Who cares if you don't think it's a flowchart!
People who are concerned with accuracy in terms and who believe that words mean something.
NO! They would never vote to convict Obama.
That is your opinion and it is without basis in fact. If Obama were shown to be ineligible, two things would happen. First, the moderate / center would explode. The support they gave Obama would evaporate. That means roughly 80% of the country would want the issue addressed and resolved within the law. You really think politicians are going to walk away and ignore 80% of the voters on a no brainer Constitutional issue?
It has NOTHING to do with doing multiple things and has EVERYTHING to do with wasting time on BIRTHER things. Got it? No birther issue, no birther agenda, no birther wet dream will ever produce ANY result that ousts Obama. Period. End of story. FINITO.
Funny, that is exactly how Watergate started. Nixon thought it would be nothing, that the investigation wouldn't go anywhere and what happened? He resigned in his SECOND term.
You have an agenda. You don't like me.
Not liking you is an agenda?? Not only is that false, not only do I not like or dislike you, your assumption that I have an agenda in not liking you is giving your self worth a value that is out of proportion to reality.
Generally speaking Jimmy, your arguments in most threads I have seen you participate is "this is what I think - you have to believe me." That is not a great style of debate or a way of winning people over to your side. You are free to dismiss what people say as they are free to dismiss what you say.
Your issue with the flow chart is that you are trying to present your suppositions as fact.
They are not.
Not only does JimmyZ devolve to calling eligibility "masturbation," but he also calls eligibility a "wet dream." It's not just over the top, it is WAY OVER THE TOP. And the despotic (adj. not a name) JimmyZ excuses it because he was making a point?! Really?
So the flowchart...is saying the following. First, pick one Birther issue. Let's choose the "natural born citizen stuff." And now, the question: Did it work? Meaning, did it come to prove that Obama is not a "natural born citizen" (ill defined as it is in the Constitution).
If the answer is NO, it did not prove any such thing, then we're back to the Election in 2012. That simple.
If the answer is YES, then we must impeach the president.
Jimmy, you are, once again, inaccurate in your conclusions about the consequences of a court finding Obama ineligible. Because Obama is ineligible, there is no basis for impeachment. You can't impeach an ineligible president. He will (if found to be ineligible) be arrested by law enforcement and forcibly removed from office, if he doesn't go on his own.
Hey, Clive, thanks very much for your post and your attempt at reconciliation. Your efforts have not gone unnoticed. :) I have said time and again in other threads that there was room for both strategies in the republican camp. Mr. Z has never accepted that olive branch of existence, so here we are. I've even tried to agree to disagree. He cannot do so without making me acknowledge that he is right and I am wrong. Since I don't believe I am wrong (and obviously neither does he), agreeing to disagree never happens either. I don't know why he resists the notion of agreeing to disagree. Perhaps he equates it to admitting he is wrong, which is something he is incapable of making himself do. A psychological case for the ages is our Mr. Z, for he defies all logic.
Diana Shifley said:
Jimmy - too extreme for most of us!!!!!!! It is amazing to me that some can't understand your point of view. or else they just refuse to do so. I don't totally agree with you on the those issues, but I can understand and appreciate your views.
Nice suck-up Diana. Jimmy remunerating you for this (seemingly blind) support? I might be able to appreciate his views if he were able to appreciate mine. The trouble with him is that it is always a one-way conversation. He does not appreciate the thoughts of anyone but himself. He tolerates Jonathan because Jonathan owns this site and Z gets to post his radio broadcasts as podcasts here. Otherwise, he wouldn't have any use for Jonathan either. It isn't that I don't understand Jimmy's views and opinions. Just because I understand them doesn't mean I agree with them. I disagree with his view that only his strategy will work, and no one else need bother to think anything up.
Then you don't know democrats.
Uh huh. Only you can speak for democrats? That should tell you something.
Already has.
Not on the eligibility issue, Jimmy. For someone who wants people to stay on point, you love to veer off at your discretion. The fact of the matter is that some 78% of the people in the country don't believe the eligibility issue. If (and that is a big if) it were shown to be false, do you really think the American people would stand for it? Are you that wedded to your own prophecies?
Since there would be no 80% favoring it, this question is meaningless.
That is your opinion, Jimmy. Mine is that only the 20% hard core left would support Obama. It is amazing that you say his support is eroding on other issues, but if the eligibility issue were shown to be true, you contend the support would rise. That makes no sense.
Republicans will never effect Obama's resignation.
The people will affect the resignation - just as they did with Nixon.
It is yours.
Dream on.
No, it's mostly "this is what is true. Believe me or don't, but I have given you the truth."
Yet this very thread belies that fact. You believe that only one path can lead to Obama being removed from the White House. That was your initial point. Now you note the Fast and Furious debacle may lead somewhere. So despite your own protestations to the contrary, you have already contradicted your initial "truth."
And on Nov. 7, 2012, I expect you to join Robert and Mary and some others and type a message to me: "You were right, I have to admit."
Right in what? That you believe the only way to remove Obama is through the election? YOU don't even believe that.
I think the court case, if it goes anywhere, will be wrangled in court way past the election.
So the election is not the end of the eligibility issue?
Who would have thunk that?
