Skip to comments.
Should we impeach?
Posted on 03/30/2002 2:25:38 AM PST by In veno, veritas
Bush recently signed an unconstitutional bill into law, CFR. With his quote of "but it does present some legitimate constitutional questions", he showed that he had foreknowledge of that fact. He blatantly endangered our rights and failed to keep his oath "to support and defend the Constitution". With all this in mind, I cannot think of one reason why we should not move for his impeachment. If anyone of you can think of one, please respond.
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism
KEYWORDS: bush; impeach
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-103 next last
I won't be hypocritical in moving to impeach Clinton and not Bush.
To: In veno, veritas
LOL, that's funny! Go for it.
To: In veno, veritas
You're a complete ass to compare Clinton to Bush in this way.
3
posted on
03/30/2002 2:30:49 AM PST
by
DB
To: In veno, veritas
It's a risky game he's playing, but he may well be defending the Constitution by bringing this before the Court--assuming they strike it down and thus it presents no danger--while gaining valuable elements that will remain valid afterwards, and warding himself from the inevitable pre-election squabble over who did what to "fix" politics. Or maybe the devil made him do it.
4
posted on
03/30/2002 2:36:15 AM PST
by
Pistias
To: In veno, veritas
Endangered our rights??????? We have a system of checks and balances for a reason...I am sure that if the SCOTUS finds it unconstitutional, then they will strike it down.
Furthermore, it was passed by both the House and Senate, so while it may be unconstitutional, I fail to how President Bush signing a law passed by Congress would qualify as High Crimes and Misdemeanors........
Also, I cannot recall the President every supporting McCain-Finegold, and not wanting to give the democRATS a potential campaign issue by not signing it, he may feel as though many do, that it won't survive a constitutional challenge in the Supreme Court....just my .02
To: In veno, veritas
First don't we have to impeach the Senate and House for voting for such a bill? Then let's impeach the President. I can get behind making McCain the first to go.
To: DB
Thankyou very much for the lovely comment, although you still haven't stated a reason.
To: BigFLPanhandleDude
"I fail to how President Bush signing a law passed by Congress would qualify as High Crimes and Misdemeanors........"
IMO, the whole lot of them ought to be impeached. The only thing they do is maneuver to retain their own power and raise as much money as possible. They've been violating their own oaths to uphold and defend the Constitution for years now.
Carolyn
8
posted on
03/30/2002 2:44:15 AM PST
by
CDHart
To: In veno, veritas
Before we tie Bush to a stake and burn him over CFR, lets see what the SCOTUS does with it.
But, I'm still not very happy he signed it.
It tells me he either is a VERY good politician or a President playing a very dangerous game with my Constitutional rights.
Either way, I don't like to be played with and I don't like politicians.
After all, Clinton was impeached for lying under oath, not being a politician.
Let's keep a little perspective
9
posted on
03/30/2002 2:47:37 AM PST
by
Popman
To: BigFLPanhandleDude
Well, it already failed the first two checks. As a reactor operator, we are told never to rely on our interlocks to keep us safe. I am the first and foremost defense in keeping the reactor safe. I fail to see how his job is anyless important. It does qualify as a misdemenor, since it is an infraction of the supreme law of the land. Either which way, I thankyou for the comments.
To: CDHart
Aside from a select few(very few), I agree with you maam.
To: Always Right
I am also in support of that, however who would try them? Hopefully not themselves!
To: In veno, veritas
And Thank You...
I do not deny that he knowingly signed an unconstitutional piece of legislation. Perhaps, as I said, he did not want to hand the Demi's their one campaign issue for the year. Since the Dem's claim that the majority of Americans support this kind of trash legislation(which I doubt), perhaps he thought to wash his hands of it, hoping, as his quote suggests, that the SCOTUS will give it the perennial double tap to the head
Of course the entire lot of them in D.C. could use a good thrashing
To: In veno, veritas
Of course if he really was opposed to it, perhaps he should have stood his ground and given it the veto pen. Either way the whole think stinks....
To: In veno, veritas
I am also in support of that, however who would try them? Hopefully not themselves! Well you are asking Congress to impeach a President for signing a bill the Congress passed. I am holding my breath as we speak.
To: In veno, veritas
So who's going to impeach him? The same Congress that voted for this bill?
16
posted on
03/30/2002 3:05:29 AM PST
by
marvlus
To: In veno, veritas
It's the job of the SCOTUS to determine constitutionality, and Bush knows this.
Comment #18 Removed by Moderator
To: In veno, veritas
Dumbass...
To: CDHart
IMO, the whole lot of them ought to be impeached. The only thing they do is maneuver to retain their own power and raise as much money as possible. They've been violating their own oaths to uphold and defend the Constitution for years now By God, you're right, let's get rid of all government, not just Congress and the President. Let's go for the state legislatures and county commissioners also. OR ...perhaps we could come up with something more intelligent to talk about.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-103 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson