thanks glynch. I've been lurking and you've taken a lot of heat lately! Rocket I think you're missing the big picture. It's more than just seeing the president. And you're making excuses why we shouldn't be allowed to do things that should be second nature to anyone. That's the point I was trying to make. Bush has suppressed any dissent in the name of liberty and freedom.
mc mark. I just think that security reasons is a valid reason to not be able to meet the president.. Could you go to any rally you wanted and meet clinton whenever?
Really? What about those fenced-off areas where the professional protestors are free to scream their heads off? Bush has insulated himself from that but that doesn't mean he doesn't know they are there. Welcome back!
sorry about the more posts but its just originally you made reference to his security detail.. at the inaguration of the president you have to have a huge detail. it would be silly to not
thanks giddy! Let's switch it around and have all the bush supporters in the cages. Rocket post all you want! night guys! I gotta go walk the dog.
You have a good point Mark. Liberals are good are crying, protesting and throwing pity parties. Conservatives are good at getting the job done. America spoke up at the polling places 2 months ago. Bottom line is no matter how you feel or how sad/angry you are it doesn't matter. A majority of us believe in George W Bush. You've got 4 more years of W, Enjoy!
mc - what was it like to walk around pissed off for the past 4 years knowing you'll be pissed off for another 4? You are one angry dude. Do you get a lot of strss headaches? Do yourself a favor and get over it. I suppose you could relocate to another country too if you want...I mean, hell, its a free country...right?!
The Chief Executive of the United States lied before a Grand Jury about a little thing. Is that really "cooked up?" Can anybody say SHRINKAGE?
'Twas a joke, my dear giddy. But since you insist on going down this path, the only reason I make that remark is I believe that under the Constitution, that impeachment was actually considered unconstitutional.
help me out...where are you getting that? it was absolutely a constitutional process. you can disagree with the move to do so...but they followed the prescribed process for impeachment under the Constitution.
This is a much smaller crime than, say, leaking the name of an active intelligence agent in time of war. The impeachment of Clinton was "cooked up" in that Starr was supposed to be investigating Whitewater and when he couldn't find wrongdoing, kept fishing for anything he could until he found a blue dress. What Clinton did was wrong and was definitely against the law, but would not have been an impeachable offense had the GOP not been foaming at the mouth to "get" Clinton for anything they could. If the GOP were REALLY that interested in not having lawbreakers in power, the person who outed Plame would be rotting in prison by now, but the hypocrites in charge are only interested in "justice" when it involves ruining a Democrat.
