I actually watched all the Clinton Hearings and fully supported and still support the impeachment of Bill Clinton, I trace the decline in democratic honor from the moment of the disgraceful press conference after the initial vote.

That being said, Tancredo’s case for impeachment of president Obama is just off, it has no more justification than the left’s nonsense of the same toward George W. Bush.

I think this president has been disastrous domestically and adequate at best on defense (which was way ahead of my expectations for him) but certainly not impeachable. Most of what this president has done is bad policy, bad decisions, based on a bad philosophy but you don’t impeach that. (The virtual ceding of parts of Arizona to the Mexican Cartels has potential in that direction but we are nowhere near there yet).

Clinton directly lied to a grand jury, this is an actual crime, and he used the power of the presidency to cover that, he was disbarred for this.

There is nothing that Barack Obama has done to this point that rises to that level, being wrong or mistaken is not an impeachable offense and both legally and politically we waste our time going in that direction.

Memeorandum thread here.

Oh and one note, I’m not arguing that Clinton was a worse president than our current one or was worse for the country, I’m arguing the legalities and the purpose of impeachment as a constitutional tool. It should be used sparingly for actual crimes not as a political club.

Update: And of course here are the democrats also talking smack in the other direction, pure hogwash.

…which didn’t have much to say to Byron York now has something to say:

But there is no getting around the fact that some of these messages, culled from the members-only discussion group Journolist, are embarrassing. They show liberal commentators appearing to cooperate in an effort to hammer out the shrewdest talking points against the Republicans — including, in one case, a suggestion for accusing random conservatives of being racist.

This is in contrast to Tuesday where they said:

The Post’s response was brief. “We do not discuss personnel matters,” Coratti responded. “The Post has standards for its employees and we expect all personnel to follow them.”

I asked whether the Post could add anything to that short answer. After all, this is a serious issue involving at least one high-profile Post journalist, and it is unlikely to go away in the near future. Does the Post really have nothing to say on the matter?

“I’m sorry,” Coratti wrote. “That is all I have to offer.”

It’s looks like the story has progressed to the point where it can’t be ignored, but the wait until friday plan worked, but since Howard Kurtz covered it then it will be on Reliable Sources on Sunday.

Meanwhile here is the memeorandum thread

Director Blue has a history lesson on race

Posted: July 23, 2010 by datechguy in Uncategorized
Tags: , ,

in this post. With one exception it’s pretty good, but lets take a look at the exception because it deals with the future of race in America.

DB hits Shirley Sherrod Maybe it’s just me, but if I had my father murdered in my teens by the Klan I might just have a chip on my shoulder for a bit. The fact that the chip is in any way off her shoulder is the amazing thing. Yeah her actual positions are wrong but I’m inclined to give her more of a pass.

More importantly it explains why in terms of race it will be another 60 years at least before conflicts concerning it are nipped in the bud. Consider:

To someone like me born in ’63 I look at this country and see us way past these things, but to those born just 10 years earlier who lived though a fight, this is not only something they experienced in their youth but their parents and grandparents told them about it and that will stick with them. That’s human nature, as long as the stuff of the 60’s and before is in living memory there will be people who carry it (and for some like Jackson, Sharpton and unfortunately the NAACP will make their living off of it) and let their opinions be shaped by them.

It will not be until the living memory of those times are gone that the next generation will be able to advance. The real danger here is that the race hustlers manage to keep the ball rolling or revive it in the same way that Griffith’s Birth of a nation did for the Klan.

Oh and if you want to understand how that can be done, read Roger Ebert’s review of the Birth of a Nation, it should be read by anyone who wants to understand film and history. (Ebert’s political views are nutty but he knows film)

…at this story:

The revelation that tax increases could hurt the economy has recently been heard from Senators Evan Bayh of Indiana, Ben Nelson of Nebraska, and, most surprising, even from Kent Conrad of North Dakota. On a scale of unlikely events, this is like the Pope coming out against celibacy. As Senate Budget Chairman, Mr. Conrad has rarely seen a tax increase he didn’t like, but this week he averred that “As a general rule, you don’t want to be cutting spending or raising taxes in the midst of a downturn.”

Granted the writer is not aware of the rules concerning married priests in the church but I digress. he continues:

Over in the House, Bobby Bright of Alabama even dared to defend the rich Americans who Democrats have been pounding for years. “I don’t care if it’s the wealthiest of the wealthy. You don’t raise their taxes,” he told The Hill newspaper. “In a recession you don’t tax, burden and restrict.” Better don the body armor on your next visit to the Speaker’s office, Bobby.

The citizen in me is very pleased as HotAir points out:

It’s the wealthy who drive consumer spending and the last thing you want to do in this economy is reduce that by raising taxes on them

No politically this might anger their base a bit but I don’t think it will lose them the votes people think. In fact making the right economic moves makes it more likely that the recession will end and may sustain their re-election.

Now the partisan in me doesn’t like anything that helps the democrats re-election so in that sense this is bad news.

However the citizen always has to trump the partisan. I didn’t become a republican because I like the letter “R”, I vote republican because I have a set of views and beliefs that I believe in and I think are best for the country, I’d just as soon have them soon have them advanced sooner than later. If it means an issue is off the table so be it.