I’m not saying to forget about impeaching Bush or Cheney, but I believe that the Democrats we have in Congress have different priorities than the American people do, and we are not going to see impeachment with these Democrats in office. I am no longer surprised to see someone like John Conyers behave in a cavalier way when someone such as Rob Kall, the publisher of OpEdNews.com, when he asked why Congress hasn’t done anything about this president breaking the law. Representative Conyers seemed to be actually talking down to Rob.
We know Conyers has been in office quite a while. Maybe that is his problem! Maybe the reason he acts as if we haven’t a clue about how politics really works, is because it doesn’t work as it’s supposed to work. All of the nuances that he believes he is privy to, in my opinion, just shouldn’t exist. He is worried about how impeachment would “look” to the voters in 2008. This, quite frankly, should not be a concern. What should be a concern is whether or not the President and Vice President broke the law and worked against the best interests of the American people. That should be the over riding concern of Representative Conyers, not about how the issue of impeachment would affect the bottom line of electing Democrats to Congress.
Without getting into all the specifics of how many times this Administration has committed crimes, I would only like to point out that they broke the law by spying on Americans without proper legal authorization. Members of the administration disclosed the name of a CIA covert intelligence operative, and the one that was convicted of this act of treason, was pardoned by the very same administration. Meanwhile, those that cite patriotism as the overwhelming reason why they support the President and Vice President, seem to have overlooked crimes committed against the American people by these very same men. These same supporters support an administration that have distorted facts and committed outright treason by lying about the reasons they took this nation to war.
The so-called “patriotic” Americans of the right are also very comfortable with this president signing statements on what parts of a law the he just signed, that he will abide by. If the president doesn’t believe that a law is just and fair in all aspects, he has the option, which is perfectly legal, to veto that law. I would like to know if the sections of the law he doesn’t prefer to follow, are only for him to ignore, or is it for every American to ignore the sections he doesn’t care for? Is it the President who is above the law, or is it everyone?
I fail to see the reasoning behind any of this. Whether it’s the President only wanting to follow the laws that he feels are legitimate, or John Conyers explaining why it is a bad time to charge George W. Bush and Richard Cheney for breaking the law? Is there a special “season” where lawmakers only obey the laws they like or enforce the laws that others break? Is the law only the law for some of us and not for others? Is there a form somewhere that I can sign that will allow me to only obey the laws that I approve of? What about a "fact sheet" that would let me know what laws are going to be enforced and what laws are not?
I realize that Rob Kall is not a professional politician. I am in that same category; I don’t know what laws are “real” and what laws aren’t. The way to resolve all of this would to enforce all the laws on the books. The laws that are outdated or unjust should be repealed. This would prevent John Conyers from treating me like the village idiot if I happened to ask him about why some individuals are prosecuted, and why some are not. I went to school and I read the papers. In my 57 years I have tried to keep up with the law because ignorance of the law is no defense, and I really don’t want to commit a crime if I can help it. The thing that I want clarified, is why can some people break the law without any fear of being prosecuted? Maybe I should run for president, or at least get a hold of that "fact sheet" that Bush and Conyers have. That way I would know what laws are “in-season” and what laws are not.
That’s the way I see it.