BS: Should Bush be Impeached?

Subject: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Bobert
Date: 28 Oct 04 - 07:28 PM

Well, like I have said on several occasions, the Bush folks will figure out some way to steal the upcoming election so...

... what should activists do after the election/selection/court decision?

Bush has lied to the American people and taken the country to war behind these lies. If the nation could attempt to impeach Bill Clinton for an affair which killed no one, then why should it not attempt to impeach Georg Bush whoes lies have lead to over 100,000 deaths, 1200 of them American?

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: PoppaGator
Date: 28 Oct 04 - 07:51 PM

You're on to something there, Bobert.

I've been thinking quite a bit lately that Bush might well be re-elected (like Nixon in '72) and then very quickly find himself in big trouble (also like Nixon in '73, post-Watergate).

The two huge blocs of single issue voters (anti-abortion and anti-gun-control) are so firmly in the Bush camp that the Democrats may not be able to win. At the very least, the election will probably be close enough for the GOP to steal it again, more easily than last time now that they control the Executive Branch.

Once the election is over, however, the continuing revelations of Neo-Con greed and stupidity will NOT be over. Something big is very likely to hit the fan before mid-2005.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 28 Oct 04 - 07:54 PM

Impeached? He should be arrested by a World tribunal and tried for war crimes. So should Blair. But how do you arrest people who are back up by the World's biggest nuclear arsenals?

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: emjay
Date: 28 Oct 04 - 08:01 PM

He would have to be impeached by the congress and unless control changes with this election, there is very little chance that an impeachment could happen.
"High crimes and misdemeanors" or something like that is the standard. Actually someone, a high placed leagal figure, did go so far as to draw up the papers--I wish I could remember who, and they looked pretty good to me--but as I said, it has to do with the party that controls the congress. Clinton was impeached by a Republican congress and over absolutely nothing--he lied in response to questions he shouldn't have been asked.
AS the little button sayd, "Clinton lied, nobody died. Bush lied, thousands died."

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Amos
Date: 28 Oct 04 - 09:00 PM

There are websites and a movement to make it happen.

Here's one: http://www.impeachbush.tv/

and another: http://impeachbush.meetup.com/

and another: http://impeachbush.pephost.org/site/PageServer?pagename=VTI_homepage&JServSessionIdr008=3pqx2bajx1.app13b

and another: http://www.abe1x.org/impeachbush/

There are probably more...


A

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Oct 04 - 09:02 PM

Has he been eatin pussy in the oval office?

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Amos
Date: 28 Oct 04 - 09:19 PM

No, worse...he's been lying to the public and murdering people in other countries!! Ooooo!


A

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: emjay
Date: 28 Oct 04 - 09:21 PM

Yes, Amos, the third one in your list has Ramsey Clark. That's the name I was trying to remember, a former US Attorney General. What he has written is very thoughtful and worth reading.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Fishpicker
Date: 28 Oct 04 - 09:23 PM

If we are going to do it(impeach HRH beorge gush), we had better get with the program before he declares martial law! Citizens of America, watch me pull a rabbit out of my hat.

                               FP

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 28 Oct 04 - 09:30 PM

Absolutely.

But, given the timing, we have a way to remove him faster.

Let's do it at the polls on Tuesday.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,Frank
Date: 29 Oct 04 - 03:23 PM

I think that he should be impeached and tried by the World Court.

Clinton was impeached because Reactionary Republicans in congress had it in for him and they did it because they could. It was nothing to do with morality or patriotism. It was an assault on the Democrat Clinton. It's too bad that Bill thought that no one would notice. JFK had many mistresses and some probably in the White House. But these were pre-Gary Hart days and he received the benefit of the doubt. And the rise of vindictive Reactionary Republicans were not quite as virulent as today.

Bush, however, has the blood of 100,000 Iraqis on his hands. That stain will not be erased from a blue dress. Unfortunately, he has taken America down with him.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: grumpy al
Date: 29 Oct 04 - 03:35 PM

Impeached! sorry I thought it said Impailed! a much better idea

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: akenaton
Date: 29 Oct 04 - 03:56 PM

My God!!   You still dont get it.

Bush is simply the figurehead.
The evil "monster" in this story is capitalism.   All kinds of capitalism, and the dozens of other "isms" that keep it ginding people to dust.
I include socialism as one of the Capitalists tools,along with that old favourite "democracy"

So before you all start baying for the blood of a retard.
          You can all go and "impeach" yourselves ...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Peace
Date: 29 Oct 04 - 04:31 PM

I see Bush and understand why some mammals eat ther young.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 29 Oct 04 - 04:44 PM

You're quite correct, Akenaton. He is a figurehead. If he loses the election (officially, I mean...) he will be replaced by another figurehead.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Once Famous
Date: 29 Oct 04 - 04:51 PM

Ake, it must be so hard to live in a world constantly trying to find a way to fit in.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: akenaton
Date: 29 Oct 04 - 05:06 PM

Martin...Your getting far too philosophical.
If you dont watch out youll end up just like all the rest.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: chris nightbird childs
Date: 29 Oct 04 - 05:13 PM

Yes. He should.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Once Famous
Date: 29 Oct 04 - 05:15 PM

Never, ake.

I function just fine in the real world and am quite happy with life.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Amos
Date: 29 Oct 04 - 05:17 PM

I think impeaching Bush is a fine idea, but he'll be out of office shortly. So let's save the money.

If he gets re-elected, THEN let's impeach him.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Once Famous
Date: 29 Oct 04 - 05:37 PM

That will be the cry of the sour grapes losers like you, Amos.


Like I said, if Kerry wins, your life will be so hollow.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 30 Oct 04 - 05:24 PM

Martin---

I assure you that all Kerry supporters will be able to struggle on somehow when Kerry is elected.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Amos
Date: 30 Oct 04 - 06:31 PM

Martin:

Well, It is true that winning a fight always leaves you temporarily without a game. But I promise you there are plenty of other games for me, so I won't lose any sleep over it. Why are you practicing your "shallow, abrasive, asshole" mask on me? You know I don't care for it!!


A

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 30 Oct 04 - 10:07 PM

Amos---

How can you say such things?

Didn't you know the "Martin Gibson School of Charm" is opening soon?

The course in "Filthy Invective" is filling up fast--taught as you know by an acknowledged master of the art.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST
Date: 31 Oct 04 - 01:22 AM

The minute he starts muff diving and smoking pussy dipped contraband Cuban cigars in the Oval office we shoud string him up.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Ebbie
Date: 31 Oct 04 - 01:59 PM

Lying to the American people about the reasons for going to war and not having an exit strategy seem impeachable offenses to me.

Remember Ogden Nash? (paraphrased)

A man jumped out of a 13th floor
and as he passed each window bar
He called out to the ones inside
All right so far!

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,Frank
Date: 31 Oct 04 - 06:51 PM

Bush is responsible for the death of over 1,100 American servicemen and women and over 100,000 Iraqis. Over 6,000 American servicemen and women injured beyond repair. Iraq is saturated with depleted uranium which stays in the atmosphere and the soil and is a cancer time bomb for many innocent Iraqis and probably returning American service people.

He has increased the potential for many more enemies.

Does this answer the question?   I think so.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,Ragnar
Date: 31 Oct 04 - 07:38 PM

Clinton's response to the Kohl Bombing:

The story of Clinton's
Marc Rich pardon
Co-conspirators serve time while multimillionaire enjoys clemency

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=21595

If Clinton had done his job there would not have been a 9/11.

R

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Bobert
Date: 31 Oct 04 - 08:18 PM

Thats' one heck of a stretch, R. What, you about 100 feet tall, 'er what?

Ahhhh, jus' out of curiosity, exactly which, if any, of Bush's mistakes cannot be blamed on Clinton?

Hey, I hated Clinton. What a Repub! But he messed up about all he could yet still left plenty for subsequent presidents to do for themselves...

Sorry, but 9/11 occured because:

1. Bush is a Bush and Bushes ain't thought of too well in the Middle East.

2. Bush turned his back on the Palestianian/Isreali confolict and allowed Sharon to flail away on the Palestinaians, and to less extent, vice versa.

3. Bush was less concerned about terrorism than Clinton.

But if you wanta blame Clinton, fire away, but find stuff he is more responsible for than 9/11. Like I said, that's way too far a stretch...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Sorcha
Date: 31 Oct 04 - 09:25 PM

Just MO...he should but he won't be. Gods help us he'll probably be re elected....

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Bobert
Date: 31 Oct 04 - 09:31 PM

Elected is a stretch also, Sorch, since he wasn't really elected in the first place and given all the shenannigans going on this time, icluding his buddies at Diebold countin' the vote, he won't be elected this time either... But, hey, to the Bush folks, them is is jus' details...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,Ragnar
Date: 31 Oct 04 - 09:46 PM

Kerry borgs blame Bush for Clinton's failures like not taking Osama from Sudan when he was offered to the US on a plate.

R

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Bobert
Date: 31 Oct 04 - 10:00 PM

Yo, Rag. Ahhhhh, jus' what planet are you from? I mean jus' 'casue you may read somethin' don't exactly make it true... Maybe you'd like to lucidate on yer sources...

Nevermind. Rush Limbaugh or Rush wanta-bee's ain't exactly like sources since they say what ever happens to come into their pea brains...

But, yeah, jus' fir grins... You wanta lay out your sources?

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 01 Nov 04 - 12:42 AM

But wouldn't impeaching Bush be sending mixed messages to the TARE-RISTS?

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: dianavan
Date: 01 Nov 04 - 12:56 AM

The election will probably be delayed until the voting machines are de-rigged. I wonder how long it will be delayed?

d

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 01 Nov 04 - 02:04 AM

Impeach: To take a large peach and insert it in the fundamental orifice of someone obnoxious.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: DMcG
Date: 01 Nov 04 - 03:10 AM

Why bother impeaching him? Just hold him under the Patriot Act. No need to bother assembling evidence or working though all those tedious arguments between lawyers.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,Ragnar
Date: 01 Nov 04 - 06:29 AM

Not from Planet Bobert.

Canucks live their Socialist lives off of their natural resources.
What happens when they are gone?

Aid from the US and the UN?

Mind your own friggin elections,

R

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Bobert
Date: 01 Nov 04 - 08:05 AM

We're doing the best we can at mindin' our own "friggin elections", R, considerin' that our democracy is terribly undemocratic and we got a bunch of thugs in power...

...not to mention a large portion of our population which is sufficiently dumbed down to the point where they care who wins the Budweiser 500 NASCAR race this coming Sunday more than who wins the elction... And these folks all vote for Bush...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Amos
Date: 01 Nov 04 - 08:31 AM

Rag,

You imply the US is a better example at conserving or replacing natural resources than Canada. I don't think this is the way it is.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,JB
Date: 01 Nov 04 - 01:05 PM

I certainly feel Bush should be impeached because his mind is impaired-ha ha!

Watching CNN here in Germany a few days ago I enjoyed Kerry`s little joke about Bruce Springsteen playing in town. He said something to the effect:


"When I said the boss was coming, Mr. Bush thought I was referring to Dick Cheeney". Bet Bush didn`t like that one, the truth always hurts you know!

Finally I can safely say as an Irish musician living for many years in Germany that a vast majority here want to see Bush being kicked out of the White House, just like his old man was.

JB

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: dianavan
Date: 01 Nov 04 - 01:26 PM

Hey Rag - Why the swipe at Canada? I don't think Bobert is from Canada. Besides that, the U.S. election effects the entire world. Canadians should be concerned.

What planet are you from? You obviously know nothing about Canada.

d

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,Ragnar
Date: 01 Nov 04 - 04:58 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,Ragnar
Date: 01 Nov 04 - 05:31 PM

My bad. It is Brucie that is the attack droid from Canuckland.

Sorry Bobert But I am from the same planet and I can't see a damned thing that Clinton did that was effective or decisive. Only something that delyed the ultimate and avoided dealing with the problem. He treated Al Quaeda attacks like criminal offenses instead of acts of war even when Al Quaeda declares war or Jihad on the US. And Bush is accused of doing a lousy job?

Anti Bush factions act as if a reset button was pushed when Bush took office and nothing before that has any bearing on the present situation.

Everything that has happened from the beginning of mankind has a bearing on the present.

Nobody ever gives an itemized response to any thing posted here. They hurl some "that's bullshit" or "you're an idiot" statements out like those a Budweiser 500 NASCAR fan would.

R

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Bobert
Date: 01 Nov 04 - 06:45 PM

Well, Rag, yer guy's idea to treat terrorist as a war certainly isn't working. Seems it has done nuthin but create more terrorists. See, when you go invading other countries that aren't terrorists and have no plans to attack you in the name of fighting terrorism than you aren't solving any problems but creating new ones... You can argue otherwise but the invasion of Iraq hasn't done anything but crate one fine place for terrorists to infiltrate and infiltrate they have. These folks weren't welcome when Saddam was in power and knew to saty the heck out. Now, with destabilizing Iraq, every day is a new day for the terrorists and the possibilities endless...

Now yer gonna argue that Bush had faulty intellegence. Doesn't matter because he has also said he would have attacked anyway to get rid of Saddam, who BTW, tried to kill his daddy... Blah, blah & blah... What hind of reasoning is this, Rag? Can you explain it. First he tells us why he's attacking Iraq. Then he finds, if you can believe the weizel, that those reasons were wrong. Then he come up with new ones which don't make any sense what so ever. "Well, Saddam isn't in power anymore!!!" Yeah, and the point is??? Maybe you'd like to explain this alittle better sincew you have accused folks of not giving itemized lists. What don't you understand about the question?

(Well, Bobert, maybe Rag likes questions that are numbered?)

Is that it? Do the questions have to be numbered?

Ahhhh, while we are asking? Just how many countries are you willing to be at war with at the same time, Rag???... I mean, since you like the military model for fighting terrorism, I'm looking at half a dozen without even having to work up much of a sweat... Ummm, we've allready seen just what happens when the US takes on a second war with what's happening in Afganistan. Outside Kabul, the warlords run the country. Taliban folks run entire villiages. Bin Laden and his boys are very possibly holed up there and guess what? We're close to loosing that war because so much emphasis is now on Iraq, where we can't ever equipe our troops. Hmmmmmm? See, Rap, the military modle ceratinly isn't working. Or do you see something that no one else sees other than Bush and his tiny little circle of neocons???

Yeah, I'm real curious to hear waht you have to say about the questions I have posed here.

Before you came here we had the mighty "Teribus" who could write doctorial thesis length posts overnight and who valiantly founght to defend Bush. Teribus and a couple of his pals (Gareth for one) asin't been around much lately. Why? Well, I'lll tell ya' why. It's because it turned out that alot of folks who oppsed Bush's push to war, were right. Yep, as the war unfolded, one prediction after another by folks who saw Bush for nuthing more than a cowboy, came to pass...

I repsect your courage to defend Bush and his failing policies but as you do it, please take the time to respond to real questions that those on the other side have fir you other than to dismiss them as "bullsh*t... That does not do well for lending credibility to your arguments...

Peace

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Peace
Date: 01 Nov 04 - 06:50 PM

I am a Canuck, and I would like to say a few things to my friend who posts using the name GUEST, Ragnar.

Dear Guest Ragnar,

Fuck you.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: iancarterb
Date: 01 Nov 04 - 06:56 PM

Cheney would be a great start, for receiving "deferred" compensation from the largest government contractor, contracted without competitive bid. I think it's at least as cut and dried as Spiro Agnew's behaviour. But as has been noted, no Republican House of Reps will begin this process, no matter how obvious and relatively straightforward.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,Ragnar
Date: 01 Nov 04 - 07:57 PM

That sums up the total contents of your brain.

R

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Bobert
Date: 01 Nov 04 - 08:03 PM

Whoes brain, Rag? Come on. If yer gonna be a Bush apologist around here, yer gonna have to work harder than this...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Peace
Date: 01 Nov 04 - 08:07 PM

Ragnar,

You are letting Los Coyotes get to your thinking. I am sure it's the traffic. No one gets shots for free, twit.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,Ragnar
Date: 01 Nov 04 - 11:28 PM

Bobert:

All I see in your whining is another peacenick movement that will die out in time.

Perhaps another terrorist attack here in the US under Kerry's watch will sober up the doomsayers.

I don't really care if Kerry does get elected. He will have a lot of promises to fill.

I will enjoy it if he can fill those promises but I will also enjoy it if he falls on his ass. It's a win / win situation for me but I do love stirring up you Kerry drones. Especially Amos. It's fun.

R

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Peace
Date: 01 Nov 04 - 11:30 PM

Ragnar:

What about Bush appeals to you?

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: DougR
Date: 01 Nov 04 - 11:32 PM

A truly funny thread. One thing you can say about folkies, they have a sense of humor. :>)

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Amos
Date: 01 Nov 04 - 11:33 PM

Ah -- doing it for fun, is it? Raggie, ole pal, you are one ill-minded pup.

Give us a call when you grow up will you?

A

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,Ragnar
Date: 01 Nov 04 - 11:42 PM

I can trust him.

R

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: dianavan
Date: 01 Nov 04 - 11:46 PM

Did you trust that he would 'get' Osama?

d

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Amos
Date: 01 Nov 04 - 11:47 PM

Ragnar:

But who can trust you? No-one here, clearly, as you have demonstrated your capacity for dodging, slurring, sliming, cutting and hiding.

For someone of such standing to assert that Bush is the man to choose because of his ... TRUSTWORTHINESS? is almost more of a laugh than my poor belly can stand. I seriously doubt you have had enough experience of the world to know what trustworthiness looks like. Or you're too dumb to know when you've been lied to. But since your real interest here is to trash threads, don't expect anyone here to try and help your sorry butt out of that particular pit of ignorance.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,Ragnar
Date: 02 Nov 04 - 09:53 AM

So I stir up shit like John Kerry. I should be treated as a hero like him.

I don't recall any time frame being set for doing away with Osama.

What was the time frame for having people like Chris Reeve get up outa that wheel chair and walk? I am still waiting.

R

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Amos
Date: 02 Nov 04 - 10:13 AM

THere's a big difference, Rag: Kerry does it constructively, by communicating. You do it destructively, by dramatizing and trashing others.

BIG diff, man.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Peace
Date: 02 Nov 04 - 12:02 PM

Wait one, here. I too am a raving, whining peacenik. I fail to see the glory in war; was a private once, and they feed privates to the machine first. (And ya know that's gotta hurt.)

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: DougR
Date: 02 Nov 04 - 01:20 PM

That's it, Amos, attack the poster!

Ragnar: I don't know how long you have been posting to the Mudcat, but if you do so expecting that other posters will respect your opinions, or even that you have a right to an opinion (without being personally attacked, ...get a life!

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,Larry K
Date: 02 Nov 04 - 01:29 PM

Rush Limbaugh has been predicting for weeks that right after Bush was reelected, democrats would start an impeachment proceeding against him.   Thanks for being so predictable and validating Rush Limbaugh again.    An impeachment attempt right after election would only help the midterm elections in reaching a 60 vote majority in the Senate to avoid fillibusters.

Today is election day.   Have all of you given up already.   I don't understand.   The votes have not been counted.   Why are you already planning on defeat.   Anything can happen and I don't take anything for granted.

A note on natural resources.   The USA is second worst in the world in amount of resources used per population.   Canada is number one worst in the world using slightly more resources per person.   One could aruge however, that the cold climate contributes to that.   Still- the Canadian record is not one to be proud of in resource usage.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Peace
Date: 02 Nov 04 - 01:32 PM

DougR:

Ragnar made a few personal attacks, and he got some RETURNED. That's life pal.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Amos
Date: 02 Nov 04 - 01:34 PM

I was not attacking the poster. I was pointing out that his rhetoric consists of trashing and dramatizing.

Does anyone know, by the way, if a sitting second-term Pres canbe impeached of first-term crimes?

A

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,Rodney
Date: 02 Nov 04 - 06:38 PM

I am beginning to realize that there is no such thing as respect for other people's opinions here. It's sorta like the 3 year olds vs the 4 year olds.

If someone tries to bring up a fact for consideration they are attacked for attempting to pull a dirty trick.

Most People can tell fact from fiction. The ones that can't, need to be constantly supported by their cronies that the poster is an evildoer.

They can't think independently of the crowd.

Rodney D

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: PoppaGator
Date: 02 Nov 04 - 06:59 PM

Nixon was not-quite impeached, but the offenses for which he *almost* was tried -- he avoided trial only by resigning -- occurred near the end of his first term, as part of his effort to be re-elected, and came to life only after said re-election, early in his second term.

So: Yes, Amos, the "high crimes and misdemeanors" for which a President can be impeached need not have occurred since his most recent re-election. They *may* need to have occurred during his current (multi-term) tenure, but it doesn't matter if he's already in the second term and the bad stuff happened during the first.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Bobert
Date: 02 Nov 04 - 07:00 PM

Yo Dougie,

I think you might want to rearead more of Rag's posts before coming to his defense. Hey, I gave Rag the benefit of the doubt. It's Rag who has no particular interest in debating the issues. He's just a hair above an outright troll...

Larry K,

I'm not sure that anyone has given up anything but with a close election, with Diebold factored in, the Dems are gonna have to face the real possibility that getting the most vots cast isn't the same as getting the most votes counted. Dem know this. It will take at least 51%, more like 52% Kerry to win the election Anything under 51% will get manipulated and the Repubs will steal it.

Rodney, mah man,

One thing I've learned 'round this joint is that if you post adult posts you will get a better share of adult reponses. So, other than branding all Catters as childlike, perhaps you'd liike to pick a topic, start your own thread, and see what happens. I think you will be surprised. Sure, you'll get yer fair share of lightweights but you'll also find a lot of folks here with much better minds tha 4 years olds...

Jus a suggestion.

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: DougR
Date: 03 Nov 04 - 03:22 AM

As I write this, Fox News (yes that dreaded news source Liberals love to hate)reports that GWB has 269 Electoral Votes, one shy of the amount necessary to win the election. The Kerry campaign is sending a bunch of lawyers to Ohio to see if there is anyway to turn this election into the fiasco of 2000, but assuming they can't find a way, Bush will likely be re-elected as President. Even more disturbing to my Liberal friends, though, is the fact that it appears that the Republicans will gain an even larger majority in the House and the Senate. Even if there were a case for impeachment (which there isn't)it might be a bit difficult to get it under way.

So Impeach away I say. I'm sure it will go ...where?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: dianavan
Date: 03 Nov 04 - 04:00 AM

Oh, Doug R -

There are plenty of grounds for impeachment.

d

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: katlaughing
Date: 03 Nov 04 - 06:22 AM

As I write this dubya has 254 to Kerry's 252 electoral votes and that is according to npr, the Denver Post and a few other news outlets. Regardless, dubya is hardly getting a huge amoutn of any support. I also doubt that Ramsey Clark, and those of us who agree with him, will let up on the impeach bush efforts. I certainly hope it moves forward.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,Rodney
Date: 03 Nov 04 - 08:17 AM

Yeah adult like having adult language such as shithead, dumbass, idiot, fuck you, low-life double-faced, twisty-tongued, cross-eyed sonofabush. That kind of post?

If one points out why and how they tnik that John Kerry violated the Hatch act and the UCMJ, they get called avery name in the book in very strong adult language.

Does anybody here care to see why I think the Democrats lost so much ground in this election?

Rodney D

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: dianavan
Date: 03 Nov 04 - 11:01 AM

Rodney - This thread is not about the election. This is about impeaching Bush. Actually, I hope he is tried for war crimes. I think it may have to come from the international community. Obviously, the mind control in the U.S. is far greater than anyone expected. Either that or the citizens of the U.S. are just, plain vicious war mongers.

d

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Once Famous
Date: 03 Nov 04 - 12:18 PM

Sour Grapes, dianavan.

Very predictable response.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,Taibnor
Date: 03 Nov 04 - 09:59 PM

Go ahead and impeach. Democrats still haven't figured out what they are doing wrong. They keep loosing ground and instead of fessing up to their own shortcomings they blame it on Evil Republicans.

They snatch defeat from the jaws of defeat. Impeach away and loose more ground in the process.

Talk about not admitting to your mistakes, Harf!

Taibnor

Subject: The Case for Impeachment
From: Amos
Date: 09 Nov 04 - 09:47 PM

President Bush can run, but he cannot hide from the Constitution of the United States. The election does not pardon the President for past, or future "high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

Impeachment is not a partisan political issue. The House of Representatives, possessed of the "sole power of impeachment," is required to consider a bill of impeachment on the facts even if every Member were of the same party, or political persuasion, as the President. The seven specific provisions of the Constitution setting forth the powers and duties of the Congress in considering impeachment intend that any President or other civil officer of the United States who has committed a high Crime or Misdemeanor "...shall be removed from Office."

The power of impeachment assures the people against criminal acts and despotic ambitions by government officials.

We, the People have the power to require the House of Representatives to do its duty and act on a bill of impeachment after full investigation and consideration. If it fails to do so those House members who failed to perform this Constitutional duty can and should be voted from office. Remember that President Nixon resigned under threat of impeachment for Watergate less than two years after his landslide reelection in 1972.

IMPEACHMENT IS IMPERATIVE

For the American people who support and defend the Constitution of the United States, who want to prevent further crimes by a lawless administration, who believe we can redeem our country in the eyes of those we have assaulted and those who have witnessed this brutality and who dare to demand of future government leadership, NEVER AGAIN, Impeachment is Imperative. A decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that we Americans should declare the causes which impel us to impeach.

President George W. Bush chose to wage a war of aggression against Iraq, which had not attacked the United States and presented no imminent threat to our people, or legitimate interests. A small cabal, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Wolfowitz, Feith, Libby and Rove wrested decision making processes from established institutions of government to reinforce President Bush's desire to seize Iraq, defying international institutions, the opinions of humankind and the rule of law to commence a disastrous criminal military adventure.

A CAMPAIGN OF DECEIT AND FALSE PROPAGANDA

War of aggression is the first offense listed in the Nuremberg Charter as a Crime against Peace. The Nuremberg Tribunal after hearing evidence of Nazi crimes in World War II convicted the leaders of waging wars of aggression, which it called "the supreme international crime."

At Nuremberg, the Chief U.S. Prosecutor, Robert H. Jackson, promised posterity that in the future all nations, including our own, would be held accountable for such crimes.

President Bush and key administration officials engaged in a lengthy campaign of deceit, concealment and false propaganda to create support for, and acceptance of, its war of aggression by claiming Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, harbored terrorists, had close ties with and supported Al Qaeda and intended to attack the U.S., U.S. citizens and U.S. interests. A free society, democratic institutions and constitutional government cannot survive such deceit by its own government.

The U.S. has made civilians and civilian facilities its direct object of attack. It has pursued assassination and summary executions as official policy. President Bush boasted of summary executions in his State of the Union message in 2003. Excessive and indiscriminate force and illegal weapons have been used. Many thousands of Iraqi citizens, whole families, women, children, elderly Iraqis have been killed as a result.

U.S. military casualties exceed 10,000 including more than 1,100 deaths with many additional thousands returned to the United States for physical and mental illnesses.

The U.S. has employed torture, including torture to death, rape and sexual assault and humiliation, as approved and ordered policy from Afghanistan and Guantanamo to Iraq, inflicted on thousands of prisoners, many, if not most, without any evidence of wrongful conduct. An admitted 37 human beings have been murdered while being held in captivity by the United States under these conditions. We know not how many more. All the mounting evidence makes clear that this program of torture and death is not aberrational conduct of rogue or undisciplined soldiers but is rather the policy adopted at the highest levels of the Bush/Rumsfeld chain of command. All this in violation of the Geneva Conventions, the International Convention Against Torture, the laws of all nations and common human decency.

Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution of the United States provides: The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, Shall Be Removed From Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

MORE THAN 100,000 DEAD BASED ON A LIE

We learn from the prominent medical journal Lancet of the report by researchers at John Hopkins University, Columbia University and the Al-Mustansiriya University in Baghdad that the U.S. war of aggression against Iraq and military occupation has cost "at least" 100,000 Iraqi lives already must civilian, women and children. Already President Bush has launched a massive aerial and ground assault on Falluja which may kill thousands of defenseless civilians.

Haiti, where President Bush forced the elected President Jean Bertrand Aristide from office, is in chaos with many thousands killed by widespread daily violence committed by U.S. supported paramilitaries against Aristide supporters.

Nearly 500,000 have voted to impeach. Help us increase that number into millions the Congress cannot ignore.

Every American should choose whether to vote for impeachment entirely on the facts, straight up, or down, without political, or partisan fear, or favor. We owe this to the country, its future, the Constitution and our common heritage. Impeachment is Required Now.

Impeachment now is the only way we, the American people, can promise ourselves and the world that we will not tolerate crimes against peace and humanity by our government. Knowing what we know, to wait longer is to condone what has been done and risk more.

Sincerely,

Ramsey Clark

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: CarolC
Date: 09 Nov 04 - 10:23 PM

But then we'll be left with Cheney. What good is that? And if they impeached Cheney, who would be president and vice president?

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Amos
Date: 09 Nov 04 - 10:30 PM

I dunno why we should hold back on that basis, Carol. Cheny would have to give way to the Speaker of the House, but I am not clear after that. The point is that this is no basis for not calling crime when a crime has occurred.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: CarolC
Date: 09 Nov 04 - 10:40 PM

I'd like to impeach all of those unelected people who are really running the administration (plus Cheney, of course), people like Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle, Fieth, and probably a few others I can't remember right now.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Amos
Date: 09 Nov 04 - 10:52 PM

Yowzah!!

T'ro' da bums out!


A

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,Larry K
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 11:21 AM

The line of sucession is president, VP, Speaker of the HOuse (Hassert) After that I think I think Senate majority leader is next.   At one point the 100 year old senator (can't remember his name right now) from South Carolina was number 5 in line for presidency.   He must of been head of the right committee.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 12:28 PM

That would be (have been actually) Strom Thurmond (my he RIP).

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Once Famous
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 12:31 PM

"Yowzah!!

T'ro' da bums out!"

Uh, you had your chance. You lost. remember?

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: CarolC
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 12:42 PM

Who says we only get one chance?

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,Frank
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 12:45 PM

George W. Putsch sent innocent young men and women to Iraq to kill innocent Iraqis who are fighting for their land. Amerika uber alles.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: DougR
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 01:41 PM

Sure, Amos, impeach him! Perhaps you should share whatever knowledge you have that Bush has committed offences serious enough to warrant impeachment with a willing Democrat who can begin impeachemnt proceedings. How about John Kerry?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: DougR
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 01:51 PM

A second thought: maybe you should also impearch the members of the House of Representatives and the U. S. Senate who voted to empower the president to go to war! Might be a tough sell though.

Ramsey Clark, the loser liberal who just loves to champon and lead losing causes. Yep, there is a guy to follow into battle, right?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 02:18 PM

Dont often agree with Doug, but he has made a very good point.

I would broaden it out a little

Why not impeach the whole electorate.
If the German people were to blame for the rise of the Nazis.....

The Republican regime shows all the signs of latent fascism...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: CarolC
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 02:29 PM

Well, not the whole electorate, Akeneton. Bush only got about 51 percent of the vote (assuming he actually got that much, which remains to be seen). That's only slightly more than half.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 02:30 PM

Yeah Carol , but Kerry got the other half!!

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: George Papavgeris
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 02:32 PM

Doug, remember "the buck stops here...". It's not just words - the President has the ultimate responsibility, not those who "empowered" him or voted him into the position.

But it's too late now. I mentioned impeachment back in February/March, only to be told by people "it's OK, we'll vote him out". But if you believe someone to be a criminal, you prosecute them, you don't just push them out of the door to be someone else's problem.

To undertake impeachment proceedings now - even if it were a practical proposition, which I doubt - makes it look like a "sour grapes" action; just an alternative method of getting rid of someone at the top.

But the high moral ground has been lost. It should have happened before the elections.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Once Famous
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 02:33 PM

Again, Kerry lost.

Sore losers. sour grapes.

Quit whining.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: CarolC
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 02:49 PM

Again, Kerry lost.

That remains to be seen.

Quit whining yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: CarolC
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 02:52 PM

"Daddy Bush! Daddy Bush! The bad people keep talking! We don't like it! Make them stop!"

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Once Famous
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 02:53 PM

Quit whining AND fooling yourself.

The election is over.

Kerry lost.

You ought to change your name to Cleopatra. Queen of denial.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: CarolC
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 02:54 PM

We'll see, Martin.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Amos
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 03:13 PM

Martin:

Just love that old Slash and Burn school of communication, huh? The Superior Man at work. When in doubt, invalidate the other person. Sure makes a lot of sense.   


In case you cannot read ordinary English the post to which I was responding stated "Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle, Fieth", none of whom were voted into orifice.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Once Famous
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 03:28 PM

I'll take what you call as slash and burn over your brand of navel gazing, Amos.

Amos, "what if" your fingers didn't smell so bad?

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Amos
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 07:03 PM

Martin,

You have a lot of smarts, obviously, but it sure beats me why you insist on acting like a brutish low-brow jerk, and more important, why you enjoy exercising cruelty toward others. What is it about causing pain and discomfort that you find so satisfying?

A

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Bobert
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 07:37 PM

Another case of latent polymorphous perverse guilt, Amos....

Comes out in all kinds of anti-social behaviors...

Get the couch...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: jaze
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 08:02 PM

I find myself wondering how many of these Bush folks were feeling pretty much the way we are now when Clinton was elected overwhemingly a second time. They probably vented until they got it out of their system then moved on. Just as we will.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: CarolC
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 09:33 PM

They're still venting about Clinton, jaze. They never stopped.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: LadyJean
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 10:55 PM

Like every other male who ever breathed, except Jesus Christ, and possibly St. Francis of Assisi, William Jefferson Clinton lied about his sex life.
Nobody died because of it. (Much as I kept hoping someone would shoot Ken Starr.) No homes were destroyed. No children were orphaned.
George Walker Bush lied about the threats posed to our country by Saddam Hussein.
Because of this, several thousand people are dead. Homes are destroyed, and children are orphaned. IMPEACH THE BASTARD NOW!    How I wish there were still men like Howard Baker in the Senate.

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: dianavan
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 11:34 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: dianavan
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 11:39 PM

Sorry, I didn't mean to click submit.

Now I have to say something. Since impeachment just brings another whole string of assholes, wouldn't it be better to try him for the criminal he is? Can he be tried for treason? Can he be tried for war crimes?

d

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: GUEST,Barney
Date: 10 Nov 04 - 11:45 PM

The Republicans have set a big trap for the Democrats.
They are falling into the trap.
Good.

Barn

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: jaze
Date: 11 Nov 04 - 07:51 PM

Why do grey boxes sometimes cover up parts of some posts?

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: Amos
Date: 11 Nov 04 - 10:03 PM

Jaze:

I think this must be an artifact of your own system, not the Cat -- I read the threads on both OS X and Win 2K platforms and have no encounters with grey boxes.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Should Bush be Impeached?
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Nov 04 - 10:55 PM

I get the gray boxes too, but I think only on pretty long threads somewhere towards the end. I've been wondering about them myself.

The Republicans have set a big trap for the Democrats.
They are falling into the trap.
Good.

Thank goodness I'm not a Democrat.