together allows
him to be exceptionally forthcoming when giving advice."
Critics still perceive him as insufficiently independent of his old
boss.
"It is sort of startling. Here is a very mild-mannered guy, a very
nice person, who has, on virtually every issue in the war on terror,
told the president what he wants to hear," said David Cole, a law
professor at Georgetown University. "The constant theme is that the
president, as commander in chief, is essentially above the law."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
| User: "SyVyN11" |
|
| Title: Re: Gonzales: Bush is acting within his constitutional powers |
07 Feb 2006 07:15:23 AM |
|
|
"KT" <KT@nomail.net> wrote in message
news:0q4hu11q99t7vlpkqc4i6pmp76vjfe0mii@4ax.com...
HEADER FIXED
.
|
|
|
| User: "¥¥¥ Lance Van Ness ¥¥¥" |
|
| Title: Re: Gonzales: Bush is a fascist pig |
07 Feb 2006 08:48:01 AM |
|
|
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:L31Gf.11919$rH5.5979@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
"KT" <KT@nomail.net> wrote in message
news:0q4hu11q99t7vlpkqc4i6pmp76vjfe0mii@4ax.com...
HEADER FIXED
HEADER FIXED
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim E" |
|
| Title: Re: Gonzales: Bush is a fascist pig |
07 Feb 2006 10:29:03 AM |
|
|
"¥¥¥ Lance Van Ness ¥¥¥" <www@NoPugs.net> wrote in message
news:Bq2Gf.30654$H71.3740@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:L31Gf.11919$rH5.5979@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
"KT" <KT@nomail.net> wrote in message
news:0q4hu11q99t7vlpkqc4i6pmp76vjfe0mii@4ax.com...
HEADER FIXED
HEADER FIXED
Still pissy about having your socialist agenda rebuked by the people I see.
Kool.
Jim E
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rich Travsky " |
|
| Title: Re: Gonzales: Bush is acting within his constitutional powers - too badwe're not at war |
07 Feb 2006 10:12:07 PM |
|
|
SyVyN11 wrote:
"KT" <KT@nomail.net> wrote in message
news:0q4hu11q99t7vlpkqc4i6pmp76vjfe0mii@4ax.com...
HEADER FIXED
HEADER FIXED
.
|
|
|
| User: "SyVyN11" |
|
| Title: Re: Gonzales: Bush is acting within his constitutional powers - too bad we're not at war |
08 Feb 2006 06:00:30 AM |
|
|
"Rich Travsky" <" traRvEsky"@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:43E96F97.FB63C213@hotmMOVEail.com...
SyVyN11 wrote:
"KT" <KT@nomail.net> wrote in message
news:0q4hu11q99t7vlpkqc4i6pmp76vjfe0mii@4ax.com...
HEADER FIXED
HEADER FIXED
a) we are at war.
b) the 2nd article of the constitiution is not just for wartime.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kevin Cunningham" |
|
| Title: Re: Gonzales: Bush is acting within his constitutional powers - too bad we're not at war |
08 Feb 2006 03:10:03 PM |
|
|
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:y3lGf.7834$Nv2.3375@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
"Rich Travsky" <" traRvEsky"@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:43E96F97.FB63C213@hotmMOVEail.com...
SyVyN11 wrote:
"KT" <KT@nomail.net> wrote in message
news:0q4hu11q99t7vlpkqc4i6pmp76vjfe0mii@4ax.com...
HEADER FIXED
HEADER FIXED
a) we are at war.
b) the 2nd article of the constitiution is not just for wartime.
Gee, I'm confused, how can we be at war if there is no declaration of war?
Or can the Majic Fairy of the Republicans just wave its magic wand and start
a war?
.
|
|
|
| User: "SyVyN11" |
|
| Title: Re: Gonzales: Bush is acting within his constitutional powers - too bad we're not at war |
08 Feb 2006 05:14:39 PM |
|
|
"Kevin Cunningham" <smskjd@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:L6tGf.12550$rH5.6633@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:y3lGf.7834$Nv2.3375@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
"Rich Travsky" <" traRvEsky"@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:43E96F97.FB63C213@hotmMOVEail.com...
SyVyN11 wrote:
"KT" <KT@nomail.net> wrote in message
news:0q4hu11q99t7vlpkqc4i6pmp76vjfe0mii@4ax.com...
HEADER FIXED
HEADER FIXED
a) we are at war.
b) the 2nd article of the constitiution is not just for wartime.
Gee, I'm confused, how can we be at war if there is no declaration of war?
Or can the Majic Fairy of the Republicans just wave its magic wand and
start a war?
After 9/11 a joint resolution said that the president could prosicute the
war on terror however he sees fit.
Also going to the first gulf war, that war never ended, the cease fire said
that Saddam had to do several things, he did none. It said that if he did
not fullfill all requirements, the war can be restarted. That is what
George W. Bush did, restart a war that congress approved in 1991!
.
|
|
|
| User: " Malto" |
|
| Title: Is "SyVyN11" the quintessential repug imbecile? I believe so........ |
08 Feb 2006 11:34:30 PM |
|
|
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:zXuGf.8176$Nv2.3169@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
After 9/11 a joint resolution said that the president could prosicute the
war on terror however he sees fit.
Also going to the first gulf war, that war never ended, the cease fire
said
that Saddam had to do several things, he did none. It said that if he
did
not fullfill all requirements, the war can be restarted. That is what
George W. Bush did, restart a war that congress approved in 1991!
LOL!
And here, ladies and gentlemen, is the republican brains trust in all its
glory.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fredric L. Rice" |
|
| Title: Re: Is "SyVyN11" the quintessential repug imbecile? I believe so........ |
10 Feb 2006 09:47:52 PM |
|
|
" Malto" <....Malto@offski.commiee.com..> wrote:
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:zXuGf.8176$Nv2.3169@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
After 9/11 a joint resolution said that the president could prosicute the
war on terror however he sees fit.
Also going to the first gulf war, that war never ended, the cease fire
said
that Saddam had to do several things, he did none. It said that if he
did
not fullfill all requirements, the war can be restarted. That is what
George W. Bush did, restart a war that congress approved in 1991!
LOL!
And here, ladies and gentlemen, is the republican brains trust in all its
glory.
He's a Christian extremist Republican. An IQ right around 20.
---
"President Washington, President Lincoln, President Wilson, President
Roosevelt have all authorized electronic surveillance on a far broader
scale." - AG Christoterrorist Alberto Gonzales, Senate testimony
"Make no mistake about it, this is an attempt to overthrow the
government, not by force of arms, but by seductive arguments
preying on the public's fear of terrorism." -- Filius Nullius
"Adolf Hitler's ghost is alive and unwell inside Pat
Robertson's carcass." -- Shydavid
.
|
|
|
| User: "SyVyN11" |
|
| Title: Re: Is "SyVyN11" the quintessential repug imbecile? I believe so........ |
10 Feb 2006 10:19:39 PM |
|
|
"Fredric L. Rice" <FRice@SkepticTank.ORG> wrote in message
news:11uqndejdgj4495@corp.supernews.com...
" Malto" <....Malto@offski.commiee.com..> wrote:
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:zXuGf.8176$Nv2.3169@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
After 9/11 a joint resolution said that the president could prosicute
the
war on terror however he sees fit.
Also going to the first gulf war, that war never ended, the cease fire
said
that Saddam had to do several things, he did none. It said that if he
did
not fullfill all requirements, the war can be restarted. That is what
George W. Bush did, restart a war that congress approved in 1991!
LOL!
And here, ladies and gentlemen, is the republican brains trust in all its
glory.
He's a Christian extremist Republican. An IQ right around 20.
isn't it past your bedtime, fuddie?
Now run along and turn off mommy's and daddy's computer.
And when you dream tonight, you will dream of a world where there is no more
democrats and no more liberals....
and when you do
SUFFER, *****!!!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Malto" |
|
| Title: Re: Is "SyVyN11" the quintessential repug imbecile? I believe so........ |
10 Feb 2006 10:58:06 PM |
|
|
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:vBdHf.9466$Nv2.871@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
"Fredric L. Rice" <FRice@SkepticTank.ORG> wrote in message
news:11uqndejdgj4495@corp.supernews.com...
" Malto" <....Malto@offski.commiee.com..> wrote:
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:zXuGf.8176$Nv2.3169@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
After 9/11 a joint resolution said that the president could prosicute
the
war on terror however he sees fit.
Also going to the first gulf war, that war never ended, the cease fire
said
that Saddam had to do several things, he did none. It said that if
he
did
not fullfill all requirements, the war can be restarted. That is
what
George W. Bush did, restart a war that congress approved in 1991!
LOL!
And here, ladies and gentlemen, is the republican brains trust in all
its
glory.
He's a Christian extremist Republican. An IQ right around 20.
isn't it past your bedtime, fuddie?
Now run along and turn off mommy's and daddy's computer.
And when you dream tonight, you will dream<SMAK>!
Hey fat boy, what's the haps?
Hows the skin disease coming along?
And have you found any rich white females yet from the internet?.;)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Roy Blankenship" |
|
| Title: Re: Is "SyVyN11" the quintessential repug imbecile? I believe so........ |
11 Feb 2006 04:54:46 PM |
|
|
"Malto" <Malto@blowme.com> wrote in message
news:dsjs1l$l5g$0@pita.alt.net...
"Fredric L. Rice" <FRice@SkepticTank.ORG> wrote in message
news:11uqndejdgj4495@corp.supernews.com...
" Malto" <....Malto@offski.commiee.com..> wrote:
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:zXuGf.8176$Nv2.3169@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
After 9/11 a joint resolution said that the president could prosicute
the
war on terror however he sees fit.
Also going to the first gulf war, that war never ended, the cease
fire
said
that Saddam had to do several things, he did none. It said that if
he
did
not fullfill all requirements, the war can be restarted. That is
what
George W. Bush did, restart a war that congress approved in 1991!
LOL!
And here, ladies and gentlemen, is the republican brains trust in all
its
glory.
He's a Christian extremist Republican. An IQ right around 20.
Sounds about right, especially when you see the "big tough guy" in real
life.:)
Here's "SyVyN11" in all his glory......
Looks like a regular guy to me. Too bad there is a reality disconnect
somewhere. That is the bummer about all this political crap. I know there
are people to whom I am abusive on these newsgroups that would probably be
OK to hang with.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "SyVyN11" |
|
| Title: Re: Is "SyVyN11" the quintessential repug imbecile? I believe so........ |
09 Feb 2006 09:25:22 AM |
|
|
" Malto" <....Malto@offski.commiee.com..> wrote in message
news:dsek9o$hhp$1@pita.alt.net...
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:zXuGf.8176$Nv2.3169@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
After 9/11 a joint resolution said that the president could prosicute the
war on terror however he sees fit.
Also going to the first gulf war, that war never ended, the cease fire
said
that Saddam had to do several things, he did none. It said that if he
did
not fullfill all requirements, the war can be restarted. That is what
George W. Bush did, restart a war that congress approved in 1991!
LOL!
And here, ladies and gentlemen, is the republican brains trust in all its
glory.
Funny thing, I'm also right!
Now go ahead and make another personal attack.
.
|
|
|
| User: " Malto" |
|
| Title: Is "SyVyN11" the quintessential repug imbecile? I believe so........ |
09 Feb 2006 03:11:54 PM |
|
|
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:C9JGf.12964$rH5.6412@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
" Malto" <....Malto@offski.commiee.com..> wrote in message
news:dsek9o$hhp$1@pita.alt.net...
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:zXuGf.8176$Nv2.3169@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
After 9/11 a joint resolution said that the president could prosicute
the
war on terror however he sees fit.
Also going to the first gulf war, that war never ended, the cease fire
said
that Saddam had to do several things, he did none. It said that if he
did
not fullfill all requirements, the war can be restarted. That is
what
George W. Bush did, restart a war that congress approved in 1991!
LOL!
And here, ladies and gentlemen, is the republican brains trust in all
its
glory.
Funny thing, I'm also right!
No, you're a fucking halfwit who hasnt got a clue.
You claim that GW1 "never ended" yet there was a "cease fire"?
And if that isnt stupid enough, then you go and claim that the war can "be
re-started".
BWAHAHAH! What a fucking moron.
Now go ahead and make another personal attack.
No need, ya dumb fat *****.......;)
.
|
|
|
| User: "SyVyN11" |
|
| Title: Re: Is "SyVyN11" the quintessential repug imbecile? I believe so........ |
09 Feb 2006 04:38:43 PM |
|
|
" Malto" <....Malto@offski.commiee.com..> wrote in message
news:dsgbl1$9ou$0@pita.alt.net...
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:C9JGf.12964$rH5.6412@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
" Malto" <....Malto@offski.commiee.com..> wrote in message
news:dsek9o$hhp$1@pita.alt.net...
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:zXuGf.8176$Nv2.3169@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
After 9/11 a joint resolution said that the president could prosicute
the
war on terror however he sees fit.
Also going to the first gulf war, that war never ended, the cease fire
said
that Saddam had to do several things, he did none. It said that if
he
did
not fullfill all requirements, the war can be restarted. That is
what
George W. Bush did, restart a war that congress approved in 1991!
