Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Is Hillary Clinton going to be President?

page: 12
5
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 4 2007 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by donwhite
I think we’ve seen a “new” Obama who will not directly clash with Hillary.


I still can't put my finger on it, but there has been a disturbance in the dark side of the Force, as if dozens of people shook hands and made a deal. Was it an understanding, or a concession? I don't know but I plan on having my minions look in to this.




posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 02:25 PM
link   


posted by Xpert11
DonWhite asked: The Dems as a whole don't impress me . . they oppose Bush43 when the polls tell them to. I am at a loss as to see what their plans and values are if they have any. None of the Dems candidates have done much for me. Hilary’s stance on her Iraq vote is bizarre to say the least . . she wants her cake and to eat it to. I am withholding judgement on Obama who had enough brains to oppose the war in Iraq. Obama still seems like a kid on Christmas morning flush with the novelty rather then a serious contender. [Edited by Don W]



X11, a couple weeks have past since you posted the above [edited] in reply to my question. Do you concur with me and J/O [him with reservations] when I say someone has clipped Barack’s wings? He picked up Hillary 2 times in NH and seems more restrained, like the senior Congressional Black Caucus has conferred with him, father to son style. “Don’t blow this! Wait your turn in line.”



posted by Justin Oldham


posted by donwhite
I think we’ve seen a “new” Obama who will not directly clash with Hillary.


I can't put my finger on it, but there has been a disturbance in the dark side of the Force, as if dozens of people shook hands and made a deal. Was it an understanding, or a concession? I don't know but I plan on having my minions look into this. [Edited by Don W]



J/O, do you see the heavy hand of Mayor Daley? His father held on to Illinois with a tight grip although sometimes he could not overcome the tendancy down state to vote GOP. Left over from the Civil War days. Sen. Everett McKinley Dirksen, for example. Sen. Charles Percy, and Pete Fitzgerald, for other GOP types. OTOH, recall Sen. Simon, or Sen. Durbin? And there was Sen. Stevenson II, and Sen. Moseley-Braun. See foot note below on Sen. Dirksen.

Daley must have been in on any Grand Strategy Conference. Perhaps Barack saw for the first time he was no cavalry to the rescue. No John Wayne. I believe you’ll find Barack much more a team player from now on and not so much a shining star!


Foot Note: Sen. Dirksen is memorable for 2 sayings attributed to him. The first is genuine, when asked about the rising Federal budget, he said, “A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon, you’re talking real money.” The other is more apocryphal. When showing the ropes to his newly elected senator son-in-law, Howard Baker, he is reputed to have said, “Never cast your vote until the money is in the bank.” He was not countenancing “selling” his vote, but rather, to be aware there are people out there on every side of an issue. After you have decided how you’re going to vote, go to those who want you to vote that way and let them “donate.” Because you cannot trust people who think they are “buying” votes, you must have cash up front. The money in the bank. END

[edit on 6/5/2007 by donwhite]



posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 03:10 PM
link   
I'm still digging, and I'm not yet satisfied with any answers that wil tell us who got to Obama. We may never know who or what chastened him, but I am willing to suggest that he may still be trying with all he's got to get that Vice Presidential spot.

Republicans can take some solace in the knowledge that Bill Richardson has been caught flip-flopping more than Kerry ever did. It all boils down to just one thing. Who does Hillary see as her best 'fit' for VP? If circumstances favor him, it could still be Obama. With all due respect to Don, I still think Obama is in the mix for that post. I've just got to find out if he was nabbed in a scandal, or if he was told teh facts of life by somebody with gravitas.

GOP contenders need to be paying attention to all of this. If they don't have their own counter-intelligence people working on this, they should. the current turn to the left (Giuliani) represents an effort to shake the religious right out of the driver's seat, and it seems to be working. If I had to bet money, I'd have to say watch for the course correction to come right after the nomination convention, or the primary. At the absolute latest, you'll see the candidate and his number two run "hot straight and normal" (borrowed sub lingo) after the primary.



posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 01:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by donwhite
X11, a couple weeks have past since you posted the above [edited] in reply to my question. Do you concur with me and J/O [him with reservations] when I say someone has clipped Barack’s wings? He picked up Hillary 2 times in NH and seems more restrained, like the senior Congressional Black Caucus has conferred with him, father to son style. “Don’t blow this! Wait your turn in line.”


