Thursday, June 30, 2005

50% of Americans think Congress should NOT impeach Bush if he lied about Iraq

Not a misprint. According to John Zogby's polling, one half the country believes that Congress should not institute impeachment proceeding against the President if it finds he lied about his reasons for declaring war against Iraq.

IMPEACHMENT! Um.... good gawd y'all, what is it good for? (Absolutely nothing!) Say it again!

Less than half think Congress should. Anyone know what the numbers were for the Monica-Clinton impeachment?

In other obvious news, a majority of American disapprove of how partisan the political parties are and wish the parties would put compromising over tending to their extremist bases, according to Zogby. No word yet how many Americans think puppies are cute and Hell would be a bad place to spend eternity.

7 comments:

The Ticked Off Ohioan said...

That just confirms what I've been suspecting for quite some time: approximately 50% or more of Americans are fucking stupid!!!!!

The Ticked Off Ohioan said...

And now for my non-knee jerk reaction. I suppose some subset of that 50% of those that are not in favor of impeachment are simply reacting to thought of Dick Cheney becoming President.

I, however, think that if the boy king were impeached then the roboton (Cheney) would be impeached also. Unfortunately that would leave us the mindless Dennis Hastert as President.

Given all of this I'm still in favor of impeachment; I really and truly find it extremely difficult to believe that we could have a worse President than the boy king. Call me an optimist :oP

Traveller said...

Impeachment? Dearly to be wished but a huge leap at this point for American who've been indoctrinated by cable news. Now, if the Plame thing...

And there's plenty about Plame this morning -- everywhere. I'd like to ask a question of any legal eagle here, please. Here's a quote from a mid-Feb Washington Post:

"According to the appellate court's opinion, Fitzgerald knows the identity of the person with whom Miller spoke and wants to question her about her contact with that 'specified government official' on or about July 6, 2003. Miller never wrote a story on the subject."

Is that a jailable offense? Refusing to give up information which relates to no story you've written as a reporter? Where is Freedom of Association here?

I know this is an old question, and it may be ridiculous in the present context, as the case seems to be opening up. See for example this.

OLS said...

According to this article, only 41% of Americans supported the impeachment of President Clinton (yup, as in 1% fewer than support the impeachment of President Bush).

Traveller said...

And if I remember correctly, Clinton's remained pretty high.

Traveller said...

That was supposed to be Clinton's popularity remained pretty high.

The Ticked Off Ohioan said...

pw, the Plame wikipedia file will probably answer your legal question.