Impeachment may be the objective

This thought does occur.

It may be that congressional Republicans privately have removed brinkmanship from the table; that their revised plan is to ensure that no default-avoiding bill, under any circumstances -- not even their own -- shall emerge from Congress; and that a guaranteed default will thereby force President Obama to reluctantly exercise the Constitutional option next week, thus creating the grounds for another year-long distraction: impeachment.

Comments

[Matt]

Just remember that if the debt ceiling is not lifted, EVERY possible action will violate some law. It can't be constitutional for a congress to pass contradictory legislation.

[susan Zoon]

If the insane clown posse, (my apologies to the band) wants to try and convince the people that saving the country from default is an impeachable offense... I invite them to their own funeral.

How will they spin the drag they create on the economy with a witch hunt? How many millions did they throw away prosecuting Clinton? How many jobs will it create? How will the CBO score an impeachment challenge?

The 112th Congress is already a joke. One quarter into the 112th Congress's two-year term, only 14 pieces of legislatio­n originatin­g in the House have become laws (12 bills and two house joint resolution­s). Fourteen. Compare that with the House in the 111th, which claimed 254 laws (plus 11 house joint resolution­s) over two years. The 110th had 308 (plus 10 house joint resolution­s). Even the often-deri­ded do-nothing 109th Congress's House controlled by the GOP passed 316 (with 16 house joint resolution­s).

[PM]

I don't know what "Surfer Dude" smokes, but I won't tolerate personal attacks here. He's gone, as is his last "comment" (which not only demonstrated rudeness, but a deplorable lack of reading comprehension, which is even worse in my book). He's banned. Good riddance. This comments section will not descend to Michelle Malkin levels.
--PM Carpenter

[janicket]

Thank you, sir! Outposts of civility in the Internet are rare and to be cherished.

[Marc McKenzie]

Susan, thank you for putting up those facts about the 112th vs. the 111th.

For too long, we've heard nothing but the line (from the Right and the Left) that the 111th Congress did nothing. Yet a simple search would reveal that they did quite a lot, as did the President.

My worry about impeachment is this: we all know that the Republicans want to impeach this President for, well whatever reason they can come up with. But what about those on the Left who want the same thing?

This article:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/sherwood-ross/37476/impeach-obama

is so full of nonsense that I can barely read it without fighting the urge to vomit. And yet that is a growing thought among some on the Left, who, as PM has clearly pointed out, let ideology--not reality--dictate how they feel about this President.

They directed too much anger and vitriol at the wrong target, and by not getting out and warning people of what could happen in 2010 if the Repubs took over, well...we see what's going on now.

If a move is made to impeach President Obama it will also be a slap in the face to millions of Americans who are people of color. They are tired of predominantly White voices from both the Right and the Left constantly attacking this man and offering no real, honest solutions for the mess that we're now in.

It's going to be tough going for a while, I'm afraid.

[Peter G]

That's exactly what I've thought. It's a trap and given the makeup of the Supreme Court almost a dead cert.

[pamelabrown]

Peter G, don't get sucked into internet insanity...even from the left. They are the fringe of the fringe.

I, like p.m. carpenter is very far left yet still have my feet placed firmly in reality, i.e., how government works...or in this case seems to be busted.

Still, p.m., I'm having a difficulty in grasping that impeachment is the objective. My cynicism has not yet snuffed the belief that our will for survival will prevail. I hope I'm not succumbing to the last vestiges of my "pollyannism".

[Peter G]

Aren't we talking about the same people Pam, who started babbling about impeachment over HCR. I'm not for an instant suggesting it would succeed but once the Supreme Court disallowed the use of that clause of the fourteenth amendment the Republicans would almost certainly try to use impeachment if only as an election tool. That's a lot of gorilla dust.

[pamelabrown]

Peter, if p.m. is correct, the republican congress won't wait to hear from the Supreme Court before they launch into their next huge, manufactured distraction. They have weaponized politics.

[Peter G]

Then I would disagree with his assessment to this degree, a Supreme court ruling overturning such presidential authority would add a good deal of credibility to a call for impeachment. At least among the credulous.

[BobH]

There is a way out for Obama. It has been done before. Completely Legal. By President Eisenhower in 1953. Sell GOLD. To the Federal Reserve. Issue a so-called US Treasury "Gold Certificate" to Federal Reserve for say 1,000 tons of Gold AND have the Fed credit US Treasury Fed accounts for about $52 billion cash(if my calculations are correct). Stay under debt ceiling. Do as necessary. US owns about 8,000 tons of gold at the moment (not to mention other precious metals - platinum, silver). Of course, you risk exhausting the Ft. Knox and other stockpiles eventually.