One of the things I learned a decade ago as an anthropology student was the difference between sex & gender. Sex is biological/physical whereas gender is socially defined and offers many shades and permutations.

Let's approach race that way.

There's race and there's what? Race and skin color are biological/physical. But there's another kind of race, a social race. I'm not sure what to call it -- perhaps it's class after all?

Writing from ignorance on this issue as a white American, it seems to me that Rep. Conyers was approached because he is chair of the House judiciary committee. His leadership as an important civil rights leader and as a leading black figure are not at issue here. Is the peace movement supposed to treat Democratic leaders who show recalcitrance differently if they are African-American?

Yes, Yes. Great article. I had not even thought that some might see it as race. Wow. Anyway, we will keep the weekly protest vigils going over here in Hawaii. Only the constant reminders of people in the streets, writers on their blogs, stumpspeakers on their daises, etc., will keep this going. t is like the drip, drip, drip through the dam wall. We need to convince them one at a time if necessary. This is too big to roll over and quit (despite feeling that way several times myself).

"This moment is not about race, it is not about John Conyers, and it is much bigger than the divides within our movements. This moment is about our future as a country, because humanity is at stake. The Bush administration' s hunger for war has caused so much instability in our world that we face a state of permanent wars."

This is profoundly true. If the American Left cannot pull itself together on this one, you're doomed.

I don't think there is such a thing as a pro-peace, progressive, racist. Can anyone name a few?

This is the question: Can we, as individuals, in all our diversity... sex/gender, color, religion (or lack thereof), ethnicity, culture, political persuasion... with all the differences that divide us, can we work together for one goal? There is only one way to save our Constitution. There is only one way to save our democracy, with all its flaws. Conyers will hear us if we will stop fracturing our power with petty disagreements. We must put aside our differences and speak as one voice. PUT IMPEACHMENT BACK ON THE TABLE!

Excellent article. Good points. Well written.

One small note on parliamentary jargon, to take impeachment off the table means the motion will be considered and debated. Impeachment is not a negotiation, it is a motion that can be debated, voted on, or tabled.

Whay are the Deafeatocrats afraid of putting Bush and Cheney at a desk in Congress, and asking them some straight questions? (which is impeachment)

Are they afraid that they will be exposed as willing collaborators?

I wonder what Pelosi and Conyers will say when (or if) Bush attacks Iran - as he threatens to do? The vast majority of us think that will never happen because it is such an insane thing to do. But we don't have sane people in the Whitehouse and we must guard against their insanity. Will Conyers and Pelosi say "I never thought he'd do such a terrible insane act"? Haven't Dems already said that? Like: "when we gave Bush war powers, I never thought he'd act so irresponibly". (Seems to me Hilary said something like that and other Dems have echoed her.) I wonder how we get Pelosi and Conyers to understand that the administration is not playing by the rules they are. Honesty, decency and a concern for something other than self is not part of the "game plan". Pelosi and Conyers need to wake up and smell the shit.

"folks who think we should wait Bush out until November 2008 and get back at him by voting in a Democrat for President"

If we don't get rid of Bush and Cheney we won't have elections.

"Whay are the Deafeatocrats afraid of putting Bush and Cheney at a desk in Congress, and asking them some straight questions? (which is impeachment)

Are they afraid that they will be exposed as willing collaborators?"

A few days ago, a group of lawyers from western Massachusetts met with the local congressman, Democrat John Olver. Their request was that Olver take part in the urgent effort to impeach Bush and Cheney. Olver responded by saying that he had no intention of doing anything to support impeachment. He went further, offering the information that the United States would soon attack Iran, and that these hostilities would be followed by the imposition of a martial law regime here.

That is why.

It is true that "people are dying in Iraq because of Bush's lies" and "people are being tortured at Guantanamo because of Bush's disregard for the Constitution and international law....."

Unfortunately, it is also true that in the fall of 2002 a majority of both houses of Congress approved the Use of Military Force resolution authorizing the invasion of Iraq, and that in the fall of 2006 Congress similarly voted to grant immunity to those who had authorized or engaged in torture during the global war on terror (a provision of the Military Commissions Act).

First things first. Repeal the AUMF. Repeal the statutory immunity granted to everybody in the executive branch who has engaged in torture in the past or may in the future.

It is very hard to prosecute and convict somebody of a high crime or misdemeanor when the House that indicts and the Senate that tries the case still have statutes in place making it arguably completely legal to commit the very act in question. And don't forget. The legal ruling on these "legal technicalities" will be made by Chief Justice Roberts.

By all means, proceed with impeachment proceedings against Bush, Cheney and Gonzales for the Downing Street lies, the torture regimen, and the warrantless domestic spying by NSA. But Congress should repeal these looming legal loopholes first, as a matter of both legal strategy and sound public policy.

Bill from Saginaw

Excellent points!

Our nation's present situation has a central theme: life or death; liberty or servitude; justice or tyranny; openness or secrecy. . . In other words will our government survive the crisis created by this administration, or will America's 200 year "experiment" fail because of human fecklessness?

Our COMMON DREAMS are at risk. Impeachment is our founders "emergency exit" out of this destruction. Representative Conyers, the chair of the House Judiciary Committee, is the man of the hour...[an hour which occurs only once to individuals and nations]. Mr. Conyers is the one person in this country, at this hour who is in the position to initiate the impeachment process, or . . . to prevent it from occurring. His personal and political challenge at present is to gather his courage and resolve and step forward. Otherwise he joins the ranks of those who failed. Gender and race are not applicable, courage and integrity are the operative words.

Paul Bramscher--

Of course it's class...everything is about class. Remember, economics is the driving force of history.

This is not an issue about race. Bringing up skin color is another attempt by the far right, the moderate right, and the centrists to blur the issue and divide those of us who are trying to help everyone.

Strange how liberals are the only ones who ever try to HELP everybody in their respective nation, but are demonized worse than ANYBODY, especially by those they're trying to help.

As someone who was there, the whole idea that race has anthing to do with the issue is bizarre! The very senior Conyers chairs the Judiciary Comittee.

But then I just realized, except for Rev Yearwood, and one of the other march leaders, there was not a single black person in our entire contingent - in a city that is 60% black.

This is an ongoing problem just about everywhere - and conservative blacks do attempt to capitalise on the the issue - turning class-conflict on it's head, they attempt to convey the antiwar movement as only a bunch of effete rich whiteys, not hard working black folk.

Very annoying. Since it is obvious from the shows of sympathy we get at our demos that blacks are certainly anti-war!

We have no democracy. We have no liberty. We have no representation in government.

Tyranny rules America.

Corporate greed dominates us all.

http://www.sheehanforcongress.us -- Let's get it going folks!

I am a black man. Just wanted to put that out there.

I agree with Yearwood. This isn't a race issue. It's an America issue. And for the record, Conyers has been against so much of this administration's evil from day one, that it's pathetic. But he could never get any traction. And if there is a racial aspect to this problem, that's where it is.

Throughout America's history, black people have truly been the standard by which we should measure how we're living up to our ideals. WE'RE the ones saying that you can't say all men are created equal, but some men are 3/5 of a man. We're the ones saying it's hypocrisy for black soldiers to fight for freedom abroad, but come home to inequality. In virtually every way, if you want to see how America is living up to its promise, look at the state of black people. (Arguably, this can be said of the entire world. But I digress.)

The problem is, that most white people just don't care -- at least not until it affects them directly. Nobody cares about New Orleans now -- not enough to march for it. Being detained by the government without cause, then beaten? Brothers have ALWAYS had to deal with that, long before the Patriot Act.

So Conyers has been yelling about this administration for YEARS, but America doesn't listen when black people call for justice. So now, there's a mainstream progressive movement behind impeachment, and we MIGHT get somewhere.

But the question black folks want answered is: When it comes time to march against predatory lending practices, will white folks come out? When it's time to march for better schools in the inner city, will suburban while folks be there, even though they don't live in the district? Will someone white PLEASE pressure our government to at least APOLOGIZE for slavery?

RE: LINK?

observer July 26th, 2007 3:49 pm

...or is this news purely anecdotal?

RE: IT'S NOT ABOUT RACISM; IT'S ABOUT RACIAL-ORGANIZATIONAL DIVIDES

We shall see how Rev. Yearwood follows up his mention of race as the progressive "tripwire" - but I suspect it is a question of mutual mistrust and ignorance following from a post-Civil Rights, post-1960s-activism failure to work together.

RE: REV. YEARWOOD'S HIP HOP CAUCUS

Scrolling and linking around Rev. Yearwood's organization, there is much progressive political, and some references to impeachment - but, as far as I could discover, no reference to this impeachment rally or the arrests or this article.

Both poor blacks AND whites have long been oppressed by the same rich. Before slavery of blacks there was (and remains) indentured servitude for all. It used to be for a ride across the Atlantic. Now it's just to put a roof over our heads.

Predatory lending has nailed EVERYONE. It caused people to borrow much more than they could afford, shot up property "values" (and therefore taxes & homeowners insurance for existing homeowners) artificially. It caused foolish people to borrow on non-existent equity, and it caused renters to take advantage of this opportunity and raise rent -- everywhere -- as well.

Too bad there isn't such a thing as a people's iminent domain. To return real estate back to communities, to take it away from the distant banks.

The Democrats don't really want to end the war despite their veneer of opposition. If they desired to end the war, they would have halted its funding long ago. Likewise, if they really preferred to challenge the Bush falsehoods regarding Iran, they would do so. Instead the Democrats, including their top presidential contenders Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama who voted in favor of holding Iran accountable for the killing of US soldiers, seem to want to handle Iran militarily.
http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_2226.shtml

John F. Butterfield July 26th, 2007 2:47 pm

I don't think there is such a thing as a pro-peace, progressive, racist. Can anyone name a few?

I would say that most of the (white) people who demonstrated early, enthusiastic support for Obama's candidacy are, in fact, racists. Certainly in a different way than we commonly think, but they're racists because the idea of a black candidate is more important to them than the candidate himself. When Obama entered the race, it was not at all clear that he was even qualified for the job (and I still have to wonder), yet he attracted massive crowds of white 'progressives' to whom, I suspect, a black President is a sign of progress, regardless of that person's policies or abilities.

The opposite of racism is not showing support for a candidate because he's black; it's giving no weight to a person's race at all when judging his character or ability.

If Conyers is the block to Impeachment of anyone then my last post is moot but I will repeat it just in case Conyers can change.
--------------
"Some still think that if you Impeach Cheney first that will fix the problem of Cheney becoming prez if we impeach Bush first.
It is a bit more involved than that because just like Nixon and his VP a similar result would happen.
When Cheney either resigns or stays to be tried by the Senate, Bush will appoint a new VP as soon as Cheney is convicted and by the time this is done the new election will be coming up and if the elections happen the new VP will be a fresh Republican candidate.
They are partners in Crime, this "real power behind the throne" is wishing that once Cheney is gone, Bush will have no power and will be no threat to the world…..I don't think that is reality.
Impeach them both as partners that way even if they play the musical chairs game of resignation, Bush will be under pressure to resign even before the House votes to make the Impeachment proceedings officially start so that he will have resigned in time like Nixon so that Bush will be able to get pardoned by what ever President is next.
The bottom line is if we Impeach them together and neither resigns in time before it gets out of the Committee, neither Bush or Cheney will be able to get a pardon from any future President because the Constitution makes it clear that there is the power of Pardon accept in cases of impeachment…If Dennis can explain why this is not better than having Bush appoint a new VP, I will give him more than 50 Bucks."
--------
But without Conyers on board, it is just a dream I guess.

But if all of us Outsiders did one thing at the polls if there is another election we could begin to organize an alternative and that is not to be so fed up with all the big money politicians that we stay away or to vote for the many 3rd 4th and 5th party candidates who will be on the ballot but have no chance to win.

We can have a virtual "none of the above votes" by voting (Writing in our own names or any name that won't be counted as a protest vote for president!)

You ask "How insane to write-in a name for president that won't even be counted?"

That is the point because it will be counted as a massive under-vote for president.
It will unite those of us on the left and the Right of the Spectrum for the first time in History and will form the basis a new voice...a protest of "none of the above".

If all us outsiders on the left and the right vote for the Greens or the Socialists or John Birchers or whatever small party, they will get counted but have no chance of winning so it will be a futile vote while a massive under-vote will be a sign that a Change can come.
Tired of the Big Money Game? Vote for yourself for President and see the change!

Love, Jim

Dear Rev. Yearwood,
Your frustration is apparent, and thank you for your time and courage and eloquence; but I have one question: If John Conyers wrote the book on impeachable offenses and now says we can't do it, why is no one listening to him? Does his denial of your cause suddenly make him a sell-out in some strange way?

Dear L3ESmith,
You are absolutely right about this being an American problem, but then, we have so many, especially the ones you note. I would love to see all of us put our energy into making THOSE important changes, since despite our lip service to the contrary, racism is still an overriding issue in this country. Katrina was as loud a wake-up call as we are ever going to get on that issue. By the way, I am a middle-aged white woman, just for the record.

Let Bush crash and burn, and let Republicans run like hell away from the flaming wreckage. That would be a much preferable scenario to me, riding the destruction all the way to the ground, so the ignominious ending of the Neo-Con power grab becomes apparent for the world to see. So much preferable to listening to them whine and cry and point fingers and say the terrorists made them do it, which is exactly what would happen if an impeachment proceeding did occur--a media circus like no other, forcing, of course, all of the Republicans to support the President instead of jumping like rats off a sinking ship. Think about it!

Thanks for listening. www.changetheschools.com

And, sorry, but I just have to say this, so send hate mail if you must. Jim, I love you, but everyone here so intent on continual bashing of the "corporate candidates" and badmouthing Hillary and Barack, in particular, is just a step away from handing the 2008 election to the right. How would you like Bob Barker look-alike Milt Romney as Prez, or maybe Rudy Giuliani? The latter has positioned himself as a hero and a centrist, so that is a possible scenario, isn't it?

Are we all so in love with our own points of view (okay, maybe we all are), that we can't see what needs to happen for the good of the entire country? We need a MASSIVE vote for the Presidency, an overwhelming vote that brings leftists, progressives, centrists and everyone else TOGETHER for the first time in history, as a total repudiation of what the Neo-Cons have done to us over the past nearly eight years. If we deny this simple truth and simply use different words to kill every possible Demo candidate, we sound no different from the crazies on the right, which is exactly what my poli sci professor used to say, back in the day: The political spectrum is a circle, not a line, and at the bottom, the right and the left meet in overlapping ideologies.

Thanks for listening and thanks, Common Dreams, for providing this forum. www.changetheschools.com

L3ESmith, "But the question black folks want answered is: When it comes time to march against predatory lending practices, will white folks come out? When it's time to march for better schools in the inner city, will suburban while folks be there, even though they don't live in the district? Will someone white PLEASE pressure our government to at least APOLOGIZE for slavery?"

My name above is a link to my website. My e-mail address is there. If there is a demonstration for the above mentioned concerns in central Florida, e-mail me. I will e-mail my rep to support an apology today, but he is a Republican.

pkokinos: It would be a heck of a lot easier for everyone from the left of the right to the actual left to get behind a candidate and deliver the drubbing you envision if there were a viable Dem candidate who actually possessed progressive values and who had a big enough pair of cajones to be able to thwart swiftboat-style attacks.

And before all the Kucinich folks start piling on, note I did say "viable". As much as I admire Dennis and agree with his politics, he's about as politically viable as Tinky-Winky, for reasons that none of us are happy about but are real nevertheless.

As a Black man who has always revered Conyers, I too was distressed that he was not willing to put impeachment on the agenda and worried about the white progressive response to Conyers' reluctance. Even though Black people have always been the most politically progressive group of Americans throughout this country's history, we've had a tenuous love/hate relationship with the white left. I stood ready to defend Conyers if need be, but luckily I haven't encountered anything to compel me into that position.

Conyers will come around. There is something holding him back and I think continued pressure will loosen him up enough to do the right thing. I know they are going after the firing of US prosecutors, but with enough bugging and nagging, they'll see that there are much bigger fish to fry than Gonzales. The Bush regime has and still is engaging in blatantly criminal and treasonous activities, and they should imprisoned like the common thugs they are.

The corporate world has always used race as a divisive tactic to bust labor. You only need to go back to the Pullman strike of 1894 to see the blacks were used as scabs to help defeat Debs and the ARU. Fastforward to Woodrow Wilson and American Exceptionalism bringing Democracy to the world. Wilson was also racist. What does this have to do with impeachment? Without the support of Labor Conyers has no power, and, alas, Labor itself is conservative, and we really do not have a progressive movment without it.

NOT to use one's power to halt the Bush Administration's wars, torture and general lawlessness is to JOIN IN such activities as an active participant. To associate oneself WITH evil, to join together IN evil, for personal or political GAIN, makes only make one's actions the more DESPICABLE.

RE: OH THOSE BAD PROGRESSIVES - IMAGINE THEIR EVEN THINKING OF NOT VOTING FOR CLINTON

pkokinos July 26th, 2007 5:51 pm
"everyone here so intent on continual bashing of the 'corporate candidates' and badmouthing Hillary and Barack, in particular, is just a step away from handing the 2008 election to the right."

