Posted on 04/04/2007 10:23:34 AM PDT by kellynla
WASHINGTON - Give Chuck Hagel his way, and he’d know what to do with the politicians another senator wrote about a half century ago, men who stood up against public opinion.
Kick them out of office. Get rid of anyone so bold as to find a place between the covers of John F. Kennedy’s book, “Profiles of Courage.”
If you doubt the Nebraska Republican capable of feeling contempt for the act of resisting public pressure for the sake of a principle, take note of what he has been saying.
“Any president who says ‘I don’t care’ or ‘I will not respond to what the people of this country are saying about Iraq or anything else’ or ‘I don’t care what the Congress does, I am going to proceed’ — if a president believes that, then there are … ways to deal with that,” Hagel is widely quoted as having said on ABC.
The issue is Bush’s objections to picking a date for the United States to withdraw the military from Iraq. If he does not back down, Hagel has indubitably, brazenly, shockingly said, Congress can impeach and convict him.
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
Frankly, Senator Hagel is a worthless human being with a BIG MOUTH!
Apparently there was only one discussion during the Constitutional Convention that dealt with the phrase high crimes and misdemeanors and that occurred on September 8, 1787. As reported out of Committee, impeachable offenses included only `treason and bribery.’ Mason wanted to add `maladministration,’ which was also contained in many state constitutions. Madison was under the impression that such language would leave the President at the mercy of the Senate. Madison relented and we wound up with the phrase as we have it today. The founding fathers quite clearly rejected impeachment for Congressional disapproval of policy. Impeachable offenses were `political’ offenses and, as under English law, not necessarily criminal. Other guidance that can be derived from the Convention is the fact that the founders were acutely aware of their rejection of bills of attainder as existed in the English system and, therefore, they thought that impeachable offenses should be something that any reasonable man could anticipate. He should not be punished for some crime made up after the fact. Also, there was to be a requirement for `substantiality.’ This mechanism was not designed for trivial offenses.
Ignorant Schuck Hagel should have someone read the Constitution to him (since he’s obviously incapable fo reading it himself) and then shut the hell up. He should never be heard from again. If he cared about his country, he’d go away permanently.
Can we impeach a Senator?
What checks do we have on worthless Senators?
13. Thinking about war in Iraq……do you believe that the United States should
leave American troops in Iraq until the Iraqis are able to protect themselves from
terrorists….or do you believe that we should begin to bring American soldiers
home?
Keep troops there 65.2%
Bring troops home 21.6%
Undecided [do not read] 13.1%
From a 2006 election poll in Nebraska
http://www.victoryenterprises.com/Nebraskapollm.htm
Nebraskans seem to support the war. Guess Hagel doesn’t care what his own constituents think
From a 3/20/07 Zogby article:
‘Bush loyalists and detractors have been skirmishing for months in letters to the editor published in the Journal Star and the Omaha World-Herald.
At the center of much of the mailbag debate has been Hagel’s opposition to the president’s Iraq war policies, including the latest addition of 21,500 U.S. combat troops.
Virtually every story about Hagel on JournalStar.com triggers a flurry of critical comments about the senator based on his differences with Bush over Iraq. “Hagel’s making a fool of himself, if you ask me,” says Ray Brown of Broken Bow, a World War II veteran who says he supports Bush more than ever.”
Gene Gausman of Milford admires Bush for “having guts enough to stick to his convictions” in the face of partisan and media criticism.
“It’s a sad day when Democrats and the liberal media hate a president to a degree that they’re willing to bring the United States to its knees rather than admit the president might be right about something,” Gausman says.
http://www.zogby.com/Soundbites/ReadClips.dbm?ID=14654
The last quoted sentence seems to be more of an impeachable offense than standing tall in the midst of a vocal opposition.
Too bad those same 65% in Nebraska couldn’t elect a true blue conservative to replace Hagel. LOL
Libs including RINOs think that if they don’t have enough votes to override a Presidentuial veto, somehow they have a sufficient mandate to try to get their way by other means? THINK AGAIN!
He was not up for election last year.... if/when he runs again, will not be re-elected, I expect. He does NOT represent us. He is increasingly unpopular here. If he runs for higher office, unlikely he will be supported by Nebraskans. Unfortunately, he has only really shown his true colors since the issues of “immigration reform” (aid to illegals) and the timetables on the war have been headliners.
Hagel is what I call a “blivet Senator.” That’s 400 lbs. of horse manure stuffed into a 200 lb. sack. When it hits the floor, it goes BLIVET, and smells up the room. That pretty much describes this P.O.S. Hagel.
Worthless Senators??? Hagel is worthless, but he has a lot of company. Senators ought to be limited to one term. Over a period of time they get the biggest egos possible. Is there any good conservative Republicans in Nebraska that will challenge this clown when he is up for reelection?
Chuck Hagel is now the “official” “maverick” of GOP, replacing John McCain who held this title for a long time in the major mediasphere. McCain, who has been “disappointing” recently with his “unreasonable” and “unpopular” stance on the Iraq “policy”, has now wrestled the title of “White House poodle” from PM of Britain Tony Blair. Blair, after successfully and, most importantly, peacefully solving Britain’s own “Iran Hostage Crisis” has regained title of “World’s Statesman” which for several years belonged to France’s Jacques Chirac.
This is giving me a headache. I think I will get a drink.
Isn't that a best cure for headaches and politicians?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.