2006-08-14 16:45:38 · 22 answers · asked by RepubTards_R_UnAmerican_Pussies 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
No, however, I could list quite a few Liberals, who should "be brought up on charges". Thanks for asking!
2006-08-14 16:50:19 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
No, because that's not how a republic works. Should we try someone for treason every time someone else says something for or against the President. No, that's called choice, that's what's called freedom, the freedom to choose. That's how a Democracy works. Not that I'm a Bush lover or anything, far from it. But people get to choose who they want to, whether or not it's the best decision or not. That's how it's supposed to work anyway. You can read it in the Bill of Rights, that is if you can read it through the stains that Bush leaves every time he wipes his *** with it. Sorry, that's why they call it America a democracy (which technically it's not it's actually a republic, but that's a different story in and of itself).
2006-08-14 17:00:33 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Should we try the New York Times for openly disclosing methods of collection on foreign enemies? That's actually a serious question.
Just because you don't agree with the guy, doesn't mean he's treasonous. Jimmy Carter screwed up our country more ways than I can count, but I wouldn't bring him up on treason....I'd just shake my head and say what a collective idiot we were for electing him.
And as I recall, only one president is guilty of a felony in office...Perjory.. If that slimeball walked, you don't have a thing on GDubya.
Talk to your Democratic buddies in Congress that voted to go to war on the same reports that GW did, but then didn't even have the gravitas to support our troops with funding or armament. Or the ones who want to allow terrorists civil trials as if they were protected either by the Geneva Convention or the Constitution (not a citizen, not protected by the Constitution, not a uniformed soldier, not a lawful enemy combatant under the Geneva Convention). It's the same group, so you could ask them both questions at the same time...
Should Sen John Murtha (D) be tried for treason for accusing US soldiers of war atrocities on the scale of Pol Pot, et al, when if anything, the US is treating these prisoners with kid gloves??
Best not start throwin stones till ya read a little more, kiddo.
2006-08-14 17:03:01 · answer #3 · answered by Woz 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Oct. 1983 Marine Barracks Beirut Lebanon 283 DEAD
Dec. 1988 Pan Am Flt 103 Lockerbie Scotland 244 DEAD
Feb. 1993 World Trade Center NYC Ny 6 DEAD
Oct. 1993 Somalia, Africa, American Rangers and Delta Force are killed by rebels. Supplied and trained by Osama. Over a thousand DEAD 19 of them American soldiers
Jun. 1996 Khobar Towers Dhahran, Sa 19 DEAD
Aug. 1998 US Embassies Kenya/Tanzania 224 DEAD
Oct. 2000 USS Cole Aden Yemen 17 DEAD
All these were attacks by terrorists against the USA and our allies, and every single president did nothing.
All they need is enough money and the right contacts to get a WMD. And literally more than half the US population would be no more.
So now we are in Iraq. Killing terrorists. But the more we kill the more we capture, the more we find out info on there operations, the easier we can shut them down.
If we leave Iraq, Iran would double in power. Now this is very bad b/c if they double in power so will the terrorists. Iran supplies them with weapons, money and man power.
THANK GOD FOR PRESIDENT BUSH
2006-08-14 16:50:55 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 3⤋
Another coward from the left that won't leave contact info. What's the matter? Afraid you're ill-equipped for intelligent discourse?
Right on Jovent!!!!! Sempre Fi!
2006-08-14 16:52:24 · answer #5 · answered by sparkletina 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
NO they are blind sheep!!! the one that should be indicted for treason is bush, Cheney, ramsfeld and rice!!!
2006-08-14 17:20:17 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Maybe you should be tried for treason for supporting terrorism.
2006-08-14 16:50:56 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
That doesn't even make any sense. That's like saying that all married people who voted for Clinton should cheat on their spouse.
2006-08-14 16:51:15 · answer #8 · answered by Jen B 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Isnt it funny how liberal pukes like this are always crying about freedom of speach...... UNLESS your opinion doesnt coincide with their flag burning views. Get a job and pay taxes you loser....
2006-08-14 16:55:12 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Lol. Nice question. That would mean trying half the country.
2006-08-14 16:51:53 · answer #10 · answered by !{¤©¤}! 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Bush will be fine!! Along with Cheney and a few others!
2006-08-14 16:49:01 · answer #11 · answered by cantcu 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