It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Can Obama be impeached for sheer incompetence?

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 08:48 AM
reply to post by Bruiex

Barney Frank brought us here, actually...

Barney Frank destroyed the US

posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 08:50 AM
On his first day in office Barack Obama called a staff meeting.

He tells them, "Now that I am President there are a few things that we need to plan for. First, if I am assassinated the first order of business is to swear in Vice President Biden, and then choose a new VP. If I survive but Vice President Biden is killed, then the priority is to find a new VP."

One of the junior staffers then asks, "What if you are both killed?"

President Obama replies, "Shoot Nancy Pelosi!"

posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 08:54 AM
Our leadership sucks. Makes me want to leave the country. But I have 80 acres of land, maybe I will make some kind of off the grid bunker deal.

posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 09:05 AM

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
I agree completely, I just wonder if anyone is aware that at this junction with everything hes passed, ONE household is responsible for 30,000 dollars attributed to his the time the end of the year comes, if the rest of this stuff hes proposing gets through, each household will be yearly 80,000 dollars in debt.......yes you read that right, each household will be accountable for 80,000 dollars just to cover all this crap hes passing.....

Is that what you voted for? Is this how we stimulate the economy? How do you spend money if you are in debt? WAKE UP AMERICA

no, big business, wall street, and side stepping of the regulations are the culprits responsible for the massive failure in our economy. and now wall street and big business need the government to bail them out

george bush for 8 years, and the republican party that controlled congress for 14 years, borrowed money, gave that money to the most wealthy in our country. now the democrats have to raise taxes to pay off the republican credit card. i wish alan greenspan would have given me a 1% interest rate loan on my money, as he did for the bankers in the early 2000's

and spending money while in debt? we weren't when george bush took office. now Obama has a mountain of debt coming into office...gee what took place, and who was in office during that time.

i know that democrats aren't spendthrifts, but the republicans have lost that arguement a long time ago as it pertains to their own fiscal ineptitude.

posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 09:07 AM

Can a president be impeached for sheer incompetence? If so, Obama should be impeached at the end of his 100 day 'honeymoon'.

After inheriting the remnants of the Bush Admin, this question seems hilarious at face value. If ANYONE should have been impeached for "sheer incompetence", BUSH wins that hands down.

During the first month of his administration, he spent more than Bush did on two wars, and Katrina relief and rebuilding

Could you be more specific? Your sentence is really vague.

He has committed diplomatic blunders with UK PM Gordon Brown

Huh? What 'blunder'? Be specific again.

He has proposed taxes that will cause an inflationary spiral, when imposed

BUSH cut taxes in the middle of 'Wartime" (his own ILLEGAL war of aggression. He put this nation in more debt during his term than all the Presidents combined. There has to be a method to put money in the public purse. "Taxes" is a beginning step. Although less taxes is the goal, how can someone possibly give broader tax cuts, but still expect revenue. And I am not talking about Income Tax. After 8n years of deficit spending and tanking us, the Obama Admin has few options as 'what to do'. Taxes are there 'logical' first step. Taxation is already on overload, but their is little other source of revenue for a Nation other than taxation.

He has committed to an assault weapon ban

There were already assault weapon bans in place, Obama is just reinstating laws that were written by Democrats and Republicans, concerning assault weapons. While the fact is that most murders and crime are committed with hand guns, I believe in the Second Amendment. People kill people, they will find any means to do this. "Assault Weapons" is a ruse. But your statement about Obama being the cause of this is erroneous.

He has targeted private citizens for disagreeing with his policies

This statement is true. His hired thugs and Secret Service people are thugs, but that's the status quo.

He has broken campaign promises on hiring lobbyists

You're shocked at this? And which President hasn't. They're all crooked in that way. Shouldn't Bush have been impeached for far worse?

He has broken campaign promises on stopping partisanship

That's a very minor thing to be ranting about. They're all partisans, it's a game, don't you understand?

He has used porkulus and earmarks to pay back his political cronies

Yep, and again, you're shocked? What part of that is 'incompetence'? It's more like thievery, and it will KEEP happening becuase like the BushBots , who thought he could do know wrong, Obama will have his bots too. Nobody checked Bush for all his transgressions, so you're complaining NOW???

He has proposed sitting down with the Taliban

"Sitting Down"?? Link please. Vagueness, appeal to emotion, scare mongering, bumper sticker posts.....much?

He wants to plunge this nation into a socialist economy.

You're JUST starting to wake up to these trends? Where have you been for the last 8 years specifically? There is nothing you have to say about Bush either? Did you speak up when Bush merged the Corporation and State(Fascism)? And Obama is not just a 'Socialist", his a Fascist too. Why do you guys blabber about "Socialism" when ALL of these asshats merge Socialism and Fascism, while giving the appearance of "Left vs. Right".

I really don't get the threads railing against Obama, that seem to ignore the past 8 years. Yes, guy is a Elitist Socialist who is Wall Street and Insider friendly. They all are dirty that way. That's the point. Why do people all of the sudden seem to be pissed about Obama, when Bush gave us tyranny, dictatorship, Empire. Where were all the "Patriots" then?

posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 09:16 AM

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by jsobecky

Some of his more egregious blunders:

During the first month of his administration, he spent more than Bush did on two wars, and Katrina relief and rebuilding.

Wouldn't you say that past administrative actions lead to this inevitability?

How can you blame the past administration? Facts, links, anything? It is a FACT that Obama's proposed spending has more than doulbed Bush's 8 year defecit in less than 6 weeks. This was NOT out of necessity, it was out Obama's socialist ideals. His second in command does not even have confidence in his approach. And the economists - well let the market speak for itself. If Obama were truly proposing sound plans to aid in recovery it would reflect in the market. Wuite the opposite is happening. Everytime a proposal comes out, confidence drops and so does the market.
I'm not a Bush fan - BUT I want to know how much longer the Obama fans are going to continue to blame bush for their President's shortcomings.

posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 09:28 AM

Originally posted by hotrodturbo7
"During the first month of his administration, he spent more than Bush did on two wars, and Katrina relief and rebuilding"

Obama spending

That source says nothing about Bush, Katrina or the wars... Has Obama spent a lot? Yes. But the statement made in the first post has yet to be backed up. At least your source is better than jsobecky's source, which was

"He has committed diplomatic blunders with UK PM Gordon Brown "

No argument. He has committed blunders. All presidents and politicians have. Unless there are perfect human beings, everyone has. Hardly an impeachable offense.

"He has proposed taxes that will cause an inflationary spiral, when imposed "

That's an opinion that will only be proven accurate or not in the coming months and years.

"He has committed to an assault weapon ban"

This would be a HUGE mistake that I would strongly disagree with (being a liberal and all
) I'm going to call my reps today. But still, not impeachable.

"He has targeted private citizens for disagreeing with his policies "

As has been stated, Rush is not a private citizen. He's a public personality, a comedian and political pundit. And Obama said ONE THING about him.

"He has broken campaign promises on hiring lobbyists "

Yes. I think he discovered just how hard that would be. He made a promise he found too difficult to keep. But he did install new and strict restrictions.

"He has broken campaign promises on stopping partisanship "

Where is his promise to "stop partisanship"? He cannot singlehandedly stop partisanship. He called for an end to it, but he needs the cooperation of thousands of people to stop it completely.

I notice you didn't touch the OP's claim of "He has supported the Card Check bill, which eliminates the secret ballot in union votes."

Which is simply not true as shown in this post.

And in the end, none of these are even CLOSE to impeachable offenses. If spending money, making blunders, proposing taxes and legislation, mentioning public figures' names and breaking campaign promises were impeachable, every president we've had would have been impeached!

The Constitution defines impeachment at the federal level and limits impeachment to "The President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United States" who may only be impeached and removed for "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors".


I'm sorry for all the Obama critics out there, but you can't impeach a president simply because you disagree with his policies.

Actually, Obama has a pretty great record for his first 50 days:

Obameter Promises Kept and Broken

The Obameter Scorecard

* Promise Kept 17

* Compromise 7

* Promise Broken 2

* Stalled 3

* In the Works 40

* No Action 444

Edit: Changed "bipartisanship" to "partisanship".

[edit on 11-3-2009 by Benevolent Heretic]

posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 09:32 AM
His approval ratings are astronomical right now, so the majority of Americans think he's doing pretty well.
You'd be hard pressed to make a case for impeachment on the grounds of incompetence.

Besides... if we're talking presidents who are incompetent, none come close to the President that just went back to Texas.

posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 09:36 AM
reply to post by Citizen Aenima

Everyone is pissed because they aren't getting the much-touted "change", but more of the same. When you base an entire campaign on one principle, and then throw it out for business as usual, it kinda makes you look like a hypocrite.

posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 09:46 AM
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

I agree with some of your points, and agree completely that a separate standard can't exists from past president's, except that the man promised various flavors of "change" and now appears unwilling or unable to deliver.

I think what people will find is that the POTUS is not as powerful as some would want them to be. POTUS is just one man. The area that he wields the most power is as Commander in Chief.

Congress, Judiciary, and wealth are where the true power lies. The POTUS is pretty much just a face on there agendas. He can go along or they can get rid of him.

posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 10:06 AM
I've said it before and i'll say it again; there are only two types of republicans.

1) the extremely rich who are protecting their assets (can't blame 'em)

2) poor people who are complete idiots and make claims such as "obama wants to make us socialist" (usually followed up with some rant about the right to bare arms)

I've got news for you. All the money that goes into food stamp and other "socialist" programs is IMMEDIATELY put back into the economy because it is spent. Money being spent is what our economy is based on. Tax breaks, which are something republicans obsess about, allow rich americans to bank the money and therefore it does not get circulated. The original George Bush increased taxes much to the dismay of his party and it eventually lead us to an economic upturn that was huge for our country.

I can't say I agree 100% with everything obama does because I don't. I can't say I disagree with everything republicans push for because I don't. What I will say is that throwing out terms like "socialism" and other stereotypical criticisms are tired and ignorant.

It takes true inovation to overhaul the problems that have gotten us here. As a result some of the tactics used to get us out will seem very different and possibly scary. That doesn't mean we should stand back and scream "socialism." Our country will always be capitalistic regardless of what Obama does. But, it can't be so incredibly capitalistic that we cripple the lower classes completely. The lower class is something that needs to be functional for higher classes to have continued success.

posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 10:06 AM
Typical really, people want instant results. They want their dinner from the drive-thru in 30 seconds. They want their taxes back in 8 hours. They want their toys NOW. They want everything on a platter, and then they want a new President to guide a plane with two flaming wings, a hole in the side and one engine to safety without a hitch. And apparently, in 50 days or left.

Gimme gimme gimme NOW NOW NOW!

How about we give the administration an actual chance to correct the monumental blunders the previous unimpeached administration managed to heap on the nation, before talking impeachment? And saying he has demonstrated 'sheer incompentence' is sensationalist, extreme, and laughable. He had done as good as many previous Presidents, and better than many. I almost felt bad for the guy when he took office, I do not envy him.

posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 10:11 AM
reply to post by jsobecky

well took you 51 days since Obamas been elected to get this subject out. you are a fountainhead of patience. but, i do have to ask, "what took you so long"?

posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 10:16 AM

Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
He can't be impeached, but the congress can hold a vote of no confidence.
[edit on 10-3-2009 by Hastobemoretolife]

[edit on 10-3-2009 by Hastobemoretolife]

This the corect answer,

but he can be , heaven forbid, be hoe you say, um polite : assisinated.

yet he is to valuable for that, so this will not happen, i promise.....

and no person should be put in danger by another....

posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 10:19 AM
Like you right wingers told us on the left when bush minor was selected as opposed to elected... GET OVER IT!!!

Obama's right toe is more competent than bush minor's entire administration was... and I hate to tell you but based on the polls most people agree.

posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 10:24 AM

Originally posted by hotrodturbo7
the man promised various flavors of "change" and now appears unwilling or unable to deliver.

I don't understand how you (or anyone) can make that claim yet. The man will be in office for 1,460 days (minimum). He's been in office for 50. He's served roughly 1/30th of his time... I don't know about you, but considering he still has 1,410 of those 1,460 days to go, I have a pretty good feeling about the amount of change he'll be able to bring to Washington in that time. If he makes 30 times the changes in the next 4 years, I think people are going to be pretty darn pleased. Of course, I'm not one who sang a mantra of "hope and change", so maybe my expectations are different than some. But the vast majority of Obama supporters I talk to are pretty pleased about his work so far.

Originally posted by hotrodturbo7
Everyone is pissed because they aren't getting the much-touted "change", but more of the same.

Really, that's an extreme exaggeration skirting on the edge of downright false. Who is this "everyone" of whom you speak?

I'm astounded at people's impatience, actually.

[edit on 11-3-2009 by Benevolent Heretic]

posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 10:37 AM

Originally posted by kommunist
I read your post with great interest, however I do have a question. You stated that:

"Even his loudest supporters are abandoning him. "

Are there any specific examples of his supporters abandoning him? I was not aware of that. Or, are you simply referring to citizens who initially supported Obama and voted for him are now having "buyers remorse"?

There is this article...


A Turning Tide? Obama still has the approval of the people, but the establishment is beginning to mumble that the president may not have what it takes.

[edit on 11-3-2009 by GuyverUnit I]

posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 10:39 AM
To give some credit to Obama I will say that its going to take a long time for the nation full of crocks to reverse back from the free ride that the Bush administration created for them.

Thanks to oversight, accountability and moronic Ideas (this goes for both sides) we are in the mess we are right now.

But Bush had 8 years to fix the nation, he didn't do a darn thing.

Obama is at least trying to reverse that free ride and trend from the Bush administration.

Yes the markets don't like Obama because the markets likes to operate on deceiving and dirty practices.

Or everybody forgot how the financial mess got here?

Wake up people you don't need to be a genius to see what is going on, how it go us to where we are at now and how the same way that this mess took years even decades so that is how may take to fix.

The promises of change are happening right now is just that many are too blind to see it, even me.

But is happening and I can not wait to see justice be served.

posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 10:41 AM
reply to post by GuyverUnit I

He has what it takes but big corrupted interest do not like it, so they have the tools to brake him or leave him.

He will get back to all those that are nothing but crocks and perhaps even his life will become in the line.

But by his actions right now he is going after all those that are nothing but parasites in Washington.

posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 10:44 AM

You can't Impeach some one for being black
You can't Impeach some one for not hiring Halliburton CEOs
You can't Impeach some one for for not continuing an illegal war
You can't Impeach some one for for giving money back to the people who were taxed
You can't Impeach some one for not hiring Exxon CEOs
You can't Impeach some one for being more worried about America then a new office being built for Black Water in Dubai
You can't Impeach some one for not being one of the "good ol boys" that destroyed America for 8 years
You can't Impeach some one because they believe in science over faith
You can't Impeach some one for trying to fix the past 8 years of mess ups caused by your guy
You can't Impeach some one because the stock market continued to crash as it had under your guy

Understand? Get over it. We voted Halliburton and Exxon out of office.

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in