Many have said that the House of Representatives will not impeach Obama because of the 1998 impeachment fiasco over then President Bill Clinton lying under oath about his affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky. Speaking on impeachment as it concerns the current occupant of the Oval Office, Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele stated, "I don't see the passion for it, quite honestly. It obscures the issues we want to talk about. I don't think Speaker Boehner or (Senate Minority Leader Mitch) McConnell want to dance on that pin. People remember 1998."
Even some tea party leaders are calling impeachment talk an "unwanted distraction." Sal Russo, a co-founder of Tea Party Express, has said, "You have to think we learned a lesson from Clinton's impeachment. To do it, you have to have public support for it, and I don't think that's present. I don't see it [talking about impeachment] as an issue today."
Rush Limbaugh, conservative talk show radio host, agrees with Russo and Steele. Even though Limbaugh believes Obama has committed violations against the Constitution, he doesn't believe the public "has an appetite for impeachment." In a recent statement, Limbaugh maintained, "Without that, it's a waste of time, if you don't have the political will. Meaning, if the Republican Party doesn't have the gonads, and if the American people are not desirous of it, then it's just whistling into the wind."
So, according to these two "leaders" of parties and one conservative talk show host, the American people have to have the "desire" to enforce the law of the land before the law of the land can be enforced or it's considered an "unwanted distraction" or "just whistling into the wind." Funny thing is there is nowhere in the oath of office that says a member will "uphold, protect and defend the Constitution only when the people are desirous of it."
Democrats, riding on the 1998 failed impeachment of Bill Clinton, believe an "Obama impeachment would be bad for the country and good for the party."
Chris Lehane, a Democratic Party strategist, who worked in the White House under Clinton, imparted this tidbit; "From the Republican perspective, it may be good politics in their primaries, but it would also be helpful to Democrats in midterm elections to bump up Democratic turnout. It would be the GOP 'Thelma and Louise' approach: Let's get in the car and drive off the cliff."
It seems both Democrats and Republicans look at impeachment as "political maneuvers" to gain Congressional seats instead of impeachment being a remedy for a lawless, out of control executive branch that violates the law of the land and other laws of our nation.
Bill Clinton was impeached for lying under oath about his activities with White House intern Monica Lewinsky. Lying under oath constitutes perjury, which is punishable by law – well it is for the average American. However, then President Clinton was given "a pass" on perjury which established a precedent for future presidents, along with government agency personnel, to commit perjury with impunity. Anyone else that lies under oath is subjected to perjury charges not to mention what happens if you lie to the police these days.
No one really cared what Bill Clinton did with Monica Lewinsky, how often it was or where it happened. What America expected from a president was honesty and truthfulness when answering questions under oath. America didn't get the truth from Clinton, but perjury. However, America was willing to "overlook" that character flaw because it was deemed a "political stunt." Maybe it was. The fact remains that "Slick Willy" committed a crime and according to the law, impeachment was the appropriate remedy.
The President of the United States, in addition to the eligibility requirements to hold office, should possess qualities of honesty, truthfulness, integrity, impartiality, fairness, respect for the law and dignity. In today's society, one would be hard pressed to find an individual seeking public office to have high moral character. But, because the office is the highest held elected position in our country, America should expect its president to have that high moral quality to avoid the possibility of coercion, blackmail or undue influence that could be detrimental to the country. The case in point is the current man occupying the Oval Office.
It has been reported that South Dakota's Republican Party has passed a resolution calling for the impeachment of Obama for violations of his oath of office in many ways. Former Rep. Allen West (R-FL) has expressed support for Obama's impeachment on his website and Rep. Steve Stockman (R-TX) handed out the book, "Impeachable Offenses: The Case For Removing Barack Obama From Office" by Aaron Klein and Brenda Elliot, to members of the House last year. Andrew McCarthy has offered a template for removing Obama from office in his book "Faithless Execution: Building the Case for Obama's Impeachment."
The news media and some members of Congress accuse "the far political right" as the only sect urging for the impeachment of Obama. Based on Obama's actions, documented in the media and elsewhere, there have been clear violations of his oath of office, criminal activity and over-reach in violation of the law of the land. Should not everyone be calling for accountability when violations of the law occur? News organizations and leftist liberals label conservatives and "the far political right" as being against government and supportive of anarchy. However, when a government fails to follow the law and that action is supported by a sycophantic portion of the public, how is that not considered anarchy?
According to the 1828 Noah Webster's dictionary, "anarchy" is defined as "want of government; a state of society, when there is no law or supreme power, or when the laws are not efficient, and individuals do what they please with impunity, political confusion."
From this definition, America could be said to be experiencing anarchy. So, to call for the rule of law and adherence to the "supreme" law of the land, The Constitution, is anything but anarchy. Every American should support the rule of law; without it, America has descended into anarchy.
Obamacare was passed without the overwhelming support of the people, which is in contradiction to what leaders are saying now – that the public must support the action of Congress to impeach. Growing opposition to Obamacare is increasing, however, that is one piece of legislation America will be stuck with from here on out. Even though Obamacare is unconstitutional, Congress and the Oval Office usurper are willing to enforce it with the goon squad IRS, while the states refuse to do their Constitutional duty to nullify, in clear violation of the Constitution.
Immigration is another issue. Our government is refusing to enforce Constitutional immigration laws, as a growing number of Americans, including Hispanic immigrants, are opposing the unprecedented influx of illegal aliens into the nation.
To claim Congress must have support to uphold the law is a straw man argument. All any member of Congress is worried about is keeping their seat of power through whatever means. If they have to overlook the law to do it, then so be it. And, anyone supportive of enforcement of unconstitutional law and/or against enforcement of Constitutional law is, in essence, an advocate for anarchy. Right now, that is almost everyone in the federal government, some political party leadership, and some hot air talk show host bloviates.
Many will say and do say impeachment is useless as the Senate may not or will not convict. Well, based on that, America might as well throw out criminal laws as they are useless since a jury may not or will not convict. Yes, that sound ridiculous because it is ridiculous. To refuse to follow the Constitutional remedy of impeachment amounts to the same thing as doing away with criminal laws when the rationale is based on the possibility of "failure to convict."
Some holding out against impeachment because the Senate would not convict may see the lawsuit by the House initiated by Boehner as a solution. Well, the Supreme Court has slapped Obama on several of his over-reaches only to have Obama ignore their ruling by continuing his lawless path. Yes, one can see how Boehner's lawsuit will make Obama toe the line. Besides, that lawsuit is useless as a judge may throw it out or fail to find in favor of Boehner and the Republican establishment. If a judge does find in favor of Boehner and establishment Republicans, who is going to enforce the ruling on Obama?
Impeachment may go the same route. However, impeachment is the Constitutional remedy while a lawsuit is a grand stand political maneuver. The Constitution and Constitutional laws are not a Chinese buffet to pick and choose what you like to enforce or to only enforce when popular with the citizenry but to enforce those laws to maintain the rule of law. Anything else is contrary to the founding principles of America.
Alas, America's travel down the path of anarchy that began over 100 years ago has picked up speed.
Welcome to the post-Constitutional, third world America – brought to you by politicians, American icons and a growing number of low information individuals.Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.