It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

MSNBC: 86% of Americans want Bush impeached

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 14 2006 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by alternateheaven
...it doesnt even take a massive ammount of democrats to skew this poll, a few geeks who are bored could probably jack a choice so far up that not even the entire registered userbase of both the democrats and republicans could sway it otherwise.


Couldn't said geeks also be republicans?

I'd say it doesn't matter




posted on Apr, 14 2006 @ 03:05 PM
link   
WestPoint23

Even you has to be aware of what our president has done to our nation, so don't even dare to question my Intelligence unless you are just so frustrated of finding excuses for Bush that your temper is running thin


Just a joke.


The truth

I hold not respect for Mr. Bush when it comes to running our country and his pursue of war and the way he lies, take revenge against people that disagree with his policies and dares to play with our rights under his powers of war president.

You don't have to be very smart to understand that one.


Still I prefer his body in the presidential seat that Cheney.



posted on Apr, 14 2006 @ 03:58 PM
link   
Impeachment is just too good for ole Two Bits...I would prefer they arrest his daughters , hold them without due cause and don't disclose their whereabouts. Impeaching a man from a job he didn't want in the first place and who has little or no say in any policy decision seems futile. He just needs a dose of his own corrupted medicine.



posted on Apr, 14 2006 @ 11:35 PM
link   
This is funny MSNBC owned by opposition to the current regime in the White House runs an on-line poll and most of the votes are thumbs down on the leadership. Am I surprised? Nope.

What does surprise me is that MSNBC is still around since I thought that have had lots of problems since they began.



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 04:55 PM
link   
there is a simple problem at work here, this being that nobody genuinely gives a s**t what anyone else thinks.

the bush administration will continue to do as it has been doing, until next election year rolls around and some other chump gets to pick up the torch of eroding our freedoms.

*Mod Edit by authors request*

[edit on 15-4-2006 by Amuk]



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by texmiller
Are you kidding me.

Can you read?

Okay if you can't I will just list what you have missed.

1. lied about WMD in Iraq
2. 9/11 - Information shows and he has admitted knowing it 3 weeks before hand.
3. Katerina - enough said
4. Wire tapping - including the american people.
5. Taxes- rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
6. afghanistan - hasn't finished this war yet.
7. Secret meetings with Oil executives about oil consumption.
8. Health Care is a mess.
9. Social Securtiy is a mess.
10. 9.2 TRILLION in DEBT.

That is just off the top of my head.


No, I'm not kidding, and yes, I can read just fine.

As for #1, Bush did not lie about WMDs, or at least if he did he wasn't the first and it wasn't a party thing. I won't repost all of my evidence for this here, if you want to read it go to the Bush dissapointed about WMDs thread.
#2. I haven't heard anything about that (at least not from a reputable source). If you know of a reputable source to coroborate that accusationI would appreciate seeing it as it may change my opinions.
#3. Do you seriously think Katrina was his fault? Are you suggesting he caused Katrina? People were given warnings that they needed to leave (manditory evacuations I do believe), if they stayed behind that was their choice.
#4. Wiretapping wasn't don by him, though it may have been called for by him. I am also sure that his presidency will not be the last to do so, especially with the rise in terrorism.
#5. Taxes are definately not unique to Bush. And as for the "rich get richer and the poor get poorer" argument, that isn't new either.
#6. We still have troops in Vietnam, Bosnia, ect. Troops will be there for many more years. That's what war does.
#7. If they are secret meetings how do you know about them? And if you didn't hear about said meetings I would be worried as he is an Oil Exec.
#8. Health care was a mess before Bush, and will be after Bush as well.
#9. See #8...
#10. We have been on the winning side in almost every war we have been in (you decide if that is a good thing or a bad thing) and, the winners are almost always responcible for rebuilding the war torn areas (costing $$$). Also, the National Debt tends to increase in times of war (look at the past). Third, dollar amounts are deceptive. Inflation, GDP, and increased population all have significant effects on the National Debt. By the way, it is Congress that spends your money not the president.

Below is shown how the U.S. Government spends it's money. Here is the question, what would YOU change and tell me why?


And just to show how we aren't the only ones, there is a list of countries by public debt as percentage of Gross domestic product, based on The World Factbook accessed in October 2005. And please notice where the U.S. is on that list.

So, please, explain to me what I am missing.

One thing, before making accusations, please do research of your own on your comments and government in general instead of just reposting someone elses comments (note the theme for ATS, Deny Ignorance). I'm just trying to save you some grief in the future.



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 09:09 PM
link   

*Mod Edit by authors request*


Umm... did no one notice this? I must say that you should know better than to say something so irresponsible. Choose your words carefully next time, you never know who’s reading.


[edit on 15-4-2006 by Amuk]



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 11:13 PM
link   
you know what, you're probably right. i'd better edit that out, and it'd be just great if you could do the same.

edit: crap. i can't. can a mod take care of that?

wasn't a very bright thing to say... but of course it was a facetious statement.

and anyway, i trust big brother has more interesting people to pay attention to.

[edit on 15-4-2006 by The Parallelogram]



posted on Apr, 16 2006 @ 01:26 AM
link   
I see it’s been edited out, well its for the best. You shouldn’t be worried about Big Brother as much as you should be about someone actually reading that and thinking its a good idea. I know it was just a facetious statement but you never know how someone else may interpret it. In any case
to the Mod’s for their action.



posted on Apr, 18 2006 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by SwitchbladeNGC

Originally posted by texmiller
Are you kidding me.

Can you read?

Okay if you can't I will just list what you have missed.

1. lied about WMD in Iraq
2. 9/11 - Information shows and he has admitted knowing it 3 weeks before hand.
3. Katerina - enough said
4. Wire tapping - including the american people.
5. Taxes- rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
6. afghanistan - hasn't finished this war yet.
7. Secret meetings with Oil executives about oil consumption.
8. Health Care is a mess.
9. Social Securtiy is a mess.
10. 9.2 TRILLION in DEBT.

That is just off the top of my head.


No, I'm not kidding, and yes, I can read just fine.

As for #1, Bush did not lie about WMDs, or at least if he did he wasn't the first and it wasn't a party thing. I won't repost all of my evidence for this here, if you want to read it go to the Bush dissapointed about WMDs thread.
#2. I haven't heard anything about that (at least not from a reputable source). If you know of a reputable source to coroborate that accusationI would appreciate seeing it as it may change my opinions.
#3. Do you seriously think Katrina was his fault? Are you suggesting he caused Katrina? People were given warnings that they needed to leave (manditory evacuations I do believe), if they stayed behind that was their choice.
#4. Wiretapping wasn't don by him, though it may have been called for by him. I am also sure that his presidency will not be the last to do so, especially with the rise in terrorism.
#5. Taxes are definately not unique to Bush. And as for the "rich get richer and the poor get poorer" argument, that isn't new either.
#6. We still have troops in Vietnam, Bosnia, ect. Troops will be there for many more years. That's what war does.
#7. If they are secret meetings how do you know about them? And if you didn't hear about said meetings I would be worried as he is an Oil Exec.
#8. Health care was a mess before Bush, and will be after Bush as well.
#9. See #8...
#10. We have been on the winning side in almost every war we have been in (you decide if that is a good thing or a bad thing) and, the winners are almost always responcible for rebuilding the war torn areas (costing $$$). Also, the National Debt tends to increase in times of war (look at the past). Third, dollar amounts are deceptive. Inflation, GDP, and increased population all have significant effects on the National Debt. By the way, it is Congress that spends your money not the president.

Below is shown how the U.S. Government spends it's money. Here is the question, what would YOU change and tell me why?


And just to show how we aren't the only ones, there is a list of countries by public debt as percentage of Gross domestic product, based on The World Factbook accessed in October 2005. And please notice where the U.S. is on that list.

So, please, explain to me what I am missing.

One thing, before making accusations, please do research of your own on your comments and government in general instead of just reposting someone elses comments (note the theme for ATS, Deny Ignorance). I'm just trying to save you some grief in the future.



Such a large post for nothing. Seriously.

You are telling me to bring the facts to you about what I have posted when you can't bring any facts yourself to the table.

Please next time save yourself some time and just post the "credible" sourcing that you used to know all of this.


By the way, it was public knewledge of the closed meeting of the oil industry with bush and dick. It was on CNN, ABC, CBS. Please look it up a simple google search will bring you what you are looking for on all accounts.

Have a great day.

[edit on 18-4-2006 by texmiller]



posted on Apr, 18 2006 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by texmiller
Such a large post for nothing. Seriously.

You are telling me to bring the facts to you about what I have posted when you can't bring any facts yourself to the table.

Please next time save yourself some time and just post the "credible" sourcing that you used to know all of this.


By the way, it was public knewledge of the closed meeting of the oil industry with bush and dick. It was on CNN, ABC, CBS. Please look it up a simple google search will bring you what you are looking for on all accounts.



I brought plenty of facts, most of them happen to be common knowledge as well, you just refuse to accept them (possibly because you just hate Bush that much, because they prove you wrong, or, more likely, a combination of the two). Also, I noticed that you didn't provide your "evidence" for the ONE reason that you gave I couldn't comment on because I have never heard about it.

Please tell me what you would like a source for, though most of it, as I stated already, is common knowledge.

As for your oil meeting comment, if you actually read my post you would see that I didn't deny any meetings. Secondly, There is a diffrence between a "secret meeting" and a "closed meeting". I have been in my share of closed meetings, but to my knowledge, never been in a secret meeting.

______________________________________________

The First Rule of Holes: If you are in one, stop digging.



posted on Apr, 18 2006 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by texmiller
1. lied about WMD in Iraq


Incorrect. President Bush was correct that Saddam had WMD's in Iraq. And even if the amount of WMD's found does not match up to the reports we had pre-war in Iraq. That does not mean Mr. Bush "lied".

This link may have some information for you: here.



Iraqi intelligence documents, confiscated by U.S. forces and obtained by CNSNews.com, show numerous efforts by Saddam Hussein's regime to work with some of the world's most notorious terror organizations, including al Qaeda, to target Americans. They demonstrate that Saddam's government possessed mustard gas and anthrax, both considered weapons of mass destruction, in the summer of 2000, during the period in which United Nations weapons inspectors were not present in Iraq. And the papers show that Iraq trained dozens of terrorists inside its borders.




2. 9/11 - Information shows and he has admitted knowing it 3 weeks before hand.


This is 100% false. It seems YOU are the one spreading lies...


3. Katerina - enough said


No, you need to say more here. It is not the President fault that the leadership of "naw' orleans" is so backwards! Also, President Bush can not control the weather, yet.


4. Wire tapping - including the american people.


Yes! President Bush did allow wiretaps on people calling known terrorists. You think this is a bad idea? Also, Jimmy Carter and Bill Clintion used these same powers, only we were not at war. Where were you then??


5. Taxes- rich get richer and the poor get poorer.


Wow, wrong again. You must not read much. Presidnet Bush has cut taxes...the biggest tax cuts in a long time.


6. afghanistan - hasn't finished this war yet.


Well, that's war for you. The United States has done a great job in Afghanistan.



7. Secret meetings with Oil executives about oil consumption.


Ah, no. Meetings maybe and this is a good idea, have you seen the high prices??


8. Health Care is a mess.


Yes, thats not the Presidents fault. What you think this is the first President we've ever had?!


9. Social Securtiy is a mess.


True, so why did the liberals in Congress block the President bill that would have fixed it? I wonder.


10. 9.2 TRILLION in DEBT.


Can't put a price on freedom my friend.

Looks like you need to start thinking for yourself, instead of just blindly hating the President.

-- Boat

[edit on 18-4-2006 by Boatphone]

[edit on 18-4-2006 by Boatphone]



posted on Apr, 18 2006 @ 03:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by BoatphoneWow, wrong again. You must not read much. Presidnet Bush has cut taxes...the biggest tax cuts in a long time.


What are you reading. Bush's tax cuts are only benefiting the Richest 1% of Americans. And I don't want to hear the "trickle on" theory again, because we know it doesn't work.



posted on Apr, 18 2006 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420

Originally posted by BoatphoneWow, wrong again. You must not read much. Presidnet Bush has cut taxes...the biggest tax cuts in a long time.


What are you reading. Bush's tax cuts are only benefiting the Richest 1% of Americans. And I don't want to hear the "trickle on" theory again, because we know it doesn't work.


First, I would like to comment that 6% of the world's population controls 50% of the world's money.

Now to reply to the above comment with a little common sence and economics. If you have a higher income than I do, you will, by default, pay more taxes than me. If there is a tax cut, that affects the % of tax we pay equally, you will still pay more in taxes than I do, yet the amount of money that you would have payed, but no longer have to, is greater than that amount for me. It stands to reason that the richest would benefit the most from that. But, that isn't what you said, you said,

Bush's tax cuts are only benefiting the Richest 1% of Americans.

So, tell me, you are not benefiting at all from the tax cuts?



posted on Apr, 18 2006 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
are only benefiting the Richest 1% of Americans.


The richest 1% of Americans pay a much larger % of American taxes! So, of course they should get the most % cut!! Duh!

-- Boat



posted on Apr, 18 2006 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by SwitchbladeNGC
First, I would like to comment that 6% of the world's population controls 50% of the world's money.
Now to reply to the above comment with a little common sence and economics. If you have a higher income than I do, you will, by default, pay more taxes than me. If there is a tax cut, that affects the % of tax we pay equally, you will still pay more in taxes than I do, yet the amount of money that you would have payed, but no longer have to, is greater than that amount for me. It stands to reason that the richest would benefit the most from that. But, that isn't what you said, you said,

Bush's tax cuts are only benefiting the Richest 1% of Americans.

So, tell me, you are not benefiting at all from the tax cuts?


Actually, no,

The Bush administrations tax/budget cuts end up falling on the states heads. There has been a steady decrease in federal grants to states, while a sharp increase in unfunded federal mandates. The states need to increase taxes or suffer federal penalties for non-compliance, thereby negating any benefit that could have come from these “cuts”. There was a 17 billion dollar increase in state tax from 2001 until 2005. As a matter of fact 32 states have increased the co pay on Medicaid, and all 50 have reduced or stopped payment to Medicaid providers. The Florida deficit was so high because of these cuts that 80,000 kids were left without healthcare.

Let’s not forget that this same plan nearly tripled the co pay on veteran’s medication. The plan also added a $250 a year fee for vets to use government health care. I’m sure you’re all in favor of that.



posted on Apr, 18 2006 @ 05:53 PM
link   
Sounds to me like the tax cuts aren't the problem, your "unfunded federal mandates" are. If that is the case what is your problem with the tax cuts? You are benefifing from the cuts, but other things offset them. Also, are these "richest 1% unaffected by these mandates you speak of? Would you prefer more taxes? Maybe the mandates should be funded by the government, increasing the deficit which the other people in this thread have been complaining about.

By the way, maybe you could list all these Federal Mandates and how much they are costing the states so we can determine which ones are not needed.



posted on Apr, 18 2006 @ 06:11 PM
link   
I will have to agree,

Polls do not lie, like bush did, they are showing the growing resentment against the Republican held congress and presidential seat.

Yes Bush may be impeached or not, but the fact remains Republicans will lose the congress in November.

The majority population in our nation be one party or the other are fed up with what is going on.


[edit on 18-4-2006 by marg6043]



posted on Apr, 18 2006 @ 07:37 PM
link   
I just thought then, Clinton was nearly impeached because of lying to the public about a blowjob, yet bush hasnt even began to be impeached when he lies about reasons for war, leaks secret info, and sets up illegal detention camps?
Geez, Democrats have it hard in America.



posted on Apr, 18 2006 @ 07:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by SwitchbladeNGC
Sounds to me like the tax cuts aren't the problem, your "unfunded federal mandates" are. If that is the case what is your problem with the tax cuts? You are benefifing from the cuts, but other things offset them.


Two sides of the same coin. The same budget that allows for the tax cuts removes federal grants that would allow for lower state taxes.


Also, are these "richest 1% unaffected by these mandates you speak of?

Well, they don't have much to worry about when a quarter of their paycheck goes down the hole.


Maybe the mandates should be funded by the government, increasing the deficit which the other people in this thread have been complaining about.


I think they are complaining, and rightly so, that money is being wasted on an illegal war, and that is the cause of the surplus. We should have more than enough money to take care of ourselves, but every few years we get into another pesky war that ruins it once again.


By the way, maybe you could list all these Federal Mandates and how much they are costing the states so we can determine which ones are not needed.


No Child left behind, off the top of my head. I'll have to get back to you on some of the others. I think you misunderstood my point. Most of these mandates are legitimate, but where they once had federal aid, now they do not. So, rather than have federal money taken from DoD or something else useless, they take it from state grants.

As for Bush, he's trying to do what any one with a good PR person and a governments budget would do, make it look like he's the good guy putting money in their pockets, and it's the states who have to be the bad guy.




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join