Republican Congressman at Town Hall Meeting: “Dream Come True” for Him to Impeach President Obama

bentivolioI’m willing to bet if you did a poll right now among Republicans, at least 30-40% would say President Obama should be impeached.  Heck, it’s probably even more than that.

The only problem is, President Obama hasn’t done anything worthy of impeachment.  Sure, Republicans think that he has, but that doesn’t mean that it’s true.

It seems Republicans feel simply “not liking” a President merits talk of impeachment.

Case in point, Representative Kerry Bentivolio and his comments where he said that it would be a “dream come true” for him to vote for impeaching the President.

The only problem is, as his lawyers apparently advised him of, there’s just not any of that pesky necessity called–oh, what’s the word?  Oh yeah, evidence.

See, this is one of the many problems with Republicans.  They base “right and wrong” not on reality or facts, but on what they feel should be right or wrong.  They treat our Constitution like they do the Bible.  They cherry pick the parts of it they support and ignore the parts they don’t.

They live by a set of rules where if they think something should be a certain way—it is.  Who cares if there’s no evidence to support impeaching President Obama, right?  Rep. Bentivolio doesn’t like President Obama so it would be a “dream” for him to impeach him.

But his comments aren’t really anything new.  For years, there’s been talk from the GOP about trying to impeach the President over the Affordable Care Act.

You know, “Obamacare.”  Only, it’s a little difficult to impeach a President over a law that was passed by Congress, signed by him then deemed Constitutional by our Supreme Court.

That’s too bad.  Quick, somebody find the world’s smallest violin and play it for a Republican.  

Then again, outside of the Second Amendment (which Republicans ignore the entire first half of) and the Tenth Amendment (which they often evoke in defense of state legislation which often violates other parts of our Constitution) Republicans really couldn’t care less about being “Constitutional.”

But hey, they yell “God Bless America!” and put American flags on their vehicles, that surely makes them “Constitutional patriotic Americans”—right?

So while they were essentially harmless, the comments made by Rep. Bentivolio exemplify a huge part of the Republican mindset as it relates to President Obama.  Because they don’t agree with him, apparently that means he’s impeachable.  That’s how closed-minded these people are.  To them, disagreeing with the President warrants talk of impeachment.

Luckily for the rest of us, the legality of something isn’t predicated on the fact that Republicans aren’t getting their way.

Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.

Comments

Facebook comments

  • Landbabs

    I hear a lot of “YOUR president has divided our country”. They do not see the irony.

  • KC4WQ

    My 4 year old writes better than this!

    • Glenna Jones-Kachtik

      Then publish your 4 year old. I guess you couldn’t dispute what Clifton said – so you HAD to say something, right???

      • KC4WQ

        No, I stated a simple observation. This article had no merit, just ramblings about things of which an educated man should be more well versed. I have found over the years, however, that arguing with a progressive is a dead end street. Common sense, history and real life never seem to enter into the discussion, just pie in the sky academic suppositions that don’t cut it in reality. Thank you for your brilliant comment BTW.

      • Mainah

        I thought that’s what Fox News was for?

      • Mainah

        I thought that’s what Fox News was for?

    • louis

      your 4 year old is prolly more educated and better at discussing politics too.

      • Cemetery Girl

        Completely unrelated, but this made me laugh. Claims that a person is undereducated and says “prolly”. As I said, completely off topic and in no way constructive to the conversation, but made me chuckle 🙂

  • Jeremy D. Kantorowicz

    Wait, so authorizing the death by drone of Anwar al-Awlaki, Samir Khan, Jude Kenan Mohammad and Abdulrahman al-Awlaki don’t count as evidence?

    • Gabby Parsons

      Only if starting a preemptive war on Iraq on the lie of Weapons of Mass Destruction is impeachable evidence.

      • Jeremy D. Kantorowicz

        A war that was declared by congress? No, not impeachable. Other war crimes and unauthorized use of military force, yes. Bush was not a good president and should have been impeached. As should the one continuing to do the same exact things.

      • Rick Hitchings

        Congress never declared war against Iraq, you moron.

