How many times have we predicted GWB's* downfall at DU?

- It occured to me as I was visiting the numerous 'he's going down in flames' threads that we've been here before. Many of us thought that Bush* ignoring the August 2001 intelligence briefing about an impending attack would get his ass kicked out of DC. As you may remember...the briefing talked specifically about hijacked planes and a terrorist attack on American soil. We would expect a real president to have at least increased security at airports since the warning specifically referred to hijackings.

- But then war happened...and we were forced to 'move on' to other things. The Bushies have committed dozens of unethical and criminal acts that would have automatically brought investigations and hearings for any other president*.

- Widespread election fraud.

- Bush*/Cheney obstruction of justice in demanding a limited (internal) investigation into 9-11.

- Hiding the Reagan/Bush presidential papers.

- The Enron coverup.

- Cheney hiding the Enron national energy policy documents.

- Shadow government.

- Billions of dollars in no-bid contracts to Halliburton and other Friends of Bush.

- The list goes on and on. But the point is that every time we believe we have Bush* on the ropes...the usual suspects appear to trip his opposition and bail him out. Will it be different this time with the transparent lies about WMD? Please keep in mind that at least two things need to happen before Bush* is finally exposed as the liar behind the curtain: The free press needs to tell the whole, unbiased truth and the loyal opposition must show up to make a case against him.

Absolutely! That's the main problem, IMO.

You are going to be wrong. You may be right about this, and the next one, and the next one after that. But one time, just one time, you're going to be wrong. That's the nice part. You only need to be wrong once, Q.

In the meantime, I'll be over here throwing haymakers as best I can. I've forgotten what the word 'quit' means.

...and I hope we can all help kick Bush's* ass...and that THIS is the one that brings him down.

- But...the pattern is getting pretty obvious and predictable. We're witnessing a series of coverups that 'should have been' exposed by now in a rational world.

- Give em hell. Or as the Pretender in Chief would say: bring em on!

we'd all be pretty damned bored. :)

'should have been' exposed by now in a rational world." Funny how rationality has gone out the window.

Amen to that, brother. And as a lifelong Red Sox fan, I'm well versed in staying the course and never giving up. We'll see this through and we'll dance naked in the streets ... well, maybe not naked. But we'll dance

Sue

Something really feels different about this one. We shall see.

- Bush* has escaped responsibility his entire life. Some one or some thing HAS TO stop this insane thug from doing any more harm.

now that there's a major breakthrough, you're predicting failure?

Are you just trying to bum us out?

...and please don't suggest such a thing.

- What I DID say is that the investigations will never get anywhere as long as the free press continues to cover for the Bushies. The reason is obvious: there aren't enough pissed off Dems (yet) to keep the issue on the front burner. More importantly...more Republicans will have to speak up. The chances of that happening don't look good because the party is controlled by 'do anything to stay in power' Neocons.

- The good news is that this is an issue that won't go away for Bush* as long as Americans are dying while he's lying. We need to keep the heat turned up while we connect all the dots...starting with 9-11.

recall that there HAVE been at least a half-dozen times already where DU began to whoop it up, thinking that the day of reckoning had finally come -- only to see it slip away into the ether, time after time.

It would be pretty naive now, to be confident that the same thing won't happen again.

Of course, we all (Q, you, me & everyone else) hope this time will be different. Still, it's only reasonable to bear in mind what has happened the other times. That's all Q was saying.

the daily call to arms, all the anger at the timidity.

Then, on a day when all the Dems are calling Bush a liar, a sudden loss of heart?

you know what I mean by not fitting?

(although I think I give him his topics)

I certainly hope Bush goes down here and now, but it will only happen if the Dems stand up and say "LIAR!"

with each possibility that the *Chickenhawkvampirevultures will roast.
With each atrocity we raise the noise level as our compatriots awaken from their drug-induced sleep.

As much as I see cynicism as a negative energy, it's positive side is that those overcome by it have opened their eyes, checked it and sit head in hand, muttering and mumbling on their crumbling Rock of Gibraltar, "OMFG..." However the rock IS crumbling. Folks will stand up or be taken down with it. I root for the collective self-preservation instinct. We take control of our destiny or a whole hell of a lot of a farkin' lot of us will DIE NASSY, FUNKY, UGLY DEATHS, starved, poisoned or blown to bloody bits by an insane, inane, clueless *cabal. Don't let them fool you into thinking those brown people or Muslims or Jews or French or complaining military people are the problem... If you are not in their *inner circle, YOU are also in the crosshairs of this out of control *MIC. Wake up. Stand up. Quick. Pretty please with all good things on top?

I swear, I'll never understand those who get off on Hollywood horror flicks. The REALITY, passing by on its daily parade, is absolutely gripping, mind-boggling, duck and cover, bass-ackward and massively DESTRUCTIVE and stupid. :shrug:

Hello, Alice? Can I make a reservation?

This is NOT the life I ordered. ;-)

Hallo, liebe DU.de Leserinnen und Leser! *Chickenhawkvampirevultures. Als Artikel.... die (pl)...??? Nay, lieber DAS. Herr Duden, sind Sie zu Hause? Tee-hee-hee! Hab' ich das Konzept großartig "eingedenglisched" oder bin ich total ausgeflippt? :think:

I've always thought so , and will continue to believe so .

In all those things you listed ...None of them killed our
young people in the military . This "big lie" killed
American people needlessly . IMHO that is different . The media
tone apears to be different . This has really put bush on the
defensive , and hopefully off balance with all these people who
are turning out to be not the best "team players" by disclosing
the truth . Rove has been and will continue to throw things up
in the hopes it distracts the media and American People once
again . So far all I've seen for approx. 5 days is a growing
discontent in the media coverage of this .

I as always will "never doubt that a small group of concerned
citizens can change the world "

is that what he/she says is rarely noticed later if wrong. I know you won't take offense Q if I say I hope your skepticism about Bush's downfall is rarely noticed later. :)

this time feels a little different. There seem to be a set of things converging which are bad news for Bush:

* The war -- all by itself, it's not going well. Add the flight jock stunt, the "Bring 'em on" comment, and pissed off wives and mothers at places like Fort Stewart, and add it all up. All by itself, the war is becoming something of an issue. Oh yes, the no WMD.

* LYING about WMD. There have been a passle of lies, and they're all out there. For some reason the Niger thing has legs. Well, the reason is that people (CIA and others like Ambassador Wilson) are leaking and speaking up. If you dont have the intel community on your side, if in fact they're out gunning for you, you're in trouble.

* The 9-11 Commission, even with his own hand-picked man, is pissed with him. It was the top rated news story on Yahoo. That surprises and pleases me.

* The economy is going nowhere.

* There are some Dem Presidential candidates who are eager to gain a little traction against Bush. They seem to be revving up the rest of them ever so slightly.

* Not yet well-broken (and it's way early), but I think it's reasonable to expect that the voting machines stories will tarnish Repugs in general, and if Bush is weakened (and he is becoming so), some of that will rub off on him too, as it should.

* The press (broadcast and print) is doing a mite bit better. Ever so slightly, perhaps, but any improvement is, well, an improvement.

:shrug: Time will tell. The only thing I know is that this is a place where there are more things going on that are going against him than at any previous time. And many of these things Rove has NO control over, except to try to distract (Liberia? Katherine Harris's "death"? Africa trip? Peace Bridge security problem? another terrorist attack -- he dare not, not with as little as he's really done at home)

Eloriel

...aren't cooperating with the 9-11 commission. It simply stinks of a coverup.

- 9-11 and Iraq are directly connected. It should eventually become apparent to all Americans that Bush* not only ignored the many warnings about 9-11...he used the death of thousands and fear of terrorism to wrongfully invade Iraq.

A stale treat served often here, and consumed with delight by those with a bit too much tinfoil (and unwarranted optimism) in their diets.

The 'Bush Is Toast' threads are some of the most annoying outside of the candidate flame wars. Every news headline has the potential to incite these types of posts:

"This will bring him down!"

"He is done! Stick a fork in him!"

"IMPEACHMENT WILL OCCUR ANY DAY NOW!"

"Drip! Drip! Drip! It's Watergate all over again!"

Ad nauseum. *Yawn*.

Believe me, I wish ANY of these issues would bring him down, but unlike many Toaster Posters, I know that wishing something were true, and knowing it to be true, are two different things.

Maybe something will bring him down, but it won't be predicted in here. It will be anticlimatic.

is what CAN be done?

Facts:
There is not a majority of congressmen who would impeach him no matter what.
He will never resign.
The public has a short attention span.

The only thing POSSIBLE is to vote him out.
What else is there?

just early ;)

...can he even be VOTED out?

- Question: what has our government done to make sure 2004 isn't a repeat of 2000? Answer: nothing.

