Page 1 of 1 [ 11 posts ]
08 Mar 2005, 8:17 am
http://www.lewrockwell.com/gregory/gregory66.html
Quote:
Calling for President Bush’s impeachment surely sounds seditious to many conservative partisans of the administration and its "war on terrorism."
As they apparently see it, during the relative peacetime of the late 1990s, calling for the impeachment of a Democrat for lying about the whereabouts of his private parts was a public service. But during wartime, to call for the impeachment of a Republican for one of the greatest of all political crimes – that is, the war – is branded treason, or, at best, ridiculed as hysterical anti-American defeatism or simply juvenile white noise.
This reveals a major problem with the American political system: That most worthy of being condemned is upheld and protected from criticism. Wartime gives the president all sorts of new power levers, privileges and potential to wreak havoc. It also shields him against the normal etiquette of political dissent and exempts him from the standard logistics of checks and balances. When it is absolutely most necessary that the president be questioned, challenged and constrained, he gets free rein. The Democrats showed no credible opposition to Bush’s foreign policy in the last election, and they certainly can’t be trusted to hold the president accountable for the atrocious wars in the Middle East.
For the Iraq war alone, George W. Bush should be impeached. It won’t happen, of course. The Republican legislators so concerned about presidential honesty as it concerned a stained dress back in the late 1990s seem to care nothing of the distortions, deceptions and lies of the Bush administration that have led to and obscured much more heinous stains – bloodstains – upon the clothing of 1,500 dead American troops, thousands more wounded, not to mention tens of thousands of dead and maimed Iraqis.
As they apparently see it, during the relative peacetime of the late 1990s, calling for the impeachment of a Democrat for lying about the whereabouts of his private parts was a public service. But during wartime, to call for the impeachment of a Republican for one of the greatest of all political crimes – that is, the war – is branded treason, or, at best, ridiculed as hysterical anti-American defeatism or simply juvenile white noise.
This reveals a major problem with the American political system: That most worthy of being condemned is upheld and protected from criticism. Wartime gives the president all sorts of new power levers, privileges and potential to wreak havoc. It also shields him against the normal etiquette of political dissent and exempts him from the standard logistics of checks and balances. When it is absolutely most necessary that the president be questioned, challenged and constrained, he gets free rein. The Democrats showed no credible opposition to Bush’s foreign policy in the last election, and they certainly can’t be trusted to hold the president accountable for the atrocious wars in the Middle East.
For the Iraq war alone, George W. Bush should be impeached. It won’t happen, of course. The Republican legislators so concerned about presidential honesty as it concerned a stained dress back in the late 1990s seem to care nothing of the distortions, deceptions and lies of the Bush administration that have led to and obscured much more heinous stains – bloodstains – upon the clothing of 1,500 dead American troops, thousands more wounded, not to mention tens of thousands of dead and maimed Iraqis.
This article raises an important point, and that is if Clinton can be impeached for lying about sex why can't Bush be impeached for lying about WMD and his other justifications for war? At least Clinton's lie didn't result in the deaths of thousands of innocent people.
08 Mar 2005, 1:06 pm
08 Mar 2005, 1:14 pm
08 Mar 2005, 1:23 pm
thechadmaster
Veteran
Joined: 13 Feb 2005
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,126
Location: On The Road...Somewhere
08 Mar 2005, 3:26 pm
Psychlone wrote:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/gregory/gregory66.html
This article raises an important point, and that is if Clinton can be impeached for lying about sex why can't Bush be impeached for lying about WMD and his other justifications for war? At least Clinton's lie didn't result in the deaths of thousands of innocent people.
Quote:
Calling for President Bush’s impeachment surely sounds seditious to many conservative partisans of the administration and its "war on terrorism."
As they apparently see it, during the relative peacetime of the late 1990s, calling for the impeachment of a Democrat for lying about the whereabouts of his private parts was a public service. But during wartime, to call for the impeachment of a Republican for one of the greatest of all political crimes – that is, the war – is branded treason, or, at best, ridiculed as hysterical anti-American defeatism or simply juvenile white noise.
This reveals a major problem with the American political system: That most worthy of being condemned is upheld and protected from criticism. Wartime gives the president all sorts of new power levers, privileges and potential to wreak havoc. It also shields him against the normal etiquette of political dissent and exempts him from the standard logistics of checks and balances. When it is absolutely most necessary that the president be questioned, challenged and constrained, he gets free rein. The Democrats showed no credible opposition to Bush’s foreign policy in the last election, and they certainly can’t be trusted to hold the president accountable for the atrocious wars in the Middle East.
For the Iraq war alone, George W. Bush should be impeached. It won’t happen, of course. The Republican legislators so concerned about presidential honesty as it concerned a stained dress back in the late 1990s seem to care nothing of the distortions, deceptions and lies of the Bush administration that have led to and obscured much more heinous stains – bloodstains – upon the clothing of 1,500 dead American troops, thousands more wounded, not to mention tens of thousands of dead and maimed Iraqis.
As they apparently see it, during the relative peacetime of the late 1990s, calling for the impeachment of a Democrat for lying about the whereabouts of his private parts was a public service. But during wartime, to call for the impeachment of a Republican for one of the greatest of all political crimes – that is, the war – is branded treason, or, at best, ridiculed as hysterical anti-American defeatism or simply juvenile white noise.
This reveals a major problem with the American political system: That most worthy of being condemned is upheld and protected from criticism. Wartime gives the president all sorts of new power levers, privileges and potential to wreak havoc. It also shields him against the normal etiquette of political dissent and exempts him from the standard logistics of checks and balances. When it is absolutely most necessary that the president be questioned, challenged and constrained, he gets free rein. The Democrats showed no credible opposition to Bush’s foreign policy in the last election, and they certainly can’t be trusted to hold the president accountable for the atrocious wars in the Middle East.
For the Iraq war alone, George W. Bush should be impeached. It won’t happen, of course. The Republican legislators so concerned about presidential honesty as it concerned a stained dress back in the late 1990s seem to care nothing of the distortions, deceptions and lies of the Bush administration that have led to and obscured much more heinous stains – bloodstains – upon the clothing of 1,500 dead American troops, thousands more wounded, not to mention tens of thousands of dead and maimed Iraqis.
This article raises an important point, and that is if Clinton can be impeached for lying about sex why can't Bush be impeached for lying about WMD and his other justifications for war? At least Clinton's lie didn't result in the deaths of thousands of innocent people.
I Agree Fully, IMPEACH THAT BASTARD AND BRING OUR MEN HOME ALIVE!! !! !
08 Mar 2005, 5:40 pm
08 Mar 2005, 7:27 pm
Archmage
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2004
Gender: Male
Posts: 619
Location: Bottom of Lake Hylia... Darn Iron Boots!
08 Mar 2005, 7:39 pm
08 Mar 2005, 11:16 pm
I love that people wanted to impeach Clinton for lying about his...umm...Lewinsky thing, which was his personal business. But when Bush's lie causes thousands of American soldiers to die, 51% of the US considers him an honourable man.
thechadmaster
Veteran
Joined: 13 Feb 2005
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,126
Location: On The Road...Somewhere
09 Mar 2005, 9:33 am
I'll Be Blunt, Gerorge Bush and Saddam Hussein should be put on trial side by side BOTH for crimes against humanity
09 Mar 2005, 10:04 am
