How Do You Solve a Problem Like W?

This is a sequence I got involved in at Swampland, which starts with this piece in the dead tree version of Time by Joe Klein, in which Joe declares the Bush presidency dead in the water and muses about what to do with such a Presidency in it's lame duck years. Followed by a blog in which Joe cast doubts the wisdom/practicality of impeachment and many commenters howl for immediate impeachment.

Ana Marie Cox's husband (Swampdad) weighed in with this :

I really like his article - even tho he says in the blog he is not calling for impeachment. [Then] what the f**k is he calling for?

Love,

Sam

To which Joe replied

Ana, ask Swampdad to think about the effects of impeachment: If successful, you get President Cheney. If unsuccessful, you get a latter day precedent--any President, and especially the next President, is more likely to be impeached than not. Impeachment was cheapened by Republicans in the last administration; it shouldn't be cheapened by Democrats in this one. It should be saved for the most blatant cases of serious criminality, not for criminal adolescence and incompetence.

As for what to do now: oppose the Bush foreign policy without proposing precipitate and ill-considered alternatives (listen to politicians like Jim Webb, John Warner, Jack Reed and Chuck Hagel on Iraq), publicize any ensuing acts of carelessness (like Walter Reed) and expose--and block--Rovean overreach. And try to find a next President who is more thoughtful and judicious.

Upon which I commented

Joe is right. Hard as it is to swallow, impeachment for incompetence is not the right answer and not what the founders wanted. It's just too bad a precedent. That said, we should be absolutely vigilant for any evidence of an impeachable offense and act swiftly if it crops up.

Short of impeachment, whats to be done? One of the better (if somewhat fantastic) scenario's would be the removal of Cheney and the appointment of a compromise, centrist, caretaker VP (which is the only kind this Senate will approve). Colin Powell would be my choice but maybe there's some responsible, moderate ex-governor. So, any time and effort put into possible crimes that require the removal of Cheney is absolutely worthwhile. And the Dems should start thinking about who would be an acceptable stand in if the gap comes up.

A few more thoughts.

The most destructive effects of this administration have been the result of the symbiosis between Cheney's ideology and Bush's stupidity. These tragic failures have been enabled by the fact that Bush is dumb enough to do the evil things Cheney dreams up. Break them up and you reduce the damage, potentially, a lot.

Replacing Cheney is a really good way to contain the damage the Administration could do in the next two years. Critically, it also means that if you then come up with valid grounds for impeachment you don't end up President Cheney. A prospect that gives horrific new meaning to "out of the frying pan and into the fire". In fact, any candidate to replace Cheney as VP would have to be credible as a caretaker President, keeping in mind the real potential for this President to be impeached, resign in disgrace or otherwise be hounded from office.

Perhaps the most realistic hope of moderating out the potential damage to America and the world from this Administration is to slowly build a veto proof majority out of Democrats and disaffected Republicans. There's some hope that, at least issue by issue, moderate Republicans and those facing reelection will be persuaded to override vetoes on key pieces of legislation. It will require top class legislative leadership to pull that off and sadly it's not clear that Pelosi and Reid have what it takes. Steny Hoyer just might though.

Perhaps the bigger issue, which goes to the biggest risk for catastrophic error, is to wrest back the war power. Given the horrible consequences of stumbling in to war with Iran, Syria or North Korea, any damage Congress sustains in a full out war powers fight is a price worth paying. That course of action would require big brass ones. Which appear to be in short supply in Congress.

Finally to echo what Joe said. On Iraq, it's always a good idea to listen to Jim Webb .