Edwards is Endorsing Obama

By Booman Tribune

Turn on your tee-vee if you want to see John Edwards endorse Barack Obama in Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Comments

(124)

And once AGAIN we can say this is over

Let move on.

But I'm sure the Hillary supporters will be telling us on Nov. 6 that the delegates might change their minds.

re: By f u bush2 May 14, 2008 - 8:05pm

"But I'm sure the Hillary supporters will be telling us on Nov. 6 that the delegates might change their minds."

It doesn't matter to them that Edward's 19 delegates would put Obama up by 187 delegates, and there are only 189 delegates left in the remaining five primaries.

♪ ♫ ♪ ♫ ♪

"Three great forces rule the world: stupidity, fear and greed." -- Albert Einstein

By Gazmik May 14, 2008 - 8:09pm

They are still banking on delegates switching. But Hillary has been losing delegates to Obama so that don't make no sense.

Check out the delusional comments...

...on THIS page:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/05/what-will-the-e.html

The republitroll fake Dems are really starting to sound pathetic! "Operation Chaos" my arse. Now it's just "Operation Couldn't Care Less!"

You don't have to burn books to destroy a culture. Just get people to stop reading them.
---Ray Bradbury

Ya know, Fact...

You're right. Hillary should be the ONLY candidate for the Dems so that McCain can fulfill his destiny.

Check out the video that convinced me

You don't have to burn books to destroy a culture. Just get people to stop reading them.
---Ray Bradbury

By LiberalIconoclast May 14, 2008 - 8:59pm

Wow!

What a bunch of whiners. Its hard to believe there are so many Hillary supporters refusing to accept reality. Most of the are probably right wingers.

By LiberalIconoclastMay 14, 2008 - 8:59pm

Holy bat shit, Batman! I didn't see this endorsement coming!!

Get your earplugs ready, Shrillary supporters are going to be even MORE shrillier ... as if that's possible!

"Bitch may be the new black but black is the new President, bitch."
Tracy Morgan, SNL

Poor Edwards Slides Down the Political Hole

Mr. $400.00 per hair cut, $6M mansion, ELITE EDWARDS

Will Edwards ever give up his wealth to really help poor people?

Edwards Home County's Largest
The 28,200-square-foot home also Orange County's most valuable

By Don Carrington
January 26, 2007
RALEIGH — Presidential candidate John Edwards and his family recently moved into what county tax officials say is the most valuable home in Orange County. The house, which includes a recreational building attached to the main living quarters, also is probably the largest in the county.

“The Edwardses’ residential property will likely have the highest tax value in the county,” Orange County Tax Assessor John Smith told Carolina Journal. He estimated that the tax value will exceed $6 million when the facility is completed.

The rambling structure sits in the middle of a 102-acre estate on Old Greensboro Road west of Chapel Hill. The heavily wooded site and winding driveway ensure that the home is not visible from the road. “No Trespassing” signs discourage passersby from venturing past the gate.

Don Knight, Orange County building plans examiner, told CJ that, including the recreational building, the Edwardses’ home would be one of the largest in Orange County.

Obama's appeal to working-class voters?
Use the ELITE EDWARDS.

Less than 24 hours after Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) trounced Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) by 41 points in the West Virginia primary, former Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) is coming forth to endorse Sen. Obama's presidential candidacy on Wednesday evening, May 14, 2008, "in a dramatic attempt by the Obama campaign to answer concerns regarding Obama's appeal to working-class voters, several senior Democratic sources tell ABC News."
Link

What phenomenal phonies!

By FACTME May 14, 2008 - 9:25pm

$400 haircuts?

Its nice to see the republican Hillary Clinton is urging her supporters to use right wing talking points.

And these right wingers like FACTME tell us that Clinton had a chance in November!

No one has more talking points lined up against them in the right wing data base than the Clintons. It was a joke to ever think she could win in November.

Guess what FACTME

The Bush administration is bringing out the propaganda. And the liberals are too occupied with Clinton's insane attempts to stay in the race to notice. I urge you to write congress and tell them to repeal the authority they gave Bush to attack Iran. We do not need another war! Tell congress that the democrats made a mistake in passing that legislation and this is their chance to fix it.

