Alright, so George W. Bush has the lowest approval rating ever in the history of public polling. As he's fond of saying, the previous winner, Harry S. Truman, has been looked upon far more approvingly by history, and he was involved in taking the United States into an unpopular proxy war in the midst of economic turmoil, a housing crisis, and what we would now call stagflation. So W. can't be all bad, er, right?

Before you start frantic troll-rating, let's just agree: Worst Ever. But for the basis of comparison, let's review the other candidates (below the flip) so we can put damage to the Republic, the Nation, and the Planet in appropriate context.

After being dragged through the mud this week, the week of October 9, 2007, watching the Republicans debate in Michigan and a couple of weeks ago having to fortify myself with strong drink just to get through the Democratic 'debate' I am ready to go to war. Yesterday's entry dealt with a review of the heroic age of the Republican Party so I decided to carry over on that theme today with a commentary written in the thralls of last year's mid-term elections. Funny, the points made then with proper updating for current events retain their force today. Hmm. Yesterday's promised lashing of the Democrats is included free of charge.

The President's own party was in shambles, shattered by a failed war effort and powerless before an ascendant and vengeful opposition majority.  The President himself was as obstinate a man as ever "accidentally" came to reside in the White House, and butted heads with Congress over the pace, form, and scope of post-war reconstruction.  This increased after mid-term elections gave the opposition even more seats in Congress, and, emboldened, they started drawing lines in the sand.  All over the country, people held their breath as the President wielded the veto pen and defied the will and overrides of the legislature, until finally Congress impeached him.  The proceedings were spiteful, divisive, and fraught with interpersonal animosity – still, the guys who wanted to get rid of the President only lost by one vote.

Just because something failed doesn't mean you can't learn from it.  Join me, if you will, in the Cave of the Moonbat, where I've spread a bunch of old issues of Harper's Weekly around on the floor.  I've also pointed out some quotes that have a hauntingly familiar ring to them, and a few things we might want to learn from a group of radicals who went after their own Mr. 26%, way back in 1868.

I see no need to wait and leave this to a representative to draft.  Within the blogosphere, we have the talent to draft articles of impeachment.  

Below are links and samples of the articles drafted against Nixon, Clinton, and just for giggles, Andrew Johnson.

Let's make this easy for Congress:

this site has become somewhat obsessed with impeachment these days, so, let's look at the issue. REALLY look at the issue! okay?

let's start at the beginning: here's the definitive primer on impeachment - have at it!

QUESTION: who, legally, can be impeached?

ANSWER:

The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.

   --U.S. Constitution, Article 2, Section 4

This includes the president, the vice president AND members of the  
judiciary (including supreme court justices)

let's not stop here... for an accurate definition of the process please join me beneath the fold!

Here's the fourth of a series of polls on the worst presidents ever. Because badness comes in many flavors, I am looking at bad presidents from several different angles: incompetence, corruption, wimpiness. Previous polls included the most incompetent (Buchanan edged Harding, the most corrupt (Harding edged Nixon), and the most evil (Nixon in a landslide)!

Today's category: screwing things up.  Pick the president who, because of his corruption, incompetence, or venality, left the country in the worst shape. The key here is that the damage was done by the president and his policies.

Here are the rules: make a choice from the list below or, choose the "someone else" listing. No matter which President you selectd, tell us why you think your choice screwd things up the worst. No presidents after 1980 will be considered.  That is especially true for this category because we can all stipulate that the current occupant of the White House would win if he was included.

Here's the third of a series of polls on the worst presidents ever. Because badness comes in many flavors, I am looking at bad presidents from several different angles: incompetence, corruption, wimpiness, and, today's category: venality. This is more than corruption. This category is reserved for Presidents who were bad human beings and whose carried out evil policies. Previous polls included the most incompetent (Buchanan edged Harding) and the most corrupt (Harding edged Nixon)

Here are the rules: make a choice from the list below or, choose the "someone else" listing. Tell us why you think your choice is the most evil president. No presidents after 1980 will be considered. That's too soon to make historical judgements and, beside, we know who would win hands down if we included the current occupant.

And an extra bonus: audio of fired US Attorney Bud Cummins' speech last week when he blasted the AG.

It is, perhaps, the nature of those who study the past to be slightly behind the times – by definition, it’s tough to get an historical perspective on current events – but as your self-appointed resident historiorantologist, I felt an obligation to dig up a few buried blockquotes and some misplaced pieces of context on the matter of presidential impeachment nonetheless.  What I uncovered reaffirmed and strengthened my personal opinion that it is our Constitutional duty to see the current resident of the White House impeached - and in the finest tradition of throwing gasoline on a dying fire, I’d like to share my findings with you all tonight.  

So join me, if you will, in the Cave of the Moonbat, for a brief look at the origins of impeachment.  Presented also for the consideration of our People-Powered community will be the opinions of Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, Joseph Story, and Barbara Jordan, who have much to say regarding what the 110th Congress ought to do...

...right now.

A lot of people are rightly passionate about whether the current occupants of the White House should be impeached. The question of whether or not Bush and Cheney deserve to be impeached is beyond settled; the crimes that they have committed against America are unquestionable, and they are far more serious than anything Bill Clinton ever did when he was impeached for what amounted to little more than lying about his extramarital dalliances.

In an ideal world, Bush and Cheney's impeachment would be the first order of business when the 110th Congress convenes on January 4, 2007. But we do not live in an ideal world, and we cannot impeach them because the process isn't about justice. It's about politics.

Anyone over the age of about 35 has lived through some of the most intensely political acts in our nation's history. We can honestly debate the merits of impeaching George W. Bush because of his actions. Less than ten years ago we saw President Clinton impeached and ultimately acquitted by the Senate. In 1974 Richard Nixon was facing impeachment but chose to resign before he could be impeached.

There was one other time in our history where a president was impeached.

Of course, even the mention of impeachment comes with the old, too radical, liberal, America hating jargon that has plagued progressives for decades. But impeachment is not so radical after all. Before we examine the case against George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, and what the implications of impeachment are, let's look at the history of impeachment in the United States.