Latest Threads
Greatest Threads
Home » Discuss » Journals » jjr5 Donate to DU
Advertise Liberally! The Liberal Blog Advertising Network
Advertise on more than 70 progressive blogs!
jjr5's Journal
Posted by jjr5 in General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009)
Fri Sep 05th 2008, 05:16 PM
When you think about it, this week was the worst week to send out a statement that your 17 year-old daughter is pregnant, while you were the VP pick of a major party. This was the RNC week. Why did governor Palin release that statement on Monday of this week? The media hearing the news at any time would have made it detrimental, and maybe revealing the information this week gave Gov. Palin a chance to correct any negative viewpoints during her VP nomination acceptance speech. However, ruining the RNC's celebration right at the beginning of the week was such an unusual move and put a damper on the whole convention.

She said that they released the statement after seeing stories on the "left-wing liberal blogosphere" about her newborn son Trig actually being the son of Bristol, her 17 year-old. Apparently she wanted to "correct" the rumor. However, ambiguity still rests on many of the details of young Trig's birth.

I'm not ruling out the possibility that she told the press about her daughter's pregnancy, during this critical time, to assuage suspicions about an even larger problem. I think Trig is Bristol's son too and that Palin is trying to cover up this fact with publicity focused on the fact that Bristol is pregnant again. Why?:

1. The fact that Bristol is pregnant does not explain why Palin was never showing in the months leading up to his birth.

2. The dates don't line up. Bristol was out of school for a period of time before Trig was born. If she left Catholic school not because she had mono, but because she was pregnant, how could she be pregnant now. Little Trig was only born in April of 2008.

"Bristol Palin left school for an extended period of time, due to mononucleosis according to her family for the last 4-5 months of Trig's pregnancy. Some classmates claimed later that they had seen Bristol Palin pregnant."

Apparently down syndrome is common both in young mothers and in older mothers

3. Why did they choose this week to say that Bristol is CURRENTLY pregnant? Of all weeks to break this, why this one? I think it is because they wanted to quiet ever growing rumors that Trig isn't actually Gov. Palin's.

Now why do I or should you even consider this possibility or care?

1. With Gov. Palin's crazy track record on abstinence only education and ridiculously conservative values (and may I just add her very quirky decisions ie troopergate) Really, why not? She would probably do this, hey, she didn't know she was going to be chosen for VP and have this become a problem, no one knew she was going to be the Rep. VP pick. Plus with these new revelations about her cultural insensitivity( recent racial slurs) who knows what she'll do next.

2. Most importantly, what does it say about her the kind of leader she could be if this is true? I mean, we don't know if it is, but people have done ugly things in the past, and we shouldn't rule this out as a possible reality if there are no facts to COMPLETELY refute it. The baby is so cute, I really don't want this to be the case, but Palin is turning out to have an ugly mind - very similar to Bush and you know what he has done.

Read entry | Discuss (10 comments) | Recommend (0 votes)
Posted by jjr5 in Politics/Campaigns
Fri Jun 13th 2008, 03:00 AM
Speech Outline: Why we should begin impeachment proceedings against President Bush and Dick Cheney

I. The word impeachment: it sounds ominous, but it was provided by the constitution in order for us to use it – it is our right, and as a democracy, now we should employ that right.

II. President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney should be impeached for several reasons including these five:

a. Their crimes fall violate Article II, section IV of the constitution
b. They are setting a dangerous precedent.
c. Congress could get more done if they impeached the Bush and Cheney.
d. They are committing dangerous crimes here and abroad.
e. Impeachment would help the democratically-controlled congress, against widespread belief, it would be in the Democrat’s favor.

III. The main reason why President Bush and Vice President Cheney should be impeached is because they have committed impeachable offenses as stated in the constitution.

a. Article II, Section 4 of the constitution says that impeachable offenses are treason, bribery, and high crimes and
misdemeanors (Hirsh).

b. High crimes and misdemeanors was left a broad term by the framers Madison and Mason because they did not want to leave it at
only treason and bribery. They wanted to encompass more criminal acts. They left it at high crimes and misdemeanors.

c. Gerald Ford said that because it is a broad term, that means it can’t be proven to be an impeachable offense. He’s wrong.

d. Alexander Hamilton, in Federalist Paper 65, said that a high crime and misdemeanor is “an abuse or violation of some public
trust” and would “relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to society itself” (Hirsch)

e. Some examples of this are in the NSA spying program, enacted by Bush and Cheney.
i. NSA stands for National Surveillance Agency.
ii. They are in charge of intercepting phone calls and emails that any U.S. citizen makes to other citizens abroad (ACLU).
iii. This program was enacted without a court order and without a warrant.
iv. It violates the 4th amendment, prohibiting unreasonable search and seizure, because the government has no reason or
charge against every citizen of the United States to do this. Also, they don’t have a court order authorizing this
V. They are also violating a law by proceeding with this program.
1. FISA the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was created to protect Americans from being spied upon (ACLU).
2. However, Bush and Cheney are violating this law.

f. This is an abuse of public trust.
g. There is also evidence pointing to the possibility that at least Cheney, and possibly Bush, have committed treason by outing
CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson.
i. Valerie Plame Wilson’s name was leaked to the Washington post and by someone in the Whitehouse.
ii. There is evidence through a trial involving Whitehouse aid Scooter Libby that this leak could have come directly from the
iii. Outing a CIA operative is an act of treason because it puts our country, our intelligence, and our intelligence
specialists at risk. This is a crime against our nation itself.

IV. Another more potent reason for impeaching Bush and Cheney is because with their policies and actions, they have set a
dangerous precedent that future more dangerous presidents would use (Swanson). The only way to push back these precedents is
by beginning impeachment proceedings against them. The Bush administration has currently established the power to:

a. Openly violate laws, such as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
b. Re-write laws or overturn laws using signing statements that say what he wants to do instead, using executive privilege.
i. E.g. Not allowing the inspector general for the Coalition Provisional Authority, who are sent in order to inform Congress
about the operation of the war, to do their job. Because of a Bush sign-in statement, they are not allowed to investigate
or tell congress“ anything involving sensitive plans, intelligence, national security, or anything already being
investigated by the Pentagon” – which includes war operations. (Savage)

c. Detain without charge
i. The Bush administration detained American citizens, Jose and Hamdi Padilla in an unauthorized prison for 3 years without
allowing them a representation, a trial, or a jury.
ii. This is against the 6th amendment of the Constitution which gives the right to a fair trial and representation to American

d. To torture
i. Just last Saturday, Bush vetoed a bill that prohibited waterboarding (AP). Waterboarding is a method that has been used by
the CIA to toture detainees. It is when the interviewer covers your mouth with a cloth, blindfolds you, ties you down, and
pours water into your mouth. It is a technique that simulates drowning and many experts have confirmed that it is torture.

e. To intentionally mislead congress.
i. The reason why Valerie Plame’s name was leaked stems from the fact that Bush made a false claim supporting the Iraq war
1. Bush said that Iraq was getting nuclear weapons from Northern Africa.
2. He used this as false evidence that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. These claims were later found to be false,
however, he used them anyway.
3. Plame’s husband former Ambassador Joe Wilson caught Bush in his lie and wrote an article saying that Bush was wrong.
4. That is when the administration leaked Valerie Plame’s name – most likely to silence her husband.

f. They have also launched unauthorized and violent wars without the consent of congress.
g. What is to stop a future more dangerous president from using these precedents set by our president and vice president, if
impeachment offenses are not started against them.
h. Imagine another president who wanted to start a war against Russia, or another country that had nuclear arms. We would be at a
very high risk for a nuclear war, and the precedents set by this administration could allow future presidents to do this.
i. The fact that Nancy Pelosi would be an unelected president isn’t as important as having a president who is checked and
upholds the law. It doesn’t matter who our president is, really as long as they uphold our laws (Swanson).

V. A question some may ponder is whether impeachment is a distraction for the congress. Well, the answer to that is no (Swanson).
a. Congress is split right now along partisan lines and sometimes it is hard to get laws passed because they may not play to
party beliefs.
b. However, even when good legislation is passed, Bush tends to veto it.
c. Bush has vetoed over 750 laws in his time as president such as whistle-blower protections (whistle blowers are people who tell
the congress when something is going wrong) or military rules and regulations.
d. Impeachment is about the only thing Congress can do. It cannot be vetoed.
i. It may even put pressure on Bush not to veto laws as was the case during under Nixon (Swanson).

