Missouri Rodeo Clown Dresses as Obama, Crowd goes Crazy.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

If these slack-jawed yokels AREN'T hating on Barry then he's doing something terribly, terribly wrong.  How would you have it?

1. These bumpkins have their boy in power, and they all cheer as Dubya joins 'em at the "Drivin' an' turnin' left contest"

or

2. Relegated to racist demonstrations at the rodeo!  YEEEEEEEEE-HAW!

[Maxwell]

Who cares? Let the rednecks have their fun.

[ingemann]

If these slack-jawed yokels AREN'T hating on Barry then he's doing something terribly, terribly wrong.  How would you have it?

1. These bumpkins have their boy in power, and they all cheer as Dubya joins 'em at the "Drivin' an' turnin' left contest"

or

2. Relegated to racist demonstrations at the rodeo!  YEEEEEEEEE-HAW!

Just as Bush had to do something good because all those urban "thugs" and "limpwristed caffe latte drinkers" didn't like him.

Maybe I'm just old fashion, but I think it's ridiculous to praise a leader for the fact that some large demographic of the population doesn't like him.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

If these slack-jawed yokels AREN'T hating on Barry then he's doing something terribly, terribly wrong.  How would you have it?

1. These bumpkins have their boy in power, and they all cheer as Dubya joins 'em at the "Drivin' an' turnin' left contest"

or

2. Relegated to racist demonstrations at the rodeo!  YEEEEEEEEE-HAW!

Just as Bush had to do something good because all those urban "thugs" and "limpwristed caffe latte drinkers" didn't like him.

Maybe I'm just old fashion, but I think it's ridiculous to praise a leader for the fact that some large demographic of the population doesn't like him.

Who they are?  How about what they believe? 

Yes, I am quite happy with a President that rural America is not enamored with.  To be so, he would not be pushing the progressive policies with gay rights, healthcare, and gun control that he has been. 

[Vosem]

attempted  to impeach him in 2007 (which has never happened to Obama),

Uh ... false?  Like I'm sure Kucinich or some other loon might have put in a bill, but there was absolutely no real movement among Democrats to try to impeach Bush.  On the other hand, half of the Tea Party representatives have openly tossed around the idea of impeaching Obama.

Dennis Kucinich and Robert Wexler introduced articles of impeachment against Bush, which no Tea Party representatives have yet done. And don't tell me elected officials didn't openly toss about the idea of impeaching Bush: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_George_W._Bush#Political_views_and_actions

In the sense that Kucinich was an elected official, you are correct.  But you're blind if you think the "movement" to impeach Bush was bigger than the "movement" to impeach Obama.  Most Tea Party congressmen will openly discuss it, even if they aren't allowed to bring forth bills to do it.

Read the article, bro. You had Democrats in positions of leadership -- including the House Minority Leader, Pelosi herself -- saying impeachment was "on the table." Today, you have just some random TP backbenchers, most of which were elected in the past few elections and have little influence. Now, that said, Obama's still in his fifth year of office (at this stage in Bush's presidency, literally nobody was calling for impeachment yet), so perhaps the movement will get bigger. But it's absolutely undeniable, just by looking at the facts, that the movement to impeach Bush was far more serious than the one that currently exists against Obama.

gun control

Negative success with this one, since the only change of note has been allowing guns into national parks. Thankfully.

[pbrower2a]

attempted  to impeach him in 2007 (which has never happened to Obama),

Uh ... false?  Like I'm sure Kucinich or some other loon might have put in a bill, but there was absolutely no real movement among Democrats to try to impeach Bush.  On the other hand, half of the Tea Party representatives have openly tossed around the idea of impeaching Obama.

Dennis Kucinich and Robert Wexler introduced articles of impeachment against Bush, which no Tea Party representatives have yet done. And don't tell me elected officials didn't openly toss about the idea of impeaching Bush: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_George_W._Bush#Political_views_and_actions

In the sense that Kucinich was an elected official, you are correct.  But you're blind if you think the "movement" to impeach Bush was bigger than the "movement" to impeach Obama.  Most Tea Party congressmen will openly discuss it, even if they aren't allowed to bring forth bills to do it.

Read the article, bro. You had Democrats in positions of leadership -- including the House Minority Leader, Pelosi herself -- saying impeachment was "on the table." Today, you have just some random TP backbenchers, most of which were elected in the past few elections and have little influence. Now, that said, Obama's still in his fifth year of office (at this stage in Bush's presidency, literally nobody was calling for impeachment yet), so perhaps the movement will get bigger. But it's absolutely undeniable, just by looking at the facts, that the movement to impeach Bush was far more serious than the one that currently exists against Obama.

gun control

Negative success with this one, since the only change of note has been allowing guns into national parks. Thankfully.

Impeachment is not the equivalent of a parliamentary vote of no confidence. Falling short of the expectations of voters is subjective. Violations of the law or failure to perform the duties of the President would be grounds for impeachment.

[Vosem]

attempted  to impeach him in 2007 (which has never happened to Obama),

Uh ... false?  Like I'm sure Kucinich or some other loon might have put in a bill, but there was absolutely no real movement among Democrats to try to impeach Bush.  On the other hand, half of the Tea Party representatives have openly tossed around the idea of impeaching Obama.

Dennis Kucinich and Robert Wexler introduced articles of impeachment against Bush, which no Tea Party representatives have yet done. And don't tell me elected officials didn't openly toss about the idea of impeaching Bush: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_George_W._Bush#Political_views_and_actions

In the sense that Kucinich was an elected official, you are correct.  But you're blind if you think the "movement" to impeach Bush was bigger than the "movement" to impeach Obama.  Most Tea Party congressmen will openly discuss it, even if they aren't allowed to bring forth bills to do it.

Read the article, bro. You had Democrats in positions of leadership -- including the House Minority Leader, Pelosi herself -- saying impeachment was "on the table." Today, you have just some random TP backbenchers, most of which were elected in the past few elections and have little influence. Now, that said, Obama's still in his fifth year of office (at this stage in Bush's presidency, literally nobody was calling for impeachment yet), so perhaps the movement will get bigger. But it's absolutely undeniable, just by looking at the facts, that the movement to impeach Bush was far more serious than the one that currently exists against Obama.

gun control

Negative success with this one, since the only change of note has been allowing guns into national parks. Thankfully.

Impeachment is not the equivalent of a parliamentary vote of no confidence. Falling short of the expectations of voters is subjective. Violations of the law or failure to perform the duties of the President would be grounds for impeachment.

Obviously there weren't grounds to impeach Bush, and there aren't grounds to impeach Obama as yet (and no obvious grounds are on the horizon), but recently that doesn't stop people from spouting about it.

[7,052,770]

attempted  to impeach him in 2007 (which has never happened to Obama),

Uh ... false?  Like I'm sure Kucinich or some other loon might have put in a bill, but there was absolutely no real movement among Democrats to try to impeach Bush.  On the other hand, half of the Tea Party representatives have openly tossed around the idea of impeaching Obama.

Dennis Kucinich and Robert Wexler introduced articles of impeachment against Bush, which no Tea Party representatives have yet done. And don't tell me elected officials didn't openly toss about the idea of impeaching Bush: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_George_W._Bush#Political_views_and_actions

In the sense that Kucinich was an elected official, you are correct.  But you're blind if you think the "movement" to impeach Bush was bigger than the "movement" to impeach Obama.  Most Tea Party congressmen will openly discuss it, even if they aren't allowed to bring forth bills to do it.

Read the article, bro. You had Democrats in positions of leadership -- including the House Minority Leader, Pelosi herself -- saying impeachment was "on the table." Today, you have just some random TP backbenchers, most of which were elected in the past few elections and have little influence. Now, that said, Obama's still in his fifth year of office (at this stage in Bush's presidency, literally nobody was calling for impeachment yet), so perhaps the movement will get bigger. But it's absolutely undeniable, just by looking at the facts, that the movement to impeach Bush was far more serious than the one that currently exists against Obama.

Are you trolling?  Pelosi's phrase, in that Wikipedia page and everywhere else, was that impeachment was "off the table."  I honestly can't believe you simply made an error when you typed the she said it was "on the table."

Practically every Tea Party member of Congress hints at impeachment when they go home to Town Halls or when they appear on TV.  I don't know how you could miss that...

