Impeachment?

Discussed briefly among friends last night: the pro's and con's of presidential impeachment.

I believe that the Clinton impeachment was an outrageous and cynical attempt to overturn the election, rather than a legitimate response to Presidential malfeasance. There is no doubt in my mind that the Republican campaign to remove Clinton from office polarized the nation and established the foundations of the culture wars we suffer today. Aside from that, it is also clear that the partisan campaign to drive the President from office resulted in widespread contempt for those who led the campaign. Who can forget that buffoon Henry Hyde whining before the Senate as the whole stinking pile of crap came to rest in his lap?

Does Bush deserve to be impeached? In my opinion, Bush is impeachable for the war in Iraq, but we would not succeed in such a blatantly partisan political effort. Even a lame duck Republican is still going to have the overwhelming support of the Congress if you try to impeach him.

We can't even stop Bush appointing radical right-wing nutjobs to the federal courts, so how are we going to manage an impeachment? We have a better chance of ending the war in Iraq, if we focus on that task.

Bush deserves to be impeached, but we should not pursue it. Rather we should oppose his war in Iraq, and his radical judicial appointments, and his tax cuts for the rich, and all his other unfair and unwise policies. Senator Reid needs to grow some brains or balls, or both, and take the fight to the Republicans on all these issues. It was a mistake to cave in to Frist on the nuclear option -- Reid must know that by now.

Let's not waste time on an impeachment effort that cannot possibly get any traction; such a symbolic ploy is not worthy of our attention when we have men and women in uniform wondering when we will wake up to the pressing need to end the misguided occupation of Iraq.

What do you think?

Neil

| +Save/Share | |