Impeachment Coming from Vermont, New Mexico and other States

Should the urge to call me stupid wane and an urge to focus on issues be discovered in ya, I would be delighted to hear your comments pertaining to post #32.

 

You could have summed Bush up in one word and saved yourself some typing PL. Puppet!:laugh:

He's just the front guy for the globalists and salesman for the Military industrial complex pretending to be POTUS. Hey he is a pretty good actor though.:laugh:

 

Intent counts. Bush is guilty of incompetence and veniality, but nothing he did was intended to hurt America. He just had other priorities.

 

I am surprised anyone is still holding to this.

 

I have never called you stupid, and you know that. I have focused on the issues, and hte issues are simply that Bush, whatever his many faults, is not a traitor. No serious thinker entertains that notion.

 

No serious thinker thinks the way you do, suggests that anyone who doesn't think the way you do is not a serious thinker and is thus, el stupido. I have provided specific issues to suggest that we are being betrayed. When you desire to focus on those issues then I look forward to the dialogue, in the meantime you remain stuck in an ad hominem loop.

 

No serious thinker or anyone interested in the Constitution can take your logic seriously. I have probably been as critical of Bush as anyone on here, even though I voted for him twice. Ineptness, lack of common sense and lack of leadership are not impeachable offenses, and certainly not treason. We as a people elected him.

Pastor Larry is right on this issue. If you are serious about having a President that you think would lead this country like you think it should be run, your time would be much better spent looking forward to someone in 2008 and getting out and helping that person.

The Bush Administration is over. Only time is left. His Congress is democratic, the public is not behind him, and time is working against him. Why bother with him? Common sense says since the Senate is 51-49 democratic, and you need 67 votes to remove from office, it is not going to happen, even if they were impeachable offenses.

 

If someone is implementing designs to overthrow the constitution by melding the United States of America with two socialist nations, eliminating the borders of the United States of America and undermining the constitution of the United States, then this is an attack on the people of the United States of America and an attack on their Constitution. This is betrayal, treason, sedition, whatever you want to call it but it certainly does not represent loyalty to our nation and its people.

Pastor Larry has yet to address issues so I'm not sure what you think he could be right about.

Because people need to know and understand that their national leaders (in both parties) and state leaders (like a certain governor in Texas) have loyalty to mammon and international interests more than they do the interests of the people. This has significant ramifications in every facet of life from the food that they eat, to the vaccines that they are caused to take, to the chips they are caused to have implanted.

 

I didn't suggest anyone was stupid. The question was about serious thinking, not about intellectual capacity. Part of your problem here is failure to interact with what I actually said, which is part of your problem with this whole issue. You are failing to interact with reality.

And these issues have been shown to uncredible. They are not real issues of treason. You repeating them will not make them such.

This assumes your position on what was done is accurate. It isn't. You are simply failing to recognize what was actually done. In fact, border security with Canada is tighter than it ever has been. You can neither come or go without a passport. You used to be able to come and go with a driver's license.

No it's not. You don't get to call it whatever you want. Treason, betrayal, and sedition have recognized meanings and you don't get to change it.

As I pointed out, there are some issues so silly and inane as not to need interaction. Havng said that, others have pointed your folly out to you.

But hopefully, the sky won't hit you on the way down.

 

Fine, I retract the stupid comments and will leave it at you have intellectual heft and those who don't think like you do not.

They have not. Why are you cowering from taking them on individually? I do not know what it is we are even disagreeing about as you will not focus on issues. Is the North American Union a myth? Is the 12-20 million strong invasion a myth? Does the SPP not exist? What is it specifically that you are declaring to be uncredible?

I have not made an allegation to that effect? Citizens being required to have national ids is real. Citizens being subjected to greater security is real. Foreign invasion forces not being required to have legal identification, and not being required to obey the law is also real. There is one set of rules for the citizens they are betraying and another set for the illegal invaders who are being used as tools to destroy the United States.

Turning the sovereignty of a single nation into one component of trilateral union is not loyalty to the sovereign nation.

Then stop interacting or interact with a focus on the presented issues.

You believe I'm in Heaven?

 

Border security may be tighter but is is insufficent and lousy on both ends. Is that impeachable? If we think so we would have to agree that linton should have also been impeached and if his wife were to get elected we should have the impeachment process ready to go because she will do even worse than her wonderful hubby.

I President Bush were to get impeached then it would certainly set a standard for the Dems that they do not want.

 

You would still be wrong. As I said, it is not about intellect, but about the proper use of intellect.

I am not cowering from them. This is an argument along the lines of "the moon is made of green cheese." It is so self-evidently false as to not even need to be addressed.

The assertion that Bush is traitorous based on these extremely silly extrapolations.

And not problemmatic in the least.

And not problemmatic in teh least.

Likely not even true. Given the penchant of some for gullibility and naivete, this hardly is credible, and does not lead to a charge of treason.

It's not even happening as of now.

The most serious present issue is the naivete that causes these stories to be believed. I am interacting on that most serious issue.

No, you are acting like Chicken Little.

 

Pastor Larry,

If you desire to focus on issues. Let's break this down one at a time so we can understand were we disagree.

Is the document entitled "Building a North American Community" drafted by the Council on Foreign Relations, a true document or a hoax?

 

Perhaps you missed it, but we disagree on whether or not Bush is a traitor. That is the issue at hand, with regards to impeachment.

The issue at hand is your willingness to be deceived into thinking that he is a traitor.

 

Pastor Larry,

I'm trying to demonstrate to you the specifics of why I believe him to be a traitor. However, you do not want to entertain specifics but just want to say "no serious thinker will listen to your logic" and such like. I don't see how that leaves us with anywhere to go, so I'll just wish you well and move on.

Best Regards,

Layman Chicken Little

 

The specifics hold no merit whatsoever. The document in question is, as you can tell by reading it, a collection of suggestions about how to move forward. Not even all the parties agree to everything in it, as you can see by reading the whole thing. So your assertion that this document shows treason is a baseless and deserves no interaction at all.

 

It was intended as a starting point for a potential discussion, not as ultimate proof. It was a simple question to determine where it is that we divide on what we believe and if we were aligned I would've moved on to a next question. However, it is quite obvious this topic scares you or something. As much as you believe me to be a chicken, you be a good ostrich, put your head back in the sand and let's move on. The last word is yours.

 

Why would you think I am scared by this topic? I think it is inane, not frightening. I think the depths to which you will go to try to assert treason is scary. We can be glad that your influence is fairly limited.