Author: has written 5273 posts for this blog.

Jill has been blogging for Feministe since 2005.
Return to: Homepage | Blog Index

18 Responses

  1. rebecca m
    rebecca m July 10, 2007 at 9:52 pm |

    Bush deserves it.

    But.

    If he goes, then Cheney is president, and that scares me more.

  2. Bruce/Crablaw
    Bruce/Crablaw July 10, 2007 at 11:02 pm |

    Thanks, Jill. The new post address is http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2007/07/10/blog-for-impeachment/.

    I too have some reservations about some aspects of the proposed impeachment of George Bush or of other officials and I look forward to the exchange of views. Thanks very much for putting up the post!

  3. meggygurl
    meggygurl July 11, 2007 at 3:45 am |

    I’m against it ONLY because it puts Cheney as president. Now… can we impeach BOTH of them… cause then Nancy will be president!

  4. little light
    little light July 11, 2007 at 4:12 am |

    Politics or no politics, strategy or expedience or whatever, I cannot swallow the notion of shrugging and giving up the rule of law for maneuvering reasons. I just can’t. I know it’s supposed to be the wise, long view to say no to impeachment and avoid the ugliness, but these are people who have, by and large, committed treason while in the country’s highest offices. If we don’t do something serious and Constitutional and legal about it, we’re essentially acknowledging that the rule of law is a convenient fiction to keep the rest of us in line, and we’re just delaying something much larger, nastier, and more violent to address the same utter disconnect between the ruling oligarchs and the concerns of the people they claim to represent.
    Politically expedient or not, the message needs to be sent that crimes have consequences and laws matter. I would prefer that it be done in a legal, peaceful way, or at least that we try. I don’t want my grandchildren looking back on my generation with nothing but shame, shaking their heads and wondering why we seem to have sat and taken it when we knew.

    I’ve debated with myself and people close to me for a long time about this, and I think I’ve gotten off the fence. If we don’t impeach now then the whole power of impeachment, and the Constitution it’s written in, is rendered worthless. They’ve played chicken with us long enough, with us flinching every time. We cannot let future rulers know, whatever happens to this particular cabal, that we will stand by while every right and dignity we have is eroded.

  5. Louise
    Louise July 11, 2007 at 6:25 am |

    Meggygirl, I think impeaching BOTH would be the only option here. Cheney has MORE than enough guilt on his plate to warrant it.

    Little light has it right- if this ISN’T done, then the power of impeachment proceedings will be eliminated as a consequence, same as the rules of law will be seen to be weak and “suggestions” rather than enforced law.

    Damn them both for putting our country in this position. This will be terribly expensive, painfully destructive to our country, and at the end of the day, completely ineffectual. But it’s the right course.

  6. Q Grrl
    Q Grrl July 11, 2007 at 9:44 am |

    What little light said. 100 times over.

  7. ChrisR
    ChrisR July 11, 2007 at 10:49 am |

    U.S. citizens have to send the message that aggressive war, torture, warrantless wiretapping, etc. are wrong.

    Impeach!

  8. BabyGirl
    BabyGirl July 11, 2007 at 10:59 am |

    Remember though that impeachment does not =removal from office. Clinton was impeached. Bush should be impeached on principle.

  9. Mnemosyne
    Mnemosyne July 11, 2007 at 11:20 am |

    As BabyGirl said, you can impeach Bush and/or Cheney, but that doesn’t mean you’ll get a conviction. The Republicans are still too much in the bag to vote in favor of conviction no matter what evidence is provided. And impeaching one or both of them and NOT getting a conviction would be worse than not doing it at all.

    I’m not saying it should be off the table, but I am saying that people need to be working on the Republican (and Lieberman “Democrat”) senators and representatives to get enough votes that an impeachment would be successful.

  10. Linnaeus
    Linnaeus July 11, 2007 at 11:29 am |

    Unfortunately, impeachment powers have been damaged considerably by the Republicans’ vendetta against Clinton. Now, anything the Congress does is going to be portrayed – with a compliant news media – as partisan payback.

    On top of that, much of the Bush crew came of political age, so to speak, in the Nixon era. Nixon would have been impeached and probably convicted since the GOP of that time was less ideologically disciplined than it is now. The lesson they learned wasn’t “don’t do it,” it was “don’t get caught.”

    I’m not against impeachment proceedings in principle. The real solution, though, is power. Defeat the Republicans at the polls.

  11. naomi dagen bloom
    naomi dagen bloom July 11, 2007 at 11:53 am |

    first, thanks to feministe for connection to the anti-choice week about to happen in birmingham, alabama. have blogged about it, trying to find someone who lives there to do guest post.

    second, signed petition to impeach cheney. might we use our collective energy around issues from this source that directly impact on women? just a thought.

  12. little light
    little light July 11, 2007 at 12:07 pm |

    I’m sorry, Naomi, but are you under the impression that the unfettered actions of this USian administration do not “directly impact women”? War is a women’s issue. Health care is a women’s issue. Education is a women’s issue. Democracy is a women’s issue. Fascism is a women’s issue. Are they men’s issues, too? Yes. Doesn’t mean they’re not feminism’s province.

  13. little light
    little light July 11, 2007 at 12:08 pm |

    Linnaeus, I think perhaps we’re talking at cross-purposes–to which problem are you advocating a “real solution”? I think we perhaps see the situation differently, and I want to clarify before I go arguing.

  14. Linnaeus
    Linnaeus July 11, 2007 at 12:21 pm |

    Okay, I’ll clarify.

    I’m skeptical of what impeachment proceedings can achieve, simply because I don’t believe the Republicans in the Senate will convict either Bush or Cheney. I also fear that an impeachment that fails to result in a conviction will actually end up weakening opposition to the Bush administration and curtailing anything that can be done otherwise to oppose its agenda.

    Now I can understand why that looks overly “strategic”, but it seems to me that undoing the damage wrought by Bush requires beating those who supported him and his views at the polls come election time – which I suspect you would also say is necessary. I’m just not sure that principle alone is going to help at this point, especially with this crew in charge.

  15. Louise
    Louise July 11, 2007 at 2:19 pm |

    An impeachment proceedings will have little “real” effect; it’s too close to the end of their terms. At this point, I doubt ANYTHING would give the country any “real solution”. That said:

    Let’s say Bush and Cheney committed other criminal acts between now and Jan 2009. Should the nation turn a blind eye to those events?

    “Gee, you shouldn’t have done that… but oh well. Go build your presidential library and we (the next administration) will try to clean up your mess.”

    Okay- what crimes can they get away with and under what time frame? Can George start physically assaulting or even murdering the WH staff at Chritmastime, or the day before he leaves? Cheney would love to take potshots at the WH press corp… when is open season?

    IT HAS TO HAPPEN. Simply voting the bastards out just doesn’t cut it. Just because the Reps fucked up impeaching Clinton and made a mockery of the impeachment proceedings does not make ignoring this administration’s offenses acceptable.

  16. Vir Modestus
    Vir Modestus July 11, 2007 at 2:54 pm |

    I support impeachment proceedings against Cheney first. They flout the rule of law, and THAT weakens all of us. Removal from office or not, the proceedings themselves will start shining light in places that the Sith lord wants to keep dark.

    My fear is that, no matter what happens in the next 18 months, the next President will be all about “reconciliation.” NO! That would be the worst thing that could happen to politics in this country, for both the rightwing and the left. Gerald Ford allowed the “cancer on the presidency” to metastasize and we got stuck with Cheney, Rumsfield, et al 30 years later. Same goes for the crooks during Reagan’s days that Bush I pardoned. The Republicans keep getting away with their high crimes and have devolved as a party because of it.

    Start impeaching now, finish it as can be done. Examine every malfeasance, expose every bit of wrongdoing. It is time to Clean House, and I mean the White House. If we don’t, another generation will see the thugs from this White House try it again.

    Tangential topic question: Can Alito or Roberts be impeached for lying to the Senate about honoring precedent and not planning on being activist judges? Seems to me they lied out of their asses and should be thrown out because of it.*

    *a boy can hope, can’t he?

  17. Linnaeus
    Linnaeus July 11, 2007 at 2:59 pm |

    I’m not saying that the administration’s actions are acceptable in any way, nor am I saying they should be ignored. It’s just that, in my view, the political situation constrains the opposition’s choices, and the opposition needs to make the most of what it has available. I’m not sure impeachment comports with that reality, but I can be convinced otherwise.

  18. Louise
    Louise July 11, 2007 at 5:02 pm |

    Tangential topic question: Can Alito or Roberts be impeached for lying to the Senate about honoring precedent and not planning on being activist judges? Seems to me they lied out of their asses and should be thrown out because of it.*

    Oh My Gawd, I think I’m in love…

Comments are closed.

The commenting period has expired for this post. If you wish to re-open the discussion, please do so in the latest Open Thread.