Thursday, September 22, 2005
I must say that I was not a little surprised at Mr. Chris Conroys reply to 'Lukery' regarding the impeachment question. To say that you will not raise impeachment unless it is raised by congress, as you intend to remain impartial in your questioning is a bit puzzling. Have you noted the present makeup of the U.S. House of Representatives, the body that would 1st consider this question? You appear to be taking a position that is quite partial by not allowing the question until the Republican led congress decides to proceed against the Republican president. If you have any sort of clarification on this issue I, and those who agree with me anxiously await the explanation.
If I may be so bold as to predict what your reply may look like, let me prespond. The contention that this is not currently an issue of social import because it is not the topic of commentary by the ruling class punditry is increasingly losing credibility. Paul Craig Roberts who has an extensive conservative pedigree has called for impeachment. Simply Google search 'impeach bush' for reams of documentation on this growing issue. As cowed as the press is by this administration I think any impeachment commentary is remarkable on its face. The punditry are increasingly asking if the probable switch of power in the House in 06 will result in impeachment. I think that is a given. How bout getting out in front a little and phrasing the question thusly. If the U.S. House of Representatives should switch hands from Republican to Democrat, do you think they will introduce articles of impeachment against President Bush? If so would you support or oppose your representative voting in favor of these articles if based upon leading the country to war in Iraq using falsehoods.
Hey... I'm not the guy that makes these questions up and I suppose you just saw why not. But it's a legitimate question, and it's coming whether you ask it or not. Thank you.
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]