Consider the case of Libby. he did nothing wrong yet he's in jail because they made him feel like he wold be convicted of a non crime and he lied to get out of it. Any member of Bush's advisers or upper management has been gone after. They use the word Haliburton like it's a cuss word and Haliburton did nothing wrong besides provide oil drilling equipment at a profit. They keep saying Bush lied about WMDs when he didn't they have told that lie so many times even some Republicans are believing it. The same old trick. Accuse someone of doing something they didn't in hopes of trapping them. It's very hard to prove you didn't do something. for example: prove you didn't hit your wife. 1,000,0000 heard you accused of it. How many will believe it? When you keep saying "no I didn't" you sound guilty anyways. Consider the case of 9/11. People actually believe Bush knew it would happen in advance. It can't be proved he didn't so he must be guilty. Not a single shred of evidence proves he did, but the lie is told so often people believe it. In order to impeach a president you must have some shred of evidence that he has done something. None exists. That doesn't matter though. people say it does,. Prove it doesn't. All this is common knowledge to lawyers. It's why we have the innocent till proved guilty clause in our Constitution. The members of Congress and the Senate are well aware of it too. Democrats use this dirty tactic any chance they get.
2007-06-25 16:25:07
·
answer #1
·
answered by Homeschool produces winners 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
Um, I think both are critical of their presidents. And besides, not all Republicans are all peachy with Bush. I know some that aren't. As for "scandal," I don't think there is one for Bush. I mean, not one we could find out about because of "executive priviledge." But I don't know if Bush has a scandal, but innocent until proven guilty (doesn't mean I can't suspect him of it). Now, Cheney and a few of the cabinet members may...
By the way, the Republicans didn't impeach Clinton. The House of Representatives are not solely Republican. Plus, the reason for impeachment is stupid. That should have been between him and his wife and Lewinsky and their lawyers. At least the democrats aren't delving into Bush's personal life to get him impeached, because personal lives rarely affect the president's ability to preside and do his duties. (at least, not that I am aware of).
Bassman, you forgot ridding the country of the writ of habeus corpus.
2007-06-25 16:13:43
·
answer #2
·
answered by cadence_lost 3
·
3⤊
0⤋
G bush
Someone who
1. Turned the largest US surplus into the largest deficit in American history, then gives tax cuts when he should be raising taxes to get more money for the country. (And of course, he only gives tax cuts to all of his rich buddies.)
2. Blamed bin Laden for 9/11 (which is okay), but when he couldn't find him, made Americans forget about him by diverting their attention to Saddam Hussein, who had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11. Has he found bin Laden? Has he found any WMDs? Didn't think so.
3. Feels the need to stick his nose in Iraq's business and "improve" their government while bombing and completely destroying Iraq-it's obvious it's just an excuse to go to war.
4. Lies about there being NO terrorist attacks since 9/11, when there have been quite a few that he covers up or makes America forget about. (Like that anthrax threat a few years ago for example.)
5. Passes the Patriot Act to keep America safe from terrorists while arresting people who aren't terrorists, never catching the people who are, and violating SIX AMENDMENTS of the Constitution.
6. Passes "Clean Air Act" which actually makes the air dirtier.
7. Makes every country in the world besides Britain and Poland hate us.
8. Quits the Kyoto Protocol because it would make his rich buddies actually spend some money to reduce global warming, and God forbid anyone has to spend money.
9. Throws ultimatums at the American people that only a complete idiot could fall for (and a lot have) like "You're with us or you're with the terrorists" and basically just gets America to be loyal to him out of fear.
10. Only gets into Yale because of his father and passes with a C- average.
11. Has said enough stupid things to fill 265 pages of "Bushisms" books.
12. Gets elected into office after losing by over 10,000 votes. Do you think it's a coincidence that his brother was the governor of the state that the whole election depended on in 2000??
George Bush is a COMPLETE ******* ASSHOLE who never should have been elected, is one of the worst people in the country to earn the job of president and definitely is the worst president we have ever had or will ever have.
If u really think about it clinton have done a better job than both bushes conbined.
2007-06-25 16:14:02
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
0⤋
NO! I call it like I see it. Funny thing is many democrat believe there was a witch hunt on the Clinton because of Nixon. However one doesn't have to search or dig like they did in Monica's Closet. It's all right there. We haven't even turned over stones when it comes to the current president because there would be so much more to uncover.
If it was Bush was a democrat and acted the way he is Republicans would have been all over him with good reason.
God I would have even switched parties and became a republican.
2007-06-25 16:13:08
·
answer #4
·
answered by wondermom 6
·
6⤊
0⤋
Bush is a extra trustworthy person that incredibly believes what he says. And remember he did properly the 1st 4 years or does not have been re-elected. in certainty he did properly till we've been given the democratic congress. human beings have short thoughts. As for Clinton he's a bigger guy and did do properly with the financial gadget, yet he's no longer an extremely morale person.
2016-10-18 21:44:05
·
answer #5
·
answered by kelcey 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's not a choice to make. Clinton was voted into office! He didn't get us into an unprovoked war. His daughter didn't go out getting drunk under age.He and his wife also tried yo get a national health plan......but the Republicans refused to go along. They did everything they could to keep that administration from being successful. Clinton was still able to put Social Security in the Black and Bush spent it all. Putting it back in the Red.
2007-06-25 16:30:00
·
answer #6
·
answered by Josephine C 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Are you serious? Democrats don't have to look for scandals in the Bush Admin. Lying about WMD evidence, justice department targetting Dems, illegal wiretapping...need I continue? When you're rife with scandal, people are going to find out about them.
2007-06-25 16:14:21
·
answer #7
·
answered by Dana1981 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
Maybe, but I think it has more to do with the fact that President Bush doesnt kiss liberal a**. He doesnt pander to them, he says what he feels and I believe he is genuine.
2007-06-25 16:59:40
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
They don't have to look. The corruption of this adminstration is so in our face only a blind fool would miss it. Yes I know this is coming from a left leaning individual. But as I type this I'm not thinking left or right. Just what it is.
2007-06-25 16:11:39
·
answer #9
·
answered by gone 7
·
5⤊
1⤋
Of course they are. And although they won't be successful it won't stop Republicans from trying to do it again with the next Democrat President and it won't stop the Democrats from doing it with the next Republican President.
The answer = ONLY VOTE FOR PEOPLE WHO AREN'T INCUMBENTS.
2007-06-25 16:09:40
·
answer #10
·
answered by Jacques LeStrapp 2
·
2⤊
2⤋