So-called conservatives among tea party and republicans are aligned against Barack Obama, but one vocal opponent arguably has more grit than another in impeaching the president: Sarah Palin. A piece in the Washington Post on the latest ideological impasse with Congress suggests that Palin, the former Alaska governor, trumps John Boehner in her convictions, despite the unlikely probability the POTUS would ever be brought up on formal charges.
Palin and the Speaker of the House are no strangers to voicing their differences of opinion about the Democratic president, and both don’t shy away from publicly bashing President Obama on issues of public policy when given the chance. In the current climate of partisan politics in Washington, one of the two opponents talks of impeachment, while the other pledges to sue the president for his alleged overreach.
However, as the Post wrote, it’s Sarah Palin, despite her outlandish rhetoric, not Speaker Boehner, who is “right” in her method of resolve in sanctioning Obama.
In a recent op-ed via Briebart, Governor Palin ruffled feathers in the public and among both parties when she suggested impeachment as a response to Barack Obama’s recent border crisis on his watch. She pointed to the recent deluge of immigrants flooding American borders and taking advantage of a loophole in the law.
She points to our overrun health-care systems, sub-par educational systems, crumbling infrastructure, cash-strapped states, and more, in her angst angst the Obama Administration, which she characterizes as guilty of “impeachable offenses.”
…President Obama’s rewarding of lawlessness, including his own, is the foundational problem here. It’s not going to get better, and in fact irreparable harm can be done in this lame-duck term as he continues to make up his own laws as he goes along, and, mark my words, will next meddle in the U.S. Court System with appointments that will forever change the basic interpretation of our Constitution’s role in protecting our rights.
“It’s time to impeach; and on behalf of American workers and legal immigrants of all backgrounds, we should vehemently oppose any politician on the left or right who would hesitate in voting for articles of impeachment.
“The many impeachable offenses of Barack Obama can no longer be ignored. If after all this he’s not impeachable, then no one is.
Meanwhile, John Boehner provides a more radical and curt response: his intent is to file a lawsuit against the sitting president. A lawsuit! Egad, and that’s putting it lightly.
This is not an endorsement of the Palin Plan, nor is this a sleight against Beohner’s blunder of a lawsuit. Instead, if there is one plan that is the lesser of two evils, the award goes to the former 2008 Vice Presidential nominee for the Republican Party.
One only has to point to the meaning of the Articles of Impeachment, which, up to now, have been a subject of consternation and debate.
Apparently, the majority of American voters have grown tired of ad nauseam talk from Tea Party and Conservative Republican operatives over how Obama is the “worst president” (U.S. News and World Report) they’ve ever witnessed.
The latest poll by Rasmussen Reports revealed that only 32 percent of potential voters support impeachment compared to 58 percent who don’t. The remaining 10 percent have expressed no opinion. Instead, the large majority voters are of the opinion that radically changing congressional leaders would be a wise step towards passing laws that are currently caught in the gridlock of Washington.
Perhaps the latter group paid attention in Civics 101, the lesson which gives power to the people. Although our current system of government is wrought with flaws, the Democratic process gives the electorate the power to vote out do-nothing lawmakers and replace them with others who closely represent the status quo.
Ironically, former Vice President of the United States Dick Cheney, another staunch opponent of Barack Obama, does not think going down that dark road, as Palin suggests, in removing the president from office, is a good idea. He’s in full support of the GOP challenging the president on his string of executive decisions, but believes it is unwise — politically — in the wake of midterm elections.
The fundamental challenge with Sarah Palin’s charge of impeachment is likely rooted in the vision of the framers of the Constitution.
In The Lessons of Impeachment History (Michael J. Gerhardt, 1999), an attempt was made to establish the basis of removing a public figure as the Founding Fathers envisioned.
Essentially, a vote to impeach can only be brought forth when there is sufficient evidence to show an official’s conduct is so egregious that it endangers the Union and detracts from the public’s trust.
As Gerhardt wrote:
These factors include, but are not limited to, the seriousness of the misconduct, its timing, the link between the misconduct and the official’s official responsibilities or special trust held by virtue of the positions held by the official, alternative means of redress, and the degree of injury caused to the Republic by the misconduct in question.”
Another point worth mentioning is that these political crimes are not necessarily indictable crimes, nor does the existence of such charges mean impeachment automatically follows.
The reason why Sarah Palin’s quest falls short — outside of the fact that she lacks a Conservative backing — is because, it’s a surefire way for incumbent Republicans, already under fire for not working with Obama, to thwart their chances of taking back the Senate.
Meanwhile, Boehner’s benign approach to censure is paradoxical at best. Many would agree that the best way to get a leg up on the president is to simply pass legislation — which calls for a Herculean gesture he’s not exhibited during Obama’s two terms: crossing the aisle.
All told, anything can be measured, yes, even if it borders on the absurd. Both ideas against the president lack vision and utility. But if a final score is tallied, the ideologically — yet boorish — award goes to Sarah Palin.
[Image via: Politicus USA]