<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Democrats are Pansies</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.americanmadness.com/2007/04/24/democrats-are-pansies/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.americanmadness.com/2007/04/24/democrats-are-pansies/</link>
	<description>Intelligent Criticism in the Service of a Better Nation</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 15:37:59 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: MattC</title>
		<link>http://www.americanmadness.com/2007/04/24/democrats-are-pansies/#comment-95570</link>
		<dc:creator>MattC</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2007 20:11:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://americanmadness.com/?p=197#comment-95570</guid>
		<description>Sorry if I was unclear- My reasoning for questioning of why no one is trying to impeach Bush is not based on my beliefs that he is an awful president and disagreeing with his policies and the way he runs the country. I think he willfully deceived the public. I think the whole WMD was bullshit and that most cabinet members knew this as well. Bush shouldn't be impeached because I dislike his policies and think the Farley Brothers have a better grasp on Foreign Relations, but rather because he and his representatives have willfully mislead us. In other words, perjury. 
I also think there is an argument that could be made for his willful disregard of the constitution and his feeling that because he is president he can do what ever he likes (like fire judges who tend to lean a little too far to the left for his liking), but I haven't really studied up on constitutional law recently so I am not sure where to begin with that one.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry if I was unclear- My reasoning for questioning of why no one is trying to impeach Bush is not based on my beliefs that he is an awful president and disagreeing with his policies and the way he runs the country. I think he willfully deceived the public. I think the whole WMD was bullshit and that most cabinet members knew this as well. Bush shouldn&#8217;t be impeached because I dislike his policies and think the Farley Brothers have a better grasp on Foreign Relations, but rather because he and his representatives have willfully mislead us. In other words, perjury.<br />
I also think there is an argument that could be made for his willful disregard of the constitution and his feeling that because he is president he can do what ever he likes (like fire judges who tend to lean a little too far to the left for his liking), but I haven&#8217;t really studied up on constitutional law recently so I am not sure where to begin with that one.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason</title>
		<link>http://www.americanmadness.com/2007/04/24/democrats-are-pansies/#comment-95284</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Apr 2007 11:54:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://americanmadness.com/?p=197#comment-95284</guid>
		<description>I think calling for impeachment of Presidents because we don't like what they say or the way they run the country sets dangerous precedent. The Constitution is vague with regard to impeachment, saying simply that a President may be impeached for "high crimes and misdemeanors." Andrew Johnson was impeached because the House thought he was vetoing too many of its bills. Clinton was impeached technically because he committed perjury (although not really and he managed to wriggle his way out of it because he has a brilliant command of the English language). Agree with the Iraq invasion or not, agree with the reasons or not, I don't see how Bush has done anything to seriously warrant threats of impeachment. And the suggestion that he be impeached is the same kind of partisan vengeance that a Republican House foisted upon Clinton 9 years ago. If the Democrats move to impeach Bush then we potentially start a pattern of impeaching the president any time there's an opposition Congress. Impeachment should be reserved for serious offenses against the country.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think calling for impeachment of Presidents because we don&#8217;t like what they say or the way they run the country sets dangerous precedent. The Constitution is vague with regard to impeachment, saying simply that a President may be impeached for &#8220;high crimes and misdemeanors.&#8221; Andrew Johnson was impeached because the House thought he was vetoing too many of its bills. Clinton was impeached technically because he committed perjury (although not really and he managed to wriggle his way out of it because he has a brilliant command of the English language). Agree with the Iraq invasion or not, agree with the reasons or not, I don&#8217;t see how Bush has done anything to seriously warrant threats of impeachment. And the suggestion that he be impeached is the same kind of partisan vengeance that a Republican House foisted upon Clinton 9 years ago. If the Democrats move to impeach Bush then we potentially start a pattern of impeaching the president any time there&#8217;s an opposition Congress. Impeachment should be reserved for serious offenses against the country.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
