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

i want to hear opinions not simple yes or no answers

2007-02-19 11:16:41 · 15 answers · asked by michael g 1 in Politics & Government Government

15 answers

Yes, for failure to live up to his oath of office, to uphold the constitution of the U.S. and instead has done his best to erode our freedoms. Also for his criminal acts while in office for lying to the American people in order to start a war for his own personal gain.

2007-02-19 11:22:37 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 3

Yes. Two biggest reasons;

First- Though the president had every right to invade Iraq, fearing WMD's, once we found nothing, we should have left.
It is the presidents obligation to defend against imminent national threats. Sacrificing the lives of U.S. soldiers so Iraq can have a democracy, is anti-constitutional. For an American soldier to die because he was helping build a school in Iraq is obscene.

Second- Taking the oath of office the president swore to 'defend against all enemies, foreign or domestic.'
But, because of politics, he has done nothing to secure the border. Since 9/11/2001, 40,000 (yes, 40,000) American Citizens have been murdered by illegal aliens. 1/3 of all Federal prisoners are illegal aliens ,who have committed serious crimes.
Diseases once wiped out in the U.S., are re-emerging because of illegal immigration.

It's not just Bush, it's almost every politician in this country has put political interests WAY ahead of national ones.

2007-02-19 19:30:41 · answer #2 · answered by Skyhawk 5 · 0 1

Just because i dont agree with his judgement and his backwards thinking, you know the weapons of mass destruction, invading a land and taking it over and forcing his views on them, i completely disagree, it would be as if a russian leader came here and forced their political views on us, but it would make no difference if he was impeached, things wouldnt change

2007-02-19 19:23:29 · answer #3 · answered by waterboy 4 · 0 0

yes but it really doesn't matter one little bit @ this point, he's just a figurehead for a much larger cross party plan for world domination that's already in full swing.

The best course of action is for you to join other peaceful protesters to get the US out of iraq NOW !

(all other nations are increasingly quick to view americans now as almost as bad as their government for being so complacent)

have you forgotten that your country is supposed to be a democracy?

from outside it certainly doesn't look that way !!!

2007-02-21 15:46:45 · answer #4 · answered by Spaghetti MY 5 · 0 0

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>NO<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>>>>>>>>>>>>REASON WHY<<<<<<<<<<<
This country doesn't need the expense of millions to pay for impeachment of a president with only 2 years left in office.
***********************************************
>>>>>>>>IMPEACHABLE OFFENSES<<<<<<<
~~~~~open link for the rest of the article~~~~~~.
IT WILL GIVE YOU THE LIST OF OFFENSES

http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1639

George W. Bush's Impeachable Offenses
December 19, 2005
Ivan Eland
Several recent presidents could have been impeached for selected unconstitutional or illegal actions during their presidencies. But the sitting president, George W. Bush, may win the prize for committing the most impeachable offenses of any recent president.
**********************************************************
>>>>>>>PARTIAL LIST OF OFFENSES<<<<<
George W. Bush is following in the footsteps of his predecessors, but may have left more tracks. For starters, invading another country on false pretenses is grounds for impeachment. Also, the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution essentially says that the people have the right to be secure against unreasonable government searches and seizures and that no search warrants shall be issued without probable cause that a crime has been committed. And the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) requires that warrants for national security wiretaps be authorized by the secret FISA court. The law says that it is a crime for government officials to conduct electronic surveillance outside the exclusive purviews of that law or the criminal wiretap statute. President Bush’s authorization of the monitoring of Americans’ e-mails and phone calls by the National Security Agency (NSA) without even the minimal protection of FISA court warrants is clearly unconstitutional and illegal. Executive searches without judicial review violate the unique checks and balances that the nation’s founders created in the U.S. government and are a considerable threat to American liberty. Furthermore, surveillance of Americans by the NSA, an intelligence service rather than a law enforcement agency, is a regression to the practices of the Vietnam-era, when intelligence agencies were misused to spy on anti-war protesters—another impeachable violation of peoples’ constitutional rights by LBJ and Nixon.
****************************************************
Yet when one thinks of bad behavior leading down the road to possible impeachment, Bill Clinton and Richard Nixon come to mind first. Although Bill Clinton was impeached for having sex with an intern and then lying about it to a grand jury, a better case could have been made to impeach him for conducting an unconstitutional war over Kosovo without approval by Congress. The articles of Nixon’s impeachment centered on his use of illegal surveillance methods against political opponents and obstruction of justice and contempt of Congress in covering it up. His launching of an unconstitutional war in Cambodia without congressional approval was equally serious, but was left out of the articles. Curiously, Lyndon Johnson, Nixon’s predecessor, also used illegal surveillance activities against political rivals, but was not impeached

2007-02-19 19:40:36 · answer #5 · answered by LucySD 7 · 1 0

President Bush cannot be impeached. He hasn't done anything wrong. Liberals want him impeached simply because they don't like him. That isn't grounds for impeachment.
There have been no war crimes or any other of those crazy theories they come up with.

2007-02-19 19:20:45 · answer #6 · answered by TRUE PATRIOT 6 · 2 3

No, President Bush is doing a great job for this country.
A lot better job than the lying Clinton done, and don't say he did not kill anybody, what about the 82 innocent civilians at Waco? Bosnia, remember he bombed the Chinese embassy, Haiti, and he also bombed Iraq, and an aspirin factory in Afghanistan.

2007-02-19 19:22:42 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

no! He hasn't committed an impeachable offense.

However, if he gives amnesty (AKA guest worker disaster program) to the illegal alien criminals I think that's an impeachable offense since he is suppose to defend our country.

2007-02-19 19:23:05 · answer #8 · answered by Dizney 5 · 1 0

Yes, for lying to Congress and the American people to gain support for a war, which has resulted in thousands of American lives.

Clinton was impeached for less.

2007-02-19 19:20:39 · answer #9 · answered by Groovy 6 · 2 3

No, we might as well just wait until January of 2009. Judging by the lineup so far, it sounds like we will have a good one :)

2007-02-19 20:35:34 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers