AFP
Chirac und Hussein, 1976
AFP
Chirac und Hussein, 1976
Posted on 03/13/2003 11:23:41 AM PST by mandingo republican
SUPPORT THE COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF UPDATE
ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT DRAFTED AGAINST THE PRESIDENT!
CRITICAL ACTION ITEMS BELOW!
3/13/03
We have just learned that House Judiciary ranking member John Conyers (D-Mich.) assembled more than two-dozen prominent liberal attorneys and legal scholars on Tuesday to consider articles of impeachment drafted against President Bush by activists seeking to block military action against Saddam Hussein.
Conyers was the only Member of Congress to attend the meeting, however Ramsey Clark--former attorney general was also there.
"We had a pretty frank discussion about putting in a bill of impeachment against President Bush," said Francis Boyle, an Illinois law professor who is working with Clark on the impeachment language.
WE URGES A SWIFT RESPONSE! call Rep. Conyers office to voice their displeasure with him for even considering such an action against a President who has vowed to protect our nation from terror.
Please call as soon as you receive this message!
Below is the contact information you need to make an IMMEDIATE, and DIRECT IMPACT ON THIS ISSUE!
Rep. John Conyers: 202/225-5126 (Washington Office) 313/961-5670 (Main District Office)
And please, after calling Rep. Conyers, pass this message on to your friends and family, urging them to follow your lead by phoning as well.
TOGETHER, WE MUST COMBAT THESE DESPICABLE ACTS AGAINST OUR PRESIDENT!
Thank you, and God Bless America,
Btw, I never took you for the type to use ad hominem attacks. I guess you find some utility in appearing childish. So be it.
>>>You are the third person in under a week to damn me without cause for not supporting Bush, "..because everyone knows I hate him and have slandered him on every issue."
Damn you?! LOL Come on now, "mister thin skinned". I never damned you in any way, shape or form. I used appropriate rhetorical verbage, to describe your past opposition to President Bushes leadership abilities and I will continue to stand by my remarks. I never implied you hated PresBush either. I said you showed contempt for his leadership and expressed that contempt in a most belligerant fashion. Very similiar to the behavior of John Conyers.
>>>"This is the third time in a week I have had a person attack me for not supporting Bush..."
Poor baby. Stop repeating yourself, I got you the first time.
The fact I don't keep records of every utterance you and other blabbering FReepers may have made in the past, doesn't mean I'm not standing on solid ground. I'm standing on rock solid ground. My memory happens to serve me very well. Thank you.
>>>I happen to be the Free Republic Network's Los Angeles Chapter President.
I could care less.
I will say this, from our past encounters and from reading several of your posts on occasion, I would never have taken you for a Bush defender. That's why I made my inititial remarks, but I still don't believe you're a real Bush supporter.
Since your memory is so bad, let me enter in the record a few points for clarification purposes.
On the issue of immigration, we basically agree. My biggest policy disagreement with PresBush, is on the issue of illegal immigration and the need for much tougher border control efforts. My disagreement with you on the immigration issue, came up when you continually trashed President Bush and your recent remark about Bush acting "criminally negligent", once again, shows the contempt, as in disdain, you have shown for his leadership and for the man himself. So don't talk to me about getting a grip on reality.
And get this bucko. I voted for Pat Buchanan too. I went with Pat over Bob, in the 1996 Colorado primary. But as a presidential candidate, at general election time, George W.Bush is no Bob Dole. You should have realized that in 2000.
>>>At the present time we are preparing for war, so I emphasize support for Bush and the military campaign...
That's good to hear
However, all in all, you're still full of BS.
What a moron. Ping. (This was directed at John Conyers for suggest Bush should be impeached.)
Since when have you been a Bush defender? I would have pegged you for taking sides with John Conyer.
Based on what?
Either this is an attempt at comedy on your part, or you've suddenly made an abrupt about face on the issue of President Bush. While our paths haven't crossed lately, on several past occasions you've displayed not only strong opposition, but even a level of contempt for PresBushes leadership abilities. Choosing to deny these belligerent occurances (example:immigration) at this point, certainly doesn't help your credibility.
I responded, then you stated this.
I wasn't really trying to turn this into a personal conflict between us. (1) I made a few simple comments, which you blew way out of proportion. (2) For some reason, you want to turn this into a flame war. (3) I'll take JimRob's advise and relent. (4) However, your extensive rant proves two things. First, you're extremely thin skinned and second, (5) I seemed to have struck a nerve, which shows the obvious truth of my remarks. (6)
1. What were you trying to do, strike up a friendship?
2. You made two insulting posts to me before I said more than three words directly to you. Those words were, "Based on what?"
3. After making two insulting posts to me, you evidently trotted over to Jim Robinson once I did respond to you in kind.
4. My extensive rant as you call it, gave you a number of reasons to reexamine your characterization of my total offerings regarding Bush.
5. The charge that I am thin skinned completely ignores your two insulting posts before I even responded to you on point.
6. The "obvious truths" that you have chosen to adopt as an opinion of me, is rather interesting in the presense of a volume of information that counters your assumptions.
What we have learned to this point is that you can call me anything you like, and if I respond you go running to the nearest thing you can find to a parent, to get out of the mess you got yourself into. Typical.
This is your comment not mine, "I'll take JimRob's advise and relent."
Here's your post which is evidently as close to relenting as you can get.
In it you continue to blast me completely ignoring that fact that I have also been very supportive of Bush. That you are not man enough to recognize that and appologize doesn't reflect poorly on me.
I won't respond further at this point, after all, "You weren't really trying to turn this into a personal conflict between us." You were just trying to get Jim to kick me off the forum.
To: DoughtyOne
I wasn't really trying to turn this into a personal conflict between us. I made a few simple comments, which you blew way out of proportion. For some reason, you want to turn this into a flame war. I'll take JimRob's advise and relent. However, your extensive rant proves two things. First, you're extremely thin skinned and second, I seemed to have struck a nerve, which shows the obvious truth of my remarks.
Btw, I never took you for the type to use ad hominem attacks. I guess you find some utility in appearing childish. So be it.
>>>You are the third person in under a week to damn me without cause for not supporting Bush, "..because everyone knows I hate him and have
slandered him on every issue."
Damn you?! LOL Come on now, "mister thin skinned". I never damned you in any way, shape or form.
I used appropriate rhetorical verbage, to describe your past opposition to President Bushes leadership abilities and I will continue to stand by my remarks. I never implied you hated PresBush either. I said you showed contempt for his leadership and expressed that contempt in a most belligerant fashion. Very similiar to the behavior of John Conyers.
>>>"This is the third time in a week I have had a person attack me for not supporting Bush..."
Poor baby. Stop repeating yourself, I got you the first time.
The fact I don't keep records of every utterance you and other blabbering FReepers may have made in the past, doesn't mean I'm not standing on solid ground. I'm standing on rock solid ground. My memory happens to serve me very well. Thank you.
>>>I happen to be the Free Republic Network's Los Angeles Chapter President.
I could care less.
I will say this, from our past encounters and from reading several of your posts on occasion, I would never have taken you for a Bush defender. That's why I made my inititial remarks, but I still don't believe you're a real Bush supporter.
Since your memory is so bad, let me enter in the record a few points for clarification purposes.
On the issue of immigration, we basically agree. My biggest policy disagreement with PresBush, is on the issue of illegal immigration and the need for much tougher border control efforts. My disagreement with you on the immigration issue, came up when you continually trashed President Bush and your recent remark about Bush acting "criminally negligent", once again, shows the contempt, as in disdain, you have shown for his leadership and for the man himself. So don't talk to me about getting a grip on reality.
And get this bucko. I voted for Pat Buchanan too. I went with Pat over Bob, in the 1996 Colorado primary. But as a presidential candidate, at general election time, George W.Bush is no Bob Dole. You should have realized that in 2000.
>>>At the present time we are preparing for war, so I emphasize support for Bush and the military campaign...
That's good to hear
However, all in all, you're still full of BS.
181 posted on 03/14/2003 8:00 PM PST by Reagan Man
LOL I'm glad you've finally come to your senses, but acting paranoid won't help you resolve your troubles.
You need to learn the difference between civilized political debate and the type of irrational and convoluted outbursts you've been displaying. These endless diatribes of yours, have solved nothing and have only made you look petty.
Okay, let's go at it.
Please ping me to even one anti-Bush statement I've made on this forum and I'll discuss the issue with you there on merit.
My advice would be to shut your mouth before you make yourself look even more foolish, then you already have.
A word to wise is sufficient.
You implied that I bash Bush on the forum. Please back that up.
I suggest you click on my name down there, then click on find in forum. There will hundreds if not thousands of posts for you to browse through.
Yes. I saw an FR thread that had pictures of Saddam and Chirac in FRANCE together. In the 70s, I believe. I'm playing ketchup on my comments now, but I'll use this as a. . .
REMINDER TO SELF !
. . .to try and find it for you shortly.
Must be ACLU lawyers all! Anybody able to get their names – if so post them so we know who the enemy is and who Saddam’s friends are in this country.
John Conyers has a blacker heart than anyone ever thought – we’ve know him as an intolerant bigot heretofore, but this crosses the line.
I'll post a 'help me' note on the USO and FR's Finest Thread to see if someone can dig it up! . . .
I'll post the images to you in a minute, EC . . .
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.