Jump to content

Talk:Efforts to impeach George W. Bush

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Trump on Impeachment

[edit]

"Property mogul and diehard Republican Donald Trump told CNN on Wednesday that President George W. Bush misled the US into the Iraq War and should have been impeached when the Democrats took control of Congress in 2006." "Bush should have been impeached: Donald Trump". AFP. Oct 15, 2008. "Trump: I wanted Bush impeached". CNN. October 15, 2008. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Terjen (talk • contribs)

Obama

[edit]

This article doesn't mention Barack Obama once. That's kind of a problem. I know WP:DOITYOURSELF or whatever, but I just don't have the time. Bsimmons666 (talk) 01:18, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why in the world would it mention Obama? Soxwon (talk) 01:19, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, Obama never called for the impeachment of Bush, nor even hinted at it or responded favorably to any suggestion of it, that I can find. No connection, no place in the article. bd2412 T 02:15, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

HUH???!!!! What does Obama have to do with any of this? And why would his not being mentioned be "kind of a problem"??!!!! This person makes no sense at all! (Yakofujimato (talk) 22:49, 10 October 2009 (UTC))[reply]

This is because Obama opposed the WAR IN IRAQ, so thusly he would've opposed Bush. The obama point looks better in his biography, though.--Cymbelmineer (talk) 22:23, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OR

[edit]

I feel that this article, by its very nature is OR. Without a reliable source that describes this supposed 'Movement to impeach George W. Bush' as a movement (like you might find for the '60s anti-war movement, for example) we are left to cobble together any and all calls for impeachment, which is exactly what this article does. This is clearly OR, the description of a previously undocumented 'movement'.

I think the best solution is to rename this article Efforts to impeach George W. Bush or something like that and remove anything that is not an impeachment resolution or related to an official action. Bonewah (talk) 14:19, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. [[User:2829NE]] (talk) 02:23, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bush has been out of office for nearly eight months now, and yet over the weekend I saw four cars with "Impeach Bush" bumper stickers. I have no objection to renaming the article Efforts to impeach George W. Bush, but impeachment is a political process driven at least in part by the sentiments of citizens, which relates the collective expression such sentiments by citizens to whatever official action follows. bd2412 T 02:56, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, I cant argue with the fact that impeachment is a political process, but that is ok, because we can easily document politics. Collective sentiment, on the other hand, is not so easy to document without performing OR. Bonewah (talk) 13:30, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That is simply inaccurate. The article never intended to prove there was a collective movement, the word movement was never being used in a collective sense, the lead section explained very clearly what the article covered. Article titles on Wikipedia are place holders and not meant to be taken literal. They nuance of an article title is explained in the lead section. Also, the article documented very well popular sentiment towards impeachment, this is an important part of American history that has been entirely wiped off of Wikipedia. Congrats. Green Cardamom (talk) 22:30, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This whole thing falls seriously short of meeting the reasonable definition of a movement. It seems as if only fringe far left political figures like Wexler, Conyers and Kuchinich were pushing this. This effort never gathered the support of mainstream liberals or Democrats, and never had a realistic chance of success. To call this ill fated distraction a "movement" is a bit much. Nobody seriously thought that this would work, nor did anyone believe that this had much support, even with skewed, questionable Canadian polls to the contrary. I've seen polls that birthers (similar crackpots to the impeachers) have commissioned that state 55% of Americans believe Obama was born in Kenya. Should we give them a 'Movement to Impeach Obama' page??? This was a bunch of far left nonsense, and was never a widespread "movement".(Yakofujimato (talk) 23:03, 10 October 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Ok I am going to request a page move (this might be controversial, so ill avoid just doing it) on or about October 16 unless anyone objects here. My proposal is to move this page to Efforts to impeach George W. Bush and narrow it's scope to only concrete impeachment actions, like Wexler, Conyers and Kuchinich's impeachment attempts. After this move I intend to remove at least the Treatment of detainees, NSA warrantless surveillance controversy, U.N. Charter and any other section not covered in the afore mentioned impeachment attempts. After that, I propose we expand the description of what was included in the impeachment attempts and describe them in more detail. Bonewah (talk) 13:35, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Check that, I will add the template today as there is a backlog of at least a few days. Bonewah (talk) 13:47, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article was edited and fought over by thousands of people while Bush was in office, it would routinely see dozens of edits per day for years on end. Now two or three editors have basically gutted it of all its former content without much discussion because no one cares anymore that Bush is no longer President. Anyway, the material is all there in the edit history for anyone who wishes to go back and look at what this article used to be like. Green Cardamom (talk) 22:30, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What is a good date to read for a complete version? GangofOne (talk) 07:37, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This version includes more extensive coverage of local community efforts and public opinion polls. bd2412 T 17:38, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Is there no statute of limitations on impeachment? Like, being in office? (For the record, I think W. belongs in Gitmo, but honestly...) TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 08:10, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Link 1 is no longer working. I will see if there is an alternate, or if not I will have to re-write most of the article.--Cymbelmineer (talk) 22:25, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Bonewah (talk) 23:22, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Efforts to impeach George W. Bush. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:46, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like this article should be renamed

[edit]

This article is exclusively about one attempt to impeach GWB. The title implies there were multiple attempts. Perhaps the name should be changed?

The 'Political views and actions' section covers some other (admittedly minor) attempts at impeachment. Still, what would you propose as a name change? Bonewah (talk) 13:44, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It is honestly sad that there is even a page like this, or one for Obama, or one for Trump, or any political figure where a vote never even took place, much less an impeachment itself. Creating a record of something that a few people attempted to do but were unable to achieve, with its own specific page, is an odd course of action and undeniably a by-product of the left-leaning viewpoints of Wikipedia that seriously tilted that way during the presidency of George W. Bush.
One could substantiate a case for a single page titled "Efforts to impeach U.S. Presidents" with some effectiveness, but it is really hard to justify the existence of any of these pages as stand alone articles, regardless of how much click-bait style articles the editors are using to source the material. Reading through the talk page on the Obama impeachment article is rather interesting, watching editors trip over themselves trying to find a way to justify both removing the Obama page, while defending the Bush or Cheney pages. I say remove them all.RTShadow (talk) 16:34, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Irrespective of the outcomes of these efforts, these pages document historical facts well-reported in reliable sources. bd2412 T 16:49, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Efforts to impeach George W. Bush. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:01, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Efforts_to_impeach_George_W._Bush&oldid=1256558542"