USA Today ad asks you to impeach Bush

[DjfunkmasterG]

A nice sized ad (1/4 page) in the USA Today is asking you to contact congress for the impeachment of G.W. Bush. The ad, an advertisement paid for by impeaachbush.org is citing 3 major articles to impeach the pres on. They also site article 2 section 4 whereas the pres and vice pres and all civil officers of the US shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

I hate the man, but I find the article funny because everything they site.

Secret prisons, lying to Congress about the war, and the wiretap is no different from what his father and Reagan did. Yet they remained in office. Congress tried to impeach clinton and it didn't work... However, Clinton didn't do all of the above either, all he did was get a blow job. So what are your thoughts?

All in all based on the bs as of late I would say yes... let's bounce his ass out now, but on the other hand I don't want Cheney sitting in as acting pres.

[EvilNed]

I wonder why they even bother. it'll never work. I mean, sure, it's a nice thought. But it takes alot more than this to get a president impeached!

[Zombie-A-GoGo]

I'm for impeachment.

[Mike70]

Secret prisons, lying to Congress about the war, and the wiretap is no different from what his father and Reagan did. Yet they remained in office. Congress tried to impeach clinton and it didn't work... However, Clinton didn't do all of the above either, all he did was get a blow job. So what are your thoughts?

my thoughts are right in line with your thoughts. i think it laughable that the right went nuts over clinton lying to congress about getting blown but yet they continue to defend this muppet who has lied to and misled congress several times and gotten literally thousands of people killed, thousands more maimed, and last and certainly not least there are tens of thousands of people who are going to suffer psychologically for the rest of their lives.

what a wonderful human being, huh?

[Marie]

However, Clinton didn't do all of the above either, all he did was get a blow job. So what are your thoughts?

All in all based on the bs as of late I would say yes... let's bounce his ass out now, but on the other hand I don't want Cheney sitting in as acting pres.

Clinton did his screw-ups of things in the world arena too. The Press and the Democrats weren't shouting it from the housetops and trying to find out how he succeeded so they can risk American lives to make him look bad. Maybe because all he succeeded in was killing them himself and convincing people like Osama that we'd run if we took casualties.

M_

[Exatreides]

Clinton was impeached by the House, just not the Senate.

Clinton was impeached for purgry right? For lying to the American people? Well has Bush done anything else besides lie to the American people?

[zombie04]

I just don't understand why so many people form so many conspiracies about the Bush administration that they demand an impeachment. Roughly 30% of the country has been totally against him from the beginning and they wouldn't give him a chance under any circumstance. I understand that some may not like everything he does and it is understandable, however I think he really has done a whole lot more good than bad. For one, the war in Iraq was not some great deception, there is nothing wrong with the domestic spy program, and I don't see how anybody could say he purposely let something happen like 9/11 happen. I don't believe any politician would've let that happen just to increase poll numbers. It's those people who believe that kind of thing that are ruining this country.

[Exatreides]

there is nothing wrong with the domestic spy program

Freedom is Slavery!

[Cody]

clinton was a good president, in office he lowered the national debt, with bush thats been through the fkin roof if anyones noticed this

yeah impeach

[zombie04]

clinton was a good president, in office he lowered the national debt, with bush thats been through the fkin roof if anyones noticed this



he also put us in a recession. those surpluses everybody gave him credit for were slippng away starting in March 2000.

[DjfunkmasterG]

he also put us in a recession. those surpluses everybody gave him credit for were slippng away starting in March 2000.

Blame Alan greenspan for that. Greenspan wanted to prove he was in control of the economy so he continued to raise interest rates which helped start the recession. 9/11 only pushed it over the edge. Clinton had zilch to do with the economic recession that is covered by the people who run the federal reserve and people like Alan greenspan.

[Arcades057]

I for one am still waiting for someone, anyone, to prove that George W. Bush lied about anything. It's easy for morons to constantly spout it over and over again... but that doesn't make it true.

Baaaaaa

[Exatreides]

"Iraq has weapons of mass destruction."

[MapMan]

Impeach !!!! Throw in a RECALL ELECTION !!!

[Marie]

Clinton was impeached by the House, just not the Senate.

Clinton was impeached for purgry right? For lying to the American people? Well has Bush done anything else besides lie to the American people?

Clinton was impeached for lying to a legal authority. He was saved by party politics. Frankly, he was IMO a horndog party animal and if the women in his past were any guide, a rapist.

Nobody's brought Bush up on charges yet. We will see what happens if they ever do. They brought Nixon up on charges, but unlike what Shakespere said was the norm (The evil men do lives after them, while the good is oft interred with their bones) people most remember the good he did.

M_

[Exatreides]

Well during Clinton, America was at the heighest point it's been since post World War two IMO.

Don't blame clinton! Blame Ross Perot for sucking up those needed middle votes in 1992. He recived about 23% of the vote I think, and Bush would have been re elected had not been him.

[Arcades057]

Exa, the "Iraq had WMDs" thing was not Bush himself coming to the conclusion. It was the CIA, MI5, KGB (or whatever) the UN, Mossad, every other intel service, and Saddam himself that made Bush come to that conclusion. To say "Bush lied" and disregard all of the other evidence pointing to the fact that he did not, is like actually having voted for Kerry after hearing him speak once.

Then again, I know a lot of people here did vote for him...

[Exatreides]

BUSH: We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories. [Bush on Polish TV, 5/29/03]

BUSH: We recently found two mobile biological weapons facilities which were capable of producing biological agents[Bush, 6/5/03]

[ipotts85]

I wonder why they even bother. it'll never work. I mean, sure, it's a nice thought. But it takes alot more than this to get a president impeached!

obviously not. clinton and johnson did far less than bush. clinton was actually impeached for getting a bj, and johnson was almost impeached for equally as bs reasons. so why would you argue that it would take a lot more?


Exa, the "Iraq had WMDs" thing was not Bush himself coming to the conclusion. It was the CIA, MI5, KGB (or whatever) the UN, Mossad, every other intel service, and Saddam himself that made Bush come to that conclusion. To say "Bush lied" and disregard all of the other evidence pointing to the fact that he did not, is like actually having voted for Kerry after hearing him speak once.

Then again, I know a lot of people here did vote for him...

it has also been pointed out that bush knew that this information was not definate by any means.


Clinton was impeached for lying to a legal authority. He was saved by party politics. Frankly, he was IMO a horndog party animal and if the women in his past were any guide, a rapist.

Nobody's brought Bush up on charges yet. We will see what happens if they ever do. They brought Nixon up on charges, but unlike what Shakespere said was the norm (The evil men do lives after them, while the good is oft interred with their bones) people most remember the good he did.

M_

the good that clinton did or the good that nixon did? because both could be argued.


...and I don't see how anybody could say he purposely let something happen like 9/11 happen. I don't believe any politician would've let that happen just to increase poll numbers. It's those people who believe that kind of thing that are ruining this country.

first, i would recommend you do a little research into bush's presidency, as well as his administration. this statement shows an obvious ignorance.

concerning your 9/11 statement : it is a known fact that the united states had cracked the japanese operational code almost a year before pearl harbor. it is also a fact that there was substantial intelligence that the japanese were planning an attack on pearl harbor. it has even been suggested that franklin roosevelt allowed this to occur to create a reason for the united states to become involved in world war II. doesn't seem so outrageous that bush would allow 9/11 to happen now, does it?

[Marie]

obviously not. clinton and johnson did far less than bush. clinton was actually impeached for getting a bj, and johnson was almost impeached for equally as bs reasons. so why would you argue that it would take a lot more? <snip>
the good that clinton did or the good that nixon did?

It takes Congressional action, which, until the Democrats retake Congress (pretty big "IF" IMO) is unlikely. Both your examples (Clinton and Nixon) were involving congresses held by the opposition party. Johnson had a Democratic majority in place.

The good Nixon did.... maybe it's sexist of me, but I can't think of how Clinton treated women as "Good" for the country or anything else.

M_

[DjfunkmasterG]

It takes Congressional action, which, until the Democrats retake Congress (pretty big "IF" IMO) is unlikely.

M_

Thank god i don't live in your fantasy land. Do you actually think there will still be a republican controlled congress after the elections this year?

if you answer is yes, Can i have some of what you're smoking? :D

[AcesandEights]

Roughly 30% of the country has been totally against him from the beginning and they wouldn't give him a chance under any circumstance.

I ernestly gave Bush a chance, but he blew it...time and time again. Maybe if he took responsibility for, well, anything I'd be inclined to be more forgiving.


Thank god i don't live in your fantasy land. Do you actually think there will still be a republican controlled congress after the elections this year?

if you answer is yes, Can i have some of what you're smoking? :D

I don't know, DJ. A lot can change between now and then, and people have a short attention span; witness the playing of the Gay Marriage Card, as a means to obfuscate the wiretapping, the war, the bungled foreign policy, the chipping away at personal liberties, the black prisons, the coming of the next recession etc., etc.

Both sides of the fence need to stop voting these crooks into office. I say all new (slightly less experienced) crooks!

[DjfunkmasterG]

I am all for less experienced crooks, makes for better news coverage when they screw up and get caught because they had no old timers to learn from.:D

[zombie04]

Blame Alan greenspan for that. Greenspan wanted to prove he was in control of the economy so he continued to raise interest rates which helped start the recession. 9/11 only pushed it over the edge. Clinton had zilch to do with the economic recession that is covered by the people who run the federal reserve and people like Alan greenspan.

Well, there really was alot to blame for the recession. Especially the fact that the technology boom in the late 90s raised the economy so high and kept it there artificially until it came crashing down did a real number. But I do think Clinton was truly lucky to be president when he did. He was the first president in a very long time who did not have to deal with the Soviet Union and since we were the only superpower, we naturally got a good economy out of it. I do think if he faced any real disasters on a global scale between 1993-1995 he would've gotten the boot in 1996. To me he was basically there at the right place at the right time.

[ipotts85]

Well, there really was alot to blame for the recession. Especially the fact that the technology boom in the late 90s raised the economy so high and kept it there artificially until it came crashing down did a real number. But I do think Clinton was truly lucky to be president when he did. He was the first president in a very long time who did not have to deal with the Soviet Union and since we were the only superpower, we naturally got a good economy out of it. I do think if he faced any real disasters on a global scale between 1993-1995 he would've gotten the boot in 1996. To me he was basically there at the right place at the right time.

bush may have been caught at the downside of an economic recession, but the massive tax cuts didn't help the situation, and his misling of the budget surplus didn't either. also, look at bush's situation at election time 2004: on paper, he shouldn't have won re-election.. and yet he managed to. (of course, his opposition didn't help the situation much...


It takes Congressional action, which, until the Democrats retake Congress (pretty big "IF" IMO) is unlikely. Both your examples (Clinton and Nixon) were involving congresses held by the opposition party. Johnson had a Democratic majority in place.

The good Nixon did.... maybe it's sexist of me, but I can't think of how Clinton treated women as "Good" for the country or anything else.

M_

yeah, i'd much prefer a lying crook to a womanizer.

[Marie]

Do you actually think there will still be a republican controlled congress after the elections this year?

if you answer is yes, Can i have some of what you're smoking? :D

We'll just have to see if history bears me out won't we? We know the press and the Deocrats want a Democrat sweep of Congress, but there's those pesky ignorant voters who just won't vote for higher taxes and U.N. control of the United States. Lets wait and see what THEY do.

M_


yeah, i'd much prefer a lying crook to a womanizer.

Actually he was both in one man.... and you KNOW who I'm talking about....

M_

[deadwrtr]

I don't know, DJ. A lot can change between now and then, and people have a short attention span; witness the playing of the Gay Marriage Card, as a means to obfuscate the wiretapping, the war, the bungled foreign policy, the chipping away at personal liberties, the black prisons, the coming of the next recession etc., etc.

Both sides of the fence need to stop voting these crooks into office. I say all new (slightly less experienced) crooks!

Funny thing about the Gay Marriage card: The Gay community hasn't been screaming from the rooftops about gay marriage, this was an issue brought up by republicans to energize their voting base, and you see how that turned out. True there will always be people vocal about the subject, but certain Repubs are obviously trying to turn this into something it isn't. Even some people within the Republican party voted no to the amendment to the constitution.

[AcesandEights]

Funny thing about the Gay Marriage card: The Gay community hasn't been screaming from the rooftops about gay marriage, this was an issue brought up by republicans to energize their voting base, and you see how that turned out. True there will always be people vocal about the subject, but certain Repubs are obviously trying to turn this into something it isn't. Even some people within the Republican party voted no to the amendment to the constitution.

I know. That's exactly what i was referring to in my previous post.

Edited for making a grammatical error that annoyed me to such an extent that I could not ignore it.

[Zombie-A-GoGo]

yeah, i'd much prefer a lying crook to a womanizer.

I'm a woman and even I would prefer a womanizer to a lying crook. Especially a lying religous zealot crook.

[DeadJonas190]

We know the press and the Deocrats want a Democrat sweep of Congress, but there's those pesky ignorant voters who just won't vote for higher taxes and U.N. control of the United States. Lets wait and see what THEY do.


Pesky ignorant voters... couldn't have put it better myself.

U.N. control? Crazy talk.

Do you remember that one kid in school who refused to listen to the teacher, would constantly cause disruptions in class to distract people from what he was actually doing and then lied about his actions even when he was caught?

The school bully. Yeah, thats what we have now as our government. Sometimes, listening to an outside source and taking their advice when it is better than our own will lead to a better result.

Anyway, as for impeachment, we are better off with Bush in office than Cheny. At least Bush is comparable to a monkey...