ObamaCare NOT working as planned

">https://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2056[/q


Absolutely hilarious watching the ol two step attempts around Alans logical points.

It was an asshole move by many Democrats, led by - who else? - Dennis Kucinich. Subsequently, the judiciary committee dropped it without a single hearing and the good Democrats in Dennis the Menace's district decided to replace him with a different Democrat.

Oh, and if it give you a warm and fuzzy, I'll (again!) say that Obama has changed positions on stuff like single-payer, warrantless wiretapping, and net neutrality. The first time in human history that a politician has changed positions!

But if you believe that actions speak louder than words, then Obama has NOT changed his position on executive orders, administrative fiats by his cabinet members, and signing statements. On the other hand, alanleroy if you believe that words speak louder than actions, I think that's a delusion driven by you political outlook.

You're asking me for a summary of all Constitutional Law regarding checks and balances? Really? Sign up for a class at your local community college. Here's the Cliff Notes: See Richard Nixon. I apologize that I cant summarize the entire Federal Court System, Congressional Oversight Committees, and FBI in any succinct post here. If your point is the President is free to do whatever he wants then I'm afraid I cant take you seriously.

Impeachment proceedings are rooted in legitimate evidence that a high crime or misdemeanor has occurred in the White House. Evidence does not take the form of a question or conspiracy theory. Example 1: Its is a known and admitted fact the previous administration engaged in interrogation tactics that broke international law regarding torture. I dont know if it was ultimately impeachable...but there was evidence and even admissions of that policy coming from the highest levels of the White House including the Vice President.... considering it was 2008 and the president was on the way out I would agree it was a waste.

Example 2: President Obama did something illegal in Bengazhi and with the IRS....and the evidence is.....well I dont know. And neither do the people are pushing impeachment. Nobody can articulate any evidence of any kind.

I'm sorry that you draw a false equivalence between example 1 and example 2. But I've noticed you are pretty good at that.

You're the one who said it was easy, not me.

Accuse me of whatever....I just want you to be absolutely clear. Did you support the house attempting to impeach President Bush, or was that just another example of political 'Sour Grapes'?

I do give you credit for pointing out President Obama's other flip-flops. And no he's not the only politician to become cynical and tinged by the power of politics. I think that happens to all of them if they're there long enough.

I am taking President Obama at his word that he 'has a pen and a phone' and will accomplish his agenda with or without congress. Now we can argue that this is a 'New Obama' and his philosophy has changed from his first years in office. We can argue that his new stance is based on Republican Obstructionism. But the meaning of his words are pretty clear and stand in direct opposition to the words of Candidate Obama.

So you think me delusional for taking President Obama at his word? Ok..you got me there.

No,I didn't support it..but there was evidence of legitimate crimes committed...hence the difference I referenced earlier and you ignored Wiki

Now lets be absolutely clear on your part, Alan. Do you think there is a difference between admission of questionable policy...and being baselessly accused of questionable policy? And if you recognize that difference doesn't that make your attempt to equivocate apples and oranges absurd?

Let me make this absolutely clear. I believe the impeachment of Clinton, The attempted impeachment of George W. Bush and the mere Talk of Impeachment of President Obama are all housed in petty partisan politics. I make no distinction between them and see them all as stupid partisan efforts to undermine the authority of the President.

As Forkush so eloquently pointed out they are all 'Asshole Moves'. I'm sorry you are so blinded by your personal politics that you just can't seem to admit that Democrat and Republican politicians both pull the same stupid nasty shit. From threatening to sue the president to prevent executive orders to threatening or actually impeaching him...If you seriously think that only Republicans are guilty of this crap...well there may be no hope for you.

As for me, I'm squarely in the camp of throwing ALL the bums out.

I already said I didn't support the 2008...and now you've confirmed that you believe "evidence" and "no evidence" are the same thing. Glad we got everything cleared up

Oh come on. I've confirmed no such thing. I'm just looking at their petty partisan motives and what is good for our country....It's not pushing an impeachment charge that further divides us and has no possible hope of coming to fruition. That's just political grandstanding in the worst possible way. The Republicans did it in 98, the Democrats did it in 08 and I sincerely hope the Republicans don't do it again in 14. It's wrong headed pandering to the base and not in the interest of all Americans.

You're looking at what exactly for your 'evidence and no evidence' charge? Are there actual articles of impeachment for Obama drawn up? Did the House Vote to send it to judiciary? Can you send them to me or publish them so we can all see what Obama is charged with?

So you're somehow comparing an impeachment charge that isn't written that may never be voted on to one that really truly existed and was actually voted on? And then you turn around and accuse me of some kind of bizarre belief that 'evidence and no evidence' are the same thing. I guess in your fantasy world, impeachment and not impeachment are the same thing.

You just can't make this shit up.