Normally I wouldn't feel the need to add any links (nor would I expect to find myself being the one to post it), but a) I can't believe this hasn't been posted and b) I can't believe the total lack of coverage it's getting.
I'm mostly interested in why it's not being covered. CNN hasn't reported it yet. Ditto Fox News. Even the CBC and the BBC haven't written a word.
I would have thought that this would be the kind of thing that would get covered. Is it just because the precedings are likely to go nowhere? Or is Kucinich considered that much of a wingnut?
Originally posted by tarnishI'm mostly interested in why it's not being covered... Is it just because the precedings are likely to go nowhere? Or is Kucinich considered that much of a wingnut?
You got it on two.
As much as I'd enjoy watching it all unfold, there's no way it'll happen. It's no use beating a dead horse, you know.
(edited by Cerebus on 10.6.08 1721) Forget it Josh... it's Cerebustown.
Both, probably. The Daily Show last night talked about how the US Senate Select Committe on Intelligence released its final reports on the administration's build up to Iraq.
Originally posted by http://intelligence.senate.gov/press/record.cfm?id=298775“In making the case for war, the Administration repeatedly presented intelligence as fact when in reality it was unsubstantiated, contradicted, or even non-existent. As a result, the American people were led to believe that the threat from Iraq was much greater than actually existed.”
TDS also made a note of how no one was talking about that. I'd guess the media isn't making mention of that because it relates to the point that McClellan made that most of the media didn't bother to question the points that the administration was offering. Bottom line is we're basically in a holding pattern until the election. Don't expect anything to get done anywhere.
The media didn't really cover Kucinich trying to impeach Cheney last year, either, if I recall correctly. Let me utilize the power of Google and dig up how that came out...
He is a nut job but more importantly it would go no where anyway and why would the Dems want to generate any sympathy for the Reps. They are going to run against Bush and ned him where he is.
It's unfortunate since if any president deserved to be impeached, it's Bush. But that was the strategic beauty of the Repubs' impeachment of Clinton --- it basically gave them virtual carte blanche to do whatever in their next trip to the White House, since they could argue that any Democratic attempt to impeach would be sour grapes.
“How is it that I am a good actor? What I do is I... pretend to be the person I’m portraying. You’re confused. Case in point: in Lord of the Rings, Peter Jackson comes to me and says ‘I would like you to be Gandalf the Wizard,’ and I said ‘You are aware that I am not really a wizard?’ and Peter Jackson said ‘I would like you to use your acting skills to portray a wizard for the duration of the show.’ So I said ‘Okay’ and then I said to myself ‘Mmm.. How do I do that?’ And this is what I did: I imagined that I was a wizard, and then I pretended, and acted, in that way on the stage. How did I know what to say? The words were written down for me in a script. How did I know where to stand? People told me where to stand." -- Sir Ian McKellen, Extras
Originally posted by Big BadIt's unfortunate since if any president deserved to be impeached, it's Bush. But that was the strategic beauty of the Repubs' impeachment of Clinton --- it basically gave them virtual carte blanche to do whatever in their next trip to the White House, since they could argue that any Democratic attempt to impeach would be sour grapes.
Actually it backfired on them as they looked bad in the end with the American public. No sour grapes involved as Bush is more valuable as a reminder in the White House to vote Democrat in 08.
Thread ahead: Ron Paul to suspend presidential bid; recruit new Republicans Next thread: As if oil prices and rice shortages weren't bad enough Previous thread: RP to hold his own "mini-convention" during the GOP one
Well, there are a few things. I think Bush is spending too much. But there is no indication Kerry will spend less - in fact, the opposite. Many of the things he is proposing involve increasing the budget.