Via the Blaze, the logical conclusion to weeks of Democratic demagoguery aimed at the Supremes’ decision in the Citizens United case, which of course made it safe for swarthy foreigners to buy the election this year by donating to the Chamber of Commerce or something. This is almost too stupid to dignify with a response, but content is content. Essentially this tool wants you to believe that Roberts committed perjury during his confirmation hearings when he said he’d be an impartial “umpire” on the bench, which DeFazio took to be some sort of guarantee that Roberts would never overrule a precedent. That’s simply insane; no would-be judge, especially a Supreme Court nominee, would ever pledge to be bound by precedent under any and all circumstances. And no Democratic caucus would ever vote to impeach a conservative judge on these grounds for the simple reason that they want liberal judges to be free to overrule “problematic” precedents too when they’re back in the majority. In fact, here’s a choice excerpt from Kagan’s opening statement at her confirmation hearings. If Roberts got booted, bet your bottom dollar that the GOP would repay the favor vis-a-vis her promises of judicial “modesty.”

[T]he time I spent in the other branches of government remind me that it must also be a modest one – properly deferential to the decisions of the American people and their elected representatives.

What I most took away from those experiences was simple admiration for the democratic process. That process is often messy and frustrating, but the people of this country have great wisdom, and their representatives work hard to protect their interests. The Supreme Court, of course, has the responsibility of ensuring that our government never oversteps its proper bounds or violates the rights of individuals. But the Court must also recognize the limits on itself and respect the choices made by the American people…

I will make no pledges this week other than this one – that if confirmed, I will remember and abide by all these lessons. I will listen hard, to every party before the Court and to each of my colleagues. I will work hard. And I will do my best to consider every case impartially, modestly, with commitment to principle, and in accordance with law.

So there you have it: If Kagan starts voting to strike down statutes, out she goes. (In fact, there are already concrete examples of Obama appointees contradicting themselves at their confirmation hearings.) Not surprisingly, a legal scholar who spoke to the Journal basically rolled his eyes at DeFazio’s plan; by some measures, in fact, the Roberts Court is actually the most restrained in decades. But then, the point of DeFazio’s shpiel isn’t to actually stir up interest in impeaching Roberts, it’s to reinforce the Democrats’ scapegoating of outside money as the cause of all their midterm problems. The average liberal base voter hears this and thinks, “Wow! Not only is Citizens United ruining democracy, but Roberts is so corrupt that he’d actually perjure himself to serve his corporate masters!” A good smear is bound to help a bit with turnout, no? No wonder Alito doesn’t want to bother with the State of the Union this year.