Subject:
|
Re: positive impeachment
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 11 May 2000 22:20:33 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
168 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I was listening to the Diane Rehm show today and there was a caller after an
> > interview with President Clinton who complained about all the time that the
> > executive and legislative branches wasted conducting and hearing the
> > impeachment of the president. That struck me funny and my first reaction was
> > that keeping them all busy was a good idea.
> >
> > So now, my new suggestion to improve the government of the US, is to keep a
> > constant impeachment process going. In fact, multiple ones. The more • clogged
> > that law-makers are, the less they can screw up.
> >
> > Anyone?
> >
> > Chris
>
> Been there, done that.
Dan Quayle for president, baby!
Tanned, rested, ready, and too dim to cause any trouble.
++Lar
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: positive impeachment
|
| (...) Been there, done that. Or at least the California Republicans have. Sorta. They had a one vote edge in one of the two state houses and were exultantant that they would finally replace the demonized Willy Brown as Speaker of the House with one (...) (25 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
3 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
