I never thought I would say this, but I’m beginning to think that impeachment may be the best way to culminate the United States’ first black president’s career.
I am rapidly warming to the idea that the impeachment ofmay be the best way to ensure him a holistic, historically justifiable and sound, though partly tragic, heroic legacy.
And it might not only be a good thing for Mr Obama but possibly the best thing for his country, reflecting something of the state of race-relations there and facilitating a process of wider socio-economic catharsis in the US.
Is impeachment such a bad thing?
Has it hurtterminally?
Has former President Clinton’s impeachment been so damaging that it might seriously undermine his wife, former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton’s chances, if she decides to run for the White House in 2016, as is now more than likely?
Sorry, I just can't agree with you.
Because you answered your own question, "Why impeach him": Not only because he deserves it, but also because all the citizens-in-name-only in government see the great advantages of his remaining in power for them personally -- they can hide their corruption behind his and he surely has promised them he will be loyal as long as they serve his purposes (yes they are that stupid) and their basic agenda is the same. To defeat him and them, impeachment (even w/o removal) is a crushing loss of political capital and much less influence to sell. They cannot destroy America unless we let them.
Obeying the law alone is a serious threat to their kind. Fear, from top to bottom, is their main tool.
If you are afraid of race-riots or the military, etc. -- it only means you've eaten their tripe.
As far as martyrdom is concerned, that may only be one of our terms; those without a true faith cannot remember the name of even one martyr outside of the provocateur's AgitProp, because of the chaos of 'the cause' and so many bodies already under the bus. We will not see 30 million lumps of canon fodder gleefully going down for Obama, if it comes to that.
We are looking at weak 18th Century style thinkers, who see their blitzkrieg crapping out from depending upon people with a short attention span and not much more than a worse short term memory. None do too well in a live, novel, situation, i.e. - the real world.
Impeach him? the real question is Why the hell not?
That is the most respectful and respectable thing to do. Just moaning and groaning while riding this pony into the volcano makes no sense at all.
Impeachment is not the way to go with the Usurper, The Great Pretender, the Imposter-in-Chief. That is reserved for those LEGITIMATELY in the office who have gone wayward IN the office. Obama is not a "natural born" citizen; therefore he is in the office ILLEGALLY.
The way to deal with this fraud is- after fair warning to him (which could be given at the Operation American Spring rally on May 16th) - to have the Oathkeepers in the nation - the military, present and past - with a sizable representation of The People behind them, remove him from the office, by nonviolent means if at all possible (since violence just begets violence). And that way, all the legislation that he has signed into law illegally (including ObamaCare), and all the Executive Orders and Presidential Directives that he has issued illegally, and all the appointments that he has made illegally (including to the Supreme Court), GO WITH HIM.
The Vice President goes with him, too; since the Democrat Party as an entity signed off on his illegal candidacy. And the Republican Party is up for legal censure as well, for obviously having perfidiously colluded in that caper, in both the 2008 and the 2012 elections. Which are, perforce, NULL AND VOID. And the U.S. military can support an Officer of The People in the Commander-in-Chief's office until new elections can be held, including for ALL of Congress. Which Officer can wield a mean broom in cleaning out the executive branch of the federal government, of all those who are there to subvert the law of the land - the Constitution.
Still hanging in there. If only by a thread.
Please, the only constitutional way to remove anyone holding the office of the presidency, even illegally, is through the impeachment process. What you're advocating is at the very least a coup d'etat or at most a revolution, which may be necessary, as security would open fire and kill many trying to remove Mr. (intentional) Obama even non-violently.
Also, you could bet that some leftist agent provocateur might try to start a violent confrontation by taking a hidden pot shot at the police. It's their modus operandi and they'd like nothing more than for the federal government to declare martial law and start mass incarcerations of "dissidents," i.e., those who believe in a limited constitutional government.
Anyone suggesting otherwise is being unrealistic. In addition, if a president is removed illegally, and that includes by assassination, no law passed by him would be voided unless Congress and a subsequent president pass new laws repealing the old acts. Only if Obama is impeached and convicted by reason of ineligibility do the acts he signed become null and void. There're no other constitutional provisions to the contrary.
As for who'd be president if Obama and Biden were removed, look at the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 (3 U.S.C. § 19). Here's the order:
Roberto, You're right --- We're screwed and tattooed. Things look grim for sure, if we think that we mere mortals can change things for the better, or reverse the clock of time. Perhaps if the Vets and Patriots can establish a solid forum in D.C. and prove most of the illegal, dishonorable, unconstitutional "laws" that Obama has forced upon us, and then somehow impeach him, we might have a legit chance. but it seems like a long row to hoe, bro. Thank you, for your logic. I am just trying to look at things in an honest, realistic way.... but I know that We the People must do SOMETHING, and soon!!
As you say, we're in a bad way, but we must try.
IMHO, it would be morally wrong and cowardly to surrender our arms to any Gov't, but especially Obama's !! I know that history is a super dry subject for many, but I just happen to be a History buff, and a serious student of the Bible [at the bare minimum], and I KNOW what shall happen in the world, soon, for sure !! I have made myself clear about what most bible-smart, educated Christians believe about the USA, too. We will either end up a 3rd world country, or cease to exist. HEAVEN is OUR HOME! While we are here, we will try to obey the Law of the Land, as long as it doesn't interfere with our, true, peaceful worship of the "Father in Heaven" ... the One true God of the KJV Bible.... and yes, HE has a real Name. We know from intense study that WE, Saved Christians have the God-given Right to bear arms [ if we choose to] and defend hearth, home, and loved ones. Period. Before we had guns, we had swords and bows, axes and knives. In fact, I have a "Grossmesser" [big knife]--a 17th century Germanic sword, and very sharp. [See: ColdSteel.com]. Don't let any goofy Liberal or Democrat tell you different, guys and gals, brothers and sisters. --Disabled Vietnam Veteran: 68-70. email@example.com
Very good research and also the only correct and Constitutional manner whereby to remove ineffective and destructive officials. But this is in the best of all possible worlds. We already have a weakened military and Obama plants in high ranking military posts. I do not expect our military to "stand on our side." In our case today, these named into political offices have not for one minute properly functioned while within their ill-gotten positions for the welfare of our country and for We The People. So rather than to abrogate from the Constitution, it is they who chose to play the Communist game. Our Declaration states "and to provide safeguards for future security." This may refer more to "it is your right it is your duty to remove such a government." Than to change the Constitution outright. Perhaps, after a trial period of ten years, all the clever Communists who have been working toward the demise of our great country will have been rooted out. No, we would all be foolish to expect any of these, including Boehner, to clean up government for us. McCarthy was right but he did not have support or a method by which to rid Congress of commies. And here we stand in that very place once again. Finally, we may have to come to blows and take up arms. That too is supported by the Declaration and the Constitution.
I've always maintained that we might well have to dust off the Declaration and take it to heart with a vengeance. It'd be a dangerous move but far less dangerous than acquiescing to tyranny.
However, it's my contention that having a military dictatorship will likely mean the loss of the Constitution, the Republic, and the Great American Experiment forever. I often get the feeling that those who would readily resort to revolution have more in common with the Jacobins than with our Founding Fathers.
As for all the criticism of Sen. McCarthy, about all that he charged was correct. There's a good book out about the subject named, Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy & his Fight Against America’s Enemies.
Los, and Roberto, You two are invaluable for your insight, logic, and understanding of what is, what could be, what MIGHT be, and all the options in between. You both have MY respect and friendship. But, me thinks a few vital factors are missing from the mix, such as a near total control of food, gas, energy, ammo, etc. All the illegal powers that Obama gave himself, by hook and crook, now that fatherless bum in the WH controls some important trigging mechanisms that could cripple and throw the whole country into a tail spin in days, almost to the point of huge riots and anarchy, IMHO. For one thing, just cut off the fuel, gas and petro, and all the stores will not have food !! Or, some say the date of April 24th might witness China blowing the lid off the fact that Fort Knox has NO gold left in it ! We are microns away from total bankruptcy anyway, and the NEW WORLD ORDER is no fairy tale... and this stuff is just for starters.
"... Fort Knox has NO gold..."
And the Fed seems to not have any, either! Germany just asked for the return of THEIR GOLD, and the Fed told them it'll take quite some time to accomplish. Our CONgress gave the Fed the 'power to COIN MONEY', and the Fed took that to mean that they could steal the gold and silver, replacing it with nickle capped copper planchets, along with valueless 'Fed 'notes' '.
It is said that they plan to collapse the 'Dollar' THIS MONTH!
Since NONE of the promises made by the fed have been kept, I say we SHOULD be able to repudiate the 'debt' and start on even ground. They 'loaned' us NOTHING. We SHOULD be able to PAY them NOTHING.
Thomas, your reasons are I why I believe a revolution may be inevitable. My comments were to those who don't know or don't believe in the constitutional process for removing bad, even treasonous, leaders. The missing vital mix you speak of is what may drive a crisis towards revolution, peaceful or otherwise.
The bottom line is that we may have to resort to dusting off the Declaration and taking it to heart with a vengeance as you imply. However, advocating a military dictatorship with an "Officer of The People in the Commander-in-Chief's office" as Stan did is a guaranteed way of ending any hope of a Republic under the rule of constitutional law.
Obama once said he was the Commander-in-Chief of the country. Where is that in the Constitution? As the Constitution states, "The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States;" - period, nothing more. To claim anything more and trying to enforce it is sedition and should be punished by hanging.
We had a gentleman here calling for a "continental congress" as provided by the Constitution (really?) in order to kick out the administration and Congress and hold new elections. I just don't know where people get such crazy ideas about the Constitution.
What he was really proposing was a revolution, and quite frankly we may need one to do just that. But I believe we should at least be more accurate in our discussions.
"...Commander-in-Chief of the country."
I wonder if he didn't 'spin' the 'subject to' portion of the 14th amendment into his being dictat... oops... 'Commander in Chief of the Country?