Why Are Dems Such Cowards on Impeachment?

[babylonsister]

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2007/jul/13/why_are_dems_such_cowards_on_impeachment

Why Are Dems Such Cowards on Impeachment?
By M.J. Rosenberg | bio

snip//

Of course, the reason Democrats reject impeachment is that they continue their quixotic pursuit of the Republican vote. The DLC types are always pushing Dems to pursue evangelicals, gun owners, tough white males, hawks, people uncomfortable with gays, African-Americans, etc.

The thought of impeachment terrifies those determined to seek votes from people who would never vote Democratic anyway.

Think of it this way. Any voter turned off by impeachment proceedings against Dick Cheney is not voting Democratic in 2008.

So why not do the right thing? Read the Constitution and then do what James Madison is telling you to do.

At the very least, the initiation of impeachment proceedings would shut Cheney down for the remainder of the Bush term. Remember what they did to Clinton and how he was forced to devote almost all his time to his own defense?

More likely impeachment would succeed, with Republicans joyfully using it as an opportunity to distance themselves from a failed administration while not directly turning on their President.

Just do it, Dems. You can't be wusses forever!

[Paulie]

1. Old habits die hard

Even with the majority they still act like a minority party.

[bunkerbuster1]

2. At LEAST take the damn baby step of impeaching Abu Gonzo.

I can't imagine why his justice-obstructing ass hasn't been convicted yet. It's an honest-to-God mystery to me.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

3. They are scared of the repukes

and have been since the Reagan years, when Ronnie "stole" so many Democrats on economic and, frankly, racist issues. But what the Dems have to realize is that it is not 1980, and people are sick of Republican rule. They can and should impeach Cheney and the Chimp as well--polls show this is what the people want.

[pansypoo53219]

20. more afraid

of the RITE WING teevee gnews blowhards and AM raydeeoh.
god forbid THEY be partisan.

the people still haven't pressured the gnews. and they do need that cover. the worm hasn't turned for the gnews.

[wellst0nev0ter]

4. Yep, It All Boils Down To The Incumbency Protection Racket

Everybody wants to keep their seats, nobody wants to stick their necks out. And Mister 26% will continue to taunt Dems as the nattering nabobs of do-nothingism that they seem to be everyday.

[EFerrari]

5. I don't get it. They are never going to get the chicken hawk bigot vote.

And, they don't need it, especially if they actually get our votes COUNTED. :shrug:

[Fresh_Start]

6. how about because they want to succeed if they bring

impeachment charges and they currently don't have the votes.

Letting Bush destroy the GOP and the GOP destroy itself supporting Bush. Soon the GOP will start covering its own tail and leave Bush hanging in the breeze. Then impeachment will succeed.

Or do you think a failed attempt at impeachment is enough?

[sharp_stick]

11. I've tried saying that it just doesn't work

nobody will listen to that argument and I don't know why. Failing to win a conviction in the Senate would be a massive blow to the Democratic party and to our chances for a sweeping win in 2008.

If it means getting the White House and better majorities in Congress come 2009 I for one am willing to let the clock run out.

on edit: I still think we may have a shot at impeaching the prick, the way he and his idiot junta keep stepping in it trying to cover their lies they may just piss off enough of the sheep that we can get the votes. It's not there yet but I remain hopeful.

[RaleighNCDUer]

25. See my post #23 below.

As for letting the clock run out, that is letting them off. Which only means they'd be back, stronger than ever, in 4 or 8 years.

Nixon escaped impeachment, and we let Ford get away with pardoning him for crimes he had not yet been charged with - so after one cycle of public disgust the repukes roared back with Reagan. The fact that the previous repuke administration had the record of most convictions or resignations under threat of judicial action was forgotten.

Reagan was nearly brought down by Iran/Contra, but Poppy pardoned the criminals who, after two election cycles, came back to power with *. The fact that the previous repuke administration had the record of most convictions or resignations under threat of judicial action was forgotten.

Why, if we do not follow through, impeach, convict and imprison, do you think it will be any different next time. For the third repuke administration in a row, records are being set for the numbers of conviction and resignations under threat of judicial action. It gets worse every time.

We CANNOT allow them to run out the clock. We would not survive the next cycle - assuming we survive this one.

[Hawkowl]

33. 100% Correct

You nailed it. I've been saying this for years. We absolutely can't allow them to get away with it this time or our Republic is lost. I would just add that just because impeachment probably won't happen doesn't mean we should stop pursuing these criminals. Once they leave office they need to be indicted, convicted and imprisoned. At the very least Congress should de-fund all secret service protection for *.

