Posted on 05/16/2006 6:57:41 AM PDT by mr. mojo risin
We know the Democrats have had no legislative agenda during this Congress, but their political agenda is becoming clearer by the day.
They want the White House in 2008. But they know their policies won't fly with the American people. So they've embarked on a plan to take control of Congress in 2006 and then use Congress to initiate a long series of investigations and possible impeachment to win the White House in 2008.
You know that Senator Russ Feingold has introduced legislation to "censure" President Bush. He has called for hearings and has vocalized his support for possible impeachment.
On a national newscast, Senator Dick Durbin, the second most powerful Democrat in the US Senate, refused to rule out impeachment of President Bush.
Another chilling comment from a Democrat Leader was in the Washington Post just a few days ago:
[House Democrat Minority Leader Nancy] Pelosi also vowed "to use the power to investigate" the administration on multiple fronts.... When asked if this would lead to impeachment of the President, she said, "You never know where it leads to."
The likely Democrat Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee (where impeachment begins), has already made it clear that he supports the Democrat's plan. Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) has sponsored a resolution calling for an investigation with the clear aim of initiating impeachment proceedings.
If this were not enough, a coalition of over 100 liberal organizations have banded together to push the Democrat Leadership to impeach the President.
But Democrats want to do more than that . . . .
Wipe out the Republican efforts to win the War on Terror.
Reverse the ban on partial birth abortions. Change the traditional definition of marriage.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth Dole United States Senator Chair, National Republican Senatorial Committee
(Excerpt) Read more at gopsenators.com ...
Sadly there are alot of disgruntled republicans/conservatives that will not show up on Nov. 6 therefore, I fear we are in for a long couple of years. I will vote holding my nose.
Bingo.
All we have to do is read some of the stuff Mia T sends us...its enough to make the hair on the back of your neck stand on end....and she has the proof to back everything up....
We had best start a big campaign to make sure this socalist never reaches the White House again in her lifetime.....
Instead of that, I'd like some of those folks to post as to what THEY think we should expect when the R's are out of power in the House and Senate. Not pie-in-the-sky "The Republicans will be forced to..." talk--solid, reality-based predictions of to what will happen with the House, Senate, Bush, WOT, SCOTUS if the illegal immigration issue keeps enough Republican votes at home to tip the balance to the D's.
I'm not expecting many posts but what the heck, maybe there will be some insight.
Well, there are a lot of idiots on FR who want to see the same thing happen.
I have no fear of a 'Rat takeover - it won't happen. Ahmadinejad will be sure to take care of that!
Too many folks are having strokes over immigration to care.
The President didn't promise to build a wall by the end of the week, or give permission to shoot on sight, so they're taking their toys and going home.
When you have no message and the future looks bleak, try scare tactics.
Proposals?
Oh come on....want everyone else to do your work for you?????
Since it's already known what has happened while the R's are in, perhaps you better figure out why people are dissatisfied.
You still want to focus on fear of the Dems while avoiding any meaningful discussion of Republican ideas or concepts.
MY work?
If those who wrote the article and agree with it want to keep Hillary out of the White House, they need a plan. I'd like to hear it. If there is a such a plan,,,,or even a concept.
At least those conservatives are intelligent enough to know that the leadership they trusted in betrayed them and their ideals, and left their government a worse place, and because of this they're not worth a pity vote.
The only reasonable option is to not vote at all, because there really isn't enough worthy people in either party to even have a party-based vote for them.
If you vote for someone incompetent, dishonest, and corrupt, just because their opponent is even more incompetent, dishonest, and corrupt, then you're just as bad as the people who voted for Kerry.
I go back and forth on this daily. Im pissed I am even in this situation. Maybe having the Republicans in the minority will be more effective. Blocking and Blaming is always easier.
I honestly with there was a viable, conservative 3rd party I could get behind.
Demoralized? Yes, I am.
Don't forget what will happen too, if there is a SCOTUS vacancy.
We might get a new Justice like, Souter or Kennedy. Thanks goodness Republicans put those two on the court.
No, I don't: I asked a very specific question. I'd appreciate a very sepcific answer and not more of the fearmongering-mongering we've had more than enough of on this site.
If you don't want to answer--I'm not surprised, few do--that's fine, but I asked the question for those who ARE brave enough to step forward with a specific description. If you want to just toss around the invective, do it in response to someoen else's post, please. Thanks.
So what - nothing to worry about in any investigation. She's talking like there is something to fear.
The thread is about fear. I didn't post the thread.
I think I know what *I* was asking for, so no, it's not an excellent point, it's completely off the point.
It's just amazing to me how in every other election of my life, when one side was asked "What do you offer? How do you see things going if your wishes come true for the election?" he or she or they were more than happy to talk about how things would be if their way were to win.
Not with you folks who've responded on this thread though: Asking the question "What will we get if you get your way?" is seen as a hostile attack and is invariably answered with "Well, what about if YOUR way continues?"
Around here we are constantly mocking the "If this goes on..." attitude of Dems, but we repeat over and over "You can't beat something with nothing" and "Obstruction isn't a platform"...yet that's exactly what some conservatives here have decided is the perfect answer.
Darkwolf, what will happen with Dims in power? Well, everything that happened with Republicans in power, but just more of it. So let's see:
1. Reps exploded spending, Dims will explode it more
2. Reps exploded illegal immigration, Dims will explode it more
3. Reps have not tried to stop abortion, Dims will work to protect it
OK, but I don't see how that is more of the same as what we do now. You don't think Bush by appointing two SCOTUS judges--which is where abortion law is decided, not in Congress--is just "have not tried to stop abortion"?
4. Reps have not ended affirmative action, Dims will continue affirmative action
5. Reps have been a big money, contributor-driven party, Dims will be a big money, contributor-driven party.
I guess there are some things that will be the opposite though, like:
1. Reps began Afghan and Iraq wars, Dims will pull out immediately
2. Reps elected George Bush, Dims will immediately start impeachment, and I believe they will start the DAY they have the House.
For me, you've just described a horror show. Why would anyone want to vote for that?
So what will the effect be on the country? Havoc and chaos until 2008, and really, I think a shift to Dim control would make things impossible to predict.
Why only until 2008?
That's why the Republicans should give their base what it wants (which is largely to follow our LAWS, so it SHOULD be a no brainer anyway). But if they will drag us through hell just to defy our wishes, well, you reach a point where you can't give these kinds of offices to people who are insincere and unreliable, and if great pain is the only agent of true change, then I predict great pain will be along shortly.
I appreciate your candor--you've solidified my resolve to vote Republican in November, for which I thank you. ;)
But I don't see why you think the solution to this is not voting R in Novemebr. As a conservative, what do you get out of it?
I asked a question when none had been asked of me. What question was I asked that I avoided? This is a thread about what happens if the D's take power in November, I asked for other opinions on that. Instead of answering, you post more of the same stuff we get over, and over, and over.
What we DON'T get is answers to my question. One other FReeper has posted an answer that shows thoughtfulness and honesty, and it is refreshing. I guess that's too much to ask, but who told you to respond to my question?
The thread is about fear. I didn't post the thread.
Who said you did? Yes, it's about fear, but so what? Lots of threads are; most of the news is about fear.
OK, so you didn't post the thread, does that mean you were forced to post ON the thread? I mean, I know it's not your fault that you're voting (or not) as you will be in November because that's the Republican's choice, they chose your vote for you, I got that, but now other people are forcing you to post on this thread? Did I force you to post a reply to my post?
I just don't get you people and your inability to asnwer simple questions.
Thanks for the response. I don't see much there to encourage me to not vote R.
The question isn't of you, it is the implied question of those selling fear. The one they want to avoid while selling the fear.
Yes, it's about fear, but so what?
The "so what?" is the point that the people who know that they have no ideas, no excuses, no real reason that their candidates should be supported, use this forum to sell the only thing they have left, fear.
It is the first sign of a dying political party. It happened to the Dems, and they haven't learned their lesson, and now it's happening to the Republicans.
you post more of the same stuff we get over, and over, and over.
Funny, it's only on these "fear" threads, which get posted over and over and over where it gets refuted. It will continue on these kinds of threads. I haven't seen it except in response to the fear threats.
Why don't you start a thread with some real purpose if you don't like the fact that these fear-mongers are being exposed on THEIR OWN threads?
I have no doubt the democrats will conduct hearings and investigations into the bush administration. These will be an embarrassment to the president but will go nowhere. The administration can claim executive privilege and refuse to turn over most documents that the committees ask for, then it will end up in court. In the end they will probably drag on until the end of the Presidents term. I doubt the Democrats would be stupid enough to try impeachment, because even if they win the senate it will be by a very small margin and they would NEVER get enough votes to remove him from office (even the Rhino's like McCain would never support this).
On policy matters, Democrats might be able to pull off some of their agenda like a modest minimum wage increase. Anything too radically left would be bottled up in the senate or vetoed by the president. The greatest threat would come from the democrats being in charge of the budgets, any tax increases are probably DOA, the President has been firm about that. What you would probably get is the democrats only agreeing to the large military / war on terror budgets the president wants if they can increase social spending by a similar amount. Which of course means the deficit will get blown sky high.
On Supreme Court justices, it's anybody guess what the final outcome would be. I seriously doubt that a democrat senate would approve an Alito or Roberts. So you would probably end up with a "moderate" like Gonzales or Miers.
Funny how you didn't post the rest of that answer.
OK, sorry I dared ask you folks to simply tell us what would result from supporting your point of view. That was really out of bounds, and I apologize for expecting to know what we would get for voting that way. That was really fear-mongering of me to ask "OK, what would happen if we did it YOUR way?" That was so truly out of bounds, and I'm sorry I dared ask such a question on a political debate site. How fear-mongering of me. (rolls eyes)
I'd like some of those folks to post as to what THEY think we should expect when the R's are out of power in the House and Senate.
And my answer.
More of the same.
I know you will probably think that is a flip answer, but it isn't. I truly expect more of the same nonsense.
BTW, that's a funny answer, considering my original post asked for those illegal immigration voters to TELL US your ideas. Instead you posted...that.
I offered the floor and all I get is the same static. It's kinda old, don't you think?
OK, thanks for the answer. I do think it's flip, but you meant it sincerely and I take it as a sincere answer. Thanks.
You took all the comments personally, they weren't meant that way. But hey, it's a political website, not a bean bag game. Scheesh, grow some thicker skin,,,,(rolling his eyes back)
I didn't take anything personally--chill out. I asked questions and got nothing much in response. Now you're using that old tactic of "You're taking it personally, sheesh, grow a thick skin" and all that, when you could be using this thread to actually answer the question intelligently instead of with a shrug and "more of the same".
Grow a thicker skin? This after your several posts whining about fear-mongering?
This is SUPPOSED to be a political site; instead, when someone asks a political question they get whoah-is-us, and when pressed to answer the answer is "Oh, more of the same">
Grow a thicker skin? How about coming up with a more thoughtful answer to an issue like who takes power in Washington?
If you REALLY believe that SCOTUS, taxes, borders, WOT, support for our military, etc. will be more of the same under the Dems then, yes, you are the typical Immigration Voter, and I thank you for your cranky avoidance of the simple question "What are you voting for?" and your ultimate, glib response. It really shows what you folks are thinking.
In the event that democrats achieve control of the house and senate in 2006, this is what will happen: Nothing. It will be status quo, business as usual. The democrats know that if they push too hard they risk a veto, they won't have enough seats to over ride a veto, so theirs will be a "go along" strategy. Sure they'll huff and puff about investigations and censure and impeachment, there will be some lengthy and expensive investigations that will end up being inconclusive.
There will be a few fights over spending, as usual, there will be compromise in dollars and cents, and spending will increase faster than the rate of economic growth.
This is 2007, 2008 will be spent with both parties doing little besides fund raising and posturing around the presidential candidates. Nothing will be accomplished.
The "war" will continue as planned. American troops will still be in Afghanistan and Iraq in 2007 and 2008. And unless there is a "Paul Craig Roberts" type of event, American troops will still be there in 2009 and 2010. We'll still be talking about Iran 2 years from now.
As far as SCOTUS is concerned, same story, status quo, nothing earthshaking. Although it probably won't happen by 2008, there is the possibility that some of the "intelligence gathering" that has been engaged in by the current administration, directed toward US citizens will be challenged in court and even make it to the Supremes. It will be found to be "constitutional." (Is this why Roberts and Alito were picked in the first place?????)
Immigration? Most of the "proposal" outlined by our president last night will be compromised into next to nothing. Some Guard units will be sent to Texas and Arizona, and we'll be given two or three stories a week about how our brave National Guard troops are helping the poor mexicans assimilate into society. If the democrats win a controlling number of seats, most of the "enforcement" will be shoved to the back burner and millions of non-Americans will continue to invade to the delight of the democrats who will get the political credit, and to the delight of president bush who will have his legacy.
While I'm making predictions allow me a couple more.......
There will be another season of the Sopranos, fall of 2008.
The 49ers will finish the 2006-2007 season over .500.
"Deal or No Deal" will become the #1 rated show in 2007 after some minor format changes.
During the week leading up to the 2008 presidential election, Comedy Central will broadcast the "Giant Douche vs. Turd Sandwich" election parody episode back to back 24 hours a day for 7 days. It will be far more interesting than the presidential election.
Nothing? (Putting aside that he didn't have both houses for five years, but a slim majority including several RINOs--that's not his doing, that's ours.)
What, in a perfect world, would you have had him do with this opportunity?
I ask because I think many of us--US--think that if we "had it all" life would be perfect, but when has either party been able to just dictate what it wants when it was in power?
Bush was handed the toughest job a president has had in years and yes, I do think the WOT IS a major accomplishment. If we could have pushed that aside, who knows? But that's the hand he was dealt. I don't see much value in pretending "If only this happened, then..." because there's always a "this" happening.
But let's rewind to 2000: What would you LIKE to see have happened by now? Because that's an interesting point about nothing being accomplished.
No problem do as the democrats do vote often{Al Capone smiles}
Of course you did.
using this thread to actually answer the question intelligently instead of with a shrug and "more of the same".
The answer was intelligent. It may be a problem with your understanding.
More of the same is what we got when the Republicans took over from the Dems and more of the same is what we will get if the Dems get back in power.
It isn't a shrug, it's a given to any thoughtful person. More erosion of freedom. More government "solutions" to societal problems. (which never work) Ever bigger government. More special interest selling of benefits for power. More trashing of the constitution. More of the same.
Whining about fear-mongering?
You confuse exposing the imbeciles as whining. On this site, any time you disagree with a Republican, you are accused of whining. It's more childish nonsense.
OK. You're a mind-reader now?
The answer was intelligent. It may be a problem with your understanding.
Thanks for keeping the level of discourse high ("More of the same" -yep, if we had Gore or Kerry, just more of the same, a Democrat congress while Bush was pushing tax cuts and WOT, more of the same) and confirming every cliche about your side of the argument. Have a nice day.
Just for the record, you made a goofy leap. I'm not a "immigration voter".
While it's true that GWB has screwed the pooch on that issue as well, it's no big turning point for me.
Now let's see how YOU do on answering questions;
Instead of making excuses and asking people about how much worse it might be if the same goofs don't get reelected, how about suggesting what can be done to fix the dysfunctional lame Republican Party?
What policies should they push without compromise?
What insults to their traditional base should be apologised for and discontinued in the future?
What simple, understandable positions on fundamental issues of governance should be embraced and never abandoned?
In short, what should they do to get people to vote FOR them, instead of against others?
You don't see the irony, after your previous posts, in asking questions?
from your post #24:"You asked a question to avoid the real question. It's an old tactic."
You are right. Plus the Democrats don't even want to impeach Bush. As you point out, it would be a waste of time. However, they are also very aware that Clinton's popularity increased when he was impeached. They don't want Bush's popularity to increase. They want it to fall more.
All this crap about "they will impeach Bush' is crap to direct attention away from the issues and their own actions.
RINOS are playing scare politics so they don't have to confront their record and people are falling for it.
The real problem is too many here don’t understand politics and how a republic works.
There are about 30% of the voting public in each camp who vote for the party no matter what. These are so-called conservatives who would vote for Arlen Specter rather than Thomas Jefferson because Specter is a Republican and Jefferson was a Democrat. On the Democrat side, this group would vote for Zell Miller rather than Lincoln Chafee, because Miller is a Democrat and Chafee is a Republican.
Neither of these groups have any political clout. They are irrelevant to the political debate.
Neither party nor any politician has to work to get their vote. Consequently, their issues are of no concern to either party.
The battle in every election is to get out the vote of people who lean toward a party or candidate and get the vote of issue voters. The 40% or so voters who either vote for either party or who withhold their vote when dissatisfied are the ones politicians have to court and motivate.
Neither the Bushiban nor the Clintonistas are of any interest to the respective parties. Those votes are there and counted before the polls ever open. The parties and individual politicians fight for and court the other 40% of the voters.
Rove knows this and spoke about it after the 2000 election when Evangelicals didn’t turn out in their customary numbers and almost cost Bush the election. In 2004, Rove made it a point to go after the Evangelical vote, including an unprecedented Republican push in the nation’s Black churches.
Evangelicals and other Christians responded by getting out and voting for Bush. This included a record 16% of the Black vote in Ohio, just about all of which came from the Black churches because of issues like abortion, gay marriage, etc.
That 16% of the Black vote was more than Bush’s margin of victory in Ohio. It was not as much as his total margin of popular vote victory, but it gave him the election. Without the Black vote Bush would have lost Ohio and its 20 Electoral votes. Take those twenty votes from Bush and give them to Kerry and you have President Kerry.
The way to advance your issue is to vote issues rather than party. If neither party is right on your issue, don’t vote or vote third party. Now you become one of the voters the parties and candidates are trying to win. You become important to the process and to how the nation is run.
So just ignore the Bushiban. The politicians do.
Let the politicians know that while you may not vote Democrat, you will vote third party or stay at home if they don’t act and vote right. Then follow through. Don’t let them scare you with that lesser of two evils crap. Make them earn your vote and you become relevant.
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.