      • Mike Williams

        War

        Gulf War
        Jan 12, 1991
        H.R.J Res. 77
        House 253-156 Senate 52-47

        Afghanistan
        Sep 14, 2001
        S.J Res 23
        House 420-1 Senate 98-0

        Iraq War
        Mar 3, 2003
        H.J Res. 114
        House 296-133
        Senate 77-23

        Yup Congress actually did something…
        They declared war.
        Darn this little things like facts…

      • Rick Hitchings

        yeah……….Authroized Military Engagements and Declaring War on another country is two completely different things, wingnut. Darn these little things like facts.

      • Mike Williams

        “Wingnut”…Nice…You kiss your momma with that mouth?

      • Rick Hitchings

        Please go somewhere where someone will actually believe you. People here are educated. Even with it printed in front of you by you, you still don’t get it. Not surprised thought, just feel sorry for you teabaggers. You are so delusional, you don’t even care or know what day it is when you wake up, just as long as you can slap a label on it and call it Tuesday.

      • Mike Williams

        I have never been accused of being a t-bagger…not even by a bridge hater.

      • Rick Hitchings

        Not a one of these is a declaration of war, as per your own words. What part of what you just stated do you not believe? Do you even know your own name, or is that some delusional made up feature about you that you picked an hour ago?

      • KC4WQ

        Rick, save your breath. Reality and facts don’t made a dent in progressive arguments

      • Mike Williams

        Chilax, chum, my comment Is a confirmation of your comment. Do you even know what side of the bread to butter? My comment was designed to point out the distinction for Jeremy. Your obviously wound up a bit too tight. Take a break, make some tea, and relax.

      • Rick Hitchings

        oh dammit…….I did it again……engaged a troll. Crap. Later bridge lover.

      • Mike Williams

        Bridge lover? Who doesn’t love bridges?
        Your not one of those people who will walk completely around the river just to avoid going over a bridge, are you?

      • Rick Hitchings

        There are 5 wars in which the United States formally declared war against a foreign nation, namely, the War of 1812, the Mexican-American War, the Spanish-American War, World War I, and World War II.

      • Rick Hitchings

        if you’re gonna play here, educate your self…….PLEASE

      • Nattxn

        T-potty types are not known to be smart.

      • Mike Williams

        just give them the wiki link so they can read for themselves..

      • Jim Green

        The Iraq war was never declared by congress. Tea Baggers should actually pick up a book and read it occasionally. There are words in it. See Fat Oxycontin Limbaugh.

      • Mike Williams

        Agreed, but it should be called by it’s operational name not Iraq War. Totally misleading. Fools even congress.
        But then again Bush fooled congress so it can’t be too hard to do that.

      • Common sense

        You have the words mixed up here.. it should be “Bush and Congress are fools”

      • Mike Williams

        your point is considered and it is just as valid.

      • strayaway

        President Obama’s executive order bombing of Libya contributed to the Islamic takeover of northern Mali, attacks on sub-Saharan blacks in Libya, Benghazi, and the turnover of 400 surface to air missiles to Al-Queda. Dennis Kucinich said Obama’s bombing of Libya was an impeachable offense before any of those fallout incidents occurred. Kucinich was then squeezed out of his congressional seat.

      • mickey

        wait————-bush was prez? I always thought cheney was running things. sure seemed like it to me

      • Mike Williams

        I agree, he should have been impeached, but not for what your stating.

    • Sean Jones

      You mean the 4 “Americans” that were giving aid and comfort to the enemy, thereby making them enemies of the US?

      • Jeremy D. Kantorowicz

        Sean, they were still Americans. They still had right to due process. Not to just be taken out at someone’s will. Regardless of what they were accused of doing. It is a war crime, and an impeachable action.

      • Mike Williams

        They committed treason as defined by law. They became enemy combatants therefore not afforded same privileges as non-combatants.

      • Jeff

        bush committed treason when he had intelligence data planted that he had “altered to fit his agenda”. That’s a quote from the Downing Street memos, An audio tape by the British government when he was plotting the deaths of 5,000 American soldiers with Tony Blair, in his own, mispronounced words!! Those conversation were taped to protect the guilty.

      • Mike Williams

        What bush did is not was not and never will be considered treason. He lied, that is not treason.
        He may have committed other crimes as well, but treason is not one of them. I wish it was, but that is not the case.

      • Common sense

        Creating false intel to enlist the US Military and use US resources for his personal gain (and Cheney) and protecting the Bin Laden family after 9/11 is treason. He is personal close friends with the enemy.

      • Mike Williams

        Article 3 of the US Constitution defines treason.
        Nowhere in the definition is found in any combination of words or re-arranging to suit the needs of the reader are the words “Create”, “False” , or “Intelligence”.

        This news article that this comment is found is about the way it is versus the way the gop wishes it were. Your statement is in direct contrast to the way it is and aligned with the way you wish it were.

        If you have proof of the other claims, I will be willing to listen. I never did like the Bush/Cheney administration I would love to have other reasons to dislike him beyond his incompetence and greed.

  • gemma liar

    another small dicked old man rightiwng trash TRYING to garner VOTES so he can keep his job–

  • Jon

    If it’s any consolation… It’s highly unlikely that this particular nutjob will be reelected. His district (and mine, sadly) was gerrymandered to be safe for Thad McCotter. Bentivilio ended up being the only one on the ballot after McCotter melted down. He will undoubtedly be replaced by a marginally less crazy Republican.

  • Jeff

    Run for election? I don’t see how these rightie candidates can even walk with their as far up their asses as they are!

  • jonjstrine42

    Don’t you get it? According to Republican law (which, as far as they’re concerned, trumps American law), Governing While a Democrat is indeed an impeachable offence. To sane people maybe it isn’t, but who’s talking about sanity when it comes to Republicans?

  • surfjac

    They could try to impeach on NOT investigating the war crimes and torture that bush authorized. There are international agreements on torture we are not following. Just saying…but it would mean bringing bush’s crimes out in the open and are they willing to do that?

    • Mike Williams

      Failure to investigate something is not an impeachable offense.

      Flash back to the 1990’s 80 million spent of trying to impeach President Clinton for anything. Finally settling on “Lying” about having sex. Very interesting case because the judge made the definition that President Clinton used and that was not the lie but it was what Congress focused on when they finally impeached him. He decided that staying in office was better than leaving…So what would be accomplished by Impeaching President Obama?
      More money wasted by congress, more time wasted by congress, give the gop a false sense of accomplishment?

      • surfjac

        Part I (Articles 1–16) defines torture (Article 1), and commits
        parties to taking effective measures to prevent any act of torture in any territory under their jurisdiction
        (Article 2). These include ensuring that torture is a criminal offense
        (Article 4), establishing jurisdiction over acts of torture committed by or against a party’s citizens (Article 5), ensuring that torture is an extraditable offense (Article 8), and establishing universal jurisdiction
        to try cases of torture where an alleged torturer cannot be extradited
        (Article 5). Parties must promptly investigate any allegation of torture
        (Articles 12 and 13), and victims of torture must have an enforceable
        right to compensation (Article 14). Parties must also ban the use of evidence produced by torture in their courts (Article 15), and are barred from deporting, extraditing or refouling people where there are substantial grounds for believing they will be tortured (Article 3).

      • Mike Williams

        From your post it sounds as if your citing already investigated cases. Which invalidates your claim.
        Any way, I do not conform with polite society. War is not a political toy and should not be used lightly or micro managed by the press, the public or the politicians. From the top down wars are won by the boots on the ground. War is hell and should remain that way. Dehumanizing war or trying to civilize it is a terrible mistake. One that could cost more lives than it would ever save. I am not saying we should kill civilians, I am saying that they know where the battle is and need to stay the hell out of it. If our enemy is walking among them, they need to say who is the enemy so they do not get killed. War is about killing your enemy in every imaginable way. Remove their will to fight, their backers will to support them, that is how wars are won. And sometimes, you have to use torture. I don’t agree with some methods, but we have many more tools available to us. The real trick to getting someone to talk, is make them want to talk. You don’t always have to dip them in honey and roll them onto a fire ant nest. You can let them watch a video of that happening to someone else. I also don’t recall any of our current enemies signing onto the UN charter. When they stop blowing up kids, and targeting little girls for assassination, I will begin to think of them in a better light than just light them on fire. I could careless if they talk or not.

      • surfjac

        What I’m citing is the unseen photos from Abu Ghraib. And I’m remembering history, nothing more or less. Torture has one purpose: to instill fear and humiliation in an enemy. There is no other useful purpose; it does not produce any intelligence of value. However, I still maintain that if you want to impeach a President, you have to have something to hang on him and letting bush and cheney walk on war crimes would be something to try and hang on Obama.

      • Mike Williams

        The “unseen pictures”? The ones that were not part of the investigation that lead to the dishonorable discharges of the parties involved? Oh..those ones…never seen em. Have you? Like I said. the investigation was done. As for it being something that you could impeach for. Still doesn’t meet the qualifications, because an investigation was done.

        Again, I agree that torture is used as a tool to instill fear and humiliation in your enemy. Which is why you don’t torture your friends and family. It is a tool of war and should be used as such. Information gained by torture can be flawed, however it is fear of torture that produces accurate information. Sometimes you need only the person’s imagination to get good results. Am I abdicating the usage of children. No.

        If a child were to pick up a gun and point it at me. I would shoot that child just as if he were old soldier. My life is not worth less because I have lived longer. However if someone pointed a gun at that same child and that child was not armed, I would be inclined to jump in front of him. Strange how that works out. That is just what it is. I would not hesitate to make the mother think that I would torture her son. Take him into another room, give him an xbox and show the mother images of torture victims. Victims of torture by our enemies that use our media and their bleeding hearts to vilify our nation.

      • surfjac

        The “unseen” pictures were the ones that no one in the administration wanted the world to see for fear that the entire world would turn against us, like the one of the child whose testicles are threatened in front of his mother.
        “..however it is fear of torture that produces accurate information.” That is such Bullshit, I can’t even believe it. Ever go through S.E.R.E.? Know why you do? So that when and if you’re tortured you know what to expect and can bullshit your way through it. Does torture stop? No, but if you keep spouting bullshit, no one knows what to believe. The most accurate information ever taken from a tortured prisoner was taken before the prisoner was tortured, by the FBI using traditional interrogation methods.
        And still, I don’t believe you’ve even come close to understanding the point I was trying to make.

      • Mike Williams

        so your basically skimming my replies. The threat of torture is a psychological tool, and yields more accurate results. The threat of torture of a loved one yields even better results. I would use torture most definitely.
        I have no trouble of conscious about treating my enemy worse than they treat my friends.
        The thing though is. I would not ask the dude any questions. I would not even listen to his screams.
        Why? Because wars are won by doing that which your enemy will not.

        If my opinions offend, well too bad. When the dust settles, I and people like me will still be around.
        Doing the things that need to be done no matter how repugnant they are until such a time as the world
        is what you think it is. Civilized.

      • surfjac

        Torture was illegal and we are too civilized to employ it or at least that’s what I believe. It’s bad enough we have to tear bodies apart with with bullets and bombs dispensed by unseen drones but that’s modern warfare. As to your position and opinions on torture, I hope you’ll feel the same way when it’s your son, daughter, cousin, aunt, uncle or neighbor picked up off the street and tortured because the police need an arrest for some drugs or they found lots of robbery money and that relative is a convenient patsy. Welcome to our facist state! Enjoy the slippery slope ride.

      • surfjac

        What exactly are you doing the needs to be done? Are you campaigning to have war criminals locked up? Are you trying to elect people who have the American public in mind and not the big corporations screwing us? Are you trying to clean up toxic waste? Teach children? Tend to the sick and infirmed?
        If you are torturing, you’re a criminal. That’s the law.

  • fairmont66

    the only crime Obama has committed is taking a job reserved for white republicans: President of the united States.