Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Eagler on September 15, 2001, 09:59:00 AM
-
for the use of force against those responsible..
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/20010914/aponline233714_000.htm (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/20010914/aponline233714_000.htm)
Anyone out there vote for this moron who voted against this?
The "Honorable" Baraba Lee from CA.
Think she polled those who elected her into office before opening her trap or what??
Here's her website: http://www.house.gov/lee/ (http://www.house.gov/lee/)
Just sent her an email expressing my "feelings" about her vote, I urge the rest of you to do so also..
-
Hiya,
Alas looks like the UK had similar person/s :(
Have to wonder in our case how they did make it through our "party" system to be nominated to be an MP (member of parliament)
Bet our Chief Whip (nominee who tries to twist arms and get MP's to vote a certain way) was a bit miffed
Anyways if history is anything to go by, when this happens in the UK their political life is almost guarenteed over, If not their aspirations to go higher hmm well they STOP and they never advance
Def
-
I am very happy about "babs" vote. it vindicates everything I have ever said about her and may finally expose her to the voters.
lazs
-
Lol, so whats the meaning of voting, if you arent supposed to vote what you want?
-
Tuomio,...the votes in the House of Representatives are from our representatives who are supposed to vote how the people they are representing feel, not how they personally feel.
Now, if her constituents do indeed feel that way, then we should keep our traps shut. She did her job, but if her vote was personally driven and not representative of her consituents, then she should be kicked out of office.
[ 09-15-2001: Message edited by: Skuzzy ]
-
Defiance - so you want a system whereby everyone agrees with everyone else and unanimity is the norm rather than the exception?
I want people to disagree publically and via their official elected roles. Especially when its against the run of the mill.
I believe it is called 'Freedom of Speech'.
-
Skuzzy, so you know that 100% of people feel like you in this issue? Maybe she's just representing that little minority who feels differently?
-
Maybe you just dont have a clue on to how people are feeling in this country. Possible, TV and journalists can not convey the depth of it.
-
What JimBear said and times that by 2 if your watching the Communist New Network to get US news. Its almost as bad as watching the Iraqi national channel.
-
i couldnt find her email what was it im gonna notify the 693 others on my mail list many from the san fran oakland area where my cousins live nad i have been many times. Oh and yes most of them if not all of them can be guranteed to send her a message.
-
Originally posted by Tuomio:
Skuzzy, so you know that 100% of people feel like you in this issue? Maybe she's just representing that little minority who feels differently?
Never said 100% agree on this. Our representatives are relied upon to vote on what the majority of thier constituents think.
If we had to wait on 100% agreement for anything we would still be using horses for transporation, if that.
I was not flaming you anyways or even looking to cause any problems. I saw you were from overseas and thought added insight into our political system was in order due to what you stated before. Simple as that.
-
Originally posted by Hobodog:
i couldnt find her email what was it im gonna notify the 693 others on my mail list many from the san fran oakland area where my cousins live nad i have been many times. Oh and yes most of them if not all of them can be guranteed to send her a message.
you need to use this link; http://www.house.gov/writerep/ (http://www.house.gov/writerep/)
her zip is:
94612
state:
CA
they are to smart (read chick toejam) to publish their email address to the masses that elect them...
"Where can I find a list of public e-mail addresses for Members of Congress? -– There is no central listing of Member office public e-mail addresses. Each Member of Congress establishes their office’s policy related to the processing and management of e-mail. Generally, if a Member has a public e-mail address, it can be found on the Member’s web site. Some offices choose to provide a link back to the Write Your Representative service to provide a means for their constituent’s to communicate via the Internet. In other cases, the office may list a public e-mail address or provide a form directly on the Member's web site. The U.S. House of Representatives does not currently provide a listing of public e-mail addresses for the elected Representatives. "
[ 09-15-2001: Message edited by: Eagler ]
-
Dowding
No i don't expect all to have the same voice
Look at the guy who i am on about
Then you may get my drift
My feeling to this MP is personally i won't even bother to type what i feel and have to edit some words
But hey you may have a different feeling to him and love him and his barmy statements
And i respect what your opinion is and assume you do with mine
Def
-
On the contrary I disagree with the guy in the most strongest of terms.
But I respect his right to voice those opinions, in the same way I respect yours.
-
But Skuzzy,
During the impeachment 76% of the people polled said the president shouldn't be impeached for blowjobs... Did that stop the Republicans? They said they were standing on principal that they didn't need polling to follow their conciseness.
A few years ago, president Clinton did a poll to see how people felt about bailing out Mexico. 86% said not to do it. He had more information than the average citizen did. Turns out Mexico paid us back in full plus interest.
What is this vote on anyway? To give the president authority to use force? Because he already has that no need to vote. Are they voting to declare war? On who exactly, you can't declare war on an adjective. That's like the war on drugs. Sort of this fuzzy dark secretive war that we see the largest prison population in the world, you can now be arrested for talking back to a cop, you can have your front door bashed in without a warrant.
Ah naw I'd have to have a lot more information before handing a blank check to Karl Rove and Dick Cheney.
And about the Congresswoman from Calif having a difference of opinion, how many Republicans voted to support president Clinton during Allied Force?
10B
-
10bears, I trust clintoons polls as much as I trust bin ladins objectivity towards America.
Tuomio's posts indicate he is about the same as the "free press" of either Iraq, Iran or Afghanistan. Clueless about what America really is.
Mav
-
10bears
It was a vote to allow the country to use force against the terrorists, plan and simple.
What does this dumb arse what, to talk to them? It was plan and simple, an attention getter for her political career or maybe she dozed off during the voting and then pressed the wrong button..stop playing politics already, this thing is bigger than Republican vs Democrat. You noticed I didn't mention her political party eh?
-
A Congress woman voted against war with the Japanese in 1941 too.
-
Originally posted by 10Bears:
But Skuzzy,
During the impeachment 76% of the people polled said the president shouldn't be impeached for blowjobs... Did that stop the Republicans?
But 10Bears, the republicans tried to impeach Clintn not for the BJ but for lying under oath in the Court of Law - wich is a criminal offence. It does not matter what he was lying about.
He could have taken teh 5th and kept his mouth shut (which would have been admission of guilt in the eyes of all people).
He could have admitted it and be forgiven by most people (myself included).
He chose to commit a crime by lying.
There is such thing as Law in that country and President is supposed to protect it, not violate it.
I can't believe that you are still ignorant what the impeachment was about...
miko
-
Geez,..did I miss sometihng? 76% of the people polled said "No" to an impeachment. The President was not impeached, if I recall,...sound like just what I said. The people spoke, the majority ruled.
But a criminal offense is out of the hands of the people. If falls to our justice system to handle that.
All I can say is, if your representative in the House did not vote the way you felt they should have voted, and you did not write to your representative to express how they should vote, then you have zero say in the outcome.
Our representatives are not mind readers, and they will act on responses from thier constituents. Why? Because they would like to get re-elected, that is why.
Anyway, all my post was attemtping to do was impart some information to a person that is not from our country about how things are supposed to work here.
People outside the United States have no real reason to know the exact in's and out's of our system. I was just trying to help someone understand a bit more about how our system works.
Nothing more or less. No hidden agendas, no hidden meanings.
-
The President was not impeached, if I recall,...sound like just what I said. The people spoke, the majority ruled.
Uh.....yes....he WAS impeached. Impeachment is a trial of sorts to see if the president should be fired. In this case the trial went easy on Clinton and he kept his job.
Nixon was almost impeached, but he resigned before it got to that point. He knew he had been caught so he did the right thing and left on his own.
-
As far as politics go I read em all. Bartcop, the Freepers, Buzzflash etc.. The reason I don’t opine
on this board very often is I know most of you are conservative to VERY conservative. And I
kinda like getting check 6 calls when I fly your wing. Another reason is to be fair, you have to
check back into this board several times a day to reply to the replies which is very time consuming.
I can't believe that you are still ignorant what the impeachment was about...
miko
Miko, read the Paula Jones transcript. The fact it took them 35 minutes to ask
the first question about Paula should’ve risen a red flag.
Geez,..did I miss sometihng? 76% of the people polled said "No" to an impeachment. The President was not impeached, if I recall
Now Skuzzy, I know you one collage boy... I know you know he was impeached then acquitted.
Nixon was almost impeached, but he resigned before it got to that point. He knew he had been caught so he did the right thing and left on his own.
Lt Hans, well maybe but history records he was asked to resign by Republican Senators who told him he didn’t have the votes.
Look,... I’ll be happy to debate Impeachment sometime with you but I’m not the
hit and run type... that means sitting at the computer all day and hitting the reset button. I’d like to put impeachment discussion on a shelf right now. This weeks events are a trillion times more serious. Was using that analogy to show you politicians don’t always use polling data to make their decisions. If they did it would be mob rule.
10B
-
I heard her on NPR last night; she's worried about rushing too quickly ahead and giving the President a blank check (not literally) to do whatever he deems necessary, blah blah blah.
Fortunately we do live in a free country and she can cast any vote she chooses and had the balls (not literally) to do so.
Hopefully the people that elected her will not have a sudden short term memory loss when she comes up for election again.
-
Ok, so voting is all about agreeing with eachothers?
THATS Iraq, i bet theres lots of others who feel differently, but because majority wants to play with guns, they cant vote what they want.
I heard many interviews from NY streets, that the people who are responsible must be bring to justice, but they dont support unnecessary use of force.
Otherwise you break your own laws. When you break the laws intentionally, you become criminal.
You must declare war before you can start killing innocent people (eventually).
Now theres the problem, can you declare war against Bin Laden and bomb the country he's living in? You have to declare war against Afghanistan if you want to bomb them legally and that will raise other difficulties.
Thats exactly why they are so anxious of bombing without war declaration on objective things, so they wouldnt have to follow the law. Those laws are set up with very good reasons, so you should first argue those reasons before breaking them. This is the impression ive got from the overseas fuzz. I watch the same newscasts and news page that you do.
War on drugs, war on terrorists..Whats the difference? I tell you, war on drugs is so you can shoot your own people at will, war on terrorists is that you can shoot alien people at will. Im not offending, just my opinion (amazinhunk).
-
President Bush and others in the government have already stated "We're at War" -- but so far there has been no formal declaration.
If all the rhetoric is true and the United States will go after the people who did this and the countries that harbor them then it would not suprise me if we actually declared war on Afghanistan (and probably a few other countries)
-
10 bears... depending on how you asked the question and at what point in time you asked it... for instance, If you asked.... "should the president be impeached for lying under oath to the people of the United states for reasons purely to get out of a sex scandal" right after he had been exosed for being a liar... u might have gotten a different answer/number.... Who cares? The people will decide about "babs the red". They just have a whole lot more information now.... well, actually they allways knew IMO but they just got their face rubbed in it and can't hide from it now.
turimo.... I don't say take ol "babs the red" out and shoot her or even throw her out of office... I have listened to her claim to be one thing and then go and vote another way for years. I don't believe anyone would have voted for her if she had espoused these views during her election. I am very pleased that she is expossed is all. A lot of U.S. politicians on both sides of the fence claim to be "moderate" during election and then become "radical" when they vote or act in our behalf....
lazs