|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
sigmundsmith
Joined: 22 Nov 2007
|
 Posted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 5:26 am Post subject: Impeachment? |
 |
|
I have just been reading some different news sites and blogs and there has been a lot of talk about impeaching Obama after the Republicans take the mid-term in 2 weeks. It has even been talked about by Republican representatives.
But there doesn't seem to be any clear reason as to why or what reasons they can impeach him. There are a lot of comments saying that he is a Marxist/Communist/Socialist, but no clear evidence as to the reasoning.
Can someone clarify what evidence the right wing conservatives have for impeaching Obama? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Caffeinated
Joined: 11 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 6:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yep, if the Rethugs win control of either Congress or Senate, expect them to basically block all of Obama's initiatives.
If you're looking for a clear reason for impeachment, there doesn't need to be one. I'm sure the Rethugs will make an issue out of anything, have investigations and independent counsels, just to have a cloud of impropriety around the White House. The cloud will be enough to get the Rethugs saying "impeachment" along with the right-wing media echo chamber. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RMNC
Joined: 21 Jul 2010
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 8:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
They can't impeach him, they need more seats than they'll get, he's been doing about as decent of a job as one could do given the circumstances, and impeaching a black guy from office would just look horrible for whoever votes for it and for America in general.
More than likely he'll run again in 2012 against Sarah Palin and win due to her being so horrible at everything she does. That said, the president's job approval has little to do with what he's doing and more with the fact that the economy sucks and people think it's his fault. I don't think he's some kind of god or anything, nor do I think that he's going to save America singlehandedly, but hey, he's better than McCain at least, and at least he proves that Blacks can actually be something some day, despite so many racist morons in America. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 8:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RMNC wrote: |
They can't impeach him, they need more seats than they'll get, he's been doing about as decent of a job as one could do given the circumstances, and impeaching a black guy from office would just look horrible for whoever votes for it and for America in general.
|
You say that, but you're forgetting the Republicans impeached America's first black President. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rollo
Joined: 10 May 2006
Location: China
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2010 12:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| No impeachment! Obvious that it would look like an attack based on race. All democrats pray that Palin will run but not likely. She is despised by the main stream of the Republican party and she will self destruct. She has shown a lot of dysfunction in her life and in what she says. Obama's poll numbers will go up as the U.S economy lurches out of the pits. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2010 7:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| sigmundsmith wrote: |
I have just been reading some different news sites and blogs and there has been a lot of talk about impeaching Obama after the Republicans take the mid-term in 2 weeks. It has even been talked about by Republican representatives.
But there doesn't seem to be any clear reason as to why or what reasons they can impeach him. There are a lot of comments saying that he is a Marxist/Communist/Socialist, but no clear evidence as to the reasoning.
Can someone clarify what evidence the right wing conservatives have for impeaching Obama? |
Not a "right wing conservative" (nor am I a lawyer), but I can think of a few possible reasons he might be considered impeachable:
1) Possibly lying about his citizenship. To this day he has not been willing and/or able to produce his original birth certificate. Even if he proves he was in fact born on US soil, it is known that he became an Indonesian citizen (Barry Soetaro), giving up his US citizenship.
2) He arguably violated the 11th Amendment when he sided with illegal aliens (foreign citizens) and the Mexican government, suing the state of Arizona over its immigration law.
3) He placed himself at the head of the UN security council (arguable violating section 9 of the constitution).
4) He allegedly interfered with security treaty negotiations with Iraq during the Bush administration (privately urging Iraqi leadership to postpone the troop draw-down until after his election) - a serious violation of the Logan Act.
http://www.villainouscompany.com/vcblog/archives/2008/09/the_audacity_of.html
5) Obamacare arguably violates the first article and 10th Amendment of the constitution.
Not to mention all the other run-of-the-mill treasonous things he's continued doing from the the Bush era, like extending the PATRIOT Act, continuing the illegal wars and torture, illegal spying on the public, issuing signing statements, sequestering public funds to dole out to private banks (and even purchasing automobile companies) etc. etc. etc. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2010 10:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| sigmundsmith wrote: |
I have just been reading some different news sites and blogs and there has been a lot of talk about impeaching Obama after the Republicans take the mid-term in 2 weeks. It has even been talked about by Republican representatives.
But there doesn't seem to be any clear reason as to why or what reasons they can impeach him. There are a lot of comments saying that he is a Marxist/Communist/Socialist, but no clear evidence as to the reasoning.
Can someone clarify what evidence the right wing conservatives have for impeaching Obama? |
Not a "right wing conservative" (nor am I a lawyer), but I can think of a few possible reasons he might be considered impeachable:
1) Possibly lying about his citizenship. To this day he has not been willing and/or able to produce his original birth certificate. Even if he proves he was in fact born on US soil, it is known that he became an Indonesian citizen (Barry Soetaro), giving up his US citizenship.
2) He arguably violated the 11th Amendment when he sided with illegal aliens (foreign citizens) and the Mexican government, suing the state of Arizona over its immigration law.
3) He placed himself at the head of the UN security council (arguable violating section 9 of the constitution).
4) He allegedly interfered with security treaty negotiations with Iraq during the Bush administration (privately urging Iraqi leadership to postpone the troop draw-down until after his election) - a serious violation of the Logan Act.
http://www.villainouscompany.com/vcblog/archives/2008/09/the_audacity_of.html
5) Obamacare arguably violates the first article and 10th Amendment of the constitution.
|
Laws that are unconstitutional are struck down. There are no impeachment proceedings.
As for the first one, that's ridiculous on so many levels. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
comm
Joined: 22 Jun 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2010 10:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
The nice thing about American politics these days is that people are completely polarized. This way, when your favored party is in the minority, they'll still viciously prevent the majority party from doing much of anything (since it would 100% for sure destroy the USA).
Vague threats of impeachment are just a glimmering example of this glorious policy which our politicians have undertaken.
@visitorq:
1. The citizenship issue may be valid. If there's a shadow of a doubt, I'm sure an ambitious and well-funded someone will find something.
2. When the executive branch performs an action which may be unconstitutional, an individual must challenge it in court and receive a specific verdict on it. In the case of a suit by foreign citizens against the state of Arizona, it simply should have been thrown out by the courts, and Mr. Obama would be free to -say- whatever he liked about the issue.
3. As long as he doesn't imply that the UN Security Council has greater authority than the Constitution, and the UN Security Council doesn't imply allegiance to a foreign state, he's free to do so. Constitutionally I don't see that it's different from a soccer club.
4. After looking into the Logan Act, I found this on Wikipedia: The U.S. Department of State has concluded that "The clear intent of this provision [Logan Act] is to prohibit unauthorized persons from intervening in disputes between the United States and foreign governments. Nothing in section 953 [Logan Act], however, would appear to restrict members of the Congress from engaging in discussions with foreign officials in pursuance of their legislative duties under the Constitution."
Located at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan_Act
Original Source: DIGEST OF UNITED STATES PRACTICE IN INTERNATIONAL LAW 1975, p. 750
So effectively the Logan Act does not apply to members of Congress carrying out their duties (acting in what they believe to be the best interests of the United States).
5. On Obamacare: see point number 2 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2010 10:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| sigmundsmith wrote: |
I have just been reading some different news sites and blogs and there has been a lot of talk about impeaching Obama after the Republicans take the mid-term in 2 weeks. It has even been talked about by Republican representatives.
But there doesn't seem to be any clear reason as to why or what reasons they can impeach him. There are a lot of comments saying that he is a Marxist/Communist/Socialist, but no clear evidence as to the reasoning.
Can someone clarify what evidence the right wing conservatives have for impeaching Obama? |
Not a "right wing conservative" (nor am I a lawyer), but I can think of a few possible reasons he might be considered impeachable:
1) Possibly lying about his citizenship. To this day he has not been willing and/or able to produce his original birth certificate. Even if he proves he was in fact born on US soil, it is known that he became an Indonesian citizen (Barry Soetaro), giving up his US citizenship.
