Bryan Preston:
would write that we’ve reached the low point of the Obama presidency, but with two years plus left to run, he and his party are bound to go even lower.
For now, here’s how low they go. They’re literally inventing a threat, and then running on that threat as if it’s real.
Rep. Steve Israel, the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said Wednesday that conservative calls to impeach President Barack Obama and the House GOP’s push to sue the President are motivating the Democratic base in advance of November’s midterm elections.
“You bet we’re going to run on a Congress that is just obsessed with lawsuits, suing the President, talking about impeaching him, instead of solutions for the middle class, talking about jobs and infrastructure. You bet that we’re going to ask people to support us based on that contrast,” Israel declared at a briefing of CNN political reporters and producers.
As Rep. Israel knows because he has an office there, the House has sent more than 300 bills to the Senate which that body’s Democrat leadership has ignored, canned, panned and cast out. Those bills run across pretty much every issue, from jobs to foreign policy to tax reform to border security. The Democrat-controlled Senate won’t even bring them up for a vote.
So it’s a lie to claim that the House is “obsessed” with going after Obama.
Israel says talk of impeachment and lawsuit against Obama is motivating the Democratic party’s base.
“The phone calls, the emails, people signing up, wanting volunteer on campaigns, has surged literally over the past several weeks. Now it always surges as you get closer to an election, but I’m telling you the August numbers are what the Octobers numbers should be,” Israel said.
And he added that “their accusations of presidential overreach have become a Republican overreach and that is motivating swing voters and persuadable voters.”
There’s absolutely no evidence that most of that is true. Swing voters surely aren’t moving the Democrats’ way over this, at least not yet. Republicans are still ahead on the generic ballot and by my count, stand to gain at least five Senate seats from the Democrats this fall. At least five. But if the Democrats tell the lie loud enough, there’s always the possibility that it may work.
Impeachment is ”off the table.”
BUT Dems are emailing supporters from the past with this promise:
Still Dems have not reached even $1 million!
I guess that includes all those ”triple matching,” funds.
So, that means Dems have gone ballistic but failed to even bring in $250,000.
I bet Dems are glad email is so cheap.
Real snail mail might have cost them more than they are bringing in!
Well, what would you expect them to do; campaign on their SUCCESSES?
As if it’s real? That’s got to be right up there with Glenn Beck’s recent admission that Iraq was a mistake. Media figures and elected officials have been promoting the possibility of impeachment as a regular between-the-acts feature in their rotational line-up of scandals and investigations for the past couple of years now. Maybe they should have prefaced each such discussion with a disclaimer stating Of course you all know that we’re not the least bit serious about this. It’s just part of the show, folks.
So, Boehner and his Obama haters, just after 24 hours from accomplishing a lawsuit against Obama for using precedent Presidential executive orders and acting on his own without Congressional approval to curtail a law which they have wasted tax payers money and valuable legislative time over 50 times to repeal, now wants Obama to ignore Congressional approval and resolve the boarder crises on his own, uh, without Congressional approval.
This is your Tea Party governance at work. And from some sick perverted illogical reasoning the ilk here believes we should hand power over to the very party that has done everything in their power to sabotage the government and economy?
@Ronald J. Ward:
Accomplishing a law suit? When was it filed? What court was it filed in? What does the suit say?
A hater can’t stop hating. No other saying applies more to Obama. And while I never agreed with Bill Clinton’s politics, he never resorted to the vitriol that is employed by Obama.
And perhaps you would like to explain under what Constitutional authority Obama has changed the law, or refused to implement the law, that he not only lobbied for, but signed?
Obama could do a lot on his own to help the border situation. First, he could suspend the DACA. He ordered it, unconstitutionally, he can cancel it. He could send the National Guard to the border, will full arrest powers.
But the funniest part is seeing black Americans rail on Obama for caring more about illegals than he does the black children being slaughtered by other blacks in Chicago. News flash, black America; the Democrats have a new mistress, and it ain’t you.
@Ronald J. Ward: Obama is saddled with a bad legislation he signed into law which he has been unilaterally and illegally preventing from going fully into effect. He has been so political about it that he saw the government shut down rather than allow Congress to do, legally, what he not long afterword did himself, illegally. This, Ronald, not hatred, is why Obama is going to be sued. Of course, as if it even needed to be said, you would (again) be singing a far different tune if a Republican was acting in this way. Boehner, by doing this, assures that can never happen. But, sycophantic trailers such as yourself can never be able to see such truth.
Obama just finds all them laws and stuff inconvenient impediments to him doing , with the full assets of the United States of America, what he and he alone feels is best for his campaign contributors, if not everyone else. If what he has wrought upon us up till now is any indication, we need the restrictive powers of the Constitution now more than ever. What he is going to (hopefully) find out is that he is not quite as hot a number as he thinks he is. Obviously, he does not know and understand nearly as much about following the Constitution as he (and others) thinks he does; he only knows the means to circumvent it.
Pelosi wants Boehner to take impeachment off the table. This Boehner cannot do. Only Obama can do that.
The Dimocrats are so frigging stupid they don’t even realize it’s them that’s talking about impeachment. I think the Right should just keep pointing out that Obama is checked out. His only goal in the next two years is to see how many rounds of golf he can play and how many days him and Mooche can vacation. The world is on fire and Zippy is golfing, or money raising. Let him continue it. We don’t want him focusing on politics, he can only screw things up even worse.
@Greg:
Greg, you do realize that “media figures” mean the liberal press, don’t you? The only elected officials talking impeachment is Dimocrats as an election fund raiser, which clearly is not working.
“and resolve the boarder crises” Ronald J Ward: That cracks me up. Who is the ‘boarder’ causing the crisis? Moochelle?
@Bill:
You know Bill, I’ve entertained your asinine gibberish perhaps for the same reasons I’m entertained by “Everyone Loves Raymond” reruns. They’re so profoundly stupid that one can’t help but be amused. But much like how Don Knots was quite a hit on The Andy Griffith Show, he was somewhat washed up on Three’s Company. Likewise, while you’re buffoonery is ticklish at times, your above statement jumps the shark on any intelligent level, even for those of us trying to laugh with you. Or hell, for that matter, even at you.
@Redteam:
I see RJW is back to his old self of insulting those that disagree with him when he has no intelligent retort.
@retire05: Actually, if you read my response (or perhaps better yet, have someone read it to you), I didn’t insult anyone at all but rather chastised the statement of that person (hence: “your above statement jumps the shark on any intelligent level”).
Do you practice stupidity? Feel free to take that as a slam to you personally.
@Ronald J. Ward:
Practice? I’d agree most on the right would have to practice, whereas lefties come by it naturally.
@Ronald J. Ward:
Thanks for proving my assertion.
This kind of reminds me of the scene in Christmas Story when Miss Shields asks Ralphie’s class who put Flick up to putting his tongue against the flagpole. Blank looks all around.
The first point I remember republicans talking about impeachment was in connection with Joe Sestak and the Arlen Specter primary. Darrell Issa brought it up. That was in mid-2010. Then there was Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona, suggesting impeachment over immigration policy. That was in 2012, on Bill Bennett’s Morning in America program. In 2013 Rep. Jason Chaffetz raised the possibility of impeachment in connection with Benghazi. That was on CNN. Sen. Tom Coburn brought it up that same year at a town hall meeting in Oklahoma. Sarah Palin argued in an article that Obama should be impeached earlier this month. The South Dakota Republican Party recently voted to call for Obama’s impeachment in connection with the prisoner exchange involving Bowe Bergdahl. Then there’s this guy.
@Greg: And your point ‘O’ anointed one?
My point is that the following claim is absurd:
@Greg: Only a president can be impeached. Obama is a usurper, he can only be removed by court action.
@Ronald J. Ward:
Well, then YOU, Ronald, should easily be able to point out where I am wrong, right? Did or did not the Republicans stand for delaying the employer mandate, and did or did not Obama and the Democrats refuse to entertain such a possibility and have the government shut down instead (a shut down they went out of their way to make as unnecessarily painful on the American people as possible)? And now, after all of that has or has not Obama gone ahead and, unilaterally and illegally, delayed the implementation of the employer mandate (along with 30 or so other unilateral changes)?
You might just check out your statements, Ronald, and you would find a pattern of others presenting you with facts and, in response, you simply call them stupid or asinine and hope no one notices you have no facts to refute the facts you faced. That is not just stupid and asinine, but childish to boot.
Look, it’s not my fault you supported a foolish buffoon that pretended to be a Presidential candidate and it turned out badly for us all. You would be a much better person and grow emotionally as well as intellectually if you would simply admit you failed to do your homework and supported a lie. Come on, Ronald; put on your big-boy pants and see the facts.
@Greg: There is really no argument that Obama SHOULD be impeached; he most certainly should. He has shown repeatedly he has no regard whatsoever for any law unless he can use it as a means to achieve his agenda. Sadly, though, our Democrats, unlike the Republicans of the Nixon era, hold their support to the Democrat party far above their loyalty to the Constitution, their constituency or the nation. Republicans in Congress are aware of this and, while rightfully Obama should be removed from office, it would only help the situation if Biden, Reid and Pelosi could be taken along with him, so what, exactly, would be the point?
However, if Obama pushes the subject and does something that turns some Democrats against him (i.e., action that costs them votes at home, not anything more that causes more damage to the country… they have shown they don’t care about that), impeachment could certainly be pursued.