Obamas impeachment campaign debate

[Spencer Addington]

Republicans don't like a democratic president. Democrats don't like a republic president. Republicans jump the gun more often than democrats. Thus the "impeachment" attempt.

[Xaol]

Republicans don't like a democratic president. Democrats don't like a republic president. Republicans jump the gun more often than democrats. Thus the "impeachment" attempt.

It's so ridiculous, makes one wonder if it isn't time to just reform the system.

[Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth]

Republicans don't like a democratic president. Democrats don't like a republic president. Republicans jump the gun more often than democrats. Thus the "impeachment" attempt.

It's so ridiculous, makes one wonder if it isn't time to just reform the system.

You are still wondering?!? I think reform is overdue...democracy can't survive when businesses are citizens and their 'free speech' is protected before actual citizens.

[Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth]

How are citizens free speech not being protected?

I didn't say they weren't, I said that they are second priority to "corporation's rights".

[Spencer Addington]

How are citizens free speech not being protected?

I didn't say they weren't, I said that they are second priority to "corporation's rights".

By saying they are second priority, you implied that they've been violated.

[Agrus Kos, Enforcer of Truth]

How are citizens free speech not being protected?

I didn't say they weren't, I said that they are second priority to "corporation's rights".

By saying they are second priority, you implied that they've been violated.

I wouldn't say "violated" simply because I think it is too strong of a word, but there are cases every year arguing about citizen's rights of free speech (especially speech concerning religion), but no one thinks twice when the Supreme Court says, "money is speech and corporations can say whatever they want."

[Mlerner12]

How are citizens free speech not being protected?

I didn't say they weren't, I said that they are second priority to "corporation's rights".

By saying they are second priority, you implied that they've been violated.

I wouldn't say "violated" simply because I think it is too strong of a word, but there are cases every year arguing about citizen's rights of free speech (especially speech concerning religion), but no one thinks twice when the Supreme Court says, "money is speech and corporations can say whatever they want."

Well, "free speech" isn't entirely free. It has limits.

[Piotr]

I think their grounds for impeachment are ridiculous. I work in DC and saw these Impeach Obama protestors in front of Union Station yesterday. I asked them why they thought they could impeach Obama- they said because of his "abuse of power" in getting his people appointed during the Congressional recess. what I find hilarious about this is that Reagan did the EXACT same thing when he was president, but you don't hear any Impeach Obama people bringing THAT up! .politics. has no long term memory, clearly.

Your morals are failing, my friend. How somebody evil not getting his punishment in the past is an argument to not punish evil people now? Disappointing.

[Xaol]

I think their grounds for impeachment are ridiculous. I work in DC and saw these Impeach Obama protestors in front of Union Station yesterday. I asked them why they thought they could impeach Obama- they said because of his "abuse of power" in getting his people appointed during the Congressional recess. what I find hilarious about this is that Reagan did the EXACT same thing when he was president, but you don't hear any Impeach Obama people bringing THAT up! .politics. has no long term memory, clearly.

Your morals are failing, my friend. How somebody evil not getting his punishment in the past is an argument to not punish evil people now? Disappointing.

Well that's not exactly what I'm trying to say, but I can see how you'd interpret it that way!

What I meant is, it just makes the Republicans seem (to me at least) massive hypocrits by throwing a tantrum over something a member of their own party did less than 50 years ago.

[Mlerner12]

I think their grounds for impeachment are ridiculous. I work in DC and saw these Impeach Obama protestors in front of Union Station yesterday. I asked them why they thought they could impeach Obama- they said because of his "abuse of power" in getting his people appointed during the Congressional recess. what I find hilarious about this is that Reagan did the EXACT same thing when he was president, but you don't hear any Impeach Obama people bringing THAT up! .politics. has no long term memory, clearly.

Your morals are failing, my friend. How somebody evil not getting his punishment in the past is an argument to not punish evil people now? Disappointing.

In no way is Obama evil. Give me exact moments and things he's done that make him evil. Then compare them to all the good things he's done.

[Rass]

Good evil it's all perspective. If I'm a billionaire Obama is evil because he is trying to take my money (taxing more) and give it to other people /things.

[Mlerner12]

Good evil it's all perspective. If I'm a billionaire Obama is evil because he is trying to take my money (taxing more) and give it to other people /things.

No. It's not because the purpose of that is not evil or malevolent, it's good (in his mind) and that's the deciding factor. Look at the definition.

[Mlerner12]

Good evil it's all perspective. If I'm a billionaire Obama is evil because he is trying to take my money (taxing more) and give it to other people /things.

No. It's not because the purpose of that is not evil or malevolent, it's good (in his mind) and that's the deciding factor. Look at the definition.

Hitler thought what he was doing was good.  So obviously he isn't evil.  Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.............  I'm loving your logic...

Well, his reasoning was bad either way. Obamas is good. What's he's doing has good intentions and is logically a good thing to do.

[Mlerner12]

Good evil it's all perspective. If I'm a billionaire Obama is evil because he is trying to take my money (taxing more) and give it to other people /things.

No. It's not because the purpose of that is not evil or malevolent, it's good (in his mind) and that's the deciding factor. Look at the definition.

Hitler thought what he was doing was good.  So obviously he isn't evil.  Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.............  I'm loving your logic...

Well, his reasoning was bad either way. Obamas is good. What's he's doing has good intentions and is logically a good thing to do.

Making the optimal human race was a "good" thing to do.  it would increase the quality of everyone's life.    The viewpoint matters.  To people in the SS they all thought hitler had good intentions and was wanting to help the world.

Except no matter what, humans that look a different way aren't genetically superior. They're the same as other humans. It's bad no matter how you look at it from any way other than Germanic Nazi.

[Mlerner12]

No matter what, socialism steals from the rich and gives to the poor.  No matter what, excessively taxing the rich to give the poor free healthcare is theft.

Just because you see things one way doesn't make that 100% for sure good, and the other way 100% wrong/evil.  If hitler would have won the war, then his view would be the "good" view and the people who were fighting for the jews would have been "evil"

I'm sorry if that anology offends anyone, it's just the most recognized and easiest analogy to use.

That's not theft! Theft is stealing! Taxing is not! People who give taxes are doing something the government asks them to do!