I wrote this back in March of this year: Since than, Gonzales has resigned.
First off, it is not criminal to be a bad manager, incompetent, and inflexible in every job save one, President of the United States. So evading why Bush should be impeached for negligent homicide or at least felony murder or involuntary manslaughter of ever soldier for the moment, I will say let's not impeach him. This could be due to improper number of troops, lying about intelligence/motives for war, going to war without proper equipment, not adjusting strategy while rebuilding was to have begun.
Basic civics here folks. Impeach Bush, which would never get the votes to convict in the Senate, would lead to President Dick Cheney. Impeach Cheney first, than find the most palatable Republican to get throgh the Senate (Hagel or Graham?) . Than impeach Bush. Like I said, not likely.
Next, the firing of US Attorneys. All of them were political appointees. So yes, the president can fire them. It just looks bad when it is done while they are investigating people on your side, it looks bad. Top it off, they're considered the 10 best or so in the nation, and all their replacements are buddies of your chief aide with little or no qualifications, there's a problem. If this was your end goal, than at the change of terms between the first and second four years, remove them all. Now here's where it becomes criminal. No matter what, under oath or not, if you lie to Congress it is perjury. We have an attorney general who committed perjury. Negligent? Intentional? Incompetent? If the answer is yes to any of these, this man should be removed from office either by the president or Congress. This is the sole cabinet position in which they both serve and irritate the president. Instead of rewardign competency, this administration rewards loyalty and service to ideology. Is it any wonder that any minor disaster or event ins magnified not just due to natural (Hurricane Katrina) or unnatural (Sept 11, Iraq, Afghanistan) events? You can gage the supposed events of normal person/reaction to evidence, but when you're loyalty is to an idea, you are inflexible.
Maybe there is an increased number of investigations now that my party is back in legislative power. Maybe there is an increased number of problems because eventually after 6+ years in any administration abuses and scandals are uncovered from years before by reporters and public at large. The sad realization is that in this case it is due to the fact that these guys are really as incompetent as they seem, perfect administration for a time like the 1990s, but imperfect in a world that is constantly evolving and changing. The fact was that after so long out of power, and with their own party in the White House, the Republican Congress was afraid to look at it's own dirty laundry.
There is one tactic they keep bringing out. Anytime you dissent, or go against the president, you are a traitor and giving aid and comfort to the enemy. But when the troops are asked, what do you think about the dissent, they respond that it is great because some one is asking what is in their best interest. They are glad to have a party that will put the pressure on a defense department that is more interested in a missile defense when the primary enemy of the day is a non-nation state loose network with no manufacturing infrastructure. Last time I checked, one needed a pretty advanced factory and tech level to build a missile capable of going across an ocean. If the scenarios are true, and they're worried about a sleeper cell launching a missile, a missile shield capable of shooting an ICBM down is useless against a shoulder fired weapon that won't get farther than the neighboring 'burb. I'm pretty sure if you asked the troops they'd want more armor plating, body armor, and spare parts for the things already there.
So who will I vote for? I don't know. Obama brings hope, but he's been a Senator only, both state and federal. Hillary is just a Senator who does know how to do the backroom deal but just as we tire of Bush, will we have Clinton fatigue as well? Last sitting Senator elected, Kennedy. Johnson was sitting VP/acting president, not senator when elected. this country likes governors. Bush, Clinton, Reagan, Carter, Nixon were all state executives. That sort of puts Richardson in the driver seat. He's got foriegn policy behind him, Hispanic, but is he willing to risk the wrath of his former boss? I don't know. The good thing about being in Iowa, is that I'll be inundated in the next 6 months or so. I'll have a good idea by next fall who I'll vote for in the Caucus and than again in the election.
PS now in September of 2007...I'm leaning towards Hillary more because Obama is self imploding and Richardson just can't seem to gain the charisma needed despite saying all the right things. Of course, this is a caucus, so I may as well just say Richardson and hope the others in the state outside of Johnson County do the same.