Rep. Stockman threatens to impeach Obama over gun control
52 replies, posted
[QUOTE=faze;39222947]You like Obama yet you like guns.
I see that as irony.[/QUOTE]
You know during his first term he only expanded gun rights right.
[editline]14th January 2013[/editline]
Obama was more pro-gun than Reagan, truefacts.
[QUOTE=Squidman;39222380]It's pretty much just an empty threat, about a fourth of presidents have had similar threats and attempts. Hell, Walter B. Jones already introduced H. CON. RES 107 in March of 2012, saying that Obama should be impeached for the drone strikes.
Its mostly just a political statement that shows his constituents that he hasn't abandoned them.
However, I do think that issuing an executive order that effects one of the amendments is rather sleazy, since the legislative branch is the only branch that can add or alter amendments.[/QUOTE]
You're fine with the president authorizing the deaths of people overseas by drones but not when he touches at home with gun control?
I'm more scared that this bloke is a senator than anything else really.
I said it last time and I'll say it again.
If you give people a stick, eventually someone's going to start smacking people with it.
Obama [b]knows[/b] it would be political suicide to do it this way.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;39223781]You're fine with the president authorizing the deaths of people overseas by drones but not when he touches at home with gun control?[/QUOTE]
I'm actually with you on this one. Drones are bullshit and romanticize war. This girl I know was a drone operator and she sat for five hours watching some Afghans actually fix a road that was blown up, like, the two things you see them doing with shovels near a road is either fixing the road or planting an IED, and these guys were actually fixing a road because there were six of them, two people is usually the norm for IED planters, but regardless they have to watch them actually plant a bomb otherwise they will have just killed innocent civilians that were fixing the road and that's bad. Anyway, she sat there for five hours watching them fix a road, they did nothing wrong and at the end of that five hours they had a shift change on the drones, so at this time the afghan guys had packed up and were headed back to their village, and the person that changed shifts with her just sits down and, completely unauthorized, blows up all six civilians because they were "carrying shovels and looked suspicious." This is why she no longer works in the pentagon, because of assholes like that guy who can't understand that what he just did, destroy a vital road to a village (which the military actually used, so it's not only vital to the Afghan village, but to U.S. troops as well) and effectively destroy six innocent people and ruin their families, was real. Because that stupid fucking piece of shit, can't follow proper procedure and no one does shit about it because the stupid fucking officers and politicians don't give a fuck because they don't have to suffer over it, there's no U.S. casualty to harm their rep. The sad part is that this story isn't even all that uncommon, that shit happens A LOT, they just don't tell you about it.
[QUOTE=wickedplayer494;39223893]Obama [b]knows[/b] it would be political suicide to do it this way.[/QUOTE]
Obama [B]knows[/B] he doesn't have to get reelected.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;39223898]Obama [B]knows[/B] he doesn't have to get reelected.[/QUOTE]
There will be a new democrat running next year; why would he want to ruin their chances of winning?
[QUOTE=IliekBoxes;39223945]There will be a new democrat running next year; why would he want to ruin their chances of winning?[/QUOTE]
Because he gets to retire at what, 200k a year for life, so, what does he care?
[QUOTE=IliekBoxes;39223945]There will be a new democrat running next year; why would he want to ruin their chances of winning?[/QUOTE]
There are so many ways to win an election than simply running off the success of the previous guy.
Besides, this is 2013. These gun issues today won't be on the minds of half the people, sadly, in 2016.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;39223781]You're fine with the president authorizing the deaths of people overseas by drones but not when he touches at home with gun control?[/QUOTE]
I never said that I was fine with it, I merely stated that an impeachment attempt has already been attempted, and that impeachment attempts are usually just political fodder. If it makes you feel any better, I can add that I also do not support the drone strikes. But to be fair, Congress can end an executive order with a 2/3 majority (which admittedly is pretty much impossible), so if the drone strikes were unpopular enough they could be stopped.
[QUOTE=Squidman;39223999]I never said that I was fine with it, I merely stated that an impeachment attempt has already been attempted, and that impeachment attempts are usually just political fodder. If it makes you feel any better, I can add that I also do not support the drone strikes. But to be fair, Congress can end an executive order with a 2/3 majority (which admittedly is pretty much impossible), so if the drone strikes were unpopular enough they could be stopped.[/QUOTE]
How you worded it gave me the impression that you were just dismissing the drone strikes, but I wasn't entirely sure.
I think the lack of unpopularity is the lack of knowledge of them. Everyone mainstream may hear about Iraq and Afghanistan on occasion, but never drones in Pakistan, let alone Yemen. People need to see pictures of the dead that these things leave behind else America is going to keep on its aggressive foreign policy with the complete ignorance of its populace backing it all the way.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;39223990]There are so many ways to win an election than simply running off the success of the previous guy.
Besides, this is 2013. These gun issues today won't be on the minds of half the people, sadly, in 2016.[/QUOTE]
yea...but it wasn't like bush made it incredibly difficult for a democrat to win in '08.
[QUOTE=draugur;39223956]Because he gets to retire at what, 200k a year for life, so, what does he care?[/QUOTE]
There are much easier ways to make that kind of money as a politician than being President of the United States.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;39224060]yea...but it wasn't like bush made it incredibly difficult for a democrat to win in '08.[/QUOTE]
Obama played McCain off as another Bush, which at points were true especially when it came to the wars. But, I don't see the gun rights right now (which I sense will pass as a political fad in 3-4 months) will be a major issue in 2016.
Though, any speculation is still too far to be certain about right now.
oh my god obamao is going to kill every single one of us unless we vote GOP
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;39224041]How you worded it gave me the impression that you were just dismissing the drone strikes, but I wasn't entirely sure.
I think the lack of unpopularity is the lack of knowledge of them. Everyone mainstream may hear about Iraq and Afghanistan on occasion, but never drones in Pakistan, let alone Yemen. People need to see pictures of the dead that these things leave behind else America is going to keep on its aggressive foreign policy with the complete ignorance of its populace backing it all the way.[/QUOTE]
My mistake, I shouldn't have begun the sentence with "However". I fully agree that the lack of knowledge is why the drone strikes are allowed to continue. I may have to put on my tin foil hat here, but to me these drone strikes almost seem like a test to see how effective they are and a chance to fine-tune their abilities. The people they target are in countries that are virtually nobodies in the international community, and as such can't really muster the support to cause an international outcry.
[QUOTE=thisispain;39224242]oh my god obamao is going to kill every single one of us unless we vote GOP[/QUOTE]
Nobody has said that. At least wait to shitpost until you can quote your claims.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;39224104]Obama played McCain off as another Bush, which at points were true especially when it came to the wars. But, I don't see the gun rights right now (which I sense will pass as a political fad in 3-4 months) will be a major issue in 2016.
Though, any speculation is still too far to be certain about right now.[/QUOTE]
im just sayin that what obama does will have some effect next election.
not to say that he necessarily cares about that shit tho, afaik most people go into a semi-retirement after their presidency.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;39224304]im just sayin that what obama does will have some effect next election.
not to say that he necessarily cares about that shit tho, afaik most people go into a semi-retirement after their presidency.[/QUOTE]
Not democrats. Carter and Clinton have both done good work.
[QUOTE=Ridge;39224278]Nobody has said that.[/QUOTE]
not my fault you haven't been paying attention
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;39223898]Obama [B]knows[/B] he doesn't have to get reelected.[/QUOTE]
he probably also knows that he'd like to actually finish his current term
[editline]14th January 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Raidyr;39224313]Not democrats. Carter and Clinton have both done good work.[/QUOTE]
well carter didn't exactly do much when he was in office so I guess he had to make up for it somehow
clinton hasn't really done much since his presidency other than write books
[QUOTE=faze;39223112]I write various folks and sign petitions and donate money to good causes.
Just venting after reading "BAN THE SCARY GUNZ!!!!11111oneone." CNN comments
Sue me.[/QUOTE]
You are the special type of really creepy pro-gun people you see on /k/ or Fox News Comments.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.