This is in progress. Pelosi's Fear of Flying.

[EFerrari]

(Feedback much appreciated. Beth)

Pelosi’s Fear of Flying: The Immediate Consequences of Aiming Low on Impeachment

This week, we as a nation find ourselves in a surreal political position. We are awaiting the results of the “Petreus” report as if that report were actually an independent account untouched by the White House Communications Office and as if this piece of propaganda could in any way alter the Bush agenda.

General Petreus is the same good soldier who breathlessly announced to the press that Saddam had mobile weapons labs when he knew those vehicles were weather balloon stations. Remember? That Petreus.

This same week, all over the country, anti war and impeachment activists are preparing for demonstrations on 9/15. There will be a march on Washington. There will be marches and vigils and protests all over the country. Here in San Francisco, three thousand of my neighbors and I will spell out the word “Impeach” with our bodies. This is our third attempt to convey our needs visually and materially to our ever more remote representative, Nancy Pelosi.

We invited the Speaker to take the fourth seat in the chopper that will tape our action -- so she could get the best possible view of her constituents’ wishes. Pelosi was unable to find a two hour block to hold a town hall meeting during the August break so we thought this would be an efficient way for her to reconnect with her district.

Unfortunately, she is unavailable that day. When we offered the seat to anyone on her staff, we were told no one was available that day. I can only hope that the whole office is out hitting the streets that day, helping homeless veterans retrieve the lives that the Bush Administration has stolen from them.

My representative is not a timid person or politician. She coined the phrase “miserable failure”, if I’m not mistaken, giving a timely expression to what so many of us felt and knew. But that was years ago. That “miserable failure” has since morphed into a global danger and a domestic menace.

Note to Speaker Pelosi: Even The National Coalition of American Nuns is calling for impeachment. Who are we waiting for, the Pope?

As I’ve said before, I don’t know what is possible. I don’t know if we can impeach George W. Bush or Dick Cheney but I know we must try. Not holding our government accountable in the past allowed seasoned and skilled felons to continue in our government today. Men to whom our values are at best abstractions they can mentally wave away like so many flies -- habeas corpus, due process, international law, clean elections. The Salvador Option has migrated to Iraq. These career scofflaws are nothing if not catastrophically efficient.

But I know one thing. If you don’t try, you foreclose possibility. And I am not willing to foreclose the possibility that these men, men who let us die on September 11, who let us die when the levees breached, who let us die every day from IEDs or preventable disease, will be held to account for those irrevocable losses of precious human life. Our lives, life itself, must be more important than political calculation.

Recently Mr. Conyers explained to Amy Goodman on her program, Democracy Now! that, with respect to impeachment, he had the Constitution in one hand and his calculator in that other. That while there was no doubt that the Bush Administration had committed impeachable offenses, we don’t have the time or the votes to do it and, as the argument goes, the Democrats only have a nominal majority so putting the 2008 election in peril would be a grave error.

With all due respect to one of our most courageous and progressive Congressmen, Mr. Conyers, you are wrong. It is the job of Congressional Democrats to find both time and votes. Because your oath was to the Constitution, not to expediency. Your calculator is misleading you because it has no conscience.

Alexander Hamilton wrote: "The President of the United States would be liable to be impeached, tried, and upon conviction of treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors, removed from office; and would afterwards be liable to prosecution and punishment in the ordinary course of law.”

Note to Mr. Conyers: Mr. Hamilton did not qualify this statement with, “if we have the time, the votes and the go ahead from our suicidal political leadership.”

The 2008 election is not only not a reason to forgo impeachment, it is the reason impeachment must go forward. If a certain Democratic frontrunner doesn’t want the word “impeachment” wafting in the air during her campaign, then she might be a frontrunner but she is no leader. In fairness to Senator Clinton, her advisors may have made this call for her. I hope for her sake (and for ours) that this isn’t the same group that advised Mr. Kerry to concede an election that wasn’t his to give away. It was ours And it was stolen from us – there is no other construction that fits the facts of that election.

Note to the Democratic leadership: No one was held to account for the massive election fraud of 2004, so our next Federal election is already in jeopardy. You must impeach now if you have any hope for a clean election in 2008. You have won and not been seated twice. There’s no need to make it a trifecta. On the contrary, it is incumbent on you to make sure we are not robbed again.

Most urgently, if Mr. Bush and President Cheney have time to bomb Iran in our name and via recycled lies broadcast in our fully owned media, we must find time to impeach them first. Enough. Impeach.

Elizabeth Ferrari
www.beachimpeach.org
San Francisco, CA

[midnight]

1. Your last sentence is one of the most important talking points to

put towards this speaker and congress. They were the first to say that there was no time for impeachment.

[EFerrari]

2. Yes. I'm writing against a deadline so, weighing stuff is hard.

But that's why it's the last sentence.

Kicking for crit.

:kick:

[liberaldemocrat7]

129. Sorry but the Sept. 15 March on Washington appears a large networking

opportunity but the war will not end.

The British government in India 1947 and the South African National party government in the 1990's fell because of commerce failure. ( The result of Boycotts of their company friends. )

[EFerrari]

139. I'm satisfied to take the steps I can to do what needs to be done.

That's what any person can do, liberaldemocrat7. :)

[aggiesal]

66. Again, when Clinton was Impeached, ...

it took only 3 months to go from Articles of Impeachment,
to the Senate "Not Guilty".

So to say there is no time, is just an excuse.
Next time any representative of congress says there is not enough time,
remind them about the 3 months it took to get a Not Guilty
from the Senate.

[dickbearton]

106. K&R.

[mzmolly]

3. Beth, I think that's excellent, but I would suggest that as activists we let Conyers

know that it's not about "the votes." We don't have the votes, but we still have an obligation to reign in this administration. This point is what opened my mind on this issue while watching the Moyers special on impeachment.

If we can refocus the activist effort on the "process" and not on a particular end result, I think we'll have more success?

Just giving some feedback as you requested it. Again, great job!

[EFerrari]

4. That's a really good point. I posted this to get exactly

this kind of feedback (thanks!) because it's too new for me to "see" it. :hi:

[mzmolly]

5. See my edited version, it makes more sense.

But, I'm glad you got it anyhow. ;)

[sce56]

65. I belive if we start the procedings then the evidence will be shouting out Impeach Indict & Convict

Just need to have the hearings started the investigation will bring out the truth and it will be hard to deny!

[lfairban]

68. Hear hear!

IIRC, the chances that Nixon would be successfully impeached looked very slim at the start of the hearings.

The most damning evidence, the smoking gun tape, was not discovered until the end. They probably didn't even know about the Oval Office taping system when they started.

[EFerrari]

89. They didn't know about it until Butterfield accidently told the truth. n/t

[treestar]

94. Exactly. Not having the votes now doesn't mean we don't have the

votes after everything is exposled. Even the M$M cannot ignore impeachment proceedings.

[mzmolly]

96. Regardless, we needn't have the votes to proceed.

Focusing on how many votes we have or don't have (to convict) is missing the point according to scholars like Bruce Fein, for example. As activists it is not helpful to say to Conyers (for example) "we will have the votes if." It is helpful to say, "it does not matter if we have the votes, we must proceed regardless..."

