Impeachment on the horizon?

[QUOTE="VigilantEagle"]He is trying to make us more and more dependent on the government and he is putting us into a lot of debt. And yes I do watch Fox News because thats the only place where I do not have to listen to the liberal bias media coverage.

Joshywaa

So you listen to conservative bias media coverage?

I can see you doubt me, why ? If I do not like him why should I act like I do ? Its my right to voice my opinion.

VigilantEagle

Voicing your opinion.... right. The way you worded your post was pretty...i don't know...blatant.

Conservatives are such babies. Bush was a war criminal and Palin is guilty of treason, but they wanna impeach Obama? Give me a break. rlake

What? :?

[QUOTE="On3ShotOneKill"][QUOTE="Former_Slacker"]

Define socialism.

VigilantEagle

Howhas Obama imposed any regulations on U.S. markets, trade, or currency ???

[QUOTE="VigilantEagle"][QUOTE="On3ShotOneKill"] Exactly. People who cry "Socialism!!!" Don't even know what it is. Just an excuse to hate the terrorist Kenyan.:roll:Former_Slacker

Ok where does he advocate government owenership of the means of production? The bailouts were coordinated by Bush and are a non-point.

[QUOTE="VigilantEagle"][QUOTE="On3ShotOneKill"] Exactly. People who cry "Socialism!!!" Don't even know what it is. Just an excuse to hate the terrorist Kenyan.:roll:On3ShotOneKill

How does the Health Care Law have any regulative effect on U.S. markets, trade, or currency ???

They're welcome to try; the attempted impeachment of Clinton was one of the major contributing factors to the Democrats' better-than-expected showing in 1998, and this time they don't even have anything remotely approaching legitimate impeachment grounds.

GabuEx

It wasn't an attempted impeachment. He was impeached.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

They're welcome to try; the attempted impeachment of Clinton was one of the major contributing factors to the Democrats' better-than-expected showing in 1998, and this time they don't even have anything remotely approaching legitimate impeachment grounds.

Oleg_Huzwog

It wasn't an attempted impeachment. He was impeached.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

They're welcome to try; the attempted impeachment of Clinton was one of the major contributing factors to the Democrats' better-than-expected showing in 1998, and this time they don't even have anything remotely approaching legitimate impeachment grounds.

Oleg_Huzwog

It wasn't an attempted impeachment. He was impeached.

Attempted conviction, whatever. :P

[QUOTE="Former_Slacker"]

[QUOTE="VigilantEagle"]: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods that is happening in America, look at the bailout and what it has done.VigilantEagle

Ok where does he advocate government owenership of the means of production? The bailouts were coordinated by Bush and are a non-point.

They were given a bridge loan. There was no nationalization. There were no bailouts in the stimulus bill.

[QUOTE="On3ShotOneKill"]

[QUOTE="VigilantEagle"]: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods that is happening in America, look at the bailout and what it has done.VigilantEagle

How does the Health Care Law have any regulative effect on U.S. markets, trade, or currency ???

How is this bill socalist though?

[QUOTE="VigilantEagle"][QUOTE="Former_Slacker"]

Ok where does he advocate government owenership of the means of production? The bailouts were coordinated by Bush and are a non-point.

Former_Slacker

They were given a bridge loan. There was no nationalization. There were no bailouts in the stimulus bill.

: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods that is happening in America, look at the bailout and what it has done.VigilantEagle

How does the Health Care Law have any regulative effect on U.S. markets, trade, or currency ???

[QUOTE="Former_Slacker"]

[QUOTE="VigilantEagle"]Obama had a bailout of his own where he did buy out GM and GM was government owned, also too GE was bailed out by Obama's stimulus bill as well and owned by the government.VigilantEagle

They were given a bridge loan. There was no nationalization. There were no bailouts in the stimulus bill.

[QUOTE="Former_Slacker"]

[QUOTE="VigilantEagle"]Obama had a bailout of his own where he did buy out GM and GM was government owned, also too GE was bailed out by Obama's stimulus bill as well and owned by the government.VigilantEagle

They were given a bridge loan. There was no nationalization. There were no bailouts in the stimulus bill.

It wasn't a bail out it was a loan...

[QUOTE="VigilantEagle"][QUOTE="On3ShotOneKill"]

How does the Health Care Law have any regulative effect on U.S. markets, trade, or currency ???

Former_Slacker

How is this bill socalist though?

[QUOTE="VigilantEagle"][QUOTE="Former_Slacker"]

They were given a bridge loan. There was no nationalization. There were no bailouts in the stimulus bill.

Former_Slacker

It wasn't a bail out it was a loan...

[QUOTE="Former_Slacker"]

[QUOTE="VigilantEagle"]You are just focusing on one thing he has done and that makes us more dependent on the government which is what the progressive liberals want us to be.VigilantEagle

How is this bill socalist though?

You haven't answered the question, how is it socialist. How does it give government the means of production? Where in the bill does ti state government can provide health care?

Although we are far from a true socialist society, I don't know why so many people advocate that it's not a bad form of government.

It's basically a system of common ownership of all production in the nation. It's so you work for the state and not for yourself. The idea of socialism is that everybody is equal in terms of wealth as the entire nation shares in the liability of all the resources and production.

I'll tell you right now, the US didn't become the largest economy in the world because of a socialist system.

I know one side screams "socialism" as it's a curse while the other side laughs at them and tells them that they have no idea what they are talking about. I feel that nobody has any clue as to what they are talking about. The idea of public ownership of production and resources does not promote a strong economy. We've never seen a true socialist country be a huge player in the world market.

The last I can think of is the Communist state of Soviet Russia. While technically not socialism, it still uses very similar methods to control the economy. The government lays out plans of production and manages every aspect of the economy. Whenever you give a small group of people that much power... it always becomes a hassle.

Socialism doesn't have anything to do with acceptance of the gays, laws on abortion, or any of that social crap. It is a pure economic system. It's not progressive as it has only ever really slowed down the economic growth of the country as they cannot adapt to changing economic conditions. During the .com boom of the 90s it was Silicon Valley that took off because in the US there is very little red tape to make a new business and enter a market like the internet.

Free markets have been the only economic system we have ever seen to promote large economic growth and keep it more-or-less stable throughout the years (with the natural down fall in the economy that comes with natural changing environments).

To call the healthcare bill an act of socialism isn't entirely true, but it does contain a lot of legislation that attempts to put more people on an equal basis in terms of wealth by increasing taxes on one economic group for the benefit of another. Though the bill also calls for massive amounts of deficit spending, which the Regan years have shown us, comes back to hurt us badly. There is also no real indication that this healthcare bill is going to help the system. It just adds more red tape to the entire process.

I guess when people are calling out socialism left and right it's just a system of checks and balances to keep people aware of the constant changing political environment. People don't want to be taxed for the benifit of others. It's so easy to just start taxing everybody else for policies that you have created that make you feel better that you could be helping your fellow man. I call them feel good policies. Medicare and social security are the two biggest feel good policies I can think of and they have BOTH failed hardcore and have cost this country billions upon billions. Infrastructure spending like on roads, electricity, water... those promote economic growth to new areas while feel good policies like medicare and social security take responsibilities away from the people and put the burden on everybody else and don't promote any economic growth. Instead they just keep requiring more and more money to keep them going.

[QUOTE="VigilantEagle"][QUOTE="Former_Slacker"]

How is this bill socalist though?

Former_Slacker

You haven't answered the question, how is it socialist. How does it give government the means of production? Where in the bill does ti state government can provide health care?

[QUOTE="Former_Slacker"]

[QUOTE="VigilantEagle"]That brings me to something about something in the UK and nothing about the bailout.VigilantEagle

It wasn't a bail out it was a loan...

What? The stimulus contained no bailout at all. It was tax cuts mixed with aid to state governments. How did it fail? Here are its effects.

• Raised the level of real (inflation-adjusted) gross domestic product (GDP) by between 1.7 percent and 4.5 percent,
• Lowered the unemployment rate by between 0.7 percentage points and 1.8 percentage points,
• Increased the number of people employed by between 1.4 million and 3.3 million, and
• Increased the number of full-time-equivalent (FTE) jobs by 2.0 million to 4.8 million compared with what those amounts would have been otherwise. (Increases in FTE jobs include shifts from part-time to full-time work or overtime and are thus generally larger than increases in the number of employed workers.)

[QUOTE="Former_Slacker"]

[QUOTE="VigilantEagle"]It is going to make the market of healthcare insurance basically crash in sense because the private healthcare plans are going to get so expensive that many Americans could not afford it so they will be force to depend on the government for their healthcare.VigilantEagle

You haven't answered the question, how is it socialist. How does it give government the means of production? Where in the bill does ti state government can provide health care?

You haven't answered any questions. How will it make premiums go up?

They are literally going to shoot themselves in the foot if they continue this nonsense. HoolaHoopMan

[QUOTE="VigilantEagle"][QUOTE="Former_Slacker"]

You haven't answered the question, how is it socialist. How does it give government the means of production? Where in the bill does ti state government can provide health care?

Former_Slacker

You haven't answered any questions. How will it make premiums go up?

Would be awesome if it actually happened but it won'ttestfactor888

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"]They are literally going to shoot themselves in the foot if they continue this nonsense. Sajo7

[QUOTE="testfactor888"]Would be awesome if it actually happened but it won'tSajo7

[QUOTE="Sajo7"][QUOTE="testfactor888"]Would be awesome if it actually happened but it won'tVigilantEagle

[QUOTE="Sajo7"][QUOTE="testfactor888"]Would be awesome if it actually happened but it won'tVigilantEagle

Those aren't really reasons to impeach. I don't like his policies either, but he hasn't extended is bounds to much and has followed the correct proceedings to get stuff passed, even if they had to do some very wierd things to get the bills to pass... it was still all legal.

The Republicans would pretty much be killing their chance to take back the white house in 2012 if they do this.

[QUOTE="Sajo7"][QUOTE="testfactor888"]Would be awesome if it actually happened but it won'tVigilantEagle

I'm not seeing any criminal charges there.

[QUOTE="Sajo7"][QUOTE="testfactor888"]Would be awesome if it actually happened but it won'tVigilantEagle

Although we are far from a true socialist society, I don't know why so many people advocate that it's not a bad form of government.

It's basically a system of common ownership of all production in the nation. It's so you work for the state and not for yourself. The idea of socialism is that everybody is equal in terms of wealth as the entire nation shares in the liability of all the resources and production.

I'll tell you right now, the US didn't become the largest economy in the world because of a socialist system.

I know one side screams "socialism" as it's a curse while the other side laughs at them and tells them that they have no idea what they are talking about. I feel that nobody has any clue as to what they are talking about. The idea of public ownership of production and resources does not promote a strong economy. We've never seen a true socialist country be a huge player in the world market.

The last I can think of is the Communist state of Soviet Russia. While technically not socialism, it still uses very similar methods to control the economy. The government lays out plans of production and manages every aspect of the economy. Whenever you give a small group of people that much power... it always becomes a hassle.

Socialism doesn't have anything to do with acceptance of the gays, laws on abortion, or any of that social crap. It is a pure economic system. It's not progressive as it has only ever really slowed down the economic growth of the country as they cannot adapt to changing economic conditions. During the .com boom of the 90s it was Silicon Valley that took off because in the US there is very little red tape to make a new business and enter a market like the internet.

Free markets have been the only economic system we have ever seen to promote large economic growth and keep it more-or-less stable throughout the years (with the natural down fall in the economy that comes with natural changing environments).

To call the healthcare bill an act of socialism isn't entirely true, but it does contain a lot of legislation that attempts to put more people on an equal basis in terms of wealth by increasing taxes on one economic group for the benefit of another. Though the bill also calls for massive amounts of deficit spending, which the Regan years have shown us, comes back to hurt us badly. There is also no real indication that this healthcare bill is going to help the system. It just adds more red tape to the entire process.

I guess when people are calling out socialism left and right it's just a system of checks and balances to keep people aware of the constant changing political environment. People don't want to be taxed for the benifit of others. It's so easy to just start taxing everybody else for policies that you have created that make you feel better that you could be helping your fellow man. I call them feel good policies. Medicare and social security are the two biggest feel good policies I can think of and they have BOTH failed hardcore and have cost this country billions upon billions. Infrastructure spending like on roads, electricity, water... those promote economic growth to new areas while feel good policies like medicare and social security take responsibilities away from the people and put the burden on everybody else and don't promote any economic growth. Instead they just keep requiring more and more money to keep them going.

Wasdie

I personally feel that this impeachment trial won't happen because the Republicans know that they won't win. I wish they could impeach him though for him being a bad President. VigilantEagle

[QUOTE="VigilantEagle"][QUOTE="Sajo7"] What would he be impeached for, exactly?T_P_O

[QUOTE="CRS98"][QUOTE="Wasdie"]

More government programs and taxes are progress?

Wasdie

Just because everybody else is doing it doesn't mean it's a good thing. Higher taxes and deficit spending cannot be a good thing for any country.

Government in this country shouldn't be large. Again, there is NO reason we have to copy the systems of other nations.

So success in other countries regarding their healthcare is something we should not emulate, if not improve? It's not like they're failures, and anyone who says otherwise are rather ignorant, or just straight up liars.

The government needs to protect the people's rights, not take responsibilities away from them.

Responsibilities like what? Getting a good enough job so they can afford healthcare?Poorer people are more likely to subject to death because they can't afford healthier foods because food that isn't healthy is cheap, live in less polluted environments because there isn't more regulation on environmental matters, and influenced by dangerous people because of the lack of police services.

Regan's idea of limited government would be great if he wouldn't have also jacked up spending on the military like he had. The idea of small government and a large private sector isn't a bad thing. It's only really bad when you start deficit spending like mad. Now it's coming back to haunt us. Instead of reducing and maybe increasing taxes here and there to make a surplus, we are given a couple trillion dollars more in spending.

We did have a surplus at the end of Clinton's years, so he must be a hero of yours.

How is that progressive? Feel-good policies like health care and social security don't make for good laws. They take the responsibility of the citizens and puts it on the state, which in turn puts the responsibility on everybody, not just those who it's effecting.

Would not taking care of those who cannot fulfill their responsibilities just be as irresponsible as not helping a man who has no legs? He wasn't responsible enough to keep them, so I guess he has the responsibility to not have any support.

The US is not built on the idea that everybody is fair. The only thing we are all supposed to be completely equal on is our rights as laid out in the Constitution. We have the right to peruse happiness, we have to catch it ourselves.

Subjective. Nobody knows what the US is built on because everyone has their own definition and own thought of how society should work.

The idea that you can take away personal responsibility and give it to others isn't progressive, it's actually a step back as it slows all sectors down. Then we have some serious problems.

Define 'responsibilities' that the people must do for themselves.

I largely disagree. Admittedly, I'm a bit slow to responding to this.

[QUOTE="Former_Slacker"]

[QUOTE="VigilantEagle"]What is so great about this healthcare bill ? I mean all it is going to do is make our premiums go up. VigilantEagle

You haven't answered any questions. How will it make premiums go up?

So how is that socialism? Also there are regulations in place to present unnessary increases although this is why a public option was necessary. Your plan should not go up the first year seeing as this law hasn't been fully enacted yet.

[QUOTE="VigilantEagle"]I personally feel that this impeachment trial won't happen because the Republicans know that they won't win. I wish they could impeach him though for him being a bad President. Sajo7

[QUOTE="T_P_O"]

[QUOTE="VigilantEagle"] For a crappy healthcare bill, putting us in more and more debt with his spending , and just overall being a bad President. VigilantEagle

[QUOTE="VigilantEagle"][QUOTE="Former_Slacker"]

You haven't answered any questions. How will it make premiums go up?

Former_Slacker

So how is that socialism? Also there are regulations in place to present unnessary increases although this is why a public option was necessary. Your plan should not go up the first year seeing as this law hasn't been fully enacted yet.

[QUOTE="Sajo7"][QUOTE="VigilantEagle"]I personally feel that this impeachment trial won't happen because the Republicans know that they won't win. I wish they could impeach him though for him being a bad President. VigilantEagle

[QUOTE="T_P_O"] I wouldn't do it around here, OT politics can unfortunately be what you just sarcastically uttered. :PVigilantEagle

There is this :P .

[QUOTE="Sajo7"][QUOTE="VigilantEagle"]I was once again being sarcastic, I know this would be pointless because then everytime the American people do not like a President he would be impeached, I need to find a way to better show my sarcasm on here.VigilantEagle