OK, to prove this overnight thing is NOT a stunt.....

[rateyes]

When the cloture vote is taken, and we fail to get 60 votes (thus limiting debate and bringing the measure to a vote)....

KEEP ON DEBATING TODAY AND TONIGHT AND EVERY DAY AND NIGHT 24/7 until the filibuster is broken.

DO.NOT.RECESS. Don't debate ANYTHING except Levin/Reed.

Don't come out and say "We don't have the votes, therefore the measure is dead." Come out and say, "We will keep these all nighters and all dayers going until we either get 60 votes for cloture or we get an "upperdown" on Levin/Reed.

DO IT. NO MORE BACKING DOWN!!!

[bryant69]

1. Prepare to be disappointed

I would like to see it go on for a few days more, but eventually they will have to get back to business.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[rateyes]

2. I'm always prepared for disappointment these days. nt

[Ezlivin]

12. Disappointment - The new state of being

It is impossible for me to grow any more cynical.

[Igel]

17. I've said things like that, too.

It was just my cynicism getting in the way--I continued to get more cynical.

Now I keep an open mind about the future quantity of cynicism I can contain.

[crappyjazz]

3. The point being made loud and clear at least to me

is that we are seeing with our own eyes why the Dems can't get done what Americans want them to get done. The rethugs are sickening

[Captain Hilts]

4. BINGO! THIS is where min. wage legislation stalled. Where impeachment would stall. nt

[slackmaster]

5. Yes, and my Senator Boxer said something yesterday on NPR that pissed me off

She said "The American people need this" - Referring to the stunt itself rather than the underlying debate.

Does she really think we are that stupid?

[crappyjazz]

7. No, but she may have been referring to the Americans

who watch CNN/FOX - they DO need to see this

[slackmaster]

11. How do you think a typical Fox watcher would react to it?

Serious question.

[crappyjazz]

15. That is a good question

I'm not sure actually ... I think it would need to be explained very clearly to them (it had to be to me!) what was happening.

I'm thinking of my FIL who watches FOX but, the Iraq War turned him on Bush. Why he still watches FOX I don't know (although I've turned him on to KO on occasion).

So that's the kind of MSM typical viewer I'm thinking of ... ones that might agree that the Dem Congress is doing "nothing". If that type of viewer could see this, I think it would make the impression of just what the Dems are up against ... I think anyway :)

Great question, though, thank you ... I'll think more about it.

[Cass]

14. Dana Bash from CNN was on this morning practically sneering into the camera.

She was blathering on that it was a publicity stunt from the Dems that will probably fail and may even backfire. I switched her off and tuned to MSNBC. At least their report explained the Dem reasoning behind this.

Without a true functioning media alot of the public has no real idea of what's going on. That fact was perfectly highlighted this morning on CNN.

[jwirr]

10. Exactly. At the same time pugs are putting their thoughts on tap

so it will be easy to use it against them in 08.

[annabanana]

6. They should let the Rpubs keep the filibuster going. . .

say NOTHING to the media.... Let the Repugs squeal, like you KNOW they will... and THEN come out and say..

If they want to stop the filibuster all they have to do is let it come to a vote... It's THEM, not US that's got everything all blocked up.

[OrangeCountyDemocrat]

16. EXACTLY!!

This is the issue which resonates with the American public.

Let's convince the American people, Which Side wants our troops home, and Which Side wants to DEBATE, DEBATE, DEBATE.

GET IT INTO THEIR FUCKING MORONIC, IMBECILIC, 5 SECOND ATTENTION SPAN, TINY BRAINS!!!

[Freddie Stubbs]

8. Except that the Senators want to get other things done, and

would rather move on.

[OrangeCountyDemocrat]

9. Make This The NORM!

Keep bringing the bill, or versions of it, up on a Daily basis, and continue to have All-Night Sessions.

Will they? I have my doubts. They're lazy in their own way, and won't follow through, but I'd support them if they continued to repeat this "stunt."

[mdmc]

13. Welcome to disappointmentville, population you

God Bless you my friend...:kick:

[pat_k]

18. Anything less than impeachment is impotent gesture. . .

. . .and empty complaint that actually gives cover to the outlaws in the White House ("If Bush and Cheney are pissing on our laws why is the Democratic Congress seeking to pass more laws for them to piss on??")

FAR WORSE than "a stunt" in my book.

[blondeatlast]

19. The Senate doesn't impeach--and I humbly suggest you catch up on what happened today.

Reid tabled ALL votes--including a war-funding bill until he gets Levin/Reed passed.

Perhaps a visit to the Greatest page yould help?

[pat_k]

20. Passing more laws for Bush and Cheney to piss on and violate -- even if passed them with a veto-proo

Passing more laws for Bush and Cheney to piss on and violate -- even if they pass them with a veto-proof majority -- is impotent gesture.

Each and Every Democratic leader has a MOUTH.

Each and Every Member of Congress takes an oath to defend the Constitution.

If Reid (or any other Member of the House or Senate) believes that Bush and Cheney are subverting our Constitutional democracy, he is obligated by his oath to call for action -- to call on the House to impeach.

ANY member of the Senate or the House can make the case for impeachment RIGHT NOW.

ANY member who takes their oath seriously has a moral obligation to do so.

[blondeatlast]

21. You've got your priorities, I've got mine. I like the idea of defunding the war.

I want impeachment too, but Reid calling for impeachment is like Michael Jordan calling the plays for the Oakland Raiders.

:eyes:

[pat_k]

22. And failing to demand it is giving the outlaws cover.

Congress has a duty to "support and defend." As long as they refuse to go after the outlaws in the White House with the ONLY lethal weapon they have, they are failing to fulfill that duty. Bush and Cheney and their co-conspirators can point to that failure and say "We're doing nothing wrong. We can spy on you without warrant. We can torture. We have absolute power. If we didn't, Congress would be obligated by their oath to impeach us."

ONLY impeachment says "NO!" ONLY impeachment tells the world that there are some Americans left who actually believe the dictates of our Constitution are worth fighting for.

It doesn't matter if too many of Bush and Cheney's minions in the Senate refuse to declare them guilty. Forcing Senators to take sides -- to declare themselves for American principle or Fascist principle -- exposes them. The American people will stand in judgment of them in the next election.

The Constitution -- amended and entrusted to us to protect and perfect as we strive to "form a more perfect union" -- calls on us to put our trust in our fellow Americans (you know, "We the People"). If we aren't willing to do that, how can we claim to stand for true American values?

By refusing to stand up for We the People, the true owners of this nation, Members of Congress have created a national crisis graver than any natural disaster or social ill. It is bigger than any international crisis. By tolerating the intolerable, they are surrendering our capacity to recover from disaster with humanity, solve our common problems in ways that reflect our common values, and serve as a force for good in the world. When the good will of the American people is cut out of the loop, no peoples, not our fellow Americans, not other nations, can look to us for help.

Nothing "trumps" impeachment.

[blondeatlast]

23. ...

Thanks.

[Virginia Dare]

33. If bush openly defies congress...

which he will do before too long, I think you will see a very swift impeachment proceeding.

[pat_k]

35. Bush and Cheney have been "defying" Congress and violating the Constitution and . . .

U.S. Code for years. They have been waging their war on the Constitution http://journals.democraticunderground.com/pat_k/22">in plain sight.

If the leadership won't take up the fight to impeach for. . .

• openly and illegally spying on the American people without warrant;


• issuing an executive order declaring Gitmo a Geneva-free zone (an act that even our corrupted Supreme Court ruled to be a war crime);


• violating Title 18, Sec 2441 of U.S. Code (our War Crimes statute) by kidnapping and holding people in their secret CIA dungeons overseas (for which there is more than enough documented by the EU TDIP report and the recent criminal prosecution of CIA agents in Italy);


• abusing signing statements as a cover for their violations of hundreds laws passed by Congress (like the statement intended to exempt the Office of the President from McCain's anti-torture amendment, which passed the Senate 90-9)

. . . what do you think Bush and Cheney could possibly do now that would overcome the impeachophobia that is currently rampant on the Hill?

The crimes against our constitutional democracy committed to date demand impeachment NOW. Believing that "they'll impeach tomorrow" is one of the http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Senator/14">false memes that allows the impeachophobes in Congress to remain and denial and refuse to impeach TODAY.

I do not mean to single you out. You are echoing a view that is widely held, but it is a view that we must reject if we are to wake our leaders up and make impeachment a reality.

[LittleClarkie]

24. So if they stopped the war but didn't impeach

that wouldn't be good enough for you?

[pat_k]

25. No. It wouldn't be "enough". . .

which should be clear from http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1366992&mesg_id=1372267">my reply below.

+++++++++++++++++++++
BTW, how do you imagine the Democratic leadership can "stop the war"? How do you imagine that the Dems can force Bush and Cheney to do ANYTHING they don't want to do? The thing about outlaws is that they could care less about laws. Remember McCain's anti-torture amendement, which passed 90-9. Gee, that sure did the trick, didn't it?

Only impeachment is an unequivocal rejection of the crimes that have been committed in our name. How do you imagine we can even begin to change the dynamics in the Middle East, or anywhere else, if Americans refuse fight for the dictates of our own Constitution?

[LittleClarkie]

26. How do you imagine they can impeach either?

And do you have any idea how much of a quagmire that would turn out to be?

[pat_k]

28. We could see articles on the way to the Senate in a week.

The charges http://journals.democraticunderground.com/pat_k/22">couldn't be more blatant. Bush and Cheney have made an indefensible case for impeachment against themselves. No Democratic member of Congress has asserted that Bush hasn't committed intolerable crimes against our constitutional democracy -- just the opposite. They accuse, then sound like idiots when they follow up with a declaration that they intend to do nothing about the crimes.

There are far http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2884515&mesg_id=2885628">more reasons to conclude that articles of impeachment would be voted out of the House VERY rapidly than to believe the leadership's push to impeach would be a "quagmire." And when those articles get to the Senate, contrary to the "conventional wisdom" on the Hill (almost always the opposite of reality), victory (resignation or removal) is not only possible, http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1169359&mesg_id=1170206 ">it is likely.

On the other hand, there is absolutely no reason to believe the Democratic leadership can "stop the war" without impeachment. Bush and Cheney have proven over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over again that they will stop at nothing to advance their agenda. Bush told us his intention to keep our troops in Iraq even if Laura and Barney are the only ones that don't oppose him. He has given us no reason not to believe him.

Even if, by some unimaginable means, the Dems force Bush to redeploy or withdraw the troops, the outlaws in the White House have proven themselves incapable engaging the stakeholders in the region and the world community in a way that would transform the dynamics in the Middle East -- or anywhere else -- for the better. As long as Bush is at the helm, unchallenged, we will see inhumanity and chaos spread. Every day Congress allows the massive power of the American presidency to remain, unchallenged, in the hands of outlaws, the outlaws will continue to destroy every single gain we have made in the past couple decades (vital functions of our government gutted, a new cold war with Russia looming; nuclear disarmament reversed; Somalia lost. . .the list goes on).

Taking a stand against the torture and war crimes through impeachment is the only way to begin to restore our moral authority to serve as a positive force at home and in the world.

[Virginia Dare]

29. Where will they get the votes for impeachment within a week?

I'm not following your reasoning.

[pat_k]

31. Which Members of the House Democratic caucus would vote against it?

When the leadership takes up the fight to impeach, which Members of the House Democratic caucus would vote against it?

[Virginia Dare]

32. There are only 9 on board right now to impeach Cheney...

so it's obviously not enough to make it a worthwhile endeavor yet. I think you will see both Democrats and Republicans moving toward impeachment once Bush defies Congress, which he will before too long.

[pat_k]

34. What would you expect when the leadership is firmly opposed.. . .

. . and continues to push http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Senator/14">false memes aimed at suppressing the will to impeach?

The question was, "When the leadership takes up the fight to impeach, which Members of the House Democratic caucus would vote against it?"

And, although Kucinich must be commended for going further than anyone else, half-measures don't galvanize. And he took half-measures on two fronts.

1. He don't go after Bush and Cheney, which cannot be logically reconciled or justified.


2. He didn't impeach for turning Americans into torturers and destroying our moral authority to object when Americans are subjected to torture by other parties to armed conflict. Kucinich didn't need a book that made a complex case. There are http://journals.democraticunderground.com/pat_k/22">FAR simpler and more compelling cases for impeachment. He could have done it in 3 pages. Every time Cheney opened his mouth to defend "dunking" he committed a war crime. The torture is the most straightforward, horrifying, and damaging of their offenses against our constitutional Democracy.

As much as I love the man, watching him go half-way has been extremely frustrating. He got so close to doing the right thing. . .so close.

Sadly, a near miss is still a miss.

[OzarkDem]

27. Not realistic or fair

There are a lot of bills moving through committee right now for important, crucial appropriations other than Iraq War spending.

I'm sure you don't want to hold up funding for breast cancer research, children's health care, education funding, lots of stuff.

[Virginia Dare]

30. There are plenty of people here who are "single issue"..

impeachment and/or Iraq war. They care about nothing else. They've told me as much. I'm not referring to the OP though.

[WilliamPitt]

36. CBS/NYT Poll: 61% Say Congress Shouldn't Fund War Without Timetable For Withdrawal

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/07/18/opinion/polls/main3071073.shtml

Not a stunt, an expression of popular will.