Saturday, July 16, 2005

New Tone?

I am beginning to think that maybe our friends over on the left may be right.

It may be time to impeach President Bush.

Not over the war, not over the Karl Rove mess, not over the supposed lies, not for any of the reasons that the left says he should be impeached...

I think we should start to think about impeaching the President over the New Tone in Washington. I think we should think about impeaching the President for not pressuring senate Republicans into triggering the Constitutional Option to stop the filibustering of his judges. ( I will no longer call it the Nuclear Option, The OPTION is constitutional, the FILIBUSTERING is nuclear...) I think we should start to think about impeaching him for not pushing the Republican, Right Wing, Conservative agenda that we elected him for.

When I went into the polling booth last November, there was one phrase playing over and over in my mind as I colored in those Republican circles on my ballot form...

"U.S. Supreme Court Cheif Justice Hillary Clinton."

That one phrase was enough to ensure that President Bush got my vote, even if all of the lies from the left had been true. Even if they had proof that there were never any WMD's, even if they produced videotape of the President HAVING SEX WITH THE KING OF SAUDI ARABIA, as long as he put Originalist (I did not say "Conservative"...) judges on the courts, he still would have gotten my vote. I could not stand the idea of John F. Kerry appointing judges to lifetime appointments to set policy for the entire Nation, in spite of the elected representatives of the people, and I knew that cheif Justice William Rehnquist was circling the drain. I knew that whoever was elected in 2004 would inevitably select at least one Supreme Court Justice, And I didn't want Kerry having anything to do with the selection process. This was THE most important issue to me during this past election cycle.

On Thursday morning of this past week, the President held a meeting at the White House with some key senate Democrats to discuss nominations for a replacement on the Supreme Court for Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.


Since when do members of the opposition party get to have ANY input into the SELECTION PROCESS for potential federal judges?? Has this EVER been done before?

The problem isn't Democrats. It is Republicans who will not support their own party, and the President for not putting more pressure on his own party members to stay in line. The Republicans hold 55 seats in the senate. They only need 50 to confirm a judge. This shouldn't even be an issue.

The only reason that it is an issue is that Republicans in the senate will not stick together and support the President. On this point I really admire and respect the Democrats. They never stray off the reservation for any reason. They understand that the people who elected them wanted Democrats in power. They understand that their constituancy does not want the representatives that they elected trying to make nice and come together with the opposition, and they present a united front.

Do you think that they would include a single Republican in the process if the situation were reversed?


Because THEY understand what is at stake. The Supreme Court is the avenue by which Liberalism becomes Policy in America. It doesn't win elections, it is ruled into law through the court system, and I am sick of it.

I think that when our elected leaders do not impliment ( and in a timely manner) the agenda of the people who elect them, then these leaders should be held accountable.

So let the impeachment proceedings begin! Maybe Dick Cheney will make a more effective President when it comes to representing Republican voters. I like him better anyway...


Balloon Pirate said...

I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken.
Oliver Cromwell


carrier said...

Do you want to see Roe V. Wade reversed?

tugboatcapn said...

Personally I don't care either way about Roe v. Wade.
Republicans dont usually have abortions,so they raise more republicans. It's fine with me if the left aborts their voter base for the next 50 or 60 years.
Meanwhile you guys wonder why it is harder and harder to win elections...

tugboatcapn said...

Do you begin to see now why Liberalism is it's own punnishment??

Xena76 said...

Roe vs. Wade will never be reversed. Certainly not due to a justice that George W. Bush nominates. He does say that he is pro-life, but in truth he is one the most moderate Republicans in Washington and he has no intention of trying to get the abortion ruling changed.

But is that what you are really worried about? Roe vs. Wade isn't going anywhere, it's new issues like gay marriage, legalization of drugs, and ten commandments rulings that has really got you worried isn't it?

Balloon Pirate said...

Your bog is better than the funny pages tuggy...

You just invent crap out of whole cloth

Republicans dont usually have abortions
Ha! Where did you get that info?
Oh, made it up, just like everything else that comes out of your keyboard.

Rove had nothing to do with the Plame leak?

US Soliders not abusing detainees?,1,5324480.story?coll=chi-newsnationworld-hed

Republicans don't get abortions? Since when?

Thanks for the laughs!


carrier said...

You wring your hands about profanity and then advocate abortion for the unborn of the opposition. Not only are you a cold hearted ignorant bastard, you certainly are not a Christian man. Please leave my country, here we embrace the differences of human beings, not punish them. Feel free to crawl back into whatever Hell hole you came from.

And no I'm not worried about the ten commandments, unlike you I believe in them. In fact I'm looking at a copy of them right now. They hang on the wall of my office. Gay marriage? That is and should remain a state issue, not a question that should come before the supreme court. And the last time I looked drugs were legal.

Seriously, why don't you move to a place where your narrow minded views will be more appreciated. Nazi Germany would have been the perfect place for people like you.

tugboatcapn said...

Once again, you have proven that you know nothing about me.

You guys are the ones who scream about people's right to murder their children.

I don't advocate the abortion of ANYONE'S children, but MY views don't seem to stop anyone.

My comment was intended to illustrate the untended consequences of liberalism. If you can't understand things like that, then maybe you should go read someone else's blog.

I (unlike Mark,)have never promised not to delete anyone's comments.
Now call me a Nazi again.

carrier said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Xena76 said...

Wow, carrier, for someone who doesn't believe in God's condemnation of evil and absolute truth, you certainly don't seem to have a problem pretending you are Him and handing out eternal judgement.
I think that it is very self-righteous of you to decide who is and is not a Christian. In the same paragraph that you slam tug for his beliefs and statements, you say yourself that this country "embraces the differences of human beings", I guess what you really mean is that this country accepts everybody who agrees with you, no one else.

carrier said...

Sounds like you're calling me a that is offensive. I obviously don't know if Tug is a Christian or not. I can only guess based on the comments he makes, he sure doesn't sound like any Christian I know. Not a real one anyway.

carrier said...

By the way, I've never screamed about murdering unborn children. I think that abortion is a terrible choice to have to make.

Xena76 said...

Is this all about the comment about the left aborting their voter base? If it is, you should probably remember that it was the left who pushed for the legalization of abortion and the left who continues to lobby for what they call "womens' rights". I don't tend to believe that that title is appropriate but that is not the purpose of this discussion.

If Tug uses extremes to make his point clear it is, I believe, due to how passionately he feels about the things he believes. You certainly have taken a point to an extreme on occasion. With most people that I know their tendency toward extremity is directly proportional to their passion about a topic. Is it possible that you misunderstood his point? That maybe he is angry about abortion and knows he can't do anything about it and as a result gets extreme with his words?

You are correct, no one can KNOW whether or not another is truly a Christian. In fact, churches are FULL of people who think they are because they are "basically good people", they go to church, they put money in the offering plate, and don't cheat on their wives. In my opinion, some of these people make God sick because they won't stand up for what is right, what is true, what really makes a difference in the world. Before you decide where someone else falls in their relationship with Christ, make sure that you have His blessing to do so, it only seems prudent.

carrier said...

I agree. I am very comfortable in my relationship with Christ. Jesus would never have endorsed the idea of abortion. Neither would he have embraced the notion of war, but that hasn't stopped our president...a man who claims to be a follower of the teachings of Christ...from pursuing a practice that has resulted in the deaths of thousands of innocent people.

Erudite Redneck said...

Wow. Dude.


"Not only are you a cold hearted ignorant bastard, you certainly are not a Christian man. Please leave my country, here we embrace the differences of human beings, not punish them. Feel free to crawl back into whatever Hell hole you came from."

Tug, you and I agree on more than we've talked about in this spacve, I'll gar-an-tee. But, we could get into a shoutin' match over a lot of stuyff, too, especially after a beer or three, I reckon. But, friend, I b'lieve I'd help you kick this jerk's smug ass.

You get him from the right. Of course, I'll come at him from the left, just barely.

Moe. Ron. He. Is.

Mark said...

"And no I'm not worried about the ten commandments, unlike you I believe in them. In fact I'm looking at a copy of them right now. They hang on the wall of my office."
Better not let the ACLU find out about that. You will be sued.

Francis Lynn said...

