Skip to main content

The Dream of Every Republican
IF THE GOP KEEPS THE HOUSE,
WINS THE SENATE:

A TRIAL BUT NO CONVICTION......

unless you consider the impact on the electorate in 2016

**********************

Talk of impeachment MEANS NOTHING....unless the GOP gets control of the Senate. Without that....the House can vote articles of impeachment, but the Senate will just knock the heck out of them making the GOP look very foolish. BUT BEING ABLE TO CONDUCT A SENATE TRIAL....and it is a trial.....under rules set up by the GOP will allow them to dredge up every so-called scandal and every disagreement in excruciating detail. It will last a year or more....NOW OBAMA WILL NOT BE FOUND GUILTY because after the trial procedure this is what happens....

* The Senate will meet in private session to debate a verdict.

* The Senate, in open session, will vote on a verdict. A 2/3 vote of the Senate will result in a conviction.

* The Senate will vote to remove the President from office.

* The Senate may also vote (by a simple majority) to prohibit the President from holding any public office in the future.

SO LET'S LOOK AT THE NUMBERS....

2/3 of the Senate. That's 67 members of the Senate finding him guilty. In even the worst forecasts for the Midterms as seen at http://mark28.blogspot.com/...  the largest number of gains for the GOP is 6 seats.

Currently there are 53 Democrats, and 2 Independents in the Democratic Causus and 45 GOP.

In the worst case scenario, we get 47 Democrats and 2 Independents and 51 GOP.Not even close to 67.

SO, WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT HERE IS A SHOW TRIAL THAT WILL TIE THE CONGRESS AND THE PRESIDENT UP IN KNOTS...all to make the 2016 race a verdict on Obama as a failed president leading a failed party.

Poll

Will the GOP vote articles of impeachment against Barack Obama if they fail to take the Senate in 2014?

43%69 votes
56%89 votes

| 158 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (5+ / 0-)

    2014: Progressivism vs. Plutocracy

    by murphthesurf3 on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 08:33:54 PM PDT

  •  And if they fail to take the Senate... (10+ / 0-)

    ...and lose some of their seats in the House, what then?

    If these clowns were going to impeach Obama, they would be doing it this week. But then they would have to do real work.

    Float like a manhole cover, sting like a sash weight! Clean Coal Is A Clinker!

    by JeffW on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 08:37:38 PM PDT

    •  Articles of Impeachment without a real trial (0+ / 0-)

      is like smooching your sister....they want a full blown makeout session and only a Senate majority guarantees that.

      2014: Progressivism vs. Plutocracy

      by murphthesurf3 on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 08:45:29 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And if the Democrats mess up their majority... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Calamity Jean

        ...in November, what then?

        Float like a manhole cover, sting like a sash weight! Clean Coal Is A Clinker!

        by JeffW on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 08:50:01 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Please clarify your question (0+ / 0-)

          November of what year....and to what are you referring...Just a bit confused.

          2014: Progressivism vs. Plutocracy

          by murphthesurf3 on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 09:01:09 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  This year. n/t (0+ / 0-)

            Float like a manhole cover, sting like a sash weight! Clean Coal Is A Clinker!

            by JeffW on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 09:10:32 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Sorry, maybe I am being dense (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              nocynicism, schumann

              And if the Democrats mess up their majority in November 2014 what then?

              If the Dems lose control of the Senate, we get the show trial I spoke of. If they do not, we get a trial that opens and closes on the same day.....

              2014: Progressivism vs. Plutocracy

              by murphthesurf3 on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 09:16:27 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  The House will not do this (4+ / 0-)

                Allen West doesn't work there anymore.
                Michele Bachmann is headed to wingnut welfare in November.
                Boehner is incompetent, but knows better than to chase this fool's dream.

                There will be no articles of impeachment filed in the House, let alone a trial in the Senate. Enough Republicans recall the self inflicted wound of the shutdown last fall, and the backfired impeachment of Clinton that they will scuttle any effort by the extreme fringe.
                Frothing about it to any microphone pointed at them is an entirely different story.

                Last full month in which the average daily temperature did not exceed twentieth-century norms: 2/1985 - Harper's Index, 2/2013

                by kamarvt on Thu Jun 05, 2014 at 04:08:31 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  If it is judged to be an effective strategy... (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Mopshell, schumann

                  you can bet your bippy that charges will come forward.

                  Obama will be hit by an array of charges- every scandal, every faux pas, every decision with which the House majority disagrees and even things that the left is angry about (GOP strategists are good at doing this).....and the sheer weight of the charges will reaffirm the view of those who hate him AND will sway those on fence.

                  Sorry, I regard this as a real threat. I live in a red state. Our base will not be convinced but theirs will be even further animated and, I think, ours robbed of a lot of enthusiasm. To combat the rigged election laws, the power of money (and therefore propaganda and on the ground organization) we are going to need a series of Dem tsunamis and a trial will suck energy from the forces needed to build that wave.

                  Let me add that the leadership in the house and senate are always the LAST to jump onto something controversial but they will when the time comes.

                  41 members of the House are calling for impeachment, and five members of the Senate have expressed support for the idea....I do not for a second believe that Boehner can block his caucus - all it takes to remove him is a simple majority vote in the House.

                  2014: Progressivism vs. Plutocracy

                  by murphthesurf3 on Thu Jun 05, 2014 at 07:11:28 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

      •  The results of the midterms will have no impact (5+ / 0-)

        whatsoever. The GOP House leadership has no interest in impeachment efforts and will not even authorize the formation of a committee to pursue an investigation. All this discussion of impeachment is complete nonsense, it's not even going to be started.

        "let's talk about that" uid 92953

        by VClib on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 09:37:55 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Agree with the above statement. (0+ / 0-)

      Although if the Republicans under Clinton had waited until after the 1998 election, they would have been a lot better off.  They acted when they did to placate their base.

      The Stars and Bars and the red swastika banner are both offerings to the same barbaric god.

      by amyzex on Thu Jun 05, 2014 at 08:43:33 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  hi murph good read (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mopshell, schumann

    every time i see hear or write the GOP all that goes though my mind is the show must go on by threedognight

    Baby, there's an enormous crowd of people
    They're all after my blood
    I wish maybe they'd tear down the walls of this theater
    Let me out, let me out

    Oh, I'm so blind, oh, I'm blind
    I wasted time, wasted, wasted, wasted time
    Walking on a wire, high wire
    But I must let the show go on

    Oh, I'm so blind, oh, I'm blind
    I wasted time, wasted, wasted all too much time

    rupda dada rupda da

  •  It's like Bill Maher said, and they know it: (14+ / 0-)

    "Go ahead and do it. Put Barack Obama on the ballot again. So he can kick your asses a third time"

    "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." --M. L. King "You can't fix stupid" --Ron White -6.00, -5.18

    by zenbassoon on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 08:41:29 PM PDT

    •  Kick ass - only if the Senate is in Dems hands (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Rosalie907, bluenick, schumann

      In GOP hands they will make lots of something out of nothing and then claim that the majority found Obama  guilty and only   political party grandstanding by the Dems kept him from being booted from office....

      2014: Progressivism vs. Plutocracy

      by murphthesurf3 on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 08:48:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The GOP knows that it takes 67 Senate votes (3+ / 0-)

        to remove a POTUS from office and they will never have the votes, so they won't start the process.

        "let's talk about that" uid 92953

        by VClib on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 09:41:18 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I wrote that as well.... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          scott5js

          the removal from office was out of the question with Clinton as well....but they went for it....same thing here but more so....there is a list of "scandals", there is the underlying question of the legitimacy of his presidency, and there is this theme that the president is dictatorial/imperial. It makes for a far better, if fundamentally foolish, case.

          With that they will win the funds, the furor, and the fans in their base that they need to take on the Democrats in a national race.

          2014: Progressivism vs. Plutocracy

          by murphthesurf3 on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 10:15:34 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  How did that work out for them (2+ / 0-)

            when they impeached Clinton? And they had a reason they could actually point to in his case.

            •  Depends on how it is presented.... (0+ / 0-)

              What was Clinton accused of? Lying about an "affair" with a young woman. The Senate case that this was not a high crime or misdemeanor was accepted by most.

              Obama will be hit by an array of charges- every scandal, every faux pas, every decision with which the House majority disagrees and even things that the left is angry about (GOP strategists are good at doing this).....and the sheer weight of the charges will reaffirm the view of those who hate him AND will sway those on fence.

              Sorry, I regard this as a real threat.

              2014: Progressivism vs. Plutocracy

              by murphthesurf3 on Thu Jun 05, 2014 at 07:00:15 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  They won the next Presidential election (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              schumann

              with a little help from the Supreme Court.  That's how it worked out.

              The Stars and Bars and the red swastika banner are both offerings to the same barbaric god.

              by amyzex on Thu Jun 05, 2014 at 08:46:18 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  I say go for it, GOP! (11+ / 0-)

    Your attempts to overthrow a lawfully-elected President in 1998 very nearly destroyed your party.

    If you still have the desire to self-immolate, most likely for good this time, the least we can do is offer you a match...

    "In whose delusional mind is democracy made better by allowing wealthy people to control more of it?" -Jon Stewart

    by radabush on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 08:47:04 PM PDT

    •  I don't think a quixotic effort to (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      markthshark

      impeach the President will be necessary.

      The POW-trashing, vote-suppressing, healthcare-destroying, Koch-sucking and birther-nominating will do it.

      "Much of movement conservatism is a con and the base is the marks." -- Chris Hayes

      by raptavio on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 08:52:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Here is the difference (0+ / 0-)

      The trial of Clinton was about a lie, a young man and the meaning of "Is"

      This time it will be about Fast and Furious, Benghazi, the IRS, ACA, and the exchange of prisoners.....a lot more meat to bite into and chew and chew and chew....

      The pre-trail will go on for 6 months, the trial for 3 weeks, and the aftermath right up to Nov. 2016.

      AND they will take every opportunity to tie Hillary, hip to hip, with Barack.

      2014: Progressivism vs. Plutocracy

      by murphthesurf3 on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 08:56:25 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Want to bet that there will be no "this time" (4+ / 0-)

        $100 that there will be no impeachment vote in the House this term. All proceeds to a DKOS affiliated charity.

        "let's talk about that" uid 92953

        by VClib on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 09:43:04 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I prefer to engage in debate rather than (0+ / 0-)

          make sidebets.....if the Senate goes GOP I think there is a very high chance that this will happen. I base this both on the rhetoric of the rank and file, the seething desire in the base, and the wishes of the big backers.

          2014: Progressivism vs. Plutocracy

          by murphthesurf3 on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 10:07:48 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  point by point (3+ / 0-)

            free propaganda you mentioned earlier; they haz that. Turn on your radio.
            Priopic base; they haz that, too. Real things are not needed to create the perpetual boners of the RW crazies. They have been in that state for six years.
            Big money backers; generally smart enough to know this has a big chance of backfiring. Thus costing them their investments. Many also grok that Obama has not committed any 'high crimes and misdemeanors' outside the fever dreams of the professional fiction writers of the RW.
            The garbled choking sounds you hear demanding impeachment are all coming from the insignificant barking dogs of the RW.
            It's NOT coming from Boehner, it's NOT coming from the Turtle, who has every reason to go there in his pathetic attempt to look teabaggy. Same goes for Cantor, Rubio, Jebby, even Christie. None of the big guns of the Republican party are using this free propaganda talking point. That says they don't see it the way you do.
            Wouldn't this be a major campaign issue for them, if you are correct? Outside of a few lower tier races, it is not even being trial ballooned.
            We've got a lot of reasons to work our butts off to keep the Senate this fall, but avoiding an impeachment scandal is not a realistic one.

            Last full month in which the average daily temperature did not exceed twentieth-century norms: 2/1985 - Harper's Index, 2/2013

            by kamarvt on Thu Jun 05, 2014 at 04:25:05 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Spoken from a blue state perspective? (0+ / 0-)

              Obama will be hit by an array of charges- every scandal, every faux pas, every decision with which the House majority disagrees and even things that the left is angry about (GOP strategists are good at doing this).....and the sheer weight of the charges will reaffirm the view of those who hate him AND will sway those on fence.

              Sorry, I regard this as a real threat. I live in a red state. Our base will not be convinced but theirs will be even further animated and, I think, ours robbed of a lot of enthusiasm. To combat the rigged election laws, the power of money (and therefore propaganda and on the ground organization) we are going to need a series of Dem tsunamis and a trial will suck energy from the forces needed to build that wave.

              Let me add that the leadership in the house and senate are always the LAST to jump onto something controversial but they will when the time comes.

              41 members of the House are calling for impeachment, and five members of the Senate have expressed support for the idea....I don not for a second believe that Boehner can block his caucus - all it takes to remove him is a simple majority vote in the House.

              2014: Progressivism vs. Plutocracy

              by murphthesurf3 on Thu Jun 05, 2014 at 07:07:30 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  It takes nearly the entire GOP House membership (0+ / 0-)

                to remove the Speaker in realistic political terms. Ain't going to happen. There is no risk of an impeachment vote based on the President's actions to date. The GOP knows they can keep the House and contest the Senate if they just don't do anything really stupid, like press for impeachment.

                "let's talk about that" uid 92953

                by VClib on Thu Jun 05, 2014 at 07:23:30 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

        •  I agree.... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          wishingwell, cazcee

          .....unless the Tea Party demands it as a condition of not going third party in 2016.

      •  asdf... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Brown Thrasher, amyzex

        As private parts to the gods are we, they play with us for their sport. - Black Adder "Chains"

        by Clive all hat no horse Rodeo on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 09:49:13 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  There's no "there" there (0+ / 0-)

        in any of that. There's no clear story that the average guy on the street can grasp.

        A married man getting a blowjob from a twenty something girl. Now, there's a story most everyone can relate to.

        It seems to have escaped your notice that the Affordable Care Act is no longer even an imaginary scandal. Trying to impeach a president over giving people access to health care is not even something rabid Republicans would attempt. They're not even really trying to repeal it anymore.

        •  In my part of the world.....you are wrong (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          schumann

          I live in Missouri, a state where ACA expansion of Medicaid was blocked by our rabidly GOP state legislature.

          AND yet in polling of the population, the working poor, most affect by this, ACA remains unpopular, a sinister plot by a dictatorial president ignoring the will of the people forcing socialism down their throat.

          It is absurd but the power of those who shape the thinking of so many of my neighbors is very real and often abused.

          2014: Progressivism vs. Plutocracy

          by murphthesurf3 on Thu Jun 05, 2014 at 06:53:15 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Can I please (3+ / 0-)

      Light that match, pretty please.  

      Never be afraid to voice your opinion and fight for it . Corporations aren't people, they're Republicans (Rev Al Sharpton 10/7/2011) Voting is a louder voice than a bullhorn but sometimes you need that bullhorn to retain your vote.

      by Rosalie907 on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 08:59:05 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Not going to happen (5+ / 0-)

    Eric Ericson actually wrote a diary about this on Red State today and said it's not going to happen.

    He said impeachment is the only thing that can revive an Obama presidency that has been dead since the GOP won the House, and they aren't going to energize the Democratic base for the 2016 elections by impeaching him.

    He actually thinks the President is trying to bait Republicans into it by being "lawless" as they describe his "regime", but that Republicans aren't going to take the bait.

    Ericson has his pulse firmly on the Tea Party and he was quite definitive that if we are pining our hopes on impeachment we are going to be wildly disappointed.

    •  Interesting twist.... (0+ / 0-)

      Here's the problem....I count 31 members of the House and 9 members of the Senate on the GOP side who have very publicly declared that Obama is in line for impeachment. I think this is going to grow. The GOP really has no Party discipline as demonstrated by its inability to govern in the House so how is it that this rising tide will be staunched by Red State.

      2014: Progressivism vs. Plutocracy

      by murphthesurf3 on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 09:05:46 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Well, let's see (0+ / 0-)

        They only need 187 more votes in the House, and then 58 more in the Senate.

        Sooooo close!

        •  Not really (0+ / 0-)

          The House debates the impeachment resolution and may at the conclusion consider the resolution as a whole or vote on each article of impeachment individually. A simple majority of those present and voting is required for each article or the resolution as a whole to pass.

          In the Senate, conviction take 2/3 but the majority party controls the trial and can shape it in ways that a failure to convict can be framed as sheer partisan loyalty and an injustice.

          2014: Progressivism vs. Plutocracy

          by murphthesurf3 on Thu Jun 05, 2014 at 06:46:51 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yes, really (0+ / 0-)

            Do you really imagine that Congress members wouldn't bother to show up for a vote on impeachment?

            A simple majority of those present and voting is required for each article or the resolution as a whole to pass.
            •  Of course they would (0+ / 0-)

              and since the House is controlled by the GOP they have the votes.

              But until they have control of the Senate passage of the articles would land them in a Dem Senate where the trial would be set up to make them look foolish and once done they could not try it again. So, they are waiting for the miderms.

              A GOP Senate will set up the show trial that they want to raise lots of money, put fire under their base, give legitimacy to their desire to dismiss Obama as an illegitimate president, and may well affect those on the fence in re. to support for Dem leadership.

              2014: Progressivism vs. Plutocracy

              by murphthesurf3 on Thu Jun 05, 2014 at 09:51:05 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  why are you surprised? (0+ / 0-)

    I have been saying for the past 8 years we are looking at impeachment proceedings.  That has been their end game because they are going for Newt Redux or a rerun of Clinton/2000.  
    Everybody was so in awe of Rove and his Machiavellian wiles but face it, he was running off Lee Atwater's playbook and should at least pay Lee's estate royalties for his ideas.  Karl has never seen an idea he could not steal or would not appropriate.  He also has never had an original thought in his life.  He is currently gassed out and cruising on E.  So is the GOP so they are returning to the old plays that worked so well on Bill.

    Problem is that Obama is not Bill but it is still red meat to the base (no puns about dark meat please) so they will huff and puff but had better bring up some promising rookie from the farm leagues or off the bench fast because their current brain trust is neither brainy nor worthy of trusting

    •  There is a lot more meat on the table this time... (0+ / 0-)

      The trial of Clinton was about a lie, a young man and the meaning of "Is"

      This time it will be about Fast and Furious, Benghazi, the IRS, ACA, and the exchange of prisoners.....a lot more meat to bite into and chew and chew and chew....

      The pre-trail will go on for 6 months, the trial for 3 weeks, and the aftermath right up to Nov. 2016.

      AND they will take every opportunity to tie Hillary, hip to hip, with Barack.

      Toss in the belief by a disturbing number of people that Obama is not even the legitimate President, or that he has visions of dictatorial grandeur...

      2014: Progressivism vs. Plutocracy

      by murphthesurf3 on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 09:47:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Your diary is rediculous. At the mere hint of... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        JeffW, wishingwell

        impeachment of Obama, Dems bring war crime charges against Chimpy McClusterfuck, Darth Cheney and anyone else they care to put through the mill.

        As private parts to the gods are we, they play with us for their sport. - Black Adder "Chains"

        by Clive all hat no horse Rodeo on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 09:53:34 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Speaking of ridiculous.... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Jon Says, schumann

          How do the Democrats bring war crime charges against anyone? If they are not in office and covered by Constitutional Law then they are powerless. The DOJ could open an investigation but given this administrations record in matters related to the use of drones, the NSA, and Guantanamo I suggest that would be iffy territory. Toss in the decision of the Obama administration in 2009 NOT to go after the origins of the war in Iraq (especially given the widely based Democratic support), your position is imaginative but totally inane.

          2014: Progressivism vs. Plutocracy

          by murphthesurf3 on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 10:05:16 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  And so, the status quo stands. See, that was easy. (0+ / 0-)

            As private parts to the gods are we, they play with us for their sport. - Black Adder "Chains"

            by Clive all hat no horse Rodeo on Thu Jun 05, 2014 at 12:40:12 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Basically unresponsive, disappointing n/t (0+ / 0-)

              2014: Progressivism vs. Plutocracy

              by murphthesurf3 on Thu Jun 05, 2014 at 05:40:46 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  How am I unresponsive? You put up a silly... (0+ / 0-)

                diary outlining Obama's possible impeachment. I then explained what the Dems might/could do in response. You then countered by saying that the Dems couldn't bring war crimes charges against Chimpy and co. because of self-implication. I then stated that the status quo will be maintained.

                Ergo, your diary is silly.

                As private parts to the gods are we, they play with us for their sport. - Black Adder "Chains"

                by Clive all hat no horse Rodeo on Thu Jun 05, 2014 at 06:25:33 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Actually that clarifies your meaning....thanks (0+ / 0-)

                  The status quo is that both sides are dirty and both can make cases against the other.

                  My reply to you said that the Dems would not do as you stated for the reason you cite but also because the legislature does not have the jurisdiction to do this.

                  I also said that the decision not to push this in 2009 was one they were stuck with.

                  SO.....given that why would the GOP not press impeachment when it will make them a ton of money, excite their base, tarnish Obama's legacy, influence the 2016 race by shifting those on the borderline....OR at least that's what they think will happen.

                  2014: Progressivism vs. Plutocracy

                  by murphthesurf3 on Thu Jun 05, 2014 at 08:31:36 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

      •  I am really not up to take down each "scandal" (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        KenBee, wishingwell, lenzy1000, elmo, emelyn

        individually; I am just up checking final auction prices.  However Benghazi is manufactured outrage unless you care to explain what Obama should have done differently, given the time, place and real world constraints of the situation.

        ACA will be a win for Obama except for the lowest information voters who are already in the bag as the 27%

        IRS is another manufactured outrage since the IRS also investigated Progressive organizations at the same time at approximately the same rate.

        prisoner exchange will harm him as much as Reagan's hostage exchange damaged his presidency.

        F&F?  The GOP could have had an issue with the Admin's reticence but instead let Issa, one of most challenged House members, lead the charge so any political advantage was lost http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/...

        So what else do you have?  The GOP will trot out those conspiracies and try to tie Hilary to them but it will not succeed except among those voters who were already in the bag for the GOP.  The average voter really does not care about these issues compared to economic issues and keeping the US out of any more forever wars  

        •  You have nailed it for the rational and informed.. (0+ / 0-)

          Nice and neat summary of each of the pseudo/faux scandals. The question is this.....isn't the electorate mostly uninformed and mostly influence by how things are packaged?

          When you have the kind of money the GOP is being fed by its backers/masters coupled with a rabid base all that is needed is to suppress the vote (and they are sure working to do that) and fool enough of those who do not auto-vote Dem. to win.

          An impeachment drama would provide the platform to play all of this out while further stalling what's left of the Obama agenda AND at the same time pushing him to act with even more executive orders.

          I keep hearing about the economic issues but who, per the polls, does the public blame for the lack of a robust recovery, Obama.

          2014: Progressivism vs. Plutocracy

          by murphthesurf3 on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 10:29:49 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  there are those who are convinced that Obama (7+ / 0-)

            is really a Kenyan pretender and that at some point, this will be proven and he will be turned out of office and McCain will be named POTUS for the balance of the unserved term and all appointments, legislation and regulations will be repealed.  if it comes after his tenure, then there will still be the dial back of his accomplishments to 2010.  Thus the ACA and other signature accomplishments will be erased from the pages of history.

            It sounds fantastic but in Wingertopia where some of us lurk and wade, this is common fare.  This is Alex Jones territory for the very lowest information voters who instead think they are "in" on some very hush hush information.  I can only point out that the GOP has tried all sorts of slanders against Obama and he won twice.  Things are going well enough that unless the GOP comes up with a very strong candidate with very very strong populist roots, there is still not a chance for the GOP.

            Most people have caught onto the fact that the GOP is doing sleight of hand, promising a series of social reforms that never come while they continue to legislate economic changes that favor the 1%.  The failure to deliver on the social agenda dates back to Reagan, the champion of GOP family values.  As things are now, the GOP social agenda is too radical for the average American voter who wants HCR, access to abortions for his family, and an economic safety net for the "working class"  

            •  Making Sense in the Red and Purple States (0+ / 0-)

              You sound like someone who lives in my neighborhood.

              Obama will be hit by an array of charges- every scandal, every faux pas, every decision with which the House majority disagrees and even things that the left is angry about (GOP strategists are good at doing this).....and the sheer weight of the charges will reaffirm the view of those who hate him AND will sway those on fence.

              I regard this as a real threat. I live in a red state. Our base will not be convinced but theirs will be even further animated and, I think, ours robbed of a lot of enthusiasm. To combat the rigged election laws, the power of money (and therefore propaganda and on the ground organization) we are going to need a series of Dem tsunamis and a trial will suck energy from the forces needed to build that wave.

              Let me add that the leadership in the house and senate are always the LAST to jump onto something controversial but they will when the time comes.

              41 members of the House are calling for impeachment, and five members of the Senate have expressed support for the idea....I don not for a second believe that Boehner can block his caucus - all it takes to remove him is a simple majority vote in the House.

              A word about you point that  "Most people have caught onto the fact that the GOP is doing sleight of hand, promising a series of social reforms that never come while they continue to legislate economic changes that favor the 1%."

              I live in Missouri- a state where the GOP rabid legislature has blocked ACA medicaid expansion- and in my area, rural, poor and in need of that expansion- ACA remains the great socialist evil foisted on the nation by a dictator and his minions. Yep.

              I really appreciate your thoughtful response.

              2014: Progressivism vs. Plutocracy

              by murphthesurf3 on Thu Jun 05, 2014 at 07:19:11 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I live in SC; I am expecting a long game from the (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                murphthesurf3

                GOP to eventually trash the current electoral college and change the rules so the votes are split instead of winner take all in battlefield states.

                Just heard GOP Lt Guv candidate press his 3 ideas: reduce taxes; reduce regulations and reduce needless litigation.  Looking at his ideas, first of all, state taxes are already among the lowest.  Local taxes and federal taxes take the bulk of what taxes SC residents pay but SC also receives far more in tax money than it pays.  FICA is the major "taker" from most paychecks.  Nothing the Lt Guv can do.

                Again with reducing regulations, SC has one of the lower rates of regulation.  Most businesses that run afoul of regulations run afoul of fed regs.  Nothing the Lt Guv can do about that.

                Finally I am not sure what he thinks he can to do discourage litigation but it gives you an idea of how things are shaping up in this red state  

                •  Yes....yes, yes. (0+ / 0-)

                  I thnk you are right on the mark. Change the electoral college to reflect House seats and the GOP is back in the game.

                  I lived in SC for four years and your read on Palmetto Politics there is mine as well.

                  Why did you emphasize the Lt. Gov. rather than the Gov. in your reply.

                  I now live in Missouri and here there is less bile but just as  much stubborness.

                  We have an odd situation in that the the state's executive tends to be a mix of dems and gop while the legislature is all gop control so there are battles regularly over legislative enforcement with a dem gov, sec of state, comptroller etc. pushing back against the right wing.

                  I would like to stay in touch with you. There do not seem to be that many at DK who are from Red States and we have a different perspective as a result. SO I am going to follow you with an invitation to follow back.

                  2014: Progressivism vs. Plutocracy

                  by murphthesurf3 on Thu Jun 05, 2014 at 09:40:33 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

  •  Obama Is Out Of Their Reach..... (7+ / 0-)

    He's half way thru his second term.  They better not take their eye off Hillary Clinton tho.  Wasting time w/ their fake impeachment, allows her to make her moves.  She's the one they should be paying attention to.  

    She's already popping up everywhere.  She's running, they know it & feel like bawling about it.

    Obama isn't running again.....they really can't touch him.  He's got the pen now, he's got the executive powers now....and they don't.  
    And he's got the rest of his young life to start a Foundation, to become a world wide icon, to remain happily married to a kick ass woman & to reap the benefits of being a former President of these United States.

    He's beyond their grasp.....that's what is driving them crazy.  

    •  Linking Obama to Hillary.... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      snapples

      The Benghazi tie in will put her on stage as well; and when they take on Obama's "weak" foreign policy record they get her as a bonus.

      I like your pivot to what is working for Obama- and the fact is he cannot be convicted. He will emerge the hero in the minds of liberals and progressives. He will out CLinton Bill Clinton in his years as a former President. I agree.

      In the meantime he can govern by EO and by threat of veto...it works. Excellent points. The best counterpoint so far. Thank you.

      2014: Progressivism vs. Plutocracy

      by murphthesurf3 on Thu Jun 05, 2014 at 12:16:57 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I like the way you think. (0+ / 0-)

      We are not powerless!! "Activism is the rent I pay for living on this planet."– Alice Walker

      by nocynicism on Thu Jun 05, 2014 at 12:36:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  only in your imagination (2+ / 0-)

    -You want to change the system, run for office.

    by Deep Texan on Thu Jun 05, 2014 at 07:23:40 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site