Bush approval rating at all time low @ 45%

Mr. Pessimistic

Bush S@(KS

I still ponder how this loser won the Presidency once. I find it hard to comprehend, I really do. It always amazes me how some people can see things so clearly and some are just clouded in a fog of ignorance.

The only reason this bum has not been impeached is because the insane have control of the asylum. Any one party having control of the government in totality is dangerous IMHO. At least the courts are rational...yet there is character assassination going on against 'liberal' judges by this out of control, radical, far right-wing freakshow that has usurped the integrity of our once proud and exemplary country.

The Neo-Con machine is inebriated on the power they have and are looking at nothing short of a total takeover of our nation and our culture of tolerance and diversity. We need to stop this. Will voting Democrat do this? Not even in the most wildest dream. We need a renovation of our house. We as a people need to find the spirit and drive of those who created this nation and fix what is broken.

We cannot let the idea of a just civilization be subjugated by big business interests and power hungry spoiled brats.

Mr. P.

The one thing of which I am positive is that there is much of which to be negative - Mr. P.

I came to get down, I came to get down. So get out ya seat and jump around - House of Pain

HEY! Is that a ball in your court? - Mr. P

I came to kick ass and chew Bubble Gum...and I am all out of Bubble Gum - They Live, Roddy Piper

Edited by: misterpessimistic at: 3/25/05 10:28 am

scrumfish

What do you think he should be impeached for?

jjacobs43

For starters, he should be impeached for lying to us in his state of the union address regarding Iraq's attempts to obtain nuclear weapons.

Mr. Pessimistic

Many things...all involving lying. Well, we could pick anything and it would still be better reason than what the Republicans did to Clinton.

Oh...STARTING a war for no reason when there was other means. He is the first President to actually start a war.

Mr. P.

The one thing of which I am positive is that there is much of which to be negative - Mr. P.

The pain in hell has two sides. The kind you can touch with your hand; the kind you can feel in your heart...Scorsese's "Mean Streets"

HEY! Is that a ball in your court? - Mr. P

I came to kick ass and chew Bubble Gum...and I am all out of Bubble Gum - They Live, Roddy Piper

scrumfish

I don't think starting a war is grounds for impeachment for the commander-in-chief. He got approval from congress. Well, sort of a blank check that could be interpreted in that way. Or is there some rule somewhere that I don't know? That is quite likely since I haven't studied U.S. government very enthusiastically. I don't think there is a law against starting a war, it's just not usually done that way here. Bush had laid out a doctrine of pre-emptive strikes before 9-11, I believe, and I think checking for legality is something they do for a president's policies. Correct me if I'm wrong, I very well could be.

Lying, well…where's the proof? Anyone who would know if Bush deliberately lied is probably part of his team, and I highly doubt that anyone of them would volunteer to testify or be very forthcoming if they were subpoenaed. Against Clinton they had a tattling illegal recorder and someone who didn't have as much to lose as Bush's people, so they had people to testify that Clinton had lied.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see Bush out of the White House. What I wouldn't want to see is another uncalled for distraction that might raise the apathy level. Convince me there's actually a good reason to impeach him! If there is solid grounds for it, then I will join you in decrying the non-Republican useless fools in government.

Mr. Pessimistic

Where is the PROOF that Clinton lied? Come now, two chattering women are not much PROOF of anything; he was not removed from office, so he musy have been NOT lying, right? We have had two books written by people who were in the Bush inner circles that told of how Bush was a disaster as Commander in Chief.

Paul O'Neil was specifically chosen by the Bush team. The fact that Iraq was a preoccupation with Cheney and others in this government, even before 9/11, is enough for me to impeach him...since he STARTED the war on very loose evidence that was questioned by many long before the "Shock and Awe" mission began.

Bush is a danger. He is cutting and SPENDING, traditionally not a Republican model. He is driving defecits high, and now there is news that the deficits may be a major problem in our future. It was ranked higher than Terrorism on the list of things most effecting our economy recently. Fuck the distraction and apathy, I will take the chance. Things will not get better unless there is major change anyway...and if it takes a schism to achieve that, then I am all for it! In any event, I would like to see him gone prior to 2008.

}

)

Mr. P.

The one thing of which I am positive is that there is much of which to be negative - Mr. P.

The pain in hell has two sides. The kind you can touch with your hand; the kind you can feel in your heart...Scorsese's "Mean Streets"

HEY! Is that a ball in your court? - Mr. P

I came to kick ass and chew Bubble Gum...and I am all out of Bubble Gum - They Live, Roddy Piper

Mr. Pessimistic

And all I am saying is that if there was Democratic control in the Congress...there would probably have been a move to impeach. They tried for years to get something to stick on Clinton...and just LOOK what they spent so much money on...a blow job. Perverts! :P

Mr. P.

The one thing of which I am positive is that there is much of which to be negative - Mr. P.

The pain in hell has two sides. The kind you can touch with your hand; the kind you can feel in your heart...Scorsese's "Mean Streets"

HEY! Is that a ball in your court? - Mr. P

I came to kick ass and chew Bubble Gum...and I am all out of Bubble Gum - They Live, Roddy Piper

scrumfish

Ya, all that was pretty sad. 2 not so great witnesses are not definitive proof of anything, but is there anyone at all who would testify that Bush deliberately lied? Even an uncredible witness? Being a disaster as president is not a good thing, but it is not exactly grounds for impeachment. I don't think starting a war is either. I thought that all that would have been enough to lose him a second term, but I guess I don't have my finger on the heartbeat of America. I have resigned myself to living with it for the rest of this term and getting more involved. Moving back to North Dakota has given me an awesome opportunity to watch the state government close up since my father is quite involved and there's not that many people waiting in line here, and there are PLENTY of people around for my to convert from republicanism to independentism.

I really don't see a solid case for trying for impeachment. But like I said earlier, I am not positive about the legality of pre-emptive strikes.

atsquish

I think that if the Democrats take back a morjority in 06 (which might happen if DeLay keeps talking), the first things you'd see happen are investigations into issues such as the war, torture, looting, contracts, and other corruption issues. If these investigations uncover huge scandals, then an impeachment might be plausable, but I think that it's a long shot. Even though polls are coming out that say that most Americans think that Iraq wasn't worth it, I don't think they'd support an impeachment. If the democrats tried something like that without some in your face smoking gun news story, they'd just be hurting themselves.

Mr. Pessimistic

Yet Clinton was impeached over, IMO, nothing...I just do not get it.

Mr. P.

The one thing of which I am positive is that there is much of which to be negative - Mr. P.

The pain in hell has two sides. The kind you can touch with your hand; the kind you can feel in your heart...Scorsese's "Mean Streets"

I came to kick ass and chew Bubble Gum...and I am all out of Bubble Gum - They Live, Roddy Piper


	FORUMS	ABOUT	BOOKS	VIDEOS	ADVERTISE	LINKS	BLOGS	DONATE	CHAT	CONTACT