Bush Impeachment Hearing

[E30 Cabrio]

"They won't be able to do the deployment. They won't have the equipment. They don't have the training and they won't be able to do the work... This vote will limit the options of the president and should stop this surge."
~ Rep. John Murtha, D-PA, February, 2006, commenting on his plans to derail the President's plan for a surge in US troops in Iraq.

"The enemy is emboldened by a surge of American troops..."
~ Sen. Carl Levin, D-MI, March 14, 2007.

"This war is lost and the surge is not accomplishing anything..."
~ Sen. Maj. Leader Harry Reid, D-NV, April, 19, 2007.

"The Speaker of the House believes that the surge is not working."
~ Speaker Of The House, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-CA, June 28, 2007.

"The facts are self-evident that the progress is not being made."
~ Speaker Of The House, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-CA, September 6, 2007.

"Well that would be a real great problem for us, no question about it."
~ House Majority Whip James Clyburn,D-SC, August 31, 2007, responding to a question about what a positive report about progress being made in Iraq would mean for the Democrats in Congress.

"Well, one thing we know is what we're doing now isn't working. You know, this is our worst year for Americans killed in Iraq. So the surge was an absolute failure,"
~ Ron Paul, November 7, 2007.

"We're not going to baby sit a civil war."
~ Barack Obama, January 2007 on the "Today" show.

"I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq is going to solve the sectarian violence there. In fact, I think it will do the reverse."
~ Barack Obama, January 10, 2007, on MSNBC.

"I did not see anything in the speech or anything in the run- up to the speech that provides evidence that an additional 15,000 to 20,000 more U.S. troops is going to make a significant dent in the sectarian violence that's taking place there."
~ Barack Obama, January 10, 2007 on CNN.

"We can send 15,000 more troops; 20,000 more troops; 30,000 more troops. I don't know any expert on the region or any military officer that I've spoken to privately that believes that that is gonna make a substantial difference on the situation on the ground."
~ Barack Obama, January 14, 2007 on "Face The Nation".

"My assessment is that the surge has not worked and we will not see a different report eight weeks from now."
~ Barack Obama, July 18, 2007, on the Today show, anticipating Gen. Petraeus' report to Congress in September '07.

"Here's what we know. The surge has not worked."
~ Barack Obama, July 20, 2007 in New Hampshire:

"After putting an additional 30,000 troops in, far longer & more troops than the president had initially said, we have gone from a horrendous situation of violence in Iraq to the same intolerable levels of violence that we had back in June of 2006. So, essentially, after all this we're back where we were 15 months ago... So, I think it is fair to say that the president has simply tried to gain another six months to continue on the same course that he's been on for several years now. It is a course that will not succeed."
~ Barack Obama, September 13, 2007 at the Democratic Debate.

"...not only have we not seen improvements, but we're actually worsening, potentially, a situation there."
~ Barack Obama, November 11, 2007 on "Meet The Press".

"Tonight Pres. Bush said that the surge in Iraq is working, when we know that's just not true.
~ Barack Obama, January 29, 2008.



And finally....

"In the 18 months since President Bush announced the surge, our troops have performed heroically in bringing down the level of violence. New tactics have protected the Iraqi population, and the Sunni tribes have rejected Al Qaeda — greatly weakening its effectiveness."
~ Barack Obama, July 14, 2008 in a NYTimes Op-Ed.

The Dems would rather politicize the war then to win it.

The quotes above make you really wonder, who's side are they on?

[!RocknE30!]

*don't need to quote a huge response and waste space*

Very well said.

[Ryan Stewart]

How dare you bring facts into a discussion about hope( the dems can pull it off ) and change ( for a new pres that's going to happen in a few months anyway).

The dems can pull it off? If it was so easy why havent they done in in the last two years with control of the branch of government that actually holds power over the economy and long-term control of the military?

Im just wondering what one man could do that 300 coudnt?

[rwh11385]

you are totally clueless like many on this site

+1

deutschman
just because the media wants you to think the nation is swirling around the toilet bowl doesn't mean its true. there are stupid people making moronic decisions and wasting their lives / air here but that doesn't mean all is doom or gloom... so stop pretending you have a clue and pick up an English book to get a better understanding of how to use paragraphs so you don't look like a babbling moron, as much

[Pinepig]

The dems can pull it off? If it was so easy why havent they done in in the last two years with control of the branch of government that actually holds power over the economy and long-term control of the military?

Im just wondering what one man could do that 300 coudnt?

Sorry man there was no sarcasm smiley.

[rwh11385]

Clinton was Impeached because he lied under oath...

[Bushs] tax cuts and rebates, which the Dems wailed and cried about, led to the Unemployment rate dropping from about 6.4% to 4.5%, and the GDP growing for 5 straight years. Even now, which high gas prices, which have more to do with an increase in demand by countries like China and India, the economy is still expanding, unemployment is still at a rate below the average for the last 4 decades.

Despite the fact that the GDP has not contracted at all in 5 years, idiots like you are running around claiming we're in a recession.

You don't even know what a recession is, do you? people like you are too stupid to understand things like supply and demand,

No, they would rather tax "the rich" which is basically anyone who makes over 50K per year and redistribute the money.

Instead of copying and pasting talking points from whatever dumb ass left-wingnut web sites you visit, why don't you start thinking for yourself and actually using facts to argue your case instead of parroting baseless, biased talking points?

+1

long read but good shit. most of the liberal morons rambling off bullshit they hear never care to find the real facts... and usually don't know fucking shit about economics

[z31maniac]

For this, he was Impeached, Disbarred, held in Contempt of Court, and paid Jones nearly 1 Million dollars to drop her lawsuit. Not exactly the actions of an innocent man to pay a plaintiff to drop litigation.

I'm not even going to play to all the other idiots in this thread, but this is particularly stupid. You obviously have no idea how business works do you?

$1 mil to drop a lawsuit that could have easily taken months and months of incredibly high paid lawyers was most likely cheaper than fighting it.

For an incredibly simplistic analogy, just like when I was a claim rep, I paid fraudulent claims all the time because it was cheaper.

What's cheaper cheif? Paying some worthless scum of society $5k to take a hike or pay $40k fighting it?

[rwh11385]

An innocent man probably wouldn't accept paying to make a suit go away, when he could have won it along with a countersuit for his legal defense fees. But that wasn't Clinton's case.

[bostonbmw]

Ditto. One guy all by himself caused the plight of a helpless nation of 300 million+.

All you Obama backers go write your precious senator. Ask him to actually show up to a vote for once, and maybe you'll get your Iraq pullout and free healthcare.

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ)
* Representing: Arizona
* Votes: 394 votes missed (63.0%), 231 votes cast

Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL)
* Representing: Illinois
* Votes: 277 votes missed (44.3%), 348 votes cast

Thats from the Washington post. Check your facts before you open your mouth!

[Money$hit]

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ)
* Representing: Arizona
* Votes: 394 votes missed (63.0%), 231 votes cast

Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL)
* Representing: Illinois
* Votes: 277 votes missed (44.3%), 348 votes cast

Thats from the Washington post. Check your facts before you open your mouth!

Neither have a stellar voting record, so the point is moot. And if you really want to nit pick, Obama's presence and voting is more to blame for our such "dire" state of social, economic and political existence since he attended more meetings/voted more anyway.

[Money$hit]

+1

long read but good shit. most of the liberal morons rambling off bullshit they hear never care to find the real facts... and usually don't know fucking shit about economics

You said it. All this talk of recession is pretty fuckin moronic. It takes two consecutive quarters of GDP contraction, and we have yet to have one. And no one declares a recession except the National Bureau of Economic Research, and they havent said shit.

[Lair]

I really hope you idiots elect John McCain.

If you don't, I won't have anything to bitch about for the next four years.

Where did those WMD go again? You know the ones - we've spent 4000+ US soldiers' lives and countless billions of US taxpayer dollars looking for them.

Keep a firm grip on those guns. You're going to need them to shoot your way out of the Patriot Act one of these days. And make sure you don't email or telephone anyone about anything that might be miscontrued.

Big Brother Bush is watching you. Stay tuned to Fox News, Rush Limjob, Bill O'Really, and good old Matt "WMD FOUND IN IRAQ!!!1" Drudge or elose you're not on OUR TEAM.

They have the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Everyone else is a gay waffleswaffleswaffleswaffleswaffles lying liberal.

[Money$hit]

I really hope you idiots elect John McCain.

Oh, and we will. Despite the fact that the Obama campaign is nothing more than a bloated out of control internet generated phenomenon that is perpetuated by Communist News Network on a daily basis, we the Republicans have a weapon that the Obama campaign doesn't.

Old people. Old people will vote, and when voting day comes, they will come in droves. And they wont give a shit about all the hype, cnn coverage, blogs, facebook groups, myspace groups, etc.

They will see the election for what it is. Barack Hussein Obama, a young, unexperienced, democrat with a "new" way of thinking, versus John McCain, an established, respected Senator, well known Vietnam War veteran and Prisoner of War.

I will be dissapointed in my country if Obama is elected.

[Lair]

Oh, and we will. Despite the fact that the Obama campaign is nothing more than a bloated out of control internet generated phenomenon that is perpetuated by Communist News Network on a daily basis, we the Republicans have a weapon that the Obama campaign doesn't.

Old people. Old people will vote, and when voting day comes, they will come in droves. And they wont give a shit about all the hype, cnn coverage, blogs, facebook groups, myspace groups, etc.

They will see the election for what it is. Barack Hussein Obama, a young, unexperienced, democrat with a "new" way of thinking, versus John McCain, an established, respected Senator, well known Vietnam War veteran and Prisoner of War.

I will be dissapointed in my country if Obama is elected.

Awesome.

You know what the definition of "insanity" is?

Doing the same thing over and over, and expecting different results.

[Pinepig]

Awesome.

You know what the definition of "insanity" is?

Doing the same thing over and over, and expecting different results.

Yet you keep posting.