Are There Grounds To Impeach Obama?

In 15 short months, Obama has been able to change a tradition of over 200 years = "no taxation without representation". America in 2010 is now, "No representation without taxation".

To Obama, the constitution is a relic of a former era......a tradition to be burned with the flag.

So what's your read on the meaning of "no taxation without representation"?? Am I to understand that I should have refused to pay my taxes as soon as we invaded Iraq and "stayed the course" because my "representatives" voted to go to war and continue funding it even though I disagreed? I wonder if I can get a rebate...

You can understand it that way if you want, although it is an entirely ignorant interpretation.
 
In 15 short months, Obama has been able to change a tradition of over 200 years = "no taxation without representation". America in 2010 is now, "No representation without taxation".

To Obama, the constitution is a relic of a former era......a tradition to be burned with the flag.

this is clownsauce, kook. i get the impression neocons are so thirsty for soundbytes they'll not even take the time to consider what they say.

just you wait... obama will represent many people he doesnt tax at all, dufus.
 
In 15 short months, Obama has been able to change a tradition of over 200 years = "no taxation without representation". America in 2010 is now, "No representation without taxation".

To Obama, the constitution is a relic of a former era......a tradition to be burned with the flag.

So what's your read on the meaning of "no taxation without representation"?? Am I to understand that I should have refused to pay my taxes as soon as we invaded Iraq and "stayed the course" because my "representatives" voted to go to war and continue funding it even though I disagreed? I wonder if I can get a rebate...

You can understand it that way if you want, although it is an entirely ignorant interpretation.

Was that supposed to be an answer? What is today's analogy to this?

history.com

"TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION" was at the center of the ideological underpinnings of the American Revolution. Resistance to the practice originated with the establishment of parliamentary supremacy in England, especially during the seventeenth century, when "no taxation without representation" was asserted as every Englishman's fundamental right. Colonial leaders also struggled during the seventeenth century to establish their provincial assemblies' sole power to tax within the colonies. When Parliament attempted to raise revenues in the colonies after 1763, colonial leaders vigorously protested, arguing that their rights as Englishmen guaranteed that, since colonists were not directly represented in Parliament, only their representatives in the colonial assemblies could levy taxes.
 
It just shows why we cant elect Republicans again...they think anyone who is not Republican is committing an impeachable offense.

"Impeach him because America did not vote for us"
 
It just shows why we cant elect Republicans again...they think anyone who is not Republican is committing an impeachable offense.

"Impeach him because America did not vote for us"

How dare you! Don't you know America is under attack from within?

:lol:


gawd, the right in America has fallen hard.

Yes...To the GOP

"High crimes and misdemeaners" means that the voters elected someone else
 
It just shows why we cant elect Republicans again...they think anyone who is not Republican is committing an impeachable offense.

"Impeach him because America did not vote for us"

How dare you! Don't you know America is under attack from within?

:lol:


gawd, the right in America has fallen hard.

Yes...To the GOP

"High crimes and misdemeaners" means that the voters elected someone else

I can't believe people ON THE RIGHT are already discussing a possible Obama impeachment. and I am having a difficult time imaging how others are trying to deny this is a result of conservative nitwitticism.

You'd think they'd STFU and stop trying to push undecideds over to Obama so early.

Oh well, Obama and Bill Clinton were right -- words are important, and they do have consequences.
 
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 that there are grounds to impeach

The following is from a report written and released by the Judiciary Committee in 1974 in the aftermath of the Watergate crisis.

Washingtonpost.com Special Report: Documents From the Starr Referral

The framers intended impeachment to be a constitutional safeguard of the public trust, the powers of government conferred upon the President and other civil officers, and the division of powers among the legislative, judicial and executive departments. The framers sought to avoid the creation of a too-powerful executive. “Attempts to subvert the Constitution."
Each of the thirteen American impeachments involved charges of misconduct incompatible with the official position of the officeholder. This conduct falls into three broad categories:
(1) Exceeding the constitutional bounds of the powers of the office in derogation of the powers of another branch of government;
(2) Behaving in a manner grossly incompatible with the proper function and purpose of the office
(3) Employing the power of the office for an improper purpose or gain.


Obama Is Bypassing the Senate
He is “Exceeding the Constitutional Bounds of the power…of another branch of government”

Obama appointing Czars left and right is a violation of the Constitution. Presidents in the past have had Czars but they usually act as advisors and do not make policy. Obama has specifically appointed these people to make policy

The Following is an article by Thomas Lifson on July 06, 2009: Constitution Apparently Declared Optional by Obama Administration

American Thinker Blog: Constitution apparently declared optional by Obama administration

With the clock running out on a new US-Russian arms treaty before the previous Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, or START, expires on December 5, a senior White House official said Sunday said that the difficulty of the task might mean temporarily bypassing the Senate's constitutional role in ratifying treaties by enforcing certain aspects of a new deal on an executive levels and a "provisional basis" until the Senate ratifies the treaty.


