[Live2ride883]

After Benghazi, fast & furious, and now this . We know that Obama likes to overstep his executive powers. Let alone adding 6 trillion dollars to the national debt in less than 4 years. This isn't even including the questionable executive decisions he signed earlier this month surrounding gun control. This is not intended to be a "pres so & so did this and another did that." What I would like it to be is an organized discussion on current events.
----------------

Yes, I believe he should be impeached, this is not the first time he has over stepped his power and I do not think it will be the last.

For clarification I am adding an additional link that addresses the concerns of Carolinadroid.



While I am certain this member will point out this is just an another "blog" he will find the actual ruling embedded at the bottom.

[CypherMax]

The Benghazi cover up alone is impeachable. So yes.

Sent from my Galaxy S3 running CleanRom 5.5.1

[backbeat]

Of course Obama should be impeached. Such an action would end the GOP as we know it.

[Live2ride883]

Wow in the first post, this has to be a record.... SMH

[Serial Fordicator]

Any president who makes unconstitutional laws on the American public without the approval of Congress, whether Democrat or Republican, should be impeached. Congress isnt all that great, but i trust 535 people not to be corrupt than one. People forget Hitler was elected too.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Android Central Forums

[LegalAmerican]

The American people are stupid enough to get fooled by this clown TWICE. Impeachment would do nothing to save us from ourselves.

Sent from my Galaxy S3

[Kelly Kearns]

Simple answer: YES

Sent from my AWESOME Note 2

[palandri]

What an interesting twist. I read:

"...The decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit marked a victory for Republicans and business groups critical of the labor board. If it stands, it could invalidate hundreds of board decisions over the past year, including some that make it easier for unions to organize...."

I've been a Union man my whole life. If you want a fair and safe workplace, better wages, a secure retirement and family-friendly policies such as paid sick leave and scheduling hours, we need pro labor people in NLRB.

[Live2ride883]

What an interesting twist. I read:

"...The decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit marked a victory for Republicans and business groups critical of the labor board. If it stands, it could invalidate hundreds of board decisions over the past year, including some that make it easier for unions to organize...."

I've been a Union man my whole life. If you want a fair and safe workplace, better wages, a secure retirement and family-friendly policies such as paid sick leave and scheduling hours, we need pro labor people in NLRB.

I was a member in good standing of the UAW for a long time until NAFTA became law, I am not against unions I believe they have served to benefit American workers in ways that most of them do not realize. I am mearly raising the point of his "recess" appointments while congress was in fact in session. Those appointments were unconstitutional.

[palandri]

I was a member in good standing of the UAW for a long time until NAFTA became law, I am not against unions I believe they have served to benefit American workers in ways that most of them do not realize. I am mearly raising the point of his "recess" appointments while congress was in fact in session. Those appointments were unconstitutional.

Understood!

[Kelly Kearns]

I have an issue with Unions backing Obama the 2nd time after he proved he would do a crappy job.

Sent from my AWESOME Note 2

[Paul627g]

I'm a 21 year member with the International Union of Operating Engineers. Over my time I can't say I've always supported 100 percent who we supported in government but the end result was always the same...

Support the ones most likely to get federal and local level funds and support needed to keep the thousands employed within the unions. Not just for my union but the laborers, carpenters, truck drivers etc...

I know not everyone is for union but after 21 years I can say my union has provided me the work and earnings needed to support a family of 7 including buying a home, cars and continued education of my family. Where as in a non union situation I would be making barely half the wages and not have anywhere near the benefits. Including working on some of the best and biggest projects in the Chicago area in the last 20 years which now thanks to union support and funding give jobs to thousands of people long after we're done moving the dirt and onto the next big job.

No president or politician is perfect and they all have to cut deals and keep promises that are handed down from term to term regardless of the level of office.

Despite what many think of Obama, he didn't create this nightmare he walked into it and took a big bite of the rotten sandwich left behind by previous presidents and politicians. The same will be repeated and judged upon when the next president takes office as everyone tries to put the blame on them for our problems.

Welcome to life folks... It's a wonderful choice isn't it?


Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Android Central Forums

[backbeat]

I was a member in good standing of the UAW for a long time until NAFTA became law, I am not against unions I believe they have served to benefit American workers in ways that most of them do not realize. I am mearly raising the point of his "recess" appointments while congress was in fact in session. Those appointments were unconstitutional.

A lower court has made its ruling. Within its ruling was no mention of constitutionality regarding recess appointments. But, don't allow that to cloud your hate and fear.

[Live2ride883]

A lower court has made its ruling. Within its ruling was no mention of constitutionality regarding recess appointments. But, don't allow that to cloud your hate and fear.

I think this statement is contrary to what you posted above.

"A federal appeals court has ruled that Barack Obama abused his powers when he made recess appointments last year when the Senate was technically not in recess, making those appointments unconstitutional and illegal."

Source:

[Kelly Kearns]

How long do we get to blame Bush?

Sent from my AWESOME Note 2

[backbeat]

I think this statement is contrary to what you posted above.

"A federal appeals court has ruled that Barack Obama abused his powers when he made recess appointments last year when the Senate was technically not in recess, making those appointments unconstitutional and illegal."

Source:

Quote the Court ruling which defines 'constitutionality'. Not a blog.

[Paul627g]

How long do we get to blame Bush?

Sent from my AWESOME Note 2

Probably for a long time... Both Jr & Sr. left a messy trail of loose ends and broken promises that we are still paying for today.

I think personally Sr. did a better job than Jr.

[Kelly Kearns]

Probably for a long time... Both Jr & Sr. left a messy trail of loose ends and broken promises that we are still paying for today.

I think personally Sr. did a better job than Jr.

You think they didn't inherit messes? We are barely over 200 years old and 1/3 of our debt had been created in less than 4 years.

We should blame Carter too, he made a huge mess with bail outs.

Sent from my AWESOME Note 2

[NothingIsTrue]

After Benghazi, fast & furious, and now this . We know that Obama likes to overstep his executive powers. Let alone adding 6 trillion dollars to the national debt in less than 4 years. This isn't even including the questionable executive decisions he signed earlier this month surrounding gun control. This is not intended to be a "pres so & so did this and another did that." What I would like it to be is an organized discussion on current events.
----------------

Yes, I believe he should be impeached, this is not the first time he has over stepped his power and I do not think it will be the last.

I would be in favor of at least some sort of censure, if not impeachment for many reasons. However, I have one part of your comment that I find to be untrue or misleading. 6 trillion dollars was added to the national debt during the last four years, however the way the budget works mandates that the president borrow to cover all expenses authorized by congress that are not paid by taxes that are authorized by congress. While the president can suggest a budget and try to negotiate, he actually has no power to spend any money on anything. All expenses and revenue are mandated solely at the discretion of congress and if they do not raise enough revenue through taxes, the president is forced to borrow the difference.

This is one of the reasons that the concept of a debt-ceiling is just plain silly, because congress is trying to say that the president cannot legally fulfill a constitutional requirement of repayment of debts that the congress invented. The problem on this front starts and ends with the congress and there is nothing any president can ever do to impact their decision making, short of disbanding them and having them arrested for the treason (if it be called that) of incurring expenses in excess of revenue. This would of course have to be followed up with emergency elections, and would get quite messy. As the senate is refusing to pass a budget, there is no choice but to continue to extend the existing budget with these silly referendums.

[Live2ride883]

Quote the Court ruling which defines 'constitutionality'. Not a blog.

How about you find a court ruling that defines constitutionality?

[NothingIsTrue]

Honestly I don't believe that any president in the last century has worked within the limits of the Constitution and we've yet to hold the Congress accountable for their work directly against their constituencies.

[NothingIsTrue]

Hitting any american citizen anywhere in the universe with a drone attack should have been the last straw.

[backbeat]

You think they didn't inherit messes? We are barely over 200 years old and 1/3 of our debt had been created in less than 4 years.

Wrong. The sharpest incline occurred between 2001-2009, primarily by spending $3BILLION pre WEEK in Iraq.

We should blame Carter too, he made a huge mess with bail outs.

Wrong again. Carter was only involved in one (1) bailout. That of Chrysler. It paled in comparison to previous as well as subsequent Presidential bailouts. I'm in shock that you failed to mention G.H.W. Bush's little $293+ BILLION bailout to save his other son, Neil. Shock, I tell ya!

[backbeat]

How about you find a court ruling that defines constitutionality?

It was your claim that the appointments were unconstitutional. Besides the court's ruling, who is in a position to determine constitutionality? You? Back up your claim.

[Paul627g]

You think they didn't inherit messes? We are barely over 200 years old and 1/3 of our debt had been created in less than 4 years.

We should blame Carter too, he made a huge mess with bail outs.

Sent from my AWESOME Note 2

Agreed.

Like I said, this is handed down from term to term local and federal levels. In another couple years we will hear the promises and solutions of the next candidates and they will take on what was left behind. This is unfortunately not something that will be resolved in our lifetime or even our children's for that matter. Its just too huge of a mess here in the United States, let alone what we can't control in other countries which affects our stock market and trade on a daily basis.