The Case against Impeachment - Schumer you reading this?
Are you pissed at the Democratic leadership for not pushing impeachment. Me? No. Or more accurately not until his support pillars have been removed.
I was speaking with George Lakoff the other day. (WOW, I can actually write that sentence and it be true). Actually, it was the Friday of the YKOS convention. I just finished a framing seminar and there was an impromptu personal chat afterwords. A bunch of folks were speaking with him and we were discussing among other things impeaching George W. Bush.
I took a few notes but the discussion opened my eyes to something I didn’t consider before. Here is the deal on how I made the trip from impeach Bush now to first things first.
Just a disclaimer, you are not going to find much support for George Bush and his policies on this blog or in my writings. Nope - He is a failed president and his policies and party have done more harm than good to America by selling the American dream to the highest bidder in terms of privatizing aspects of government so the few benefit at the expense of the many. Then there is the reduction in civil rights from wiretapping to habeas corpus. We’ve made room for government sanctioned torture by tossing the moral high ground overboard. There was something else too - umm what was it? Oh yea, IRAQ! There is more of course.
What are we trying to accomplish? Ask yourself, what is the goal here? Stopping Bush’s policies? Holding Bush accountable? Revenge for Clinton? Demonstrating that the Democratic party has a spine? Here is a hint - the reason isn’t any of those.
The case against impeachment of Bush
Impeachment makes Bush stronger. Right now the Republican party is on the run. It is a diffused group with a weakened leader. We look at nationally and see Congress where the Dems are barely in control in the Senate and have a simple majority in the House. I think if you look at state parties, in many places around the country the state GOP is in disarray.
Attempting to impeach Bush solidifies his base, gives them a call to arms, a common enemy, and unleashes the endless noise machine of “revenge for Clinton”, “do nothing Congress” - focusing on something that can’t be done (no votes for removal). It serves as a rallying cry for state parties as well. It kicks in their fund raising machine which hasn’ t been doing too well lately.
Oh, yeah - Sorry the votes are not there for impeachment and subsequent removal from office. Nope. So he gets impeached. This is a guy with ~25% approval ratings - Does he really care? This is a guy who believes he is right. He answers to a higher father. He believes he is above reproach. So impeaching Bush, if possible, is just a lot of feel good activity - for naught.
But it is the right thing to do. l
I don’t mean to be glib here but so is curing cancer, solving world hunger, peace and love among all mankind. Hear me out. There a lot of good that needs to be done. How does one really choose? Ask yourself this - what is the objective here - what good are we trying to accomplish?
But we will stop his agenda. George could be abducted by Martians tomorrow and his agenda would continue. What is missing in any impeachment discussion is that it is not his agenda at all.
Now this is important. It is not his agenda at all. It is the conservative agenda/philosophy run amok. That is really what we are trying to stop here. Bush is one guy. The agenda, he and his hijacked party are pushing, is the real enemy. Sure, he is the personification of it, but the agenda is implemented by the underlings in the various governmental roles he has appointed. It is a failed conservative agenda.
There is a great line from the movie Patton after Patton engages the Afrika Korps w/o Rommel. Patton is pissed Rommel wasn’t there - His aide says “If you defeat the plan, you defeat the man”.We need to look beyond Bush. This is about the agenda or conservative philosophy as practiced by Bushco.
But there is hope. Here is where the Democrats can really make a difference. Endless hearings shining light into darkness and removing Bush’s enablers. Yes - Alberto is “gone” so is Rove, and a bunch of others. Drag them back and hold them accountable for what misdeeds they have done.
Senator Schumer - you paying attention or are you going to be played for a patsy again like you were during the Roberts/Alito hearings? You didn’t get elected to be a patsy.
We need Senator Schumer to work is judiciary committee magic and focus the spot light into the dark period of American history.
The key is to remove the pillars of this philosophy. Those pillars have names - real names like Gonzales, Miers, Rove and all the rest. Hold the underlings, the appointees, the minions accountable. The agenda fails.
Otherwise it is like a tapeworm. The head is pulled, but it continues to be the parasite that is sucking the nutrients from the American people
Remember the implosion of the Kodak Buildings? What happens when a Building implodes? Key pillars are taken out and eventually the building collapses on itself. Watch this video of B23 at Kodak Park. Go after the support pillars, isolate the President, and with no support to distribute the weight of failure this philosophy has generated - It collapses in on itself.
Want to read Lakoff’s take on impeachment? Here you go. This conversation from an interview before YKOS. There are more reasons presented by Lakoff. The ones I mentioned above are the ones that resonated with me at YKOS. I added the implosion part as a visual because now it makes sense.
I’d be happy to discuss in the comments. No shrill comments, no name calling or calling anyone out. There won’t be any tolerance for that. Bring your best arguments and let’s discuss. I’ll agree to disagree in advance if it helps.
I worked my schedule to be on around lunchtime and after work.
See you in the comments.




Seems like you are going to have to convince a lot more people:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movement_to_impeach_George_W._Bush
Cheers!
The question is are you convinced? You thoughts?
Well thought out … well said.
Thanks - what was your position prior to the post?
What about the argument that without impeachment, he will never be held appropriately accountable for his actions? About the deterrent effect that impeachment may have on future holders of the Office?
The thrust here is not Bush - it is the policies run amok. with or without Bush the polices run amok. Attack the polices by removing the enablers.
There are not votes to remove Bush if he gets impeached. The polices personified by him are still in place.
Deterrent? um Clinton got impeached and did that deter Bush? The votes for removal are the deterrent and they are not there.
Bush is one guy not the policy - go after all the policy enablers.
We can always try him for treason … I think there’s a case for that, but the punishment is so … well, Texas … that I think most will shy away from trying.
I can buy Lakoff’s strategy, but I just can’t shake the feeling that the Congressional Dems don’t have the moral courage, fighting spirit or tactical sense to enact it. Until the Dems understand that they’re fighting a counter-revolution against an insidious, well-funded, fanatical insurgency, and until they get leaders willing to think strategically and act tactically to destroy it as an ideology, Conservatism will never be defeated. After all, Nixon got impeached in 1973 and in 1980 you had Mr. Conservative himself, Ronald Reagan, elected in a landslide.
[...] who nails it with focus on philosophy over the person. I mean it isn’t like I haven’t haven’t argued that before. Julie you [...]