Can Obama be impeached for sheer incompetence?

reply to post by jsobecky


Can Obama be impeached for sheer incompetence?

Taking into consideration that we didn't do a darn thing with Bushes incompetence for 8 whole years and 6 of Congress hold, I think we are just going to keep bending over like good citizens and and take it in the behind like true patriots.

Welcome to the joke call America thanks to the incompetence of the political rats in our two elite parties.

Tbh if he can be impeached for those things (which is in a way ridiculous to impeach people for) then GWB would have been impeached loooong time ago.

Best regards

Loke.

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
reply to post by intrepid

 

actually they ARE facts, like i said read a newspaper, watch the news. And LIBS isnt a label, liberals are exactly that. Im conservative, its not a label its what i am.

It has nothing to do with subscribing to anything, I read, I watch. I decide for myself, just like I spent days pouring over this stimulus package, to see what was in it. Im willing to bet many of his great defenders did no such thing or they would be just as upset as his former supporters.

So Mr.Moderator, dont accuse me of anything but stating what is! Have a fantastic day guys.

Uhm yes, naming someone a "liberal" or a "conservative" is a LABEL.

en.wikipedia.org...

Wiki is not always a good site for sources, but for this one it is good.

Please link to sites that back up your claims, otherwise it is just your opinion.

I read the stimulus package as well, took me about and hour and a half to do a quick run through and then I did spent multiple hours checking and rechecking references.

I got really sick and tired of seeing the threads pop up like crazy making claims that just were not true in regards to the stimulus package as well.

Peace

To the Bush bashers:

If Bush was incomptetent, is it OK for Obama to be incompetent also?

I thought Obama voters voted for change?

BTW there is nothing incompetent about policies that keep Americans safe.

Now burying our children and grandchildren in massive debt...that's incompentence.

Bush had a part in it...but he did it for national security, and Democrats loaded up every Bush spending bill with pork knowing Bush had no choice to to approve it. Obama is doing it in the name of Socialism, and Democrats once again are loading it up.

reply to post by The Lass

Originally posted by The Lass
It's easy being pedantic from thousands of miles away ... like me ... but your President has to be both impeached by the House of Representatives and convicted by the Senate on a charge of bribery, treason or other high crimes & misdemeanours before he can be removed from office.

And with strong Democrat representation in both Houses, the chances of him being tossed out of office because of incompetence are, at best, remote.

Actually, it doesn't seem to be so cut and dry:

en.wikipedia.org...

In the United States, impeachment can occur both at the federal and state level. The Constitution defines impeachment at the federal level and limits impeachment to "The President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United States" who may only be impeached and removed for "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors". [2] Several commentators have suggested that Congress alone may decide for itself what constitutes an impeachable offense.[citation needed] In 1970, then-House Minority Leader Gerald R. Ford defined the criteria as he saw it: "An impeachable offense is whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history."[3] Four years later, Ford would become president when President Richard Nixon resigned under the threat of impeachment.

To others:

I think this is more than a case of 'buyer's remorse'. It's more like waking up, hungover, in a Las Vegas motel room, handcuffed to your worst nightmare, and both of you are wearing a wedding ring!

Originally posted by jsobecky
I am accused at not providing facts, or links. It is not necessary in many cases, as you well know.

It's never necessary. You can make any silly statement you like but if you'd like to be taken seriously, you'll want to post factual information with sources. If you don't care about being taken seriously, don't worry about it.

It is a fact that he proposed sitting down with the Taliban,

Yes, it may become necessary based on the mess the bush administration left for him.
Since you don't agree we should talk with the taliban, what would you suggest we do?

The only reason links' are being asked for is a stalling technique.

I'm sorry but this is an absurd statement. How long would it take you to post links and summaries you're familiar with? Maybe 5 minutes? So in affect, you think we're trying to stall you for 5 minutes? What would that accomplish?

Originally posted by RRconservative
To the Bush bashers:

If Bush was incomptetent, is it OK for Obama to be incompetent also?

Dude, get off the "partisan train". Seriously. Once you see that nothing changes between Rep. and Dem. you'll be on the track of what's wrong in America.

Yes.. a President can be removed if he is found to be certifiably incompetent to govern. It would work the same way as impeachment would except that the issue would be the failure to "protect and defend" the Constitution of the United States, and, for doing intentional damage to the nation.

It is good to note that some Dems are revolting on him even now, scared of the coming election cycle. His approvals are dropping daily, and the Media friends are showing signs of stress.

I predict that the Dems will turn on Him and de-thrown him before 2010 and replace him with Biden. And that would be worse, but that's how I see it.

It's highly unlikely Obama could be impeached for imcompetance after 8 years of Bush.

How incompetant would Obama have to become to out do Bush?

I'm thankful we will never know. He would have to be hit in the head with a manhole cover to sink that low. And I'm pretty sure the secret services would have that covered.

reply to post by jsobecky


I'm old enough to remember President Ford.

He was many things but a constitutional lawyer he most certainly was not. If you're basing your arguments on that gentleman's knowledge you're on rather a stick wicket.

Assuming we ignore the bribery & treason elements of the charge, we're left with "high crimes & misdemeanours. "High" is taken as being a deliberate act against the nation, an action taken or a decision made with a degree of intelligence, with thought & deliberation which goes against one's own country or which gives comfort to its enemies. Crimes & misdemeanours are exactly that, crimes, defined by your own laws.

The charge laid before Congress to remove a President from office doesn't include incompetence or maladministration, unfortunately. You'd be lucky to find a President who could survive such a charge, frankly.

reply to post by jfj123


If you seriously want me to provide links, I will do so. May take a few minutes, though, as supper is cooking!

Just let me know.

Where was all this enthusiasm to dump an incompetent president when Bush was in office?

He got eight years to make this mess and he gets off scot-free while President Obama is supposed to be burned at the stake because he got left holding the hot potato that Bush threw into his lap.

He just took the oath of office in the middle of January and already they are declaring the man a failure.

If you had held Bush up to this same yard stick maybe we would not be in the mess we are in now.

I am a NPA because I know that our government is a mess and it will only get worse as long as people are blindly following party lines.

You can’t fix this government. It has to be bulldozed and rebuilt from scratch.

We need to keep only the foundation and bring in all new, fresh and untainted wood.

This time we can’t allow the old wood to rotten the good wood. We must remove all the rotten wood as soon as it is identified.

We are not republicans and we are not democrats. We are Americans and it time that we remembered that little detail.

Here are a few to hold you over:
******************

Some of his more egregious blunders:

During the first month of his administration, he spent more than Bush did on two wars, and Katrina relief and rebuilding
answers.yahoo.com...


He has committed diplomatic blunders with UK PM Gordon Brown
community2.myfoxhouston.com...


He has proposed taxes that will cause an inflationary spiral, when imposed
seekingalpha.com...

He has committed to an assault weapon ban
www.gunpundit.com...

He has targeted private citizens for disagreeing with his policies
voices.washingtonpost.com...


He has broken campaign promises on hiring lobbyists
news.yahoo.com...

He has broken campaign promises on stopping partisanship
finance.yahoo.com...


He has used porkulus and earmarks to pay back his political cronies
conservativexpress.blogspot.com...


He has supported the Card Check bill, which eliminates the secret ballot in union votes
online.wsj.com...


He has proposed sitting down with the Taliban
susiemadrak.com...


He wants to plunge this nation into a socialist economy.

reply to post by jsobecky


Hell this gives me Deja Vu are you sure you are talking about Obama and not Bush?

Because is sure sounds alike to me.

reply to post by jsobecky


I starred you for this humorous aside:

I think this is more than a case of 'buyer's remorse'. It's more like waking up, hungover, in a Las Vegas motel room, handcuffed to your worst nightmare, and both of you are wearing a wedding ring!

This presents a coyote ugly situation. You wake up in a cheap motel with paper sheets that you roll out, and you see a hair peace on the headboard and teeth are in an A&W Rootbeer mug! You look over at her/his body and the only clean part is where your lips have been and they are laying on your arm. So do I chew off my arm or do I wake up and face this nightmare?

But Obama says there is hope! So therefore, I must chew my arm off!

I am starting to develop such a crappy outlook on life that I am having to use Preparation H for eye drops!!

reply to post by jsobecky


Thank you for those links.

I've flicked through each & cannot identify where Obama is left vulnerable to impeachment proceedings because he's broken the law.

Perhaps you could demonstrate which law he's broken ?

You can't impeach a President because you don't like his policies, he & the Democrats won the election & have every right to govern.

Originally posted by NightSkyeB4Dawn

Where was all this enthusiasm to dump an incompetent president when Bush was in office?

He got eight years to make this mess and he gets off scot-free while President Obama is supposed to be burned at the stake because he got left holding the hot potato that Bush threw into his lap.

There was plenty of enthusiasm to impeach Bush when he was in office, but, like this, it was all talk and no action. While we can't blame Obama for causing the crisis, we can certainly blame him for not handling it well. I don't see how putting us in debt for trillions more dollars is going to aid us in this financial crisis.

reply to post by The Lass


My OP question actually bordered on the rhetorical, or even academic. But, if he were to implement a policy that harmed the US, and it was shown to harm the US, then it seems that would meet the criteria for 'high crimes'.

This thread has to be some sort of joke.

[SNIP]

Obama has been doing the best he can to pull America out of the quicksand its sinking into, and you'd like to see him impeached? Were you too busy counting grains of sand to notice what's become of our country since 2000?

Anyway, regardless of what the right-wing fringe thinks, most of the country approves of Obama. According to Gallup.com he has a 62% approval rating vs. a meager 26% disapproval rating.

Gallup.com

Compare that to Bush who pulled in a whopping 22% approval during his final months in office.

CBS

If you're serious, I suggest you step back from partisan politics and actually look at what is happening. If you still think he should be impeached then have fun being part of the extreme minority.

Mod Edit: Civility and Decorum are Required

[edit on 11-3-2009 by Gemwolf]

reply to post by NightSkyeB4Dawn

Originally posted by NightSkyeB4Dawn

Where was all this enthusiasm to dump an incompetent president when Bush was in office?

He got eight years to make this mess and he gets off scot-free while President Obama is supposed to be burned at the stake because he got left holding the hot potato that Bush threw into his lap.

This is a common misconception. Actually, Bush tried to impose regulation as early as 2003 but was shot down by several powerful members of Congress, most notably Barney Frank and Chuck Schumer.

For an insightful article and video, see this thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...