Bush (merge x4)

[Matt]

The Dems do not have a large enough majority to get anything done. The Republicans throw a wrench into anything that the Dems attempt to do that they don't agree with. If a larger majority is gained in November, expect to see some things done. Bush will not be impeached. At this point, what would be the point? He has no regard for anything or anyone anyway..

I'd just like to see it done as a way to stand up to him. His latest **** on the Constitution is unforgivable in my eyes.

 

[Raiden]

I'd just like to see it done as a way to stand up to him. His latest **** on the Constitution is unforgivable in my eyes.

Unfortunately, Bush has had blatant disregard for Constitution for the past 8 years, and as much as I'd like to see it done, Dems just don't have that big a majority to get something like this through the Congress. It's a travesty.

 

[Marx]

I'd just like to see it done as a way to stand up to him. His latest **** on the Constitution is unforgivable in my eyes.

I agree Matt. I just don't see how it serves any purpose. If the Dems stand up to him and offer impeachment proceedings (and they will lose due to Republican interference) it just paints the Dems as even more weak and unable to get anything done. Regardless of why they can't get it done won't be important. You know?

 

[Matt]

I agree Matt. I just don't see how it serves any purpose. If the Dems stand up to him and offer impeachment proceedings (and they will lose due to Republican interference) it just paints the Dems as even more weak and unable to get anything done. Regardless of why they can't get it done won't be important. You know?

Yeah, and it is sad that our system of checks and balances has become so tainted by partisan politics that a President will be allowed to trample the Constitution without any kind of resistance because Congressmen care more about party than country.

 

[Marx]

Yeah, and it is sad that our system of checks and balances has become so tainted by partisan politics that a President will be allowed to trample the Constitution without any kind of resistance because Congressmen care more about party than country.

It really is Matt. I couldn't agree more. This country has become so engrained and entrenched in partisan politcial warfare that the country is suffering as a result. And the politicians could all care less too...so long as their "party" has the upper hand.

 

[BlackLantern]

Yeah, and it is sad that our system of checks and balances has become so tainted by partisan politics that a President will be allowed to trample the Constitution without any kind of resistance because Congressmen care more about party than country.

I highly doubt our next President will be willing to restore or repair the damage done to the Constitution by the office of the President.

 

[Matt]

I highly doubt our next President will be willing to restore or repair the damage done to the Constitution by the office of the President.

As do I. Especially if a Democrat takes the White House. Then the Democrats in Congress will forget everything they were *****ing about in regards to Bush and embrace it with their President.

 

[Marx]

As do I. Especially if a Democrat takes the White House. Then the Democrats in Congress will forget everything they were *****ing about in regards to Bush and embrace it with their President.

Gotta love politics!

 

[Phallic]

Unless it was proven that Bush did something that violated the constitution in a gross manner, and have it be hard proof rather than speculation, then absolutely.

If not, then no. Impeachment in a time of war for the sole purpose of political disagreement will do nobody any good. If he is grossly violating American rights, then yes, he should.

Given how too little is known about the NSA deal, you really can't use that as a legitimate argument. Maybe you believe it to be so, but to do something like impeaching a president, you have to have HARD data.

 

[Phallic]

As do I. Especially if a Democrat takes the White House. Then the Democrats in Congress will forget everything they were *****ing about in regards to Bush and embrace it with their President.

 

[EdRyder]

As do I. Especially if a Democrat takes the White House. Then the Democrats in Congress will forget everything they were *****ing about in regards to Bush and embrace it with their President.

I couldnt disagree more.When you run down the laundry list of Bush's **** ups the sum of them all fall on the incompetents he appointed to office.

Gonzales, Libby , Wolfowitz.
Matteo Fontana, J Steven Griles, Darleen Druyen, Bob Cobb, Phil Coony, SueEllen Wooldridge, Claude Allen , David Safavian, Eric Keroack, Julie MacDonald...****ing Abramoff.

Its almost impossible for any administration to recreate this level of ******ation.

 

[Marx]

Unless it was proven that Bush did something that violated the constitution in a gross manner, and have it be hard proof rather than speculation, then absolutely.

If not, then no. Impeachment in a time of war for the sole purpose of political disagreement will do nobody any good. If he is grossly violating American rights, then yes, he should.

Given how too little is known about the NSA deal, you really can't use that as a legitimate argument. Maybe you believe it to be so, but to do something like impeaching a president, you have to have HARD data.

Presidents are more than capable of being impeached in a time of war. There are definately grounds for impeachment. To suggest that it would only be the result of political disagreement would tell me that you haven't been paying attention.

 

[Marx]

I couldnt disagree more.When you run down the laundry list of Bush's **** ups the sum of them all fall on the incompetents he appointed to office.

Gonzales, Libby , Wolfowitz.
Matteo Fontana, J Steven Griles, Darleen Druyen, Bob Cobb, Phil Coony, SueEllen Wooldridge, Claude Allen , David Safavian, Eric Keroack, Julie MacDonald...****ing Abramoff.

Its almost impossible for any administration to recreate this level of ******ation.

When it comes down to it, I honestly don't believe a Democratic president would pull off such a gross level of misconduct. Call it naive, but I see what I see.

 

[BlackLantern]

abuse of power has many forms...giving incompetent people jobs is merely one aspect of it...I guarantee that whoever gets into the White House, be it Dem or Republican, will put that surveillance bill through, in one form or another...

 

[Marx]

abuse of power has many forms...giving incompetent people jobs is merely one aspect of it...I guarantee that whoever gets into the White House, be it Dem or Republican, will put that surveillance bill through, in one form or another...

If it's a Dem, I'm not so sure BL.

 

[BlackLantern]

If it's a Dem, I'm not so sure BL.

Some backroom/golf course deal will get made...if the Dems have an important bill they want to get through, the Republicans will offer to help if they get support for the surveillance bill...

 

[Marx]

Some backroom/golf course deal will get made...if the Dems have an important bill they want to get through, the Republicans will offer to help if they get support for the surveillance bill...

Anything is always possible. Given the history of the two, Republicans are usually the ones to step on civil liberties and the constitution.

 

[BlackLantern]

It will get wrapped in a vien of "keeping America safe"...I would hope people don't fall for it...but if so get ready to have the government read your emails and all that

 

[Marx]

It will get wrapped in a vien of "keeping America safe"...I would hope people don't fall for it...but if so get ready to have the government read your emails and all that

Now that people seem to have caught on to this administrations antics, I would hope any attempt made would be pretty transparent.

 

[Phallic]

Presidents are more than capable of being impeached in a time of war. There are definately grounds for impeachment. To suggest that it would only be the result of political disagreement would tell me that you haven't been paying attention.

Under what proven grounds?

 

[Joker]

At this time, there would be no god damn point. The guy has a year left...By the time they actually got the proceedings going, he would be gone anyway. It just shows how f**ked up this countries standards are that if a man lies about getting a hummer, impeached, but if a man lies about why he starts a war, illegally taps citizens phones, arrests people with no just cause, and is involved in torture scandals, we do nothing.

 

[Superman]

At this time, there would be no god damn point. The guy has a year left...By the time they actually got the proceedings going, he would be gone anyway. It just shows how f**ked up this countries standards are that if a man lies about getting a hummer, impeached, but if a man lies about why he starts a war, illegally taps citizens phones, arrests people with no just cause, and is involved in torture scandals, we do nothing.

That's what happens when you let Neo-Cons run the country.

 

[Matt]

Under what proven grounds?

Aiding and abetting people who are refusing to comply with a valid Congressional subpeona (which is a crime).

 

[Marx]

Aiding and abetting people who are refusing to comply with a valid Congressional subpeona (which is a crime).

I agree Matt. The last I checked that was a crime.

 

[YsoSerious]

So am I reading correct that you want to waste even more money in impeaching a president that has under a year left, and then let Dick Cheney take over to totally f^%k things up? Sounds like a democrat's idea to me.