[mzmolly]

95. I believe that "Impeach, Indict, Convict" is a nice talking point

but that should not be the stated goal. :hi:

[bridgit]

6. she has been looking a little dour sitting next to Der Pretzeldent lately...

poor kid :(

[Cleita]

7. If we can't push for impeachment, then we really need to cut

off the flow of money to fund this war and any other wars the Bush administration may have in mind. I do think that they have the votes to turn off the money spigot. I think a little armtwisting of moderate
Republicans could be in order to get a quorum. Maybe they could dangle the threat of impeachment over the heads of some Republicans to get them to stop funding the war as the lesser of two evils.

[EFerrari]

25. Our majority is really only nominal.

But, imho, we've got to stop focusing on the limits of a nominal majority and start thinking in terms of what even a nominal majority allows us to do.

This beast is closing on Bethlehem.

[bleever]

8. Sorry to start small,

but the spelling is "Petraeus".

I'll keep reading. :hi:

[ChairmanAgnostic]

9. and here i thought it started with a B and had a Y in it.

say, isn't he also the same guy who lost 100,000 weapons, ammo and more?

[EFerrari]

11. Oh, no!

lol

Thanks!

[bleever]

10. In the last paragraph,

you might consider saying "fully corporate-owned media".

This is a great piece, and I hope you consider sending it to places like OpEdNews.com. Other DUers who've gotten work posted there include autorank and calimary, and I'm sure they'd be happen to help you with the submission procedure.

:thumbsup:

[EFerrari]

13. I'm afraid it's already in, and hope the eds catch my mangling

of General Liar's name.

Thanks, bleever!

[Gregorian]

12. This is a work of art. I'm speechless.

You've made all of the important statements. There could be no better way to say it, in my mind.

I felt the Kerry election part of this may have been a slight distraction. But then, maybe right on. I don't know.

It isn't often that I sit here with my jaw dropped. I find this quite stunning in accuracy and effect.

Thank you.

[EFerrari]

14. Thanks, Gregorian. I hope one or two people still on the fence

agree with you. :pals:

[WillyT]

15. Hell Beth...

She could at least whisper into Bush's ear, "If you go ahead and take military action against Iran, Impeachment will not only be on the table, it will be pursued in all vigor and haste!"

BTW - Excellent letter, K & R !!!

:yourock:

[EFerrari]

17. My mom made me promise that I wouldn't be mean to NP or HRC

or I would get no dinner from her. :hi:

[warren pease]

16. A couple of suggestions...

You might consider weaving in a couple of these points when you're discussing Conyers' "calculus:"

1 Simple justice says they must be held accountable for their crimes, and punished to the full extent of the law.

2 Their totalitarian agenda must be exposed so that the American people understand the magnitude of their unprecedented criminality.

3 Somebody has to put a stop to their murderous agenda before they can nuke Iran or shed any more blood in Iraq or Afghanistan.

4 They must serve as an example of what will happen to the next right wing cabal if it tries to replace representative democracy with fascism.

If you choose to do so, you'd obviously have to rework them to fit your tone and style. I think point 2 is particularly relevant when the "don't have enough votes" objection is raised. One reason is that most people haven't a clue what BushCo has actually done these past six plus years. An impeachment is so momentous that even corporate media would have to cover it, which could lead to a great awakening on the part of those who have been narcotized for a long while. That could, in turn, lead to such a public outpouring of revulsion and disgust -- along with the emails and faxes to their Reps and Senators -- that it would make even the staunchest anti-impeachment GOPer worry greatly over their next run for office.

Also, you might consider sending it to Online Journal and a few of the other more reputable news/opinion sites. It'll probably get picked up by many others as well.

And re punctuation nits, always put punctuation marks inside quotation marks, even if it seems weird. Or so says the AP style guide, which all editors live by.


Finally, that's a great piece of work, with great eloquence and style and makes its points beautifully -- with or without any additions from me or the other posts on this thread. Thank you very much for writing it.


Best,

wp

[EFerrari]

18. I can't ever remember where punc goes or if it's

"breath" or "breathe". :(

Thanks for the reminder because it IRKS me no end.

[The Wizard]

70. Not if

the corporate propaganda outlets portray the impeachment as a partisan witch hunt by disgruntled Democrats bent on revenge for the Clinton impeachment. The corporate media is the enemy.

[warren pease]

98. "The corporate media is the enemy."

And swiss cheese if full of holes.

Point is, they are what they are. So how can their nature as GOP whores and propagandists be used to advantage? What they are is the greatest mass culture manipulation system in history. They are also fond of calling themselves "news gathering and reporting" organizations. An impeachment trial is too big to avoid coverage -- either wall to wall or at least for significant blocs of time in which actual words from actual human speakers, not sound bytes or voice overs, will be heard. So they're at least useful in that context.

They'll have to cover the various motions introducing the articles of impeachment -- which of course, as you say, they'll spin as non-impeachable offenses. They'll have to cover witness testimony, which will inevitably bring to light at least some of what we here have known since 2000, but which much of the public at large has probably never heard or, if they had, either remembered only the pro-BushCo spin or forgotten it entirely.

If you were around for Watergate, you'll remember that witness testimony was often surprising and, in one case, shocking enough to open a whole new line of inquiry. That was when Alexander Butterfield, a minor player who kept Nixon's schedule and handled his paper flow, revealed that the Nixon white house had installed an audio surveillance system and had been recording conversations with friend and foe alike for about 2.5 years. Five microphones in his desk and two in wall lamps by the fireplace in the Oval Orifice, more in the cabinet room, still others in the executive office building, some more at Camp David -- these had picked up everything said in Nixon's presence, which turned out to be incontestable evidence that Nixon had ordered the Watergate coverup.

Now Watergate was no longer the word of Dean against Nixon. And it's fair to say that Butterfield's testimony actually forced Nixon's resignation because the case against him for impeachable offenses was inconsequential compared with the evidence in the present case against Cheney and Busholini.

Kucinich's HR-333 contains three indictments against Cheney; it could easily contain 300. I suppose he focused on the ones easiest to prove in court. But the fact that, for once in their executive privileged lives, dozens of these bastards will be forced to testify under oath with the cameras rolling and the whole world watching is bound to produce new leads, new evidence and probably new crimes we've only speculated about here.

So I think it's worth the gamble. After going to a town hall meeting my congresswoman hosted the other night, in an affluent white suburb of Portland that you'd swear is the very embodiment of the GOP version of the American dream, I'm convinced there's a lot more of us than anyone realizes. Speakers were unanimous in their contempt for the "off the table" crowd; there was nothing but unrelenting rage over what's happened to this country, the Constitution and the US' position in the world since 2001; one after the other after the other DEMANDED impeachment immediately; most also demanded the US get the hell out of the Middle East, with a few wanting to stop giving Israel $3 billion a year to screw with the Palestinians.

But impeachment was the key word and just about every single speaker demanded it NOW. Pelosi was predictably and repeatedly vilified, as was Reid.

I heard an unending stream of emotional, barely restrained, bitter and angry indictments of the Dem leadership for caving on Iraq and not starting impeachment hearings SIX MONTHS AGO. These people were FURIOUS and damn eloquent about it. And there were no dissenters, and many of the speakers were self-identified former republicans who are completely aware that BushCo is a fascist organization that has nothing to do with traditional conservatism. Bush and Cheney were called "sociopaths," "idiots," "fascists," "chickenhawks," "draft-dodgers," and a few more I can't remember.

So that's the good news, and my take on why mass media -- particularly TV -- will have to cover House impeachment hearings. Their viewers will demand it, and the TV programmers are hyper sensitive to ratings and share -- and the advertising rates good ones command.

Now the other side of the coin.

BushCo is still drawing between 23 and 32 percent approval in the polls. That would be the fundie nuts, the Fux watchers, the violent sociopaths -- probably the child molester and gay public toilet six voting blocs too these days -- and the elites who are making money faster than the Fed can mint it under BushCo's tax "reforms," the war budget and all the countless other ways BushCo has put in place to transfer what's left of America's wealth from the bottom and middle to the top.

These people wouldn't support impeachment if Cheney killed, butchered, barbecued and consumed an infant on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in front of 10,000 witnesses.

But the ones at that town hall meeting -- former republicans, the neo-screwed, centrists and a few anarcho-socialists like myself -- will listen to the testimony and ignore the bullshit.


It'll be quite a show if Ms. Nancy ever decides the Constitution is more important than bipartisanship and accommodation, or acknowledges that House members can actually walk and chew gum at the same time (the "interferes with other important business" argument).

wp

[The Wizard]

161. Oh that dick Cheney

"These people wouldn't support impeachment if Cheney killed, butchered, barbecued and consumed an infant on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in front of 10,000 witnesses."
They'd say he must have been pretty hungry and accept it.

[EFerrari]

19. Kick

[Laelth]

20. Hear, hear!

Good work, OP.

:dem:

-Laelth

[bigtree]

21. How can you be certain Bush wouldn't attack Iran

to distract from the impeachment proceedings.

There's certainly a valid argument in favor of removing Bush, but it's arguable, at best, that Bush would be forced to end his militarism just because Congress decided to put all of their chips on an impeachment.

[EFerrari]

23. I'm not. But, could you agree that impeachment proceedings

would draw resources away from these runaway felons?

I don't put anything past them, bigtree.

[bigtree]

46. Do we really need an impeachment to take away their resources?

Look at the position of Leahy as he addresses the obstruction on his investigation of Justice. He's proposing leveraging approval of a new AG with complance in his investigation from the WH. That's the type of hardball I would expect before we could ever hope for these politicians to hold fast on something as confrontational as an impeachment. That type of leverage should be applied to every administration or republican request, across the board.

As for prosecuting these bastards, we desperately need some outside prosecution or investigation threatening an actual prosecution/conviction which would galvanize attention and give weight to the Democratic charges; remove any taint of partisanship which would give cover to recalcitrant republicans; and, draw all of the other crimes and abuses into the ultimate set of charges.

[EFerrari]

49. It will never come from outside. It has to be us.

And partisanship is neither here nor there.

They took an oath.

[bigtree]

74. They didn't take an oath to impeach

It's not as if any old impeachment would fulfill their responsibility to hold the administration accountable. I certainly don't think an impeachment which doesn't have any reasonable chance of getting a conviction is of any more value than the investigations and hearings that are going on now. I personally don't want to see a process where Democrats present evidence generated entirely in-house and republicans effectively provide an acquittal. I just don't see the value in taking the country down that road.

I don't believe anyone would be held accountable in a process like that. That's why I believe we need an outside prosecutor/investigator who will take away that taint of partisanship, because, I believe that only a conviction will actually have the effect proponents say they want. I think a process which ends in an acquittal could actually harm future efforts to impeach with legislators even more reluctant to press forward with whatever was charged in the failed proceeding.

The act of impeachment is about the law, but it will inevitably become about politics (at least in this Congress) if all that is being argued does nothing but track the same effort underway right now in committee which hasn't motivated anyone to move beyond their standing divisions and come together to prosecute the Executive. We shouldn't expect to move these republicans any more than what we've managed so far in every legislative effort this Congress' Democratic majority has made to hold them accountable.

[EFerrari]

82. I understand your positing, I think, bigtree but there are problems.

We didn't go down that road with St. Ronnie and the result is, he was canonized and his crew of criminals are still in our government.

A special prosecutor would probably be a good idea.

And lastly, the Republics are looking at an election cycle that will make 2006 look like a birthday party. I wonder how many of them want to get President Fredo on that boat to be rid of his taint before election day.

[truedelphi]

24. Me thinks he will attack Iran regardless n/t

[EFerrari]

26. We're in an arms race with our own bloody government.

:grr:

[hisownpetard]

102. OMG, this statement is so true. I've been thinking the same thing but couldn't

find a way to put it so succinctly into words. You rock!

[truedelphi]

22. Bravo! K & R'ed

[LiberalFighter]

27. Who are we waiting for, the Pope? IMO it should read

Who are you waiting for, the Pope?

[EFerrari]

28. I was trying to be nice.

lol

:rofl:

[bemildred]

29. K&R. nt

[Lone_Star_Dem]

30. Beth, well done.

Other than the very minor issue on the spelling of Petraeus's name, I think it's excellent. This sounds as if it came from a real person who deeply cares about what's taking place, which it did.

I loved it, and I am very proud to post on the same board as you. :patriot:

[EFerrari]

31. I humbly apologize for my spelling.

It's awful.

And, thank you.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

32. Please don't!

That is not what I meant by my post at all.

I really shouldn't have mentioned it at all, and I apologize. Have you ever read my post? My spelling is atrocious!! I kid not. I got lucky by knowing how to spell his name. That's all.

Ignore that asinine mistake of mine for mentioning something so minor and focus on the rest of my words.

What you said was beautiful and moving. If anything that wee, tiny mistake made it more human and real. I really mean that.

Oh, and your grammar beats me twenty ways to Sunday!

[EFerrari]

36. Let me cop to my sins so I can sleep at night.

lol

:)

[Lone_Star_Dem]

38. A few sins add spice

Who wants to be bland and sinless? :P

[Bluebear]

33. Feedback: Magnificent. No other word will do or is necessary. nt

[EFerrari]

34. My bagman will be at the usual street corner.

More seriously, DU is such a gift. Because it puts the salient facts right up front. It's writers' heaven.

I had to scramble this weekend and couldn't have asked for a more diligent pool of fact checkers.

DU

(Oh, and let's impeach these bastards!)

[creeksneakers2]

35. Very well written

Its clear and concise. All the main points of the argument for impeachment are well covered.

Its all on the same point up until paragraph about Hillary Clinton and John Kerry. The piece loses direction and cohesiveness there, and loses more when a note to the Democratic leadership is included. Points from those paragraphs that favor impeachment could have been applied to the general case.

More about the demonstration would make it all more interesting.

Still, a great piece of work.

[EFerrari]

51. You may be right about that. Thanks. n/t

[mod mom]

37. IMPEACH-already! (and if you really want fair & verifiable elections-the time to act

is now!

[EFerrari]

39. How in the world can we endanger an up coming dirty election?

:shrug:

I'm not up for #3, mod mom. No way. I remember.

[mod mom]

40. Right under our noses and despite affidavits and video we got silence from the

majority of the Dem leadership. Their silence now, is alarming, despite the evidence of experts.

[EFerrari]

42. So we keep screaming and shouting and whispering and bugging.

I'm in if you are. :)

[mod mom]

43. I'm in, of course:

:patriot:

[EFerrari]

63. And we're so lucky to have you, mod mom.

:hi:

[femrap]

41. K & R

I sent another round of cards to the Dems on the Judiciary Committee....I am just appalled that these people are doing nothing about this sadist and vice-sadist. I have this fear that they'll never cede office.

[EFerrari]

44. I feel the same way and guess the way I deal with it is to keep moving.

Harder to hit a moving target. Hang in, my friend.

[glitch]

45. Awesome post. I wish she could truly hear it but I admit my expectations have dropped.

K & R

[EFerrari]

47. It's hard to keep going after so many losses.

But, that's just when we need to. And to remember our gains, too. Like 2006 when they had to shave our votes to avoid a public landslide.

Nancy is juggling a lot right now. We need to help her know the weight of our concerns. We can do that. We have to.

[Senator]

48. Well done. FWIW, I might consider adding...

...to this part:

"Recently Mr. Conyers explained to Amy Goodman on her program, Democracy Now! that, with respect to impeachment, he had the Constitution in one hand and his calculator in that other. But most people would say he's got a Magic-8-Ball in one hand and his dick in the other."

But your way's probably better. Yeah, there's no need to give free advertising to Mattel. They're probably covering those things with lead paint in china these days anyway.

---

[EFerrari]

50. LOL!

:spank:

[kaygore]

52. Well done and well said. Thank you!

[EFerrari]

53. Thanks, Kay. I have a very real fear of flying, too.

But, my fear isn't a real danger to anyone; Bush is.

[EFerrari]

54. One last kick. Going to walk my puppy who has also suffered through

this regime for her whole life.

Thanks, you guys.

[bridgit]

55. There is really only one set a feedback required yes...

Your words are beyond reproach, Beth, and so, they are strung bead-like; they are balanced and quite nearly...pristine. They are as you've pointed out throughout 'nice', not per se pointed. But understood as reasonable. And that's a good thing, no doubt. It's probably a better thing that I do not control this world. That would be a simple matter indeed. I'd gather up some burly guys & gals, some note takers, traipse on in that ole WH, cuff the both of them, Cheney & Bush, and hop them out the front door frog style. Simple.

Your observation here, however, I do understand as it is able to be distilled:

'Recently Mr. Conyers explained to Amy Goodman on her program, Democracy Now! that, with respect to impeachment, he had the Constitution in one hand and his calculator in that other. That while there was no doubt that the Bush Administration had committed impeachable offenses, we don’t have the time or the votes to do it and, as the argument goes, the Democrats only have a nominal majority so putting the 2008 election in peril would be a grave error.'

Into this: The Immediate Consequences of Aiming Too High on Impeachment

We don't have the votes. While time remains of the essence, time is itself tic-toc tic-toc ticking away. And by the time it has been suggested we look about so as to gather votes, nuance them, talk them down from out the trees, bush has placed another B-52 loaded with nuclear ordnance over some landscape somewhere without permission or flight plan, still...

Having been key to giving us a Wall Street that bounces round like a red rubber ball taking the proud, the innocent, the free, the brave, the dumb, the smart, and the sub primers too; I oft times find little solace in Hamilton's recitation of nobler words elsewhere. Those were great times. But the marauder is here today entrenched. And like that SNL skit 'the guest that wouldn't leave' he keeps asking for more pizza, soda pop, and the clicker to the family TV.

Maybe it's simply a matter after-all of balls, or ovaries, or call it what you will; but someone would do better imo to consider tossing the whole game board and the pieces too up into the air: the funny money, the get out of jail free cards, the whole kit & caboodle, risk it all!!

Cause these guys ain't going nowhere in the face of 'nice', nor at it's recommendation...my opinion.

Again, Pelosi has been looking very exhausted by this whole travail, poor kid. And I am quite sure it is far less than pleasurable sitting across from these pirates, these traitors to America The Beautiful, as they say with their faces filled with smirk...

"What are you gonna fucking do about it!"

Impeachment for me is like a phantasm, a full roaming vapor, bush should not be in there to begin with but I'm simple that way.

I like your OP :)

[fed-up]

56. Excellent!!!

http://chicobeat.com/?q=call_to_action_0



For the next three months the message on this billboard will be shuffled around Butte County, appearing in nine different spots in Chico, Oroville and Paradise. Anybody with similar sentiments who’d like to help pay for the project can send donations to P.O. Box 4812, Chico, CA, 95927. This sign is on Lassen just west of The Esplanade.


If a donation is made please put DU either on the envelope or on the notation line of payment.

[Maraya1969]

57. NANCY PELOSI = MISERABLE FAILURE Please someone make that

into a bunch of signs. At least she is not delusional like * so it would have an impact on her.

I think we need the strong ammunition.

I am tired of being nice.

[EFerrari]

64. I hear you. Me, too. n/t

[cascadiance]

99. Nancy, break us out of this nightmare tale! Break free!

[EFerrari]

120. LOL!

:rofl:

[Kurovski]

58. K&R

She won't listen to Americans, so she's likely to ignore the pope as well. Maybe her hairdresser can talk her into it?

[EFerrari]

62. We thought for sure she'd go for the chopper ride.

lol

Oh, well. Back to caging industry spies or pies.

:pals:

[chill_wind]

59. To one of my always all-time favorite DU'ers, I say---Outstanding!

KnR!

[EFerrari]

61. Thanks for thinking along side of me, chill_wind.

:)

[Mind_your_head]

60. K & R

[Duppers]

67. K & R

excellent.

[tecelote]

69. Excellent! Thanks.

Did I hear that the problem is that Impeachment would take too much time? What a crock!

That's like saying that fixing the damn would take too much time away from the bucket brigade.

Impeachment will save lives and save our country. What is more important?

[EFerrari]

148. No kidding, tecolote.

Btw, I'm a vegetarian.

lol

[broadcaster]

71. Pelosi is worthy of impeachment herself...

Besides Bush and Cheney, there is no one in politics I detest more
than Nancy Pelosi, and then Harry Reid.

These two have done everything they could do to hand over the country
to Bush, and to enable him to further destroy the country.

Pelosi belongs in jail and so does Reid. American traitors that they
are.

Pelosi is beyond spineless, she's a traitor and a sell out. Same
for Reid.

[ForeignSpectator]

72. This might be telling...

Before the summer, some people here wondered what Pelosi says to Bush in this pic :




A guess now would be : "We can't close our deal just yet. I came to think yesterday that I want a bigger cut, if I should make impeachment go away."





Apparently they reached some sort of agreement...

Then didn't she call Bush and his family "lovely", "great", "patriots" and whatnot in an interview, I think with Charlie Rose. What for??


PS : Beth, your piece is great work!

[Just-plain-Kathy]

144. When I first saw your photo, it came to mind...Nancy must be saying...

..."I want a piece of the action".


...Welcome to the DU ForeignSpectator!! :hi:

[TomClash]

73. Feedback much appreciated

You asked for it. This is meant to be constructive so don't take it the wrong way.

No one wants Bush to remain in office but no one wants to impeach another President - especially during a war. It's bad politics. All the Repukes got for it was an increase in Clinton's popularity. I don't want Bush to leave office with a 55% approval rating because of impeachment sympathy - that just helps the Repuke candidate in 2008.

We don't have the votes in the House - I count at most 150. Ever try to get votes on the Hill? With all due respect to Alexander Hamilton, who never served in the US Congress under this Constitution, the reluctant ones who have to run in marginal districts aren't going to budge. Go tell Heath Shuler he has to vote for impeachment during a war - good luck.

You missed your best argument - or maybe I didn't read it correctly - given the Bush-Ceney track record we can't afford to leave them in office a minute longer. Iran, terror, a third world war, recession all loom on the horizon and we can't leave the country in the hands of these clowns and their third-string team of Repuke hacks. We need experience and competence at the helm. We need Al Gore.

[EFerrari]

80. I don't know about Johnson but we were "at war" during

both Watergate and during the Lewinsky affair. We're at war most of the time, aren't we?

And no kidding about that "third string". Starting with Junior, who was probably fielded because Jeb got too dirty too soon.

I'm going to print this out and read it with all your notes. Thanks so much for taking the trouble. :)

[KharmaTrain]

75. "I don’t know if we can impeach George W. Bush or Dick Cheney"...

How about when we have the evidence of crimes...then do CAN and must. This mean real criminal charges and not political ones. Real, documented proof rather than rumor and hearsay. It's evidence currently being hidden behind "executive privilidge" and an omarata that has made getting the real evidence difficult, but it will happen.

The old saying is "if you're going to aim for the king, you better be sure you're gonna kill him"...and this is the case with impeachment. I want a successful impeachment and conviction...not a half-hearted political game based on "he said/she said" "evidence" that glosses over a lot of the underlying criminality and criminals in this regime. These crimes are far bigger than just two people...but an entire criminal enterprise. What makes things worse right now is we have a Justice Department completely compromised and a complicit Repugnican party that will never vote to convict.

This is like going after an organized crime family. The blood isn't directly on booosh and crashcart's hands...but it must be squeezed up from the underlings who did the dirty work...the Monica Goodlings, Harriet Miers, Alberto Gonzalez and others who can't escape their own crimes and, in turn, will reveal who above them ordered what and when. Yes, it will take time...but it's important to get a thorough accounting of what's happened (so it can be prevented again) and the best hope for this to happen would not only be a Democratic majority in the House, but a larger one in the Senate that would push for the conviction and a Democrat in the Executive who can clean up the DOJ mess and refocus the department in going after all the crimes of the past 6 years. The FBI is already working overtime...and the cases are coming along slowly. Democratic control will make things move faster...something both Pelosi and Conyers know.

Also...unfortunately, any indictment now will be met by a boooosh pardon...a rush to getting these indictments could let many of these slimeballs never to face judgement for their crimes. I want complete justice (including war crimes trials in the Hague)...and, while it burns me no end to think this...the real investigations really can't get rolling until after 1-20-09...so no pardons can be thrown around.

This is the time to gather, document, push for more investigation and crack this syndicate...slowly unravel all the corruption and crimes. No law says impeachment can't be retroactive...and one that will succeede with a conviction!

[Enthusiast]

76. Pelosi and Reid............

Pelosi and Reid are weenies! They project weeniness. They are making the Democratic Party look weak. They are making the Democratic Party weak. The Democratic Party needs to project strength and I don't mean that in a military sense.

[EFerrari]

79. It is going after the mafia. They are a criminal cartel.

We agree on that!

[Senator]

84. There will be nothing without impeachment

There is nothing "being hidden." The regime admits and defends their crimes as lawful and unimpeachable under "Unitary Executive" theory. They have "stipulated" as to the facts of the case (if you must a "legalistic" analogy). And the crimes have already been "adjudicated" by the USSC in Hamdan (Geneva violations) and the FISA court (illegal spying).

All that is left is the accusation and punishment by Congress for political "high misdemeanors." No crime or proof is required for impeachment. Standing idle and waiting for "more evidence," or "the legal process," or any activity after they leave office and "the nation has moved on" is just siging up for a cargo cult.

They are already using "being divisive" as a rationalization for inaction. That lame excuse actually becomes somewhat valid should a Dem win in 2008. And just like with Poppy's criminal pardons of his co-conspirators, and Reagan's serial criminality, there will be zero political will to take even investigative step one.

Only impeachment can get our once-great nation, and the American People, "off the hook" for these atrocities committed in our names but without our proper consent. Only impeachment can hope to prevent the eventual revisiting of this cabal on the halls of power.

Failure to impeach is complicity -- approval -- exoneration for the regime.

We allow it at our peril.

----

[EFerrari]

87. They assert and defend their crimes, exactly.

If Karl Rove were on our side, he'd call that their strength and go after it.

[KharmaTrain]

90. Words Aren't Indictments

Yes, impeachment is A remedy, but not the only one for all the abuses and crimes of this regime...and it's not one that can be done in one fell swoop, feel good, political passion play that ends up both exonerating this regime (when booosh ISN'T convicted by the Senate) and many of the foot soldier criminals...the ones who have been doing the dirty tricks slip through the cracks. They all must be investigated, indicted, tried...and IF PROVEN, convicted.

Unitary executive is a concept...vote caging, outting CIA agents, politicizing the DOJ and other departments...those are CRIMES...and ones that are still not thoroughly investigated. THOSE are the high crimes...the ones that need to be prosecuted and through the process justice is served. Not through a political showtrial based on a theory. Crimes have been indicated, but not proven...not FISA nor any other abuse of this regime. It's hiding behind Executive privilidge and a code of secrecy that is starting to break down, but is far from broken. It's led to the initial convictions of goons like Cunningham and Abramoff...the tip of a massive iceberg that slowly is being chipped away.

Impeachment ISN'T the only way to "get off the hook". Sad to say, in many parts of this world, it'll take generations for this country to "get off the hook" for the war crimes and abuses that won't be addressed by a political impeachment...but only in the World Court and through international tribunals...and those trials can't move forward until crimes are proven here...not political, but real criminal ones.

Yes, impeachment is part of the process, but it's not THE process.

[Senator]

149. Impeachment is the ONLY indictment ...

...that is indispensible to any further "process." Without it, any part of the pipe dream you describe is about as likely as full prosecution for the theft of the last 2 presidential elections.

Without impeachment it all become's "America's Crimes," not those of a particular regime. Unitary executive becomes a "concept" that "legalizes" all those "crimes," as necessary for national security -- with the tacit approval of Congress.

That is what is being advocated by anything other than immediate impeachment.

===

[KharmaTrain]

153. Impeachment doesn't solve "America's Crimes"

It's a political game that has no real binding results. There are no criminal penalties with impeachment...and, if anything gives booosh a "get out of jail" card when a rushed and premature impeachment fails to convict. Sorry, a vote in the House doesn't cut it...it didn't stop Clinton from sending our military into Kosovo in '99 and it sure won't stop boooosh from going after Iran. An acuittal in the Senate exonerates him, makes Democrats look even more inept and does so right in the middle of the '08 elections. Meanwhile lots of other rats...real criminals slip away from their crime.

America's crimes won't be absolved in the world by a political showtrial either...especially one that does nothing to address the thousands who have been killed in Iraq and other places by this regime's arrogance.

While you may want a feel-good political show trial, I want a total investigation and criminal charges brought against as many involved with the illegalities of this regime...not just slapping two figureheads on the wrist while the real "foot soldiers" lay low for a few years to resurface in 2012 or 2016.

Impeachement is a moot point now...as it always has been...as without the 17 votes to convict, it's a waste of time. Sorry to poop in your cornflakes, but an impeachment puts a halt to many of the investigations and could easily exonerate this regime. A political impeachment without proven criminal charges minimalize all the crimes we both agree not only have taken place, but need to be prosecuted...not by some weak-kneed politicians, but in front of a jury of peers.

[Senator]

154. Impeachment Redeems America's Soul

Which is far more important than dreaming of prosecutions which are even more remote in probability than a Senate conviction/removal.

But you're really just arguing with yourself. You claim impeachment is moot, and that it's counterproductive, and that it exonerates the regime. While none of those claims are actually true, they do conflict with each other as arguments.

So, you're pooping on your own cornflakes.

