Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Impeachment or Impotence: Wake up Sen. Murray and Rep. Inslee

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
pat_k Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-27-07 09:37 PM
Original message
Impeachment or Impotence: Wake up Sen. Murray and Rep. Inslee
Edited on Tue Feb-27-07 09:43 PM by pat_k
Take Action Now!
Sen. Patty Murray and Rep. Jay Inslee are asking State Legislators to cancel their March 1st hearing on the resolution that calls for Congress to consider impeaching George Bush and Dick Cheney. (See D.C. Dems want to stop legislative impeachment talk, Seattle Times, 2/26/07)

Telling their constituents to shut up about impeachment is reprehensible, but that is precisely what Sen. Murray and Rep. Inslee are doing by asking the State Legislature to cancel their hearing.

Their job is to represent, not dictate.

Go to voiceoutrage.com
to send a message to
Sen. Murray and Rep. Inslee Now!

Spread the word!!

________________________________________________
Note: voiceoutrage.com is forwarded to a "SoapBox Alert" on Congress.org at http://www.congress.org/congressorg/issues/alert/?alert...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
AndyTiedye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-27-07 09:52 PM
Response to Original message
1. Don't Shut Up, Say It Louder. IMPEACH BUSH AND CHENEY NOW!
IMPEACH NOW
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
baby_bear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-27-07 11:30 PM
Response to Original message
2. I don't think the public has the stomach for another impeachment
I know I will get slammed for this, but I want the Dems to do strong things. I want them to pass meaningful legislation (even if Bush vetoes it). Think of all the energy and capital and money and time and opportunities the Republicans wasted impeaching Clinton.

Everyone knows Bush and Cheney are bad guys. The Dems need to clamp down on them legislatively. For example, they can pass legislation that repeals certain amendments to the Patriot Act that should never have been allowed. Heck, I would love to see the whole damn thing repealed. They can also roll back Bush executive orders that allow the Office of Management and Budget to trump rules and guidances from federal agencies that are trying to do their jobs according to congressional direction/acts.

I want the Dems to stop the infighting and start working to pass lots and lots of legislations and basically dare Bush to use his veto. On the record!

In the 23 months left of this evil empire's rule, the Dems can make them impotent and show them to be as terrible for this country (and planet) as they truly are. I don't want them to get distracted with a sideshow like the Republicans did with Clinton, that bled Congress dry of anything meaningful for so long.

I also want to make sure that we gets lots and lots of oversight hearings. We haven't had any of the Bush Administration until this year. There is so much damage to try to emend. Please remember that there are many federal agencies out there that need these oversight hearings. Impeachment will not rectify the damage done to agency integrity all across the board. Hearings will shed light on all of this and help us to try to undo the horrible damage this administration has wreaked (and continues to wreak) on the executive branch. We need sunlight, lots of it. Impeachment would allow the below-the-radar attacks on our federal agencies to continue, and Dems would lose ground for 2008.

I am not opposed to seeing Bush and Cheney face international charges; crimes against humanity sounds about right to me.

b_b
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
12string Donating Member (443 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-28-07 08:17 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. The stomach for impeachment
Edited on Wed Feb-28-07 08:57 AM by 12string
When I consider the fact that these proceedings are not a
witch-hunt for a blue dress,but are necessary as a wake-up
call for the sheeple,I can't help but feel that impeaching
this president and co-conspirators,is necessary to the very
survival of this nation.The gravity and multitude of offences
committed absolutely have to be given light of day.Sweeping
them under the rug is a poor way to treat a symptom of the
cancer in our government,and certainly not a cure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KharmaTrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-28-07 08:28 AM
Response to Reply #2
5. But It Would Feeel Good
I'm with you 100% on this topic. I've long argued that impeachment is a political not a criminal proceding. It lets many off the hooks for their criminality as the ordeal of an impeachment (which will fall short of 67 votes in the Senate) would conflict or even derail real criminal investigations and prosecutions. Not to mention the games the corporate media would play seeing a chance to get ratings from turning this from an investigation of the issues and criminality into a popularity contest.

I want justice as much, if not more, than anyone...but I want REAL justice...in a court of law...without pardons and where executive privilidge can't be invoked. That court resides in The Hague. The first step is launching suits that work in concert with Congressional investigations that can bring all the corruption and criminals into the light...then let justice do its thing from there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pat_k Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-28-07 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #5
11. Poppycock
Edited on Wed Feb-28-07 11:43 AM by pat_k
Impeachment is defensive. It's purpose is to remove an official who is subverting the Constitution or otherwise abusing their power. It is the means by which we uphold the principle of consent -- by providing ourselves a mechanism by which we can retract our consent.

