South Dakota Republicans are demanding the impeachment of Obama.
The South Dakota Republican Party passed a resolution on Saturday calling for the impeachment of President Barack Obama.
Delegates at the party’s annual convention in Rapid City voted 191-176 in favor of the measure, which claims that the president has "violated his oath of office in numerous ways," according to the Sioux Falls Argus Leader.
They cite the exchange of Bowe Bergdahl and Obamacare as violations of his oath of office. At least it’s slightly reassuring that a bit less than half the Republicans in attendance voted against the silly measure.
Since the ACA was passed by Congress, if the president has violated his oath of office, then so has a majority of both houses of Congress and they too should be removed from office.
Well, this isn’t surprising. Half of SD wants to embrace draconian everything. I just hope they don’t hear about the whole dark enlightenment thing.
@1 Congress isn’t black.
1. The GOP/Tea Party/America Haters party could impeach Obama. The constitution is vague, high crimes and misdemeanors undefined, which could mean anything.
They tried to impeach Clinton for having a girl friend.
2. But the Senate has to concur by holding a trial. They wouldn’t convict because the Democrats hold a slight majority. For now. That could change in one election cycle.
3. When we start impeaching Presidents solely on the basis of party lines, the US democracy is winding down. Or it is over. At that point, power, money, and hate overcomes elections.
@4 They did not *try* to impeach Clinton, they *did* impeach Clinton. The precedent has been set: impeachment is for Presidents that Congress really doesn’t like, real crooks resign.
The word “impeach”, BTW, means “accuse”. It is the first step in removal from office, but it does not mean “remove from office.” Bill Clinton and Andrew Johnson were both impeached by the House and acquitted in trials before the Senate.
I actually like it when Republicans and other conservatives take radical positions. I think it makes them far less appealing to the general electorate.
So keep it up guys! How about a constitutional amendment proclaiming Christianity as the official religion of the U.S.? (Actually, I think that’s already been proposed.)
Re billgascoyne @ #5
Articles of impeachment were voted against Nixon but he resigned before the House actually voted to impeach him.
I have found that the wharglgarbl about Impeach Obama (because reasons) has been gaining traction among the wingnut rabble. All of it is mostly nonsensical babble about Benghazi or some such. It’s telling enough as a meme, just like it was equally telling that the supposedly libertarian Teabaggin’ movement began instantly as soon as a black Democrat sat down at the President’s desk.
pharyngsd:
Sadly, no. It pushes the Overton Window. If if the general public think that Republican X is spewing bullshit, it makes the other, already extreme Republicans who aren’t spewing X look “more moderate”. In addition, some areas are so right-leaning that they will vote Republican even if the candidate in question is the most ridiculous clown you could imagine. Having a ridiculous Republican does not help us: it means they are playing with fire and willing to watch us all burn.
The Republican Party seems determined to prove it has no relevance in today’s America. The SD convention is just the latest in numerous Republican efforts to institute clearly ridiculous policies that pander to the Republican base…the lowest common denominator.
To some extent, I’d like to see the House vote this through, just to see how many Republicans in both houses are willing to go along with these preposterous charges.
Conviction in the Senate requires a two-thirds majority. The Republicans have 45 seats in the Senate now; 20 Democratic seats are up for election this year. Even if the GOP won all those races, they wouldn’t have enough for conviction.
Correction: the 20 Democratic seats are among those whose terms are ending. There are three special elections, in Hawaii, New Jersey, and Oklahoma. The Republicans will get OK, probably not the others. They still wouldn’t have 67 votes.
What is it with all these southern states???
I wouldn’t mind seeing Obama impeached over the whole illegal spying thing, or any of the numerous other business-as-usual violations that all presidents have done for decades. Thing is, they won’t impeach over those because they’re things that they actually LIKE. So, as usual, all the things they hate about Obama are made up (Obamaphones) or stuff that is actually good, while all the terrible things are things they can’t risk losing.
What rpjohnston said.
@busterggi #13:
Dunno. I’m trying to think of a common denominator, but I fear it may be too sweeping a generalisation.
It’s a pretty good bet that most of them took their vows to reality with one hand behind their backs, fingers crossed.
Heh. In the UK we have something similar (final clause).
It’s just a single state party (presumably South Dakota Republicans found the time to do it in between launching a million new legal attacks on abortion rights), but I’ve been waiting for the “impeachment” ball to drop ever since Obama got re-elected. The Republicans are pretty clearly either in fear of the Tea Party crowd or being toppled by them in many elections, so sooner or later the House will find some farce of a reason to go for impeachment even if it doesn’t pass there (and I don’t think it will – Boehner was part of the original “impeach Clinton” crowd and has apparently been doing his best to stay away from another shitshow like that).
Wait, 176 of them actually VOTED AGAINST that measure!? It’s a miracle. Praise the Flying Spaghetti Monster. R’Amen.
inquiringglaurence @19:
And I can almost guarantee that will be used against them, at a future date, during primary races.
South Dakota isn’t a southern state, it’s more a western one. Like many rural western states it’s gone quite far right; maybe on account of having Limbaugh and his ilk on talk radio 24/7. Whatever the cause, these states reliably vote Republican in presidential elections, but due to their sparse population, haven’t enough electoral votes to count for much.
This was a meeting of Republican activists, who are both more extreme and more motivated than the average joe. Their endorsing impeachment of the POTUS means not a whole lot more than a similar vote from the customers of your local Waffle House.
My guess is if the GOP does not do quite well in the upcoming midterms (they are counting on another 2010-style wave election), they may impeach Obama during the lame duck session, just out of spite.
brett wrote:
Since his reelection? I’ve been expecting it since his first term. They’ve been frantically looking for something to pin to him since he first took office. First it was his birth certificate. Now it’s the Bergdahl prisoner exchange (and keep in mind that if he hadn’t done it, the rhetoric would be exactly the same except they’d be berating him for “leaving our noble soldiers behind”). They publicly vowed to make him a one-term president, but some seemed determined to make sure he didn’t even have that long.
I’ve never seen this much zeal for a party to remove a president. I’m not sure how much is racism (certainly some of it is), and how much is just a further amplification of the shit they threw at Clinton, but things are getting absolutely absurd.
I really have my doubts that this action will be beneficial to the Republican party. And I also have serious doubt that without outstanding evidence of complete incompetence, it will be difficult to impeach Obama (the nations first black president) and not just look like a bunch of racists and hypocrites.
Given that the Republican party has made it blatantly obvious that they want it there way or no way. And with the addition of the Tea Party they are now allied with fundamental religious nuts. Is there really any chance that rational people will take them seriously? Looks more likely to lead to a house cleaning or a greater divide within the party itself.
Reminds me of the Monty Python skit where you have the rational party, the silly party, and the extremely silly party. And from what I’m seeing from the Republican party since Obama has been in office is that is is missing the rational party. Funny trick, stonewall government and then blame it on the president.
jamesheartney, @21,
Republicans in rural states like South Dakota are rugged individualists who are afraid that Big Government will take away their rights to the Three Gs: God, guns, and government subsidies.
I see no evidence the Republicans have “signed” the divorce papers from reality.
Smeared their finger prints in something other than ink on the line, sure…
Racism and hypocrisy are the right and left pillars of the American Way.
Hadn’t you noticed?
jamesheartney @ 21:
It’s partly because the population density is low enough that people can entertain the fantasy of moving when they see the smoke from someone else’s chimney, so having to take other people into account (and generally not being in a state of nature) is perceived as a terrible imposition.
ck @ 22:
The people who have been hearing all their lives — and on mass media, which validates it — that liberals are actively working to destroy America are now old enough to hold office.