His argument is basically this: Torture is wrong, therefore Bush must be impeached.
Of course, Keillor's thought process does not extend beyond this basic argument. He does not stop to think: If Bush is removed from office, who will be the next president? That would be Dick Cheney. Do you think Cheney would stop the torture? I doubt it. If we impeach Cheney too? I think we can go down the Constitutional chain of command and not find anyone who will remove this policy. They might be a lot more quiet about it, but it won't go away.
Ironically, Keillor is smart enough to recognize that the ballot box does not leave us an option:
"Meanwhile, many Democrats have conceded the very subject of security and positioned themselves as Guardians of Our Forests and Benefactors of Waifs and Owls, neglecting the most basic job of government, which is to defend the country."
So we impeach Bush, Cheney takes over and hides the torture, and then in the next election we vote Republican? That should teach the Republicans a lesson.
In all seriousness, I can appreciate there are people in this country who are adamantly opposed to torture. I especially respect the position of people like John McCain who are opposed to it based on the fact they were on the receiving end of it. In general, I am also opposed to it.
But folks, this is war. War presents us with many "lesser of two evils" choices. If the safety of our country depends directly or indirectly on the use of torture, then I will support it. I don't have to like it. You don't have to like it. At least we are still alive to discuss it.