forge wrote:DeadlyKungFu wrote:dj superflat wrote:impeachment is pretty much guaranteed to ruin things for the dems come 08. investigate, bust chops, leave impeachment alone. that way, dems should be able to take the presidency fairly easily in 08 (assuming the house dems don't make the US hate them in the next 2 years).
I disagree. Impeachment is just to bring charges against. The GOP used it against Clinton to waste his time and money, stall his projects in office and make him a much less effective president that he already was. They continued to use the same catch phrases against every Democrat running for anything, it became a blanket accusation, lack of morality on the left. :ironic:
It's OBVIOUS that Bush is greasy, his misdeeds need to be documented and he has to answer for his atrocities.
Please baby jesus, send someone to put a bullet in GWB's head.
oooh...that last line gonna get you a knock on the door!
I find it incredible there is even any doubt
those evil neo-con bastards tried to impeach clinton for getting a fucking blowjob!!!!
I mean I know you guys have puritan roots and all - but do you know how crazy that sounds to the rest of the world? - that there is any doubt at all about impeaching Bush for taking the country to war and killing hundreds of thousands of people based on complete lies when they did it to clinton for getting a blowjob??????????????????????????????????????????????
this is where we get sayings like "only in america"
The simple answer is that your characterization of it as "complete lies" is off base. The definition of a lie is when you knowingly deceive another. Therefore, in order for it to be a "lie", you must know that the information being passed on is false.
The intelligence regrding WMDs, which I am sure you are referring to as "The Lie", has been around long before Bush was in office. Bill Clinton had the same intelligence, and believed that Saddam had WMDs. John Kerry made speeches based on that intelligence, saying that if you didn't think Saddam was a danger with his WMDS, then you shouldn't vote for Kerry. Everyone believed he had them, even the intelligence agencies of other countries around the world. I don't see you calling any of them liars, though.
The dems now have a majority, so they can try to set the agenda. But, at the end of the day, this is what will happen:
Dems will push new bills. If the President disagrees, he can use the veto. And since the Dems do not have a 2/3 Majority, they will never be able to override the vetos. So our legislature is at a stalemate for the next 2 years.
The Dems will push for impeachment, despite their claims to the contrary during the campaigns. Their theory is that this will help them solidify a Hillary win for President in 2008. (Hillary is the 100% guaranteed front-runner) I think this strategy will backfire on them, however. The American people have shown they are fed up with Iraq, but I doubt the majority want to see Bush impeached over it. So if the Dems push it, I think it will hurt them in 2008.
But... that's just what I think. Only time will tell.
M-Tech D900T laptop, 17" WSXGA+ wide-screen, Intel Pentium 4 3.4 GHz HT (600 series) 2 MB cache, 2048 RAM (Dual Channel DDR2 PC4200 533 MHz), Dual hard drives: 80 gig x 2 = 160 gig SATA 5400 rpm (RAID 0 config)
Korg Zero 8 mixer/soundcard/MIDI
