Cracking the Mystery of Why the Democrats Won't Impeach George W. Bush

It is no longer a mystery why Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are unwilling to even allow the word impeachment to be spoken in their presence. For months I have been struggling hard to understand how these guys, most of whom were around when the Republicans violated every tenet of adult behavior in their ravenous mission to impeach Bill Clinton on even the most ridiculous of "offenses", have allowed Pres. Bush to remain unfettered by the process of preparing for impeachment. Nobody really thinks that Republicans would actually vote to convict the liar, but engaging in impeachment would at least be enough to distract the Bush administration from their hellbent assignment to destroy America. Just think what future high crimes and misdemeanors and errors in tactical judgment and incompetencies of a historic nature might be avoided if Bush and Cheney were spending every waking moment destroying all the evidence that an impeachment process would allow the Democrats to get their hands on.

Alas, my friends, that is merely a pipedream. Why, you might as well ask for the moon or that the next election presents the maddening choice of picking between two statespeople with vision, intelligence, charisma and new ideas about how to make America great. Impeachment is off the table; Nancy "No-Balls" Pelosi has made that clear. And now I have finally come to understand why. In fact, I not only understand why Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and the majority of spineless Democrats won't commit to holding George W. Bush accountable for the multitude of impeachable offenses he has committed, I even sort of sympathize with their dilemma. The way Pelosi and Reid and the gang are thinking is the ultimate in bleeding-heart liberal approach to criminals.

You don't try a retarded man for murder, so why would you charge a retarded President for impeachable offenses?