In light of certain revelations, I was wondering about the mood of the people who stumble upon this blog. If you would be so kind, please answer these three questions:
1. Should the President be impeached? You may pick a letter (or more than one - the answers aren't all mutually exclusive), or come up with an answer not provided.
A. The President acted appropriately in declassifying materials. There is no issue here.
B. You liberals couldn't get him on some other issues, so now you're trying this one on. Give it up!
C. The President is probably on safe legal ground, but listening to his Press Secretary describing the justification is rather like listening to Bill Clinton parce "is".
D. It's troubling, but don't quote me. What's the status of the USA PATRIOT Act again?
E. That conversation about censure might be appropriate about now.
F. Well, maybe impeachment is appropriate, but after the Clinton impeachment, the country cannot afford to be torn apart like that again.
G. I've been reading over the Twenty-Fifth Amendment, and I've concluded: Can't we impeach the Vice-President first? After all he was still talking about WMDs "proven" to be in Iraq on Meet the Press four months after the Pentagon showed it wasn't the case.
H. From my reading of USC 50,
"Protection of identities of certain United States undercover intelligence officers, agents, informants, and sources," ITMFA.
(Now since this is a wholesome, family-friendly, column, I won't tell you what that means. But if one were to go to ITMFA dot COM, one would be shocked, SHOCKED to find out.)
I. Who the heck is Valerie Plame?
2. Will either the President or the Vice-President ever be brought up on impeachment charges, and if so, how far will the charges go in the process?
3. Some retired US generals have been calling on Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld to resign. Will he, and if so, when? Should he?
BONUS: Have recent revelations made you more cynical about the political process, you were already cynical about the political process, or you are more hopeful about the process because information has come to light?
My answers will be in the reply section, but I may wait a bit in order not to skew the results.
***
Beatles set to join online music revolution. Beatles. Revolution. Seems that they had a song (or three) called Revolution.
***
Someone calls this "the best 9-11 documentary I've seen" - I've only started watching it. (1 hour, 20 minutes)
***
After the past week, I feel like the donkey in this video. Before AND after. (Only a couple minutes.)
3 comments:
FYI=- Thispost originally had the picture of CBush and Cheney halfway down this page - http://www.republicanvoices.org/pres_elec_mass.html
which, admittedly, looked as though the Veep was controlling W. But then it went away. Alas.
The president deliberately lied about the reasons for going to war, and even had a date in mind for the invasion of Iraq, wmd's or not. i think that's as good a reason to impeach as an oval office blowjob.
My answers:
1. D, E, F, and G.
2. Only if the Dems win the House of Reps, and then no formal articles will be drafted.
3. He should have quite a while ago. I watch him on the morning news shows and he's a loon. I think he will by the end of the year.
B. Tres cynical.
And Chance, while I totally agree with your basic sentiment, technically Clinton wasn't impeached for "an oval office blowjob", he was impeached for LYING about it. Subtle difference, I suppose.
I thought it was pretty stupid at the time, and a better case could be made now for impeachment, over substantive issues.
Post a Comment