Super Bowl ads: Chrysler and impeachment
Bob Unruh - WND
Sometimes as much hype is created over the advertisements during the Super Bowl as the game itself, and this year it was Ferris Bueller and Honda, Audi and its vampires, Coke, Pepsi, Clint Eastwood and Chrysler, Donald Trump and Century 21, Skechers, Best Buy and impeachment.
Well, the idea of throwing Barack Obama out of office wasn’t on the small television screens actually. It was in the sky over the Super Bowl, in a banner sponsored by a couple of dozen individuals who gathered under the Stop Obama Now slogan.
Organizers explained, “Whether you believe that impeachment is practical at this time or not, this event is a protest of the media bias surrounding the corrupt Obama regime. We feel that the media has practiced a huge double standard. Criticism of Obama is suppressed by the corporate media as well as generally in society, due to political correctness and even appeasement for fear of social unrest and/or retaliation of some kind. This is a chance to voice our disapproval in a way that is difficult to ignore and there is benefit to that, in itself.”
They continued, “It is said that in times of deception, the truth is subversive. This is very much a time of deception. The truth is that many people think Obama is totally unfit for the presidency and even dangerous, due to his radical, anti-American background. His actions while in office have only confirmed that wide-spread belief in many ways. He should be removed from office as soon as possible. This is a way that we can make our message heard without the censorship of the corporate media.”
The banner was flown around Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis for several hours in view of tailgate parties, downtown Indianapolis and along freeways before the game started.
The game began about sundown, when the flight was concluding.
Stop Obama Now spokesman Roger Ogden says Obama needs to be impeached because he is not a natural -born citizen “in the sense the framers of the Constitution intended.”
The group says further that Obama has exhibited a “contempt” for the U.S. Constitution.
“He has demonstrated usurpation of the powers of Congress and the contempt for the judiciary. He waged war in Libya after seeking the approval of the Arab league, but incredibly not that of Congress. He failed to respond to a court subpoena recently for a trial in Georgia regarding a challenge to his eligibility for the presidency.”
Lastly, they cite his “radical associations.”
“He was a member of a racist black nationalist sect for 20 years and appointed avowed communists, such as Van Jones, to national office.”
The group sponsored an “Impeach Obama” banner that flew over the USS Carl Vinson just before Obama arrived to watch a college basketball game, then later gave an eyeful to the audience at the Rose Parade.
The towed banners have 12-foot-high lettering.
Ogden, an organizer for “Stop Obama Now,” said his group joined thousands who are part of the “Impeach Obama Tea Party” on Facebook.
Organizers of the impeachment effort argue that Obama is not a “natural born citizen,” as defined in a U.S. Supreme Court decision, because his father was not a U.S. citizen. They also point to the many moves he’s made in the White House, from taking over private corporations to spending trillions of dollars more than the budget allocated to bowing to Islamic leaders to maneuvering to threaten constitutional rights protected by the 2nd Amendment.
Past efforts to take Obama to court over the eligibility dispute have proven unsuccessful, although Maricopa, Ariz., County Sheriff Joe Arpaio currently has a Cold Case Posse investigating the possibility that Obama will use a fraudulent document to try to qualify for the state’s ballot in 2012.
There also are several lawsuits pending that challenge Obama’s eligibility, but the U.S. Supreme Court repeatedly has refused to even consider the question of law at hand – whether Obama is eligible. One justice admitted the judges were avoiding the issue.
And there have been allegations that Obama supporters tried to change the requirement that a president be a natural-born citizen legislatively before Obama’s ascent to power, strongly suggesting a knowledge of a potential problem years ago.
Despite the stonewalling by official channels, a scientific survey showed fully half of Americans want Congress to investigate.
There have been other calls for Obama to be removed.
Former Congressman Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., wrote in a WND column: “The number of the president’s actions that arguably qualify as impeachable offenses is staggering. The question before the country is what to do about it.
“It is time for the House of Representatives to take its constitutional responsibility seriously and launch an impeachment investigation. The investigative committee should hold hearings, collect and weigh the evidence, and then present its findings to the Congress and the nation. ”
He cited individual violations for which Obama, if found guilty, should be removed.
The first statement from a member of Congress on the issue of impeachment came from U.S. Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., who responded to this question from Think Progress: “I know Newt Gingrich has came out (sic) and said if they don’t reverse course [regarding trials for terror suspects] here, we ought to be talking about possibly impeaching either Attorney General [Eric] Holder or even President Obama to try to get them to reverse course. Do you think that is something you would support?”
Franks replied: “If it could gain the collective support, absolutely. I called for Eric Holder to repudiate the policy to try terrorists within our civil courts, or resign. So it just seems like that they have an uncanny ability to get it wrong on almost all fronts.”
WND also has reported that Jonathan Chait at The New Republic, before the 2010 election, predicted that the House would impeach Obama, but he wouldn’t be removed from office because that would require 67 votes in the Senate.
“Hear me now and believe me later. … They won’t do it right away. And they won’t succeed in removing Obama. (You need 67 Senate votes.) But if Obama wins a second term, the House will vote to impeach him before he leaves office,” Chait wrote.
In his explanation of why he believed an impeachment could be forthcoming, Chait said the reason itself won’t matter.
“Wait, you say. What will they impeach him over? You can always find something. Mini-scandals break out regularly in Washington. Last spring, the political press erupted in a frenzy over the news that the White House had floated a potential job to prospective Senate candidate Joe Sestak. On a scale of one to 100, with one representing presidential jaywalking and 100 representing Watergate, the Sestak job offer probably rated about a 1.5. Yet it was enough that GOP Representative Darrell Issa called the incident an impeachable offense,” Chait wrote.
WND also reported when Maj. Gen. Jerry Curry, who served in Vietnam and commanded the U.S. Army Test and Evaluation Command at Aberdeen Proving Ground during his long military career, said Congress should hand Obama an ultimatum.
“Action should be taken by the Senate and should be taken by the House,” he said. “They should serve notice on him and say, ‘Mr. President, we love you but we want to tell you something. You’re under a cloud of suspicion. We can’t continue running this country with you in charge under this cloud. Now either you clear it up or you resign from office.’”
He was answering questions on Stan Solomon’s “Talk to Solomon” show:
Peter Ferrara, on the American Spectator website, also has predicted Obama’s resignation.
“I am now ready to predict that President Obama will not even make it [to 2012],” he wrote. “I predict that he will resign in discredited disgrace before the fall of 2012,” Ferrera said.
Times columnist Jeffrey T. Kuhner, who also is president of the Edmund Burke Institute, wrote, “President Obama has engaged in numerous high crimes and misdemeanors. The Democratic majority in Congress is in peril as Americans reject his agenda. Yet more must be done: Mr. Obama should be impeached.”
Kuhner continued, “He is slowly – piece by painful piece – erecting a socialist dictatorship. We are not there – yet. But he is putting America on that dangerous path. He is undermining our constitutional system of checks and balances; subverting democratic procedures and the rule of law; presiding over a corrupt, gangster regime; and assaulting the very pillars of traditional capitalism. Like Venezuela’s leftist strongman, Hugo Chavez, Mr. Obama is bent on imposing a revolution from above – one that is polarizing America along racial, political and ideological lines. Mr. Obama is the most divisive president since Richard Nixon. His policies are balkanizing the country. It’s time for him to go.”
And at the Taking America Back 2010 conference in Miami in September 2010, Floyd Brown expanded on the idea.
Brown, president of the Western Center for Journalism, said, “The Obama presidency is a disease. … Article 2, Section 4 (the impeachment clause of the Constitution) is the cure. And it’s Obama’s hatred of America that makes it absolutely imperative that we take action now.
“Barack Hussein Obama is not some do-gooder that has had his plans go astray,” Brown added. “He is not a person of good will just trying his best to make America go the right direction. He is not. Barack Hussein Obama is a liar that absolutely knows what he’s doing to the United States of America. He has a plan. He has an agenda. This man knows exactly where he’s taking us.
“Barack Obama is a very dangerous man,” said Brown. “Over the last two years, we have been watching the slow progression of what I call a bloodless coup.”