Rep. Jim Clyburn: GOP will try to impeach President Obama

[DCPatriot]

I don't think that the debate between impeachment and non impeachment should involve race........AT ALL.

The question is not whether or not Obama has committed impeachable offenses.  I would guess that 100% of the people on this forum agree that he has.  (Well.........maybe one or two don't).

I think what it boils down to with me is whether or not the ultimate goals will be achieved if the Republicans fall into Obama's Brer Rabbit trap and start impeachment proceedings.  There is no question that the Dems want the R's to go that direction.

Frankly, I don't ever think there has been a debate in which I have been so conflicted.  I AM a Constitutionalist.  Impeachment IS the way the Constitution provides for law breaking punks like Obama.

And yet................... and yet, I'm not sure that under all the circumstances that exist, it's the right thing to do right now.   I find myself agreeing with posts I'm reading on BOTH sides of the debate on this thread.

I wonder if anyone else is experiencing the same thing............

Michael Savage just spoke about this dilemma on his show within the past half hour.

He calls Obama a "Communist street agitator, who is purposefully trying to destroy the country by inciting race riots in Ferguson, Mo....and beyond.  He 'secretly' met with the Ferguson activist leaders the DAY AFTER the mid-terms and told them to stay the course. 

According to Savage, he is going to use the smoke and violence of Ferguson and hopefully beyond, to pass amnesty.

Savage pointed out that in WWII, our soldiers had to shoot OUR own wounded in the Pacific Theater, soldiers with frost-bitten hands and legs...because there was no time to ability to transport them out.   And that said wounded GLADLY ACCEPTED THE SHOT.  Nobody begged...nobody cried.

Savage asked if those soldiers gave up their lives fighting so this Communist street agitator could set the country on fire and destroy it by giving amnesty to up to 30 million illegal immigrants.

Now incidentally, Savage is dead-set against impeachment.   His solution is for the current GOP makeup to do what the Democrats did to President Bush's Executive Order on the limits of using fetal brain stem cells for cloning, etc..  They simply passed a bill canceling Bush's EO.

He wants the current GOP held House to do the same thing and make Obama veto it.

Then in January, we can override the veto.  Presto....mission accomplished.

NOTE:  I'm not aware that the GOP has a "super majority"....otherwise, why are we fretting right now?

[MACVSOG68]

I don't think that the debate between impeachment and non impeachment should involve race........AT ALL.

The question is not whether or not Obama has committed impeachable offenses.  I would guess that 100% of the people on this forum agree that he has.  (Well.........maybe one or two don't).

I think what it boils down to with me is whether or not the ultimate goals will be achieved if the Republicans fall into Obama's Brer Rabbit trap and start impeachment proceedings.  There is no question that the Dems want the R's to go that direction.

Frankly, I don't ever think there has been a debate in which I have been so conflicted.  I AM a Constitutionalist.  Impeachment IS the way the Constitution provides for law breaking punks like Obama.

And yet................... and yet, I'm not sure that under all the circumstances that exist, it's the right thing to do right now.   I find myself agreeing with posts I'm reading on BOTH sides of the debate on this thread.

I wonder if anyone else is experiencing the same thing............

I think that's a very honest assessment ML.  I do believe that even those of us here (RINO, ignorami, Pukes, etc) who do not want to see an impeachment are also very conflicted.  Personally I believe the Republicans were swept into control of both houses, not to go after Obama in such a manner, but to put Congress back into the legislative process as relevant and meaningful participants.  Republican candidates made a lot of promises about fixing Obamacare, the budget, taxes, energy and immigration.  I'll go way out on a limb and suggest that most Americans want to see action on those issues, not a grudge match for the next year and a half with only one possible outcome.

Impeachment is the ultimate political weapon, and should be used only when no other option exists.  the USSC has already scolded Obama once, and I suspect can and will do it again.  Reid can no longer hide GOP legislation from the Senate, the lawsuit will go forward, and the GOP still has the power of the purse.  As conflicted as I am about Obama and what he may attempt, I'm not ready to throw out the mandate of the American voter just yet.  But the GOP has frequently disappointed me just as they have most here.  I'm hopeful but far from convinced they will pull it off.

 

[Bigun]

I wonder if anyone else is experiencing the same thing............

Yes indeed! And I've said so.

[Cyber Liberty]

I think that's a very honest assessment ML.  I do believe that even those of us here (RINO, ignorami, Pukes, etc) who do not want to see an impeachment are also very conflicted.  Personally I believe the Republicans were swept into control of both houses, not to go after Obama in such a manner, but to put Congress back into the legislative process as relevant and meaningful participants.  Republican candidates made a lot of promises about fixing Obamacare, the budget, taxes, energy and immigration.  I'll go way out on a limb and suggest that most Americans want to see action on those issues, not a grudge match for the next year and a half with only one possible outcome.

Impeachment is the ultimate political weapon, and should be used only when no other option exists.  the USSC has already scolded Obama once, and I suspect can and will do it again.  Reid can no longer hide GOP legislation from the Senate, the lawsuit will go forward, and the GOP still has the power of the purse.  As conflicted as I am about Obama and what he may attempt, I'm not ready to throw out the mandate of the American voter just yet.  But the GOP has frequently disappointed me just as they have most here.  I'm hopeful but far from convinced they will pull it off.

You have put what I've been trying to say in a much more eloquent fashion.  As I read your post, I spotted this:

I do believe that even those of us here (RINO, ignorami, Pukes, etc) who do not want to see an impeachment are also very conflicted.

A thought occurred to me.  I'm relatively new here, so nobody really knows if I fall into one of those categories.  I'm a conservative who by and large identifies with the Republican party, and I know sometimes one must make lateral moves to move the ball down the field.  I come from a forum where I've been a noisy wheel for 16 years, and it never occurred to me that people might get irritated with me because they don't know me yet.

Thanks for bringing that home.  Oh, that other guy is still on my List.   

[MACVSOG68]

You have put what I've been trying to say in a much more eloquent fashion.  As I read your post, I spotted this:
A thought occurred to me.  I'm relatively new here, so nobody really knows if I fall into one of those categories.  I'm a conservative who by and large identifies with the Republican party, and I know sometimes one must make lateral moves to move the ball down the field.  I come from a forum where I've been a noisy wheel for 16 years, and it never occurred to me that people might get irritated with me because they don't know me yet.

Thanks for bringing that home.  Oh, that other guy is still on my List.   

You're okay in my book CL!  Sometimes, the silly names get really irritating, but those in particular have been thrown at some of us within the last couple of weeks.   If I respond immediately, it's usually not in the best interests of this forum...or me.  If I wait a while, recognizing who's doing it, and likely their age, I tend to blow it off maybe with a little sarcasm, but not the vitriol I used to use.  So don't make your list too long.   

[Cyber Liberty]

You're okay in my book CL!  Sometimes, the silly names get really irritating, but those in particular have been thrown at some of us within the last couple of weeks.   If I respond immediately, it's usually not in the best interests of this forum...or me.  If I wait a while, recognizing who's doing it, and likely their age, I tend to blow it off maybe with a little sarcasm, but not the vitriol I used to use.  So don't make your list too long.   

The day you make the list will be the day I throw it all in.  You are a stand-up guy.  You may get under my skin, but I'll always know that about you.

 

[Oceander]

I think that's a very honest assessment ML.  I do believe that even those of us here (RINO, ignorami, Pukes, etc) who do not want to see an impeachment are also very conflicted.  Personally I believe the Republicans were swept into control of both houses, not to go after Obama in such a manner, but to put Congress back into the legislative process as relevant and meaningful participants.  Republican candidates made a lot of promises about fixing Obamacare, the budget, taxes, energy and immigration.  I'll go way out on a limb and suggest that most Americans want to see action on those issues, not a grudge match for the next year and a half with only one possible outcome.

Impeachment is the ultimate political weapon, and should be used only when no other option exists.  the USSC has already scolded Obama once, and I suspect can and will do it again.  Reid can no longer hide GOP legislation from the Senate, the lawsuit will go forward, and the GOP still has the power of the purse.  As conflicted as I am about Obama and what he may attempt, I'm not ready to throw out the mandate of the American voter just yet.  But the GOP has frequently disappointed me just as they have most here.  I'm hopeful but far from convinced they will pull it off.

 

Could not agree with you more.

[Oceander]

You're okay in my book CL!  Sometimes, the silly names get really irritating, but those in particular have been thrown at some of us within the last couple of weeks.   If I respond immediately, it's usually not in the best interests of this forum...or me.  If I wait a while, recognizing who's doing it, and likely their age, I tend to blow it off maybe with a little sarcasm, but not the vitriol I used to use.  So don't make your list too long.   

I hope that I've outgrown some of the arrogance and vitriol with which I used to post (as I think you may remember).

[MACVSOG68]

I hope that I've outgrown some of the arrogance and vitriol with which I used to post (as I think you may remember).

Heck Ocean, we both went a few rounds back then.  All in the past my friend.  But c'mon, we did have some pretty good tax debates...

[DCPatriot]

Just want to reiterate here that although I am staunchly pro-impeachment, I would never accuse anyone in here of being a (RINO, ignorami, Pukes, etc).

Being disappointed with somebody for their view is as far as I'll go.

As I said up thread, I love all of you that have chosen to make TBR your 'home' to discuss politics and the GOP.

[truth_seeker]

I would just point out that those of us who are currently opposing going the impeachment route ARE using Gruber type arguments to support our positions! (I.E. The voters are STUPID.)

But Gruber was wrong, because the voters were not stupid. They were misled.

And I do assert the majority of voters do NOT want Obama removed from office. Fix stuff, but let him complete his term. That is what the electorate wants the GOP majority to do.

[Bigun]

But Gruber was wrong, because the voters were not stupid. They were misled.

And I do assert the majority of voters do NOT want Obama removed from office. Fix stuff, but let him complete his term. That is what the electorate wants the GOP majority to do.

If you are suggesting that you think the GOP should cooperate with Obama in any way then I strongly disagree!

[MACVSOG68]

Just want to reiterate here that although I am staunchly pro-impeachment, I would never accuse anyone in here of being a (RINO, ignorami, Pukes, etc).

Being disappointed with somebody for their view is as far as I'll go.

As I said up thread, I love all of you that have chosen to make TBR your 'home' to discuss politics and the GOP.

I know you would never say anything like that DC.  But it isn't all that uncommon here.  I don't hang out on any other boards or forums except this one (well except to lurk), and my observation is that while everyone here is into politics and the GOP, not everyone can handle disagreements with the demeanor you and most of the posters regularly exhibit.

[Luis Gonzalez]

I think that's a very honest assessment ML.  I do believe that even those of us here (RINO, ignorami, Pukes, etc) who do not want to see an impeachment are also very conflicted.  Personally I believe the Republicans were swept into control of both houses, not to go after Obama in such a manner, but to put Congress back into the legislative process as relevant and meaningful participants.  Republican candidates made a lot of promises about fixing Obamacare, the budget, taxes, energy and immigration.  I'll go way out on a limb and suggest that most Americans want to see action on those issues, not a grudge match for the next year and a half with only one possible outcome.

Impeachment is the ultimate political weapon, and should be used only when no other option exists.  the USSC has already scolded Obama once, and I suspect can and will do it again.  Reid can no longer hide GOP legislation from the Senate, the lawsuit will go forward, and the GOP still has the power of the purse.  As conflicted as I am about Obama and what he may attempt, I'm not ready to throw out the mandate of the American voter just yet.  But the GOP has frequently disappointed me just as they have most here.  I'm hopeful but far from convinced they will pull it off.

If Sun Tzu were a member of this forum, he would advise to never do what the enemy wants you to do or what they expect you to do.

It's easy to lose sight of the true adversary here. It isn't Obama, it is progressivism.

Obama can hurt progressivism more by just being Obama in the White House, than we could ever hurt progressivism by working to get Obama out of the White House.

[MACVSOG68]

If Sun Tzu were a member of this forum, he would advise to never do what the enemy wants you to do or what they expect you to do.

It's easy to lose sight of the true adversary here. It isn't Obama, it is progressivism.

Obama can hurt progressivism more by just being Obama in the White House, than we could ever hurt progressivism by working to get Obama out of the White House.

Excellent point!

[Oceander]

If Sun Tzu were a member of this forum, he would advise to never do what the enemy wants you to do or what they expect you to do.

It's easy to lose sight of the true adversary here. It isn't Obama, it is progressivism.

Obama can hurt progressivism more by just being Obama in the White House, than we could ever hurt progressivism by working to get Obama out of the White House.

[aligncare]

If Sun Tzu were a member of this forum, he would advise to never do what the enemy wants you to do or what they expect you to do.

It's easy to lose sight of the true adversary here. It isn't Obama, it is progressivism.

Obama can hurt progressivism more by just being Obama in the White House, than we could ever hurt progressivism by working to get Obama out of the White House.

Somehow, though an issue's been talked to death, you manage to present a fresh perspective. kudos.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

I would just point out that those of us who are currently opposing going the impeachment route ARE using Gruber type arguments to support our positions! (I.E. The voters are STUPID.)

That was a brilliant observation.  I also liked your comment earlier "We are all friends here."  I hope to repeat/emulated it myself going forward. 

This whole thread is excellent.  Lots of passionate commentary.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

Furthermore....if the populace were really upset with the Republicans for impeaching Clinton...they should have been insane with rage that Bush, the dastardly Republican, STOLE the 2000 election.

Why then, did GWB throttle John Kerry by about 6 MILLION votes in 2004?

Not "that angry" it would seem.....   

As I recall the House impeached Clinton.  The GOP lost seats in Clinton's 6th year when it was widely believed they would gain seats in the Senate at least because the rats had more seats to defend. 

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1998-11-06/news/1998310048_1_gingrich-notwithstanding-newt

This is the first time since 1934 that a president's party didn't lose seats in a midterm election, the first time since 1822 that a White House gained seats in the sixth year of a presidency.

After the elections the GOP didn't even try to convict Clinton.  In Jan 1999 the Senate voted 100-0 not to hear any live witnesses...and we all knew the fix was in.  The RINOs were more concerned about their elected offices than doing their constitutional duty.

I think they were right.  I think Gore would have been President on 9-11 if the GOP Senate had actually tried to convict Clinton. 

But I don't know how I would prove it.

[Luis Gonzalez]

I would just point out that those of us who are currently opposing going the impeachment route ARE using Gruber type arguments to support our positions! (I.E. The voters are STUPID.)

The voters elected Obama twice and gave him a Democrat-controlled Senate to boot.

Are you arguing that Gruber is wrong?

[GourmetDan]

If Sun Tzu were a member of this forum, he would advise to never do what the enemy wants you to do or what they expect you to do.

If that were the case, then all the GOP would have to do is green-light Bambi's immigration 'reform' executive orders...

[Luis Gonzalez]

If that were the case, then all the GOP would have to do is green-light Bambi's immigration 'reform' executive orders...

Sun Tzu would not preach inactivity or passivity. He'd recommend unexpected counter action.

Blacks in the US are already starting to react to the negative impact illegal immigrants are having on their lives.

Perhaps the best way to handle Obama's executive orders is to use it to pit legalized aliens against blacks.

Divide and conquer.

[DCPatriot]

If that were the case, then all the GOP would have to do is green-light Bambi's immigration 'reform' executive orders...

Just as there is not one, single, solitary Republican's fingerprints on the Affordable Care Act....Obama dares/wishes for the same strategy when it comes to immigration reform.

Why...he'll ".....have those 'wetbacks' voting Democrat for the next 200 years!"   

[GourmetDan]

Sun Tzu would not preach inactivity or passivity. He'd recommend unexpected counter action.

IOW, you now think that Sun Tzu wouldn't apply your initial recommendation but would use a different tactic...

[Cyber Liberty]

If Sun Tzu were a member of this forum, he would advise to never do what the enemy wants you to do or what they expect you to do.

It's easy to lose sight of the true adversary here. It isn't Obama, it is progressivism.

Obama can hurt progressivism more by just being Obama in the White House, than we could ever hurt progressivism by working to get Obama out of the White House.

Thank you, it's what I've been trying to say.  For my efforts, I got personally insulted by one who has made himself the first (and sole) occupant of my "Screw You" list.