White House: Dems' investigations excessive

Quote :

"'They've launched over 300 investigations, had over 350 requests for documents and interviews, and they have had over 600 oversight hearings in just about 100 days,' [presidential spokesman Scott] Stanzel said. 'So that's about six oversight hearings a day.'"

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-07-05-democrat-investigations_N.htm

Is this what the Democrats were elected to Congress to do? The answer is self-evident.

8/3/2007 2:18:39 PM

yes?

8/3/2007 2:21:13 PM

this is what I wanted them to do.

8/3/2007 2:22:00 PM

absolutely?

8/3/2007 2:22:00 PM

where there's smoke, there's usually fire.

anyhow, as the backers of the GOP's orwellian Patriot Act tell us, you will have no fear of additional scrutiny, if you have nothing to hide.

8/3/2007 2:22:01 PM

Quote :

"yes? "

8/3/2007 2:22:24 PM

Quote :

"anyhow, as the backers of the GOP's orwellian Patriot Act tell us, you will have no fear of additional scrutiny, if you have nothing to hide."

that's a damn good point, props.

8/3/2007 2:33:04 PM

I believe congressional oversight is important, but I also believe this government has more important things to address

8/3/2007 2:34:28 PM

I'm not saying that there shouldn't have been any investigations of the Bush administration or that Congress should neglect its oversight responsibility. But seriously--if you were to be candid--wouldn't some of you agree that the abovementioned number of investigations is excessive?

And one would think with this many investigations that if illegality were rampant in the Bush administration--as many of you claim--more people would be in jail. Why can't the Democrats in Congress find all of this alleged corruption? I mean, they sure as hell are looking very hard for it. Are the Democrats just incompetent or are they crooked? Or is the supposed illegality in the Bush administration that many of you so desperately hoped for just not there?

Quote :

"[Y]ou will have no fear of additional scrutiny, if you have nothing to hide."

joe_shithead

Would you mind telling that to the "global warming" alarmists? Thanks.

[Edited on August 3, 2007 at 2:42 PM. Reason : .]

8/3/2007 2:36:55 PM

Quote :

"And one would think with this many investigations that if illegality were so rampant in the Bush administration--as many of you claim--more people would be in jail. Why can't the Democrats in Congress find all of this alleged corruption? I mean, they sure as hell are looking very hard for it. Are the Democrats just incompetent or are they crooked? Or is the illegality in the Bush administration that many of you so desperately hoped for just not there? "

I know comprehending things is not your thing, but have you been paying ANY attention to the news recently?

8/3/2007 2:41:20 PM

^ahahahahahh

8/3/2007 2:42:47 PM

^^ Ah, the "reading comprehension" shit--it never gets old.

8/3/2007 2:44:41 PM

^^^ has nothing to do with reading comprehension. but ^ shows your lack of reading comprehension.

8/3/2007 2:47:48 PM

^ I think it shows how stupid you fuckers are. The quotation at issue is from USA Today--the most widely read newspaper in the country. So, the answer to the question about me "paying attention to the news" is self-evident. You just don't like the news that I pay attention to.

8/3/2007 3:00:36 PM

i'll just let the stupidity of that statement simmer a little bit, since you have no idea what we're even talking about.

8/3/2007 3:03:21 PM

vague/nonexistant answers sure are productive

8/3/2007 3:33:30 PM

well i think what was fairly obvious is that for one thing bush just commuted the sentence of someone who would have gone to jail. on top of the fact that he's claiming executive privilige on lots of the very information that would be needed to prove criminal actions.

8/3/2007 3:36:45 PM

^^^ If by "simmer" you mean that you're trying to think of something meaningful to post for a change, then I get it. As to the latter part of your post, if that actually is the case, I consider it a blessing.

^ Yeah, for a conviction having nothing to do with the alleged underlying crime, which has been totally rejected even in civil court. And Clinton never claimed executive privilege, did he?

[Edited on August 3, 2007 at 3:39 PM. Reason : .]

8/3/2007 3:36:48 PM

hooksaw, i think you should note that i generally don't post about other people, nor do i get caught up in the petty shit that goes around here so much.

8/3/2007 3:38:20 PM

^ I have no idea what that means.

8/3/2007 3:40:16 PM

Quote :

"If by "simmer" you mean that you're trying to think of something meaningful to post for a change"

i usually try to post meaningful things, even if you disagree with them.

Quote :

"Yeah, for a conviction having nothing to do with the alleged underlying crime, which has been totally rejected even in civil court. And Clinton never claimed executive privilege, did he? "

so going to the "clinton did it" defense, huh?

[Edited on August 3, 2007 at 3:45 PM. Reason : .]

8/3/2007 3:40:48 PM

^ You mean, like these trinkets?

Quote :

"ahahahahahh"

Quote :

"has nothing to do with reading comprehension. but ^ shows your lack of reading comprehension."

Quote :

"i'll just let the stupidity of that statement simmer a little bit, since you have no idea what we're even talking about."

None of these posts addressed the topic at issue in any meaningful fashion.



^ Not really. It goes to the context of the use of executive privilege by US presidents and selective outrage by left-wing loons suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome (BDS).

[Edited on August 3, 2007 at 3:49 PM. Reason : .]

8/3/2007 3:46:29 PM

see, and now that i've barely descended into the realm of hooksaw/boone/state409c/twista, i regret it. i won't talk about people in the slightest anymore. i just couldn't resist, because your statements seemed so willfully ignorant of what has actually been going on.

Quote :

"selective outrage by left-wing loons"

and plenty of republicans, especially considering the gonzalez stuff. just read some news about the FISA stuff from this week, many republicans have issue with giving the AG more power, specifically because of gonzalez's apparent lack of discretion in the past.

[Edited on August 3, 2007 at 3:51 PM. Reason : .]

8/3/2007 3:50:11 PM

and lack of memory of anything he does

8/3/2007 3:54:34 PM

^^ So, why hasn't Gonzales been convicted of anything--or anyone of note other than Scooter Libby? Why isn't Gonzales gone? Why doesn't the Democrat-controlled Congress demand his resignation?

BTW, it's spelled Gonzales--your z is subtly racist.

[Edited on August 3, 2007 at 4:05 PM. Reason : .]

8/3/2007 4:03:55 PM

misspelling his name is racist?

and the reason that he isn't gone, is the fact that it's not congress's decision unless they impeach him. Bush doesn't seem likely to fire him either because he probably wouldn't be able to get another AG confirmed before the end of his term. and they can't get facts on him because bush is claiming executive privilege on basically anything to do with what they consider wrong.

8/3/2007 4:06:08 PM

^ Yes.

And the Democrats are always with the excuses: We can't pull out of Iraq because the mean old Republicans won't let us--even though we control Congress! We can't impeach Gonzales because the mean old Republicans won't let us--even though we control Congress! We can't do this, that, and the other thing because the mean old Republicans won't let us--even though we control Congress!

Shit, I had no idea that Bush was omnipotent. Did you ever consider that maybe a lot of the ideas your team has just suck?

8/3/2007 4:16:08 PM

if they claim executive privilege on everything, there's not much impeachment could do, either

8/3/2007 4:25:07 PM

This man is smarter and more powerful than all the Democrats in Congress. Apparently, he is also omnipotent.

8/3/2007 4:29:51 PM

they don't control enough of congress to become more powerful than bush, no.

8/3/2007 4:32:05 PM

^ So, it's true then, right?

8/3/2007 4:33:00 PM

what?

8/3/2007 4:39:08 PM

jesus this is retarded.

we need some moderating bad

[Edited on August 3, 2007 at 4:51 PM. Reason : .]

8/3/2007 4:43:10 PM

Quote :

"Don't lump me in with the right-wing kooks--I'm an independent."

8/3/2007 4:53:11 PM

Quote :

"we need some moderating bad"

LEAVE IT TO THE LIBERAL TO PROMOTE BIGGER GOVT

8/3/2007 4:59:02 PM

ah ha

now that was pretty funny

8/3/2007 5:25:33 PM

Quote :

"jesus this is retarded. we need some moderating bad"

wlb420

Yes, to stop people from not addressing the topic at issue in any meaningful fashion in a thread they didn't have to click on and not adding any threads of their own to TSB.

Suspend yourself.

8/3/2007 5:50:24 PM

seems like republicans got so much to hide now a days...i dont blame the dems for wanting to air that shit out...popular opinion is a bitch

8/3/2007 6:06:01 PM

maybe if the democrats weren't so fucking obsessed with MonicaLewinsky-ing the president, they could actually accomplish something worthwhile. hooray for this wonderful 2-party system.

8/3/2007 11:05:56 PM

^^ Yeah--shows what you know.

Approval of Congress lowest in a decade
Only about a quarter of Americans approve of how it's doing its job, a poll shows; most see 'business as usual.'

Quote :

"WASHINGTON — Fueled by disappointment at the pace of change since Democrats assumed the majority on Capitol Hill, public approval of Congress has fallen to its lowest level in more than a decade, according to a new Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll. Just 27% of Americans now approve of the way Congress is doing its job, the poll found, down from 36% in January, when Democrats assumed control of the House and the Senate. And 63% of Americans say that the new Democratic Congress is governing in a 'business as usual' manner, rather than working to bring the fundamental change that party leaders promised after November's midterm election. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco), the first woman to hold that position, has also failed to impress many Americans. Only 36% approve of the way she is handling the job, the poll found."

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-pelosi12jun12,0,7184922.story

AP Poll: Public Gives Congress Low Marks

Quote :

"WASHINGTON - In the eyes of the public, Congress is doing even worse than the president. Public satisfaction with the job lawmakers are doing has fallen 11 points since May, to 24 percent, according to an Associated Press-Ipsos poll. That's lower than for President Bush, who hasn't fared well lately, either."

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/07/13/ap3912812.html

[Edited on August 4, 2007 at 12:33 AM. Reason : .]

8/4/2007 12:28:18 AM

and the democrats have such a whopping 49 person majority of the senate. it's a wonder they can't pass everything that they put on paper with that sort of power.

8/4/2007 1:44:53 AM

lol the only problem with democrat witch hunts are that there are not more of them

8/4/2007 1:42:32 PM

i'm glad i didn't waste my time voting

8/4/2007 1:48:10 PM

Quote :

"And the Democrats are always with the excuses: We can't pull out of Iraq because the mean old Republicans won't let us--even though we control Congress! We can't impeach Gonzales because the mean old Republicans won't let us--even though we control Congress! We can't do this, that, and the other thing because the mean old Republicans won't let us--even though we control Congress! "

It's not the "mean old republicans" because they are starting to line up against Gonzales too. It's Bush can Co. blocking their people from being questioned by congress that's thwarting the investigations. And there are tons of other Republicans that are silent on the issue as well.

8/4/2007 1:49:40 PM

so whatever happened to that abramoff guy...they still investigating all the repubs for that one too?

8/4/2007 4:16:17 PM

Oh, and I supposed the Repub party Clinton witch hunt was okay?

8/4/2007 8:50:31 PM

Quote :

"I'm not saying that there shouldn't have been any investigations of the Bush administration or that Congress should neglect its oversight responsibility. But seriously--if you were to be candid--wouldn't some of you agree that the abovementioned number of investigations is excessive?"

Yeah it sounds bad, until you consider that these investigations outed the likes of Tom Delay and brought to light the Valarie Plame incident.

Seriously, this is like blaming the police for arresting too many people that are breaking the law. Maybe the GOP should stop running the government like it's own fucking amusement park...

8/5/2007 9:54:54 PM

^
Erios = HockeyRoman?

What a terrible analogy. If a police department conducted 300 investigations, made over 350 requests for documents and interviews, and held over 600 hearings that produced only two convictions, you and everybody else would be calling for them all to be fired.

8/5/2007 10:47:04 PM

what a terrible analogy. police departments don't initiate investigations.

8/6/2007 2:03:54 AM

set em up to page 2....cant wait for more investigations...the more the better...get these scumbags out of fucking office if you can

8/6/2007 3:02:44 AM