Skip to main content

View Diary: Media pounds Bachmann migraines, campaign defends manhandling reporter (256 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  why? (0+ / 0-)

    What reason can you cite for migraines disqualifying a primary candidate that do not also apply with EVEN MORE URGENCY to a sitting President? How in hell can you even say with a straight face that "a primary candidate might not be able to perform the job" is grounds for not getting that job, but a President who ALREADY HAS THE JOB and can't perform it, is not grounds for removing them from the job.

    (opens popcorn) it will be awfully entertaining watching you try to defend THAT double standard . . . . .

    •  Easy, it's the Constitution (3+ / 0-)

      Constitution of the United States of America Article II, Section 4:"The President, Vice President, and all civil Officers of the United States shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors."

      So Obama, or any other President could be impeached for one of three reasons: treason, bribery or "high crimes and misdemeanors". Now, "high crimes and misdemeanors" is a little vague, but it doesn't include health reasons.

      On the other hand, there is no such restriction on who I decide to vote for or not to vote for. There are restrictions on who can become President, such as they must be a natural-born citizen, at least 35 years old, and have lived in the US for at least 14 years. Although strictly speaking, these are only restrictions on who can take the office, I can vote for anyone I want.

      It can make my decision who to vote for based on whatever criteria I decide. However, once that person is elected, a different set of criteria is in effect. I wouldn't vote for Bachmann because she's a moron, but being a moron isn't grounds for impeachment.

      The wolfpack eats venison. The lone wolf eats mice.

      by A Citizen on Wed Jul 20, 2011 at 12:57:55 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  so then your answer would be "if Obama were (0+ / 0-)

        physically unable to perform the office, we can't remove him from office under the Constitution"?  

        Really?  That's the best you can come up with?

        I, of course, think you are just bullshitting me to avoid looking like you don't have a silly partisan double standard which you do in fact have.  (shrug)

        •  The truth is the best I've got. (2+ / 0-)

          Why should I need any more? If the Constitution isn't good enough for you, then nothing is.  There is no double standard. If was calling for Bachmann's impeachment, then you would have a point. As I am not, then you don't.

          The wolfpack eats venison. The lone wolf eats mice.

          by A Citizen on Wed Jul 20, 2011 at 01:50:56 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I think your stubborn desire to prove us all (0+ / 0-)

          "partisan" in this issue says a lot more about YOU than about us.

          Every single person who has responded to you has done so with clarity -- the issue is not the fact she has migraines. The issue(s) include concern for disability during a migraine, and concern for the fact that her staff members assaulted a journalist.  In addition you seem to have no understanding of what impeachment is.

          So you are obviously unwilling to change your mind regardless of facts.

          Again, that says more about YOU than us.

          I woke up this morning only to realize, it's opposite day again.

          by Melanie in IA on Thu Jul 21, 2011 at 08:27:56 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site