OT: Should he (George Bush) stay or should he go? a poll.

[Ecstatic]

Is Bush justified in his position of not needing to execute a law he believes is unconstitutional?

Hypocrite.

Please. If you're going to argue a position, argue it, but refrain from attacks ad hominem. Nothing I said was hypocritical. In fact, I left it quite open, as a question: "Is Bush justified?" and pointed out that a great many legal minds are arguing that question. I professed my opinion that Bush has exceeded his executive powers, but I also qualified that position by clearly stating that I am not in a position to seriously argue that point at any depth. Maybe you are: I don't know your qualifications in terms of Constitutional law. But I never made any such claims.

The looney-kazooney left like you maintian adamantly that the US Constitution is a "living breathing document". Meaning, it is whatever I say it is. So which is it,because now you`re arguing it means exactly what it says.

Where did I say this? Nowhere. I said no such thing. Please, read what I wrote before you launch an attack against a position which I did not take. I did not state that the Constitution "means exactly what it says." Please do no put words in my mouth. I simply pointed out that Bush has taken far more exceptions to Congressional legislation than any President before him, and that in some eyes--including mine--that challenges the tripartite balance of Federal powers.

Secondly,for example, one 1978 budgetary law....
<snip>
Another good example is Roosevelt's statement on signing the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942....
<snip>
And we won`t even get into what Clinton pulled off.

Jack Goldsmith, a Harvard Law School professor oversaw the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel for the administration, said the statements do not change the law; they just let people know how the president is interpreting it.

''Nobody reads them," said Goldsmith. ''They have no significance. Nothing in the world changes by the publication of a signing statement. The statements merely serve as public notice about how the administration is interpreting the law. Criticism of this practice is surprising, since the usual complaint is that the administration is too secretive in its legal interpretations."

I don't deny and didn't deny any of this. Of course prior Presidents have done so. My point here is that no previous President has come within shouting distance of Bush in terms of his stance regarding his interpretation of the law, even during the signing statement (which is, as Goldsmith points out, merely a "public notice" about said interpretation). Prior Presidents were extremely selective in this regard, as opposed to Bush.

Let`s refresh your sive like memory,

That's it, I have been insulted one too many times. I don't know why you are picking a fight or being deliberately demeaning, but I see no point in pursuing this discussion any further. Have a good life.

[Willie Escalade]

First post here...

Basically, kick the asshole out.

[TheMan]

impeach

[houstonshemalefan]

All I know is that there has not been a terrorist attack on US soil since 9/11/2001 so the guy's doing a great job at protecting Americans at home (including the arrests of 7 in Miami planning on blowing up the Sears tower in Chicago).

The economy is great, plenty of jobs, plenty of growth, no terrorist attacks. Seems like he's doing a great job for the people in the USA so I'm happy with him!

The only concern here is the rising cost of oil/gasoline. But that's up to OPEC not the US president. However, had Bill Clinton opened up ANWAR to drilling 10 years ago when he had the chance (he vetoed the bill) we would be drilling our own oil and less dependant on foreign oil.

[White_Male_Canada]

Let`s refresh your sive like memory,Approved October 16, 2002

AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE AGAINST IRAQ RESOLUTION OF 2002

Public Law 107-243
107th Congress


AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
(a) AUTHORIZATION- The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary

That's it, I have been insulted one too many times. I don't know why you are picking a fight or being deliberately demeaning, but I see no point in pursuing this discussion any further. Have a good life.

In other words, you got fuck all . Get it !? Congress GAVE POTUS authorization to conduct war on Iraq.Damn you people are thick.

Hype,hate and hyperbole are not grounds for impeachment.

[trish]

Hype,hate and hyperbole are not grounds for impeachment, just war.

[specialk]

All I know is that there has not been a terrorist attack on US soil since 9/11/2001 so the guy's doing a great job at protecting Americans at home (including the arrests of 7 in Miami planning on blowing up the Sears tower in Chicago).

The economy is great, plenty of jobs, plenty of growth, no terrorist attacks. Seems like he's doing a great job for the people in the USA so I'm happy with him!

The only concern here is the rising cost of oil/gasoline. But that's up to OPEC not the US president. However, had Bill Clinton opened up ANWAR to drilling 10 years ago when he had the chance (he vetoed the bill) we would be drilling our own oil and less dependant on foreign oil.

Yesssireee.........I know I'm sleeping better these days now that the Seven Stooges from Fla. are behind bars!!!!

Sadly, had you got your post in 5 mins. earlier we could have spared the Bush Regime. As it were, the Hung Angels Senate voted unamimously to impeach 21-0.............Oh well timing is everything :P

[Whitey]

Let's see... Warrantless Wiretaps, Secret Financial Monitoring Programs, Lies, More Lies, Lies to Cover up More Lies, No-bid contracts for Cheney's former company, a complete failure to prevent the 9/11 attacks despite warning, misleading a nation into war, signing statements that basically say he can avoid actually obeying any law he signs, lies about his drinking, years of cocaine use, spent his time in the Nat'l Guard as a liquor officer (i.e. in charge of refilling liquor cabinets) at his daddy's behest, failed oil companies financed by Saudi nationals (the same who financed 9/11), and a million other things.

I'd say its time for him to go.