Tag: 2014 midterm elections
From Clinton To Obama: Why GOP Impeachment Fever Is Now So Predictable

From Clinton To Obama: Why GOP Impeachment Fever Is Now So Predictable

Making predictions is a perilous practice for any political journalist. Too often, the would-be seers turn out to be dead wrong – as can be attested to by George Will, Michael Barone, Larry Kudlow, and the humiliated boy genius on Fox News, all of whom projected a big victory for Mitt Romney in 2012.

Yet there is at least one future event that could be safely forecast years ago, almost as soon as Barack Obama entered the White House: a movement among House Republicans to impeach the president.

In the conventional wisdom that chronically afflicts Washington, all the current muttering about impeachment is merely a theatrical display for the GOP’s wingnut base – as Democrats use the same threat to stir emotions (and donations) among Obama loyalists. Such complacent analysis misreads not only the mood and character of the Republican Party’s dominant Tea Party wing, but the recent history of impeachment as a political instrument of the far right.

The same forces that have sought to ruin Obama from the beginning were hatching schemes to remove Bill Clinton from office long before the unveiling of his reckless indiscretions with Monica Lewinsky. Back then, the talk of impeachment among zealots who schemed against Clinton, ranging from Pittsburgh billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife and disgraced former attorney general Ed Meese to an assortment of back-bench congressmembers and religious hucksters, could be easily brushed aside. Today, many of the survivors among that old cast of characters are peddling Impeach Obama bumperstickers– notably including Joseph Farah of WorldNetDaily, which features an “impeachment store” online.

Claims that Clinton had committed a high crime or misdemeanor worthy of impeachment under the Constitution dated as far back as 1994, the year after his inauguration, when the teamwork of determined right-wing activists and incompetent mainstream reporters ginned up a series of phony scandals. At secret meetings, the leadership of ultra-right organizations such as the Council for National Policy persuaded themselves that Hillary Clinton was about to be indicted (for something), and that Bill Clinton could soon be impeached (for anything).

The itch to impeach Clinton gathered momentum in 1997, not long after his re-election, a democratic victory that did not impress his right-wing enemies. As with Obama, they wanted to undo his presidency not because he had committed a supposed constitutional offense, but simply because his “liberal, globalist, socialist” politics offended their sense of morality. Of course, they feel the same way about Obama today. Indeed, from the perspective of the insurrectionary Tea Party Republicans and other self-styled “patriots,” elections hardly matter at all, unless their candidate wins. To them, a Democratic president lacks legitimacy by definition.

For a pungent whiff of irony, remember that electing Obama in 2008 was supposed to preserve us from another decade of political trench warfare, instigated by those polarizing Clintons. Electing Hillary Clinton would lead America back into the partisan psychodrama of the Nineties, or so the Washington pundits warned us; better to choose that nice, inspirational, bipartisan-sounding senator from Illinois, they advised.

And how did that work out for us? Scarcely through any fault of Obama, the result has been no different from the scary projections of a divisive Clinton presidency: legislative gridlock, economic brinksmanship, kooky conspiracy theories, and now congressional lawsuits accompanied by loud talk of impeachment. Clinton and Obama are just names for the object of hate, against whom any slanderous, mendacious, and vacuous attack can be mounted.

That was why gullible rubes once bought hundreds of thousands of videotapes accusing the Clintons of murder – and why the same kind of suckers bought into the race-baiting “birther” insinuations about Obama. It is why a top House Republican will lie blatantly on television about the Supreme Court’s dozen rebukes of this president’s alleged constitutional overreach – when most of those cases involved George W. Bush.

In temperament and ideology, the Tea Party Republicans who run the House aren’t much different from the Gingrich gang that went after Clinton. They don’t care whether Obama won the election in a near-landslide — or that seeking to remove him would be very dangerous for our country and the world. If their party wins control of the Senate in November, then the reactionary impulse to impeach may well become irresistible.

Photo via Wikimedia Commons

Want more political news and analysis? Sign up for our daily email newsletter!

GOP Forced To Walk Thin Line After Hobby Lobby Ruling

GOP Forced To Walk Thin Line After Hobby Lobby Ruling

The Supreme Court officially adjourned for the summer on Monday, but not before bestowing Republicans with a double-edged sword in the form of a major ruling.

The Court’s 5-4 decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby struck down a key provision of the Affordable Care Act that had required employer-provided health care to include contraception coverage for women, even if the employer objected to birth control on the basis of religion. Republicans hailed the decision as a victory for religious freedom and the Republican National Committee released a statement thanking the Court for ruling “on the side of liberty.”

For the GOP, the Hobby Lobby decision does present some cause for celebration: The ruling calls attention to religious freedom — a cause touted by the right — and serves as ammunition for Republicans who claim that Obamacare is a flawed and oppressive law.

However, the Court’s ruling also serves as a reminder of just how cautiously the GOP must tread when speaking on any issue in a social and cultural context. In 2012, Republicans paid a heavy price for their increasingly militant and unpopular positions on social issues, and in 2014 they cannot afford to speak too loudly on social issues just months ahead of midterm elections.

As a Democracy Corps analysis pointed out in February, 2012, the public has long disagreed with Republicans on contraception and Planned Parenthood funding. According to the survey, voters “wonder why at a time of great economic distress, Republicans are consumed with denying birth control coverage for women.” With the Hobby Lobby ruling dominating the news, the GOP must again confront contraception and women’s access to health care services, among other social issues — ones on which women and young voters tend to side with Democrats.

Voters have not shifted towards the Republican point of view on the issue. Just one day before the Supreme Court released its Hobby Lobby decision, Reuters revealed the findings of a new Reuters/Ipsos poll: When asked “whether employers should be able to choose what forms of contraceptives their health plans provide based on their religious beliefs,” 53 percent of Americans disagreed — and only 35 percent agreed.

A Gallup poll released in May similarly found that a massive 89 percent of Americans — including 88 percent of Republicans — say that the use of birth control is morally acceptable.

Recognizing public support for contraception methods, the GOP must make sure that its praise for the Hobby Lobby ruling does not translate into anti-contraception or anti-women’s rights cheers. But early returns suggest that controlling politicians’ reactions to the decision might prove difficult.

On Monday, Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) agreed with Andrew Wilkow, host of Sirius XM’s The Wilkow Majority, that women use contraception to protect themselves from “recreational behavior.” Meanwhile, Karl Rove made sure to remind America that the true issue concerns women’s access to birth control and abortion, telling Fox News’ America’s Newsroom that the “country is becoming more pro-life.”

“Should somebody be forced to violate their moral beliefs by having to pay for something they believe causes an abortion?” Rove asked.

Along with having to rein in the jolliest of the right, the GOP must also now fend off attacks from Democrats who say that Republicans’ response to the Court’s decision proves the GOP platform is anti-women. The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee has already attacked Republican Senate candidates who would support “radical, anti-woman measures that would go even further than today’s decision.” The DSCC specifically called out GOP Senate hopefuls “including Cory Gardner (CO), Joni Ernst (IA), Thom Tillis (NC), [and] Terri Lynn Land (MI)” for supporting policies that could “outlaw popular forms of birth control” — an attack that will surely be repeated throughout the remainder of the midterm campaigns.

Photo: Afagen via Flickr

McConnell Promises To Fight Abortions If GOP Wins Control Of Senate

McConnell Promises To Fight Abortions If GOP Wins Control Of Senate

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) is hard at work on the Senate’s agenda — that is, of course, if Republicans take over in November.

As Cortney O’Brien reports at the conservative site Town Hall, McConnell used the last day of the National Right to Life Convention to vow that he and his fellow Republicans would pursue “pro-life” policies and measures if control of the Senate shifts right after the midterm elections.

“I’m proud of my record and defense of life. If I was Majority Leader, we’d already have had a vote on it [abortion limits] in the Senate. It’s long past time for us to join the ranks of most other civilized nations to protect children past 20 weeks in the womb,” the passionate McConnell said at the convention.

McConnell was specifically referencing a bill that would ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy. The bill, written by Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), immediately sparked criticism from the left and from women’s health advocates, who note that most abortions that occur after the 20-week period are related to health issues that threaten the mother or fetus — or both. Without any support from Democrats — and even lacking full support from the Senate GOP — the bill’s future appears grim.

Even if the bill miraculously garnered the support needed to pass the Senate and the House, President Barack Obama would surely veto it.

Still, McConnell — who points to his early planning as evidence that he would serve as a “better scheduler” than current Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) — projects optimism about limiting access to abortions. “For six years, the president has been isolated from this growing movement … He will be forced to listen to the cause that’s brought us all here this morning … Senate Dems would be forced to take a stand,” the Kentucky senator said.

McConnell made the comments in Kentucky on Saturday, but the spiel probably would have lasted longer if he had spoken on Monday, when the Supreme Court announced its ruling in the Hobby Lobby case. The 5-4 decision struck down a key provision of the Affordable Care Act that required all employer-provided insurance to include contraception coverage, even if the employers have religious objections to contraception methods. Immediately after the announcement, the Republican National Committee praised the Court for ruling “on the side of liberty.”

The ruling — a narrow decision that does not actually prohibit the federal government from providing contraception coverage for women or from requiring that employer-provided health care provide other key areas of coverage, despite employers’ religious objections — may encourage Republicans to take a firmer stance on abortion.

After its great 2012 losses, the GOP has attempted to steer clear of social issues that have largely shaped its platform, but also alienated significant populations of the electorate, like women and minorities. However, growing tension between moderate Republicans and Tea Party Republicans has forced GOP politicians to reconsider their strategy. Still, the possibility exists that Republicans who remind voters of the GOP’s narrow and unchanging positions risk again driving moderate voters in the direction of the Democratic Party.

Photo: Gage Skidmore via Flickr

Mississippi Republicans Battle In U.S. Senate Runoff

Mississippi Republicans Battle In U.S. Senate Runoff

Washington (AFP) — Mississippi incumbent Thad Cochran was fighting for his political life in a Republican runoff for his U.S. Senate seat Tuesday, seeking to repulse a surging conservative challenger bucking the party establishment.

A series of primary races are similarly pitting political veterans against relative outsiders, including key contests in Oklahoma, New York, and Colorado, as the fields are sown for the congressional mid-term elections in November.

Republicans are widely expected to retain control of the House of Representatives, and with President Barack Obama’s Democrats struggling to hold the Senate, the GOP is pouring efforts into this year’s campaigns in hopes of winning both chambers of Congress.

Such an outcome would all but doom any legislative agenda Obama would want to achieve in his final two years in the White House.

Tuesday’s main event is in the southern Gulf Coast Republican stronghold of Mississippi, where 76-year-old Cochran, one of the old-guard gentlemen of the Senate, was forced into a runoff this month by state senator Chris McDaniel, a radio talk-show host backed by the anti-tax, small-government Tea Party movement.

All eyes are on the state to see if veteran Cochran goes down, much like House Majority Leader Eric Cantor lost his seat earlier this month to a little-known conservative professor in their Virginia primary.

That outcome sent shock waves through Washington, and empowered Tea Party-backed candidates angling for their own upsets against Republican incumbents.

With anti-Washington animosity sky-high, members of the GOP establishment have rushed to Cochran’s rescue, including 2008 presidential nominee Senator John McCain who hailed Cochran’s record on military issues.

McCain’s running mate, Sarah Palin, by contrast, campaigned in Mississippi last month for McDaniel.

The race has emerged as one of the most expensive primaries ever, with outside groups pouring money into both campaigns.

Cochran, nicknamed the Senate’s “King of Pork,” has been accused of squandering taxpayer money by funneling millions of dollars per year in earmarks to his state, something McDaniel has seized on while campaigning.

“This is pretty simple,” McDaniel reportedly wrote in a fundraising email.

“If you think we should keep the same guys in office that supported these outrageous spending sprees, then listen to John McCain and support Thad Cochran.”

In New York, veteran Democrat Charlie Rangel faces the toughest re-election fight of his 22-term career, in a rematch of the 2012 primary against state senator Adriano Espaillat.

Rangel, 84, leads in polls, but should he lose it would mark the end of an era in New York politics.

In Oklahoma, two-term Republican congressman James Lankford is favored to win retiring Senator Tom Coburn’s seat, but he faces strong opposition from T.W. Shannon, an African-American member of the Chickasaw Nation and former speaker of the statehouse.

AFP Photo / Justin Sullivan

Interested in U.S. politics? Sign up for our daily email newsletter!