- Bang

We would do well to understand that the only solution that is likely to be effective, and yet timely enough to head off economic and cultural disaster, is the threat of impeachment to George W. Bush.

However, conservatives who favor Bush’s impeachment are in a distinct minority, and liberals so inclined, despite a loud volume of rhetoric from the left, are also a minority.

I believe the lack of support for Bush’s impeachment, across the political spectrum, stems solely from the impeachment movement’s sole reliance up to now on anti-war grounds. Like it or not, there are not enough Americans who are convinced of the wrongness of the Iraq war effort itself. Stated another way, there are too many voters who supported, and will continue to support, military intervention in Iraq on any grounds whatsoever.

If the two minorities from either end of the political spectrum could make common cause, a coalition with enough votes in Congress might be formed with could at least begin the impeachment process. In this way the Bush administration might feel sufficiently threatened to move to the right, taking the actions conservatives desire as to illegal immigration, namely: securing our borders, deporting illegal aliens, and prosecuting employers who knowingly employ illegal aliens. Concurrently, Bush might be moved to begin a decisive disengagement from Iraq.

How could such common cause be made? It would involve a significant and far-reaching compromise between the liberals and conservatives. Let’s re-state the situation which makes compromise imperative: a) Some liberals favor the impeachment of Bush over alleged lies and abuse of power related to the war in Iraq, while conservatives discount these factors, in whole or in large part; and, b) Some conservatives believe the Bush is in violation of his oath of office…certainly an impeachable offense…for failing to act decisively on the illegal immigration question.

To effect a compromise that would significantly increase momentum for Bush’s impeachment, articles of impeachment should be drafted which include not only the left’s charges concerning the war, but also the right’s charges that Bush has violated his oath of office.

Each side would have to “give,” as follows: Liberals would have to come out against illegal immigration, and conservatives would have to endorse the liberal position concerning the war and national security power abuses.

Naturally, each side would insist on a “gain.” The gain for liberals would be tacit conservative endorsement of the liberal position, and likely political gains for the Democrats in Congress in 2006, and an increased possibility of regaining the White House in 2008. Democrats have been accused of fringe mentality so long that such an endorsement would likely appeal to them, and appear as considerable and tangible in their eyes.

The gain for the conservatives could be twofold: 1) decisive action against illegal immigration, or a clear declaration that such will be necessary for any politician seeking conservative support; and 2) negotiation of a mutually acceptable, yet decisive “exit strategy” from Iraq that would establish U. S. power credibility and largely break the back of the insurgency.

A possible such “exit strategy” would include cordonization and ensuing destruction of the Sunni triangle…preceeded by a suitable period allowing any person the opportunity to exit through screening checkpoints…this to be followed with a phased withdrawal of combat troops (definitely short term, but without announced timelines) leaving only advisory-type units to train and coordinate operations of the Iraqi security forces. Further, the exit of combat troops should be tied to tangible evidence of Syrian and Irani disengagement from support of the insurgency, delineated through direct diplomatic efforts. Failure to meet such targets, it would be made clear, would be cause for re-introduction of direct U. S. combat power.

Such a compromise between the liberal and conservative patriots in this Country appears to be necessary to accomplish what we both desire, i.e.: the removal of an administration which is proving itself increasingly unable or unwilling to address critical problems facing America.

What we lack is only agreement on the grounds which could constuct such a compromise, and a core of leadership in the Congress, from Members on both sides of the aisle, which could take this idea and begin to move it forward.

I am appealing to such leadership, through this forum and website, that it begin the process. Thank you for your consideration of this proposal.

“CB Howell where’s the math on this going to take us?”

Well, problem here is we would need to delge into to the rehlm of “imaginary numbers”. Unless you’re a graduate student in math…not a good idea.

Moors invide Eurpoe so the Crusades happen.

Cartoons are drawn of thier prophet and the they go about terrorizing, killing and burning. Essentially making what the cartoons show a reality. Could hte cartoons been prophetic? (no pun intended)

Yeah steve, I can see how these two things are exactly the same.

We are talking the present by the way, not the ancient past.

catch up to modern times.

I would agree with you if the crusades were ON GOING, but we have evolvbed, and are not living in the past.

Alex stevie would like to buy a clue.

To that I think the cartoons are right on target.

Istead of showing that the religon of peace is a RELIGON OF PEACE, they instead prove the cartoons RIGHT.