 |
|
Add to My Group
|
June 24, 2008 at 22:13:27
Selling Hope: Wexler's Impeachment Charade by scott creighton Page 1 of 3 page(s) |
|
 
|
Editor's Note: See David Swanson's article, In Defense of Robert Wexler, for another take on Rep. Wexler. On December 12th of 2007, I made a mistake. This evening, for an hour I made the same mistake. I won’t make it again. I promise you that Mr. Wexler. How long did you think you could get away with this little game of yours? Did Eric Johnson come to you one day after Kucinich put forward HR 333 to impeach Cheney, and say “hey, there’s some good numbers here from this impeachment thing. Now how can we ride on this for awhile?” Is that what he said, Robert? No wonder you pay him $120k a year + (and no wonder people say government is bloated. A Chief of staff for a congressman getting paid that kind of money while you guys up the minimum wage $2 per hour over three years.), or was it your idea to ride the courage and the coat-tails of a real representative back into office? Today I got a phone call that professed to be a conference call on impeachment with Robert Wexler. So I listened in and took notes on what he said, like an idiot.
You see, on Dec. 12th 2007, I wrote a little article about Wexler’s strange “petition” that consisted of three sentences. Three. It was on a newly set-up website where you could “sign” the petition. But there were some strange things about it.
“His site for the petition is teamed with a contribute link where you can contribute to his upcoming re-election bid. In fact, signing the petition also signs you up to support his re-election. And you can’t see the actual petition, except for those three sentences; once you sign it takes you to a thank you page and offers you a chance to contribute.”
Right off the bat I noticed that his petition site had a “contribute” tab at the very top. Contribute to what you might ask? Contribute to his campaign fund, that’s what.
So I wrote the article based on the idea that no one should try to make money off of something that Kucinich started and millions of people desperately want to better our country; to protect the constitution; and to save the lives of countless of our soldiers and the innocent cilivilians in Iraq.
Once you signed the petition (as I did) it “…(a)ctually it takes you to the “Join” page of his campaign website where they ask you questions like whether or not you voted in 2006 and whether or not you would like to volunteer for his campaign staff.”
I rightly pointed out that at the time Wexler wasn’t even a co-sponsor of HR 333, Kucinich’s question of privilege to impeach Vice President Cheney. I just checked, and he got around to signing on as a co-sponsor on the 11th of this month. 12 days ago.
Anyway, 20 minutes after that article was published, Eric Johnson, Wexler’s Chief of Staff, put up a comment on the site. It’s all still there for everyone to see. He told me that yes, the petition was 3 sentences long, but was connected to an oped that Wexler had written and was linked to the site. The Oped piece was a call for impeachment, but it linked back to the petition site, and therefore the “contribute” tab as well.
Nearly a quarter of a million people signed that “petition” (you want to see what a petition looks like? Here’s one The Petition to Replace Pelosi as Speaker of the House (4 pages legal definitions, somewhat passionate language, and no DONATE link anywhere (in fact many people have felt so strongly about it they have asked to contribute, and I have respectfully declined their offers. Money is too hard to come by these days, and their signatures are MORE than enough.) I repeat: “No DONATE page anywhere”.
But, I have to admit, though I thought it strange that Johnson would happen across my little site so quickly, I listened to his argument, and posted his comments into the body of the article giving them full opportunity to make their case.
That was my mistake. It won’t happen again.
I have recently received several letters from Wexler about impeachment. He is not taking much of a hard-line with the House leadership though. He claims this is their obligation and their duty and that there is nothing more important than this bill. And at the bottom of every one of those letters is the same big DONATE link button.
However, I would like to point out that he is also a co-sponsor of House Resolution 362, otherwise known as the Naval Blockade of Iran Bill, which demands that the White House use all possible options to block refined gasoline from entering Iran. There is a very valid argument that this may give the Bush administration just the edge it needs to provoke an attack on Iran before the election. Either way, Iran is not building nuclear weapons, and to punish the people of Iran, who helped us in the attack on the Taliban and the search for Bin Laden, is not the democratic way to go.
http://willyloman.wordpress.com/
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
 Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
 View Authors' Articles |
|
|
|
|
| 9 comments |
|
Snake oil salesmen sell us no hope but our own
I really liked this article and applaud Creighton's efforts at unmasking the sham Wexler's foisting; but still, knowing & believing all that, i would rather vote for him, than for someone who wouldn't even sell me hope. Creighton's right--for whatever reason EVERY politician i've ever met has been little more than a self interested self-aggrandizer who invariably attend to party & position needs first and work for the public good only as an afterthought. STILL, someone who is marketing me back my own hope is preferable to someone working against my hopes. Try living out here in AZ where our legislators are Trent Franks, Jon Kyl, and oh yes, John McCain. Selling me my own hope at least i get to feel hope, & get to personally work on advancing that hope, instead of spending all my activist energy battling theirs. I may be willfully naive, but i still believe and teach that citizen power ultimately is the most important power, or is supposed to be anyway. If exploiters aim to profit from our mobilization then i am willing to tolerate that a bit, so long as we at last actually mobilze. --mikel by mikel weisser (49 articles, 3 quicklinks, 15 diaries, 87 comments [3 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2008 at 11:11:08 AM  (0+)
|
|
Reply: I can accept that conclusion
I wrote this last night right after the "conference call" and quite frankly, I was a bit disappointed at the time. though i still stand by what I say in the article, it seems this is the current political climate we live in. I guess it could be worse; he could be trying to get drilling rights for his buddies at Exxon. by scott creighton (25 articles, 11 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 244 comments) on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2008 at 11:42:34 AM (0+)
|
|
Scott, with respect, I don't care why Wexler is helping us.
I don't care if he's funding his campaign or selling a book, or marketing a movie, trading cards and an action figure. Whatever he's willing to do for impeachment, I'll take it -- because we need his help. It's too bad that you were disappointed. But, expecting other people to somehow measure up to your private purity test is going to be a no-winner, especially where politicians are involved. And that expectation will do nothing to forward the case for impeachment or to build the team when other people inevitably disappoint you. by Elizabeth Ferrari (20 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 81 comments) on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2008 at 11:48:55 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Elizabeth
I noticed a long time ago some things about his 'petiton" and I wrote about it. i was contacted by his Chief of Staff, and i gave them the benifit of the doubt and PUBLIClY included his reply and have supported his efforts ever since. So I certainly try to expand the cirlce of impeachment supporters. It is not about Wexler not living up to MY personal standards or letting me down, but what it is about is this commonplace idea that all of them use any isue to further whatever agenda they have being "ok" because that is the way it is done. Why is it not ok for republicans to wrap themselves in the flag to get reelected, while it is just reasonable to accept that a democrat will wrap themselves in someone elses impeachment efforts to do the same? Mind you, Dennis Kucinich isn't the only House member who could put forward the question of privilege to impeach Bush. So why did it take so long for Wexler to jump up again? Why didn't he do the same thing before kucinish did thus giving more credibility to the motion? by scott creighton (25 articles, 11 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 244 comments) on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2008 at 11:58:58 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Scott, I'm more interested in supporting those who support
impeachment than I am in second guessing their motives. I hope Wexler's book sells out. I hope he rakes in a ton for his campaign fund. If he wants to sell a rock opera to cover his costs, I'll help write it. And I look forward to working with him on holding this criminal regime accountable. We need hundreds of more Wexlers. by Elizabeth Ferrari (20 articles, 0 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 81 comments) on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2008 at 3:13:05 PM (0+)
|
|
Difficult
It is difficult to trust Mr Wexler after Conyers has jerked us around for more than a year. It seems as if he is over doing his support of the impeachment movement but any help we can get is nice. I will be keeping a wary eye on Wexler while continuing to push for George and Dick's early retirement. by Hayesml47 (6 articles, 0 quicklinks, 4 diaries, 540 comments [10 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2008 at 3:18:59 PM (0+)
|
|
ITS THE OLD GOOD GUY BAD GUY
CONGRESS AND THE SENATE ARE LAUGHING AT WE THE PEOPLE, THEY ARE ALL GETTING RICH, AND LAUGHING ALL THE WAY TO THE BANK, THERE IS NO MORE CHECKS AND BALANCES, NO MORE OVER SITE, AND THEY LIKE IT THAT WAY AND ALL THE ELECTIONS ARE FIXED . JUST LOOK AT WHAT WE ARE GIVING TO VOTE FOR TWO GLOBAL ELITE PAWNS. IS THIS YOUR PICK, I DON'T THINK SO, ITS AT THE POINT OF NO RETURN, AND WAXLER IS JUST THERE TO GIVE US A LITTLE HOPE AND GIVE THEM MORE TIME TO PASS MORE BILLS TO REPRESS ANY DECENT THAT MIGHT BE IN THE WORKS, IF YOU CAN;T SEE THIS, YOU ARE WATCHING TO MUCH FOX, OR MSNBC DECEPTION by RICH SHA (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 106 comments) on Wednesday, Jun 25, 2008 at 5:11:26 PM (0+)
|
|
Thanks for link to Swanson's article
Scott: You're a class act. I'm not a supporter of your slam against Wexler, but you've won my support for your promotion of a contrary vision. Exactly what I want from commentary sources! FYI: For someone who is 100% on board with impeachment, see Samm Simpson running in FL-10. http://www.sammsimpson.com She got ImpeachPac's endorsement in 2006, gave Bush rubber stamp/wholly-owned subsidiary of the military industrial complex Bill Young the best run for his money since 1994 while only spending $40K. Young spent over $100K to beat her. She's back and facing a primary against 2 life long Republicans posing as Dems. It's a winnable seat, but of course the corporatist Dems are doing their best to screw up the process. Please help if you can. by Michael Fox (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments) on Thursday, Jun 26, 2008 at 1:03:09 AM (0+)
|
|
'Let's Pretend' at the Congresional Nursery School
Bright and chipper Teacher: “Welcome boys and girls! Get ready for another fun filled day here at the Congressional Nursery School. It’s campaign season. Let’s play, LET'S PRETEND! Does anyone have an idea they’d like to share?” . Robbie Wexler: “Let’s pretend to impeach the President and Vice President. I wrote up a little something that’s short, sweet and sure to bring home the bacon!” . Teacher: Interesting! Dennis Kucinich played that game a few months ago to rave reviews. Any other ideas? Teacher: Scott Creighton, is visiting today. What’s your idea? . Scott Creighton: “I say let’s really do it!” . Teacher: Do what? . Scott: Impeach the President and Vice President! . Wexler: Scott, get real. That won’t bring home the bacon! . Scott frowns . Wexler: Hey cheer up. We get to play with pork bellies today during recess. What's ever left over, we get for lunch. . Scott: So it’s all about the pork? . Wexler: Perks too. by Susan Allen (18 articles, 3 quicklinks, 3 diaries, 23 comments) on Friday, Jun 27, 2008 at 8:16:50 PM (0+)
|
Want to post your own comment on this Article? 
|
||||
|
||||||||||||||
Must Read (0) 
Well Said (0) 
News (0) 
Touching (0) 
Funny (0) 
Supported (0) 
Interesting (0) 
Inspiring (0) 
Valuable (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |
