On Impeachment

One of my kinda-sorta relatives sent me this email the other day:

There goes all respect I HAD for Obama..... He was a lecturer in constitutional law, and says impeachment should be reserved for grave breaches of presidential powers. Sounds pretty hypocritical to me.
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/06/28/america/NA-POL-US-Obama-No-Impeachment.php

To which I responded thusly:

I wouldn't be too hard on him.

I KNOW W's a criminal, and really should be impeached/jailed/executed for treason/etc, but I've also heard several people/sources say that during an impeachment, NOTHING else gets done in Congress. Plus, when it comes down to voting to throw him out, I really doubt that they could muster enough repugnican votes to do it since it takes a 2/3s majority to declare a guilty verdict. Even if they did get him out (and they'd have to get rid of Cheney simultaneously), he's got so many incompetent cronies in place, it would take his remaining term and then some, to root them all out and replace them, so still nothing (or very little) would get done. So it seems like any way you look at it, we're fucked.

Sure, I'd much rather have Obama be more blunt and say something about how much he wishes he could impeach the bastard but can't because the republicans are just going to continue stand in the way of anything good for the country, but I suppose he has to worry about any little thing he says being twisted by Rove and his minions. Maybe he's being cautious for naught, since Rove will twist this anyway.

I'm a Facts Curator

Not exactly the Life-of-the-Party type, I know. Oh well.

The Classic IQ Test

Blogger by default

Sheeesh. All I wanted to do was leave a comment and not be anonymous, and lo and behold, I had to create a blog. I KNOW I had an account once before with no blog, but something seems to have happened.

I have no idea if this post will lead to others, or be my one and only. If I post again, I have no idea what the subject will be.

One thing: I MUST give a tip of the hat to Ann at Practically Harmless, from whom I've stolen the phrase for my title. If she gives me her blessing and/or forgiveness, I promise her top billing on my blog roll (once I figure out how to make one.)

Oh what the hell... let's throw in something with some content. Here's my latest attempt to get my views printed by the Seattle PI:

I'm intrigued by the many reactions to the "Passport Crisis," but it seems to be the perfect example why the conservative/republican approach to government does not, will not and cannot ever work.

I remember Ronald Reagan, the darling of every republican '08 candidate for president, saying, "Government is not the answer" and "Government is not your friend." Certainly, W's government is not the friend of the American people, but in more general terms, with Reaganism's core beliefs becoming republican core beliefs, and the Reagan 80's being touted as "the good old days," I have to wonder what people expect when they vote for republican candidates.

Think for a moment: If a republican administration were to actually formulate and institute a program that were to succeed, they would prove Reaganism wrong. When a republican proggram fails, all they need to do is stand back and say, "See; we told you so. Government isn't the answer." In simplest terms, there is no incentive for conservatives to succeed. Not only are there no consequences (in their minds) for failure, there is actually a need for failure.

In one sense the passport backlog is not a crisis of the magnitude of Iraq, spiraling deficits, corruption or our failing health care system, but to a person or family that's worked and saved for years for a vacation abroad, only to have to cancel it and forfeit their hard earned money spent on plane tickets, etc., it's a very big deal indeed. The only reason for the crisis is this government's "incompetence by design." After passing laws which would lead to a huge increase in applications, the State Dept. failed to hire, and still has not hired, additional personnel to handle them, thus the backlog. This government's response, the typical, "No one could have anticipated ________," (Gov't standard form WBAZERO) simply doesn't fly. My seven year old grandmonster could have anticipated the surge. This crisis was created. Why?

A look at this administration's record shows more and more government functions being put in the hands of corporations, usually run by heavy republican donors, former Halliburton execs or some other crony type; the main qualifications being a lack of qualifications. The Army no longer cooks its own meals, repairs its own vehicles or trucks its own fuel. Airport security, prescription drug coverage and portions of veterans' health care are privatized as well. Post Katrina security was in part handled by private security services (mercenaries) such as Blackwater; the need being created by W's failure in Iraq (a shortage of National Guard to guard the nation), and the overall mess that is the Dept. of Homeland Security. Social Security would be privatized if W could get his way; "The system is going bankrupt."

The yet to be proposed solution is to privatize the passport application process, but in order to necessitate that, the need had to be created: the government had to fail.

Update

Well I got published. But of course they edited it. Oh well.