[KharmaTrain]

13. It's Turned Into A Symbol

Honestly, that's the only explanation I can see for throwing such emotion and energy into one political gesture that we all know has little chance to be effective now, in spite of other things that can be done.

I wonder how many people knew that the House voted out a College Tuition bill that will help students get financial aid. I didn't see a post here in GD on the topic...and one would think something of this nature, that would positively affect many DU'ers went un-noticed. Sadly, this bill like many others face the same fate an impeachment does...death in the Senate. There won't even be a vote as a Repugnican filibuster has bottled up a ton of House legislation in an effort to protect booooosh and his war for profit. It's putting party ahead of country. Even worse, some of these goons...like Lugar and Dimeneci and Alexander say one thing to the cameras and another when the votes are taken.

People here should focus on pushing for the 60 votes in the Senate that ensure up or down votes...that would break the log jam on tons of bills going through and forcing boooosh to negotiate...or have him face no funding at all. Public pressure is on our side here and a lot more possible than attacking those who stand with us.

Cheers...

[babylonsister]

15. This bill?

http://www.speaker.gov/blog/?p=572

House Passes the College Cost Reduction Act
July 11th, 2007 by Jesse Lee

The House has passed the College Cost Reduction Act of 2007, H.R. 2669, by a vote of 273-149. The bill will provide the single largest increase in college aid since the GI bill in 1944. The legislation invests about $18 billion dollars over the next five years in reducing college costs, helping millions of students and families. It comes at no new cost to taxpayers, and is funded by cutting excess subsidies paid by the federal government to lenders in the student loan industry.

more...

[KharmaTrain]

18. That'd Be The One

Unfortunately add that to a list of bills...like the prescription drug revision, 9/11 commission recommendations and a bunch of other very good bills that are sitting in McConnell limbo...held hostage by a minority intent on destroying this country. That's the message that needs to be hammered over and over.

[babylonsister]

24. McConnell is puzzling me; he's up for reelection but doesn't seem to

care and he's getting blasted with disparaging commercials. Maybe he knows something we don't?

[KharmaTrain]

28. He Never Represented Kentucky

His future has K-Street all over it. He was put in there by Rove to be Dr. No. They felt Frist got rolled too easily by Reid and McConnell doesn't give a shit...and they're right.

I haven't seen a poll lately, but I can't see him being on the ticket with Fletcher as being a good start...but he's got millions stashed away and still runs a very capable political machine. Party bosses feel the public owes them, not the other way around.

Hopefully he'll be one of several Repugnican goons that fall next November. Our job is to make it happen.

:toast:

[RaleighNCDUer]

23. If I've said it once, I've said it a hundred times --

it is not a matter of counting the votes. It is GETTING the votes. Sure, take a snapshot of this moment and it's obvious that an impeachment would fail to convict. But spend three months dragging all the issues into open, exposing all the crimes, the blatant violations of the constitution, and put it in front of the public which already, by a slim majority, favors impeachment of Cheney, at least, and the senate will be in the position of impeaching or directly opposing a strong majority of those who will be voting for them in the next election.

Marshal your arguments, twist a few arms, and it can be done before Thanksgiving. It doesn't have to wait until the end of next year, when it bumps up against the election -- that's what they want, to run out the clock.

There are grounds for impeachment on what they've already boasted of doing - the warrantless wiretaps, violations of the Geneva accords, extrajudicial renditions. Impeach on those grounds, then add further charges as proof of them comes up in the investigations.

[Fresh_Start]

29. keep investigation

indict a few more ppl in the administration

learn a little from history and realize that Nixon 'impeachment' momentum occurred after watergate was all over the headlines for months......

[bvar22]

39. Forcing 34 Republic Senators to go PUBLIC would be a WIN!

Forcing 33 Republic Senators to go PUBLIC in their support of a criminal incompetent who is at 25% and falling would be a BIG WIN for down ticket Democrats in 2008, especially after a riveting public trial where all the crimes and incompetency are paraded before the public 24/7.

PLEASE IMPEACH!
Win/Win for the Democrats!

Not IMPEACHING is Lose/Lose for the Democrats.
We have to tolerate 18 more months of Bush*.
The Dems look like pussies for Election 2008.

[LiberalEsto]

7. Could it be those anthrax incidents?

Remember when mysterious packages containing deadly anthrax were mailed to Tom Daschle and Pat Leahy? Were they a warning to the others?

I keep thinking that there is no way the Democrats in Congress would behave in such a cowardly fashion unless they know something that we don't, and might possibly be afraid for their lives.

How can they allow our Constitution to be destroyed, line by line? How can they turn their backs on actual treason -- as in the betrayal of an undercover CIA agent's identity?

I simply cannot understand why they aren't taking action.

[AndyTiedye]

26. Anyone Who Really Rocks the Boat Gets Wellstoned

[LiberalEsto]

27. I forgot about that.

Guess they're heeding the warnings.

[DBoon]

8. because Rove has the NSA intercepts for each of them

and will unleash information on each one and their families if they pursue impeachment.

The same reason J. Edgar Hoover stayed in power so long - he had the goods on everyone

[JHB]

9. Because the last brave Dems (70's committee chairmen, Church, etc.)...

...were specifically targeted for defeat by the conservative movement.

And the Lee "roll over and show them your throat" Hamiltonian "leadership" of the party learned that lesson too well. Twenty years of capitulationism is a hard habit to break.

[Peregrine Took]

10. I heard Claire McCaskill, new Dem senator from Mo, say "I'm afraid"......

that it would shift attention away from the 2008 presidential race, or words to that effect. That's their problem - they are always AFRAID!!!

This was on Bill Press's show this morning.

[LibDemAlways]

12. Agreed. Not impeaching the bastards at

this point means Pelosi and Co. are shirking their Constitutional duty. This isn't about stains on a blue dress, an impeachment brought about for purely political reasons. This is about treason, about deliberate and systematic violation of the law, about perjury and deliberate deception - the egregious betrayal of the public trust.

Impeachment is the only Constitutional remedy. The pressure the impeachment hearings put on Nixon brought about his resignation. If the multiple crimes of Bush/Cheney are brought to light, (and the corporate whores would certainly have to cover it), only the most die-hard kool-aid drinker is going to support these criminals. The repukes in Congress will feel the pressure to abandon the sinking ship.

They may not have the votes now, but who knows how some of the more moderate repukes would vote in light of all the revelations brought about by the hearings and at trial.

It all comes down to the Dems willingness to uphold the Constitution and do the right thing.

[JCMach1]

14. It's like putting a guy on trial who is going to be executed in 1.5yrs anyway

Little to gain by this and much to lose

The timeline is quite short...

[bettyellen]

48. executed? you mean retire happily, don't you? not at all the same. he should be disgraced.

[gatorboy]

16. Ugh. 30% of Amercia apprently run things.

Time to chuck'em.

[BlooInBloo]

17. Another concept of cowardice applies as well...

... Unwilling to fight unless victory is guaranteed. This one applies to many outside of Congress as well.

[wiggs]

19. Two reasons. First though, I don't believe they're wusses or cowards

If you've made it to congress, you're savvy, smart, ambitious, aggressive, connected, well informed, opinionated and have a sizable ego. I believe there are two reasons why impeachment is not being pursued (and I hold out hope for a third reason, below):

First...there are some democrats who are on board with the GOP/neocon creed of concentrating wealth and power, even at the expense of other countries. They don't mind the overall direction this administration has taken. That there are corporatists in the dem ranks shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.

Second...dems are part of a government which has misbehaved very, very badly over the last 6 years...probably in more ways and worse than we know about. Exposing and documenting the ills would be embarrassing and could damage the overall image of America internally and in relation to other countries. I believe that dems pursuing real, honest accountability could lead to real loss of faith in and respect for this country...it's that bad. It would feel a bit like self-immolation to them. I personally feel that such introspection is needed and would be healthy, though.

Third....I HOPE they are merely delaying impeachment until such point where the nation stands up and demands it. I don't like this idea so much because moving on from this disaster in very policy area is an emergency and delay costs lives and causes irreparable damage.

[smoogatz]

34. "If you've made it to congress, you're savvy, smart... well informed"

Like Dan Quayle? Or Rick Santorum? Or Sam Brownback? I'm pretty sure all it takes to get yourself elected to Congress is a fat bank account, a complete lack of pride and a lot of rich and well-connected friends. It helps if Daddy's a former Senator or otherwise powerful and influential, too. Smart, savvy or well-informed? Not so much.

[wiggs]

38. You think we've elected a bunch of Dan Quayles to represent dems (the OP topic) in

congress? If so, this would be a new theory on why dem behavior in congress is what it is.

I think the Dan Quayles are rare on either side of the aisle and are irrelevant.

[smoogatz]

40. They seem to be more common among the Rs--

although our Dem congress-critter is a corporate "new democrat" moron. No doubt there are numerous others of his stripe. Dem behavior in congress is what it is because they are more beholden to their big contributors than they are to us. That seems obvious.

[wiggs]

41. Agree there. nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

21. Politics as usual, as usual, as usual, as usual.....disgustingly, as usual.

[omega minimo]

22. It's hard to admit you've been had

:hi: :patriot:

[rudy23]

30. I think swing voters would respect Dems more if they impeached. The perception of Dems as doormats

is KILLING us. Swing voters aren't stupid, they know a pushover when they see one.

[Fresh_Start]

31. ask a swing voter if they want a symbolic act which

will have no actual impact.

I'm guessing that the answer is no.
No one wants anymore feel good strokes.

They have to succeed in impeaching the bastards otherwise the entire impeachment process is diminished as well as the dems.

[Poiuyt]

37. Historically, parties which have started impeachment proceedings have prospered in the

next election. Republicans did lose a few seats in 2000, but not as many as would normally be the case (were there no impeachment), and they still maintained majority. Usually, the party which initiates impeachment picks up seats.

[Gregorian]

32. The short answer is- Money.

And that is why Kucinich is the good man he is.

And that is why we need more candidates from the people instead of from the corporations.

[smoogatz]

35. First Gonzales, then Cheney.

Take out the supports one by one. Then we'll see about the Chimperor, if there's time. I actually think you might be able to muster sufficient votes in the Senate to convict Cheney, if there's anyone from his office that could be iinduced to testify now that Libby's been pardoned. That's a big "if": not sure what incentive they'd have to cooperate, at this point.

[Yavin4]

36. Corporate Campaign Contributions from Lobbyists

There are two Democratic parties. There is the rank and file base like us, and the inside Washington, political consultants who make huge money from campaign contributions from lobbyists.

It's the inside Washington crowd that fears losing that campaign cash more than anything else. They fear that an impeachment process will scare off the corporate lobbyists because it would be a sign that the Dem base was in control of the party, not the elite Dems in Washington.

And, if the Dem base can force an impeachment, then they can force nationalized healthcare, energy conservation, higher taxes on the wealthy, stronger regulations, etc.

[Poppa]

42. Congressional Democrats

This is an excellent post and it hits the nail squarely on its
head, i.e., most Democratic Representatives and/or Senators
are cowards when it comes to supporting impeachment against
Bush, Cheney, Gonzo, Rice, and all of the rest of that rat
pack. The DLC and the K Street goons with their high priced
consultant fees do not represent the views of the vast
majority of the rank and file members of the Democratic Party.
Their wrong advice to the Congressional "leadership"
always results in giving Bush a pass and that allows him to
continue to destroy this country.   

[kenny blankenship]

43. If you shortened that question by just 2 words

it would answer itself.

[leftchick]

44. no wonder a majority of a Americans want a Third Party Choice

The DLC has transformed the Democratic party into republicans (minus the abortion issue).

Do we need a third party? Most say yes (58%!!)

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/2007-07-12-third-party-usat_N.htm

WASHINGTON — Most Americans, unhappy with both the Republican president and the Democratic-controlled Congress, say it's time for a third political party. Not that they're necessarily ready to vote for one.

In a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll taken Friday through Sunday, 58% say the two major parties are doing "such a poor job" that a third party is needed. Just a third say the established parties "do an adequate job of representing the American people."

[Vidar]

45. The corporate masters are yanking their chain.

[onenote]

46. they're not groundbreakers

Members of Congress are, in large part, traditionalists. They don't like breaking new ground. They like being able to point to precedent. Why? In part to cover their asses and in part because its built into the institutional DNA of Congress to follow existing paths. Check out Hind's precedents and Jefferson's manual and all that...

So, members of the House look around and they see Democrats clamoring for impeachment. But they don't see any repubs. And they check their history books -- when the House voted to start impeachment inquiry against Nixon, the vote was 410-4 -- lots of bi-partisan support. Even when the repubs rammed through the vote to start an impeachment process against Clinton, they picked up 31 Democratic votes. And members think to themselves --- until some repubs indicate that they support the commencement of hearings in the Judiciary Committee on impeachment, we're going to sit tight.

Its just the way things work around here. Have for years and will continue for years.

[scarletwoman]

47. I honestly don't care anymore. For 6 1/2 years they've unequivocally shown that they're not into

standing up for principle, period.

So, I don't care anymore. They're in their own little Beltway world of status and power games, and cashing lobbyist checks. I have no expectation of them ever actually doing the right thing -- especially not after they just finished handing bush/cheney all the cover they need for attacking Iran. (see my post here )

Bless Dennis Kucinich, though -- he's the ONLY one actually TRIES to do the right thing. Fuck all the rest of the weasels.

sw