Are There Grounds To Impeach Obama?

[Dr Gregg]

Wow Dr Gregg. I really got under your skin.

In a way, I am flattered.

You are the coward that had to run away cause he posted a cookoo emoticon, and you can't answer the question.

Listen Gregg. Read what i wrote.

I never said they had a secret agenda.

I SAID THEY TEND TO MAKE AN ISSUE WHEN ONE DOES NOT EXIST.

Many organizations do that for exposure purposes.

I did not cry about your use of an emotion smily face.

I said that your use of it said that you saw my statement as nuts and thereofre it was futile to debate you.

Regroup and get back to me when you want to act civilly.

Yeah, like your initial post to me was civil. WHat a phony

Again, you say so, must be true, no actual supporting argument or evidence that they do what you claim.

 

[del]

Yeah, as I already stated, but Jarhead seems to think there is some other agenda

no, he doesn't, stupid. unball your little fists, stop kicking your tiny little feet and read what he posted.

dipshit

another great del response. Yet another person that just makes statements, with nothing to back it up.

Please, do show how the ACLU doesn't protect people's freedoms. Maybe if he did that instead of being a little baby, then it would of clarified his position. But all I see is "they don't do that" with nothing but that person saying it.

I know, moron USMB logic, don't back anything you say up, cry when someone calls you out on that, then run away or dodge

you claimed that jarhead said that ACLU has a hidden agenda. he said no such thing. if you're too feeble to scroll back a few pages and read what he wrote, that's not my problem, *Doctor*. here, see if you can parse out the complexities of what he said.

no

Another brilliant, insightful post by del, a true model on how everybody should discuss things on a message board

In defense of Del, yours was a question that many on the left would laugh at.

It was a valid question, but most common sense americans on both the left and the right know exactly what the ACLU's agenda is.

ANd I have no doubt you do as well. So the question was rhetorical and trolling in my eyes. ANd I assume Del's eyes as well.

now, you were speaking of jarhead's claim that the ACLU has a hidden agenda; by all means, elaborate.

 

[Jarhead]

You are the coward that had to run away cause he posted a cookoo emoticon, and you can't answer the question.

Listen Gregg. Read what i wrote.

I never said they had a secret agenda.

I SAID THEY TEND TO MAKE AN ISSUE WHEN ONE DOES NOT EXIST.

Many organizations do that for exposure purposes.

I did not cry about your use of an emotion smily face.

I said that your use of it said that you saw my statement as nuts and thereofre it was futile to debate you.

Regroup and get back to me when you want to act civilly.

Yeah, like your initial post to me was civil. WHat a phony

Again, you say so, must be true, no actual supporting argument or evidence that they do what you claim.

I offered my opinion. You do not need to agree with it.
And if you want to call your God knows how many posts calling me every name in the book a valid compariosn to my one post that referred to your question as valid, but most reasonable people see the ACLU otherwise, then maybe we are on two different pages as to what being civil is all about.

I know one thing for sure, my way works for me.

Now, seeing as I have allowed your rants and attakcs on me to affect me to a point where I used words I have not used since Desert Storm, I have decided to not let you get to me again.

You have a very short memory Gregg. I actually enjoyed some of our debates.

No, not running like a baby. Just know what is and what is not worth my time and effort.

But call it what you want. You may have the last word. Enjoy it.

 

[Dr Gregg]

no, he doesn't, stupid. unball your little fists, stop kicking your tiny little feet and read what he posted.

dipshit

another great del response. Yet another person that just makes statements, with nothing to back it up.

Please, do show how the ACLU doesn't protect people's freedoms. Maybe if he did that instead of being a little baby, then it would of clarified his position. But all I see is "they don't do that" with nothing but that person saying it.

I know, moron USMB logic, don't back anything you say up, cry when someone calls you out on that, then run away or dodge

OK you lying peice of shit asshole.
Show me where I said that you scumbag.

Very civil of you

Wow Dr. Greggy. I really got under your skin.

In a way, I am flattered.

I would support the ACLU if their sole mission was to do as you say.
But it is not.
They have a bad habit of creating issues where issues do not exist.

Claiming their sole mission is not what they say, with nothing to back it up. And you could of clarified right off the bat if you would back up your statements of fact with an argument. YOu claimed its "common sense", sure, maybe in conservative world where anything liberal is bad and false, regardless of facts.

So what is there sole mission, other than what they state?

 

[Dr Gregg]

no, he doesn't, stupid. unball your little fists, stop kicking your tiny little feet and read what he posted.

dipshit

another great del response. Yet another person that just makes statements, with nothing to back it up.

Please, do show how the ACLU doesn't protect people's freedoms. Maybe if he did that instead of being a little baby, then it would of clarified his position. But all I see is "they don't do that" with nothing but that person saying it.

I know, moron USMB logic, don't back anything you say up, cry when someone calls you out on that, then run away or dodge

you claimed that jarhead said that ACLU has a hidden agenda. he said no such thing. if you're too feeble to scroll back a few pages and read what he wrote, that's not my problem, *Doctor*. here, see if you can parse out the complexities of what he said.

Another brilliant, insightful post by del, a true model on how everybody should discuss things on a message board

In defense of Del, yours was a question that many on the left would laugh at.

It was a valid question, but most common sense americans on both the left and the right know exactly what the ACLU's agenda is.

ANd I have no doubt you do as well. So the question was rhetorical and trolling in my eyes. ANd I assume Del's eyes as well.

now, you were speaking of jarhead's claim that the ACLU has a hidden agenda; by all means, elaborate.

maybe if jarhead could discuss things by actually backing up what they said, instead of just claiming what they say to be fact, then there wouldn't be a misperception. But no, he runs off like a little baby. Can't act civil to people and make insulting posts, then cries and claims other's arent' civil. Right

 

[California Girl]

no, he doesn't, stupid. unball your little fists, stop kicking your tiny little feet and read what he posted.

dipshit

another great del response. Yet another person that just makes statements, with nothing to back it up.

Please, do show how the ACLU doesn't protect people's freedoms. Maybe if he did that instead of being a little baby, then it would of clarified his position. But all I see is "they don't do that" with nothing but that person saying it.

I know, moron USMB logic, don't back anything you say up, cry when someone calls you out on that, then run away or dodge

you claimed that jarhead said that ACLU has a hidden agenda. he said no such thing. if you're too feeble to scroll back a few pages and read what he wrote, that's not my problem, *Doctor*. here, see if you can parse out the complexities of what he said.

Another brilliant, insightful post by del, a true model on how everybody should discuss things on a message board

In defense of Del, yours was a question that many on the left would laugh at.

It was a valid question, but most common sense americans on both the left and the right know exactly what the ACLU's agenda is.

ANd I have no doubt you do as well. So the question was rhetorical and trolling in my eyes. ANd I assume Del's eyes as well.

now, you were speaking of jarhead's claim that the ACLU has a hidden agenda; by all means, elaborate.

Not the first time that Greggo has totally misread the words of others - probably not gonna be the last. He is a cross that we must all take turns to bear.

 

[del]

another great del response. Yet another person that just makes statements, with nothing to back it up.

Please, do show how the ACLU doesn't protect people's freedoms. Maybe if he did that instead of being a little baby, then it would of clarified his position. But all I see is "they don't do that" with nothing but that person saying it.

I know, moron USMB logic, don't back anything you say up, cry when someone calls you out on that, then run away or dodge

you claimed that jarhead said that ACLU has a hidden agenda. he said no such thing. if you're too feeble to scroll back a few pages and read what he wrote, that's not my problem, *Doctor*. here, see if you can parse out the complexities of what he said.

In defense of Del, yours was a question that many on the left would laugh at.

It was a valid question, but most common sense americans on both the left and the right know exactly what the ACLU's agenda is.

ANd I have no doubt you do as well. So the question was rhetorical and trolling in my eyes. ANd I assume Del's eyes as well.

now, you were speaking of jarhead's claim that the ACLU has a hidden agenda; by all means, elaborate.

maybe if jarhead could discuss things by actually backing up what they said, instead of just claiming what they say to be fact, then there wouldn't be a misperception. But no, he runs off like a little baby. Can't act civil to people and make insulting posts, then cries and claims other's arent' civil. Right

save the bullshit for somebody who's never had the *pleasure* of interacting with your whiny ass, doc.

i'm not buying, and i don't think you'll find many that are.

have a nice day.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The ACLU is a fraud. Only the k00ks dont think so. They invariably ONLY stand up for the rights of those on the far left.

Rush Limbaugh? You idiot. top watching FOX News.

The ACLU has filed many of friends of the court briefs alongside conservatives.

 

[Jarhead]

Hey Cal Gal and Del:

Thanks for your support.
Sometimes I lose control. Rare, but hey, chit happens.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Not the first time that Greggo has totally misread the words of others - probably not gonna be the last. He is a cross that we must all take turns to bear.

look what the rains washed in?


isn't there a sewer that needs cleaning?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Hey Cal Gal and Del:

Thanks for your support.
Sometimes I lose control. Rare, but hey, chit happens.

JAR *** head, I supported you. The minute CaliBoil waves her skanky wand some of you go lunatic


note: edited

 

[Dr Gregg]

Listen Gregg. Read what i wrote.

I never said they had a secret agenda.

I SAID THEY TEND TO MAKE AN ISSUE WHEN ONE DOES NOT EXIST.

Many organizations do that for exposure purposes.

I did not cry about your use of an emotion smily face.

I said that your use of it said that you saw my statement as nuts and thereofre it was futile to debate you.

Regroup and get back to me when you want to act civilly.

Yeah, like your initial post to me was civil. WHat a phony

Again, you say so, must be true, no actual supporting argument or evidence that they do what you claim.

I offered my opinion. You do not need to agree with it.
And if you want to call your God knows how many posts calling me every name in the book a valid compariosn to my one post that referred to your question as valid, but most reasonable people see the ACLU otherwise, then maybe we are on two different pages as to what being civil is all about.

I know one thing for sure, my way works for me.

Now, seeing as I have allowed your rants and attakcs on me to affect me to a point where I used words I have not used since Desert Storm, I have decided to not let you get to me again.

You have a very short memory Gregg. I actually enjoyed some of our debates.

No, not running like a baby. Just know what is and what is not worth my time and effort.

But call it what you want. You may have the last word. Enjoy it.

and i offered my opinion of you and your statement, and you whine and call it ranting.

Maybe you should back up your statements instead of just saying the argument is laughable or the knowledge is "common sense" and there wouldn't be this issue.

Now, seeing as I have allowed your rants and attakcs on me to affect me to a point where I used words I have not used since Desert Storm, I have decided to not let you get to me again.

As far as this, I hear you. This place full of lying, trolling shitbags (in fact every message board is lately) and brings out the worst in everybody, me included. I know what you mean and get annoyed when I resort to it also, but history on this forum has shown me that actual civil discussion gets you nowhere, and you hear the dumbest, most inane shit ever. Kind of like the OP

Not that it matters now, but sorry I pissed you off, since I know how it feels. But then again if you would of just answered my post, regardless of my tone, this wouldn't have gotten to this point.

 

[Dr Gregg]

you claimed that jarhead said that ACLU has a hidden agenda. he said no such thing. if you're too feeble to scroll back a few pages and read what he wrote, that's not my problem, *Doctor*. here, see if you can parse out the complexities of what he said.




now, you were speaking of jarhead's claim that the ACLU has a hidden agenda; by all means, elaborate.

maybe if jarhead could discuss things by actually backing up what they said, instead of just claiming what they say to be fact, then there wouldn't be a misperception. But no, he runs off like a little baby. Can't act civil to people and make insulting posts, then cries and claims other's arent' civil. Right

save the bullshit for somebody who's never had the *pleasure* of interacting with your whiny ass, doc.

i'm not buying, and i don't think you'll find many that are.

have a nice day.

Dels answer to everything, everybody posting is a whiner.


And like anybody should listen to a punk that does nothing but insult people all day, rarely ever actually contributing to the thread or posting an argument other than some snide little quip Good day loser

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I didn't know the ACLU had a secret agenda...it's always been pretty straight forward and out there for all to see as far as I can tell.

Yeah, as I already stated, but Jarhead seems to think there is some other agenda

Where did Jarhead say this? I missed it and would love to address it if true.

I guess my subtle defense of JarHead was lost to most.'


seeing that disgusting tramp Caligirl in a thread has ruined a roll we were on.

I have to apologize to jarhead.

note: cali is here -- a hazmat suit is recommended

 

[Jarhead]

Yeah, like your initial post to me was civil. WHat a phony

Again, you say so, must be true, no actual supporting argument or evidence that they do what you claim.

I offered my opinion. You do not need to agree with it.
And if you want to call your God knows how many posts calling me every name in the book a valid compariosn to my one post that referred to your question as valid, but most reasonable people see the ACLU otherwise, then maybe we are on two different pages as to what being civil is all about.

I know one thing for sure, my way works for me.

Now, seeing as I have allowed your rants and attakcs on me to affect me to a point where I used words I have not used since Desert Storm, I have decided to not let you get to me again.

You have a very short memory Gregg. I actually enjoyed some of our debates.

No, not running like a baby. Just know what is and what is not worth my time and effort.

But call it what you want. You may have the last word. Enjoy it.

and i offered my opinion of you and your statement, and you whine and call it ranting.

Maybe you should back up your statements instead of just saying the argument is laughable or the knowledge is "common sense" and there wouldn't be this issue.

Now, seeing as I have allowed your rants and attakcs on me to affect me to a point where I used words I have not used since Desert Storm, I have decided to not let you get to me again.

As far as this, I hear you. This place full of lying, trolling shitbags (in fact every message board is lately) and brings out the worst in everybody, me included. I know what you mean and get annoyed when I resort to it also, but history on this forum has shown me that actual civil discussion gets you nowhere, and you hear the dumbest, most inane shit ever. Kind of like the OP

Not that it matters now, but sorry I pissed you off, since I know how it feels. But then again if you would of just answered my post, regardless of my tone, this wouldn't have gotten to this point.

Gregg, I am one that believes in personal responsibility. I take full blame for my reaction and you give me blame for your reaction (as you did in your last line).

But on a side note. I did not need to answer your question as I never gave you reason to ask that question. You took what I said and turned it into what you wanted it to say. I never said anything about a secret agwenda.

All I said was that if what yoiu said was their SOLE MISSION I would agree with you.
But it is not. They have an equal mission of notariety; sensationalism for publicity.

AND I MADE THAT CLEAR IN MY VERY FIRST POST.

SO Gregg, whereas I appreciate your response, we are on two different ends of the spectrum. I do not like you Gregg. I do not appreciate your approach nor do I appreciate you constant ranting and raving.

You seem to be an angry and quite possibly misquided individual; probably much like I was when I was in my late teens/early twenties.

Anyway, I am not going to "ignore" you but I want to make this clear to you...If you see a post of mine and you want to debate it, I will not respond. I am not running from you. I am simply not interested in your views. There are plenty of other decent left leaning individuals on here I can debate.

 

[SuMar]

Constitutional Grounds for Impeachment

Obama has sworn to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States” I do not believe he has. I think...

...

and therein lies your problem. don't think.




note Clinton: this road worked well for the Right Wing Lunacy, the first time, didn't it?

Yep. No point thinking cause that might mean you disagree with Dante. Can't have that.

I guess we all should speak...slow....so they can keep up.

 

[Jarhead]

Hey Cal Gal and Del:

Thanks for your support.
Sometimes I lose control. Rare, but hey, chit happens.

JAR *** head, I supported you. The minute CaliBoil waves her skanky wand some of you go lunatic


note: edited

Cal Gal may not be your cup of tea, but she is mine. I will defend her anytime I think she is right; and protect her when I think she is wrong.

And exactly where did I go lunatic?

And I noticed the edit. That is why I responded. I was kind of confused why you resorted to calling me names. I can take it no problem. But what did I do to deserve it? Call you a straight shooter?

 

[Dr Gregg]

I offered my opinion. You do not need to agree with it.
And if you want to call your God knows how many posts calling me every name in the book a valid compariosn to my one post that referred to your question as valid, but most reasonable people see the ACLU otherwise, then maybe we are on two different pages as to what being civil is all about.

I know one thing for sure, my way works for me.

Now, seeing as I have allowed your rants and attakcs on me to affect me to a point where I used words I have not used since Desert Storm, I have decided to not let you get to me again.

You have a very short memory Gregg. I actually enjoyed some of our debates.

No, not running like a baby. Just know what is and what is not worth my time and effort.

But call it what you want. You may have the last word. Enjoy it.

and i offered my opinion of you and your statement, and you whine and call it ranting.

Maybe you should back up your statements instead of just saying the argument is laughable or the knowledge is "common sense" and there wouldn't be this issue.

Now, seeing as I have allowed your rants and attakcs on me to affect me to a point where I used words I have not used since Desert Storm, I have decided to not let you get to me again.

As far as this, I hear you. This place full of lying, trolling shitbags (in fact every message board is lately) and brings out the worst in everybody, me included. I know what you mean and get annoyed when I resort to it also, but history on this forum has shown me that actual civil discussion gets you nowhere, and you hear the dumbest, most inane shit ever. Kind of like the OP

Not that it matters now, but sorry I pissed you off, since I know how it feels. But then again if you would of just answered my post, regardless of my tone, this wouldn't have gotten to this point.

Gregg, I am one that believes in personal responsibility. I take full blame for my reaction and you give me blame for your reaction (as you did in your last line).

But on a side note. I did not need to answer your question as I never gave you reason to ask that question. You took what I said and turned it into what you wanted it to say. I never said anything about a secret agwenda.

All I said was that if what yoiu said was their SOLE MISSION I would agree with you.
But it is not. They have an equal mission of notariety; sensationalism for publicity.

AND I MADE THAT CLEAR IN MY VERY FIRST POST.

SO Gregg, whereas I appreciate your response, we are on two different ends of the spectrum. I do not like you Gregg. I do not appreciate your approach nor do I appreciate you constant ranting and raving.

You seem to be an angry and quite possibly misquided individual; probably much like I was when I was in my late teens/early twenties.

Anyway, I am not going to "ignore" you but I want to make this clear to you...If you see a post of mine and you want to debate it, I will not respond. I am not running from you. I am simply not interested in your views. There are plenty of other decent left leaning individuals on here I can debate.

Probably good, cause you are just yet another judgmental person making ASSumptions about others based on their posting style and nothing else. I'm from NY, I speak my mind and my opinion. Nothing angry about it.

So, when did you gain the magic ability to determine someone's emotions and intentions all based on message board posts?

My guidance is fine, its intellectually dishonest people that want to believe talking points and ideology over reality that is misguided.

 

[Jarhead]

and i offered my opinion of you and your statement, and you whine and call it ranting.

Maybe you should back up your statements instead of just saying the argument is laughable or the knowledge is "common sense" and there wouldn't be this issue.



As far as this, I hear you. This place full of lying, trolling shitbags (in fact every message board is lately) and brings out the worst in everybody, me included. I know what you mean and get annoyed when I resort to it also, but history on this forum has shown me that actual civil discussion gets you nowhere, and you hear the dumbest, most inane shit ever. Kind of like the OP

Not that it matters now, but sorry I pissed you off, since I know how it feels. But then again if you would of just answered my post, regardless of my tone, this wouldn't have gotten to this point.

Gregg, I am one that believes in personal responsibility. I take full blame for my reaction and you give me blame for your reaction (as you did in your last line).

But on a side note. I did not need to answer your question as I never gave you reason to ask that question. You took what I said and turned it into what you wanted it to say. I never said anything about a secret agwenda.

All I said was that if what yoiu said was their SOLE MISSION I would agree with you.
But it is not. They have an equal mission of notariety; sensationalism for publicity.

AND I MADE THAT CLEAR IN MY VERY FIRST POST.

SO Gregg, whereas I appreciate your response, we are on two different ends of the spectrum. I do not like you Gregg. I do not appreciate your approach nor do I appreciate you constant ranting and raving.

You seem to be an angry and quite possibly misquided individual; probably much like I was when I was in my late teens/early twenties.

Anyway, I am not going to "ignore" you but I want to make this clear to you...If you see a post of mine and you want to debate it, I will not respond. I am not running from you. I am simply not interested in your views. There are plenty of other decent left leaning individuals on here I can debate.

Probably good, cause you are just yet another judgmental person making ASSumptions about others based on their posting style and nothing else. I'm from NY, I speak my mind and my opinion. Nothing angry about it.

So, when did you gain the magic ability to determine someone's emotions and intentions all based on message board posts?

My guidance is fine, its intellectually dishonest people that want to believe talking points and ideology over reality that is misguided.

Curious:

Why is it you speaking your mind and opinion but with me it is being intellectually dishonest and magically determining ones emotions and intentions?

Am I not allowed to speak my mind and OPINON as well?

That in itself gives me reason to believe you are misguided. MY OPINION. No magic there.

Secondly, the fact that you put the blame of you reaction on me is another reason why I see you as misguided. We are all to control ourselves regardless of the wordsa of others and if we dont, we are solely to blame.

Why do you give others the credit for your personal reactions? Do you not have the self esteem to understand that you have total control of anything you say and how you say it?

 

[Yurt]

no