Because it has been at least 24 whole hours since some Republican doofus insisted that Republicans do NOT want to talk about impeaching the president, no seriously, they do NOT want to talk about it, sheesh, stop making them talk about it all the time,
You should be proud of Rep Yoho; he helps keep Florida consistently ahead of California, Arizona and Alabama in "news of the weird" columns nationwide.
You can't really blame them, though. They're only basing their views on the fact that TWICE in recent history a presidential election has been stolen: 1972 and 2000. No wonder they're jittery -- they are constantly afraid that sooner or later the Dems will try the same thing.
I know I'm late to this non-thread, but I just want to point out that Rep. YOHO (You Obviously Hate Obama) has given us a pristine example of terrorist-speak, or more precisely, hostage-taker-speak: "Really, we don't at all want to harm these hostages, but if you don't accede to our demands you will force us to kill them. And it will be all your fault. Neener, neener*".
It is contemptible bullshit when said by literal hostage-takers, and it is contemptible bullshit when said by the contemptible Ted YOHO.
*Actually, I've embellished this. As far as I know, it is not customary for terrorists to say "Neener, neener". But the idea is there.
Apparently I am. It's a bit obscure. If you aren't talking strictly about very close elections that were (allegedly) settled by back-room deal-making or by not really neutral arbitrators in favor of the Republican candidate, then I have missed it. But if you are talking about such elections, then I don't see how the very lopsided 1972 election applies. I don't see any obvious parallels between the elections of 1972 and 2000. How was the 1972 election "stolen?"
<em>&quot;The last thing is impeachment of a president. We, and myself, and the American people for the most part they don&rsquo;t want to impeach the president. They don&rsquo;t want to have to sue him and waste the time and effort. All we&rsquo;re asking is faithfully execute the laws of this land that you are elected to do.</em>
..since when has any Republican allowed popular public opinion to influence their decision making?!?&#039;
See, Rep. Yoho is not saying that they would impeach the President. That would be silly. He is saying they would just attempt to remove him from office for imagined high crimes and misdemeanors. <em>Totally</em> different thing.
We are just going to have to sue Bamz if he keeps trying to inpeach himself we just aint got time for all this inpeach talk
You should be proud of Rep Yoho; he helps keep Florida consistently ahead of California, Arizona and Alabama in &quot;news of the weird&quot; columns nationwide.
You can&#039;t really blame them, though. They&#039;re only basing their views on the fact that TWICE in recent history a presidential election has been stolen: 1972 and 2000. No wonder they&#039;re jittery -- they are constantly afraid that sooner or later the Dems will try the same thing.
I know I&#039;m late to this non-thread, but I just want to point out that Rep. YOHO (You Obviously Hate Obama) has given us a pristine example of terrorist-speak, or more precisely, hostage-taker-speak: &quot;Really, we don&#039;t at all want to harm these hostages, but if you don&#039;t accede to our demands you will force us to kill them. And it will be all your fault. Neener, neener*&quot;.
It is contemptible bullshit when said by literal hostage-takers, and it is contemptible bullshit when said by the contemptible Ted YOHO.
*Actually, I&#039;ve embellished this. As far as I know, it is not customary for terrorists to say &quot;Neener, neener&quot;. But the idea is there.
Eau who?
1972? Yeah, that one was a real squeaker, wasn&#039;t it? Or do you mean 1876 (Hayes-Tilden)?
**Actually, terrorists usually close their messages with &quot;LOL.&quot;
Kinda missing the point there.
Apparently I am. It&#039;s a bit obscure. If you aren&#039;t talking strictly about very close elections that were (allegedly) settled by back-room deal-making or by not really neutral arbitrators in favor of the Republican candidate, then I have missed it. But if you are talking about such elections, then I don&#039;t see how the very lopsided 1972 election applies. I don&#039;t see any obvious parallels between the elections of 1972 and 2000. How was the 1972 election &quot;stolen?&quot;
<em>&quot;here&rsquo;s our hero Ted Yoho, a large-animal veterinarian turned Florida congressman&quot;</em>
...hey, leave his wife out of this!
(As a Florida native I get to take cheap shots hat homegrown ASSCLOWNS)
<em>&quot;The last thing is impeachment of a president. We, and myself, and the American people for the most part they don&rsquo;t want to impeach the president. They don&rsquo;t want to have to sue him and waste the time and effort. All we&rsquo;re asking is faithfully execute the laws of this land that you are elected to do.</em>
..since when has any Republican allowed popular public opinion to influence their decision making?!?&#039;
Not to worry, Teddy. We&#039;re sure Senate GOPers will filibuster any sneaky Dem/Obummer plan to impeach the Dictator-in-Chief.
Yoho ya ho.
See, Rep. Yoho is not saying that they would impeach the President. That would be silly. He is saying they would just attempt to remove him from office for imagined high crimes and misdemeanors. <em>Totally</em> different thing.
...that&#039;s a hell of a drought!
<strong>CORRECTION</strong>: you must mean &quot;Shuckin-n-Jivin&quot; while presidenting! **Fixed**