LOL!
And here, ladies and gentlemen, is the republican brains trust in all
its
glory.
Funny thing, I'm also right!
No, you're a fucking halfwit who hasnt got a clue.
Look in a mirror
You claim that GW1 "never ended" yet there was a "cease fire"?
Cease fire does not mean a end of hostilities. It just means 'cease
fire'. In other wars there were cease fires in the middle of the war,
did not mean the war ended, just no shootings.
Thing is I handed back your gay ***** to you and you cannot stand it.
And if that isnt stupid enough, then you go and claim that the war can "be
re-started".
Read the cease fire agreement, read the UN resoultions for the 12 years
since the first gulf war.
But then again, the cornerstone of liberalism is saying you know everything,
while knowing nothing.
BWAHAHAH! What a fucking moron.
Look in a mirror.
Now go ahead and make another personal attack.
No need, ya dumb fat *****.......;)
That is your speed, short bus.
.
|
|
|
| User: "robw" |
|
| Title: Re: Is "SyVyN11" the quintessential repug imbecile? I believe so........ |
09 Feb 2006 10:19:53 PM |
|
|
"Short Bus."???
You're pathetic.
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:TvPGf.16452$vU2.9455@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
" Malto" <....Malto@offski.commiee.com..> wrote in message
news:dsgbl1$9ou$0@pita.alt.net...
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:C9JGf.12964$rH5.6412@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
" Malto" <....Malto@offski.commiee.com..> wrote in message
news:dsek9o$hhp$1@pita.alt.net...
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:zXuGf.8176$Nv2.3169@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
After 9/11 a joint resolution said that the president could
prosicute
the
war on terror however he sees fit.
Also going to the first gulf war, that war never ended, the cease
fire
said
that Saddam had to do several things, he did none. It said that if
he
did
not fullfill all requirements, the war can be restarted. That is
what
George W. Bush did, restart a war that congress approved in 1991!
LOL!
And here, ladies and gentlemen, is the republican brains trust in all
its
glory.
Funny thing, I'm also right!
No, you're a fucking halfwit who hasnt got a clue.
Look in a mirror
You claim that GW1 "never ended" yet there was a "cease fire"?
Cease fire does not mean a end of hostilities. It just means 'cease
fire'. In other wars there were cease fires in the middle of the war,
did not mean the war ended, just no shootings.
Thing is I handed back your gay ***** to you and you cannot stand it.
And if that isnt stupid enough, then you go and claim that the war can
"be
re-started".
Read the cease fire agreement, read the UN resoultions for the 12 years
since the first gulf war.
But then again, the cornerstone of liberalism is saying you know
everything,
while knowing nothing.
BWAHAHAH! What a fucking moron.
Look in a mirror.
Now go ahead and make another personal attack.
No need, ya dumb fat *****.......;)
That is your speed, short bus.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: " Malto" |
|
| Title: See "SyVyN11" proven as the quintessential repug imbecile!!! |
09 Feb 2006 05:30:54 PM |
|
|
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:TvPGf.16452$vU2.9455@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
" Malto" <....Malto@offski.commiee.com..> wrote in message
news:dsgbl1$9ou$0@pita.alt.net...
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:C9JGf.12964$rH5.6412@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
" Malto" <....Malto@offski.commiee.com..> wrote in message
news:dsek9o$hhp$1@pita.alt.net...
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:zXuGf.8176$Nv2.3169@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
After 9/11 a joint resolution said that the president could
prosicute
the
war on terror however he sees fit.
Also going to the first gulf war, that war never ended, the cease
fire
said
that Saddam had to do several things, he did none. It said that if
he
did
not fullfill all requirements, the war can be restarted. That is
what
George W. Bush did, restart a war that congress approved in 1991!
LOL!
And here, ladies and gentlemen, is the republican brains trust in all
its
glory.
Funny thing, I'm also right!
No, you're a fucking halfwit who hasnt got a clue.
Look in a mirror
You claim that GW1 "never ended" yet there was a "cease fire"?
Cease fire does not mean a end of hostilities. It just means 'cease
fire'. In other wars there were cease fires in the middle of the war,
did not mean the war ended, just no shootings.
Thing is I handed back your gay ***** to you and you cannot stand it.
And if that isnt stupid enough, then you go and claim that the war can
"be
re-started".
Read the cease fire agreement, read the UN resoultions for the 12 years
since the first gulf war.
Right.
So a war that had to be "re-started" was never stopped?
Jesus, you are even more fucking stupid than I thought.:)
LOL!
.
|
|
|
| User: "SyVyN11" |
|
| Title: Re: See "SyVyN11" proven as the quintessential repug imbecile!!! |
09 Feb 2006 05:58:56 PM |
|
|
" Malto" <....Malto@offski.commiee.com..> wrote in message
news:dsgjbn$q2j$0@pita.alt.net...
Right.
So a war that had to be "re-started" was never stopped?
Blame Bush41 for that. If George's father had the fucking guts, he should
have sent Stormin' Norman straight up to baghdad, then to tehran and then it
would have been PAX AMERICANA!!
Jesus, you are even more fucking stupid than I thought.:)
You just can't wrap your brain around the truth. What a idiot.
LOL!
.
|
|
|
| User: " Malto" |
|
| Title: See "SyVyN11" make a ***** of himself in public! |
09 Feb 2006 06:39:00 PM |
|
|
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:4HQGf.8822$Nv2.2851@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
" Malto" <....Malto@offski.commiee.com..> wrote in message
news:dsgjbn$q2j$0@pita.alt.net...
Right.
So a war that had to be "re-started" was never stopped?
Blame Bush41 for that.
LOL!
But you claimed the war was never stopped, so how can you "blame" anyone for
something that didnt happen, you spastic?
***** me dead, you're getting stupider by the minute!
.
|
|
|
| User: "SyVyN11" |
|
| Title: Re: See "SyVyN11" make a ***** of himself in public! |
09 Feb 2006 07:08:27 PM |
|
|
" Malto" <....Malto@offski.commiee.com..> wrote in message
news:dsgncb$3jg$0@pita.alt.net...
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:4HQGf.8822$Nv2.2851@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
" Malto" <....Malto@offski.commiee.com..> wrote in message
news:dsgjbn$q2j$0@pita.alt.net...
Right.
So a war that had to be "re-started" was never stopped?
Blame Bush41 for that.
LOL!
But you claimed the war was never stopped, so how can you "blame" anyone
for
something that didnt happen, you spastic?
***** me dead, you're getting stupider by the minute!
you are choking on your own stupidity!
Thing is that I am right, I have the facts on my side and you can't stand
it. Therefore you must make little digs at me like a nine year old
learning swear words for the first time.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Kevin Cunningham" |
|
| Title: Re: Is "SyVyN11" the quintessential repug imbecile? I believe so........ |
26 Mar 2006 05:11:00 PM |
|
|
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:TvPGf.16452$vU2.9455@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
" Malto" <....Malto@offski.commiee.com..> wrote in message
news:dsgbl1$9ou$0@pita.alt.net...
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:C9JGf.12964$rH5.6412@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
" Malto" <....Malto@offski.commiee.com..> wrote in message
news:dsek9o$hhp$1@pita.alt.net...
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:zXuGf.8176$Nv2.3169@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
After 9/11 a joint resolution said that the president could prosicute
the
war on terror however he sees fit.
Also going to the first gulf war, that war never ended, the cease
fire
said
that Saddam had to do several things, he did none. It said that if
he
did
not fullfill all requirements, the war can be restarted. That is
what
George W. Bush did, restart a war that congress approved in 1991!
LOL!
And here, ladies and gentlemen, is the republican brains trust in all
its
glory.
Funny thing, I'm also right!
No, you're a fucking halfwit who hasnt got a clue.
Look in a mirror
You claim that GW1 "never ended" yet there was a "cease fire"?
Cease fire does not mean a end of hostilities. It just means 'cease
fire'. In other wars there were cease fires in the middle of the war,
did not mean the war ended, just no shootings.
Thing is I handed back your gay ***** to you and you cannot stand it.
And if that isnt stupid enough, then you go and claim that the war can
"be
re-started".
Read the cease fire agreement, read the UN resoultions for the 12 years
since the first gulf war.
But then again, the cornerstone of liberalism is saying you know
everything, while knowing nothing.
BWAHAHAH! What a fucking moron.
Look in a mirror.
Now go ahead and make another personal attack.
And there is no declaration of war. The last declaration of war was against
Germany in WWII. Since there is no declaration of war there is no war.
.
|
|
|
| User: "SyVyN11" |
|
| Title: Re: Is "SyVyN11" the quintessential repug imbecile? I believe so........ |
26 Mar 2006 11:05:59 PM |
|
|
"Kevin Cunningham" <smskjd@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:8cFVf.18110$S25.14430@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:TvPGf.16452$vU2.9455@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
" Malto" <....Malto@offski.commiee.com..> wrote in message
news:dsgbl1$9ou$0@pita.alt.net...
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:C9JGf.12964$rH5.6412@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
" Malto" <....Malto@offski.commiee.com..> wrote in message
news:dsek9o$hhp$1@pita.alt.net...
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:zXuGf.8176$Nv2.3169@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
After 9/11 a joint resolution said that the president could
prosicute
the
war on terror however he sees fit.
Also going to the first gulf war, that war never ended, the cease
fire
said
that Saddam had to do several things, he did none. It said that if
he
did
not fullfill all requirements, the war can be restarted. That is
what
George W. Bush did, restart a war that congress approved in 1991!
LOL!
And here, ladies and gentlemen, is the republican brains trust in all
its
glory.
Funny thing, I'm also right!
No, you're a fucking halfwit who hasnt got a clue.
Look in a mirror
You claim that GW1 "never ended" yet there was a "cease fire"?
Cease fire does not mean a end of hostilities. It just means 'cease
fire'. In other wars there were cease fires in the middle of the war,
did not mean the war ended, just no shootings.
Thing is I handed back your gay ***** to you and you cannot stand it.
And if that isnt stupid enough, then you go and claim that the war can
"be
re-started".
Read the cease fire agreement, read the UN resoultions for the 12 years
since the first gulf war.
But then again, the cornerstone of liberalism is saying you know
everything, while knowing nothing.
BWAHAHAH! What a fucking moron.
Look in a mirror.
Now go ahead and make another personal attack.
And there is no declaration of war. The last declaration of war was
against Germany in WWII. Since there is no declaration of war there is no
war.
wah wah wah, we are at war, no much how many times you stick your fingers in
your ears and sing out LA LA LA LA LALA, it doesn't change that fact!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dan Kimmel" |
|
| Title: Re: Is "SyVyN11" the quintessential repug imbecile? I believe so........ |
27 Mar 2006 05:48:13 AM |
|
|
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:XoKVf.7340$x94.848@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
"Kevin Cunningham" <smskjd@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:8cFVf.18110$S25.14430@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:TvPGf.16452$vU2.9455@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
" Malto" <....Malto@offski.commiee.com..> wrote in message
news:dsgbl1$9ou$0@pita.alt.net...
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:C9JGf.12964$rH5.6412@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
" Malto" <....Malto@offski.commiee.com..> wrote in message
news:dsek9o$hhp$1@pita.alt.net...
"SyVyN11" <711robhorine@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:zXuGf.8176$Nv2.3169@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
After 9/11 a joint resolution said that the president could
prosicute
the
war on terror however he sees fit.
Also going to the first gulf war, that war never ended, the cease
fire
said
that Saddam had to do several things, he did none. It said that
if
he
did
not fullfill all requirements, the war can be restarted. That
is
what
George W. Bush did, restart a war that congress approved in 1991!
LOL!
And here, ladies and gentlemen, is the republican brains trust in
all
its
glory.
Funny thing, I'm also right!
No, you're a fucking halfwit who hasnt got a clue.
Look in a mirror
You claim that GW1 "never ended" yet there was a "cease fire"?
Cease fire does not mean a end of hostilities. It just means 'cease
fire'. In other wars there were cease fires in the middle of the
war,
did not mean the war ended, just no shootings.
Thing is I handed back your gay ***** to you and you cannot stand it.
And if that isnt stupid enough, then you go and claim that the war can
"be
re-started".
Read the cease fire agreement, read the UN resoultions for the 12 years
since the first gulf war.
But then again, the cornerstone of liberalism is saying you know
everything, while knowing nothing.
BWAHAHAH! What a fucking moron.
Look in a mirror.
Now go ahead and make another personal attack.
And there is no declaration of war. The last declaration of war was
against Germany in WWII. Since there is no declaration of war there is
no
war.
wah wah wah, we are at war, no much how many times you stick your fingers
in
your ears and sing out LA LA LA LA LALA, it doesn't change that fact!
No, we have stupidly allowed American lives to be put at risk in combat, but
as a matter of *law* America isn't at war. Try to keep up.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rich Travsky " |
|
| Title: Re: Gonzales: Bush is acting within his constitutional powers - too badwe're not at war |
12 Feb 2006 09:07:26 PM |
|
|
SyVyN11 wrote:
"Rich Travsky" <" traRvEsky"@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:43E96F97.FB63C213@hotmMOVEail.com...
SyVyN11 wrote:
"KT" <KT@nomail.net> wrote in message
news:0q4hu11q99t7vlpkqc4i6pmp76vjfe0mii@4ax.com...
HEADER FIXED
HEADER FIXED
a) we are at war.
What country are we at war with? Is there a draft? Victory gardens? Scrap
metal drives? Travel restrictions? Etc
b) the 2nd article of the constitiution is not just for wartime.
Who said it was? It covers several things - like impeachment.
RT
.
|
|
|
| User: "SyVyN11" |
|
| Title: Re: Gonzales: Bush is acting within his constitutional powers - too bad we're not at war |
12 Feb 2006 11:20:31 PM |
|
|
"Rich Travsky" <" traRvEsky"@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:43EFF7EE.2C886765@hotmMOVEail.com...
SyVyN11 wrote:
"Rich Travsky" <" traRvEsky"@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:43E96F97.FB63C213@hotmMOVEail.com...
SyVyN11 wrote:
"KT" <KT@nomail.net> wrote in message
news:0q4hu11q99t7vlpkqc4i6pmp76vjfe0mii@4ax.com...
HEADER FIXED
HEADER FIXED
a) we are at war.
What country are we at war with?
Iraq and the concept of TERRORISM!
Is there a draft?
Nope, we still have a volunteer military, so why don't you join?
Victory gardens?
Nope
Scrap metal drives? Travel restrictions? Etc
Nope, nope, and nope.
But we are still at war, asking your stupid little questions does not change
that fact.
b) the 2nd article of the constitiution is not just for wartime.
Who said it was? It covers several things - like impeachment.
Section 1.
The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of
America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and,
together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as
follows:
Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may
direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and
Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no
Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit
under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.
The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for
two Persons, of whom one at least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same
State with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted
for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and
certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United
States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate
shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all
the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the
greatest Number of Votes shall be the President, if such Number be a
Majority of the whole Number of Electors appointed; and if there be more
than one who have such Majority, and have an equal Number of Votes, then the
House of Representatives shall immediately chuse by Ballot one of them for
President; and if no Person have a Majority, then from the five highest on
the List the said House shall in like Manner chuse the President. But in
chusing the President, the Votes shall be taken by States, the
Representatives from each State having one Vote; a quorum for this Purpose
shall consist of a Member or Members from two thirds of the States, and a
Majority of all the States shall be necessary to a Choice. In every Case,
after the Choice of the President, the Person having the greatest Number of
Votes of the Electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should
remain two or more who have equal Votes, the Senate shall chuse from them by
Ballot the Vice President.
The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on
which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout
the United States.
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States,
at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the
Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who
shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen
Years a Resident within the United States.
In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death,
Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said
Office, the Same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may
by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability,
both of the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then
act as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the
Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.
The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a
Compensation, which shall neither be encreased nor diminished during the
Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within
that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.
Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following
Oath or Affirmation:--''I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will
faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to
the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the
United States.''
Section 2.
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United
States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the
actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing,
of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any
Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall
have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United
States, except in Cases of Impeachment.
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to
make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he
shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall
appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the
supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose
Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be
established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such
inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the
Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen
during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire
at the End of their next Session.
Section 3.
He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information on the State of
the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall
judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene
both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them,
with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as
he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public
Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and
shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.
Section 4.
The President, Vice President and all Civil Officers of the United States,
shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for and Conviction of, Treason,
Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
______________________________________________________
What crimes did Bush commit?
RT
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rich Travsky " |
|
| Title: Re: Gonzales: Bush is acting within his constitutional powers - toobad we're not at war |
14 Feb 2006 10:27:05 PM |
|
|
SyVyN11 wrote:
"Rich Travsky" <" traRvEsky"@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:43EFF7EE.2C886765@hotmMOVEail.com...
SyVyN11 wrote:
"Rich Travsky" <" traRvEsky"@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:43E96F97.FB63C213@hotmMOVEail.com...
SyVyN11 wrote:
"KT" <KT@nomail.net> wrote in message
news:0q4hu11q99t7vlpkqc4i6pmp76vjfe0mii@4ax.com...
HEADER FIXED
HEADER FIXED
a) we are at war.
What country are we at war with?
Iraq and the concept of TERRORISM!
Iraq? We won, remember?
Is there a draft?
Nope, we still have a volunteer military, so why don't you join?
Why don't you, chickenhawk?
Victory gardens?
Nope
Scrap metal drives? Travel restrictions? Etc
Nope, nope, and nope.
But we are still at war, asking your stupid little questions does not change
that fact.
But against no country... hmmm.
b) the 2nd article of the constitiution is not just for wartime.
Who said it was? It covers several things - like impeachment.
Section 1.
Yeah, so? We're not at war. Now go back to calling blacks stupid, you're good
at that.
RT
.
|
|
|
| User: "SyVyN11" |
|
| Title: Re: Gonzales: Bush is acting within his constitutional powers - too bad we're not at war |
14 Feb 2006 10:54:36 PM |
|
|
"Rich Travsky" <" traRvEsky"@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:43F2AD99.F0AD9297@hotmMOVEail.com...
Yeah, so? We're not at war. Now go back to calling blacks stupid, you're
good
at that.
RT
Rather call you stupid, because it is true.
and we are at war. There are people and countries that want to destroy
us. I guess it is no big deal to you if Iran finally gets a nuke. Who
cares if they launch it at Israel or America, it will only kill the evil
republicans.
Wake up from your eternal daydream and smell the plutonium.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rich Travsky " |
|
| Title: Re: Gonzales: Bush is acting within his constitutional powers - toobad we're not at war |
19 Feb 2006 09:26:51 PM |
|
|
SyVyN11 wrote:
"Rich Travsky" <" traRvEsky"@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:43F2AD99.F0AD9297@hotmMOVEail.com...
Yeah, so? We're not at war. Now go back to calling blacks stupid, you're
good
at that.
RT
Rather call you stupid, because it is true.
Ah, you're upset at being caught making racist remarks...
and we are at war. There are people and countries that want to destroy
With which country?
us. I guess it is no big deal to you if Iran finally gets a nuke. Who
cares if they launch it at Israel or America, it will only kill the evil
republicans.
Wake up from your eternal daydream and smell the plutonium.
.
|
|
|
| User: "SyVyN11" |
|
| Title: Re: Gonzales: Bush is acting within his constitutional powers - too bad we're not at war |
20 Feb 2006 05:38:41 AM |
|
|
"Rich Travsky" <" traRvEsky"@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:43F936FB.D537A948@hotmMOVEail.com...
SyVyN11 wrote:
"Rich Travsky" <" traRvEsky"@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:43F2AD99.F0AD9297@hotmMOVEail.com...
Yeah, so? We're not at war. Now go back to calling blacks stupid,
you're
good
at that.
RT
Rather call you stupid, because it is true.
Ah, you're upset at being caught making racist remarks...
Unlike you libs, I judge based not on color of the skin, but of the content
of character. And I find you character lacking.
and we are at war. There are people and countries that want to
destroy
With which country?
With terrorism, and if we aren't careful with Iran, North Korea. It seems
that you don't care if either joins the nuclear arms race. Why do you
trust Iran and North Korea with nukes.
us. I guess it is no big deal to you if Iran finally gets a nuke.
Who
cares if they launch it at Israel or America, it will only kill the evil
republicans.
Wake up from your eternal daydream and smell the plutonium.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rich Travsky " |
|
| Title: Re: Gonzales: Bush is acting within his constitutional powers - toobad we're not at war |
21 Feb 2006 09:55:16 PM |
|
|
SyVyN11 wrote:
"Rich Travsky" <" traRvEsky"@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:43F936FB.D537A948@hotmMOVEail.com...
SyVyN11 wrote:
"Rich Travsky" <" traRvEsky"@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:43F2AD99.F0AD9297@hotmMOVEail.com...
Yeah, so? We're not at war. Now go back to calling blacks stupid,
you're
good
at that.
RT
Rather call you stupid, because it is true.
Ah, you're upset at being caught making racist remarks...
Unlike you libs, I judge based not on color of the skin, but of the content
of character. And I find you character lacking.
Your words:
there are those black voters that are crossing over, not all. The civil
rights pimps depend on the stupidity of those that follow them.
and we are at war. There are people and countries that want to
destroy
With which country?
With terrorism, and if we aren't careful with Iran, North Korea. It seems
that you don't care if either joins the nuclear arms race. Why do you
trust Iran and North Korea with nukes.
We're at war with the country of terrorism? My my. Where is that on the map?
us. I guess it is no big deal to you if Iran finally gets a nuke.
Who
cares if they launch it at Israel or America, it will only kill the evil
republicans.
Wake up from your eternal daydream and smell the plutonium.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
