Clinton lied under oath about a relationship. Then, he came clean and apologized to the nation. He was impeached. He was tarred and feathered by the "liberal media". People were able to empathize with him for lying and getting caught. Most people do that. No big deal (to 60% of the country at least, I know for a fact Mr. Block will disagree).
Bush, however, will never agree to be put under oath. Therefore, he will never be in a position to lie under oath. This is why his approval rating is so low. People want to see him answer questions without responding "that is classified". Heck, even when he tells the truth, he tells you that he was lying.
The nation wants accountability from their public figures. I think this is why the public doesn't approve of Congress, because they are not holding the rest of the government accountable for their actions, you know, the job they are being paid to do.
Don't get me wrong, I would not like to see a witch hunt of Clintonian proportions, but there is all sorts of fishy stuff going on right now and I think the public is fully aware of it.
3 comments:
Search Google for "+bush +impeachment" and you get 1.4 million hits. 7.27million hits for Yahoo. Select "+clinton +impeachment" and you get 1.24 million hits on Google and 3.75 million on Yahoo. My Lexis-Nexis account has expired or else I would run the numbers up on this one, too.
A sitting president that has no formal charges against him gets tagged up harder when referencing to impeachment than you do for a former president who actually was impeached!
I am certain the president would testify under oath IF he is ever charged with any crimes. But since it appears that he has not been implicated in any criminal proceedings this point is moot. The fact that Clinton was charged, was impeached and was disbarred seems to be OK since he apologized.
The speculation you engage in within this post disappoints me. I hate it when smart people refuse to let their brains get in their way when making judgements. "Fishy things" and "we all know what's going on"...how did you find time to write this post while constantly evading the black helicopters circling the house? Who reminds whom of "American Dad" now? Clinton's impeachment was not a witch hunt. Those occur when their are no witches but someone has to get burned.
Congress is never held accountable for jack. To think that they, collectively, want nothing more than to preserve their re-election in advance of anything else is not being cynical - it is being pragmatic.
26 of the 32 US Senators running for re-election in '08 have served at least 2 terms. Biden is seeking a 7th term while still pursuing the Presidency. Warner is hoping for a 6th term. These guys will never institute term limits because they have business-class seats on the Taxpayer Gravy Train. Limits of 2 terms to Senators and 5 terms for Representatives. Congressional staffing should undergo review after every election by independent, outside firms. These positions should be considered as being "on contract" and be "at will" hires with contract extension limitations being in place here.
There will always be graft in government, the public will always want to see those taking part held accountable.
Not sure what you're getting at with the Clinton vs. Bush impeachment thing. Clinton wasn't impeached during Bush's term...point being, now, the number of douchebags with blogs (myself possibly included) has increased exponentially. Also, Bush's popularity is abysmal, so it comes as no surprise that people want him out. They think he's incompetent. They think he has engaged in straight up criminal activity, which, apparently the president has immunity from? Or at least that seems to be the Nixonian argument they are using with their warrantless wiretapping program that we are not allowed to know about due to national security concerns.
I, personally, am all for a completely open government. Yeah, that's right, completely open goverment. Sue me.
I agree with your term limit comments.
All I want out of this administration is for them to respond to subpoenas or investigations in a forthright fashion. They have not done so yet. Why don't they just get rid of Gonzalez? To prove they are in power. It's nothing more than a power trip. I'm just really sick of it.
Clinton had consensual sex. He lied under oath about it. That doesn't concern me in any way.
Now that we are clear in that you are morally wishy-washy...regardless of what the act was, the crime was lying before a grand jury. And the Congress. But lying before the voters is not a crime. If it were all politicians would be in jail.
"They"? Are these the same "they" that are flying the black helicopters? You are playing partisanship here in that as much slime and innuendo that is being dredged today is the same volume of slime and innuendo that was dredged in the Clinton administration. He had the big balls to lie, lie again, absolutely did not have any relationships with those lies - then apologized for those lies. So don't paint Bush with the brush that you seem unwilling to yield against others.
My Google/Yahoo paragraph had everything to do with S/N - every d-bag with a computer and a connection now can spout their opinion and seem relevant. that is if you agree with their opinion. What do the Unabomber and Daily Koz have in common? Not a damn thing. But at least the Unabomber had the courage of his convictions, no matter how deranged. Most blogs and/or bloggers are too busy typing with one hand while they exercise their "freedom of speech" with the other hand.
"Nixonian" is cute. How were Nixon's wire taps different from Bush's and Clinton's? Well, Nixon's were not approved by Congress. So are Bush's now "Clintonian" wire taps? Please check the height of the table before you jerk your knee and bang it.
I am by no means a Bush apologist here. A good portion of what he is doing runs contrary to my personal convictions. My beef is with you and others who get blinded by the partisanship and the fluff and auger in on that. Then all the conversation becomes just noise and people lobbing bombs at one another. The point should be understanding why the fluff gets more attention and killing the fluff. When I hear the BS of the AG, etc. and someone wants to debate that my general feeling is that they have absolutely no idea that this is not a problem that we should be debating.
Find outrage in the blanket amnesty that Congress is hoping to give 13 million illegals. Think about how taxes go down yet spending goes up. Why do we have a Dept. of Education when this is constitutionally a STATES RIGHT. Why can the Franklin Police seemingly find kids who vandalize but cannot solve 3 murders?
Speak of the important stuff and intelligent thought will follow. And hopefully, action.
Post a Comment