"If the Democrats take over, will they go on a witch hunt?"

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

NOTE: Can't link directly to this one. It's a comment posted to a post by Craig Crawford (" Kerry-Edwards Back Bush Censure") on his blog "Crawfordslist." Direct link to the post is below, link to the post's comments section (ALL of the comments) is also below, so THERE.

:evilgrin:

http://crawfordslist.blogspot.com/2006/04/kerry-edwards-back-bush-censure.html

http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=13550470&postID=114459643895105173&isPopup=true

Trial.Lawyer.Richard said...

This may be a good idea morally. Bush is worthy of Censure. However, I think the "censure debate" fuels public concerns about the Democrats taking over Congress. If the Democrats take over, will they go on a witch hunt and spend their time accusing Republicans of wrongdoing.....instead of running the Country?

The whole censure issue will be rendered moot if the Bush-Cheney Administration continues with its War Planning for Iran. I posted Sy Hirsch's New Yorker Article in the last string. He writes that U.S. Army teams HAVE ALREADY BEEN SENT INTO IRAQ. He says that War with Iran is in the "advanced planning stages."

War With Iran, in the Fall before the 2006 Congressional Elections, would make the American Public wary of "changing horses in mid-stream" and possibly thwart a large transfer of Congressional seats to the Democrats.

The Neo-Con "regime change" agenda for the Middle East is dangerous and the American Public needs to be paying close attention. This is similar to the run up to the Iraq War.

Rich

4/09/2006 12:07 PM

[ClassWarrior]

1. No, we'll see that justice is served.

:evilgrin:

(Framing, framing, framing!)

NGU.

[Democrats_win]

2. Exactly!

[Donald Ian Rankin]

21. That still raises the same issue, though.

The law is there to protect the innocent first and to punish the guilty only secondarily. I don't think that rooting out Republican corruption would (not "will", alas) interfere with the running of the country, but if it would I'd far rather see criminals let of and the economy, Iraq, the environment etc fixed that the reverse.

The OP raises a legitimate concern, even if the answer is "no, it won't".

[Meridian]

3. Democrats will ensure that "Justice Is Served"

Don't use Republican talking points. It only empowers those piggies.

[davidwparker]

4. We'll show that the people want this country back. We won't resort

to the guillotine ... yet.

[tocqueville]

7. Gillette, the best a Republican can get ? nt

[Botany]

5. How about seeing that laws are enforced and that lying to hide

criminal actions is not going to be permitted. Along with a lap dog
congress that has been protect bush's ass from day one.

[long_green]

6. If they don't then all the time I've spent drawing up Arrest Lists

will have been wasted.

[onehandle]

8. More like a witch burn.

These criminals have been soaking themselves in gasoline for twelve years.

We get the matchbook in January of 2007.

Then we'll begin undoing the damage they caused as we RUN THE COUNTRY.

[renaissanceguy]

9. I don't buy the argument about not "changing horses midstream."

Perhaps that is the case with the pResident, but I don't think people could care less if their congressperson changes during a war. If anything, in this particular situation, I think another war would make them angry at repugs.

[Bush_Eats_Beef]

10. Agreed, but I can sure smell it as a "talking point"...

...Rove sold that one...HARD...during the 2004 election. But you're right. We'll find out how well a "Bush Talking Point" works for a Republican who isn't Bush (ESPECIALLY if they are attempting to DISTANCE themselves from him). Perhaps that was the essence of the threat Rove put out there a while back ("If you want our help in the midterms, get on board") and Mehlman's reminder that right now, Republicans are "Brand 'W' Republicans"...

Pathetic. Just pathetic.

:patriot:

[Byronic]

12. It IS a nonsensical argument

"You can't change horses in midstream during war".

I believe if things are going dreadfully and irredeamably wrong, then you must do just that.

Take Britain in World War I - the failing Asquith replaced by Lloyd George

Or World War II - Chamberlain replaced by Churchill

I thought Republicans were supposed to love Churchill?

[welshTerrier2]

11. they should give subpoena power and the right to call hearings

to the minority Party ...

the American people and the cause of democracy is not served when only the majority party has these powers ... proper oversight demands that either Party should be able to call hearings and be empowered to get to the truth ...

the current system encourages partisan cover-ups ...

as for "witch hunts", the term implies that they won't "search for the truth with integrity" ... there's a huge difference between honest hearings and witch hunts; i believe the Democrats will hold honest hearings ... the real crime is that the republicans have refused to do so ...

[TallahasseeGrannie]

13. Sure. Human nature.

[FrenchieCat]

14. I didn't like the censure proposal because, in principle, it does not

fit the crimes committed and has no chance of happening BEFORE we take back the house......

And I disagree with those who find censure more "Reasonable" than Impeachment because, in Principle, this is incorrect.

I also find that those talking about impeachment and censure, as noble as they may be......are distracting from what the real issues are that can strengthen Democrats to win back the congress ....and those issues are not threats of either Censure or Impeachment upon a President who is not running in the election.

1/2 of a great strategy is timing.
I think the timing for discussions on Censure and Impeachment is NOT BEFORE the 2006 elections are held. This is allowing just the type of attacks I keep hearing about from the GOP and their media minions. The gullible public will suck this up....and the GOP voting base is being stimulated into charging into the voting booths.....when it might have happened otherwise.

As for after AFTER 2006, and what could happen if we win back the congress? I think what should happen is whatever is required to allow our democracy to work as it was intented.

It's not the intent of what raising an issue can do, that counts....it is the end results, even if sometimes unintended.

[bullimiami]

15. its not a witch hunt, the house needs to be cleaned.

its about time for justice and truth. enough of the liars and corruption.

[HuffleClaw]

16. nice spin, 'a witch hunt'

i expect a loooong period of the republicans playing the victims. i suggest mailing the little crosses and some carpet tacks so they can play the martyr properly.

[BrklynLiberal]

17. Repukes calling themselves victims is like the kid who murders his parents

asking the court for mercy because he is an orphan.

[Homer Wells]

18. Dont Need a Witch Hunt

They are all right there in plain sight:nuke:

[skids]

22. It would be even less sportful than a Cheney quail shoot! n/t

[WePurrsevere]

19. Since most Witches I know aren't Republicans...no ;-) but the Dems will...

make sure that justice is served for those neo/fundie-CONs that have been doing their darnedest to destroy our country.

[blondeatlast]

20. Shooting fish in a barrel seems more likely.

Weeding out the corruption in this administration will be no sport whatsoever.