fltflores fltflores

THE 109th DEMOCRATIC CONTROLLED CONGRESS NEEDS TO IMPEACH GEORGE W. BUSH

THE 109th DEMOCRATIC CONTROLLED CONGRESS NEEDS TO IMPEACH GEORGE W. BUSH

Impeach Bush NOW!

51-49 AXE!

GOODNIGHT MY BUSH LOVEY!
13,726 views 38 replies
Reply #26 Top
It ain't never going to happen! So don't hold your breath S1.
Reply #27 Top
It ain't never going to happen! So don't hold your breath S1.


It will if we(Democrats) take back the congress and get some god dam accountability in this government. I love how you can try and Impeach Clinton for a Blowjob and Bush virtually commits crimes against humanity breaks 27 constituional laws over 800 congressional laws and oh he can stay in power.
Reply #28 Top
S1GenocideOctober 14, 2006 13:10:12


love how you can try and Impeach Clinton for a Blowjob


as usual the demented left forgets FACTS! FIRST FACT Clinton was IMPEACHED by the house! not for getting his dick sucked, but for lieing under oath.
But this is what I have become to expect from the Democratic party, rewriting history, lieing, and more taxes!!
Reply #29 Top
but for lieing under oath.


I guess we should impeach Bush then for lying under oath about WMDS huh?
Reply #30 Top
More lame crap from infants who forget that Congress Approved returning to hostilities with Iraq in accordance with the terms of the Ceasefire of 1991 signed by representatives from the US and Iraq... the UN was NOT a signatory if the ceasefire itself. The UN merely approved of most of the terms and included them in one of their worthless resolutoins. However, the ceasefire and the resolution are two different events and documents.

So worshippers of the UN can put that in their stupidity pipe and smoke it!
Reply #31 Top
S1GenocideOctober 14, 2006 13:17:36


but for lieing under oath.


I guess we should impeach Bush then for lying under oath about WMDS huh?


sure as long as we impeach everyone that agreed with him, that would be 96 members of the senate and around 300 members of the house.
Reply #32 Top
. I love how you can try and Impeach Clinton for a Blowjob and Bush virtually commits crimes against humanity breaks 27 constituional laws over 800 congressional laws and oh he can stay in power.


You are exaggerating your numbers there.
Reply #33 Top
Reply #34 Top
lol... this is so cool. Dems rally the troops and this kind of unintelligible apesh*t kidstuff is what they get. Give that bwa some mountain dew and pop rocks and let him preach.

Keep up the good work. For Republicans to win over the next few years we need as many people like fltflores out there, saying whatever pops into their heads as loud and often as they can. Anything that gets reasonable people to edge warily away from Dem talking points and promotes the idea that their anti-Bush platform is just paranoid urban legend is okay by me .
Reply #35 Top
It ain't never going to happen! So don't hold your breath S1.


It will if we(Democrats) take back the congress and get some god dam accountability in this government.


Just keep on dreaming!
Reply #36 Top
Attempting to impeach Bush would be a useless exersize, because at best the Dems will win a slight majority. That is still much less than the 2/3 vote needed to impeach the president. The best the dems can do is to investigate the president and see what they can dig up.
Reply #37 Top
2. Ol Bushy Said back in 2003 That "WE DO NOT KNOW IF NORTH KOREA HAS WMDs AT THIS TIME"
even though they openly admitted it for YEARS


Who cares?

Who are they? The Koreans? If I told you I were the King of the world, does that mean that you know I am?
Reply #38 Top
I love how you can try and Impeach Clinton for a Blowjob and Bush virtually commits crimes against humanity breaks 27 constituional laws over 800 congressional laws and oh he can stay in power


Lets set the record straight "right now"! We tried to impeach Slick Wille for "lying" under oath on the stand, NOT for any sexual conduction (BJ or otherwise)! And as for the rest of your post.....if he's "supposedly" broken all these laws that you say, then "why" is he not in court? I'll tell you why. Because the "court" found him NOT GUILITY of any wrong doing! Prove otherwise.