Will Leftists Still be Trying to Impeach Bush & Cheney After they Leave Office?
Lately, I’ve been getting a lot of e-mail from cowards, random individuals (or maybe just one individual using a variety of names) who send me links featuring screen names with moveon.org addresses. When I reply, I receive a MAILER-DAEMON e-mail informing me, “The email account that you tried to reach does not exist.”
That’s why I define these people as cowards. They bait me with an anti-Bush or anti-McCain article, but make it impossible for me to engage them in an exchange about the article they feel they just have to share with me.
Lately, they’ve been sending a number of e-mails pushing impeachment of President Bush, the Vice President or both. Why are they so obsessed with impeaching the man? It’s not just these spammers. Just today at the grocery store, I spotted a car with an “Impeach” bumper sticker, just below one promoting the reelection of Jimmy Carter. (I’m not kidding.)
And yes, one of those e-mails I received today alerted me to Dennis Kucinich’s call for the president’s impeachment.
I mean, no matter what happens, George W. Bush will be leaving the White House in just over seven months. Impeachment proceedings would give the president the chance to defend his record in public forum and so enable him to gain sympathy with the American people. At the same time, his adversaries would show how obsession they have become with “getting” W, decreasing the chances people will support one of those adversaries to lead the nation when his term is up. And those leftists do love that particular adversary.
Well, maybe that’s it, these leftists just feel some “need” to “get” W. It seems pushing for impeachment fills some hole in their soul.
Alas, that I cannot pursue this notion with those so obsessed with impeachment that they send me e-mails promoting their preoccupation. They have created fictitious e-mail addresses preventing me or any other recipient of such spam from replying to their missives. And it appears moveon.org helps facilitates this psychosis.
UPDATE: It seems there is something in the air. Or maybe it’s Dennis Kucinich’s UFO’s sending out signals to society. Just as I begin my morning blog read, I discover Stephen Green’s Pajamas post,
‘Impeach Bush’ - Not Just for Bumper Stickers Anymore.
27 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
It just proves that these fucking retarded Democrats are totally detached from reality.
WHat the hell are they doing to serve us? Absolutely nothing.
You know how the unemployement rolls went up by 500,000 last month? Those were young people who can’t get minimum wage jobs because those employers cannot afford to hire them because the Dems raised min. wage.
The Dems make it clear.. the govt is their play box and they will use it to pursue their resentful vindictive agenda.
Comment by Vince P — June 11, 2008 @ 1:45 am - June 11, 2008
There are different theories, retribution for impeaching Clinton, retribution for winning in 2000, retribution for 2002, 2004, or all of the above.
But whatever the justifications, one thing is sure, it is rooted in psychoses, not the law or the constitution.
Comment by American Elephant — June 11, 2008 @ 2:29 am - June 11, 2008
Exactly. Bring it on!!!!!!!!
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — June 11, 2008 @ 2:41 am - June 11, 2008
Oh, and yes, they will still be calling for Bush’s impeachment after he leaves office. And Obama has promised if he is elected to investigate the administration for war crimes!
Now theres a uniter!
Comment by American Elephant — June 11, 2008 @ 2:56 am - June 11, 2008
It’s all of the above. I think the liberals SHOULD bring it and let the people discover that it’s the liberal left who’s been lying to Americans for the past 8 years. Even their song that “Bush lied” turns out “were generally substantiated by intelligence community estimates.”
What’s more, the American people should be reminded who didn’t go after lord BJ for ransacking and pillaging the White House. Now, who has more class?
Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 11, 2008 @ 4:43 am - June 11, 2008
So funny! You guys are living in the same fantasy world as Bushco. Makes for great entertainment though. Thanks!
Comment by sonicfilter — June 11, 2008 @ 6:26 am - June 11, 2008
Lefties live in a state of arrested emotional development. The obsession with settling scores with people you resent rather than accomplish anything substantive is symptomatic of that.
Comment by V the K — June 11, 2008 @ 6:49 am - June 11, 2008
This doesn’t surprise me. Many on the Left are completely unhinged with regards to Bush. The man is almost out of office so one would think they’d be satisfied with that knowledge and put all their efforts in getting “their guy” to succeed him and undo whatever they disliked about the Dubya Era. Ah well. This does raise an interesting constitutional question: how can someone be impeached when they’ve already left office? The only case I’m aware of from our history is that of Senator William Blount in 1797. The House impeached him, the Senate voted to expel him and later decided the try him on the impeachment charges. That trial was dismissed because “the Senate had no jurisdiction over its own members beyond its constitutional right to expel members by a two-thirds majority vote”. So how does this apply to a former president? Oh the lawsuits this could generate…
Comment by John — June 11, 2008 @ 8:47 am - June 11, 2008
You know, I am not sure I know a happy liberal. Seriously. I am live in a hive of liberals and there are a lot of them who are caught up in their academic burrows and warrens and chirp away and seem enormously happy. But they have created a fortress of their own research and expertise on some arcane aspect of the world and they cling to their mastery of the obscure with relish and delight. They also think that their common view of the rest of the race is sound in indisputable.
