Most readers of The Washington Post probably missed it. But probably not Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Fifty-six of his law school classmates (Harvard Law School, class of 1982) bought space for an open letter in mid-May that excoriated his “cavalier handling of our freedoms time and again.”
It read like an indictment, to wit:
“Witness your White House memos sweeping aside the Geneva Conventions to justify torture, endangering our own servicemen and women;
“Witness your advice to the President effectively reading Habeas Corpus out of our constitutional protections;
“Witness your support of presidential statements claiming inherent power to wiretap American citizens without warrants (and the Administration’s stepped-up wiretapping campaign, taking advantage of those statements, which continues on your watch to this day); and
“Witness your dismissive explanation of the troubling firings of numerous U.S. Attorneys, and their replacement with other more ‘loyal’ to the President’s politics, as merely ‘an overblown personal matter.’
“In these and other actions, we see a pattern. As a recent editorial put it, your approach has come to symbolize ‘disdain for the separation of powers, civil liberties and the rule of law.’”
By now you’re expecting something like a conclusion by his classmates, such as a demand for resignation or a call for Gonzales’ impeachment. No such logic.
Instead, these intrepid classmates punted, urging Gonzales and President Bush “to relent from this reckless path, and begin to restore respect for the rule of law we all learned to love many years ago.”
Just this week, four Democratic Senators called for a special prosecutor to investigate their belief that Gonzales gave false testimony about the regime’s warrantless domestic surveillance program. They criticized the Attorney General for possessing an instinct “to dissemble and to deceive.”
Four of Gonzales’ top aides have already resigned. The head of the FBI, Robert Mueller, just testified before Congress and contradicted Gonzales’ statements which were made under oath.
It is not often that an Attorney General of the United States is treated with bi-partisan inferences of perjury before a major Senate Committee (the Senate Judiciary Committee). Senator Patrick J. Leahy, the soft-spoken Chairman, said to him: “I just don’t trust you.”
His counterpart, Republican Senator Arlen Specter, the ranking minority member of the Committee, extended his fellow Senator’s remark, adding, “Your credibility has been breached to the point of being actionable.”
Why don’t these and other Democratic and Republican Senators say plainly what they say privately day after day: that they believe that the Attorney General has lied under oath, and not just once.
Again, they avoid the logical conclusion.
But then the Democrats have been doing this dance of evasion with George W. Bush on a far larger scale for four years. After all, Gonzales’ impeachable offenses are his superiors’. Gonzales took the orders; Bush-Cheney gave the orders. The litany of Bush-Cheney impeachable abuses extends far beyond those associated with Gonzales, foremost among them of course Bush plunging the nation into a bloody, costly war-quagmire on a platform of fabrications, deceptions and cover-ups again and again, year after year. And Gonzales took the orders; Bush-Cheney gave the orders-a more serious basis for a Congressional demand for their resignation or the commencing of impeachment proceedings in the House of Representatives.
Compare the many impeachable offenses of Bush-Cheney with the certain impeachment of President Richard K. Nixon that was rendered moot by his resignation in 1974. Compare the actual impeachment of President William Jefferson Clinton by a Republican-controlled House of Representatives in 1998 for lying under oath about sex.
Granted, Nixon became ensnared in the criminal laws and Clinton was caught in the tort laws. But Bush-Cheney’s “high crimes and misdemeanors” tower in scope and diversity over those earlier Presidents.
Instead of a burglary and coverup, as with Nixon, it was the horrific ongoing war (longer than either the Civil War and World War II) with hundreds of thousands of lost lives and many more injuries and sicknesses.
Instead of a sex scandal, as with Clinton, there is a serial constitutional scandal oozing ongoing repeated constitutional crimes. For which alas, there is only one constitutional remedy arranged by the framers - impeachment.
And that remedy the Democrats took “off the table” after they won the Congress last November and before they even took office. Just what the White House recidivists needed to know to keep at it. What a lesson for future generations.
Most Americans do not want their members of Congress to practice rushing to judgment. Nor do they want their members to rush away from judgment. The Democrats, with very few exceptions, are very good at escaping from their constitutional responsibilities.
It is time to hold the Bush-Cheney-Administration responsible for their indefensible acts.
Ralph Nader is a consumer advocate, lawyer, and author. His most recent book is The Seventeen Traditions.
“Instead of a sex scandal, as with Clinton, there is a serial constitutional scandal oozing ongoing repeated constitutional crimes. For which alas, there is only one constitutional remedy arranged by the framers - impeachment.”
IMPEACH - IMPEACH - IMPEACH!
So what else is new…
“It is time to hold the Bush-Cheney-Administration responsible for their indefensible acts.”
Nader, a usual, comes to the exactly correct conclusion: IT IS TIME TO HOLD CHENEY AND HIS MOUTHPIECE BUSH ACCOUNTABLE FOR HIGH CRIMES, MISDEMEANORS, WAR CRIMES, CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY AND VIOLATIONS OF OATHS OF OFFICE. Not to mention general sleaziness and lousy aesthetics.
Whether the Congress “has the votes” or not, to impeach is largely irrelevant. The act of holding these monsters accountable with all the accompanying publicity will create numerous positive outcomes.
The first is that the Bully-in-Chief and Emperor-Without=a-Brain will see that there are political forces that have the chutzpah to stand up to their fascism and reign of terror.
Another is the quite obvious political fact that tying up these fools in an impeachment process will make every Democratic candidate stronger in the general election in 2008.
It is obvious that the Dems don’t have an ounce of political integrity or a strand of moral fiber, but you’d think that they at least have enough mental capacity to understand the survival and self-interest aspect. While they clearly failed as human beings log ago, shouldn’t their animal survival instincts kick in here at least?
“What a lesson for future generations.”
REAL BLAME FOR BUSH POLICIES
Blame the Bush team all you wish for the disastrous consequences of their environmental and social policies, and this ill conceived war. But those who must shoulder the blame for are: the thoughtless voters who helped Bush steal the elections, the five Supreme Court justices who violated their oath by placing politics and favoritism over principle when planting Bush in office, and our legislators who have succumbed to intimidation and tolerated these unprecedented abuses.
As the late Molly Ivins, who always seemed to be right with incredible insight, stated in her last column “We run this country and we are the deciders. Every one of us needs to take action and make the ridiculous look ridiculous”.
Future Generations?
check out this email:
The following recipients have been sent your petition: autodelete@democrats.com
Text:
I support the impeachment of Vice President Dick Cheney and I authorize Rep. Dennis Kucinch to enter my name into the Congressional Record.
For his role in violating the United States Constitution
To restore the rule of law to this country
Vice President Dick Cheney must be impeached.
Incredibly sincerely,
Mary Lou
why would activist@democrat.com send petition signatures to autodelete?
What are they afraid of?
If anyone watched the Democracy Now exchange between Cindy Sheehan and Dan Gerstein, with Ray McGovern on the phone, how is it possible to say that the Democrats have any justification for refusing to impeach?
Gerstein is a propaganda hack, if not an actual Israeli spy, an emissary from Joe Lieberman/AIPAC, representing the Democrat “strategy”.
There is no actual strategy. There is only fear and craven calculations of political expedience.
What are they afraid of?
Damn! Now that they know that Ralph Nader favors impeachment, there’s no chance of the Democrats doing it.
IMPEACH them for their crimes, IMPEACH them to save our democracy!
“A more rational government [is] one in which the will of the people should have… a moderating and salutary influence.” –Thomas Jefferson to William Bentley, 1815.
I’ve mentioned it many times — keep writing and calling your elected representatives. Outline your reasoning, which isn’t a difficult task, that the House of Representatives must take action to commence with impeachment proceedings. There is ample justification. Explain that political reasons are never a reason to fail to undertake the constitutional remedy to oust an administration that has, as the known evidence indicates, committed high crimes and misdemeanors. The constitution allows for this, as a matter of fact, requires this, when crimes against the United States have been committed by a sitting president.
Call Monday. Do not procrastinate. Call.
The logic I’ve been using is “Just because Pelosi is ignoring her San Francisco constituency on impeachment does NOT mean you should do the same. Support impeachment. Let’s let an open process decide.”
Are you kidding? You’re one to speak. You are part of this on-going problem that’s been created by the Bush-Cheney administration. Give me a break. And don’t use the excuse that 80,000 Democrats voted for Bush because they to are traitors and part of a problem that we’ll never get out of. It’s just starting to snowball.
Ralph,
If you had not run your vain, futile attempt at a campaign in 2000, we probably would not be in the mess at all!
“It is time to hold the Bush-Cheney-Administration responsible for their indefensible acts.
“hear, hear!”
“(Bush) was so charming,” said Pelosi, daughter of House Minority Whip Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco. “I thought some of us were in love with him.”
http://www.dailycal.org/printable.php?id=8486
“A life spent making mistakes is not only more honourable, but more useful than a life spent doing nothing.” - George Bernard Shaw
Statement on the Articles of Impeachment
Barbara Charline Jordan Statement on the Articles of Impeachment
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/barbarajordanjudiciarystatement.htm
hey gang - stop playing the “ain’t it awful” and “blame” games and start noticing who’s on our side. Thanks, Ralph, all is forgiven and welcome to the tent.
80000 democrats who voted for Bush in 2000 are traitors. Nader gave people a choice–unlike the democrats.
It is such a rare honor in these dreadfully depressing times to read what a true American hero thinks. Since the phony Orwellian War the Bush Administration created I thought all heroes were simply myths. It has been proven time and time again our generals are simply moronic, sycophantic, who are equally responsible for this horrific yet phony war. The corporate/white house press is anything but a “free press”. Thank god for Greg Palast.
The average person is so beat down with hopelessness and legitimate fear of this insanely belligerent government they do nothing. These are they most disgraceful and fearful times in this countries history. Thank you, Mr. Nadar for being a ray of hope for us little people. You are and should always be recognized as a True American Hero.
When will you all comprehend? I’ve sent hundreds of emails day after day. I’ve made almost as many calls. I’ve participated in protests carrying “IMPEACH BUSH” signs.
Cindy Sheehan showed up in DC with an impeachment petition bearing the signatures of A MILLION American citizens and was PUT IN JAIL!
IT’S TOO LATE!
If you stop to think about it, it’s been too late for a long time. When the 2000 election was stolen, people took to the streets in protest. Nothing happened.
During the run-up to the invasion and occupation of Iraq, MILLIONS of people, WORLDWIDE, took to the streets in protest. Nothing happened.
With the stealing of the 2000 election a point of no return was crossed.
With the false flag of 911 and the murder of American citizens by their own government the fate of our nation and probably the human race was sealed.
Next month, with the annexation of Canada and Mexico, America will cease to exist and the North American Union will be born.
The machinery of total, global military domination has been set in motion.
No amount of emails, phone calls, people yapping on the Internet or peace marches are going to stop it.
No political party is going to stop it.
The American people are obviously not going to stop it.
I seriously doubt that anything will.
relayer@q.com
Ralph’s campaign in 2000 was a courageous attempt to ’speak truth to power’ and it was not responsible for Gore’s “losing” the election, as Greg Palast’s research has pointed out. Gore won.
This disastrous administration has pressed to the limit whatever prerogatives it enjoys (and some it doesn’t), without any sense of restraint, decorum, proportion. High-handedly firing nine (9!) U.S. Attorneys for being insufficiently zealous in implementing the Bushies’ political agenda, then justifying it by noting that these members of the Justice Department serve “at the pleasure of the president,” is a case in point. For too long, Democrats have been content to make a token show of “standing up” to this administration. That’s not enough. This thuggish, arrogant administration must be knocked down. It’s time for impeachment.
Robert Settgast:You hit the nail on the head-the fool’s who voted for the moron, the criminal Supreme’s who broke the law and installed him and the gutless congrass are all to blame.This most corrupt administration should have been IMPEACHED long ago.
I used to say that Dems are spineless. But now I have changed my mind. May be what they are doing is just what they really want to do. So my new motto is:
Democrats = Bush-enabler
That’s what they have been doing since 2000. Remember this, when you interact with any Democratic representative, and when you contemplate voting in 2008.
Democrats = Bush-enabler
Impeaching an unpopular fascist dictator so the oligarchy can replace him with a more popular fascist seems counterproductive. At least Bush serves to wake people up.
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/video_popups/pop_vid_impeachment1-2.html
According to John Nichols of the Nation magazine, “Impeachment isn’t a constitutional crisis. It’s a cure for a constitutional crisis” and “The Founders said monarchical behavior — the behavior of a king, acting like one — is an impeachable offense. You need not look for specific laws or statutes. What you need to look for is a pattern of behavior that says the presidency is superior not merely to Congress but to the laws of the land — to the rule of law.”
Using Campaign Spending Limits to Get America Better Politicians is the Only Way to Solve America’s Problems Enough
Thank you Mr. Nader, a TRUE American hero! I am so tired of those who do NOT have their facts straight still tyring to blame Nader for Bush being handed the presidency! Don’t you think if they managed to marginalize LEGAL Black voters, and get their henchmen to alter the counts, they would have had a plan for the votes that went to Nader? They had the machinery of the Florida state vote in place (nothing like a brother waiting in the wings, and a well financed machine behind him) and a willingly complicit court.
Robert Settgast: It’s true the court is responsible, and the castigation would hold for those voters who voted on the basis of what they TOOK to be true. We cannot presume that because we have the wit and fortitude in this forum to question the “usual sources” of info, that average Americans, particularly those raised to respect “authority” do likewise. I am not excusing ignorance entirely, but I do feel that many might have had good intentions or voted differently HAD THEY been given the truth! We know that the elections are smoke and mirrors. No one brought up the Bush family participation in the S & L scam; and Bush’s Texas record as governor was largely under the MSM radar. The FIX was in! And still is! I thank Nader for spending most moments of his time on earth acting as watchdog to the very corporations that have gutted this nation, its treasury, constitution and civil liberties under the guise of a political pay per view (i.e. lobby system).
The question, “what are they afraid of?” is a good one.
Are these Democrats (and some Republicans) being threatened?
Are they being victimized/influenced by Mafioso tactics?
How can we ever know?
I think that some people who oppose Nader are actually afraid. So they speak out against Nader because they are afraid of speaking out against the supposed democratic party because they don’t want to face the reality that the true betrayal will come (and has come) from the democrats.
And other liberals who speak out against Nader are protecting their pocket because they don’t want to ’sacrifice’ anything to achieve justice. But if we are going to have less wars, we are going have to ‘want’ less material goods. Yes, Virginia, you don’t have a god-given right to an SUV, 3 television sets, 2 cordless phones, a cell phone, a laptop, 2 cars, a 2,000 sq. foot house. All this comes at the expense of someone else’s misfortune.
Even Kucinich (whose values I admire) withdrew from the last presidential primary to show his loyalty with the democratic party rather than peace, truth, and justice.
Chosing between the republicans and the democrats is like asking ‘do you want your ass fucked, or do you want to get fucked in the ass.’ Either way, you’re fucked.
It’s sad that mainstream America fails to support and recognize what Nader is doing, what Cindy Sheehan is doing, and what the thousands of other people are doing.
Embrace fairness and justice, no matter who it comes from. And unfortunately, as of this moment, it is not coming from the Democratic party leadership.
Don’t Fear Nader - http://www.wordsareimportant.com/nader.htm
peace, justice, and human rights for all.
sungoddess (3:01 pm) - the theory that Democrats are being “threatened” is frequently put forward by those who haven’t paid careful attention to political analysis in the past, but are now (understandably) becoming alarmed. These people wrongly & naively assume that the Dems are “our friends” and/or “the lesser evil.” They are therefore astonished when they start paying close attention, & realize that the Dems actually offer zero serious opposition to the Bush depredations (& in fact, that the Dems often actively facilitate these outrages).
The theory that they’re “being threatened” is naive. The truth is much grimmer: the Democrats’ real function in the political system is to falsely & dishonestly posture as the “party of the common man,” while actually serving the same corporatist interests as the Republicans. The Democrats are intrinsically two-faced. They are Judases.
You ask, How can we ever know? If you read the real history & analysis, by writers like Chomsky, Parenti, Zinn, Wm Blum, or the WSWS, you can easily learn the explanation of these things. It’s not a mystery.
Soundchaser,
you’re probably right.
no-one in elected office is going to stop the war or impeach bush. (hillary will say what she needs to say to get elected, and then proceed to keep bases in iraq for her entire administration)
the democrats for the most share responsibility for the war.
those who voted against the war did not exhibit the courage and tenacity to effectively air the truth about the war.
the system is broken.
this is not a democracy anymore;we have the symbols and veneer of a democracy, but its all theatre.
what runs the system is money.
the providers of that money are overwhelmingly, corporations.
our representatives say what we want to hear in public but in reality they dance to the tune of their corporate masters.
we have to get the corrupting influence of money completely out of the system.
publicly financed elections - or nothing changes…
QUOTE:
sjc_1 July 28th, 2007 1:44 pm,
If you had not run your vain, futile attempt at a campaign in 2000, we probably would not be in the mess at all!
END QUOTE
We would not be in this mess if Al Gore had not run a pathetic campaign and had not acted like a wet doily during the so-called “debates” where he let Bush walk all over him.
The pathetic Dems seem unable to take any responsibility for their own miserable failures. It’s always somebody else who is to blame. That’s the same strategy the Repugs use. So in that area, the Dems and the Repugs are the same too!
We would not be in this mess if Gore had not conceded to a stolen election and his useless party gave their powder to the Repugs at that time and they have been Bush-Enablers ever since.
I don’t understand this thinking where The People should not vote for the candidate they feel is the best choice, which for many people was Ralph Nader.
According to you, people were wrong to vote their conscience. Instead, they should limit themselves and keep spinning their wheels in this damn rut called the dismal one-party system with 2 right wings.
The RNC can control their senators by withholding funding during reelection time or doing a Wellstone on them. However I also think they have used extortion on the democrats to prevent impeachment. Maybe a promise not to bomb Iran or declare martial law. Or else a promise to run the most incompetent slate of presidential candidates so a democrat will easily win the presidency. Or a promise not to destroy the economy by crashing the dollar. Maybe no dirty tricks. In the end if this is true, then the democrats are as corrupt as the republicans and are just the other side of the same coin.
erma: I think it was troll bait. I had no doubts against Nader back in ‘00 and I think more and more people are coming to see how very correct he was.
One could blame Nader with more ammunition if idealistic progressives had a Gore-Kucinich or Gore-Wellstone ticket. But Gore’s pick of Lieberman spoke volumes — Lieberman has come out of the closet for what he is. Did Gore have any voice whatsoever in the selection of his running mate? Would Lieberman have orchestrated Gore from the “no branch” VP office in the way that Cheney somewhat orchestrates Shrub?
angrydem,
Are you aware that last week the Senate voted 97-0 (that includes Bush-Enabler Dems) to give Bush the go ahead to attack Iran.
And the Dem koolaid drinkers STILL insist there’s a difference between the so-called “two parties.”
One day when people finally are able to see the Dems for who and what they truly are as opposed to what people wish they were, many people will see that we do indeed have a one-party system rather than this charade they call a “two party system.”
They are indeed one in the same and that is why impeachment is not going to happen and is scoffed at by the Bush-Enablers. They are not about to impeach two of their own people…Bush/Cheney and the very people they have been helping since 2000.
To me, it’s as clear as day. But to those in denial who are still drinking the Dems’ koolaid they say:
the Dems don’t have a spine, they need to grow a spine, they are afraid… and other such nonsense.
No, the Dems have a remarkably strong spine…for helping Bush/Cheney and the Repugs. They posture with their theatre as some supposed “opposition” on occasion to dupe the pathetic and gullible Dem koolaid drinkers who are still clinging on to them and sending them $$$, I bet. In some cases the Dem koolaid drinkers are sending money to a millionaire politician! Why would anyone send money to a millionaire? DUH. What a bunch of sad people.
as much as nader is a voice of sanity in these troubling times, do not forget that nader supported the clinton impeachment.
I remember arguing with a friend of mine who voted for Nader in 2000. I was ready to hit him in the face! Then the Democrats co-operated with Bush for the next 8 years, just like they were on his payroll. They had at least 40 Senators every second of every day from 2000 to now, and they could have blocked every one of Bush’s criminal enterprises. Instead they did nothing.
As a party, the Democrats have no reason for being. They aren’t a labor party, they aren’t a peace party, they aren’t a party for social justice. Hillary and Obama are all about Hillary and Obama… “We really really want to be President, and we’re a little better than Bush.” Edwards occasionally makes a noise about social justice, but when he campaigned with Kerry, it all went away. Gore is happy to have his big fat face back on TV, long after his 8 years a Vice-President, when he did absolutely nothing for the environment, and carbon emissions increased 12% during the Clinton-Gore term. So what? Global warming wasn’t a hot-button issue in 1992, and it wouldn’t make you $100 million for rehashing old news in a movie. An inconvenient truth? Back when it was really inconvenient, Gore ran away from it along with all the rest of his corporate sponsors.
The Democrats have no firm conviction about anything.
Flush those bums down the toilet of history!
It’s Richard M. Nixos, not Richard K. Nixon. otherwise, impeach.
Nader is honest to the point of being a bad politician, and a tremendous asset to the country.
He’s a shining beacon of why our so-called representative Government is in bad need of redesign, from the ground up. Outdated, corrupt, bought and sold, a dangerous vehicle in need of complete reengineering for the safety of the world.
By the way, charming speaking style aside, Clinton was despicable. NAFTA, various bad legislation, so called reform, indifference and punishment for working, middle class America, A “newer” democrat, working for his corporate masters. It was only when he stepped on their feet, that he was punished.
It turns out that in real life, the thing to do to best protect one’s values may differ depending on the context. Life is complicated like that. I voted for Nader too, but no way Bush was going to carry NJ. Had I lived in Florida, I would have voted for Gore, because that vote better reflected my values in that swing state.
So I disagree with sjc_1, only to the extent that it wasn’t so much Nader’s fault, it was the people in the swing state of Florida who voted for him that put the margin close enough for Bush to steal it with all those other nefarious means.
Add 90,000 votes to Gore’s column in FL and all the things Bush did to steal it would have been way overwhelmed and Gore would have won outright and incontestable, and we all would have averted this global catastrophe. So let’s not diminish those folks’ accountability with the line of reasoning that Bush did this and Bush did that. Of course he did, but if we had those votes, we would have defeated his attempt to steal the election. We can only control what we can control, and that’s how we cast our vote.
The lesson to be learned is that if you live in a swing state, don’t be screwing around throwing your vote away just to make a statement. Sadly, it looks like we’ll never learn our lesson.
Hey, I’m not a big fan of Democrats either, but I can face facts. We would be living in such a radically different and better world if it wasn’t for those 90,000 votes it’s heartbreaking to think about.
So let’s not do that again — please. Unless of course you’d like it this way for another eight years.
“citizen1 July 28th, 2007 2:41 pm
I used to say that Dems are spineless. But now I have changed my mind. May be what they are doing is just what they really want to do. So my new motto is:
Democrats = Bush-enabler
That’s what they have been doing since 2000. Remember this, when you interact with any Democratic representative, and when you contemplate voting in 2008.
Democrats = Bush-enabler”
Perhaps they are both. They enable Bush to do what they are too spineless to do
http://mecawi.org/Sept.%2029%20Call.html
I’ll see you in DC.
Bladerunner July 28th, 2007 4:51 pm
National Strike. Red, White and Blue Flu. September 10th and 11th. Call in sick, take vacation time. Maybe the car won’t start. And no one buys gas! Buy your gas beforehand. Take public transportation. If no one buys gas for 2 days, and there are enough job slow downs and stoppage. Maybe the Media will take notice. And this is completely passive. Sure beats signing another petition. Or calling your Congressperson for the 100′th time, begging them to please do something. Here’s our chance as American’s to do something by doing nothing!
GREAT IDEA. LET’S GET ORGANIZED. SPREAD THE WORD
Great article, If Al Gore hadn’t taken all those votes away from Ralph in 2000, we wouldn’t be in the mess today, and I’m not being ironic or sarcastic, I’m being very positive.
What about another run for the presidency, Mr. Nader, only you can save us from Hitlery, Obummer, Adolf Giuliani and Mitwit Romney.
Trippin; “If Gore had those 90,000 votes, he would have won”. The fact is that Gore did win.
I have no doubt that if there was no question about Florida, it would have been something else.
Bush was going to win that election one way or another. I will always believe that Nader is
one of the real heros in a country that doesn’t have many heros anymore.
General strike! Here here!
Because the Congress has stopped representing ‘The People’
it’s time to
Remove Our Consent
“This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing Government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it.”
–Abraham Lincoln
First Inaugural Address
Ya gotta love that Red White and Blue Flu! Yeah baby!
sjc_1 (1:44 pm ) writes, “Ralph, If you had not run your vain, futile attempt at a campaign in 2000, we probably would not be in the mess at all!” // Remarks like these are valuable in illuminating the mind of the Dem Party loyalist. They help us see why the Democrats themselves cannot be trusted.
Anyone reading Nader’s article, or just paying attention to the last 6 years, should recognize that the overarching role of the Democratic Party has been as enablers & facilitators of Bush. They are the fake opposition. They’ve been 100% complicit in every outrage, either actively or passively. They haven’t fought against a single one of Bush’s crimes, & instead have made the crimes much more difficult for the American public to perceive clearly.
On top of all this, they now lie to us and claim that they haven’t stopped the war because “they don’t have the votes.” Many fine articles, such as those by Dave Lindorff & David Swanson, make perfectly clear that the Dems could have cut off the war funding in May simply by refusing to pass any bill that gives Bush the money. They could have done this without a single Republican vote. In the House, they only need a simple majority (51%) to block anything they want. In the Senate, they only need 41 votes to filibuster anything they really want to stop.
The entire performance of the Democrats since the stolen election has exposed the real political character of the Democrats. They are enablers of criminals. (Pelosi herself is a bulwark of Bush-Cheney’s defense against impeachment.) They don’t oppose preemptive war, torture, spying on Americans, or dismantling of the Constitution. They don’t call Bush out on his lies. Not only do they lack the character to stand up to the forces behind Bush, they don’t even have the guts to call out these forces by name! Have you ever heard big-name Democrats assailing the military industrial complex, or arguing that corporate power has become grotesquely excessive?
Dem Party loyalists like sjc_1 would have us reject voices like Nader’s (who was prescient enough to see that the Dems were becoming Republican-Lite), & put our trust instead in gangster-enablers who won’t even defend the Constitution or impeach the thugs in the White House. The absurdity of this viewpoint speaks for itself.
But Rudyjo, I’m not disputing that Gore won. I’m saying that with those 90,000 votes he not only would have won, he would have actually become President.
Dear Ralphie, You are NOT in any position to talk about who the Dems are dancing with! Your past HUGE deals/ dances (2000 & 2004) with the enemy give you NO room to talk!!
Other then that, I think we have all agreed about impeachment and war crimes for the last couple of years, your words are not new.
Words, as you know, are useless when there is a majority of angry citizens who take NO real action what so ever … just blogging their life away. If they vote Dem … we will see change, if they screw the vote … the way you did … we will see more of the same.
Why aren’t you telling people to get out in the streets and DO SOMETHING!!
If there are two million or more marching on Washington in September I will change my tune …
PS … RichM - I’m always amazed by your kind of convoluted imaginings. Never dealing with the facts .. just hoping to convince someone of YOUR truths?? Why aren’t you posting on pub sites?? Is it because all you pubs sound alike and you won’t get heard?
Trippin: I too come from a “non-swing” state, so your statement is true. It did not matter that I voted, my state was secure (in this case for the Democratic Party). But…that does not say the same will hold true in 2008…so everyone needs to stay aware of the political winds, if there is a presidential election.
As too a national action, ex-Vietnam war resisters know what the power was during those times. But now, with the media, Mainstream or not, controlled the way it is, even if we brought two million people to DC, it would be a one day story, with s sensational arrest sidebar, and if Lindsay Lohan got busted, the demonstration would end up on page 7, and the third item on the evening news.
Saying this does not say it should not be done, but as many have said in this thread, don’t put too much stock in the outcome.
Paddy Chayefsky had it right over 30 years ago:
Howard Bealle (NETWORK -1976):
“You’re beginning to believe the illusions we’re spinning here, you’re beginning to believe that the tube is reality and your own lives are unreal.”
“Right now, there is a whole, an entire generation that never knew anything that didn’t come out of this tube. This tube is the gospel, the ultimate revelation; this tube can make or break presidents, popes, prime ministers; this tube is the most awesome goddamn propaganda force in the whole godless world, and woe is us if it ever falls into the hands of the wrong people…”
“And when [only seven companies] in the world controls the most awesome goddamn propaganda force in the whole godless world, who knows what shit will be peddled for truth…?”
In the sixties, when we marched, when we protested, we got ink, we got TV time, we got high profile people to represent us. Please tell me it CAN happen again.
I wonder how many people walk away from an unfavorable Supreme Court ruling declaring that they will: “Take this to a higher authority!”
Brother Bush was the Florida governor, calling all of the shots. The Supreme Court ruled. So what is a visionary to do? Walk away with some dignity, knowing a lost cause when he sees one.
Al Gore’s choice of Lieberman for VP was very unfortunate, however, Al Gore knows better than anyone that the only power a VP has is in the rare Senate tie-breaker. VP’s are chosen mainly for campaign strategy based on geography or to supposedly balance the President in some way.
Al Gore really wanted to lead the world and prevent impending doom. You don’t become President (at least in 2000) by appearing radical. Moderation is key for anyone serious about winning an election. Had Gore been elected, he would have educated people about the environment and we would have seen real change. Modern Presidents never really educate the public; they just hurl rhetoric. As President, Al Gore would have convinced Americans to embrace environmental reforms.
Nader was able to be the dream candidate for progressives because he doesn’t worry about winning. He could say anything he wanted to. He was outside of the political fray so he was spared the inevitable taint. He has a taint now, however, and it’s a big one. He caused George Bush. In an election that pitted, say, Hillary against Guilliani, it wouldn’t matter if Nader ran, because there isn’t much difference there. There is a huge difference between Gore and Bush, too obvious to describe.
Despite all of the spin Greg Palast has placed on the 2000 election, if Nader hadn’t entered, Al Gore would have won. I have to say, I am baffled at how proud the Nader voters seem of their decision. There is no time for a protest vote. I am terrified that Nader will Third Party us into doomed elections over and over.
George Bush is a disaster, but he is truly ignorant and delusional. Ralph Nader knew exactly what he was doing in 2000. Plenty of people begged him not to run, none of them from the Right Wing.
Nader needs to apoligize for his role in the 2000 election and for his claim that Bush and Gore are the same. His name is mud until then.
It’ll be curious to see who Hillary picks as running mate. Someone far out in right field no doubt. Obama’s pick will be interesting too. If his running mate needs to be (how do I say it?) neocon kosher, then we’ll know — beyond any doubt — that the selection of candidates in the Democratic Party is a top-down thing.
jstevens: Come now. Gore was a centrist who picked perhaps the most right-wing democrat for VP. A dual-national (arguably an Israeli first), later rejected by his own party, and the guy who wants to essentially instigate WWIII in the mideast. Gore’s VP choice was miserable — and we knew it back then. How did he so terribly miscalculate? Had he picked Wellstone (also Jewish, though no neocon) or Kucinich, perhaps Gore might have deserved more of the “liberal” vote, though I can’t say he’s “progressive”.
But his VP choice pegged him for what he was — no friend of progressives. And so there’s no wrong that Nader committed. Why should progressives be compelled to vote for a center-right ticket?
gabi July 28th, 2007 5:08 pm
“You are NOT in any position to talk about who the Dems are dancing with! …”
What’s wrong with facts?
Who held hands with the Republicans to punish the League of Women Voters in order to exclude other voices?
Who joined Republicans in passing the USAPATRIOT Act?
Who joined Republicans in passing the Iraq War Resolution (IWR)?
Who rolled over for toxic Republican judicial appointments?
Who cooperated in funding our illegal invasion and continues to do so to this day?
Who joined hands with Republicans in a 97-0 vote designed to pave the way for a possible attack on Iran?
Whose complicity with Republican malfeasance extends well beyond this list?
There’s only one answer, and you are advocating for it.
I find RichM much more cogent and far less likely to stoop to the personal attack like yours.
For goodness’ sake, try to add something constructive.
BaltoCaveMan,
“Even if two million marched it would only be a one day story ??”
What the H kind of reasoning is this ??
… Two million or more people in DC would shut it down … and get noticed by those who pay attention in DC.
It would say loud and clear … “We are still damn mad and getting madder”
You poo poo the idea because of “the outcome” (who knows what the “outcome” will be?) but that is just a lousy excuses used by those who never march. All those non active hypocrites who do NOTHING but gripe.
Then you go on and quote “Network” … What do you think “Network” was all about … staying in the apt/house and quietly posting your life away ?? NO, it was about opening your window, going out in the streets and shouting ….
“I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore”
That’s what Paddy was saying/ doing!!
Trippen; I really wonder if as you say, Gore would have become president. As we now know,
Bush and his buddies have no respect for the law. I’m saying that if they didn’t get away with
stealing the votes in Florida, they had a plan B and a plan C ready to go to make sure that one
way or another, they were going to win. By the way, I’m reading Gore’s book, The assault on Reason. You would think it was written by Noam Chomsky and not the Gore who was once V.P.,I highly recommend it, he really says it like it is.
Pelosi talked about being in love with Bush? First I have to endure the image of sex with Wolfowitz and now George? Both are disgusting; both the image and the possible outcomes.
Seriousprofessor -
Might be a good idea for you to read a post before responding to it. The Dems did not write this article - the Dems did not make a remark about who nader is dancing with … I have EVERY right to call nader on his hypocrisy !
Your attack on me for calling out Rich is questionable - I’m sure he has a “voice” of his own!!
For goodness sake, perhaps you should be doing something more constructive.
THANK YOU, GABI!!!
If I implied that people (myself included) should sit in their homes on Sept. 29th, then I did not say what I meant well. Two million, hell three million should join me in DC!
What I unsuccessfuly wanted to imply was “tree falling in the forest”, as what happened three years ago, when almost a half million people showed up in DC. I cried when no one really heard much about it, except on forums like this.
SEPT 29 - be one one of 3,000,000!
Thank you Balto … I’ll be there, and if everyone who is “madder then hell” is there, we will rock this country.
If the Europeans can do it … we can!
We did it before ..long ago ..we can do it again!!
Paul Bramscher–I agree. Wellstone would have been an excellent choice for VP. But.. Gore wrote a very left-wing book about the environment and felt compelled to show how moderate he was ever since. He was also, I believe very upset by the Monica Lewinsky debacle, and felt it would reflect on him. Lieberman was, if I remember correctly, the only Democrat to speak out vehemently against Clinton for the affair . In the strange world of campaign strategy, he looked like a good idea to Gore as a result. The VP has no real power, so it is a forgiveable sin in my book. We would have all been in trouble if something happened to Al, and Lieberman took over, but really about the same amount of trouble that we are in now with George. But the VP taking over for the President is a long shot. Bush becoming President is a reality–a tragedy that the self-righteous Mr. Nader could have prevented. Al Gore wanted so much to be President because he has a real passion to save the world. He was trying really hard to get to that top spot so he could have real power. Power hungry individuals are often dispicable, but in Mr. Gore’s case, he realizes that no one else will address global warming. No one else presents a chance for saving the world from environmental disaster. It’s complicated, it’’s global, it’s immediate, it’s everything. Who can prevent it if not Al Gore?
gabi July 28th, 2007 5:59 pm
“Seriousprofessor -
Might be a good idea for you to read a post before responding to it.”
Oh, spare me the phony umbrage. Lest we forget, your objection was to Nader having a voice, based on your hypocritical underlying assumption which I have debunked. I’m not surprised that you don’t like it, but your continuing in the personal vein is a non-sequitur, which is no response at all.
Maybe if your party didn’t consistently join hands with the Republicans, of which I provided several awful examples, you wouldn’t need cheap maneuvers and condescencion (you know: talking down to people).
Those who condemn Nader for having run are fascist morons, there’s no way to sugar coat it. For openers, who the hell are they to tell who should or should not run for office? This is still a democracy.
Democrats and Republicans are two rotten pieces of the same cloth, if this recently elected majority in congress is not proof enough, nothing else is. Dems are enabling and protecting Bush, they just gave him even more money for the war, they just gave him a green light to invade Iran and the cretins are still not over Nader. If only Gore had won his own home state, Tennessee. Instead he picked war monger scum Lieberman as his running mate, which should’ve immediately raised a red flag.
Nader’s article is pointing out the flawed logic behind many in the House and Senate. And he’s challenging the reader to look to the future. What are we going to next time? Good question.
—————————————-
anyway. On Nader and elections and if he stole my lunch money….
Rather than try to argue against subjective reasoning and/or “going on my gut” sensibility, I’ll just offer folks a research article worth reading. You’ll have to pay for the article online in pdf, or you’ll have to go down to the stacks at your local college library or public library.
Abstract and link below:
American Politics Research, Vol. 33, No. 5, 672-699 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/1532673X04272431
© 2005 SAGE Publications
Ralph Nader’s Campaign Strategy in the 2000 U.S. Presidential Election
Barry C. Burden
Harvard University
Those observing the 2000 presidential campaign agreed that Ralph Nader could not win the presidency but disagreed about his actual strategy. Many Democrats contended that he was playing the role of “spoiler” in an attempt to attract attention or affect the election outcome. Others argued that he was trying to earn 5% of the popular vote to secure matching funds for the Green Party in the next presidential election. Count models find that Nader’s travel schedule, unlike Gore’s, was unresponsive to the closeness of the major-party race. Nader’s appearances were driven primarily by opportunities for attracting a large number of voters, suggesting that earning 5% was indeed a central campaign goal. Data on television advertising produce a parallel result. This finding resolves an ongoing debate about Nader in particular, but also points to broader differences between major and minor-party campaign strategies.
http://apr.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/33/5/672
It is better to fail in originality than to succeed in imitation.
Herman Melville
Yes, Rudyjo, maybe that would have happened. And indeed, had we seen the Al Gore we see today back then, things would have been different.
But as I say, all we can control is what we can control. My observation that Gore would have been President with those Nader votes is based on the outcome we know, that’s true. Of course, we can hypothesize all sorts of possibilities, but at some point we have to look at real consequences for real voting decisions as well. Ninety thousand more votes are incrementally harder to steal once you’ve already stolen so many.
More importantly, in the next election, it would be a true tragedy if we threw up our hands, said the Republican candidate is a criminal anyhow so they’re going to steal the election, so might as well hand it over to them in the interest of sending somebody a message they aren’t going to hear anyhow. I don’t think the planet can take another four years of these policies, and that’s precisely what will result. This distresses me greatly.
The time to get candidates to reflect our values is now — during the primaries. Once the die is cast and a candidate is chosen, states that are safe are fine to cast protest votes. But if swing state voters choose third parties out of a sense of purity of ideology instead of common sense, we’re done for.
I don’t like it one bit either, but that’s what we’re facing. If I were in charge there would be no electoral college, and financing of elections would be public. The equation of money and speech erroneously made by our Supreme Court would be rescinded.
Alas, we have to play the cards we’re dealt as best we can. The consequences of not doing so are obvious with each passing day. We shouldn’t be giving ourselves a pass for past failings, we should correct them. The entire world is depending on us.
Trippen; We may disagree on some things, but one of the things Gore tries to drill home is that if there
is going to be democracy in this country, the most important thing that is going to insure it
is what we are doing right now, using the internet to spred ideas, we have no control over what
“News” we get from corporate owned TV, radio, and newspapers, but as long as us regular people
can use the internet, there is still hope.
Right on!
Ralph is always right!
That’s why he is not president….
Let’s not criticize the US citizens. They don’t have the information. Seven corporations own the mainstream media and theirs is an act of omission by not letting the information out the Iraqi war and the criminal offenses of the Bush administration.Thus, there is no counter to Limbaugh and FOX network. The real order of business is to pass a law breaking the monopoly of the seven corporations so that competition can bring the news to the Amerian people. Our blogs are a voice in the wilderness.
Chimpeach!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sometime before the 2006 “election” Pelosi made it clear that “impeachment was off the table.”
Well, the Dem koolaid drinkers didn’t want to believe that. They said she was just saying that to “play the game” to fool/dupe the Repugs. Yeah, uh huh.
I swear, the Bush-Enabling Dems really have some wishful-thinking, delusional people supporting them….still.
I (and a few others) told the Dem koolaid drinkers before the “election” that Pelosi was absolutely serious. She was NOT just saying that.
So the Dem koolaid drinkers began to call me every now under the sun including the most common term used on the Internet, “troll.”
It looks like Erma was correct, as well as a few other realists who were saying the exact same thing I was saying. All it takes is to look at things realistically rather than what you WISH would be the case.
I’ve noticed in other threads on here that the wishful-thinking Dem koolaid drinkers can’t stand to hear the words of a realists because we “rain on their impotent parade.” They prefer to live in their wishful-thinking world so they call us realists such terms as “defeatists” and “bitter, isolated and impotent triumphalism” and other such hot air nonsense. Fine.
At least we realists are not disappointed time and time again like you wishful-thinking Dem koolaid drinkers who have these “high hopes” and expections for this dead-ass Dem party of yours which is not going to do anything but to continue enabling Bush. Period. I expect nothing positive from the Dems whatsoever—based on their miserable performance since 2000—so I’m never disappointed, in that sense.
One wonders how much longer you thick-headed, delusional people will continue drinking your Dem koolaid?
How is that koolaid serving you at this point?…since impeachment ain’t about to happen. Your beloved Dems are not about to impeach the very people they have been enabling/helping since 2000. They are not going to impeach one of their own. Get a clue.
QUOTE:
fbelcast July 28th, 2007 8:58 pm
Let’s not criticize the US citizens. They don’t have the information.
END QUOTE
I will never condone or excuse ignorance as you are doing. If people don’t have “the information” it’s because they don’t want it and what kind of pathetic example of a citizen is that? The “information” is there and available if one truly wants it. Having little or no interest in politics to begin with has been my experience with most people I’ve tried to talk with about politics.
This is the argument.
Both President Bush and V/P Cheney are highly suspect of committing impeachable crimes. To date, only one, Dennis K, has initiated the impeachment process. Congressman Conyers refuses to act upon that bill. One man is holding up the legal process for impeachment.
Why? Bought off, ignorant, afraid, disagreees, has been asked ot sit on it by someone inpower?___ We don’t know why!
Our Constitution is the SUPREME law of the land. That statement is unarguable.
If our Constitution is not the supreme law of the land, then there is no law in America.
Our Constitution clearly states: If the president-vice president, violate the law, they SHALL be impeached. It does not read they may be, or might be, or could be. It states__ they SHALL be.
As of right now, along with President Bush, Vice President Cheney to name two, Congressman Conyers is also guilty of breaking the supreme law of the land, by his refusal to begin the impeachment process.
Conyers states, there are not enough votes.
It matters not if he thinks that, he will not know unlesss he enacts the bill and puts it up for vote. The hearings will begin, witnesses will be supeoned to testify, under oath, before congress. The national press will have to cover the proceedings and the public, the congress, the whole world, will learn the truth.
Therefore, with one individual playing god and refusing to obey the SUPREME law of the land, we the people, suffer the consequences.
There is no reason why one of the members of congress, cannot rightfully and legally, force the issue with Conyers and have him arrested for breaking the law. One should go to a federal judge and ask to have the required legal papers drawn up to have Conyers charged and arrested, if he refuses to comply with the long established supreme laws of our treasured Constitution.
That is the end of the argument. Well, my argument. I submit the written Constitution of The United States of America, as a legal reference to support my case and argument.
If anyone disagrees, they SHALL be cursed.
If,___ Mr. Ralph Nader, being a respected lawyer, would answer the above argument and argue the legalities I will listen. Should Ralph Nader disagree and explain why I am wrong, I will lift the curse of any who may have been cursed__ and curse myself.
I voted for Ralph Nader in 2000, and don’t regret it at all, not for one second. If Ralph runs next year, my vote goes to him again. As an ex-Democrat, there are Democrats in some districts worth voting for, but by and large, they are joined at the hip with the Republicans.
The polls say 65-70% of America wants the illegal occupation of Iraq to end and bring ALL U.S. troops home, then why not the same percentage of voters casting their ballot next year for the Green Party candidate or if Ralph runs as an independent voting for him? If the majority of the public really wants to end this never ending act of legalized murder, aka war, then vote to reject the two-party duopoly. Not only the Iraq debacle, but every detrimental bill the Congress passed for their secret buddy, Bush/Cheney, (they have to be linked together-Bush and his brain ) has to be repealed, for starters.
Special thanks for comments by SoundChaser,SeriousProfessor, RichM, PaulBramscher,common_sense,Dr. Zimmerman Roberts, bladerunner,BaneRichter,rocky,JacobFreeze,erma,malestrom, and siouxrose.
SoundChaser hit the bullseye when he correctly stated what most or all of us have done these past few years and the situation is actually worse. Why? Even massive rallys when we march in unison for several hours is a constructive form of street theater, and the war-mongers watch us on C-SPAN and joke with each other about our inability to effect change. Why? Because they havn’t been inconvenienced.
Can you IMAGINE the POWER that WE THE PEOPLE, citizens of this/our country have if we first VISUALIZE, then take ACTION by coordinating a GENERAL STRIKE by working people. And I mean everybody, not just trade unionists (which I am), but even non-union workers, professional white-collar types, farm workers, et cetera. We will lose money, but that is a small price to pay for restoring the democracy being eliminated by the Bush Crime Family (republican) with the help of the Democrats . Unless we take immediate ACTION, things will deteriorate and you’ll be posting additional comments such as the ones above.
TAKE TO THE STREETS, WITHHOLD OUR LABOR, until we correct what is wrong in this country.
Information re: impeachment.
http://www.impeachbush.org/site/PageServer
QUOTE:
KEM PATRICK July 28th, 2007 9:20 pm
Our Constitution is the SUPREME law of the land. That statement is unarguable.
If our Constitution is not the supreme law of the land, then there is no law in America.
END QUOTE
Well Kem, the US Constitution is supposed to be the law of the land but the reality is that there is little US Constitution remaining because the Bush-Enabling Dems (including Boxer, Kerry, Feinstein, Biden, Hillary) voted “Yes” for the USAPATRIOT ACT. The USAPATRIOT ACT shreds the US Constitution. That’s why I refer to anyone who voted “YES” for this as a Traitor to the US Constitution.
There is apparently no law in the States now which applies to George W Bush and Dick Cheney, in part, because Sam “I believe in the concept of the Unitary Executive” Alito was put on the Supreme Court by the Dems voting “Yes” for him. George W Bush, in recent speeches referred to “MY government.”
This is part of the reason why I say we are just an inch away from a full-blown dictatorship because Bush/Cheney think they are above the law. They ignore congress without any consequences, ignore subpoenaes without any consequences and have essentially dissolved congress, though not officially so.
RUDYJO: I agree with your point about the election being fixed with plan A, B, and C. Nader was the obvious fall guy.
FBELCAST: The issue you raise as per media is a decisive one. ERMA with all due respect, there are 2 points I’d like to make with respect to the onus being placed on all citizens to educate themselves. First, some people work 2 or more jobs, have young children, bad marriages, etc. Their lives are SHEER chaos, and not indirectly because of policies being enacted by corporations to make their lives (on the verge of poverty) miserable. Second, this forum probably attracts a “better class of intellect” than most; and with that being said, it’s somewhat elitist for us to presume that average Americans even REALIZE the degree to which they are being lied to. I have friends who think I am just being contrary when I tell them CNN is nothing more than (as Bill C Davis once put it) the equivalent of “Generals, on stage!” It might as well be choreographed BY the military industrial complex.
I highly recommend “Conservatives without Conscience” by John Dean because it identifies a sizable segment of the US population that has been trained not unlike Pavlov’s dogs to follow rules. This type of mindset is insidious and grows in the fertile soil of fundamentally religious Bible belt sectors. If you live in a city with a university then you have a limited idea what these types of communities are like. I have lived in many places and one cannot diminish the role community plays in the cues, beliefs and contradictions that normalize many lives.
Well Erma, I fully understand your comments.
Buttt__ officially, the Constitution IS still the SUPREME law of the land.
And officially, Conyers is the only person who is stopping the legal process. He is guilty of a crime and should be arrested and charged with the crime.
I voted for Nader when he ran.
It will take alot more than just impeachment. Nixon and Clinton still have presidential libraries built in thier names. How about that for salt in the American taxpayers wound? Any the irony of a Bush library? What will be in it, a portrait and marble statue of him and NO books?
If he wants to visit a library, perhaps it should be the one at Leavenworth. Maybe they have graphic novels he can look at.
Siouxrose,
I understand all that you said. I live in San Francisco but have relatives who live in the Bay Area suburbs as well as out in “the sticks” of Virginia.
My experience is that people are tuning-out politics. Since 2000 after Bush was selected, I have tried to gently inform people in conversation of what’s going on and their responses to me have been:
“Oh that can’t be true…I haven’t heard that. Where do you get your information?….Do you believe everything you read on the Internet?” and other patronising crap. They do their very best to pooh-pooh what I say and to make me look like I’m a nut. And if I try to explain anything in detail well then I get glazed eyes and yawns and then comes the question: Erma, do you ever have any fun in your life? No ULR link is ever sufficient (unless it comes from Faux News). And by the way the person who asked me if I ever have any fun in my life has never heard of John Bolton or Cindy Sheehan. My definition of “fun” and that other person’s definition of “fun” are two different definitions. So you’re right, most of this nation is in a deep fog due to the Bush State Media (a.k.a. corporate media). The people I’m talking about even go so far as to make the Internet appear to be only about “pornography” and “lurking child predators.”
Sigh.
There is either little interest in politics or there is flat-out denial and it doesn’t matter (from my experience) whether the person lives in the City or out in the sticks. The reaction is the same, unfortunately.
So when I hear some so-called “liberal” talk show host say, “people are waking up” I have to ask: Where? To me, I see the opposite happening. More tuning out.
jstevens: The VP has quite a bit of power — able to cast a tie-breaking vote in the senate, and Cheney has pushed the office into its own 4th branch of government. But most importantly, the VP is next in line. It’s clear that LBJ was a man of extraordinary power, and would have had the opportunity — and no motive not to — to fully investigate the Kennedy assassination. No reason not to, that is, unless he had something to do with it.
I’d have been scared witless to have Lieberman as a VP running mate, listening to the guy advocating a new war. Killing thousands of people, spending millions of dollars, etc. All preemptively, against a country which poses NO THREAT to the USA. It’s a form of psychosis. If I were Gore, I’d have to have a special Secret Service detail to watch my back whenever a VP like that was around… BTW: This theory isn’t mine, someone else here posted it in relation to another article, and I think it is something to ponder very carefully. The VP isn’t a powerless position. It’s potentially massively pivotal. Gore’s choice as Lieberman was off-base. I’d have been willing to take a chance and vote for a Gore-Wellstone or Gore-Kucinich ticket, but no overtures were made. And, hence, perhaps Gore deserved some of the orthodox Jewish community’s vote for his pick of Lieberman. But for progressive secular humanists, it was a clear message to go away. And, hence, it would have been arguably irrational to vote for Gore despite this.
Go, Ralphie, go! Well said, and much needed.
And for those who continue to blame Ralph Nader’s campaign for the Bush-Cheney regime, blame instead all those who did not vote at all, since they far outnumber those who cast a forlorn vote for Ralph, and since there is no evidence that those who voted third party would have cast votes at all were Ralph Nader not in the race. Blame instead, those who systematically shut out a large number of voters in 2000 in Florida and other places by illegally removing them from the voter rolls, by making unduly cumbersome and confusing ballots, by inadequate numbers of voting machines in high-minority, poorer areas, and by the refusal to allow a full recount to ever be completed before an out of control Supreme Court ruled to subvert the discovery of the will of the people.
Blame instead the factors that render our Constitution a puny and ineffective wisp of paper pitted against a government run of, by and for the Corporations.
That would be Richard M. (as in Milhouse, like Bart Simpson’s friend) Nixon, not Richard K. A little thing, perhaps, but little things will be used against us on the road to impeaching these thugs.
serious professor …
gee, you sound just like little bully boy bush when he’s challenged by the truth!