By f u bush2May 14, 2008 - 9:36pm

Just the facts man-

Clinton's continuing support from white, lower-income, low-education and older voters has fueled her argument that Obama is a flawed general election candidate against Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., the presumptive Republican nominee.

By FACTME May 14, 2008 - 9:44pm

Are you dreaming of a white christmas?

You people are insane. You really believe the majority of Hillary voters will not vote for Obama.

All I know is I knew Hillary would never stand a chance in the general election a long time ago.

Now tell congress to reverse the bill people like Hillary signed giving bush power to attack Iran before its to late.

By f u bush2May 14, 2008 - 9:48pm

Are you kidding, the Kyl-Liberman Amendment is ONE thing HRC got right. Do you think the Dems in congress are going to just say...Um, we screwed up we need a do-over....

Obama will be quite the good President after GW takes care of the Iranian nuclear ambitions...

"My presidency will be al Qaeda's worst nightmare." -John McCain Sep 4, 2007

By Fight4itMay 14, 2008 - 10:05pm

You ass

The Bush administration is bringing out the propaganda. Do you want another needless war?

Maybe if they have you do your nursing duties right in the war zone that would change your mind.

You know when you give the cheer leader speech to the soldiers on the front lines they must laugh their asses off.

I can see it now. You clap them on the back and say "go get em.' and they don't stop laughing the rest of the day. In hte mean time you probably bust them if they come off the front lines showing signs of pot in their blood work.

By f u bush2May 14, 2008 - 10:13pm

Being out in the field would wreak havoc on poor FRightenedTwit's complexion.

Support the Troops
End the Occupation

By Guy FawkesMay 14, 2008 - 10:20pm

Nice poster...It must make you insanely jealous knowing that I'm in a field surrounded by chicks AND, I make a helluva good living AND after I get retire I'll make an even better living...

Yep, I'm an RN and totally thrilled by the JOB....

"My presidency will be al Qaeda's worst nightmare." -John McCain Sep 4, 2007

By Fight4itMay 14, 2008 - 10:24pm

Don't worry, FRighty. I'm not gonna ask, so you don't need to tell...

Support the Troops
End the Occupation

By Guy FawkesMay 14, 2008 - 10:30pm

Cool, cause I'd hate out "out" you in front of all your "friends"....

I'd love to trade witty quips, but my lunch is over. Good evening all...

Hmmmm, wonder if Obama is gonna screw the pooch and take the Clintons as VP.....

"My presidency will be al Qaeda's worst nightmare." -John McCain Sep 4, 2007

I'd love to trade witty

I'd love to trade witty quips, but my lunch is over

He just saw a hot female nurse and lost his appetite. What he wouldn't give for a guantanamo guard to walk in the door right now.

By f u bush2May 14, 2008 - 10:13pm

Who said ANYTHING about a ground war in Iran? Why do you libs think I advocate a ground war with Iran... I patently think that a ground war with Iran is a BAD idea. Did Reagan use ground troops when he thumped Libya? How many ground troops did Clinton use in Kosovo and Iraq? Did Syria go to war when Isreal took out their nuclear facility? The Iranian nuclear ambitions can be fixed with smart bombs and air strikes. There is only a "war" if they get froggy and strike back...If they do, they're done (AND THEY KNOW IT). Just like Syria would have been if they would have hit back at Isreal...

"My presidency will be al Qaeda's worst nightmare." -John McCain Sep 4, 2007

By Fight4itMay 14, 2008 - 10:21pm

"Who said ANYTHING about a ground war in Iran? Why do you libs think I advocate a ground war with Iran... I patently think that a ground war with Iran is a BAD idea. "

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!

You can't be that dense! What makes you think that it WON'T turn into a ground war, HERE AND THERE, once we start bombing the SHIT out of Iran??!!

Jesus H. Christ, man! Do you get WOOD just THINKING about war??!!

"Bitch may be the new black but black is the new President, bitch."
Tracy Morgan, SNL

By Pookie2112May 15, 2008 - 10:30am

"What makes you think that it WON'T turn into a ground war, HERE AND THERE, once we start bombing the SHIT out of Iran??!!"

-Ummmm, historical fact. Again, Reagan bombed the crap outta Libya and what happened, Quadafi sat down and shut up. Clinton bombed the crap outta Iraq and Kosovo and what happened, Saddam shut up for a while..

To fight any kind of a ground war, the Iranian army would have to cross open desert to attack our forces.

"My presidency will be al Qaeda's worst nightmare." -John McCain Sep 4, 2007

By Fight4itMay 15, 2008 - 1:23pm

Unless you've been stuck in a cave, St. Ronny didn't have Al Qaeda to contend with; nor did St. Ronny have to deal with a 9/11 type incident. Just because St. Ronny bombed LIBYA, doesn't mean Monkey Boy should bomb IRAN. And, if Monkey Boy WERE to bomb Iran, why, he'll just have created another astounding recruiting tool for Al Qaeda and they WILL bring a war HERE, because you know as well as I do, that they would jump at the chance to get involved.

If Monkey Boy does something as infinitely STUPID as bombing Iran, you can get your gear ready for service in WWIII.

Face it, you get wood over bombing Iran.

"Bitch may be the new black but black is the new President, bitch."
Tracy Morgan, SNL

By Pookie2112May 15, 2008 - 2:15pm

If Monkey Boy does something as infinitely STUPID as bombing Iran, you can get your gear ready for service in WWIII.

WW3? R U Serious? Who in the hell is gonna give a crap if we hit Iran's nuclear facilities? The Russians, the Chinese? Are the Russians goonna risk Moscow for Tehran's ILLEGAL nuclear facilities? Are the Chinese gonna risk Beijing over Tehran? NOPE not in 1,000,000 years. Now who is WW3 gonna be against? The US and Iran, yeah, that'll be a quick WW3. Do I advocate and occupation, nope, do I advocate ground troops, nope, do I advocate bombind their cities, NO. But hitting their ILLEGAL nuclear facilities (just like Israel hit Syria's) is just fine by me...

"My presidency will be al Qaeda's worst nightmare." -John McCain Sep 4, 2007

By Fight4itMay 15, 2008 - 3:50pm

You can put your little hard-on away. Just like your Unfair Tax fantasies, it ain't gonna happen.

Support the Troops
End the Occupation

By Fight4itMay 15, 2008 - 3:50pm

Oy vey ... sigh ...

"WW3? R U Serious? Who in the hell is gonna give a crap if we hit Iran's nuclear facilities? The Russians, the Chinese? Are the Russians goonna risk Moscow for Tehran's ILLEGAL nuclear facilities? Are the Chinese gonna risk Beijing over Tehran? NOPE not in 1,000,000 years. Now who is WW3 gonna be against? The US and Iran, yeah, that'll be a quick WW3. Do I advocate and occupation, nope, do I advocate ground troops, nope, do I advocate bombind their cities, NO. But hitting their ILLEGAL nuclear facilities (just like Israel hit Syria's) is just fine by me..."

Yes - WWIII ... I think MANY countries will GIVE A CRAP IF WE AGAIN ATTACK A SOVEREIGN NATION. Gee, when we ATTACKED Iraq, we had EVERYONE on our side, right?

I'll say this one more time ... rrrrrrrrrrrreeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaalllllllllllllllllyyyyyyyyyyyy ssssssssssssssssssssssssssslllllllllllooooooooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww ....
Both ... the ... MILITARY ... (that ... outfit ... you ... pretend ... to ... listen ... to) ... AND ... THE ... CIA ... HAVE ... REPEATEDLY ... AGAIN ... REPEATEDLY ... have ... stated ... that ... Iran ... is ... LIGHT ... YEARS ... AWAY ... FROM ... DEVELOPING ... NUKES. I'll ... repeat ... YEARS ... away ... from ... developing ... nukes. Irans ... nuclear ... faciliites ... are ... LEGAL. I'll ... repeat ... Iran's ... nuclear ... faciliites ... are ... legal.

Just because Monkey Boy says they are not DOES NOT MAKE IT TRUE BUT JUST ANOTHER LIE.

Now, since I'm pretty sure Russia AND China buy OIL from Iran ... THEY MIGHT HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY ABOUT US BOMBING IRAN.

Iran has every RIGHT to have nuclear facilities - just as it's CHINA'S right - INDIA's right - PAKISTAN'S right - ISRAEL'S right ... who the fuck are WE to tell THEM what to do? We DON'T. And considering the SHITTY position Monkey Boy has put us in, we HAVE NO RIGHT because Monkey Boy has RENDERED US INSIGNIFICANT IN MOST OF THE WORLD'S EYE.

