Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

President Cheney ?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Catchawave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 02:24 PM
Original message
President Cheney ?
Hope no one else is thinking about a Bush impeachment or resigning anytime soon. Cheney's on deck ya'know!

2006, 2006, 2006 Dammit, don't lose focus and maybe we can keep our America intact ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
MrModerate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 02:26 PM
Response to Original message
1. Think Nuremberg . . .
Think of all the Nazis lined up in the box looking verrrry uncomfortable.

Ya don't have to impeach just one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
4morewars Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 02:33 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. I believe that was the last time....
that a bunch of facsist murderers were put on trial? I dare say, the only time ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dulcinea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 02:27 PM
Response to Original message
2. Cheney is the real president anyway. eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueJac Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 02:28 PM
Response to Original message
3. Fuck Dick....
Impeach them in tandum......two for one deal, might be a first but what the hell!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 02:29 PM
Response to Original message
4. I'm curious how impeachment proponents think we'll take the first step...
In a GOP-controlled House. With redistricting ensuring safe seats for just about everyone, Dem and Rep. What in the world makes anyone think that articles of impeachment will be introduced in a Republican House of Representatives? Isn't it either overly optimistic, hopelessly naive, just plain ignorant, or some combination of the three to think that this would ever happen?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Atman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Yes.
It can't happen. There are enough Kool-Aid drinkers and anthrax recipients to make sure impeachment is an impossibility.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
4morewars Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. Don't forget black box voting !
"It doesn't matter who casts the votes, what matters, is, who counts them."-----Josef Stalin
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pushycat Donating Member (401 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #8
28. Yes, just ask Congressman Peter King...
Alex Pelosi's new film "Diary of a Political Tourist" catches a tipsy Congressman Peter King making a comment at a White House function before the election had been finished that, "It's already over. The Election's over. We Won."

When Pelosi asks, "How do you know that?" King replies, "It's all over but the counting. And we'll take care of the counting."

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/2004votefraud.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Danmel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-15-05 12:21 PM
Response to Reply #28
33. And that Fuck just got promoted to head of Homeland Security in the HOuse
He is the COngressman in an adjacent district- he is a really nasty guy- he curses out his constituents, he rants and raves like a lunatic- he is unstable. We are in trouble folks.

As to impeachment- it is a fairy tale- and besides how would it help? Cheney'd become President for rea- he'd have the chair the desk and the title and he'd get to pick a VP would presumably would be the nominee for 2008. THen we'd have to run against an incumbent, assuming that we completely suspend reality and think a Republican house, senate and judiciary is gonna impeach a Republican President. You gotta be careful what you wish for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 02:38 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. And same goes for resignation...
Why would Bush ever resign? I mean, it's one thing for him to say he accepts responsibility. It's ridiculous to assume he'll act on it.

Bush is not going early unless something unbelievably drastic happens and can be pinned directly on him with hard evidence.

Basically, we're stuck with Bush uuntil 2008. The rest of it's just wishful thinking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
4morewars Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 02:42 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. 2009
January 20th, 2009

Sorry
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catchawave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #11
22. I feel your pain....
Edited on Wed Sep-14-05 03:33 PM by Catchawave
2006 is first, doncha know :) Of course, I have this thing in Virginia right now...gov in 2005, whew!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laelth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 06:28 PM
Response to Reply #9
25. Why would Bush resign?
Cuz bein' President is haaaard work!

-Laelth
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-15-05 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #9
31. What if the American people storm the White House.
Oh - wait - that won't happen either. The new season of "Survivor" starts tonight.

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-15-05 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #31
34. I'm actually hoping that happens on Sept. 26...
We're surrounding the White House anyway. While we're at it, might as well pop inside...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OzarkDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. Incorrect assumptions on your part
There are still many Republicans in Congress who still think for themselves and know right from wrong.

If some of the more treasonous activities of Bushco are substantiated, quite a few Republicans would rather see impeachment move forward than see their party and their country destroyed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Independent_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #7
14. I agree...
It seems like many Republicans have been jumping ship as of late.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
longship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #7
15. This is the correct evaluation.
The rest of them are wrong. It is right to proceed now because if we don't the world may hate us for not acting. In fact, we *must* act now in spite of any political expedience. We need to push for impeachment, and continue to push for it until it takes.

I can no longer sit on the side and watch these people destroy my country. Torturers. War mongers. Racists. Sexists. Constitution raping. Religious kooks. All of them. They have to go; the sooner the better.

The Congressional Black Caucus are the only people who are acting here (along with a couple of others). They carry our water for us now. They are true patriots, the only ones in Congress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 02:50 PM
Response to Reply #7
16. Oh really?
I think this is some of that over optimism I was talking about. First, you'd need articles of imprachment to come up in the House Judiciary Committee. Right away we run into our first impossibilty -- the idea that committee chairman Sensenbrenner would ever allow initiation of articles of impeachment.

But let's say he does. We then need a majority of the committee to approve it -- the next impossibility. On a 40-member committee, 23 are Republicans. And I see precious few of these supposed Republicans that are looking out for the good of their country. In any case, you'd need at least 4 of them to vote for impeachment, plus every Deomcrat -- which wouldn't happen.

Next, we go to the floor of the House itself, where Republicans outnumber Democrats 231 to 202. So, even if every Democrat votes for impeachment -- which is itself unlikely -- you still need 30 GOP votes.

Still with me? You say I've got incorrect assumptions? I don't think so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calimary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #7
17. You BETCHA!!!
Edited on Wed Sep-14-05 02:57 PM by calimary
There is a handful, a small group, that will start rediscovering their consciences, especially if the IMPEACHMENT cries continue, and grow louder and greater in number, combined with:

--Public opinion polls that either stay down, rise negligibly, or drop even lower:
--The September 24th anti-war march in Washington (and others around the country) led by Cindy Sheehan - yeah - remember her? Cindy First-Big-Hole-Punched-in-bush's-Armor Sheehan? I bet there will be MANY more people in that march because of Hurricane Katrina, and because there is a wee bit of awakening of the adversarial press, there WILL be more coverage (Hint: It's looking more "in" to raise questions. More MSMers are starting to realize that the emperor really doesn't have anything on);
--Fitzgerald will be speaking soon re: Plamegate;
--Iraq, itself, will reemerge as a big story, and won't be ANY nicer or prettier than it is now, and there will be plenty of people being reminded there of the incompetence of this SAME bunch of people that got us into this mess, and also made the Katrina nightmare as bad as it was. There will be linkage now that there wasn't, before.

It is NOT useless. Hey, if we'd thrown in the towel early on Nixon, he'd have been a full two-termer and it'd be President Agnew after him, okay? Check your history books. That did NOT happen. And it did NOT happen because the REPUBLICANS in Congress saw the light (either because their consciences finally got the better of them, or rising public opinion did) and convinced Nixon to jump before he was pushed.

It is NOT useless. It is NOT an exercise in futility.

Unless YOU MAKE IT SO.

The alternative is to sit there in futility and curse the darkness. I'd rather light one little candle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Independent_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. Me too...
I'd rather light one little candle myself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 03:11 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. I'll check my history book if you check yours...
The House was under Democratic control during Watergate. The House Judiciary Committee chairman was Democratic congressman Peter Rodino.

If Democrats controlled the House, I might feel differently about impeachment. But since they don't, it remains a quixotic campaign.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calimary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #20
23. You are indeed correct. But Nixon would have hung on if he'd perceived
that he still would have had the support of his party in the House. The reason he resigned is because he was shown, point blank (and I think Barry Goldwater was one of the GOP people chosen to go to the White House and bring him the news, if I remember correctly) that he had lost all support within his own party. When they deserted him, he gave up. He wouldn't have given a rat's ass if it had been all Dems. And he would have hung on and fought and done enemies list stuff for all he was worth, if he'd thought for one minute he had allies to help him survive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-15-05 12:02 PM
Response to Reply #23
29. Yes, he would have.
He'd have fought and fought and fought. And in the end, he'd have been impeached and removed from office. Because Democrats were in control of Congress.
Until we take back Congress, impeachment is a non-issue. We need to focus on ousting the Republicans from Congress in 2006. Then, if we take control, we can impeach the bastard. After all, the current minority leader of the House Judiciary Committee is John Conyers. If we took over, he'd become chairman. And he'd want blood, me thinks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrModerate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #4
13. Actually, I've never run across anyone who thinks this will happen . . .
Only that, in a just universe, it SHOULD.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
category5 Donating Member (62 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 05:51 PM
Response to Reply #4
24. Exactly...no impeachment unless dems take over congress in 2006
To think otherwise shows complete lack of reality. Work on
defeating repug congress in 2006.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 02:40 PM
Response to Original message
10. No, you get Chaney first...
but Bush will have to wait until 2007, when we finally have the Senate and House back, then the line of succession looks much better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 02:43 PM
Response to Original message
12. how many times will I have to do this
READ Article Two , section four, we can impeach the whole lot in one fell swoop, depends how the articles are written
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flying Dream Blues Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 03:03 PM
Response to Original message
19. What a sad state of affairs. Evil and Eviler. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calimary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 03:25 PM
Response to Original message
21. I've posted this before. I suspect it'll be GREAT FUN if cheney
inherits the presidency after bush is thrown out.

Why? PLEASE remember this. It's fundamental:

cheney likes to operate in the dark. He's happiest working and manipulating and pulling strings behind the curtain, in the shadows, behind the scenes - where NOOOOOOOOOOOObody can see what he's up to. Why is that? Because he realizes that what he's up to would piss off most average Americans if they knew about it, because they'd see in detail how he WASN'T working on behalf of THEIR BEST INTERESTS. So of course he doesn't want us to see what he's up to and he wants all his doings in secret. That's why he wanted to be SECOND IN COMMAND. Not Numero Uno. He knew it'd be the perfect puppet-master position because idiot george was such an egomaniac that he'd want the big job and the big title and the big office and the big limo and all the fanfare and other such gravy. cheney does all the heavy lifting and george is the figurehead.

cheney would HATE being in the hot seat - the head guy, the guy where the buck stops, the guy who takes all the heat, front-row center. He would HATE it. No more operating in the shadows for him. ESPECIALLY if an IMPEACHMENT trial and all the woes that go with it energize the public AND the press to assume correctly that where there's smoke, there's fire. Once we arrive at such a point, people will be naturally predisposed to be suspicious of these folks, and a president cheney would NOT get the free pass that good ol let's-have-a-beer-together george has.

Furthermore, there's the appeal thing. Like it or not, george has appeal. He has this aw-shucks, good-ol'-boy, nice average guy image where people genuinely did resonate to the "the guy you could go have a beer with" shtick. It was shtick, but it was effective. People really think he's fairly amiable. NOBODY thinks that of cheney. NOBODY. He does not have a warm fuzzy ANYTHING. He's got this lopsided snarl and he looks like everybody's pet caricature of the miserly millionaire breezing past the long bread lines in his fancy car. He does NOT have the appeal bush does. So, cosmetics and perceptions and superficiality being what they are in today's America, he would NOT get the breaks people are so willing to give the "affable" bush. THAT'S why bush was put in the front, anyway. He's the sunny side of the cooked egg. cheney is the stuff underneath that stuck to the pan. The public would be FAR less willing to cut him the slack they've cut george.

All that will be HILARIOUS fun for us to enjoy. At such a time, also, Congress - possibly a House of Reps back in Democratic control if people are still as pissed by next year's elections - will be in NO MOOD to play ball with these shits anymore. NO MORE MR. NICE GUY. The loser stench that clings to bush will slop over and stain all things republi-CON, especially a president cheney. We will have seen too much to be naive anymore. He will be a placeholder just as Gerald Ford was, and a LOT less sympathetic a public figure.

The likeability quotient for bush versus the one for cheney are like night and day. People just don't like cheney as much. It's visceral for both, and very much an intangible. He's not as fun or as smiley. He growls and has that sneer, and he's just not a sympathetic character. And unsympathetic characters do not win public sympathy. By then, people will be suspicious, fed up, angry, and VERY tired of this status quo. To be a republi-CON in general won't be a pleasant experience, and they won't be able to get anything done. Neither will he. It'll be an EXTREMELY unhappy time for the whole unholy bunch of 'em, especially as they start to turn on each other more, out of frustration and yearning for the good old days they see slipping away from them (we got SO CLOSE!!!! - as Will Pitt said in one of his recent pieces: "Somewhere there's a neocon who is seething."). I can remember campaigns after the whole Watergate debacle that ultimately brought in Jimmy Carter - where one of the big campaign slogans was "Had Enough? Vote Democratic" And people did. And you could not PAY people to admit they'd voted for Nixon. Such voters simply could not be found. And believe me, some of us tried. I can remember that, well (and I remember how deeply satisfying it was, too).

cheney won't have any fun at all. He'll VERY quickly get REALLY tired of everybody looking over his shoulder and demanding answers and accountability and press conferences and statements and explanations, when he's gonna want to kick back in that nice mansion he just bought and count his money with nobody bothering him or annoying him or expecting things of him or asking for stuff anymore.

Besides, there's the added factor of his famous ticker. Little ol' lynne may very likely step up and start making those "husband needs to come home and spend more time with the family" noises. If, indeed, the stress of his new job doesn't get to him all by itself. He is NOT negotiating from a position of strength, health-wise.

At any rate, if bush does go down - and it's a VERY WORTHY, VERY NOBLE CAUSE for all of us to get behind, for the sake of the survival of the America we still love - anything and anyone involved with him will be damaged goods to one degree or other. The WHOLE LOT OF 'EM will be NOT be negotating from a position of strength.

Which is exactly where we want 'em. Weakened. On the defensive. On the wane - watching as their sun is setting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bunkerbuster1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-15-05 12:10 PM
Response to Reply #21
30. I've posted as much before, as well.
I'd love to have a President Cheney, if only for the "deal with the organ grinder, not his monkey" kinda reasons.

But all the rest of your reasons are quite valid.

Cheney, Cheney, he's our man
He can do what Chimpy can
('t.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ktowntennesseedem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 06:39 PM
Response to Original message
26. Doesn't bother me too much.
As pointed out many times here, he is actually running the show anyway. He's even scarier than Shrub; evil and smart is much worse than evil and ignorant. But if he were officially the pres, he could no longer control things from some undisclosed location while Shrub goes on stage for their dog-and-pony shows. He will be out in the open, calling the shots, taking the hits (which should grow even harder and sharper after any impeachment, especially now that the MSM has finally grown some balls.) I foresee many more "go fuck yourself" opportunities for him, and I don't see the religious right base giving him a free pass for being the "good Christian :puke: man" that Shrub was.

Two other reasons I don't worry too much about "President" Cheney just yet. One, any impeachment will take a while to happen, especially with the GOP in charge on the hill, and that must be followed by an indictment and removal from office. I can't imagine Mr-I-can't-recall-any-mistakes (yesterday's half-assed acceptance of responsibility doesn't count--he STILL didn't admit any mistakes) doing anything other than kicking and screaming as they drag him and Pickles out of the White House. So even if impeachment happens in high gear, it won't be right away. And two, if this thing gets ugly enough for the GOP to actually turn on its own and impeach their glorious leader, it just might be ugly enough to bring down the whole lot of them. Who knows, maybe in a desperate attempt to save his butt Dubya will finally admit the whole mess is all Cheney's fault.

For now, I'm keeping the popcorn hot!

:popcorn:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-14-05 07:14 PM
Response to Original message
27. We'd get Cheney on war-profiteering EASILY
Edited on Wed Sep-14-05 07:15 PM by zulchzulu
Did you know he's made over $12 Million from Halliburton and its subsidiaries in deferred payments since 2001. All with secret no-bid contracts...

That's money off the backs of our troops and us, the taxpayers...imagine the ads pummeling the tv on this fact...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
renie408 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-15-05 12:16 PM
Response to Original message
32. Jesus, just that title made my heart drop.
I don't think impeachment is going to happen anyway. I think we should concentrate on 2006 and 2008.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 08:21 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC