WH puts limits on queries from Democrats

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Ugg, Nov 7, 2003.

  1. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #1
    Link

    There goes another myth about the "freedoms" we enjoy in this country and reinforces the fact that gw & co. are more interested in totalitarianism than a democratic republic.
     
  2. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #2
    And then they whine about how unfair it is that none of their judges get confirmation hearings.

    Changing the tune in Washington my arse.
     
  3. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #3
    "House committee Democrats had just asked for information about how much the White House spent making and installing the "Mission Accomplished" banner for President Bush's May 1 speech aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln."

    ROFL!!!

    Ya go to askin' Mickey Mouse questions, they cut off your cheese supply...

    :D, 'Rat
     
  4. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #4
    rat, you're the one who consistently harps about gov't waste. the way to combat waste is through audits and enforcing accountability.

    i realize you find this particular query amusing, but shouldn't you, in actuality, be glad that _someone_ is trying to force the WH to be accountable?
     
  5. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #5
    Okay, fine. Let's change the whole political process. No more photo ops by anybody, anywhere, anytime. No ceremonious signing of bills into law, with people of that particular interest group flown in for the occasion. No more "fact-finding" joy-riding junkets, by anybody in Congress or the Administration. And on and on...

    I realize that even the small stuff adds up, but given the way our entire government is run, I just can't get excited over this level of nit-picking.

    Particularly when it's this hypocritical. You're gonna find me hard to convince that those worrying about the cost of this banner aren't themselves just as bad in their own various self-promotions. Purely partisan politics, sez me.

    It's proper to question White House spending, but the reality is that it's best reserved for some meaningful issue. You go to stomping on someone's turf inside the Beltway, the paybacks can be painful. Getting burned over trivia is just plain stoopid.

    :), 'Rat
     
  6. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #6
    'Rat,

    The inquiry in question is not that big of deal. It should be an embarrassment to the WH that Bush can stand up in a press conference and say that the WH had nothing to do with the staging of the event on the carrier. They had to back track almost immediately. There is no doubt that some Democrats are trying to get some information that would show the lie for what it is. I agree this narrow part of it is a tempest in a teapot, as entertaining as it is.

    However, to cut off your opposition from Congressional inquiries is a very big deal. That cuts to the heart of open government. That I can't believe you support.
     
  7. wwworry macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2002
    #7
    The real issue with the banner on the aircraft carrier is that more American soldiers have died in Iraq after "mission accomplished" than before. When questioned about the banner the White House, as usual, lied about who was responsible for the sign. They said the soldiers put up the sign when, in fact, the whole mega dollar photo op, including the aircraft carrier circling around so that land could not be seen in the background, was orchestrated by the White House.

    They have egg on their faces and now they do not anyone to ask them about it. This is the same lack of accountability that was seen when they denied requests for the Enron sponsored energy policy meetings.
     
  8. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #8
    No, Sayhey, I don't support the cutoff. It's petty. However, it's also what happens when this high degree of "warfare" gets going. When you try to start a ruckus over purely partisan politics, a purely partisan response is what you get. In this particular deal, both sides are acting like kindergardeners. IMO.

    I don't have a clue about the thinking behind all this BSing and denial/Oops! nonsense. It ain't the way I'd do things. I'd never forget the ancient adage that a secret is only a secret if it's limited to two people and one of them is dead. This applies inside the Beltway more than anywhere else I know of.

    'Rat
     
  9. Thanatoast macrumors 6502a

    Thanatoast

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Location:
    Denver
    #9
    This is scary ****. The White House continues to cut itself off from accountability. Sure it's only a banner now. What about when it's not?
     
  10. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #10
    Oh but we must spend $80 million to find out who gave who a blowjob, and that is a well-founded use of government money, but a banner - well that's just the way the game is played.

    Ok so he didn't lie under oath. But he lied. When it was about a blowjob it was impeachable, when it was about a banner photo-op it's the opposition playing politics. I get it.
     
  11. Taft macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #11
    Yeah, they are. But remember back during the Clinton days? Do you remember how things were different? Do you remember how congress wouldn't leave Clinton alone until he answered all of their questions?

    What seperates these two situations is that during the Clinton years, Republicans held control of the legislature. The "opposition" party could ask all the questions it wanted to because they had the voting power. The president literally couldn't refuse. Now, the "opposition" party doesn't have control of the legislature. They don't have voting power.

    One question: since the "opposition" party can't force the issue via a voting process, does that mean that the president shouldn't be held accountable?

    The system for exposing corruption and holding it accountable is very messed up in this country. A majority should never be needed to instigate investigation of corruption or wrongdoing. As it stands, Bush will never be held accountable because he controls the legislature like a puppet via his party. Now, if Democrats were allowed to ask questions, to force hearings, etc. this corrupt president might be held accountable for his actions.

    This is bad. Very bad.

    Taft
     
  12. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #12
    "A majority should never be needed to instigate investigation of corruption or wrongdoing."

    True, but we're stuck with it.

    "As it stands, Bush will never be held accountable because he controls the legislature like a puppet via his party."

    Also true, SFAIK, but I imagine you'll just get mostly grins from Congressfolks--when off the record. On the record, you'll get the usual bland pablum. Beltway hardball is nasty stuff.

    I'm gonna be off traveling for the best part of ten days or so. Y'all take care...

    'Rat
     
  13. mcrain macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #13
    No we are NOT! It's called the democratic process. The Republicans are basically bending us over, lubing us up, and sticking it to us all, and then lying about it. Oh, it wasn't me, it was that other person standing with his pants down behind you. Or worse, acting like we don't have the right to ask who is sticking it to us. They are telling us all to shut up and take it.

    VOTE REGIME CHANGE IN 2004
     
  14. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #14
    Gee, mccrain, isn't it sad this sort of stonewalling never, ever happened before?

    Who hired Craig Livingstone? Where did all those illegal FBI files come from? Back up through time, through various administrations, and you'll find that regardless of regime change, the behavior doesn't change.

    And that's why I say we're stuck with it.

    'Rat
     
  15. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #15
    its called the tear down game, whoever is in the whitehouse can be sure the opposing party will do everything it can to criticize everything and anything and make the president dodge constant mud. both parties have been guilty but with the demo's playing games on nominee's after 3 yrs the whitehouse has decided to play games on stupid questions, someone needs to sit both PARTYS down and spank the crap out of both of them and tell them no more PARTYS till they get along....................by the way their PARTYS are at the cost of our TAX DOLLARS!
     

Share This Page