Posted on 11/14/2014 12:50:54 PM PST by Jim Robinson
In July, former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin wrote a widely-publicized op-ed for Breitbart News. Enough is enough of the years of abuse from this president, she wrote. Without borders, there is no nation. Obama knows this. Opening our borders to a flood of illegal immigrants is deliberate. This is his fundamental transformation of America. Then, she dropped the bomb: Its time to impeach; and on behalf of American workers and legal immigrants of all backgrounds, we should vehemently oppose any politician on the left or right who would hesitate in voting for articles of impeachment.
Believe it or not, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) had actually suggested impeachment even earlier, this time over the Bowe Bergdahl prisoner swap, in which the Obama administration freed five top-level Taliban terrorists in exchange for the alleged deserter. He stated, There will be people on our side calling for his impeachment if he did that. And Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) said in March that Obama could be up for impeachment if he continued his unconstitutional approaches to immigration reform and Obamacare.
But it was Palins comments that drove ire. At the time, Palins critics leapt on the comments to suggest that Republicans more broadly were planning impeachment; House Speaker John Boehner immediately fired back, stating that he disagreed with Palin on impeachment.
There were some who defended Palins position Mark Levin explained, our country is being destroyed
.Heres the dead truth. Obama should be impeached, but he wont be impeached. Obama should be impeached if the Republicans take the Senate, but he wont be impeached if the Republicans take the Senate. Obama has committed high crimes and misdemeanors by violating the constitution.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Amen.
What?! Back up my claims that you will not engage on a factual basis. Your posts are my proof! And by the way, I posted several questions. Not only did you not address them, you ignored them because they DESTROY your argument. Here it is again, before accusing me of not backing anything up, try to live up to your own standards for once in your life!
“When you respond, try to refute what I have said, no more strawman BS from you. That is all I or anyone else ever gets from you. Answer the following; A senate race in N.H. is taking place. The Republican is a Rino according to you. Should the citizens of that state who are conservatives not vote, or vote for the dem to teach the GOP a lesson? When the dem wins, is the state and the country better off? Why was a Rino who will agree with us 70% of the time not good enough? We all know a true conservative will not win there in this day and age, with the way things are. So, how does taking your advice or using your strategy benefit anyone but the dems?
Rinos who prove to be empowering dems and not willing to work with conservatives should be primaried. However, if they win the primary, my previous questions stands.”
Let’s see it Norm. Your solutions, your rebuttal, your answers to these questions.
And all red.
That is why a 25th Amendment, Section 4 action by Biden is very possible.
Biden's best chance to be President(yes folks, he really does want this) is to oust Obama now, and get in place for 2016 against Lieawatha and Cankles.
Especially if, during the Benghazi hearings coming up in a few weeks, we learn just what Obama was doing the night of Sept.11, 2012 in the WH, when he was NOT in the situation room.
I have ordered sufficient quantities of popcorn.
Lets be honest is right. Your RINOs are pushing amnesty. Just as we told you before you elected them.
Fact. Thats the bottom line. 30 years. Even Reagan had to fight them. Read a history book.
Go back to your first post. I’m still waiting.
He’s a regular rainbow, isn’t he? ;)
That, too.
What the hell does that mean? You hate Reagan?
Now Jim, don’t be a homophobe. Embrace diversity ;)
He's a double agent too,IMHO.
You’re right.
Riots in the streets.
Total chaos.
He would love to declare “Martial Law,” for his own doing.
And Reagan allowed Amnesty. Is he not pure enough for you now Norm? Should we have voted for dems in protest to Reagan’s Rinoism?
I oppose amnesty and I favor impeachment. However, refusing to vote for a Rino against a dem because we may disagree on those issues is not smart. At least I stand some chance to influence the Rino. i.e. the 2006 push for amnesty was stopped in its tracks. If the dems were controlling things, that would not have been the case.
Oh yea man, Totally. He was like evil and stuff.
You mean the thing he called the biggest mistake of his career? That Reagan? Are you aware of what an idiot you look like trotting that out instead of proof of the accusations you made against me?
Nice stall tactic, my entire post is a refutation against your previous posted positions on voting for the GOP. Now, stop stalling and address what I posted. Here is is again;
“When you respond, try to refute what I have said, no more strawman BS from you. That is all I or anyone else ever gets from you. Answer the following; A senate race in N.H. is taking place. The Republican is a Rino according to you. Should the citizens of that state who are conservatives not vote, or vote for the dem to teach the GOP a lesson? When the dem wins, is the state and the country better off? Why was a Rino who will agree with us 70% of the time not good enough? We all know a true conservative will not win there in this day and age, with the way things are. So, how does taking your advice or using your strategy benefit anyone but the dems?
Rinos who prove to be empowering dems and not willing to work with conservatives should be primaried. However, if they win the primary, my previous questions stand.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.