Elizabeth Holtzman’s incredible article, The Impeachment of George W. Bush, should be read by everyone with a vote in this country. Holtzman is a retired member of Congress who sat on the House Judiciary Committee that voted to impeach Richard Nixon in 1974. She writes:
I can still remember the sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach during those proceedings, when it became clear that the President had so systematically abused the powers of the presidency and so threatened the rule of law that he had to be removed from office. As a Democrat who opposed many of President Nixon's policies, I still found voting for his impeachment to be one of the most sobering and unpleasant tasks I ever had to undertake. None of the members of the committee took pleasure in voting for impeachment; after all, Democrat or Republican, Nixon was still our President.She does a terrific job of laying out the case to impeach Bush in very calm and very great detail.
At the time, I hoped that our committee's work would send a strong signal to future Presidents that they had to obey the rule of law. I was wrong.
Molly Ivins does it again. Turn into today's Hang In, and Raise Hell.
On the general subject of political corruption, do not fall into the fatal error of cynicism. You do your country a great disservice by saying things like: "Eh, they're all crooks. Nothing anyone can do about it. Money will always find a way."The New York Times also did a good job of summing up why Alito should NOT be confirmed in Judge Alito, In His Own Words. (Thanks, Nancy, for pointing that out.) The Times says the case for rejecting Alito boils down to:
The answer is perpetual reform. Fix it, and if corruption comes back again, you just whack back at it again. The system as it is encourages corruption and must be changed. Public campaign financing is the best answer in the long-term -- all this "lobby reform" talk is hopelessly inadequate. Hang in, and raise hell -- this is a heaven-sent opportunity to clean it up. Don't blow the chance with cheap cynicism.
- Evidence of Extremism
- Opposition to Roe V. Wade
- Support for an Imperial Presidency
- Insensitivity to Ordinary Americans’ Rights
- Doubts About the Nominee’s Honesty