Impeachment? Thoughts? How did we get here?

[jillboston]

I can't believe we are here. High crimes and misdemeanors now include executive orders? Thoughts? I just can't (having lived through the bullshit Clinton impeachment).

[heyjude]

If it's a democrat in the oval, the Rs will impeach.

[teflepi]

There is no way Boehner will let this happen. None. TP Rs want it to show their constituents they mean bidness. And, yeah, that is all.

[teflepi]

They(Rs) have a chance to take both chambers. No chance.

[teflepi]

Finally, I just saw it was a WH Aide. Yeah, I am thinking they may be hoping for it (Ds, not really Obama) because it will help.

[jillboston]

Jul 25, 2014 21:17:12 GMT -5 heyjude said:

If it's a democrat in the oval, the Rs will impeach.

It wasn't always this way. No other Presidents than Johnson and Clinton. Neither justifiable but, pretty rare.

[heyjude]

I mean if I was an R and realized demography was not on my side and my party was one generation away from becoming the next Whigs, I would throw impeachment at every Dem in the Oval too. It's the last sad gasps of the Grand Old Party.

[teflepi]

Jul 25, 2014 21:21:15 GMT -5 heyjude said:

I mean if I was an R and realized demography was not on my side and my party was one generation away from becoming the next Whigs, I would throw impeachment at every Dem in the Oval too. It's the last sad gasps of the Grand Old Party.

There is no way.  Their strength is to get both chambers, and with gerrymandering, it is workable.  They would be fools to do it.  I think it is a Ds wet dream.

[heyjude]

Jul 25, 2014 21:21:12 GMT -5 jillboston said:

Jul 25, 2014 21:17:12 GMT -5 heyjude said:

If it's a democrat in the oval, the Rs will impeach.

It wasn't always this way. No other Presidents than Johnson and Clinton. Neither justifiable but, pretty rare.

Yeah, this is how desperate people respond. We should look at it with pitty.

[jillboston]

Jul 25, 2014 21:18:29 GMT -5 teflepi said:

They(Rs) have a chance to take both chambers. No chance.

If they do take both chambers it will be the very first order of business. I sincerely hope we are all not ok with that -which I am sure generally we aren't here. But the bigger question is why this is being talked about and is, frankly, imminent if the R's retain the house and take the Senate.

[jillboston]

Jul 25, 2014 21:22:32 GMT -5 heyjude said:

Jul 25, 2014 21:21:12 GMT -5 jillboston said:

It wasn't always this way. No other Presidents than Johnson and Clinton. Neither justifiable but, pretty rare.

Yeah, this is how desperate people respond. We should look at it with pitty.

I don't see it that way. I can see this actually happening if the R's take the Senate next year.

[anonymous]

Jul 25, 2014 21:26:50 GMT -5 jillboston said:

Jul 25, 2014 21:22:32 GMT -5 heyjude said:

Yeah, this is how desperate people respond. We should look at it with pitty.

I don't see it that way. I can see this actually happening if the
R's take the Senate next year.

Which looks

[teflepi]

Jul 25, 2014 21:25:55 GMT -5 jillboston said:

Jul 25, 2014 21:18:29 GMT -5 teflepi said:

They(Rs) have a chance to take both chambers. No chance.

If they do take both chambers it will be the very first order of business. I sincerely hope we are all not ok with that -which I am sure generally we aren't here. But the bigger question is why this is being talked about and is, frankly, imminent if the R's retain the house and take the Senate.

I don't think so.  It is all talk to get elected and that is all.  They would lose in 2 years if this actually moves forward.  I can see being very mad about the NSA and continuation of the Patriot Act, but this is not new.  Sad for a D to do it, but not new.

[Deleted]

This isn't going to happen.

I don't understand how one can make the Whig argument. Look at the prognostications for the Senate, the current state of the governorships... There were hundreds of seats flipped at all levels just four years ago. Not to mention the fact that RCP has the House staying Republican even without the tossups included in the tally. (I think it was 230 without tossups). The president's Gallup rating in the 30s doesn't bode well, either.

[Deleted]

Jul 25, 2014 21:26:50 GMT -5 jillboston said:

Jul 25, 2014 21:22:32 GMT -5 heyjude said:

Yeah, this is how desperate people respond. We should look at it with pitty.

I don't see it that way. I can see this actually happening if the R's take the Senate next year.

Doubtful.  There are many moderate GOP senators that would not call for this.  I read an interesting article about McConnell possibly losing.  Cornyn's supposed to be the frontrunner, but there could be a power struggle. 

[anonymous]

Sorry. Post fart. I think the r's could have both sides next year thanks to gerrymandering. I hate what this country has turned to. I heard something on npr last week. Some tea party guy running in Kentucky, maybe? Said the incumbent "tried to work with the other side" and that is not what tr country wants/needs. I mean, I feel pretty strong about a lot if issues but I get that it can't be all stand your ground. I just can't believe it's come to point of if you work to compromise you are no good. Social media has not been any good for politics, IMO

[heyjude]

Jul 25, 2014 21:26:50 GMT -5 jillboston said:

Jul 25, 2014 21:22:32 GMT -5 heyjude said:

Yeah, this is how desperate people respond. We should look at it with pitty.

I don't see it that way. I can see this actually happening if the R's take the Senate next year.

I see it happening too! It doesn't mean I don't think it's the action of a dying party.

I think in 25 years the Rs will be over we all just have to suffer through their bull shit for the next 25 years while they die out.

Playing the impeachment card over every little fucking thing a dem in office does is a defensive move not an offensive one.

[jillboston]

Jul 25, 2014 21:32:54 GMT -5 @julesf said:

Jul 25, 2014 21:26:50 GMT -5 jillboston said:

I don't see it that way. I can see this actually happening if the R's take the Senate next year.

Doubtful.  There are many moderate GOP senators that would not call for this.  I read an interesting article about McConnell possibly losing.  Cornyn's supposed to be the frontrunner, but there could be a power struggle. 

Uh.. Many moderate GOP Senators? They've all retired or lost their seats in primaries. If the Democrats lose the Senate there will be impeachment.

[secretlyevil]

Nothing to add to the thread but that I donated money today because of this rumor.

::waves @julesf:: hiya!

[teflepi]

I feel the R death may be premature. This was the Ds in 2004, 2006, etc. Eh, I will not be sad if the uber-social conservative wing of the Rs goes away (they are living in the 50s), but there has to be a 2 party system. A one party is too dangerous to the system. I'm not surprised by the talk (hope?), but I don't see them completely going away. I see a serious shakeup.

[secretlyevil]

Either of the extreme sides in power is dangerous. We need at least a two party system. It would be nice to gave some additional viable parties.

[summer]

I feel like impeachment is what they do instead of trying to work with those who disagree. But I think when two sides are so opposed to one another and their visions for the country are so different, maybe it's not possible to work together.

It's like a hostile failed marriage staying together for the sake of the kids.

[sushi]

When boehner is calling out Palin for being a nutjob? It's a crazy party.

[anonymous]

Jul 25, 2014 23:52:13 GMT -5 summer said:

I feel like impeachment is what they do instead of trying to work with those who disagree. But I think when two sides are so opposed to one another and their visions for the country are so different, maybe it's not possible to work together.

It's like a hostile failed marriage staying together for the sake of the kids.

What does the GOP want for the country? Do they want low taxes but no social nets , anti- abortion across the biard, I just don't know what they want

[rubytue]

Jul 25, 2014 21:33:07 GMT -5 anonymous said:

Sorry. Post fart. I think the r's could have both sides next year thanks to gerrymandering. I hate what this country has turned to. I heard something on npr last week. Some tea party guy running in Kentucky, maybe? Said the incumbent "tried to work with the other side" and that is not what tr country wants/needs. I mean, I feel pretty strong about a lot if issues but I get that it can't be all stand your ground. I just can't believe it's come to point of if you work to compromise you are no good. Social media has not been any good for politics, IMO

It was Tennessee. They were talking about Lamar Alexander. Dude has been in TN politics since I was in diapers. That story really struck me because i remember him as governor (when the TN senators were Ds, Sasser and Gore). I thought that was one of the saddest statement I've ever heard. And if that is what they want (not to work together), we are doomed. Doomed I tell you *sigh*

[summer]

Jul 25, 2014 23:59:44 GMT -5 anonymous said:

Jul 25, 2014 23:52:13 GMT -5 summer said:

I feel like impeachment is what they do instead of trying to work with those who disagree. But I think when two sides are so opposed to one another and their visions for the country are so different, maybe it's not possible to work together.

It's like a hostile failed marriage staying together for the sake of the kids.

What does the GOP want for the country? Do they want low taxes but no social nets , anti- abortion across the biard, I just don't know what they want

I think they've been pretty clear about what they want. Ultimately I think both sides want a strong America, they just have different ideas of what that is and how to get there.

I'll take a stab at it.  

From what I hear and see on TV, R's (I can't tell really who is a regular R and who is a Tea Party R so I'm lumping them together which is maybe unfair) seem to want is a country where the taxes are low on people and businesses with the assumption being that people will either 1) take care of each other privately (ex: the churches will help, neighbors, friends) or 2) people should be more responsible and not make choices that get them into bad places.   I think that goes with their pro-life argument.  There shouldn't be so much encouragment of loose sexual behavior in the media and pop culture (sex ed falls into that for some), but if you are immoral enough or get yourself into some predicament where a pregnancy occurs, it's not the fault of the baby so you need to have it and learn from it and not do ABC again.  In addition to that, you need to take care of it (minimal safety nets and all) because you failed somehow and that's life.  People just need to do better and not always fall back on some or another oppression they have faced/our facing...we've all been oppressed and had a tough time at some point.  The separation of church and state thing is murky because there is the belief that there need to be religious values (Christian) for people to act right (not get pregnant, rob, steal, cheat) and simmering distrust of secular things because they are a slippery slope to all those other problems.  Businesses and profit are what keep the wheels of America turning, so businesses need maximum freedom to maximize profits. Capitalism governs itself so we need to not restrict and choke it with regulations.  Generally, the less rules for businesses, entities, corporations, etc., the better because they can make more money for America, meaning all of us. Individuals need more rules because their individual mistakes cost us all.    That is just my interpretation.

ETA: And our government is for the most part much too inefficient and wasteful to be involved with social spending that will actually help the problems.  And the people in government are not business-minded enough to understand how best to help businesses so it is better that they are not involved in regulation.  Government is generally not good. 

[mmp]

Jul 25, 2014 23:59:44 GMT -5 anonymous said:

Jul 25, 2014 23:52:13 GMT -5 summer said:

I feel like impeachment is what they do instead of trying to work with those who disagree. But I think when two sides are so opposed to one another and their visions for the country are so different, maybe it's not possible to work together.

It's like a hostile failed marriage staying together for the sake of the kids.

What does the GOP want for the country? Do they want low taxes but no social nets , anti- abortion across the biard, I just don't know what they want

No, we are not anti-social programs. No one wants to take a ham sandwich away from a starving child. But we don't feel the govt owes us a living, or healthcare, or quite a bit of programs that keep people dependent on the govt. 
Keep us safe, have laws and regulations so my food isn't tainted, roads aren't death traps, etc. Punish corruption. Provide an education.  But unburden the businesses that hire people and provide opportunity.  Most people want to do for themselves. They don't need/want the govt micromanaging their lives. The govt does a shitty job running itself, it's going to tell me what's best?

[lg28]

Maybe I've been under a rock but I hadn't heard anything about impeachment. Over what??

[IIOY]

Jul 26, 2014 7:00:24 GMT -5 lg28 said:

Maybe I've been under a rock but I hadn't heard anything about impeachment. Over what??

It's just Republican chatter among the angrier folks. I really don't think it's worthy of attention at this point.

[jillboston]

Jul 26, 2014 7:02:10 GMT -5 IIOY said:

Jul 26, 2014 7:00:24 GMT -5 lg28 said:

Maybe I've been under a rock but I hadn't heard anything about impeachment. Over what??

It's just Republican chatter among the angrier folks. I really don't think it's worthy of attention at this point.

lg28 The movement towards it at this point is on executive order changes to Obamacare (employer mandates).
The House recently voted on Boehner's suit against the President based on this issue. Passed on party lines.
IIOY - I have to respectfully disagree. CNN polled it last week - 57% of Republicans are for impeachment. If the GOP wins the Senate in November it will happen IMHO.