What are your views on his presidency and do you believe he is doing a good job or not?
Gosh, what a good question. I'm surprised that the topic has not been well aired already.
He was elected legitimately.
He hasn't committed any misdemeanors or traitorous acts that we know of.
He has done exactly what his predecessor did, except he kicked into overdrive.
And no, he isn't doing a good job, but he can't be impeached for incompetency.
Thats too bad.
Jim, be careful.
If you continue with objective and honest comments, I will start to like and respect you.
And neither of us wants that.
YES HE HAS!!!
He started a war without even CONSULTING congress, let alone getting a declaration of war.
The man has desecrated the Supreme Law of our Land, and no one cares.
"On at least 125 occasions, the President has acted without prior express military authorization from Congress. .."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaratio … ted_States
125 times and not a single impeachment ....
Evan - I like you but I disagree with a lot of the ideas that exist in the vacuum unaffected by real history, Supreme Court decisions and the reality that most of us live in.
Exactly. We are mature adults here, we do not need to cry for impeachment when we disagree with the President's policies. Just as there was no ground for the cries that Bush should be impeached, there is no ground for those cries with Obama.
You are quite correct. On Mr. Bush's part, being a moron was no grounds for impeachment.
No...just given a pink slip at the end of the day...like us people in reality land get...for poor job performance or the fact that we had to reduce our work force costs and discovered that we could do with out his position!
You believe that our country could do better without a presidency?
HHHMMM...I don't believe we have a real president that is concerned for the American Public...only someone that has puppet strings to the real power: secret money control. I believe that has been the case, on the average, since the early 1800's- (Some Presidents more then others)...maybe even beyond that. However, I do feel like the earlier Presidents back before the early-1800's had their hands full assembling and defining a nation. All this has been a planned subverted effort over the period of several centuries...Bringing me to the conclusion that "they" are more interested (as a set "long-term" goal) in seeing our country fall in line to a New World Order, then they are in the American Public.
Impeachment simply for not doing a good job?!
hmm...You live and learn..........
I don't think anyone should be impeached. Unless they come from Georgia.
Of course he should.
The problem is that Congress doesn't have any balls.
he is upheld, (allowed to act), under Presidential powers, but he has in fact crossed the line of the Presidential Powers act several times. I believe some of the actions could be considerd as Impeachable, as did Bill Clinton's act's in his last term, and I do not mean the Lewinski affair!
Those acts, I believe, would have to be deemed deliberate however and I believe Obama has a means to prove they were necessary at the time.
Do not sell Obama short, I am no fan but, he is skilled as a professor of Constitutional Law from Columbia, and he calculates his moves well.
But, yes he has steped over the line of his powers.
Kind of like, "we had to torture, even though it is against International Law?"
Kind of like settlements are illegal, but we allow them anyway?
Kind of like, making up a war?
We all were so vigilant before. SNARK
I agree with Jim, while Obama is the most incompetent President since Carter, incompetency is not a high crime.
For the record, Obama has done an admirable job of doing exactly as he promised in his campaign, trying to "fundamentally transform this nation".
And for the record, the only one calling for Obama's impeachment is moonbat Dennis Kucinich....a Democrat.
Yeah--I would say Kucinich is the only true American out there.
He TRULY cares about America, NOT political affiliations!
"If crimes were committed, we must act." Simple, and true.
But, we didn't, we don't, we are gutless. And hypocrits. Physician, heal thyself.
Before you go around telling other people how to live.
So if he is the only true American out there, then I assume you agree with his conclusions that Obama should be impeached?
But wait, I thought you were 100% in the tank for Obama and everything he stands for?
Talk about having your cake and eating it too.....
Don't waste your time.
Unless of course lovemychris thinks Obama isn't a true American.
Oh my God, she's a birther.
I can run words together too.
I know--where do you think I got the idea?
I try to tell you...it's a point of flattery to you all when I copy you!
What it means is you blindly follow everyone else.
You don't think for yourself instead you chant what the rest of the followers chant.
Its really,really sad.
Errrr, who's chanting monkeyseeasmonkeydo?
So, LMC, are you in Kucinich's corner or Obama's? Which is it?
And so is Kucinich.
He realizes that Obama has to do what he has to do, as well as Dennis has to do what Dennis has to do!
Since when is a president perfect? Only you Pubbies used to lock-step with Bush. Dems don't operate that way.
"Since when is a president perfect? Only you Pubbies used to lock-step with Bush. Dems don't operate that way."
You demonstrate your ignorance so eloquently, LMC. Most conservatives were very disappointed with many of Bush 43's policies. Port security, Harriet Miers, government spending, immigration, the list goes on.
You have a very strange definition of "lockstep"....
Every single one of them voted to continue the oil subsidies....even Paul.
And please remind me, which Republican in office spoke out during Bushco?
Which one suggested impeachment hearings?
Which one even said BOO to King George?
If I may, I think it was because Bush was securing oil money for those, said Republicans. Who would want to impeach someone who has provided money? I don't think many... Although, there may have been many Democrats that did suggest a Bush impeachment.
I do not hold a high appreciation for the Bush family and I am glad that they are out of office. Well, I mean, Jeb could still run but... I don't think it will happen.
One person suggesting an impeachment is minimal. Actually going through and filing a report is another thing. Which brings me back to Obama...
Well, the thing is, how are we going to now impeach Obama, when we let Bush off the hook?
It's not like it was 50 years ago.
Those perps are still walking the streets.
What are you going to say about that?
It's not ancient history, not water under the bridge.
It's a huge gaping wound on America.
And impeaching Obama would only make the wound deeper, because what would be your justification?
Why Obama, and not Buscho?
I don't have many problems with Obama. I like that he is president. I was merely asking the question of should he be impeached.
The question could be viewed many different ways, from a person who does not want him impeached, or from a person who does want him impeached. I was writing it from a neutral standpoint. However, I personally do not think it would look good for the United States as a nation if Obama was impeached.
There are those who will say that because of his actions he should be impeached. Maybe I am not as learned as these people. I fail to see their reasoning, (also another reason why I posted this forum).
Yeah! He doesn't even have to use the correct form of the word!
HAHA...I was refering to his charming little anctedote; Obamalovesyou....or whatever it was.
I copied him by using monkeyseeasmonkeydo to describe him.
It's the sincerest form of flattery!!
But OK--I'll just go back to dogging on him....at least I tried!
This seems like an immature way of leading an debate, however informal it may be, (I am talking about mocking each other in such a way). It does nothing to validate your arguments further, but in retrospect diminishes them.
Thankyouforyourcontributionthoughitseemsyouknowlittleaboutthatofwhichyouspeak ifneitherpartyisoffendedwhoareyoutocriticizehowotherschoosetointeractduringwhatisreallynotaformaldebatebutratherabitofafreeforallwheregoodnaturedribbingispartoftheusualandcustomarydiscourse ifyouareuncomfortableinsuchasettingperhapsyoushouldchooseaforumthatdoesnotcauseyourpantiestobunchinsuchapainfulmanner
Ha! I find this funny.
Thank you for the humor, it surely gave me a laugh. And I'm not kidding.
Excuse me as I go catch my breath.
Really? You reply to practically every post lovemychris makes yet you believe she agrees with 100% of Obama's policies. Either you have incredibly poor comprehension skills or you just ignore what doesn't fit with your image of "liberal."
She said she was 100% behind Obama.
What about that don't you understand?
Sorry, her actual words were.
"I'm with Obama...all the way."
Thanks, Jim. LMC has yet to criticize Obama in any meaningful way, unless of course it is for not being liberal enough....
I don;t think anybody could be liberal enough for her.
Actually, he's not conservative enough. We should stop all the wasteful spending that goes to corporate welfare.
Biggest waste of money in the world.
It's called tax expenditures...I learned it on O'Donnell's show last night.
And, the amount of loop-holes and give-aways to corporate America and the military would make your head spin.
In the trillions.
I want him to stop that wasteful spending. Pronto!
Get conservative on the military industrial complex.
"We should stop all the wasteful spending that goes to corporate welfare."
Let me guess, we should give it all to the welfare queens and drug addicts throughout the country.
They know how to turn a dollar into two.
Of course they would do it sooner, they have been so successful at managing their own lives and finances.
The really sad part is you actually believe what you wrote.
Unfortunately, we have tied our selves in to the American model too closely, bought too many duff mortgages off you and generally been far to quick to say America, oh wow. when we should have said America, oh woe!
Please John, tell all of England to not bother with us anymore.
Make sure the French get the message too.
Speak for yourself, You Baggers do not speak for America!
Stop with the "American people want"....only YOUR Americans want what you want.
The rest of us don't.
and you are 12% of the population...tyranny of the minority!
LMC, a word to the wise, don't believe everything you see on TV.
Oh, I don't! You could not get me to believe a WORD Fox news says: or anyone affiliated with them.
Like Trump the blow-fish.
Or that lying senator Kyle.
So far as I know---O'Donnell is not a liar.
And if I really wanted to, I could research tax expenditures.
Fool me once, shame on you.....you know the rest.
Which is the MOST meaningful way, since he has not fully practiced what he preached and has generally leaned more conservative than promised.
But then, I suppose criticizing him for wishing he could take a walk alone is more meaningful to some people.
If he cherished his anonymity, then perhaps the Presidency wasn't for him.....
Boy, you'll stoop to anything, won't you?
What's next,his sleeping habits? How he brushes is teeth?
I know---the color socks he wears. Impeach! Impeach! his socks don't match his underwear.
Keep in mind, Beckles wears, super-hero undies!
So far, we have--He's bad because:
1. He eats arrugula--OH, the elitism!!
2. He likes his privacy--DAM that Commie!!!
3. He invited some peeps over for a beer--That drunk.
4. He has an American birth certificate--He's a Kenyan Muslim Terrorist who hates America.
Oh, and of course, a real complaint: the things he has done the same as Bush:
Impeach him, let Bush off the hook.
If I was an alien looking down on America, I would think this was a sit-com on tv.
Unless, of course, I'm directing the sit-com.
Um, it's a foregone conclusion that when you hold public office, particularly the highest one in the land, then you forfeit a considerable amount of privacy. So if you insist on bitching about it, then perhaps he should have thought it through a little more. I'm hard pressed to see how such an obserevation is "scraping the bottom".
Memo to LMC: it's awfully early in the morning to be that unhinged, but may I remind you that I have never called for the President's impeachment, I have repeatedly said that I believe he was born in the US, I have never called him a drunk or commie or anything else you claim.
Your arguments are hard enough to take seriously, but making stuff up for the sake of having a rant to post DOES qualify as "scraping the bottom".
Have a nice day.....
That's pretty low, even for you. I bet it makes you feel kind of sleazy, but you're willing to scrape the bottom for the cause.
Sorry, but if Obama is looking for sympathy, he's looking in the wrong place. You're President. Which means you're onstage CONSTANTLY whether you want it or not. Either man up and deal with that part of the job or resign and let somebody in there who will.....
LOL! He made a comment about a small pleasure he misses from his life before president and you're suggesting he man up or resign.
Do you realize how ridiculous that is?
I know you won't admit it, but I suspect you do.
He wants to be president and yet he's rattled by such a small part of the responsibility?
Yeah, 'man up' fits perfectly. I don't recall hearing such petty gripes from former Presidents. Confirms my suspicion that we are becoming a nation of candy asses....
Who made this an issue?
It's dumber than the Birthers.
Sheeesh, we all know Bush wanted to be a lumber-jack!
"Oh, I'm a lumber-jack, and I'm ok. I work all night and I sleep all day" or is it sleep all night and work all day?
Monty-Python. English humor...my favorite! Benny Hill to.
Is it incompetency or did his power/position get to his head? He feels its okay to make/break decisions without going through congress. Does this not concern anyone. Yes, impeaching him would be a gift.
Do you only read with your right eye?
I am against Libya.
I am against the Bush tax cuts.
I am angry that he did nothing about Bushco.
I am angry that he did nothing about Operation Cast Lead.
BUT--I'll be damned if I'm going to hold him to a higher standard of using the office than Bush!
You people allowed Bushco to break the law/shred the Constitution/go to war on phony crap
Now, all of a sudden, you want to reverse the way a president can operate.
UH UH...not a chance.
Cause, I was one out there when it was all going down, saying "Wait! If you do this, you allow every president from now on to do it!!!"
And what did you all say? USA USA USA
Know what I think? You all were so sure that you would have Repub presidents from now until forever, that you didn't care! Now that it's Obama, all of a sudden, it's an issue.
If anyone's wanting cake and eating it too, it's you.
You want Obama to pay for things Bush already did,and put into place.
All of you people? I am confused. It sounds as though you are speaking to a majority party. Am I not mistaken in the fact that Hubpages is a small community in comparison to the population of the United States?
Why is saying USA a bad thing? I am proud to live in the USA. Again, am I missing something? It seems as though you are implying that the vast majority of Hubbers are Republican. Are they?
No, but that is who I mean when I say all you people. More specifically, the rabid right wing.
And, my point was, when they were in charge, Bush could do no wrong. It was USA USA USA no matter what.
Now, they say we have a president who actually hates America and is anti-American!!!
All of a sudden, the USA USA USA rah rah crowd is no more.
No accolades for the war.
No giving the president props for keeping us safe.
Things that were deemed traitorous when their side was in charge, are now suddenly patriotic.
It's a bitter pill to swallow.
Amen. And vice versa.
Whatever happened to "support our troops" anyway?
I never see those ribbon stickers on cars anymore.
Don't hear a whole lot of people declaring it's unpatriotic to question our military involvement overseas. But it sure is popular to lambast Obama for that military involvement (NONE of which he started, and was, in fact, publicly AGAINST invading Iraq!)
Thank you for demonstrating my point!
and, if I might make another:
I keep hearing "the liberal media" "the liberal media"--
Well,this radio station here, WRKO....
Always when Bush would speak, they would broadcast it. So, yesterday, I had to drive far, and I thought, "good!" I can listen to Obama's speech!
Well, no. They didn't broadcast it! Anywhere! Even NPR!
So, right now--Ed Shultz is having this huge rally---I go to C-Span, since they always run Tea-bag rallies.......
Unless it's from another day or something....but I didn't see anything about it anywhere!
Where is the liberal media?
Once again false information from a liberal.
"and I thought, "good!" I can listen to Obama's speech!
Well, no. They didn't broadcast it! Anywhere! Even NPR!"
I don't know about NPR or WRKO, but I heard his latest campaign speech on the radio.
The station is irrelevant.
It was on CBS radio and FOX Radio.
I know, I tried to find something interesting to listen to.
Instead I got the latest lies from your Obamagod.
They even cut into Rush Limbaugh's radio show.
Peddle your bullshit to somebody else.
I'm reporting that.
I told you the truth about my situation, now you can deal with your derogatory lines.
His speech was on every news/talk station here in metro Atlanta.....
Well, it wasn't here....and this is supposed to be a "Blue" state...so I don't get it.
Same with the talk-radio...if it's a Blue state, why would right-wing radio be more popular than liberal radio?
It doesn't make sense.
Well, I hate to break it to you, but stations are not and should not be required to drop everything just to air a speech by the Community Organizer.
I remember seeing speeched from Bush 43 on CNN because it wasn't on Fox. The world doesn't end.....
Excuse me, but my question was: Where is the liberal media?
If the media was liberal--I would have heard that speech, and I would be watching Shultz's rally.
Let's see if anyone broadcasts the rally for an end to our Middle East policy.
I would take bets on that one being a no-show.
Yet, Palin opens her palm for some dough, and every station has to have her on.
It does not make sense, if people are saying the media is liberal!
Something else is going on.Well--just look at who owns media..never mind, answered my own question.
On liberal stations, yes.....most talk stations tend to trend conservative...
Either way, stations don't have to air it every time the man opens his mouth. Most stations carried the speech, your didn't.....sorry about that.....
Yeah, but mine always carried Bush.
It's Bias in favor if Conservatives, even in a liberal state.
I don't understand why missing a speech is a big deal. You could go on the internet and view his latest speech on Youtube. It seems like a relatively small thing to sweat over.
Unless, you are more upset that Liberal Media is not actively available in your area? In that case, you could phone your local station, or email them and ask them to air more liberal views.
I'm trying to point out that to claim the media is liberal is ridiculous.
It's a veritable onslaught of righty-spew, and I don't get it, in a liberal state.
I geuss I could call them and ask why they didn't air his speech....that might be a good idea!
"we should give it all to the welfare queens and drug addicts throughout the country."
No--you save them for your for-profit-prisons. That way, you can trade them on the stock exchange like cattle.
"No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state." The Constitution!
Mr. Obama sat in New York as chairman of the U.N. Security Council -- a first for an American president, meant to symbolize his commitment to rebuilding the Council's tattered authority -- he received a taste of the opposition he is likely to face on some of his nuclear initiatives. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.h … A96F9C8B63
Been here before....around 2006.
And is it not a coincidence that we bombed Libya with UN approval but not from our own Congress?
It creates a question as to where OUR presidents loyalty resides.
The UN is not a foreign state, therefore it would be a loophole. It does not have a fixed country in which it resides and is a union of states. Being chairman of the security council is not a crime, in fact it makes him look more involved with the United States' security, (which is a good thing, the last time I checked).
The president does not need approval from Congress to move and deploy troops, it only makes the move look better. It is actually one of the presidential powers that control of the military resides with the president.
Here is a link that may help understand what powers reside with any president of the United States:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powers_of_ … ted_States
Under the section 'Constraints of Presidential power' it mentions the power to order and direct troops. And yes, I am willing to also say that the section mentions that it is up for debate how much power the president has over the military without Congressional approval.
Does the land that the United Nations building stand on belong to the U. S.?
It is a foreign entity.
So what is he President of the U.S. or head of the U.N. security council?
I for one would like to think that our president holds his country in the highest regard and would not be willing to offer it up as a sacrificial lamb in the name of the New World Order
Really? Take a good look back (and around)...and see where the path takes you!
The land was donated to the United nations by the Rockefeller family, I know this.
Help me find the path just give me a term to google
I find the searching and learning fascinating.
I have been researching secret societies for several years, I have written hubs based on my personal research.
I just watched a founding fathers mason conspiracy documentary last night.
Thanks, I am well down this path but I still have a long way to go. Funny how the more you look the more the pieces start to fit into place.
Libya: All About Oil, or All About Banking?
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/libya- … ut-banking
I completely agree with this, I do not know much about the entity in the other article so at this time I cannot comment on that.
I will be researching though, thanks for the lead.
It would make our country look really stupid if we impeached Obama after electing George W. Bush twice.
I think stupidity would not be the main concern. From my personal experience, people are seldom concerned about how stupid they may look while making important decisions. And, only after close reflection do they realize the error of their ways. Then, by that time it is too late to change their mind.
(Like how I just edited this post. I thought it would be good as is, but upon reflection, I realized it need a bit more)...
We already look really stupid for electing Bush twice.
That is a pretty hard act to follow in the "they can't be serious" category.
But you're absolutely right.
Impeaching Obama would put America over the top.
haha I smiled too.
I think Ron just gave new meaning to the idea of a run-on sentence....
(Did you notice that if you change just one letter you get peace?)
You are a breath of refreshing air (not to mention a refreshing breath of air) here on the politics and social issues forum!
Either you really are neutral and just looking to stimulate (and moderate) a rational discussion... or you could be our first Independent Party troll
Are you a troll or a paid poster for Independents?
Just kidding about which part? I enjoyed the compliments and am hoping it is not that part.
I don't have a political affiliation. Although, I would like to be a poster for a day, (with what they must hear!). I like hearing people bounce around a good/funny conversation, which is one reason why I posted this forum.
Of course the compliments are sincere.
The are you a troll or paid poster was just joshin.
The very idea that anyone so neutral COULD be a troll or paid by someone to post is just .... unbelievable.
You are the Switzerland of the forums
(that's a compliment too, btw).
Now I can properly thank you so, "thank you".
Eh, the late night inspires writer's block. Writing a response is a daunting task. Oh look, I'm doing it!
Either way, if I were to choose a party I would choose a cool one. One that has balloons and offers free cookies. Does any political party do that?
Also, what is the tea party? (Just for wit, do they offer tea?)
Well, you present an interesting dilemma.
Balloons AND free cookies you say?
The Democrats are good at giving things away free.
Cookies are probably not on the list anymore (you know, Michelle Obama's healthy foods will save America from obesity campaign). But if you want free services the Ds are your party.
Balloons are full of hot air, and so are Republicans.
The Tea Party is a splinter group of extreme Republicans. They are all about limiting the size of government, slashing the deficit by any means necessary (except taxes on the wealthy). They go around shouting about upholding the Constitution -- everything is measured against what the founding fathers envisioned for America (kind like the last 230+ years never happened).
Their ideology is based on fundamentalist Christian values.
Making abortion illegal and denying gay people the right to marry are two of their pet projects.
I'm sure you've heard of Sarah Palin? She is a Tea Partier.
Oh -- another term you might hear when discussing the TP is "teabagger." Please do not ask me to explain that one!
...at the OP...I can't make up my mind....i'm left, i'm right, i'm in the centre, and then i'm all around the place...and then I head to Canada......
..i luv american political threads.......it gets heated!...in Canada we're just too polite...but not always....
thank you, merci, eh?
Howard Stern Rips Glenn Beck http://dlvr.it/NbwzY
see why I miss my Howard??
by Kathryn L Hill3 weeks ago
Will they respect her? Willingly work with her? Even want to get up and go to work every morning? Well…????? Did Trump feel a little henpecked in the debate? Will the roosters in Congress of either party...
by WeStand4Freedom6 years ago
Impeachment of a President One would think that the impeachment of a president is not conducive in showing him support.”Give him a chance,” people say. President Obama, to be exact, has been in...
by Army Infantry Mom6 years ago
Why did Clinton get impeached for getting a BJ (That didn't hurt America) However Obama seems to be untouchable when it comes to impeachment? I just don't get it !!!
by OLYHOOCH5 years ago
Posted: March 02, 20118:19 pm EasternBy Bob Unruh© 2011 WorldNetDaily U.S. Rep. Trent Franks A Republican congressman has told a left-leaning blog that if there is collective support, he would favor the impeachment...
by OLYHOOCH5 years ago
50 Reasons To Impeach Obama 1. Obamacare2. The failed $850 billion stimulus3. High, persistent unemployment4. Gas prices...5. His 2012 budget's fecklessness6. Massive deficits each & every yr7. Seizure of GM...
by Kathryn L Hill17 months ago
James Madison wrote: "A popular Government without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy, or perhaps both… Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: and...
Copyright © 2016 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.