2007-11-19 02:12:28 · 21 answers · asked by Earl Grey 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Would I have intimate relations with Russel Crowe if he walked in my kitchen and threw me on the floor?
Would I eat hot fudge sundaes all flippin' day if they didn't make me gain weight?
Would I go to a fine store and max a credit card if they didn't send me those annoying letters asking me to send them money?
Well, no offense but,
DUH!
2007-11-19 03:47:19 · answer #1 · answered by Silver 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
No. First of all Cheney would be worse than Dubya and so they would both have to go. Secondly the more they are in office the better for the Democrats as they can point out during the campaign how much corruption and incompetence came out of the administration and with the support of others in the Republican party they managed to nearly destroy this country. Impeachment would be expensive and counter productive. I suggest we wait until they are out of office and let the international community try them as war criminals and then, if anything is left of them, we can try them for crimes here.
2007-11-19 10:33:02 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
I'd video Jeff Gannon poking him in the stinky in the Oval Office
then sell it
and let him resign before I could impeach him
2007-11-19 10:19:45 · answer #3 · answered by leftypower 2 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Only if I could impeach Cheney at the same time.
2007-11-19 10:43:07 · answer #4 · answered by ConcernedCitizen 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Sure. I would impeach him along with Dick Cheney simultaneously. However, that would depend on if Bush is mentally competent enough to even stand trial.
2007-11-19 10:22:02 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
In a second. Starting an unnecessary war, bankrupting the country, and eliminating parts of the Bill of Rights, is more than enough reason to get the little fool out of office.
Lying to Congress is enough of an "misdemeanor" to be removed from office.
2007-11-19 10:23:32 · answer #6 · answered by Zardoz 7 · 5⤊ 2⤋
A long time ago. Prior to obtaining authorization to go to war in Iraq--which was conditional, by the way--he had had Rumsfeld divert defense dollars to build up bases in Kuwait and UAE without Congressional approval. That was a Constitutional violation. The President does not have the power to allocate monies. That is the jurisdiction of Congress. Congress did not hold him accountable for that violation of the US Constitution.
2007-11-19 10:18:21 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 3⤋
It's too late to start impeachment now. Just let him continue to solidify his case as the WORST PRESIDENT EVER and take the rest of the party down with him. Only he can veto a children's healthcare bill for being too fiscally irresponsible and two days later ask for another 200billion for a failed war.
2007-11-19 10:22:25 · answer #8 · answered by Alex G 6 · 8⤊ 3⤋
Yes... but not for the war.
I would impeach him for not protecting our borders.
Border security and infrastructure are the two most important functions of the government.... and Bush has failed to seal our boarders and upholding immigration laws.
2007-11-19 10:18:35 · answer #9 · answered by Fred Head 4 · 5⤊ 4⤋
Yes, and then indict Bush-Chaney, the cabinet, the department heads on treason, et al.
2007-11-19 10:26:13 · answer #10 · answered by LEE 3 · 5⤊ 2⤋