Who's Ted Stevens? He's the President Pro Tempore, and a Republican Senator from Alaska. And, might I further mention, he's very conservative.
Ted Stevens out, Condi Rice is in
Condi Rice out, Sec of Treasury John Snow is in, he might be our safest bet, but let's assume that since we've gotten this far, the Republicans might work to get him out of office. Especially in order to get the next in line in office.
John Snow is out, Rummie is in...
Rummie is out, Gonzo is in...
What's the point? Here's the point. As tempting as it may seem to get rid of a president by impeaching, and convicting, him, it's just not a good idea if you are trying to do so because of ideology. This is because you have a long chain to go before you get to someone you would actually want sitting in the big chair.
Your only shot in this instant is have mass impeachments at a time when you have a majority in the House. In this case, we would have a Democratic Speaker of the House who is directly under the VP in the line of succession.
Here's my thoughts on impeachment. Let's say George W. Bush was impeached (and then convicted) for starting a war (and getting innocent kids killed) by lying to both Congress and the American people. By the time Congress got around to the impeachment proceedings, it would be 2006 or 2007. By then the next election process would be starting to heat up. The crimes of the figure head of the Republican party would be fresh in the minds of the American people. This would leave a clear thought in the minds of the American voters, especially those who are related to or know someone who was killed in Iraq. As far as I'm concerned, if the GOP can try to impeach someone over lying about getting a blow job, then I think it's only fair to try to impeach someone whose decisions led to the deaths of innocents. Of course, this is just my opinion and I might be wrong.
Oh, dear God. Please -- no, really, pleeeeeeze -- tell me we can impeach Ch*ney, too. Lie to me if you have to. That's the most beautiful thing I've heard in ages.
While Mr. M's line of power scares the crap out of me, I agree with Rouse's thinking. Even if that old bastard Cheney became the Pres. the public would abhor him and hopefully that Quack Doc would not have a chance at winning in '08. Here I go being cynical, but no matter who wins in '08, the bushsit will take years and years to repair. My vote is go for the impeachment and let the games begin.
9 comments:
I believe you are correct. So, why not impeach both?
OWL - I have to laugh...I e-mailed Mike Malloy (from Air America) and asked him the same question. He e-mailed me back the same response as you!
I tend not to be so optimistic as to imagine that that wonderful thing could happen, but it sure would be fine if it did.
Here's why you don't impeach Bush...
Bush out, Cheney in...
Cheney out, Dennis Hastert in...
Dennis Hastert out, Senator Ted Stevens in...
Who's Ted Stevens? He's the President Pro Tempore, and a Republican Senator from Alaska. And, might I further mention, he's very conservative.
Ted Stevens out, Condi Rice is in
Condi Rice out, Sec of Treasury John Snow is in, he might be our safest bet, but let's assume that since we've gotten this far, the Republicans might work to get him out of office. Especially in order to get the next in line in office.
John Snow is out, Rummie is in...
Rummie is out, Gonzo is in...
What's the point? Here's the point. As tempting as it may seem to get rid of a president by impeaching, and convicting, him, it's just not a good idea if you are trying to do so because of ideology. This is because you have a long chain to go before you get to someone you would actually want sitting in the big chair.
Your only shot in this instant is have mass impeachments at a time when you have a majority in the House. In this case, we would have a Democratic Speaker of the House who is directly under the VP in the line of succession.
M
Yeah, that's what I was thinking as I looked down the line of succession. we are just really, really screwed.
Here's my thoughts on impeachment. Let's say George W. Bush was impeached (and then convicted) for starting a war (and getting innocent kids killed) by lying to both Congress and the American people. By the time Congress got around to the impeachment proceedings, it would be 2006 or 2007. By then the next election process would be starting to heat up. The crimes of the figure head of the Republican party would be fresh in the minds of the American
people. This would leave a clear thought in the minds of the American voters, especially those who are related to or know someone who was killed in Iraq. As far as I'm concerned, if the GOP can try to impeach someone over lying about getting a blow job, then I think it's only fair to try to impeach someone whose decisions led to the deaths of innocents. Of course, this is just my opinion and I might be wrong.
Oh, dear God. Please -- no, really, pleeeeeeze -- tell me we can impeach Ch*ney, too. Lie to me if you have to. That's the most beautiful thing I've heard in ages.
ae, what I'm about is booking a one-way luxury cruise for the entire Bush Administration on the next rocket to Mars.
I'd love to 'disassemble' the whole bunch.
While Mr. M's line of power scares the crap out of me, I agree with Rouse's thinking. Even if that old bastard Cheney became the Pres. the public would abhor him and hopefully that Quack Doc would not have a chance at winning in '08. Here I go being cynical, but no matter who wins in '08, the bushsit will take years and years to repair. My vote is go for the impeachment and let the games begin.
Yeah - at this point, what do we have to lose? Might as well 'bring it on'...
Post a Comment