Why Isn’t Obama Impeached Yet? > Democrats Ask

Believe it or not, Democrats are now asking the question, “Why isn’t Obama impeached yet?” The reason is rather simple: They’re trying to drum up campaign dollars by promoting Obama impeachment talks.

There’s not a credible swarm of Republican leaders directly calling for impeachment. But there is a method, albeit an odd one, for the Democrats’ madness.

Obama Impeached Mantra a Push For Senate Votes

Regardless, Democrats are wielding their Obama impeached mantra to reap Republican gains in the November election. Essentially, they’re using Obama’s impeachment as a rallying cry, and have even managed to fundraise off the threat. Fox News explains:

Impeach ObamaThe campaign arm for congressional Democrats has been sending out tons of fundraising emails warning of the Obama impeached threat, and claims to have raised roughly $2 million in their latest campaign.

Barack and Michelle Obama have even warned of that possibility on the stump. And a top White House official even said Friday “it would be foolish to discount” a bona fide impeachment push by Republicans.

The warnings by both Obama and Democrats have left Republicans baffled. After all, there’s no organized push by Republicans to impeach the president. So, it seems, the Dems are propping up the controversy to gain political favor — and when I say favor, I mean mo’ money.

Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.) put it this way: “You know, this might be the first White House in history that’s trying to start the narrative of impeaching their own president.”

Calls For Obama Impeachment a Democratic Benefit

The idea is that warnings from Democrats that the GOP is attempting to impeach Obama could help out the Democratic pursuit to maintain Senate control. The Constitution states that even though the House makes an impeachment vote, it’s the Senate that decides whether to convict. So, in effect, a Republican push to impeach Obama would inevitably fail.

But this isn’t going to happen, Fox continues:

Sarah Palin kicked off the impeachment headlines earlier this month when she wrote a column calling for it. But to date, senior Republicans in general have shied away from that call.

House Speaker John Boehner stood by his decision to proceed with a lawsuit against Obama over abuse of executive power, but would not sign on to the impeachment idea. Even Michele Bachmann, one of the most conservative members of the GOP caucus, wouldn’t get on board with impeachment.

It is fascinating that Democrats would go this direction. Advertising that the opposing party is trying to impeach their own president is not a common political tactic. But they’re money-hungry, and you never know how far money-hungry politicins will go.

Of course, there was a time when congressional Democrats refused to endorse Obama.


Israel Palestine Conflict Summary – War in the Middle East

Taking a look at an Israel Palestine conflict summary could be beneficial to understand today’s chaotic events in the Middle East. Or, at least it could be to explain why media pundits seem to have the facts skewed.

The Iraeli-Palestinian conflict has been surging for quite some time now, and Hamas’ offensive and barbaric campaign to “own” the Middle East continues to wreak havoc on Israel.

Israel has been facing political and economic pressures to negotiate a halt to the “Gaza War,” (what the media is calling it) as the destruction and death tolls continue to mount.

John Kerry is calling for a cease-fire after unsuccessfully brokering a peace agreement earlier this year. But here lies the problem: As long as Hamas’ anti-semetic ideology remains in the picture, instituting a continuing peace agreement is futile. The Jihadists simply live for the drama.

Israel Palestine conflict summary

This is a brief timeline. There was no conflict for centuries. In fact, over a century ago Palestine was inhabited by a multi-cultural demographic — about 86 percent Muslim, 10 percent Christian, and 4 percent Jewish — that largely lived peacefully.

In the late 19th century, the “Zionists” in Europe began colonizing the land. The Zionists first considered areas in Africa and the Americas, but finally settled on the land of Palestine.

Over a period, fighting broke out among Jews and the indigenous population. Hitler’s rise pushed more and more Jewish refugees toward Palestine and that’s when the Israeli-Palestinian conflict began to intensify.

In 1947, the all empowering, omnipotent UN stepped in, recommending the partition of Palestine into two states and the internationalization of Jerusalem.

The Israeli Palestinian two state solution

Longstanding U.S. foreign policy has supported a “two state solution” to the Middle East conflict. In 2005, Israel withdrew its citizens from Gaza in hopes that it would improve the Palestinian economy. Essentially, it was a testing ground for a sovereign Palestinian state. Well, it didn’t work.

Instead, Hamas came in and destroyed the economy, imported weapons into Gaza, instituted a genocidal version of Islamic law, and declared an ongoing war against Israel and the West. Again, a cycle of war churned over.

Now, the land of Palestine is in turmoil, as Hamas continues to fire rockets into Israel.

Israel is seen by Islamist groups as the outpost of the West in the Middle East. And Israeli troups are essentially battling against militant Islam. Since its founding Hamas has fired over 8,000 rockets at Israel, and not because its engaged in some Palestinian human rights campaign. After all, they’re using their children as human shields and suicide bombers.

It’s a matter of hate, not land

Today’s Middle East conflict is largely a matter of revulsion — that is, the Arab states despise Israel and want it wiped off the map. Palestinian supporters claim it’s still about land, and that Israel has no right to it. They renounce the idea that terrorist organizations like Hamas despise Israel’s religion and culture — even though it’s laid out rather clearly in the Hamas Charter.

Hamas is systematically putting the Palestinian people in danger, while committing acts of genocide against the Jewish people who have been fighting for survival for centuries. Innocent men, women, and children are being slaughtered in both Gaza and Israel — no different from Syria and Iraq.

Sure, land had something to do with the initial strife. But to say religious differences are not a factor in today’s “Gaza War” is just downright ignorant.

Just take a gander at the Hamas Charter. They’re goal is, ultimately, to exterminate the Jews.


Terrorist Group ISIS Defector Reveals Jihadist Ideology

Terrorist group ISIS, the jihadist terror group formerly known as the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham, is being exposed by a man who recently left the organization.

Evidently, the man told BBC that the terrorist group is using young foreign men and brainwashing them to impose a highly oppressive form of Sharia law. And, of course, to kill anyone who stands in the way of their jihadist cause.

Understandably, to protect himself and his family he didn’t give a name to the BBC reporters. But he explained ISIS’ terrorist philosphy explicitly: “If you’re against me, then you’ll be killed. If you’re with me, you work with me. You submit to my will and obey me, under my power in all matters.”

Terrorist group ISIS training forced on members

The former terrorist noted that he did not join terrorist group ISIS directly, but that he was previously a member of a jihadist wing of the Free Syrian Army. His particular brigade had pledged allegiance to ISIS, which automatically incorporated him with the terrorist organization.

He was “shocked” when he was coerced into ISIS training, and when he determined really how radical the terrorist group was. The jihadist group teaches, he notes, “not the principles of Islam, the principles of the Islamic State. So they educate you on the Islam they want… it appeals to the heart and not to the mind, so that your heart becomes impassioned with their words.”

ISIS ideology: Help the poor and then kill them

And the jihadists used the same tactic in every new town they took over. Their strategy?

  • First, they’d help out the poor by building up infrastructure.
  • Then they would create a murderous regime and devour anyone who dared to oppose them.

Breitbart continues:

“Once Isis succeeded in attracting people, they alter dramatically–from being good to cruel and harsh,” he affirmed. “You’re either with me or against me! There is nothing in between.” That appears to be the situation in Mosul, Iraq, one of the largest cities under ISIS rule. While reports began to surface that ISIS had begun winning over the people of that city by establishing stable electricity and water utilities, others have begun to report that ISIS is rejecting rations to Christians and Shiites, who are considered apostates.

Apparently they duped a lot of people, including the young foreigners they bring in and indoctrinate with the ISIS ideology. You have to watch out for that terrorist trickery.

Not much different from Hamas.


Loss of Biodiversity – Actually, CO2 Increases Diversity

Earth is on the brink of experiencing a catastrophic loss of diversity. At least, that’s what the greenies say.

First, in case you didn’t know, here’s your biodiversity definition, courtesy of Wikipedia: Biodiversity is the degree of variation of life, which can refer to a genetic, species, or ecosystem variation.

Of course, the environmentalists are desperate for some biodiversity action plan. But that’s a whole nother story.

Are we experiencing a biodiversity crisis?

The global warming alarmists think so. But they are constantly fabricating so-called “threats to biodiversity.”

BiodiversityThe Heartland Institute, a prominent think tank that promotes skepticism about climate change, recently met to address a number of issues, including the biological impact of increased CO2 on Earth due to human action.

What Dr. Craig Idso, founder of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, noted at the conference should put global warming alarmists at ease. “Should” being heavily emphasized.

In a nutshell, Dr. Idso affirmed that the mounds of literature on biodiversity put out by the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) ignores key points on rising temperatures and atmospheric CO2 levels. In fact, he noted, atmospheric CO2 is not a pollutant.

Even more damning, Idso asserts that boosted levels of CO2 curb the negative impact of numerous plant stresses including air pollution, insufficient water, high salinity, and low and high temperatures. Oh, and it allegedly protects against herbivores being gobbled up by animals.

A loss of biodiversity?

Quite notably, the doc goes on to emphasize that increased CO2 levels allow plants to produce the same amount of crop yield with less water. Furthermore, plants are able to grow in dry areas where it had been previously too dry to exist. Another benefit to this is that increased vegetation decreases the impact of soil erosion.

And here’s the climax: According to Idso’s theory, it is far more likely that CO2 proliferation will increase biodiversity and assist in the expansion of animal habitats. Why is biodiversity important? Well, it is, isn’t it? If what Idso affirms is true, maybe it doesn’t — now.

More than anything, perhaps this is a story of irony.