The very first poll taken on impeaching Bush last year was within a few points of support for impeaching Nixon the day before he resigned, and double the peak support for impeaching Clinton.
I had to scrounge around in some paid databases to find the polls on Nixon since I couldn't find it floating around the internet.
To see this with graphics and the original 1973 & 1974 LA Times articles, go to:
http://professorsmartass.blogspot.com/2007/10/poll-numbers-on-impeaching-bush-like.html
If that is the case, why isn't Congress starting proceedings so they can at least get his violations of laws, treaties, our Constitution, and basic human decency on the record and get themselves on the record opposing it?
2007-10-11 04:36:30 · 18 answers · asked by yurbud 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Clinton lied about a sexual affair in the context of a civil lawsuit.
Bush lied about whether Iraq was involved in 9/11 and whether they posed an threat to the US.
Bush's lie cost half a trillion dollars, the lives of thousands of our troops, and over 600,000 Iraqis.
The American public seems to be able to tell the difference between those offenses. The very first poll on impeaching Bush showed nearly double the support for impeaching Clinton after years of investigation into his business dealings and sex life.
Clinton hurt his wife and daughter with embarrassing behavior. Bush killed people, trampled on our constitution, admitted breaking the FISA law, and allows torture in violation of the Geneva Convention.
2007-10-11 17:23:56 · update #1
hey, you avitar, is that you simpsonized? (burger king thing)
2007-10-11 04:40:22 · answer #1 · answered by bread 4 · 0⤊ 3⤋
How has he failed totally? He won 2 elections: Success He cut taxes, as he said he wanted to: Success One judge he nominated for the S.C. withdrew under pressure: Failure Two judges he nominated are now sitting on the SC: Success He wanted Saddam Hussein to be removed from power: Success He wanted to prevent further terrorist attacks on the United States: Success (so far, knock on wood) He wanted give Iraq a freely elected government, elected by the people of Iraq: Success What do you want? What's the failure? What should he do differently. Give some examples. The total failure is something Dems repeat over and over until they get their loyal followers to repeat it without thinking. I know it's popular to say the Iraq war is a failure because there is still a lot of violence there. But it's important to understand that this is a war and Bush is not some all powerful god. He can't control what the enemy does. The enemy does what they think will help them win. Bush can't make them stop hiding in the civilian population and stop killing our troops. Given the situation, we are doing very well there. Our biggest challenge is getting the support at home to stay in it. That is probably Bush's biggest failure; he's a terrible speaker and has trouble communicating the importance of this war. We need to let politics end "at the water's edge" and show our enemies a united front.
2016-05-21 22:01:21 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because Bush has not committed any impeachable offense. And you, like most of the rest of Bush's detractors have no clue what an impeachment is, how it is carried out, and what the result of an impeachment is. Besides he has committed no violation of law, treaties or the constitution as you have stated. Thank God that leadership does not base its decisions on polls because far too many people in this country are non-thinking lost and wandering sheep that cannot create an original thought to save their soul. And you have just proved that point with your question.
2007-10-11 04:56:24 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Umm, polls for impeachment have no legal basis. The legal basis of impeachment is proving a crime happened, not taking an unscientific and inaccurate vote amongst people that don't have the facts.
As far as congress is concerned, Pelosi probably knows the government has to FUNCTION not waste time making any more symbolic resolutions to put on the record to show this or that.
2007-10-11 04:45:03 · answer #4 · answered by Pfo 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nixon had a Democratic Congress and the evidence was overwhelming.
Bush has a Democratic Congress but they are not enough of a majority to get the votes required for an impeachment. The Neocons would never vote in favor of impeachment of President President Bush.
2007-10-11 04:41:34 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
Because popular opinion does not justify an impeachment. Lincoln would have been ran out office if that were the case.
And what violations? Everything you and everyone else complains about were voted, passed and actually championed by congress and both parties at the time.
Steven C: "neocons would never vote for impeachment" funny you say that. Since only dems voted not to impeach last time around.
partisan politics are played and endorsed by both parties, dont be willfully ignorant.
2007-10-11 04:41:20 · answer #6 · answered by Phil M 7 · 5⤊ 2⤋
As much as I believe Bush should be impeached, it can't be done without profound evidence of scandal. There is mixed evidence of legitimacy as well as scandal in the Iraq war and mixed evidence is not proof. There is not enough evidence that can prove Bush guilty of scandal like they did with Nixon. Plus his term is almost over anyways so its easier to just wait until next year. Then after that, get ready to vote!
2007-10-11 04:41:52 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
Ask your Liberal constituents . . . that's right, Bush has not committed any crime, and therefore cannot be impeached. The Polls only told the Dems what platforms to run on - getting us out of Iraq, and impeaching Bush . . . which of course they have done neither.
2007-10-11 04:50:45 · answer #8 · answered by vinsa1981 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Because to many senators are concerned about their political careers instead of doing whats right. If a republican or democrat for that matter, helps impeach a president of their party, it s straight to the black list for them ...
To answer the person above trying to make a comparison between Clinton and Bush ... Lets consider it ..
Lieing about your DNA on a dress ... Lieing about reason to go to war ... Hmmmm which is worse ???
2007-10-11 04:40:56 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
Having irrational people mad at you doesnt warrant impeachment. Although I disagree with a lot of GW's policies, disagreeing isnt a violation of law. Contrary to what the nuts want to spew, Bush has committed no crimes and therefore there is no reason for impeachment
2007-10-11 04:41:59 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 4⤋
Well is like the whole senate is running for President maybe they all want to be above the law...
2007-10-11 04:53:59 · answer #11 · answered by Jose R 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