Impeach Obama?

posted at 1:42 pm on October 17, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

When the grassroots come together for events like Western CPAC, it usually brings together a great deal of energy as well as a wide idea of ideas, some better than others.  One of the worst — and worst defended — ideas at WCPAC comes from Floyd Brown, whose ImpeachObamaCampaign.com is one of the sponsors for this event.  In his speech this morning, Brown misstates history, draws ridiculous parallels to the Nazi era, and takes the wrong lessons from the Clinton impeachment, which at least had the virtue of coming from an actual impeachable offense.

Brown’s best argument for impeaching Barack Obama was his reliance on Federalist 65 to claim that impeachment was a mechanism to express political dissent from the executive.  Unfortunately, Federalist 65 is a philosophical, not legal, document.  The language of the Constitution is pretty clear: impeachment is reserved for “high crimes and misdemeanors,” not political dissent.  Contra Brown, the US is not set up to be a parliamentary democracy with votes of no confidence, because the President does not derive his powers from Congress in our system as the Prime Minister does from Parliament in those systems.  Presidents get elected by the states through popular votes in our constitution.  Congress has no jurisdiction to issue no-confidence votes, and to arrogate that role would be a usurpation of power from the people and the states.

The Constitution includes impeachment for Congress to remove corrupt Presidents, and other federal officials as well.  Even then, it uses a large amount of political capital, which usually comes to the detriment of those pursuing it, especially when the effort is seen as partisan.  Floyd Brown not only missed this, he fundamentally misrepresented the impact of the impeachment of Bill Clinton.  Brown claims that before Clinton’s impeachment, he was pursuing a radical agenda on health care and foreign policy, and that the impeachment left him a lame duck and compliant to a Republican Congress.  Unfortunately, he’s completely wrong about this history.  The impeachment came in 1998, long after Clinton lost Congress to Republicans in 1994 and successfully tacked back to the center.   The impeachment effort left Republicans on the defensive, somewhat divided, and provided enough momentum for Democrats to keep the GOP from gaining seats in both the House and Senate, as had been expected in the last Clinton-era midterms.

If that wasn’t bad enough, Brown then drew parallels between Obama and Adolf Hitler and the Nazi seizure of power in the 1930s.  I have no love of Barack Obama as President, but one would have to have never studied the Nazis in order to claim that the Democratic majority is following in their footsteps.  They have a radical agenda that is a disaster for America in both the short and long terms.  There are plenty of grounds to argue for their defeat in the next election, and fortunately for us, the Democrats are making most of them for us, which is why they’re crashing in the polls.  However, the Democrats are not rounding up opposition and throwing them in camps, shooting them on the streets, or passing bills granting Obama dictatorial power.  Those arguments do nothing but make a certain portion of the grassroots look ill-educated and hysterical.

If we want to “remove” Obama from office, we  have an election in 2012 that will do the trick nicely, if we can remain focused on it.  If we want to cut into his power, the midterms in 2010 give us the same opportunity we seized in 1994.  Calls for impeachment only make us less credible for both efforts.

Update: Fixed the link and corrected “misrepresented”.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Killgore since you are trolling over here let me be the first to tell you that you are an unemployed loser who could not score in a Hong Kong whorehouse.

Hilts on October 17, 2009 at 10:39 PM

Clinton, for example, absolutely should have been impeached for the White House Travel Office scandal alone.
tom on October 17, 2009 at 5:58 PM

Ugly as was that mess, the president has wide discretion. Those who serve with/under him do so at his/her pleasure. It’s the same as those eight fired Fed prosecutors under Bush that the Dems want to harangue for political points that mean little in the end.

Liam on October 17, 2009 at 7:20 PM

The Travelgate people were not fired as bad employees, but falsely accused of a crime and fired. They were also part of the Civil Service, and were not political appointees. The whole point of the Civil Service is that you can’t be fired for political reasons.

The federal prosecutors were political appointees that the president had the power to fire at will.

Two absolutely different groups of people. Clinton at one point fired every one of his US attorneys, and it was not a scandal, because he had the right to do it.

Travelgate was sleazy, illegal, and corrupt. The fact that these men were fired and charged with crimes was sufficient cause for impeachment.

ThereGoesTheNeighborhood on October 17, 2009 at 10:43 PM

Does anyone really doubt…….

That some Lib group has already bought the domain names of IMPEACHPALIN.COM
IMPEACHROMNEY.COM
IMPEACHHUCK.COM
IMPEACHPAWS.COM

PappyD61 on October 17, 2009 at 5:46 PM

Try going to those sites you mention and you will see that no one has bought those domain names.

Bradky on October 17, 2009 at 8:06 PM

Don’t be so sure. Lack of a web site does not mean lack of a domain name.

In fact, an admittedly superficial investigation shows at least some of these domain names are taken.

host http://www.impeachromney.com
http://www.impeachromney.com is an alias for impeachromney.com.
impeachromney.com has address 68.178.232.99
impeachromney.com mail is handled by 10 mailstore1.secureserver.net.
impeachromney.com mail is handled by 0 smtp.secureserver.net.

host http://www.impeachhuck.com
http://www.impeachhuck.com has address 208.68.139.38

host http://www.impeachhuck.com
http://www.impeachhuck.com has address 208.68.139.38

ThereGoesTheNeighborhood on October 17, 2009 at 11:11 PM

Bribery was, and remains, well understood, then and now — namely, the intention to corrupt or influence, particularly public policy, by offering, or a government official accepting, something such as money or favor, quid pro quo, his vote or support in a particular public policy matter.

INC on October 17, 2009 at 2:34 PM

Looks like the above definition may well fit the big Pharma backroom deal Obama offered to get their support for health care.

tigerlily on October 17, 2009 at 11:55 PM

Killgore since you are trolling over here let me be the first to tell you that you are an unemployed loser who could not score in a Hong Kong whorehouse.

Hilts on October 17, 2009 at 10:39 PM

Is that what you consider a conservative value?

Bradky on October 18, 2009 at 12:08 AM

Why does this even merit a blog post? To show that we are “reasonable” here at HA? We don’t need to prove that to anyone.

Cylor on October 18, 2009 at 12:25 AM

Does anyone really doubt…….

That some Lib group has already bought the domain names of IMPEACHPALIN.COM
IMPEACHROMNEY.COM
IMPEACHHUCK.COM
IMPEACHPAWS.COM

PappyD61 on October 17, 2009 at 5:46 PM

Try going to those sites you mention and you will see that no one has bought those domain names.

Bradky on October 17, 2009 at 8:06 PM

Don’t be so sure.

I was able to resolve 3 of the 4 names in DNS. I posted the results, but apparently it’s stuck in moderation for who knows how long.

impeachromney shows as a parked web site, which means someone registered the domain name but has yet to put up any content. The others don’t even have a web site at all, but that probably just means they were registered with different registrars that don’t automatically create a parked web page.

ThereGoesTheNeighborhood on October 18, 2009 at 1:21 AM

This is why we can’t have nice things.

Decider on October 18, 2009 at 1:25 AM

Hear hear! Spot on analysis, Ed!

I’ve been having the same discussion[s] on … well, another site, and I too have concluded that Impeachment is a bit bone headed of an idea.

My reasoning is that America voted for this putz, thus we need to relearn the lessons taught by the Democrat party which are that we cannot ever trust ANY Democrat politician, that they Never can keep their spending down, and that socialism never works.

IMHO, Rush is right when he states that conservativism [sp] works every time it is tried, and I take that a step further by declaring that we need to elect real conservatives if we want to straighten out the Bush/0bama messes.

DannoJyd on October 18, 2009 at 1:27 AM

Cylor on October 18, 2009 at 12:25 AM

The topic remains relevant as there are a lot of people who think impeachment is a good idea.

It isn’t. Not even a little bit.

DannoJyd on October 18, 2009 at 1:29 AM

Well, if we’re merely asking whether Obama has committed any impeachable offenses, we need to investigate who was responsible for the NEA conference call (6 federal laws and regulations violated, according to Ben Shapiro) and the firing of Gerald Walpin. Those are actual crimes committed by his administration and possibly authorized directly by him. I’m not saying that they’re foolproof grounds for impeachment, but they should be seriously investigated.

However, the last thing we need is Obama becoming a political martyr.

CarpeFishem on October 17, 2009 at 1:47 PM

Turn off the Fox News. That is just ridiculous.

Decider on October 18, 2009 at 1:29 AM

gary4205 – Your brand of crazy is hilarious

My favorite part of your rant is that espousing a healthy lifestyle is nazi-esque. I guess any time someone says you should eat well and exercise, they must be like Hitler too.

Unless you can cite your ‘facts’ you are just … hot air.

A Axe on October 17, 2009 at 8:27 PM

No, but it’s OBVIOUS you know little of the history behind this. I assumed that Hot Air readers would understand, but there you go.

The Nazis didn’t just “espouse” a healthy lifestyle, they attempted to FORCE IT on the people, just like the turds in the democrat/communist party here.

Also, Hitler, and later Mengele, were quite enamored with American “progressives” of the early 20th century. Especially eugenics. Margaret Sanger, a Klan associate and founder of Planned Parenthood, was a big influence on Hitler and Mengele.

In reverse, look at Rahm Emanuel’s brother Ezekiel, he is as bad as Mengele. He is the one who has written about the “death panels” that Sarah Palin wrote so eloquently about.

Dr Death advocates denying health care to the very young, very old, and disabled, in order to make sure those “in their productive years” get plenty of care.

This is Obama’s adviser on ObamaCare.

There’s more, but I really don’t want to overload your brain.

Go read some history, then open your eyes to what is going on around you now!

gary4205 on October 18, 2009 at 2:03 AM

The topic remains relevant as there are a lot of people who think impeachment is a good idea.

It isn’t. Not even a little bit.

DannoJyd on October 18, 2009 at 1:29 AM

I don’t disagree…but there are people who scream “impeachment” for every president. Absent of any provable crime that actually rises to that level, those people remain marginalized kooks.

It just seems to me like a strange topic for this site in particular, or at least Ed, to devote actual time and space to distancing itself from. I would think the simple absence of “impeach Obama” threads here would and should say enough on its own.

Cylor on October 18, 2009 at 4:18 AM

Impeachment would never work, and does not appear to be the appropriate constitutional remedy for someone illegally occupying an elected national office.

According to research and investigation currently being pursued, this appears to be a case for quo warranto.

See this site for legal analysis of this issue.

NavyspyII on October 18, 2009 at 6:33 AM

gary4205 on October 18, 2009 at 2:03 AM

Your consistently random usage of all-capitals and “quotations” showed that you are massively unhinged.

Obesity is an epidemic in the US. It is by far the #1 cause of death and other illnesses. If you didn’t just read the echo chamber and read the Public Health Reports, you would know that it is a cause of concern.

The ‘Death Panel’ was nothing more than ‘End of Life Counseling’ – which already exists, and is a fantastic idea (you know – do the talk before they get hit with Alzheimers).

You are insane.

A Axe on October 18, 2009 at 10:57 AM

Pffftttt….The questions are: Does Obama fulfills and respects the Constitution and the Founding Fathers, and has not “nudged” any single mandate of the Constitution?

Does Obama care?

IMPEACH I SAY! It will happen, just not now.

ProudPalinFan on October 18, 2009 at 10:57 AM

I don’t think any of the reasons he is a bad president are particularly impeachable. I suppose there might be some grounds on corruption, but I haven’t really seen something that amounts to proof on that.
Besides, I still say Biden is impeachment insurance.

Count to 10 on October 18, 2009 at 11:34 AM

I don’t disagree…but there are people who scream “impeachment” for every president. Absent of any provable crime that actually rises to that level, those people remain marginalized kooks.

It just seems to me like a strange topic for this site in particular, or at least Ed, to devote actual time and space to distancing itself from. I would think the simple absence of “impeach Obama” threads here would and should say enough on its own.

