Letters to the Editor
-
But, Do the Republicans Want to Impeach Bush and Cheney?
Gary Kamiya's article and most of those posting responses seem to assume that all that stands in the way of throwing Bush and Cheney out of office is a Democratic will to do it. Unfortunately, it will take the will of a substantial number of Republicans to impeach AND CONVICT them. Specifically, it takes two-thirds of the Senate. Until such time as there is a reasonable possibility of getting 17 or more Republican senators, it's pointless to try.
It is possible that with continued investigations of the Administration by Congress that getting 17 Republican votes may yet be possible. Remember, that when Nixon was impeached what ultimately caused him to resign was the message delivered to him by Republican senators that there would be enough Republican votes to convict him.
As it was for Nixon, I think it could be for Bush and Cheney. If and when they are assured that all the investigations have caused at least 17 Republican senators to agree to convict, the two will be gone overnight.
Whether sufficient evidence can be developed in the time left in this Administration to actually cause that to happen is anyone's guess. But, if one wants to bet, I think the safe bet is to go with the ability of the Administration to drag things out long enough so there won't be an impeachment and conviction.
But, as a final irony, as did Gerry Ford when taking over from Nixon, I think that Bush's successor will take over telling the American people that, "Our long national nightmare is over."
As long as our "long national nightmare" really is over eventually, I think that everyone will be happy. (Except, obviously, the soldiers condemned to die in the interim.)
-
Removal from office
Much as the word impeachment gets bandied about, it really doesn't mean much anymore.
To impeach someone is to indict him on charges. What is really needed is removal from office. Bill Clinton was impeached and he remained in office afterwards.
Sometimes I have the dark fantasy of having a "7 Days in May" style coup where people who really believe in the Constitution march Bush, Cheney and all the other miscreants in this administration physically out of their offices with all their belongings in a box, with armed security guards-just like high level managers get when they are canned.
They didn't do their job, so they get forced out in the most humiliating and public way-with other people gasping in wonder.
It is used as a tactic to remind other workers that employment is not for life, nor is it guaranteed.
Now that would be quite a sight, wouldn't it? So much more gratifying than all those Congressional hearings and votes!
-
Best explanantion I've ever heard for the war
All the muddle headed accusations about oil or American empire were way off base. This war was about revenge, pure and simple.
Lots of Americans I know regard 9/11 as the worst thing to happen in the history of the world. For them (and I dare say most Americans) America is omnipotent, inviolate, the very centre of the world, society and everything. The fact that something like that could happen, and more importanly could happen again, was inconceivable.
Considering that attitude, Bush's war was remarkably restrained. I thank god we didn't have a schizo like John McCain in the White House. One gets the distinct impression that had he been in charge on 11 September 2001, he would have bombed the middle east into radioactive glass.
-
We Need A Two-fer Instead
Should Dumbya actually receive the measure of punishment he most certainly deserves...impeachment...we would then be left with the bastard-child of Satan...Dick Cheney...as President.
No, only a "two-fer"...nailing BOTH their hides to the courthouse door...will suffice. Otherwise, why replace a clueless President with one who lacks moral authority?
-
'Imagine peace', have courage, NAME the horrible deeds.
I agree with the points in this article and think they are well made.
1) NAME THE CRIMES: I would only add that in Kamiya's article and in the letters following I did not see the word 'murderer' in reference to George Bush. He is guilty of the deaths of many, many thousands of people, the maiming of thousands more and the displacement of millions, it seems. HE is guilty of that, of those things. I believe that if we do not name what he is guilty of, the outcomes of this war, nothing will change. Call it, not murder, but 'manslaughter one' if you like, but he is guilty of all that. He really is like a ruthless, out-of-control, mindless thing. And all this should be named. His and Cheney's crimes should be named all the time; detailed, and named. No, we will not get relief from this insanity until we are capable of naming the crimes, not being afraid to. And this would lead to impeachment. Impeachment is 'trying', I think (not necessarily removing from office), just as suing is asking; it may not succeed -- in removal, it may get bad press, but if a lot of naming of the crimes (in stark terms!) begins to go on and then keeps going on, as background or prelude, it will be much harder for the press folks to dismiss it when impeachment comes up. When I say naming i mean that i notice that people who are full up to here with all of this nonetheless speak in generalities. It is naming the facts that will only do it. Calling a spade a spade. Being unafraid to stand up to the aggressor. (I think it IS scary, actually. Gary Kamiya outlines some of the reasons why. In addition, the Bush administration has gone way out of bounds to get back at their enemies. So it is scary; I feel scared as I speak.)
2) HABEAS CORPUS: By the way, I noticed in the article that Kamiya left out the loss of habeas corpus when listing the infractions of Bush; this is one of the MOST important, legally, and should be flogged to Congress daily until they change it back.
3) LEARN FROM KUCINICH'S BILL: As to the letters, I am glad to know that Dennis Kucinich has written a good bill to impeach Cheney. At least there will be a document outlining his crimes for all the Congress to read, for us and for history. (And we can hope -- maybe, just maybe it will work!) Kicking Cheney out from under Bush would be just the ticket.
4) DITHERING ON WHY NOT TO IMPEACH BUSH:
A. I do not agree that the reason Congress will not impeach Bush is that Cheney will become president. I don't think Americans like Cheney. I don't think that he has any charm at all and will not be able to get anybody together (in Congress, which is probably the only important group in the next year and a half) to approve of what he might want confirmed (war, appointments, etc.)
B. Second thought: However, he easily could bomb Iran, couldn't he, or anyplace else, since presidents are doing this without Congressional approval these days anyway. So.. maybe Cheney's finger on the button really is the thing that scares them. Who knows?
5) WHAT CAN BE DONE ABOUT ROVE?
By the way, now that many of the President's Men have fallen: Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz; and Gonzales has been neutralized, who, exactly, is it who is commenting on such things as Jimmy Carter's attack on the administration (saying Carter is 'irrelevant', a rank projection, since that is the term people have just recently been saying about Bush). Who are these people? I hear 'Bush administration' people but who is propping him up? Libby and Card are gone. -- Oh yeah, Rove.
How can Rove be gotten out?
6) BEWARE OF NARROWING THE OPTIONS OF CREATIVE THINKING: I was alarmed at some of the comments here which said assuredly that no one would be impeached. I think comments that are full of surety should not be made. It stops creative thinking. It withers hope. How about lightening up on such predictions in favor of at least leaving a bit of a window open to possibilities, anything that we can imagine, not necessarily the likeliest things but 'what we can imagine'. And then imagine it.