Bye, Karl! Don't let the door hit you in the . . .

Yes, that's right, Karl Rove, the architect behind Smirky's rise to ultimate evil, er, power, will be resigning in a couple weeks. You would think that I might be dancing in the streets to the tune of "Ding Dong, the fat-MFer-that-has-ruined-the-country is dead", but I'm not. Why? Well, it's all too obvious that this man has never done anything without thinking through the ramifications and weighed all possible outcomes against his goals. Yes, he's been wrong before (I really think he thought the Republicans would retain the Senate in the election of 2006--remember his "I have the math" interview answer?), but he has never moved precipitously or thoughtlessly, let alone due to an emotional impulse.
So, why is he stepping down now?
Let's assume that Karl Rove has done unspeakable acts of illegality and unethics in the service of the loons in the White House--that's easy. Let's further assume that even in this era of spineless Democrats, enough people out there know enough stuff about Rove that investigations currently underway will eventually end at Rove's doorstep, even given his literal contempt of Congressional oversight. Given the first assumption, the second will result in convictions aplenty, impeachment, and who knows what all else, or the prospect of Doughy McEvil rolling over on Smirky and the gang to avoid jail time. If he were to stay employed that is. Now that he's unemployed, however, the Republicans and Smirky have their ripostes at the ready if the investigations continue: "Haven't you done enough? This partisan witch hunt needs to stop." "Rove is a private citizen who shouldn't have to endure having his name being dragged through the mud." "Impeachment is a waste of time and money; he's no longer in office." And my personal favorite, "Get over it. Let's move on."
The sick thing about this is, there are enough stupid Democrats (yes, I'm talking about you, Joe Lieberman) in Congress that will agree with this point of view to preclude the continuation of any investigations, up to and including impeachment proceedings. And we'll be right back where we were in 1974 after Watergate, or 1987 after Iran-Contra, when most of the current crop of solipsistic sociopaths were let up off the mat. By not impeaching these criminals we do two things: we let them maintain their capacity for serving in public office and we send the message that we don't care about the rule of law (or the power of Congress) any more. Each time a Republican regime has begun since Nixon resigned we've been screwed over more extensively than the previous time, by the same people in many cases. Why wouldn't they? There haven't been any repercussions for their illegal, immoral, and wanton acts of countrycide.
I don't have any illusions that this time it will be any different, but I know that I don't want to be around the next time a Republican junta takes power if it isn't. And if TBO and I get lucky enough to have a child, I will make sure s/he knows enough to hightail it to Canada as soon as those election results come in, God forbid. I sure will . . .