« Back to story "Kucinich presents Bush impeachment articles"

Story Comments

Posted by: mesodude 1 year, 5 months ago

This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.

All Comments Share Story Report

Neutral
mesodude1 year, 5 months ago

This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »

Why not? Americans and Iraqis are still dying because of Bush's lies. Our military and economy are still ruined. Why shouldn't we talk about this "$hit" again?

(comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 5) (recursion depth : 1) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
Reply
10 Replies

loading ...
- JoseMadreComment removed: Hard Banned6 Replies
  - Neutral
    mesodude1 year, 5 months ago
    
    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
    
    "Pelosi wants no part of it because then she and Kerry and a lot of other Democrats would be exposed for their part in the war lead up."
    --You have an interesting imagination but none of what you say mitigates the fact that when Democrats and Republicans agreed to allow Bush to disarm Iraq, they didn't agree to anything like what this horrific three-hour tour has morphed into over the course of 5 years. THAT is the issue you cons fail to get through your thick skulls. No one, neither Democrat nor Republican authorized Bush to invade Iraq, AND destroy the country in a way that it would ultimately be necessary to stay there indefinitely and spend trillions of dollars giving the Middle East a surprise makeover. You cons love regurgitating CRAP about what "everyone knew" and what "everyone thought." No sane person would have given Bush the green light to do any of that and cons know this. No way, Jose. ;-(
    
    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 7) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
    Reply
    5 Replies
    
    loading ...
    - Neutral
      Teech1 year, 5 months ago
      
      This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
      
      This guy is a gutsy little booger! He doesn't appear to follow any lock-step party doctrine and doesn't seem to be a "yes man." He's a Democrat for sure, but one who questions all policy and decisions. A renegade? No. A clear thinker? Seems to be. Hears the music of the Democrats, but marches to his own drum.
      I hope there's a spot for him in the next administration.
      Recall, if you will, that Lincoln actively sought out his opponents and those with divergent viewpoints and INCLUDED them in his administration. When his administration came to a consensus, it was a STRONG consensus tempered in the crucible of opposition and debate.
      Future administrations would be wise to emulate him.
      
      (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 8) (recursion depth : 4) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
      Reply
      4 Replies
      
      loading ...
      - Neutral
        TemplarScribe1 year, 5 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        Were I the President, I'd find room for him at the very next Supreme Court Justice vacancy.
        His drive, his couragenousness, and his desire to see justice done despite the odds, are exactly the qualities needed in a court dominated by justices who want only to avoid rocking the business-political status quo.
        And while Secretary of State wouldn't be a stretch for Kucinich's talent, I'm guessing that spot's already been offered to someone else.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 9) (recursion depth : 5) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
      - Neutral
        tkyrchncs1 year, 5 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        Lest your analogy go to far it should be noted that Lincoln presided over the bloodiest conflict in American history, with over 1,000,000 Americans dead and half of America ravished, with major cities razed and farms and infrastructure and economy ruined.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 9) (recursion depth : 5) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        2 Replies
        
        loading ...
        
        libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned1 Reply
        
        Neutral
        TemplarScribe1 year, 5 months ago
        
        This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
        
        Hey,LibsR:
        Thanks for pointing out the historical errors in the abovec post. You've proven you have the ability and the will to point out the errors in other's reasoning.
        If you could only do that with politics, levelling an equally valid and harsh eye upon both Dems and Reps, pointing out the errors of both, joining in on occasion with the Dems and pointing out occasionally when the Reps are wrong...
        Then you may do a real service to the Propeller community at large.
        
        (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 11) (recursion depth : 7) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
        Reply
        0 Replies
        
        loading ...
- Neutral
  Endoscopy1 year, 5 months ago
  
  This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
  
  This is hilarious. Everybody in the west was saying the same thing. The Clinton administration was saying the same thing. The Democrats and Republicans were saying the same thing. Bush fooled the world by lying.
  Why can't Kucinich and rabid Libs all remember history. Bush was saying what the world was but he was lying. Real astute.
  
  (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 6) (recursion depth : 2) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
  Reply
  2 Replies
  
  loading ...
  - Neutral
    djn3nunez31 year, 5 months ago
    
    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
    
    I'm sure it's hilarioius as hell to the families of the 4000 soldiers (or the countless Iraqis who have lost innocent family members). If Everybody was saying the same thing why was it so hard to get the UN on board with military action? Clinton never once said he would invade and occupy Iraq to remove Saddam from power. Even the President father publish his rationale for not removing Saddam.
    Rice and Powell both stated in 2001 Iraq was no threat and had no WMD production facilities.
    Bush certainly didn't fool the world as world opinion showed. However the American (liberal) media sure helped by parroting each of the administrations false assertions about the threat Iraq, a country that had been plagued by two costly wars, and 11 year of crippling sanctions, posed to the worlds remaining superpower. Anyone in America calling the Bush Administration out on the obvious lies was proclaimed a near traitor and/or terrorist sympathizer.
    
    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 7) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
    Reply
    0 Replies
    
    loading ...
  - Neutral
    mesodude1 year, 5 months ago
    
    This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
    
    When did Congress agree to fund the destruction and rebuilding of the Middle East from scratch? When did they agree we were going to spend several trillion dollars and stay there indefinitely? Where is that spelled out in the agreement, Endo?
    
    (comment_max_expanded_depth : 55) (comment depth : 7) (recursion depth : 3) (max_comment_reply_depth : 40) (comment_max_render_depth : 55)
    Reply
    0 Replies
    
    loading ...

Post Reply

You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.

People Who Liked This Comment (38)

People Who Didn't Like This Comment (7)

Submit a Story

Advertisement