Asher Heimermann's Blog

Clinton's actions didnt cause a war or for lives to be lost, that is a major difference here.

I dont agree with impeaching Bush though, not unless it can be proven that Bush lied to the public about grievous facts. I think the whole nation had blood lust after 9/11, as the invocation of this word was used to justify so many things w/o question. We wanted war, so we got it... now some have a guilty conscience over it, and want to blame someone (but never themselves... no, not that!). Others who remember Vietnam and decided that wasnt worth it either (I'll debate that opinion with anyone who relates this war with Vietnam, or that Vietnam was a 'mistake to learn from') want to be able to say 'I told you so', and perhaps that is an important thing to consider. I dont think anyone can say purely based on fact that Vietnam was bad or good in the end, or that this last war was either. We simply dont know yet, and we will likely never know. War and violence is never a good thing, but some take that to heart and wont even strike back or defend themselves as they are beaten... which shows lack of survival instincts to me.

As to if Bush deserves being impeached... well... we still have to hear the facts first. Dont let your political opinions cloud your ability to reason here and make you draw premature conclusions. If you wait until the facts/evidence come out, you may hear/see something truly shocking that you didnt know about before, and may change your mind. Its too early to pass judgement. Is this a political play by Kucinich, partly, Im sure... you arent going to

Mr. Hahhmerister:

Ask all you want. Just make it substantive, not just POLITICAL.

If, Mr. Bush can be found to be guilty of a CRIMINAL offense........and it does need to be a bit more than not paying a parking ticket, I will be the first to say he has to go.........but, WAIT, he is going in what less than a year?!

Smack of political idiocy............well............let the fact fall where they may.

for legislation that limits the president from gaining too much or abusing power.

In the end, I really cant see anything but positives from it all. The articles of impeachment are really nothing more than proving that there is reason to investigate further, or to believe that a wrong-doing has happened... like a probable cause in a criminal case.

Well, meanwhile, Kucinich did also manage to get HR676 put through as well. From the looks of it, one of the biggest reforms that all the presidential candidates talk about but wont actually clarify anything about... maybe because he's sneaking it by while they are all busy with other topics (I wouldnt be shocked if McCain knows as well, possibly agrees, but cant say anything in front of his fellow 'Pubs so hes looking the other way... he is a 'flip-flopper' after all). In a huge way, he would be 'stealing their thunder' right out from under them as well...lol. He's also dealing a nice 'one-two' punch to the right... jabbing with the impeachment articles (no doubt to get everyone's attention), and waiting for the uppercut with the National Healthcare Reform Act. IMO he was the best candidate on the Dem side, its a shame he got bumped out so early. No corporate money, a true 'poverty to politics' story, you kind of have to admire the guy because he also isnt all full of crap or chasing ambulances like Edwards, and not an attention BLEEP like both the Clintons. The guy is all about public service, not even as 'partisan' as you may think.

You gotta admit, he knows how to pick his fights (or fight to the top from any position), and fight them rather well. Tenacious, hard to argue with... kinda like Carville's long lost twin or something.

Some of the stuff in the 35 articles is a bit 'grey', or tainted with opinion on their own, but when you view the whole article, and the reasons, all together they do sum up to one hell of a picture. If you are going to try to t