I'm torn.
On the one hand, his administration has lied to the American people 935 times, according to a January 2008 study by the Center for Public Integrity, from the September 11th attacks to the invasion of Iraq in April 2003.
On the other hand, if impeached, President George W. Bush would initiate his final standoff with the nation, a battle which might prove to be useless especially in a campaign year with voters concentrating on who will replace the failure.
For some in Congress, the time for replacement hasn't come soon enough.
Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-OH, spoke in front of the House Judiciary Committee, as a part of the committee's hearing on executive power and the Bush Administration. A single article of impeachment was filed against Pres. Bush, accusing the Commander-in-Chief of high crimes and misdemeanors stemming from allegations of falsified intelligence by the Pentagon in the lead up to war, the politicization of the Justice Department under Attorney Generals John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales, and the secret propaganda machine involved in selling this war to the American people, among many others.
Regardless, I'm still torn as to the necessity of impeachment for two reasons. First, this is too little, too late from the Democrats. President Bush has a little less than six months left in office, but the Democrats have had control of Congress for the last 18 months. Fight after fight with the Bush Administration leaves Congress with as little as a 9% approval rating this past month.
Second, Rep. Kucinich has the right mind, and I hardly disagree with his reasons for impeachment. Having this issue come up now seems like there won't be enough time to actually complete the process before January 20, 2009. Having this year be an election year, combined with Congress's upcoming, month-long recess -- where we will be treated to our final Crawford Ranch vacation from Dubya -- makes Rep. Kucinich's impeachment article all but useless.
Consider how Pres. Bush has acted this year. He still has the blood of over 4,000 of our troops and countless thousands of Iraqis on his hands, all because of a lie, but no one truly knows for what. That being said, Bush has eased into his role of super-senior. He knows no one, save Kucinich, will challenge his authority as the country is swept into who will sweep up after him.
The country has assumed that there's no point to pursue these sorts of charges on the president, regardless of the validity of the arguments against him, as he will be gone too soon for this process to be effective.
In that respect, I admire Rep. Kucinich's resolve to attempt to stand for democracy and morals in the country's highest public office, but I also realize the apparent pointlessness of pursuing this action, despite my complete agreement and support.
I supported this notion as early as 2002, however, before any of our troops died in the name of a lie. As much of a referendum the 2006 midterm elections were on the war and the Bush administration, Congress has done little to nothing to try to end the war or Bush's tenure as president.
The American people were savvy enough to know this before the election. In a Sept. 2, 2006 CNN Research Poll of 1,004 adults, 57% of those polled thought it would be good for the country if the Democrats in Congress conducted official investigation into the inner workings of the Bush Administration during his first six years in office. By that same token, 69% of the same polling group believed that President Bush should not impeached and removed from office, while 70% of those polled, given the scenario of a likely Democratic Congress coupled with a Republican president, accurately predicted the gridlock and stalemate emanating from Washington since the Democrats took over the Legislative body.
With Congress's current disapproval rating floating in the high 70's, coupled with a president well on his way to that mark by the time he leaves office, the irony emerges. The country has had enough of President Bush and the war in Iraq, but they'd rather not trust Congress with his removal due to their own ineptitude and backdoor dealings.
Basically, the strongest statistic to cite comes from the dissatisfaction of the people in the direction we are going. An average of recent polls finds that roughly 4 in 5 people are dissatisfied with the direction of the country. Contrast this with the same poll question from the month of September 2001, when 1 in 5 people thought we were on the wrong track.
The American people are speaking loudly and clearly, as we often do. But as always in a campaign year, the people are being shoveled coverage of the two candidates like pig feed at a Jimmy Dean farm. And we can't get enough of either Sen. John McCain's search for relevance in rural grocery stores or Sen. Barack Obama doing his best Jesus impression for His giddy followers in Europe. It's hard to focus on the current administration when we look at the relative "inexperience" of a man who convened 200,000 people together in Berlin, versus the light years of "experience" of a man who wants to continue at least a minimal American presence in Iraq for 100 years, who can't remember Czechoslovakia is no longer a country, can't tell the difference between Sunni and Shiite Muslims, and can't even get an editorial published in the New York Times.
But, as always, I digress. In case you couldn't tell who I was just talking about, Sen. Obama is "The One" who went to Berlin.
The truth in Iraq is the coming down of violence, and Bush's new time horizon for a casual withdrawal of troops seems like more of a reality to the world. Now, contrary to the belief that withdrawal is automatically failure, Republicans can actually talk about withdrawal without sarcastic smirks of the same faux elitism they accuse Democrats, specifically Sen. Obama, of emitting to make them seem out of touch with normal Americans.
Just like Rep. Kucinich's article of impeachment, President Bush's new time horizon is too little, too late on a giant mistake. Whether or not Bush will actually receive any condemnation of his actions remains to be seen. However, due to the previous inaction by Congress and the shortness of time given to carry through to this goal -- which is only five months after Congress's summer break -- when it comes to impeaching the president, just call me the current U.S. Constitution.
I'm torn.
On the one hand, his administration has lied to the American people 935 times, according to a January 2008 study by the Center for Public Integrity, from the September 11th attacks to the invasion of Iraq in April 2003.
On the other hand, if impeached, President George W. Bush would initiate his final standoff with the nation, a battle which might prove to be useless especially in a campaign year with voters concentrating on who will replace the failure.
For some in Congress, the time for replacement hasn't come soon enough.
Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-OH, spoke in front of the House Judiciary Committee, as a part of the committee's hearing on executive power and the Bush Administration. A single article of impeachment was filed against Pres. Bush, accusing the Commander-in-Chief of high crimes and misdemeanors stemming from allegations of falsified intelligence by the Pentagon in the lead up to war, the politicization of the Justice Department under Attorney Generals John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzales, and the secret propaganda machine involved in selling this war to the American people, among many others.
Regardless, I'm still torn as to the necessity of impeachment for two reasons. First, this is too little, too late from the Democrats. President Bush has a little less than six months left in office, but the Democrats have had control of Congress for the last 18 months. Fight after fight with the Bush Administration leaves Congress with as little as a 9% approval rating this past month.
Second, Rep. Kucinich has the right mind, and I hardly disagree with his reasons for impeachment. Having this issue come up now seems like there won't be enough time to actually complete the process before January 20, 2009. Having this year be an election year, combined with Congress's upcoming, month-long recess -- where we will be treated to our final Crawford Ranch vacation from Dubya -- makes Rep. Kucinich's impeachment article all but useless.
Consider how Pres. Bush has acted this year. He still has the blood of over 4,000 of our troops and countless thousands of Iraqis on his hands, all because of a lie, but no one truly knows for what. That being said, Bush has eased into his role of super-senior. He knows no one, save Kucinich, will challenge his authority as the country is swept into who will sweep up after him.
The country has assumed that there's no point to pursue these sorts of charges on the president, regardless of the validity of the arguments against him, as he will be gone too soon for this process to be effective.
In that respect, I admire Rep. Kucinich's resolve to attempt to stand for democracy and morals in the country's highest public office, but I also realize the apparent pointlessness of pursuing this action, despite my complete agreement and support.
I supported this notion as early as 2002, however, before any of our troops died in the name of a lie. As much of a referendum the 2006 midterm elections were on the war and the Bush administration, Congress has done little to nothing to try to end the war or Bush's tenure as president.
The American people were savvy enough to know this before the election. In a Sept. 2, 2006 CNN Research Poll of 1,004 adults, 57% of those polled thought it would be good for the country if the Democrats in Congress conducted official investigation into the inner workings of the Bush Administration during his first six years in office. By that same token, 69% of the same polling group believed that President Bush should not impeached and removed from office, while 70% of those polled, given the scenario of a likely Democratic Congress coupled with a Republican president, accurately predicted the gridlock and stalemate emanating from Washington since the Democrats took over the Legislative body.
With Congress's current disapproval rating floating in the high 70's, coupled with a president well on his way to that mark by the time he leaves office, the irony emerges. The country has had enough of President Bush and the war in Iraq, but they'd rather not trust Congress with his removal due to their own ineptitude and backdoor dealings.
Basically, the strongest statistic to cite comes from the dissatisfaction of the people in the direction we are going. An average of recent polls finds that roughly 4 in 5 people are dissatisfied with the direction of the country. Contrast this with the same poll question from the month of September 2001, when 1 in 5 people thought we were on the wrong track.
The American people are speaking loudly and clearly, as we often do. But as always in a campaign year, the people are being shoveled coverage of the two candidates like pig feed at a Jimmy Dean farm. And we can't get enough of either Sen. John McCain's search for relevance in rural grocery stores or Sen. Barack Obama doing his best Jesus impression for His giddy followers in Europe. It's hard to focus on the current administration when we look at the relative "inexperience" of a man who convened 200,000 people together in Berlin, versus the light years of "experience" of a man who wants to continue at least a minimal American presence in Iraq for 100 years, who can't remember Czechoslovakia is no longer a country, can't tell the difference between Sunni and Shiite Muslims, and can't even get an editorial published in the New York Times.
But, as always, I digress. In case you couldn't tell who I was just talking about, Sen. Obama is "The One" who went to Berlin.
The truth in Iraq is the coming down of violence, and Bush's new time horizon for a casual withdrawal of troops seems like more of a reality to the world. Now, contrary to the belief that withdrawal is automatically failure, Republicans can actually talk about withdrawal without sarcastic smirks of the same faux elitism they accuse Democrats, specifically Sen. Obama, of emitting to make them seem out of touch with normal Americans.
Just like Rep. Kucinich's article of impeachment, President Bush's new time horizon is too little, too late on a giant mistake. Whether or not Bush will actually receive any condemnation of his actions remains to be seen. However, due to the previous inaction by Congress and the shortness of time given to carry through to this goal -- which is only five months after Congress's summer break -- when it comes to impeaching the president, just call me the current U.S. Constitution.
I'm torn.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment