Reply #33: He obviously has no concept of duty, and can't read polls. . .

[pat_k]

He obviously has no concept of duty, and can't read polls. . .

He is in deep denial of the grim realities of our national crisis. We charged each and every one of them with the duty to "support and defend." It is a duty that requires them to defend our nation from the destroyers by fighting to impeach and remove their power to destroy. The oath to "support and defend" doesn't carry the exemption "unless I believe the fascists will beat us." Our Armed Services personnel don't have the option of saying "No thank you. I'll sit this one out. I don't believe we'll win." Neither does he. He took the same oath.

Not to mention the fact that "getting things done" and passing laws for the executive to violate is not "getting things done." It is getting steamrolled. It is proving to the public what the public has long believed -- that Democrats are wimps. Well meaning wimps perhaps, but wimps nevertheless.

Tragically, his denial of reality and rationalizations appear to be shared by the entire beltway establishment. It's gonna take continued heavy duty intervention to break through.

Whenever the fascists invoke unitary authoritarian power they tell us they are violating our Constitution and U.S. Code. Cheney, Bush, and their minions only need the cover of that fascist fig leaf when all can see they are committing grave violations.

Their criminal intent is crystal clear with every scribbled "signing statement" that claims executive power to violate the law. When they declared Gitmo a Geneva-free zone, they declared their intent to torture. We can prove they acted on that intent, but we don't need to. The intent alone is intolerable. (And the fact that their abduction, arbitrary and, indefinite impeachment constituted, and other "policies" constituted War Crimes was confirmed by SCOTUS. Even when stacked with fascists, that court couldn't deny reality.)

It is hard to imagine how Bush and Cheney could possibly have made the necessity of their immediate removal any clearer. A couple examples from the public record and it's "case closed."

The case for impeachment and removal is so simple, so compelling, and so grounded in our most treasured principles; the Democratic establishment's refusal to make the case is beyond rational comprehension.

Duty trumps all political considerations. But in this case, the RIGHT thing is the WINNING thing.

Why does he think Congressional approval is in the dumper? How do they manage to delude themselves that playing "see no evil; speak no evil; hear no evil" and continuing "business as usual" will someone win them respect and votes?

The absurdity of their blather would be laughable if it weren't so tragically devastating to the nation and the Party.

=================== Polls ==========================

http://january6th.org/reasons-for-success.pdf">Reasons for Democratic Success

http://january6th.org/oct2006-newsweek-poll-impeach.html">51% "want impeachment to be a priority in the new Congress (Newsweek, Oct-2006)

While I'm sure they they were just trying to adhere to the blackout on impeachment polling, when Newsweek asked, "do you personally wish that George W. Bush's presidency was over" they asked a question that strips away all the http://journals.democraticunderground.com/pat_k/23">impeachophobic excuses that impeachment can't/won't/shouldn't happen. They unintentionally managed to capture the ACTUAL level of support for impeachment.

Newsweek Poll, 27-Jan-07

"At this point in time, do you personally wish that George W. Bush's presidency was over, or don't you feel this way?

58% Yes, wish it was over

37% No, do not

5% Don't know/refused.

The breakdown by Party found that 21% of Republicans, which constitutes 7% of all Americans "wish it was over"

Tragically, 12% of Democrats, which constitutes 4% of all Americans "do not" want it over.