The reasons to impeach Obama!

[bobcollum]

I always laugh at all of the folks screaming about 16 trillion, even though they didn't make much of a stink all the way up to 9 trillion, as if that's more reasonable a figure.

too stupid and perfectly liberal!! Republicans were signing the pledge at $9 trillion too!! Jefferson the first Republican proposed the first Balanced Budget Amendment 200 years ago. Libturds have defeated 30 Balanced BUdget Amendments since then!!

And here you are implying that we need not to worry about $16 trillion!! Why not sub moron???

After voting for it for decades, they started to feel a little guilty I guess.

What about 5 trillion, was it more manageable then?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I always laugh at all of the folks screaming about 16 trillion, even though they didn't make much of a stink all the way up to 9 trillion, as if that's more reasonable a figure.

too stupid and perfectly liberal!! Republicans were signing the pledge at $9 trillion too!! Jefferson the first Republican proposed the first Balanced Budget Amendment 200 years ago. Libturds have defeated 30 Balanced BUdget Amendments since then!!

And here you are implying that we need not to worry about $16 trillion!! Why not sub moron???

After voting for it for decades, they started to feel a little guilty I guess.

What about 5 trillion, was it more manageable then?

dear, Republicans have been signing the pledge for 25 years and voting for Balanced Budget Amendments for 200 years. Have Democrats????? What does that tell you???

See why we're 100% positive a liberal will be slow??

 

[bobcollum]

Yeah, sure they have...for 25 years.

Who were these Republicans, and why weren't they running things?

 

[Immanuel]

The House, with its Republican majority, has only to draw up some charges and vote to impeach and Obama is impeached. That simple. So why don't they?

Because there are no legitimate grounds to impeach him on and doing so will only bite the Republicans in the ass in the long run, just like the impeachment of Bill Clinton.

I would concur with the person who said that Obama hates this country. I think he would sell it out in a heartbeat if the highest bidder offered him a seat of power, but until he does so, he has committed no "high crimes or misdemeanors".

Immie

 

[regent]

The House, with its Republican majority, has only to draw up some charges and vote to impeach and Obama is impeached. That simple. So why don't they?

very very simple, because independents decide elections!! As a liberal do you really lack the IQ to know that??

This is not an election it is an impeachment process. The House charges the Senate tries. It is not a legal process but a political process.

 

[regent]

The House, with its Republican majority, has only to draw up some charges and vote to impeach and Obama is impeached. That simple. So why don't they?

Because there are no legitimate grounds to impeach him on and doing so will only bite the Republicans in the ass in the long run, just like the impeachment of Bill Clinton.

I would concur with the person who said that Obama hates this country. I think he would sell it out in a heartbeat if the highest bidder offered him a seat of power, but until he does so, he has committed no "high crimes or misdemeanors".

Immie

Exactly, the public is behind Obama and the impeachment would be seen as another Republican farce. Incidently, anyone know what a high crime is in America?

 

[Rshermr]

The House, with its Republican majority, has only to draw up some charges and vote to impeach and Obama is impeached. That simple. So why don't they?

Because there are no legitimate grounds to impeach him on and doing so will only bite the Republicans in the ass in the long run, just like the impeachment of Bill Clinton.

I would concur with the person who said that Obama hates this country. I think he would sell it out in a heartbeat if the highest bidder offered him a seat of power, but until he does so, he has committed no "high crimes or misdemeanors".

Immie

Exactly, the public is behind Obama and the impeachment would be seen as another Republican farce. Incidently, anyone know what a high crime is in America?

And the public would be correct.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

QUOTE=EdwardBaiamonte;6495508]

I love it when people refer to it as that. It was voted in by both parties. So, you are using "half truths". We already know the kettle is black. 11 trillion? Wtf are you talking about?

The debt was at $11 trillion when Obama took office. So to claim $16 trillion in debt as an impeachable offense is somewhat deceptive

well its the fastest rise in American History; moreover Barry is a communist so has no plans to stop the debt from expanding forever.[/QUOTE]

Nonsense.

The House can’t impeach the president for debt increases the House itself authorized.

And the president isn’t a 'communist,’ and even if he were it’s not an ‘impeachable’ offense.

The House, with its Republican majority, has only to draw up some charges and vote to impeach and Obama is impeached. That simple. So why don't they?

Because they know the Senate would never convict.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

QUOTE=EdwardBaiamonte;6495508]

I love it when people refer to it as that. It was voted in by both parties. So, you are using "half truths". We already know the kettle is black. 11 trillion? Wtf are you talking about?

The debt was at $11 trillion when Obama took office. So to claim $16 trillion in debt as an impeachable offense is somewhat deceptive

well its the fastest rise in American History; moreover Barry is a communist so has no plans to stop the debt from expanding forever.

Nonsense.

The House can’t impeach the president for debt increases the House itself authorized.

And the president isn’t a 'communist,’ and even if he were it’s not an ‘impeachable’ offense.

The House, with its Republican majority, has only to draw up some charges and vote to impeach and Obama is impeached. That simple. So why don't they?

Because they know the Senate would never convict.

 

[kiwiman127]

I love it when people refer to it as that. It was voted in by both parties. So, you are using "half truths". We already know the kettle is black. 11 trillion? Wtf are you talking about?

The debt was at $11 trillion when Obama took office. So to claim $16 trillion in debt as an impeachable offense is somewhat deceptive

well its the fastest rise in American History; moreover Barry is a communist so has no plans to stop the debt from expanding forever.

EdB, do you know what communism really is? Below is the definition:

Definition of COMMUNISM

1 a : a theory advocating elimination of private property
b : a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed
Communism - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Now, why don't you tell us exactly what Obama has done in specific terms that match up to the definition of communism.

Or is this like the OP where you use distortions of actual facts to make your point?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Now, why don't you tell us exactly what Obama has done in specific terms that match up to the definition of communism.

too stupid but 100% liberal!! He's not God so can't do communist things but he can move us in that direction. He voted to the left of Bernie Sanders?? Why not ask you mother to help you firgure out what that means??

Norman Thomas quotes:
The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.


This was precisely the tactic of “infiltration” advocated by Lenin and Stalin.[3] As Communist International General Secretary Georgi Dimitroff told the Seventh World Congress of the Comintern in 1935:
"Comrades, you remember the ancient tale of the capture of Troy. Troy was inaccessible to the armies attacking her, thanks to her impregnable walls. And the attacking army, after suffering many sacrifices, was unable to achieve victory until, with the aid of the famous Trojan horse, it managed to penetrate to the very heart of the enemy’s camp."[4]

C. S. Lewis on Diabolical Democracy, Socialism, and Public Education « Conservative Colloquium


Buckley endorsed Chambers’ analysis of modern liberalism as a watered-down version of Communist ideology. The New Deal, Chambers insists, is not liberal democratic but “revolutionary” in its nature and intentions, seeking “a basic change in the social and, above all, the power relationships within the nation.”


Do you see why I am positive that as a liberal you have a low IQ? Do you want to be a liberal all your life??

 

[kiwiman127]

Now, why don't you tell us exactly what Obama has done in specific terms that match up to the definition of communism.

too stupid but 100% liberal!! He's not God so can't do communist things but he can move us in that direction. He voted to the left of Bernie Sanders?? Why not ask you mother to help you firgure out what that means??

Norman Thomas quotes:
The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.


This was precisely the tactic of “infiltration” advocated by Lenin and Stalin.[3] As Communist International General Secretary Georgi Dimitroff told the Seventh World Congress of the Comintern in 1935:
"Comrades, you remember the ancient tale of the capture of Troy. Troy was inaccessible to the armies attacking her, thanks to her impregnable walls. And the attacking army, after suffering many sacrifices, was unable to achieve victory until, with the aid of the famous Trojan horse, it managed to penetrate to the very heart of the enemy’s camp."[4]

C. S. Lewis on Diabolical Democracy, Socialism, and Public Education « Conservative Colloquium


Buckley endorsed Chambers’ analysis of modern liberalism as a watered-down version of Communist ideology. The New Deal, Chambers insists, is not liberal democratic but “revolutionary” in its nature and intentions, seeking “a basic change in the social and, above all, the power relationships within the nation.”


Do you see why I am positive that as a liberal you have a low IQ? Do you want to be a liberal all your life??

So your reponse is deflection? You didn't answer my question because you are clueless about real communism. All you did was a copy & paste of someone's opinion of something unrelated to the specifics of my question that doesn't come close to answering the question.
So again, here we go,,,,,,,,

Definition of COMMUNISM

1 a : a theory advocating elimination of private property
b : a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed
Communism - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

Now, why don't you tell us exactly what Obama has done in specific terms that match up to the definition of communism.

This time no deflection that doesn't answer the question. My bet, you can't do it.

 

[regent]

Well a number of historians call FDR's presidency the first of the modern presidents. In any case FDR changed the office of the executive along with some of the nation to something new , and for now, few seem able or even willing to change it back again. America may never see a Fillmore, VanBuren or Hoover again.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

So your reponse is deflection? You didn't answer my question because you are clueless about real communism. .

our liberal intellectuals went to Russia and saw real communism first hand, they said they saw the future and it worked!!
Then they spied for Stalin, many kept spying even after Stalin and Hitler became partners because they knew real communism, as you call, took time to develop, it didn't happen over night.

39 countries tried to develop it and only managed to kill 125 million human beings and yet here you are arguing for yet another attempt. Would your blood thirsty idea be worth another 1-2 million lives? If the 40th try fails to create utopia would you go back and try to create a Nazi utopia??

 

[The Professor]

The House, with its Republican majority, has only to draw up some charges and vote to impeach and Obama is impeached. That simple. So why don't they?

Because there are no legitimate grounds to impeach him on and doing so will only bite the Republicans in the ass in the long run, just like the impeachment of Bill Clinton.

I would concur with the person who said that Obama hates this country. I think he would sell it out in a heartbeat if the highest bidder offered him a seat of power, but until he does so, he has committed no "high crimes or misdemeanors".

Immie

Exactly, the public is behind Obama and the impeachment would be seen as another Republican farce. Incidently, anyone know what a high crime is in America?

High crimes:

Mugging someone on the top floor of the Empire State Building?

Violating any part of the criminal code when you're inebriated?

Driving under the influence?

Am I close?

Actually, there is no real consensus on what the words mean. I found that out during the Clinton fiasco. Whatever is ultimately accepted as the legal definition, I am certain that excessive spending will not be included.

I agree that any attempt to impeach Obama would result in disaster for the GOP. In fact, I think it would be the literal end of the party, at least at the national level.

 

[regent]

Because there are no legitimate grounds to impeach him on and doing so will only bite the Republicans in the ass in the long run, just like the impeachment of Bill Clinton.

I would concur with the person who said that Obama hates this country. I think he would sell it out in a heartbeat if the highest bidder offered him a seat of power, but until he does so, he has committed no "high crimes or misdemeanors".

Immie

Exactly, the public is behind Obama and the impeachment would be seen as another Republican farce. Incidently, anyone know what a high crime is in America?

Mugging someone on the top floor of the Empire State Building?

Violating any part of the criminal code when you're inebriated?

Driving under the influence?

Am I close?

Actually, there is no real consensus on what the words mean. I found that out during the Clinton fiasco. Whatever is ultimately accepted as the legal definition, I am certain that excessive spending will not be included.

I agree that any attempt to impeach Obama would result in disaster for the GOP. In fact, I think it would be the literal end of the party, at least at the national level.

Pretty close. Actually the term is from England as is impeach. High crimes was never spelled out in America and never codified. In England it was a act by a person in such a high position that he or she should never been involved. In America there needs to be no crime just a motivation to impeach, and maybe remove, again, it is a political process not a legal trial.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Exactly, the public is behind Obama and the impeachment would be seen as another Republican farce. Incidently, anyone know what a high crime is in America?

Mugging someone on the top floor of the Empire State Building?

Violating any part of the criminal code when you're inebriated?

Driving under the influence?

Am I close?

Actually, there is no real consensus on what the words mean. I found that out during the Clinton fiasco. Whatever is ultimately accepted as the legal definition, I am certain that excessive spending will not be included.

I agree that any attempt to impeach Obama would result in disaster for the GOP. In fact, I think it would be the literal end of the party, at least at the national level.

Pretty close. Actually the term is from England as is impeach. High crimes was never spelled out in America and never codified. In England it was a act by a person in such a high position that he or she should never been involved. In America there needs to be no crime just a motivation to impeach, and maybe remove, again, it is a political process not a legal trial.

maybe we should define impeachable as indifference to a $16 trillion debt, or maybe set the limit at $20 trillion or $75,000 per person in 2012 dollars. Then when he sought to eliminate the debt ceiling or increase spending Obozo could be impeached and removed.

 

[kiwiman127]

So your reponse is deflection? You didn't answer my question because you are clueless about real communism. .

our liberal intellectuals went to Russia and saw real communism first hand, they said they saw the future and it worked!!
Then they spied for Stalin, many kept spying even after Stalin and Hitler became partners because they knew real communism, as you call, took time to develop, it didn't happen over night.

39 countries tried to develop it and only managed to kill 125 million human beings and yet here you are arguing for yet another attempt. Would your blood thirsty idea be worth another 1-2 million lives? If the 40th try fails to create utopia would you go back and try to create a Nazi utopia??

I knew you couldn't answer the question. If you can't prove or back-up your statements, well then don't make such statements. It's that simple.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

So your reponse is deflection? You didn't answer my question because you are clueless about real communism. .

our liberal intellectuals went to Russia and saw real communism first hand, they said they saw the future and it worked!!
Then they spied for Stalin, many kept spying even after Stalin and Hitler became partners because they knew real communism, as you call, took time to develop, it didn't happen over night.

39 countries tried to develop it and only managed to kill 125 million human beings and yet here you are arguing for yet another attempt. Would your blood thirsty idea be worth another 1-2 million lives? If the 40th try fails to create utopia would you go back and try to create a Nazi utopia??

I knew you couldn't answer the question. If you can't prove or back-up your statements, well then don't make such statements. It's that simple.

what question???? Are you afraid to say??????????? What does your fear tell us about your IQ and character??

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Mugging someone on the top floor of the Empire State Building?

Violating any part of the criminal code when you're inebriated?

Driving under the influence?

Am I close?

Actually, there is no real consensus on what the words mean. I found that out during the Clinton fiasco. Whatever is ultimately accepted as the legal definition, I am certain that excessive spending will not be included.

I agree that any attempt to impeach Obama would result in disaster for the GOP. In fact, I think it would be the literal end of the party, at least at the national level.

Pretty close. Actually the term is from England as is impeach. High crimes was never spelled out in America and never codified. In England it was a act by a person in such a high position that he or she should never been involved. In America there needs to be no crime just a motivation to impeach, and maybe remove, again, it is a political process not a legal trial.

maybe we should define impeachable as indifference to a $16 trillion debt, or maybe set the limit at $20 trillion or $75,000 per person in 2012 dollars. Then when he sought to eliminate the debt ceiling or increase spending Obozo could be impeached and removed.

Eliminating the debt ceiling (a good idea, btw) or increasing spending would be acts of Congress, not the president. How could you impeach the president for acts of Congress?

You’re obviously unaware of the fact that your blind hatred for Obama is succeeding in only making you look more idiotic – if that’s even possible.