Obama begging to be impeached

McALLEN, Texas – Observing what he could only describe as “chaos on the border” during a midnight tour of the Rio Grande on Friday, Rep. Steve Stockman, R-Texas, concluded, “President Obama is begging to be impeached.”



“For all I know, Obama is preparing to process five million illegal immigrant kids and teenagers into the United States,” Stockman said upon observing border operations near McAllen, Texas.

“He wants us to impeach him now,” Stockman theorized, “before the midterm election because his senior advisors believe that is the only chance the Democratic Party has to avoid a major electoral defeat. Evidently Obama believes impeachment could motivate the Democratic Party base to come out and vote.”


Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2014/07/congressman-at-border-obama-begging-to-be-impeached/#gTEEhXujirRYXLj8.99

That's really interesting. Stockman is suggesting impeachment because Obama is following the protocols spelled out in a 2008 law signed by George W Bush in 2008. Can we impeach Bush retroactively?

The House has their opportunity to come up with some financing to handle this problem. Where are they? Oh, that's right. They are about to embark on a month long vacation, so screw the border!

Yes, just as Obama is about to embark on a month long vacation. (as if he isn't on one already.)

He won't be impeached. I hope they don't even try to impeach him. I don't think they will.

WHL wrote:Yes, just as Obama is about to embark on a month long vacation.  (as if he isn't on one already.)

He won't be impeached.  I hope they don't even try to impeach him.  I don't think they will.  

Figuring she wouldn't be impeached, the Dims tried to run Mother Theresa in 2008; however, she was unavailable through no fault of her own. The only other alternative was a black man who'd been accepted in the Ivy League university system through a foreign passport, been given a letter of endorsement by a Muslim scholar—had succeeded in ousting a Republlcan Senator through a corrupt Illinois judge, and voting "present" at every Illinois Senate opportunity—so as to be invisible. (Except for the dying-babies bill, which he endorsed as OK).

His masters figured nobody would impeach America's first black President (putting aside Clinton's claims). It appears his masters were correct! Obama's masters wanted a Manchurian Candidate for President—and they got one.

  


.

That's so typical of all of the BS flying around about Obama, much of it fostered by FOX News.

Obama voted "present" in the Illinois Senate 129 times out of 4,000 votes, or 3%

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/09/obamas-legislative-record/

The conservatives should reconsider their tactics instead of lying all of the time. An original thought process might help!    

News Buzzard wrote:Obama voted "present" in the Illinois Senate 129 times out of 4,000 votes, or 3%

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/09/obamas-legislative-record/

Voting "Present" is not the mark of a Presidential candidate, but the mark of a follower.

  


.

There are procedural reasons why a legislator will sometimes vote present, but in your tunnel vision, blind hatred of Obama you just can't understand them. Being black is not an impeachable offense, and I can't wait to hear the Republicans articulate the high crimes and misdemeanors that Obama has committed. They do so at their own peril so I hope they bring it on!!    

Of course most are criticized for only voting present-when they do it repeatedly. Does it mean they are indifferent, indecisive? What?

WHL wrote:Of course most are criticized for only voting present-when they do it repeatedly.  Does it mean they are indifferent, indecisive?  What?

I would hardly call a 3% rate of "present" as being "repeatedly", and sometimes lawmakers, even though not opposed to a law, won't like some particular language in it, or perhaps an amendment, so they'll vote present instead of no. It makes sense to me, but then again if the weather is crappy you'll blame Obama!

News Buzzard wrote:That's so typical of all of the BS flying around about Obama, much of it fostered by FOX News.

and Hillary Clinton...:

President "Present"

This shouldn’t be a surprise. We had inklings of it a long time ago. Back when Barack Obama was running for president in 2008, Hillary Clinton accused him of “taking a pass” on tough issues when he was in the Illinois state senate... Its basis is the 129 times he voted “present.”
—National Review

  


.

News Buzzard wrote:That's so typical of all of the BS flying around about Obama, much of it fostered by FOX News.

Obama voted "present" in the Illinois Senate 129 times out of 4,000 votes, or 3%

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/09/obamas-legislative-record/

The conservatives should reconsider their tactics instead of lying all of the time. An original thought process might help!    

This particular load of “BS flying around about Obama” was started by Hillary Clinton, on Monday, January 21st, 2008.

News Hawk wrote: and voting "present" at every Illinois Senate opportunity—so as to be invisible.

That wasn't Hillary. It's really a shame that folks don't have to speak a word of truth anymore. 3% is not every Illinois Senate opportunity!

News Buzzard wrote: That wasn't Hillary. It's really a shame that folks don't have to speak a word of truth anymore. 3% is not every Illinois Senate opportunity!

Just the important ones.

And yes it was Hillary.

"On issue after issue that really were hard to explain or understand, you voted present . . . And anytime anyone raises that, there's always some kind of explanation." - Hillary Clinton on Monday, January 21st, 2008 in Myrtle Beach, S.C.

It's a real shame that some folks blame others for their lies and failures.

Hillary did not say that Obama voted present every time, as News Hawk did. Once again you're comparing apples and oranges, but then again that's your favorite hobby, here on the Forum Of Gloom!!!

I won’t speak for New Hawk, but this is apples to apples.  Hillary was making the point that Obama could not and would not make the hard decisions and voted “present” whenever the choice was a difficult one.  Who cares if he voted on insignificant items?  It appears he avoided the important ones for political expediency.
 
Now I have no idea if Hillary was right or wrong as I don’t know Obama’s voting record, but considering she made this statement in 2008, it seems prophetic.  As the POTUS, Obama has not been able to make difficult decisions and avoids them whenever possible.   He has not been able to lead anyone outside of his own party.

Are you calling Hillary a liar?   

I'm calling Hillary the right person to crush any stooge you put up!!!  

News Buzzard wrote:Hillary did not say that Obama voted present every time, as News Hawk did. Once again you're comparing apples and oranges, but then again that's your favorite hobby, here on the Forum Of Gloom!!!

For accuracy—repeating my quote:

Figuring she wouldn't be impeached, the Dims tried to run Mother Theresa in 2008; however, she was unavailable through no fault of her own. The only other alternative was a black man who'd been accepted in the Ivy League university system through a foreign passport, been given a letter of endorsement by a Muslim scholar—had succeeded in ousting a Republlcan Senator through a corrupt Illinois judge, and voting "present" at every Illinois Senate opportunity—so as to be invisible. (Except for the dying-babies bill, which he endorsed as OK).

His masters figured nobody would impeach America's first black President (putting aside Clinton's claims). It appears his masters were correct! Obama's masters wanted a Manchurian Candidate for President—and they got one.

Funny, you didn't speak to "the Dying Babies Bill", his "masters", his Muslim professor's endorsement, cheating the Ivy League "affirmative action" system with his foreign passport, cheating through a corrupt Illinois judge to grab his Illinois State Senate seat from a Republican—much less—that he is the "Manchurian Candidate"—just like the movie.  

"Slick Willie" has nothing on this failure as a leader.

  


.

Outerlimits wrote:"...It's a real shame that some folks blame others for their lies and failures..."

Yesterday, Hillary blames Obama for the world being in a mess:

Speaking on the Sunday talk show, “Fareed Zakaria GPS,” Clinton veered off the topic of America’s frosty relations with Russia and distanced herself from the overseas quagmires vexing President Obama.

“We are in this period where we have to go back out and sell ourselves,” she said. “It is not to be taken for granted. What do we stand for and how do we intend to lead and manage? How do we enlist the rest of the world in this struggle between cooperation and order, and conflict and disorder, which is really at the root of so much that’s going on today – and I don’t think we’ve done a very good job of that.”

Zakaria’s eyes widened over Hillary Clinton’s insinuation that Obama is doing a less-than-stellar job leading on the world stage.

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2014/07/28/hillary-shocks-cnn-says-george-w-bush-made-her-proud-to-be-an-american-takes-a-swipe-at-obama-134826

  


.

News Buzzard wrote:I'm calling Hillary the right person to crush any stooge you put up!!!  

Hillary will capture less of the black vote, but will still gain a large majority of them. For whatever reason, much of the Jewish vote goes to the Dims—of which we have about 5 million Jewish voters. About 5 million Muslim voters will definitely vote for the Dims.

Our "stooge" won't seek the Muslim vote—so you're likely correct.

  


.

You're missing the elephant in the room: Obama took 77% of the Hispanic vote and the Republicans are doing absolutely nothing to woo the Hispanics. (like immigration reform)

News Buzzard wrote:You're missing the elephant in the room: Obama took 77% of the Hispanic vote and the Republicans are doing absolutely nothing to woo the Hispanics. (like immigration reform)

Not only that, I left out the dead voters.

It's hopeless for the Republic!




.

News Buzzard wrote:You're missing the elephant in the room: Obama took 77% of the Hispanic vote and the Republicans are doing absolutely nothing to woo the Hispanics. (like immigration reform)

Giving our country away may buy votes in the short term. We are almost at the tipping point as it is between those that pay taxes and those that don't.

This country is on solid financial footing for decades to come, even if we don't do anything about the revenues. At some point the Republicans will realize that we'll have to pay for the wars and tax cuts we mistakenly did over the last decade. If we go along as we are for the next 25 years our public debt will be in the area of where it was after World War ll. We're still having no trouble borrowing money and our tax revenues are rising with more people getting jobs. I'm not buying the gloom and doom mentality which is evident on this forum, but we need to address our tax code. The Republicans gave away the store to the top tier in this country and that's why we have the worst wealth and income disparity since the early 20th century.

Solid footing?

I would say that 17 Trillion in debt and counting and 100 Trillion in unfunded liabilities is pretty close to being bankrupt.

We print/create our own FIAT-CURRENCY. I doubt that the rest of the world will let the US go on its money printing party forever. It seems the left always forgets this point and is blind that the rest of the world is taking action and will topple USD as the reserve currency. Call it Doom and Gloom if you want but it is reality. Facts, numbers and liberals don't mix too well.

Outerlimits wrote:Solid footing?

I would say that 17 Trillion in debt and counting and 100 Trillion in unfunded liabilities is pretty close to being bankrupt.

We print/create our own FIAT-CURRENCY. I doubt that the rest of the world will let the US go on its money printing party forever. It seems the left always forgets this point and is blind that the rest of the world is taking action and will topple USD as the reserve currency.  Call it Doom and Gloom if you want but it is reality.  Facts, numbers and liberals don't mix too well.  

Being a realist does not mean being a doomist! The unfunded pension liabilities are the far larger problem, trailed by the debt and crumbling infrastructure.