"The elite" are taking Bush down......

[virtualobserver]

He will have a Republican challenger.

Mark my words.

[Sephirstein]

1. Guiliani?

God! If he runs, except 8 more years of GOP the Cuomos handed to America on a silver platter! ("Liberal" endorsement of Rudy.)

[virtualobserver]

11. I think that he would be hard to beat

He is a good soldier.

[Cronus Protagonist]

22. He's also an adulterer

We can hammer him with that for years.

Click Here To See Fair & Balanced Buttons, Stickers & Magnets!>

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Prodemsouth]

3. Okay, I will mark them. I asked if he will have a challanger in the

primary a week ago most said no! I hope you are right, but I doubt it.
Would like to hear more about why you think this to be the case.

[virtualobserver]

7. Tenet asking the Justice Dept to look into the "outing" of Wilson's wife

That story has been around a while, and it wasn't catching on that seriously.

Tenet works for Bush, and this investigation is the last thing that Bush would have wanted. This is a very serious violation of the law.

This causes me to feel that powerful people outside of the Administration have concluded that Bush has blown his Presidency.
They need an alternative to Bush, plus they need to quickly weaken him so that a challenger can take the nomination, while advocating an alternate economic and foriegn policy, thus blunting the inevitable Democratic charge.

In the Watergate scandal, without "Deep Throat", what do you think that the outcome would have been?
Woodward's CIA connections didn't hurt, I'm sure.

When the CIA is involved, I am always suspicious.

[Cappurr]

9. Don't you know who Deep Throat was?

All the "experts" with their charts and time tables have it wrong. Deep Throat was George Bush I. I'm convinced of it.

[virtualobserver]

17. maybe you are right, Deep Throat has re-emerged

We need more human intelligence. That means we need more protection for the methods we use to gather intelligence and more protection for our sources, particularly our human sources, people that are risking their lives for their country. Even though I'm a tranquil guy now at this stage of my life, I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious, of traitors.

George H.W. Bush
April 16th, 1999
Dedication Speech
George Bush Center for Intelligence

[spooky3]

30. verrry interesting; thanks.

[Exultant Democracy]

25. I've always thought so too

GW and his crew took Nixon down so that they could take over the rethuglican party instead of Nixon's chosen.

[Droopy]

4. I don't think so

I'll remember and you're not the only one who is saying this, but I don't think there's going to be anybody but Bush. He will have the nomination unchallenged. The only way I see a conservative challenging Bush is through a third party.

[Jose Diablo]

5. Cheney does an Agnew..Bush does a Nixon

Thats how I see it CAN happen. Will it? I don't know, my 8 ball keeps coming up, "ask question later".
:evilgrin:

[Cappurr]

8. Bush does not have Nixon's character

(Can't believe I used Nixon and character in the same sentence) but he would never, ever admit he was wrong and would never ever resign.

[fla nocount]

14. I've been looking for a Tri-lateral Commision replay of this event

for months with no result. Who is to be our innocuous successor ala Ford........McCain? Who to be the ineffectual Carter.......Kerry? Who to be the B grade actor hero that leads us to prosperity and dignity.....Ahnold? Perish the thought.

[LittleDannySlowhorse]

6. Really?

I certainly have no problem believing that there are Republicans who would LOVE to run against Bush, but the things that I see as pretty unsurmountable obstacles are:

1. The money issue. Nobody is going to raise any kind of significant "war chest" that would pose any kind of threat to Bush's $200 million (that's the correct figure, right?).

2. No Republican will want to run against a "popular wartime president". Democrats can get tagged as antiwar and not have a problem with it, but being tagged as an "antiwar Republican" would destroy their career permanently. I think that the Republican party is 100% behind Bush, whether they like him or not, just as a matter of job security. A Republican running against Bush would be perceived as a Republican running against the war. This would be the same thing as a Democrat running on a segregationist platform.

I agree with Droopy. Any right-wing challenge to Bush would have to come from a 3rd-party candidate.

[grasswire]

12. I've been saying this for a couple of months

There WILL be a Republican challenger. I'm sure some jockeying is being done already. I'm sure there's some talk in the back cloakrooms.

[virtualobserver]

15. they won't be anti-war

just an alternative to Bush.

Plus, maybe they don't want a Republican to win this time.
The next few years won't be pretty.

[Jacobin]

10. They don't need to. They'll push Clark

as the General who can "finish the job in Iraq", i.e. placate the Iraqis sufficiently that they can take the oil.

[Imajika]

13. Nonsense

"He will have a Republican challenger."

Nope. Not a chance.

This is just another chapter in the "Bush is going down" fantasy.

Bush will be the Republican candidate, and he will be very hard to beat.

Imajika

[virtualobserver]

16. so why did Tenet do this?

he didn't have to....Do you think that Bush wanted this?

[Imajika]

20. Maybe because...

...it was the right thing to do.

Sending this investigation to the Justice department does not necessarily mean anything will come of it.

We have no idea who was involved. For all we know the White House could have even signed off on sending the probe to Justice.

It is just way, way, way too early to think that this will amount to anything much.

From reading all the threads about this on DU today, you'd think this was the end of the Bush administration. In reality it is probably not much different than any of the previous "Bush is going down" scandals that fizzled out.

I hope people realize that White Houses are investigated all the time. Clinton's White House was investigated endlessly, yet to the chagrin of the rightwing fanatics nothing much ever came out of these investigations that hurt Clinton.

This is an interesting story, but that is all it is right now.

Imajika

[virtualobserver]

21. they are rarely investigated for treason

and this is a sexy story

[KharmaTrain]

26. Amen & Thank-You

It's gonna take something VERY big to do any serious damage to this regime. They didn't steal the executive and hood-wink the media by their "ahem" good looks. These goons will do whatever it takes, say whatever works and if all else fails, pull strings.

Thus Democrats can't either hide their heads in the sand or jump at every Rove/Bush/Chenney/Rice thing as though this is equivelent to Clinton's Penis. It's not. It'd take a massive calamity (and, no I don't wish for this to happen, but I fear another 9/11 is in the pike before Election, 2004) or a scandal so huge and glaring, like Watergate, that it's totally indefensible. We don't have anything near that on this corrupt regime right now.

Fact is, we have a very large job ahead of us...and seeing the latest California polls, along with sampling of others, I'm not liking what I'm seeing. Arnold's lead shows that the Repugican/Media distortion machine is going into overdrive in California...and could work...annointing Ahnold by declaring him the victor so that Dems get frustrated (and we're very good at that) and stay home. The focus there now should be singular...defeat the recall, period. The manchild's overall numbers have slumped 25% since the invasion, but his approval numbers have to hit 45% or lower and stay there before you can say this boy is really in trouble.

In the meantime, the GOOPs desire for money and power means they're not going within a Texas mile of throwing a challenger against Bunnypants, Inc. It's not a good business move (there goes my special contract, lobbying gig, think-tank job, etc.) or for one's health (stay out of small aircraft) to go against the BushCo. machine. Look how far the Repugs will bend principles to support Ahnuld just to get their hands on California tax money.

I'm gladly an uncommitted Democrat. I'm window shopping these days and listening to ALL the candidates...hoping one will emerge that we can all rally around and start the long, hard job it will be to dislodge this regime from the levers of power.

Dream of impeachments and backstabbing, and here's hoping there's a lot of mud that's dragged on these continuing revelations of this regime's illegal activities, but except for the small number of us who care, it makes little dent on the vast majority who are just trying to pay bills. These people, and many are just like us, won't wake up until next fall...and then it's time for us to be ready to show up big at the polls and create a result that can't be stolen by the Supreme Court.

[angka]

27. wrong.

this is emerging as highly significant.

don't take my word for it: listen to ambassador wilson himself, who said on august 21st that he wanted "to see whether or not we can get karl rove frog-marched out of the white house in handcuffs" over this.

this is a major breach of national security for purile, vengeful, political purposes. too many abuses of power have gone unpunished in the last couple of years. CIA is bitterly angry with the administration over their setting tenet up to take the fall over their own lies. i have a sneaking suspicion they're not going to let this get whitewashed...

[Imajika]

29. Sure...

...we will see.

"this is emerging as highly significant"

Yes, that is what I heard about "Bush Knew", "Enron", "Uranium-Niger", etc, etc, etc, etc, etc...

This is just a story. We have absolutely no idea where it will go, if anywhere. Nor do we know what White House official(s) might have to take the fall if it even gets that far. Even if this story eventually costs someone in the administration their job, it doesn't mean it would be Rove - no matter what Ambassador Wilson wishes.

People are getting way ahead of themselves.......again.

Imajika

[angka]

34. hmm.

the mistake here is the idea that the enron meltdown (and the other ones that dwarfed it), the administration's iraq war lies, and especially the increasing evidence that bush let 9/11 happen, are somehow not cogent in the present day.

all of these things are aggregating. this sort of criminality is now slowly beginning to be understood as the present administration's lying stock and trade. i for one hope this particular story does as much damage as possible, and contributes to its inexorable downfall.

[Resistance Is Futile]

18. Conditional nonsense

The GOP is a lot bigger than Chimpy. If his poll numbers do not rise over the long term, he will be pulled. The party will not go down with him if he turns into a sinking ship.

This is not to say that the repalacement, if any, will be any better than Chimpy. Campaign center, govern fascist is to be expected as the anti-New Deal agenda is the sum total of the GOP ideology.

[Mari333]

19. You are only correct in that the election will be stolen again

This time by DIEBOLD.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

23. Marked. But you're off your rocker.

The key to Pug success is the lockstep. A serious, rather than the token "I receive 1 delegate" opponent, would violate the first rule of Rethuglicanism.




It'd be nice to see Chimp getting hammered from both sides, though. So I hope you're right. :toast:

[virtualobserver]

24. The fact that I'm off my rocker is a completely separate issue.

I agree with the lockstep requirement, but I think that since Bushco has destroyed its credibility, they need a replacement team.

Hagel's experience with Election Systems & Software might make him a good choice

[cmd]

28. Frist n/t

[maggrwaggr]

31. His name is CLARK

And I'll take him over Bush any day of the week.

Still .... I'd rather have a democrat

[lostnfound]

33. That seems to be the plan..

I've been withholding judgment but as far as the issue that matters to me the most, Clark is frighteningly more of the same.

It occurs to me that the phrase 'knee-jerk liberal' is absolutely an oxymoron..perhaps our problem is that we are slow to react and not ready to jump to the attack. Everyone is innocent until proven guilty, in our minds. I suspect if a likely-to-be-leftie suddenly appeared on the Republican slate he'd be slandered in a heartbeat for not having paid his dues or for being a sheep in wolf's clothing.

Do lefties typically cram their way onto the Freepers website?

Wonder how much deliberating there's been along the lines of 'chances of winning nomination', 'in the event of winning nomination, chances of causing Bush to lose', and 'chances of dumping Dean for a more controllable (blackmailable) DLC type'?

[Unknown Known]

32. Not until all the mediawhores are fired

will I believe this.

[quaker bill]

35. Bush is busy draining the pond.

Why the big * rush for money? He has no primary opponent (yet). I expect so there is little cash left to fund a challenger.