Get your ASS over there and FIGHT. Don't wait for ORDERS, VOLUNTEER.

"Bitch may be the new black but black is the new President, bitch."
Tracy Morgan, SNL

Libya

was not side by side with not one but TWO countries occupied by American troops.

Compared with Iran, Libya is a tiny country with an archaic army. Like Wyoming, it is large on the map but insignificant in population.

By Fight4itMay 14, 2008 - 10:05pm

I will pray to your GOD that Bush doesn't do any such thing, especially without evidence. And as far as I can tell from Ms. Rice's remarks, Iran does not have nuclear weapons.

By Fight4itMay 14, 2008 - 10:05pm

"Obama will be quite the good President after GW takes care of the Iranian nuclear ambitions..."

What part of YEARS AWAY FROM DEVELOPING A NUKE, escapes you? Are you saying that Monkey Boy is right to IGNORE both the MILITARY and CIA, especially the military, that branch of our defense system that is irreparably broken?? The same military Monkey Boys claims he listens to and DOESN'T? You truly believe Iran is a bigger threat than:

Pakistan with nukes;
North Korea with nukes;
India with nukes??????????????????

Do you REALLY believe our military can handle ANOTHER WAR?????????

Are you SERIOUS??!!

"Bitch may be the new black but black is the new President, bitch."
Tracy Morgan, SNL

re: By FACTME May 14, 2008 - 9:44pm

"Just the facts man-"

Well, then post some actual facts rather than Hillary's opinions.

Poll shows both Clinton and Obama beating McCain
By Alexander Mooney, CNN
May 14, 2008

According to a new Quinnipiac University poll, both Democratic candidates beat McCain by a gap well outside the margin of error. Obama beats McCain by 7 points in the poll, 47 percent to 40 percent, while Hillary Clinton bests the Arizona senator by 5 points, 46 percent to 41 percent.

♪ ♫ ♪ ♫ ♪

"Three great forces rule the world: stupidity, fear and greed." -- Albert Einstein

Lieberman sums Hillary up - he should know

Lieberman Says Bombing Iran ‘Has An Appeal To It’

On right-winger Bill Bennett’s radio show this morning, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) expressed his openess to bombing Iran, saying that there is “an appeal to it.” Discussing the West Virginia primary results, Bennett praised what he claimed was Sen. Hillary Clinton’s (D-NY) transformation into his “style” of politician, which he said is someone who “throws down a shot of liquor and bombs Iran.”

Lieberman whole-heartedly endorsed the “appeal” of the hawkish caricature Bennett had created:

BENNETT: Listen, I give her credit. She has found her…three things. She’s found her voice. He is very much in the background now, it’s not this, you know, ventriloquial thing, it’s definitely her voice.

LIEBERMAN: That’s true.

BENNETT: And Joe, you know, this is my style. This is a girl who puts on her pearls, goes down, throws down a shot of liquor and bombs Iran, you know. This is…lookout Mrs. Bennett, this is my kind of girl.

LIEBERMAN: Hehehe, it does have an appeal to it.

Neither Lieberman nor Bennett is shy about his willingness to militarily strike Iran.

Almost a year ago, Lieberman declared on Face The Nation that “we have to be prepared to take aggressive military action against the Iranians.” Earlier this week, he called airstrikes against Iran “a distinct possibility.”

In April, after Gen. David Petraeus and Amb. Ryan Crocker testified before Congress, Bennett told the Weekly Standard’s Bill Kristol that the “conclusion” he drew was that their testimony was “less an argument for getting out of Iraq than going into Iran.”

The link has an audio clip of the interview.

By f u bush2May 14, 2008 - 9:40pm

who “throws down a shot of liquor and bombs Iran.”

Now that's a load on nonsense. He needs to get his hearing checked.

You forgot when Obama was pressed about what he would do IF Iran nuked Israel? He would bowl a gutter ball then use force against against Iran.

Why? You're fooling yourself if you think Obama is any different.

By FACTMEMay 14, 2008 - 10:14pm

Because you are in a state of mental break down over Hilary's loss you are not aware of Bush's actions right now. Tell congress to revoke the power congress gave to Bush regarding Iran. Tell them to make him seek approval before taking action.

By f u bush2May 14, 2008 - 10:27pm

Hilary's loss

Hillary's loss?

Your mental breakdown hasn't produced an OBAMA win. He hasn't crossed the finish line. Does he even know where it is?

West Virginia primary results:

Clinton 67, Obama 26

By FACTMEMay 14, 2008 - 10:43pm

West Virginia primary results...

Irrelevancy defined...

Mittary is finished.

Support the Troops
End the Occupation

By Guy FawkesMay 14, 2008 - 10:59pm

You know very well she's not finished until she wins.

re: By FACTME May 14, 2008 - 11:12pm

What makes that any different from the Republican mentality? If we wanted a Republican, we'd be voting for McCain.

♪ ♫ ♪ ♫ ♪

"Three great forces rule the world: stupidity, fear and greed." -- Albert Einstein

By GazmikMay 14, 2008 - 11:15pm

Hillbots & Ditto-dolts; two sides of the same crusty ass coin. Rush thanks them all for their stupidity.

Support the Troops
End the Occupation

By Guy FawkesMay 14, 2008 - 10:59pm

YIKES! That picture made me throw up in my mouth a wee bit ...

"Bitch may be the new black but black is the new President, bitch."
Tracy Morgan, SNL

re: By FACTME May 14, 2008 - 10:43pm

Do you have any clue? With Edward's 19 pledged delegates, it would put Obama up by 187 pledged delegates. In the remaining 5 primaries, the total delegate count is ony 189 delegates. Without Edward's delegates going to Obama, Hillary would need to get 95% of the remaining delegates to get even with Obama. If the 19 delegates go to Obama, she would need all but one of the remaining delegates to get even with Obama. She couldn't even get anywhere close to 95% in West Virginia where she was expected to win. She didn't even mange the 75% that was stated before that she would need of the remaining delegates to have more than Obama. The only thing that could give Clinton the win would be super delegates. And she has only picked up one of those in the past week.

Hey, but it's not our fault that you Clintonistas are lousy with math.

♪ ♫ ♪ ♫ ♪

"Three great forces rule the world: stupidity, fear and greed." -- Albert Einstein

By GazmikMay 14, 2008 - 10:56pm

Do you have any clue?

Tell me you don't know that delegates are free to align themselves with the candidate of their own choice.

re: By FACTME May 14, 2008 - 11:15pm

Do you have a clue what "pledged" means?

Obviously not.

And the mo's going with Obama. So if there's going to be any switching, you're going to be even more disappointed.

♪ ♫ ♪ ♫ ♪

"Three great forces rule the world: stupidity, fear and greed." -- Albert Einstein

By FACTMEMay 14, 2008 - 11:15pm

Tell me you don't know that delegates are free to align themselves with the candidate of their own choice.

Only super delegates, not pledged delegates. And the super delegates are leaving Clinton for Obama.

ITS OVER. THE VOTERS SPOKE. LIVE WITH IT.

Now can we concentrate on Bush's october surprise?

Delusions...

Clinton campaign: We're ahead in the popular vote
CNN.com
May 14, 2008

Four different scenarios of the total popular vote have been kicked around: (1) only counting primary contests without factoring in Florida and Michigan, whose contests were not sanctioned by the national party, (2) counting primary and caucus contests without Florida and Michigan, (3) counting primaries and contests and Florida but not Michigan, and (4) counting all primaries and caucuses including Florida and Michigan.

Clinton trails in all four counts, but by significantly different margins. In the first scenario she trails by by about 397,000, in the second she's behind 699,000, in the third she has a 405,000 vote deficit, and in the fourth scenario she trails by 77,000 votes.

The fourth scenario does not give Obama any votes out of Michigan, where he did not appear on the ballot.

The only scenario in which Clinton would appear to have the lead is a fifth scenario that only counts primary states – including both Florida and Michigan – and excludes any votes cast in the party’s caucuses. In that count, Clinton currently holds a lead of about 225,000 votes.

♪ ♫ ♪ ♫ ♪

"Three great forces rule the world: stupidity, fear and greed." -- Albert Einstein

Well, there you go-

The only scenario in which Clinton would appear to have the lead is a fifth scenario that only counts primary states – including both Florida and Michigan – and excludes any votes cast in the party’s caucuses. In that count, Clinton currently holds a lead of about 225,000 votes.

That's nothing new.

April 26, 2008
Popular Vote Gives Clinton an Edge
By Michael Barone

By FACTME May 14, 2008 - 10:34pm

Let me fix that for you:

"Cheating Gives Clinton an Edge"
By Michael Barone

By f u bush2May 14, 2008 - 10:36pm

See- there's your mental breakdown at work.

By FACTME May 14, 2008 - 11:08pm

When Bush attacks Iran

FACTME's only concern will be to convince everyone that Hillary can not be held accountable because of her vote.

FACTME:

Are you concerned at all about Bush starting another fucking war for political gain? Or are you too busy breaking down over hillary's loss.

The real news now should be a focus on Bush policy and the general election. you're doing nothing but distracting people.

By f u bush2May 14, 2008 - 11:14pm

May 8, 2008
The Honorable George W. Bush
President of the United States
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20500

Dear Mr. President:

We are writing to register our strong opposition to possible unilateral, preemptive military action against other nations by the Executive Branch without Congressional authorization. As you know, Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution grants Congress the power "to declare war," to lay and collect taxes to "provide for the common defense" and general welfare of the United States, to "raise and support armies," to "provide and maintain a navy," to "make rules for the regulation for the land and naval forces," to "provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions," to "provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia," and to "make all laws necessary and proper for carrying into execution ... all ... powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States." Congress is also given exclusive power over the purse. The Constitution says, "No money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in consequence of appropriations made by law."

By contrast, the sole war powers granted to the Executive Branch through the President can be found in Article II, Section, which states, "The President shall be the Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into actual Service of the United States." Nothing in the history of the "Commander-in-Chief" clause suggests that the authors of the provision intended it to grant the Executive Branch the authority to engage U.S. forces in military action whenever and wherever it sees fit without any prior authorization from Congress.

In our view, the founders of our country intended this power to allow the President to repel sudden attacks and immediate threats, not to unilaterally launch, without congressional approval, preemptive military actions against foreign countries. As former Republican Representative Mickey Edwards recently wrote, "he decision to go to war ... is the single most difficult choice any public official can be called upon to make. That is precisely why the nation’s Founders, aware of the deadly wars of Europe, deliberately withheld from the executive branch the power to engage in war unless such action was expressly approved by the people themselves, through their representatives in Congress."

Members of Congress, including the signatories of this letter, have previously expressed concern about this issue. On April 25, 2006, sixty-two Members of Congress joined in a bipartisan letter that called on you to seek congressional approval before making any preemptive military strikes against Iran. Fifty-seven Members of Congress have co-sponsored H. Con. Res. 33, which expresses the sense of Congress that the President should not initiate military action against Iran without first obtaining authorization from Congress.

Our concerns in this area have been heightened by more recent events. The resignation in mid-March of Admiral William J. "Fox" Fallon from the head of U.S. Central Command, which was reportedly linked to a magazine article that portrayed him as the only person who might stop your Administration from waging preemptive war against Iran, has renewed widespread concerns that your Administration is unilaterally planning for military action against that country. This is despite the fact that the December 2007 National Intelligence Estimate concluded that Iran had halted its nuclear weapons program in the fall of 2003, a stark reversal of previous Administration assessments.

As we and others have continued to review troubling legal memoranda and other materials from your Administration asserting the power of the President to take unilateral action, moreover, our concerns have increased still further. For example, although federal law is clear that proceeding under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) "shall be the exclusive means by which electronic surveillance" can be conducted within the U.S. for foreign intelligence purposes, 18 U.S.C. 2511(2)(f), the Justice Department has asserted that the National Security Agency’s warrantless wiretapping in violation of FISA is "supported by the President’s well-recognized inherent constitutional authority as Commander in Chief and sole organ for the Nation in foreign affairs". As one legal expert has explained, your Administration’s "preventive paradigm" has asserted "unchecked unilateral power" by the Executive Branch and violated "universal prohibitions on torture, disappearance, and the like."

Late last year, Senator Joseph Biden stated unequivocally that "the president has no authority to unilaterally attack Iran, and if he does, as Foreign Relations Committee chairman, I will move to impeach" the president.

We agree with Senator Biden, and it is our view that if you do not obtain the constitutionally required congressional authorization before launching preemptive military strikes against Iran or any other nation, impeachment proceedings should be pursued. Because of these concerns, we request the opportunity to meet with you as soon as possible to discuss these matters. As we have recently marked the fifth year since the invasion of Iraq, and the grim milestone of 4,000 U.S. deaths in Iraq, your Administration should not unilaterally involve this country in yet another military conflict that promises high costs to American blood and treasure.

Sincerely,
The Honorable John Conyers
Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee
Link

Thanks to Pelosi, Bush is still pissing on her shoes.

re: By FACTME May 14, 2008 - 10:34pm

The only way that Hillary has more votes is if you try to count votes that don't count and Hillary agreed to them not counting, and totally ignore votes that do count! How much more disingenuous can you get?

♪ ♫ ♪ ♫ ♪

"Three great forces rule the world: stupidity, fear and greed." -- Albert Einstein

By GazmikMay 14, 2008 - 10:37pm

You're going to try to impress someone that these states and their residents, which are part of the USA, that their votes are NOT going to be counted?

____State____ Entered Union______ Year settled
26. _Michigan___Jan. 26, 1837________1668
27. _Florida_____Mar. 3, 1845________1565

And that these territories that are not in the USA residents' will be counted?

Puerto Rico
American Samoa
Virgin Islands
Guam

It seems to me that the DNC has come up with some rules that are unconstitutional, and need to be challenged.

re: By FACTME May 14, 2008 - 11:02pm

Those rules were agreed to before the primaries. And Hillary agreed to them. Just because your candidate is sucking hind tit, you can't change the rules now.

And the residents of US territories are as much US citizens as you or I.

♪ ♫ ♪ ♫ ♪

"Three great forces rule the world: stupidity, fear and greed." -- Albert Einstein

By GazmikMay 14, 2008 - 11:14pm

Hillary followed the rules.
The voters followed the rules.

Because Obama erred in taking his name off one ballot and campaigned by advertising (cheating) where he wasn't supposed to is his fault no one else can be penalized for it.

re: By FACTME May 14, 2008 - 11:23pm

All he did was ran some national ads. He wasn't campaigning specifically in Florida. But your gal was. You keep projecting Hilliary's problems onto Obama. You have no morality, do you?

♪ ♫ ♪ ♫ ♪

"Three great forces rule the world: stupidity, fear and greed." -- Albert Einstein

By GazmikMay 14, 2008 - 11:25pm

Of course he has no morality, he's a right-wing troll. Here's an image of him with a typical West Virginian Hillbot.

Support the Troops
End the Occupation

re: By Guy Fawkes May 14, 2008 - 11:32pm

And I was thinking something along the lines of:

♪ ♫ ♪ ♫ ♪

"Three great forces rule the world: stupidity, fear and greed." -- Albert Einstein

By GazmikMay 14, 2008 - 11:39pm

I see, it's 11:39pm and you're thinking about sheep.

A foursome no less.

Well, to each his own. As liberal as you want to be. Go for it. We'll know how good it was if you post that picture tomorrow night.

By Guy FawkesMay 14, 2008 - 11:32pm

Nope again!

Gazmik is on the left and fu bush2 is on the right.

By Guy FawkesMay 14, 2008 - 11:32pm

Holy shit, Guy! You found FACTME and puffpuffhuffhufflarry!!!!!!!!!!! LMAO

"Bitch may be the new black but black is the new President, bitch."
Tracy Morgan, SNL

By FACTME May 14, 2008 - 11:23pm

You know where Clinton "erred"? She should have never made comments about those two states if she thought she might later advocate counting their results!

That is a lack of foresight! Just like her Iraq vote.

Seriously. Her calling for the use of those tainted results is a cheating strategy. But what's worse is that she didn't keep her mouth shut at the time. she made comments about those states not counting. And then she changed her mind. She must think we are all idiots and not paying attention.

re: By f u bush2 May 14, 2008 - 11:27pm

"She must think we are all idiots and not paying attention."

Or she must think that we're all Hillbots like FACTME and Huff that would be perfectly willing to lie, cheat, and steal to get a Hillary nomination.

♪ ♫ ♪ ♫ ♪

"Three great forces rule the world: stupidity, fear and greed." -- Albert Einstein

Not!!!!!

HEY THEY BROKE THE FUCKING RULES!!! PEOPLE DEAL WITH REALITY AND LET THIS SUBJECT GO!! IT SEEMS LIKE EVERY ELECTION FLORIDA IS ALWAYS STEPPIN ON IT'S OWN DICKS!!! AND MICHIGAN AGREED TO DO IT EARLY KNOWING THAT IT WAS AGAINST THE RULES. Hmm let's see the other 48 states held up thier end of the bargain and adhered to the rules. So stop SNIVELING

Whoa. Back up, FACTME ...

"You're going to try to impress someone that these states and their residents, which are part of the USA, that their votes are NOT going to be counted?

____State____ Entered Union______ Year settled
26. _Michigan___Jan. 26, 1837________1668
27. _Florida_____Mar. 3, 1845________1565

And that these territories that are not in the USA residents' will be counted?

Puerto Rico
American Samoa
Virgin Islands
Guam

It seems to me that the DNC has come up with some rules that are unconstitutional, and need to be challenged."

It was the STATE governments that moved the primaries up, AGAINST the wishes of the DNC, who, by the way, ADVISED said state governments that if they BROKE THE RULES, those delegates WOULD NOT COUNT. ALL candidates AGREED to not only NOT campaign in those states, but to TAKE THEIR NAMES OFF THE BALLOTS (except for Shrillary, of course because she agrees to rules knowing full well she'll break them). Therefore, this is not a DNC issue, but a STATE GOVERNMENT ISSUE, which, said residents of said states need to take their bitch up with THEIR ELECTED OFFICIALS.

This is typical, however. Shrillary's losing so she'll change the rules 3/4's of the way through the game to suit HER needs, to inflate HER ego.

"Bitch may be the new black but black is the new President, bitch."
Tracy Morgan, SNL

By FACTMEMay 14, 2008 - 10:34pm

Now you're linking to Michael Barone articles? Sheesh, you really ARE a wingnut.

Support the Troops
End the Occupation

"Elitist" charges are hilarious

Every one of the major candidates is elitist, if you consider elitism to be a degree from a prestigious school and/or coming from a wealthy or prominent family. And that's a good thing! I WANT the president of the United States to be well-educated, well-spoken, literate and worldly. I don't want a Jeff Foxworthy or Archie Bunker type to be the leader of the free world.

But when the reich-wingers start accusing Democrats of being elitist and using the term in a derogatory fashion, remember who some of them are:

  • George W. Bush graduated from Yale (hard to be more elitist than that). His father was a President and Vice President and his grandfather was a senator.
  • John McCain is a graduate of the Naval Academy. You need your Congressman's letter of recommendation just to get admitted, and no it's not a formality.
  • Dick Cheney attended Yale (and flunked out).
  • Mitt Romney graduated from Harvard and is the son of a governor.
  • Ronald Reagan was a highly-paid actor and president of the Screen Actors Guild.

Which Republican president wasn't an elitist? Richard Nixon.

I wonder what color the sky is in FACTME's world?

Let a psychiatrist deal with him. Can we just move on? There are more serious matters to deal with than a bitter voter that can't come to terms with his candidate's loss.

By f u bush2May 14, 2008 - 11:16pm

a bitter voter that can't come to terms with his candidate's loss.

Why are you such a liar?

Moving on to Kentucky?

By FACTMEMay 14, 2008 - 11:39pm

You still refuse to deal with the issue of Bush and Iran.

re: By FACTME May 14, 2008 - 11:39pm

So? She's not going to get enough delegates in Kentucky to put her anywhere Obama.

She's down by 187 pledged delegates, and there are only 51 delegates for Kentucky. And if she's lucky, she might get 60% of those? If she doesn't get 100% of the votes in Kentucky, there's no chance of her getting up to even with Obama, much less ahead of him. At that point, she might as well throw in the towel because at that point, it becomes mathematically impossible for her to win with pledged delegates.

♪ ♫ ♪ ♫ ♪

"Three great forces rule the world: stupidity, fear and greed." -- Albert Einstein

By f u bush2May 14, 2008 - 11:16pm

True enough. There's really only ONE THING left to say to Hillary & the Hillbots anyway.

Support the Troops
End the Occupation