Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'News / Current Events' started by Crabtownboy, Jul 11, 2014.
Do you agree?
Talk is cheap.
It won't happen.
I guess it depends if there is justification for impeachment.
Of course they do. Impeachment without conviction is a disaster.
Impeachment itself is a disaster and will not happen. It would be considered racist.
The Democrats are hoping for impeachment because they would be off the hook for the collapse in the country and could say, see, the Republicans are racist just like we always said....
The Democrats will never admit that Obama should be impeached and convicted and only the Democrats can impeach and convict Obama and they will never do it because in reality Obama is the greatest Democrat ever.
They do not actually believe these actions are racist but they do dishonestly try to paint it as such in order to get voters excites. Its the same thing the pharisees did with Jesus.
Yes, I agree. Impeachment during the midterm elections would lead to Democrat gains in the House and Senate. Just look at the 1998 elections. Impeachment proceedings did not start until after the elections, however the damning Starr Report was released in September 1998 and talk of impeachment had been going on for months. The Starr Report would be the text the impeachment would follow.
If the House (read: Republicans) vote to impeach before the elections I think Obama would receive sympathy from the electorate and Dems would gain seats.
If race were not a factor, Obama could be impeached--we all agree that he is acting illegally and immorally. The Democrats are too cowardly to admit that Obama is destroying the country and the Democrats are too cowardly to abandon their support of Obama. The Democrats are a rule or ruin party at this point so it will be ruin.
If Obama acts illegally to shut down coal-fired electrical plants, as scheduled, there will be a depression. No one can afford to pay a doubled electrical bill.
The Democrats are drunk with power and now they are blood-thirsty.
I believe he's talking about some republicans just calling for his impeachment, not actually doing it.
Saying he needs to be impeached, doesn't do any real damage. Doing it would.
Again, look to 1998 for a history lesson. Republicans had been talking impeachment for months. They lost several seats in the mid term elections. Clinton was not actually impeached until January 1999. Newt Gingrich resigned as speaker of the House.
The Democrats argued in Clinton's case that adultery was no reason for conviction.
In the case of Obama, do you think that we are dealing with the soft bigotry of low expectations?
I'm not understanding your question. In my mind "soft bigotry of low expectations" means that because someone is at a disadvantage, be it wealth, race, education, what have you, then we don't expect them to be high achievers. What is your definition? How does this relate to Obama?
You still miss that point that the vast majority of House Republicans are not even calling for impeachment. So far , it is nothing like 98. So the people that actually are calling for impeachment are doing no real harm.
Most of them realize Obama is trampling on the constitution, but most of what we "know" he is doing is not prosecutable. Now if Republicans take him to court and get a ruling in their favor and he defies the court...that is a horse of a different color.
They were right. And...
He wasn't impeached for adultery.
What I am trying to say is did anyone really expect much from Obama? They could not vet him because of his peculiar past and he was a low achiever even before he got elected to the Oval Office.
Boehner and other party leaders, including those in the Tea Party movement, disagree now.
When they have a majority in both houses, with they still disagree? That's the question.
CMG: "The Democrats are a rule or ruin party at this point so it will be ruin."
A B S O L U T E L Y ! ! ! !
Here is what it looks like when dems are in charge: