Since Pelosi became Speaker how vehement have the Dems been against the Iraq fiasco: and worse, the probable Trillion US$ this has cost? No, but she isn't president elect... Obama is. All but one of the Republicans voted in favour of the war, 23 Democrats voted against it. At the time the Republicans had control over the houses, Pelosi had no authority at all.

This what Pelosi said about impeachment proceedings. Blocking of impeachment proceedings against Bush "In the wake of George W. Bush's reelection in 2004, several leading House Democrats believed that Democrats should pursue impeachment proceedings against the president. They asserted that Bush had misled Congress about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and had violated the civil liberties of Americans by authorizing wiretaps without a warrant. In May 2006, with an eye on the upcoming Congressional elections — which offered the possibility of Democrats taking back control of the House for the first time since 1994 — Pelosi told colleagues that, while the Democrats would conduct vigorous oversight of Bush administration policy, an impeachment investigation was "off the table." (A week earlier, she had told the Washington Post that, although Democrats would not set out to impeach the president, "you never know where" investigations might lead.)<12> Since becoming Speaker of the House in January 2007, Pelosi has held firm against impeachment, notwithstanding strong support for that course of action among constituents in her home district. In early July 2007, antiwar activist Cindy Sheehan announced that unless Pelosi moved to impeach Bush by July 23, Sheehan would run against Pelosi as an independent candidate in the 2008 election.<13> On July 10, 2008, Pelosi said of Dennis Kucinich's article of impeachment against President George W. Bush, introduced that day, "This is a Judiciary Committee matter, and I believe we will see some attention being paid to it by the Judiciary Committee. Not necessarily taking up the Articles of Impeachment because that would have to be approved on the floor, but to have some hearings on the subject. My expectation is that there will be some review of that in the Committee."<14> In the July 31, 2008, issue of Time Pelosi said, "You can't talk about impeachment unless you have the facts, and you can't have the facts unless you have cooperation from the Administration." NOTHING major has been said about the fraud, corruption and malfeasance exercised by Bush and his felonious cronies in Iraq. Mr Obama has also been strangely silent on the matter. For a lawyer and an accomplished orator one would have thought he would have been waxing lyrical about this Trillion Dollar fraud! After all, he now has to somehow sort out the fiscal and financial downsides! At least the Dems had the balls to impeach Nixon over Watergate. Ans that was minor, in a relative sense. I suppose one has to give Bush and his gang the style vote: if one sets out to steal from one's government at least he went for the big one!

It was politics, PS, nothing more, nothing less. Bush was going nowhere, he was pretty much a lame duck, but remember also that impeaching Bush would have put Cheney straight into the President's chair! :shock: :shock: :shock: There wouldn't have been enough time to go after both of them. It was an expedient and pragmatic decision that meant there was no real alternative. Watergate, in comparison was a cakewalk at a time when it was purely an internal affair. Bush's crimes were more external and very difficult to pin the blame on one man.

I really hope, Tony, that next year, Congress and the Senate go after the bastards behind this fraud. All the various American political and economic commentators I exchange perspective with seem to share an identical view on this, whether they are Goppies or Dems. Cheney, Rumsfield and Bush, as well as Poppa Bush and Carlisle have been engaged in this scam. Trouble is, whoever attempts to sort out this unholy fiscal mess has also the Bail Out scam as well! It transpires that far from using the $700 billion to ease liquidity in the wholesale and retail money markets, leeches like Morgan Chase have been Hoovering up troubled investment bank competitors at fire sale prices! Good, innit! Privatise the vast profits: and socialise the massive debts! And then take the debt relief to buy up asssets. Could only happen in the USA.

I'm with Tony on this one. I think we should give Obama a chance. You never know, he may surprise us. He is already picking his team, with someone called Rahm Emanuel tipped for one of the top jobs, according to the BBC. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/us_elections_2008/7712270.stm Rahm Emanuel? Never heard of him. Interesting background though, which comes as no surprise. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rahm_Emanuel However, there is still time and plenty of issues pending where hopefully Obama can prove that he is not merely George W Bush with a black face.

He's not that black. In fact, it appears that he has Scottish ancestry through his mother's side! Salmond is already claiming him as one of their own! Mr Salmond said Americans had chosen another president of Scottish descent. According to the BBC

Opportunistic little twat.

Emanuel, according to commentary I heard on the radio this afternoon, is a foul-mouthed, hard-nosed bulldog of a politician. The idea of picking him is to ensure that Obama is not seen by anyone as being a 'soft touch'. Emanuel isn't likely to be the only one of such character either. It's a good move to have a pack of dogs around, it will allow him to be who he wants to be knowing that he's got a high degree of political protection. I have a feeling that Obama is going to be quite an act and inviting Republicans into his cabinet will take a lot of the sting out of the opposition, such as it is after the election.

Unfortunately Tony, his daddy supported terrorists who killed British soldiers (among others). I realise they are PC 'freedom fighters' (just like the IRA) in contemporary political discourse amongst certain circles in the US, but terrorist 'freedom fighters' nonetheless.

Pity there are no white politicians like him. Wouldn't that be illegal?

He called his white grandmother a racist in public, for daring to say she got worried walking past groups of young black men in the street. Then pretends he gives a shit, when she died the other day. Believe me Percy, he is black. His Mother was a typical sixties left wing self hating white. His Father was like many black men with a taste for a bit of white. Shag them, impregnate them, then F*** off for a bit more of willing white women. Got any evidence to support your allegations? Apart from the fact we are all aware of, that his father did a runner.

Unfortunately Tony, his daddy supported terrorists who killed British soldiers (among others). Now wouldn't it be a surprise if you weren't talking about Irgun or some splinter thereof?

I'm just thinking of the time when Emanuel (or Obama with Emanuel by his side) has to stand up and condemn terrorism after an attack by Al-Qaida or whoever. I wonder if any one will dare expose the hypocrisy involved?

Hmm, I think that you are drawing two different parallels here and they are not converging... other than in your mind.