Complicit Democrats Won't Censure?

Tweet

Our great Senator Russ Feingold is once again calling on Congress to censure President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and other administration officials for "misconduct relating to the war in Iraq and for their repeated assaults on the rule of law."

What Feingold has been trying to do is highly commendable but I feared that merely censuring George W. Bush might be accepted in lieu of impeachment until I read this insightful posting on Topix.

bottlecap wrote:
The irony of the Iraq War is that Saddam Hussein was the nemesis for wahhabism whose epicenter was in Saudi Arabia. It is wahhabism that fueled the hatred of the 9-11 attackers.
Saddam was a true socialist, who used stalinistic tactics on these religious bigots and was able to control them. Now we have eliminated the wahhabist's biggest enemy and Congress should look into the influence of Saudi money in the Bush war decisions.
The problem is that Pelosi and the democrats are also getting Saudi money as witnessed by Pelosi's warm relationship with CAIR, a Saudi supported legal group.
Because of this the democrats would rather shirk an investigation into the war and hide behind the US attorney firings then have their own financial dealings with the Saudis come to light.

The secular modernist Saddam had nothing to do with 9-11 and wanted to talk directly with Bush months before the invasion. The rest is history. If there is any truth to bottlecaps statements - Bush is safe. He will not be censured or impeached - a genuine embarrassment.

It's getting to a point where people are so upset with Congress and their inability to change course after the recent mid-term election that ordinary people are willing to challenge them for their seats......and thats just the democrats!!! What would people like to do with Republicans? Don't even go there..you...don't....want......to.......know.