What about Nixon, can we post a thwart about Nixon?

he's been dead a long time. fire away...

And Lyndon, and Woodrow, and Carter too?

seems you've thwarted them repeatedly

Leave the compound fast pat. -- it will be good for you.

Wait a minute, Carter only looks dead, never mind.

Changing the argument to one you would rather engage in is why some have trouble taking you seriously. No one has posted that the Republican party is the answer for anything. This thread is about the supposed "most ethical" party ever. For all the complaints about the other party, I don't see you or anyone in the "ethical" party doing anything except making excuse or trying to change the subject. It speaks a lot to whether you really want a "more ethical" party or just a more liberal one...regardless of ethics. As always...the end seems to justify the means.

thwart

Here's a clue. We Americans are demanding justice and accountability, and we don't care what your party is, we don't care what you did for the government yesterday, and we don't care what you think you're going to do for us tomorrow.

good word

Republican Ethics. Hmm.....

Let's see, during the last 6 years we've seen:
-Our country stuck in a budget-draining fiasco of a "war" which was unrelated to AlQaida
-The countries of orgin(Saudis living in Afghanistan and hiding in Pakistan) pretty much ignored.
-Our civil liberties given cement shoes and walked off the pier
-Blanket suppression of Media and Science through a multitude of techniques
-Our country deep in debt to Communists (newly trained to directly replace US buisnesses)
-A cokehead AWOL POTUS and a draft-doging VP acting like military heros
-A V.P. who shoots guys in the face- while hunting without a licence out of season (of course it was the Texas DNR reps land and no blood-alcohol was done)
-A POTUS directly tied to energy companies using stag-coach-robber techniques on select west-coast states
-Blatant corruption by DeLay/Abramoff/etc/etc.....

Did I miss anything?

Much like the Spanish Inquisition, no one expects Chaucer:

Whan that April with his showres soote
The droughte of March hath perced to the roote,
And bathed every veine in swich licour,
Of which vertu engendered is the flowr;
Whan Zephyrus eek with his sweete breeth
Inspired hath in every holt and heeth
The tendre croppes, and the yonge sonne
Hath in the Ram his halve cours yonne
And small fowles maken melodye

All true, but then there's the oxymoron of Democrat Ethics.

What are we to do?

No but you didn't hit anything either. I have yet to see anywhere that you pointed out an actual law was broken. Only the same old endless loop of "I hate Bush." The only actual lawbreaker even mentioned that I can see is Abramhoff...who gave money to both Republicans and Democrats...and is in jail right now. I cant even give you a "good try" for that.

No laws are broken when no laws are enforced. Blanket legislation, selective enforcement. Why have law?

Reminds me of a sugar cereal commercial where the kids announce "we eat what we like".

"This world nys but a thurghfare ful of wo,
And we been pilgrymes, passing to and fro.
Deet is an ende of every worldly soore."

That makes absolutely no sense. Laws can certainly be broken...regardless of whether the laws are enforced. Can you cite a law that was broken by Republicans so we can discuss it instead of all this endless innuendo...whether it was enforced or not? You have not as yet....but you seem just fine with the Democrats who are actually breaking specific laws...and were caught redhanded...like Conyers and others in this thread.

Oh, look, the neocon version of "no controlling authority."

The thing is: while Bushies are busy building up the uber-federal government, 'ya know the one which needs to make sure you wipe, they got the propaganda machine in full swing advertising themselves as "common working men".
It sure will be a shock to Americans to see the same policies with a different face.

Bush has back-tracked so many times that no one can predict where he's going(is that the heisenberg principle?).

no, the heisenberg principle says you cannot simultaneously know a particle's location and momentum (or more accurately, the more accurately you measure one, the less accurate the other). In part because observing influences the outcome.