Tiassa
07-20-03, 10:28 PM
(1) United States Constitution, Article II (http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articleii.html#section1)
(2) United States Constitution, Article VI (http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articlevi.html)
(3) The God Option (Hindustan Times) (http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_304594,00120001.htm)
A very simple argument.
The oath of office taken by the President of the United States, including George W. Bush, reads: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." (1)The status of the Constitution in the United States is as follows: This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding. (2) The Hindustan Times quotes George W. Bush: Even as this ghastly nautanki unfolds in the subcontinent, George ‘Mad Dog’ Bush actually comes out with the real reason why he invaded Iraq. Bush’s exact words, speaking to Palestinian leader Abu Mazen, as quoted by the Israeli daily Ha’aretz: “God told me to strike at al-Qaeda and I struck them, and then He instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me, I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them.” (3)So ... if Bush has agreed to "preserve, protect, and defend" the "Supreme Law of the Land", and yet appeals to a higher power of God in order to justify acts which do seem to be deceptive at best, illegal and murderous at worst ... has George W. Bush failed to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution by proxy of making it subordinate to a higher power?
One cannot cite Bush's freedom of religion. Why? Review the boldfaced section from Article VI of the US Constitution.
As far as lies and greed are concerned, Bush can tie up the system until judgment day as long as he holds congressional sway. In the meantime, there is something that is clear-cut, and that is that George Bush has apparently transcended the Constitution in order to justify his actions as President.
This is an impeachable offense.
A note for Fukushi: This, incidentally, is what happens when I don't smoke "enough" pot. Trust me, you prefer my brain when it's not running in its highest gear. Just thought I'd mention it since (A) you mentioned it recently, and (B) it's a pretty silly topic anyway.
:m:,
Tiassa :cool:
(2) United States Constitution, Article VI (http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articlevi.html)
(3) The God Option (Hindustan Times) (http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_304594,00120001.htm)
A very simple argument.
The oath of office taken by the President of the United States, including George W. Bush, reads: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." (1)The status of the Constitution in the United States is as follows: This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding. (2) The Hindustan Times quotes George W. Bush: Even as this ghastly nautanki unfolds in the subcontinent, George ‘Mad Dog’ Bush actually comes out with the real reason why he invaded Iraq. Bush’s exact words, speaking to Palestinian leader Abu Mazen, as quoted by the Israeli daily Ha’aretz: “God told me to strike at al-Qaeda and I struck them, and then He instructed me to strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the problem in the Middle East. If you help me, I will act, and if not, the elections will come and I will have to focus on them.” (3)So ... if Bush has agreed to "preserve, protect, and defend" the "Supreme Law of the Land", and yet appeals to a higher power of God in order to justify acts which do seem to be deceptive at best, illegal and murderous at worst ... has George W. Bush failed to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution by proxy of making it subordinate to a higher power?
One cannot cite Bush's freedom of religion. Why? Review the boldfaced section from Article VI of the US Constitution.
As far as lies and greed are concerned, Bush can tie up the system until judgment day as long as he holds congressional sway. In the meantime, there is something that is clear-cut, and that is that George Bush has apparently transcended the Constitution in order to justify his actions as President.
This is an impeachable offense.
A note for Fukushi: This, incidentally, is what happens when I don't smoke "enough" pot. Trust me, you prefer my brain when it's not running in its highest gear. Just thought I'd mention it since (A) you mentioned it recently, and (B) it's a pretty silly topic anyway.
:m:,
Tiassa :cool: