• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

It's time to IMPEACH Bush!

jfuh

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2005
Messages
16,631
Reaction score
1,227
Location
Pacific Rim
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
I don't think that we should impeach bush at all. I don't blame him for anything that he has done. I blame the idiots who placed him in office. Not elected but placed.
It's like handing over your car keys to a blind man. Come on we all knew Bush was stupid when he first showed up in '98.
 

Trajan Octavian Titus

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
jfuh said:
I don't think that we should impeach bush at all. I don't blame him for anything that he has done. I blame the idiots who placed him in office. Not elected but placed.
It's like handing over your car keys to a blind man. Come on we all knew Bush was stupid when he first showed up in '98.
Oh you mean the writers of the constitution who declared that the electoral college and not the popular vote will decide the winner of a presidential election . . . those bastards! :roll:
 

jfuh

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 10, 2005
Messages
16,631
Reaction score
1,227
Location
Pacific Rim
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
Oh you mean the writers of the constitution who declared that the electoral college and not the popular vote will decide the winner of a presidential election . . . those bastards! :roll:
Try the Supreme Court that placed him in office.
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
jfuh said:
Try the Supreme Court that placed him in office.
Wow...

I was hoping there wern't anyone left that would suck this stuff from from the teat of the DNC, but I assumed wrong...

Would you care to expalin what the Supreme Court ruled on...specifically?...

Give us actual details to back up your claim...A claim which has been debunked multiple times over...
 

Trajan Octavian Titus

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
20,915
Reaction score
546
Location
We can't stop here this is bat country!
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
cnredd said:
Wow...

I was hoping there wern't anyone left that would suck this stuff from from the teat of the DNC, but I assumed wrong...

Would you care to expalin what the Supreme Court ruled on...specifically?...

Give us actual details to back up your claim...A claim which has been debunked multiple times over...
Due to the narrow margin of the original vote count, Florida law mandated a statewide recount. In addition, the Gore campaign requested that the votes in three counties be recounted by hand. Florida state law (F.S. Ch. 102.166) at the time allowed the candidate to request a manual recount by protesting the results of at least three precincts. The county canvassing board then decides whether or not to recount (F.S. Ch. 102.166 Part 4) as well as the method of the recount in those three precincts. If the board discovers an error, they are then authorized to recount the ballots (F.S. Ch. 102.166 Part 5). The canvassing board did not discover any errors in the tabulation process in the initial mandated recount. The Bush campaign sued to prevent additional recounts on the basis that no errors were found in the tabulation method until subjective measures were applied in manual recounts. This case eventually reached the United States Supreme Court, which ruled 5-4 to stop the vote recount, which allowed Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris, a Republican, to certify the election results. This allowed Florida's electoral votes to be cast for Bush, making him the winner. Seven of the nine Justices agreed that the lack of unified standards in counting votes violated the Constitutional guarantee of equal protection, but five agreed that there was insufficient time to impose a unified standard and that the recounts should therefore be stopped.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._presidential_election,_2000


Damn Supreme Court following the law how dare they.
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
Due to the narrow margin of the original vote count, Florida law mandated a statewide recount. In addition, the Gore campaign requested that the votes in three counties be recounted by hand. Florida state law (F.S. Ch. 102.166) at the time allowed the candidate to request a manual recount by protesting the results of at least three precincts. The county canvassing board then decides whether or not to recount (F.S. Ch. 102.166 Part 4) as well as the method of the recount in those three precincts. If the board discovers an error, they are then authorized to recount the ballots (F.S. Ch. 102.166 Part 5). The canvassing board did not discover any errors in the tabulation process in the initial mandated recount. The Bush campaign sued to prevent additional recounts on the basis that no errors were found in the tabulation method until subjective measures were applied in manual recounts. This case eventually reached the United States Supreme Court, which ruled 5-4 to stop the vote recount, which allowed Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris, a Republican, to certify the election results. This allowed Florida's electoral votes to be cast for Bush, making him the winner. Seven of the nine Justices agreed that the lack of unified standards in counting votes violated the Constitutional guarantee of equal protection, but five agreed that there was insufficient time to impose a unified standard and that the recounts should therefore be stopped.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._presidential_election,_2000


Damn Supreme Court following the law how dare they.
I had a feeling YOU would know it...I was wondering if the newbie could show it and understand it...:shrug:
 

LeftyHenry

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 21, 2005
Messages
1,896
Reaction score
12
Location
New York City
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
You know studies show that Gore won Florida under any circumstance

Also bush is prone to impeachment for NSA scandal
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Che said:
You know studies show that Gore won Florida under any circumstance

Also bush is prone to impeachment for NSA scandal
Yes, yes, yes...

And the moon is made of cheese and there are little grren men that live on Mars...

A comprehensive review of the uncounted Florida ballots from last year's presidential election reveals that George W. Bush would have won even if the United States Supreme Court had allowed the statewide manual recount of the votes that the Florida Supreme Court had ordered to go forward.

Contrary to what many partisans of former Vice President Al Gore have charged, the United States Supreme Court did not award an election to Mr. Bush that otherwise would have been won by Mr. Gore. A close examination of the ballots found that Mr. Bush would have retained a slender margin over Mr. Gore if the Florida court's order to recount more than 43,000 ballots had not been reversed by the United States Supreme Court.

Even under the strategy that Mr. Gore pursued at the beginning of the Florida standoff — filing suit to force hand recounts in four predominantly Democratic countiesMr. Bush would have kept his lead, according to the ballot review conducted for a consortium of news organizations.


http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/12/politics/recount/12VOTE.html?ex=1122955200&en=cf5afcd60e6018af&ei=5070&oref=login

This is old hat...Why are you even bothering?...:confused:

If you hate the guy...fine...You hate the guy...

But please don't insult the intelligence of this forum and start whipping out anything you can think of to make what you believe true...
 

alphieb

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 13, 2005
Messages
1,982
Reaction score
31
Location
Vincennes IN
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
President Green Genes

Raging Moderate, By Will Durst

NBC’s Brian WIlliams asked George Bush if the federal government’s faltering response to Hurricane Katrina was due to racial indifference, and for a half a second you could almost hear Dubya’s vertebrae fuse together as he perceptibly grew about a quarter of a millimeter. His voice trembled, and he snarled with a noticeable lack of tele-prompting, “You can call me anything you want, but do not call me a racist.”

Which was not the point, but it is true. It’s not fair to call the president of the United States a racist. This is not a man who gives the tiniest whit about black or white. This is a man who only cares about green, and whether or not you have any. In this country, if you’re rich, you’ll get taken care of. If you’re not, you won’t. Pretty much as simple as that.

He is neither an ageist or a sexist or a fascist or a typist. Or a homophobe. Or a xenophobe. Or a xylophone. Rather, he is a cashist. The first Green President, but the only whales he’s saving are the Vegas kind. Tax cuts for the wealthy. Economic stimuli for the wealthy. Legislative amendments for the wealthy. Overseas incentives for the wealthy. Judicial appointments designed to nurture favorable decisions for the wealthy. Secret, winking loopholes for the wealthy. Complimentary all-you-can-eat seafood buffets with a pearl in every oyster for the wealthy. No-bid contracts for his buddies, who happen to be, say it with me now… wealthy.

For the poor: you got your cuts. Winter heating subsidy cuts for the poor. Student aid cuts for the poor. Health cuts for the poor. Food stamp and nutritional cuts for the poor. Education cuts for the poor. Outlandish dress codes at state dinners to further disenfranchise the poor. Outsourcing jobs to create more poor. With George Bush in charge, it’s a bull market for poor.

In other words, if you got money, just sit still and you will be showered with more. If you ain’t got, he and his people will throw up plexiglass, guard dogs, razor wire, enough red tape to wrap a moose: whatever it takes to keep you from getting.

I know the theory on paper is trickle-down. Rich people spend their money and it trickles down to the poor. But the theory on paper is crap. Rich people hang onto their money. That’s how they got rich. You give us poor people money and we’ll spend every damn penny we get our grubby little hands on. Why do you think we’re poor? Blowing it on superfluous stuff like food and rent and medicine and gasoline. Silly profligate us. Besides, I’m tired of being trickled on.

So, let’s be straight about this. Kanye West is dead wrong about the president. George Bush doesn’t hate black people. George Bush doesn’t hate poor people either. He just LOVES rich people. A whole lot. Like a fellow waiter back in Milwaukee used to say, “It’s not that I like the rich more than the poor, its just that they tip so much better.”

Political comic Will Durst actually thinks poor people tip better. But the rich do order more expensive bottles of wine.

Will Durst is a political comedian who has performed around the world. He is a familiar pundit on television.See www.willdurst.com for additional information on Will’s performance schedule.
His two CDs are available at laugh.com. Email Will at willdurst@sbcglobal.net. ©2005 Will Durst.


This is just something I wanted to share with everyone. I thought it was comical.
 

LeftyHenry

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 21, 2005
Messages
1,896
Reaction score
12
Location
New York City
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
cnredd said:
Yes, yes, yes...

And the moon is made of cheese and there are little grren men that live on Mars...

A comprehensive review of the uncounted Florida ballots from last year's presidential election reveals that George W. Bush would have won even if the United States Supreme Court had allowed the statewide manual recount of the votes that the Florida Supreme Court had ordered to go forward.

Contrary to what many partisans of former Vice President Al Gore have charged, the United States Supreme Court did not award an election to Mr. Bush that otherwise would have been won by Mr. Gore. A close examination of the ballots found that Mr. Bush would have retained a slender margin over Mr. Gore if the Florida court's order to recount more than 43,000 ballots had not been reversed by the United States Supreme
Court.

Even under the strategy that Mr. Gore pursued at the beginning of the Florida standoff — filing suit to force hand recounts in four predominantly Democratic countiesMr. Bush would have kept his lead, according to the ballot review conducted for a consortium of news organizations.


http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/12/politics/recount/12VOTE.html?ex=1122955200&en=cf5afcd60e6018af&ei=5070&oref=login

This is old hat...Why are you even bothering?...:confused:

If you hate the guy...fine...You hate the guy...

But please don't insult the intelligence of this forum and start whipping out anything you can think of to make what you believe true...

Yes, Yes, my friend of course which is why MSNBC says other wise!

http://www.angelfire.com/rant/sstewert/News/election2000.html

"What this says is that judge terry lewis was going to order a statewide recount of all the undervotes and the overvotes and to count every vote where the intent of the voter was clear. Then gore would have won by 171 votes and the NORC report backs that up. The US supreme court stopped the recount one day before judge terry lewis was going to have a hearing and then order a statewide recount of all the under and over votes. This proves that Gore would have won if not for the US supreme court stopping the recount, it also proves the NORC recount evaluation spun the results to say Bush still won. Plus this proves the media is conservative, if the media was liberal they would report this story. WHICH THEY HAVE NOT REPORTED AT ALL ANYWHERE, it came out today (11-23-01) on the msnbc.com web site and not one word of it has been reported by the mainstream media."

If you read the article my friend you will understand. I bother because we're talking about impeachment and this was the first case in which Bush could be impeached

Here's some more links my confused and brain washed little friend!

http://archive.democrats.com/display.cfm?id=181

http://www.leftwatch.com/archives/years/2004/000031.html

Besides, Gore actually won the election with the majority of the people any how
 
Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
2,669
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I have heard of this impeachment for five years now - ever since he was accused of stealing the 2000 election. Since then, the list of trumped up scandals has become a mile long and still, he isn't impeached. What's taking so long, guys?
 

Billo_Really

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally Posted by KCConservative:
I have heard of this impeachment for five years now - ever since he was accused of stealing the 2000 election. Since then, the list of trumped up scandals has become a mile long and still, he isn't impeached. What's taking so long, guys?
Were waiting for Congress to go down to the local sporting goods store and pick themselves up a set of balls.
 

kal-el

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 22, 2005
Messages
3,412
Reaction score
8
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Billo_Really said:
Were waiting for Congress to go down to the local sporting goods store and pick themselves up a set of balls.
Yes, this Congress has no spine at all. Impeachment will not happen while we have a Republican Congress. George Bush can practically "walk on water."
 

Billo_Really

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally Posted by kal-el:
Yes, this Congress has no spine at all. Impeachment will not happen while we have a Republican Congress. George Bush can practically "walk on water."
I really don't see any difference between dems and reps. They both answer to the same class of people and continue policies from the previous administration. Clinton continued everything Reagan and Carter put on the table. Bush did the same. And Kerry would have too. It's only the faces that change. And who's fault is that? Ours!
 

alphieb

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 13, 2005
Messages
1,982
Reaction score
31
Location
Vincennes IN
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Billo_Really said:
Were waiting for Congress to go down to the local sporting goods store and pick themselves up a set of balls.
LOL....I like that, it was very witty.
 

alphieb

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 13, 2005
Messages
1,982
Reaction score
31
Location
Vincennes IN
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
kal-el said:
Yes, this Congress has no spine at all. Impeachment will not happen while we have a Republican Congress. George Bush can practically "walk on water."
Nah, The reps know he is an idiot too, they are just pretending like he is not.
 

kal-el

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 22, 2005
Messages
3,412
Reaction score
8
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
alphieb said:
Nah, The reps know he is an idiot too, they are just pretending like he is not.
Yea, you're probably right, you'd have to be a bigger intellectual decrepit, not to see he's a moron's moron. I'd say they wouldn't hold impeachment hearings up to a point, but they do want their jobs. If he does something really despicable, and the public pushes for it, they would have to be really dumb not to go ahead with impeachment.
 

SixStringHero

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
1,588
Reaction score
133
Location
Southwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Billo_Really said:
I really don't see any difference between dems and reps. They both answer to the same class of people and continue policies from the previous administration. Clinton continued everything Reagan and Carter put on the table. Bush did the same. And Kerry would have too. It's only the faces that change. And who's fault is that? Ours!
You make a good point. Both parties need a serious overhaul. At the very least I would like to see a viable 3rd party that I actually agree with come into play other than the Green's(who I agree with on many environmental issues and Libertarians(who I tend to agree with on many issues)

If those 2 parties could merge in a positive way I might actually be able to support something. Of course I would endorse the government putting more stringent EPA standards on industry, and that would conflict with the Libertarian viewpoint, but we can't all have our cake and eat it too.
 

SixStringHero

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
1,588
Reaction score
133
Location
Southwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
alphieb said:
Nah, The reps know he is an idiot too, they are just pretending like he is not.
Still insisting the president of the United States is a complete blithering idiot?

Doesn't that sentence just strike you as insulting?

If not, it should. Your saying the president of our country is an idiot. I may not agree with Bush on a lot of things, but the last thing I think is that he is an idiot. Far from it.

Then again, I don't equate being articulate with intelligence.
 

kal-el

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 22, 2005
Messages
3,412
Reaction score
8
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
SixStringHero said:
Still insisting the president of the United States is a complete blithering idiot?
Keen observation. Nothing gets by you.:lol:

Doesn't that sentence just strike you as insulting?
Not in the least. Why would it be insulting?

If not, it should.
C'mon. It's not even being judgemental labeleing him an "idiot", based on his actions, and the way in which he mangles words like someone with Tourrette Syndrome, it's a perfectly reasonable assumption to make.

Your saying the president of our country is an idiot.
Again, nothing gets by you.

I may not agree with Bush on a lot of things, but the last thing I think is that he is an idiot. Far from it.
Far from it, huh? Yea, his education was expensive, but if you just observe him, one could come to the conclusion that he treated it casually. It seems everytime he opens his mouth, he shows everyone how he mangles the English language. Here's some of your intellectual giant's words:

"I have made good judgments in the past. I have made good judgments in the future."
"I stand by all the mistatements that I've made."
"Well, I think if you say you're going to do something and don't do it, that's trustworthiness."
http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/blbushdumbquotes.htm
 

SixStringHero

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
1,588
Reaction score
133
Location
Southwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
kal-el said:
Keen observation. Nothing gets by you.:lol:



Not in the least. Why would it be insulting?



C'mon. It's not even being judgemental labeleing him an "idiot", based on his actions, and the way in which he mangles words like someone with Tourrette Syndrome, it's a perfectly reasonable assumption to make.



Again, nothing gets by you.



Far from it, huh? Yea, his education was expensive, but if you just observe him, one could come to the conclusion that he treated it casually. It seems everytime he opens his mouth, he shows everyone how he mangles the English language. Here's some of your intellectual giant's words:

"I have made good judgments in the past. I have made good judgments in the future."
"I stand by all the mistatements that I've made."
"Well, I think if you say you're going to do something and don't do it, that's trustworthiness."
http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/blbushdumbquotes.htm
It's like I said, I don't judge one's intelligence on how well they speak.

Those are funny quotes to be sure, but to me that doesn't represent the abundance or brevity of his intellect.

I just don't see how an idiot could be the president of the US---thats the notion that I find strikingly absurd and insulting.
 

tecoyah

Illusionary
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
10,428
Reaction score
3,836
Location
Louisville, KY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
SixStringHero said:
I just don't see how an idiot could be the president of the US---thats the notion that I find strikingly absurd and insulting.

Or......Embarassing
 

LeftyHenry

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 21, 2005
Messages
1,896
Reaction score
12
Location
New York City
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Billo_Really said:
I really don't see any difference between dems and reps. They both answer to the same class of people and continue policies from the previous administration. Clinton continued everything Reagan and Carter put on the table. Bush did the same. And Kerry would have too. It's only the faces that change. And who's fault is that? Ours!
Yup I agree however the puppets do tend to stick w/ their party
 

kal-el

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 22, 2005
Messages
3,412
Reaction score
8
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
SixStringHero said:
It's like I said, I don't judge one's intelligence on how well they speak.
Of course not, unless he represents the 50 states in our great nation, then it is perfectly acceptable to do this.

Those are funny quotes to be sure, but to me that doesn't represent the abundance or brevity of his intellect.
Are you ****ing kidding me? Dude, he talks like he has dyslexia. His remarks attain levels of supreme idiocy unmatched by any prior President. abundance or brevity of his intellect- Ha. Would you call a man intelligent if he stole elections, turned budget surplus's into deficits, waged a war on jobs, and waged a war based on a voice he hears in his head? He has brought great devestation at home and abroad.


I just don't see how an idiot could be the president of the US---thats the notion that I find strikingly absurd and insulting.
You and me both dude.
 
T

The Real McCoy

kal-el said:
Are you ****ing kidding me? Dude, he talks like he has dyslexia. His remarks attain levels of supreme idiocy unmatched by any prior President. abundance or brevity of his intellect- Ha. Would you call a man intelligent if he stole elections, turned budget surplus's into deficits, waged a war on jobs, and waged a war based on a voice he hears in his head? He has brought great devestation at home and abroad.
How did he "steal" the election and how has he waged a "war on jobs?"

Last I checked, the 2000 election myths were debunked long ago and unemployment rates have been dropping for quite a while.
 
Top Bottom