Saturday, May 11, 2013

"Impeach Obama!"

"We're up to at least fifteen good reasons!"

#15.

Just existing: When a man told Rep. Michele Bachmann that President Obama should be impeached just because, Bachmann replied, “Well, I’ll tell you, I’ll tell you, I agree, I agree.” Texas Republican Michael Burgess told a Tea Party group in 2011 that he would push to impeach Obama for just generally being liberal. When a reporter asked him later what the charges would be, Burgess said he wasn’t sure, but said “it needs to happen” so Republicans can tie up Obama’s legislative agenda.

That right there is the real reason. The only reason.

Gawker explains WTF all this Benghazi shit is about. The big finish...

Okay, so, what's the fucking deal?

As befits a scandal as overdetermined as this one, there are a bunch of fucking deals. There's the deal where the State Department actually did fail to protect its employees, and should be held accountable, and only barely has been.

There's the deal where Republicans are trying to kneecap Hillary Clinton in advance of an anticipated 2016 run ("at the very least, Mrs. Clinton should never hold high office again," Paul writes in the Washington Times yesterday).

There's the deal where this is a sad, late mulligan on Romney's response, a little proto-revisionism to suggest that his doomed and incompetent campaign was defeated through the perfidy of the White House, rather than its own pointlessness and awfulness.

There's the deal where House Republicans and Fox News are trapped in a tight feedback loop, like two best friends with inexplicable inside jokes told in Oppish.

And there's the usual deal where Obama is a Muslim and he did 9/11, or whatever.

Three more years of this. Unless the sane voters can be summoned to the polls to make some changes in the composition of the Congress in 2014, and then just a year and a half.

3 comments:

Katy Anders said...

It's gotta be the Hillary aspect. They're looking at Hillary's approval ratings and going into panic mode.

Granted, I'm not overly enthusiastic about the prospect of another damn Clinton. But then again, I liked Obama in 2008 mostly because I thought he'd be less of a sell-out than the Clintons... which was a complete miscalculation on my part.

PDiddie, aka Perry Hussein Dorrell said...

You and I see exactly the same, Katy. I was convinced that Hillary Clinton was going to be too conservative for my taste, and I was never enthusiastic about the Obama cult of personality.

Of course, my guy was John Edwards.

Regardless of what I think (and what the GOP does), Hillary is going to run and if she's savvy she'll pick a Latino as V-P (think one of the Castros) and consequently the Republicans aren't going to sniff the White House until 2032.

As dense as they are, I believe even they understand this, which is also why they are acting so deranged.

Gadfly said...

And, there's the deal that neither Rethugs NOR Dems will talk about, and that's that Benghazi was a CIA nest. No wonder there's a CIA-State "scrum" over a lot of this.

It's a tempest in a teapot, but the WH did "massage" some of the info. David Corn's got a good article on that at Mother Jones.

But the bottom line is we shouldn't have had a CIA nest there in the first place. Team Obama, CIA, and Congressional Repubs all keep whistling in the dark on that.