Not President Hastert if we win in 2006 - PRESIDENT PELOSI!

[helderheid]

Thank you SO MUCH Jack Rabbit! Please spread the word!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=966581&mesg_id=972054


We take back the house and senate - Pelosi is Speaker of the House - we impeach */trigger happy and PELOSI is President in 2007! First woman President to boot!

[KingFlorez]

1. Yes, Yes, Yes!!!

That would be so good! PRESIDENT PELOSI!

[helderheid]

20. my reaction too! Surprised so few responses! edited to add

Shall we send roses? (I'M JOKING)

[napi21]

2. I don't want to see President Pelosi either!

Any Dem would be much better than any Pub, but I just don't think Nancy is up to THAT task!

[helderheid]

3. OH PLEASE are you telling me she is worse than */trigger happy???

There are STILL elections in 2008

:eyes:

[saltpoint]

4. I like the sound of President Pelosi a great deal better than President

Hastert.

[Imagevision]

5. nah, no Nancy? - let's keep Bush n Cheney --duh!!!!!

[helderheid]

6. LMAO! You owe me a recommend!

[marmar]

7. And Judicial Committee Chairman John Conyers...

:)

[helderheid]

8. Yes yes YES!

[SaveElmer]

9. Still won't happen....

You have to get the House and Senate...and not only do you have to get the Senate, but have to get 67 votes to convict. That is not going to happen...

[helderheid]

10. waaa waaaaaaaaaaa

(couldn't resist the Debbie Downer music) :)

Don't piss in my cheerios damnit!

[SaveElmer]

11. I love those skits...

Especially when they can't contain themselves and start cracking up...

Sorry to rain on your parade there...but hey, I think the dems are gonna have a good election result in November!!!

[helderheid]

14. I do too - I always relate! :)

[pnwmom]

27. If committees used subpoena power to bring out enough scandal,

there might be 67 votes. We're probably only seeing the tip of the iceberg now.

[SaveElmer]

34. Theoretically yes...

But it would have to be a magnitude order worse than what we know now for that to happen.

[pnwmom]

40. Well, for example, hard evidence that Bush/Cheney knew that 9/11 was

planned, and just stood by and let it happen.

[SaveElmer]

46. I could think of thousands of things...

That if they came out would cause this to happen. But the chances of that are remote. And there is no credible evidence that Bush/Cheney knew in advance the attack on 9/11 was coming

[pnwmom]

47. No, just circumstantial evidence.

Like the fact that Bush didn't order increased airport security despite the August memo that he DID receive.

And the coincidental timing of the war games.

And the way they ignored the urgent warnings of people like Richard Clarke.

And Bush's lack of reaction when informed of the attacks.

And administration officials avoiding air travel on commercial craft during the period before the attacks.

And the fact that Bush had already told a journalist that he could get a lot done if he were a war president.

You're perfectly right, there is no real evidence at this point. But there hasn't been an unbiased investigation, either.

I'm just saying . . . there's nothing that Bush & Co. has done before or since that's made me think they could be INCAPABLE of sitting idly by, letting the attack happen.

[SaveElmer]

48. I agree they were negligent...

But I don't think they knew that these specific attacks were coming.

[Selteri]

29. I dunno, if the dems get control of both

I can see a lot of Repukes jumping ship instead of voting on party lines in a desperate attempt to make sure they'll be able to KEEP THEIR JOBS.

[SaveElmer]

35. I could see a couple principled pubs...

Voting for it...Snowe, Collins, maybe Specter...but there would have to be between 14-16 jumping ship (assuming Democrats have a slim majority). I just don't see that happening, unless something on an order of magnitude far worse than we know now comes to light.

[bleever]

12. As president, as she has as Minority Leader in the House, Pelosi

would Get It Done.

She knows how to balance the demands of ideology and practicality.

She is extremely capable of executing the duties of the office.

No comparison to * is even necessary.


Recommended.


ed: gram.

[helderheid]

13. can I get a recommend?

Damn, feel like a preacher! :)

[WillyT]

15. Your Wish Is My Command !!! - K & R !!!

:bounce::hi::bounce:

[helderheid]

16. thanks for the 3 y'all and send this to every womans caucus you know!

[stellanoir]

17. I put my hands on the radio as well as the keyboard

and gave you a big fat "RRRRRRRRRRRRRR...." ed.

Still that teeny weeny problem of the voting machines troubles me a wee tad.

[helderheid]

18. I'm with you. I really am. I have 2 issues that concern me more than any

other - the media and electronic voting machines.

I will vote on a paper absentee ballot. Not sure if it will be counted but feel it has a better chance than a DRE

[KingFlorez]

23. Done

Recommended

[helderheid]

19. This deserves 100 recommends. It does. And then we have to get rid of the

evote machines.

[helderheid]

21. .

[helderheid]

22. GAH WHY ISN'T THIS THE MOST IMPORTANT THREAD HERE?

[onenote]

26. because its a fantasy not reality?

As another poster noted, to toss chimpy and cheney from office,you'd need a two=thirds vote in the Senate, and that just isn't going to happen, even if we are successful, as I earnestly hope and pray we are, at recapturing a majority in the Senate.

onenote

[helderheid]

24. 1 more rec. I'm off to bed.

[helderheid]

25. DO IT FOR HELEN THOMAS!!!!!!!!!!!!

nite

[Selteri]

28. I could back Pelosi.

I want to back someone with a generally progressive record.

[hvn_nbr_2]

30. If we win the House this year, and especially if we win the Senate too...

I've thought that the Pukes would likely put tremendous pressure on Chimpie Strangelove and Darth to resign before the new Congress is sworn in. That way, Hastert would become pres and they'd still have the White House for two more years. Hastert may have enough scandals coming up to be impeachable but not nearly so quickly or surely as Chimp & Darth.

[helderheid]

31. Makes me wonder if they have something else up their sleeves!

[helderheid]

33. If they don't do that, they must plan to Diebold us again in 2006 - the

polls are so bad for them now though it's hard to imagine how they could... but they are capable of anything.

[helderheid]

32. morning kick

:donut:

[Triana]

36. um...

...I doubt we'll take back the house *and* the senate.

[Kazak]

37. PELOSI in '06!!!

WooHoooo!!!!

[Lefty48197]

38. Uh oh. Now the Clinton's will have to "deal with" the Pelosi threat

I can just hear the wheels turning in the heads of the conspiracy theorists. Or is that the sound of the spinning blades on the black helicopters?

[Independent_Liberal]

39. Impeach BUSH/CHENEY -- PELOSI 2007

Start printing those bumperstickers now guys!

:)

[helderheid]

41. ooooh I like!

[dysfunctional press]

42. pelosi heading the 2008 ticket is an even dumber idea than hillary

doing so.
and hillary as the nominee is a pretty stupid idea.

[helderheid]

43. that is not what we're talking about. Please read the post.

[dysfunctional press]

44. ahhh my mistake-

still- if we gain control of the house, i gotta think we can do better for speaker than pelosi.

[Jack Rabbit]

45. OK, I'll get on the bandwagon

PELOSI FOR PRESIDENT IN 2007

[All50inBlue]

49. just

out of curiousity, WHICH 6 repug senate seats will be GAINED?

Burns, MT (r)
Chafee, RI (r)
Santorum, PA (r)
Kyl, AZ (r)
Talent, MO (r)
Ensign, NV (r)
Dewine, OH (r)
Allen, VA (r)

Tennessee?


is anyone afraid of losing ANY democratic senate seats?