Obama; mute on Impeachment

[liberalnurse]

I have read Obama's website on issues, did several Google searches as well as review ed other web blogs but no stance noted a to where Obama sits on Impeachment. Anyone with links and factual information; please share.

[JeanGrey]

1. It doesn't matter. There is not going to be any impeachment

and time spent talking about it is simply a waste. Everyone should have figured this out by now.

[rateyes]

2. The whole damned Democratic Leadership is mute on impeachment...

and deaf and blind, too.

[blogslut]

3. And you won't find it on Hillary's site either.

So, your point would be....?

[blm]

4. He should stay Mute - he's a senator who would be called to act as JUROR if there was

an impeachment.

Strange that so many Dems are still unaware of how Impeachment and then Removal works.

Senators listen to the CASE presented by a House that has impeached a President and then must JUDGE according to the evidence presented.

You want Dem Senators to say impeachment is needed and THEN have to recuse themselves from being objective jurors?

[John Q. Citizen]

5. And here I thought it was just Hill. They are both voting present on impeachment, eh?

Can you imagine that?

[eyesroll]

7. Senators don't vote on impeachment at all.

The House impeaches.

[stahbrett]

6. I'd rather the candidates focus on what they'll do as president

The Republicans had no chance to get Bill Clinton removed from office, yet they stupidly impeached him anyway. I'd hope the Democrats would be smarter, and focus on winning the White House. There's no way 2/3rds of the Senate would vote to convict Bush or Cheney, and they'll be out of office in 11 months anyway.

[Avalux]

8. As well he should be. It's a divisive topic and I'd rather he stay mum about it.

Doesn't serve any of us if he becomes an attack dog for impeachment and would certainly sink his campaign. The Republicans would go nuts.

[SoFlaJet]

9. it's a moot point ln

as articles of impeachment must be initiated from the House-senators can NOT draw up the papers

[SoFlaJet]

10. it's a moot point ln

as articles of impeachment must be initiated from the House-senators can NOT draw up the papers

[AndyA]

11. Obama has stated he is against impeachment.

Apparently, in his opinion, Bush and Cheney haven't committed any "grave breaches" of authority. :eyes:

Obama, a Harvard law school graduate and former lecturer on constitutional law at the University of Chicago, said impeachment should not be used as a standard political tool.

"I think you reserve impeachment for grave, grave breaches, and intentional breaches of the president's authority," he said.

"I believe if we began impeachment proceedings we will be engulfed in more of the politics that has made Washington dysfunction," he added. "We would once again, rather than attending to the people's business, be engaged in a tit-for-tat, back-and-forth, non-stop circus."

Meanwhile, today in Congress, our fearless leaders are making sure Bush and Cheney are not held responsible for illegal spying, and the telecoms get a "get out of jail free" card forever on the subject. Their crimes are about to be legalized in order to cover up the crimes. Nice. Thanks, Congress. And they say the GOP is the minority party... :puke:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-06-28-obama-impeachment_N.htm

[liberalnurse]

18. Thanks; I see he is using the Progressive Democrats for

self-serving means. Ohio Progressive Democrats will be unhappy.

[The_Casual_Observer]

12. He's bipola.....bipartisan.

[MonkeyFunk]

13. Senators should be mute on impeachment

they're the jury.

[democrattotheend]

14. Don't think either candidate has mentioned it

Most mainstream Dems have stayed far away from it. Clinton and Obama are focused on winning the election...if the Congressional leadership wants to take this up, fine (although I think it would backfire and hurt our chances of winning the White House in 2008). We'd have to impeach both Bush and Cheney for it to make any difference, and as much as I like Nancy Pelosi, I'd rather have Obama or Clinton as president for at least 4 years than have Pelosi be president for a few months. Impeachment proceedings take months, and it's unlikely that they could impeach both Bush and Cheney before their term expires anyway.

[bowens43]

15. Does it matter?

A presidential candidate would be a fool to jump on the impeachment wagon.

[RoadRage]

16. And you found several links indicating that Hillary is ready to pull that trigger?

I guess I don't understand posts that say "OBAMA BRUSHES HIS TEETH EACH MORNING" if it's the same thing that Clinton does.

Point out the differences, but trying to "villify" one when the other is on the same path makes no sense.

If you're pissed because NO ONE is going after Bush, then change the post title to "Obama & Clinton aren't going to Impeach Bush" to try and at least appear impartial on the topic.

[flor de jasmim]

17. It's not a policy issue

At least in theory, what goes on a campaign website is what the newly elected person hopes to do vis-à-vis policy. Once Bush leaves office, he cannot be impeached and therefore irrelevant to what Obama would do in office. His other policies regarding open government speak to the issue, even if indirectly.

That said, is any current candidate talking about impeachment?