POLL: Bush Recall?

Remove all ads!

http://www.bushrecall.org/petition/

So what do you think? Does it have legs? Weigh in.

Poll Information
This poll contains 1 question(s). 20 user(s) have voted.
You may not view the results of this poll without voting.

Poll Results: Bush Recall? (20 votes.)

Bush Recall? (Choose 1)
* Great idea! Count me in. - 55% (11)
* You can't recall the President. It won't happen, so don't bother. - 20% (4)
* Bush is doing a great job. A recall is petty liberal drivel. - 20% (4)
* (results only) - 5% (1)

 

It may have legs but it's lacking a bankroll.

 

And you can't recall the president.

 

A parliamentary system would have a vote of no confidence. But you are stuck with impeachment or wait until end of term. Recall, as I recall, is only on state-level aviable.

 

The only process I know of for removing a sitting president is Impeachment. The only two other ways out are:

1) Resignation

2) Assassination

No recalls for the President, although I think it would be warranted in this case if it were available.

 

Hah, my intimate knowledge of the sister-republic. It's only state level, but it's a number of states which got it. 20 or so, I guess. One of those things from Virginia, maybe ?

Actually, we imported the recall-process in the 19th century, but it's rarley used, except for an incidient 2 years ago, because we usually settle things with initiatives. But anyway, a great import from the USA.

 

Okay, well let's just say for the sake of arguement - how appropriate for the Alley, eh? - that it WAS possible to recall Bush ala California. Do you feel that it's warranted in this case? I say yes. Based on the arguement presented here, it seems perfectly logical to me.

 

Hm, I already spammed that thread full. So it won't matter anyway if I continue.

All 3-points are valid ways to govern. Getting deeper in debt to get things done, lie about important issues to get even more important things done and getting important tax-cuts through to stimulate the economy needs time. But the higher deficit means that public spending rises which means domestic demand is up. Maybe Keyensian antiquity, but it worked before.

And a recall is in the end just a regular election at an irregular point in time, i.e. earlier then nromal. So, if you don't like the way he governs, it wouldn't matter to wait that year through and then is election anyway.

$6,601,572,481,194.83., I mean, a few Billions public debt more or less won't matter anyway.

But Germany is following. 1.283.691.572.352

 

First off, take the budget deficit of California.
Take the dollar amount per person in the state.
Now take the budget deficit of the US. Take the dollar amount there per peron in the US. The ratio is a lot worse off in California than the US.
California is not the only state that has a recall option in the constitution. I believe there are 19 other states.
Second, the US does not have a recall option in the constitution.
I read the web site as well;

Well, we're sending troops into different countries to fight the war on terrorism. Yeah, yeah, I know everyone's view on this. Not the topic here.

Purely coincidental. Is it Cheney's fault that his old company is the best for the job? I'm not sure how many companies placed a bid, but Haliburton has the most experience.

Millionaires and billionaires? Hmmmm, my wife and I got tax refunds. We are certainly not billionaires, hell, we're not even millionaires.
Personally I'm tired of people crabbing about rich people simply because they are not rich themselves.
Also, there are plans to fix the US deficit. There is no plan like that in California.

 

Elios, I like the assertion that they're the best for the job.

They might well be, but it was given to them without inviting any sort of tenders from other companies. THAT to me smacks of either nepotism or corruption depending on how you look at it.

 

It's not limited to California, but only there it's so nicely developed (special election, AD 1911). In some states it's present in the constitution, in some it isn't. The funny thing is that it's considered a natural right of the people to recall those they have elected if they don't do their job well, but it's being limited anyway.

There have been some attempts, but only one has been succesful so far against a governor and it was so long ago as in 1921, against gov. Lynn Frazier of North Dakota. Ironically, he had signed the recall laws of that state. In 1991 gov. Edwin Mecham of Arizona was about to be recalled, but they impeached him first.

 

That statement is wrong. Halliburton was given the contract with no bidding. Let me repeat that for you business majors...NO BIDDING.

Halliburton has the most experience?...Halliburton is a company that drills for oil in Wyoming. Now we all know the huge amount of oil Wyoming produces...I think my car alone acounts for 25% of their product.

The corruption that really gets me mad is crap going on with the Corporations of War. Companies like the afore mentioned Halliburton, Honeywell and McDonald-Douglas. The CEO's of companies with defense contracts have seen their salaries go from 1 to 2 million a year to an average of a whopping 35 to 40 million a year!!!

This war is going to pack Hell chock full of suits.

[ August 22, 2003, 21:51: Message edited by: Late-Night Thinker ]

 

Yes, because of its political connections, Hali has a hold on a lot of the market. There used to be a few more of these companies based here in Houston but most of them have been bought out, as BTA has mentioned. How can one compete for all that taxpayer money in a no bidding market?

Edit: And I have to add that America would be whole lot better off without that gang of criminals in office. But Bush's record is sealed and not available for "public viewing" any longer. There was a copy of Bush's application in the Houston Chronicle - you may remember it DR - when he ran for Gov. He left the line blank which asked: "Have you ever been arrested?"

[ August 23, 2003, 00:12: Message edited by: Chandos the Red ]

 

God, I wish man. Remember - I've only lived in Houston for 3 years. So I didn't have a chance to cast my vote against him when it probably would've counted. In fact, I remember sitting in my brand new sh*t-hole student apartment - utterly stupified - watching the 2000 election (if you can call it that). But if you have any left over clippings, I'd love to see them.

 

Sorry, I dont, DR. But it was a pretty hot topic several years back. If I remember right, he did the same thing on some other state government paperwork. He can get away with it because no one can get access to the records.

 

@ Elios, Halliburton was NOT a coincidence. First off, Cheney owns stocks in it still and Bush and Cheney are well known to play favorites to companies that support them. And there was no bidding which really is a dead give-away. And not to be all completely Bush-bashing, but they REALLY play favorites. For isntance, there is a lot of technology out there for better energy sources. And the technology would get better if he gave those groups tax breaks. But does he? No. He gives special tax breaks to oil companies and tries to pass through legistration to go drill in Alaska. And of course the democrats refuse to let him drill in Alaska and so none of the wires got replaced (rolling blackouts anyone?) Whose fault? Both. Bush and the Republicans should stop trying to force the Democrats to allow drilling. And the Dems. need to be smarter.

Anyways, you can't recall the President. (Apparently you can't even impeach one that lies in court) And even if you could, not enough people hate him. There's far too many people who like what he's doing with the war on terrorism and many people like Elios who believe that constant tax breaks will eventually work.

And because I HAVE to ask this... For those of you who honestly believe tax breaks will work -- why do you think this?? I think I know why George Bush does, it's cuz his father believed it would, his brother believed it would, his schoolteachers, friends and colleagues all his life have said it would. But for those of you who haven't been brain-washed all your life, what makes you think it will work? Like where in economics class does this happen? See cuz I haven't taken economics, I've taken logic and history. See all I know is when Reagan gave out tax breaks, the economy and stock market plummeted and we got to the worst debt ever (until now.) And yet when Roosevelt invented jobs for people by doing road repairs and created Welfare and stuff, suddenly things were doing better. And while Bill Clinton (of all people) was having an afair and being a typical democrat, stocks went up and unemployment was down and people in general were doing well. Oh yeah, and we had the first surplus in oh... ages.... Now here we have Bush who is giving tax breaks and spending money and we're going FAR in over our heads for debt and the stock market is down and in all honesty, I haven't seen the economy doing better... just slowly spiraling into hell. Now history and a look at current events (and the stock market) told me this much. So maybe there's some complex secret here that I'm missing because I don't get it. I would think that seeing how the republicans have the most money in stocks they would want it to be up higher. So SOMEBODY explain to me what I'm missing.

Woops, look at me... offtopic. Well I guess if it was possible to recall a president (and if I was just one year older) I'd recall him. But then, I wouldn't have voted him in even though Gore is a moron.... *swears a little about republicans* John McCain.... That is all I will say. John McCain...

 

The problem is the contradiction. Reagan actually was talking liberal and is reaganomics is dubbed as "ultra-liberal" (liberal -> traditional sense). But his behaviour was quite contrary. He actually copied FDR in a lot of ways, even if he was so un-fond of FDR. He gave out goverment fundings like there is no tomorrow and left an ambigious legacy. And a puzzle -> Was it the tax-cuts or the unprecedented growth in goverment expenditures ? The same is happening right now. Tax-cuts and more goverment spending. Demand increases because of the former or the later ?

And highlight -> Defence expenditures went into high-tech. -> That means US-goverment gives a lot more money per student head than Europeans do. I think Europeans should copy the US and should value education more.

Oh by the way, the theory says, cut-budget-deficit and cut-taxes. NOT blow up budget-deficit and cut-taxes anyway.

Edit: And the other interesting thing is, that Reagan copied FDR in yet another way. FDR is the great communicator, only overshadowed by Reagan, which started his career as Radio-moderator in the 30ies. Obviously impressed from the biggest Radio-star of his time, communication is everything.

[ August 23, 2003, 16:40: Message edited by: Yago ]