39% of Americans believe Bush should be impeached.

Read all about it, he http://Muvy.org

On Sat, 7 Jul 2007 19:03:32 -0700, Sparrow wrote
(in article om):

Read all about it, he http://Muvy.org


OK, I'm all for it. What are the charges? Remember, these have to be
legitimate charges, instances where he broke US law. You can't impeach a
president because you disagree with his policies. What we need in this
country is a recall procedure where the people can vote "no confidence" to a
sitting administration like they do in Great Britain. Then, the president
doesn't need to be guilty of a crime, he just needs to not please the
citizenry with his policies.

On Jul 7, 9:34 pm, George Graves wrote:
What we need in this
country is a recall procedure where the people can vote "no confidence" to a
sitting administration like they do in Great Britain.

Right now about 30% of Americans are very happy with President Bush,
who was elected by a 51% majority. While I personally believe he's a
moron, there is no rule that says it's undemocratic for a president to
only please 30% of the population. There could be some time in the
future where angering 70% of the population is the right thing to do.
If you had to please the majority of people, then we wouldn't even
elect presidents. We would just vote on issues and the majority vote
would decide what to do.

It would be unfair to the 30% of Americans who like Bush to impeach
him unless he has done something illegal. He won the vote, so he is
the president. Besides, he doesn't have any power to do anything that
70% of Congress disagrees with. If his actions are so bad, they can
be democratically overridden by others.

You can't just do away with the rules of democracy because they are
giving you the results you want.

James Davis wrote:

Right now about 30% of Americans are very happy with President Bush,
who was elected by a 51% majority.

incorrect, Gore won the election by the "majority" of the american
public, only in how the electoral college is setup did, bush sneak in.

While I personally believe he's a
moron, there is no rule that says it's undemocratic for a president to
only please 30% of the population.

duh! but it's unprecedented to have such a poor performing president in
american history.

There could be some time in the
future where angering 70% of the population is the right thing to do.
If you had to please the majority of people, then we wouldn't even
elect presidents. We would just vote on issues and the majority vote
would decide what to do.

It would be unfair to the 30% of Americans who like Bush to impeach
him unless he has done something illegal. He won the vote, so he is
the president. Besides, he doesn't have any power to do anything that
70% of Congress disagrees with. If his actions are so bad, they can
be democratically overridden by others.

You can't just do away with the rules of democracy because they are
giving you the results you want.

On Jul 7, 8:42 pm, none wrote:
James Davis wrote:
Right now about 30% of Americans are very happy with President Bush,
who was elected by a 51% majority.

incorrect, Gore won the election by the "majority" of the american
public, only in how the electoral college is setup did, bush sneak in.

While I personally believe he's a
moron, there is no rule that says it's undemocratic for a president to
only please 30% of the population.

duh! but it's unprecedented to have such a poor performing president in
american history.

There could be some time in the
future where angering 70% of the population is the right thing to do.
If you had to please the majority of people, then we wouldn't even
elect presidents. We would just vote on issues and the majority vote
would decide what to do.

It would be unfair to the 30% of Americans who like Bush to impeach
him unless he has done something illegal. He won the vote, so he is
the president. Besides, he doesn't have any power to do anything that
70% of Congress disagrees with. If his actions are so bad, they can
be democratically overridden by others.

You can't just do away with the rules of democracy because they are
giving you the results you want.

Perhaps you remember the 2004 election where he did indeed get 51% of
the popular vote.

GG

G-squared wrote:

You can't just do away with the rules of democracy because they are
giving you the results you want.

Perhaps you remember the 2004 election where he did indeed get 51% of
the popular vote.

but we'll never know that for sure....

G-squared wrote:
On Jul 7, 8:42 pm, none wrote:
James Davis wrote:
Right now about 30% of Americans are very happy with President
Bush, who was elected by a 51% majority.
incorrect, Gore won the election by the "majority" of the american
public, only in how the electoral college is setup did, bush sneak
in.

While I personally believe he's a moron, there is no rule that
says it's undemocratic for a president to only please 30% of the
population.
duh! but it's unprecedented to have such a poor performing
president in american history.

There could be some time in the future where angering 70% of the
population is the right thing to do. If you had to please the
majority of people, then we wouldn't even elect presidents. We
would just vote on issues and the majority vote would decide what
to do. It would be unfair to the 30% of Americans who like Bush
to impeach him unless he has done something illegal. He won the
vote, so he is the president. Besides, he doesn't have any power
to do anything that 70% of Congress disagrees with. If his
actions are so bad, they can be democratically overridden by
others. You can't just do away with the rules of democracy
because they are giving you the results you want.

Perhaps you remember the 2004 election where he did indeed get 51% of
the popular vote.

And that’s why *I* don’t argue that his 2000 election was illegitimate
anymore. All it could possibly do now is allow him to serve a “second�
“legitimate� term.

On Sat, 7 Jul 2007 20:42:56 -0700, none wrote
(in article ):

James Davis wrote:

Right now about 30% of Americans are very happy with President Bush,
who was elected by a 51% majority.

incorrect, Gore won the election by the "majority" of the american
public, only in how the electoral college is setup did, bush sneak in.

While I personally believe he's a
moron, there is no rule that says it's undemocratic for a president to
only please 30% of the population.

duh! but it's unprecedented to have such a poor performing president in
american history.

Unprecedented, it might be. Illegal, it is not. Robert Bolt once wrote a play
called "A man for all Seasons" in which Sir Thomas Moore, Chancelor of
England was having a philosophical argument with his daughter's fiance, a
young lawyer named Roper about an unwanted house guest who had just left:

*Roper: Sir Thomas, arrest that man, he is bad.
Sir Thomas: On what charge?
Roper: Charge? He's evil.
Sir Thomas: There's no law against that.
Daughter: While you two argue, he's gone.
Sir Thomas: And go he should, until he's broken the law.
Roper: I suppose now that you would give the Devil the benefit of the law?
Sir Thomas: Wouldn't you?
Roper: NO. I'd cut down every law in England to get after the Devil.
Sir Thomas: And with the laws all cut down, and the Devil turned 'round upon
you, Where would you hide then, young Roper; the laws all being flat? This
country is planted thick with laws, God's laws and man's and if we cut them
down to go after ANY Devil, who could stand in the wind that would then
blow?Yes, I'd give the Devil the benefit of the law, FOR MY OWN SAFETY'S
SAKE!

*This is paraphrased from memory, I don't have the text handy, but this is
the gist of the conversation

Sage words, and worth remembering. Bush is the worst president in US history,
yet go he should until he breaks the law, and we cannot circumvent the law
just to rid ourselves of a terrible leader. If we do, we'll have more serious
problems that simply a bad president.

Also, we need to be careful that we don't elect a worse one simply because
the candidate isn't George Bush. I'm very afraid that we might just do that.


There could be some time in the
future where angering 70% of the population is the right thing to do.
If you had to please the majority of people, then we wouldn't even
elect presidents. We would just vote on issues and the majority vote
would decide what to do.

It would be unfair to the 30% of Americans who like Bush to impeach
him unless he has done something illegal. He won the vote, so he is
the president. Besides, he doesn't have any power to do anything that
70% of Congress disagrees with. If his actions are so bad, they can
be democratically overridden by others.

You can't just do away with the rules of democracy because they are
giving you the results you want.

"George Graves" wrote in message
. net...
On Sat, 7 Jul 2007 20:42:56 -0700, none wrote
(in article ):

James Davis wrote:

Right now about 30% of Americans are very happy with President Bush,
who was elected by a 51% majority.

incorrect, Gore won the election by the "majority" of the american
public, only in how the electoral college is setup did, bush sneak in.

While I personally believe he's a
moron, there is no rule that says it's undemocratic for a president to
only please 30% of the population.

duh! but it's unprecedented to have such a poor performing president in
american history.

Unprecedented, it might be. Illegal, it is not. Robert Bolt once wrote a
play
called "A man for all Seasons" in which Sir Thomas Moore, Chancelor of
England was having a philosophical argument with his daughter's fiance, a
young lawyer named Roper about an unwanted house guest who had just left:

*Roper: Sir Thomas, arrest that man, he is bad.
Sir Thomas: On what charge?
Roper: Charge? He's evil.
Sir Thomas: There's no law against that.
Daughter: While you two argue, he's gone.
Sir Thomas: And go he should, until he's broken the law.
Roper: I suppose now that you would give the Devil the benefit of the law?
Sir Thomas: Wouldn't you?
Roper: NO. I'd cut down every law in England to get after the Devil.
Sir Thomas: And with the laws all cut down, and the Devil turned 'round
upon
you, Where would you hide then, young Roper; the laws all being flat? This
country is planted thick with laws, God's laws and man's and if we cut
them
down to go after ANY Devil, who could stand in the wind that would then
blow?Yes, I'd give the Devil the benefit of the law, FOR MY OWN SAFETY'S
SAKE!

*This is paraphrased from memory, I don't have the text handy, but this is
the gist of the conversation

Sage words, and worth remembering. Bush is the worst president in US
history,
yet go he should until he breaks the law, and we cannot circumvent the law
just to rid ourselves of a terrible leader. If we do, we'll have more
serious
problems that simply a bad president.

Also, we need to be careful that we don't elect a worse one simply because
the candidate isn't George Bush. I'm very afraid that we might just do
that.


Well spoken. I shudder at the thought of an amateur like Obama or a
vacilator like Billary gaining office.

Honu



There could be some time in the
future where angering 70% of the population is the right thing to do.
If you had to please the majority of people, then we wouldn't even
elect presidents. We would just vote on issues and the majority vote
would decide what to do.

It would be unfair to the 30% of Americans who like Bush to impeach
him unless he has done something illegal. He won the vote, so he is
the president. Besides, he doesn't have any power to do anything that
70% of Congress disagrees with. If his actions are so bad, they can
be democratically overridden by others.

You can't just do away with the rules of democracy because they are
giving you the results you want.

"none" wrote in message
...
James Davis wrote:

Right now about 30% of Americans are very happy with President Bush,
who was elected by a 51% majority.

incorrect, Gore won the election by the "majority" of the american
public, only in how the electoral college is setup did, bush sneak in.

==============================
Bull****!
Bush got 51% of the popular vote in 2004.

Spreading and repeating a lie does not make it true.....