Time to impeach
Time to impeach
If the Republicans win the U.S. Senate in November, they face a dilemma: to do what's right for the country or what's right for their chances in 2016.
It is now obvious to all but President Obama's most zealous supporters that he has repeatedly violated the Constitution. And it is highly probable that he and his administration actively obstructed investigations into Benghazi and the IRS targeting of conservative groups.
For the good of the country, the Republicans and concerned Democrats must strongly consider impeachment proceedings against Obama. If not, the principle of separation of powers — a cornerstone of our Constitution — will be emasculated and we'll be well down the road to some type of autocratic government.
But impeachment proceedings are very dangerous to the political fortunes of the party that initiates them. Even when justified, it is traumatic for the country and typically frustrates and angers the public, even those people who believe the proceedings are justified. Thus, it will likely damage Republican hopes to win the presidency in 2016.
Obama needs to be impeached to restore balance to the branches of government and preserve the Constitution. I say this even though the thought of Hillary Clinton as our next president scares the hell out of me — even after enduring Obama.
Michael G. Bitterice
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Why the difference?
- Arnold must cut police force
- No ‘pass’ for Obama
- Pa.’s ‘safety laws’
- Right to veto
- Being a volunteer firefighter