Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Racehorse
So, if what you claim is true, then you agree Bush should be impeached?

Apparently YOU do, because you stated in post #33: "should Bush fail or refuse to be the executive, impeach him." Remember? I agree.

160 posted on 08/31/2005 10:15:29 AM PDT by Map Kernow ("I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing" ---Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies ]


To: Map Kernow
So, if what you claim is true, then you agree Bush should be impeached?

Apparently YOU do, because you stated in post #33: "should Bush fail or refuse to be the executive, impeach him." Remember?

Rather a sloppy stab at tossing my words back at me.

Congress, unfortunately, did not mandate the increased manning nor did they either provide funding or mandate the funding.  When by way of a supplemental funding authorization they had the chance to fund the whole enchilada for the year, they chose to fund only 650 new hires, not the 2000 they said they wanted.

Additionally, the original bill authorizing the increase spread it out over five years.  He'll be out of office by then.

For me to get to the "should Bush fail or refuse to be the executive, impeach him" stage, the above would have to be a mandate.  Not easy for one co-equal branch to impose on another.

I agree.

I may come to agree.  But, not yet.

173 posted on 08/31/2005 11:55:45 AM PDT by Racehorse (Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson