>(Look at the Republicans
>who impeached Clinton; it was so absurdly partisan that obviously the
>biggest reason for the impeachement was not the adultery or the lying
>(politicians have told bigger lies before and gotten away with it!) but
>the fact he was a Democrat and they just didn't like him. But that wasn't
>what they *said*.)
Bzzt. In classic Democratic spin, you have made impeachment about
"lying". Unfortunately, impeachment was not about lying, it was about the
"Rule of Law." In particular, we had a President who publicly crowed
about signing the "Violence Against Women Act" - an Act which was so
abusive, that it gave any woman who simply *accused* a man of a sexual
offence near-plenary powers to pursue that man's entire sexual history.
This President then asserted that this Law should not apply to him, for
various and sundry reasons. After the Courts asserted that, in fact, the
President is not above the Law (most especially Laws he very publicly
supported and signed) - this President again asserted immunity by
flagarantly refusing to comply with the Courts and then committing a second
offense of perjury.
The Presidential Oath of Office plainly states that the office holder
solemnly swears "to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the
United States." If clearly violating the Oath of Office, especially in
regards to a Law that the President intended to apply against the rest of
the American citizenry, is not an impeachable offense - then impeachment
might as well be stricken from the Constitution as being a meaningless
check-and-balance on the authority of the executive.
If you want to talk about partisanship, however, let us talk about the
Democrats. Had Bill Clinton done the appropriate thing and resigned, or
the Democrats done the appropriate thing, and convicted Bill Clinton of the
crimes he committed, then Al Gore would have become President sometime in
1998. The Democratic Agenda would have been unaffected. Running as an
incumbent in 2000, he would almost certainly have been re-elected.
In other words it was the *Republican* Party that had everything to lose
from impeachment. If the Democrats had acted honorably during the
affair, the entire Washington Agenda would be completely different right
now. The entire course of our nation's history would have been changed.
Instead, the Democrats placed one man above principle, and are now
suffering their just deserts.
JDG
P.S. Arlen Specter agitated a few months ago for extra checks and balances
on the Presidential pardon power, after Bill Clinton essentially sold some
of his pardons to the highest bidder. Of course, these checks and
balances already exist. Its called impeachment. And given that Mr.
Specter cravenly voted to acquit a guilty man, he should hardly be
surprised by future abuses of power.
__________________________________________________________
John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - ICQ #3527685
"Compassionate conservatism is the way to reconcile the two most vital
conservative intellectual traditions: libertarianism & Catholic social
thought."
-Michael Gerson, advisor to George W. Bush
