| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Obama acts like a grownup, alienates Democrat base |
| 2007-06-29 |
| "Captain Ed" Morissey Barack Obama may have made some of the more radical elements of his party angry yesterday by eschewing impeachment in the next eighteen months, but only because he injected a sense of rationality to the partisan struggle. Obama argued that impeachment should be reserved for "grave" crimes, and that elections provide the most cleansing agent to poor government: . . . Obama has this correct, not just legally but also strategically. First, although many people like to claim that impeachment is a political tool, the Constitution makes it clear that the remedy should only apply to actual criminal conduct. "High crimes and misdemeanors" makes it plain that the founders didn't want a Parliament that removed an executive for a simple loss of confidence, but an independent executive whose election should only be nullified for actual and provable criminal conduct. Strategically, it's difficult to understand why anyone still argues for impeachment -- but the fact that Obama has to address this shows they do. George Bush and Dick Cheney have 18 months left in office, and sixteen until the next election. Even if the Democrats started impeachment now, it would probably take that long to gather enough evidence for a win in the House, let alone the two-thirds in the Senate needed for removal, which would be the entire point. . . . Finally, Obama understands that such a move only guarantees to poison political debate over the next decade. He told the constituent breakfast that he'd rather attend to policy than foolish attack strategies. In the sense that Obama represents the future of American politics, it offers some hope that the acid partisanship of the last generation may give way to something more practical and ennobling, and I say that as someone who disagrees with Obama on almost every policy position. Will he get credit for this among his allies? Try taking a read through the comments on the USA Today story, and decide for yourself. Here's a couple samples of the moonbattery in the If we don't impeach B$C then who should we impeach? Clinton for his picadillos and not B$C for the killing of thousands of people? Lying, cheating, stealing, killing and maiming? What is a serious charge? Not supporting the "Party?" |
| Posted by:Mike |
| #3 meh. He's still just a guy with a really pleasant voice. |
| Posted by: eLarson 2007-06-29 20:46 |
| #2 He's the only democrat I have some respect for but his party I don't. |
| Posted by: Snereck de Medici6366 2007-06-29 19:53 |
| #1 Any time you're dealing with a person who spells America with a "k" instead of a "c" you know you're dealing with someone whose maturity level never got beyond 19 yrs. of age, whose sanity is essentially nonexistent, and whose understanding of history is either a)nonexistent or b)active but completely wrong. My ancestors who died at the hands of fascists spit on anyone who thinks that W and his administration are fascists. Your likening of the two is an insult to and cheapening of my relatives and their suffering and death. |
| Posted by: no mo uro 2007-06-29 17:50 |