Stop asking for Obama's impeachment

[S.J.]

Remember how only Democrats were calling for Bush's impeachment? Given how this forum was founded in 2003, I bet there are a million liberal threads in the archive calling for his.

Bush was impeached, said no one, ever.

LOL....there were indeed whackjobs who called for Bush's impeachment.

Just as there are whackjobs calling for Obama's impeachment.

So nobody can be held blameless.

Oh the whackjobs should be blamed.

As in nobody can be held blameless for calling for the impeachment of a president, on either side.

Oh certainly- i can be held blameless- I never called for the impeachment of any President. And I am fairly confident that I am not alone.

Or do you mean that there are certainly Republicans who have called for the impeachment of Obama- and there are Democrats who have used that to stir the pot? Absolutely.

IF I didn't think that impeachment for apparently political purposes was really, really bad for America, I would actually encourage Republicans to attempt impeachment of Obama- but impeachment for anything less than what Nixon did is bad for America.

It makes the impeachment process just a way to undue an election.

Anything less than what Nixon did??? Are you f-ing kidding??? Obama has done FAR worse than anything Nixon ever dreamed of doing. The only thing Nixon did was try to cover up a second rate burglary that didn't even benefit him. Obama has done nothing BUT cover up, lie, and obstruct justice for 6 years now. That's like comparing a traffic violation to a murder. What planet are you posting from?

 

[Kosh]

LOL....there were indeed whackjobs who called for Bush's impeachment.

Just as there are whackjobs calling for Obama's impeachment.

So nobody can be held blameless.

Oh the whackjobs should be blamed.

As in nobody can be held blameless for calling for the impeachment of a president, on either side.

Oh certainly- i can be held blameless- I never called for the impeachment of any President. And I am fairly confident that I am not alone.

Or do you mean that there are certainly Republicans who have called for the impeachment of Obama- and there are Democrats who have used that to stir the pot? Absolutely.

IF I didn't think that impeachment for apparently political purposes was really, really bad for America, I would actually encourage Republicans to attempt impeachment of Obama- but impeachment for anything less than what Nixon did is bad for America.

It makes the impeachment process just a way to undue an election.

Anything less than what Nixon did??? Are you f-ing kidding??? Obama has done FAR worse than anything Nixon ever dreamed of doing. The only thing Nixon did was try to cover up a second rate burglary that didn't even benefit him. Obama has done nothing BUT cover up, lie, and obstruct justice for 6 years now. That's like comparing a traffic violation to a murder. What planet are you posting from?

From the far left programmed drone planet..

 

[jon_berzerk]

it is better to leave the liar in office

in another year the leftists will be begging to get this clusterfck out of office

 

[Jackson]

Damn. You are correct sir.

Do I win a Cigar?

 

[Pogo]

Damn. You are correct sir.

Do I win a Cigar?

Depends on what the meaning of "a" is.

 

[NoNukes]

You know, we could have the best of both worlds...IMPEACH and not convict. Just impeach the SOB - that would take the wind out of his sails and give him the legacy he really deserves.

Then maybe he would have the tail between his legs for a while and stop his dictatorial ways.

Yes, because that worked so well with Clinton.

 

[Jackson]

You know, we could have the best of both worlds...IMPEACH and not convict. Just impeach the SOB - that would take the wind out of his sails and give him the legacy he really deserves.

Then maybe he would have the tail between his legs for a while and stop his dictatorial ways.

Yes, because that worked so well with Clinton.

Actually, he did work very well with the Republican Congress when Gingrich was leader.

 

[Skylar]

LOL....there were indeed whackjobs who called for Bush's impeachment.

Just as there are whackjobs calling for Obama's impeachment.

So nobody can be held blameless.

Oh the whackjobs should be blamed.

As in nobody can be held blameless for calling for the impeachment of a president, on either side.

Oh certainly- i can be held blameless- I never called for the impeachment of any President. And I am fairly confident that I am not alone.

Or do you mean that there are certainly Republicans who have called for the impeachment of Obama- and there are Democrats who have used that to stir the pot? Absolutely.

IF I didn't think that impeachment for apparently political purposes was really, really bad for America, I would actually encourage Republicans to attempt impeachment of Obama- but impeachment for anything less than what Nixon did is bad for America.

It makes the impeachment process just a way to undue an election.

Anything less than what Nixon did??? Are you f-ing kidding??? Obama has done FAR worse than anything Nixon ever dreamed of doing. The only thing Nixon did was try to cover up a second rate burglary that didn't even benefit him. Obama has done nothing BUT cover up, lie, and obstruct justice for 6 years now. That's like comparing a traffic violation to a murder. What planet are you posting from?

If its as blatant as you insist, then surely the GOP has made huge headway in their lawsuit against Obama.

Um, how many of the GOP's attorneys hired to sue Obama have already quit?

 

[Skylar]

Oh, you can offer us ignorant personal opinion. But why would anyone give a shit about you pretending to be someone you've never met?

SJ was giving an opinion about someone, not pretending to be that person. Do you know the difference?

And I was giving my opinion about SJ's opinion. And its my opinion that he was pretending to be Obama.

Can you tell me what statement SJ made that gave you that impression?

The part where he started telling us what Obama believed, how he viewed all Americans, etc. In reality, SJ doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about, as he doesn't know Obama, has never met him, has never been in the same room with him.

But hey, baseless, uninformed opinions are still opinions, right?

We started in the third grade writing reports of famous people telling about what they believed and how the viewed life, politics, war, movies, etc. We never met anyone of them.

Who hasn't written about Martin Luther King yet the know how he viewed life. He wasn't a violent man but he wanted rights for all people. He had love for all men not just African Americans but whites, too and wanted all of them to live together. I didn't know him and I am not pretending to be him. I just know about him. I lived when he lived.

SJ's ignorant babble was certainly reminiscent of a 3rd graders writing report. And had about as much factual backing. Why would I or any rational person give a fiddler's fuck about SJ pretending to be the president?

 

[AntiParty]

I say impeach Obama and see what the Right does when they can't point the finger anymore.

 

[Judicial review]

Oh hell just get it over with.

 

[S.J.]

SJ was giving an opinion about someone, not pretending to be that person. Do you know the difference?

And I was giving my opinion about SJ's opinion. And its my opinion that he was pretending to be Obama.

Can you tell me what statement SJ made that gave you that impression?

The part where he started telling us what Obama believed, how he viewed all Americans, etc. In reality, SJ doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about, as he doesn't know Obama, has never met him, has never been in the same room with him.

But hey, baseless, uninformed opinions are still opinions, right?

We started in the third grade writing reports of famous people telling about what they believed and how the viewed life, politics, war, movies, etc. We never met anyone of them.

Who hasn't written about Martin Luther King yet the know how he viewed life. He wasn't a violent man but he wanted rights for all people. He had love for all men not just African Americans but whites, too and wanted all of them to live together. I didn't know him and I am not pretending to be him. I just know about him. I lived when he lived.

SJ's ignorant babble was certainly reminiscent of a 3rd graders writing report. And had about as much factual backing. Why would I or any rational person give a fiddler's fuck about SJ pretending to be the president?

Not half as ignorant as your ridiculous attempt to pervert what I said into pretending to be the president. Frankly, I'm a little embarrassed that I'm even responding to your adolescent and impotent argument.

 

[Skylar]

And I was giving my opinion about SJ's opinion. And its my opinion that he was pretending to be Obama.

Can you tell me what statement SJ made that gave you that impression?

The part where he started telling us what Obama believed, how he viewed all Americans, etc. In reality, SJ doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about, as he doesn't know Obama, has never met him, has never been in the same room with him.

But hey, baseless, uninformed opinions are still opinions, right?

We started in the third grade writing reports of famous people telling about what they believed and how the viewed life, politics, war, movies, etc. We never met anyone of them.

Who hasn't written about Martin Luther King yet the know how he viewed life. He wasn't a violent man but he wanted rights for all people. He had love for all men not just African Americans but whites, too and wanted all of them to live together. I didn't know him and I am not pretending to be him. I just know about him. I lived when he lived.

SJ's ignorant babble was certainly reminiscent of a 3rd graders writing report. And had about as much factual backing. Why would I or any rational person give a fiddler's fuck about SJ pretending to be the president?

Not half as ignorant as your ridiculous attempt to pervert what I said into pretending to be the president. Frankly, I'm a little embarrassed that I'm even responding to your adolescent and impotent argument.

Dude.....you don't now what you're talking about. All your babble about what Obama believes, how he views Americans, what he wants to do the country is blithering nonsense. You don't know the man. You're not quoting the man. You're quoting yourself AS Obama. And making up whatever silly nonsense you wish as you go along.

The question is....why would any rational person give half a shit what gibberish you make up while pretending you're the president?

 

[S.J.]

Can you tell me what statement SJ made that gave you that impression?

The part where he started telling us what Obama believed, how he viewed all Americans, etc. In reality, SJ doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about, as he doesn't know Obama, has never met him, has never been in the same room with him.

But hey, baseless, uninformed opinions are still opinions, right?

We started in the third grade writing reports of famous people telling about what they believed and how the viewed life, politics, war, movies, etc. We never met anyone of them.

Who hasn't written about Martin Luther King yet the know how he viewed life. He wasn't a violent man but he wanted rights for all people. He had love for all men not just African Americans but whites, too and wanted all of them to live together. I didn't know him and I am not pretending to be him. I just know about him. I lived when he lived.

SJ's ignorant babble was certainly reminiscent of a 3rd graders writing report. And had about as much factual backing. Why would I or any rational person give a fiddler's fuck about SJ pretending to be the president?

Not half as ignorant as your ridiculous attempt to pervert what I said into pretending to be the president. Frankly, I'm a little embarrassed that I'm even responding to your adolescent and impotent argument.

Dude.....you don't now what you're talking about. All your babble about what Obama believes, how he views Americans, what he wants to do the country is blithering nonsense. You don't know the man. You're not quoting the man. You're quoting yourself AS Obama. And making up whatever silly nonsense you wish as you go along.

The question is....why would any rational person give half a shit what gibberish you make up while pretending you're the president?

Tell ya what. Learn how to debate and get back to me. I'm not gonna spend any more time arguing with somebody who can't even come up with a legitimate argument. Anyone can see you have nothing. Try another angle, only make it something credible, not some bogus claim about "pretending to be Obama". That's something a third grader would try to pull off. If that's the best you can do, you're not worthy of engaging. Got it? Don't waste my time.

 

[KissMy]

Oh hell just get it over with.

You're just another fairy-tail believing wackjob.

 

[Kosh]

SJ was giving an opinion about someone, not pretending to be that person. Do you know the difference?

And I was giving my opinion about SJ's opinion. And its my opinion that he was pretending to be Obama.

Can you tell me what statement SJ made that gave you that impression?

The part where he started telling us what Obama believed, how he viewed all Americans, etc. In reality, SJ doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about, as he doesn't know Obama, has never met him, has never been in the same room with him.

But hey, baseless, uninformed opinions are still opinions, right?

We started in the third grade writing reports of famous people telling about what they believed and how the viewed life, politics, war, movies, etc. We never met anyone of them.

Who hasn't written about Martin Luther King yet the know how he viewed life. He wasn't a violent man but he wanted rights for all people. He had love for all men not just African Americans but whites, too and wanted all of them to live together. I didn't know him and I am not pretending to be him. I just know about him. I lived when he lived.

SJ's ignorant babble was certainly reminiscent of a 3rd graders writing report. And had about as much factual backing. Why would I or any rational person give a fiddler's fuck about SJ pretending to be the president?

More far left drone babble based on faulty programming based on a dangerous religion..

 

[NYcarbineer]

Conservatives are addicted to hyperbole and hysteria.

 

[Judicial review]

Oh hell just get it over with.

You're just another fairy-tail believing wackjob.

When congress is controlled by the opposit party and the president is hated by everybody including his own party and congress issues a bold warning saying dont fuck with us the president would be foolish to challenge the legislative branch.

 

[LoneLaugher]

My judgement on this thread:

The OP is weak.

Jackson is among the least intelligent people posting at the USMB.

SJ is a straight up nutjob.

That is all.

 

[Kosh]

Conservatives are addicted to hyperbole and hysteria.

Oh my the irony from the far left programmed drone..