Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dump Cheney for Condi, Bush urged
Times Online ^ | 04.23.06

Posted on 04/23/2006 9:18:06 AM PDT by Dr. Marten

REPUBLICANS are urging President George W Bush to dump Dick Cheney as vice-president and replace him with Condoleezza Rice if he is serious about presenting a new face to the jaded American public.

They believe that only the sacrifice of one or more of the big beasts of the jungle, such as Cheney or Donald Rumsfeld, the defence secretary, will convince voters that Bush understands the need for a fresh start.

The jittery Republicans claim Bush’s mini-White House reshuffle last week will do nothing to forestall the threat of losing control of Congress in the November mid-term elections.

Fred Barnes of the Weekly Standard magazine and author of Rebel in Chief, a sympathetic new biography of Bush, said: “There are going to have to be sweeping personnel changes if people are going to take a second look at the Bush presidency.”

Barnes, who is close to the White House, said he believed Cheney would be willing to stand down in order to help Bush. “It’s unlike Bush to dump somebody whom he likes and respects,” he cautioned. “But the president needs to do something shocking and dramatic such as putting in Condoleezza Rice.”

Cheney appeared to have beeen caught napping during a visit to the Oval Office by China’s president, Hu Jintao, on Friday, although he claimed he had been looking down at his notes. It has often been said that he would cite medical reasons should he ever resign.

The best scenario, Barnes added, would be for Bush to announce that “Dick Cheney will be around as an outside adviser and I can call him on the phone, but I’d like to anoint somebody who I think will be the next leader of the United States”.

Tom Edmonds, a leading Republican consultant, said the White House had failed to grasp that the party was in desperate straits. “I have never talked to so many disenchanted Republicans,” he said. “The president even stonewalled the minor changes he made by talking about how he was really perfectly happy with his team. He didn’t even give himself wiggle room.”

One Republican strategist, who did not want to be named, said: “If I were Bush I would think of changing Cheney. It is one of the few substantial things he can do to change the complexion of his administration. The rest is nibbling around the edges.”

Bush’s new chief of staff, Joshua Bolten, quickly put his stamp on the inner workings of the White House last week by stripping Karl Rove, Bush’s most powerful adviser, of his policy-making role and ordering him to concentrate on his forte: winning elections.

Bolten also obtained the resignation of the White House spokesman, Scott McClellan, who was nicknamed Piggy in a recent Vanity Fair article because of his resemblance to the hapless victim of the feral boys in Lord of the Flies.

Tony Snow, a Fox News broadcaster who is favoured to replace McClellan, has previously described the Bush administration as “listless” and in dire need of change.

But a new communicator cannot reinvent an old team. Edmonds believes Rumsfeld should go. “The president is loyal to a fault,” he said. “His loyalty shouldn’t be to Rumsfeld but to the troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. We need a new, strong face on the war, such as Senator John McCain or Joe Lieberman (the pro-war Democrat senator).”

Bob Schieffer, a CBS news television presenter, said Bush may yet drop Rumsfeld despite his strong declaration of support. “It was also this president who said, ‘Brownie, you’re doing a heck of a job’ and that was just before Brownie got canned,” Schieffer said, referring to Michael Brown, who directed the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s much-criticised response to Hurricane Katrina.

John Snow, the Treasury secretary, has been left twisting in the wind while replacements for him are openly discussed, and Rob Portman has been brought in to replace Bolten as budget director. Suggestions that Harriet Miers, Bush’s White House counsel who was dropped as his supreme court nominee, would be next to go were denied last week.

Supporters say Bush should live up to his bold claim that he is “the decider” — made while rejecting recent calls for Rumsfeld’s resignation from half a dozen senior generals — and start firing senior people rather than backroom staff.

“If the Democrats win either the House of Representatives or the Senate it will be death and torment. It will be horrible for Bush,” said Barnes. A Democrat win could lead to moves to impeach Bush for leading the country to war on allegedly false pretences, or at the very least, to bog down the president’s legislative programme until he leaves office in 2008.

Rove has been privately warning party activists to expect some losses in the mid-term elections. One insider said: “I’ve heard him say at several party gatherings that the president wasn’t supposed to win in 2000, but he did. We’ve increased our margins of victory time and again. We can’t just keep winning on top of winning so we’re bound to slip back, but we’re still doing better than you would historically expect.”

Only one two-term victor has been more unpopular than Bush at a similar six-year stage in his presidency — Richard Nixon in the months before he was impeached.

 


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bush; bushisanidiot; bushthemoron; cheney; condoleezza; gwbushisexcellent; mccarthyisbigbomb; morebarf; repubslovecheney
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-105 next last
To: Dr. Marten

The Times Online piece is at
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2148000,00.html

It's a British news outlet! ...wishful thinking in Britain.


51 posted on 04/23/2006 12:08:01 PM PDT by familyop ("Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists." --President Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bray
"This is a PravdABDNC hoax."

It's piece in a British newspaper. Have a look at the link.

I agree with the rest of what you wrote.
52 posted on 04/23/2006 12:10:38 PM PDT by familyop ("Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists." --President Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Marten
"They believe that only the sacrifice of one or more of the big beasts of the jungle, such as Cheney or Donald Rumsfeld, the defence secretary, will convince voters that Bush understands the need for a fresh start."

That no surprise, coming from a pro-terrorist British opinion rag like the Times Online.

ICM (Poll of British people)
"ICM Research interviewed a random sample of 1,000 adults aged 18+ by telephone on 20-21st April, 2002. Interviews were conducted across the country and the results have been weighted to the profile of all adults.
. . .

"Q3. In the dispute in the Middle East between Israel and the Palestinians, from what you have seen and heard about the conflict which of the two do you sympathise with more, Israel or the Palestinians?"

Israel           14%
Palestine      28%
Both            14%
Neither         23%
Don't know   20%
"
53 posted on 04/23/2006 12:14:55 PM PDT by familyop ("Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists." --President Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: clintonh8r
So the candy-ass GOPers in the House and Senate want the president to dump his key players because they can't get re-elected on their own merits, and they think dumping Rummy or Big Dick will mean more votes for them? Yeah...that's a strategy to go with.

Exactly right - These weak-kneed GOPers simply need to stand up and fight back on the DEM's / MSM - They need to stand shoulder to shoulder with our CIC / SecDef on the WOT / Iraq, they need to tout our robust economic success....they need to take the issue of high gas prices to the DEMs pointing out the facts that 30 years of wrong-headed environmental policies have costs!..we are bearing those costs at the pump today.

54 posted on 04/23/2006 12:15:12 PM PDT by SevenMinusOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Marten
"Well, I stated a fact. Bush is an idiot."

"There were 16 errors in the simultaneous interpretation of Bush's speech, including a missing section that was filled in later. "

The interpreter made mistakes. Simultaneous interpreting is not easy. But why call Bush an idiot? The mistakes were not his.

Can you find an American source for your opinions?
55 posted on 04/23/2006 12:21:50 PM PDT by ChessExpert (The Democratic Party - a Marxist front organization)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: ChessExpert

"Then you give a link to what others say about him!"

I've already stated my thoughts about the man. As for the link I provided, Roland does not offer his own thoughts on the matter. He did however translate several articles from other sources relating to how the meeting was perceived in China, Taiwan and Hong Kong.

Of course, the protest that was allowed by an ET reporter was not broadcasted in China. If there were any competence among those handling this visit by Hu Jintao, none of these mistakes would have even taken place.


56 posted on 04/23/2006 12:33:16 PM PDT by Dr. Marten ((http://thehorsesmouth.blog-city.com))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: bray

I agree. Name these GOPers who want Chaney to go. Too bad about them. They have done nothing to inspire the confidence of the public. Chaney is the best VP we ever had and Condi has pro-abortion baggage that cannot be disregarded. Let's show the integrity and support our President and VP.


57 posted on 04/23/2006 12:41:14 PM PDT by conservative blonde (Conservative Blonde)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ChessExpert
"The interpreter made mistakes. Simultaneous interpreting is not easy. But why call Bush an idiot? The mistakes were not his."
The interpreter made mistakes. The officials doing background checks on attending journalists made mistakes. The official announcing the name of the Chinese National Anthem made mistakes. Bush himself made a huge mistake by grabbing the Chinese President in the manner he did.
 
The entire visit was completely fumbled.
 
Can you find an American source for your opinions?"
 
My opinions are not dictated by others. As for citing the mistakes this administration made while hosting the Chinese President, what makes the difference where they come from? If the US administration didn't recognize the mistakes they were making, what makes you think other AMericans would pick up on it either?

58 posted on 04/23/2006 12:43:50 PM PDT by Dr. Marten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: ChessExpert
Good point. The only idiots i know of are those like me who continue to send money and support those who do not represent me. I have to admit , the argument that , ya we are bad but the dems are worse is wearing thin. Bush is inarticulate and he has a pitiful media response team . I steam when he refuses to crush these dwarfs that attack him. He is no idiot . He and his team have done a remarkable job . It is easy to forget what kind of shape we were in after 911 . I think he is dead wrong on his immigration position , mainly because he has no idea how it impacts city and state services , not to mention the emerging middle class. However i am glad he is where he is.
59 posted on 04/23/2006 12:45:36 PM PDT by fantom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Rhetorical pi2; libstripper; ChessExpert
Yes, yes and yes...........

What makes this "theory", ha, ha, so plausible is the fact, that when Vice-President Agnew was found to have taken payoffs (while a governor, I believe).........full bore, to the hilt, ______to the wall attack by the big liberal media, but, when President Clinton was found to have taken payoffs (also, while a governor, I believe) the sounds of silence, and, of............crickets.

Yet another perfect example of the double standard, hypocritical, biased, lefist, lying socialist MSM.

60 posted on 04/23/2006 1:14:59 PM PDT by AwesomePossum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Marten

You call the President and idiot then post commie propaganda article whining about how it was a tragedy that the Chinese President may have been embarrassed by the fact that someone pointed out that his communist government is immoral.


61 posted on 04/23/2006 1:42:01 PM PDT by Naptowne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Marten
"how the meeting was perceived in China, Taiwan and Hong Kong.

First of all Hong Kong is in China. Secondly China has a state controlled media that tells its citizens what to percieve and how to percieve it, and anyone in that country who is observant questions anything that government says. Thirdly Tawain is in position to dictate anything America does. That nation would not exist if it was not for America, and that is a fact. Why don't you post some excerpts from Mao's little read book ?

62 posted on 04/23/2006 1:50:09 PM PDT by Naptowne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Naptowne
You call the President and idiot then post commie propaganda article whining about how it was a tragedy that the Chinese President may have been embarrassed by the fact that someone pointed out that his communist government is immoral.
Commie propaganda?
 
First of all, the owner of ESWN is not a commie propagandist. Second, the protest should have never happened in the first place. If it wasn't staged by officials in the Bush administration, this woman should have never even been permitted access to the press conference given that she pulled a similar stunt in Malta several years ago when Jiang Zemin was President.
Third, morality is a debatable issue that is dictated differently from one society to the next. Just because one nations practices differ from our own does not make them immoral - so step off your little pedestal.  

63 posted on 04/23/2006 2:01:49 PM PDT by Dr. Marten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Fresh Wind
He was not napping he was reading his notes as usual being well prepared.


64 posted on 04/23/2006 2:07:16 PM PDT by snugs (An English Cheney Chick - BIG TIME)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Marten

I'd rather Cheney dumped Bush for Condi.


65 posted on 04/23/2006 2:07:48 PM PDT by Sloth (Archaeologists test for intelligent design all the time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Hal

Absolutely either they are thick or they think their readers are.


66 posted on 04/23/2006 2:08:09 PM PDT by snugs (An English Cheney Chick - BIG TIME)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Nuc1

Don't forget who owns the Times - Murdoch he always has his own agenda and no doubt ensures his reporters have it as well.


67 posted on 04/23/2006 2:10:21 PM PDT by snugs (An English Cheney Chick - BIG TIME)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Rhetorical pi2

Exactly they would never allow Rice to get through the confirmation hearings.


68 posted on 04/23/2006 2:13:11 PM PDT by snugs (An English Cheney Chick - BIG TIME)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion

Won't happen for 2 main reasons IMHO

1) Cheney does not want to go and feels he is in the best place for his country and his President, all the time he feels that he will not resign. He has to resign he is elected. The President could ask him to go but not sack him and the President will not ask him to go because in IMHO he does not want him to go and also it would be seen as disloyalty and GWB value loyalty.

2) Cheney realises even if he wanted to go and IMHO he does not the fall out would be huge and would not only hurt the Bush administration but would hurt the re-election of the Republicans in the House and Senate. The RATS would jump on it saying it shows a divided party and leadership problems.

The third and perhaps the most damaging consideration is confirmation hearings even if the above 2 considerations are ignored.

Think of other recent ones including Rice's own for Secretary of State and John Bolton for UN Ambassador. Again too damaging for the administration and Party.

Also to be considered if Rice does not want to run for President that why would she accept/be pushed into a role which traditionally has been nothing position. Surely she is better off personally and more importantly where she is for her country.

Cheney's Vice Presidency is unique in the advice; some say power he wields; this would not be the same for Rice. For Rice it would be a demotion not promotion.

In conclusion, the President does not want it, Cheney does not want and Rice would not want it.


69 posted on 04/23/2006 2:18:12 PM PDT by snugs (An English Cheney Chick - BIG TIME)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Naptowne

First of all Hong Kong is in China. Secondly China has a state controlled media that tells its citizens what to percieve and how to percieve it, and anyone in that country who is observant questions anything that government says. Thirdly Tawain is in position to dictate anything America does. That nation would not exist if it was not for America, and that is a fact. Why don't you post some excerpts from Mao's little read book ?

First off all, I'd suggest you brush up on your geography and general knowledge of China. Hong Kong is not in China. It is an autonomous region belonging to China and subject to the governance of Beijing, but the people of Hong Kong are basically free and do not experience the censorship or repression of their Mainland counterparts.

Secondly, what happened to your second point? You moved from "First of all" to "Thirdly". Did your knee-jerk reaction cause you to lose count?

Thirdly, your little rant about Taiwan (not Tawain) makes no sense whatsoever. Care to clarify? 

 

70 posted on 04/23/2006 2:20:00 PM PDT by Dr. Marten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Sloth

Now that I could probably go for!


71 posted on 04/23/2006 2:20:29 PM PDT by Dr. Marten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Rhetorical pi2

Very insightful post. It is said that the night Spiro Agnew resigned, Nixon realized that it was all over for him. Choosing a mediocrity like Ford was probably Nixon's payback to the Republicans that hung him out to dry. Imagine if Ronald Reagan was tapped! Nobody would even remember Jimmy Carter today.


72 posted on 04/23/2006 2:21:17 PM PDT by SamAdams76 (I think Randy Travis must be paying his bills on home computer by now)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Marten
Barnes can take a flying leap as far as VP Cheney is concerned. The VP is what is standing in the way of the left and msm's hopes of impeaching the President. They know they don't want a President Cheney! So sit down and shut up Barnes.

It's the spineless roll-over Republicans in Congress that are jittery because they are the ones losing the base and most of them have not figured out why nor do they seem to want to know. They'll be the ones sitting around the Thanksgiving table this year scratching themselves.

73 posted on 04/23/2006 2:33:55 PM PDT by daybreakcoming (If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. A. Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nuc1

EVERYBODY at the Slimez was SELECTED, not elected. Time for a change. Punch MUST resign.


74 posted on 04/23/2006 2:56:37 PM PDT by Paladin2 (If the political indictment's from Fitz, the jury always acquits.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Marten
I will second this post!!

"Repeating that "Bush is an idiot" only makes it clearer and clearer that perhaps you don't belong in this forum."

Our President so completely surpasses the intelligence of all his opposition, all they have left is to name call.

As for Vice President Cheney.......This country has never know a better or stronger VP. Never! And Conservatives not only respect him, they adore him.
75 posted on 04/23/2006 3:10:49 PM PDT by gidget7 (PC is the huge rock, behind which lies hide!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Marten
REPUBLICANS are urging President George W Bush to dump Dick Cheney as vice-president and replace him with Condoleezza Rice if he is serious about presenting a new face to the jaded American public

This is the dumbest idea I've ever heard.

76 posted on 04/23/2006 3:13:21 PM PDT by SaveTheChief ("This one goes to eleven.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gidget7

Take a hike, gidget. So what if I think Bush is an idiot?

Unlike many other Republicans I reserve the right to think for myself. I don't toe the party line or agree with something just because everyone else may be on the wagon.

You on the other hand..well..enjoy the ride.


77 posted on 04/23/2006 3:15:13 PM PDT by Dr. Marten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: snugs

I agree with YOU snugs, and the Conservative Base doesn't want it either. We too, would look at it as a betrayal.


78 posted on 04/23/2006 3:18:53 PM PDT by gidget7 (PC is the huge rock, behind which lies hide!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Marten

[Third, morality is a debatable issue that is dictated differently from one society to the next. Just because one nations practices differ from our own does not make them immoral...]



The woman who yelled at the Chinese President was protesting their government's practice of imprisoning people who practice religion or who state unpopular political ideas. Such actions by a government are immoral not because they're different from our own, but because they're inherently evil.

This woman did something moral and courageous in protesting the way she did and I distrust the judgment of people who condemn her or who lament that the Chinese government will be embarrassed by it.


79 posted on 04/23/2006 3:19:04 PM PDT by spinestein (The mainstream news media are to journalism what fast food chains are to fine dining.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Marten
[I don't toe the party line or agree with something just because everyone else may be on the wagon.]



I've been watching the "Bush is an idiot!" Bandwagon parading around the country for the last 5 years and I have no intention of hopping aboard even if the Democrats weren't the band leaders.
80 posted on 04/23/2006 3:25:21 PM PDT by spinestein (The mainstream news media are to journalism what fast food chains are to fine dining.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Marten
Excuse me?? I know you didn't just say that.

I don't tow anyones line, nor do I necrssarily agree with everything any one person says or does. That doesn't give me the superiority to call anyone an idiot, never mind the President of the United States!

For the record, I disliked and distrusted Clinton, but never ever would I disrespect the office he held.

I do like the President and Vice President. and I proudly admit it. Do I always agree with every thought either of them has ever had? No, but I do not have a clue of what they run up against day in and day out either. Or the strategic they have to be involved in just to keep the country going amidst the infiltration of socialistic and communistic ploys by other parties day after day.

I commend them both, and if posters like you don't like that fact, deal with it, suck it up, or whatever else you have to do. It matters not to me.
81 posted on 04/23/2006 3:27:00 PM PDT by gidget7 (PC is the huge rock, behind which lies hide!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: spinestein
The woman who yelled at the Chinese President was protesting their government's practice of imprisoning people who practice religion or who state unpopular political ideas. Such actions by a government are immoral not because they're different from our own, but because they're inherently evil.
I'm well aware of what the woman was doing and I know exactly what she was shouting. However, while I do believe that people should be able to practice their choice of religion without interference from the State (so long as it isn't hurting other people), the Falun Gong is not a religion; it's a cult. Pesky and harmless, but still a cult. I don't approve of the way the Chinese government deals with the Falun Gong, but it's not all that different from the way the US handled the Branch Davidians either.


This woman did something moral and courageous in protesting the way she did and I distrust the judgment of people who condemn her or who lament that the Chinese government will be embarrassed by it.
Yes, it was courageous and kudos to her because she wouldn't be able to protest like that in China. However, this was not the time nor the place for such an event and if the Bush officials had done their homework in preparing for this State visit, none of these mishaps would have happened. Unfortunately though, the protests from a Falun Gong member was just one of a series of mistakes.
 
I guarantee you wouldn't like to see our President treated the same way in China.

82 posted on 04/23/2006 3:32:31 PM PDT by Dr. Marten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: toddlintown

"The vice president is an elected official of the USA. It is not like firing a cabinet member."


"So if Cheney did go, who would move in succession..Hastert?"

Unlike presidental succession, the replacement VP is nominated by the President and confirmed by Both the Senate and House.


83 posted on 04/23/2006 3:46:42 PM PDT by edwin hubble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Marten
[...the Falun Gong is not a religion; it's a cult. Pesky and harmless, but still a cult. I don't approve of the way the Chinese government deals with the Falun Gong, but it's not all that different from the way the US handled the Branch Davidians either.]


I also strongly disapprove of the way they were both handled.





[I guarantee you wouldn't like to see our President treated the same way in China.]


Our president is heckled and protested all the time, both here and in other countries on official visits. It's part of the job of being an elected American politician who makes speeches in public and it doesn't bother me at all that it happens.

That is a fundamental difference between democratically accountable governments and one's which are not, such as in China.
84 posted on 04/23/2006 3:47:43 PM PDT by spinestein (The mainstream news media are to journalism what fast food chains are to fine dining.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: clintonh8r
Richard Nixon in the months before he was impeached.

Don't you know nothing???..Nixon was impeached..the allies fought against the Russians in WWII..the US beat Canada in the Spanish-American war..Washington won the Civil War..I could go on..but history is my favorite subject..

85 posted on 04/23/2006 3:51:56 PM PDT by BerniesFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: spinestein
This woman did something moral and courageous in protesting the way she did

Why was it courageous? She was safe in America rather than China when she did it. Moral is a toss-up if it is true that she got into the ceremony using questionable press credentials. And if I seriously tell someone "their days are numbered" - it could be taken as a threat. All that said, I can appreciate that she had something to say - just not the way she chose to deliver them. What bothers me is that it took the SS THREE MINUTES to get to her.

86 posted on 04/23/2006 4:09:54 PM PDT by daybreakcoming (If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. A. Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: snugs

Did you see this crap?


87 posted on 04/23/2006 4:23:19 PM PDT by defconw (Proud Member of the Bucket Brigade! Yes I am a Bushbot, so what of it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: defconw

Oh yes I have posted several bits on the thread


88 posted on 04/23/2006 4:25:26 PM PDT by snugs (An English Cheney Chick - BIG TIME)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: snugs

Don't worry, I won't forget, but thanks for the reminder.


89 posted on 04/23/2006 4:26:06 PM PDT by Nuc1 (NUC1 Sub pusher SSN 668 (Liberals Aren't Patriots))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: snugs

On my way there. I want to smack these alleged "Republicans", I just wish VP Cheney would change his mind and RUN!


90 posted on 04/23/2006 4:30:56 PM PDT by defconw (Proud Member of the Bucket Brigade! Yes I am a Bushbot, so what of it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2
The ole gray lady ain't what she used to be...I would rather see them closed down. But Punch punched out would be a good start.

IMHO the SLIMES don't give a D@mn what we think.
91 posted on 04/23/2006 4:32:13 PM PDT by Nuc1 (NUC1 Sub pusher SSN 668 (Liberals Aren't Patriots))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: daybreakcoming

[Why was it courageous? She was safe in America rather than China when she did it.]


She is being legally prosecuted for her protest as she probably suspected would happen.

Risking prosecution to protest genuine oppression is a virtue.


92 posted on 04/23/2006 4:36:48 PM PDT by spinestein (The mainstream news media are to journalism what fast food chains are to fine dining.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: TypeZoNegative

"You can't replace Cheney with Condie. Condi's Secutary of State.
You can only replace a vice president with the speaker of the house."

While it is true that the Speaker of the House is 2nd in line in presidential succession, the Speaker of the House does not succeeded to the Vice-Presidency if the VP's office becomes vacant. Under the 25th amendment, if the Vice-Presidency becomes vacant the President nominates a new VP who is subject to confirmation from both the House and Senate. The 25th amendment is the amendment that gave us President Ford.


93 posted on 04/23/2006 4:54:45 PM PDT by My GOP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Marten
I guarantee you wouldn't like to see our President treated the same way in China.

Where are the US torture camps for political prisoners who dared to disagree with Dubya, as there are for Falun Gong? You're still walking around free, I notice :-)

Cheers!

94 posted on 04/23/2006 5:01:58 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: gidget7


95 posted on 04/23/2006 5:16:46 PM PDT by daybreakcoming (If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. A. Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Marten
..that's it, throw all the conservatives from the train--that's the ticket

If ANYBODY huge is forced to resign, the MSM, the Dems and the Al Qaeda will view it as an act of weakness and it will be like a remake of JAWS.

..to the President: get real on immigration, stay the course in the WoT and tell the press to go fish--or go hunting with Cheney...

96 posted on 04/23/2006 5:20:34 PM PDT by WalterSkinner ( ..when there is any conflict between God and Caesar -- guess who loses?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fudd Fan
Love Americans. Haven't a clue about the world around them. refuse to learn anything. React on instinct. Attack whatever their mind reents whether its the right target or not.

It's not the NY Times. (but if you'd clicked the link you might have realized that)

97 posted on 04/23/2006 6:57:31 PM PDT by Oztrich Boy (Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: daybreakcoming

awwwww why thank you, humble appreciation!


98 posted on 04/23/2006 6:59:31 PM PDT by gidget7 (PC is the huge rock, behind which lies hide!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: familyop
It's a British news outlet! ...wishful thinking in Britain.

Last time I looked, the publisher of The Times was an American. So Britain may just be the place the trial balloon is launched.

99 posted on 04/23/2006 7:03:38 PM PDT by Oztrich Boy (Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: bray
Yes it would be a catastrophic mistake indeed. The South voted for George W. Bush but it will be a cold day in hell before we vote to elect a black woman President of the U.S.
The Republican party has thrown a lot of money to secure the southern vote and they have got it after over a hundred years of democratic domination at the federal and state level. Nominate a black woman on the Republican ticket and They will automatically lose the white southern vote. Not only that but black dems will label her an uncle Tom and will refuse to vote for her as well. Call me a racist or bigot if you will but I live here. I know.
100 posted on 04/23/2006 7:37:40 PM PDT by Vote 4 Nixon (EAT...FISH...SLEEP...REDUX)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-105 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson