.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

The Asylum

Welcome to the Asylum. This is a site devoted to politics and current events in America, and around the globe. The THREE lunatics posting here are unabashed conservatives that go after the liberal lies and deceit prevalent in the debate of the day. We'd like to add that the views expressed here do not reflect the views of other inmates, nor were any inmates harmed in the creation of this site.

Location: Mesa, Arizona, United States

Who are we? We're a married couple who has a passion for politics and current events. That's what this site is about. If you read us, you know what we stand for.

Sunday, April 29, 2007

WAAAAAAAHH!!!! We're not getting our way!

No offense, but I've about had it with the Democrats and their ideas regarding impeachment. Today, as Ian observed over at Hot Air, that Jack Murtha is the newest nutter in the caucus to call for it. He did so this morning on Face the Nation. Here's the key excerpt of the transcript:

SCHIEFFER: What are Democrats going to send back to the White House? Will it be a bill that has some kind of conditions? Because, in the end, aren't you going to have to fund these troops to keep from putting them in harm's way?

Rep. MURTHA: Well, in the first place we gave the president everything he asked for and then some. We gave him $4 billion more. We gave him for PTSD, we gave him for brain damage, all those kind of things, more money for Walter Reed to take care of those problems. But what--if he vetoes this bill, he's cut off the money. But obviously we're going to pass another bill. It's going to have some stringent requirements. I'd like to see two months. I'd like to look at this again in two months later...

SCHIEFFER: Just fund it for two months, rather than a year.

Rep. MURTHA: Fund it for two months, instead of a year, and then look at it again.

SCHIEFFER: White House says no.

Rep. MURTHA: White House says no. But the White House has said no to everything. They say we're willing to compromise, and then we don't get any--we've compromised on waivers for the requirements of the troops, which is their own requirements, and also goals instead of requirements for the benchmarks. So we've already compromised, and we need to make this president understand, `Mr. President, the public has spoken.' There are three ways--four ways to influence a president, and one is popular opinion, the election, third is impeachment, and fourth is--and fourth is tighten the purse.

SCHIEFFER: Are you seriously talking about contemplating an impeachment of this president, congressman?

Rep. MURTHA: Bob, what I'm saying is there's four ways to influence a president.

SCHIEFFER: And that's one of them?

Rep. MURTHA: And one of them's impeachment...

SCHIEFFER: And that's one option--that's an option that's on the table?

Rep. MURTHA: ...and the fourth one that is on--I'm just saying that's one way to influence the president. The other way, is your purse. And the purse is controlled by the Congress, who's elected by the public. In the last election, public said we want the Democrats in control.

As Ian pointed out, and as any sane, common sense, intelligent American knows, Congress can't impeach the president because they don't agree with him or get along with him. It's called checks and balances, and it's clear to me now that Murtha is anything but sane or balanced. He's completely looney tunes. Impeachment is not a charge to be taken lightly, or threatened because some people don't get along with the commander in chief. Impeachment is instituted when a crime has been committed. In short, and for those sitting in the cheap seats here, THERE IS NO HIGH CRIME OR MISDEMEANOR THAT'S BEEN COMMITED. That's in Article II, Section 4 if Jack's forgotten his junior high civics classes.

This is more BS from the Democrats. More whining. More crying. More LYING about their intentions regarding this war supplemental. They could give a rip less about the troops. They're working as hard and as fast as they can to lose this war, and force our retreat. What's worse is that they're not even bothering to listen to those in the intelligence field telling that it's not a smart move to do this; that our enemies will visit the mistake back on us worse than what was delivered to our doorstep on 11 September.

With information coming out now that Iran does have ties to senior al Qaeda terrorists, and they're working with them, the threat now faced by our enemies is worse than ever. The president didn't cause this. The terrorists did. We responded, and Jack Murtha -- like the majority of the Congress in 2003 -- gave him the authorization to go into Iraq. (What's sad is that wasn't even needed. We had the regime change aurthorization still in hand from 1998.) Now, they want to call no joy, and leave. Leaving right now would not only signal to the terrorists that they only need to kill a few of our soldiers to force us to submit to their whims, but we would watch a nation of 25 million people suffer at the hands of a bunch of barbaric animals.

The Left may want to see that. Maybe they forgot the aftermath of Vietnam, and what Pol Pot did to his people. We don't, and we can't forget that now with the Democrats playing these kinds of games. If I were the president, I'd call ol' Jack into my office, and ream his @$$ so bad that he'd think twice about opening up his uneducated yap again. Enough of this garbage, and shame on the media for giving idiots like Murtha the mouthpiece to spew their BS from.

Publius II


Post a Comment

<< Home

weight loss product