til pragmatikere og kalkulatorer igjen; de som tror en kan redde prinsippet ved å bryte/overse det:
This brings us back to impeachment. The question it poses is not whether it will be the thing that drives Donald Trump from office or whether it will be an unalloyed political boon for Democrats or other progressive forces in the country. It won’t be any of these things. Instead, the issue raised by impeachment is whether America, at this stage in its history, has what it takes to stand up against the forces of tyranny – whether there is still a passion among its people, and enough vitality in its institutions, to defend the American ideal against an unprecedented assault.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/18/trump-impeachment-why-it-matters
for pragmatikerne/kalkulatorene, så er det intet å forsvare; de er lik de som de som de hevder å kjempe mot, bare med andre meninger, men like prinsippløs. la oss se på dem som det de er; speilbildet av sin motstandere.
som det avsluttes med:
Like the future course of the impeachment process itself, the broader implications of this are not pleasant to contemplate. It is not foreordained that King’s theological conviction that “the moral arc of the universe is long, but it bends towards justice” applies to the political realm. Instead, there is only the guarantee that for so long as the American ideal is alive, and for so long as there are people and institutions who embody it and transmit it through those mystic chords of memory to the next generation – for this long at least, there is struggle, and there is hope. For now, impeachment embodies that hope, and so it must proceed.
tillegg:
Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) dreit seg ut.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/12/19/tulsi-gabbard-present-vote-impeachment-critics/
for ikke å snakke om kommentator henry olsen i wp, som greier å gå på hodet:
Taken out of the context of our times, it’s easy to see why some people would view Trump’s call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky as impeachable conduct. Using public office for private gain is about as basic an abuse of power as there is. Trump’s request that Ukraine cooperate with his personal lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani, suggests that personal rather than public benefit was Trump’s aim. If we lived in normal political times, this argument would likely have more persuasive power than it has to date.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...daaa9e-21e0-11ea-bed5-880264cc91a9_story.html
men siden det nå er demokrater som kjører dette løpet mot kong trump, så gjelder ikke prinsippet, da er det de som står på prinsippet som bedriver partipolitikk (og selvfølgelig ikke gop som står enstemmig bak monarken). en god gammel reductio ad hominem.
det er partipolitik og det er partipolitikk. ikke all partipolitikk er også i overenstemmelse med prinsipper for en republikk, men den kan også være det. utgjør hele forskjellen!
