Before We Get Too Excited...

[Scriblerus the Philosophe]

...Remember Bush is still the sitting President and Cheney isn't wasting his last two months in office.

President Bush's aides have been scrambling to change rules and regulations on the environment, civil liberties and abortion rights, among others — few for the good. Most presidents put on a last-minute policy stamp, but in Mr. Bush's case it is more like a wrecking ball. We fear it could take months, or years, for the next president to identify and then undo all of the damage.

More attacks on civil liberties

Agents will be allowed to use informants to infiltrate lawful groups, engage in prolonged physical surveillance and lie about their identity while questioning a subject's neighbors, relatives, co-workers and friends. The changes also give the F.B.I. — which has a long history of spying on civil rights groups and others — expanded latitude to use these techniques on people identified by racial, ethnic and religious background.

Weakening environmental laws and regulations
In coming weeks, we expect the Environmental Protection Agency to issue a final rule that would weaken a program created by the Clean Air Act, which requires utilities to install modern pollution controls when they upgrade their plants to produce more power. The agency is also expected to issue a final rule that would make it easier for coal-fired power plants to locate near national parks in defiance of longstanding Congressional mandates to protect air quality in areas of special natural or recreational value.

Interior also is awaiting E.P.A.'s concurrence on a proposal that would make it easier for mining companies to dump toxic mine wastes in valleys and streams. [/quote]
_{I guess I'm lucky there's no mining companies near my water table.}

The ever-present attacks on abortion rights

ABORTION RIGHTS Soon after the election, Michael Leavitt, the secretary of health and human services, is expected to issue new regulations aimed at further limiting women's access to abortion, contraceptives and information about their reproductive health care options.

Existing law allows doctors and nurses to refuse to participate in an abortion. These changes would extend the so-called right to refuse to a wide range of health care workers and activities including abortion referrals, unbiased counseling and provision of birth control pills or emergency contraception, even for rape victims.

Gitmo will also stay open.

We suppose there is some good news in all of this. While Mr. Bush leaves office on Jan. 20, 2009, he has only until Nov. 20 to issue "economically significant" rule changes and until Dec. 20 to issue other changes. Anything after that is merely a draft and can be easily withdrawn by the next president.

Unfortunately, the White House is well aware of those deadlines.

[Sibling Zono (anon1mat0)]

What, no confirmation on a pardon for Ted Stevens?

[Pachyderm]

You didn't think they were leaving without a final "%&*k you for voting Democrat", did you?

Everything they can do from now to Dec 20th will be to screw things up for Obama. The expectation placed on him is already sky-high, and the Repubs will want to do him over, and be back in power in 4 years...

[Swatopluk]

After retaking Congress in 2010 
We'll see a record number of pardons too (higher than even Clinton's)

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

After retaking Congress in 2010 
We'll see a record number of pardons too (higher than even Clinton's)

But.  Will Bush pardon Cheney?  Then, on the last day, step down, so Cheny can pardon Bush?

I wouldn't put it past either of'em

[Sibling Zono (anon1mat0)]

AFAIK, you can't pardon a crime that hasn't been charged yet, besides, I think it likelier for them to be charged on an international court.

[Swatopluk]

Unfortunately blanc pardons are legal in the US. No previous charges, let alone convictions necessary. 

[Sibling Chatty]

AFAIK, you can't pardon a crime that hasn't been charged yet, besides, I think it likelier for them to be charged on an international court.

No, a presidential pardon covers EVERYTHING done, charged or not.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/thepresidentandcabinet/a/prespardons.htm

The presidential power to pardon is granted under Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution.

"The President ... shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment."

No standards, and only one limitation -- no pardons for the impeached.>>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pardon

<<In the United States, the pardon power for Federal crimes is granted to the President by the United States Constitution, Article II, Section 2, which states that the President:

    shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.

The Supreme Court has interpreted this language to include the power to grant pardons, conditional pardons, commutations of sentence, conditional commutations of sentence, remissions of fines and forfeitures, respites and amnesties.>>

Like Ford did for Nixon, a BLANKET PARDON, for anything ever done.

[Sibling Zono (anon1mat0)]

Which brings the question: can you impeach a former president?

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

Which brings the question: can you impeach a former president?

No.

but you may try him for anything else just like any other citizen.... after all, that IS what impeachment is: opening the door to try the president.

[Swatopluk]

I have heard (from lawyers) that impeachment after leaving office is possible. The main reason to do that is that it includes a ban for life from public office.

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

I have heard (from lawyers) that impeachment after leaving office is possible. The main reason to do that is that it includes a ban for life from public office.

You may be right.

However, I think that from jail, it'd be hard to run for 'nother office.

As would a sub-25% approval rating.... he'd be lucky not to get lynched in some cities... !

[Swatopluk]

Impeachemnt is not necessarily limited to P and VP. A lot of their henchbeings could run again.

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

Impeachemnt is not necessarily limited to P and VP. A lot of their henchbeings could run again.

I say, use Chatty's suggestion: ship the lot of'em off to Iraq.

Let THEM clean up the mess THEY created; let them stay until it's either stable, or they are dead.

Either way, the world is a better place....

For Bushya and Cheney, give'em each a HUMVEE and a machine gun...... that ought to be more than enough for men of THEIR self-importance to set things right.

[Sibling Zono (anon1mat0)]

For Bushya and Cheney, give'em each a HUMVEE and a machine gun...... that ought to be more than enough for men of THEIR self-importance to set things right.

Nonononono! They'll shoot indiscriminately! Remember that dubya has wrecked every single enterprise he has touched over the years, from oil companies and baseball teams, to the country itself. They'd be killing civilians and claiming they were victims of angry glances, and had no choice but kill them all.

Bring back a Napoleonic punishment and exile them to an island in the middle of the Pacific, but without any comforts whatsoever. That or a cell in isolation in a maximum security facility.

Actually, I kind of like that last one...

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

For Bushya and Cheney, give'em each a HUMVEE and a machine gun...... that ought to be more than enough for men of THEIR self-importance to set things right.

Nonononono! They'll shoot indiscriminately! Remember that dubya has wrecked every single enterprise he has touched over the years, from oil companies and baseball teams, to the country itself. They'd be killing civilians and claiming they were victims of angry glances, and had no choice but kill them all.

Bring back a Napoleonic punishment and exile them to an island in the middle of the Pacific, but without any comforts whatsoever. That or a cell in isolation in a maximum security facility.

Actually, I kind of like that last one...

A humvee and a single gun.

In a country that is full of people who hate their guts.....

Think about how poor a shot Cheny is.

Make sure there's plenty of booze in the humvee's too... and Bushy will be a poor shot, too.

Neither would last an hour.  We'd be lucky to find bits of their rotten corpses...

[Pachyderm]

Why bother losing a perfectly good gun and a Humvee? 

Read somewhere, I think it was Papillon, where a man was tied down over a carnivorous ant colony.Always struck me as a particularly unpleasant way to go.

Plus, it feeds the ants...

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

Why bother losing a perfectly good gun and a Humvee? 

Read somewhere, I think it was Papillon, where a man was tied down over a carnivorous ant colony.Always struck me as a particularly unpleasant way to go.

Plus, it feeds the ants...

[pieces o nine]

Why bother losing a perfectly good gun and a Humvee? 

Read somewhere, I think it was Papillon, where a man was tied down over a carnivorous ant colony.Always struck me as a particularly unpleasant way to go.

Plus, it feeds the ants...

IIRC, the character of "Gomer Pyle" had a few hokey yokelisms, one of them being:  "Tie me to an anthill and smear my ears with jam!"

Sounds worth testing with the Yokel-in-Chief, no?

[Sibling Zono (anon1mat0)]

Think about how poor a shot Cheny is.

I don't know if he is a good shot or not but I wouldn't assume his capabilities on the incident with his 'friend', in fact I would be willing to bet that he shot him in the face on purpose.

[Swatopluk]

A good shot does not need a shotgun to hit anything 
(I'll take that back, when somebody kills a swarm of mosquitos with a single shotgun blast)

[Sibling Chatty]

Think about how poor a shot Cheny is.

I don't know if he is a good shot or not but I wouldn't assume his capabilities on the incident with his 'friend', in fact I would be willing to bet that he shot him in the face on purpose.

Cheney was drunk. Plain and simple, the quail outings to that part of Texas have always been drunken shows of stupidity. One of my cousins down in that area is a caterer, and she'd dealt with them for years. Cheney gets drunk and stupid.

That's why they had to wait before calling an ambulance or the cops. Time to sober the stupid jackass up so that they didn't have to explain his blood level of alcohol, or the fact that he was (as usual) drunkenly cussing every being that crossed his path.

[Sibling Zono (anon1mat0)]

I don't doubt about his blood alcohol level. What I'm suggesting is that it was intentional and the fact of him being drunk makes it far more plausible.

[Scriblerus the Philosophe]

I bet he's a spiteful bastard drunk or sober. Maybe they guy he popped said something that pissed his drunk self off.


And I vote we throw those two and their toadies in Afghanistan. It's messier, as I understand it, than Iraq and less stable. All they get is a shot gun, a parka, and some of those terrible army provisions. I expect that's the last we'll hear of them.

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

... Cheney gets drunk and stupid.

Is that not an example of a redundant statement?

In fact:  it's a sort of triple-redundancy.  Cheny.  Drunk.  Stupid.

Is it not?

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

I bet he's a spiteful bastard drunk or sober. Maybe they guy he popped said something that pissed his drunk self off.


And I vote we throw those two and their toadies in Afghanistan. It's messier, as I understand it, than Iraq and less stable. All they get is a shot gun, a parka, and some of those terrible army provisions. I expect that's the last we'll hear of them.

I'd be infavor, if you emblazoned the parka with some symbol that told anyone who they were... in fact, put that symbol on all their clothing, even their underwear.

But, I'd only issue them a knife each, not a shotgun.  Well, perhaps a pistol with a single bullet each, in case they wanted to do the honorable thing.

[pieces o nine]

... Cheney gets drunk and stupid.

Is that not an example of a redundant statement?

In fact:  it's a sort of triple-redundancy.  Cheny.  Drunk.  Stupid.

Is it not?

Is your question, sir, not phrased in the style of Keith Olbermann?