Analysis: Dennis is at it again

He's at it again. Dennis Kucinich (D-iminutive) has once more introduced an article of impeachment against the president. Back in June, Kucinich claimed 35 counts of impeachable offenses against George W. Bush. They soon died in the House Judiciary Committee. This past Thursday however, The Littlest Congressman simplified and introduced one article, entitled "Deceiving Congress with Fabricated Threats of Iraq WMDs to Fraudulently Obtain Support for an Authorization of the Use of Military Force Against Iraq."

The Left's desire for righteous payback is understandable. Bush came to power in 2000 illegitimately and held on to power in 2004 through vile means. During his tenure, Bush has endangered national security, executed a poorly planed, unneeded war and squandered America's world standing. Yes, this is the worst presidency in over a hundred years. Still, it is a strategic error to pursue impeachment, even symbolically. The Cleveland Elf is hurting the Democrats and their chances of undoing Bush's catastrophic legacy.

First and foremost -- it won't work. There is no chance the president is going to be impeached, let alone convicted in the Senate. If Liberals ever wonder why they, or figures like Kucinich are not taken seriously, this is it. They are not acting seriously; tilting at the impeachment windmill is inherently not serious. As Bismark, among others said, "politics is the art of the possible."

This sort of do-nothing showmanship and deadlock is exactly what people don't like about Congress. Bear in mind, Congress is doing about as poorly in approval polls as President Bush. Kucinich is doing nothing to improve this image of not doing anything, but he does help tie it to the Democrats. Indeed, the only reason why this is not hurting the Democrats more is that not enough people take people like him seriously.

The Democrats were given Congress in 2006 because the country had enough of Republican incompetence. The American people are generally not political savvy, but they are forward looking. "Attempted a snowball's-chance-in-hell to impeach Bush" is not a winning answer to "What have you done for me lately?"

The effort is especially futile when the president has only six months left in office. It would be a little like expelling a student on the last day of school. The electorate is far more interested in who will replace Bush than how to prosecute him. This is true even abroad; remarkably low numbers of protesters took to the streets during the lame duck's farewell tour of Europe.

Recriminations, even well-deserved ones, are looking to the past, not the future. The future -- that's where the votes are.

Speaking of the past, take a look at the last time a president was impeached. The Republicans gained very little from their attempt to unseat Bill Clinton. While Clinton was not actually impeached until early 1999, it was clear that was where Congress was headed during the November 1998 midterm elections. It was a major issue in the elections.

The threat of impeachment and the focus on "getting" the president, rather than actually doing something, cost the Republicans. Instead of posting the expected gains in both houses, the Republicans lost. Yes, it resulted in a total backlash against the Republicans.

The smartest move Nancy Pelosi made as Speaker of the House was before she actually took the office -- it was to take impeachment off the table. It neutralized it as a Republican campaign issue. Justified or not, it would have let the Republicans paint Democrats as crazy Communists who want to arrest the president. If the Democrats truly believed there is enough popular support to impeach Bush, they would do it. The support simply is not there. Outside of chatter on the Internet, that is.

John McCain would love to talk about impeachment instead of the economy. He would also love for Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter to talk about impeachment instead of the conservative issues they differ from McCain on. He would also love for Barack Obama to talk about impeachment, where his lack of support would enrage the petulant Left and not convince the Right.

You want to undo the last eight years? Let the subject of debate be what Obama wants to talk about.