Whenever I allow myself to challenge one of their bugaboos, they go ballistic. Sarcasm, horror at my ignorance, profound disgust, shock and dismay. These captains of intellectual might can not extend the courtesy of a reasoned debate. But if I keep at it, soon, I learn of all that is wrong and ugly and deceitful and nasty about Bush, the Republicans, conservatives, the religious right, corporations, and America in general.
How can you be happy when there is so much you loathe and despise? Seldom do I see a liberal enter this site for the purposes of a gentlemanly debate. For the most part, they seem to want to issue decrees or just drop a turd in the punchbowl.
I usually smile my way through their ramblings when I encounter them in person, because mostly they string 17 inanities together in a premise, leap to a conclusion and then use the conclusion and four more inanities as a premise for a more outrageous conclusion and so forth ad infinitum.
What possible happiness can they have when they are not in their Amen corner agreeing with each other?
Comment by heliotrope — June 11, 2008 @ 10:29 am - June 11, 2008
With Congress’ approval rating at 18.7% (a full 11 points behind the President’s), they must be shooting for 0.0% approval if they decide to back this phony impeachment boondoggle.
Go ahead, Dhimmicrats. Try impeachment. You obviously forget that history can repeat itself and you can lose seats in Congress for doing so.
Idiots.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — June 11, 2008 @ 11:27 am - June 11, 2008
Frankly, I’m relieved the left puts so much energy into settling scores. Can you imagine what would happen if they focused that much energy on implementing their agenda?
Comment by V the K — June 11, 2008 @ 11:34 am - June 11, 2008
Um, sonicfilter, could you offer some facts to justify your comment? thanks.
Comment by GayPatriotWest — June 11, 2008 @ 12:07 pm - June 11, 2008
#12 - Forget it, Dan. He’s a seagull.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — June 11, 2008 @ 12:43 pm - June 11, 2008
I fully encourage impeachment. Let ALL of the players who sincerely reviewed pre-war intel go forward on live Congressional hearings and testify under oath.
That would include Bush Admin officials, PLUS Kerry, Clinton, Wilson, Plame-Wilson, Rockefeller, NY Times editors, British intel officials, etc., etc.
Bring. It. On.
Comment by GayPatriot — June 11, 2008 @ 1:50 pm - June 11, 2008
But guys… Could we trust Bush Admin officials to actually speak up for themselves? Showing the ridiculousness of the charges? Except for an occasional speech from Rove, they pretty much haven’t, up to now.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — June 11, 2008 @ 1:56 pm - June 11, 2008
No wonder so many Americans are so fed up. Everywhere one looks there is a crisis and Congress seems to have no time nor interest to address them. Yet leftist Congressman Dennis Kucinich on Monday took five hours of the House session to read his articles of impeachment against President Bush. Then on Tuesday, a team of House clerks took another five hours of the House’s session to officially read the articles of impeachment. And it’s likely the Democratic leadership will quietly table the articles just as it appears the leadership did with Kucinich’s articles of impeachment against Vice President Cheney.
Someone earlier posted a link to an article about Senator Obama and an investigation of the Bush Administration for possible war crimes. While the full text of Obama’s answer is provided, without the full text of Philadelphia blogger Will Bunch’s question to Obama the answer is wide open to different interpretations. A key part of Obama’s answer was his position that no one should conduct witch hunts over polciy differences; that there’s a clear difference between dumb policy decisions and actions that violate laws.
Comment by Trace Phelps — June 11, 2008 @ 2:42 pm - June 11, 2008
I am not sure I know a happy liberal.
Do any of the libs who post here seem happy?
Comment by V the K — June 11, 2008 @ 3:20 pm - June 11, 2008
#17 - V, if it weren’t for so many depressed libs, GlaxoSmithKline would have to declare bankruptcy.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — June 11, 2008 @ 3:52 pm - June 11, 2008
Libs aren’t happy.
Comment by American Elephant — June 11, 2008 @ 8:54 pm - June 11, 2008
More opinion & evidence that Bush suffers from a “Battered President Syndrome” and is now incapable of defending himself or even understanding his own policies:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/06/020735.php
Perhaps that is why the calls for impeachment are rising. The time to kick a good guy (if you’re a liberal) is when he’s down. They can smell the blood.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — June 12, 2008 @ 2:10 pm - June 12, 2008
Why wouldn’t he be suffering from battered president syndrome? who else is really standing up for him anymore?
Comment by American Elephant — June 12, 2008 @ 2:59 pm - June 12, 2008
As Wikipedia puts it,
When someone has this syndrome, it’s tragic… and pathetic. You (or at least I) wish they could stand up for themselves. To answer your question: some abused people do stand up for themselves and thus *escape* the syndrome. I don’t know why exactly some do and some don’t, but many do. And I believe Bush would be more successful and popular today, and not making the kind of pitiful remarks I cited, if he had challenged his opponents’ (wrong) moral premises and stood up for himself more aggressively all along.
Wikipedia also notes,
Hmm… Scott McClellan, anyone?
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — June 12, 2008 @ 4:24 pm - June 12, 2008
Oh I disagree.
I think Bush has been standing up against not just liberals, but pretty much the whole world for almost his entire presidency. He has sacrificed his popularity, spent every ounce of political capital he has and risked his legacy — and not just on the war. On tax cuts, on judges, on embryonic stem cells, on partial birth abortion, on reforming social security and more
He has done everything he promised he would do when he campaigned and put everything he has into it. Moreover he has done it all in the face of a Democrat party and media that are doing everything in their power, not just to oppose him, but to destroy him — and they have pretty much succeeded in the short term. But he still keeps on keeping on.
And one of the things he promised us he would do is bring a new tone to washington. And whether Democrats reciprocate or not, hes going to do it.
But quite frankly, spoiled rotten conservatives stopped supporting him some time ago — both voters and particularly the cowards in congress who have all but disappeared out of fear for their own jobs — because its hard doing what is unpopular. (Welcome to his world.) I think thats why hes battered.
He proved to us over and over again he can take on Democrats AND the world and win if only his base is there for him. But they aren’t. they abandoned him because they didn’t get 100% of what they wanted. They only got 90% or 85%. He did everything he said he would, he put everything on the line to do it, and in the end conservatives bailed on him. Thats what battered him, not anything the Democrats did.
So he made some dumb statements. So what? What evidence do we have that a) they aren’t being taken out of context as the press has done his entire presidency and b) that he has any intention of changing any of his policies? I suspect, given his character and past performance, that hes simply trying not to rock any boats and keep from giving the press any bait between now and November.
I cut him some slack and give him the benefit of the doubt. He’s more than earned them.
Comment by American Elephant — June 13, 2008 @ 12:39 pm - June 13, 2008
I’m with you, American Elephant. Bush has taken a lot of flack from his own party simply because his second term didn’t seem to be fueled with the same resolve that made his first term such a success, but now that he’s in his last year, we should stop to think about how history should and will view him. Ann Coulter’s column this week is directly on point:
http://www.anncoulter.com/
In “Bush’s America: 100 Percent Al-Qaida Free Since 2001,” she astutely reminds us that Bush’s greatest accomplishment is the fact that there hasn’t been an Islamic terrorist attack on U.S. soil in the 7 years since 9/11. I’m glad she took a break from commenting on the 2008 election to point this out.
Comment by Sean A — June 13, 2008 @ 9:11 pm - June 13, 2008
#16: “A key part of Obama’s answer was his position that no one should conduct witch hunts over polciy differences; that there’s a clear difference between dumb policy decisions and actions that violate laws.”
Yes, there is a clear difference between policy and war crimes–a distinction that a Harvard-educated lawyer is capable of discerning without having presumptive Attorney General John Edwards “launch a probe.” That rooster that plays tic-tac-toe knows the fucking difference. This is just the usual lip-service to the extreme left wing that all Democrat candidates are beholden to. It means NOTHING, and he will do NOTHING. He just has to tip his hat to the Huffpost whackos to keep them from rioting in the streets like animals.
Comment by Sean A — June 15, 2008 @ 7:59 pm - June 15, 2008
George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney belong in an insane asylum. Bush is comparable to Adolf Hitler. Bush is mentally ill. Bush suffers from narcissism and megalomania. Bush lied, and thousands of people died. Bush is psychotic. Bush is dangerous. The American people should pursue the involuntary psychiatric hospitalization of Bush and Cheney to safeguard against further atrocities. God will judge and punish Bush and Cheney.
Submitted by Andrew Yu-Jen Wang
B.S., Summa Cum Laude, 1996
Messiah College, Grantham, PA
Comment by Andrew Y. Wang — September 25, 2008 @ 8:57 pm - September 25, 2008
[...] And I doubt that the president portrays himself as a victim, but Barbara and her ilk really have become obsessed with this man. What will they do when he’s no longer president? Continue to blame all ills on him? Still try to impeach him? [...]
Pingback by GayPatriot » Bush-Obsession: The Sociopathy of Angry Leftists — December 17, 2008 @ 6:48 pm - December 17, 2008