I hope the Republicans IMPEACH Obama!

[Kondor3]

Irrelevant enough to take away the Democrat majority in the Senate ... I will settle for that..

<snicker>

 

[BullKurtz]

Some Americans. In some Red states, who didn't vote for Obama in the first place. These people have always been against him.

They are just as irrelevant to his agenda now as they were before the election.

We'll see who's "irrelevant" when we frog-march his scrawny ass off to Leavenworth.

 

[ogibillm]

Some Americans. In some Red states, who didn't vote for Obama in the first place. These people have always been against him.

They are just as irrelevant to his agenda now as they were before the election.

We'll see who's "irrelevant" when we frog-march his scrawny ass off to Leavenworth.

what's the weather like in fantasy land today?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Question, do libs feel Obama is above the law? Are there no grounds under which you would support impeachment?

Yes, if he ACTUALLY DID SOMETHINGF THAT WAS IMPEACHABLE!!!

If Bush told congress to pound sound and that he was going to rule by executive order, ignoring them and the laws they passed my guess is the libs would be demanding his impeachment.

He actually did that a lot more than Obama, you understand that, right?

It's not the number but the content of the executive orders.

 

[BluesLegend]

Question, do libs feel Obama is above the law? Are there no grounds under which you would support impeachment?

Yes, if he ACTUALLY DID SOMETHINGF THAT WAS IMPEACHABLE!!!

If Bush told congress to pound sound and that he was going to rule by executive order, ignoring them and the laws they passed my guess is the libs would be demanding his impeachment.

He actually did that a lot more than Obama, you understand that, right?

It's not the number but the content of the executive orders.

You notice the lib ran away and hid when called on this, not surprising.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Question, do libs feel Obama is above the law? Are there no grounds under which you would support impeachment?

Yes, if he ACTUALLY DID SOMETHINGF THAT WAS IMPEACHABLE!!!

If Bush told congress to pound sound and that he was going to rule by executive order, ignoring them and the laws they passed my guess is the libs would be demanding his impeachment.

He actually did that a lot more than Obama, you understand that, right?

It's not the number but the content of the executive orders.

You notice the lib ran away and hid when called on this, not surprising.

They always do.

 

[ogibillm]

Question, do libs feel Obama is above the law? Are there no grounds under which you would support impeachment?

Yes, if he ACTUALLY DID SOMETHINGF THAT WAS IMPEACHABLE!!!

If Bush told congress to pound sound and that he was going to rule by executive order, ignoring them and the laws they passed my guess is the libs would be demanding his impeachment.

He actually did that a lot more than Obama, you understand that, right?

It's not the number but the content of the executive orders.

do you have any content that violates the law?

 

[Kondor3]

...I don't know where you are getting this crap. Maybe you've 'conjured' it.

...

Absolutely correct.

I conjured it.

I dreamed it up with my own tiny little brain and then belched it up here.

Trouble is, if the Failed Messiah serves-up his threatened EO on Immigration, he's going to open-up a can of Congressional whoop-ass that could turn such speculation into reality in fairly short order.

But DO feel free to continue to ignore the possibility.

That will make the take-down all-the-sweeter if the new Congress heads-off in that direction after January 2015 and actually pulls it off.

...And you weren't concerned with the Senate getting slapped when Harry Reid was running it. Or the House when Pelosi was running it.

Quite true.

The EO(s) coming down the pipe were not generally in direct contravention to the Will of the American People, who do NOT want to give Shamnesty (in any of its variant forms and labelings) to 12,000,000 Illegal Alien invaders who consume American jobs and American school and property-tax resources otherwise available for American citizens.

The EO(s) coming down the pipe were generally not undertaken with such open and blatant arrogance and contempt for both the Will of the American People and the Congress.

The country has grown tired of this arrogant and incompetent autocrat and is now looking for an excuse to fire him.

That's all you really need to know.

Fair?

Reciprocity?

What the hell does any of that have to do with a large percentage of Americans (and their elected officials, quite possibly) looking for any excuse to fire your boy?

 

[Kondor3]

...do you have any content that violates the law?

What matter?

If the Congress wants to fire Obama badly enough, they will.

The actual flash-point or trigger may very well be an EO on Immigration or some-such...

But the charge(s) themselves could be little more than a felony version of Jaywalking While Making Cross-Eyed Faces at the School Crossing Guard.

So long as they can be pitched as 'high crimes and misdemeanors and so long as the charges can be made to stick for a conviction in the Senate.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Question, do libs feel Obama is above the law? Are there no grounds under which you would support impeachment?

Yes, if he ACTUALLY DID SOMETHINGF THAT WAS IMPEACHABLE!!!

If Bush told congress to pound sound and that he was going to rule by executive order, ignoring them and the laws they passed my guess is the libs would be demanding his impeachment.

He actually did that a lot more than Obama, you understand that, right?

It's not the number but the content of the executive orders.

do you have any content that violates the law?

What are you burpping out SHIT? yOU TELL ME WHAT EXECUTIVE ORDERS OF ALL THOSE Bush WROTE CHANGED ANY LAWS?

 

[ogibillm]

Yes, if he ACTUALLY DID SOMETHINGF THAT WAS IMPEACHABLE!!!

If Bush told congress to pound sound and that he was going to rule by executive order, ignoring them and the laws they passed my guess is the libs would be demanding his impeachment.

He actually did that a lot more than Obama, you understand that, right?

It's not the number but the content of the executive orders.

do you have any content that violates the law?

What are you burpping out SHIT? yOU TELL ME WHAT EXECUTIVE ORDERS OF ALL THOSE Bush WROTE CHANGED ANY LAWS?

i had more of a problem with bush's signing statements.
that said, do you have any executive orders by president obama that you feel change laws?

 

[ogibillm]

...do you have any content that violates the law?

What matter?

If the Congress wants to fire Obama badly enough, they will.

The actual flash-point or trigger may very well be an EO on Immigration or some-such...

But the charge(s) themselves could be little more than a felony version of Jaywalking While Making Cross-Eyed Faces at the School Crossing Guard.

So long as they can be pitched as 'high crimes and misdemeanors and so long as the charges can be made to stick for a conviction in the Senate.

i agree, but it'll be easier if they have a real crime to hang their charges on.
and bigreb seems to think there is criminal content in obama's e.o.s

 

[bigrebnc1775]

If Bush told congress to pound sound and that he was going to rule by executive order, ignoring them and the laws they passed my guess is the libs would be demanding his impeachment.

He actually did that a lot more than Obama, you understand that, right?

It's not the number but the content of the executive orders.

do you have any content that violates the law?

What are you burpping out SHIT? yOU TELL ME WHAT EXECUTIVE ORDERS OF ALL THOSE Bush WROTE CHANGED ANY LAWS?

i had more of a problem with bush's signing statements.
that said, do you have any executive orders by president obama that you feel change laws?

That wasn't my question
I don't give a fuck if you say you had a problem with Bushs executive orders, that is a given. My question was what executive orders did Bush sign that changed laws?

 

[BluesLegend]

He actually did that a lot more than Obama, you understand that, right?

It's not the number but the content of the executive orders.

do you have any content that violates the law?

What are you burpping out SHIT? yOU TELL ME WHAT EXECUTIVE ORDERS OF ALL THOSE Bush WROTE CHANGED ANY LAWS?

i had more of a problem with bush's signing statements.
that said, do you have any executive orders by president obama that you feel change laws?

That wasn't my question
I don't give a fuck if you say you had a problem with Bushs executive orders, that is a given. My question was what executive orders did Bush sign that changed laws?

OH OH I know this one...none!

 

[rdean]

More Americans voted for Obama than voted for ALL the Senate Republicans in the last election

I won't argue that point ... Because it is simple math and ALL Senate seats weren't up for vote ... The majority of seats still shifted towards Republican by 9 ... Something your comment doesn't address.

.

So which failed GOP policies are Republicans going to try to foist on the American people?

Attempts to pass legislation can fail, but policies that haven't been made cannot be referred to as failing ... And you would have to ask them what they intend to do.

.

We have 30 years of failed GOP policies. What changed?

 

[ogibillm]

He actually did that a lot more than Obama, you understand that, right?

It's not the number but the content of the executive orders.

do you have any content that violates the law?

What are you burpping out SHIT? yOU TELL ME WHAT EXECUTIVE ORDERS OF ALL THOSE Bush WROTE CHANGED ANY LAWS?

i had more of a problem with bush's signing statements.
that said, do you have any executive orders by president obama that you feel change laws?

That wasn't my question
I don't give a fuck if you say you had a problem with Bushs executive orders, that is a given. My question was what executive orders did Bush sign that changed laws?

And if I said none what would it matter? Do you have any of obamas that change laws?

 

[BlackSand]

So which failed GOP policies are Republicans going to try to foist on the American people?

Attempts to pass legislation can fail, but policies that haven't been made cannot be referred to as failing ... And you would have to ask them what they intend to do.

.

We have 30 years of failed GOP policies. What changed?

You have problems with past and present tense ... Past policies may have failed (your assumption and you didn't mention any) ... Future policies haven't failed yet. Otherwise ... If your only discernible statement is "We have 30 years of failed GOP policies. What changed?" ... Then, "It isn't yesterday" should suffice.

Why don't you skip tripping all over your tense or timeline difficulties ... And just tell us what policies scare you so much ... Then we can move forward with some kind of discussion.

.

 

[Syriusly]

[
you are so far out in right field you can't be taken seriously. when you use a phrase like 'rule by mafia don' it just proves that you aren't remotely interested in having a fact based conversation.

Of course, Obama is a democrat, ergo the law is not relevant.

Fact is, Obama has engaged in Mafia style extortion - impeach the crook, then prosecute him. Obama is a criminal - that is a fact. You don't care, because party is the only thing you value - but the facts remain.
l.

Once again- that word doesn't mean what you think it means- 'fact' does not mean your unsubstantiated imagination.

 

[Syriusly]

Some Americans. In some Red states, who didn't vote for Obama in the first place. These people have always been against him.

They are just as irrelevant to his agenda now as they were before the election.

We'll see who's "irrelevant" when we frog-march his scrawny ass off to Leavenworth.

LOL.....yeah.....that is the wet dream of racists since 2008.

 

[Synthaholic]

Some Americans. In some Red states, who didn't vote for Obama in the first place. These people have always been against him.

They are just as irrelevant to his agenda now as they were before the election.

Irrelevant enough to take away the Democrat majority in the Senate ... I will settle for that.

.

For two years. In which, nothing will get done without compromising with Obama.