TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › The call for Impeachment begins!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The call for Impeachment begins!  

post #1 of 99
Thread Starter 
post #2 of 99
This doesn't have any real-life implications though. Sadly.

http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1639

Most presidents in recent history have done something impeachable. Two of them have been impeached... And Bush is the first one to have admitted to an impeachable offense (requesting wiretaps without any approval from anyone).

Bout time we fired him. After all, we never hired him in the first place. If he worked anywhere but politics... well... he sure wouldn't be the ceo.
post #3 of 99
To be honest, the call for impeachment started about 10 minutes after he was sworn in the first time.

I think this is as much about the 2008 elections as anything. The Dems are making it crystal clear to their base that they are totally and completely against Bush, and hoping that the "We're not Bush" ticket does better this time than it did in 2004.
post #4 of 99
I just don't want to hear the mass whining if John Edwards gets voted in.

"Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it."
post #5 of 99
He should have never been president in the first place! I love the Michael Moore Movie Farenheight 911> Great stuff LOL! I'd like to have words with that jack** narssacistic bast***! Dude needs to get over himself!
post #6 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by neetanddave View Post
I just don't want to hear the mass whining if John Edwards gets voted in.

"Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it."
I'd be happy if John Edwards gets voted in. No whining from me, that's for sure.

Although I don't like Bush, I think he'd be a lot less dangerous to the world, if Cheney were impeached. Cheney is the REAL danger behind the Bush/Cheney White House.
post #7 of 99
In case it isn't clear from the article (and it isn't very) this is not the US senate or house. It's the Vermont one. And thus, probably doesn't have much to do with the 2008 presidential elections and since Vermont is pretty much a blue state... I believe it to be more of a political statement than anything else. Towns and cities have been doing this for years.

So, Bush is impeached in Vermont. Only in Vermont. It's just a gesture and showing of discontent.
post #8 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by HopeHacker View Post
I'd be happy if John Edwards gets voted in. No whining from me, that's for sure.

Although I don't like Bush, I think he'd be a lot less dangerous to the world, if Cheney were impeached. Cheney is the REAL danger behind the Bush/Cheney White House.
John Edwards isn't even popular in his home state of NC, where I live. That should tell you what we know about him.

Unless you are ready to give up all your rights and line up at the welfare office for government freebies, you might want to reconsider who you vote for. Cause that will be his agenda.
post #9 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by neetanddave View Post
John Edwards isn't even popular in his home state of NC, where I live. That should tell you what we know about him.

Unless you are ready to give up all your rights and line up at the welfare office for government freebies, you might want to reconsider who you vote for. Cause that will be his agenda.
I noticed that in the 2004 elections. If your own state doesn't vote for you during a presidential election, then yes, you do have some political issues.

Quite interesting though, even if it is one small state. I guess I thought they were going to let him be a sitting duck the rest of the term.
post #10 of 99


Ohhh I wish it would happen, even if it is just two days before the end of his term. That would wipe the smirks off their arrogant mugs.

It should absolutely be done to show that the American people will only put up with so much, that we won't allow our constiturion to
be hijacked by self serving,greedy,power hungry,war mongers.
post #11 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by neetanddave View Post
Unless you are ready to give up all your rights and line up at the welfare office for government freebies, you might want to reconsider who you vote for. Cause that will be his agenda.
I feel like we've already given up a lot of our rights, since the Bush administration has been in office, and I don't think anything could be much worse than what we've had to endure since they've been in power. I wish they would be impeached. Cheney should have been impeached the moment he released that spy's identity.
post #12 of 99
Anyhoo, boyfriend laughed at this saying that VT is nothing for Bush/Cheney to fear.

Apparently they're the same state that legalize marijuana, but failed to see that 1) there were holes in the laws and 2) It's still a Federal offense if you have possession of it. don't know how much he made up, but just thought I would pass that on.
post #13 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by HopeHacker View Post
I'd be happy if John Edwards gets voted in. No whining from me, that's for sure.

Although I don't like Bush, I think he'd be a lot less dangerous to the world, if Cheney were impeached. Cheney is the REAL danger behind the Bush/Cheney White House.
That is the real truth. This is long past due to get Bush out. He should have never been allowed to even run. Cheney is even worse. He's actually the intelligent one.


Quote:
Originally Posted by trixie23 View Post
He should have never been president in the first place! I love the Michael Moore Movie Farenheight 911> Great stuff LOL! I'd like to have words with that jack** narssacistic bast***! Dude needs to get over himself!
I had a friend that had an opportunity to see Farenheight 911 when it was showing in Crawford, TX. You should have seen how upset people were over it. He just laughed at them. lol


Quote:
Originally Posted by HopeHacker View Post
I feel like we've already given up a lot of our rights, since the Bush administration has been in office, and I don't think anything could be much worse than what we've had to endure since they've been in power. I wish they would be impeached. Cheney should have been impeached the moment he released that spy's identity.
I couldn't agree with you more on that. He is the worst president we have ever had and it only gets worse with each passing lie that comes out of his mouth. I have never voted for him and never wanted him in the first place. You should see what they want to do in Alaska.

Sadly, this is only for VT and I don't see where that is going to really do much at this point. The 2008 election should be very interesting with hope of a fresh start and allowing the healing process for this country to begin. All I know at this point is that whoever is elected, whether it be republican or democrat, will have a huge hole to start trying to dig back up to the top. They will have to spend probably most of their term cleaning this mess up. I don't forsee the war ending for quite a while. At this point, anyone is better than having Bush around.
post #14 of 99
People need to lighten up about the Michael Moore Movie! It is mere opinion and he has ever right too it... I agree with him and thought it was hilarious! My mom was offended because it was opinion and now she regrets her decision! Now she see's things a little differently!
post #15 of 99
There's another impeachment about to hit against Cheney from the U.S. Senate. It was going to be filed this past week but they waited out of respect for what was happening at VT. Watch for it in the next few weeks. There's been a lot of data being collected for a very long time.

I'm just going to sit back, make a big bowl of popcorn and watch the fun begin!!!
post #16 of 99
Yep, and Bush bombed the WTC, not the terrorists. Ho hum
post #17 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
Yep, and Bush bombed the WTC, not the terrorists. Ho hum
That isn't what anybody is talking about.
post #18 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zissou'sMom View Post
http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1639

Most presidents in recent history have done something impeachable. Two of them have been impeached... And Bush is the first one to have admitted to an impeachable offense (requesting wiretaps without any approval from anyone).
My DH and some friends run a liberal web-site. It's big enough that they have occasional radio time in one city and they get listed on other big name sites. When they uncovered a Fox News pornography story (they caught Fox posting a picture of actual intercourse), their site got a million hits that day. The only thing their site does is to post links to news articles around the world that talks about the issues of the day. There is nothing controversial about the site, just a central place to find out what is going on in the world.

We talk on the phone and constantly hear the "clicks" associated with phone tapping. We say hello to Roberto Gonzalez and ask him how his day is going. We're just normal people. We're not terrorists. But someone in the household is doing nothing more than trying to educate the public, and since it is something that the administration doesn't like, our phone lines are targeted. Yes, our personal privacy is being invaded and its illegal.
post #19 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by trixie23 View Post
People need to lighten up about the Michael Moore Movie! It is mere opinion and he has ever right too it... I agree with him and thought it was hilarious! My mom was offended because it was opinion and now she regrets her decision! Now she see's things a little differently!


I think A LOT of people are seeing things differently now, and the '06 elections prove it! You should see 9/11: Press for Truth. It's about the families of 9/11 victims searching for answers, and despite all their research and the 9/11 comission, they still feel cheated out of a lot of their questions as to why it happened and where things went wrong.
post #20 of 99
I have a file myself... don't think I'm important enough to be listened too, but somewhere in Washington enshrined in a little folder is a study in black and white of my fingerprints. ( Hopefully you get the reference)

I think I know what website you are talking about, maybe. Have you managed to be put on the no-fly list yet? I have met a couple people who aren't allowed to fly just cause they have been vocally opposed to Bush in just the wrong way. And no, they would never do anything violent either.

The anti-terrorism laws are used in many cases as anti-dissent laws.
post #21 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by sofiecusion View Post
I think A LOT of people are seeing things differently now, and the '06 elections prove it! You should see 9/11: Press for Truth. It's about the families of 9/11 victims searching for answers, and despite all their research and the 9/11 comission, they still feel cheated out of a lot of their questions as to why it happened and where things went wrong.
Sure alot of people were upset by it and offended but that is their right! My mom was offended but she did admit, the movie made her expand her mind and see other points of view! At least it was good for something, gave me a good laugh! Im glad Im not a part of brainwashed society!
post #22 of 99
Well, I don't for one minute think anyone but the radical islamic Al Queda had anything to do with 9-11.

There is no way everyone's questions can be answered. It was an independent commission, I don't know what more people want.
post #23 of 99
And the 9/11 commission says that.

Questioning the official story that it was completely unpreventable is not the same as saying Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda weren't behind it. For the most part, everyone except a few conspiracy theorists believe that.

But not everyone believes that the people who were supposed to protect our country from something like that did the best they could have. And yes, they are human, but. Were the intelligence failures that allowed it to happen someone's lack of doing their job, or were they just we can't know everything?

Some people believe that it could have been prevented, and that it could have been handled significantly better while it was happening.
post #24 of 99
Perhaps it would have been better if Clinton had taken Osama when offered him on a silver platter.
post #25 of 99
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
Perhaps it would have been better if Clinton had taken Osama when offered him on a silver platter.
Ya think?

I was watching a blurb on the Today show as I was getting ready this morning, forget who the pundit was but Lauer was saying that if Clinton had done the things in office that GWB has that he would have already been impeached for it.

He also asked why are the Dems appearing to be so weak that they have not yet taken the same steps that the conservatives would have if the players were reversed.

I wasn't able to stay to listen to the answer, but it got a: "Huh, good question!" out of me before I ran out the door.
post #26 of 99
Quote:
Originally Posted by GingersMom View Post
Ya think?

I was watching a blurb on the Today show as I was getting ready this morning, forget who the pundit was but Lauer was saying that if Clinton had done the things in office that GWB has that he would have already been impeached for it.

He also asked why are the Dems appearing to be so weak that they have not yet taken the same steps that the conservatives would have if the players were reversed.

I wasn't able to stay to listen to the answer, but it got a: "Huh, good question!" out of me before I ran out the door.
That is exactly right. I do wish the democrats would show a little nerve though. I think the they're still worried that the public might see them as unpatriotic if they do something. When really they're unpatriotic by not doing anything about this.

Why can't they do the right thing without taking a poll to see what the public thinks is the right thing!
post #27 of 99
Unfortunately, short of killing Bin Laden after he got him, there was nothing he could do. There wasn't a case against him at the time that would have held up in court and no Arab country would take him because they didn't want to bring the Jihadis wrath down on their own government. The Saudis had deported him to get rid of him so they sure weren't going to take their problem back. In hindsight taking him and killing him looks like the best thing to have done though highly illegal, but this was before 911.
post #28 of 99
Because the liberal democratic politicians are gutless wonders Snuzy.

What, exactly, is their PLAN for Iraq, other than to cut and run and let the chips fall for the Iraqui people.

Denise, it just goes back to not having the cajones for the job IMO. Wasn't Osame to blame for the USS Cole. The USS Cole that Clinton never avenged.
post #29 of 99
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/6587957.stm Picture #6

So. What exactly is the plan that Bush has in Iraq? We are killing more Iraqis than the insurgents. So the plan is to... start off by making everything worse and making the entire Middle East more and more unstable, creating yet another breeding ground for terrorists, and continue in a fruitless, goal-less, and extremely costly war. With no end in sight, no stated objective, just a quagmire in which more and more military troops and more and more Iraqi civilians will die.

Iraq doesn't want us there. The majority of our country does not want us to be there. And an even greater majority of the entire world does not want us to be there.

There has never been a valid justification and in fact we and the people who voted to go to war were LIED to. Outright, bald lies.

There never was a reason for us to be in Iraq, and there is even less reason for us to stay there.

The whole argument about leaving is so Americentric. Why do we think that nobody on the planet can take care of themselves without unwanted and unnecessary help from us? Maybe things will get worse, but that is the direct result of us killing their leader and interfering in every aspect of the lives of a society we don't really know that much about and haven't made much effort to.

And this argument keeps us in Iraq forever. This makes us weaker and more vulnerable to attack from a group or country that actually is a threat to us. Remember that Axis of Evil? Well, two of the countries now HAVE nuclear weapons, and we invaded the third one. What? Why is it a great idea to solve those problems with diplomacy but not okay for Saddam Hussein? And I will not for a minute believe that Kim Jong-il isn't as bad as Hussein. He actually has MORE of a link to known terrorists than Hussein ever did. Bin Laden considered Saddam to be an infidel.

Is that our goal as a country? To wreak our terrible vengeance on anyone who crosses us?
post #30 of 99
I do absolutely believe that Iraq wants us there and I do believe that the majority of Americans don't want to cut and run and slink away like the Democrats would like us to.

I do believe in fighting the War on Terror and taking it to the Terrorists so we don't have to fight it here. I will always believe that, no appeasement for me.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
This thread is locked  
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › The call for Impeachment begins!