“BortaS bIr jablu’DI’, reH QaQqu’ nay’.”
-Klingon proverb

Tim Curry, national affairs writer at MSNBC, wrote a piece entitled “What would a Democratic majority do in 2007? If minority wins November elections, expect investigations and subpoenas” dated May 11, 2006. The article quotes Rep. Henry Waxman ( D, California), who at the time was the ranking minority member on the Government Reform Committee:

I would pursue a much more vigorous set of investigations (than Republicans have)... I'd certainly consider a high priority to investigate abuse of prisoners, manipulation of intelligence that has gotten us into Iraq, I'd want to know about waste of taxpayers' money by private contractors, whether it's in reconstruction of Iraq, or work in the Louisiana-Mississippi Gulf region or for homeland security.

Senator Waxman will probably chair the Government Reform Committee this coming January. Watch for a flurry of subpoenas indicting most of the Bush Cabinet.

Then House minority leader Nancy Pelosi (D, California) told NBC's Tim Russert:

Investigation is the requirement of Congress. It's about checks and balances.

That's funny. I always thought the primary role of Congress was to legislate, not investigate. Not so, according to the LA Times:

A primary role of Congress is to oversee the president through hearings, debates and investigations. Indeed, our entire political system is premised on the idea that the executive and legislative branches will clash.

The LA Times and the rest of the MSM are setting the stage for investigations that will probably lead to impeachment hearings.

In 1993-94, when both houses of Congress and the presidency were controlled by the Democrats, the House Government Operations Committee held 135 oversight or investigative hearings. In 2004-2005, under unified Republican government, the panel (renamed the Government Reform Committee) held just 37.

The insinuation being that fewer investigative hearings by Republicans in 2004-2005 must mean that Congress "rolled over" for Bush. It could not possibly mean that Republicans in 1993-94 simply had more to investigate.

Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D., Ohio) will be head of the subcommittee investigating national security. This is what Kucinich has to say back on May 11:

We're in a war we didn’t have to be in. There needs to be accountability about the use of executive power. People need the truth.

Well, if we're in a war we didn't need to be in, that must mean that Bush lied, right?

Bush lied, people died!
Bush lied, people died!

Remember Kucinich? Allow me to jog your memory a bit:

As Mayor of Cleveland, oversaw the default of the City of Cleveland - the first major city to default since the Great Depression.
Selected as one of the 10 Worst Mayors in US History
Originally a pro-life Catholic, but flip-flopped on abortion and promised to uphold a woman’s right to partial-birth, late-term abortion
Leader of the socialist “Progressive Caucus”, a group that advocates bigger government and a new world order with huge welfare and "social programs"
Proposed a Department of Peace that would address issues like “maldistribution of the wealth”
Claimed that any war with Iraq would be fought to control that nation's oil; supported the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 under President Clinton but opposed the current action in Iraq
Introduced a bill banning Space Weapons that includes prohibiting the use of “psychotronic” devices “directed at individual persons or targeted populations for the purpose of ...mood management or mind control”
Received an "F" rating from the tax watchdog organization, the National Taxpayers Union, for his failure to work to reduce or control the federal government’s burden on taxpayers

(Sources: Wikipedia, Dennis Kucinich's Skeleton Closet, Dennis Kucinich for President? Yeah, right!)

Does Kucinich sound like a reasonable, moderate guy to you? Hardly! Kucinich has more in common with Fidel Castro than most Democrats. Kucinich is a bonafide nutcase, and he will be the Democrat's junk yard dog this coming January. The MSM will just adore him.

On November 10, 2006, an unnamed MSM reporter asked Senator Harry Reid, "Do you have an appetite for several investigations in the conduct of this administration as it relates to the Iraq war and intelligence, Halliburton, and Katrina?"

Reid said:

I believe that the first order of business when we reorganize after the first of the year is congressional oversight. Let's find out what's going on with the war in Iraq, the different large federal agencies that we have. There simply has been no oversight in recent years. I don't want to frighten anyone about investigations. Congressional oversight is not a negative. It's not a negative term. People talk about investigations. There will be times, on rare occasions, when subpoenas will have to be offered, but rarely. If Congress does its job, and does congressional oversight as it's been done more than 200 years, it's good for everyone.

Good for everyone except Bush and anyone even remotely associated with him. Make no mistake: The Democrats will not stop "investigating" until President Bush goes down in flames. It won't be enough to simply embarrass Bush. His entire legacy must be ripped to shreds. That's what Democrats do ever since Wild Bill showed them the way.

Ah, revenge is SO sweet! The Democrat agenda begins to unfold, and item Numero Uno on the agenda is:

Destroy Bush.

Get ready, America. It's payback time.

Posted by Chris Rowan at November 11, 2006 11:18 AM
Comment #194624

Chris: If the republicans had done their job in Congress (oversight), the democrats would probably not have the opportunity to DESTROY BUSH.

It’s time to get on with the BARBECUE.

Posted by: jlw at November 11, 2006 2:19 PM
Comment #194627

Re: Dennis Kucinich, I have a good story. I live in Portland, Or and in late ‘04 I was on my way to a John Kerry rally in Pioneer Square. I swung by the library to return some books (Ya, I know, I guess that makes me a liberal). Anyway, Kucinich was standing on the steps, he gave us a smile, turned, walk into the library and into a meeting room. We followed him in and it turned out to be a meeting about universal health care in Oregon. I an my partner received name tags and ended up sitting right next to Mr. Kucinich and became deeply involved in a discussion about the state of and accessibility to health care in Oregon. I found Mr. Kucinich to be thoughtful, accessible, extremely intelligent and able to articulate his point of view without the use of note cards. When I think about someone like him, for years being on the edge of power and then someone at the center of power like bush (who clearly needs someone to tell him which end is up when he gets out of bed), it makes me very sad. We have wasted so much time. The least that can be done is to understand how it all happened.

Posted by: charles Ross at November 11, 2006 2:22 PM
Comment #194630

“Senator Waxman will probably chair the Government Reform Committee this coming January. Watch for a flurry of subpoenas indicting most of the Bush Cabinet.”

I’m so pleased that Waxman will be in charge of this committee. And I’m very glad were going to:

investigate abuse of prisoners, manipulation of intelligence that has gotten us into Iraq, I’d want to know about waste of taxpayers’ money by private contractors, whether it’s in reconstruction of Iraq, or work in the Louisiana-Mississippi Gulf region or for homeland security.

The thing that has me puzzled is when did Republicans become so complacent about the wasting and theft of our taxdollars?

“The insinuation being that fewer investigative hearings by Republicans in 2004-2005 must mean that Congress “rolled over” for Bush.”

Come now, it’s very obvious that they did “roll over” for Bush.

“Good for everyone except Bush and anyone even remotely associated with him. Make no mistake: The Democrats will not stop “investigating” until President Bush goes down in flames.”

Yeah, well, where there is smoke, there might well be a fire. Why are you afraid of investigations? If everything is above board, you have nothing to worry about, right? And if things have not been above board, why wouldn’t you want to know?

“It won’t be enough to simply embarrass Bush.”

I think you’re over-reacting. No one could possibly embarrass Bush more than his own actions, inactions, displays of incompetence and cronyism, and his many obvious failures have.

“His entire legacy must be ripped to shreds.”

What legacy are you talking about?

“That’s what Democrats do ever since Wild Bill showed them the way.”

Showed us the way? Huh? It was the GOP who ripped Clinton to shreds and impeached him because of a blowjob.

“Ah, revenge is SO sweet! The Democrat agenda begins to unfold, and item Numero Uno on the agenda is:

Destroy Bush.”

Nah. It’s just garden variety checks and balances. I know it’s been awhile for your party, and you’ve forgotten what that is like, but it’s all really very necessary and important for the health and well-being of both our government and our country.

“Get ready, America. It’s payback time.”

Accountability is a bitch?

Posted by: Adrienne at November 11, 2006 2:37 PM
Comment #194638

Hmm. This post smacks of a Right-wing hysteria Jack is always accusing the Left of.

I’m with Adrienne on this one, Chris. Your regular garden-variety checks and balances after six years of having their own way must strike Republicans as the end of the world. It won’t be. Unless George and Dick want it to be, of course.

And lay off Kucinich. He’s no more a ‘whack job’ than Delay, Roberts, Santorum, Duke Cunningham, Foley, Miller, Allen— at least he has integrity, and an intellect to go with it. You may not like his positions on things, but he is not short on intelligence.

The anti-intellectual strain the Far Right is so proud of really does have it’s effect. To wit: George W. Bush. His lack of curiosity, his pedestrian mind and mediocre morality isn’t exactly serving the country at this point, is it?

Posted by: Tim Crow at November 11, 2006 3:59 PM
Comment #194639

1)If you are to use Klingon proverbs, please translate, as for most of us, its only a second language.

2)Democrats were elected to reform things. How does one determine what to reform?

3)The Congress can subpeona, but not indict. Only if they yield information of a crime will indictments result. In that case, it will not be Congress’s fault this happened.

4)Legislation is the main role of congress, but one of its congressional duties is oversight of the executive branch.

5)Kucinich’s not as bad as you portray him.

The real story of the default, according to Wikipedia relates to an energy scheme where a company called CEI was trying to force the sale of Cleveland’s Municipal Light to them. The people holding the loans on Cleveland, which the city defaulted on, also held CEI stock, which constituted a conflict of interest on their part. The whole deal was crooked in a way eerily reminiscent of the whole Enron mess. If you want somebody willing to go the distance to oppose corruption, he might be your guy.

As for any kookiness, please be aware that you’ve linked to a site that has links to list of 30 people killed or disappeared by the Clintons.

7)Ultimately, we’re not dealing with an administration here going down in flames. We’re dealing with a smoking hulk that’s already crashed. Democrats just want to take a look at the wreckage, see how much damage is done.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at November 11, 2006 4:06 PM
Comment #194643

“Individuals whould be accountable for (their) actions.” GW Bush while campaigning for gov of Texass.

“Victory means exit strategy, and it’s importnat for the president to explain to us what the exit strategu IS.” GW Bush 4/99

“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to do he bidding of the leaders. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works that way in any country.” Hermann Goering……and Bush leaned that at his granpappy’s knee….one who supported the Nazi movement.

and, in #194639,Stephen Daugherty has more facts than most repugNUTs.

Posted by: qat at November 11, 2006 5:04 PM
Comment #194645


I copied the Klingon proverb from Wikipedia. I thought it would be a little humorous. Apparently not. Also thought most people would be able to use context clues to glean what it meant (title of article “Payback” and Klingon proverb in close proximity…Maybe fewer people watched “The Wrath of Khan” than I thought).

Touche’ on the “second language” quip. I posted a Klingon quote, so I must be a Trekkie. I’ll admit to watching the series as a kid, but that was a long time ago. I’m actually quite normal.

Or not. Depends on your point of view. I’ve been married to my college sweetheart for over 25 years and have two wonderful children who are neither gay nor anorexic. All of us have jobs, except for my daughter who still attends high school. I contribute to a Conservative blog, but I’m over 40. Most bloggers are younger than me. I guess I could be considered abnormal, too.

You know, it sure is strange. I don’t hold liberals or liberalism in high regard, but I don’t think I’ve ever directed a derogatory comment at any specific individual here. Maybe I have. If so, I apologize.

So, you think Kucinich isn’t as bad as I make him out to be? How about this:

It’s not every day a politician calls for a 100-percent tax rate on national TV. Even the most liberal-friendly of journalists would be inclined to question such a punitive idea. But when former presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich called for such a tax on the “windfall profits” of oil on the July 28 “Early Show,” CBS’s Hannah Storm didn’t even bat an eyelash.

Opening an interview segment with the liberal Rep. Kucinich (D-Ohio) and the libertarian Cato Institute’s Jerry Taylor on the so-called windfall profits tax, Storm asked Kucinich how such a tax would “translate to consumers and help the people who are paying at the pump.”

The former Cleveland mayor replied that “when you start imposing some discipline, a 100-percent tax on excess profits, then the oil companies aren’t going to be making $1,300 a second like ExxonMobil is.”

Yes, he said 100 percent. Rather than pressing Kucinich on the 100 percent figure or how he expected it to lower the price of gasoline, Storm asked Taylor for his rebuttal.

Yet when Taylor finished explaining how the Congressional Research Service found that a similar tax in place in the 1980s actually raised prices, Storm pushed Taylor with a talking point that echoed Kucinich’s rhetoric.

(Source Business and Media Institute, 7/28/2006

Maybe Kucinich was just having a bad day. And it is just one article. But I think you’d agree that, at the very least, Kucinich’s views are far left of the majority of Americans. Kucinich is not a centrist or a moderate.

But I say, Go for it! Get Kucinich out there in front of the cameras and let him talk. Sandwich him in between Dean and Kerry and let them try to out-nutcase each other. Let the American people see what liberalism is all about.

Posted by: Chris at November 11, 2006 5:30 PM
Comment #194646

Looks like GOP sour grapes to me.

Get over it, Americans have spoken. Pelosi is the new boss.

Posted by: Boomer at November 11, 2006 5:42 PM
Comment #194649

First, Kucinich will never be the sole person in charge. Eccentricities can be balanced out by others, and if he really becomes an embarrassment, Democrats will throw him under the bus.

Second, I think this is a bit of cherry-picking on your part. Kucinich comrades will be the exception, not the rule. As for Dean and Kerry? Kerry, unlike most Republicans, had the good sense to get scarce pretty soon after his comments became a liability. As for Dean?

Well, Dean just lead the Fifty State strategy in the last election, so if he was selling crazy, America was buying it.

As for the Klingon? Well, I think you can communicate the joke better by giving the translation. I watched Star Trek a bit too when I was younger, but I found its perfection in the future vision a bit bland.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at November 11, 2006 6:22 PM
Comment #194650

What Congress and the voters need to do is to get on with adequately addressing the Nation’s pressing problems.


And, if politicians refuse to do so, then voters need to (next time) vote out ALL irresponsible incubment politicians, regardless of party.

So far, what progress has been made?

Let’s keep score.

Check off each item as it is finally, adequately addressed.


Let’s see how much (if any) of that is adequately addressed between now and 2008.

Posted by: d.a.n at November 11, 2006 6:25 PM
Comment #194651

Chris, do you want some cheese with that whine?

In sports, you’d be what’s known as a ‘homer’. What I love about posts like this is that it tells us much more about what YOU’D do in this situation than anything else… in otherwords, your prognostication is more a projection of what you would do if the situation was reversed than what will happen.

We know there will be investigations, but to attribute them to some sort of vendetta is just an application of your way of thinking, not the Democrats. There are legitimate reasons for investigations… lying to Congress, breaking the law by spying on American citizens and warrantless wire tapping, abuses of prisoners and violating our Geneva convention agreements, massive fraud, waste, and theft in the governments use of ‘private contractors’… geez, now that I think of it, the list is very long. All or any of these investigations would be a hundred times more in the interest of the welfare of the American people than the debacle and witch-hunt of a popular president for nonexistant financial shenanegans and ten year hunt for his personal (though legal) failings.

What ever investigations take place, the validity and legitimacy of them will be judged by the American population.

Your party still doesn’t get it. If BushCo has done nothing wrong, they don’t have anything to worry about, right?

Posted by: LibRick at November 11, 2006 6:45 PM
Comment #194657

Trying to impeach Bush will hurt the country and the Dems while helping Bush and Republicans.

I doubt that the Dems even have the votes in the House to impeach. They certainly do not have the votes in the Senate to sustain it.

The Dems have been successful up to now by NOT giving a target. They stayed away from real policy and snipped at Bush. If they impeach, the break cover. It will be a competition, a race. You think people will side with Dems. Remember how well Clinton survived. A president, any president, has lots of ways to get back.

Re Bush, you will recall that Bush spanked Dems in 2002 and 2004. The reason he did not this time is that Dems layed back in the weeds.

So from the partisan viewpoint, I would say bring it on. As an American, it will hurt our country, so I say do not.

BTW - why is it that Dems did not push the wiretapping or the financial records stuff in the election? Because they read the same polls I do. Most Americans are much closer to the president’s position on this. From the nasty politics point of view, all you need is ONE terror attack in the U.S. that could have been prevented by a wiretap and the game is over.

Posted by: Jack at November 11, 2006 8:30 PM
Comment #194662

Chris Rowan,

“100% taxation on excess profits”

What are excess profits? I think most people would define them as gouging. So you are pro-gouging? I guess you don’t believe in the 100% taxation of illegal drug profits, raceterring, etc., either?

Since you’ve raised your children to be neither gay nor anorexic, I presume you have magical powers to prevent natural behavioral extrema and mental illness. I will warn you that high school is not “raised” and many times words can come back to bite you. Making fun of others who have to deal with medical and social issues makes me wonder exactly how attuned you are to your children. My guess is not nearly as well as you think.

I’ll close with an English proverb: “Pride cometh before a fall.”

Posted by: gergle at November 11, 2006 9:21 PM
Comment #194912


“Trying to impeach Bush will hurt the country and the Dems while helping Bush and Republicans.”

I’ve been waiting for some time to whole-heatedly agree with you again. I tried to analize it from all sides to find fault, but I’m stuck admitting that I completely agree. I’m no Bush fan, and I’d like nothing more than to oust him right out of the white house. But right now cool heads need to prevail.

Posted by: Kevin23 at November 13, 2006 7:51 PM
Comment #194941

QAT,, dispense with the insults toward our visitors with words like RePUGnuts, or lose your privilege to comment here.

Posted by: Watchblog Managing Editor at November 13, 2006 11:58 PM
Comment #194942

Subpoenas and hearings of a prophylactic nature will be welcomed by the public. Subpoenas and hearings designed for payback, may not be, depending on the allegations and discoveries made.

The American public does not tolerate one set of laws for them and another set which exempts those in power. The public will tolerate and accept punitive hearings where clear criminal activity has taken place.

Let’s begin with and ethics investigation of William Jefferson and Bush’s breach of the FISA act. Those both appear to hold the potential for clear violations of the law.

If Bush is found guilty, a Censure would be appropriate, as it would not grind government and progress to a halt. Impeachment serves no benefit to the country, in terms of time and tax dollars lost only to instate Dick Cheney as President, followed by his impeachment proceedings, which if successful, would not appeal the public’s sense of the appropriate manner for the opposition party to achieve the Presidency.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 14, 2006 12:06 AM
Post a comment