Impeach without Passion

By: The Grey Havens
Published On: 7/14/2007 1:59:43 PM

The debate over impeachment is gathering steam, and passion will be a critical factor if America is to rise up and protect itself against tyranny.  Nonetheless, for impeachment to be successful, the case must be made clearly, correctly, and dispassionately. 

The case is simply this:  The "high crimes and misdemeanors" of the Bush Administration are known in Congress and have precipitated a Constitutional Crisis.  For the defense of the US Constitution impeachment is the only cure.*

Bill Moyers today points towards that case with the aid of Progressive journalist John Nichols from The Nation magazine, and Conservative constitutional attorney Bruce Fein from the American Freedom Agenda. 

Join Moyers, Nichols and Fein for a review of why the future of the American republic may well depend on the how Congress perceives the maturity of the American people.  Are we grown-up enough to take our medicine?  Was the current crisis precipitated by Democrats unwilling to fully impeach Nixon?  If so, what happens the next time an Authoritarian regime takes the White House?  What crimes are acceptable?  Will next few months define for history whether 21st Century Americans are worthy of American Freedom?  Enjoy this dispassionate conversation and decide for yourself whether you believe the union should endure.

*...shy of the actual intention of the 2nd Amendment.


Comments



Reflection (JScott - 7/14/2007 8:21:37 PM)
"The Constitution-breakers are trying the Constitution-defender; the law breakers are passing condemnation on the law supporter; the conspirators are sitting in judgement on the man who would not enter into their conspiracy, who was, and is, faithful to his oath, his country, The Union, and the Constitution. What a spectacle! And if successful, what a blow to free government! What a commentary on popular intelligence and public virtue" (Gideon Welles)
Gentleman the founding fathers never intended for impeachment be used as a political weapon as it has in the past. A President should not be removed simply because he is in disagreement with those in a Congressional majority. I see no "treason" "bribery" or "high crimes" here against the American people. I think if this is pursued we will see Congressional approval rating hit further lows.


This isn't about disagreement (The Grey Havens - 7/14/2007 8:28:29 PM)
This is about a president asserting powers that don't exist, illegally politicizing the government, and thumbing his nose at both Congress and the courts.

It's not about opinions or disagreements. Its about whether we believe that the US Constitution is worth fighting for, or just a piece of paper.



Impeach with passion (Rebecca - 7/14/2007 9:23:40 PM)
We all should be mad as hell with this administration. Who says we have to impeach without passion? Let's do it with all the passion we have. Having the evidence should mean we are even more passionate about kicking these people out.

I'm tired of being told not to get mad. We all should be outraged. If we aren't then what do we really feel about our freedoms?

There are so many blatant violations of the Constitution. The administration has admitted a few of them publicly. Is a public admission admissable in court?



We Have to Reach the Tipping Point (The Grey Havens - 7/14/2007 11:02:43 PM)
50% support impeachment.  Almost 70% disapprove of Bush.

Those 20% won't be convinced through partisanship, but through patriotism.  Impeachment is patriotic, and it must be done completely.

The heavy lifting will be done by reasoned, clear-minded patriots.

If patriotism is your passion then put America first and impeach.  If partisanship is your passion, cheer while the patriots defend the greatest nation on earth.



Impeach (walkabout - 7/14/2007 9:54:52 PM)
Do you suppose Pelosi saw this?


Again (JScott - 7/15/2007 8:51:58 AM)
"This preceeding is politcal in character-before a politcial body- and with a political object" (Charles Sumner)
Who is a served by impeachment but eh opposing party in all their granduer. Will they high five and pat themselves on the back under this ruise of "patriotism". The people are not served by this, they would be better served by a Congress that would demonstrate a patriotic founding in politcal will and act like the branch our founding fathers designed. Instead they quiblle with a President instead of attempting to solve our nations problems, they earmark thousands of items (something they promised they would not) they continue to spend tax payer dollars on issues that they tell us 70% of America does not support. Where have the Statesman gone, where is the leadership? Where are the RFK's,JFK's, Woodrow Wilsons, Teddy Roosevelts, the Abe Lincolns? Where are our modern visionaries? What has happened in the last twenty years to our processes to our soul as a nation? Two things: all be it two families: The Bushs and the Clintons. I am not a supporter of impeachment on ANY President, but one that believes our Congress owes it to us to do the peoples work. They have serious work that needs to be done and apparently are not very interested in solving any of it.....wait is not that malficience or as our founders termed "neglect of duty". November will be the trial one by fire and I for one plan to vote these incumbants out and go door to door, email to email, blog to blog to insure that the people of Virginia have the representation they deserve.

Attention Republicans and Democrats: This Shall be Deemed an Eviction Notice in Ninety Days Shall you Continue to Neglect the Duties of your Office" this could be fun.



Question (tx2vadem - 7/15/2007 1:49:29 PM)
What is with romanticizing the past?  None of these visionaries you speak of were without flaw.  There are no white knights out there waiting to save the day.  There is only the American electorate, and most of them don't show up to vote. 

On your good government drive, I say we reap what we sow.  If Americans are willing to vote occasionally and then cease to pay attention for two or four of the intervening years or not bother to vote at all, what do you expect?  If congressmen can go to Washington and the only oversight they receive is from motivated interest groups, then what do you expect?  If you have a Congress (which for the past 6 years under Republicans) did not provide any oversight of federal government, didn't bother to take a lot of action on Inspector General reports, or investigate attempts to suppress findings at the OSC, what kind of government do you expect?

In order to fix those things, you would need to change our culture and fix some major institutions in the process.  That's a tall order.  It brings to mind a Haiku by Li Po: "We sit together, the mountain and I, until only the mountain remains."



All may be lost then (JScott - 7/15/2007 11:53:23 PM)
All may be lost if it solely rests on the electorate. We don't run. If there is no one worth voitng for and they are all the same as you propose then all is indeed lost.
I know its dead in the water but term limits is the only way Washington will ever be forced to change.
 


A pragmatic response (tx2vadem - 7/15/2007 1:59:36 PM)
Considering it is not possible to pass a cloture vote on any Iraq amendments or bills (even those supported by a majority of senators), I think there is not a chance that anyone would be removed from office.  The other thing to consider is that you would want to remove both President and Vice President which would elevate Speaker Pelosi to the job of President.  And that is about as likely as fitting a camel through an eye of needle.

So, the House could pass articles of impeachment, but it would just be a waste of time.  I realize there is the principle of it, but why waste time on it. 



Republicans: Pelosi is pro-gay she-devil (Andrea Chamblee - 7/16/2007 11:33:16 AM)
The Republicans will demonize her, as they do with other prominent female politicans, ironically for possessing the same characteristics of determination and control as they will applaud in the other politicians they like - who will be almost exclusively male.  We will hear constantly that she is a San Francisco liberal. Let's make sure the echo chamber also resonates with the fact that she is a Chesapeake native.  She grew up ion Baltimore's Little Italy, and went to college at DC's Trinity College.