Our household is finally settling down. My son is adjusting to his temporary disability. My husband and I are catching up on our sleep. We can relax a little now.
Now that the crisis is over, I can return to my other musings.
Today I was thinking about that person who says he's the leader of our country. It is now widely acknowledged that he did not win the 2000 election and that if the recount had been allowed to be carried out, Al Gore would be in the White House. The fact that this discretion has been allowed to continue is both frustrating and just plain wrong.
There is talk of impeachment. I know of a few websites which make this effort a major focus. But why should impeachment be an issue if the guy never won the election in the first place?
We the people of the United States own the White House. If we the people elected Al Gore to be our president--and he was prevented from taking his rightful place by a small corrupt group of old men--then we the people have the right to evict him.
I propose we give him thirty days. We could include a small stipend to help him with moving expenses, just to be nice. Maybe enough for a good-sized U-Haul.
Telll him to evacuate the premises by the end of August. Then we can let the real president take his rightful place.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I just looked up the phrase "normalcy is not a word," and I came upon your site. Funny, how like minds attract. (As for the term "normalcy," it was coined by the former holder of the "worst president ever" award* (see below).
Now then, my question, to get to the point, is WHY didn't more Americans have the same reaction to the stealing of the election, and rise up to do something about it?
The answer seems to lie in the same reason nothing has been done, really, to end the war in Iraq, to push for impeachment for so many other crimes against the constitution committed by this administration. Depending on your lot in life, I think the answer is either self-absorption/interest or powerlessness.
Powerlessness first. More accurately, the disenfranchised. Those who are most affected by this administration's terrible policies (and crimes) are powerless to challenge or call attention to them, as they are busy surviving--and most just barely (the incidence of PTSD among victims of Katrina has actually increased; an anomaly in the history of this DSM-IV diagnosis; soldiers in our "all-volunteer army" [read:coerced army] are forced to return to battle if their limbs are not blown to bits already and they can still make their way into the meatgrinder for the sake of new business opportunities for Cheney, Bush and their corporate vampire set).
But the worst offenders--myself included--are those who know the truth but are too comfortable to really do anything anything about it. Yes, I voted for Pelosi's congress (and wonder why, now. But that's another blogpoint). Yes, I donate to SaveDarfur, MoveOn and other organizations (please visit invisiblechildren.com). Yes, I pressure the news media now and again, in my small ways, to end their complicity in the march toward disaster for the human race and its borrowed home, Earth.
I'm sure we all do small things in our own small way. But the pivotal question is this (and feel free to take it either literally or as an analogy): Why didn't we tear down the pillars of the Supreme Court on the day Bush v Gore was announced, and demand that re-count? Any fledgling democracy in any nation on earth, no matter its history and/or memory of repression, would have seen, at the least, such righteous (and morally right) outrage from its populace. For it is, I fear, only in those who remember what it was like to live without freedom that the taste, and reverence, for true freedom endures.
Go figure.
So what's the next step?
Phew. . .
I wonder if anyone else in the small club of those offended by the misuse of language will find their way to your blog. If not, I intend, thanks to you and the spark you renewed in my gut, to send off as many letters to as many powerful outlets as I can on this topic. For the truth must out.
Oh, and here's more on the previous holder of the "worst president ever" distinction, thanks to CNN.com. Interesting, some of the parallels. If only Laura were as bold and prescient as Harding's wife was. . .
Warren Harding (President #29, 1921--1923)
Warren G. Harding is generally regarded as the worst president ever. He was disappointing from the get-go, as the very basis of his campaign was boring. Harding ran on the promise of a "return to normalcy," which he (somehow) felt people craved following Woodrow Wilson's bold and visionary term.
To make things worse, Harding ran the White House like a kind of boys' club, where he and some friends known as the "Ohio Gang" enjoyed drinking, playing golf, and cheating on their wives. (Harding is widely rumored to have paid a gambling debt with antique White House china.)
After admitting to friends that he felt overmatched by the job of president, Harding gave his Cabinet free reign and treated the presidency as more of a ceremonial post.
Just as the friends he'd appointed were being nailed for corruption one after another, Harding contracted what doctors assumed was ptomaine poisoning and died of a related heart attack. No autopsy was performed, but rumors abounded that his wife poisoned him to protect what legacy he had left.
Post a Comment