---

[Time for change]

103. Refusal to comply with a Congressional subpoena is itself an impeachable offense

In fact, it was one of the three articles of impeachment drawn up against Nixon.

Furthermore, even without that and even without additional testimony there is tons of evidence of impeachable offenses against Bush and Cheney already on record. The Supreme Court itself deemed Bush a war criminal for his violation of international laws regarding the treatment of prisoners. And Bush himself admitted puclicly to his warrantless spying program, which is another impeachable offense. As is his nearly one thousand "signing statements", where he claims executive privilege to ignore laws duly passed by Congress.

[KharmaTrain]

109. Nixon Was An Un-Indicted Co-Conspirator

Those criminal charges were the underpinning for the articles that were drawn up...the refusal to honor supboenas was built into the obstruction charge. In Clinton's case, the Starr "report" was a referal of the legal charges that Hyde used for his sham show trial. There has been no such charges brought up that directly implicate either boooosh or cheney that directly link them to a criminal act like Nixon or Clinton. This is what Conyers is working toward.

There are court battles ahead to determine if those "impeachable offenses" you state are really impeachable and criminal...that is headed toward the courts and if and when there are criminal violations, then impeachment can and must move forward. A political "impeachment" without a conviction means nothing...a criminal impeachment with a conviction restores the Constitution.

[Time for change]

137. It is not up to the courts to determine if impeachable offenses were committed.

That responsibility is clearly given to Congress in our Constitution, and there is no requirement whatsoever to wait for the courts to act.

As for Nixon's refusal to honor the subpoenas, it was not built into the obstruction charge. It was a totally separate article of impeachment, and it merely specified that Congress needed that information for its continued investigation of his impeachable offenses:

Article 3

In his conduct of the office of President of the United States, Richard M. Nixon, contrary to his oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has failed without lawful cause or excuse to produce papers and things as directed by duly authorized subpoenas issued by the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives on April 11, 1974, May 15, 1974, May 30, 1974, and June 24, 1974, and willfully disobeyed such subpoenas. The subpoenaed papers and things were deemed necessary by the Committee in order to resolve by direct evidence fundamental, factual questions relating to Presidential direction, knowledge or approval of actions demonstrated by other evidence to be substantial grounds for impeachment of the President. In refusing to produce these papers and things Richard M. Nixon, substituting his judgment as to what materials were necessary for the inquiry, interposed the powers of the Presidency against the the lawful subpoenas of the House of Representatives, thereby assuming to himself functions and judgments necessary to the exercise of the sole power of impeachment vested by the Constitution in the House of Representatives.

Edited to add that impeachable offenses don't even have to be technically crimes, as explained in this post, with quotes from our Founding Fathers:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1383699

[EFerrari]

118. Has anyone -- the Court, in specific -- taken up the issue that

this administration has tortured American citizens?

I suspected but didn't know for sure until recently that Walker Lindh was tortured. And, they've destroyed Padilla's mind.

Worse, they've deliberately deployed the tactic of making detainee's afraid to trust their attorneys. This was reported by Amy Goodman. "Did you know your lawyer is a Jew, a homosexual . . ." and so on.

We are dealing with evil here. It's evil.

[Time for change]

141. Yes

The USSC ruled him a war criminal on those and other grounds:

The abuses and torture of our prisoners have been frequent and abundantly documented. Regarding those abuses, the U.S. Supreme Court so much as branded George W. Bush a ‘war criminal’ for violating the Geneva Convention, in their Hamdan v. Rumsfeld decision, as explained by Vyan. In that decision Justice Stevens, speaking for the majority, explained that the petitioner Hamdan was “entitled to the full protection of the Geneva Convention”, and that the “military commission convened to try him was established in violation of both the UCMJ and Common Article 3 of the Third Geneva Convention”. Justice Kennedy further elaborated on the Geneva Convention that the USSC determined the Bush administration to have violated:

The provision is part of a treaty the United States has ratified and thus accepted as binding law… moreover, violations of Common Article 3 are considered “war crimes,” punishable as federal offenses…

[EFerrari]

147. Thank you very much, TFC. I'd forgotten about Hamdan. n/t

[Senator]

150. BTW, it's not just the treaty ratification bit

Very specific, US Federal law. No vagaries of international namby-pamby:

US CODE: Title 18,2441. War crimes

(a) Offense.— Whoever, whether inside or outside the United States, commits a war crime, in any of the circumstances described in subsection (b), shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both, and if death results to the victim, shall also be subject to the penalty of death.
(b) Circumstances.— The circumstances referred to in subsection (a) are that the person committing such war crime or the victim of such war crime is a member of the Armed Forces of the United States or a national of the United States (as defined in section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act).
(c) Definition.— As used in this section the term “war crime” means any conduct—
(1) defined as a grave breach in any of the international conventions signed at Geneva 12 August 1949, or any protocol to such convention to which the United States is a party;
(2) prohibited by Article 23, 25, 27, or 28 of the Annex to the Hague Convention IV, Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, signed 18 October 1907;
(3) which constitutes a violation of common Article 3 of the international conventions signed at Geneva, 12 August 1949, or any protocol to such convention to which the United States is a party and which deals with non-international armed conflict; or
(4) of a person who, in relation to an armed conflict and contrary to the provisions of the Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices as amended at Geneva on 3 May 1996 (Protocol II as amended on 3 May 1996), when the United States is a party to such Protocol, willfully kills or causes serious injury to civilians.

[EFerrari]

160. Thank you, Senator.

[bridgit]

124. Yep, John Gotti had a nefarious little 35yr run while slipping out from under...

what many felt to be a phalanx of simple, easily understandable laws and that was from within a trail of blood, broken bodies, legal wiretaps, and a string of weeping widows draped in mantilla'...but, of course, for his $1,000 suit/mouth pieces so stated from a court room filled instead with smoke & mirrors

Naw, removal/conviction is the game imo, and there's just enough time on the clock to run it out. Cheney will snarl, bush will sing-song, "What, me worry!!" from the tops & bottoms of mountains & landfills of deleted emails & redacted 'documents'. It will take months upon months to discover who let the dogs out. Months longer to determine where they went and voila!! Their hearths & homes secured upon the innocent deaths of hundreds of thousands, the consternation of a watching world wondering how such things occur in so bright an experiment as America. Halliburton, Lockheed-Martin, Raytheon paying dividends out to the horizon and beyond.

It not even so much as the game has been lost so much as it has been frittered away; out from under over-sight & nobler words some resembling: freedom, liberty, and justice for all. This cheney/bush crime matrix, and it's not just them but their enablers and they are many; they all knew that where Americans would hesitate to ride to the sound of their guns...they would ride to where American Poetries were being cast about like lying leaves on the wind. And so it were thus. No more pardons I agree, no more pity agree with me, and please, goddess...no more bumper-stcikers.

http://action.aclu.org/site/PageNavigator/sheepadanimated

[Vidar]

77. Excellent. Highly recommended.

[Time for change]

78. Excellent notes

:applause:

[EFerrari]

83. Awesome notes!

Thanks!

[Golden Raisin]

81. Brava! Kudos!

Sadly, I don't think Pelosi in particular or Congress in general are going to do a goddamn thing except talk-talk-talk and hold more "investigations" while the proverbial clock runs out and BushCo continues to sneer at and spit (you can use another word that starts with s and ends with t if you wish) on Congress. I think Cheney/Bush will unilaterally attack Iran, with no formal consultation of Congress, and then this emasculated Congress will have to either find a spine and the will to genuinely oppose the administration, or more likely, fall in line, be "patriotic", rally around and support "our President in time of war". My gut tells me that with this bunch we ain't gonna' see a sudden growth of backbones and testicles. I hope I'm wrong. Personally I think impeachment (and hopefully but doubtfully) conviction should proceed even if we don't have the votes and truly is doomed to failure. So what?! At least we will have tried. We owe it to the Constitution, the Founding Fathers and to set an example for future generations of Americans. I also cannot help wondering if History will judge us as we judge and condemn those Germans who saw exactly what was happening step-by-step but sat idly by as Hitler and the Nazis rose to power. It would be nice if History can say that at least an attempt (even if futile) was made to stop the slide into dictatorship and fascism in the USA.

[EFerrari]

85. A million Iraqis dead, a million displaced for lies.

Election tampering, FISA violated, NOLA drowned, rendition and torture -- Padilla and John Walker Lyndh are American citizens, remember?

[Just-plain-Kathy]

86. I keep wondering if the dems are waiting to make a move right before an election..

...maybe even this election. Maybe they're afraid people will forget if they did something noble and right.

Well, we will NOT forget if they do nothing and let things stand.

And we will never again defend them when our neo-con neighbors call them "worthless" or "whimps".

...This just may be the year when a third party wins.

[EFerrari]

88. I don't know about nobility and you just made me think

I have to cruise this piece for puffery.

Bush and Cheney are dangerous sociopaths. And they've surrounded themselves with their peers. They're dangerous to us -- they're getting us killed every day. They're dangerous to our form of government and so, to our way of life. They're dangerous to the world community. Chavez doesn't call Junior "Mr. Danger" for nothing.

[Mnemosyne]

111. And as far as I recall not one single representative has come straight out

and called *co exactly what they know they are

FUCKING INTERNATIONALLY ORGANIZED WAR CRIMINAL LIARS!


We are in the biggest fight of our lives. The World watches and and wonders why *co are still allowed to be in power here. We truly have become the joke and bully of the planet, if not in all dimensions of being.

I never dreamed I would ever feel such embarrassment and shame to be an American.

This is an excellent piece Beth!

Because your oath was to the Constitution, not to expediency

You make some powerful points throughout the entire OPED, Beth. Powerful.

I do feel we have to get beyond our natural instinct to be so stinking "nice", the fate of our beloved country, possibly the world, is in our hands at this moment in history. The entire world is watching, waiting for the other shoe to drop.

Thanks to the Universe for those, such as yourself, et al, that have the courage and clarity to speak out and 'educate' the apathetic masses.

I do see the apathy starting to fade out somewhat. I only pray it will not be too late before the masses learn they need to rise up or suffer unimaginable, to them at least, consequences.

With hearts, minds and spirits like yours; maybe we can win, if the bastards don't nuke us too soon. :grr:

Word. :hug::hi::hug:

[EFerrari]

114. I just hope they don't take binReilly's advice and nuke San Francisco.

They are an international cabal operating in American drag, flag and all. I know what you mean.

:hug:

[Mnemosyne]

135. Please stay safe. This seems like a runaway train

and the crash is coming.

:hug:

[4dsc]

91. Forget impeachment

Its truely sad that the so called leadership of the democratic party has FAILED us and will not seek impeachment of this corrupt administration!! I truely believe they have STALL any kind of impeachment hearing to the point it won't get done at any time during this administration?!! It makes me so mad that I am thinking of sitting out the 2008 elections and not supporting any candidate!! That's how pissed I am at this point!!

[Kermitt Gribble]

92. I had such high hopes for Nancy

and the new Democratic congress. The past 10 months have been filled with considerably more disappointment than satisfaction. "Impeachment off the table" being the most disappointing. I spend alot of time every day lurking here, absorbing all the wonderful information DU has to offer, and I can't comprehend what is holding them back from impeachment.

[reprobate]

121. Yes we all had high hopes for Pelosi and the new congress, but we were duped.

What we DIDN'T know about was the Pelosi-Emmanuel (and IMO Rove was involved also) deal to turn the House conservative.

TruthOut reported on the facts in THIS ARTICLE.

Recommended reading. It explains how Pelosi appointed Emmanuel to head the DCCC while she was still minority leader. He, then, recruited and supported with party money conservatives (including some who switched parties from the repugs to run) while instructing Dem donors NOT to support progressive candidates for the primaries. This of course was against the rules of the party. But conservatives obey no rules.

The result was a divided Democratic party that plays right into the hands of the fascists on the right. There are about forty 'Blue Dog' democrats (Emmanuel's conservatives) which when added to the repug votes defeat any bill intended to control the miscreants in power.

When one considers the actions Pelosi has taken since the election it's difficult to imagine that she was not a part of this plot. Emmanuel was NOT an unknown quantity by any means.

This was a mini-coup. It has all the fingerprints of KKKarl Rove all over it.

We've been snockered, folks

[Forrest Greene]

93. Nancy Pelosi

...& the Democratic establishment have completely sold out the country, its citizens, & the Constitution, deliberately & with malice aforethought. They want the dictatorial powers accrued by the Bush Junta to be theirs when they take over in 2008,

This will end with armed resistance groups & a group of allied countries invading the US & G.W. Bush blowing his brain out in a bunker. See Germany, 1945. That which we resist, that which we defeat, we become.

What possible difference or change do you think might be brought about by demonstrations? How? Do you not think these people with powerful weapons are playing for keeps?

[Irishonly]

97. Wonderfully Written

I like a few suggestions that were made but Wow, just wow.

[NotGivingUp]

100. Why would impeachment be "putting the 2008 election in peril "?

Their 2008 election IS in peril because they are NOT impeaching. I'm not voting for anybody who is not for impeachment. By not impeaching they have proven to me that they are one and the same party with the Republicans, and they're all working for that little group of corporate elitist pigs. Read Howard Zinn's "The People's History of the United States". Our government has been working against us for a long, long time.

[EFerrari]

116. Professor Zinn's work should be on every progressive's must read list.

I couldn't agree more.

Re the election, the thinking seems to be, enlarge the toehold we have in Congress to a working majority and take back the White House. Secure the position. And I can see how would make sense to our Democratic congress critters who have had to endure a Republic shark tank for all these long awful years.

And, I disagree with them.

[Dystopian]

101. K&R

Gifted writer & activist! I'm in awe....Thank you!


peace~

[EFerrari]

104. Rob put it up at OpEdNews:

(And yes, bleever, I fixed Petraeus. Thanks!)

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_elizabet_070908_pelosi_s_fear_of_fly.htm

It had to go up as it was because of time constraints. But, I've printed out your notes and will use them to morph this piece into a new one mid week -- have to catapult the propaganda for our event.

b.

[bleever]

107. Excellent!

Where else are you submitting it? SF Chron? Buzzflash?

[EFerrari]

110. Rob has a page where you can send the link.

But, I think I'm going to do another piece and submit it somewhere else mid week. Maybe I can try Salon or Buzzflsh. The Chronicle won't print on this topic, imho.

Now I better go put up the ERD before Melissa kills me. :P

[Lorien]

105. I have always wondered; WHY do the Dems in Congress believe that

impeachment proceedings would imperil their chances in 2008? It seems rather simple to all of us: if they do nothing, the Democratic base feels cheated and unrepresented, since they haven't done what they were hired by us to do: end the war and hold BushCo accountable. They risk losing their base. Perhaps they are worried that Right Wing Hate radio will attack them for an attempt at impeachment, saying that it's a political move that is irresponsible in a "time of war". They'll attack Dems anyway, and Democrats will NEVER be able to secure large numbers of votes from their listeners no matter what they do. One of the complaints all Republicans have when speaking of Democrats is that they don't "stand for anything" while Repugs do (even if it's evil). Most voters want to know what they are voting for. At this point, what ARE we voting for when we vote for Dems? We vote with the HOPE that they will represent us, and we vote against the other guy. When they DON'T represent us, then is voting for the least destructive candidate enough? Will that really motivate the base? Showing strength by taking a stand, making our positions clear, having conviction and not backing down despite the odds is a win-win. Even if the impeachment proceedings fail, we will know where everyone stands once it's over. That should be a good thing, but perhaps it is the very thing that our representatives in Congress fear most.

[NotGivingUp]

126. They would've had my vote if they impeached.

The only dem I will vote for is Kucinich.

[Melissa G]

108. Thanks, Hermana!

:thumbsup::yourock:

[EFerrari]

112. I'm coming, Mom!

lol

:hi:

[treestar]

113. Nice job, Beth

:yourock:

[EFerrari]

115. DU rocks! I got great suggestions and will put them to work.

:hi:

[mogster]

117. Kick!

Already recommended :-)

[EFerrari]

119. Do you have any vacation time, mogster?

We're going to have a great time, spelling it out.

:hi:

[mogster]

152. I'm never on vacation, lol

So, where do we begin ;-)

[EFerrari]

159. You sound like Emerson: "Where do we find ourselves?"

-- "Circles"

Come out, my friend. We have good tacos here and huge ravens that you could photograph. :loveya:

[mogster]

164. As long as the motive keeps still long enough

for me to focus, I can photograph anything! ;-)
Congrats with the post, Beth. You write very good material :hug:

[omega minimo]

122. "Not holding our government accountable in the past allowed seasoned & skilled felons to continue."

"Not holding our government accountable in the past allowed seasoned and skilled felons to continue in our government today."


There it is.
:patriot:

[Raster]

123. Pelosi, and most of Congress, for that matter, answer to a higher power than the American people.

And that higher power has ordered Congress to keep impeachment "off the table." I urge you to cut through the lies, discard the bullshit. Look at this logically as the sane, compassionate, intelligent person that you are. It is clear that bush* and cheney* and their various minions do NOT have the best interests of Americans--all Americans, not just the rich--at heart. It is clear that immediate action MUST be taken to begin to remedy this situation. And it becomes clear with each new report, justification, excuse and lie that there really are only two positions that can be taken: to act as accomplices to cheney*/bush* or to oppose and work to bring this cabal of criminals to justice and begin to mend the damage they have created.

Wake up America!:kick:

[Nothing Without Hope]

125. Very, very well said. I agree completely! This Tom Tomorrow cartoon on Reid

can be translated to another iconic image for Pelosi. There IS no excuse, and we are running out of time before the mess we are in now looks like paradise in retrospect.



found here: http://www.workingforchange.com/comic.cfm?itemid=22395

And for those who have not yet read the statement by the nuns which you mentioned, it's not to be missed:
http://www.journalnow.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=WSJ%2FMGArticle%2FWSJ_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1173352587402&path=!living&s=1037645509005

At this point, the question must be asked: how many Democratic "representatives" in Congress are going down the path of greed and horror with the Bush White House because they are actually as corrupt and corporate-owned as the Republicans? Or perhaps they are being blackmailed, fearing that career-damaging secrets will be revealed unless they meekly go along. From the first I have believed that gathering blackmail info to control possible opponents and keep their own in line was one of the main goals of the illegal wiretapping/data-mining/spying project. Or both.

K & R!!!

[EFerrari]

131. Hi there,my friend! What a great toon! lol

:hi:

[southerncrone]

127. Excellent! You speak for most of us! We at least

need to impeach to bring all these crimes to the forefront of the nation's minds. MSM CANNOT ignore what comes out in the impeachment hearings. The will have to broadcast it, too.

If Dems don't press forward w/this, THEY are in jeopardy of being voted out in '08!
It will also pressure Repubs to show their true colors by voting w/ their constituents, or against them.
I'm sure there will be a lot of letter writing if impeachment hearings are broadcast.

PUT THE PRESSURE ON!

[pokercat999]

128. Unfortunately the Majority of the seated Democratic

Caucus is a co-conspirator in the lies, crimes and cover-ups of this mis-administration. With the government and media controlled by corporate interests, I see no solution to the problem by democratic means.

To quote some infamous words, "This will be a long slog".

[puebloknot]

130. Whatever you were smoking when you wrote this...smoke it some more!

Great article, beautifully written, cuts right to the heart of the matter. Refusal to hold criminals to account, when the power exists to do so, constitutes criminal complicity. Faint heart never won fair Justice!

[EFerrari]

132. You're trying to get me on another list, right?!

lol

:hi:

[puebloknot]

134. No, just trying to light up your life on this one! :)

[EFerrari]

138. Well, thank you.

:hi:

[puebloknot]

143. Another thought:

Calling Pelosi out for her treasonous actions (or lack thereof) -- my wording, not yours -- holds a lot more weight coming from you than the likes of me because you've worked with her, she's in your district, you're working from more than just gut-level rage (I'll own that, too).

Your article needs to be published and e-mailed far and wide! Sincerely! :)

[EFerrari]

145. I have literally worked with her senior staffer on community efforts

and this piece will be sent out to them in the morning. They won't like it but at least, they will know that I am consistent and also won't be blindsided by our action next Saturday.

[puebloknot]

151. Courageous of you to beard the lion(ess) in your own back yard. Brava! nt

[CoffeeCat]

133. Elizabeth, thanks for sharing this with us...

This truly was a gem.

You are a masterful and very powerful writer. You made so many excellent points and you made
them with incredible clarity. I liked that you had to say about Conyers words, "...not having the
time or the votes...". What a great point, that if BushCo has the time to bomb Iran and widen
this war, then why on Earth don't the Democrats make time to stop this nonsense?

Thanks for writing this. It should be circulated far and wide.

[EFerrari]

140. Thank you, TwoSparkles.

Let's see how we do. I'm very encouraged by the number of people who are getting off of their couch to put their energies into this problem.

[Kurovski]

136. Kick. (nt)

[stimbox]

142. Excellent!

:bounce:

[EFerrari]

146. Hey, are you coming out on the 15th?

Brad is in chewing fingernail mode. :hi:

[stimbox]

156. Yep, wouldn't miss it.

:yourock:

[EFerrari]

157. Great! Maybe we can put together a little post game show.

:hi:

[stimbox]

162. Ha, ha, ha...

Set up in front of Pelosi's house and do a Noriega on her.

:headbang:

[Wapsie B]

155. Very good post!

To me Pelosi's actions make this whole thing one big farce. That the * regime can do anything they want, unchecked. Her actions, along with her fellow Dems not wanting impeachment show me this political system is one big con game, with both major parties in on it.

[EFerrari]

158. I don't believe that was Nancy's solo decision.

This is group think from party leadership who, after being out of power for years, don't want to put 2008 at "risk". And they're wrong. If they don't move, it will be at risk.

[Imagevision]

163. nancy Pelosi is beginning to look like a H-U-G-E disappointment...!

[Kurovski]

165. Kick.

:kick: