Sheik Yerbouti
Lifer
- Feb 16, 2005
- 14,080
- 5,453
- 136
There are other ways to hold the President accountable than to impeach him. Congress has the power to "wear the pants" in the relationship, but isn't, which is why I assume people aren't seeing these options.
Impeachment is an extreme and ultimate punishment that must be reserved for the rarest of situations -- like stripping the Supreme Court of appellate authority, for example. If it is not absolutely necessary to do so, it shouldn't be done. Clinton shouldn't have been impeached and neither should Bush.
It would be seen as partisan, it would only serve to divide the country more, it would become an every-day tactic, and at the end of the day it would change absolutely nothing. It is an extremist solution and its negative consequences outweigh its benefits.
People keep on pointing fingers at Bush, but it's the Repulican Congress who enables him. There will be no war in Iran if there is no Congressionally-authorized funding. There will be no more Presidential scandals like the wiretapping business if Congress asserted its oversight functions. I could go on -- but the real people who we need to get rid of are those in Congress who permit this madness. Bush is able to do what he is doing because he is being allowed to do so.
I think he should be put on trial. his entire administration is just a bunch of criminals. as long as Cheney goes with the entire bunch.
Lemon law
Lifer
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
We must also remember impeachment should not be but is in fact always dependent on politics.
While the political storm clouds are gathering, the resulting tornado's may be far more expensive for this country than the following impeachment. Or the storm could fail ti gather and the democrats with control of house and senate may well decide to keep Bush around.--hamstrung and muzzled--maybe let him out once a week--but above all kept out of further mischief.
But if Iraq triggers a new world war---it won't matter who is commander and chief---we will all be walking as this country grinds to a halt. Be Careful of what you wish for--it could come with that monkey paw price.
While the political storm clouds are gathering, the resulting tornado's may be far more expensive for this country than the following impeachment. Or the storm could fail ti gather and the democrats with control of house and senate may well decide to keep Bush around.--hamstrung and muzzled--maybe let him out once a week--but above all kept out of further mischief.
But if Iraq triggers a new world war---it won't matter who is commander and chief---we will all be walking as this country grinds to a halt. Be Careful of what you wish for--it could come with that monkey paw price.
HardWarrior
Diamond Member
- Jan 26, 2004
- 4,400
- 23
- 81
It just amazes me that many American's support the fed when it prances all over the world lecturing/brow-beating other countries about "democracy" and "human rights." Then we wonder why many see us as the lazy hypocrites. The guy was sitting behind the Big Desk when the American people were (bald-faced) lied into a war that didn't need to be fought. 2300+ American soldiers dead, 20,000+ fvcked for life, 100,000 Iraqi's dead who wouldn't have been if we had stayed our arses at home, our status as the "indispensable nation" in taters, more Terrorists!!!(tm) being created and trained then we could ever hope to kill, the executive claiming that it can do anything it wants and let's not even mention the national debt and the $250B wasted with no end is sight. All this, and the best response that some people can offer when even the idea of impeachment is broached:
wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee (the sound of the framers spinning in their graves)
I would vote yes. Put Cheney in office while there is still time to salvage the Republican party.
You're misrepresenting what the framers wanted. What the framers wanted was a democracy. What the framers wanted was the will of the people to be represented in government.
Last time I checked, Bush didn't put a gun to the head of the millions of Americans who elected him, knowing just as much then as we do today about Iraq.
You want to be angry at someone for Bush's actions? Look to Congress, and look to the American people. You want to be angry that there's no accountability? Look to Congress, and look to the American people.
As I said very carefully, Bush has a blank check because of Congress and the American people and has run with it. You want to give a mouse a cookie and then lock him up for eating it? Maybe worry about not giving him the cookie in the first place.
JulesMaximus
No Lifer
- Jul 3, 2003
- 74,586
- 985
- 126
Impeach him for what?
You can't just impeach an elected leader because you don't like him or because you don't agree with him.
You can't just impeach an elected leader because you don't like him or because you don't agree with him.
Jeff7 had a pretty good reason why.
Just because Bush has executive power does not make him immune to everything
HardWarrior
Diamond Member
- Jan 26, 2004
- 4,400
- 23
- 81
Don't give me that "democracy" BS. They intended that this be a consitutional republic, and they weren't quiet about it. If you don't know the difference then you shouldn't be posting in this thread.
Just because he was elected doesn't automatically make anything he's done while in office either good OR lawful. The fact that Iraq was indeed unlawful can be in NO way ameliorated by majority approval.
I'll assign blame to whomever I wish, under whatever circumstances I wish. Grow some humility. Your remedy is childishly simple and completely ineffectual: "When everyone's to blame, no one's to blame." If you don't think this jackass should be impeached, then fine. But don't waste time couching it in holy fury at everyone else besides him. Bush is the chief executive, a fact that he mentions at nearly every turn. We wouldn't be in our current state without his DIRECT urging and approval.
But leave Bush out of it, right? Because YOU say so, no viable reason needed.
Have you forgetten that this thread is about impeachment? It has nothing to do with blanket punishment of congress and the American people. If that's what you're hell bent on talking about, why not start a thread of your own? Do you even stay in the US? I'm asking because you have a strange view about the way things work here and what's happened during the Bush administration.
A lame, meaningless analogy, spoken "very carefully."
Please give me the courtesy of not calling my posting BS. If you can't control yourself, then you shouldn't be posting in this thread either.
I completely agree and didn't say otherwise - my point was no more than that the majority did approve. Please take the time to read my posts - above, you'll see I quite clearly stated that I do think he has committed impeachable offenses.
You're missing my point. The American people are the ones who put him there. The American people are the ones who put representatives up who rubber-stamp what he does. The rubber-stampers are the ones who would vote for impeachment.
I do not think the American people or Congress should be "punished" - but I think those looking for impeachment ought to think the consequences of that solution and the reasons that precipitated the discussion. It's easy to blame Bush and only Bush but realistically there are many more at fault who need to be held accountable. Were that so, even with Bush we wouldn't be in the current situation.
Oh, and by the way, I work in Washington. Curiously enough, I know a thing or two about what we call "local politics". Lived here since 2001.
A pointless ad-hominem attack where reasoned thought might've been written.A lame, meaningless analogy, spoken "very carefully."
my view is simple, and has been probably stated in this thread allready.
if clinton can get impeached or almost impeached (whatever the result was) for lying about getting his dick sucked.. and bush gets in NO trouble for all of the ****** that has happened in the past 6 years.. i dunno pretty obvious to me.
if clinton can get impeached or almost impeached (whatever the result was) for lying about getting his dick sucked.. and bush gets in NO trouble for all of the ****** that has happened in the past 6 years.. i dunno pretty obvious to me.
I definitely agree Clinton shouldn't have been impeached... it was a really big shame they couldn't barter the censure deal the Dems were trying for in the final days.
Luckily, in retrospect, it was seen as the ultimate excess and the Republicans suffered for it. The situation is somewhat different this time... more citizen support, less congressional support... but the citizenry still isn't behind it as a majority. It would again be unpopular, it would again hurt the impeachers and help the impeachee. Clinton's popularity was twice was Bush's is now when he was impeached.
The Dems should recognize that even if they win enough seats to impeach (simple majority in the House) they won't be able to convict (2/3s in the Senate) and will suffer for it. They're already doing so badly that they really can't afford any more cuts. The Republicans will easily make this into "an attack on national security" and a "victory for the terrorists" and we'll never get rid of the Republican power structure.
To Congress I say: Censure him if possible and stop enabling him because you're scared of looking bacd.
To everyone else I say: Get out and vote during midterms and it will be much more satisfying for the Dems to win on their own merits instead of putting yet another card in the Republican hand, "they just hate the President and don't have any actual ideas".
HardWarrior
Diamond Member
- Jan 26, 2004
- 4,400
- 23
- 81
I'll describe your high-pressure prattle any way I wish, within forum rules. Moreover, I'll post where I please. You've done nothing but pontificate at me from word one, now you want to wax demure? Sorry, it doesn't work that way.
In so many words, no. You're far too verbose for that. You have, however, given every indication that, according to you, the president should be given a pass because _______________ (fill in with the dire scenario of your choice). Perhaps since you've mistaken a democracy for a republic, you've mistaken a man for a king?
And I said that fact amounts to bubkes in the eyes of the law. Remember?
Ah geez! :disgust: Please stop it with the head-games. I'm not the one.
Yet because it wouldn't be "pretty" he shouldn't be held accountable, right? I got that part, and I simply disagree with it. You try breaking the law and see exactly how hard the government throws the book at you.
Not at all, you've expressed it repeatedly. I disagree with your thoughts, simple enough? Please, say yes.
A truism, followed by a rehash of what you've said twice now.
ONE MORE TIME!!!
AGAIN, we're talking about impeachment, not self-flagellation. As far as congress, we'll see what the mid-terms bring, and it doesn't look good for the republicans. As far as the people, it seems like lots of them have awakened from their lie-induced slumber. What more can I ask? See how that works?
Which makes your expressed views all the more tragic, and predictable.
A lame, meaningless analogy, spoken "very carefully."
My assesment was quite "pointed", and direct. You're just too pompous and self-absorbed to realize it. Next time, keep your kindergarden associations to yourself.I can't speak for the company you keep, but many people I know (the adults, that is) would be at least mildly frustrated if talked AT in this fashion, sir/madam.
Your question is missing something?
You have to impeach for some reason. Impeach for what? State the reason!
If your reason was the war, remember that Congress keeps voting for funding for the War and unless you are going to impeach everyone in Congress, you dont have any real grounds for that.
You have to impeach for some reason. Impeach for what? State the reason!
If your reason was the war, remember that Congress keeps voting for funding for the War and unless you are going to impeach everyone in Congress, you dont have any real grounds for that.
Have you reviewed your own posts? The hypocrisy here is nightmarish. In the span of my several posts on the issue, you've managed to say what I write is "BS", suggest that I "don't know the difference" between a democracy and a constitutional republic, tell me to "grow some humility", suggest what I write is "childishly simple", tell me to "go start a thread of [my] own", claim I'm unaware initially by not being in this country enough and then being in its capital, call my analogies "lame and meaningless", lord, I could go on forever.
Enough with the hyperbole and ad hominem attacks. I feel like responding in kind, but I'm not going to take the bait and stoop to your level. I'm simply not interested in that level of discourse. If you don't like what I say, combat it with thoughts, not shrill spittle-flecked hysteria. Do you want to have a discussion or do you want to scream?
For all your insistence that I am simply repeating myself, why is it that you haven't addressed my actual point, which is that the President should be held accountable for his actions, but that impeachment should not be the remedy? If you disagree, that's fine -- but why not address my argument instead of contorting it into a straw-man that's easy to knock down?
HardWarrior
Diamond Member
- Jan 26, 2004
- 4,400
- 23
- 81
You've already gone on forever, in the span of what, 12 lousy posts? Nice recap. I said it all, and damned well meant every word, you fatuous windbag. Let's get to it; you want your ass kissed. You, BenWilliams, being superior to the rest of us vengeful heathens, has decreed that Bush should NOT be held accountable. The rest of the nation, 300 million people, are too muddle-headed and easily distracted to insist that the chief executive, the leader of this country, PAY for his many crimes against both us and the constitution. If we don't immediately agree we'll be subjected to eternal repeats of the same crap until we do.
Exactly where do you think you are, sir? We're all free to express our opinions here. What we can't even come CLOSE to expecting is the FORCED conversion of anyone we choose. I DON'T AGREE with your sentiments. What the hell is so hard to understand about that? Oh, I forgot, you're better than the rest of us, and as such deserving of more than you give in return.
Cry me a river.
Then shut up. It should be obvious by now, even to a numb-skull like you that I'm not buying any part of your carefully-crafted twaddle.
You aren't only politically flaccid; you're socially inept as well. Only the most delusional of posters indulges in emotional divination. If I'm "feeling" anything right now its amusement at the idea of your continued nattering and the inevitable distaste it will engender.
I've read it all before.
What can I say? I have a lot of thoughts to discuss. And when you ignore them in favor of instead ascribing different thoughts to me, I have to repeat them.
All while comporting with the rules, you said earlier, no doubt giving particular weight to that one in caps: "PERSONAL FLAMES WILL NOT BE TOLERATED".
Someone recently told me that such "emotional divination" was only in the realm of the most "delusional of posters" showing their "social ineptitude". After careful analysis, I have to say that I completely agree.
Actually, I just said I wanted to have a discussion about impeachment. You decided on your own that I wanted my ass kissed and thought I was better than everyone. To be honest, I'd rather appreciate it if you kept your distance from my ass, but your interest is noted.
:shrug: Never said otherwise. I just wanted to talk about impeachment. Instead I'm being screamed at by you. I'm just as curious why as you are.
No, I don't think so. You just don't seem worth it.
Nor am I buying any part of your rather shoddily-crafted flaming. Is that also obvious?
HardWarrior
Diamond Member
- Jan 26, 2004
- 4,400
- 23
- 81
If you were anywhere NEAR as smart as you think you are you'd have left it alone, a long time ago.
Here, for the sake of clarity, and to throw your juvenile BS right back in your face:
You never wanted to discuss anything. It was one, big fat lecture from the start. I'm done. Go bitch and whine at someone else, son.
Here, for the sake of clarity, and to throw your juvenile BS right back in your face:
You never wanted to discuss anything. It was one, big fat lecture from the start. I'm done. Go bitch and whine at someone else, son.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter