Since 1797 16 Federal officials impeached...NO REPUBLICANS

[The American Nightmare]

Am I not allowed to start a thread defending Republicans? After all the anti-bush rhetoric on a TS forum, I think someone should get equal time. I just wanted to show the holier-than-though liberals, including yourself, that with all your ranting and raving over the years, you are more guilty of political shenanigans, than the conservatives that you love to denigrate. It's so typical of chefmike to obfuscate what I wrote, by saying I was proved wrong.

I understand your point, but Mike is absolutely correct. Your original post is not addressing anything important.

I don't recall anyone pointing out indictments of Republicans in the past. It's neither here nor there.

[marquis999]

Oh sure, all the impeached presidents were not Republicans. But how many of the assassinated presidents were Republicans? 3 out of 4. How many attempted assassinations? All but Kennedy and Andrew Jackson were Republicans. There are other options to impeaching the president. How many Democrats resigned in disgrace?

Those pesky Republicans also seem to get us involved in more wars. George H W Bush had 4 different conflicts in as many years. 5 if you count the war on drugs. How'd that one turn out, by the way?

It is not my intent to annoy anyone with this email. I'm not sure the same can be said for "yourdaddy."

[The American Nightmare]

Oh sure, all the impeached presidents were not Republicans. But how many of the assassinated presidents were Republicans? 3 out of 4. How many attempted assassinations? All but Kennedy and Andrew Jackson were Republicans. There are other options to impeaching the president. How many Democrats resigned in disgrace?

What the fuck?

[marquis999]

I'm just saying that if more people stopped shooting Republicans then maybe more republicans would be impeached. But those congressional trials are mighty expensive.


Hmmm... odds in Vegas are 4:1 that Dubya will be impeached for High Crimes and Misdemeaners, specifically bribery.

Again, it is not my intent to annoy anyone with this posting.

[The American Nightmare]

I'm just saying that if more people stopped shooting Republicans then maybe more republicans would be impeached.

I thought YD was obscuring the issue but you just took the cake.

You can have it, and eat it!

[chefmike]

I'm just saying that if more people stopped shooting Republicans then maybe more republicans would be impeached. But those congressional trials are mighty expensive.


Hmmm... odds in Vegas are 4:1 that Dubya will be impeached for High Crimes and Misdemeaners, specifically bribery.

Again, it is not my intent to annoy anyone with this posting.

It is not my intent to annoy anyone with the posting of this article from the American Press. This is for comedic purposes only, as I love our beloved coward-in-chief with all my red-blooded american heart.

Judge eases restrictions on John Hinckley


Associated Press

WASHINGTON — A federal judge today loosened the restrictions on John W. Hinckley Jr., allowing the hospitalized presidential assailant to spend seven overnight visits with his parents in Williamsburg, Va.

Hinckley, who shot President Ronald Reagan in 1981, had been permitted to leave St. Elizabeths Hospital in Washington for outings around the nation's capital. He wanted to make longer trips and travel outside the area to his parents' community in southeastern Virginia.

U.S. District Judge Paul L. Friedman ruled Hinckley could be allowed initially three, three-night visits and later another four, four-night visits. It was not known today when Hinckley will make the visits.

The Justice Department could appeal the decision. Justice Spokesman John Nowacki said the order was being reviewed.

Friedman said Hinckley "is not permitted to leave one or both parents' supervision at any time during the course of the conditional release" except when the hospital deems it necessary.

The government had opposed Hinckley's requests to visit Williamsburg, a three-hour drive from the forensic hospital where he has been held since 1982.

When Hinckley shot Reagan and three other people in 1981 as the president emerged from a downtown hotel, he was suffering from major depression and a psychotic disorder that led to an obsession with actress Jodie Foster.

Hinckley, found not guilty by reason of insanity in 1982, said he shot Reagan to impress Foster.

His doctors have said his depression and psychosis are in full remission.

Since last year, Hinckley has been allowed occasional local overnight visits with his parents within a 50-mile radius of St. Elizabeths Hospital.

Friedman ordered that during the visits to the gated community where his parents live, Hinckley is not to spend more than 90 minutes away from their supervision. The hospital must assess the success of each visit before a subsequent visit can be allowed, according to the order.

The hospital also must submit to the court, as well to Hinckley's and the government's lawyers, an itinerary, along with a schedule and goal, for each of the initial three-day visits. The court is to decide later whether it will allow Hinckley to make the longer visits.

Hinckley will have to meet with a psychiatrist at least once during each visit and check in daily by phone with the hospital, Friedman directed. Hinckley is taking Risperdal, an anti-psychotic drug.

He also will be allowed supervised used of the Internet. However, any attempt to contact the media will be considered a violation of his conditional release, as will be any contact with Leslie DeVeau, a former girlfriend of 22 years and ex-patient at the hospital, according to the ruling.

The goal of the visits is to allow Hinckley to be "acclimated" to his parents' community and relearn skills, including gardening, cooking and taking out the garbage, Friedman wrote in his opinion.

The judge rejected a proposal from the hospital that Hinckley be allowed to get a driver's license and seek work and training. Friedman wrote that such activities are "premature at this time."

Hinckley's attorney, Barry Levine, did not immediately returned a call seeking comment late today.

[marquis999]

I thought YD was obscuring the issue but you just took the cake.

You can have it, and eat it!

Thank you. That was indeed my intent. To go so far the other direction as to make it painfully obvious that the issues that liberals have with the current administration has absolutely nothing to do with anything but the present. YD's premise that there was no validity to the "Left" because of past shenanigans which in turn make any illegal activities of the current administration justified.

If he knows some way to correct the past, let's get it fixed. I know the present can be changed and it seems to need it.

If only Slick Willy, when asked if he had had sex with that intern, had responded "Yeah baby, I shagged her rotten!" It would have been over and YD would have nothing to use to justify the actions of the republicans which he so readily admits needs defending.

Sorry if any liberals were upset by my posts, but you do have to admit that a legitimate question to ask democrats right now is "What the hell are you doing? What the hell do you stand for? How are you different other than not Republicans?" Give me something to believe in before 2008, or I believe I'll just have another serving of consciousness altering material of my choice.

It is not the intent of this message to annoy anyone. If you happen to be annoyed by this message, that's not going to bother me either.

[Felicia Katt]

Again, Yourdaddy, after begging in 4 different messages for me to respond, did you actually bother to read my post? Apparently not, because it showed that whatever point you thought you were making was totally blunted by the facts.

No Democratic Presidents have been forced from office in disgrace.

One Republican President was.

Again, what was your purpose? To defend Bush? If you want to defend Bush, provide facts and figures that show his successes. Don't come here with a misdirected and factually unsupported attack on people unrelated to the issue. That does as much to defend Bush as invading Iraq did to catch Osama.

FK

[Hugh Jarrod]

You're probably right, but usually, the "All knowing" trio jumps right on my posts. They are so politically naive, that they don't realize there has to be a balance, a ying/yang, to everything. I have to take the American side, and I'm damn proud to do it.

By no means is the republican side anymore (or less) the american view than any other side. Only republicans would have you believe as such. The problem is that your view is that no republican is ever wrong, or can do wrong. You are a tool.

[Felicia Katt]

Hugh, he gets his view straight from the top, but with blinders on. Bush was asked twice in 2004 in press conferences to describe any mistake he had made since 9-11 and on both occasions he was either unable or unwilling to do so.

Its an old saying that even the thinnest pancake has two sides. But in Bush's world, where Yourdaddy apparently has established residency, pancakes and issues only have one The right side. or as they would call it the American side. Of course they are flat as a flapjack wrong about that, and to characterize it that way, but can't or won't admit that. So they attack. or accuse, or they bring up irrelevant crap about impeachment or Whitewater or Vince Foster, rather than addressing the issue. But no amount of criticizing the cook, or the skillet or the stove, or the bisquick, or what was served for breakfast there 4 years ago will change a 3 dimensional pancake to fit into their one dimensional world view.

You are right that Yourdaddy is a tool. Too bad he is not a spatula! LOL

FK