Impeaching Bush and Cheney

Recently George McGovern said that he supports impeaching Bush and Cheney. George McGovern is not exactly a powerful voice in today's politics, and it should surprise no one that he opposes anything Republican.

That said, I agree with him, though I am not especially sanguine that impeachment is possible, even though I think it is justified. Constitutional Scholars have told us that impeachment is not a Constituitional crisis, but a solution to a Constitutional crisis.

Bush and Cheney shame themselves by violating the oaths they took to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States, the law of the land. It, the Constitution, existing only in our minds and hearts, but not as a person, can't object and defend itself. But all the Americans who have lived by it's words and meanings since it's adoption would, if they could, object. Some of us who are still alive can and should.


Former US Senator Bob Graham said(I have to paraphrase) at a recent University of Oklahoma forum, as one of a number of current and former politicians who enjoy decent, mostly honest and authentic reputations, We kicked King George out in 1776 but many of us were not accustomed to dealing with freedom, and it's expressions.

The boy who would be King George, and Cheney, the modern day Machiavelli, should be kicked out in 2008. In 1776 it took a revolutinary war to kick out King George. Thanks to what we have accomplished without a King as the decider, we can kick out the current day imposter, our own wannabe king george, not by a shooting revolution, but by a thoughtful revolution, if only we have the guts to do it, employing the Constitutionally provided solution to a Constitional crisis; trial by Impeachment.

These two, Bush and Cheney, deserve to be shamed by being tried and found guilty of violating their pledges to support and uphold the Constitution of the United States.


That is what should be the result of the outrage which Lee Iococca expresses and finds wanting in the populace, in his recent book asking, Where is the Outrage?

The leaders of Congress, Pelosi and Reid, who hold their jobs because the American people spoke up in 2006, and elected them, are ignoring the mandate of the American people as much as Bush and Cheney.

They are more focused and interested in not doing anything that might distract from their agenda of electing a Democrat as president, and gaining veto proof control in Congress.
They shy away from the confontational, likely because they worry about that approach getting in the way of what they want, Dem control of government, and job security for themselves; a job which used to be a sacrifice as a public servant, but now is the best job on the planet. What other job gives one the priviledge to vote oneselve's a raise, and provide oneself with the best health care plan on the planet, and which they deny to the rest of us.

It worries me that an election which transfers the power of government to an adversary of the former group in control, only perpetuates internecine, partisan conflict; the last thing American citizens need, want and voted for.

How is that different from the tribal conflicts in the Middle East? Some say that voting is the key to Democracy. In Iraq and Palestine, votes were cast, there were winners and losers, but nothing approaching what we think of as democracy can be observed.

It's not a real stretch to see just this same thing happening in our own country. We've experienced our citizens elect people they thought would stop the killing in Iraq, get us out of there, but to no avail.

Here's what I think of that. Those we elected are not into governing, nor leading. They're playing prevent defense when ahead by a little, near the end of the game. It doesn't stop the offense from gaining some ground. In fact, if they do, the momentum and the positive emotion of the players and the fans(read politicians and voters)often shifts to the advantage of the underdog.

It's a plan to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Leanderthal
Lighthouse Keeper