why does U.S. congress not have the balls to impeach the chimp ?

Question

football coaches get fired for badly leading a team. Why cant chimp be fired for badly leading a nation ?

Iraq is a quagmire. Job economy is sucky as always.

Answer 1

Why don't you run for president if you think you can do better? Yaaa I didn't think soo chimp!!!

Answer 2

Football is different from the politics of running a country. Football coaches are also not elected.

Congress does not impeach Bush because, while there is a lot of screaming from all sorts of uninformed people, there is nothing impeachable about what Bush is doing. If there was, don't you think they really would impeach him?

Iraq is not a quagmire and you need to stop watching network news and other skewed sources. The job economy during Bush's administration has been better than it was under Clinton, by the way. In fact, it's been better on average than most other times as well. Stop believing everything you hear.

Answer 3

"Firing" a President, like firing football coaches as you say, comes when he is voted out of office. THAT'S how elected officials get "fired." No football coach that I have ever heard of was arrested and tried for "badly leading a team." That's what impeachment is. Maybe you need to find out what you're talking about before you open your mouth and let your belly rumble as my dad would say. (I just said it nicer than up y did, but I mean the same thing.)

Answer 4

If you go after impeachment, then many important issues such as health care, social security reform etc, fall by the wayside. That being said, when the truth of what really happened with the outing of Valerie Plame sinks in, the democrats will be hard pressed to not seek impeachment.

Answer 5

It doesn't take Ba**s, it takes proof of high crimes and misdemeanors, which they don't have because none have occurred. If our President is a chimp, you sir, are an a*s.
*** Add: To the blond with no name above: The republicans did NOT go after Clinton for having an affair. He lied under oath. Don't be a mind numbed robot spewing trash!

Answer 6

Like a democrat ever had the balls to do anything.


Hey you voted for them. Feeling lied to yet?

Answer 7

Exactly what high crimes and misdemeanors has he directly committed that would hold up in a legal investigation that could lead to impeachment?

Answer 8

There's so many things to fix and so little time. Why add an impeachment to the plate? He'll be gone in two years. Good Riddance!

Answer 9

I don't get it myself. The republicans went full charge after Clinton for an affair but the Democrats aren't even talking about impeaching Bush for all the lies he has told over the past 6 years.

Answer 10

One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

"There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seing and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.