FRC Wants Congress to Pressure the Supreme Court »« MO Bill Would Make Proposing Bills a Felony

Wingnuts: Obama Would Be Arrested if Not President

Cliff Kincaid, the utterly deranged Accuracy in Media leader, went on the radio show of the equally deranged Rick Wiles recently and the two of them exchanged imbecilities. Among them, they both claimed that if Obama was not the president, he would be arrested if he applied for a government job.

Kincaid: We’ve got a President who couldn’t pass a background check, you know it’s not too surprising when we got a President like this putting into place people like Brennan, Hagel, we can go down the list, Van Jones, tick them off. It’s just that he gets away with it and the Republicans, I remember at our conference in Washington before the election, we had Congressman Lamar Smith there saying ‘well we’re not going to pursue impeachment because we hope the American people vote this guy out on November 6.’ Well, that didn’t work out so well, did it?

Wiles: No it didn’t. You know Barack Obama, if he wasn’t president, if he just worked into a government agency and said he wanted to apply for a job and he filled out an application, I think while he was sitting there and they were doing a background check on him I think agents would come out and handcuff him.

Kincaid: Yeah, yeah, you’re right. I mean, this is the guy—we don’t have to go through the whole history—this is the guy who Sarah Palin put it, ‘palled around with terrorists.’

Yes, because we would arrest anyone who once sat on the same board with a guy who committed a crime 30 years earlier.

Comments

  1. Randomfactor says

    The guy may be right. There’s the “PATRIOT” Act to consider, and Obama’s albedo is awfully low.

  2. hexidecima says

    wow, the mastabatory fantasies of a police state these twits do have. Come right out and arrest someone for no reason, golly!

  3. cptdoom says

    Apparently no one let these bozos know that President Obama had two different government jobs – one in Illinois and one in Washington DC, prior to being elected.

  4. slc1 says

    Yes, because we would arrest anyone who once sat on the same board with a guy who committed a crime 30 years earlier.

    For which he was not prosecuted.

  5. mvemjsun says

    Maybe they are confused and meant to say the Pope would be arrested if it was not for his current job.

  6. Chris A says

    If there is any court in this nation in which “Sarah Palin said…” is considered admissible evidence, I am very glad that I have some skills that Canada is interested in importing.

  7. shouldbeworking says

    Just imagine putting someone like Hagel in a position of power and authority! He should be in a powerless, dead end job because he can’t be trusted. Being a senator counts, right?

  8. Larry says

    What is with the impeachment fantasy these wingers have? I am incapable of recognizing even the most implausible reasons for such action so I can’t imagine what they believe are the grounds necessary for it. I’m sure that it ultimately comes down to being president while black but what, if any, are the reasons they toss around?

  9. Subtract Hominem says

    Larry @9

    What is with the impeachment fantasy these wingers have? I am incapable of recognizing even the most implausible reasons for such action so I can’t imagine what they believe are the grounds necessary for it. I’m sure that it ultimately comes down to being president while black but what, if any, are the reasons they toss around?

    Reason #1) Avenging Nixon. Really.
    Reason #2) He’s presiding while not Republican. I’m sure you can see how they find this an impeachable offense.

  10. chilidog99 says

    Birthers of the world unite!!!

    You have nothing to lose but your brains!

    . . . Er wait, they have lost those already.

  11. regexp says

    We’ve got a President who couldn’t pass a background check

    Whenever I hear this – its guaranteed whomever stated it never had to go through a background check him/herself.

  12. andrewjohnston says

    @Subtract Hominem: I don’t think many modern wingers really think much about Nixon (who would probably be too liberal for the modern GOP anyway). However, they definitely remember people calling for Bush’s impeachment after the case for Operation Iraqi Freedom blew up. I’d wager it’s revenge for that.

  13. iangould says

    “this is the guy who Sarah Palin put it, ‘palled around with terrorists.’

    Beats palling around with religious psychos who encourage the murder of “witches”.

    Note too that they apparently believe the background chcek for a government job is done while you wait.

  14. DaveL says

    wow, the mastabatory fantasies of a police state these twits do have. Come right out and arrest someone for no reason, golly!

    Remember, it’s only because they love the constitution.

    Just not the part about not being deprived of liberty or property without due process of law.

    Or the part about freedom of association.

    Or about equal protection under the law.

    Or about birthright citizenship.

    Or the part about Habeas Corpus.

    Or barring the States from making their own currency.

    Or reserving the power of removing the president to the Senate.

    Or the part about Bills of Attainder.

    Or the part guaranteeing religious freedom.

    Or the part about women voting.

    Or the part about unenumerated rights.

    Or the Supremacy Clause.

    Or the part about public trials, the right to counsel, or cruel and unusual punishment.

  15. says

    I wonder if these guys have the same attitude towards Republicans who “palled around” with Eldridge Cleaver. After all it can reasonably be argued that Cleaver was a terrorirst in the late ’60s, and in his later years Cleaver became a Republican.

  16. Dawn Smith says

    It really ticks the right off that POTUS is where he is and not in jail somewhere rotting away with a lot of black men his age. They also can’t stand Mrs. Obama is not some welfare queen back in the projects of Chicago.

  17. helenaconstantine says

    possible items for a bill of impeachment against Obama:

    1. Murder of Abdulrahman Anwar Al-Aulaqi (a 16 year old boy and a US citizen who was never even charged with a crime) in Yemen on October 14, 2011.

    2. Murder of first responders coming to the site of a drone strike at a wedding in Pakistan by the launch of a second hellfire missile, on August 18, 2012.

    That should do for a start.

  18. slc1 says

    Re helenconstantine @ #21

    Since the Rethuglicans approve of the drone attack policy, this is the last thing they would impeach Obama on.

Leave a Reply