Will someone explain this to me??

Dick Durbin's statement in one fell swoop throws a colleague under the bus and supports *'s stance...

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/07/27/graham.impeach/index.html

"There is no evidence that the pResident knowingly misled the US people....but it is clear that those around him misled him, and misled indirectly the US people."..

Ummmm Dick, if * relied on his people for info, and he then communicated that to the US populace doesn't that mean that HE misled the people too, indirectly or otherwise??

When will we get a Democrat that will stand up and fight these lying fucking bastards??? When will we get a Democrat that will get up and call a spade a spade?

They impeached Clinton for lying about a blowjob...Sen Graham has it right...it is the Rethugs that lowered the bar so turnabout is fairplay...

TB

remember that line from the campaign? Bush might not be the sharpest needle in the pincushion, but he makes those who are his advisors?

He lied to us, it's his fault.
If he wants to argue that he's the patsy of people who misled him, it's STILL HIS FAULT, because he chose those people.

My "Theorem of Responsibility:"

Lemma 1: Republicans are pro-business and pro-corporate culture.

Lemma 2: In the business world and in corporate cultures, even if a CEO delegates all his or her authority to those he or she appoints, the CEO cannot delegate responsibility for the actions or inactions of those he or she appoints.

Since President Bush is a Republican, he is pro-business and pro-corporate culture. His Presidency is marked by a delegation of powers to his Cabinet members and advisors.

The failure of one or more of these delegates to do their job is not just their failure as individuals, but the President's failure as a CEO/manager to place people in those positions who would act responsibly.

Therefore, the President is accountable for these failures due to his responsibility for appointing the people who failed.

Just as we hold Ken Lay, Bernie Ebbers, and Dennis Kozlowski responsible for the failures of Enron, Worldcom, and Tyco, we should likewise hold President Bush responsible for the failures of his administration. As we would any other President.

the fact that none of these people have been charged, fired or even reprimanded? Surely if his advisers mislead him he should have punished them? If not, is that not evidence that he was NOT mislead by them, but knew exactly what he was doing?