Saturday, July 28, 2007

So, are you in favor of impeachment yet?

Mark writes:
I can no longer see any good reason why Bush, Cheney, Gonzales and the other schemers and enablers behind this policy could not be convicted of war crimes in the (impossible) event that they were ever tried.

So then Mark, are you now in favor of impeachment? If not, why? One wonders if such trials should be conducted in the United States or some other venue. I would also love to see him provide his own list of the administration's "other schemers and enablers" to be subject to war crimes. Given that Mark has in the past alleged that the remarks of his commenters have contributed to death squad activity in Iraq, I have no doubt that Michael Ledeen would figure close to the top of any such list.

6 comments:

Donald R. McClarey said...

It really is sad to see Mark so vehemently embrace his inner moonbat. Every war has its casualties and Mark's farewell to common sense is one of them. For fighting a war against adversaries who embrace indiscriminate terror as their weapon of choice, and using methods more restrained than those utilized by most past wartime American Presidents, he wishes to have Bush, Cheney, et al charged with war crimes. Mark is becoming increasingly indistinguishable from the the loons on Daily Kos or Democratic Underground. But for the social issues I think he would be posting there now. Very sad.

Shawn said...

Agreed Donald, the blatant illogic and double standards in his approach are glaringly evident for those with eyes to see. But we have to remember there but for the grace of God would go us and remember to pray for him at least as much as we critique and criticize him. (Not an easy to thing to remember oftentimes admittedly.)

Anonymous said...

Bush and Cheney's impeachment is the best thing that can happen for the country. Pelosi will be unelectable if she gets the Dem nomination and will take the wind out of Hillary's sails in any event (since, among other things, the latter would never be able to claim the prize of "first female president"). Also, the Pelosi interregnum will cure Bush fatigue, which is on the verge of annihilating the GOP. What's worse: a year and a half of President Pelosi or four-to-eight of President Clinton or President Obama? The choice seems clear.

Pauli said...

Wowwwwww.... great armchair analysis, Anonymous. Go buy another dime-bag, dude.

Anonymous said...

When Clinton or Obama (or both) win come election day 2008, you'll wish you'd listened to me!!!

Tama said...

Thanks for writing this.