Are there grounds to Impeach Obama or am I grasping at straws? Is this worth pursuing?


Once the Republicans can clean house and gain control, I say "Yes We Can".

Obama has never appointed anyone with the title of "Czar" - that is a media nickname. Stop being a fucking idiot and focus ... the term "czar" is functionally meaningless. Its a term media applies as they see fit, and as of recently, its a term the right likes to apply to as many people as possible to excite the mass of idiots like yourself into a false patriotic constitutional frenzy.

:lol:
Wrong...Obama has in fact used the term several times to describe his appointees.
 
If you can't tolerate the results of a free and fair election, please leave the country. You are NOT an American!


First of all, I'm curious if anyone has appointed you to declare who is and isn't American. And second, I thought we lived in a country where we don't have to agree who got elected in office. Fair election?...That is subjective...But as an AMERICAN...I do relish for the next election where I can wave goodbye to the outgoing President.
 
It just shows why we cant elect Republicans again...they think anyone who is not Republican is committing an impeachable offense.

"Impeach him because America did not vote for us"

How dare you! Don't you know America is under attack from within?

:lol:


gawd, the right in America has fallen hard.

Yes...To the GOP

"High crimes and misdemeaners" means that the voters elected someone else

You guys really aren't reading anything we've said are you? Rather then let us speak for ourselves, you already have decided everything we think and believe and anything we say and do contrary to what you've determined in your head isnt real.

It's rather sad.
 
If you can't tolerate the results of a free and fair election, please leave the country. You are NOT an American!


First of all, I'm curious if anyone has appointed you to declare who is and isn't American. And second, I thought we lived in a country where we don't have to agree who got elected in office. Fair election?...That is subjective...But as an AMERICAN...I do relish for the next election where I can wave goodbye to the outgoing President.

being a conservative in America today gives one the responsibility to call others un-American. without doing so, they have no enemy.

Opponents are now enemies. Welcome to Ronald Reagan's Mourning in America. :eusa_whistle:


:evil:
 
How dare you! Don't you know America is under attack from within?

:lol:


gawd, the right in America has fallen hard.

Yes...To the GOP

"High crimes and misdemeaners" means that the voters elected someone else

I can't believe people ON THE RIGHT are already discussing a possible Obama impeachment. and I am having a difficult time imaging how others are trying to deny this is a result of conservative nitwitticism.

You'd think they'd STFU and stop trying to push undecideds over to Obama so early.

Oh well, Obama and Bill Clinton were right -- words are important, and they do have consequences.

We are discussing how we wont impeach him because he hasnt committed crimes.

But I guess that's not important. Words are very important. It's unfortunate you ignore them.
 
You guys really aren't reading anything we've said are you? Rather then let us speak for ourselves, you already have decided everything we think and believe and anything we say and do contrary to what you've determined in your head isnt real.

It's rather sad.

now you're projecting---but you gave yourself away. how?


"You guys" You have it set up as a world view. Now that is truly sad.
 
Yes...To the GOP

"High crimes and misdemeaners" means that the voters elected someone else

I can't believe people ON THE RIGHT are already discussing a possible Obama impeachment. and I am having a difficult time imaging how others are trying to deny this is a result of conservative nitwitticism.

You'd think they'd STFU and stop trying to push undecideds over to Obama so early.

Oh well, Obama and Bill Clinton were right -- words are important, and they do have consequences.

We are discussing how we wont impeach him because he hasnt committed crimes.

But I guess that's not important. Words are very important. It's unfortunate you ignore them.

you keep trying to speak for the others. I know you keep trying to say the conservatives here aren't conservatives, just as you say the people at Tea Party Rallies aren't really conservatives...

If you changed the subject or re-framed things along the way---I lost you.


sorry
 
How dare you! Don't you know America is under attack from within?

:lol:


gawd, the right in America has fallen hard.

Yes...To the GOP

"High crimes and misdemeaners" means that the voters elected someone else

You guys really aren't reading anything we've said are you? Rather then let us speak for ourselves, you already have decided everything we think and believe and anything we say and do contrary to what you've determined in your head isnt real.

It's rather sad.

You have to look at it from this perspective....idiots like Dainty go to their loon websites, get their daily talking points and then descend upon the message boards to spew their hatred. Anyone who challenges or debates them are branded as right wing terrorists. News outlets that monitor these boards and pick up on this stuff then write stories in the MSM and claim what these left wing loons say is true thus securing those retards to their news outlets. Quite simple....I thought Dainty was Keith Olberman when I first started posing here...they sound like 2 little girls singing in unison.
 

Forum List

Back
Top