Talk About Network

Google





Education > Teachers > Re: NANCY PELLO...
Latest [ Topics | Posts ] Archive Post A New Topic Post a Reply
<< Topic < Post Post 2 of 4 Topic 146 of 212
Post > Topic >>

Re: NANCY PELLOSI (your time is now)

by "Seveigny" <seveigny@[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Nov 11, 2006 at 09:50 PM

<letoured@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:mgR4h.11205$bg7.4471@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> In <w_Sdnrsdato__M_Ynz2dnuvz_t-dnz2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, on 11/08/2006
>   at 03:58 PM, "needles" <briticanj@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> said:
>
>
>
>> If the Liberals win control of both the House and the Senate, and if
>>they
>> impeach both the Prez and the Veep, that would mean that the speaker of
>>the
>> House is next in line for the White House. Do realize what this all
>>means ?

Now that  the progressives have won  control of Congress why would they 
decide to impeach the President and the Vice President?  Has either 
committed an impeachable offense?  According to the Constitution, the 
President and Vice President can be impeached based on high crimes and 
misdeameanors.  Has President Bush or Vice President Cheney committed high

crimes or misdemeanors?  Have they committed treasonable acts?
The Republican Congress attempted to impeach President Clinton on that
basis 
and they failed.  Why would a progressive Congress waste their time in
this 
way? The Republican Congress wasted the mandate of the people by pursuing 
partisan politics.  Its ironic to me that over and over again, the people 
sent Republican representatives to the House and the Senate, expecting
them 
to make some substantial change and the Republican leader****p failed them 
over and over again.  Did the Republican leader****p do anything they 
promised to do?  No.    I remember, very clearly, the promises made by the

Republicans when they won control of Congress in 1994.  Promises were made

about cleaning house, about overhauling the tax system, about making 
abortion illegal and creating a smaller government.  Did any of them make 
good on those promises? No.  Instead what we got was tax reform that 
benefitted the wealthy, nation building that resulted in the loss of lives

of American soldiers, an "education reform" that will result in most
schools 
being unable to meet the requirements of NCLB, and a Medicare "reform 
package" that most senior citizens don't understand.
Instead, the Republicans created a system rife with coruption.  Enron. 
Jack 
Abramoff.  Tom DeLay.  A representative who misused his power by having 
inappropriate ***ual contact with House pages and a House hierarchy who 
chose to ignore that abuse of power.

>> We could have a female (Democrat) President and it would not be Hillary
>> Rodam Clinton.

Hillary Rodam Clinton may or may not decide to run for President.  She is 
very influential at this point and will be more influential now that the 
Democrats are in control of the Senate.  Senator Clinton is a very wise 
woman and she may elect to stay in the Senate.  She knows, far better than

most hopeful presidential candidates, what the powers of the president
are, 
what limitations the president has and how difficutlt it is to be
president. 
I think it likely that she will decide the powers as a Senator outweigh
the 
powers of the president.  I think it likely that she will be unwilling to
be 
examined by the microscope that presidential candidates put themselves 
under.

Nancy Pelosi will be the Speaker for the House of Representatives.  She
may 
want to be President but she wants to be elected by the popular vote, ie.
if 
she wants to be president she will run for the office.
>
>> *Regime change anyone ?*


I think there will be a regime change in 2008.

> If they will they will force you right wing kooks into cl***** for
reading
> comprehension and cognitive reasoning -- instead of throwing people into
> secret prisons where they are tortured -- it will be a good thing.

Who is "they"?  Why do you ascribe the right wing as "kooks"  Why go into
ad 
hominem attacks?  Why do you think that those on the right wing of the 
spectrum need reading comprehension and cognitive reasoning instruction? 
This is nonsense.  While I don't believe that imprisoning people and 
torturing them is the ethical way to behave, I can see why my opponents
have 
differing perspectives.  Terrorism is frightening.  People believe in 
fighting fire with fire.  Me, I think thats a way to burn down everyone's 
house.
> Now take the right wing kook stuff somewhere else.
Right wing kook stuff.  Left wing kook stuff.  Lets try to get away from 
calling names and look to what we can do to solve the problems our nation 
and our world face.
       ~Cate
 




 4 Posts in Topic:
Re: NANCY PELLOSI (your time is now)
letoured@[EMAIL PROTECTED  2006-11-10 02:14:42 
Re: NANCY PELLOSI (your time is now)
"Seveigny" <  2006-11-11 21:50:09 
Re: NANCY PELLOSI (your time is now)
"Larry Stimely"  2006-11-12 16:09:36 
Re: NANCY PELLOSI (your time is now)
"M. Kilgore" &l  2006-11-12 12:06:43 

Post A Reply:
  Go here to Signup

AddThis Feed Button


About - Advertising - Contact - Frequently Asked Questions - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use - Signup

Contact
localhost-V2008-12-19 Wed Jan 7 21:40:11 PST 2009.