Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not a big Obama fan, but Impeachment isn't something that's done just because you don't like the President.
THAT is the difference between the far left trash and the rest of humanity; I may be quite conservative and think he is a dreadful president - but unlike the far left garbage rooting for the Wisconsin 14 derelicts trying to recall elected officials, the man was voted into office, and has not committed a crime.
Just because you dislike a politician does not mean they should be impeached, as the leftist trash wanted to do to Bush every minute.
In this country, you are elected to serve a term, and unlike the whiners on the left, we accept that and hold our nose until the next election - and try to deal with the environment as it is - we do not run to another state and freaking hide to stop the legislative process if we are in the deep minority... or try to get the winners of elections "re-called" to move the goal posts AFTER the game ended...
Actually, no matter how many times you say otherwise, your president remains, proven in action, a slightly left-of-center centrist. I've already seen your counter argument, which is basically just asserting the same statement over and over as if it is true, so no need to respond. I have disproven your argument in prior threads.
Living in a dream?
I have debunked your arguments so many times I have you auto pilot debunking.
They don't call me the liberal slayer for nothing.
I have debunked your arguments so many times I have you auto pilot debunking.
They don't call me the liberal slayer for nothing.
And, once again, writing words but saying nothing (especially since I ain't no liberal, son). We'll chalk this one up to yet another win for me. Is there a mercy rule in this game? I'm starting to feel bad for you.
So long as they stick to the authorized mission, it's certainly not a war. Wars are a very different animal altogether. Reagan authorized attacks in Grenada, Clinton in Afghanistan... the list goes on. None were wars. None were illegal.
THAT is the difference between the far left trash and the rest of humanity; I may be quite conservative and think he is a dreadful president - but unlike the far left garbage rooting for the Wisconsin 14 derelicts trying to recall elected officials, the man was voted into office, and has not committed a crime.
Just because you dislike a politician does not mean they should be impeached, as the leftist trash wanted to do to Bush every minute.
In this country, you are elected to serve a term, and unlike the whiners on the left, we accept that and hold our nose until the next election - and try to deal with the environment as it is - we do not run to another state and freaking hide to stop the legislative process if we are in the deep minority... or try to get the winners of elections "re-called" to move the goal posts AFTER the game ended...
um.... are you forgetting that the Republicans actually impeached Clinton as a opportunistic power grab? Watch your partisanship. It'll bite you when you're not looking!
So long as they stick to the authorized mission, it's certainly not a war. Wars are a very different animal altogether. Reagan authorized attacks in Grenada, Clinton in Afghanistan... the list goes on. None were wars. None were illegal.
I have the opposite opinion, that they were all illegal.
The legal definition of an "Act of War" = An act of war is an action by one country against another with an intention to provoke a war or an action that occurs during a declared war or armed conflict between military forces of any origin. The loss or damage caused due to such conflicts are excluded from insurance coverage except for life assurances
Surely I would think that bombing a country would equate to provoking a war..
In addition, The War Powers Act of 1973 describes the authorization of the President to be The War Powers Act of 1973
The President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situation where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and after every such introduction shall consult regularly with the Congress until United States Armed Forces are no longer engaged in hostilities or have been removed from such situations.
Bombing another nation is introducing the United States Armed Forces into hostilities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluefly
um.... are you forgetting that the Republicans actually impeached Clinton as a opportunistic power grab? Watch your partisanship. It'll bite you when you're not looking!
Lie.. They impeached a president for violating the law and committing a crime that would have had you or I in jail.. Martha Stewart went to jail for far less..
I have the opposite opinion, that they were all illegal.
The legal definition of an "Act of War" = An act of war is an action by one country against another with an intention to provoke a war or an action that occurs during a declared war or armed conflict between military forces of any origin. The loss or damage caused due to such conflicts are excluded from insurance coverage except for life assurances
Surely I would think that bombing a country would equate to provoking a war..
In addition, The War Powers Act of 1973 describes the authorization of the President to be The War Powers Act of 1973
The President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situation where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and after every such introduction shall consult regularly with the Congress until United States Armed Forces are no longer engaged in hostilities or have been removed from such situations.
Bombing another nation is introducing the United States Armed Forces into hostilities.
Lie.. They impeached a president for violating the law and committing a crime that would have had you or I in jail.. Martha Stewart went to jail for far less..
I explained the legal analysis earlier in this thread. You can read it. Precedent and law, dating back to Thomas Jefferson, are on Obama's side, not your's.
They impeached Clinton based on a blowjob (that no one but his political opposition cared about) because they saw an opportunity to knock him out of power. Don't try to rewrite history, son. I watched it happen with my own eyes.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
