President George W. Bush should be impeached

"We shouldn't give the image that we uphold the law? Somehow I fail to see the problem with this. Our nation is being criticized for Iraq and for torture, and these criticisms stem from these crimes." Whose law? Our law? Or the arbitrary human rights laws that only a part of the world takes as a given? The backroom deals and political secrecy that go on in the upper levels of the government, of ANY government, are far above and beyond our concern. To impeach the president is an act of ignorance, like a group of children saying that their babysitter is violating the bed time rules she set for them. "They only occur because we turn a blind eye to them. A democracy cannot be effectively run by criminals. It is not acceptable to let criminals walk free, whether they are the president or a man living in a dumpster." Criminals by whose interpretation? It's easy to point at a murderer and call him a criminal. But what about a soldier? How about the assassin who takes down the head of a dictatorial regime? It all boils down to purpose, and who's pulling th strings, and for what reason. We don't know what goes on up there, but we can cling onto the propaganda and the mantras that we were taught (ironically, by the government) as children in order to point the finger back. It's ludicrous. In addition, this is not a democracy. At very best, we can call this a democratic republic, but it is more of an aristocracy. America is not the shining beacon of freedom for all mankind. We are not the land of the free, or the home of the brave. We're just like any other country, and we are run just like any other country, better than some, worse than others. Therefore, impeaching the president, the person who makes sure everything in the back rooms runs smoothly, in order to uphold nebulous ideals we have little to no objective justification for, is stupid. "While pilots don't have to follow the "no admittance" signs on the cockpit door, they do have rules to follow, otherwise they lose their job. The same goes for leaders, yes, they have some leeway that others don't have, top secret security clearance, their finger on the red button, but that does not give them leeway to trample human rights or lie to the people they serve. When my opponent claims that these acts are nothing compared to the welfare of the country he forgets that these acts harm the welfare of the country." And what my opponent needs to understand is that we are far too ignorant to even BEGIN to understand what is good and bad for the country. To further extend the analogy, imagine if you will a 10 year old trying to supervise his own surgery, criticizing his surgeon. This is the gap between the civilians being ruled and the president himself. "An overview: My opponent claims that the welfare of the country must take precedence over upholding justice. He never supports this, and, even if this is true he never says why impeachment harms our welfare, especially in this instance, besides a brief mentioning of it making a joke out of the nation (which is never warranted). The actions we are punishing Bush for were not only illegal, but harmed the country, so we still are helping the country through impeachment." My support is the argument that my opponent's definition of upholding justice (impeaching the president on ridiculously infantile charges) is merely an ignorant act based on ideals that have been forced on us since birth by our society. I also clarify my point on impeachment harming our welfare: In my opinion, no impeachment will ever take place. The act carried out by congress will never be passed because it is purely symbolic. In order to give the illusion that the people have power over a president who "breaks the law", they include this act of impeachment. However, it's all for show. There have only been two prior attempts to impeach and both have failed. Thus, the only way an impeachment can ever go through is if the American populace itself, outside the know, decides to impeach the president as a group, without the aid of representatives. This is on the verge of revolution. It is also the ONLY way my opponent's proposal can go through. That is what I mean when I say that a call to impeach, should it ever be successful, is greatly harmful to our country. In the eyes of any other country leaders, this would be hilarious because the patriotism and propaganda used to keep us sheep docile would in turn destroy those who rule. As for my opponent's final point, it is laughable to even ASSUME we can punish our president, even if there is anything to punish him for (which there isn't). My opponent naively assumes that the few examples of Bush's "improper behavior" are enough reason to impeach him and justify the act. I say with a great deal of confidence that the man is responsible for much, much worse, including and not limited to assassination, global political conspiracy, etc. And I also add that this is all fine and dandy because it is part of how a country is run. Civil rights, human rights, good, evil, morality in general, these things do not transcend all human life. They are merely on the level of day to day civilian life. To impeach the president won't punish Bush, it will only punish us.