zumpano21 Posted October 7, 2006 Share Posted October 7, 2006 As I understand, the Democrats are poised to take back Congress and the Senate with the upcoming November elections. I also understand once they have won the election, that objective #1 is to impeach the sitting president . How easy is this to do? I really have no idea, if anyone can shed light on this, please feel free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted October 7, 2006 Share Posted October 7, 2006 They won't do it. Because its political suicide now. Even though everyone knows he's crooked they don't have hard evidence on him. Dems just want answers as do the rest of the world. You'll see mainly hearings thats all. God and history will judge Bush last thing this country needs is to make itself more of a mockery like the Republicans tried to do to Clinton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shu Posted October 8, 2006 Share Posted October 8, 2006 Impeacing the President is very hard! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted October 8, 2006 Share Posted October 8, 2006 (edited) Impeacing the President is very hard! No its not really. You just need is a super majority in the house and boom he's impeached. Then he or she goes on trial in the Senate to be removed. You can impeach real easily in the house because most of the members act like parliamentary mp's. They usually vote the party line. So when the Republicans had a majority in the house during the Clinton days they impeached him. But then the Senate was in control by the Democrats so they were obviously going to vote against impeachment. But a lot of republicans went with the Democrats because the impeachment in a lot of peoples eyes was seen as a power grab by the republicans. The same thing would happen here as well. A lot of people would see it as a power grab. Although it might be different this time around because Clinton was still well liked through the scandal. His lows in popularity was in '94 when the Republicans swept both the house and the senate on an anti-corruption platform. (lol, deja vu anyone?) So I don't know, I personally think the man is so pathetic he doesn't even deserve to be impeached because then he'd have that label and his apologists would be talking about him for the rest of mankind. To me he's the devil and will get his punishment when God comes calling. Sometimes I wish we lived in france during the french revolution. So easy to get rid of leaders. The scary thing is that republicans will take his war of terror and use it for the rest of my life. Further turning the country into a tolitarian state. Please international habs fans, don't let your country polarize itself. Sadly I think Canada is next to get the polarization bug. Because the Cons got into power critizing the Liberals (rightly or wrongly). And now that they are in power are still yelling at the Liberals. The problem is this creates polarization of party ideals on a grass roots level. These anti Liberal spats turn to hate. We don't need Hate in politics. Because now I can't even speak to my aunts and unlces because of my political views. If I did I'd be silenced and asked to go home and never come back. Its there way or the highway. Hating leads to isolation. Please don't hate own members of your population because they like or have different views from you. Edited October 8, 2006 by Pierre the Great Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbr93 Posted October 8, 2006 Share Posted October 8, 2006 Please international habs fans, don't let your country polarize itself. Sadly I think Canada is next to get the polarization bug. Because the Cons got into power critizing the Liberals (rightly or wrongly). And now that they are in power are still yelling at the Liberals. The problem is this creates polarization of party ideals on a grass roots level. These anti Liberal spats turn to hate. We don't need Hate in politics. Because now I can't even speak to my aunts and unlces because of my political views. If I did I'd be silenced and asked to go home and never come back. Its there way or the highway. Hating leads to isolation. Please don't hate own members of your population because they like or have different views from you. A country doesn't get polarized because of one party. It works both ways. Look up the definition of the word polarization. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted October 8, 2006 Share Posted October 8, 2006 I know that. Its not one party but the entire culture. Just don't let it happen. Its not good for any country. Although you could say Canada already is polarized especially in the west whenever they here the word 'Quebec' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonus Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 No its not really. You just need is a super majority in the house and boom he's impeached. Then he or she goes on trial in the Senate to be removed. You can impeach real easily in the house because most of the members act like parliamentary mp's. They usually vote the party line. All you need is a super majority? this is not easy to get. Even if the democrats get congress, they aint getting anywhere close toa supermajority. Congressmen are not incredibly loyal and you would not even get all democrats to vote for impeachment (probably not even close). Procedurally, impeachment is plausible, but it is practically impossible. I prefer to win my battles at the poles anyways. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 Thats what I'm saying its not going to happen. Democrats don't act like sheep to get the 2/3rds for impeachment. The republicans on the other hand have shown that they vote party lines a lot. Same here. I rather see change at the polls instead of through a congressional act of no confidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLP Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 (sure glad PTG didn't start this thread ) Keep it civil boys, and if you can't keep an open mind or disapprove of free expression or spirited/opinionated dialogue stay clear because something tells me this could be a doozie! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 lol believe it or not I'm not for impeachment at all. I just think its a stupid procedure. Too many steps to go through and the republicans abused it last time. What I'd like is something like a no confidence vote which would have the power to force a new election. But of course that would mean having to change the constitution and the movement towards a parliamentary style form of government. Heck if america wants to keep its 'President' then we should reform the system to the French style of government. I like that form. Because then you could keep the 3 powers in check. (although its more 1 power system now when the white house flips the bird to the supreme court and says it can do whatever it wants). Reform of the Constitution anybody? Would make politics more interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 Forget impeachment. Can we just put him on trial for war crimes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted October 9, 2006 Share Posted October 9, 2006 Forget impeachment. Can we just put him on trial for war crimes? Oh I'd so love to do that. But the problem is the US controls the world. See in my opinion Churchill should have been tried for the brutal war crimes committed on the city of Dresden. But he was on the winning side. The winning side always gets a pass. In this case the US always gets a pass. Nobody is ever going to turn Bush and his goons in for war crimes unless he gets dethroned. And no president ever turns in another president. Ford pardoned Nixon for example. Those Reagan people never saw jail time either. Oliver North? I don't think he went to prison. So as I said Bush's judgement day is when he meets his maker. His maker won't be very happy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smon Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 Well, George W. Bush's ridiculous plans for the world really have ended up screwing everyone royally. Point A - Invasion of Afghanistan, which everyone basically supported. Now - Never found Bin Laden (apparently he is in Pakistan), Canadian and British soldiers trying to keep the country from returning to the Taliban Point B - Now instead of using the goodwill they generated to look for that devil Bin Laden, he rushes off to go on the Invasion of Iraq Now - Country in civil war. Did you know that the people celebrating when the U.S. apparently liberated the country were Muslim fundamentalists who were released en masse from jails by the Americans? Chances are they're the ones running around blowing stuff up. Honestly, if Bin Laden is in Pakistan, then the U.S. really ought to get in there and find him. If Pakistan is as much of an ally as they claim, they shouldn't have a problem. What will the history books say 20 years from now? There was a guy as bad as Hitler, but nobody ever found him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revvvrob Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 Honestly, if Bin Laden is in Pakistan, then the U.S. really ought to get in there and find him. that may be what should be done, but i'm not sure that'll help President Bush's popularity! that being said, i still believe in President Bush. President Clinton was impeached for lying - as far as i understand, you can't impeach President Bush for being wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 Bush lied to get into Iraq. He fixed intellegence. Blood is on his hands Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revvvrob Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 Bush lied to get into Iraq. He fixed intellegence. Blood is on his hands we've been over this too many times in this forum - do a search - you'll find my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 Thats great. I don't care. Fact is the man is just as dilusional as his enemies. He's made the world less safe. You in Canada, Killer in Britian, Dutch in Holland, JLP in Japan, Aussie in Australia are in more danger today because of that man and his actions. JLP with South Korea Aussie with Indonesia and Bali bombings Dutch with the problems his country is going through Killer with his problems of bombings And you in Canada Bush is solely responsible for the uptick in terrorist attacks throughout the world. But see Bush never has cared about the world. As long as the lower 48 haven't been attacked he doesn't care about the people in Britian, Holland, Japan, Australia and Canada. Thats the typical US response to things. They don't care about you but when something happens to them, they want you to care about them. For example you want to look at Canadian history? Air India- oops no big deal in america FLQ- just a bunch of crazy french canadians And now in the age of terrorism. If Canada much less arrests somebody you'll here crazy fools like the terrorist supporter of the IRA Peter King say Canada is full of terrorists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smon Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 Well, come on - it wouldn't take a genius to see that the evidence they supposedly had was flimsy and untrue. I still remember how they paraded Colin Powell in front of the U.N., and he showed satellite photographs of a truck that he claimed was carrying nuclear materials. What's even more ridiculous is that they forced Powell to claim this before the UN because they knew he was considered a moderate. He had often clashed with others in the administration, who were reportedly planning an Iraq invasion even before the September 11 attacks. Powell later recounted how Vice President Cheney had joked with him before he gave the speech, telling him, "You've got high poll ratings; you can afford to lose a few points." Air India- oops no big deal in america The sad fact is that it was considered no big deal in Canada, either. CSIS had the terrorists who blew up that plane under surveillance, but through sheer incompetence did nothing. 20 years later saw the trial of three B.C. men charged with the crime, they were acquitted because the judge didn't believe the evidence of the paid informant - so justice was not served. Now they're holding an inquiry into it, and the victims' families are asking whether it was swept under the rug because the victims were almost entirely Canadians of foreign descent. They're probably right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huzer Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 And now in the age of terrorism. If Canada much less arrests somebody you'll here crazy fools like the terrorist supporter of the IRA Peter King say Canada is full of terrorists. Peter King? The football announcer for NBC that writes MMQB for Sports Illustrated? I never knew! Haha. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pierre the Great Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 Peter King: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_T._King Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.