The Congressional oath is an oath to defend the Constitution. We charged them with the duty enforce the terms of our common contract, and we empowered them to impeach to carry out that duty. Failing to enfoce the terms allows that contract to effectively be erased. And erasing the Constitution is the goal of each and every blatant Unconstitutional and Un-American act Bush and Cheney have committed in plain sight.

Retribution is for the Courts. Impeachment defines their acts as "out of bounds" and so, although it is unrelated to future judicial proceedings, impeachment is more likely to strengthen any prosecution. Failing to impeach hands them a defense -- i.e., "If our acts were illegal, why then didn't the Congress, who are duty bound to defend the Constitution, refuse to impeach?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nabia2004 Donating Member (566 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-28-07 08:34 AM
Response to Reply #2
6. Even my republican friends were ready for impeachment - nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pat_k Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-28-07 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #6
10. . . .yep. Pelosi's "off the table" edict was ignored by the people. . .
Edited on Wed Feb-28-07 11:33 AM by pat_k
. . .it was aimed at.

But, in the bizzaro world of the beltway, they pat themselves on the back, sure they escaped the mythical backlash beast.

It reminds me of my dog. Mailman comes. She barks. Mailman "retreats." Her barking "worked." And so her impotent barking is reinforced.

Tragic.

Heartbreaking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nabia2004 Donating Member (566 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-28-07 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #10
16. Makes me wonder what kind of "backroom deal" was made with the devil
We get the same BS from the majority of our DC representatives, and they are just lame excuses.

Senator Murray:
"I have two words for anyone who wants to impeach the President: Dick Cheney."

Congressman Jay Inslee:
"As much as I despise what this president has done to the country, my job is to find a way to end the war in Iraq, which I voted against. We should do nothing whatsoever to hinder our effort to end the war. Grandstanding that prevents us from growing a coalition against the war is a luxury we cannot afford. We don't have the votes to remove Bush from office. Bush is leaving office. We need to make sure our troops are leaving Iraq."

http://blog.seattletimes.nwsource.com/davidpostman/arch...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pat_k Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-28-07 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Speaking of Murray and Inslee -- Can go to voiceoutrage.com to send them a message.
Edited on Wed Feb-28-07 05:29 PM by pat_k
Go to voiceoutrage.com
to send a message to
Sen. Murray and Rep. Inslee Now!

Spread the word!!
________________________________________________
Note: voiceoutrage.com is forwarded to a "SoapBox Alert" on Congress.org at http://www.congress.org/congressorg/issues/alert/?alert...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thedeanpeople Donating Member (48 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-28-07 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #2
7. <deleted>
Edited on Wed Feb-28-07 11:23 AM by thedeanpeople

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pat_k Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-28-07 11:27 AM
Response to Reply #2
9. The only thing they gain by submitting to "the decider" . . .
. . .and allowing American to remain a War Criminal nation and pariah to the world is the disdain of the American people.

There is no "getting things done" under rule by signing statement. The Republicans are already "on the record." Watching Dems get steamrolled just earns them the public's disdain, or even worse, sows hopelessness and apathy.

"Oversight" means nothing to the outlaws in the White House. Bush and Cheney break the Constitution and International law without a thought. You think a little finger-wagging does anything but prove how useless finger-wagging is?

I do not mean to single you out. You echo the same losing song the Dems have been singing for decades. It's the song they sang 1987, when the Democratic majority refused to impeach Reagan and Poppy so they could "get things done" and "prove they could govern" and then got steamrolled, proved their impotence, and watched helplessly as the White House was snatched from their waiting hands.1,2

It was the same song -- "Can't seek truth because we need 'to get things done'" -- that Clinton and Co. sang to rationalize their refusal to go after Poppy for abusing pardons to obstruct justice and cover the criminal acts that he and his co-conspirators committed in Iran-contra, or to dig into and expose the truth about Iraqgate and the October Surprise.3

The tragic irony is heartbreaking. If they had thought less about 'getting things done' and more about exposing the criminal syndicate at the heart of the Republican Party they would have opened doors to actually getting things done -- big, meaningful things that could have actually changed the lives of struggling Americans for the better. Instead, the Democrats haven't even been able to 'hold the line.'

Our so-called Democratic leaders are repeating the same devastating mistakes -- unless we can get through to them.

There is no moving forward with a broken Constitution. There is no moving forward with the Congressional oath once again betrayed by people trapped in a world of irrational rationalization.

The Biggest Problems the Democratic Party faces have absolutely nothing to do with "getting things done" or "issues" -- it is the perception that they are weak and unprincipled. The disdain they have earned for refusing to stand and fight for principle, win or lose. Their inability to demonstrate conviction to overarching principles that inspire.

Impeachment demanded to fulfill their oath, it is the salvation of the Party -- it's an opportunity to take a stand, demonstrate conviction and strength, and define themselves as the champions of the People's Government and the Constitution (and there ain't much that is more inspiring than that)

The outraged public voted the Democrats in because they want out of Bush World. There is ONLY one way out. Impeachment -- the one weapon we gave them to fulfill their oath and defend against precisely this kind of attack on the Constitution. They are already losing the public's support and confidence. They will keep losing it, and have no idea why, if they refuse to stand strong in the only meaningful way available to them.

Impeachment or Impotence.

Duty or Complicity.

Cowardice or Courage.

The choice is theirs.

_____________________________________
  1. "It's like Deja vu all over again"

    "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing
    over and over and expecting different results."
    -- Unknown


    NY Times
    November 27, 1986 2006
    Risks for the Democrats
    By R. W. Apple JR.

    "Flushed with victory in the Nov. 4 7 elections, which gave them control of the House and Senate, the Democrats see obvious benefits and not-so-obvious pitfalls in the unfolding ongoing crisis of secret arms shipments to Iran and possibly illegal diversion of funds to the rebels in Nicaragua CIA-run prisons overseas where abductees are subjected to "incommunicado detention and torture." (1) One main pitfall, in the view of many senior members of the party, is seeming too prosecutorial, too much like the notorious leader of the Spanish Inquisition.

    . . .leading Democrats warned that the worst thing for the country and the party would be an all-out attack on the President, whom they consider personally very popular despite the damage done to his prestige and credibility this month.

    . . .a member of the House leadership who asked not to be identified. "The one thing likely to produce sympathy for Reagan Bush is Democrats in full-throated hue and cry, baying for the blood of the Administration.". . .

    Paul Kirk, the party chairman, said the crisis gave the party "an earlier chance than we expected to seize control of the national agenda, by speeding the onset of the post-Reagan Bush era." He and others believe that while the President and his key aides are preoccupied with investigations into the affair, the Democrats ought to begin laying out, calmly and methodically, their programs for 1988 2008 and beyond.

    ''It ought to be possible for us to be positive and assertive without being absolutely confrontational here,'' Mr. Kirk added.

    But there was less agreement, as many of the key Democrats headed home for Thanksgiving, about what the party should do than about what it should not do.

    . . .But in the view of most party professionals, their chances of winning the Presidency two years from now, for only the second time in the last six elections, have been greatly enhanced by the prospect of a lame duck in the White House - if only they do not overreact.



  2. Limits of Power: How the Democrats are Kept on the Defensive, by Linda Greenhouse, NYTimes, 9-Aug-1987 (emphasis added)

    . . .
    The Democrats who now control both Houses of Congress for the first time in the Reagan era learned that winning the majority was not the same as winning the power to control events, or even to shape them. Time after time, the Republican minority has demonstrated that being out of power need not mean being out of political instincts. President Reagan, weakened by foreign policy scandal and his lame-duck status, has nonetheless refused to slide into the irrelevancy that Democratic leaders keep predicting for him.. . .

    The Power of the Veto

    . . .Congress earlier this year voted to make the fairness doctrine legally binding, but was unable to override a veto, leaving the F.C.C. free to act. . . .

    Filibusters, as well as vetoes, have left Senator Byrd seething with frustration. . .

    On foreign policy, opinion polls showing that the public has more confidence in Congress than in President Reagan. . .

    Yet Congress remains all but paralyzed in foreign affairs, unable to translate deep disquiet over Reagan Administration policies into coherent initiatives of its own. The sustained Congressional uproar over the Administration's actions in the Persian Gulf ultimately produced nothing more than a few nonbinding resolutions. . .

    It is as if Congress, while rejecting the messengers, has internalized the message that a stream of witnesses delivered to the Iran-contra committees: the inevitable primacy of the Presidency in a ''dangerous world.'. . .'

  3. The Clintons Real Trouble with Truth, Robert Parry, Boston Chronicle, 23-Feb-2007

    . . .
    Special prosecutor Lawrence Walsh was still battling the cover-up that had surrounded the Iran-Contra scandal of the 1980s; Democratic congressmen were digging into the Iraqgate scandal, the covert supplying of dangerous weapons to Iraqs Saddam Hussein in the 1980s; and a House task force was suddenly inundated with evidence pointing to Republican guilt in the October Surprise case, alleged interference by the Reagan-Bush campaign in 1980 to undermine President Jimmy Carters efforts to free 52 American hostages then held in Iran.

    Combined, those three investigations could have rewritten the history of the 1980s, exposing serious wrongdoing by Republicans who had held the White House for a dozen years. The full story also would likely have terminated the presidential ambitions of the powerful Bush family, since George H.W. Bush was implicated in all three scandals.

    After winning in November 1992, however, Bill Clinton and the leaders of the Democratic majorities in Congress didnt care enough about the truth to fight for it. Heeding advice from influential fixers like Vernon Jordan, Clinton and the congressional Democrats turned their backs on those investigations. . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
radfringe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-28-07 08:24 AM
Response to Original message
4. ummmm...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pat_k Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-28-07 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #4
12. That says it all. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
porphyrian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-28-07 11:22 AM
Response to Original message
8. Impeachment is a Constitutional imperative.
If we are indeed a nation of laws, we cannot allow the highest ranking officials of our nation to disregard those laws and the Constitution itself. Impeachment is the Constitutionally-prescribed manner in which to stop them, and it is our duty, to our nation, the world and future generations, to do so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bigmack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-28-07 11:49 AM
Response to Original message
13. Here's a relevant piece...
Edited on Wed Feb-28-07 11:53 AM by Bigmack
from today's Seattle Times

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003592...

Impeach Bush? Don't bother
By Danny Westneat Seattle Times staff columnist

Congressman Jay Inslee knows a thing or two about the politics of impeachment. After all, he owes his job to it.

It's doubtful Inslee, of Bainbridge Island, would be in office had he not been the first politician in the nation to run TV ads decrying the impeachment investigation of President Clinton in 1998. The ads said the impeachment was a waste that had paralyzed Congress. At the time, Clinton was toxic and few were defending him. Inslee's stand was national news. He surged ahead of Republican Rick White to win a seat he's held ever since.

Now Inslee is getting blasted by some anti-war activists for saying the growing movement to impeach President Bush is also a waste.

Thursday, that movement goes prime time. The state Senate is holding a hearing in Olympia on a resolution requesting that Congress begin impeachment proceedings against both Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.

"These are my friends," he says, "so this is difficult to say. But all impeachment would do is rally support for George Bush. Among Republicans, it would make him a hero. And it would make it that much harder to end this war."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pat_k Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-28-07 12:04 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. Methinks some letters to the editor are in order.
The delusional thinking behind such parrot squawking is as bad as the delusional White House.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Comparing with Clinton is Oxymoronic

(Note: And BTW, it's exactly what the Euphemedia is training people to think/fear. So it is not my intent to single out these posters.)

It's not just apples and oranges, the circumstances are diametrically opposite.

Clinton was a popular, twice-elected president -- impeached for less-than-trivial reasons -- by a party in danger of being seen as extremists.

Bushcheney is an unpopular, never-elected, never-legitimate regime -- being impeached for torture/war crimes, spying on Americans, and terrorizing the nation into war -- by a party that might be in danger of being seen as conscious or vertebrate.

Realistically, we can expect "Reverse Clinton" results. Perhaps even on conviction/removal.


WRT to the mythical backlash beast, see Post 10 above.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bigmack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-28-07 08:23 PM
Response to Reply #14
18. I've emailed Westneat...
... and Insley.

I think Insley may be right.... impeachment would poison politics bigtime.

BUT, that damn Constitution keeps intruding. If Dumbya hasn't committed high crimes and misdemeanors, then nobody has.

How the hell are people to trust a government that doesn't punish officeholders for their crimes?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pat_k Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-28-07 12:47 PM
Response to Original message
15. Add Gregoire to the list of Dems telling constituents to shut up.
Stop impeachment talk, Gregoire says
The Columbian
Feb 27, 2007



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 26th 2014, 06:52 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC