Posted: August 10, 2007 in Uncategorized

I don’t put that much faith in statistics really. But two news items this am caught my eye because I used to order DOJ publications that dealt with sort of thing because I was curious.
The first deals with murder statistics and breaks the information down by race. It reiterates what many have been saying for years. Black on black crime is a real problem. I don’t give a rat’s ass what Jackson, Sharpton, Lowry, etc say either. Pumping more money in to inner city (ie urban) areas has not solved the frickin’ problem. Until the black community addresses the ills within itself, there will not be any change in this sad situation. Other races are not the problem any more. We’ve had 50+ years of forced busing, handout programs, special set asides for blacks and for what?

This is something that gives me hope. I think people are starting to get it. The media is not to be trusted. If it weren’t for the internet and talk radio to a lesser extent in my opinion this would not be the case. What’s interesting here is although I agree journalists shouldn’t ‘care’ about their subjects, just report the info, it’s they way they twist the information that is the problem and perhaps shows a lack of care–not so much for the subjects but for the way they present and handle vital information. I guess in any other profession this would be a dereliction of duty but to the everyday journalist, manipulating information for socialist goals is just another day at the office.

Which brings me to this article. I love it when a plan backfires. But what’s so ridiculous about this situation is it’s happened in other municipalities and because of the high concentration of libtards, it gets a pass and become a legitimate movement. Bush has not committed an impeachable offense. So to all these fucktards that put forth these resolutions, you are wasting valuable time you could be spending on…oh say….important community issues and such. I think the big thing is Clinton WAS impeached. He did commit an impeachable crime and from now on KozKooks and their mymidons will go after any Republican leader in a childish attempt to diffuse the crime.

Impeachable offenses
Barking moonbats across the country constantly beat the drum that Bush should be impeached. But for what? There is no evidence that Bush has committed treason. He has not sold technology to our enemies (Clinton, Gore, and China). He has not given aid and comfort to our enemies. No evidence of a treasonable offence. What about the ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ part of the Constitution. Is there any evidence Bush has committed any crime at all. Has he acted outside the guidelines of the Constitution or any current laws in the conduct of his office? So that leaves us to the current ideas that the House uses as a guideline for prosecuting a public official under the vague high crimes and misdemeanors phrase. Basically it’s anything the current House deems it to be at the time. Well OK…but that still doesn’t answer the question: What has Bush, or Cheney for that matter, done that would be a ‘high crime and misdemeanor’? Libtards would say it’s that he lied about Iraq and weapons of mass distruction. A charge that if true would certainly fall under the aforementioned test. He and his administration officials mislead the public and Congress.

Maybe they are basing the lie allegation on this statement:
Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations.

Or maybe it was this:
“If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.”

Or this:
“Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime … He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation … And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction … So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real…”

I could go on but you get the idea. Did Saddam have WMDs? Probably. But he had plenty of time to bury or get the crap out of the country. Plenty of things have been found too. Tons of insecticides for crops in a country that doesn’t farm much for instance. So back to what I was saying. All the above statements basically say the same thing. Saddamn had WMDs. The fact that whatever has been found didn’t meet the media’s definition of WMD still doesn’t make what was said impeachable. Besides for someone to be convicted for lying, they have to know at the time they make the statement that it was a lie. There’s no evidence of that either. I guess it’s asking too much for the good people of Telluride, Chapel Hill, SanFran and whoever else to do a little research. It’s just more hip to continually berate our leaders and undermine this country’s ability to defend itself from our enemies. Unfortunately this guy may be right. And I said it in first in 2002.

Two truths come to mind here. Intelligence can be faulty. And enemies, when given enough time, can get rid of contraband. We many never really know what Saddam had or the true extent of his programs or intentions. The inept UN and El Baradei saw to that. The whole problem with all this is many Americans want microwave results and anything that causes them some type of psychological pain as when prices for goods and services go up, they lash out. They try to find someone to blame because they are so deluded with their thoughts of the past. Impeachment proposals are wastes of energy. Which is one reason Congress hasn’t acted on anything. Don’t you think for one minute that if Bush or Cheney had acted against the public trust Pelosi and Reid wouldn’t be sprinting to file papers? They probably get on their knees at night as they pray to Satan that something will surface. Another reason they aren’t going to pursue this? Because they had the same information as Bush and agreed to this action. If Bush is guilty, then so are they.

OH…and the above statements? They weren’t uttered by Bush or Cheney at all. They were (in order) Hillary Clinton (Feb. 5, 2003) ,Bill Clinton (Feb. 4, 1998), and John Kerry (Jan 23, 2003).


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s