English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Forget about Iraq and consider the creation of the North American Union.

In 2005, Presidet Bush met President Vicente Fox of Mexico and they developed the "Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America".

The creation of the North American Union would effectively merge the US, Canada, and Mexico. There would no longer be borders between the three countries (this would take care of the illegal immigration problems, since all peoples would now be considered citizens of the NAU). The economies of all three would be merged.

This plan is being moved forward by the Bush administration without the consent of Congress and the American people. I have written about Bush's use of signing statements and their effect on the Constitution. The creation of the NAU would destroy the Constitution.

Republicans and Democrats, put aside the partisanship and realize that Bush should be impeached before he destroys this country.

2007-02-05 11:01:12 · 16 answers · asked by taa 4 in Politics & Government Politics

Flowmaster: Caring for the Constitution, the system of government in place and not buying into the mindless ideologies of both parties makes me more of an American than you.

Perhaps it time that you actually consider thinking for yourself, but I'm assuming that you're the type of person that would jump off a cliff if asked, or you were probably at home cheering during that great political pep rally known as the State of the Union address.

2007-02-05 11:18:52 · update #1

16 answers

My god, you don't know the first thing about being a president. I hope you get fired from your job. Stop being stupid. Bush is not that bad.

2007-02-05 11:19:17 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Its ineffective, first the President has to dedicate a impeacheable offense like "treason, bribery, or different severe crimes and misdemeanors . Secondly the technique might take continuously just to start up, he may be long long gone out of workplace, in the previous it became into even began. Thirdly the democrats robotically referred to as for it, the superb option now they're able or maybe recognized that they might not do it. After the impeachment then the senate might could convict him. So no longer gonna take place. He hasnt broken any rules, and definitely there is not any reason to question him, he's gonna be long gone in a 365 days, worry with reference to the subsequent president.

2016-10-01 11:49:03 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

I believe we could impeach Bush just for the fact that he is using our oil and gasoline supplies to further initiate his violence in the war,after 9-11 he ordered that the SPR be brought up to maximum capacity.that took until 2005,the current rate in the SPR is 589million barrels,the only way we are allowed to use this reserve is an emergency drawdown(don't say Katrina because the flow in the gulf of Mexico was still producing 1.3 million barrels a day even with 8 refineries offline,the International Energy Agency agreed to sell on market 2 million barrels to make up for the disruption of the hurricane.That lasted 30 days. Us officials auctioned oil on line to whom? we don't know...This was done in an effort to keep higher prices away from the pumps.....the impact this had was not what was delivered in the intended speech's given,So how much gasoline are we using in the war and where is it coming from. Isn't it a crime to take out of the national reserve that which is designed to keep us from having to deal with terrorist actions that hoard our oil supply from us?

2007-02-05 12:02:11 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

"Impeach Bush."
Is the new liberal Bash Bush slogan? I guess the "9/11 conspiracies" and "Bush Lied" campaigns have run their course.
Please note that any valid or verifiable proof concerning any of this rhetoric is sadly not forthcoming - simply because it doesn't exist.

Incidentally, the NAU belongs in the same bogus category as the rumor of a One World Order conspiracy.

2007-02-05 11:22:55 · answer #4 · answered by LeAnne 7 · 0 0

Let's begin with Cheney. Testimony in the Libby trial points to his central role in outing a CIA agent.

Cheney could be replaced with someone from the reality-based community that could serve to put a leash on Bush. John Warner would make a good VP.

2007-02-05 11:06:53 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

NAFTA was the first step in this process, so perhaps treason proceedings are in order against Bill Clinton.

Until the Dems show they are willing to stand up on the illegal immigration issue (specifically by supporting Ramos and Campeon), there's going to be no progress made on stopping this.

2007-02-05 11:07:23 · answer #6 · answered by MoltarRocks 7 · 2 1

Hey Tom, get over it. I love president > Bush, he is the best president America ever have. And if you don’t like him, hey get over it. Pray and thank God for we are a safe country, with freedom. Got it pointless piece of sh-t?

Ps.
You should born in the Middle East.

2007-02-05 11:11:57 · answer #7 · answered by FlowMaster 3 · 2 0

Destroy the Constitution? If you really knew anything about the Constitution you would know that Bush,right or wrong, has done nothing he can be impeached for.

2007-02-05 11:08:32 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

No, the time was yesterday, between 12:00 and 1:00 p.m. EST.

Unfortunately, you were a day late and you missed your chance. Now you are stuck with him until January 2009.

2007-02-05 11:06:20 · answer #9 · answered by bkc99xx 6 · 1 2

ya ya ya,,hey right now my main bash man bush is on a roll,can you feel the heat yet,,,VICTORY IN IRAQ,,,,its in the air man,,,cannot impeach the peach,,,skinny do the doo,,decider

2007-02-05 11:09:03 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers