There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers
"He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
Now, should Obama start behaving as if he loves this country, respects the Constitution, our individual rights, stops treating this as some type of collective, then my opinion and view might change. I say might because I would wonder what scheming this guy would be up to.
We've come a long way from the time people freaked out when someone said they wanted him to fail (because of his policies) to the majority of Americans actually wanting him to be stopped. There are some bitter clingers on the left that are still ladeling the Kool-Aid, but hey... some folks are just unreachable. They're true followers of the Alinsky/Obama/Marxist Doctrine... and they're closed minded. (Why not read the book linked below and ask yourself if that might be you.)
Last edited by zimmer; 03-24-11 at 07:02 PM.
I AM DEPLORABLE.
NEVER CRIMINAL HILLARY (S-NY)
1. UN Resolution 1973 authorized the use of force to establish a no fly zone and protect Civilians by any means. It does not mandate anything.
2. What Obama has done falls under the War Powers Act of 1977. He had 48 hours to notify Congress which he did. He now has 60 days before he is required to get Congressional Authorization and if not he has 30 days to withdraw.
Based on this sad to day but Obama can not be impeached for this.
He is in violation of Article 4 Section 4 of the Constitution for not protecting the States form invasion by illegals and not just Mexicans.
This is too hilarious - I wonder which way New Gingrich (probable Republican Presidential Candidate) would go - impeach or not impeach! LOL!
Newt Gingrich: For Libyan Intervention Before he Was Against It
Posted by MICHAEL CROWLEY Wednesday, March 23, 2011
ThinkProgress busts the former House Speaker in--barring some explanation I can't imagine--a rather shameless act of flip-floppery, shifting within days from "exercise a no-fly zone this evening" to "I would not have intervened."
To me this is Gingrich's great strength also proving to be a great liability. Gingrich has had political staying power in large measure because he's extremely deft at crafting sound bites that hit like exploding bullets. (You'll find a bunch in my recent Newt story, here.) Part of that comes from Newt's knack for making his every position sound authoritative and definitive. The problem is that such certitude rarely stands up to complex facts and changing events. Still, when asked the same question under different circumstances--in this case, with Obama acting versus Obama not acting--Gingrich's impulse is to sound as certain in his new position as he was in his old, now outdated one.
Read more: Newt Gingrich: For Libyan Intervention Before he Was Against It - Swampland - TIME.com
"I have been thinking that I would make a proposition to my Republican friends... that if they will stop telling lies about the Democrats, we will stop telling the truth about them." --Adlai Stevenson, Politician
Conservatives may want to remember that Constitutionally, if Obama is impeached, it wouldn't negate the '08 election. It would mean President Biden. Unless that's what you want...
(BTW, I may be wrong, but doesn't it go to Harry Reid next? Again, that doesn't sound like something you want.)
Fact: President Bush's Administration lied to Congress, the American People and the United Nations about national intelligence that it used as the false pretext for invading a sovereign country.
Fact: The national intelligence estimate used by the Bush Administration as its basis for invading a sovereign country, was not the same version of the national intelligence estimate put before the United States Senate.
Fact: When George W. Bush, ordered the United States Military to invade a sovereign country based on false statements made to the United States Senate about a national intelligence estimate which contained no justification for going to war, George W. Bush, committed an impeachable offense.
Fact: When George W. Bush, delivered to the United States Senate, a false version of the national intelligence estimate used to justify the need to invade a sovereign country, defining the same as being necessary for the protection of national security interests of the United States of America, George W. Bush, committed an impeachable offense.
Fact: When George W. Bush, addressed the United Nations as the Executive Branch representation of the United States of America, and made false statements on behalf of the United States of America, in an attempt to gain unwarranted support for the creation of a Military Coalition for the sole purpose of carrying out the invasion of a sovereign country, based solely upon false statements made about threats to the national security of the United States of America, and based on false statements about the non-compliance of that same sovereign country to adhere to and abide by previous United Nations resolutions regarding the dismantling of "Weapons of Mass Destruction," George W. Bush, committed an impeachable offense.
Fact: The United States of America, is a permanent member and signatory of the United Nations and thus has made itself subject to the international laws that govern its Members within the United Nations.
Fact: Libya, is a current member, General Assembly seat holder and signatory of the United Nations and thus made itself subject to the international laws that govern its Members within the United Nations.
Fact: When the Government of Libya, used its Military to put down a peaceful protest of its citizenry engaged in the redressing grievances process through public, non-violent and un-armed demonstrations, the Government of Libya committed a violation of its signature within the United Nations General Assembly, and having done so, also violated International Law, making itself accountable for redress through the process of United Nations Security Council Resolution - up to and including the use of Military force to bring Libya in compliance with International Law.
Fact: When Barak Obama, ordered the United States Military to strike designated military targets in the sovereign country of Libya, under the authorization expressly outlined by the United Nations Security Council, which outlined the use of force to erect a U.N. No-Fly-Zone and to use force as necessary to protect the lives of the Libyan People from the Military aggression received from the Libyan Government in violation of its signature at the United Nations, President Barak Obama, committed no impeachable offense.
Now, those are the facts, like it or not. If the world is going to have a body like the United Nations, and if sovereign countries are going to make themselves subject to the international laws that come from such a body, then those same sovereign countries cannot cry foul, when they are found in violation of their own signature that gives the United Nations and its Members the legal authority to bring the violating country into compliance. It really is just that cut and dry.
Thus, the case for impeaching and/or trying the current President of the United States of America is therefore, all at once, without merit and without any foundation or basis in U.S. and/or international law.
Case in point. Case closed. Grand jury dismissed. Home in time for supper.
Last edited by PW4000; 03-25-11 at 01:18 PM.
SEC. 2. (c)
The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.
Libya does not meet criteria 3. Obviously criteria 1 can't pertain, so what specific statutory authorization did he receive to meet this requirement?