Hmm you ask a very interesting question.
I wouldn't sign on to the dotted line that a deal has been brooked between the Hillary and Barrack camps we could just be seeing the lack of substance in Barrack campaign. A back room deal is a very distinct possibility Hillary and her team may have reached the conclusion that by taking Barrack as the VP pick they could best define the relationship and responsibility's with there chosen VP.

I am thinking that Barrack would be much like Nixon was as an VP . Nixon had nothing more then an professional relationship with Ike and little influence in the Ike admin and Nixon time as VP would serve as the spring board to his eventual election as president. Barrack may well be happy to just occupy the VP seat and bid his time for a possible future bid at the presidentency.



posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 09:10 AM
link   


posted by xpert11


posted by donwhite
X11 . . someone has clipped Barack’s wings . . like the Congressional Black Caucus has conferred with him, father to son. “Don’t blow this! Wait your turn in line.”


(1) Hmm . . an interesting question. I wouldn't sign on the dotted line that a deal has been brokered between Hillary and Barack’s camp. A back room deal is a distinct possibility . . Hillary and her team may have reached the conclusion that by taking Barack as the VP pick they could best define the relationship with their chosen VP . .

(2) I am thinking Barack would be much like Nixon as a VP. Nixon had nothing more then a professional relationship with Ike and little influence in the Ike admin . . Nixon’s time as VP served as a spring board to his eventual election as president. Barack may be happy to occupy the VP seat and bide his time for a future bid at the presidency. [Edited by Don W]


1) The No. 3 House post of Majority Whip is held by SC’s James Clyburn. John Conyers, MI, is chair of the Judiciary Committee; John Lewis of MLKJr days is chair of the Oversight sub-committee of the Ways and Means Committee; Charles Rangel, NY, is chair of the tax law writing Ways and Means Committee; Eleanor Holmes Norton, the non-voting delegate from DC, has acquired great influence in her 17 years in the Congress. Juanita Millender-McDonald died in April 22, ‘07. Her district is now 47% Hispanic and the Black Caucus is expected to lose the CA 37 seat to an Hispanic candidate. Dem of course, either way.

2) Yes. As relates to Barack in the VP slot. Aside: Although I must say Bush43 is somewhat of an enigma how he relates to VP Cheney. I’m not sure if B43 is not in fact running the government. I’m thinking VP Cheney would have done it much better and differently. I’m seeing Bush43 as a true believer in the Neo Con Doctrine. As in religion, there is nothing worse than a late comer convert.

I think Neo Con Doctrine is: the US - after the fall of the USSR in 1991 - had a “window of opportunity” for 25-30 years to reshape the world in our image. Wreck the United Nations. Destroy multi-lateral diplomacy. Expand Israel’s power in the Middle East. Crush the Yuan and the Ruble, for good measure. Laugh at the EU, as a polyglot of idealists foredoomed to failure. Too many diverse interests to sit for long in one parliament.

Which would leave the US the world’s only viable multi-national country. 12 super-carrier battle groups to enforce world hegemony. That’s Neo Con-ism. Bush43 is the ringleader of the cabal that had a free hand in W-DC from the Nine Eleven Event until November, ‘06. Now it is just slightly restrained, just a tad inconvenienced. Hey, isn’t Commander in Chief next to GOD! And B43 has said he talks to God. Hmm. End.

Barack would be a Nixon, not a Cheney. And who knows, he might pull it off in 2016. It’s his best chance so if he is wise, he will take it.

[edit on 6/6/2007 by donwhite]



posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 02:43 PM
link   
I'll stand on my original proposition that stated Obama would be Hillary's VP. Bill Richardson has done himself in, so he won't be a factor. As long as she can stay out of trouble, it'll be Obama in 2016.



posted on Jun, 18 2007 @ 07:07 PM
link   
I've got an example to back up my thinking. It's being reported today that "somebody" in Obama's camp leaked opposition research on Hillary Clinton that spun certain of her dealings in a racist manner.

I don't mean any disrepect to Mr. Obama, but that's an amateur's wound and it doesn't help him. If anything, it underscores his lack of expeirence for just one reason. His chief of staff is not ruling with an iron hand, and this more or less proves that. If this happened in the Clinton camp, we might never find the remains of the person responsible for it.

I joke, but I also make a point. Hillary and her inner circle are no different than any of their GOP counterparts. She's playing to win. Obama isn't the first guy to be done in by one of his own, and he won't be the last. Giuliani;s own staff lost his playbook, so it shows that we're all human. Even so, the best that Obama can hope for is the Vice Presidency in 2009.



posted on Jun, 18 2007 @ 07:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by ragster
Do you guys believe that Hilary Clinton will be the next Prsident,


Yes I do see below for the top reason I think so.

www.belowtopsecret.com...



posted on Jun, 19 2007 @ 01:28 AM
link   
If Hillary is elected in 08 I wouldn't go as far as calling her a dictator but I would say that Hillary would use Obama to consolidate power by reducing the role of the inexperienced VP has in her admin (a more experienced candidate would demand a greater role in the VP role ) . Hillary is such a polarizing figure so I cant see her being able to smile and pretend to be above the partisan bricking. Obama cant afford to be used as a buffer or launching pad for partisan attacks because it would go against the platform he ran on that's if Hillary is elected and she tries to re craft her image as the queen who is above partisan politics.

Obama could be the guy who makes all the back room deals that pass Hillary legislative program but I don't see him gaining any real experience as VP. Around 2010 assuming that Hillary is elected she could be in the same position her husband was in your in the White House but you face a Republican congress.


[edit on 19-6-2007 by xpert11]



posted on Jun, 19 2007 @ 04:52 PM
link   
I hope she proves me wrong. I'll be more than happy to take back everybad things I've ever said about what her brand of politics is capable of if she proves me wrong. I don't think she will, but it's out there and I've said it.

When the Democrats take the White House in '08, they'll also be picking up improved majorities in the House and in the Senate. Because their political agenda does include an undenied growth in government, I have to be skeptical of their ability to avoid the temptations of total power.



posted on Jun, 19 2007 @ 06:30 PM
link   
Did you see her new video? The one that's a take off on the Sopranos final episode?

I have no idea why she would do that, so many people already think of the Clintons as a crime family!



posted on Jun, 20 2007 @ 12:06 AM
link   
Actually, that video was very smart stuff. the Clitnons are playing up to their contraversies. It's all very Machievellian. Just the kind of thing I might have advised them to do. There are four ways to win hearts and minds. Bribe 'em, starve 'em, kill 'em or make them want what you have.

Hillary has some of the best people in da biz on her team. She knows this instinctively, but her handlers know it for the tactic that it is. There are many times when its better to play up to your contraversies than to waste time explaining or denying. I've done it a time or two myself, so I know it works. It's not deception. It's influence.



posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 06:53 AM
link   

posted by Justin Oldham
Actually, that video was very smart stuff. the Clitnons are playing up to their contraversies. It's all very Machievellian. Just the kind of thing I might have advised them to do. There are four ways to win hearts and minds. Bribe 'em, starve 'em, kill 'em or make them want what you have.

Hillary has some of the best people in da biz on her team. She knows this instinctively, but her handlers know it for the tactic that it is. There are many times when its better to play up to your contraversies than to waste time explaining or denying. I've done it a time or two myself, so I know it works. It's not deception. It's influence.


Say Mr J/O, I really liked your lesson in Bribery 101. Ply them with filthy lucre as St Paul warned; deny them necessities of life; cut them off at the knees; or paint them green with envy as Dante depicted.

Hillary is on the hot seat now. She is the confirmed leader in the all guiding opinion polls. She is riding so high it is hard to imagine she will not suffer a decline at some point in time. General disillusionment. Disappointment. Attributing to her that which she cannot do, as in the Senate, stop the war.

I liken her current position to much like riding a camel. I have heard that camels have a mind of their own. You don’t so much tell a camel where to go as you find one that’s going your way. If you have ever watched one of those old b&w movies where actors actually rode camels, you will see it is a real chore to ride one. Which is why you usually see Arabs leading camels rather than riding them. And probably why Jesus rode a burro into Jerusalem. It is hard to impossible to look scerene on a camel.

I have posted elsewhere that polls of polls predict she will arrive at the Convention with 1800 delegates out of the 2100 needed. Barack will be #2 in Denver with 800. Which puts him in the cat bird seat holding proof positive of his vote catching popularity and having more than enough votes to switch to her to put her over the top on the first or second ballot. In exchange for the Numero Duo spot!

It is going to be a tough ride for anyone to hold onto for the next 14 months. That’s like 2 in a row of the “7 months” pregnancies we saw a lot of in the pre-pill days when so many first borns were “premmies.” Or so the grand parents said.

[edit on 6/22/2007 by donwhite]



posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 06:45 PM
link   
Justin's rule of politics #4, never do for yourself what others are wlling to do for you. Hillary is launching any number of cultural and commercial initiatives that will move by themselves after she's stoppped paying attention to them. It's one of several things she is doing that NONE of her competition is doing with any degree of effectiveness.

[edit on 22-6-2007 by Justin Oldham]



posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 10:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
I don't mean any disrespect to Mr. Obama, but that's an amateur's wound and it doesn't help him. If anything, it underscores his lack of experience for just one reason. His chief of staff is not ruling with an iron hand, and this more or less proves that. If this happened in the Clinton camp, we might never find the remains of the person responsible for it.

I joke, but I also make a point. Hillary and her inner circle are no different than any of their GOP counterparts. She's playing to win. Obama isn't the first guy to be done in by one of his own, and he won't be the last. Giuliani’s own staff lost his play book, so it shows that we're all human. Even so, the best that Obama can hope for is the Vice Presidency in 2009.

I hope she proves me wrong. I'll be more than happy to take back everybody things I've ever said about what her brand of politics is capable of if she proves me wrong. I don't think she will, but it's out there and I've said it.

When the Democrats take the White House in '08, they'll also be picking up improved majorities in the House and in the Senate. Because their political agenda does include an undenied growth in government, I have to be skeptical of their ability to avoid the temptations of total power.


1) On disrespect. I have argued - not convincingly - that Barack would not get the nod for VP despite his good showing. So far he may be #1 in raising cash and he is holding a strong #2 in popularity polls. The Dems consistent #3 is Edwards who is too pro-union, too-left leaning to make an impact on the R&Fs who run the Party. Not because they aren’t “left” in their Goldwater ‘Heart of Hearts,’ but because they are winners first, ideologues second. So let’s begin to talk seriously about a Clinton Obama ticket in ‘08. I wish she’d send Barack to Spanish school.

2) Playing to win. No belly dancer her, but fire in the belly she has. You have constantly characterized her as a devotee of Machiavelli, Mr J/O. Capable of making the hard decisions. You cannot do anything good or bad until you gain the office.

3) When Dems take the White House. Let’s hope she does not add to the era of shattering disregard for the Constitution and the attacks on our 220 years old tradition of civil liberties we have witnessed under the Gang of Four - Bush43, VP Cheney, AG Gonzales and Condi “the Chameleon” Rice. America’s First Designated President.


Book Note: I just finished a 2006 Bestseller by Ron Suskind, “The One Percent Doctrine: Deep Inside America’s Pursuit of its Enemies Since 9/11" He lays it out day by day, how American-ism was betrayed by its leaders.

[edit on 6/22/2007 by donwhite]



posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 11:14 PM
link   
I've said from the beginning of this thread that Barack Obama was Mrs. Clinton's most likely running mate. As a dark master of American politics, I don't look at things through a partisan lense. As arm chair psychologist and political profiler, I look at what a person is capable of and what they actually do. I may not agree with her politics, but I will acknowledge Hilary's skill in the arena.

I still say that American is ready for a black VP. I don't say that out of any true sense of idealism, I say that as a practical sociological matter. In spite of our man ups and downs, we are more than we have been. We are ready. Having said that, I still question the politics of the Democrat party, and I'm glad to see that Don shares my hope that they won't continue putting a torch to the Constitution as Mr. Bush has.

I feel vindicated AND validated. I shall now go and barbecue some beef and drink some beer as just reward.



posted on Jun, 23 2007 @ 07:36 AM
link   

posted by Julian Oldham
I've said from the beginning of this thread that Barack Obama was Mrs. Clinton's most likely running mate. As a dark master of American politics, I don't look at things through a partisan lense. As arm chair psychologist and political profiler, I look at what a person is capable of and what they actually do. I may not agree with her politics, but I will acknowledge Hilary's skill in the arena.

I still say that American is ready for a black VP. I don't say that out of any true sense of idealism, I say that as a practical sociological matter. In spite of our man ups and downs, we are more than we have been. We are ready. Having said that, I still question the politics of the Democrat party, and I'm glad to see that Don shares my hope that they won't continue putting a torch to the Constitution as Mr. Bush has.

I feel vindicated AND validated. I shall now go and barbecue some beef and drink some beer as just reward.


1) On beer. As a youth I hated beer. It tasted terrible. Dionysus was my early ticket puncher to a young man’s right of passage to inebriation. I joined the Army National Guard at 15 - altering a birth certificate making me 17 - and on each Tuesday night’s drill, my ride stopped at a tavern for “a couple beers for the road.” This was a full generation before the MADD mothers made DUI so unpopular, and barely 4 years after the end of War 2. It was 1949 and most out of the way barkeeps were still serving anyone in uniform. With or without pimples. The old enough to fight is old enough to drink theory. (Which theory by the way is NOT true. You do not have to be responsible to be KIA. To drink, you should be.).

Waxing nostalgic in the early 1980s - early sign of old age - I began to shop at a new for Ky liquor warehouse style store. Prior to a change in our liquor laws, customers could not self-serve. I bought my first beers by label. Kirin of Japan had the most beautiful label and was not bad beer either. Red Stripe of Jamaica proved to me you could make good beer in a hot climate. China offered a couple brands that were the equal to any. Canada and Australia were among the best, which status I automatically granted to Germany. IMO there are more drunk Aussies than drunk Krauts. Proportionally speaking. I did learn that St Pauli Girl was never sold in Germany, but was made there for the US market. I drank Lowenbrau long before Millers bought it. Well, they bought the label. I finally settled in on a good American brand, Rolling Rock of Latrobe PA. I happen to have a 6 pack of Samuel Adams Light in my fridge today. Even I am not entirely consistent.

Barack Obama has all those attributes you want in a candidate but rarely find in one person. He is handsome. He is young. He is articulate. He is persuasive. He is a proven fund raiser. He seems to be squeaky clean. He is a family man. He may prove to be a cross-over candidate. Newcomers to America - Green card holders and new citizens - may be able to easily identify with him; he barely makes the anti Schwarzenegger cut by being born in Hawaii. He is black. Well, barely, but enough black that in the Old South he would have had to eat outside and use 'Colored' toilets. He has a book (or 2) to his credit. I could go on mentioning he’s the husband of one wife and so on, but I think I’ve made my point.

So why did I resist “adopting” Barack as my own? 1) The ‘06 Ford v. Corker senate race in Tennessee showed the GOP was still wiling to play the race card in any close election. I just wanted to avoid that issue because I believe having a woman at the top of the ticket would in itself be asking the voters to make one quantum leap away from 220 years of male dominance. The devil you know is better than the devil you don’t know kind of thinking. GOP presidents beginning with Eisenhower have proved to be slow to stuck when it comes to urging the cause of equality for America’s long suffering blacks. Nixon played the race card, by opposing school bussing. Ford? He is the exception that proves the rule. Reagan? Humph! He looked backwards and thrived on the Welfare Cadillac falsehood. The First Bush looked UPwards. What do blacks have to do with the rich anyway?

When Geogia’s own Newt Gingrich captured the Congress in 1994, the black ghettoes knew it was more hard times a’comin. Bush43 has “given” up on America’s blacks. Anything he can do to “stomp back ” at them Texas style is his game. Did not his “handlers” have to ‘drug’ him to get him into the NAACP convention? One time.

With Obama in the #2 slot, the voters will have to make a sea change TWO times in ONE vote. Hillary already had overwhelming support among rank and file blacks so adding Obama will not add to her vote total. If ‘08 Republicans hold true to their evil ways, it could cost her some closet Redneck votes. I’m counting on Obama to be a genuine cross-over candidate who will appeal to Hispanic voters and a small Muslim vote. Which reminds me of immigration, but that is about to be solved is it not?

2) I had previously urged Jack Warner (VA) or Bill Richardson (NM) as likely fail safe or even “fallback” candidates but Jack keeps saying “No” and Bill has slipped badly. A Virginia Dem would put the south in "play” if the Movers and Shakers in the Dem hierarchy believed the election would hinge in the south as in 2000. Alternatively a New Mexican puts the West in "play" if they believe the swing states (electoral votes) were in the West. The Dems choice of Denver shows me there is strong sentiment in that direction. (That same logic does not explain the GOP choice of NYC. I’m predicting a WTC site finale!)

Obama OTOH, “from” Illinois, is a state that has not had electoral prominence since the 1960 JFK squeaker over Nixon. With the first Richard Daley long since deceased, stuffing ballot boxes the Windy City by the 10s of 1000s of pre-marked Dem votes to offset a similar GOP tactic downstate, is not in the cards. Yet, the nation’s mood indicates Obama can confidently “promise” to carry his weight in Illinois, and could make a impolitic jest by asking Hillary if she can do the same in Arkansas. (Hillary was born in Illinois).

So there you have it, J/O, my concession speech.


PS. You know the History Channel is attributing American’s 10 to 1 preference for beer over wine to the Little Ice Age? Which 500 years long period closed with a bang in 1816, the Year With No Summer.

[edit on 6/23/2007 by donwhite]



posted on Jun, 23 2007 @ 04:43 PM
link   
I'm pleased to say that Operation "Steak and Beer" was a success. there were no human casualties. In general terms, I am a fan of lagers and pilsners. More so the lager. In my youth, I had a taste for dark beer. During the holidays, I permit a six pack of Guiness on the estate. I have generally preferred lagers with a bite, al la Red Stripe.

It pains me to think tha the Republicans are going to lose again in '08, but I understand the reasons why. doesn't mean that I like it. Just means that I get the point. I do tend to agree with Don's assertion that an Indy Bloomberg run the White House would be a spoiler for the Democrats. I'm sure they have already sent theri people to talk with Mike.

There is one pint I'd like to re-make here. I think that the next President, no matter who they could possibly be, will be sorely tempted to build on what Mr. Bush has already done. I really do think that anyone with a grip on reality would be tempted to say, "I'm a better person. I can control this. I can do good things with it, too." In this regard, I don't think it matters how you view Hillary. Good or Evil, she will...I think...be tempted to greater power in ways that won't be good for us.

Some of the people who read my work are surprised that my fictional President is so 'humane.' Hey, con one. We're all human. The people who knew them have said that all of history's greatest tyrants were actually quite nice and likeable behind closed doors. I know that there have been a few exceptions, but the point I'm getting at is that most people don't get out of bed say, "I think I'll be evil today."



posted on Jun, 23 2007 @ 05:53 PM
link   
Mr J/O, I am not ignoring the issue you have raised repeatedly, that is, the potential for continuing and adding to the abuse of the balance of power between the three independent and supposedly co-equal branches of our 1787 designed Government. It’s a tough question not easily answered. Just as few realize 2001 was the first year of the new century and new millennium, so also they may not grasp that Bush 43 has set a tone and tenor for the Article 2 branch of the government never seen before. He, Cheney and Gonzales have been the ‘Perfect Storm’ in demolishing old time religion and old time government. Whether we as a nation can go back remains to be seen. That is the question you keep urging and that I keep passing on.

Bush43 has declared since the day after the Nine Eleven Event that the nation is at war and he is the commander-in-chief. Congress has not declared a state of war to exist. Review: Article 1, Section 8. "The Congress shall have power . . To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water . . " It is my own view the Bush43 "War on Terror" is the grandest example of political opportunism coupled with unconscionable demagoguery! B43 and AG Gonzales have mis-read the US Con again.

Let’s do it: Article 2, Section 2, Clause 1: The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States; he may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices, and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.

Nowhere does the Con say B43 is the C-in-C of the nation. Nowhere does it say he can suspend laws, sign secret orders, create military tribunals, or render a person in our custody into the custody of another state to be tortured. How in the heck does that absolve us anyway. Has B43 and AG Gonzales never heard of conspiracies to violate laws? He does it to escape the jurisdiction of the US Courts. As in Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.

In time of war, it is imperative the armed forces have but one source of orders. One person in charge. You have only to read about the travails of George Washington and those who opposed him both in the Continental Congress and out of it who wanted to, first replace him, then failing in that, to co-opt his authority by making a new field commander of equal rank who would be more compliant to the whims of Congress. Washington acted decisively to retain his earlier grant of sole authority over the armed forces but he never confused his writ of authority to run to making laws. Whatever de did, it was done through Congress.

Abraham Lincoln, the man who weathered the second greatest challenge to our existence as a 1787 nation, likewise soldiered on with all the slowness caused by adhering to the laws of the land. Yes, he did replace generals, which is within the scope of C-in-C power, but he did not act outside the US Con or the Congress or courts. Even the sometimes criticized arrests made in Maryland were done under acts of Congress.

Franklin Roosevelt was roundly criticized too. But no one can point to any act of FDR during the darkest days of the Great Depression where FDR acted outside the laws or usurped authority. All the New Deal however much criticized was passed into law by various Congresses. Never by Secret Executive Order signed in the night. Although we know by hindsight that it was wrong to order the 110,000 Japanese Americans into concentration camps, let me say very few white Americans in California complained.

George W Bush, no matter how high he holds himself in his own eyes, is no Washington[/n], he is no Lincoln and he is no Roosevelt. Yes, Bush43 is indeed ONE of a KIND. And if there is a God in Heaven, he will be the last of his kind. America’s FIRST designated president. By a Supreme Court that usurped its authority. By a 5 to 4 vote.

So now that he has done all that, and got away with it 100% by having a wayward series of GOP congresses under Dennis Historied and Bill First, two non-performer, and he has replaced so many of the good people who were in government for yes and years with nincompoops like Monica Goodling from Falwell University of Christian Believers. Who know next to nothing but put into jobs they could do. Gee! Pray ever morning before you go to work so you can do God’s job! Sweet Jesus. “Faith based” ought to be a criminal offense.

I don’t know, J/O, whether the next president will give up all those usurped powers extra legal non constitutional powers. It takes 60 votes in the Senate to do anything meaningful. If the votes give the Dems 60 or more votes, then it will truly be a Democratic Party problem. With fewer than 60 votes, then it remains a talk-talk problem crated by the Republicans.

[edit on 6/23/2007 by donwhite]



posted on Jun, 23 2007 @ 06:49 PM
link   
It is tough to tell for me.

I think that she has a darn good chance of making it, but then again, it isnt even about the people voting right? According to David Icke, the next president has already been selected right? Based on some hierarchical illuminati structure?

Whatever. I still think that because of Bill's clout, she will end up being the frontrunner for the Dems. I also think that she might acquire Mr Obama as her running mate.

If this were to happen, that ticket would be unstoppable.





new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join