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

attempted  to impeach him in 2007 (which has never happened to Obama),

Uh ... false?  Like I'm sure Kucinich or some other loon might have put in a bill, but there was absolutely no real movement among Democrats to try to impeach Bush.  On the other hand, half of the Tea Party representatives have openly tossed around the idea of impeaching Obama.

Dennis Kucinich and Robert Wexler introduced articles of impeachment against Bush, which no Tea Party representatives have yet done. And don't tell me elected officials didn't openly toss about the idea of impeaching Bush: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_George_W._Bush#Political_views_and_actions

In the sense that Kucinich was an elected official, you are correct.  But you're blind if you think the "movement" to impeach Bush was bigger than the "movement" to impeach Obama.  Most Tea Party congressmen will openly discuss it, even if they aren't allowed to bring forth bills to do it.

Read the article, bro. You had Democrats in positions of leadership -- including the House Minority Leader, Pelosi herself -- saying impeachment was "on the table." Today, you have just some random TP backbenchers, most of which were elected in the past few elections and have little influence. Now, that said, Obama's still in his fifth year of office (at this stage in Bush's presidency, literally nobody was calling for impeachment yet), so perhaps the movement will get bigger. But it's absolutely undeniable, just by looking at the facts, that the movement to impeach Bush was far more serious than the one that currently exists against Obama.

Are you trolling?  Pelosi's phrase, in that Wikipedia page and everywhere else, was that impeachment was "off the table."  I honestly can't believe you simply made an error when you typed the she said it was "on the table."

Practically every Tea Party member of Congress hints at impeachment when they go home to Town Halls or when they appear on TV.  I don't know how you could miss that...

To be fair, just about every President is threatened with impeachment by some backbencher from the opposite party. Its not worth even comparing. Bush had Kucinich, Obama had Walter Jones. It goes on and on, whether the said President actually deserves impeachment or not.

[pbrower2a]

attempted  to impeach him in 2007 (which has never happened to Obama),

Uh ... false?  Like I'm sure Kucinich or some other loon might have put in a bill, but there was absolutely no real movement among Democrats to try to impeach Bush.  On the other hand, half of the Tea Party representatives have openly tossed around the idea of impeaching Obama.

Dennis Kucinich and Robert Wexler introduced articles of impeachment against Bush, which no Tea Party representatives have yet done. And don't tell me elected officials didn't openly toss about the idea of impeaching Bush: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_George_W._Bush#Political_views_and_actions

In the sense that Kucinich was an elected official, you are correct.  But you're blind if you think the "movement" to impeach Bush was bigger than the "movement" to impeach Obama.  Most Tea Party congressmen will openly discuss it, even if they aren't allowed to bring forth bills to do it.

Read the article, bro. You had Democrats in positions of leadership -- including the House Minority Leader, Pelosi herself -- saying impeachment was "on the table." Today, you have just some random TP backbenchers, most of which were elected in the past few elections and have little influence. Now, that said, Obama's still in his fifth year of office (at this stage in Bush's presidency, literally nobody was calling for impeachment yet), so perhaps the movement will get bigger. But it's absolutely undeniable, just by looking at the facts, that the movement to impeach Bush was far more serious than the one that currently exists against Obama.

gun control

Negative success with this one, since the only change of note has been allowing guns into national parks. Thankfully.

Impeachment is not the equivalent of a parliamentary vote of no confidence. Falling short of the expectations of voters is subjective. Violations of the law or failure to perform the duties of the President would be grounds for impeachment.

Obviously there weren't grounds to impeach Bush, and there aren't grounds to impeach Obama as yet (and no obvious grounds are on the horizon), but recently that doesn't stop people from spouting about it.

There simply weren't the votes.

Lying to Congress is a serious crime... and lying to a deliberative body that has meaningful choice to reject an appeal to war on a casus belli is itself a war crime. I would have voted to impeach -- or convict. Maybe with tears in my eyes, but I would have done so in either House of Congress were I in the position to do either.

[Vosem]

attempted  to impeach him in 2007 (which has never happened to Obama),

Uh ... false?  Like I'm sure Kucinich or some other loon might have put in a bill, but there was absolutely no real movement among Democrats to try to impeach Bush.  On the other hand, half of the Tea Party representatives have openly tossed around the idea of impeaching Obama.

Dennis Kucinich and Robert Wexler introduced articles of impeachment against Bush, which no Tea Party representatives have yet done. And don't tell me elected officials didn't openly toss about the idea of impeaching Bush: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_George_W._Bush#Political_views_and_actions

In the sense that Kucinich was an elected official, you are correct.  But you're blind if you think the "movement" to impeach Bush was bigger than the "movement" to impeach Obama.  Most Tea Party congressmen will openly discuss it, even if they aren't allowed to bring forth bills to do it.

Read the article, bro. You had Democrats in positions of leadership -- including the House Minority Leader, Pelosi herself -- saying impeachment was "on the table." Today, you have just some random TP backbenchers, most of which were elected in the past few elections and have little influence. Now, that said, Obama's still in his fifth year of office (at this stage in Bush's presidency, literally nobody was calling for impeachment yet), so perhaps the movement will get bigger. But it's absolutely undeniable, just by looking at the facts, that the movement to impeach Bush was far more serious than the one that currently exists against Obama.

Are you trolling?  Pelosi's phrase, in that Wikipedia page and everywhere else, was that impeachment was "off the table."  I honestly can't believe you simply made an error when you typed the she said it was "on the table."

...that has to be the single most embarrassing misreading I've made since the occasion in 7th grade Science when I misread "organism" as "orgasm". You're right, though.

But not about the fact at hand. John Conyers -- an extremely senior House Democrat -- introduced a resolution calling for an investigation of Bush that got more than 30 co-sponsors, some of whom were fairly senior Democrats (here's the list: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:HE00635:@@@P ). The Tea Party has yet to try anything remotely similar.

Practically every Tea Party member of Congress hints at impeachment when they go home to Town Halls or when they appear on TV.  I don't know how you could miss that...

I agree, but the Democratic leadership in the House during Bush's second term was much more open to flirting with impeachment than the present Republican leadership. And even the Democratic 'weird backbenchers' of the time were more enthusiastic; Dennis Kucinich and Robert Wexler introduced an actual resolution to impeach Bush, which the TP has yet to do. The Democratic movement to do so was clearly far more serious than the TP-ers are today.

attempted  to impeach him in 2007 (which has never happened to Obama),

Uh ... false?  Like I'm sure Kucinich or some other loon might have put in a bill, but there was absolutely no real movement among Democrats to try to impeach Bush.  On the other hand, half of the Tea Party representatives have openly tossed around the idea of impeaching Obama.

Dennis Kucinich and Robert Wexler introduced articles of impeachment against Bush, which no Tea Party representatives have yet done. And don't tell me elected officials didn't openly toss about the idea of impeaching Bush: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_George_W._Bush#Political_views_and_actions

In the sense that Kucinich was an elected official, you are correct.  But you're blind if you think the "movement" to impeach Bush was bigger than the "movement" to impeach Obama.  Most Tea Party congressmen will openly discuss it, even if they aren't allowed to bring forth bills to do it.

Read the article, bro. You had Democrats in positions of leadership -- including the House Minority Leader, Pelosi herself -- saying impeachment was "on the table." Today, you have just some random TP backbenchers, most of which were elected in the past few elections and have little influence. Now, that said, Obama's still in his fifth year of office (at this stage in Bush's presidency, literally nobody was calling for impeachment yet), so perhaps the movement will get bigger. But it's absolutely undeniable, just by looking at the facts, that the movement to impeach Bush was far more serious than the one that currently exists against Obama.

gun control

Negative success with this one, since the only change of note has been allowing guns into national parks. Thankfully.

Impeachment is not the equivalent of a parliamentary vote of no confidence. Falling short of the expectations of voters is subjective. Violations of the law or failure to perform the duties of the President would be grounds for impeachment.

Obviously there weren't grounds to impeach Bush, and there aren't grounds to impeach Obama as yet (and no obvious grounds are on the horizon), but recently that doesn't stop people from spouting about it.

There simply weren't the votes.

That didn't stop the Democratic Party's left-wing from going ahead with multiple different resolutions to do it, which the TP has yet to attempt even once.

[t_host1]

hey all, the ? been asked if Obama; in a national address pardon the clown.

Would of any, of the former presidents do this?

[Brittain33]

Rep. Blake Farenthold (a real-life Congressman) says that a majority of the House would vote to impeach Obama.

http://newsone.com/2675245/impeach-obama-blake-farenthold/

[Landslide Lyndon]

hey all, the ? been asked if Obama; in a national address pardon the clown.

Would of any, of the former presidents do this?

Why? Has he been convicted of something?

[Vosem]

Rep. Blake Farenthold (a real-life Congressman) says that a majority of the House would vote to impeach Obama.

http://newsone.com/2675245/impeach-obama-blake-farenthold/

Farenthold is a random junior backbencher talking out of his ass. John Conyers, the ranking member on the Judiciary Committee, an important member of House leadership, actually introduced a resolution that got 38 co-sponsors, including other influential Democratic House leaders. I think it's extremely clear that, at least as yet, the movement to impeach Obama has nowhere near the strength that the movement to impeach Bush did.

[t_host1]

hey all, the ? been asked if Obama; in a national address pardon the clown.

Would of any, of the former presidents do this?

Why? Has he been convicted of something?

Life Time Ban of being a Rodeo Clown has been invoked by the Rodeo Clown Association.

[Landslide Lyndon]

hey all, the ? been asked if Obama; in a national address pardon the clown.

Would of any, of the former presidents do this?

Why? Has he been convicted of something?

Life Time Ban of being a Rodeo Clown has been invoked by the Rodeo Clown Association.

I didn't know that the US President had the power to void disciplinary actions taken by the Rodeo Clown Association.

[Brittain33]

They both have equal strength: nil. Conyers' effort was symbolic and if a Republican introduced an impeachment bill it would get way more than 38 co-sponsors. There was never any plausible effort to impeach Bush.

Rep. Blake Farenthold (a real-life Congressman) says that a majority of the House would vote to impeach Obama.

http://newsone.com/2675245/impeach-obama-blake-farenthold/

Farenthold is a random junior backbencher talking out of his ass. John Conyers, the ranking member on the Judiciary Committee, an important member of House leadership, actually introduced a resolution that got 38 co-sponsors, including other influential Democratic House leaders. I think it's extremely clear that, at least as yet, the movement to impeach Obama has nowhere near the strength that the movement to impeach Bush did.

[Miles]

Steve Stockman is inviting the clown to Texas.

As if there aren't already enough clowns the Texas delegation.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Steve Stockman is inviting the clown to Texas.

As if there aren't already enough clowns the Texas delegation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcYppAs6ZdI

[t_host1]

hey all, the ? been asked if Obama; in a national address pardon the clown.

Would of any, of the former presidents do this?

Why? Has he been convicted of something?

Life Time Ban of being a Rodeo Clown has been invoked by the Rodeo Clown Association.

I didn't know that the US President had the power to void disciplinary actions taken by the Rodeo Clown Association.

aaah... in this court of public opinion, he, Obama, is the Judge.


[UPDATE] Rodeo Clown Association says that, "they have not banned the rodeo clown for life, they have scheduled him for sensitive training class".

[barfbag]

Yeah, but that's different....somehow.

Obama never had the courage and leadership to ask the all important question: Is our children learning?

Well I guess that just changes my positions on all the issues after bringing up such a memory. I mean you really converted me. At least Bush knows what the definition of is is.

[Badger]

attempted  to impeach him in 2007 (which has never happened to Obama),

Uh ... false?  Like I'm sure Kucinich or some other loon might have put in a bill, but there was absolutely no real movement among Democrats to try to impeach Bush.  On the other hand, half of the Tea Party representatives have openly tossed around the idea of impeaching Obama.

Dennis Kucinich and Robert Wexler introduced articles of impeachment against Bush, which no Tea Party representatives have yet done. And don't tell me elected officials didn't openly toss about the idea of impeaching Bush: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_George_W._Bush#Political_views_and_actions

Because you were apparently under age 12 at the time, allow me to assure you that Kucinich's motion got a blip on the nightly news and almost new Democrats or liberal groups (certainly none of note) backed it. If you weren't playing Pokeman at the time, you'd know this was an utter non-event.

[Badger]

Yeah, but that's different....somehow.

Think about it. It'll come to you.

[Badger]

Rep. Blake Farenthold (a real-life Congressman) says that a majority of the House would vote to impeach Obama.

http://newsone.com/2675245/impeach-obama-blake-farenthold/

But...but.....Kucinch! CONYERS!!