Jerusalem Post
Posted by SHMUEL ROSNER
And a couple of notes:1. When one asks whether Jews will "consider voting" for "someone else" this doesn't mean that they will consider voting for a Republican. They might not. That's why I do not buy the "Obama lost half of Jewish support" headlines.
2. Previous studies have indicated that "41% of American Jews have visited Israel at some point during their lives.4 Among those who have been to Israel, a little over half (54%) have visited once, 17% have visited twice, and the remaining 29% have visited three times or more". But the McLaughlin poll has 51% of visitors to Israel. This might mean that the poll is somewhat biased towards Jews more affiliated with Israel than the average - which means one should treat carefully the "total".
3. By the way, the fact that there a clear "association between affiliation status and close family or friends who live in Israel" is well established. "Fifty-seven percent of affiliated Jews and half of the moderately affiliated have such a connection to Israel, as opposed to only 36% of those who do not have a Jewish organizational affiliation".
4. Yet again, in the McLaughlin poll 56% have friends or family living in Israel. But according to NJPS the real number is 46% - a 10% difference that can have impact on the total.
5. On the other hand, this new poll has higher percentage of Democrats than the AJC Jewish opinion survey. Confusing? In some ways it is.
5. The number of Jews disapproving of Obama's handling relations with Israel is much higher in this poll than in the quite recent AJC survey. On the other hand - differences between Orthodox, Conservative and Reform should not surprise anyone.
6. But in both surveys one can see the strong Jewish attachment to Jerusalem. Of all denominations. And also the deep suspicion that Arabs want to destroy Israel and not to make peace with it.
Update: Laura reminded me that Ron wrote an excellent post about this poll. You should read it (here).
Note: And there are other polls floating around that are demanding Congress begin Impeachment proceedings and if that takes hold, who knows who will be running for presidnet on the Democratic ticket in 2012. I do not trust polls, but there are enough signs spreading like wild fire that the elections can take a turn no one expects at this moment. (see below) Bee Sting
Can we actually impeach Barack Hussein Obama? Should we impeach Barack Hussein Obama? To borrow a phrase from the "anointed-one," ... "yes we can."
But before going on, we really need to address the often misunderstood subject of what exactly constitutes an impeachable offense, in order to illustrate that Barack Obama's actions are grave enough to warrant impeachment.
Former-President Gerald Ford, while serving in the House of Representatives, said an impeachable offense was, “whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history.”
Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution reads: “The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”
The key phrase here is "high crimes and misdemeanors,” a concept in English Common Law that was well-known to our Founding Fathers but is grossly misunderstood in this day and age.
"High crimes and misdemeanors" essentially means bad behavior.
Here's a passage from C-Span.org which succinctly and beautifully summarizes the historical significance surrounding the inclusion of the term "high crimes and misdemeanors" in the Constitution:
“’High crimes and misdemeanors’ entered the text of the Constitution due to George Mason and James Madison. Mason had argued that the reasons given for impeachment - treason and bribery - were not enough. He worried that other "great and dangerous offenses" might not be covered... so Mason then proposed ‘high crimes and misdemeanors,’ a phrase well-known in English common law. In 18th century language, a ‘misdemeanor’ meant ‘mis-demeanor,’ or bad behavior."
In other words, "high crimes and misdemeanors" does not refer to a criminal act (as some would lead you to believe) and our Founding Fathers fully intended to allow for the removal of the President for actions which were... well... simply put... egregious... grossly incompetent... grossly negligent... outright distasteful... or, in the case of Barack Hussein Obama, actions which clearly show "malevolence toward this country, which is unabated."
And make no mistake, for those who mistakenly hold the illusion that impeaching Barack Hussein Obama would be a simple matter of "playing politics," the Founders fully intended that the impeachment of a sitting President be a political act.
As C-Span.org notes:
“The Congress decides the definition [of impeachable offenses]: by majority vote in the House for impeachment, and by 2/3 vote in the Senate for conviction. The Framers of the Constitution deliberately put impeachment into the hands of the legislative branch rather than the judicial branch, thus transforming it from strictly a matter of legal definition to a matter of political judgment. Then Representative Gerald Ford put it into practical perspective in 1970, when he said an impeachable offense is ‘whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history.’"
The Obama Administration exemplifies maladministration. It qualifies as the poster-child for bad behavior.
Obama and those around him are ravaging this great country and adding a sorry chapter to a noble history.
Impeachment, as written in the Constitution, was tailor-made for Barack Hussein Obama and our Founders placed it in our Constitution for such a time as this.
It could be easily argued that we have a duty to impeach Barack Hussein Obama.
Of course, our elected officials won't have the back-bone to go it alone. That's where you come in.
Help us spread the word far-and-wide and our elected officials will come to know that Impeachment is the will of the American people and they ignore the will of the people at their own political peril.
The question is not whether we should impeach Barack Hussein Obama. Rather, the question is, can we impeach Barack Hussein Obama before it is too late? (more)
