Even if Cheney is the source of the leak, Democrats should do nothing. BS!

[ProSense]

BS! So if the VP committed an act of treason, just let it slide?

Posted on Mon, Feb. 20, 2006

Democrats should want Cheney to stay where he is

By Peter A. Brown

Now, the allegations about Cheney authorizing the leak are just that, but even if they were established fact, why in the world would Dean want Cheney out of office?

If that happened, then the next time Cheney was involved in a hunting accident no one would care.

Seriously though, it has been 40 years since the Republicans entered the presidential primary process without a clear front-runner if not presumptive nominee. This has led to relatively mild primary campaigns and the ensuing unity gets at least some credit for the GOP winning seven of the past 10 presidential elections.

Cheney has no presidential ambitions and Sen. John McCain of Arizona is probably the leader at this point in the GOP contest for 2008. But, his edge is a tenuous one and subject to questions about his acceptance among core conservatives, who dominate the GOP candidate selection process.

Why would Dean want to give the president a chance to strengthen the GOP hand for 2008? Who knows whom Bush would pick - maybe McCain, or perhaps someone more conservative and relatively unknown who might benefit considerably from three years in the public eye as vice president.

http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/newssentinel/news/editorial/13917161.htm

I don't get the logic. If anything the person would succumb to Bush, become associated with his ineptitude and be weakened. Does anyone really think a person put in that position will magically change direction (certainly not McCain--he'll ramp up the war) or will come out looking stronger? What about all the investigations people are demanding across the country? Would that person encourage independent inquiries into domestic spying, Iraq lies, etc.? And if (when) the Democrats take control of Congress, is that person going to cooperate with them on Congressional oversight?

Given these factors, this article implies that a person associated with a failed president, a person who can only stand by and watch (or willing cooperate), will be viewed favorably.

Force the GOP's hand. IMO, they should both be impeached.

[derby378]

1. "I, for one, welcome our new crab overlords..."

Throw Cheney out, and throw this Brown guy after him!

[Triana]

2. They'll let it slide, not to worry...

...they let everything slide. Why would treason be any different?

[Canuckistanian]

3. And Shrub is SO clever with his appointments, isn't he?

I's absolutely sure he'll pick another sure-fire winner.

[On the Road]

4. It Isn't Up to "the Democrats,"

it's up to Patrick Fitzgerald.

Of course Bush and Cheney should both be impeached. But from a purely political point of view, I agree with the sentiment. The last thing I would want is a new Republican VP who is free from all the baggage of the Bush administration and who can run as an incumbent in 2008. No Gerald Fords!

[Vickers]

5. the new VP would have the Bush-stink ALL over 'em after 3 years.

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

[Cocoa]

6. this guy's profession is giving dems bad advice

here's his archive at a right-wing website:

http://jewishworldreview.com/0106/peter_brown.archives.asp

[ProSense]

7. For the elections, link all the Repubs to Bush. n/t