..back the the theme of the post - This is the same old Old Tone with Repubs. Republicans have never had the cohesiveness of the Dems. They do not handle power & control in a way the Dems do. The Dems can be ruthless, tyrannical - as witness when they controlled the various committees in the Senate & House. The Republicans are too mamby-pamby make-nice. The Dems know how to wield power. The Repubs are too worried what the press is going to say about them. We may as well impeach the whole Repub Congress also.

tugboatcapn said...

I'm not too worried about Carrier, ER. He's been looking for a reason to call me a Nazi bastard ever since he first stumbled onto my Blog.
Who'da thunk it would be my pro-abortion stance that finally got it out of him...

tugboatcapn said...

And, Francis, where has it gotten them? The press hates them more than ever, and the Democrats would filibuster the President's recomendation on what to have for lunch. They are less cooperative than they have ever been, all the while getting louder and more mean spirited. I really believe it is time to stop playing with them and get serious.
(Finally, someone commented on my POST...)

carrier said...

You are right. I went over the top and I apologize for the Nazi comment.

Have a nice life.

carrier said...

And of course the Christian comment too. Uncalled for.

I will say one last thing before I go. I believe that brand of in your face partisan politics (practiced by both parties)is what's ripping this country apart. A lesser degree of representation in congress shouldn't equal a complete disregard the minority voice.

I'm really not a jerk by the way. I work hard and pay my bills. I have three children and three grandchildren and have done my best to make sure they will all be responsible productive citizens of this country.

It's been nice chatting with you.

tugboatcapn said...

Apology accepted.

And now let me say that I realize that my comment was extreme and inflamatory. The reason that I made it was because I am tired of having Roe V. Wade thrown at me every time I suggest that maybe the Supreme court may be out of control and needs to be reformed.
I know that realistically Roe v. Wade will not be overturned within my lifetime, so I choose to concentrate on other battles. Abortion was made legal through the courts, but the way that I would like to see the abortion issue resolved is for everyone to realize that it is wrong, and stop having them on their own.
The point of my comment was that when a child is aborted, whatever contribution that child would ever have made throughout their entire life is erased before they ever draw breath, whether that be voting Democrat, curing some disease, writing a beautiful song, or simply raising another child who would do these things. And these children have been aborted for decades now. Many of them would be voting age by now.
To me this is a very sad thing, and I can do nothing about it except make inflamatory comments.
If my comment was too harsh, and offended anyone, then I apologize for offending you, but I will not apologize for my convictions.

Erudite Redneck said...

As to the point of this post:

Thhis is how I felt when President Clinton started jacking with welfare and especially when he started pushing for NAFTA. That is NOT why I voted for a Dem.

Eh, they all run to the middle if they make it to a second term. They all start worrying about their "legacy."

Toad734 said...

Only 2 of the 9 Justices are Democrats so how is the Supreme Court "liberal". Just because they follow the constitution, just because they don't follow typical Republican agenda, just because they rule opposite of what you may want doesn't make them liberal, it makes them educated.

How can you or most anyone else say how valid their rulings are; are you a lawyer or a judge? Have you studied law for almost your entire life? Have you studied the Constitution and other legal precedents enough to say they are wrong?

I especially didn't agree with the eminent domain ruling but I would hardly call that liberal, that is "big business" Republican as you can get.

I thought I was getting a link?

tugboatcapn said...

I never said the Supreme Court was liberal. What I said was, they were out of control and needed reform. I've gone out of my way to keep my opinion on the Supreme Court non-partisan. The problem that I have with the current Supreme Court is that they seem to have begun handing down rulings which, from my understanding of the Constitution, are in direct opposition to what the founding fathers intended when they wrote the Constitution in the first place. (McCain-Feingold, emminent domain, etc.)
They also have begun to base their rulings on court cases from other countries, and even in some cases on rulings from other countries which were later overturned. (see the opinions of Justice John Paul Stephens)
My concern over the present Supreme Court is based on my desire to preserve the Constitutional freedoms which the founding fathers intended, and not on any desire to pack the Supreme Court with Republicans.
Republican or Democrat, it would be disastrous to place Justices on the Supreme Court who will institute their own personal policy preferences rather than interpret the law.
I would hope that this is an issue that you and I could agree on Toad.

I will provide a link now that I have permission.