Is impeachment a possibility?  

Hmm, that seems harsh to me. Personally I'd settle for his resignation in disgrace.

Trying to base judgement of motivations based on a low level advisors guess as to what somebody else was thinking is stretching the fabric of truth out of existence, not to mention using that as basis for a impeachment when the Congress gave the green light to do it. Highly unlikely they would also recall the majority that authorized the military action.

Just about any Congressman/Senator: "Umm yeah, I'm going to censure myself out of office and also impeach the President because a jaded Brit official said the oil word."

Riiiggghhhttt.

Oil was just the icing on the cake. We went after that "evil man that tried to assinate my Daddy...". A very small and oft overlooked quote.

I really must be missing something here.

Why is this worthy of any sort of reprimand?

I think Daddy Bush and Baby Bush do that just fine by themselves.

Iraq isn't our top, nor second top source of oil. Does anyone realize that? If you want to gripe, gripe to the auto industry lobbyists that continually push bills to keep gas guzzling vehicles in production and eliminating the bills to make cleaner and more fuel efficient engines; overall lowering our dependence on the black gold.

As for Bush, I'm glad we finally got a Pres. who has balls, I forgot what that was like when Cliton was in office...

he means that the president was lying, he did not went in war for disarming Iraq but for oil.

Knowing that mainly all politicians tend to lye at a certain point or another, we should impeach them all. What about a nice silly dictature ?

Clinton has balls too, at least Monica is ready to swear it

Name a president who hasn't lied and killed people as a result.

I'll be waiting.

wait no more == george washington

"i never told a lie"

that was too easy

lets do another one

The reason why Iraq wasn't our top or second source of oil was because we put an embargo on Iraqi oil a long time ago. The joy of this war would be that now we can get that embargo lifted (bad ol' dictator is gone) and we can start tapping Iraq without feeling bad because we saved them from Saddam and now we own them. (In a manner of speaking).

As far as impeaching Bush, anyone who didn't think this war was about oil should be slapped around a bit.

Bunge is still on my ignore list, but I checked in anyway...fantasize if you like, but instead maybe you should be doing something constructive to see that he doesn't get re-elected if he bugs you so much.

Oh, did he indeed? The evidence that Iraq was responsible for the assassination attempt on Pres. Bush Sr. is flawed and circumstantial at 'best'.

http://www.newyorker.com/archive/con...30fr_archive02

Why, oh why must everything black and white around here? Can you people please gain some sensibilty and stay away until that time? Christ, get a ****ing life, folks. Treason? Impeachment? One man's claims? Assumptions? People's own political moticvations? Now with denying the idea that Iraq was behind anassassination attempt toawards Bush Sr. which is completely irrelevant? You people are an exhausting, sad bunch.

i am just here for the prize i get for finding a president who didnt lie and cost lives because of it.... groverat!
you told us you would be waiting and... you seem to have left... you would be a bad bad president, lie to AO lie to the world all for your own self-lovin'

i wonder what i win





as a point of policy all presidents should face an impeachment hearing at some point during their term(s) that way we can perfect the current system of back stabbing and lies...

At this point I would normally do my World Famous Oil Dance.

But I'm working on a sort of oil-themed circus act, and I feel it's time I, you know, moved on.

I don't want to be thought of as "the oil dance guy", you know? When I've got so much else to offer.

Don't humiliate yourself. It would do you a lot of good to read Hersh's article before forming an opinion on this.

billybobsky:

You get a cookie.

Since I know of no Bay of Pigs, Gulf of Tonkin Resolution or Sudanese Aspirin Factory for Washington you win by default.

Impeach Bush?

What a joke.

At least within the context of his time as a president your stereotype don't be applyin to William Henry Harrison neither pineapple boy.

Harrison was a fiend, you have no idea.

I've heard thing! I've heard things!

Ooh, what a condescending little turd you are, little boy. It's inane. What bunch of tools you all are, but you especially for writing that garbage. There is no one that I can think of on either side of this manufactured political spectrum that comes close to independent thought. To say the least it bothers me, as I am constantly expecting something better of you, and yet you fail me so ver yoften. I am left with nothing better to say myself. I hope you like the same treatment you just gave me.

Do people actually pay attention to what they write? You are calling someone condescending and then turn around to call that same person a turd and a little boy.

Anyone else find this oh so funny yet oh so pathetic?

That's the point. Anyway, I figured I'd blow steam in the Stupidest Thread ofthe Day?. Enjoy your evenings.

What I find amazing is that the same crowd here who would advocate impeachment for Bush based off a statement of an aide in England wouldn't advocate impeachment of Clinton when the impeachable statements came directly from his own mouth.

Consistancy in reasoning, yep.

Nick

The Clinton impeachment trial was ludicrous. Yes, he lied. About something completely unrelated to his presidency. He's swine for cheating on his wife, hell he was a slimeball anyway. He did deserve to be dis-barred (sp?) but it had nothing to do with his role as President. I'm seeing the same dumb anti-Bush drivel as we had with clinton, but the hypocrisy just stinks to hell, everyone turning coat. Tha'ts why I got condescending before. See how stupid it sounds from the other side? No?

Ugh, I don't know why I torture myself. It just seems that you (meaning everyone) just arbitrarily picks a pigeonhole and squats there and post-rationalizes their psition. We have people posting that one person says something and it's gospel and someone else psts someone from aonther person and it's inherently baseless. People link to stuff like Bush says oil is an important part of Iraq'aseconomy, and suddenly thwe hole war is only about oil. We have people posting that Jaques Chirac once bought grapes from mesopotamia in 1976 and that makes him a defender of Hussein. We have people who don't like Bush's decisions so they have to be Pro-Hussein. We have people piling up stories about GWB not liking brussel sprouts, therefore he wants to cut down the rain forests. We have reports that US soldiers were fired at during a rally in Iraq, and people either assume that the soldiers opened fire without provocation or that the whole crowd was in on the conspiracy. It's maddening. Judging by the people around me every day, that most people don't really think like this, but reading the drivel on these boards gives me doubts.

oh no, everyone around you is just as insane/inane as they are here, they just hide it better on a daily basis.

A naive point at best. I shall now edumicate you in the art of blunt subtlety.

It doesn't matter whether or not the Iraqi's were behind the attempt or not, or even if the attempt never existed, as long as Jr believes it did. Remember, he's Texan an' likely to open a can of whoop-ass on someone he mildly thinks was messing with his family.

That guy and his advisory commission may report to Blair, but it sounds like he isn't even part of Blair's government. He certainly has exactly zero insight into the decision-making of Tony Blair, or into the discussions between Blair and Bush duirng the run-up to war. So he thinks the war was about oil? Good for him. Glad he has an opinion.

No one is advocating for impeachment based off this article? Really I could have swown the name of the thread was, "Is impeachment a possibility?" with a link to said article.

I wasn't equating a blow job with mass murder. I was stating that it was interesting the credibility you give sources based off your political perspecive. Clinton was a primary source for his offense and yet you wouldn't give his actions a thought towards impeachment. You have a source in this article that isn't Bush, isn't someone in his cabinet, isn't even someone in his political party. Yet you give it full credibility. It isn't even a primary nor secondary source. It is no better than gossip. Yet you fully advocate it as truth worthy of action.

I didn't link the acts. I said it is interesting how willingly you would act considering the source and how it agrees with you.

Nick

Using the term "re-elected" implies that he was actually elected in the first place.

Huh, this thread gets a great big:

F YOU!


is is is?