VI. Bush and Cheney should be impeached because they are causing unrest for our country and the world through their unwarranted
a. The war in Iraq was unwarranted and baseless, yet thousands of Americans and Iraqis have died because of the war.
b. Bush and Cheney wanted to attack Iran this summer, a country that most likely has nuclear capabilities.

VII. There is also no reason why the Congress, headed by the Democrats should be hesitant in proceeding with impeachment, as it
would ultimately benefit democrats (Swanson).

a. In 1952, Republicans tried to impeach Truman and in 1953, they won big (Swanson).
b. When the Democrats tried to impeach Nixon they had a huge victory in the next election (Swanson).
c. However, for example, when Democrats in the 1980s decided not to begin impeachment proceedings against President Regan for the
same reasons they hesitate impeaching Bush and Cheney now – they are afraid of loosing the election in 2008, the Democrats
ultimately lost the next election. Republicans and Democrats alike send a message to their constituents that they are able to
hold people accountable and stand up for justice when they begin impeachment hearings (Swanson).

VIII. Conclusion:

a. With about a 61% disapproval rating (PollingReport), the people have spoken, it’s time to impeach President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. We need to exercise our rights to impeach a criminal president or vice president, our right to privacy, and our right to a fair trial. We owe this to our founding fathers, to our democracy, and to future generations. Now that you have heard this information, act on it. Let your friends know about things that struck you. Let your professors know, let your congress people know. If we all speak together, maybe we can stop the direction in which our president and vice president are taking us before it is too late. Thank you.

Thought I would post this in response to librechik's recent posting:
Impeachment Hearings Would Destroy the Republicans

Works Cited:

Associated Press. “Bush vetoes bill banning waterboarding.” 08 March, 2008. 09 March, 2008. < >
Hirsch, Alan. A Citizen’s Guide to Impeachment. Washington, D.C.: Essential Books, 1998.

“NSA Spying on Americans is Illegal.” American Civil Liberties Union. 29 December, 2005. ACLU Foundation. 09 March, 2008. < > “President Bush - Overall Job Rating in National Polls.” 2008. Polling Report Inc. 09 March, 2008. < >

Savage, Charlie. “Examples of the president’s signing statements.” The Boston Globe. 30 April, 2006. Globe Newspaper Company. 09 March, 2008. < >

Swanson, David. “What Distracts us from Impeachment?” The Humanist. November/December 2005: 6-7.
Read entry | Discuss (1 comments) | Recommend (+1 votes)
Posted by jjr5 in General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010)
Thu May 22nd 2008, 01:59 AM
Read entry | Discuss (0 comments)
Posted by jjr5 in Politics/Campaigns
Wed Apr 30th 2008, 09:40 PM
Its wrong to win something by CHEATING. Robo-calls? Come on!
Read entry | Discuss (4 comments) | Recommend (+1 votes)
Posted by jjr5 in Politics/Campaigns
Mon Apr 21st 2008, 01:56 PM
Consider the way Clinton has run her campaign - with divisive, manipulative political tactics ,and even outright lies - do we really want her to win the primary, or then the general, with a "mandate" that affirms that what she has been doing is OK?

If she wins PA on the basis of her negative campaign ads, what will that tell her and other politicians with similar political aspirations? - Dirty political tricks will ultimately work in your favor and lying to the American public is OK. As we can see with Bush's presidency and his campaigns prior (which hinted to the kind of government he would run with his campaign's heavily Rovian tactics), these pre-presidential tactics set a precedent, or a "mandate", that the newly-named winner can than wields in front of the people of America saying, "This is what you wanted, so I'll use it again. . ."

Read entry | Discuss (2 comments) | Recommend (+1 votes)
Greatest Threads
The ten most recommended threads posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums in the last 24 hours.
Visitor Tools
Use the tools below to keep track of updates to this Journal.
Random Journal
Random Journal
Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals  |  Campaigns  |  Links  |  Store  |  Donate
About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.