|
Move on from a case of lying that didn't affect this country to one that got over 500 of us killed
Theres a difference there.
And testimony strongly suggests that that Bush has ignored the intelligence community's insistance that we don't know whether or not Saddam has WMD and it is prudent not to push that supposition.
And a censure movement would ascertain whether or not he did act improperly and lied about what our intelligence community told him.
Also, for your second post.---------
Why make an argument for censure against Clinton? There was no public support for censure. Most americans don't even know what censure means and does.
They thought it was right for him to be censured but not right to be impeached over something so trivial.
Likewise they are not looking for impeachment against Bush for lying, which is a charge they, their supporters and I believe. Only a censure.
It's consistent and an honorable purpose.
|