The Boston Globe
Ideas section today has an in-depth article examining the arguments for
and against impeaching Bush and Cheney. I provide a link to the entire
article in the title to this post, and recommend you read it.
Basically, though the two sides of the argument (from a Blue State
point of view, I guess), are:
1. The main arguments in favor of impeachment are focusing on the damage this administration has done to the Constitution. The idea is that impeaching the President and VP would make it less likely that future administrations would play so fast and loose. The main items here:
a) Conducting electronic surveillance on citizens without proper judicial oversight;
b) Lying to Congress and withholding information from Congressional requests;
c) Presidential signing statements infringing on the constitutional balance of power.
2. This administration has failed to uphold international and domestic law:
a) Dropping the ball on Katrina;
b) Condoning torture and extraordinary rendition;
c) Cluster bombs in Iraq are beyond the pale of civilized nations;
d) Threatening Iran.
This is mainly a political strategists' argument, but seems to be widely espoused.
1. The idea is that by leaving Bush and Cheney in office, one of the most
unpopular administrations in history continues to demoralize and
alienate the Republican Party. If a move were on to impeach the two, it
is feared they would become political martyrs and it would energize the
2. It would take up so much political energy and capital that nothing else could be accomplished.
I have to say, the political strategy has a certain logic. But I am not
sure we are doing the world or the future any favor. I think we owe it
to both to impeach Bush and Cheney.
but that's just me.
Sunday, June 24, 2007
The Boston Globe