Ah yes, clearly it is the fault of the baaaad left, not the DLC-dominated Democrat Party that - failing to learn its lesson from 2000 and 2004 - has set up a Democratic playing field favoring the 'known quantity' - the most right wing Democrat (see Business Week editorial) of the pack, running a campaign based on picking up Republican swing votes and holding on to progressives w/no place else to go with threats.

Wowee, you sure know how to sell your candidate.

"Are we all so in love with our own points of view...that we can't see what needs to happen for the good of the entire country? We need a MASSIVE vote for the Presidency, an overwhelming vote that brings leftists, progressives, centrists and everyone else TOGETHER..."

...for a piece of right wing Democratic scum who's banking on scaring people who can't be attracted.

Say - why not write a letter to every candidate except Kucinich and Gravel telling them to move left. Not really left, not anything remotely progressive - just to a traditional Democratic position, just so they represent the majority of the electorate that wants OUT of Iraq soon? So that - besides progressives voting 3rd party - droves of traditional Democrats who see little difference don't just stay home?

What? Oh, I see, 'fraid "they" won't be "reasonable"? It's up to "us"? Up yours, apologist. Reform your party, then come back.

L3ESmith,

I will certainly march for equal rights no matter what. I will push for not only an apology for slavery, but reparations. As the head of Anti-Racist Action in Charleston, SC, I will not rest until everybody is 100% equal. Discriminating on the basis of something as ridiculous as the color of a person's skin still amazes me. Oh yeah, and I'm a poor 23-year-old white boy escaping a solidly conservative southern family who laughs at my views, if that matters at all.

Were there any trade union members, especially officers, in the contingent that faced off with Rep. Conyers? I am asking any of you who might have been there. This is the very first blog or chat I have signed up for because I am a bit doubtful that online chatting can change the political structure. But I am interested in further dialogue. Bill Witherup, Director of Gene Debs Labor Ensemble: www.debslaborensemble.org

Who cares? It's too late. Send the whole human race back to the stoneage. Maybe they'll make the right choices next time around.

relayer@q.com

Is there really such a thing as a White leftist/progressive anti-war movement? WTF? Reading this article almost made me laugh, if it was not for the grave circumstances surrounding it.

Let me get this straight. There are people, and I assume these people are mostly African Americans, who want to defend Conyers' inexcusable cowardice in failing to initiate impeachment proceedings by blaming a non-existent leftist anti-war movement conspiracy. This is the kind of racist crap that not only provides fodder for the right wing psychos running the government and media, but makes White leftist progressives loathe the "race card". Typological thinking, regardless of your skin color, does not work in the biological world. Types do not have objective reality; that is, they are not real. Variation is real. Read Ernst Mayr on population vs typological thinking. But I digress. Ergo, there is no such "thing" as a White leftist anti-war movement, etc.

It is pretty straightforward in my opinion. The percentage of Americans supporting impeachment of Bush and especially Cheney is relatively high and growing. The percentage of Americans who disapprove of BushCo's handling of the Iraq Invasion is staggering. So, somebody like Conyer's, who is Chairman of the U.S. House Judiciary committee, should have the testicular fortitude, insight, and political clout to get the ball rolling. He should tell Pelosi's camp, which is mostly White but not progressive nor leftist despite popular political mythology, to kiss his ass and be "a man for the people and for America" as Yearwood claims. Bada Bing!

Impeachment does not go nearly far enough as far as the Bush administration/family goes. They need to be tried for the criminal actions committed in fixing at least 2 presidential elections, the administration and the war generals/gutless ass-kissers need to charged with the war crimes of torture, invasion of an innocent country, and all the war crimes committed thereafter. The list of serious crimes this administration has committed is almost endless.

The republican lead congress needs to be held accountable for their criminally complicit actions. One can only hope that the Republican Party fades like its aptly named predecessor the Know-Nothing-Party.

But then again this is American we live in land of the corporations and home of the most corrupt leaders in the world….yea we're number one.

You want to talk about racism? How about bombing Iraqis, threatening to bomb Iranians, luring African-Americans and Hispanics into the military to be used as cannon fodder? That's racism! Get off the backs of progressives who are trying to set this system right! If you think the progressive movement is too white--then join it and change its color!

I think that it's certain that John Conyers would like to impeach Bush and Cheney. His efforts have been hobbled by Nancy Pelosi and others in the Democratic Party Leadership.

This is the relationship of tactics to race: respect for the role that he has played in efforts for justice and equality for African Americans and for all Americans requires that the progressive movement frame the tidal wave of public pressure for impeachment not as an attack on John Conyers but as something that he can then take to put the pressure on Pelosi et al.

Reverend Yearwood is entirely right. He must be highly commended for expressing the matter so clearly, so succinctly, and so elegantly.

As I said yesterday in my posting in response to Ruth Conniff's dreadful piece about impeachment (see Ruth Conniff,"The Impeachment Imbroglio: Sheehan, Conyers, Pelosi, and Feingold," July 25, '07 at Common Dreams), the impeachment issue facing us has nothing to do with empirical minutiae, and, when it comes to the Constitutional structure of the nation, WITHOUT WHICH THE UNITED STATES WOULD PLAINLY CEASE TO BE THE UNITED STATES, race, gender, sexual orientation, and such attributes (whether these be cultural or physical) become dwarfed into irrelevant details. In fact, contentions about those attributes can only be adjudicated within and against the background of the Constitution and the laws that stem from it. This is to say that such contentions presuppose the Constitution in order to arise in the first place.

It is a matter of jus, of right, not of facts and factual considerations, save, of course, those facts and instances of behavior that prompt us to demand impeachment proceedings in the first place. All other (than the latter) empirical matters are merely obstacles erected by confused people or by those who seek to divide in order to get their way.

Without the framework of the Constitution, dear fellow Common Dreamers, United States citizens become ex-United States citizens. Although the people of what was once the United States would still be walking the territory that once was under the jurisdiction of the United States' Constitution, they would no longer be citizens of the United States, for the United States would no longer exist.

Again, why is impeachment such a vital issue?

Because BushCo is gradually unbuilding the Constitution until such time as the Constitution is merely a piece of paper (i.e., a document that, along with the body of positive laws, no longer commands and regulates the behavior of those people who are citizens or legal residents of the United States, and of their government), which BushCo will then replace with the pure rule of force and compulsion.

Remember that Bush the Lesser publicly stated that the Constitution is merely a piece of paper, a greater avowal of his intentions and his contempt for the Constitution one could barely imagine.

It is that simple and that serious.

susanh,

You've got to be kidding me. I agree that Conyers has been a leader in the African-American cause and has overall done the right thing for the country (although he is a congressman in the 21st century so he's got to have some dirt under those nails; let's be honest, eh?), but that in no way excuses his unwillingness to put impeachment "back on the table." Not to mention the hypocrisy he displayed in initiating the arrest of the pro-impeachment/anti-war activists for conducting a peaceful sit-in at his office.

Sorry lady, but the time for excuses and inaction have passed. Screw Conyers if he can't muster the chutzpah for this kind of high-stakes gig. There is only one Chairman of the U.S. House Judiciary committee and he is it. I don't care if he is the reincarnation of Gandhi. He needs to lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way! Black, white, green, red...it doesn't make any difference. IMPEACH NOW!

Don't let yourselves be fooled again, this time from the so called "Democrats".

It has nothing to do race, it has to do with failure of the "opposition party" to do its job, to hold this war criminal Bush accountable.

If not Bush/Cheney then whom? If not now then when?

Conyers and Pelosy: we the people say, impeach is and should always be on the table. The constitution says so.

IMPEACH BUSH/CHENY NOW.

Well said Rev. And nice points all. The Backbone Campaign (which I direct) gave Rep. Conyers a Backbone Award in appreciation for his leadership on Executive Accountability etc.. I felt (and continue to feel) extremely sad and disappointed to hear about the arrests and the unwillingness of Congressman Conyers to move forward with impeachment, and it honestly strikes me as almost unfathomable why this is the case. Perhaps there does loom a yet deeper crisis around a corner which he secretly feels impeachment would trigger and he is trying desperately to steer away from.

We are at a truly frightening crossroads. During this time solidarity, and faith in those who are also working tirelessly on everything from Katrina recovery to election integrity to challenging the American empire building project is essential. I believe that acknowleging an inheritance of racism with conscious efforts to navigate, collaborate and communicate through it, while weaving together a story of a world we are working together to build is our only hope.

Setting precedent that the crimes we have seen will not be tolerated is not negotiable.

Thank you Rev. for the couragous and soulful contribution you make to accountability and the weaving of that story every day.

Bill Moyer
Backbone Campaign

Very good blog and discussion. Many people would have you believe that the words "class war" are bad words, worthy of contempt. Similarly, those same people have been led to believe that the word communism (economic socialism) means the end of the world. Well let me tell you, if you don't already know it, but unimpeded capitalism will be the downfall of this socila experiment. Corporations will take every advantage, use every tool (including buying of candidates and voters) by any means (especially the money hungry media moguls) to further their profits at the expense of the working class, a term that has changes meanings the last twenty years. Mr Moyer understands and the article by the Rev. perfectly frames the issues that the powers that be would like for us to confuse by using the hot button words such as progressive, socialist, communist, and anarchist tgo demonie those who are against the system and to paint themselves as patriots and those who don't agree as something less than that. The word democrat meant something until around 1980, when the establishment began using words such as liberal to define the democrats and conservatives to define the republican party. Conservatives are supposed to represent the population that is against the constitution beling redefined and reinterpreted by modern judges. But what we have seen is the most massive and comprehensive reconstruction of our rights and a complete re-write of the constitution by an entity NOT even mentioned by the founding fathers; an group given more rights and LESS responsibilities in our social structure than any ever in the history of mankind.
Corporations now run our lives, and the rich are getting richher, much richer.
It is time to ignore the media's unfettered support of the status quo and begin to think again. Please people lets start our own "velvet revolution" and reform our government.
We will have to face the fact that the current regime has put us into a dept we will unlikely be able to get out of without massive tax increases. Lets ensure that when the tax increases are brought up, that we makle sure we get universal healthcare, and governemnt controlled federal elections.
Give Kucinich's platform a look, I think you will like what you see.

It never occurred to me that there was a racial aspect to this confrontation at Conyers' office until spotting this article by Mr. Yearwood. After reading his comments, however, it appears the Reverend has done an important service illuminating the crisis and catalyzing several thoughtful reactions in the comments section.

Many thanks to Mr. Yearwood for taking part in the action and then responding so eloquently to racial concerns.

Conyers is someone I generally admire and I'm certainly disappointed that he's refusing to help move impeachment forward.

After all, isn't removing Cheney and Bush from power as soon as possible the single most important issue facing Americans of all colors and ethnicities? Aren't these the same ghouls that left New Orleans—and huge numbers of poor blacks—to drown or flee for high ground like rats?

Aren't these the two sociopaths still sending large numbers of poor and minority troops to their deaths in Iraq?

Aren't these the overlords who have made sure that rich whites now have an even larger slice of the pie while pushing more poor and minorities off of health care, out of decent work, and deeper into despair and poverty?

Conyers has done a lot of solid work in the past but he should not be immune from pressure at such a pivotal moment in our nation's history. Bush and Cheney seem hell-bent on dismantling what is left of the Bill of Rights and Constitutional Democracy, and replacing it with executive autocracy and a de facto police state.

They are also driving this country toward an even greater and more destructive war with Iran, and anyone who thinks they are incapable of launching such a conflagration has been in a deep snooze for the past seven years.

As Moonraven points out, getting rid of Bush/Cheney and their pack of "rabid dogs" should trump all other concerns right now.

And if we want to stop ethnic violence, let's not forget that this war (as Fedupwithpolitics points out) has killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and made millions of them into refugees. They've been tossed into a social Hell straight out of Hobbes: thanks to American greed, belligerence, and racism, Iraqis now face a future that is "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short."

Should the architects of a slew of international war crimes be allowed to retain power?

If Bush and Cheney do remain in power then tens of thousands more of Iraqis will die in an insane war, and the fatalities from an unprovoked war on Iran are simply unimaginable.

When is he getting impeached?

Rev Yearwood rightly points out two things: One that we love John Conyers for his unparalleled work, and two that impeachment is larger than any of the players (even Bush and Cheney). It is about our Constitution and the rule of law.

Did I mention that Rev. Yearwood along with three other activists with him are all advisory board members of Progressive Democrats of America. Worth taking a look at: www.pdamerica.org

i think the timing of the contempt of congress citations reflects this dispute. contempt of congress could blossom into impeachment. i hate that conyers had the marchers arrested, but perhaps he will still bring up the impeachment bills in his committee.

over last weekend i met somebody who claimed al yearwood was as protective of john conyers as anybody ever was. that would account for the spurious claims of racism.

impeachment is mandatory to a return to the rule of law to the united states, much less an end to the war in iraq.