Obama's War: Grounds for Impeachment?

Giambattista you are claiming that President Obama's actions are illegal. But you have offered no proof other than your unique interpretation of the Constitution which is at odds with how the Constitution has been interpreted throughout its history.

Andrew Jackson, the nation's 7th president, invaded Florida (a Spanish possession at the time of invasion) without a declaration of war. He also used military forces against the Indian nations freely and without a declaration of war by Congress.

President Jefferson (one of the nations founding fathers) authorized military action in North Africa (Barbary Wars) without a declaration of War by Congress. In fact there are 125 undeclared wars in US military history. A formal declaration of war by congress is the exception rather than the norm.

The point is that your interpretation is at odds with how the Constitution has been read throughout history. If you are going to impeach a sitting POTUS you should have a good and sound legal cause.
 
Last edited:
iceaura said:
I'm not. I'm calling anyone who posts pictures of Obama with a drawn on Hitler moustache, and complains about high handed Presidential warmaking as if it were a sudden emergency without any reference to W&Cheney, a Teabagger.
Click to expand...

Then that's what I am. And I'm proud of it.

I'm a birther, and a teabagger, apparently.

But the suggestion was sincere - you want to impeach this kind of Presidency, start with W or Cheney. Low cost, big reward.
Click to expand...

Low cost. Try getting people motivated to impeach someone who's already left office.
Stupid.

Oh, hey! Your biggest threat is someone who doesn't even hold office now! Imagine that! Go after that! Impeach that! Impeach W. All your sins are fogiven!
 
giambattista said:
Then that's what I am. And I'm proud of it.
Click to expand...
As are they all.
giambattista said:
Oh, hey! Your biggest threat is someone who doesn't even hold office now!
Click to expand...
Impeachment is for crime, not threat.

Betrayals of office. It allows recovery and correction from the bad doings.

And yes, W&Cheney rank far higher than Obama, right now, on that scale. If what you want is to set the country on a better course with less Presidential dominance and control, correcting W tenure establishments of same (having what W&Cheney did declared criminality and betrayal of office) would be the way to go - Obama just inherited their setup, and hasn't even used a lot of it, so impeaching him wouldn't necessarily change anything in that arena.
 
I think Obama should be send immediately to Guantanamo so that the truth can be pulled out of him.

Clearly he is an opportunist lier keen on destroying the USA in any way he can.
 
Giambattista said:
Then that's what I am. And I'm proud of it.

I'm a birther, and a teabagger, apparently.



Low cost. Try getting people motivated to impeach someone who's already left office.
Stupid.

Oh, hey! Your biggest threat is someone who doesn't even hold office now! Imagine that! Go after that! Impeach that! Impeach W. All your sins are fogiven!
Click to expand...

I play video games, and every time I hear someone call someone else a teabagger I cringe.

Dude, do you know what impeach means? Impeach is merely the trial, it does not necessarily lead to removal from office.
 
Giambattista said:
What is this two-sided battle of the ideologies or demagogues, as if there are only two options?
Click to expand...

It's called "American politics."

Giambattista said:
Bush is no longer in the White House, and his actions don't justify what Obama does.
Click to expand...

His actions - and the political reaction to them - amount to a precedent that more-or-less explicitly justifies what Obama does.
 
quadraphonics said:
His actions - and the political reaction to them - amount to a precedent that more-or-less explicitly justifies what Obama does.
Click to expand...

And it is not only the actions of george II, but the actions of many presidents over a long period of time that amounts to precedent which explicitly justifies what Obama has done.
 
quadraphonics said:
It's called "American politics."
Click to expand...

It is? Stupidity?
Wonderful. We're on the right foot.

His actions - and the political reaction to them - amount to a precedent that more-or-less explicitly justifies what Obama does.
Click to expand...

Right. He justifies himself because of his opponent in the last election that he vowed to differentiate himself from.
 
joepistole said:
And it is not only the actions of george II, but the actions of many presidents over a long period of time that amounts to precedent which explicitly justifies what Obama has done.
Click to expand...

Wow.

Are all of you reading off the same cue card? Sounds familiar.

Yes. You are all reading off the same cue card.

Obama's actions are not dependent on any previous president.

They all answer for themselves, not as a collective.
 
fedr808 said:
I play video games, and every time I hear someone call someone else a teabagger I cringe.
Click to expand...
?????????

Dude, do you know what impeach means? Impeach is merely the trial, it does not necessarily lead to removal from office.
Click to expand...

Impeach means to throw a giant peach at someone and/or envelope them within the giant peach in hopes that they will try to eat their way out of it, rather than try to run a country.

It usually doesn't work.
 
Giambattista said:
Wow.

Are all of you reading off the same cue card? Sounds familiar.

Yes. You are all reading off the same cue card.

Obama's actions are not dependent on any previous president.

They all answer for themselves, not as a collective.
Click to expand...

Yes we are, it's called reality and history.
 
Yes we are.

Dildo.



obama-ive-changed12.jpg
 
Giambattista said:
Wow.

Are all of you reading off the same cue card? Sounds familiar.

Yes. You are all reading off the same cue card.

Obama's actions are not dependent on any previous president.

They all answer for themselves, not as a collective.
Click to expand...

you see their is this amazing little legal concept. its call precedent. learn about it
 
the wars power resoulution of 1973 allows military action only in regards to aporoval of congress or immenent danger to the country. you could argue both of those here. but for the first the senate ratified the UN charter making us a part of the body and under an obligation to help enforce its decries.
 
Rhaedas said:
Even subtle Godwin's law applies.
Click to expand...

Even Obama's Law applies.

Thou wilt rape American hearts, and thou shalt pretend to win them over with pretensions of overcoming the race barrier....

They will be bamboozled.

Obama is a fake.

But he means well. He tries.
But his hands are tied.
He has lots of strings.
Like a ventriloquist's dummy.

No wonder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top