Speaker Pelosi, lead or step out of our way. We The People are coming to IMPEACH THIS CHARLATAN.

[seafan]

We have passed the point of no return. This impostor in the White House is forcing the people of this country off the edge of the cliff to certain destruction.


We The People are screaming out for leadership from you and the rest of our representatives in Congress, of whom we demanded to do their jobs after the November election.


It's about secret trade deals between the Bush Administration and a handful of senior Democrats being negotiated outside of The People's sight.


It's about Bush quietly doubling the number of The People's children he's sending to Iraq by the end of this year.


It's about the greed and intimidation by the Bush Administration, directed like a laser beam at the decimated Iraqis' government, forcing a signoff on the foreign oil interests' demands to privatize and seize profits from more than 70% of Iraq's oil resources.


It's about more than 3,300 of our troops killed in Iraq as of April.


It's about Bush thumbing his vile nose at you when you and the Senate leadership try to insert impotent, non-binding legislative language setting a non-binding date to start bringing troops home from Iraq, but Bush can waive it if he so chooses. Well, he chooses every f***ing day and it ain't for the good of this country.


It's about the snakes of graft and corruption that have envenomated into our political system, corrupting The People's hopes and chances for survival as a nation.


It's about the callous lack of life-sustaining care for The People that the Bush Administration has so wantonly demonstrated.


It's about the devastation of our Gulf Coast, now nearly 2 years ago, yet there it sits, in rotten devastation and filth, unimaginable human suffering and death, and George W. Bush has blood on his hands.


It's about the lack of food safety, environmental safety, job security, educational security, and infrastructure security.

It's about universal health care being Missing In Action in this country.


It's about our gutted civil liberties, loss of privacy, and the loss of basic rights as people.


It's about our own Supreme Court-appointed President and his Vice President committing treason by exposing our deep cover national security spies.


It's about this dreadful group of rabid GOP partisans inserting operatives throughout our government, to serve as nothing but whores to this administration.


There is no longer justice, Madam Speaker. There is no honor. There is now no rule of law.




It's about this soulless, murderous dragon, sitting on his treasures, grinning through rotted teeth at the angry little ants milling aimlessly at his feet.



Madam Speaker, we demand that you begin impeachment proceedings immediately. We do not accept your statements that impeachment is "off the table". Do the job We The People demanded of you with the last election.


America is hemorrhaging at the hands of this maniacal zealot occupying our White House.


We The People will not die with him.

[katmondoo]

1. I agree

But now how can it be done with a majority in the Senate of 2

[Puppyjive]

42. Vote them all out of office

I get very discouraged with Congress when they spend an enormous effort on something that they know the President is going to veto. What happened to the minimum wage increase? They don't care because they were all born with silver spoons in their mouths, including Bush and his cronies. The best course of action is the one that is possible in the first place. Congress needs to find a way to end the war now. If impeachment is the only tool that will work, then do it. Congress ought to realize that the American public will vote them all out, if that is what it takes.

[BeHereNow]

111. Welcome to DU! And I could not agree more about voting them all out.

However, we have what I call the "cock roach" problem at hand.
You see, for every roach we see in the branches of our government
there are thousands hiding in the walls, just waiting their turn to venture
into the kitchen.
Furthermore, the "powers that be" have virtually constructed a
twenty foot tall, ten mile deep wall around the kitchen to
assure that their pet roaches continue the raid on WE, the people.

I don't know the answer.
Just saying what I have concluded.

Again, Welcome.
BHN

[bdamomma]

123. it is the rich white man's club, and they have proved that for a long time.

[Raster]

148. Here is a test ...

to see if your Congressperson is an enabler.

1. Did your Congressperson vote to cede war powers to bush* to invade Iraq? If your Congressperson voted pro bush*, they are an enabler and probably a coward to boot.

Here is another test to determine if your Congressperson is an accomplice.

2. Did your Congressperson vote for the "New" Bankruptcy Bill? If so, they are an accomplice to the plundering and pillaging of this country's infrastructure, natural assets and wealth of the middle class and the poor. Our country, our assets, even our children's future assets are being looted in the largest transference of wealth from 95% of the population to approximately 5% of the uber-wealthy.

If your Congressperson voted for both, I suggest you consider other options.

[Maraya1969]

147. Scream this to her! Here is her contact information. She needs to be shown just like every

other politician that works for THE PEOPLE! And they way we do that is direct contact by ordinary citizens.

http://www.speaker.gov/contact/

She needs to be inundated with emails to let her know just what "WE THE PEOPLE DEMAND"

PLEASE EVERYONE SEND EMAILS TO HER. And let her know about the MSNBC poll where 88% of the people believe her should be impeached.

The very act of beginning an impeachment proceeding will put a damper on this crazy man IMO. And it will get the message out about all the horrors he has committed to the average person who doesn't pay that much attention.

[wildbilln864]

165. I emailed your link and....

also sent a link to this very page! I asked her to please read these comments. I don't really expect she'll read it but I thought I'd try it anyway.

[orleans]

169. thanks for the link. n/t

[truedelphi]

2. As we type this, Conyers and Lofgren have been addressing the House

On the need to investigate the OPEC price fixing, anti-trust matter.

Until Bush is impeached the price of oil will stay high.

Yet another of many reasons for impeachment

[Freddie Stubbs]

17. What countries are OPEC?

[truedelphi]

21. Wikipedia spells it out at this URL

http://tinyurl.com/2k2f8j

[bjobotts]

76. The Dems claim it would take up all their time and energy...

and they would not get anything else done. They just don't get what we are saying so once again:
WE WANT YOU TO PUT EVERYTHING ELSE ON THE BACK BURNER AND DO 2 THINGS;
1. STOP FUNDING THE OCCUPATION AND BRING THE TROOPS HOME.

2. IMPEACH BUSH/CHENEY/GONZALES/RICE and put them in jail.

Is that simple enough. These are the most important issues to us- the voters. We want you to do this before you do anything else and we don't care how long it takes or if you must ignore other issues. Do these two things first.

[Dr.Phool]

130. Like they're accomplishing so much, as it is.

[lazyriver]

186. Exactly what I was thinking. Things *looked* promising

right out of the gate but in five short months and just as we need them most, Congress's momentum has ground to a halt. I understand we don't have the votes to override Bush's veto but so fucking what? Pressure him anyway. Make him veto again and again. Let him try to speechify until his black dead heart is content that "Democrats don't support the troops because they won't give me, The Commander Guy, everything I want". Nobody was buying it last month as his dismal approval rating dropped even further. Make him keep getting up in front of the microphones and cameras. Make him do his little angry monkey dance after he vetoes the will of the people and recite his lame talking points to try to pass blame.

The support of the public is/was growing for Congress's efforts to place some sort of restrictions on his endless war policy. It would continue to grow if Congress would stand up to the man with a 28% approval rating. By giving in to him they will make it seem to some, perhaps many, that he was right all along and all their efforts were merely "political theater" as he stated so many times. The rest of us who are a little smarter will know he isn't right but will also know who doesn't deserve reelection next time around.

Dennis Kucinich looks like a better presidential candidate every minute.

[whopis01]

132. At least if the Dems didn't get anything done....

that would be a far sight better than them doing everything they can to help Bush fight his illegal war!

[chervilant]

203. Thank you

for this succinct delineation of how our representatives should proceed. I hope your activism extends to writing letters and sending emails to the politicians who most need to get this message.

[leftchick]

3. you really should send this to her

and cc all the rest of the traitors.

[AndyA]

4. Great idea!

Just click the "E-mail this thread to a friend in the upper left corner, and Nancy's E-mail addy in her capacity as Speaker (from people not in her district) is: [e-mail]

I'm sure she'd just LOVE to hear from EVERYONE on this! She needs to read this message.

[barbtries]

36. thank you for this

in all this time on DU i never noticed it before. i'll be using it a whole lot more in the future too.

i told her to get impeachment back on the table or kiss her dreams of re-election good-bye, and that she is bound by her oath to rid the country of this rogue administration.

nothing she hasn't heard from millions of people before me i'm sure. but goodGAWD what will it take. what the hell will it take for them to do the right and constitutionally mandated THING here??

[bdamomma]

127. this should take drastic action from us, we are playing and we

are tired of playing with fire. Our Congress must know how we feel and stop putting the American people on the back burner.

[rateyes]

70. Done! Thanks. nt

[volstork]

136. emailed to Pelosi

let's see what good it does....

[NightWatcher]

5. Congress wont do shit. The only hope is we the people

I hope this occurs when bush declares himself king. I plan on taking up residence in the streets of DC when this occurs or when we get hit with another false flag attack and nuke Iran.

[Raster]

144. You're right, Congress as we know it won't do shit. They are enablers.

[robbyrob79]

6. I just wonder

How much damage will impeachment do to the executive branch and the office of president in general? Does this mean that every president from now on will be under the microscope of impeachment?
I agree with everyone on the crimes of this administration, but in the greater sense, are we shooting ourselves in the foot right now with all this talk of impeachment? Remember what a mess the Clinton impeachment was, and what happened as a result. Bush talked endlessly about restoring the power of the executive branch. By impeaching, we put ourselves at risk of a tremendous backlash, particularly if it doesn't work.
I really think that's what a lot of congresspeople are afraid of, particularly if a vote to impeach goes out on the house floor and fails. Then there will be a huge upheaval, and things would get really ugly. I think that there's not enough people to get behind impeachment to make it a slam dunk yet, and that's why it hasn't come to the table. If impeachment proceedings are voted on and then voted down, it looks to all the world like it really was just a fishing expedition, and that's the last thing we need.
Unfortunately that's what it comes down to, is simple politics. How would the right wing spin a failed attempt to impeach? How loud would O'Reilly and Limbaugh be screeching about it? How many stupid americans would decide to hate democrats because they wanted to impeach that poor decider/commander guy? Impeachment is something that has to be undertaken very carefully, because it is the kind of thing that can quickly spin out of control if its not done right.
The other problem I think is that the DOJ isn't exactly in congress's corner in this situation, and I think that would make the investigation part of this very difficult, unless a special counsel is appointed and uses some sort of independent investigation team. Although once Gonzo is gone, things might quickly change at justice and make it a lot easier to start an investigation. I think that is something that all of this is hinging on, is DOJ's refusal to cooperate on the issue, so the compelling evidence is going to be hard to come by. I think that's why the president is fighting so hard to keep Gonzo around, he's shielding the rest of the executive from those nasty investigations.

[Gregorian]

8. What kind of backlash could possibly be worse than what we have?

Things could not get any worse.

Limbaugh and the rest will make their screeching noises regardless of what we do.

Every president has been, and will be, under the microscope of impeachment.

As a novice, and armchair politician, I see no reason not to impeach.

[ccpup]

10. take a look at

my response to robbyrob in the same thread

[robbyrob79]

12. CCpup said it better than I could have

[ccpup]

38. thanks, robbyrob79,

for your show of support. Unfortunately, there are many on DU who are understandably frustrated and angry, yet can't see through their hunger and lust for blood/revenge/satisfaction/(fill in the blank). Diplomatic-types like me who see both sides of the issue are often derided and belittled. Oh well.

[Name removed]

104. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ccpup]

119. so, let's see,

in one day I've been accused of being a wingnut, a wannabe and now a nazi sympathizer. And who said it was impossible for me to multi-task?!

Be careful, JD, or your "us against them" talk and slinging of undeserved and inaccurate nicknames will sound redundantly reminiscent of the man you're attempting to impeach.

[JDPriestly]

126. I lived in Germany and Austria a long time.

I know whereof I speak. Invading another country without sufficient provocation is a war crime. I haven't accused you of being a Nazi sympathizer. I just said that the last time I heard your "two sides" argument was from a NAZI sympathizer. Most disputes have two sides. Most criminals can think of some excuse that justifies their violations of law. There is no excuse whatsoever for the repeated illegal acts of the Bush administration. And there is even less excuse for the Democrats' failure to call the Republicans to account for the criminal acts of the Bush administration. Bush is an unpopular president. It is time for him, Condoleeza Rice, Cheney and Gonzales to leave office.

I think the Democrats believe that if they just wait until 2008 they will win the election. Democrats are overlooking the fact that crooks like these Republicans will not willingly go -- even if they are clearly not elected. The Democrats are taking a gamble on the Republicans' willingness to play fair and abide by an election win. By 2008, the Republicans will have rationalized their continued hold on power. The Democrats are being fooled.

Bush has almost no public support. He is being enabled by Democrats who are scared of taking responsibility. I am totally disgusted by the Democrats' lack of courage.

[ccpup]

129. then perhaps you might want to

direct your disgust at the Dems and not me. I simply shared my opinion, what I thought. You're more than welcome to disagree and perhaps even discuss this with me. But to assign labels or appear to compare me to a Nazi sympathizer because you don't like what I wrote doesn't open the door to convincing me of your position.

[JDPriestly]

134. My point is that there are not "two sides" to the criminal conduct

of the Bush administration. We are way beyond the "two sides" argument. It is time to impeach, try and convict. And our leadership in the House and Senate should be working toward that end, not toward trying to compromise with crooks.

[tavalon]

138. If that was the last time you heard that argument

You haven't been listening to our Congress or Barack Obama much in the last few years. It's been said over and over and over. I have an Anarchist friend who is happy to tell me his opinion on the sorry state of our two party system but just last night told me that he respected me for choosing to be a Democrat because I was fighting the problem from within. Way to not make me feel defensive but man, am I ever feeling chagrined today and it isn't the first time. I'm beginning to agree with another friend who says you can tell what politics really is by breaking down the word - poli = many and tics = blood sucking parasites.

[tavalon]

135. Busy, busy day, eh?

While I don't agree with your point of view, I recognize that it's a different point of view and doesn't automatically qualify you as a minion of Satan. People are pretty ruffled right now (and I think rightly so. We are being ignored).

[ccpup]

137. thank you for not seeing me

as a minion of Satan. Between my wingnut duties, my wannabe Chairperson meetings and the I'm a Nazi Sympathizer and Proud of It Parade planning, I don't know if I could juggle being a minion (especially of Satan -- that's a HUGE job!) as well.

And I can sympathize with your feeling of being ignored. You're right. They ARE ignoring you, but, with a big enough bullhorn and a loud enough voice, you're sure to get their attention. Just don't give up. This is an important issue.

[tavalon]

141. Thank you for having a sense of humor

It's hard when everyone is jumping on you even if you know that they are using you as a scapegoat.

[davekriss]

190. I don't see it as JD calling you Hitleresque

What I hear is that the high crimes and misdemeanors of the Bush administration are so crystal clear and out in the open that there is only one side, one judgment to draw, and one conclusion: IMPEACHMENT. If this is indeed JD's point, I am in 150% agreement.

The absence of an attempt to impeach means (to me) that the Democratic Party is complicit (albeit passively). I'll use the words of others to express my own position:

Where the law of the majority ceases to be acknowledged, there government ends; the law of the strongest takes its place, and life and property are his who can take them.
-- Thomas Jefferson, to Annapolis Citizens, 1809

Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience. Our problem is that numbers of people all over the world have obeyed the dictates of the leaders of their government and have gone to war, and millions have been killed because of this obedience... Our problem is that people are obedient all over the world in the face of poverty and starvation and stupidity, and war, and cruelty. Our problem is that people are obedient while the jails are full of petty thieves, and all the while the grand thieves are running and robbing the country. That's our problem.
-- Howard Zinn, "Failure to Quit"

He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetuate it.
-- Martin Luther King Jr

Cowardice asks the question - is it safe? Expediency asks the question - is it politic?
Vanity asks the question - is it popular? But conscience asks the question - is it right?
And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular; but one must take it because it is right.
-- Martin Luther King, Jr.

We are facing a most extreme crisis in our democracy and it appears right now that fascism is winning the battle.

[Quantess]

193. With all due respect, ccpup,

It is merely your opinion that you are a "diplomatic type". You may actually be an "enabling type".

[bdamomma]

125. I also have this feeling that impeachment should be advised and

considered, again, we are always several steps ahead of our own Congress.

[ccpup]

9. I agree with you

but the need from outraged DUers for bloody, raw meat to satisfy their hunger is oftentimes too strong for what you and I might consider reasonable thought. (oh, that sentence is going to bug a lot of people, but I am trying to be respectful).

Yes, there are crimes being committed every day by * and his merry band of thieves -- and I do mean merry -- and, yes, many, if not all, of those crimes are impeachable offenses.

But do we have the votes in the House? I don't know. And the Senate? Decidedly not. So, the 4 months spent impeaching bush not only takes four months away from the business the constituents need district by district and state by state and the work needed to bring the soldiers home, but, at the end of the day when we've failed because we NEVER HAD THE VOTES TO BEGIN WITH, we're left with the ruins of a Democratic Party sitting with a big, black eye and looking at a repug majority in the next elections, an emboldened repug party that can play the Victim and wrap their wolve-selfs in sheep's clothing even better than before and *, who now finds himself a martyr and can push through even more evil, onerous legislation than before because the Free Pass he got from the Press now comes complete with the gold cloak of someone who's been "wronged".

Isn't fair, doesn't make sense, but I suspect that's the political reality Reid and Pelosi are facing.

[proud2BlibKansan]

32. Oh god, please, it's not about the votes for christ sake!!

It's about CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR!! The man is a fucking war criminal. We cannot stand by and just let him get away with it. Just think - If we had impeached Nixon, do you honestly believe we would be in Iraq today?

It's time to send a message that it is not okay to lie about going to a war that resulted in many hundreds of thousands of deaths.

Anyone who votes against impeachment is just putting a rubber stamp on his criminal behavior.

[Amonester]

168. Not only it isn't fair, but in the context of the LAW, when people ...

know the fact that crimes have been commited by criminals they can identify, but willingly (or cowardly, if you prefer...) omit to either denounce or prosecute those criminals (if it is within their power to do so, and they have an Oath of Office to respect). In other words: they are mandated to proceed according to the Rule of the Law, and failing to proceed with the due process they are obliged to respect, knowlingly, automatically makes them accomplices of the criminals they refuse to prosecute, and there are no exceptions to the Rule of the Law in that matter (or something like that).

Isn't that "troubling" you "a litte bit" or "big time" or "not at all?" Because it sure is troubling us here "big time"... :crazy:

[Mojorabbit]

171. I don't agree

Most people don't follow politics closely. They want the war ended. The headlines are screaming that the dems are rolling over. That is all they will see and the party will pay in the end as well as the young men and women fighting this war and being used as political pawns.

[davekriss]

195. When we hungry wolves cry, IMPEACH NOW!

We don't mean take a vote today. We mean instead to continue and intensify serious and public hearings, fully supported by supoena and sworn testimony, into why the Bush administration lied us into an illegal and immoral war, how 9-11 was allowed to happen and why full investigation into this matter was stonewalled and obstructed by the administration, why the administration engaged in illegal wiretaps on U.S. citizens, why the administration siezed and imprisoned U.S. citizens and legal residents without exercising the right of habeus corpus, why the administration violates Geneva Conventions and "disappears" and renders and tortures, why the administration hasn't fired anyone for outing Plame, why the administration negligently allowed thousands to die after Katrina -- the list goes on and on.

I think after airing these high crimes and misdemeanors, Republicans will be forced to join with Democrats and soundly impeach & convict Bush and his minions.

On edit: Let me clarify, take a vote TODAY in the House to impeach Bush, vote to convict after the long trial in the Senate makes a "no" vote so politically costly that no self-serving ammoral Republican (i.e., all of them) would possibly vote "no".

[EFerrari]

11. Things aren't ugly now?

The Executive is out of control. That needs to be addressed.

[robbyrob79]

19. Its a matter of votes

If impeachment was a slam dunk, then it would make sense to start talking seriously about it, but if its tried and fails, we end up in a much worse situation than before, but a huge amount of backlash against the democrats for 'trying to ruin the executive branch' or something along those lines. I'm sure all of this is frequently discussed behind closed doors, and if enough votes to support it do come around, I'm sure it will happen.
I think the votes problem is that they'll need a 2/3 majority in the house to impeach the president, and a lot of republicans aren't willing to be Brutus and stab their great leader in the heart (you know it will be worse for the republican party than anything else could possibly be). If Bush and his whole merry band are entered into an impeachment trial, you KNOW he's not going to resign, he'll stand trial, be found guilty, and ruin the republican party.
I'd like to see that happen as much as anyone else, but I just don't think its a reality unless the democrats get a supermajority in the house, and that's not going to happen until 2008 (cross your fingers!).
I think the real focus now should be in getting Gonzo out of office and someone who's not a Bushie in there to try and pull DOJ's head out of its ass. I can see the first part happening, but not so much the second part.

[EFerrari]

23. That's a political calculation and not for me to make.

Let the politicians do that. I want this mofo impeached for every drowned person in NOLA and for every dead kid in Iraq, ours or theirs.

[robbyrob79]

24. I know what you mean

I'd love to see the whole shooting match thrown in jail too, its just that impeachment is kind of the nuclear option, if you're expecting a mushroom cloud but instead you just get a fizzle, things are going to quickly turn against you.

[EFerrari]

25. I really do get that. But the public is furious -- for conflicting reasons --

and the Republics are trying to run away from Junior. There is a window here, if we're talking about the politics.

If we're talking about justice, that's different. And I work for impeachment every day. :)

[robbyrob79]

28. Yes, the public is furious

I know that republicans are trying to distance themselves from W, but the problem is that he is a member of their party, and their fear is that there will be a huge anti-republican backlash because of this (and also I'm sure there will be a fair number of congressmen that will end up getting swept up into it too, depending on how far-reaching the corruption really is).
Yes, I would love to see the death of the republican party, but having a one-party rule is also not a good option. Republicans are VERY hesitant to talk about impeachment because they don't want the finger of blame either pointed at themselves or at the party in general.

[Morgana LaFey]

89. You have articulated exactly what I'm so freakin' SICK OF with

our elected Dems: their goddamned cowardice, spinelessness, gutlessness, their self-serving personal political agenda behind their refusal to do the damn right thing. I'm up to my eyeballs with the lot of them and it's about enough to make a person wanna go postal.

[JPettus]

176. You can be sick of it

But that still doesn't change the cold hard facts of reality.

If you get the votes to impeach, so what? That's a simply majority vote and meaningless. All you get then is a chance to try the bastard in the Senate. Do you really think that the Republicans in Congress will commit professional suicide for themselves and their party by voting to remove Bush? Perhaps in Nixon's day, but today's Republicans lack ethics and a moral backbone. They are party loyalists only.

I've said it before and I will say it again. You wouldn't have the votes to remove the Shrub if you video'd him shooting Ted Kennedy with an illegal assault weapon on the floor of the Senate while raping a ten year old boy.

Then what do you have? You have the same situation the Republicans had when they impeached Clinton and failed and LOST seats in the next election. Remember that overall the November elections were not seen as a mandate to remove the President in time of war, they were seen as a mandate to get us out of Iraq. Only someone as self-absorbed and criminal as Bush would see it as a mandate for him to increase the number of troops there and it's causing even more public opinion to turn against him.

Right now, the Dems have settled on a strategy that works, because there is no way to defend against it. They know it works because the Republicans did it successfully against Clinton. They investigated him to death. In Clinton's case, after millions in costs investigating FBI files, White House Travel Agency, Whitewater and everything else under the sun, all that Starr could show was that Clinton got a blowjob from a woman who wasn't his wife and lied about it in an illegal perjury trap. And even in that case, Bush campaigned on returning dignity to the White House and though he barely lost, it was close enough that he and his brother could steal the election.

In the case of the Republicans, Americans are seeing that the targets did much much worse than lie about blowjobs, and continue to. Wait and see if the new NBC study about body armor yields information that the people who signed off on the test results didn't make a ton of money on kickbacks at our soldier's expense.

The Dems launch investigation after investigation. Because it's news, if not proof of corruption on the part of the Republicans, it gets covered in the media. Every day, something new surfaces that casts the Republicans in a bad light. When some new event in an investigation comes to light, it highlights what has been called the Republican culture of corruption. When they support Bush on Iraq by preventing a veto override, they look bad and the public looks at them even more harshly.

Right now, moderate and fiscally conservative Republicans are departing the party in greater and greater numbers. Soon, Bush will have no support but that small group of determined pinheads that think he's a Christian and bringing them to Judgement Day and the rapture.

They can't vote to stop the investigations, they have no power to stop the bad information from coming out and all they can do is try to attack the messenger, and then the next day something new comes out yet again, from a different source. This isn't showy and it doesn't give some of us a catharsis of emotion over the crimes of the Bush Administration, but it could result in removing more of them from power and giving us a veto proof majority as well as the White House, and it likely will result in changes that prevent the Republican Party from getting the kind of power they had under Bush again anytime in the near future, provided the Democrats don't start behaving like Republicans.

[davekriss]

200. There is a big difference, JPettus

You say, "Then what do you have? You have the same situation the Republicans had when they impeached Clinton and failed and LOST seats in the next election."

Well, the big difference between then (Clinton's impeachment) and now is Clinton DID NOT COMMIT AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE. Lying about a sexual dalliance is not what we historically or by precedent consider an impeachable offense. It was clear to the American people that Clinton's impeachment was a partisan attempt to damage the Democrats ahead of the 2000 election, and the public reacted accordingly. Clinton was popular when he was impeached, and his popularity increased during the hearings. And the smear failed -- Bush was forced to steal the 2000 election instead.

Bush, on the other hand, is a very unpopular President, with approval ratings between 29% to 33% in various polls, very similar to Nixon. And like Nixon, he has committed clear impeachable offenses. I think the fear argument -- what happens if the Democrats don't garner the 67% needed to convict in the Senate -- is a straw man argument without weight.

[JPettus]

204. Actually, Perjury IS an impeachable offense

And by lying under oath, even in an illegal perjury trap, Clinton DID commit an impeachable offense. It would remain to be seen if a criminal court would have found him guilty and that would normally depend on the jury you get.

You also seem to be forgetting that impeachment is NOT a legal action, it's a political one, and the only time it's ever really been used for a criminal offense, Nixon resigned before he could be impeached. The impeachment of Andrew Johnson and William Jefferson Clinton were both blatant partisan political actions. And, even if you impeach, which is easy enough to do, getting Bush removed is considerably harder because all you need is for the Republicans in the Senate to stand with Bush and you still lose. And why would they vote to remove? IF they remove Bush, they will lose even worse in 2008 than if they stand with him. Party loyalists would desert them because they deserted Bush, and moderate Republicans and independents wouldn't consider voting Republican after that. So, their only hope in 2008 is party loyalty and standing with Bush.

So, you aren't going to send Bush to jail, and even if you impeach, if you don't have the votes, you aren't going to remove him. All you do is make him look stronger than he really is.

As for Clinton, if he wasn't damaged by the constant investigations, Bush's claim to want to return dignity to the White House (a claim that even Democrats couldn't argue, after Clinton not being able to keep his zipper zipped) appealed to a number of moderate and independent voters, otherwise it wouldn't have been the closest election in US history and Bush couldn't have stolen it at all, since he really only had Florida and Texas where he had that kind of influence, and he won both those. One other state going for Gore would have won the election in spite of Florida. One. Several of those red states were right on the edge and could have gone either way. Win just ONE of those and Bush couldn't have stolen the election at all.

And, as I mentioned before, the American people didn't consider the November 2006 election a mandate on removing Bush from office. They saw it as a mandate on Iraq. You have over 70% of the population in favor of a timeline to remove troops from Iraq. Republican voters in Iowa who plan to vote in the primary want a timetable to bring the troops home. However, Republican voters still support Bush between 50-60% in nearly all polls.

You likely don't have 50% in favor of removing Bush from office. If you do, I would be surprised, and even then we know that Republicans don't listen to their constituents, they listen to the money from the national party.

You also don't have the media on your side to make your case to the public, so they can lean on their representatives. Remember that ALL of the large, corporate media, including ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox and CNN are all tilted to the right, so while you can attempt to investigate Bush, any attempt to remove him will enable those groups to cast your attempt as a partisan political attempt to remove a sitting President in time of war.

Bush's popularity ratings are based upon questions like "do you think the country is going in the right direction," and "how much do you approve of President Bush's actions." The questions are not, "Do you think President Bush should be impeached and removed from office."

Popularity is not the same is wanting to kick a president out of office, only to change the direction of his adminstration, as when the Republicans used Clinton's Health care to get their own takeover of Congress in 1994. That vote was not a mandate for the Republicans to remove Clinton, but to change his direction, but the Republicans took it as a mandate to try to remove Clinton from office and you saw what happened.

You have to be careful about what the majority of Americans are really saying when they respond to a poll or vote in an election. Misinterpreting those results to push your own agenda can make things much worse.

You also need to look up what the "straw man" logical fallacy is. It is when your opponent misrepresents your position in order to knock down the false position and claim victory. That is not what I did. I offered you logical arguments with historical precedent to point out why the course of action to impeach is likely not as good a course of action compared to what is actually being done by the Dems.

[davekriss]

210. Very reasonable post (and I agree with much of it)

I agree and understood that impeachment is a political tool, not a legal tool. The American public, history and precedent, condemns the Clinton impeachment precisely because lying about a sexual dalliance is not thought to put the interests of the U.S. at risk, the high bar for impeachment. It does no grave harm to the United States nor was it a serious abuse of power. It caused no harm except to Mrs. Clinton. That's why Clinton, already popular before he was impeached, rose in popularity during the hearings. The American public was rallying around their besieged President and recognized the partisan hack job for what it was. I claim the opposite will happen with Bush.

What is important is that the high crimes and misdemeanors perpetrated by the to-be-impeached-and-convicted violates the public trust we invest in our leaders to carry out their constitutional duties (and only these duties) in the best interests of our republic. Bush's high crimes and misdemeanors easily rise to that level. The job is to increase the public perception that this is so (no easy task). Impeachment hearings would serve as the means as it would focus public attention on the administration's crimes. Subsequent public pressure would cause some Republicans to vote for impeachment. I admit the challenge is great and chances are we still would not have enough votes to convict, but I don't think focusing a spotlight on Bush Crimes will have negative consequences for us in 2008; in fact, I think the opposite will happen. Moderates and independents will shun the Republican Party for spying on Americans, for torture, for commiting the very same crimes we punished Nazis for at Nuremburg.

As far as polls go, I've seen (but don't have time to find and cite) a poll that says 53% of the American public would support impeachment if it turned out Bush lied about the reasons for invading Iraq. Public hearings during impeachment proceedings in the House would do much to increase that figure.

The most salient point you make (for me) is in your second paragraph: "...why would they vote to remove? IF they remove Bush, they will lose even worse in 2008 than if they stand with him. Party loyalists would desert them because they deserted Bush, and moderate Republicans and independents wouldn't consider voting Republican after that. So, their only hope in 2008 is party loyalty and standing with Bush." What we need to do is make "standing with Bush" so visibly negative that they will be individually forced to abandon this position. Impeachment hearings would contribute to that.

This is not an easy question, IMO. Regardless how we got there, we are at war. Impeaching a president during a time of war would be spun so negatively by the corporate media (the near-monopolized media a clear enemy of democracy today). I think that our first priority should be stopping the war. But the only way to do that is, I think, stopping the Bush administration. The only way to do that between now and 2008 is impeachment. I'm open to other arguments.

[JPettus]

228. And here is where we get all locked up

Because you are talking ideology and principles and I am talking reality.

In a perfect world, the Republican Senators would have a sense of ethics, a sense of principle and would vote to remove. IN a perfect world, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Gonzo would all be in prison for the rest of their lives as war criminals.

And I would stand and applaud right along with you.

What I am saying though, is that Republican Senators have no sense of honor, or decency or ethics. They have only a sense of self-preservation, which is why no matter if it's the right thing to do in principle, you cannot get the votes to remove George W. Bush. And you very likely never will.

Your statement that "subsequent public pressure would cause some Republicans to vote for impeachment" seems a bit naive to me. Perhaps you mean one or two of the more moderate Senators? I don't really see Republicans listening to their constituents much at all. I see them holding town hall meetings where they give lip service to the concept, but with the exception of a couple of moderates who are close to bolting anyway, they tend to vote the party line on big issues and have since at least 1995. I don't see nearly enough unhappy moderates to make the difference, and if you impeach with the hope that those votes will be there, you are going to lose just as the Republicans lost.

Their strategy was, if they could embarrass Clinton enough, the public humiliation and the trial would get Americans angry enough to force their Democratic Senators to vote for removal. And if they didn't remove, at least Clinton would be so damaged it would strengthen the Republicans and weaken the Dems. It didn't work out that way for them.

You write "What we need to do is make "standing with Bush" so visibly negative that they will be individually forced to abandon this position. Impeachment hearings would contribute to that."

But what you don't seem to understand is that death by investigation does that very thing and it does so without backlash, and it does so without any way for the Republicans to stop it, to retaliate. All they can do is reel from one scandal to the next as the newest revelation of their corrupt actions comes out. Additional subpoenas will help and Monica Goodling's alleged refusal to turn over subpoena'd documents will only make it worse for the GOP. Now, perhaps all of this, plus Bush's refusal to back down on Iraq, will cause those numbers go up for impeachment, but right now roughly 50% is not going to get anyone removed and it might even backfire on you.

[davekriss]

232. I do admit...

...that I cling to impeachment out of principle and emotion. Your post is again very astute and I think correct.

"Republican Senators have no sense of honor, or decency or ethics" is so very true, yes, they have only an aggressive sense of self-preservation. The same is true of some (if not many) Democratic Senators too. The one point of difference is I think there is value to the American people to impeach and attempt to convict, even if we lose the conviction. The House investigation and Senate trial would focus the U.S. public on the atrocities the corporate media barely reports. If the gig is up, if what we learn is our representatives do not represent our interests and instead vote to retain Bush and Cheney, then so be it. Many have yet to learn that. We have our own pravdas and apparatchik and there is value to display that through the focused medium of impeachment coverage. Maintaining the status quo gets us nowhere.

I think there is value in throwing sand into the (complicit) wheels of state, to slow it down, to start (or continue with amplification) a public discussion concerning what we want this nation to be. Impeachment can bring focus to the neo-liberal imperial fascist carcass of a democracy we have become, with hopefully subsequent populist reaction.

My personal priorities would be to, first, stop the war, then proceed with a progressive domestic agenda. I think impeachment is one step toward stopping the war, but I am open to other arguments on how this can be achieved.

[JPettus]

235. I think where we differ

is that I don't believe we are clinging to the status quo. There ARE wheels in motion here, though they are not flashy and they don't provide a catharsis of emotion to those who are frustrated with BushCo.

But I was exceptionally frustrated with the harassing investigations that the Repugs did to Clinton, more than the impeachment. Impeachment was news but everyone knew they weren't going to remove him. It was really almost a relief when they did start impeachment, because between the harassment and the investigations and leaking embarrassing info about Clinton to the press every other day, I was ready to scream.

Believe me, the Repugs are already frustrated with the ongoing investigations into BushCo, the ones that they blocked when they were the majority power. Now they can't block, they can't retaliate, they can't stop what is going on, and every day brings more bad news that they have to try to put the best face on.

This is working, far more than the more flashy impeachment proceedings.

[davekriss]

216. You're right, you didn't make a straw man argument

You committed the fallacy of "appeal to the consequences of belief". The proposition, we need to impeach Bush, is false because, if you hold that belief and we don't garner the votes in the Senate to convict, then we we lose seats or suffer other negative consequences in 2008. Therefore, "we need to impeach Bush" is false...

...ok, you didn't commit any fallacy, yours is a reasoned argument. I'm just having fun with admitting that you were right, I misused "straw man" in my previous post. :)

[JPettus]

229. No biggie, and if it helps

I want impeachment every bit as much as you, but having watched the entire Clinton attacks closely, I am also concerned that the Dems manage this in such a way that we not only keep the power so we can undo the actions of the Republicans to keep their own control, but stop the war, bring our people home, set the economy straight and put a stop to media control by a handful of corporations, along with creating universal health care and finding alternate sources of energy.

And, if it helps when you are so frustrated, remember that I'm posting this from Afghanistan, and I do understand the danger that our troops are in and want them home as quickly as we can get them there.

[davekriss]

230. Can I vote for you?

I like your agenda.

...Afghanistan? Can you enlighten?

[JPettus]

236. No politics in my career

I don't want people rooting around in my closets looking for skeletons.

I'm a military contractor working in Afghanistan. My company provides maintenance on a Battalion's worth of equipment, putting on armor kits to protect the occupants of the vehicle; maintaining the vehicles, supporting the troops. I do network security stuff and our department also provides morale stuff for the people living here on site, which includes troops and contractors from multiple countries. Morale stuff includes internet in their rooms, AFN TV and some more satellite channels, including two premium movie channels, CNN International and HBO India. We want to look out for the people who are here, so we help them get VOIP phones they can hook up in their rooms and call home to their families, provide internet, an MWR with a gym and more open use computers for internet phone calls and surfing, a TV room, etc. Interestingly, the morale stuff we do wasn't in the original contract, from my understanding, but my boss wanted to do it and put it together out of second hand, used parts, then got a local contract for some of the services. Now, everyone else has signed on to the necessity of providing this to the people who live and work here and the company is allowing us to increase the bandwidth and get more channels. We also provide four DVD channels, where we have connected four DVD players to the TV system and put movies on to repeat over and over all night with no commercial interruptions. The company doesn't provide the movies or the players for that, so it's mostly my boss and I doing this.

I've always felt that Afghanistan was necessary in light of 9/11 and have no problem coming here. I've turned down higher paying jobs in Iraq mostly because I don't agree with being in Iraq, and only partly because I suspect its more dangerous there. If you do everything right, you can still get killed in either place, but this is something I believed in, and wanted to help. (and the money is good)

[rucky]

149. If I were selling my record collection...

I better make sure it's sold before I put it up for sale, but nobody's shown interest yet so I better not try to sell it.

[Nunyabiz]

179. That is where "We the People" come in

Faux News along with the totally complicit MSM needs to be destroyed.
Stop the lies

[The Count]

31. UNDER A ..MICROSCOPE YOU SAY? MICROSCOPE???? I need a telescope myself

to help me keep perspective and only pick the largest crimes and misdemeanors (stealing elections, starting wars based on lies, spying on us) from the thousand of serious crimes committed...

[Amonester]

59. That "poor decider/commander guy" they will spin has committed...

(with the "aide" of Cheney & Gonezo and many others) "crimes and misdemeanors" almost every single day or week for years and they are easy to CLEARLY demonstrate (the Asshcroft's hospital trip being one of the last ones we learned, for example) to the voters who growinly want these criminals gone (and this, in spite of all the more and more *evident* M$M's RW bias).

It's the right thing to do for a majority of Dem voters, AND for a GROWING minority of Repub voters, especially when, by NOT even starting to do the right thing their OATH OF OFFICE oblige them to do, they risk of losing so many votes (couple that with KKKarl's purges...), that they should start packing as soon as Nov. '08, IMHO.

[rateyes]

73. To hell with political considerations...

We should do the right thing because it's the right thing. Period. If we impeach and remove this incompetent mindless boob from office, the country, when it gets its freedoms back will rise up and thank us. But, even if they don't, we can't stand this adminsitration much longer.

[JDPriestly]

101. Bush and His Buddies Are Criminals

Impeachment is appropriate. It is the only process we have to get a government that will uphold the Constitution and the law. We have to impeach crooks, and Bush and Cheney are crooks. So is Gonzales.

I have asked whether it was wiser to let it go and use their crimes against them to defeat them in 2008. Now that I have seen how weak willed the Democratic leadership (?) is, I say we demand impeachment now. Among other things, we need to let the Democratic "leadership" know that they too can be impeached if they act dishonestly.

[BeHereNow]

114. In the light of your logic- the Congress is also criminal- they have failed to uphold their oath

to protect the constitution and are therefore complicit.
Just sayin'...

BHN

[JDPriestly]

124. How right you are! Sorry to have to agree with you.

This is a dark day in the history of our nation. I feel like all hope is lost.

[sbyte]

173. That is the deal. The cards are on the table, "go fish" Gonzo.

It is a slow, step by step process but it is true, Gonzalass' has will have to leave before further progress can be made in the march of justice. He says he has testified fully before congress. But it is not clear that he is fully cooperating or feels and shame for being irresponsible in accepting responsibility for the departments apparent breach of non-partisanship and the lack of nobel aspirations of truth seeking for justice wherever it leads.

What is justice? Is a bias view of a situation helpful?

Is (undue) pressure from friends and political Allies useful to the job of chief justice official?

How can you object when your not objective?

Wouldn't it be wise to seek counsel from other highly ranked judges and court officials when making difficult decisions?

And, specifically, how can you decide anything if you can't recall much of anything important to a board of inquiry?

[Nunyabiz]

180. The Clinton Impeachment was a partisan hack job

"are we shooting ourselves in the foot right now with all this talk of impeachment? Remember what a mess the Clinton impeachment was, and what happened as a result. Bush talked endlessly about restoring the power of the executive branch. By impeaching, we put ourselves at risk of a tremendous backlash, particularly if it doesn't work.
I really think that's what a lot of congresspeople are afraid of, particularly if a vote to impeach goes out on the house floor and fails. Then there will be a huge upheaval, and things would get really ugly. I think that there's not enough people to get behind impeachment to make it a slam dunk yet,"


It was bullshit, however Bush has committed no less than 25 Impeachable offenses, starting with TREASON.
I see it exactly the OPPOSITE as you, if we do NOT Impeach what is clearly a Treasonous, Never elected, POS that has destroyed the Constitution and Bill of Rights plus broke the country both monetarily and morally then we will be inviting the next administration to carry on the same criminal acts thinking they will get away with scott free.

[Ensalada]

206. It only took 4 months to impeach Bill Clinton

Bill Clinton testified in August 1998, and in December 1998 was impeached mainly on grounds of perjury in his August testimony.

4 months is all it took to impeach him for lying about having sex.

That is what a motivated Congress can to do a president who was a damn sight smarter & savvier than * is

[sampsonblk]

184. Its because they were WRONG

The public sided with Clinton because it was just a blowjob. Who doesn't want one of those? Big deal.

This is different.

[emald]

209. things "could" get ugly????

WTF? You don't think it is fucked up now? Who gives a rip what the outcome is. These people are criminals, admitted felons. We must impeach and try and imprison them. GWBushit is a fucking felon. Who cares,,,people like you make me sick. fucking country has gone to the criminals and we sit around and worry how we might, might, be percieved.
I'll tell you how this country is percieved, as a greedy devouring criminal enterprise that the world is waiting for someone to stop.
Take your equivication and go stuff it.

jazus, what a bunch of fucking cowards. OHHHHHH, how will it look???? fuck

[Raksha]

241. You know something? I DON'T CARE!!!

Does this mean that every president from now on will be under the microscope of impeachment?

Nobody has ever deserved impeachment more than this imposter, and if the Republicans want to invent some reason to impeach the next Democratic president, it won't change that fact. Hell, they would probably do that anyway, but in any case that's their business and their problem. It would be to our everlasting shame as a nation if we fail to impeach these criminals (Bush and Cheney at the least), no matter what the consequences.

[ccpup]

7. why does this sound to me

a lot like "you're either with us or against us"? I didn't like it when it came out of *'s mouth and it sounds even worse coming out of an alleged Dem's (and I use the word alleged only because I don't want to assume you're a Dem; you might be an Independent or Progressive, so I'm trying to be respectful).

[hootinholler]

13. Sadly, people will die from inaction

If this festers much longer the shooting will start.

-Hoot

[EFerrari]

14. K&R

:applause:

[seafan]

15. BREAKING CNN: Withdrawal timetable dropped from war spending bill

http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/blogs/politicalticker/


May 22, 2007

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Congressional Democrats plan to send to President Bush a war-spending bill without a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq, two Democratic leadership aides tell CNN.

Earlier this month, Bush vetoed a war spending bill passed by the Democratically-controlled Congress that included a timetable for withdrawal. The president has insisted that he will not sign any bill that includes such a provision.

The bill is expected to include benchmarks that the Iraqi government would have to achieve. The bill is also expected to require the president to provide numerous reports to Congress before August 2007 on the Iraqi government's progress, the aides said.

If the Iraqi government fails to meet the benchmarks, the aides said, reconstruction funds could be cut. The bill may also allow the president to waive the penalties for failing to meet the benchmarks if he feels they are necessary.

.....

[AspenRose]

18. Grrrrrr

:mad: :nuke:

[dogday]

16. If someone can tell why the Democrats are sitting on

their hands.. So what if we don't have the votes, let's send the message.. The shit has got to stop...:mad:

[GOTV]

67. Why? Short of votes in the Senate. Now you've been told.

> So what if we don't have the
> votes, let's send the message.

Messages don't change anything. So will mark you down as not wanting to change anything.

[dogday]

72. You do that sport

I don't see any change occurring do you? Mark me whatever way you want, I want this war to end and I am not happy that the Democrats cannot even get time-lines for it...

My Son has been to Iraq and in a few months is eligible to go again...

So you just keep marking me down anyway you want, and I will keep hoping for a sign, a message, a vote, anything that tells me we are going in a different direction....

[maggiegault]

91. Do Whatever You Must Do To Keep Him Out Of That Hell Hole

Send him to Canada, have him go underground. Don't listen to any bullshit about "honor" and "having a job to do." I did, from my brother, and he was killed in Western Baghdad by an IED on May 3.

I don't mean to belabor my dead brother at DU, but I cannot stress enough how I would not wish this suffering and pain on anyone. Please, do whatever you can to keep your son home. I don't want to hear you crying the way my mother has for the past three weeks.

The Democrats' are every bit as disgraceful as the GOP, in my book. They obviously do not get that their worries about their own political fortunes do not serve the wills of those they were elected to serve.

NOT ONE MORE DEAD SOLDIER, NOT ONE MORE DEAD IRAQI

[truedelphi]

133. I'm sorry to ask this at such a painful time

But my right wing cohort at work speaks of the need to stay in IRaq to honor those who have fallen.

Does our staying there offer solace to anyone in your family?

I don';t mean this sarcastically or ironically - but the right wing talks of this constantly (a long with the notion that "our" President needs our support)

I offer you and yours my prayers during the difficult days ahead.

[maggiegault]

167. I'm Happy To Answer Your Question Or Anyone Else's...

...I cannot speak for all of those grieving dead soldiers, but I can say that *I* WANT to talk about it, I WANT to talk about my brother.

So feel free to ask.

My answer is a resounding NO, and I think that I speak for most who are grieving this kind of loss. There was a time when I think that the GOP talking point did offer some solace to some, if only because the GOP point of view was so popular at the beginning of the war in Iraq. However, now? No way. We see no need, and we openly say that our Andy, our beloved son and brother and husband and father, died needlessly, for nothing. We are incredibly proud of him, but not for the fact that he was "spreading democracy" in Iraq. We are proud of him for being a great soldier, a wonderful leader, a terrific husband, a loving father, and a cherished friend. We also feel that it is the Army's loss, to have squandered so many thousands of great men and women for the folly of a madman.

[GOTV]

222. Stop hoping for a sign and start doing something that makes a difference...

... realize that until we have the votes in the Senate impeachment will not save your son or anyone else in Iraq.

Work towards a successful impeachment not a symbolic "message" impeachment. Or work towards something else. Because an impeached Bush is as capable of keeping your son in Iraq as an unimpeached Bush.

[dogday]

225. Considering how much cooperation we are getting

from the Democrats, that is a cause indeed... Since the Pentagon has stated we will probably be in Iraq for the next 2 decades with at least 50,000 troops, I know this war will continue because we have established our presence and we are not leaving...

At this point Impeachment is more probable than ending the war...

[bread_and_roses]

140. The people will hear the message. And that counts. (n/t)

[GOTV]

220. It's the corporate media's message that they will hear - and THAT's what counts n/t

[bread_and_roses]

234. the numbers say they've wised up a little, at least on Iraq

and the bad news just keeps coming and coming. And while most are not political junkies like us, they've heard something of the scandal after scandal, of Wolfie and Gonzo, of the pretend president's ratings...on and on.

And - no small matter - the Dems would go some way toward showing some conviction, some responsiveness to the voters, some grounding in the real world. And an audience.

Not to mention that it is unethical to make life or death decisions based on purely political calculation, which is what they are doing now - last I saw, the Congress' rating wasn't much better than the President? People are really not stupid - just over-burdened with working too many hours at two many jobs for wages that keep them stretched to the limit if not actually poor.

[ThatsMyBarack]

20. Kicker Upper!

:patriot:

[redacted]

22. Hey Nancy, LOOK AT THIS MSNBC POLL. Are you paying attention?

Half a million votes and almost 90 percent want impeachment. Nancy, once again, are you paying attention?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x935464

[Kelly Rupert]

57. Did you miss those words "this is not a scientific survey?" n/t

[redacted]

131. Kelly: DO NOT INSULT your fellow DUers like that.

Do not insult the intelligence, knowledge and awareness of me and the many people here who agree with my point. You probably have no idea with whom you're speaking!

I've spent more time in university math, statistics, econometrics and computer science classes than YOU probably spent in all your time in college, period. And let me educate you about something.

Any time you get half a million people to agree about anything, which is what this poll shows, you don't need rigorous statistical sampling techniques to tell you with academic precision whether the results are generalizable to the population.

I find it almost comical when "some people say" (as the phrase gets used on Fox news) "Geez Louise, all but 10 percent agree in that poll. But know what? It means nothing because it's "NOT SCIENTIFIC." Like these people have any idea of what the science that makes good survey research really amounts to.

Well, guess what. Beyond a certain point, it doesn't need to be "scientific." The common sense of those interpreting the results is probably more important. You don't need to have a PH.D. in statistics to draw the conclusion from results this strong that a very significant portion of the population, if not a majority, agrees about a certain conclusion.

Keep in mind that these days, modeling techniques are so good that one probably doesn't need more than about 50,000 people to infer very accurately what 250 MILLION people are thinking at any one time. This is why the debate over the Census is so absurd. A census is way, way overkill. It's an anachronism.

In this case, we've got half a MILLION. You can account for a hell of a lot of sampling error when you've got half a million people participating in any poll. The smart money here will be on those who assert that there's substantial support among a large percentage of the population for impeachment. Just how large, we'll soon find out with more precise analysis and techniques. But anybody who says that the proportion can't possibly be a substantial one because the poll is "not scientific" has a LOT to learn.

[chervilant]

201. And, do you think that disclaimer is accurate?

I am a methodology geek, and I agree with you that this disclaimer is scientifically accurate when a poll's respondents are not a 'representative sample' of our population. However, this particular poll--scientific or not--is an incredible measure of the vast support among our citizenry for impeaching Bush, Cheney, et al.

I see important differences between impeaching Clinton (not a popular move among the citizenry, not an offense that represented grave consequences for our nation or the world) and impeaching Bush, et al. (VERY popular move for the vast majority of We The People, multitudinous acts of treason that threaten our Republic AND the world).

Essentially, I think it is a grave mistake to question the validity of impeaching Bush, Cheney, et al., based on whether or not it will 'damage the Democrats' chances in the next election.' We The People have to send a clear message to ALL POLITICIANS, regardless of their political affiliation, that We The PEOPLE will not tolerate this rampant malfeasance NOW or EVER AGAIN.

I am a charter member of We The People. It warms my heart to see so many of us using this phrase to represent the collective citizenry of this United States. We The People will prevail, I assure you, as did our ancestors who risked their lives to secure our freedom.

[GOTV]

68. Online polls are not worth the paper they're printed on n/t

[WI_DEM]

26. Impeach, yes, but can we convict him in the Senate?

Who will be the 18-20 GOP Senators who will convict him? Assuming that all Dems vote to impeach, which is not a forgone conclusion.

[Kelly Rupert]

58. Shush. Don't speak reason.

They're only here to get their fix of angry, impotent solidarity.

[John Q. Citizen]

86. We can't win in Iraq either, yet that doesn't stop congress from funding it.

Congress should just pass a constitutional amendment to get rid of the impeachment clause. It's a joke.

While they are at it, they should suspend the entire constitution as well, cause it's a joke too.


And I''ve been thinking. Our leaders are right. Voting to uphold the law is just a waste of time and energy. I don't think we have the votes to elect a Democrat in 2008. So I'll just put my time and energy somewhere more productive. Maybe I'll start voting for who I like on Dancing With the Stars instead. At least they count those votes.....

[Kelly Rupert]

93. Impeaching Bush is not "upholding the law,"

it is removing a man who has likely broken it from office. If you care so little about minimum wage, health care, Iraq, immigration, social security, and the environment that you would refrain from voting simply because you didn't get an impeachment, then I'm not going to stop you.

[John Q. Citizen]

142. Minimum wage? Now let's see where did I hear about that? Has bush signed it yet?

Ha ha ha.

He isn't going to either. It's a scam my friend. If you want to make nice with a bunch of war criminals go right ahead. Good luck!

[moodforaday]

103. Have you got habeas corpus back yet?

Didn't think so.

[MsRedacted]

166. Don't be flip. If you have something intelligent to say -- say it. NT

[paparush]

27. I Totally Agree - This should be the LITMUS TEST for her district - Impeach or Lose Your Seat.

PERIOD.

[John Q. Citizen]

87. Her district voted 60% in favor of impeachment in Nov 06.. n/t

[sheerjoy]

29. K&R n/t

[ClayZ]

30. K and R

[LynneSin]

33. Oh lordy, here we go again

Pelosi is playing this smart - until we get the 67 senators we need to actually remove Bush from the White House, Pelosi along with the rest of the democrats are sticking with the investigations. It won't be the democrats that start the impeachment, it'll be the republicans when they realize that Bush is so damaged that their (congress) careers are threatened.

I don't want another farce like 1998 where we go thru all this impeachment stuff but nobody is tossed out of office. Yes, I realize there is a big difference between a blow job and the lives that Bush is affecting with his policies, but Bush will find it nothing but a JOKE if we impeach him but the republicans have enough votes (and trust me they have plenty) to keep Bush in office

Then what have we done - NOTHING

Stick with the investigation.

[EFerrari]

34. Yes, here we go again and again and again until we get accountability.

Nancy is losing her own district. That's not smart.

But I agree that the Thugs will be the first rats across the finish line.

I want this threat over Junior's head. It's stupid not to use it when there are so many good cases to be made. F#ck me, more good cases than wrinkle creams at Macy's cosmetic counters.

[LynneSin]

35. We have one shot at impeachment

and I truly feel if we rush into it we'll gain nothing. We're starting to see some of the fringe republicans standing up against Bush, we need to pull a few more in especially the 21 republican senators up for re-election in 2008 - their jobs are on the line.

But to impeachment Bush but not remove him from office will be like a badge of honor for Bush - "Hahahaha, you couldn't get rid of me" type attitude. That is not a strategy for us and Nancy knows it

[EFerrari]

37. It worked for the Thuggery re Clinton.

Are the rules different for us? Well, yes they are, to answer my own question. They have the whore media and that makes the difference.

Cr@p, Lynne, this is a bad day in this district. And as much as I trust Nancy to be smarter than the average bear, I'm going to keep pushing because that's all I know how to do.

Politicians are risk adverse. That's their job. Mine is a different job, I guess.

[LynneSin]

43. No one said you shouldn't push - hell I'm pushing my folks in Delaware

I never said I didn't want an impeachment, I just realize that there are strategies going on here that the average person probably isn't privvy to. Just because 50-70% of Americans want impeachment doesn't mean that those with republican senators & represenatives are going to get the support we need.

But if anything - this impeachment frenzy by the public is probably what Nancy & Harry want. They need the media on-board with impeachment, they need the public on-board with impeachment and we need to be pushing more than just the democrats but the republicans too (and yes, I've written my republican representative Mike Castle, who I think would support an impeachment, he's pretty moderate).

No one wanted Clinton impeached by the republican jihad. We now need the voters AND the media to be pushing that same jihad into accepting an impeachment

[EFerrari]

47. Yes. And the fire under Republican pants right now

because they're seeing their lives pass before them may be our best weapon.

Let's see how we do.

[LynneSin]

48. We're both on the same team

Perhaps we see the game being played differently but that doesn't mean we want different outcome.

I think everyone who has a republican representing them either in the house, senate or both should be doing routine calls & letters to push for impeachment. And none of this "My republican senator/represenative will never bother listening to me" bullsh*t. We have to put the heat under them and let them know that we support impeachment and demand action from them or it's their jobs on the line!

[EFerrari]

49. You bet we're on the same team.

And the Republics have much more to lose by making the wrong decision on Junior, than we do.

Let's move. :)

[GOTV]

66. It DID NOT work for the thuggery. Clinton served his full term and they looked like idiots n/t

[EFerrari]

71. So much like idiots that they are today able to raise the spectre

of the "tainted" Clinton tenure and get away with it. It doesn't matter that he's among the most popular figures worldwide, the American media tars him.

[GOTV]

218. They *try* to raise that spectre only to be slammed to the pavement with the reminder that....

... Clinton was acquitted. In my experience that shuts them up pretty quick.

Clinton has the highest investigation to sleaze ratio of any president.

[JDPriestly]

107. They did not look like idiots.

They looked like winners. And that is how they got Bush into the White House in the first place. I am so sick of these weak willed Democrats. They are afraid to gamble on truth, on justice on human rights. What frauds.

I do not cheat. I try not to lie. I do not live my life as a fraud. Sure, I'm not rich or famous like they are. But I have integrity. People who know me love me. I cannot respect Reid, Pelosi, etc. They have no integrity.

[GOTV]

217. Then you remember the events differently. I remember their embarrassment in not even getting 50%

And it's foolish to think the impeachment gave them the white house. The impeachment drove UP Clinton's approval rating.

[greyghost]

39. You are absolutely correct...

there is no point in condemning Pelosi when the votes in the Senate simply aren't there.

[EFerrari]

41. This isn't about condemning Pelosi but about showing her

where her people are so she can lead them.

[greyghost]

44. Pelosi knows EXACTLY

where her people are, she simply does not have enough votes.

[EFerrari]

46. I respectfully disagree. And point out, her district is furious with her

and she may not have enough votes next time to continue her tenure.

[greyghost]

51. You need a reality check.

Impeachment will not pass the Senate. At this time it's a pointless waste of energy no matter who is sitting in the Speakers chair.

No one can create votes that are not there.

The repukes will have to join in, as they did with Nixon, to effect a change.

[EFerrari]

54. Reality check: Republics are invoking Reagan to distance themselves

from Junior.

[greyghost]

80. True...

but are they ready to hang Chimpy out to dry yet?

Impeachment will not get anywhere until the votes swing Pelosi & Reids way.

[tomp]

146. but they're not voting any differently. nt

[Rosa Luxemburg]

81. If some GOP want Bush and Cheney gone because of the liability

Many of the GOP are not happy with their leadership. They may consider impeachment?

[John Q. Citizen]

159. The occupation is lost. Funding it won't change a thing. So why invest in that

losing stratedgy which is a war crime, instead of investing in an ethical, legal, and moral stratedgy, such as impeachment?

Let's face the facts. The Dems always shoot themselves in the foot, and that's just what they are doing here.

By the time the election rolls around they will own the Iraq war, bush will be a welcome and beloved elder statesman that Bill Clinton can play golf with, and the people are just plain fucked over.

[John Q. Citizen]

155. Time for a recall drive. Being a war criminal is being a war criminal. Continuing

the lost and illegal occupation is ethically indefensible, morally corrupt, and who needs that?

If you know anybody whose launching a drive please post it, I'd like to help. I grew up in the Bay Area and wouldn't mind spending most of the summer working for accountability.

[EFerrari]

156. I will. I expect my mailbox to overflow the rest of the week.

Let's see how we do. :(

[John Q. Citizen]

158. Yes, it's a bummer. I wish the Dems would cave into the people. n/t

[moodforaday]

106. Let's see her speak out, then

Let's see her speak out on this little caper:

Bush Anoints Himself as the Insurer of Constitutional Government-ALL 3 BRANCHES (The Progressive)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x923898

Doesn't need votes, just needs some integrity. Let's see her, or any Dem party leader, stand up and raise hell in Congress about Bush making himself a dictator.

But they are not speaking out. They are busy making trade deals in secret with the Repubs instead.

[MistressOverdone]

74. Well put; I agree

[moodforaday]

105. "PLaying it smart"? I've been hearing this line

for months, about different issues.

I think you are allowing your party leaders to dupe you, just because they are your party leaders. But I may be wrong. Show me one thing not in the future, not something you hope for - but in the past: something recent that Pelosi did "play smart" and it brought ahbout a change for the better. One thing.

[Individualist]

112. Apologists have been using the "playing it smart"meme for years, not months.

They drag it out every time our elected leaders cave in to the repukes.

[progressoid]

40. I guess this means the honeymoon is officially over.

[bigtree]

45. It's just not credible that all of those initiatives would be effected by just impeaching Bush

Many of them would not get a hearing because of the inevitable gridlock.

There's also no guarantee that the occupation would just end with some impeachment process. It may sound good to claim that all of the problems we face can be solved by some partisan impeachment effort, but most of that assumes there wouldn't be a hardened opposition, which is inevitable.

I prefer that any impeachment drive be preceded by an indictment from a outside counsel appointed by one of our investigative committees. Even then, it would have to be focused on a specific crime, not on the myriad of political issues our slim majority is unable to legislate away.

Impeachment is a pipe dream; a refuge for some who are in despair over the difficulties of managing the opposition in our democracy. There's a tendency to expect our majority to be able to dictate action instead of working toward the compromises that our political system provides for and requires when the majority lacks the necessary amount of votes to override vetoes and filibusters and prevail.

Impeachment should not be used as a substitute for legislating.

[JDPriestly]

109. All of those initiatives will be watered down by

Yellow Dog Democratic and Republican amendments and then vetoed by Bush. This country needs to have a thorough house cleaning at the highest levels.

[Zodiak]

50. The excuses never end,

The Republicans did not suffer from the impeachment of Clinton. In fact, they rode it into the White House and remained in the catbird seat in Congress. Majorities do not matter when the other party is half full of cowards and turncoats.....and our party is.

Now we have a Congressional majority and somehow the Republicans are STILL in the catbird seat. This country doesn't seem to turn on Democrtic opinion, only Republican opinion. Doesn;t matter what the majority is in Congress.

It is a relentless paradigm we find ourselves in and it is fomented by two things....cowardice and capitulation. I see no "compromise" in government....only capitulation to Republican demands and a litany of excuses to the American people continuously not representing them.

I serioulsy do see civil unrest in the future....a lot of it (already crime is on the rise and little uprisings have occurred all over the country with little fanfare). How we will wish that we did more than listen to excuses and sit on our hands when those days come.

[greyghost]

53. Oh...

those days are coming, a lot sooner then those in Washington would think.

[Zodiak]

60. Let me be clear

I am not looking forward to them. Those times are very uncertain and I greatly resent that our leaders are chancing this.

[greyghost]

63. They are corrupt beyond repair...

they understand nothing but a punch in the face and a kick in the ass.

[Zodiak]

64. or the emptying of their wallets n/t

[greyghost]

79. Exactly...

:evilgrin:

[jonnyra]

55. We can only hope for civil unrest

at this point. There will be no political solution to the destruction of the constitution and endless wars with Iraq and soon Iran. There will be no political solution to oil companies mega profits while the average hard working American watches their income get eaten up by the immoral energy companies. There will be no political solution to the DOJ takeover by the republicans. AMerican citizens dying because they can get medical care. WTF?

Forget the democratic party...they are useless. They cant even face down Gonzales lying and smirking through hearing after hearing. Do we really think they could stop the insanity of Iraq? The answer is no! Our congressmen and women are under oath to protect the constitution and they are failing to do so in the faced of direct attacks by Gonzales and Bush and Cheney.

So what to do? Our nation is now a sick and pathetic disgrace to the world. It has been destroyed by big business. Big business is the true culprit here and we should stop playing the political game. Big business is more than happy to watch all the political fighting going on as they know it distracts from the rape of our nation they are engaged in. Big business is more than happy with Endless War as they profit from it.

Screw the political solution...it does not exist with a congress not willing to protect the constitution AS THEY WERE SWORN TO DO. It is time to target business. As long as its business as usual nothing will change. I suggest we mobilize and target Wall Street. I suggest we stop waiting for the useless scum in congress to do their jobs and act. Act now with force and consistency with boycotts and general strikes. OUR CONSTITUTION HAS BEEN ATTACKED BY THE CRIMINALS IN THE WHITE HOUSE. If our leaders wont stop them then WE THE PEOPLE MUST. Lets stop believing our elected leaders are any more than pawns of big business...they are not.

Big business should be the next target of our discontent not Bush or Cheney. We have the power to bring business to its knees and we should be organizing to do just that. General strikes...boycotts of targeted businesses...refusal to pay bills...SOMETHING to stop BUSINESS AS USUAL IN THIS SICK AND FUCKED UP NATION. We own this nation...time to let the money makers know whos really in charge here and demand change. Otherwise we watch our constitution turn to ashes as Bush, Cheney and the republicans use the burning bodies of our soldiers as an accelerate. This is just total insanity.

[greyghost]

61. Damn fine post...

You hit the nail on the proverbial head.

A good start would be buying gasoline from any station other then Exxon/Mobil. Keep that up for a few weeks and I bet we will see lower gas prices.

[Zodiak]

62. I agree

Major civil unrest sucks and people's noses get bloodied, but a general strike has a real shot. Americans had better get familiar with the concept and how to pull one off successfully because it is becoming the weapon of next resort.

Now....how to divorce Americans from their insane work ethic?

And welcome to DU!

[BeHereNow]

117. Wecome to DU- Great post, but I must point one thing out. We missed it.

The opportunity to succeed at what you propose as the solution.
It is no longer a national economic system, it is global.
And that is precisely why our voices are ignored by our global corporatist
government "representatives."
The corporate forces that control the country are global, in the economic sense-
our boycotts are not even a flea bite in their profits at this stage.
They act with impunity because they can.
As Paul Volker of the Trilateral Commission stated back in the 1980's,
in order for the New World Order, ie Globalization to succeed,
the standard of living for the average Duh' murikkkan must
decrease significantly. Unfortunately, as the global elite were
planning the demise of the shop happy, credit card toting Duh'murikkkan
public, this statement went unnoticed.
The plan proceeded and thus, they no longer need us.
Witness Katrina and take heed of what it foretells of the future.

BHN

[PleadTheFirst]

202. Wish I could Rec. a post within a thread.

This sums up our situation in a nutshell.

[urantia1]

240. Bushco

I am so sad at what this administration has done to this country. It will take years to undo the damage, even if someone tries.

[Yukari Yakumo]

96. Uh... WRONG!

The Republicans LOST seats in '98, unprecedented in a mid-term election.

Chimpy won in 2000 for three reasons. One, he played the "Good ole boy" role to a hilt (and that 25% still buy). Two, Gore did not run the campaign well. It should not have been close enough for Chimpy to steal Florida away to win the election. And finally, Gore's choice of a running mate, 'nuff said.

[Zodiak]

100. I said they rode the accusation into the WH

and the congressional stuff came later. Their punishment was non-existant for impeaching Clinton.

As far as your refutation of my point about going into the WH, you surely do not disagree that Bush came in to "restore integrity to the WH". What incident was he desciribing that occurred that needed an integrity restoration? The blowjob, of course...the one that got Clinton impeached.

I do not disagree that the other points you make are factors, but Clinton's disgrace before the American people was a factor, as well.

Impeachment does not have political consequences if they are warranted, and failure to convict doesn't necessarily paint the impeaching party as unworthy of the vote. Failure to convict along party lines only underscores the corruption in our government and spurs further action. But he would be shamed by the investigative process, and that shame can spread across his party.

What's more, his viscious agenda would grind to a screeching halt. As of now it is full-steam ahead.

But this sitting on our hands is not the action of patriots....it is risk aversion, and we all know it is literally killing our people and our future by the minute.

[greyghost]

102. It was...

close enough to steal, and it was stolen.

Hell, if Gore had simply won Tenn. it would have been out of reach.

The Electoral College's time pasted long ago, but both parties use and abuse it.

[moodforaday]

108. Exactly. All excuses, no results

Can't impeach because it would take away energy - from what, pray? From criminal deals like this one?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x867693

Certainly not from stopping the war and the dying! Certainly not from fighting, or at the very least making noise about Bush's executive orders and signing statements. Certainly not from wrenching habeas corpus back from his slimy claws. Exactly what are the Dem leaders spending that precious energy ON?

[davekriss]

226. Example: Military Commissions Act

I wonder what the Democrats are spending their energy on too (and I am a life-long straight-line Democratic voter). One of the first things on my agenda would be reversal & nullification of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, the bill that denies non-citizens any right to habeas corpus and allows Bush to decide with impunity what is and is not a violation of the Geneva Convention. Why hasn't there been a vote on a bill that reverses that?

[seafan]

52. We MUST proceed to the impeachment stage to protect the US against this uncontrolled executive.

It is how history will judge us.

Did we, as Americans, when faced with crimes committed by this president and vice president against our nation and other nations, use our Constitutional rights as The People of the United States to indict those responsible?

At this critical point, the wrangle over the potential Senate outcome to convict is only a distraction from the business at hand; we must not allow ourselves to be browbeaten by pessimism about what represents the second stage in the progression of stopping this unchecked and dangerous administration.

The business at hand is to begin the process.


We must begin the process.


Having The People's House vote affirmatively on articles of impeachment will wake up the nation in a simultaneous roar of validation that will force Senators to rethink their survival politically. But, if it turns out that a few Republicans choose to go down with the Bush/Cheney ship, by ending their political careers with a Nay vote, we, as a people will forever know that we did what was right for our country, when we started the process.


It is the last tool of The People against a despotic leader. We must use it.


What our leadership needs is courage.


We The People have it.


But what we are seeing is that while our ship has a gaping hole in the bow where Bush/Cheney tore into the rocks, Speaker Pelosi and Harry Reid are telling us not to bother wrenching the crazed captain from the wheel.... just start bailing out the water with our tin cups. And maybe we will have shallow water under us when the ship slips beneath the surface.



There is no other way to save ourselves. And most critically important, our window of time is slamming shut. We cannot wait any longer.



We must begin the process of indicting and removing this dangerously out of control executive and his vice president.




We owe it to those who will outlive us.

[Kelly Rupert]

56. Okay. So how exactly are Y'all The People going to do this? n/t

[jonnyra]

177. It starts with ignoring Pelosi and the Dems

Screw Pelosi...she had her chance and BLEW IT. Shes sucking up to Bush and thats not what we voted her and party in power to do. WE DID NOT VOTE FOR THEM TO WATCH THEM COWER IN THE FACE OF BUSH'S TANTRUMS GODDAMMIT!

We have our soldiers in the middle of an UNWINNABLE CIVIL WAR getting killed and maimed everyday. And the dems know this is unwinnable yet they back down...that is sick. We have Exxon/Mobile crushing the lives of average hard working Americans with their control of the flow of gasoline. We have Bush/Cheney trying to attack Iran under any false reason he can generate...you have all probably noticed a sudden leap in anti Iran propaganda in the last few days...its starting in earnest and will happen soon.

MOBILIZE AGAINST EXXON/MOBILE. BOYCOTT ALL THINGS EXXON. Lets move to get a groundswell of support for boycotts and possibly a one day general strike..to be 2, then a week if they do capitulate to WE THE PEOPLE!. I know it sounds absurd. I know your all thinking "yeah right...fat chance". BULLSHIT. THIS NATION HAS HAD IT WITH THE CRIMINALS IN THE WHITE HOUSE and THE DEMOCRATS THAT ARE COWERING FROM THEM. The vast majority of the nation is on our side and will get behind us if we can start this war. The dems do not care that the oil companies are literally holding all working Americans HOSTAGE to their gasoline prices. The dems WILL DO NOTHING TO STOP THIS CRIME OR THE CRIME IN IRAQ or the crime thats about happen in Iran.

Mobilize against EXXON/MOBILE. Start talk of a general strike...it may not even have to happen as the mere mention of such a thing will strike fear in the pockets of the rich (they have no heart). That is how we bring the white house down...no one day protest will do it. Only a declaration of war against the corporates will get action.

It has to start with the liberal blogoshpere. We know there is power here....we can start the tsunami. WE ARE THE TSUNAMI. We need a WAVE OF ANTI CORPORATE ACTIONS. Can someone start a major thread calling for this action? I dont have enough clout around here. Can someone start a thread announcing a call to arms with the target as WALL STREET and the CORPORATIONS? We need to push the dems aside as they are clearly part of the problem not the solution. We need this strategy to be headline not buried in our blogging. Can we do this? YES! Will it be easy? No but it can happen. Spread out across the blogosphere, sign up for all of our favorite blogs (you know who they are) and push this message: WE ARE DONE WAITING FOR LEADERS TO STOP THE BLOODLETTING AND THE RAPE OF THE AMERICAN WORKER BY EXXON. DONE. So again can someone with much DU clout (ie number of posts) start a headline thread that calls for a new target: WALL STREET.

Please DU...we must get our soldiers out Iraq and the dems are useless. I am shaking with anger as I think of more young men dying in Iraq while Pelosi BACKS THE WHITE HOUSE CALL FOR MORE DEAD SOLDIERS. And the corporations are the real hidden reason for all of this sick shit and we the people are about to STOP IT. This the time and this is the moment.

Mobilize against Exxon/Mobile. Start the talk of a general strike by all those held hostage by big oil and all those who cry for our soldiers. That will scare the hell out of these MFs.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

65. All Hail President Cheney! n/t

[davekriss]

227. Impeach his a** too! (n/t)

[rodeodance]

69. Has this been sent to Pelosi?

[Jack Rabbit]

75. K/R

[StefanX]

77. Pelosi has an announcement on yahoo.com asking what The People want from Congress

I think IMPEACHMENT is what MOST Democrats want MOST.

I mean, you've got a poll on MSNBC with HALF A MILLION respondents saying IMPEACH.

I understand she said it "wasn't on the table" -- maybe she was being diplomatic, maybe she was just being modest (as SHE is next in line to be President).

So we know it's not HER idea. So nobody can accuse her of being power-hungry.

I think maybe she WANTS us to force her hand.

Let's do 3 things:

(1) email this thread to her -- her email for out-of-state constituents is [e-mail] and there's a little button on the top of every DU page that says "email this thread to a friend" Be firm - but polite!

(2) call her office

(3) email this thread to our friends

[seafan]

82. Thanks, StefanX. I had not noticed that e-mail link. I hope the Speaker is wearing her raincoat.

A tsunami's coming.

[me b zola]

78. k&r

:kick:

[nonoxy9]

83. Keep 'em honest!!!

U took the words out of my head!

[puebloknot]

84. K&R No king, no queen tolerated in America. Madame...

...Speaker, it's time to honor the will of the American people.

Impeachment is the only right, honorable, and *practical* thing to do. Your political future, and that of the Democratic Party, depends on it.

[babsbunny]

85. This feels right to me!

I can't take much more! My head will explode!

[Forkboy]

88. They're afraid of a man with 28% approval ratings.

It's mainly a party of cowards at this point.

[Yukari Yakumo]

98. Which one?

The one that won't risk potentially turning someone into a martyr?
Or the one that, come hell or high water, will stand by someone no matter what?

[tnlefty]

120. I think that this is the part that blows my mind the most! Low

approval ratings, I see and hear repugs on c-span who have turned on him, the Worst pResident Ever, the most hated man on the planet, people are sick of this lying, warmongering, faux-christian criminal...and they capitulate? I need a head exploding emoticon.

[deminks]

90. K & R

[april]

92. Did you send this to her? nm

[Initech]

94. So if Congress isn't willing, can we show up at the WH with torches and pitchforks in hand?

I think there's more than one way to get the message across! :evilgrin:

[bonito]

95. K & R !

[deacon]

97. Amen n/t

[Lena inRI]

99. CONGRESSIONAL DEMS=BUSH ENABLERS. . DAYS OF WINE AND ROSES. . .

. . .and now I get why the Neocon PNACers picked GWB to be their Presidential figurehead over far smarter choices. . .because, LIKE THE VERITABLE HARD-CORE ALCOHOLIC THAT HE IS, GWBush is the drunk with a thousand promises for WINE AND ROSES. . . enabled by Dems who are VICTIMIZED BY GWB'S CONSTANT PROMISES FOR REHAB. . .

Speaker Pelosi. . .

TIME TO KICK BUSH OUT OF THE WHOUSE. . .BEFORE HE DRAGS US ALL DOWN AS HE HITS ROCK-BOTTOM.

Not enough impeachment votes????

SO WHAT! TAKE A STAND ON PRINCIPLES ALONE. . .FOR THE HISTORICAL RECORD!

Wasting time???

WHAT DO YOU CALL ALL OF BUSHIE'S VETOES. . .TIME-SAVERS???

So Dems are absolutely convinced Repukes will never vote for impeachment???

IRREFUTABLE EVIDENCE FROM IMPEACHMENT TRIAL WOULD COMPEL REPUKES TO IMPEACH. . .GET SOME STARCH, DEMOCRATS!

STOP. ENABLING. THE DRUNK, WILL YA !

:spank: :spank: :spank: :spank: :spank:

[debbierlus]

110. Dead on! Speak Pelosi is turning into a BIG disappointment

I believe we are either going to have to clear out all but a few of the best dems, & put progressives in their jobs. They are leaving us no choice.

[here_is_to_hope]

113. I agree....n/t

[Red Poet]

115. Just Emailed this to Pelosi

Speaker Pelosi:

Thanks for verifying my long-held suspicion that Democrats are unworthy of my vote. By capitulating, once again, to Bush by removing a timetable for troop withdrawals from the Iraq funding bill, you have shown the whole world that you are either a co-conspirator with Bush or a first rate coward. I am hardly surprised by your latest capitulation: your earlier public statement that “impeachment was off the table” proved that you have about as much spine as a platter of Jell-O. By failing to stand up to a modern despot like Bush, you and your fellow cowardly Democrats have placed yourselves squarely in the same camp as those German politicians of last century, who paved the way for the rise of the Third Reich by refusing to stand up to Hitler. And, I have no doubt that you will continue to capitulate to every whim of America’s first dictator. After all, that is what cowards like you do best. I hope you are happy with all that corporate money coming your way, as that is all you have won by your latest capitulation. You have certainly not won any more votes for Democrats; in fact, you have probably won the 2008 elections for the Republicans. Or was that your intention all along?

Since I was a young man back in the 1980’s, I have witnessed the relentless slide of this once-free country towards despotism due, in large part, to the failure of Democrats to stand up for the people and for America’s values. I watched, back in the 1980’s, as Democrats refused to take a strong stance to stop the imperial ambitions of the bastard Reagan. Then, in the 1990’s, I watched as the Democrats selected as their candidate a closet Republican named Bill Clinton, who proceeded to enact much of Ronald Reagan’s reactionary domestic agenda. Through all of that, I consistently voted for Democratic candidates for Congress and Senate even on those years when I voted for progressive third party Presidential candidates due to the mediocre nature of the Democratic candidate (for example, Clinton). But this latest display of cowardice has changed all that for good. Never again will I vote for a mainstream Democratic Presidential candidate, regardless of how extreme the Republican candidate might be. I would certainly not vote now for a spectator candidate like Obama or a piece of corporate shit like Hillary. And I will never again vote for a Democrat for Congress or Senate except in those rare instances when the candidate in question has a proven and truly outstanding progressive record and political courage to match. You have managed to not only lose my respect, but you have also lost my vote for your fellow Democratic members of Congress and Senate.

Yours, in disgust and disrespect,

(name deleted)
A former Democratic voter.

[truedelphi]

139. you have about as much spine as a platter of Jell-O

Jello actually can hold up quite well.

Pelosi has as much spine as S-O-U-P

[LWolf]

116. K&R n/t

[Sydnie]

118. I would sign that

Good message!

[Dukkha]

121. the SOTU address should've been a warning

when the dems couldn't stop applauding and fawning all over the enemy. That served as a warning of things to come. Just business as usual in the cesspool of corruption on capital hill. All they care about is their own career and covering their political asses, reaffirming our well earned distinction as the most hated nation on Earth.

[bdamomma]

122. you know it's getting to the point, when I feel like saying someone

needs to....................................(fill in the blank), and remember we do not have free speech anymore. hey Agent Mike:hi:

[StefanX]

128. Wow -- 122 votes for this thread (as of now)... and still counting

I think that's some kind of record.

Too bad Pelosi's not listening to us on this one. We're pretty fired up.

Too bad for her, and for Congress, that is.

I honestly think they will be the LAST Congress in history if they don't listen to us on this one.

When someone commmits a crime, you arrest them and put them on trial -- whether or not you know how the jury is going to come down on them.

You give criminals a free pass -- then government is dead.

So go ahead and ignore DU, Nancy. If you do, I predict Congress soon go out of existence -- as soon as the next terrorist attack or hurricane comes, and W takes over the government.

I'm not making this up -- Bush just made up an "executive order" saying his has power of the WHOLE GOVT in the event of another "disaster".

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x936590

So basically we're now one disaster away from losing the whole country.

Which ought to clue you in, Nancy. This is an emergency. Too bad you're going to go down in history as OPPOSING 88% of The People and letting a dictator take over the country.

Bush has an excuse, he's an idiot. What's your excuse, Nancy?

[KAZ]

145. You know what, screw your "Nancy" shit.

I'm as frustrated as the next guy, but political realities are what they are. You want to screw someone, then go pick a fight with your neighbor. They're still putting these Repukes in office. What don't you understand about the term "slim majority"?

[John Q. Citizen]

160. 60% percent of Nancy's voters called for impeachment at the polls on 11/06

That's not such a slim majority.

Nancy can stop the funding all by herself. She is House Majority leader, you are aware? She can stop any bill she wants from coming to the floor. No bill, no funding. No more funding, no more occupation.

Doesn't need to be 60%. Nancy can stop the war all by herself right now.

[greyghost]

181. True...

sad but true.

[whistle]

143. I just recommended this post at #149...this must happen

[femrap]

150. We need to have an

Activist Action....call House members and demand IMPEACHMENT!!! NOW!!!

[Maryland Liberal]

151. Impeachment is a GOOD Thing!

There is no way we can lose with an impeachment of the The Chimp. If we get the required number of votes - we win. If we do not get the required number of votes = we sill have tied alot of Repug senators to a 33% popular president -making 2008 look VERY good. Its a no-brainer - inpeache the bushie - NOW!

[bridgit]

152. of course we're not going to die with him, he's going to slide out the backside...

live at his ranch travel back & forth from there to Houston & Dubai, etc, sit on half a dozen Big Oil boards and start raking in m-o-n-e-y from all the other nefarious deals no one as yet has even dreamt about, noble thoughts lovely recs therefore kudos, but the fix is already in

[Kurovski]

153. Kick. (nt)

[Hailtothechimp]

154. They cave on the war funding AND refuse to impeach. WTF???

Did they get the message last November? I don't think they did.

Russ Feingold is the only Senator I respect anymore. With Kucinich, John Lewis, Murtha, and a handful of others in the House, but not the Pelosis and Hoyers and the ones who make policy. They have no political capital left with me any more (and that means you too, Jan Schakowsky, my heretofore admired Rep.)

[mtnsnake]

157. Beautiful!

:toast:

[EFerrari]

161. kick

[WiseButAngrySara]

162. Send her this thread! ....n/t

[KT2000]

163. You are right!

"We The People will not die with him." Excellent

[FloridaJudy]

164. I'm opening my window

and yelling "I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it any more!"

Anyone care to join me?

[orleans]

170. k&r. n/t

[man4allcats]

172. We are THROUGH the Looking Glass ...

I say this not only to Democratic members of Congress, both of the House AND the Senate, but to Republican members as well. This is not a partisan issue. Whether you are Republican, Democrat or Independent, you were elected to uphold the Constitution, the Supreme Law of the Land. There is no question that Bush and Cheney have violated their oaths of office. There is no question that democracy as we know it in the United States is in jeopardy. The 110th Congress must collectively impeach Bush and Cheney or go down in history as the Congress that enabled the destruction of America, this planet's premier democracy. What will it be, Madame Speaker? Whether you like it or not, whether you want it or not, the choice is yours.

[Senator]

174. Moreover, It's About US -- Far More Than Him/Them

It's about whether or not WE stand silently complicit will all the horrors listed here.

It's about whether or not WE trust Our Fellow Americans with the truth. Trust them to stand with us against War Crimes, in defense of the Constitution and the Rule of Law, and in objection to a culture of fear, violence, suspicion, and greed.

It's about whether or not WE send the message -- to each other, to the world, to history, to our children -- that WE ACCUSE.

Only Impeachment ... is that accusation.

It IS our positive agenda.

It is our ONLY moral, patriotic option.

----

[krispos42]

175. Pelosi, put some steel in your spine and brass in your balls and GET THEM!

Use your shiney new mega-mallet and break some heads!

[Vinca]

178. The Speaker - as well as our representatives - needs to represent

THE PEOPLE. THE PEOPLE! The People have been forgotten - or intentionally ignored - when it comes to Congress.

[Ganja Ninja]

182. Just because you can't override a veto doesn't mean you have ...

to capitulate and vote for whatever the little dictator wants. They could simply not pass any funding and let the money run out. But just like the vote for the war they don't have the will or desire to say no. I'm so sick of the spineless Democrats that I'll vote for anyone that can offer me a non-right wing alternative. I'm fed up and disgusted.

[pink-o]

183. WTF is wrong with these Dems???

...Back in the dark days of 2003, if anyone had spoken up against King George, they would've gotten drawn and quartered. But a new Rassumsen poll shows the a new low for Bush's approval ratings. There's no consequence to speaking out against his policies nowadays, what's the fuckin problem???

Wimps, cowards and colluders. I've tried to give this congress the benefit of the doubt for 6 months--especially since Nancy is my rep--but my benevolence is stretched to the breaking point!

Rassumsen poll results:


http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/political_updates/president_bush_job_approval

[proud2BlibKansan]

185. AMEN!!!

ITMFA!!

[Just-plain-Kathy]

187. Get them for treason.

[Cults4Bush]

188. Dem Leaders actively suppressing Impeach movement!! LOOK!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x943113

This was my final straw. If you want to be an apologist for this kind of shit then go right ahead. You cant win the elections without the grass roots activist base, you have thoroughly betrayed us... this action in the post I linked is beyond the pale for me. It is a rethug tactic... this on top of everything else, Im sure someone will explain how that it was perfectly fine though.

[blueworld]

189. They keep confusing "spin" with "spine"

Excellent post. And don't forget, not only is * doubling the "surge" which was supposed to be completed by June but those two aircraft carrier groups just passed thru the Straits of Hormuz to play games with the Iranians!

Why argue about funding Iraq when we can fund so much more carnage! Way to go Harry & Nancy! :nuke:

[Mad_Dem_X]

191. Proud to be Rec #200

AMEN!

[muffin1]

192. Just emailed Pelosi!

Like most of DU, I am so SICK AND TIRED of this criminal administration. The list of lies and scandals is so large it gives me a headache to think about them all. LIES about WMD's! Lies about Iraq's ties to 9/11! No plan for Iraq once we went there! The deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi citizens! Torture! Suspension of habeas corpus! Illegal wiretapping ( they even had to twist the arm of one of the most hawkish, conservative assholes there is - John Ashcroft - as he lay in critical condition in the hospital)! Cronyism - Michael Brown, Harriet Miers, Gonzo! Lack of response during Katrina! Corporate greed! Out-sourcing! And, of course, THE DEATHS OF 3,300 American soldiers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I hope to hell this Congress will finally do something to end this madness. America cannot take much more of this. :cry:

[Ensalada]

194. SORRY, NANCY CAN'T TAKE YOUR CALL RIGHT NOW ...

She's on the phone with Occidental Petroleum, discussing the http://www.oxy.com/Presentations/2006_3Q_earnings/2006_3Q_index.htm">15% spike in their 3Q earnings.

[seafan]

196. We are staring at the edge of the abyss.

These are the points that, for me, lay out the danger we are in right now.



1. This president is an unchecked menace with a 28% job approval rating.


2. In this face of massive loss of credibility and trust of the people in this country, he plows on with unabated speed, destroying everything in his erratic, drunken power path. And like an aggressive malignancy, there is nothing left behind but blackened, hollowed-out corpses.

Such as our Constitution.

The Rule of Law.

America's world standing.

The lives of 3,300+ US troops.

The lives of 665,000+ innocent Iraqis.

The survival of America's Middle Class.

Free and fair elections.

The carnivorous rise of Global Corporations.

The incessant meddling by recycled Iran-contra alumni in the affairs of other nations.

Inciting hatred among our people by demonizing various groups such as:

Immigrants. Gay people. People of color. Women. Poor people. People against the Iraq invasion and subsequent occupation. Those who want fair trading practices. Those who fight for clean air and water and protection of natural resources. Those in a court of law who represent the weak, oppressed or injured, against corporate giants. Those who try to grow crops without prosecution for seed patent infringement, forced pesticide use or foreclosure because of expanding corporate greed. Injured soldiers and their grieving families, waiting years for care, if at all. Troops that resist orders to abuse others.


This aberrant group of Republicans will not survive without inciting continuous hatred and spilling of the blood of others to further their own greed and lust for power.



3. This president and his vengeful party pre-meditatively weakened every one of our strengths as a nation of laws. But, perhaps the most calculated destruction was aimed at weakening our power to remove them from office when it would inevitably become necessary. By attacking President Clinton with salacious impeachment charges a decade ago, the intended result by this GOP was to weaken the strongest tool We The People have to remove a truly despotic leader, and that is impeachment and removal from office. The GOP wanted to cultivate mistrust and disgust for the impeachment process. And by bastardizing its use against President Clinton for a personal transgression, they succeeded.


Now we are left with the mistrust and accused politicization of a legitimate process when it has become necessary to wield it to protect America from grave harm. We reap what they have sown. And it was all by design.



4. The world has, until now, distinguished the essential goodness and honor of the American people as separate and apart from the murderous actions of our government. We are now at the edge of the abyss.

If We The People do not use our Constitutional powers to begin the process of impeachment and removal of this rogue leadership, we will be forever and irreparably damned as being one and the same as this regime that is a grave threat to the world.



We are truly staring at the edge of the abyss.

[Ensalada]

197. So ... did you watch Dancing With the Stars last night?

[SammyWinstonJack]

198. K&R!

[Freddie Stubbs]

199. If there aren't votes to cut off war funding, what makes you think there are enough votes for

impeachment? :shrug:

[tomp]

205. or for that matter, getting anything else accomplished.

bush can veto anything the dems pass. the issue is they are not winning politically. the majority of americans are behind them, yet the republicans seem not to be taking any heat for bush's policies. why is that? my view is because the dems are not waging the political war that thier constituents and even repub constituents want them to. they are not taking the republican party to task for its failure to do what the american people want. why has no republican voted with the dems? aren't they feeling pressure from the grass roots too?

the dems are risking looking completely incompetent in '08. if they are unable to sway repubs to vote for their bills they are useless. but of course, so are the repubs. the politicians, in general, are not leaving the people much choice.

[pat_k]

215. 'cause supporting the "right" of the Pariah in Chief to nullify McCain's anti-torture. . .

. . . amendment ("interpret" into oblivion with a signing statement) will be a heck of a lot more difficult than rejecting an impotent attempt to hit Bush with their purse.

It will not be easy to say "Bush can spit in our faces and say 'Screw you, I'll torture when as I please' if he wants. The President can nullify anything we do if it pleases him, even if it were President Hillary.

Not many Senators will be keen to jump on the torture bandwagon, when they voted to 90-9 FOR McCain's anti-torture amendment. The Republican Senators who are scrambling over each other to "distance" themselves from Bush aren't going to be keen on saving his ass.

Americans are certainly "against" Bush's occupation, but there is no consensus on the "best" way to extract ourselves. (That's the definition of a quagmire, no good way out.)

Americans are united in their anger at Bush.

[emald]

207. demo's are cowards, participating in the raping of this country

they are as complicit as the repukes. Both parties have gone to the greed side. We the people seem to mean nothing anymore, only rich big dollar corps get attention from these criminals.

IMPEACH NOW. IMPRISON NOW.

Pelosi is a coward. All of them are spineless and short sighted. Representative government? Not here.

[BonnieJW]

208. I had high hopes for Nancy but then there's this

SECRET TRADE DEAL: Dem Leaders Brag About Appeasing K Street By Keeping Dem Colleagues In the Dark

In a stunning interview with reporters, House Democratic leaders began bragging that the reason they kept the deal secret in the first place - and perhaps the reason the legislative text of the deal remains secret - is because they feared the concessions they were making to K Street lobbyists, the Bush administration and top congressional GOP leaders would elicit opposition from the majority of their own congressional Democratic colleagues. The interview came after a contentious House Democratic Caucus meeting where these leaders faced angry colleagues who are now resorting to coordinated House and Senate floor speeches to shine a light on the deal. Meanwhile, Colombia's president, who has been connected to paramilitary gangs assassinating union organizers, is coming back to Washington in the wake of the deal to attempt to seal final approval for the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement.

For today's full report, go to:
http://www.workingassetsblog.com/2007/05/secret_trade_deal_day_13_dem_l.html

[davekriss]

211. Incredible, isn't it?

Does speak to the argument that we are a one party state, governed by the Republicrats, who answer to corporate-state interests and not we the people. In other words, that we are a fascist state today, not a free and open democracy.

[NotGivingUp]

212. that's it...that's what we've got here...one party, fascist state. nt

[pat_k]

239. Closed social systems create their own reality. . .

. . .the problem is not the Parties per se. The folks on the Hill really are just people -- but they are people who inhabit an insular, dysfunctional, world. Most of their "conventional wisdom" is the opposite of reality. Shared "insider" assumptions are rarely challenged or tested against reality. Unless a social system is open to "outsiders," faulty assumptions beget faulty interpretations, which beget assumptions that diverge further and further from reality "outside."

Of course, the power of money shapes things too, but social forces are FAR more powerful. Even "the best" get sucked up. Even Howard Dean is sounding more and more like one of "them."

On both the "money" front and the "social" front, ordinary people are the counterbalance.

Money in politics has one purpose -- to influence the REAL power brokers (i.e., the people "out here"). When we engage each other, we can make their dollars worthless. When we enter their world and confront them, and recruit primary challengers to shake things up, we can completely change the social dynamics. We are already seeing the effects of opening up their closed world..

In other words, it is not really about them, it is about us. It is about challenging their baseless fears. The "backlash beast" the Dems imagine to be lurking outside is actually a product of their fear of being glared at cocktail parties. Their aversion to the ickiness of the Clinton impeachment (and belief that they must, at all costs, avoid the "ickiness" of a Bush impeachment) has nothing to do with public sentiment. Americans who were disgusted by the Clinton impeachment are the people who would be thrilled to see Bush impeached. The electorate has changed. Young voters harbor no residual feeling about Clinton's impeachment. Not many 10-13 year olds were paying any attention then.

What we need to remember is that our so-called "leaders" really are just people. But they are people who get sucked up in a world of illusion because ordinary people -- the "outsiders" -- have allowed themselves to be pushed out.

They can be reached, but it requires an "invasion" of outsiders. As long as we allow politics to remain the purview of "professionals" the establishment of any Party will fall victim to the groupthink prevalent at any given time.

[NotGivingUp]

213. It's becoming clear to more and more people that the parties

are one and the same, and they are not working for us. The just continue to play their game of good cop, bad cop and continually fuck us over.

[greyghost]

219. True...

it's time for a third party. I find myself hoping that Bloomberg does run.

The repuke candidates are a total joke, and Hillary is Bush lite. It's time for a REAL CHANGE.

It is a VERY SAD state of affairs.

[pat_k]

214. It's about turning American's into torturers. . .

. . .and destroying our moral authority to object when other parties to armed conflict torture Americans.

It's about turning the USA into a war criminal nation that spies on its own citizens without warrant.

It's about terrorizing the nation into a war of aggression with the most colossal bomb threat in history: "mushroom clouds over our cities in 45 minutes." Not even in the world of paranoia and delusion that is Bush World could the coerced and fabricated "intelligence" be "stretched" to include the capacity drop a nuclear bomb "in 45 minutes."

It's about committing crimes so abhorrent to us that violators are subject to the penalty of death. Namely, Title 18, section 2441 (War Crimes) and Title 18, Section 844 paragraph e. (Bomb Threat).

[intheflow]

221. This thread has the highest number of GP recommendsations

I ever remember seeing since the GP began. Are you paying attention, Democratic party?

[AllyCat]

223. Emailed her office. Will call on way to work. Number for out of district?

[EFerrari]

231. Office of the Speaker:

Office of the Speaker
H-232, US Capitol
Washington, DC 20515
[phone]

[AllyCat]

237. Yeah, as soon as I said I was from Wisconsin...

they transferred my call to a voicemail system. I emailed American Voices, but no luck with the call. I left a message, but I'm sure they didn't listen. Not like they listened to anyone else.

What a pathetic bunch.

I'm on a crusade to get recall elections for all of them who voted for this. How do we start it?

[Gregorian]

224. Let's start by IMPEACHING CHENEY.

That should be our new platform.

[KitSileya]

233. I so agree!

Another main point about the latest Democratic cave-in, is that we can't tell potential voters that the dems are a better alternative. The Republicans, those old school Republicans, who are horrified at what Bush has done, won't se a Democratic candidate as an alternative - it's not like they stand for anything. Instead, they are going to vote for a repuke candidate, who will, in public, distance himself from the bushit mess, and offer a clear cut, strong, and reasonable alternative, but behind closed doors, he will be in the power of pnac just as much as Bush is. I will not be surprised if a repuke wins in 2008. If the Democrats continue the path they have started on, not even a fair election in 2008 will help them. They simply will not seem like a reasonable alternative for the swing voters.





If I weren't too late, I'd give this thread a rec.

[Karenina]

238. Kick!

:kick: