• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Pelosi Defies White house - To Meet W/Terrorists!

Karmashock

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
897
Reaction score
67
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Term limits I think would be a good place to start there. I think much of the corruption is caused by people that remain congressmen and senators for upwards of 30 years. I think after 12 years you've had your say and need to let someone else represent your district/state.


What's more I feel the point that what pelosi has done is being evaded. Perhaps I'm mistaken. Would you agree that what she has done is wrong and that ideally she should be some how punished for what she's done?

I'm not saying she should be burned at the stake... just something that makes it clear to everyone that you do not do this... and anyone that does do it will be sorry.
 

gullivers travails

New member
Joined
Mar 31, 2007
Messages
42
Reaction score
7
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Term limits I think would be a good place to start there. I think much of the corruption is caused by people that remain congressmen and senators for upwards of 30 years. I think after 12 years you've had your say and need to let someone else represent your district/state.

What's more I feel the point that what pelosi has done is being evaded. Perhaps I'm mistaken. Would you agree that what she has done is wrong and that ideally she should be some how punished for what she's done?

I'm not saying she should be burned at the stake... just something that makes it clear to everyone that you do not do this... and anyone that does do it will be sorry.

I agree with your term limits suggestion. And, there have been other suggestions for bringing honesty and decency into our federal government. But, the 'powers that be' will not allow that. For them, the DOLLAR supercedes God.

As to Pelosi, what she's done could well be termed wrong and politically motivated. But, that's not the point! Every successful politician in D.C. engages in wrong and politically motivated actions - right up through the president. They will only dare to charge someone with law breaking if that someone somehow agrees not to 'get even.'

In comparison to what happens every hour in D.C., what Pelosi has done is equivalent to taking two (2) lollipops when leaving her favorite restaurant.
 

Karmashock

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
897
Reaction score
67
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
I agree with your term limits suggestion. And, there have been other suggestions for bringing honesty and decency into our federal government. But, the 'powers that be' will not allow that. For them, the DOLLAR supercedes God.
No... not the dollar. Power. There is a major difference. These people are there for power. They hold on to power. They claw and maim and scratch for power.


It's a room full of old dragons curled up on piles of burnt bones. We need term limits... We need them in the state governments as well.
As to Pelosi, what she's done could well be termed wrong and politically motivated. But, that's not the point! Every successful politician in D.C. engages in wrong and politically motivated actions - right up through the president. They will only dare to charge someone with law breaking if that someone somehow agrees not to 'get even.'
no, she crossed the line. Name another congressmen or senator that tried to steal power from another branch of government.
 

gullivers travails

New member
Joined
Mar 31, 2007
Messages
42
Reaction score
7
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
no, she crossed the line. Name another congressmen or senator that tried to steal power from another branch of government.
In my experiences in D.C., I say again that Pelosi merely stole a lollipop compared to a daily multitude of crimes including grand theft, lies and actions harmful to the public, the killing of over 3.000 soldiers and a host of other equally and even more horrendous actions done by the legislative and executive brance - and, the judicial.

Politically knowledgable people would not give a second thought to charging Pelosi - instead, they point fingers of accusation - knowing full well they can't afford to press the matter any further without revealing their own crimes.

You probably differ because of living an exemplary life style - and, take offense at any action by ANYONE which would resemble the unacceptability of what Pelosi did.
 

Karmashock

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
897
Reaction score
67
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
the point that she can't be taken down is a mark of corruption. Not that she is pointed out as doing something wrong. She did do something wrong. Fact. She should pay some kind of peniality for that. Fact. She probably won't which is part of the problem.



you are effectively dismissing her actions which is in and of itself an acceptable of corruption. It is not in anyway helpful to dealing with that corruption, ending it, or dealing with the factors that support it.


As to my opinions I believe that no one is above the law. The minute you have different sets of laws for different people is the minute you've got a classet society.
 

gullivers travails

New member
Joined
Mar 31, 2007
Messages
42
Reaction score
7
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
the point that she can't be taken down is a mark of corruption. Not that she is pointed out as doing something wrong. She did do something wrong. Fact. She should pay some kind of peniality for that. Fact. She probably won't which is part of the problem.

you are effectively dismissing her actions which is in and of itself an acceptable of corruption. It is not in anyway helpful to dealing with that corruption, ending it, or dealing with the factors that support it.

As to my opinions I believe that no one is above the law. The minute you have different sets of laws for different people is the minute you've got a classet society.
Once more - Yes! Pelosi may have done something wrong. But, that's the norm in D.C. About 535 people in Congress plus the presidency group do something wrong most every day. So, why do you single out Pelosi? Wrong is wrong! Right?

And, people like you and me DON'T dismiss their actions - there's nothing we can do about that. We have a corrupt governmental system - CORRUPTION rules the day!

Either we put them ALL in jail - or, NONE! No persecution, please!
 

Karmashock

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
897
Reaction score
67
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Once more - Yes! Pelosi may have done something wrong. But, that's the norm in D.C. About 535 people in Congress plus the presidency group do something wrong most every day. So, why do you single out Pelosi? Wrong is wrong! Right?
It is not the norm to break the logan act. It is not the norm to directly and illegally undermine the executive's foreign policy. It is not the norm to violate the separation of powers. Has it happened before? Yes... hardly the norm however.

And, people like you and me DON'T dismiss their actions - there's nothing we can do about that. We have a corrupt governmental system - CORRUPTION rules the day!

Either we put them ALL in jail - or, NONE! No persecution, please!
that's not how justice works. If you have a freeway of speeders do you pull htem all over?


No. You have one set of cops do a traffic break. that is they drive in front of the traffic blaring their horns and swerving to make it clear that no one is go past them... they then drive the speed limit. This is crowd control... this will keep most people in line all by itself if you do say once a week or so in a major city.


At the same time you should have a few people out there to pick cars off one at a time for tickets. These are the hard cases or the idiots that weren't paying attention... and they pay the ticket and hate get to be upset about that while everyone else drives by and says "glad that isn't me".


Result? People start obeying the speed limit... It's like ****ing magic.


And speaking of magic... and thus rabbits (as in out of hats) , happy easter!
 
Last edited:

tecoyah

Illusionary
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
10,428
Reaction score
3,836
Location
Louisville, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
This woman...(and by extention the house/Congress), are a percieved threat to the administration. Thus we see a focus on an obscure , 200 yr old, usually ignored law that when examined, has little bearing on the actual visit to Syria. Anyone who takes this as anything other than a political play is either fooling themselves....or just a fool.

Get real people....she was doing her damn job.
 

Karmashock

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
897
Reaction score
67
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
This woman...(and by extention the house/Congress), are a percieved threat to the administration. Thus we see a focus on an obscure , 200 yr old, usually ignored law that when examined, has little bearing on the actual visit to Syria. Anyone who takes this as anything other than a political play is either fooling themselves....or just a fool.

Get real people....she was doing her damn job.
the law has been updated as recently as the 1990s and it is a fundamental separation of powers issue.


How old is that law that says that congress has authority over the budget and that the president cannot by fiat simply declare funds be released?


The law is by no means irrelevant or even dusty. It is however "inconvenient" to those that are amused or excited by the notion that the current democratic congress will have more power then it should.




Consider the future. Show some human intelligence and think forward.


In a few years the reps could be back in control of congress and a dem could be in the white house.


How would you like it if THAT congress under cut a dem president's foreign policy?

MY GOD PEOPLE, WAKE UP! You are opening the door here to something truly dangerous. Once precedence has been established YOUR people will get nailed as well. I feel I have to point that out because you don't seem to respect the constitution itself or the fundamental structure of this country... but merely what is politically expedient for your own factions petty power games.


Please... examine the situation again and judge properly. You cannot decry bush for breaking rules if you are if anything more willing to break rules in the interest of your own power. Have some integrity.
 

gullivers travails

New member
Joined
Mar 31, 2007
Messages
42
Reaction score
7
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
In a few years the Republicans could be back in control of congress and a Democrat could be in the white house.

How would you like it if THAT congress under cut a Democrat president's foreign policy?

MY GOD PEOPLE, WAKE UP! You are opening the door here to something truly dangerous. Once precedence has been established YOUR people will get nailed as well. I feel I have to point that out because you don't seem to respect the constitution itself or the fundamental structure of this country... but merely what is politically expedient for your own factions petty power games.

Please... examine the situation again and judge properly. You cannot decry bush for breaking rules if you are if anything more willing to break rules in the interest of your own power. Have some integrity.

Those among us who were around during the Clinton adminstration understand fully well what happens when the party in control of Congress differs from that of the president. We been there!

And, you show an ongoing unwillingness to concede that lies, cheating, stealing and corruption profiles ALL members of Congress and the Administration if such members expect to get anything done. Good people must turn into bad people or nothing happens! That's Washington, D.C.

BOTH SIDES BREAK THE RULES - BOTH SIDES LIE, CHEAT, STEAL AND ARE CORRUPT. THEY HAVE NO CHOICE.
 

Karmashock

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
897
Reaction score
67
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Those among us who were around during the Clinton adminstration understand fully well what happens when the party in control of Congress differs from that of the president. We been there!

And, you show an ongoing unwillingness to concede that lies, cheating, stealing and corruption profiles ALL members of Congress and the Administration if such members expect to get anything done. Good people must turn into bad people or nothing happens! That's Washington, D.C.

BOTH SIDES BREAK THE RULES - BOTH SIDES LIE, CHEAT, STEAL AND ARE CORRUPT. THEY HAVE NO CHOICE.
You experenced it with the balance of powers intact. Imagine what would happen if the congress could overrule your president's foreign policy. What if a republican congress could effectively start a war without a president's support? Effectively get the enemy to fire on us thus forcing the president to fight simply to defend?


This is a slippery slope... and while I can see that you want to sweep this under the rug, it's unwise to do so.
 

gullivers travails

New member
Joined
Mar 31, 2007
Messages
42
Reaction score
7
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
You experenced it with the balance of powers intact. Imagine what would happen if the congress could overrule your president's foreign policy. What if a republican congress could effectively start a war without a president's support? Effectively get the enemy to fire on us thus forcing the president to fight simply to defend?

This is a slippery slope... and while I can see that you want to sweep this under the rug, it's unwise to do so.

Sorry! I don't 'follow' you. Like....sweep 'what' under the rug?
 

Karmashock

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
897
Reaction score
67
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
her actions... you're attempting to discard the whole incident as DC business as usual and it isn't. it's a major and UNUSAL violation of the seperation of powers.


I know she's your girl and I don't expect you to be as willing to slap her down as I am. But to retain credibility you have to have limits. At some point you have to be willing to say "this isn't acceptable even if my people did it". If you don't have that limit then you're just a party tool. Literally an implement no longer responsible for their own actions but a tool for another power.


Don't be a tool.
 

gullivers travails

New member
Joined
Mar 31, 2007
Messages
42
Reaction score
7
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
her actions... you're attempting to discard the whole incident as DC business as usual and it isn't. it's a major and UNUSAL violation of the seperation of powers.

I know she's your girl and I don't expect you to be as willing to slap her down as I am. But to retain credibility you have to have limits. At some point you have to be willing to say "this isn't acceptable even if my people did it". If you don't have that limit then you're just a party tool. Literally an implement no longer responsible for their own actions but a tool for another power.
I suspect you're so 'locked in' to punish Pelosi for 'some' reason that you've closed your mind to your real values and ethics.

Pelosi is NOT my girl! Her actions could be deemed wrong - that I don't really know!

I do not believe in 'selective' applications of my beliefs and values. Right is right and wrong is wrong. But, we live in a political environment, like it or not - admit to it or not, that gives but 'lip' service to values and principles.

If we are to punish ONE - then, we must punish them ALL! Like, starting with Bush and Cheney, then all members of Congress.

For instance, Bush has killed over 3,000 of our soldiers - all based on a lie that all media agrees upon - plus many other lies to cover each preceding lie. Yet, you find Pelosi's dubious action more grievous than Bush's. Doesn't make sense at all!

What's that old saying - What's good for the goose is good for the gander!
 

Karmashock

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
897
Reaction score
67
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
I suspect you're so 'locked in' to punish Pelosi for 'some' reason that you've closed your mind to your real values and ethics.
You're making excuses for her because you dislike the war.


Pelosi is NOT my girl! Her actions could be deemed wrong - that I don't really know!
The inevitable backslide... You previously said that her actions WERE wrong. Now you're saying that they could be "deemed wrong" as if the matter has to be go through some kind of judgment phase where nature of the action has to be debated.


Sir, I am at least consistent in what I have said and have dealt with you fairly and more importantly honestly. You have first attempted to cast yourself as an inpartical independent who was so jaded by bad DC politics that you didn't see the point in punishing her.

When I pointed out that that attitude merely protects people like Pelosi you then morphed into a supporter of her actions and cast doubt upon whether her actions were really wrong in the first place.


This is dishonest and I'm not going to play shadow games with you. This is not because I lack the ability but because such exercises bore me.


I do not believe in 'selective' applications of my beliefs and values. Right is right and wrong is wrong. But, we live in a political environment, like it or not - admit to it or not, that gives but 'lip' service to values and principles.
Indeed we do, and it is people such as yourself that selectively apply such values on the left AND the right that allow it to continue. You must punish pelosi REGARDLESS just as any republican should be punished REGARDLESS.


No one is above the law.

If we are to punish ONE - then, we must punish them ALL! Like, starting with Bush and Cheney, then all members of Congress.
Indeed, and where did Bush violate the separation of powers?

He didn't. So in fact you want someone that didn't commit a crime to be punished BEFORE you'll condone punishing someone that by your OWN admission DID commit a crime.


that is pathetic.

For instance, Bush has killed over 3,000 of our soldiers - all based on a lie that all media agrees upon - plus many other lies to cover each preceding lie.
Not a crime. Bush didn't kill people, they were killed in a military engagement that he had every legal right to start.


So what is your LEGAL argument. If you don't have one then YOU DO NOT HAVE ONE.

Yet, you find Pelosi's dubious action more grievous than Bush's. Doesn't make sense at all!
Considering one was illegal and one was not I don't really know what you're smoking.

What's that old saying - What's good for the goose is good for the gander!
I completely agree so long as we're talking about the same thing that's being given to both. And considering that you want bush punished despite breaking no laws and you want pelosi spared despite breaking laws I think you should consider the integrity of your claims. Just because it's spouted on highly biased webblogs doesn't mean it's rational thinking.
 

gullivers travails

New member
Joined
Mar 31, 2007
Messages
42
Reaction score
7
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
If Pelosi is to be punished, then she has to wait her turn!

Bush first, then Cheney, then Pelosi - then a host of others.

I'm independent and my words and postions demonstrate that clearly.

In my working years, I was deemed most knowledgable in political science.

I carry no vendettas. I'm not against women being in power.

My choices for president in 2008 are Gingrich or Guiliani. I can't find even one Democrat that could handle the job. Those 'two' guys could be outstanding.

In our democracy, a person is deemed innocent until proven guilty by their peers. You never heard of that! But, that's how it is.

I fear that your bias and possible demeaning attitude towards women have clouded your vision and sensibilities.

You do not 'speak' American.
 

Karmashock

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
897
Reaction score
67
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
If Pelosi is to be punished, then she has to wait her turn!

Bush first, then Cheney, then Pelosi - then a host of others.
For what?


Cite a crime. Make a LEGAL case. I have made a LEGAL case against pelosi, I've seen nothing but political hearsay offered from in in regards to bush.
I'm independent and my words and postions demonstrate that clearly.

In my working years, I was deemed most knowledgable in political science.
And I'm a master of time and space with full command of 9 dimensions of reality.


Your words thus far have NOT demonstrated you to be independent as you seem hell bent on protecting a deeply partisan character for making an obvious breach of the separation of powers.

I carry no vendettas. I'm not against women being in power.
are you implying that I do? Because no one said anything about this...

My choices for president in 2008 are Gingrich or Guiliani. I can't find even one Democrat that could handle the job. Those 'two' guys could be outstanding.
Both of those guys would continue the war in Iraq which would lead to more "murders" of our soldiers.
In our democracy, a person is deemed innocent until proven guilty by their peers. You never heard of that! But, that's how it is.
The only way she could be innocent is if she was supporting BUSH"S foreign policy.


Was she doing that?


No. Ergo, Guilty.


Thank you, come again.

I fear that your bias and possible demeaning attitude towards women have clouded your vision and sensibilities.

You do not 'speak' American.
What is this nonsense about being demeaning towards women?


If I've been demeaning women then you're a racist and a child molester. :roll: :lol:

Oh and you like to have sex with dead people! :lol:


Demeaning towards woman... give me a break... that was the most pathetic cheap shot I've seen months. Just wow.
 

gullivers travails

New member
Joined
Mar 31, 2007
Messages
42
Reaction score
7
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
For what?

Cite a crime. Make a LEGAL case. I have made a LEGAL case against pelosi, I've seen nothing but political hearsay offered from in in regards to bush.
If you are truly serious about the above statements, then GOOD-BYE!
 

Karmashock

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
897
Reaction score
67
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
If you are truly serious about the above statements, then GOOD-BYE!
Seriously? If you're seriously going to refuse to answer that question and are just going to run away, then that is the most pathetic argument I've had the misfortune to encounter in months... and that is impressive.

If you can't make a credible LEGAL argument then you have no case. NONE. You have NO POINT if you can't make a legal argument.

That 's being rational... If you're dissing someone for not living in fantasyland... where the rain is made of sugar coated dew drops and the hills are alive with the laughter of children... then hop right back on that unicorn and ride off into the sun set... you can scream "hi ho, butter cup... AWAY!" :lol:

All I asked was that you make a LEGAL argument to prove that bush should be brought up on charges before pelosi. You were completely unable to do that. You said he "murdered" 3000 US soldiers... which of course makes no sense under any legal precedent. Murder furthermore just for your information is a LEGAL term. To "kill" is not a legal term. Murder is.

So in the future if you don't want to come off as a clown (you know the guys that paint smiles on their faces and then dance at children's birthday parties), I suggest you choose your words more carefully and of course back up your words when directly challenged to do so... instead of freaking out and running away. :roll:
 

Stinger

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2005
Messages
15,097
Reaction score
537
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
This woman...(and by extention the house/Congress), are a percieved threat to the administration. Thus we see a focus on an obscure , 200 yr old, usually ignored law that when examined, has little bearing on the actual visit to Syria. Anyone who takes this as anything other than a political play is either fooling themselves....or just a fool.

Get real people....she was doing her damn job.
It's not an obscure law, it was almost invoked during the Contra issue in Nicaragua when several Democrats sent the famous Comrade Ortege letter telling him to not negotiate with the Reagan WH just wait till they came to power and they would support him.

She was NOT doing her job, she has taken on the role of Shadow President, her actions were stupid and harmful. She should be censured and removed from the post of SoH.
 

ARealConservative

cookies crumble
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Messages
14,518
Reaction score
3,438
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
For what?


Cite a crime. Make a LEGAL case.
No where in the constitution does it authorize the federal government to collect money for education. That power is left for the states.

Bush campaigned for No Child Left Behind - which costs substantial money - then implemented it - after swearing to uphold the constitution.

So.....how important is this logan act again?
 

Karmashock

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
897
Reaction score
67
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
No where in the constitution does it authorize the federal government to collect money for education. That power is left for the states.

Bush campaigned for No Child Left Behind - which costs substantial money - then implemented it - after swearing to uphold the constitution.

That's not a legal argument against bush but against congress. there is nothing illegal about campaigning for something that is a violation of the constitution... especially something as thin as that.


Think I'm wrong? Show me under what precedent or legal code you could try him for campaigning for no child left behind...

This should be good.
So.....how important is this logan act again?
I'm guessing the constitution is something you only pay lip service too then?
 

ARealConservative

cookies crumble
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Messages
14,518
Reaction score
3,438
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
That's not a legal argument against bush but against congress. there is nothing illegal about campaigning for something that is a violation of the constitution... especially something as thin as that.


Think I'm wrong? Show me under what precedent or legal code you could try him for campaigning for no child left behind...


This should be good.
Oh - I'm sorry. I was under the impression the president has the duty to veto any legislation that violates the constitution.

But hey - you continue on your partisan witch hunt regarding the logan act while ignoring other abuses of power. :roll:
 

Karmashock

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
897
Reaction score
67
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Oh - I'm sorry. I was under the impression the president has the duty to veto any legislation that violates the constitution.

But hey - you continue on your partisan witch hunt regarding the logan act while ignoring other abuses of power. :roll:
No, that's actually the supreme court's job. They are the guardian's the constitution. What's more congress is more responsible as they would have in fact WRITTEN the damn legislation.


And again, it's an INCREDIBLY thin argument. You want to send bush to jail for not vetoing the no child left behind act. :lol:


That's just silly. And that you're comparing this to a senor offical undermining our foreign policy only makes your argument that much more pathetic.

Go ahead and call me a shill for a political faction or the king of the moon while you're at it. Anyone that's paying attention will see right through that nonsense... and what's more, you know it's thin too. So the only person "might" think you're fooling... is me... and you're not.



here's an interesting question, what would her punishment even be for this? I can't even think of anything they could do to her... Does anyone have any idea what the legal precedent is on this?


And please... no more clown comments... we've had enough.
 
Top Bottom