sweetheart-mine Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 One guy lied under oath, that's why he was impeached. Whether George Bush broke the law is mostly a matter of opinion and would be pretty hard to prove. wow. Link to post Share on other sites
ShuckOwens Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Yeah, impeach the guy that cheated on his wife vs. the guy that completely sold out his entire country.Perjury is a crime. Liberating millions of Iraqis, and taking legal action stateside, and military action worldwide to decimate Al Queda is not. Calling George Bush a war criminal at a rock concert does not make him an actual war criminal. Link to post Share on other sites
fatheadfred Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 He didn't really say much, but if you really want me to... Why is coming from the military an inherently bad thing? And why should Barrack be given a free pass about lobbying money? Because you happen to agree with his politics? Or because you think he'll do better things with the lobby money? Then what you are saying is you only care about lobbyists if Republicans are involved. Well, Obama obviously loves his wife way more than McCain does, that's for damn sure. If you are worth 2 million dollars, you love your wife. But not 140. That's where the line is drawn. I hoped to clarify that the McCain name was well established, respected. John the Maverick seemed to parallel W's bio. I don't think it is abnormal to fight the expectations of our fathers, especially when they are higher ups in the military, CIA, government, etc. It must be rough. But we are comparing two people. We are pulling out all the stops. In this particular situation, John was able to cash his crony checks in regard to graduating from the Naval academy and wrecking planes. While Obama has the sappy American tale of rugged individualism. In this sense, I relate. I struggle as many of us do. In this sense he has a better ability to relate to the majority of the US population. The Dem party, in itself, does a better job of siding w/ people instead of corporations. I am not saying they don't accept lobbies, they do; however they seem to get the leftovers after the Reps. cash out. Uh, the $ figure wasn't mention as a symbol of love. It is strange, though, that Johnny turned his back on his wife and the navy, then punched his ticket w/ the silver spoons and ran for office. Career move. Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 wow. I'm not saying he should've been impeached, but there was more of a case on him than there is for Bush. They proved perjury for Bush (and someone correct me if I'm wrong), they would have to prove that Bush willingly and knowingly led the country to war under false pretenses. And even then, I'm not sure that is an impeachable offense, since I'm not sure there are actual laws against, that, though again I could be wrong. Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 I hoped to clarify that the McCain name was well established, respected. John the Maverick seemed to parallel W's bio. I don't think it is abnormal to fight the expectations of our fathers, especially when they are higher ups in the military, CIA, government, etc. It must be rough. But we are comparing two people. We are pulling out all the stops. In this particular situation, John was able to cash his crony checks in regard to graduating from the Naval academy and wrecking planes. While Obama has the sappy American tale of rugged individualism. In this sense, I relate. I struggle as many of us do. In this sense he has a better ability to relate to the majority of the US population. The Dem party, in itself, does a better job of siding w/ people instead of corporations. I am not saying they don't accept lobbies, they do; however they seem to get the leftovers after the Reps. cash out. Uh, the $ figure wasn't mention as a symbol of love. It is strange, though, that Johnny turned his back on his wife and the navy, then punched his ticket w/ the silver spoons and ran for office. Career move. It seems like you are assuming a lot of things here, and that's my problem with this. It's unfair to ASSUME things about someone's personal life. As for the democrats taking less money from corporations, come on. If they do, it's probably incrementally smaller, and it doesn't really matter. If you've convinced yourself they care more about you than they do perpetuating a cycle that keeps them in power and keeps money in their pockets, good for you. It must be easier to vote for them with a clean conscience, but I can't bring myself to do it. Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 I have probably said this before, but my logic is Democrats are slightly more likely to do something to help me out than Republicans, so I vote Democrat more than nine times out of 10. There are a few Republicans I vote for, but that's because I know them personally and think they are good dudes. Link to post Share on other sites
Sal Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Perjury is a crime. Liberating millions of Iraqis, and taking legal action stateside, and military action worldwide to decimate Al Queda is not. Calling George Bush a war criminal at a rock concert does not make him an actual war criminal. Liberating millions of Iraqis? I think you have that backwards. We have killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and displaced millions more. And for what? Saddam was our ally up until the day he invaded Kuwait. It is all about the oil and Bush's machismo. We also violated International law. Oh yeah, is President Moron still looking for Osama or does that take too much work? Link to post Share on other sites
MrRain422 Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Torture is a crime. So is conspiracy. So is contempt of Congress. So is lying to start a war. So is spying on Americans without a warrant. So is extraordinary rendition. So is preemptive war. So is destruction of White House records. etc Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 I have probably said this before, but my logic is Democrats are slightly more likely to do something to help me out than Republicans, so I vote Democrat more than nine times out of 10. There are a few Republicans I vote for, but that's because I know them personally and think they are good dudes. I think this is a good way to think about it. But if Jules or JUDE said it, they'd have people asking them how they look at themselves in the mirror or how they sleep at night. This place is fun. And I really think if it was so easy to have the president impeached that a dude on a message board could wrap it up, it would've happened already. Link to post Share on other sites
fatheadfred Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Newsflash: he ain't on the ticket. Keep up. Oh, until the Enquirer proves me wrong, he is still married to his wife. Link to post Share on other sites
MrRain422 Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 The fact that Bush has not been impeached has nothing at all to do with a lack of evidence. It has to do with Democrats having no spine, that Democratic leadership has decided (rightly or wrongly depending on your perspective) that pursuing impeachment would be politically damaging for Democrats, and because some members of Congress from both parties don't want investigations because of how they may be personally implicated. Link to post Share on other sites
Sal Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 The fact that Bush has not been impeached has nothing at all to do with a lack of evidence. It has to do with Democrats having no spine, that Democratic leadership has decided (rightly or wrongly depending on your perspective) that pursuing impeachment would be politically damaging for Democrats, and because some members of Congress from both parties don't want investigations because of how they may be personally implicated. Politics. Couldn't have said it any better. The Dems also probably remembered how it backfired on the Republicans in the 90's. Clinton's approval rating actually went up. Link to post Share on other sites
fatheadfred Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 this is the debate about our next president?Yeah, get on board, let's ride. Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Well, what is to be gained from impeaching Bush? Link to post Share on other sites
Atticus Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 The fact that Bush has not been impeached has nothing at all to do with a lack of evidence. It has to do with Democrats having no spine, that Democratic leadership has decided (rightly or wrongly depending on your perspective) that pursuing impeachment would be politically damaging for Democrats, and because some members of Congress from both parties don't want investigations because of how they may be personally implicated. are you kidding me? a prosecutor with indictable evidence moves. that is just plain silly. and the political angle would be uncalculable. cite ANY credible evidence that an indictment against Bush has been stymied by political pressure. Link to post Share on other sites
fatheadfred Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 wow. Yeah, I am rolling too. Link to post Share on other sites
Party @ the Moontower Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Perjury is a crime. Liberating millions of Iraqis, and taking legal action stateside, and military action worldwide to decimate Al Queda is not. Calling George Bush a war criminal at a rock concert does not make him an actual war criminal. Are U serious? Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Well, what is to be gained from impeaching Bush?Maybe the feeling that was around after Nixon quit - that the system can be abused, but it holds up to that abuse and can right itself. That said, it would have been an awful catharsis to impeach Bush. It would have been like the whole country being on an episode of that show "Intervention." There would be anger, tears, maybe even civil unrest in some spots. (Like New Paltz!) And what if he and Cheney didn't want to go? We'd be like a Latin American country - our fate decided by who the military supported. Link to post Share on other sites
Sal Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 are you kidding me? a prosecutor with indictable evidence moves. that is just plain silly. and the political angle would be uncalculable. cite ANY credible evidence that an indictment against Bush has been stymied by political pressure. The Prosecutor would be the House of Representatives. There is no way they would do it due to potential fallout. Link to post Share on other sites
fatheadfred Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Well, what is to be gained from impeaching Bush? To show future politicians, especially the Prez., that they cannot rewrite laws to line pocketbooks of oil companies and the defense industry at the expense of tax dollars and the lives of American soldiers and foreign civilians. A little more important that telling the prez he can't get his knob slobbed in office. Link to post Share on other sites
Atticus Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 The Prosecutor would be the House of Representatives. There is no way they would do it due to potential fallout. all points aside I freaking adore your avatar Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 The extent that democrats misunderstand the impeachment trial of Clinton is astounding. And once again, the person who makes sense to me is Bjorn. Link to post Share on other sites
Sal Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 all points aside I freaking adore your avatar People tell me I look like Jack Kerouac. I don't see the resemblance. Link to post Share on other sites
Party @ the Moontower Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 People tell me I look like Jack Kerouac. I don't see the resemblance. Good looks will get you far in life Sal Dylan or not dude? Link to post Share on other sites
Sal Posted August 27, 2008 Share Posted August 27, 2008 Good looks will get you far in life Sal Dylan or not dude? I could say the same about you. Don't know about Dylan yet, going to make the call now. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts