GAO rules Bush Admin Interference in Media Illegal - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-01-2005, 10:27 AM   #1
New Yorker
 
Sherry Darling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,857
Local Time: 10:27 AM
GAO rules Bush Admin Interference in Media Illegal

http://nytimes.com/2005/10/01/politi...rtner=homepage


Questions
1. Can the Dems get their act together on this?
2. Will there be REAL accountability?
3. Is this impeacable?
__________________

__________________
Sherry Darling is offline  
Old 10-01-2005, 10:37 AM   #2
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 09:27 AM
The answer to #3 is "no," because Congress is controlled by Republicans.

Melon
__________________

__________________
melon is offline  
Old 10-01-2005, 12:48 PM   #3
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2democrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England by way of 'Murica.
Posts: 22,140
Local Time: 02:27 PM
The question is when will the american people finally open their eyes and get fed up with the corruption of this administration.
__________________
U2democrat is offline  
Old 10-01-2005, 02:57 PM   #4
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Se7en's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: all around in the dark - everywhere
Posts: 3,531
Local Time: 09:27 AM
isn't any illegal act technicaly grounds for impeachment? all clinton did was lie about getting a bj. this seems a bit more serious. "covert propaganda?"
__________________
Se7en is offline  
Old 10-01-2005, 04:12 PM   #5
New Yorker
 
Sherry Darling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,857
Local Time: 10:27 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Se7en
isn't any illegal act technicaly grounds for impeachment?
Well, yes, indeed.

Paging Reid and Dean....pick up the red courtesy phone please....
__________________
Sherry Darling is offline  
Old 10-01-2005, 04:32 PM   #6
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 09:27 AM
I say impeach him, and like Clinton he will be found not guilty of an offense serious enough for removal.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 10-02-2005, 09:24 AM   #7
New Yorker
 
Sherry Darling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,857
Local Time: 10:27 AM
I consider the government overtly, explicity, intentionally hiring a newsguy quite serious enough for impeachment AND removal. "High crimes and misdemeanors", no? It's abuse of WH power for the purposes of maintaining power, exactly as Nixon (though if I had to rank 'em, Nixon still takes the cake).

I'm a bit surprised by the lack of replies Is this a lack of interest? Not sure what to say? It's so obvious that he needs to go that it goes without saying?
__________________
Sherry Darling is offline  
Old 10-02-2005, 09:53 AM   #8
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
BonosSaint's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,566
Local Time: 10:27 AM
It is probably technically impeachable, but the House isn't going to impeach and the Senate isn't going to convict. I was furious at the Clinton impeachment and think impeachment should be so rare. Not a political/partisan think which I think the Senate realized in the Clinton impeachment trial. I think they knew the body would be stained and it would open up a myriad of impeachment proceedings in the future. I think Bush is pretty reprehensible, but I don't really think this particular case rises to the level of impeachment.

Answers to 1 and 2 : No and No. We have a weak opposition party.
__________________
BonosSaint is offline  
Old 10-02-2005, 09:59 AM   #9
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 09:27 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Sherry Darling
I consider the government overtly, explicity, intentionally hiring a newsguy quite serious enough for impeachment AND removal.
On the removal we disagree. Not even in the ballpark of NIxon.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 10-02-2005, 10:10 AM   #10
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Jamila's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,454
Local Time: 08:27 AM
GAO - glad to see one part of our government is honest!
__________________
Jamila is offline  
Old 10-02-2005, 10:20 AM   #11
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 02:27 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Jamila
GAO - glad to see one part of our government is honest!
Isn't that the truth.............
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 10-02-2005, 01:16 PM   #12
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,294
Local Time: 09:27 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Sherry Darling

I'm a bit surprised by the lack of replies Is this a lack of interest? Not sure what to say? It's so obvious that he needs to go that it goes without saying?
Probably because most people have been completely desensitized to the various incompetencies and dishonesty exhibited by members of this administration for 5 years that this is just another in a long line.
__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 10-02-2005, 02:01 PM   #13
New Yorker
 
Sherry Darling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,857
Local Time: 10:27 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox


On the removal we disagree. Not even in the ballpark of NIxon.
Hi Dread!

I can agree that it's not in the league of Tricky Dick, but (and forgive my repeating myself here) what I understand is that the government made a decision to hire a "journalist" to promote propaganda. I'm curious why that isn't enough? What would be? Where's your "line"?

Thanks for the replies, all. Antriam, I hope to god you're wrong, but I don't think you are.

Clearly it's time to go shopping. for Retail Therapy.
__________________
Sherry Darling is offline  
Old 10-02-2005, 02:08 PM   #14
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,495
Local Time: 09:27 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram


Probably because most people have been completely desensitized to the various incompetencies and dishonesty exhibited by members of this administration for 5 years that this is just another in a long line.


or that bush benefits, immeasurably, from the soft bigotry of low expectations.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 10-02-2005, 02:12 PM   #15
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 09:27 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Sherry Darling


Hi Dread!

I can agree that it's not in the league of Tricky Dick, but (and forgive my repeating myself here) what I understand is that the government made a decision to hire a "journalist" to promote propaganda. I'm curious why that isn't enough? What would be? Where's your "line"?

Thanks for the replies, all. Antriam, I hope to god you're wrong, but I don't think you are.

Clearly it's time to go shopping. for Retail Therapy.
Forgive me if I am wrong on my facts, but has there been any attempt to hide what they did. Were they acting out in the open the entire time? My understanding is that this was not some back room deal, hidden from the public. My understanding was that this was the administration believing they were acting within their legal rights.

If I get thet ime to do more research on this I shall.

Propaganda? The NCLB Propaganda? Is this the end of the universe?
__________________

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com