- We need a 'deep throat' to come out and expose this whole criminal admin.

I just fear it will be delayed until he is in a second term.

He's gonna squeak in for 2004 and then everything will fall apart. At least that would bode well for 2008.

finally realized that there is nothing this man can do to get himself in trouble. The plain fact of the matter is that everyone knows that he lies, but they just don't give a damn. The unspoken visceral gut feeling that Bush gives off is that the white man must remain in charge. Must kick ass. People agree with that, and whatever it takes to maintain that, is okay. Its okay to murder Iraqis and steal their oil because a higher cause is at stake: We must maintain control or we will be deluged by the teeming hordes. Therefore, we have every right to retard the development of other peoples, murder, maim, lie steal and cheat. We must maintain "our way of life".

The bottom line, its okay to lie in the service of white supremacy. Lying about sex, on the other hand, is despicable.

I agree there is probably a lot of truth to this, but also keep in mind, that a lot of these people change with the wind. The ones I know think of themselves as "moderates," bizarrely enough, and if the mainstream media changes its mind, they will too.

They are the same people who changed their minds about the Vietnam war and about Civil Rights. They are still racists to this day, but they took it underground when it became shameful in the 60s and 70s to be overt about it. Now with right wing radio, they are coming back out of the closet about it, of course.

But they were still fair enough back then to see that the injustice of Vietnam and Jim Crow were wrong, and if they can be made to see the extreme injustice of what is happening now in Iraq, they will turn. They need the true facts but so far, no one in the mainstream media has called the Bush Corp. on the blatant lies and manipulation.

I know what you mean, but I think there's a difference here:

What's happening here is not ONE specific thing that has the potential to blow up in his face, and then is a big disappointment when it doesn't.

What's happening is the slow adding-on and gathering together of many little pieces that start adding up.

This makes a lot of sense to those of us who watched Watergate unfold. And Bush is especially vulnerable because of the almost mystical aura of untouchablity that has surrounded him since 9-11. Once his weaknesses start to show, and the tabu against criticism is broken, that invisible shield will be gone. He is personally not strong against criticism.

I don't think we even WANT a big blockbuster smoking gun thing right now, which they can defuse with some lie and then discredit the accusers. They are starting to get entangled in their own complex interconnected web. Ever watch an insect in a spider web -- it takes a VERY long time.

For a fascinating description of the web and the way it is starting to catch them up:

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/070103_beyond_bush_1.html

The removal of chimpy & his cohorts won't happen overnight. Any one "smoking gun" can be spun away before Rove has breakfast. But there are signs the intelligence community is against chimpy. The media has stories critical of the administration. Chimpy's boys are losing control.

I warned other DUers of the fallacy of comparing ANY of this to Watergate. No parallels at all. None. Different era, different WH, different occupant, different media, different America. Very different.

Plus, one of the hallmarks of toaster posting, which I neglected to mention above (hard to keep track of them all) is being advised to be patient. Any more patient, and we'll find ourselves predicting his downfall "any day now" the day after his swearing in come January 2005.

He came in with a tampered ballot box, and he will have to be sent out by one, honestly. THAT is worth working for. Something attainable. Not fairie-dust fantasy-land illusions of Watergate Mach II or impeachment.

Q,

If the situation in Iraq turns around to the point (say, by fall) that people really believe the invasion was worthwhile, then lying to get Congress and the public to support the invasion might not have huge consequences for Bush. From what we have seen thus far, I don't believe there's any chance of that happening.

If you predict the future based on the past, how you frame the issue determines the outcome. Frame it around * the individual, and the argument is that he has always gotten away with everything and never taken responsibility for anything; hence this is an unchanging fact about him that will last forever. Take a larger frame and look at every presidency in the last 40 years and the unchanging fact becomes the media always turns on them and the crap always hits the fan.

CYD

..that people on DU have this irrational expectation of what "GWB's* downfall" would look like.

You just can't impeach a President that easily. I mean, during Iran/Contra the Democrats held both the House and Senate and still couldn't get Reagan for obvious wrongdoing.

The Republicans impeached Clinton but couldn't convict him in the Senate that they controlled. And Clinton came out of impeachment as popular as ever. The entire episode may well have hurt the GOP more than it did Clinton.

For me, Bush's downfall will simply be losing the 04' election. I do not think there is any chance whatsoever he will be impeached. It just ain't gonna happen while the Republicans control both legislative chambers. The Democrats really are powerless in the House of Representatives, and are seriously hamstrung to accomplish much in the Senate.

"It occured to me as I was visiting the numerous 'he's going down in flames' threads that we've been here before."

Yeah, I find the number of those threads I read rather amusing. It is such wishful thinking and it is hard for me to understand how folks on this forum, whom presumably are in the political-know, would make the same mistake over and over again.

"Many of us thought that Bush* ignoring the August 2001 intelligence briefing about an impending attack would get his ass kicked out of DC."

Not me. How would he get kicked out of DC without solid evidence of criminal wrongdoing? You can't expect a President to be impeached or forced to resign because something bad happens on his watch - even if he was warned of an impending attack. I mean, I understand your point and agree that Bush's administration is mostly incompetent - but it just ain't enough to bring down a President. I mean, should FDR have been driven out of office because of Pearl Harbor - they knew an attack was coming in short order somewhere, but weren't prepared for it when it did.

"As you may remember...the briefing talked specifically about hijacked planes and a terrorist attack on American soil."

Yeah, but it didn't say where and when. It was just one of many threats. You can't expect that to bring down a President no matter how enraging it is.

"The Bushies have committed dozens of unethical and criminal acts that would have automatically brought investigations and hearings for any other president*."

Perhaps. But herein is the major problem for us. There is no longer an Office Independent Council for such things, and the GOP controls the entire Legislative Branch. Democrats have no subpoena power and severely restricted budgets which in all practicality eliminates our ability to do any real investigation.

Lets go through your list:

"Widespread election fraud"

No proof Bush or anyone in his administration commited election fraud.

"Bush*/Cheney obstruction of justice in demanding a limited (internal) investigation into 9-11"

Obstuction if Justice? This is a legal term for a specific crime. You can't just toss it around like the Republicans did with the term "perjury". There is no evidence that Bush has actually legally obstructed justice in a criminal manner.

"Hiding the Reagan/Bush presidential papers."

Sorry, that's not a crime. We may not like it, but the White House can attempt to do all sorts of shady things without any of them being actual crimes.

"The Enron coverup"

Lots of crimes commited by ENRON and those involved with it. But, no evidence Bush or anyone in his administration committed any crimes.

"Cheney hiding the Enron national energy policy documents"

Not a crime or an impeachable offense.

"Shadow government"

Not a crime or an impeachable offense.

"Billions of dollars in no-bid contracts to Halliburton and other Friends of Bush"

I don't know enough abit this, but I suspect however unethical, there is probably no crime or impeachable offense. Infact, I think the Bush Administration used some sort of emergency clause that technically allowed them to assign contracts without going through the bidding process. This may be highly unethical - but I don't see any crimes here either.

Really, political insiders should have known that none of these things would "bring Bush down".

"But the point is that every time we believe we have Bush* on the ropes...the usual suspects appear to trip his opposition and bail him out."

Your expectations are far too high. The way we will defeat Bush is by draining his crediblity and electability over time. It is very unlikely that any single story will be a knife through the heart. It just doesn't work that way.

"The free press needs to tell the whole, unbiased truth and the loyal opposition must show up to make a case against him."

Yes, but the media is not going to change in any dramatic way anytime soon. It is what it is. When big stories come along that hurt Bush they will be covered - but those stories will die on the vine without evidence of criminal wrongdoing. And unless it is obvious criminal wrongdoing, that evidence is going to be near impossible to come by without an OIC and without Democrats controlling at least one of the Chambers of Congress (preferably the House of Representatives).

All these stories hurt Bush, but the damage is done cumulatively and over years - not all at once.

I almost get a sense that the desperation about Bush going down before the elections is really motivated by a terrible fear that he will win if he survives that long. I think we are far better off recognizing that the odds that Bush will be knocked off before he stands for election is very, very, very unlikely. We should be focusing on how to beat him, not wasting too much time fantasizing and dreaming that he will be impeached or forced to resign.

Imajika

!

Exactly right. Nowhere near enough now to impeach. Practically speaking, I mean. I think he's done things that SHOULD be impeachable, but nothing that would make it happen in reality.

One possiblility would be if the Sept. 11 probes led to some huge revelation. If some smoking gun were found that proved LIHOP beyond a shadow of a doubt, then how could any congressman continue to support him.

But, this is a remote possibility, and not in the Dems control. What IS in their control is 2004. Every vote will count in 2004, just like it did in 2000, so every hit against Bush is huge.