I have an idea for a poll! How about: "Do you think that the Baxter Bulletin is purposefully messing with the online polls so as to make our community appear attractive to lovers of the current regime who are shopping for a new place to live?"
Someone at the paper sure did earn a gold star last night, pulling the poll back left sometime after midnight.
OldSchoolAmerican - 10 years ago
The Benghazi tragedy is enough grounds to impeach the President as he is the Commander-in-Chief (gag).
And it certainly is appropriate for the House to sue the President about his use of Executive Orders regarding the ACA. The resulting court decision will set precedent for future Executive Orders.
SueNomi - 10 years ago
He's letting our nation be invaded, he took away health care from millions, he refuses to listen to the average American, he left people to die in that embassy...need I go on?
Fire Eyes - 10 years ago
So abandoning people to die in an embassy is not sufficient to warrant impeachment? Leaving the borders wide open to wholesale invasion by God knows who is not enough reason? Slick Willie was impeached for far less, ditto Nixon. BO the PO HAS committed countless violations of the Constitution. I suggest you liberals try reading said Constitution for starters. As to the lawful/unlawful nature of Executive Orders, they are NOT in the Constitution, have NEVER been added to same by any amendment, and therefore should NEVER carry the weight beyond that of mere opinion of the writer. Instead, they have a way of becoming law bypassing all the checks and balances of the Constitution. In my book, that alone is enough to question the agenda of a president who writes them, including FDR.
snowyowl43 - 10 years ago
Cameron, I agree with you totally but he may differ a bit on the interpretation of the present SCOTUS.
Cameron Lincoln - 10 years ago
This poll would gain more meaning if you actually asked what those grounds are. Those who say Obama has exceeded his authority need to refresh themselves on history a little bit. Executive Orders are extremely commonplace throughout our Presidential history. Teddy Roosevelt himself signed 1008 of them. I also suspect most of your readers haven't gone through and read Obama's executive orders. I've read a good portion of them and they range from the absolutely mundane to the "no one should be forced to read something this dull." The threats of impeachment are quite simply groundless. Imagine that. A president who taught Constitutional Law for twelve years knows the Constitution.
snowyowl43 - 10 years ago
The only reason Boehner says he wants to "Sue" Obama is because there are no reasons to Impeach him. Of course there are no reasons to sue him either. The ones that need to be sued are the Republicans in the House.
Leave a Comment
Give others the chance to vote.
Share this poll, because the more votes the better.
I have an idea for a poll! How about: "Do you think that the Baxter Bulletin is purposefully messing with the online polls so as to make our community appear attractive to lovers of the current regime who are shopping for a new place to live?"
Someone at the paper sure did earn a gold star last night, pulling the poll back left sometime after midnight.
The Benghazi tragedy is enough grounds to impeach the President as he is the Commander-in-Chief (gag).
And it certainly is appropriate for the House to sue the President about his use of Executive Orders regarding the ACA. The resulting court decision will set precedent for future Executive Orders.
He's letting our nation be invaded, he took away health care from millions, he refuses to listen to the average American, he left people to die in that embassy...need I go on?
So abandoning people to die in an embassy is not sufficient to warrant impeachment? Leaving the borders wide open to wholesale invasion by God knows who is not enough reason? Slick Willie was impeached for far less, ditto Nixon. BO the PO HAS committed countless violations of the Constitution. I suggest you liberals try reading said Constitution for starters. As to the lawful/unlawful nature of Executive Orders, they are NOT in the Constitution, have NEVER been added to same by any amendment, and therefore should NEVER carry the weight beyond that of mere opinion of the writer. Instead, they have a way of becoming law bypassing all the checks and balances of the Constitution. In my book, that alone is enough to question the agenda of a president who writes them, including FDR.
Cameron, I agree with you totally but he may differ a bit on the interpretation of the present SCOTUS.
This poll would gain more meaning if you actually asked what those grounds are. Those who say Obama has exceeded his authority need to refresh themselves on history a little bit. Executive Orders are extremely commonplace throughout our Presidential history. Teddy Roosevelt himself signed 1008 of them. I also suspect most of your readers haven't gone through and read Obama's executive orders. I've read a good portion of them and they range from the absolutely mundane to the "no one should be forced to read something this dull." The threats of impeachment are quite simply groundless. Imagine that. A president who taught Constitutional Law for twelve years knows the Constitution.
The only reason Boehner says he wants to "Sue" Obama is because there are no reasons to Impeach him. Of course there are no reasons to sue him either. The ones that need to be sued are the Republicans in the House.