"Undermining my electoral viability since 2001."

Outlandish Josh

Published on Sat, 2006-12-09 18:39

On The Question of Impeachment

With Democrats set to take over the congress in 2007, there's obviously a lot of interest and wonder in the prospect of impeaching President Bush. I'm not a fan of this idea.

There are several reasons why I don't think it's especially great goal to pursue which I'll list, but I want to point out that the idea that impeachment is "off the table" is clearly bunk. It's in the constitution so it's on the table, the question is whether or not this is something that should be pursued specifically. I think not.

Why? Well here's a list of my reasons:

  • President Cheney: you can't impeach them both at the same time, and the notion that major policy changes can be brought about this way seems wrong. We're not impeaching our way out of Iraq. It's rather more difficult I'm afraid.
  • Vengeance Is Ineffective: while there are strong legal arguments, and a streak of boy scout civic duty, my read is that much pro-impeachment sentiment is motivated by a desire for revenge, to strike back for all the harm Bush has caused. I understand this and I feel it myself, but it makes me think twice. What's the practical outcome we're looking for?
  • There Is No Absolution: related to my feeling on vengeance, I also think a lot of impeachment boosters see this as a chance for the nation to absolve itself for the mistakes of Bush. I also understand this motivation, and feel the desire to clean up our reputation too, but I think its simplistic and naive to think that a single act will do this.
  • It's Costly: time and energy spent on this won't be spent elsewhere, and undertaking this as a strategy will generate significant opposition and inevitable backlash.

All this leads me to a cost/benefit analysis that says setting out with the explicit goal of impeaching the president is not a good idea. I think investigation, oversight, testimony and hearings are in order, but I also think that repudiating the Bush Legacy is a much bigger thing than punishment.

Putting the Bush Legacy down is the work of decades. Setting impeachment as a goal (rather than allowing it as a consequence of this wider effort) is a grave error.

There's a possible course of events in which congressional hearings and grassroots activism build support for this over the next six months to a year, and impeachment actually becomes a national consensus. I think this is unlikely, and impossible to manufacture, but it would be a good thing in this context, especially considering how it would play in with the 2008 election.

However, if you're looking for tactics, holding mass anti-war rallies is probably going to be more effective than agitating for impeachment.

Politics is the Art of controlling your environment. It's an emotional process, but ultimately it is about outcomes, not how you feel.

Responses

Sun, 2006-12-10 01:00 — Samuel

All of what you say is true. Especially what you say about permanently laying rest to the insanity of the turn of the century: that this is the work of decades and vastly more important than vengeance.

Now. Having said that.

I'm staunchly in favor of impeachment. Because it isn't boyscout civic duty, but the gravest moral responsibility.

Furthermore, it is an integral and necessary part of putting down the legacy - to turn back in years to come and understand through the narrative of history that what happened at the turn of the century was wrong.

As for demanding that this be the result and not aim of investigation, I can answer only that the plot has been obvious from the getgo. The facts were in everybody's face, and to imagine that we don't know where those investigations would lead is disingenuous. To refuse to draw a conclusion and thereby an aim based on obvious (rather than institutional) fact is silly.

As for the strategy monkey side of it, impeachment as such is probably not a selling concept. It's probably a more useful thing just to keep the hearings open and remember that what we're dealing with is a political generation's moral identity.

And this can be manufactured. Not faked, but produced. And it can be made to happen in such a way that impeachment gets back on Pelosi's table, and then crawls off that table and into the west wing.

Impeachment is a reflection of a nation's understanding of right and wrong. If we cannot look back on the narrative of our nation and know that our generation understood that reckless warfare, war profiteering, erosion of rights, and (finally) torture are wrong, then we are pretty seriously fucked. Because narratives aren't just about absolution, but about legitimating worldviews. And that's the first and most important step in controlling your environment.

Sun, 2006-12-10 14:28 — elley

i , too am in favor of impeachment. yes, it's going to be long and expensive if we can even get it off the ground, and we'll have to go through it twice because cheney's just as guilty. i don't think revenge is why we need to do it, or to distance ourselves from bush. bush acted improperly, he messed up, he didn't fulfill his duty. he needs to pay the price, just as any other citizen of this country must be prosecuted for breaking the law, regardless of how difficult it may be. impeaching the president is not supposed to be easy, and it's not going to undo the mistakes of the past, but we can't turn our backs on a president's heinous behavior. impeachment is the only method available for disciplining presidents, and we must make use of it when a president, well, fails us. our democracy requires that we act when our elected leader doesn't represent us any longer.

Sun, 2006-12-10 14:38 — Outlandish Josh

Impeachment is a reflection of a nation’s understanding of right and wrong.

Unfortunately given recent history, I don't think it's that cut and dry. I'd like to see the dude impeached, but I think the moral responsibility you both talk about is bigger than discipline and punishment, and I think setting out with impeachment puts the target in the wrong place.

If investigations and oversight lead to a national consensus building around this -- which is possible, but unlikely -- it could be a great symbolic act that helps set the tone for the new era; it would be an effect of something much larger. However, if it is a partisan fistfight, if removing a Lame Duck from office with a year or less left in his term becomes the objective, it's all our political capital down the crapper and nothing that actually helps anyone out gets done.

Sun, 2006-12-10 16:14 — John Y

at this point anyway. Sure, you may be able to muster the votes to impeach in the House. But I doubt, heavily, you would have the Senate convict and remove him. Unless something absolutely heinous, and more importantly, obvious, came to light, he wouldn't be removed by one of the slimmest(and theoretical, 2 "Dems" are independants) majorities in the Senate, ever.
I agree with Josh, that the way to go is investigations, and PUBLIC hearings. That way, we as a nation can re-align and confirm our moral compass. As it has stood, all the public really gets are sound-bites, so all these contentious issues and theories that the administration creates and drives aren't actually debated on the level they should be. If these investigations and debates turn up specific illegal action by the president(which it well probably could) then begin impeachment proceedings. But at least start the national debate, fully, about what we believe, hopefully not driven by deceit and fear-mongering this time.
Specifically pursuing impeachment as a prime goal will drain tons of money, time, and Democratic political capital for '08. Also, the thought of Cheney being president for even a day is enough to scare me out of even thinking about impeaching. He shoots his friends in the face, what would he do if he actually had the most powerful military ever in his direct command(shudder), not to mention the amount of the Treasury that would be turned over to corporate America(than already has been). It's good to debate this, but we need to be realistic, especially since there hasn't been a lot of that in government for the last 6 years.

Mon, 2006-12-11 03:29 — Outlandish Josh

In reading and thinking more, I don't think this is necessarily a "Aye/Nay" or "Josh vs Someone" argument. Really it should be (and is shaping up as) a real debate about goals and priorities, strategy and tactics.

I think it was a mis-statement for Speaker Pelosi to say that anything is "off the table," but I also think people read more into that than maybe they should. All she's saying, I hope, is that there's not going to be an immediate drive to impeach from the democratic leadership, which I think is right.

I also think that grassroots supporters of the idea should think about what they really want and how to get it, and be open to realizing the full range of motivations -- as this will make any activism more effective. It's important not to get sucked into a false debate of for and against.

In that light, my statement on the issue needs to be reworked as well, as I realize the way I framed it was playing into that false debate. That was my mistake.

Tue, 2006-12-12 02:23 — Samuel

it's one of those tricky situations. the deontologically right thing to do is obviously to impeach the fucker. the consequentially right thing to do is to focus on the future.

i don't think it's gonna happen. and i don't think that the reps in the house or senate are going to waste their time on it. but paradoxically, i think that citizens in support of it provides a very powerful motivator for hearings, which are positive. which means that consequentially i think it's also useful to drive towards impeachment. as a citizen. not, necessarily, as senate majority leader.

in other words, i think it's a win/win situation.

of course, this is strictly amateur night analysis. i've given little thought to the inevitable and bitter backlash.

i just really, really want him in prison is all.

Tue, 2006-12-12 10:34 — Outlandish Josh

i just really, really want him in prison is all.

I feel the same way, that feeling is (I think) based on me seeing some kind of personal satisfaction or payback; it's too close to wrath for comfort. For me, at least.

Pages

Old Stuff

Pages