Rep. Charles Rangel: BUSH IS IN "DEEP SHIT"

[kpete]

Bush Broke Baghdad, But Democrats Still Break on Clean-Up
Wesley Clark Says Wait, Detach Gracefully; Hillary Still Hovering; Barack on Iraq: Pack
By Jason Horowitz

So now that the Democrats have won control of Congress, what should they do about the war in Iraq?

“I never understand that question,” answered Charlie Rangel, the incoming chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. “You have a President that’s in deep shit. He got us into the war, and all the reasons he gave have been proven invalid, and the whole electorate was so pissed off that they got rid of anyone they could have, and then they ask, ‘What is the Democrats’ solution?’”

For many Democrats, Iraq is George Bush’s war, a Republican conflict that they are powerless to influence. They’ve also calculated—correctly, to judge by the midterm elections—that the voting public understands that the G.O.P. is responsible for the hellish situation in Iraq that now threatens to destabilize the entire Middle East.

more at:
http://www.observer.com/20061218/20061218_Jason_Horowitz_politics_newsstory1.asp

[DemonFighterLives]

1. Rangel Rocks!

Put the ball back in dubby's court. It is his mess and he needs to clean it up. We will help of course by ridding this country of the criminals.
:dem:

[Bitwit1234]

2. And now the republicans are floating this

that the democrats are responsible for the Iraq war dragging on. They are responsible because bush does not know what to do...can you believe that.

[NanceGreggs]

4. Even the simplest concept ...

... "You break it, you've bought it", is too far over the Idiot's head to be understood.

[longship]

3. Dupe.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2913161&mesg_id=2913161

[wryter2000]

5. Wow

I've never heard Charlie curse before. :wow:

Kick butt, Congressman Rangel!

[Imagevision]

6. I believe Bush has to dump Malaki in order to stay in the game - ousted, IED, suicide bomber?

as long as he's gone, Bush needs a pass, Malaki disappearing I believe is the reason for Bush going thru January before he announces his magic plan...

[highnooner]

7. But, we are to look forward!

[walldude]

8. Perhaps you missed Tom Delay's version of reality

The war is going badly, who's fault is it? Why the liberals and the media of course!

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/12/12/delay-blames-the-left-for-bushs-failed-war/#more-12728

The Republicans had nothing to do with the failure of this war, the war failed because... because.. BECAUSE THE PEOPLE ON THE LEFT HAD THE NERVE TO... TO.. QUESTION IT!

[Manifestor_of_Light]

9. Rangel Rocks

I remember when he was chair of the House Judiciary Committee when Barbara Jordan thanked him ironically for putting her on the committee, when they were going to impeach Nixon.

He's like Conyers, he's been around forever! :yourock:

[gratuitous]

10. Will Rangel's comments make any sense to the major media folks?

"What's that crazy black man talking about, swearing like that? So rude. Republicans never swear like that. He doesn't have a solution! The Democrats are in disarray!"

The media are so ready to let Bush off the hook, the idea that Iraq is Bush's baby just won't register.

[Octafish]

11. Real deep shit...

And the doo-doo will be even deeper, once the DEMs investigate all the lies -- from Selection 2000 to 9-11 to the present day.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

12. K&R... I hope you enjoyed a well-deserved break from posting at DU...

but it's good to vote up your good work again Pete... Happy Holidays

[radfringe]

13. Dems can come up with all the plans they want.. but

sadly, the decisions regarding what to do in Iraq is up to the decider.

Pressure through funding can be applied to "force" a plan - but curtailing the funding will only hurt the troops.

Dems can implement massive oversight and investigations, which will bring the abuses and war-profiteering to the attention of the public. This would further erode bush's poll numbers.

However, the "decider" has made it perfectly clear he doesn't pay attention to polls, or anyone else that disagrees with him. A further erosion would most likely cause the decider to further seclude himself in his bubble.

Pelosi has stated she's not considering impeachment. How low in the approval polls will the decider have to hit before the people demand impeachment?

Unlike other lame-duck presidencies - we are in the middle of two wars: Iraq and Afghanistan. In the past, Congress could make a lame-duck president totally irrelevant through applying pressure or over-riding vetos. However, the big issues are the wars, and decisions about the war is ultimately the president's responsibility.

the mid-term elections show the people want a change - if the Dems aren't able to effect a significant change through "normal" course of business, the only option left may be to impeachment.

Impeaching the "decider" would just put the "controller" (cheney) in the big chair - so both must be impeached or forced to resign. This doesn't mean Pelosi would move into the oval office.

In the Nixon-Agnew days - Agnew resigned, Nixon appointed Ford as VP. After Nixon resigned and Ford moved into the oval office, Ford appointed Rockefeller as VP. Something similar to this would need to happen with Cheney resigning/being removed first.