I'd vote to impeach.

For the seventh time Bush has mentioned energy independence. I hope he means it and I hope all Americans join him in this effort.

The technology has been in place for it for years, but the political will has not been.

Surreal, to say the least!

Perhaps the worst speech in American history! Bush just does not get it, or does not want to get it! He and Cheney are the only two fools left in America who do not want an end to Iraq. He speaks about getting off oil but puts no teeth or money into it. His health care proposal is a complete joke and the insurance big wigs most likely wrote it for him. His health care scheme does nothing to control costs and that is the problem, we have the CPI going up at 2.5% and medical inflation at an average of 10% and many plans seeing over 20%. Of course when you suckle the teet of the insurance and drug industry you don't do anything that they tell you not to do. When Webb spoke he was clear and concise and the contrast with Bush was clear.

On Iraq:

"All the King's horses and all the King's men
couldn't put Humpty back together again."

--Mother Goose

A new poll shows that 75% of people in California are against the war in Iraq and the majority of Californians trust Sacramento democrats more than Arnold and much more than republicans. Only the die hards like Foy, Osbourn, Strickland and their minions still hang on to the failed policies of Bush. Time to throw these bums out and elect all dems in Ventura County!

Yep, that's the solution. Throw out all opposition so we can have a true one party system, just like the old Communist Party in Russia, the nazi Party in Germany, or the Bath Party in Iraq. Then people like 'Not Osbourn' can unify the people by imposing their views on everybody. Heck, why not cut out the middle man and just appoint a dictator to run Kalifornia, someone like Fidel Castro or Kim Jung Il. That way you can stamp out all resistance and simply send the 25% of people who oppose your ideas off to forced labor camps.

Take a chill pill BubbaK. When you react this way to someone's comment you sound demented and like an extremist. It sounds like you are saying the minority should run things and not the majority, which goes against the Constitution of the United States. Why don't you support the Constitution?!

GS
Bush said again that he is the Decider. He said he decided to have the blood of over 3,000 American kids flow into the desert sands of Iraq to make his corporate buddies even richer, he decided to lie to the Amercian public about WMD's that did not exist, he decided to bankrupt the Country after being left a surplus. If we are going to have a "Decider" let's elect one who knows his butt from a hole in the ground!

Bush has surged to 30% in recent polls.

Seems like supporting him is an extremist position.

Why can't he just have Dick Cheney resign already?

For the good of the Nation and World, IMPEACH Cheney and Bush now! Bush is the lamest lame duck in history!

Predictions. Bush will leave office with an approval rating of 14%, the lowest in recorded history! Cheney will go to prison for leaking the name of Valerie Plame, but in prison he will gain a new understanding of "alternative lifestyles" and when he comes out of prison he will lead the way to all states allowing Gay marriage. Later he will divorce his wife and marry his former cell mate.

I'm sorry to break it to you, but the Bush Administration had nothing to do with "leaking" information about Valerie Plame. That is already an established fact. As much as the left wing fanatics on this blog want to believe it to be true, it is simply not true. But it is not surprising to find that the left wing fanatics on this site have their own alternate reality since the real world is often just too much for them to bear.

LOL! Yeah right! I remember Nixon saying "I'm not a crook. I did not know about Watergate." And Reagan "My astrologer never told me about Iran/Contra." Reality Bites you can bite this buddy!!!!!

Arlen Specter today said "Bush is not the sole decider on Iraq." The GOP is coming apart at the seems!

Evidence was found today that the Bush Administration ordered the altering of documents that supported evidence that global warming is a fact. Most likely Bush was acting on direct orders from his overlords in the oil industry. But Bush being such an upstanding guy, who would never lie (Except about Iraq), he would never have approved releasing Valerie Plame's name. LOL!!!!!

MAYBE YOU MISSED IT BUT ARMITAGE AND LIBBY WORK FOR THE ADMINSTRATION OR DID BEFORE THEY STEPPED DOWN.

YOU LIVE IN THE REALITY WHERE EVEN THOUGH THE VAST MAJORITY OF AMERICANS THINK YOUR MAN IS A FAILURE THOSE WHO OPPOSE YOU ARE 'LEFT WING'.

70 PERCENT OF AMERICANS THINK BUSH IS DOING A POOR JOB. 58% WANT HIS PRESIDENCY TO END. HIS APPROVAL RATINGS AT BEST ARE LOW 30'S. YOU ARE THE EXTREMIST.

I HOPE REALITY LEFT SOME TEETH MARKS WHEN IT BIT YOU.

LIAR.

The Bush Administration did not leak information about Valarie Plame. That is a fact.

Yet the left-wing radicals on this site respond by brining up Watergate, Iran/Contra, Iraq, global warming, the oil industry, and public opinion polls. None of which have anything to do with the Valarie Plame case. Just because you want something to be true doesn't necessarily make it true. Intelligent people rely on evidence to make their arguments. Instead the simple-minded folks around here can only change topics and then call anybody who disagrees with them a "liar".

After a long investigation it is now an established fact that the Bush Administration had nothing to do with leaking information about Valarie Plame. And anybody who continues to insist that it does is the real liar.

LOL!!!!! The Bush people investigated themselves and said "We didn't do it." You live in fantasyland if you think Bush and Cheney did not have a private talk about releasing Plame's name. (Or maybe you think Cheney alone runs this country, of course they could be true given W's low IQ.) Let's not forget why it was released. Because Plame's husband went to Niger and found that Bush and his people were lying about Iraq and he then wrote an op-ed piece to this fact and that is a fact. So you are saying that Bush, a proven liar, did not lie about this? Get real!

Brian,
Did you read the op-ed piece today by Tom McClintock? He basically is calling Arnold a liar over his budget proposal. Sounds like a good blog topic.

This was not a case about the Bush Administration investigating itself. It was an independent grand jury investigation that concluded that the Bush Administration was not behind the alleged Valarie Plame "leak". This whole argument is pure fantacy. Radical liberals like Decider in Chief have little interest in knowing the facts but instead prefer to repeat lies because it is easier and more convenient.

Silly liberals, tricks are for kids.

RealityLite, learn to spell, it is fantasy, not fantacy, duh! You would not know a radical liberal if they bit you on the ass! I'm sure the "grand jury" had real access to the White House and their records. I'm sure Tricky Dick Cheney never filled Bush in about what was going on. Tell me another bed time story. LOL!!!!!

Is that the best you can do is to run a spell check? So far you have produced no evidence to support your delusions and have instead just gone off in wild tangents. I'm not very impressed by your reasoning or the by your lack of intellectual honesty. It must be nice to just make stuff up as you go along. I think from now on I'll just address you as Liar in Chief.

RealityLite,
At least take a second to re-read what you wrote. Above you screwed up again and wrote "reasoning or the by your lack of". In terms of your buddy Bush, let's look at his record. Did he lie about Iraq? Yes. Was there testimony yesterday that he had his staffers change the reports of scientists about global warming to change what they said? Yes. Is it true the American people do not trust him based on every poll? Yes. Is it likely that he knew about Plame and everything going on, even if he did not personally tell someone to leak it? Yes. The only one having trouble with reality is you.

There you go again Liar in Chief, ignoring the topic and instead of going off on wild tangents. All of this is about one basic thing: the Bush Administration did not leak information about Valarie Plame. This is a well establish fact after many months of media scrutiny and an extensive investigation by an independent grand jury.

You have no evidence to back up your claims to the contrary. That either makes you ignorant or a liar. For your sake I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and just assume that you're a liar.

The only defense of your argument has been to bring up Watergate, Iran/Contra, global warming, the oil industry, poll numbers, and spelling. I'm sorry to inform you that none of those topics has anything to do with the Valarie Plame investigation.

Wacky liberals.

There you go again Liar in Chief, ignoring the topic and instead of going off on wild tangents. All of this is about one basic thing: the Bush Administration did not leak information about Valarie Plame. This is a well establish fact after many months of media scrutiny and an extensive investigation by an independent grand jury.

Do you have a link to you "well established fact?"

Realitylite,
You are so full of crap. Well established fact? From who? You? A "grand jury" with no power? Is that why they called Ari Fliescher yesterday, Bush's spokesman? Sorry, but your boy Bush is headed for impeachment!

Richard Armitage admitted to being the first person to leak Plame's name as a CIA agent to Novak. The reason why he hasn't been charged is because Fitzgerald would have to prove that he intentionally leaked that information with malace and fore-thought or something of this nature. The point being that it is very hard to prove. But I don't think there is any doubt about the fact that numerous people in the administration including Libby, Armatage, Rove told various reporters the fact that Valerie Plame was a CIA agent and that there seems like Cheney and Libby were obsessed with dicrediting Wilson.

So please provide a link to your information about a grand jury saying that the Bush Administration was not responsible for the outting of Valerie Plame as a CIA agent.

Wow, I have just been reading back some of Reality bites comments and he/she calls people liar, ignorant, Wacky liberals and simple minded. And he/she said this:

After a long investigation it is now an established fact that the Bush Administration had nothing to do with leaking information about Valarie Plame. And anybody who continues to insist that it does is the real liar.

Richard Armitage leaked the name to Robert Novak here's the link: (halfway down the page under the heading "Valerie Plame Investigation). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Armitage
Oh and Richard Armitage was Deputy Secretary of State to Colin Powell when this all came out which means...he was part of the Bush Administration.

I think you are drawing the wrong conclusion. Fitzgerald didn't charge anyone with the crime of leaking the name of a covert CIA agent to the press. That is a far cry from as you put it: " an independent grand jury investigation that concluded that the Bush Administration was not behind the alleged Valarie Plame "leak"

Maybe you should check your facts before you go making really nasty comment to people and calling them liars and ignorant. It just makes you look like a fool. And just try having a civil discussion with people rather that rant and rave like a mad man.

Folks willing to support with facts:

Thanks for getting the conversation back to a civil discussion.

Perhaps this site can help Ventura County residents get beyond the static of so many television and talk radio shows.

It's hard to learn or to understand when people are being called liars, haters, unpatriotic, stupid, etc. whether a conservative or a liberal, a Christian, Muslim, Jew, Buddhist, agnostic, civil servant, developer, small business owner, stock broker, man, woman, African-American, Euro-American, "other" . . .

I agree.

IT IS OFFICIAL! No longer is it unpatriotic to question Our Fearless Leader's incompetent handling of Iraq.

As long as Bush calls it the Democrat Party instead of the Democratic party we will all know he doesn't want to work with the other party.

I am also impressed Bush wants to fight global warming.

That means peter Foy is so extreme he is to the right of Bush! How did a right wing extremist win in Ventura County?

I hope he governs from where the people stand on issues, not his own agenda. He seems like a pretty good guy so I bet he will.

The only thing America loves more than a winner is the guy who gets up off the floor and keeps on fighting. I bet if Bush keeps on fighting his poll numbers will rise back into the 40s and he has a good shot at bringing some Senators back to Congress in 2008. That is, unless someone from the DemocratIC Party stands up and goes nose to nose with him. There's lots of sensible talk coming from the Dems but so far there's not a fighter in the crowd.

Congresswoman Barbara Lee (D - California, 9th District) was the lone vote from the very beginning.
Obama (D - Illinois U.S. Senator) also spoke out from the very early.

See http://lee.house.gov

Barbara Lee was the lone "no" vote against going after Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda after 9/11. If Barbara Lee had her way Osama Bin Laden would still be on the loose... Oh wait!!! Nevermind.

A memo was released that Cheney wrote. On it he started to write "The Pres" in relation to the leak, and he then crossed it out, but you could still read it. The only way Bush did not know about the leak is if it really is true that in the White House they treat Bush like a mushroom, you know, they keep him in the dark and feed him a lot of crap!

There's lots of sensible talk coming from the Dems but so far there's not a fighter in the crowd.

Posted by: gs at February 3, 2007 01:19 PM

Sen. Russ Feingold is awesome. Where most of the Congress is talking about non-binding resolutions Feingold is introducing a bill that would get us out of Iraq. Rep. John Conyers in the House is also a fighter and good man. The Republicans are beyond contempt. First the fillibuster the vote on Minimum Wage and then they fillibuster the vote to just open up the debate on the Warner non-binding resolution. They are truely blood-thirsty, elitist, pathetic, bastards.

By the way, I am still waiting for an apology from realitybites. My guess is that he/she will just change his/her Name and start posting their pathetic bile again under a new name being that he/she was so incredibly wrong and so rude about it. That's what a coward would do.

Reading the Star today was tragic. On the one hand they had a story on the funeral of a Thousand Oaks Marine killed in Iraq. They also had a story on how republicans in the Senate are blocking debate on Iraq. Here we have our best and brightest young people fighting and dying for their country and republicans are so ashamed they do not even want the public to hear a debate on Iraq. How cowardly they have become! The people sent a clear message in the past election about Iraq and it is clear that republicans do not give a damn about what the people want, they only care about the special interests profiting off of the war!

If the Rebublicans continue to support the Iraq war for the next two years, they will be extinct in the 2008 elections. Although I am happy about that prospect, I do not wish to spend the blood to get it accomplished. We need to get out of Iraq now.

They say think locally and act globally. I think a great protest against the war in Iraq locally would be for Ventura County republicans in mass to change to Decline to State or to Democrat and to cut off all funding to the VCRCC.

As a Liberal Democrat in Ventura County I always feel very out-numbered, especially in Thousand Oaks. Last election in November despite the country overwelmingly voting in the Democrats, Ventura county voted Elton Gallegly back in (a well known George Bush flunky). Don't get me wrong I love T.O. and the people are wonderful and friendly but when politics comes up I either avoid the subject or keep quiet.

Wojo,
You are smart. If they find out you are not a conservative nut job in T.O. they persecute you! A lot of people in T.O. actually believe the crap McClintock and Strickland say. They drank the kool aide and then asked for more!

I know that none of you will agree with me but this is not a popularity contest. Yes Bush is a poor leader. Yes, it was a mistake to invade Iraq. Yes, our current Iraq strategy is not working. No, we should not pull out. Why not? It is not the right thing to do. You just can't go into someone's country and mess it up and leave. Not to mention the longer-term consequences of not securing the region. It will not be easy but it is the right thing to do and we need the right leader to do it. Pulling out right now would just be a disaster and likely to cause much more death and destruction in the future. Let's do the right thing fix it now. Now a message to Congress: These non-binding resolutions are a joke! Stop the in-fighting and actually get working on legislation that's what you are paid to do.

You forgot to mention that Bush & Co are too dishonest, corrupt and incompetent to be entrusted with running a war. There's much to be said about our duty to the region but the current crop of miscreants are NOT the ones that will about a successful outcome.

As for moving on, the Nation needs to stop and think about the future: do we shake hands and move on, as if nothing's happened or do we bring the miscreants to task and make them examples for any future administration that considers playing so fast and loose with the Nation's good will? I say we show the World and the Nation that we truly do stand for justice, regardless of the political cost!

Disenter said:

You just can't go into someone's country and mess it up and leave.

I think the problem is that in going into Iraq George Bush has made such an incredible mess that there is no solution that will be a good solution. The alternatives are between are between, bad, very bad and disasterous. Once we come to terms with this I think you will find that the best solution will be a diplomatic solution not a military solution. The Iraqis do not want us in Iraq and they will not stop attacking us until we leave.

If we were to impeach this President and say to the world that this criminal led a scared nation into a war that was wrong, that might be our best chance and save that most lives. We need to sit down with the entire region and hammer out a peace. George Bush does not have the ability to do this. I know this sounds naive, but it sounds better than forcing a democracy down Iraq's throat at the point of a gun.

"The alternatives are between are between, bad, very bad and disasterous." Almost true. There is no one solution that is perfect, but in the end some are better than others and a complete and immediate pullout is not the answer.

"the best solution will be a diplomatic solution not a military solution. The Iraqis do not want us in Iraq and they will not stop attacking us until we leave." Not true. The best solution is a combination of diplomacy and military support. Also the Iraqi's do want us there.

"If we were to impeach this President and say to the world that this criminal led a scared nation into a war that was wrong, that might be our best chance and save that most lives."

Let's just take a deep breath here. The impeachment process would drag the whole country down. Let's not rush down that path. It would be nice if we could blink and make him go away, but it is not that simple. Also, you would end up with Cheney. Is that what you really want? Best to wait until '08.

I am not a graduate of Westpoint, so I can admit I do not have the solutions, but a complete pullout right now would be an abandonment of the Iraqi's and would also leave this issue to be dealt with by a later generation. We must fix this now, like it or not.

Also the Iraqi's do want us there.

Posted by: Dissenter at February 15, 2007 01:33 PM

A poll conducted by the well-respected group World Public Opinion last month showed that 61 percent of Iraqis support attacks against U.S. forces. The poll found that 83 percent of Iraqis surveyed want the U.S. to withdraw completely next year.

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/brmiddleeastnafricara/250.php?nid=&id=&pnt=250&lb=brme

The impeachment process would drag the whole country down.

Posted by: Dissenter at February 15, 2007 01:33 PM

Why? I know me personally...I would party, party, party. Of course you would have to also impeach Cheney for outting Valerie Plame which if I'm right Patrick Fitzgerld has not yet closed that investigation. And everyday during the Scooter Libby trial they are uncovering more and more about how obsessed Chaney was with vengence on Ambassador Wilson.

Or maybe we could get him for shooting his freind in the face while he was drunk. You know if I shot my friend in the face do you think I could tell the police who want to investigate the shooting to come back later after I had solbered up.

These people are beyond corupt they are criminal and the rest of the world sees it and finally this country is seeing it. George Bush has a 32% approval rating and his handling of the war is at 28%. And barely one-third of service members approve of the way the president is handling the war, according to the 2006 Military Times Poll.

If you believe that Bush & Co should get a free ride simply because it would be bad for the Nation's self-esteem then you are part of the problem and you are encouraging the very worst from our elected leaders. You ought to be ashamed.

IMPEACH!!!!! IMPEACH!!!!!!!!!

His approval rating is up to 32% so fix the picture.

Next year, let's all find a good bar somewhere with plenty of wide screen TVs and let's play "State of the Union Bingo". (Personally, I will need a few tall cool ones to suffer through another of W's public speaking adventure of cliche's, distractions, malaprops and attempted rhetorical flourishes.)

You have very interesting site!
Respect you!
http://louisellipsehandbag.iespana.es

State of a the Union speech? I don't think so. First of all it would take too long for Bush to describe how screwed up things are. Maybe a three week seminar.
The State of the Union Speech was a re-run of the same crap. Same promises with less time to do it in.
Instead of a State of the Union speech; it's a sales pitch with claims of competence in some areas. The scary part is he thinks that's pretty good. It takes a great Country to survive a President like this.