DUmmie FUnnies 12-29-05 ("The post impeachment administration: Powell-Gore?")

The only thing more bizarre than the DUmmie THREAD featured in the DUmmie FUnnies this morning where the DUmmies fantasized about a reality-challenged scenario where Bush gets chimpeached is this DUmmie THREAD titled, "The post impeachment administration: Powell-Gore?" As you might have surmised from the title, the DUmmies are already assuming the fantasy of a chimpeachment and are now planning on the makeup of the post-chimpeachment administration. Colin Powell isn't even in government any more but that small fact doesn't seem to interfere with the DUmmie fantasy as you shall see. Even more bizarre is that Powell would somehow choose Al Gore to be his vice-president. But wait, DUmmies! Why stop there? I mean since we are in your Alternate Reality, wouldn't Powell say to himself that Gore was really elected in 2000 and then meekly step aside and let Gore take over the presidency? As usual, the DUmmie Fantasies being channeled from the Alternate Universe are in Bolshevik Red while the commentary of your humble correspondent, envisioning my own Alternate Reality of Petra Verkaik and Salma Hayek battling it out in a hotel room over who gets first dibs at my body, is in the [brackets]:

I believe that if the Democrats take the House after the mid term congressional elections, there will be an impeachment. Moreover, the Democratic majority will give cover to disgruntled Republicans to join the impeachment effort.

[How kind of you to give cover to the disgruntled Republicans of the Alternate Universe.]

However, we have to keep in mind that it is almost a certainty that impeachment will not change Republican party control of the executive branch. This is because the outgoing president will control the appointment of a vice president.

As during the Nixon administration, once Congress decides that impeachment is a real possibility, they will first have to force out a corrupt vice president -- then Agnew, today Cheney. It is inconceivable that Congress would impeach Bush, but allow the author and instigator of most of his crimes, Cheney, to assume the presidency.

[And don't forget Denny Hastert. We must get rid of him too! Plus everybody down to about the 145th level of succession.]

This raises an important question for Democrats: Who will be the post impeachment president and vice president?

[Why ask the Democrats? They have NO input as to the post chimpeachment president and vice president.]

Almost all the Republicans in the administration and the Senate are simply too tainted either by the crimes of the administration or corruption in Congress. Both parties' leaders will be trying to clean house, signal a move by the Republicans from the extreme fringe right policy positions and send a message to the international community that the US is ready to return to the "reality based" international community -- all in the same appointment.

Frankly, the only viable Republicans are John McCain and Colin Powell, and given the international crisis that Bush has created, Powell is the far more likely candidate.

[Thanx for just killing McCain's primary election chances in '08. Any "Republican" considered "viable" by the DUmmies needs to be prevented from getting the presidential nomination by REAL Republicans.]

At this point, however, because of the unprecedented fiscal, military and international challenges the federal government will face, Democrats need to insist on some kind of "government of national unity" -- in other words, the appointment of a Democratic vice president. The only Democrat with the stature to be vice president under those circumstances is Al Gore, both because of his experience as vice president and because he actually won the popular vote in 2000.

[This fantasy scenario will only happen with the proper astological alignment. Namely Uranus must be aligned in front of your face.]

You may disagree with this analysis and proposed administration, but I hope you'll agree that it's time for progressive Democrats to look ahead and begin planning for the post-Bush administration.

[How about the more modest goal of planning for your institutionalization, DUmmie HamdenRice ? And now on to the other DUmmie comments...]

powell is an asshole solidly in the bush pocket and the world knows he is a liar who likes to advance his own interests ... existing patriotic feelings in powell? NONE! so, why get rid of an asshole to put in place another asshole? sorry for the foul language. i have no other way to express my utter contempt for powell.

[Nice to see you get all worked up over a fantasy that WON'T be happening in this Reality.]

I don't disagree at all ... but the point is, that the Republicans will control the successor to Bush-Cheney. Powell lied about the war, but he has bee furiously apologizing and leaking his embarrassment ever since he left office. Surely you can see he is positioning himself for the succession?

[Yeah. Powell has nothing better to do with his time than planning for a DUmmie Fantasy scenario that WON'T be happening.]

republicans would never vote for GORE and on principle GORE should not stand with any republican in a ticket nor take second place to it. he would be another asshole if he, for a second time, would willingly accommodate the assholes.

After all this national trauma, would you prefer .... Powell-McCain? Or Powell-Santorum? If we are going to control a post-Bush administration, I think we need someone in at a very high level.

i am not dreamin' republicans are not going to let go of power and control and without the bush machine to act as their backbone...neither sanctoroom nor mackane have the charisma to do what bush has done...unless they are using diebold machines, i have the feeling that even with those two running the country, much of democracy would return to these shores. although, i may be totally wrong.

[Or totally deluded for extending even the least bit of credibility to this thread.]

The succession to the presidency is defined...I don't think your scenario accounts for the fact that the Constitution was amended to provide a clearly defined succession of the Presidency. How is your scenario going to get around the 25 amendment?

[By leaning back, closing his eyes, and clicking his heels together three times while wishing real hard.]

I guess the OP thinks it would go like this: Dubya is impeached and removed from office. Cheney becomes President and appoints a VP, say, Powell Cheney is then impeached and removed from office. Powell becomes President and appoints a new VP.

However, Bush will not be removed by the impeachment process. That is just a pipe dream.

You can tell that Pitt is full of CRAP just by reading the conversation with Bouncer Ty that he reproduces. Sorry but NO ONE can remember conversations in that detail. I just spoke to someone on the phone about an hour ago and I can give you the general drift of the conversation but word for word? No way! Anyway, here is Pitt's bogus account of his conversation with Bouncer Ty:

The bouncer at my bar is named Ty. A native of New Orleans, he speaks with the slow drawl unique to the region, and he is huge. Not outlandishly huge, not freakishly huge, but definitely one of the larger specimens of human one is likely to meet. He works the door at my joint, as well as at another bar down the street a ways. Ty is smart, funny as all get-out, and a marvelous spinner of tales.

Each night Ty works, he regales my friends and I with stories of mayhem and bouncer-justice, of the drunken boobs stupid enough to think they can push him around at the other establishment. My bar, one gets the sense, is too peaceful for his tastes; he has never been forced to exercise his talents while working at my joint.

Ty and I have assiduously observed the tenets of that invisible sign which hangs over the door of every drinking establishment in America: “Thou Shalt Not Discuss Religion Or Politics In This Place.” The two reasons for this are straightforward: I don’t particularly relish the idea of discussing work when I am in my cups; also, Ty is an ardent Bush supporter, so the first reason becomes doubly significant. If I want to get frustrated and annoyed, I can just turn on CNN and listen to the Know-Nothings ply their wares.

A funny thing happened the other night, however, something that changed the whole dynamic of our relationship. I was passing by Ty, and he grabbed me by the arm to pull me aside. He knows what I do for a living, and wanted to discuss politics in defiance of the invisible sign. “What do you think of the Patriot Act?” he asked me

“I think it’s a damned troubling thing,” I said after a moment. “There are aspects of it that have been on the books for years because of the War on Drugs. There are aspects of it that are brand new to American law. Overall, I think it is tremendously invasive and not in line with how we have done things in this country. As a Republican,” I said with a bit of the needle in my voice, “the issues of personal freedom and governmental interference should bother you.”

“I ain’t no Republican,” he said. “I’m an Independent. I think they’re all crooks.”

“Fair enough,” I said, “but you are a Bush supporter.”

“Yep,” he drawled. “So what parts of the Patriot Act don’t you like?”

“Well,” I said, “one scary part of it is Section 215, the thing people call the ‘Sneak-and-Peek’ provision. Section 215 says law enforcement can enter your house, search your stuff, bug your phone, bug your computer, and they never have to tell you they were there. The FBI could have 215ed their way into my house and I’d never know it. Hell, they could be there right now. All they need is a warrant signed by a judge somewhere to do it.”

“That ain’t right,” he said after a moments consideration. “But at least they have to talk to a judge.”

“Well,” I said, “have you heard about all this stuff with the National Security Agency spying on people here in America?”

“Little bit, yeah,” he said.

“You know that the NSA can spy on pretty much anyone, tap their phones, do total surveillance?” I asked, and he nodded. “Well, back in 2002, Bush told the NSA to start spying on Americans. Lots of them. But he did this without going through the FISA court.”

“FISA court?” he asked.

“FISA stands for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which was passed in 1978,” I said. “After Watergate and all that craziness, they wanted to make sure our intelligence services weren’t being used by people in power to spy on Americans. If you want to get the NSA to spy on Americans, you have to get a warrant from what’s called the FISA court. That’s a few judges who hear an argument for a special FISA warrant.”

“OK.”

“Now here’s one of the crazy parts with this Bush-NSA thing,” I said. “To get a warrant from this FISA court, you don’t need to have probable cause. You don’t need to have evidence. The FISA court has handed out more than 19,000 warrants since it was set up, and has only denied four. And they do it quick, because obviously if you go before the FISA court for a warrant, you’re probably pressed for time. It’s the easiest court in America to get a warrant from. Bush totally blew past them, said he didn’t need warrants from the FISA court, and just had the NSA start spying away on Americans.”

Ty’s response to this was too profane to be printed here.

“Why the hell’d he do that?” he finally asked.

“Good question,” I said. “There are two probable reasons, neither of which are very comfortable. The first reason is that he and Cheney want to expand the power of the Executive Branch. Cheney, specifically, has always felt that the Executive let go of too much power after Watergate and Vietnam, gave too much power to Congress and the press, and these guys have been trying to get it back. So they decided that, since we are ‘at war,’ they were going to do whatever they damned well pleased.”

“Seems smart,” he said.

“Maybe,” I said, “but that’s a different debate. Ask yourself this, though. Imagine a Democrat wins the White House in 2008. These Bush guys will have left this Democrat with outrageously broad powers. They can spy on who they like, because Bush did it. They don’t have to get warrants, because Bush did it. They can lie to the press, because Bush did it. They can bulldoze Congress, because Bush did it. That make you comfortable?”

“Hell no,” he said.

“Right,” I said. “Too much power is too much power, no matter who is in power. The separation of powers is there for a reason.”

“So what’s the other reason you think he didn’t get the FISA warrants?” he asked.

“That,” I said, “is actually the scarier part. Like I said, FISA has given out those 19,000 warrants and has only denied four. It’s incredibly easy to get a warrant from them. The only reason they’re there at all is to safeguard your privacy and mine, to make sure some crazy maniac in the White House doesn’t start spying on Americans, on personal enemies, on you and me. The NSA can do that, so the FISA court is there as a firewall.”

“OK,” he said.

“So maybe,” I said, “Bush didn’t go to the FISA court because he knew they wouldn’t give him the warrants. Maybe he didn’t go to the FISA court because he wanted to spy on enemies like Patrick Fitzgerald, like Joe Wilson, like Cindy Sheehan, like Tom Daschle or Harry Reid, or anyone else who was messing with him. Maybe he didn’t go to the FISA court because he knew the surveillance he wanted was illegal, but he was damned well going to do it anyway.”

“That ain’t right,” said Ty, his face reddening.

“Now take this all one step further,” I said, “since you asked about the Patriot Act. Think about that Section 215 and the sneak-and-peek stuff. I told you they need to see a judge first to come into your house, search and bug your stuff. But this whole NSA deal shows that Bush and these guys don’t give a hoot in hell for judges, warrants or the process of law. They’re going to do what they want to do, warrant or not. We’ve got a situation now where Bush and his people could not only be ordering the surveillance of Americans, but could also be authorizing home invasions, and all without any kind of warrants and oversight. What does that sound like to you?”

“Fascism,” he said without hesitating.

“This is the reason,” I said with a smile, “why I don’t talk politics at the bar. I have a way of going on and on until the paint peels. But let me ask you one last question.”

“Shoot,” he said.

“As a Bush supporter,” I said, “how far are you willing to go to support the guy? How much individual liberty, how many laws, are you willing to give up to Bush before we lose the country? How far is too far?”

Ty didn’t have anything to say at first. “This,” he finally muttered, “is too damned far.”

At that moment, a crowd of people came into the bar, and Ty had to check their IDs. I went back to my beer.

Drip, drip, drip.

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.