Sunday, December 30, 2007

"Vermont Town Seeks Bush, Cheney Arrests"

BDS is just so much FUn to watch! Last night I was watching a documentary about the 2004 election which focused on volunteer efforts in Ohio. The BEST part of the documentary was when the long-haired blonde Democrat organizer went completely BERSERK when Ohio Secretary of State, Ken Blackwell, announced the results in favor of Bush. The BDS organizer kept screaming at the screen. Also the other Democrats were quite FUnnie as well especially since they were celebrating the great Kerry "victory" in the exit polls. That documentary inspired me to spend a couple of hours watching YouTube videos of liberals demanding the impeachment of Cheney and Bush. Great entertainment which is why I really enjoy this DUmmie THREAD titled, "Vermont Town Seeks Bush, Cheney Arrests." The town in question is Brattleboro which I understand is a magnet for Socialists from around the country. I've never been to Vermont but I would love to go there this autumn to watch the leaves change color and to watch the residents of the Brattleboro area go into full meltdown mode when they realize the Republicans will once again win the White House. So let us now watch the DUmmies cheer on Brattleboro in Bolshevik Red while the commentary of your humble correspondent, who really enjoys watching people in cars covered with BDS impeachment stickers, is in the [brackets]:


Vermont Town Seeks Bush, Cheney Arrests


[A liberal wet dream up there is to frog walk Bush and Cheney across the Brattleboro town square.]


President Bush may soon have a new reason to avoid left-leaning Vermont: In one town, activists want him subject to arrest for war crimes.

A group in Brattleboro is petitioning to put an item on a town meeting agenda in March that would make Bush and Vice President Cheney subject to arrest and indictment if they visit the southeastern Vermont community.

"This petition is as radical as the Declaration of Independence, and it draws on that tradition in claiming a universal jurisdiction when governments fail to do what they're supposed to do," said Kurt Daims, 54, a retired machinist leading the drive.

The measure asks: "Shall the Selectboard instruct the Town Attorney to draft indictments against President Bush and Vice President Cheney for crimes against our Constitution, and publish said indictment for consideration by other municipalities?"


[I hate to be a stickler for detail but what are the SPECIFIC crimes THAT Bush and Cheney are to be charged with? I notice this same oversight in the impeachment videos. They all somehow neglect to mention any grounds for impeachment. And now to hear from the DUmmie Peatnut Gallery...]


Now if we could just get the rest of the states to adopt such a plan!


[You might have a good chance in Taxachussetts.]


Rest of the states? It's a city, not the state of Vermont.


[Silly detail like the specific charges with which Bush and Cheney could be arrested for.]


Cities and towns can pass resolutions, which is fine, but they carry no legal weight. They are *not* completely useless, because they do call attention to how horrible the regime has been. But they have no legal standing to arrest, impeach, convict or otherwise get rid of Bush/Cheney. If you want people to make up laws as they go along, then you sink to the level of BushCo. I think energies would be better spent writing letters to our reps asking for articles of impeachment.


[That's just the ticket. Instead of trying to elect Democrats, expend all your energy on an impeachment that is going nowhere and is already impossible to achieve due to time contraints.]


Please read this carefully and try to understand. This is in the United States Constitution and is the law of the land. Vermont cannot do anything legal to remove Bush.


[NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!]


Whoa! Can Berkeley be far behind?


[Berkeley is probably working on a resolution to send Bush and Cheney to The Hague.]


Make sure Mike Malloy see this! We take our pleasures where we can find them.


[Enjoy your useless pleasures!]


Regrettably I would not be so excited to receive a 50-star American flag these days. A thirteen star, maybe, but not a 50-star flag. The 50-star flag is the flag of a regrettable empire, created without the consent of the governed in an oligarchy masquerading as a democracy.


[May we now question your patriotism?]


The only legal way to remove a sitting POTUS is impeachment/conviction.


[KILLJOY!!!


Of course it's not going to happen and even if it did, it wouldn't mean much, but that's not the point. It simply illustrates the frustration and anger that people have about bushco.


[Plus it gives normal people loads of entertainment watching your extreme BDS in action.]


They have been declared War Criminals by the World Court because of their lies for war and genocide of the Iraqi people.


[I love having a front seat to delusional BDS entertainment!]


So no, they'll never come to Brattleboro, because they're afraid someone might actually enforce the law.


[I'm picturing Barney Fife trying to arrest the President while accidentally shooting himself in the foot.]


If Congress doesn't get it done, it won't be done. The Hague is good only for trying 3rd world dictators who have already been beaten by someone else, probably the United States. No US President will EVER go there in our lifetime. No Democratic president would EVER accept such a precedent, even for a hated Republican. Why? Because then it IS a precedent and might bite them personally in the ass. I'd laugh if I weren't crying so hard.


[Me? I'm just laughing!]


Arresting Bush and Cheney may very well pave the way to their removal. Word.


[Yeah, I can just picture Bush and Cheney being frogwalked into the Brattleboro city jail...NOT!]


I applaud your indignation that Bush has been allowed to continue to hold office, but if you could channel it into doing just a little bit of reading, you would learn, as I did, that Brattleboro's gesture is completely meaningless, unenforcable, and illegal.


[But very very FUnnie!]


States must do what our elected dem leaders refuse to do. Treat this administration like the criminals they are and issue warrants to arrest them. I pray a multitude of cities and states do the same sending a clear message to our elected reps in congress and to the world. We want them impeached.


[Issue a jaywalking warrant for Bush.]


could you really ask a beat cop to arrest the President? Could he ever consider his job safe after that?


[Barney Fife wants his job security.]


Okay, I'm from Brattleboro. And while I think it's a nice symbolic gesture, all you people who are hooting and hollering and saying, "Oh, boy! I want to move to Brattleboro!" need to understand that this is a movement of - EIGHT - people. Okay? Eight.


[Eight is Enough. We like our BDS comedy shows.]


Why do liberal activists keep coming up with such fool stunts? It detracts from the seriousness of their positions.


[Shhh! Don't discourage them.]


Best keep our powder dry. Save it for when we might really need it. Like when something really impeachable happens.


[Oops! You...you mean NOTHING impeachable has happened yet? Thanx for that startling admission.]

26 Comments:

Anonymous Ray said...

"The 50-star flag is the flag of a regrettable empire, created without the consent of the governed in an oligarchy masquerading as a democracy."

So, when the individual citizens of a particular territory vote for their respective Constitution and their newly elected legislature petitions Congress for statehood, they're really not voting and it's really not a democratic process but they are actually creating a oligarchy and are ruled without their consent? Ok, got it.

10:59 AM  
Blogger Beefeater said...

I really love it when some MOONBAT DUmmie posts "make sure Malloy or Olberman sees this!". What are they going to do, and why don't you send it to them?

12:46 PM  
Anonymous Skully said...

Beefeater said...
'I really love it when some MOONBAT DUmmie posts "make sure Malloy or Olberman sees this!". What are they going to do, and why don't you send it to them?'

Yeah what's up with this??
Who the hell is Malloy?? Wasn't he one of the cops on "Adam 12"?? What's he going to do arrest Shrubco when they go leaf peeping some fall?? I can hear it now: One Adam 12, One Adam 12, we have unimpeached war crimminals in VT looking at leaves; please apprehend for shipment to Hague.

And Olberman?? What the hell does this have to do with sports?? Is leaf peeping a sport in VT??

12:58 PM  
Anonymous john f not kerry said...

"The only legal way to remove a sitting POTUS is impeachment/conviction."

Or, he could just serve out his term and leave quietly, remembering never to go to Brattleboro because there are 8 too many nuts there.

12:59 PM  
Anonymous Anon 1:50 said...

But what about the martial law Bush is supposed to declare? You know so he can Chavez himself into a 'dictator-for-life' thing?

I read about it on DU, so it must be true!

5:16 PM  
Blogger Britt said...

Martial Law is 24 business hours away!

5:29 PM  
Anonymous Publius said...

Okay, I'm from Brattleboro. And while I think it's a nice symbolic gesture, all you people who are hooting and hollering and saying, "Oh, boy! I want to move to Brattleboro!" need to understand that this is a movement of - EIGHT - people. Okay? Eight.

The DUmmie doesn't want anymore idiots like himself to move to his town. Can't say I blame him/her/it, but still, I gotta laugh.

6:55 PM  
Anonymous troglaman said...

"I can hear it now: One Adam 12, One Adam 12, we have unimpeached war crimminals in VT looking at leaves; please apprehend for shipment to Hague." skully

The Hague. DUmmies superhero sanctuary.

Thanks, skully. You're the gift that just keeps giving.

By the way, the US has violated the Geneva Conventions. Torture, right to trial and all that. Not that it matters to most of you. I know it doesn't. Geneva Shameeza.

11:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sorry Trog...but if the enemy we're fighting doesn't abide by the Geneva Convention, then we're not bound by it strictures. Ya might want to read up on it. By the way, what 'torture' are you blathering about? I hope you're not talking about waterboarding, cuz the Dems in Congress seem to disagree.

12:49 AM  
Blogger Sonnabend said...

1.The US is not a signatory to the ICC.

The Hague means jack shit.

No jurisdiction, no authority.

2.The President has never been named a "war criminal" by anyone, not have there been at any time any charges of any kind, as there is no proof, no proof is no prima facie case, no case, no charges.

3. As the President, as a Head of State, he enjoys full diplomatic immunity, which means he can park his car in the middle of the street, sit down and have a barbecue and no one can do a damned thing about it.'

The same goes for Mr Cheney.

4. Vermont is open carry, which means the President is perfectly legally allowed to carry whatever sidearm he wants.

5. Anyone who wants to be smart with the President will find out posthaste just how little a sense of humour the Secret service has.

6. In Texas, even if he didn't have protection, there are other laws which will quite adequately have more than enough deterrent force to ensure that no one bothers him.

The Castle Doctrine, for example.

They have wasted eight years screeching hate...and they have accomplished nothing in that time.

Pathetic.

1:53 AM  
Blogger Britt said...

Oh, and even we had signed the Geneva Convention, terrorists do not meet the standards of the Geneva Convention:

Article 4

(2) Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions: (a) that of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates; (b) that of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance; (c) that of carrying arms openly; (d) that of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

No chain of command, no uniforms, no open carry, and damn sure no respect for the laws and customs of war. They are savages, and no quarter should be asked or given to them. They are not an honorable enemy, and thus do not get the protections extended to an honorable enemy in war. Thus, we can legally do whatever the hell we want to them. In fact, they are spies or saboteurs under the Geneva Convention and thus liable to summary execution.

Now, I can understand a moral objection to waterboarding, and I can understand you wanting to put these bastards on trial. That is the argument that terrorism is a law enforcement issue. I think you're wrong, I think terrorism is a national security threat, and something that needs all weapons brought to bear on it. Do not make the mistake of thinking your position is supported by the Geneva Conventions. The Geneva Conventions were designed to protect honorable soldiers during the fighting of a conventional war. It was not meant to provide a shield for mass murder. In fact, if you read it, you will find that rouge violent elements are not extended protection, and indeed are strongly condemned by the accords.

3:04 AM  
Anonymous N. O'Brain said...

Wait, didn't we give all those German POWs trials during WW II?

No?

Ok.

Nevermind.

8:09 AM  
Blogger Tazzerman said...

Sonnabend and Britt, excellent posts. Of course, facts NEVER stop a BDS suffering moonbat nor do they even slow em down..

10:22 AM  
Anonymous Shambhala said...

troglaman said..

Troglaman no can think.
Troglaman say what Mike Moore want
Me feel bad for dumb Troglaman

10:36 AM  
Blogger Son Of The Godfather said...

[A liberal wet dream up there is to frog walk Bush and Cheney across the Brattleboro town square.]

I'm a little surprised you let this error go to print!...

Everyone knows it's frog marched... Like when those 24 business hours were up, and they frog-marched Rove out in handcuffs. heh
-------

troglaman said...
"I can hear it now: One Adam 12, One Adam 12, we have unimpeached war crimminals in VT looking at leaves; please apprehend for shipment to Hague." skully

The Hague. DUmmies superhero sanctuary.

Thanks, skully. You're the gift that just keeps giving.


Trog, buddy, as with the vast majority of your posts, your intended "put down" makes no sense. Skully makes the point that DUmmies are overly enthusiastic about incorporating "The Hague" into their already weak arguments (and sissy-fits), and your comeback is "You're the gift that just keeps giving."? It's no wonder why Lucy keeps pulling the football away from you pansies.

By the way, the US has violated the Geneva Conventions. Torture, right to trial and all that. Not that it matters to most of you. I know it doesn't. Geneva Shameeza.

LOL. Here's an idea, trogman... How about actually researching the Geneva agreements before spouting your ignorance about such things that you obviously parrot from comrades even more idiotic than yourself. It just makes everyone here embarrassed for you.

10:43 AM  
Anonymous troglaman said...

"Sorry Trog...but if the enemy we're fighting doesn't abide by the Geneva Convention, then we're not bound by it strictures." anon

Really? You're a "stricture" idiot. You're wrong. Look it up or something. Geneva makes torture wrong no matter who does it. It's a crime.

But what's clear in your argument is that if they do it to us, we should be able to do it to them. What you're little pea-brain fails to comprehend is that making it legal absolves everyone. Even the enemy. Are you ready to absolve WW2 Japanese, Nazi, or our current crop of terrorists of the crime of torture?

I think you are. I'm not. You like the concept, I don't. There's nothing you can say that will change my mind.

Go ahead, wingnutia. Convince me torture is a really good tool for promoting freedom and democracy. Really. I'm dying to hear it.

2:13 AM  
Blogger Sonnabend said...

****By the way, the US has violated the Geneva Conventions.****

Terrorists are unauthorised combatants.They are not a member of any military. As such, they can be put up against a wall and SHOT.

In case it had escaped you, trog, terrorists and others captured get three hots, a cot, lawyers, halal food, prayer mats, activists, the media.

Prisoners captured by terrorists get an unmarked grave.

***Torture, right to trial and all that.****

Got a moment? Theres this guy name Daniel Pearl wants a word.Says that some guy named Leon Klinghoffer has some objections to your opinion.

****Not that it matters to most of you. I know it doesn't.****

Not really, no..I fail to see why we should give them anything other than a drumhead trial and a firing squad.

They violate the laws of God and Man, they carry out atrocities and then demand their "rights"...and they have useful idiots like you to help them.

A grand total of three people have been "waterboarded"...THREE.Far as I am concerned, thats necessary.

Let's assume that we have a prisoner who knows of a 500 lb bomb in the middle of Baghdad.

I'd do whatever it took to get that information and the hell with his "rights"

I am concerned with the rights of those they plan to kill, all you care about is the poor misunderstood terrorist who deserves their "rights"...even after they have committed crimes that violate the very "Convention" you so cherish.

The United States military does not take schools hostage and then detonate bombs and machinegun children.

The United States does not shoot an unarmed woman then detonate a bomb to kill twenty more, just to be sure of their target

The United States does not take prisoners and then behead them, then parade the video of that death in grisly fashion.

The United States does not plant a bomb in a tanker, then detonate it to create a chlorine chemical weapon.

The United States does not fly airplanes into skyscrapers, killing thousands.

To quote Ralph Peters, and in answer to your asinine whining.

"Nothing's a crime unless its committed by the United States of America"

4:06 AM  
Anonymous Shambhala said...

Sonnabend

Your arguments will never get through T's thick head.

He would rather have another 3k killed by his fellow trogladites, and in theory bring down Bush, than have any success in the WoT.

12:11 PM  
Blogger Britt said...

Oh trogalman, like all of the members of the Left, you do not understand what the rule of law means.

Rule of law means that you follow the law as written, not as you wish it to be written. You call for POW status for terrorists, but you are wrong because the Geneva Convention clearly states that terrorists do not get POW status. You cannot make up the law as you go along. There is no binding law that keeps the United States from interrogating terrorists. I say interrogating because water boarding is not torture. Unpleasant, yes. Degrading, yes. Humiliating, yes. Effective, yes. Useful, yes. Necessary, yes.

People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.-George Orwell

Go back to sleep Trogy. It's a bit rich to bask in the safety provided by the rough men and question the manner in which they provide it.

5:30 PM  
Anonymous troglaman said...

"Oh trogalman, like all of the members of the Left, you do not understand what the rule of law means." effin britt

Fine. Does the "law" mean anyone can go to jail forever? No charges. No lawyers. Tell me, britt. Who decides these things? It's not comforting that you don't seem to care. You just trust. You just believe. Dumbass.

1:40 AM  
Anonymous Radical Redneck said...

Fine. Does the "law" mean anyone can go to jail forever? No charges. No lawyers.

Uh yeah. Rules of war are far different from criminal law anencaphelic.

This is far too good for the hajjis - they should be ground into pig food!

11:27 AM  
Blogger Britt said...

Terrorists are not criminals. They are enemy combatants, captured on a battlefield in time of war. More to your point, they are not US citizens or residents, and thus the Constitution does not apply to them.

I guess you never got past the preamble: "We the People of the United States...."

8:14 PM  
Anonymous troglaman said...

"Terrorists are not criminals." britt

Oops. Yes, they are. And don't bother with the "enemy combatant" thing. I get the concept. How about you as an enemy combatant, britt? Let's say liberal, progressive, communistic, abortionists win the next election and decide to label you an enemy combatant. I'm sure you'll be just fine with it. You've probably always wanted to go to Syria.

Thank your Glorious Leader for the opportunity for us libs to put you away forever.

2:20 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Trog puked out this: "Really? You're a "stricture" idiot. You're wrong. Look it up or something."

I did, you leftist dipstick--Although I didn't need to look it up--I already knew what the word meant, here you go, moron:

American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source - Share This stric·ture (strĭk'chər) Pronunciation Key
n.
A restraint, limit, or restriction.
An adverse remark or criticism; censure.
Pathology An abnormal narrowing of a duct or passage.

There's three choices there; now, if you can put down your manure-bong for a second, based on the context of what I wrote in my first post, which of the 3 do you think applies here?

You are a pathetic creature Trog. I don't hate you for your left-wing boob-ery and willful ignorance, rather, I pity you for your diminished mental capacity owing to your overuse of recreational pharmaceuticals.

Dumbass.

10:59 AM  
Anonymous troglaman said...

"I pity you for your diminished mental capacity owing to your overuse of recreational pharmaceuticals." anon

I think the "abnormal narrowing of a duct or passage" about covers it, anon. Dwell on that.

Narrowed duct Dumbass.

1:59 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow...nice comeback.

Why do you keep coming back here trog? You constantly get your lunch handed to you post after post; you have no real grasp of issues, or even reality, for that matter.

Facts just seem to bounce off your thick little skull with an amazing consistency.

Oh, wait; I used the word "consistency;" I hope you don't get too confused by a multi-syllabic word like that. Do I need to paste that definition here for you too? Never mind--if i did, a libtard like you who is totally confused by the concept of 'context,' would probably probably just hurt your head trying to figure it out.

10:44 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home