Talk of impeachment

...is growing slightly more serious. Via Shakespeare's Sister, Harper's has just published an article making the case. Cynic that I am, I still think it far more likely that George W. Bush will be fragged by his own troops (metaphorically speaking) than that Democrats will do anything. Even if they do retake the house.

But, I just want to see Bush forced to leave office before his term is completed; at the moment I'm not picky about who ushers him out.

And I like this guy too...

It starts out introducing our favorite man, John Conyers, and questions him on just what he was thinking by introducing a resolution "to make recommendations regarding grounds for possible impeachment” in a Republican-majority House, given how the neocon Congress are nothing more than lemmings (slight paraphrase). Conyers goes to brass tacks in answering why:

“To take away the excuse,” he said, “that we didn't know.” So that two or four or ten years from now, if somebody should ask, “Where were you, Conyers, and where was the United States Congress?” when the Bush Administration declared the Constitution inoperative and revoked the license of parliamentary government, none of the company now present can plead ignorance or temporary insanity, can say that “somehow it escaped our notice” that the President was setting himself up as a supreme leader exempt from the rule of law.