|
|
Add to My Group
There is a dramatic and growing split between rank and file Democrats (particularly those of an activist bent such as those on DKos or DU) and Democratic politicians in Washington who have basically placed Impeachment "Off the Table." Many Democrats have been frustrated and even outraged by this - but have they truly listened to the reasons why? From the Blogger Conference Call Nancy Pelosi: I made a decision a few years ago, or at least one year ago, that impeachment was something that we could not be successful with and that would take up the time we needed to do some positive things to establish a record of our priorities and their short-comings, Pelosi statement here alludes to a point of mine, which bears repeating. Impeachment and Removal, though frankly necessary, is not yet a possibility except as a pointless exercise in vainglory. Just as failed subpoenas have further emboldened the rampant lawlessness of this Presidency, a failed Impeachment Vote or even a failure to Remove in the Senate would make Bush nigh unto a God. All powerful. Unstoppable. Senator Feingold, who at one point stood virtually alone on the issue of Censure, has also tamped down Impeachment Expectations in his own DKos Diary I believe that the President and Vice President may well have committed impeachable offenses. But with so many important issues facing this country and so much work to be done, I am concerned about the great deal of time multiple impeachment trials would take away from the Congress working on the problems of the country. The time it would take for the House to consider articles of impeachment, and for the Senate to conduct multiple trials, would make it very difficult, if not impossible, for Congress to do what it was elected to do – end the war and address some of the other terrible mistakes this Administration has made over the past six and a half years. As could be expected Feingold's position was not well received. Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold wrote a diary on this site recently...a smoke screen for why he was being a wimp and not taking the will of the people with him when he had to vote on the get-out-of-Iraq bill. He wanted HIS cake and to eat it, too. Some have pointed out that Feingold stood shoulder to shoulder with Republicans intent on Impeaching Bill Clinton. At issue was a motion by Senator Robert Byrd (D - W.V.) to dismiss all charges against the President. The vote was 44 to 56. 44 Democrats voted yes. 55 Republicans and one Democrat voted no. 55 Republicans. And one Democrat. Just one. Russ Feingold. Regardless of whether you feel that Feingold is either gutless or some form of hypocrite, it should be noted that he does have a point when he essentially says there are bigger fish to fry than Bush. There is for example, The War Occupation. This week the Senate staged a dramatic All-Nighter in an attempt to break a Republican Filibuster over an Iraq Redeployment Timetable. Despite several hints that Republicans such as Pete Dominici, George Voinovich, John Warner, Olympia Snowe, Chuck Hagel and Richard Lugar just might be willing to finally budge and break with the President on Iraq - only Senators Snowe, Hagel, Susan Collins and Gordon Smith actually did by voting to end the Filibuster against Levin-Reed. (It should also be noted that the only Democrat voting against ending the Filibuster - was Harry Reid for procedural reasons so that he could bring the measure up again in the future. And of course, Lieberman.) http://www.truth2powerproject.com
Antioch College graduate, short-term inner city school teacher, sometime photographer, survivor of the Human Potential Movement, vet of Wars of Sexual Orientation; West Coast dweller, beavering away in small home business; devoted uncle to 7 year old; lover of humor, musical theater, history, France, oysters, New York School painting, movies, computers (oddly), and of opining.
I choose ending the occupation If anybody really thinks that Bush and Cheney can be removed from office via impeachment (one without the other makes absoultuely no sense), they are dreaming. A nice dream, but a dream. It would be a pointless exercise and might result in the loss of one or both houses of Congress next year. I have supported legislative efforts to narrow the president's options, and I think that they have succeeded. However, it is becoming increasingly important for the Democrats in Congress, including the presidential candidates, to do some serious thinking about what should actually be done and in the event a Democrat wins the White HOuse in 2008 -- not at all a foregone conclusion -- what will be done. Okay, we win, now what? And how do we take a solid majority with us? What's the plan, Stan? In my view, the official that needs to be removed immediately is Sen Reid as majority leader, not because he is apparently an Irreconcilable regarding Iraq, but necessarily because he isn't an effective spokesperson and policy leader. The Senate democrats need a leader who understands that they do not have a working majority and who can help craft a set of policies and articulate them to the nation. I know this is heresy to some, but Lyndon Johnson was a terrific majority leader, bully and jerk that he was. I think of Sen. Dodd as having good leadership potential, and he is certainly articulate. Focusing on impeachment etc is not, really, doing the people's business, and I think the people would know it. by
jmundstuk (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 5 comments)
on Sunday, July 22, 2007 at 11:05:12 PM
While you were searching for the "smoking gun" for the Impeachment of what you called this “massive criminal enterprise”, have you run across a list of the “positive things” that Pelosi hopes to accomplish with Bush over the next year and a half? Finalizing (fast track) trade agreements? Election deform? Pelosi's formula for defeat in the next election consists of solidifying the Republican war core by pulling Iraq funding (“just days short of victory”, they will claim) and doing everything possible to alienate those Democrats who view Impeachment of the “Unitary Executive” Bush/Cheney as a moral imperative. Resolution of Bush's war can only follow Bush's impeachment. The first step is to file a (House rule 604) motion against both Bush and Cheney for treason. by
Samuel Bryan (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 118 comments)
on Monday, July 23, 2007 at 2:35:58 AM
It's free to signup! And easy. And takes just a minute or two....
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Must Read (
Well Said (
News (
Touching (
Funny (
Supported (
Interesting (
Inspiring (
Valuable (
