for crying out loud: IMPEACH! IMPEACH! IMPEACH! IMPEACH! IMPEACH! IMPEACH! IMPEACH! ... yeeeeeeeeeeh

KO: "What do the Democrats do with this?

Answer: Nothing, absolutely nothing.

If the US doesn't slip forever into corruption-riddled oblivion, historians from a better, future period will look back and marvel at both the depravity of the Bush administration and at the mincing, disgraceful acquiescence of Congress.

It really is sad. I've defended the Democrats in Congress--after all they are actually in the minority in the Senate when it comes to any national security vote (where Lieberman votes hard right), but they really seem to have no idea what to do with power. They can't even enforce their subpoenas, for fear of endangering the bipartisan stimulus package. They've made it very clear that they are afraid of GOP non-cooperation.

Another problem they have is that Bush is at rock bottom and he has no agenda at all for the last year, so he has no incentive to agree to anything at all. No carrot, no stick.

Of course the Dems cannot impeach him. If they do, then they'll have a harder time lying about Iran and all the other wars they will be fighting when they take office.

Did Olbermann's guest really say "Boolean," "memory hole," and acknowledge that "spineful" isn't actually a word all in less than ten minutes?

...I'm amazed. I guess I'm not used to hearing these things on the news.

Republicans, Lard bless their sad souls, understand power. Dems too rarely have the fire in their bellies to march together toward a common goal, like impeaching lying warmakers.

Incompetent failure though he is, next year Bush will be happily cutting brush, playing golf, and speechifying for big bucks without have been impeached.

Life is not fair.

As I have said before - it doesn't matter who you vote for, the government always gets in. Why would the Democrats, who are expecting to be in power, wish to do anything to curb the potential power of the President? Turkeys do not vote for Christmas.

Another quotation - "The difference between Republicans and Democrats is the same as the difference between two sparrows sitting on a fence. One wags its tail up and down, the other wags its tail down and up."

This list of 935 lies doesn't even take into account the shell game the Bush administration played with the term: "WMD". They would talk about the evidence for the existence of sarin gas in Iraq, for which there was some evidence ( of course there was, we sold them the stuff) and then pull the WMD switcheroo and start talking about the threat of mushroom clouds.

Most people were led to think that "WMD" meant nukes or a "dirty bomb" of depleted uranium. But the difference between sarin gas and a nuke is like the difference between a pee shooter and a crate of TNT.

Why is it that media-people and politicians claim that this issue is too complex for people to follow?

There are several impeachable 'crimes' the president committed. And they are very easy to explain.For instance:

In 2002, the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (the agency in charge of assessing for the country the "state of U.S. intelligence") did not consider the "uranium from Africa" claim to be supported by enough evidence to justify the president being on-record making the claim.

The CIA had told the president to remove the claim from his speeches on at least two occasions in the months prior to president's State of the Union (SotU)speech.

Bush made the claim in his SotU speech anyway. As such, George W. Bush, before a joint session of Congress, did knowingly misrepresent the state of U.S. intelligence.

That's a heck of a lot simpler to understand than Watergate. It's even better, because Bush, after his speech, tried to blame the CIA for not taking the claim out of his SotU speech ... how many times do they have to tell the president? Bush is both a liar and he's such a heel he's willing to make others take the blame for his own lying.

What a simple and straight-forward narrative.

impeach. impeach. impeach.

Here's another conspiracy of lies that particularly burns me up: The Mobile Bio-Weapons Lab claim.

Not only before the war, but afterward.

According to the Washington Post, on May 27, 2003 the Pentagon transmitted its decision to the White House that the trailers found in Iraq (which Bush claimed to be mobile biological weapons labs) “had nothing to do with biological weapons.” Nevertheless, the most senior members of the Bush administration claimed repeatedly and for six months leading up to the November 2004 presidential elections that the trailers were evidence that weapons of mass destruction had been found.

You know what this calls for ... a whole lot of pooyou.com.

On at least 532 separate occasions (in speeches, briefings, interviews, testimony, and the like), Bush and these three key officials, along with Secretary of State Colin Powell, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, and White House press secretaries Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan, stated unequivocally that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (or was trying to produce or obtain them), links to Al Qaeda, or both. This concerted effort was the underpinning of the Bush administration's case for war.

But Iraq did have WMD (we found some of them after the invasion). Saddam did have ties to Al Qaeda. How many times do we have to go over and over this? How can you lie about documented fact?

FYI, here's some followup on that:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22847771/

Saddam publicly denied having unconventional weapons before the U.S. invasion, but prevented U.N. inspectors from working in the country from 1998 until 2002 and when they finally returned in November 2002, they often complained that Iraq wasn’t fully cooperating. Piro, a Lebanese-American who speaks Arabic, debriefed Saddam after he was found in an underground hideout near his home city north of Baghdad in December 2003, nine months after the U.S. invasion. Piro said Saddam also said that he wanted to keep up the illusion that he had the program in part because he thought it would deter a likely Iranian invasion.

Saddam lied! People died! Et cetera.

But Iraq did have WMD (we found some of them after the invasion).

Are you talking about this:

The lawmakers pointed to an unclassified summary from a report by the National Ground Intelligence Center regarding 500 chemical munitions shells that had been buried near the Iranian border, and then long forgotten, by Iraqi troops during their eight-year war with Iran, which ended in 1988. (source)

If so, permission to laugh. If you still don't get why I'm laughing at you then you need to read the last paragraph on that article.

Or perhaps you are referring to this piece of news?

You're like Mitt Romney trying to justify his MLK lie by parsing the word "saw".

Calligraph,

Cute use of a source - as in, yeah, you quoted the source to support your argument - although this passage is a shell of support at best.

As a teacher who has caught those doing poor research, I feel perhaps at best you did not read the entire article. More than likely, you just left out the parts that undermine your assertions.

First off, where in this article does it say that Saddam had ties to Al Qaeda? Answer: nowhere.

2nd: if you in fact did not read the entire article, take a gander:

"Saddam Hussein allowed the world to believe he had weapons of mass destruction to deter rival Iran and did not think the United States would stage a major invasion, according to an FBI interrogator who questioned the Iraqi leader after his capture."

"In 2003, a close aide of Saddam's told The Associated Press that Saddam did not expect a U.S. invasion and deliberately kept the world guessing about his weapons program, although he already had gotten rid of it." (the inspections had an effect)

Finally: “For him, it was critical that he was seen as still the strong, defiant Saddam. He thought that (faking having the weapons) would prevent the Iranians from reinvading Iraq,” Piro told Scott Pelley of “60 Minutes.”

Slipshod research. Sometimes trend articles making ill-based claims. Shows such as O'Reilly factor. The et cetera includes bogus rolling.

ciao