Thread: NO!!

Originally Posted by CrocketsGhost

Originally Posted by AmericanElizabeth

I didn't threaten impeachment, I just mentioned that with all the talk out there of impeachment that one would think he had given this issue more thought than it appeared he had during his speech, because he sounded the same as the last few times he has talked about it, that's all I said.

But I guess he does not give a lot of thought about anything, unless he is told to by all the CEO's that benefit from the cheap labor.

I wasn't saying that you threatened impeachment. I was speaking generically about the tenor of a number of the messages sent to the President as evidenced by previous commentary by others in this thread and others.

I have written and written and called without threats as well. I don't agree with impeachment anyway. He just isn't listening. Every time I get a fundraising letter from the Republicans I return it with a letter stating why I will not support them anymore. It doesn't matter. They just keep sending them. Over Christmas I got one with a picture of the President and First Lady... oh joy.

Anyway, my point is that it is a losing battle with Mr. President regardless of the tenor of our letters. Is it really the best strategy, and best use of our time to try to get him to change his mind? He isn't going to. Like someone said, he doesn't need to worry about being re-elected and has shown over and over again, that he will do what he believes is right. I don't care how many of us write, he is steadfast in his beliefs. Plus, he is answering to someone other than the American people. It is all about money.

All that being said, what is the best strategy? How do we turn this around?

I'm still wondering why we haven't had a US citizen's march against amnesty? It's obvious that there is power in numbers and when they see millions of illegals in the streets what sways/frightens them is that they see voters, present and future. Why haven't we marched?

Originally Posted by anniealone

Originally Posted by CrocketsGhost

Originally Posted by AmericanElizabeth

I didn't threaten impeachment, I just mentioned that with all the talk out there of impeachment that one would think he had given this issue more thought than it appeared he had during his speech, because he sounded the same as the last few times he has talked about it, that's all I said.

But I guess he does not give a lot of thought about anything, unless he is told to by all the CEO's that benefit from the cheap labor.

I wasn't saying that you threatened impeachment. I was speaking generically about the tenor of a number of the messages sent to the President as evidenced by previous commentary by others in this thread and others.

I have written and written and called without threats as well. I don't agree with impeachment anyway. He just isn't listening. Every time I get a fundraising letter from the Republicans I return it with a letter stating why I will not support them anymore. It doesn't matter. They just keep sending them. Over Christmas I got one with a picture of the President and First Lady... oh joy.

Anyway, my point is that it is a losing battle with Mr. President regardless of the tenor of our letters. Is it really the best strategy, and best use of our time to try to get him to change his mind? He isn't going to. Like someone said, he doesn't need to worry about being re-elected and has shown over and over again, that he will do what he believes is right. I don't care how many of us write, he is steadfast in his beliefs. Plus, he is answering to someone other than the American people. It is all about money.

All that being said, what is the best strategy? How do we turn this around?

You are asking a seemingly simple question that has no simple answer. First off, the President, like it or not, was duly elected. He is a stubborn individual, and we have precious little leverage to use against him and his policies directly, particualrly given that he will never again have to face the electorate. However, we can do as I suggest above while simultaneously attempting to make it difficult or impossible for him to implement his policies by applying pressure to other elected officials who have more to lose from crossing their constituents. I am not suggesting that sending letters or email of any sort to the President is the sole stratagem. Lean on your local officials to do their part to resist amnesty and quash the illegal invasion. Lean on your Congressmen. Seek whatever legal recourse exists. Protest your local police department if it is not doing enough to combat the problem. There are many things that can be done, but trying to get a single official like the President to see things your way is like trying to get the girl of your dreams to fall in love with you when she doesn't even know who you are. There comes a point that all you can do is make your proposition appear sufficiently attractive while recognizing that you have almost no control whatsoever over the thoughts and opinions of another person.

Justsayno wrote:

Not that that got much notice, maybe got deleted, but ridicule may work better than threatening with impeachment.

I agree threats of impeachment are no good and would definitely fall on deaf ears.....it is backing the action of impeachment that would get his attention. I doubt that most people are foolish enough to email with threats knowing that they will end up in the trash. In my experience, action always speaks louder than words. I would not waste my time on threatening letters of any kind to a politician.

Originally Posted by April

Justsayno wrote:

Not that that got much notice, maybe got deleted, but ridicule may work better than threatening with impeachment.

I agree threats of impeachment are no good and would definitely fall on deaf ears.....it is backing the action of impeachment that would get his attention. I doubt that most people are foolish enough to email with threats knowing that they will end up in the trash. In my experience, action always speaks louder than words. I would not waste my time on threatening letters of any kind to a politician.

I I have previously explicated ad nauseam, impeachment is not a realistic goal, given that no one has identified any "high crimes and misdemeanors" in which the Congress, which is the sole body charged with carrying out impeachment, is not complicit.

Thanks for your opinion , however there seems to be lots of people who disagree with that and if they choose to take that route that is their choice. One of the things I love most about America is the Freedom to choose your own path whether others agree with you or not!

Originally Posted by April

Thanks for your opinion , however there seems to be lots of people who disagree with that and if they choose to take that route that is their choice. One of the things I love most about America is the Freedom to choose your own path whether others agree with you or not!

No, it's not their choice. It is Congress' choice, and all the complaining and threats in the world cannot accomplish an impeachment that Congress is unwilling to pursue.

Of course, the people you cite may feel free to exercize their right to tilt at windmills rather than doing something productive if that is their choice.

Congress is made up of people. I believe that when people choose to stand up to fight corruption they are productive,even if it is only in a small way.

Originally Posted by April

Congress is made up of people. I believe that when people choose to stand up to fight corruption they are productive,even if it is only in a small way.

Yeah, it's made up of people who voted for the same policies that many are citing as "treason."

Again, meet my challenge to produce a single charge that could stick, given that it is Congress that would have to be willing to prosecute that charge, and I'll grant you the possibility of success. Otherwise I will continue to call the desire for impeachment a fool's errand.

I too think impeachment is a fool's errand, and for the same reason Crocket gives, that Congress would have to convict ITSELF in order to convict The Shrub.

Besides, do you really think Dick Cheney would be a good option? Or Nancy Pelosi?