I've a lot of agreement for jeromes basic argument.  but would like to take it further. It's argued that it would be a disgrace if Bush was not to be impeached. I would say it is an act of political and moral cowardice that will come back to haunt the democratic party if they do not at least try.

Kos' counter arguments are somewhat simplistic. his first point

we cannot actually convict, so a failed attempt would vindicate Bush much the same way it did for Clinton;

 Well I'd argue that they are such a piss poor gang of incompetents, that it would be hard for any investigation not to turn up enough to damage any feasable candidate that the republicans are going to put up against you at the next election. plus it will distract their entire election machine during the next couple of years when they are trying to get their campaign running properly. If they want to find George not guilty, they are going to have to deflect blame to other quarters.

it would prevent the new Democratic Congress from pursuing progressive democratic legislation, which it does have the votes for.

 What? is there some strange unwritten rule that says that the houses of government can't do anything else whilst impeachmet is happening?  If the media is concentrating on this, it may be an oppertunity to slip through far more progressive legislation, whilst they are distracted.

it would take at least a year, by which time Bush's term would have only a year left anyway.

Now that argument really makes my Blood boil. How is that of any relevence at all? If the  American government is not willing to hold its members to account, then it is essential the populace holds its elected representatives feet to the fire. The power that drives American exceptionalism, is that it is meant to be a pure democracy where politicians are heald to account by the people. Much of the world is willing to go along with this myth, but you have to live up to it for this dispensation to be granted, without it you are just another grubby nation state.

We don't say the average burglar only is going to have your tv for half an hour, before he trades it in for drugs, and his life expectancy is way down on the rest of us and as he's not going to be around for long, we should let him get on with it. why should we deal with crooked politicians in that way?

Jérôme's argument can be found irritating to Americans because it doesn't go into the details of American domestic politics, which is of course of central importance to Americans.

This makes American readers feel that their needs aren't being considered, only the rest of the world's.  So their instinct is to lash out, even people who detest Bush and would love to impeach him if they could.

I'd say it does, If you dont deal with the whole gang now, then the next generation of republican operatives will turn up, having been taught the valuable lesson that we do not expect responsibility from our politicians. and that any half assed, crack brained scam that they can come up with will be tolerated "for the good of the country". It's hard to see any republican president who hasn't come to office without some severe political impropriety. It is in the American publics interest that these Jackals are removed from the process, and I fam frankly incredulous that any American cannot see it that way.

Any idiot can face a crisis - it's day to day living that wears you out.