Exclusion @ MindSay 
It seems I recall a time called high school when many of the smartest kids were considered outcasts and despite differences in interests and opinions, often engaged socially with one another simply because their perspectives, ways of thinking and communicative tendencies often led to confusion and miscommunication when engaged with more typical patterns of thinking found in the general population. Whether due to inadequate vocabulary or an inability to conceptually grasp the discussions of the gifted, some of those lacking in such abilities would fear and despise the intellectual subset of high school students and through exclusion or occasionally use threat of violence to help supplement a hidden ego-weakness characterized by the ideas that "if I don't know what they are talking about then a) they may be better than me in some way and b) they may be talking about me."
Then came the internet and those smart people could gather together, discuss their issues, and they could not be threatened into keeping their discussions in carefully guarded privacy. It was the realization of the worst fear of many who either through choice or limitations do not participate in nor acknowledge the benefits of the academic or intellectual lifestyle. And you know, sometimes the smart kids were talking about them. So they try to counter with the one true weapon in the age of cyberspace- with words of their own. Unfortunately, they still don't know what those bright kids were talking about, so their arguments fall flat. Meanwhile, those kids- so often excluded, so often misunderstood, and so often demonized for their talents, have been sharpening their skills at debate and honing their linguistic talents to razor sharp precision.
You can almost hear them type: it's our time now.
Divisive tactics are profitable. The mood in America today is polarized with those in power ignoring those who are not. We cannot stand long with the governing half ignoring the other half. Calling me a bad person due to liberal beliefs and unpatriotic for opposing the war in Iraq is typical. The ignoring - even abolishment - of the right of dissent is not consistent with our heritage or the law of the land, but that is the way of things. How do you feel about the USA being an agressor nation? How do you fell about the SUV writeoffs and who benefits? How do you feel about the erosion of our rights and the checks and balances that have worked well for more than two centuries? Eminent domain and the right to protest by burning a flag make a glorious tandem for just a few days work by the Supreme Court and the House.There is a seemingly long forgotten principle of the greater good. It should be the basis for our legislative actions and national leadership.That is, we should vote for whatever means and people that provide the best possible of whatever is involved for the most people possible at the lowest cost possible. This is a policy of inclusion and unity as opposed to exclusion and division by whatever common denominator that applies. It leads to centrist thinking and de-polarizes those from opposing views to a middleground acceptable to a majority. If impeaching Bush is unacceptable, what can we do to accomplish the greater good. My suggestion would be to deny Bush the congressional majorities that make his whims and wishes the law of the land. Vote out the Republican extremists in the 2006 elections ivolving the entire House and a third of the senate. Note, I did not say replace them with democrats. Maybe there are independents - dare I call them centrists - willing and able to run and get elected. Short of impeachment, a harsh measure by any means, this would tie the adminstrations hands and remove the rubber stamp partisan approval of more of the nonsense. Simply put, Presidents are elected to execute the will of the people, not to impose their will on the people. We the people are tired of it.