Cylor on October 18, 2009 at 4:18 AM

The fact remains that there IS a noticable IMPEACH 0bama movement out there/here, and thus it merritts discussion. That discussion needs actual ideas/ideals along with facts to back them up.

Also, Hot Air isn’t America. There is a lot of America out there and ignoring the discussions taking place there is fatal in real time politics.

BTW, can someone please tell me when/how 0bama took control of LGF? [insert 0bamaBot graphic here]

DannoJyd on October 18, 2009 at 12:18 PM

ha ha ha once again the right lets its fringe morons run loose and does nothing to distance itself from them.

Dave Rywall on October 18, 2009 at 12:40 PM

ha ha ha once again the right lets its fringe morons run loose and does nothing to distance itself from them.

Dave Rywall on October 18, 2009 at 12:40 PM

If we could pull that trick off we would be so much better off than the Democrats, maybe if we banned 500+ accounts a month like another site that is engaged in an open blogwar we could do it.

DFCtomm on October 18, 2009 at 12:44 PM

ha ha ha once again the right lets its fringe morons run loose and does nothing to distance itself from them.

Dave Rywall on October 18, 2009 at 12:40 PM

If we could pull that trick off we would be so much better off than the Democrats, maybe if we banned 500+ accounts a month like another site that is engaged in an open blogwar we could do it.

DFCtomm on October 18, 2009 at 12:44 PM
—————
You won’t bother because it’s way too many of your votes.
And when Palin launches her own little party, the GOP is finished.
You’ll lose 20-30% of the really stupid people who will jump whip over to her and the Dems could then run a toaster oven and win.

As for banning 500+ accounts: Hotair has maybe – MAYBE – 15 or 20 contributors you all hate and would love to ban. So if there are that many being banned over there on the other lefty blogs, then clearly its your side who are doing more of the trolling.

Dave Rywall on October 18, 2009 at 12:59 PM

Dave Rywall on October 18, 2009 at 12:59 PM

Looking forward to the upcoming elections, eh? Well, that is when the horse laugh will be on you. ;o)

DannoJyd on October 18, 2009 at 1:56 PM

Is that what you consider a conservative value?

Bradky on October 18, 2009 at 12:08 AM

Well, I’m not sure if it’s a Conversative value. But one might ask if cheating on your terminally ill wife, having a child with your hoochie-momma and lying your ass off about it to all AMerica are liberal values.

Or do you consider the part where he made plans to be with her after the terminally ill wife died, “liberal values”?

hawkdriver on October 18, 2009 at 2:55 PM

hawkdriver on October 18, 2009 at 2:55 PM

The poster himself seemed to know a little about whoring around. You missed the point.

Bradky on October 18, 2009 at 4:13 PM

the Democrats are not rounding up opposition and throwing them in camps, shooting them on the streets, or passing bills granting Obama dictatorial power.

May we please think about that third one? After all, we still don’t know what’s in the “Obamacare” sack of …stuff. You smokers, and people who don’t fit the Metropolitan Life Insurance height/weight guidelines might want to sneak over and check out this link on Drudge;
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33336289/ns/politics-washington_post/

oldleprechaun on October 18, 2009 at 7:30 PM

As a non-USA citizen, the one thing that stands out is the failure of Obama to uphold the Constitution. This is quite serious.

In the case of Clinton, the impeachable offense was not what he did with Monica Lewinsky, including all of the pornographic details of his dalliance. It was the fact that he lied under oath. He committed perjury. It is for that reason that those who claimed that he could not be impeached were wrong.

As for Tricky Dicky Nixon and Spiro Agnew, well what they did was contemptible. However, the break-in or rather the Watergate scandal should not have been enough for impeachment to be successful, based upon the standards that are being applied to certain Democrat Presidents.

Out of all of these people, the one who has caused the most harm to the USA is Obama. Clinton was not causing any harm from the point of view of the world at large. Tricky Dicky was not causing harm even from the domestic viewpoint… he took action that in fact ended USA participation in Vietnam… but that did not stop the Democrats calling fro his blood with all of their constant screams of calling him “Mad Bomber Nixon”, even though it was LBJ who was doing most of the bombing…. and who caused the upgrading of participation in Vietnam and South East Asia.

Whilst it is too early to start the calls for impeachment of Obama, I do think that his behaviour on the world stage is actually quite sufficient to start building a solid case. In other words, people should be keeping a file on what he says and does, for future reference.

He has not brought peace to the world at all. He has not brought hope to the world. He has brought the opposite…. and you only have to look at the response in Russia and North Korea to get my meaning….

The USA is less secure now than under Nixon…….

maggieo on October 18, 2009 at 9:28 PM

Eyas on October 17, 2009

re: Saddam Hussein. He was not democratically elected to the position of President. Very few people seem to realize how he came to power. It was with the barrel of a gun. Specifically, he went into the Iraqi Assembly as it consisted back then, and with a group of like minded individuals, he shot up and killed those present. In other words Hussein came to power via a coup d’etat.

maggieo on October 19, 2009 at 12:28 AM

The Constitution includes impeachment for Congress to remove corrupt Presidents, and other federal officials as well.

Sounds like we could impeach the whole government on the basis of corruption alone. Let’s get going.

petunia on October 19, 2009 at 1:09 AM

A Axe on October 17, 2009

It is obvious that you know nothing about Hitler and the Nazi regime. Healthy exercise was very much a part of that scene. I am sure that someone could find the information regarding the exercise regimen that all children were required to do at the time. What he forgot was the Hitler Youth which bears a lot of similarity to Obama Youth…..

maggieo on October 19, 2009 at 1:22 AM

Your consistently random usage of all-capitals and “quotations” showed that you are massively unhinged.

Obesity is an epidemic in the US. It is by far the #1 cause of death and other illnesses. If you didn’t just read the echo chamber and read the Public Health Reports, you would know that it is a cause of concern.

The ‘Death Panel’ was nothing more than ‘End of Life Counseling’ – which already exists, and is a fantastic idea (you know – do the talk before they get hit with Alzheimers).

You are insane.

A Axe on October

====================================================

The ad hominem attack that you have made does not address the issue which is that under Hitler there was an exercise campaign and that this is now being forced upon people again.

Even if obesity is at epidemic levels in the USA, Canada, Australia, the UK and yes even in Germany, that has nothing to do with the issue which is the policies that are similar to that of Hitler in Nazi Germany.

In those days it was calisthenics that were the rage, and people had to participate. There is nothing wrong with doing simple exercises in the home, or being on a health kick. There is something wrong when it is something that is mandated.

This is about voluntary actions vs. mandated actions.

It would seem that since you lost because you showed that you knew nothing about Nazi Germany that you decided to attack the person… that is not cool.

maggieo on October 19, 2009 at 1:59 AM

BTW you are also wrong about the purpose of the death panels which has nothing to do with “Alzheimers” which is a disease which you seem to sneer at….

The true purpose of those meetings as it was placed in the proposals was in fact to try and get people to make decisions to end their lives by using coercion. You only had to read what was proposed to recognize that there was a sinister purpose and that it was in fact meant to put pressure on the elderly to “do the right thing”.

Alzheimer’s is a brain disease where people deteriorate. At the worst stage these people need a lot of care and attention which can be provided in a nursing home facility. Lots of people with Alzheimers can function for a very long time before they fully deteriorate.

maggieo on October 19, 2009 at 2:04 AM

Regardless of what he has done, there is no way this congress will vote to impeach, much less convict Obama.

MarkTheGreat on October 19, 2009 at 8:58 AM

Impeachment is a political check, not a legal one.

Congress can impeach any officer of the government for any reason it is willing to face the voters for.

Now days, that pretty much means that the voters are going to have to be baying for blood before Congress will impeach and convict any high official. But it wouldn’t have to be for anything actually criminal.

LarryD on October 19, 2009 at 12:24 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3