2) He arguably violated the 11th Amendment when he sided with illegal aliens (foreign citizens) and the Mexican government, suing the state of Arizona over its immigration law.
3) He placed himself at the head of the UN security council (arguable violating section 9 of the constitution).
4) He allegedly interfered with security treaty negotiations with Iraq during the Bush administration (privately urging Iraqi leadership to postpone the troop draw-down until after his election) - a serious violation of the Logan Act.
http://www.villainouscompany.com/vcblog/archives/2008/09/the_audacity_of.html
5) Obamacare arguably violates the first article and 10th Amendment of the constitution.
|
Laws that are unconstitutional are struck down. There are no impeachment proceedings. |
Says who? It's not just passing laws, it's committing treason. At any rate if he violated the constitution multiple times, and deliberately at that, then it would certainly warrant an impeachment. I'm not exactly qualified to make a legal case, but I seriously doubt you're much more qualified to dismiss it (and if you are, then by all means present your rebuttal).
| Quote: |
| As for the first one, that's ridiculous on so many levels. |
Oh, on so many levels? Funny you didn't list even one...
Last edited by visitorq on Wed Oct 20, 2010 10:53 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2010 11:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| comm wrote: |
The nice thing about American politics these days is that people are completely polarized. This way, when your favored party is in the minority, they'll still viciously prevent the majority party from doing much of anything (since it would 100% for sure destroy the USA).
Vague threats of impeachment are just a glimmering example of this glorious policy which our politicians have undertaken.
@visitorq:
1. The citizenship issue may be valid. If there's a shadow of a doubt, I'm sure an ambitious and well-funded someone will find something. |
Unless there's nothing to find, that is.
| Quote: |
| 2. When the executive branch performs an action which may be unconstitutional, an individual must challenge it in court and receive a specific verdict on it. In the case of a suit by foreign citizens against the state of Arizona, it simply should have been thrown out by the courts, and Mr. Obama would be free to -say- whatever he liked about the issue. |
I'm not really sure what you mean here...
| Quote: |
| 3. As long as he doesn't imply that the UN Security Council has greater authority than the Constitution, and the UN Security Council doesn't imply allegiance to a foreign state, he's free to do so. Constitutionally I don't see that it's different from a soccer club. |
The US doesn't send ambassadors to soccer clubs, nor do soccer clubs command armies.
| Quote: |
4. After looking into the Logan Act, I found this on Wikipedia: The U.S. Department of State has concluded that "The clear intent of this provision [Logan Act] is to prohibit unauthorized persons from intervening in disputes between the United States and foreign governments. Nothing in section 953 [Logan Act], however, would appear to restrict members of the Congress from engaging in discussions with foreign officials in pursuance of their legislative duties under the Constitution."
Located at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan_Act
Original Source: DIGEST OF UNITED STATES PRACTICE IN INTERNATIONAL LAW 1975, p. 750
So effectively the Logan Act does not apply to members of Congress carrying out their duties (acting in what they believe to be the best interests of the United States).
|
Um, Obama wasn't a Congressman - and he certainly wasn't acting in the best interest of the US (unless you consider prolonging a war to further your own selfish agenda to be beneficial to the nation). He was there as a private citizen (unless he's not actually a US citizen, in which case you can scratch that one off the list)... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sergio Stefanuto
Joined: 14 May 2009
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2010 11:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
A man walked into a bar. He immediately realized that all the bartenders were robots.
"Hello, sir. What would you like to drink?" asked a robot
"Martini, please" the man replied. Lo and behold, the robot brought the finest Martini he's ever tasted in his whole life!
"If you don't mind my asking, sir, what is your IQ?" asked the robot.
Surprised by the question, the man replied "140" and they proceeded to discuss theoretical physics.
The man finished his drink, but was curious, so went back inside.
"Hello, sir. What would you like to drink?" asked a robot
"Martini, please" the man replied. Again, the robot brought a delicious Martini.
"If you don't mind my asking, sir, what is your IQ?" asked the robot.
This time, the man replied "100" and they proceeded to discuss movies and sports.
The man finished his drink, but remained curious, so went back inside for one last time.
"Hello, sir. What would you like to drink?" asked a robot
"Martini, please" the man replied. As before, an excellent drink was served.
"If you don't mind my asking, sir, what is your IQ?" asked the robot.
"50", replied the man this time.
The robot then asked, "Are you still happy that you voted for Obama, sir?" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mc_jc
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Location: C4B- Cp Red Cloud, Area-I
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2010 11:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
hehehe...
My question is; who did worse- Obama or Carter? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Happy Warrior
Joined: 10 Feb 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2010 1:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| visitorq wrote: |
| The Happy Warrior wrote: |
| visitorq wrote: |
| sigmundsmith wrote: |
I have just been reading some different news sites and blogs and there has been a lot of talk about impeaching Obama after the Republicans take the mid-term in 2 weeks. It has even been talked about by Republican representatives.
But there doesn't seem to be any clear reason as to why or what reasons they can impeach him. There are a lot of comments saying that he is a Marxist/Communist/Socialist, but no clear evidence as to the reasoning.
Can someone clarify what evidence the right wing conservatives have for impeaching Obama? |
Not a "right wing conservative" (nor am I a lawyer), but I can think of a few possible reasons he might be considered impeachable:
1) Possibly lying about his citizenship. To this day he has not been willing and/or able to produce his original birth certificate. Even if he proves he was in fact born on US soil, it is known that he became an Indonesian citizen (Barry Soetaro), giving up his US citizenship.
2) He arguably violated the 11th Amendment when he sided with illegal aliens (foreign citizens) and the Mexican government, suing the state of Arizona over its immigration law.
3) He placed himself at the head of the UN security council (arguable violating section 9 of the constitution).
4) He allegedly interfered with security treaty negotiations with Iraq during the Bush administration (privately urging Iraqi leadership to postpone the troop draw-down until after his election) - a serious violation of the Logan Act.
http://www.villainouscompany.com/vcblog/archives/2008/09/the_audacity_of.html
5) Obamacare arguably violates the first article and 10th Amendment of the constitution.
|
Laws that are unconstitutional are struck down. There are no impeachment proceedings. |
Says who? It's not just passing laws, it's committing treason. At any rate if he violated the constitution multiple times, and deliberately at that, then it would certainly warrant an impeachment. I'm not exactly qualified to make a legal case, but I seriously doubt you're much more qualified to dismiss it (and if you are, then by all means present your rebuttal).
|
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/tocs/a1_2_5.html
Impeachment is an indictment for "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." Usually, this would be high crimes and passing an unconstitutional law is not a crime, and even if it were, the President doesn't pass laws, Congress does.
Signing a law concerning health care into office is not treason. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rollo
Joined: 10 May 2006
Location: China
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2010 2:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forget Fox news soundbites and the ravings of teabaggers who draw a "CHECK" for mental problems. he has committed no treasonable offenses!! He has done a decent job as president. He ran on a platform which featured healthcare and he kept his promise to some extent. Absolutely amazing how much money doctors and the insurance companies have spent fighting healthcare reform and now they are spending billions to overturn it. Most even honest Republicans would give him a B. Bush was the worst president in U.S history. Often drunk or coked up. Obama had a huge mess to clean up. Karl Rove has outflanked the Democrats once again, bringing in foreign money to fund the teabaggers who he uses to attack the president with outrageous claims.
So many are ready to believe the propaganda coming from insurance companies who have no desire to help America but just to get Obamacare overturned. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stephorama
Joined: 19 Sep 2010
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 20, 2010 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No really, I was excited when I saw the thread title! I thought this was going to be about Bush! You know, deliberately lying and misleading the country into a very costly (lives, body parts, money) war could arguably bring impeachment proceedings.
I feel like shaking people who continue to harp on Obama not producing his original birth certificate. I'd like to see one human being who actually has their original birth certificate. The one I currently have is a copy; an official copy issued by the state I was born in, just like the one Obama has produced.
Arguably violating what one group sees as irritating is not impeachable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
