Letters to the Editor
Xanthro
Published Letters: 522 Editor's Choice: 47
-
To No Name Given.
[Read the article: Salon interview: Harry Reid]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Xanthro: No President in US history has been removed from office via impeachment conviction and with Bush having two years left now is not the time to break that history."
-----------------------------------------------------------
No Name Given: That's not an argument for anything. He should be punished and removed as a warning, as should Cheney, whose crimes are legion.
===========================================================
Absolutely not. " President should only be impeached and removed if there is an immediate danger to the functioning of the United States. Clinton's impeachment was silly and Bush's impeachment, while his actions are far worse, is equally silly.
The United States is not in danger because of Bush, it's in danger because the Legislative branch has abandoned its responsiblities. The balance against the executive has disappeared, but that balance could be restored by even a Republican controlled Legislature and a Democratic Legislature damn will better demand it.
-----------------------------------------------
No Name Given: You say think about the future? I am. I am thinking abou the next jerkoff president we have and I want him to know he will be removed summarily if he tries any of the kind of BS like Bush has been doing for 5+ years.
========================================================
See, he's been doing it for five years, you've just admitted it's not an immediate problem.
Impeachment hurts the Executive branch not just for the impeached President but for future Presidents as well, and should only be undertaken under extreme conditions.
While Bush is likely the worse President ever, and he does ignore the Constitution, the fact is measures not as extreme as impeachment can be used. Until these are tried talking about impeachment is unwarranted.
--------------------------------------------------------
No Name Given: Presidents who break the law flagrantly and in a brazen fashion should be punished heavily. The highest laws of our land are the constitution and our senate-approved treaties, and he has walked all over both with utter disregard.
========================================================
So did Lincoln, so did FDR, so did Truman, in fact, most Presidents have trampled over treaties and the Constitution. They were not impeached, much less removed.
FDR rounded up hundreds of thousands of Americans, based on skin color, and placed them in concentration camps. Bush has rounded up less than a dozen American citizens, based on actions, and placed them in concentration camps.
FDR trampled on the Constitution far worse than Bush has.
--------------------------------------------------------
No Name Given: You accuse others of being childish (ad hominem) because you have nothing of substance to say about their arguments. What is more childish, wanting justice to be done for the sake of our nation and its future or preaching go-along get-along because you lack the stomach to do what is right?
=====================================================
You have either misread what I wrote or are trying to distort what I wrote. I'll give you the benefit of assuming it was the former.
"To those who don't want to support Democratic senators because of Liberman, grow up. Seriously, grow up and stop acting like a spoiled child."
Not voting or supporting other Senators because you don't support Senator Liberman is childish. I didn't say persuing impeachment was childish.
========================================================
No Name Given: Impeachment is right for the long term because it sends the right message about the laws of our land. Not impeaching says "you can set up torture programs, both secret and not," and "you can tap phones or do whatever you want with impunity, and the only measure of its legality is whether or not you're brazen enough to get away with it."
------------------------------------------------------
When did the Legislative Branch say that the Executive branch couldn't tap phones? Even on torture, you can't point to an incident after McCains law was passed.
We can argue that Bush's action violate FISA, but then the Courts haven't ruled whether the President has to follow the FISA law, we can argue whether Presidental authority allows for torture. We can argue whether "enemy combatants" are covered by the Geneva Conventions.
I'd personally say that the first two violate the law, while the latter are not covered by letter of the Geneva Convention (but should be granted its protections none the less) but I'm not the Legislature branch. Until the House and the Senate make these arguments, Bush can do whatever the hell he pleases.
That's why it is childish to not support other Democratic Senators because you don't like Liberman, too much is at stake.