That's right, sports fans. In what's possibly the stupidest and most childish thing the Democratic Party has ever done (in the last couple weeks), a number of liberal representatives are preparing to introduce articles of impeachment against President George W. Bush.
One wonders, "are partisan politics behind this?" The fact that this idea is being espoused by Democrats in the first place already goes about 80 percent of the way to prove that.
But let's give them the benefit of the doubt and play this game for a few minutes. According to the resolution's text, which was provided to reporters by a congressional aide on the condition of anonymity, Bush's administration is guilty of over a dozen high crimes and misdemeanors.
One such unforgivable sin is the way Bush's "actions speak louder than the U.N." policy is "threatening the independence and sovereignty of Iraq." Well, if being harmful to Iraq is a crime, perhaps liberals might want to impeach Saddam first.
Bush is also being blamed for the deaths of civilians in Afghanistan. Presumably, we deliberately killed a lot of innocent people because dead civilians are the only fuel on which Dick Cheney's magic gold-making machines run.
But in all seriousness, collateral damage is - while not too much of an impeachable offense - a horrible and unavoidable side effect of war. Countless Afghani women now free to show their faces in public without fear of being stoned to death could not be reached for comment.
OK, so we've gotten over the foolish notion that Democrats have a legitimate complaint, so you can stop pretending to be an idiot. The fact is, Bush's political opponents don't like him and are trying to use impeachment to air their grievances.
It looks like the Democrats forgot that being a strong conservative isn't a crime (the first one to respond, "Well, it should be," will qualify for a free punch in the neck), and impeachment is not the appropriate vehicle for political argument.
Also, some of us who actually remember the Clinton years might be feeling a warped sense of déjà vu right about now. When it was their boy up in the White House committing perjury, suborning others to commit perjury, and smearing witnesses, liberals across the country developed a special sort of Tourette's syndrome wherein they would involuntarily scream, "It's just about sex!" or "This is purely political!" whenever Clinton's impeachment was even mentioned.
The difference here is that Clinton flagrantly and repeatedly broke the law, and so such charge can be levied against Bush. I distinctly remember one Congressman getting up on television and booming, "You cannot impeach a President simply because you do not like him!" Do I have to explain the irony here?
This is nothing new. Democrats have always had a bizarre relationship with the law - vital when they need it for their own purposes, a mere technicality when they don't. That's why they sit around cooking up imaginary conservative infringements against the First Amendment and then turn around and try to pretend that the Second Amendment doesn't exist.
Will this set a precedent for society at large? My roommate ticks me off with a lot of annoying questions ("Eric, where'd you hide my insulin?"), and arresting him for it would be fun. But punching him usually works fine.
The only problem is, the Democrats aren't strong enough to land a punch anymore. As for the impeachment attempt: It's a big swing and a miss.
Eric Spratling is a journalism junior. Reach him at ericspratling@cox.net.
