How Stupid is Grover Norquist (a.k.a., Has a Republican Ever Actually Looked at the Constitution?)

So apparently the latest bit of insane inanity out of Grover Norquist's multiple chin topping mouth involves impeaching President Obama if he is elected to a second term and allows the Bush tax cuts to expire. And I regretfully quote:

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. The last year, he’s gone into this huddle where he does everything by executive order. He’s made no effort to work with Congress.

I don't even know where to start with this one. First off, let's concentrate on the "tax [cuts] lapse." So impeachment is a valid response to letting the sunset provisions of Bush's original tax bill kick in? Which would basically be the executive executing a previously enacted law. This is wrong, how? Secondly, and more importantly, what exact charges would be used in these impeachment proceedings? Guilty of not letting jowly gargoyle Grover Norquist get his policy way? Here is when the Constitution (y'know that thing all the Tea Parties drone on about) says it is appropriate to impeach in Article II, Section 4:

Section 4
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

I mean unless it is another ridiculous GOP implicit charge of treason or he's saying POTUS would be guilty of NOT bribing the top tax brackets with cuts, where exactly would sunsetting the Bush tax cuts fit in there. Such statements make a mockery of the U.S. Constitution, as well as of our general political process, and I truly hope that Norquist crawl back into whatever mole man hole he came out of. I mean, seriously, your name is Grover. GRRROOOOVVVEEERRRR (and, actually, the linked picture is a perfect description of Norquist too. Freakin' nerd monster).

(Image: Google Images)