Jeep Driver Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c ... ON.RES.107: Impeach the SOB this time. Apply all the pressure you can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comanchero87 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 That link contains no Information. What are you Blood or Crip....lol. I hope your not mixing up dems and repubs like you did with voltage and amps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carnuck Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.CON.RES.107: Impeach the SOB this time. Apply all the pressure you can. Jones? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeep Driver Posted March 12, 2012 Author Share Posted March 12, 2012 Bill Text 112th Congress (2011-2012) H.CON.RES.107.IH THIS SEARCH THIS DOCUMENT GO TO Next Hit Forward New Bills Search Prev Hit Back HomePage Hit List Best Sections Help Contents Display Print Subscribe Share/Save Bill PDF XML [Help] Printer Friendly[Help] Congressional Record References Bill Summary & Status H.CON.RES.107 -- Expressing the sense of Congress that the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high... (Introduced in House - IH) HCON 107 IH 112th CONGRESS 2d Session H. CON. RES. 107 Expressing the sense of Congress that the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES March 7, 2012 Mr. JONES submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary CONCURRENT RESOLUTION Expressing the sense of Congress that the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution. Whereas the cornerstone of the Republic is honoring Congress's exclusive power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution: Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that, except in response to an actual or imminent attack against the territory of the United States, the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress violates Congress's exclusive power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution and therefore constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeep Driver Posted March 12, 2012 Author Share Posted March 12, 2012 http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:H.CON.RES.107: Impeach the SOB this time. Apply all the pressure you can. Jones? Yeah, Jones from NC-3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeep Driver Posted March 12, 2012 Author Share Posted March 12, 2012 That link contains no Information. What are you Blood or Crip....lol. I hope your not mixing up dems and repubs like you did with voltage and amps. Nope, I'd like to see both parties hang from the end of a short rope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comanchero87 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Too bad no president has done this for a hundred years. Now all of sudden they want to impeach someone for doing it. Hmmm. How about you tell them to start doing there freaking job and stop working on bills to nowhere. And if this was passed, if we were being attacked we would have to wait for congress to go into emergency session and pass a declaration of war before we could strike back. Brilliant! At this point in time the House would probably pass a declaration of war against Iran. No thanks. Send letters but make them actually be about important issues not media stunts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comanchero87 Posted March 12, 2012 Share Posted March 12, 2012 P.S. your boy Jones is a switch hitter. He couldent win the democratic seat from which he almost inherited from his father, so switched sides to the republicans and went on to win and hold the seat. Ya hang um both alright on a short rope you could get two birds with one stone with this guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeep Driver Posted March 13, 2012 Author Share Posted March 13, 2012 First off he's not my boy......not even my rep. Clearly you don't keep up with current events And no this has nothing to do with national defense or the CiC's ability to respond. Did you see the Paneta testimony before congress last week? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeep Driver Posted March 13, 2012 Author Share Posted March 13, 2012 More than half of Mississippi GOP voters say Obama is a Muslim, new poll suggests http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/poll ... 27518.html You might enjoy this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeep Driver Posted March 13, 2012 Author Share Posted March 13, 2012 http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Governm...#disqus_thread Quote: In November 1985, the Harvard Law Review published an article by Derrick Bell that was a "classic" in the development of Critical Race Theory. The article was edited by then-student Elena Kagan, and was cited by Prof. Charles Ogletree in support of her nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court by President Barack Obama in 2010. The article makes clear that Critical Race Theory sees the U.S. Constitution as a form of "original sin"--a view later embraced by Obama as a state legislator, and reflected in his actions and appointments. The following is an excerpt from the non-fiction portion of the article; much of what follows is a fictional story that Bell intended as a parable of racial "fantasy." (99 Harv. L. Rev. 4) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawn Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 that yahoo article says he's a christian ( although i don't see how that would make any difference, either way, i'm sure he's not really religious - or maybe he is......) some of the greatest americans of all time have been muslum ( martin luther, sammy davis, shawn ( j/k ) - to name a few. on a side note, is this kind of hate-literature even legal anymore ? : so i don't know--it's all pretty scary stuff. --- sometimes i get a bee in my bonnet and wanna go off on a political/spiritual rant but am always trying to hold back for fear of offending the awesome people on this board who have given me so much help over the years. http://30.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m0h6a ... o1_500.png Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeep Driver Posted March 13, 2012 Author Share Posted March 13, 2012 Oh he's religious alright but he ain't Christian. Look up Black Liberation Theology and Cone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dakal Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 bottom line, vote for who you think will make America strong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comanchero87 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 :agree: There should not even be one issue at this point in time that relates to race or religion. That is if you really follow the constitution and the Laws of this country. Anyone making such statements and accusations is themselves violating the same laws they are so viciously trying to enforce. Church and State are separate institutions. Its that way for a reason. So the state is not inhibited by the morals and beliefs of separate systems trying to pull them in every direction. Just leave church out of it and look at the good that has came. Now think what this country would be like if McCain was pres. :D and had a heart attack and died. :help: Sorry if I offend anyone we should keep The pub separate from the tech section if you know what I mean. :bowdown: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ejndssn Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 that yahoo article says he's a christian ( although i don't see how that would make any difference, either way, i'm sure he's not really religious - or maybe he is......) some of the greatest americans of all time have been muslum ( martin luther, sammy davis, :no: jeepcomj - to name a few. on a side note, is this kind of hate-literature even legal anymore ? : so i don't know--it's all pretty scary stuff. --- sometimes i get a bee in my bonnet and wanna go off on a political/spiritual rant but am always trying to hold back for fear of offending the awesome people on this board who have given me so much help over the years. http://30.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m0h6a ... o1_500.png i do believe that the sammy was a convert to Judaism vice Muslim. and martin luther was christian. Just a note that Christians, Jews & Muslim all believe in one God. and i like to put it this way there are many paths to the top of the mountain how we get there is the journey. Now as for the President i didn't vote for him then and i won't now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comanchero87 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 More than half of Mississippi GOP voters say Obama is a Muslim, new poll suggests I bet more than 3/4s believe he wasent born in hawaii, that Hawaii was a gift from the King himself, evolution is a hoax and government should keep its hands out of their medicaid. The only standing birthers have is Hawaii is a lie. It was illegal corporate take over and is not a legit State under US law. Go do some research on that and come back at me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeep Driver Posted March 13, 2012 Author Share Posted March 13, 2012 :agree: There should not even be one issue at this point in time that relates to race or religion. That is if you really follow the constitution and the Laws of this country. Anyone making such statements and accusations is themselves violating the same laws they are so viciously trying to enforce. Church and State are separate institutions. Its that way for a reason. So the state is not inhibited by the morals and beliefs of separate systems trying to pull them in every direction. Just leave church out of it and look at the good that has came. Now think what this country would be like if McCain was pres. :D and had a heart attack and died. :help: Sorry if I offend anyone we should keep The pub separate from the tech section if you know what I mean. :bowdown: Well then I guess you would agree that the state has no business mandating to the catholic church to provide contraception? Well they have. Fluke ring a bell? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comanchero87 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 As long as they don't cover viagra on the same pretense, but I don't see that happening. Or mandate invasive ultrasounds on a woman. Too bad the blunt amendment allowed for all institutions not just religious ones to deny any medical coverage for religious reasons. I wish you would see what your fighting for. What do you think about unions? No No comment on Hawaii? Why do you think this hasent been brought up in mainstream media? That would bring the Hawaiian Kingdom to light. don't want that to happen now do we. It would show how much influence corporations have had over this country. If there is any conspiracy its the billion dollar corporations trying to inslave the worker bee's. "Class Warfare" 'Experience declares that man is the only animal that devours his own kind, for I can apply no milder term to the general prey of the rich on the poor." Thomas Jefferson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shawn Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 :smart: http://www.jhuger.com/kisshank.php :smart: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeepcoMJ Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 When voting, you're always given the choice of voting for whoever you see as the lesser of two evils. but don't kid yourself. there's not a good politician out there. they're all crooked with their own agendas. I won't be voting to re-elect our current president. I didn't vote for him in the first place, and I was right not to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeepcoMJ Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 Shawn, I'm Atheist, if anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comanchero87 Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 :agree: What do you think about Walker? Just would like to know from a resident rather than through the tube. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeepcoMJ Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 Walker proposed the right thing. Gotta remember...he's not the king. it takes him and the state senate to get these bills approved. he just proposed them. Public union members had two choices...go broke and be out of jobs, or have cut-backs that will keep them employed, paid, and still recieving more benefits than most people. We've had alot less state cut-backs on some very necessary, and some very beneficial programs (still have spanish in schools, autos shop, etc. though some schools are taking it upon themselves to eliminate it so they can keep their teachers happy pay-wise with the budget they're given). Above and beyond that anyways...a union is not a profit organization. they were charging the state double of what health insurance costs...making money hand over fist. If you ask me, the unions were getting greedy, and these people complaining need to realize that their reps were pocketing tons and tons of money and are the real cause of the problem. Private sector unions have remained unaffected except by the limitations of our current economy. I didn't vote for him, but I'm not complaining. he trimmed our state debt down almost if not more than half. What is there to complain about there? Sure, some people lost some simple perks, but they have a roof over their head, and they're not paying the difference of what they lost in the form of more taxes. ...coming from an unemployed person who is NOT receiving unemployment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
89eliminator Posted March 13, 2012 Share Posted March 13, 2012 :agree: What do you think about Walker? Just would like to know from a resident rather than through the tube. i HATE talking politics but.... Walker did what he said he was going to do. He didnt make everyone happy by doing it how he did it, but thats impossible to do anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts