We have had polls showing if I recall 53% of Americans saying Bush deserves impeachent if he lied us into war. http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=104031 NOw "according to a poll by Princeton Survey Research Associates for the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. 43 per cent of respondents believe both administrations lied to provide a reason for invading Iraq." http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/9780 It isn't moving Bush's way. If my memory is correct, this support for impeachment of Bush is greater than you ever had for impeaching Clinton. The only difference is that the Republicans now control both Houses and during Cllinton's term they had enough control in the House to bring impeachment. An interesting polling question would be whether the public thinks Clinton'sl lie was worse than the lie or even mistake of Bush on Iraq. It could get interesting if the Republicans lose both Houses in 2006. Sadly it gives them great motivation for election fraud.
It was proven that Clinton lied under oath... the same exact thing Scooter Libby is accused of doing. However, it hasn't been proven (or anywhere near it) that President Bush lied to anyone regarding the war, so it is a pointless question. The poll you are referring to is a joke of a poll in the first place... it is about on par with "If there was a shooter on the grassy nole, do you think there was a conspiracy?!"
Bush's lie is as hard to prove as the fact that Iraq didn't have any WMDs. No matter how hard people tried to make that point, there are still about 50% Americans who believe that the troops found them, without seeing any pic or video, just because they BELIEVE. Now, what's the point to prove anything anyways?
From Fox News ___________________________ http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,174627,00.html In Scandalous Times, Bush Could Learn from Clinton Friday, November 04, 2005 By Patrick Basham With the White House shrouded in scandal, the biggest obstacle to George W. Bush’s political comeback is that he’s no Bill Clinton. The heaviest millstone around the president’s political neck isn’t the case against Scooter Libby or the continuing investigation into Karl Rove. Rather, it’s the growing public perception that, unlike President Clinton in the 1990s, Bush is presiding over an unsuccessful, even incompetent, administration. Scandal’s ability to upset the political apple cart is such that some observers argue scandals are now the primary means through which Americans engage in political conflict. What will be the current scandal’s impact on the Bush presidency? An especially bad omen is the effects of a serious political scandal -- which public opinion considers this one to be -- dissipate very slowly. When governments or government officials are perceived to have violated the public trust, their transgressions aren’t quickly forgotten. In fact, some scandals resonate throughout our political culture for several years. For example, pollsters found that the Watergate scandal’s effect upon public opinion was still felt a decade after Richard Nixon resigned from the presidency. History also teaches us that a scandal’s presence applies considerable downward pressure on a president’s approval ratings. The mere perception of inappropriate behavior, not necessarily actual wrongdoing, is frequently a catalyst for declining approval ratings. It’s rare for the public to separate a president’s professional performance from his personal integrity. A president’s personal integrity influences how he is evaluated and a scandal brings his integrity into question. The average scandal depresses a president’s approval ratings by nine to ten percentage points, and with only a 39 percent approval rating according to a new WashingtonPost/ABC News survey, President Bush clearly can’t afford to take an average hit. The most notable exception to the scandal effect is Bill Clinton. His presidency remained popular despite the eruption of the Monica Lewinsky scandal in February 1998. Gallup poll surveys show support for his performance relatively high, although the public was far more critical in its evaluation of his personal qualities. By the 2000 election, Clinton’s approval rating stood at 57 percent while his personal approval was only 40 percent. A comparison of the public’s contrasting reactions to the Watergate and Lewinsky scandals provides further bad news for President Bush. Why did so many more Americans support President Nixon’s impeachment in 1974 than President Clinton’s impeachment in 1998? The extent to which an administration suffers politically from a scandal is determined largely by prevailing economic conditions. A strong economy permitted a majority of Americans the luxury of discriminating between Clinton’s job performance and his personal integrity. In 1998, Clinton benefited from the public’s perception that the economy was in good shape, in sharp contrast to the public’s perception of the economy in 1974. Most Americans wanted Richard Nixon out of office for economic reasons, but most Americans wanted Bill Clinton to remain in office for economic reasons. Overcoming the political damage inflicted by a serious scandal requires that the American people perceive both strong presidential leadership and managerial competence in the Oval Office. The good news, therefore, for President Bush may be found in the recent lesson that peace and prosperity successfully blunted the Lewinsky scandal’s impact upon the Clinton presidency. Desperate to regain the political offensive, the White House might find that an appropriate Supreme Court nomination and a serious attack on a bloated federal government both prove to be powerful weapons in Bush’s political arsenal. Back in 2000, George W. Bush’s presidential campaign drew an explicit contrast between its candidate’s high ethical standards and Bill Clinton’s scandalous personal behavior. Five years later, there is tremendous irony in the fact that President Bush, if his second term agenda is to survive this scandal, needs to give America a reason to rate his own presidency along Clintonesque lines. Patrick Basham is senior fellow in the Center for Representative Government at the Cato Institute.
It could get interesting if the Republicans lose both Houses in 2006. Not going to happen. Bush appears to be poison to Congressional Republicans. His *support* in the 2006 Congressional races would likely hurt more than help. Given that, Republicans are starting to distance themselves from Bush (and back to political middle). I suspect also that the Congressional Republicans may start to pursue their own agenda, betting that George 'What Do Mean That I Can Veto These Bills?' Bush will acquiesce.
lets get the house in 06. and get as much of the senate as we can in 06. and we can play this game. until then...no chance. as far as him not 'lying' under oath...thats irrelevant. high crimes and misdemeanors are whatever the congress deems them to be.
I don’t care so much about him being impeached, as that would leave Cheney in charge. I do hope that Americans agree to turn Bush, Cheney and Rumsfled over to the international court to be tried for war crimes when the time comes, though. It would be fitting to see them tried soon after Saddam. Like Saddam they have illegally inflicted their will on the Iraqi people, against the will of the Iraqi people, and slaughtered tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis in the process. Some of them were even key members of the Reagan administration when it was allied with Saddam at the time he was gassing his own people. The immorality of their behaviour, then and now, boggles he mind and chills the soul. These people really need to be brought to justice, but I'd rather it was in a criminal court.
If Bush got impeached, and removed from office, Cheney probably would be too. I would even say Cheney has a better chance of being impeached than GW Bush.
I would like to point out again that Impeachment is almost solely a political and not legal act. It doesn't matter whether the Pres. lied or not if Congress thinks that the Pres. is worth impeaching they could do so even if its just picking his nose.
where did you get your new bumber sticker? I bet you also have a sticker of the confederate flag on you rear windshield...
