General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsGrover Norquist: impeach President Obama if he doesn't extend tax cuts for the rich
By Ed Kilgore
As screwed up as things are in Congress right now, its natural that nobody much wants to contemplate how much more screwed up things might be after the November elections unless one party or the other emerges with united control and something of a mandate. So it was interesting to read an interview Nancy Cook of National Journal conducted with everybodys favorite right-wing commissar, power-broker and demagogue, Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform, about post-election scenarios:
NJ: What if the Democrats still have control? Whats your scenario then?
NORQUIST: Obama can sit there and let all the tax (cuts) lapse, and then the Republicans will have enough votes in the Senate in 2014 to impeach.
Yes, impeach.
Now you have to appreciate that Grover is probably feeling a little long in the tooth lately, and perhaps impatient. With all the back-and-forth over who said and did what during the administration of St. Ronald Reagan, its bound to make him think back to his salad days in the early 1980s, when he as swaggering around Washington with a bumper sticker on his briefcase that read Id rather be killing commies, an allusion to his pastime of hanging out with freedom fighters being backed by South Africas apartheid regime. Or perhaps hes fondly remembering the later period when he was famous for harassing state legislatures and city councils to name things after Reagan.
Some of Grovers more recent projects havent gone so well, most notably his effort to turn Muslim-Americans into a pro-Republican voting bloc (viz. the recent candidate debate in Florida, when a question from a Palestinian-American voter launched several of the would-be presidents into a lather of Muslim-bashing).
- more -
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal-a/2012_01/norquist_looks_ahead035063.php
Here's the actual title of the National Journal piece:
- Impeach Obama?
Grover Norquist predicts a rebellion if President Obama wins reelection and doesnt extend the Bush tax cuts.
stopbush
(24,396 posts)FreakinDJ
(17,644 posts)abelenkpe
(9,933 posts)given that polling suggests between 70-80 percent of all Americans favor increasing taxes on the rich?
edhopper
(33,570 posts)he gives a shit?
abelenkpe
(9,933 posts)But I do think the reps he would need to pursue impeaching the president might.
Ask congress to impeach the president because he refuses to continue coddling the 1% while the rest suffer? Suicide if one wants to be re-elected.
malaise
(268,930 posts)tabatha
(18,795 posts)and to go against the electorate, is treason.
RC
(25,592 posts)How is that not treason?
onenote
(42,694 posts)Norquist is a doofus but what he does isn't "treason" as that term is narrowly defined in the US Constitution. Indeed, its not even illegal.
Its just bad policy.
TheMastersNemesis
(10,602 posts)If Norquist ever got sick, he should NOT receive any healthcare. Since he believes that everyone should take care of himself. He has been responsible for the deaths a lot of Americans. He is complete GOP scum.
tabatha
(18,795 posts)In his dreams.
By whom?
The vast majority of the electorate wants the rich to pay their fair share.
But to Norquist, the electorate and democracy do not matter.
POS.
newspeak
(4,847 posts)are the wealthy and corporations. Reagan lowered taxes and then had to raise them twice; however, he still caused a massive deficit. The rich do not create jobs; unless they get mega bucks for it. So, most jobs are going to countries that love slave labor and little regulations. They can keep repeating the shite like a mantra, it's still a fabrication.
MadHound
(34,179 posts)There will be some sort of kabuki theater, some sort of "hostage"situation, and then in the name of bipartisanship, Obama will again preemptively cave and extend tax cuts for the rich for years longer.
tabatha
(18,795 posts)MadHound
(34,179 posts)That's exactly what he did last time. What makes you think anything, any damn thing, will be different the next time around?
BumRushDaShow
(128,844 posts)Answer = yes.
MadHound
(34,179 posts)Because I point out the fact that Obama has already extended the tax cuts for the rich, and based on that fact it is likely he will extend them again.
Sorry that reality is such a disappointment for you, but it is reality nevertheless. Unless you can point out to me where Obama didn't extend the tax cuts for the wealthy
BumRushDaShow
(128,844 posts)is citing skewed "assumptions" as fact. That is the sort of thing that Faux Snooze does.
Too many here on DU were adamant that DADT would not be repealed based on their "assumptions-as-fact", yet here we are today without it.
Sorry but the misery squad has become irrelevant.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)Why else would the poster try to divert discussion away from the ever continuing tax cuts that were voted for by conservatives in Dem clothing as well as the "honest about what they are" Republicans.
The extensions were also signed By a Democratic (at least party affiliation wise if not Progressive policy wise) President.
I just learned that calling a long time progressive on this board a "Norquist ally", even when it is obviously being leveled against a DUer that is rabidly anti-Bush/Obama tax cuts by one that sees the continued tax cuts as something that was good or at least something we must not rally against.
Ass backwards accusation, reeks of projection by the pro tax cut poster calling people names.
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)BootinUp
(47,141 posts)lol.
paulk
(11,586 posts)I think there's been enough pressure that Obama is, at least, starting to change his rhetoric on this. I'm not convinced it's all theater.
The proof, as they say, is in the pudding, however, and Obama's past actions don't lead one toward hope.
Hope is all I have, though, so I need to hang on to it.
Arkana
(24,347 posts)He did it so that millions of unemployed people could continue receiving the help they need.
He made the best of a really shitty situation, and I have to tell you--your denigration of him says a lot more about you than it does about him.
SammyWinstonJack
(44,130 posts)Bohunk68
(1,364 posts)I've got an idea if you want to exercise your 2nd amendment rights against treasonous bastards who hate the Constitution.
HopeHoops
(47,675 posts)What an idiot.
Beaverhausen
(24,470 posts)Seriously why the hell does anyoneistem to this guy?
Guy Whitey Corngood
(26,500 posts)Paladin
(28,252 posts)Zorra
(27,670 posts)if President Obama wins reelection and doesnt extend the Bush tax cuts."!1!1!
Who's gonna rebel? It sure won't be the 99%.
And if it ain't the 99%, that leaves
1%.
Good luck with that, Grover...does the name Custer mean anything to you?
barbtries
(28,787 posts)that the republicans haven't tried to impeach him yet. they'll do that for political reasons as proven by history
nobodyspecial
(2,286 posts)were sufficient grounds for impeachment.
And newsflash Norquist, the rebellion happens if those tax cuts are extended. Millions should not be made to suffer just so multimillionaires and billionaires can amass more money than they could possibly spend in a lifetime.
opihimoimoi
(52,426 posts)mmonk
(52,589 posts)Thanks.
Buns_of_Fire
(17,174 posts)That tends to happen when people like him realize that people aren't marching to their tune anymore. Yeah, Grover, I'm real afraid of the 1% "rebelling" -- I'm shaking all over. What're they going to do -- leave the country? "Go Galt" on us? Big deal. What are they going to do to the country that they haven't already done?
sarcasmo
(23,968 posts)yurbud
(39,405 posts)It's ironic that like the filibuster, Republicans use impeachment when it's entirely inappropriate and Democrats won't use either when it's essential to protect our democracy and stop ongoing crimes.
julian09
(1,435 posts)Ship of Fools
(1,453 posts)An unofficial, unelected fuckwad nobody. How I'd like to take the Roves, Palins, and Norquists of the
world and bang their empty little heads together.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Any more questions?