2007-09-25 10:20:49 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
ignorance is not a impeachable offense, we would of been up to 1500 presidents by now if it was
2007-09-25 10:24:47 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
Gee, I don't know. Let's consider:
GEORGE W. BUSH: Wasn't impeached even though he is responsible for the deaths of 675,000 Iraqis and 3,800 U.S. soldiers fighting an unconstitutional, illegal, immoral, unjustified 'war' against another sovereign nation that in no way threatened, provoked or attacked the United States;
BILL CLINTON: Was 'impeached' because he had an adulterous affair with another consenting adult (as if Republicans would never do anything so dastardly!);
JIMMY CARTER: Wasn't impeached because he worked hard at trying to establish peace in the Middle East and devoted his Presidency to the release of American hostages in Iran, even though it mean he had to sacrifice his run for re-election;
RONALD REAGAN: Wasn't impeached even though he authorized a scandalous 'arms-for-hostages' deal that became known as the notorious IranContra Affair and squandered billions of taxpayers' dollars on a 'Star Wars' project that went nowhere;
I guess you're right: Carter should have been impeached along with Clinton: they're both terrible human beings. -RKO- 09/25/07
2007-09-25 17:42:17 · answer #2 · answered by -RKO- 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Do you know what impeachment means? I rather doubt it!
Good old RKO, at it again, if you can't blind them with brillance, well, you know the rest.
Why was it Clinton was impeached? Not for lying under oath? Everyone else knows that is the reason.
As for the rest of them that you think should be, you are yet, in all of your ramblings, to name an impeachable offense.
2007-09-25 17:36:50 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Impeach a Nobel laureate? Didn't they tell you not to stand in the smoker with the cheese.It leaves you light headed
2007-09-25 17:35:17 · answer #4 · answered by Deep Thought 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
You need help to get over your obcession with Jimmy Carter.
2007-09-25 17:37:06 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Because Nixon (almost) was...And republicans didnt have much credibility in 1977.. thats why dems wont pursue impeachment of bush to get even for Clinton.
2007-09-25 17:30:43 · answer #6 · answered by zackadoo 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
for what?
lol @ conservatives wanting to impeach a president for the high crime of being a member of the opposing party
2007-09-25 17:24:47 · answer #7 · answered by captain_koyk 5 · 6⤊ 0⤋
Jimmy Carter, worst president in U.S. History, by a wide margin, but like Bush he didn't commit a violation or Broke any laws as President of the U.S.,
Jimmy Carter's greatest hits
Thanks for the highest inflation in U.S. History,
Thanks for that energy crisis,
Thanks for your failed middle east policy
Thanks for allowing IRAN to hold hostages in our own embassy for over 454 days,
Great JOB IN LETTING CASTRO empty out his jails and send us all his Killers, Rapists and drug dealers to the U.S., nice job on that one.
Thank god Reagan stomped your butt in 80 to clean up your failures.
2007-09-25 17:33:53 · answer #8 · answered by dez604 5 · 0⤊ 3⤋
High crimes and misdemeanors are required for impeachment, just being a bad President doesn't do it!~!
2007-09-25 17:26:04 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
I don't think he deserved it. Reagan did, though. You fantasizing about Jimmy again? The only politician I ever hated was Reagan and I get pissed off every time I see or hear his name, but I don't obsess on him.
2007-09-25 17:30:48 · answer #10 · answered by grumpyoldman 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