What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Play the flash game. view!
DragonAgeJourneys.com - Play the free companion flash game to Dragon Age: Origins.
52 Comments
- littlebylittle, on 10/11/2007, -3/+79As Nixon found out, "Executive Privilege" doesn't apply to crimes, like illegal wiretapping.
- statik99, on 11/03/2009, -3/+38It's so wonderful that members of congress have a sense that a citation is in order... how about actually putting that "sense" into ACTION.
- silverchrysalis, on 10/11/2007, -3/+33not to mention the contempt of about 92% of the rest of the world
- Drexus, on 10/11/2007, -5/+33Finally a dead-stop to the planned hijacking of the political system. I'm glad there are measures for this. It would be a dark day to find that we need this sort of thing ... and then try to put it in place. US citizens: Fight for your freedom!
- Ajajadude, on 10/11/2007, -2/+24Damned laws always hindering the president and his plans!
- defektiv, on 10/11/2007, -2/+18Bush: And what will we do tomorrow, Cheney?
Cheney: The same thing we do every day, Bushie.. Try to take over the world! - Shaman760, on 10/11/2007, -2/+18I was thinking "Contempt of Country".
- consonance, on 10/11/2007, -2/+13"BREAKING: CONGRESS MIGHT HAVE SPINE!!!!!!!!!"
- ZWarren69, on 10/11/2007, -2/+12And I would have gotten away with it, too! If it weren't for those meddling congressman.....
- thewump, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9Awesome.. Something for us all to talk about between now and the time that absolutely nothing happens about this.
- CourtesyFlush, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11Isn't that rather like being in contempt of Big Bird or Kermit?
- SilentRamble42, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11Hasn't Bush been facing the contempt of Congress since January?
- brstilson, on 10/11/2007, -6/+12American Democracy FTW
- ZWarren69, on 10/11/2007, -3/+9Holy *****! Congress decided to grow some ***** balls! ***** yea!
Well.... they haven't done anything yet...
MAYBE Congress will grow some balls!! - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6How do you impeach a dictator?
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8they just refused to get us used to them being above the law, its called psychological warfare
- otep, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6
.......Clearly, Bush hates America. - SheilaNoya, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Unfortuantely, the Republicans still have the Democrats scared to take any impeachment action against Bush. They keep pointing out how badly the Republicans looked after they impeached Clinton. However, there is a HUGE difference here. Clinton had a 73% approval rating at the time of his impeachment - Bush is barely able to keep his approval rating at the 30% level. Impeach the entire Bush regime and lets move this country FORWARD again.
Clinton's Approval Rating During His Impeachment:
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/20/impeachment.poll/ - Deodrus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4He earned my contempt a long time ago.
- superRoot, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4He's certainly gained my contempt :)
- withincontext, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Most of the people I know are oblivious to the political climate in the States right now. It's frustrating that everyone is focused on the god damn iPhone.
- nixr, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3And that is the crux of the matter. Until Congress grows a sack this administration will continue to subvert the constitution. We, as constituents, need to make it absolutely clear to Congress that if they can't find the testicular fortitude to hold these criminals accountable, we will find someone else who will.
- candafilm, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3There is a certain uneasiness that I feel. It seems to me that Paris Hilton is getting a ton of press for a three week jail term. Is it just me or does it seem like the media is just trying to direct our attention to something meaningless? I'm terrified that in 3, 4, 5 months from now we find out we waged another war or something all under the cover of a low class celebrity doing time.
- gottadiggit, on 10/11/2007, -4/+7It will be interesting if another event occurs allowing the Prez to try out his shiny new Marshal Law Privileges, thereby taking power away from the Congress for at least 6 months.
- DeskFlyer, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5And the snowball is getting bigger....
- anonym41414, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Is it really too difficult for you to learn to spell "martial law?"
- stepnw1f, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Everyone should call their Reps.
- sethosayher, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3I hope this actually ends up happening...
- mabhatter, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Contempt of Congress is what Impeachment is all about. The one president that was actually impeached was impeached for basically that "crime". Johnson was obstructing Congress' laws and they removed him. The constitution's steps are for Reps to majority vote to file "charges", then the Senators conduct an investigation with the Chief Justice instead of the VP as head. If 60% agree the Prez or VP is out.
in short there is no need for Congress to have a "smoking gun" crime to impeach, no "broken law" is required.. that's the WORST possible of all the cases, but somehow the most common lately. - milliebubba, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Save it for the warrantless wire-taps. You know, of course, if Congress does not force a showdown, we will be stuck by this kind of behavior from Presidents from now on. Why not INSIST that Congress overrule that most recent Executive Order giving Bush the power of dictatorship?
- MadN, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3Not really an issue to decide;
Which would you accept, "Contempt of Congress" or "War Crimes"? - SilentRamble42, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2No; Kermit can get stuff done, and no one questions his methods.
RIP Fozzy.... - gottadiggit, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1No not really but that's how George spells it. Did it really impede your understanding of the comment or are you just being anal?
- stepnw1f, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2"We are off to see the Wizard, the wonderful wizard of Oz..."
- Encephalon, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1You know, I sure hope that they can enforce it against the so-called "chief". I mean, I was always taught that the laws were there so that there would be some measure of order to be brought about by them and that, you know, no one was supposed to be able to go above it; no matter how "powerful" you are to the rest of the world. I mean, OK... So he finished his daddy's war and will now wallow in oil money for the rest of his life; does this mean that he should go unpunished? I hope not... I REALLY have my fingers crossed on this one.
- greg88, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1can anyone say non-binding resolution??? its just a political show and nothing will come of this.....just like the Iraq funding. The democrats know this but the show must go on
- JoeyStrange, on 10/11/2007, -4/+4Impeach those freaks of nature. I would love to see them and all of their criminal cronies in front of a judge with balls enough to convict.
- CraigJ, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1No, Contempt of Congress is real. The question is, can congress enforce it against the chief executive? If they proceed this will likely end up before the Supreme court, and given the potential political fall out, it is unlikely to proceed.
- anonym41414, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0On what charge?
- stepnw1f, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Yup...
- LordSlashstab, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0and then it'll fail cause congress is full of ***** talkers, but no action
- Kikokun, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2the day of reckoning is upon us...
that plot of land that Bush bought in Paraguay will finally come in handy!!
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/10/19/18321646.php - anonym41414, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0Considering that the Congress has absolutely no authority to cite the executive branch for contempt (read your Constitution, friend), and allegations of war crimes are totally spurious, I'd pick neither.
I respect your decision to disapprove of the actions of the American government. However, you need to understand how our system works. The President is not an employee of Congress. - TheSabre, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1Maybe they'll pass a resolution to authorize a pre-vote of a contempt charge.
- anonym41414, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0As a matter of fact, the President cannot be held in contempt of Congress. It's a separation of powers issue. The President does not work for Congress, nor Congress for the President. Neither branch of government has any direct authority over the other.
- defektiv, on 10/11/2007, -6/+3this back and forth crap is giving me political blue balls. imo, the first one to get these jackasses out of the white house before chavez actually convinces putin to move his nuclear sub fleet will have a red carpet to the seat in the white house.
- lordmetroid, on 10/11/2007, -6/+2Democracy bad, republic better, volountary interaction best!
- ZWarren69, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1It really is a shocker to us all.
- swrostmore, on 10/11/2007, -10/+5what? is Ron Paul on the Judiciary Committee?
PAT LEAHY FTW! - mattmollysdad, on 10/11/2007, -7/+2oh no House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers actual moved... ur kidding. this whole thing is a joke... what did Obama say yesterday, how about Hillary? now leading the Democratic Party we get John Conyers... I wonder if Maxine Waters is second in line.
-
Show 51 - 52 of 52 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is