Sputter sputter sputter …
It’s sad to see Common Dreams turning into a Dem bashing pub site…. but don’t worry, if it is becoming a pub site nader will still be here writing articles. Many of you seem to forget his many “dances” with pub politicos. Not only at the time of Clinton’s impeachment, but also in 2000 and 2004.
To all of the Fakeocrats who continue to go after Ralph Nader with the same hatred and lack of intelligence the Republicans went after Clinton with
You’re the same sheep you damn the Republicans for being
You’ve been corporate played, corporate laid and politically slayed
You’ve allowed yourselves to become corporate pawns…and you hate us for not selling out the truth…like you did/do
Nader 2008
I’ve read every blog here twice. Am I incorrect about this?
If fifty million people marched on DC and peacefully, but firmly and loudly, demanded Bush and Cheney both be impeached, if Congressman Conyers refused to enact the bill,___ what difference would it make?
Isn’t Conyers the only man who is preventing the impeachment process to continue? Please someone___tell me if that is correct.
BTW, I like Nader too. I like Gore too. I like Kerry too. I like Mr. K also. I like Edwards too.___ So what? How do we impeach Bush and Gore if Conyers sits on the bill?
QUOTE:
gabi July 29th, 2007 12:55 am
It’s sad to see Common Dreams turning into a Dem bashing pub site….
END QUOTE
The truth hurts doesn’t it, Gabi? I’m glad to see a “progressive” website that FINALLY tells the truth about the worthless and useless Bush-Enabling Dems. It’s about time! By contrast, other so-called “progressive” forums are too often saturated with pathetic Dem apologists and excuse makers, trying to make excuse after excuse for the Dems’ mountain of failures and wearing blinders to all the “YES” votes the Dems have willingly given Bush/Cheney and the Repugs.
These days, only a Dem koolaid drinker in denial is STILL supporting these Bush-Enabling Traitors to the US Constitution. And that makes you (and other Dem koolaid drinkers) no better than they are because you are enabling The Enablers.
That’s been one of my chief worries about pinning everything on impeachment. In complex systems you often need to approach these things like a Gantt Chart. It turns out that the impeachment movement runs the risk of slowing absolutely everything else, even those which may not have the same dependencies, from moving forward.
Why not also promote secession? Article V as one other poster mentioned? And other ideas?
“I’d rather vote for what I want and not get it than vote for what I don’t want, and get it.” - Eugene Debs
Dem bashing–Secession–strike–Fakeocrats–sheep and pawns???
What we need maybe, is for almost all to bash our heads on a concrete block until our brains wake up and run out of our ears.
Is this string about how we can impeach Cheney/Bush? Or is this string about the mistakes made by Nader, Gore, Kerry, Clinton, Truman, or Mickey Mouse? I got lost here someplace. Of course at my age, I often get lost and sometimes forget when I’m in the bathroom why I went in there.
Never mind, it’s late and my head hurts from reading a lot of stupid shit that has nothing to do with the gist and purpose of the article.
“It’s all your fault Ralph, it’s all your fault Gore, it’s all your fault John Kerry, you shouldn’t have selected Lieberman and I hate Dems and I hate everything and I think, I think, I think”!!! __Who else fu###ed up.
How can we get the pick a pair impeached is the question??
Kem,
To me it was a given before the 2006 “election” that Bush/Cheney would not be impeached and it’s a given to me now that they will not be impeached.
To my understanding, Nancy Pelosi has to put “impeachment ON the table” before anything else can go forward. I can’t stand Pelosi and I’m in her district. I voted for her opponent Krissy Keefer of the Green Party. Pelosi is not about to put “impeachment ON the table.”
Therefore the topic of impeachment is moot. The Bush-Enabler Dems would rather let Bush/Cheney off the hook for all that they have done since 2000 and all the crimes they have committed, in part, because the Dems would be implicated in their crimes as well because they have been complicit with and enablers of Bush/Cheney.
“We” can’t get the pair impeached by the very people who are the pair’s Enablers. It just isn’t going to happen.
As I wrote in another post, Iraq and Afghanistan war-profiteer Feinstein was asked about impeachment recently on one of the talk show and she said impeachment isn’t going to happen because (I’m paraphrasing): the Dems would look like nuts if they were to try to impeach Bush/Cheney.
Some things are just not going to happen. Three that come to mind:
1. Impeachment - Won’t happen.
2. Getting rid of these easily-hackable electronic voting machines which are all over the nation now. - Won’t happen
3. Ending the US Middle East occupation and imperalistic goals of PNAC. - Won’t happen until the last drop of oil is extracted from the Middle East.
Erma.__ That is what a lot of people believe, but the bill is on Conyers desk and Pelosi can’t legally prevent him from putting the bill on the floor of congress for a vote. Naturally she has the power to scare him from acting on it. He is breaking the law by sitting on it. But, he will sit on it unless legal action is taken.
But will actionbe taken? Nope
I’m not going to bother to argue with the Dems about Nader, for whom I’ve voted every four years since 1996. The Dems strike me as something like religious fanatics.
Here’s the deal: I am not a Democrat so I have nothing to say about who Democrats choose as their presidential candidate in 2008. However, I will not vote for for warhawk Hillary in 2008, regardless.
I probably only represent about 5 percent of the voters, but in an era of 50-50 elections the Democrats need our 5 percent to win. So what will it be? If the Dems make the same mistake they made in 2004 — nominating a warmonger — they I will sit back and watch them lose. Change or die.
Lynn Porter
QUOTE:
lporter July 29th, 2007 3:48 am
I’m not going to bother to argue with the Dems about Nader, for whom I’ve voted every four years since 1996. The Dems strike me as something like religious fanatics.
END QUOTE
Lynn, interesting you should say that because for sometime I have referred to the party-line Dems as “fundamentalist Democrats” because they remind me of fundamentalist christians. If a candidate has a “D” behind their name, that’s good enough for them.
I heard a local “liberal” talk show host rattle off the many problems he has with Hillary. This host is one that I would term a “fundamentalist Democrat.” He’s always “rah, rah” Dems and rarely has any criticism of the Dems (just like fundamentalist christians feel they can’t criticize their church, their preacher or their god). Anyway, the other night this host said he would vote for Hillary if she’s the nominee. My question for him is: If Hillary had a “R” behind her name would you still vote for her? (I can guess that the answer to that is “no.”)
Also speaking of religious fanatics, not long ago it was Howard Dean and others who were speaking of “welcoming young evangelical christians into the Democratic fold.”
DNC chair Dean says party needs to invite young evangelical Christians
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/05/10/BAGD4POMP26.DTL
I think Edwards said that too if memory serves correctly.
I swear, these Dems get worse with every passing day.
The fundamental question for Pelosi: When should we impeach a president? Is it just when you want or when you should but don’t.
Paul Bramscher: I share your opinion about November 1963. The VP was incredibly nervous and distracted that day according to accounts I have read. You raise an interesting point, however, I don’t consider Lieberman, for all of his faults, in this category.
Lieberman was a terrible choice for Al Gore, but even if Lieberman became President, he would not be as bad as our current president. Attacking Iran would not even be on the table if we hadn’t invaded Iraq.
I imagine a very different world right now if Gore had won in 2000.
If one was to call me a Dem Party loyalist not having read my blog http://yourland.blogspot.com I’d call them ignorant. I don’t mean that pejoratively, I mean it constructively, because they are merely uninformed about the matter. They simply don’t know any better.
If they were to still call me a Dem Party loyalist after reading the blog, I’d call them a liar. The posts there stand for themselves, and have been standing there well in advance of this particular thread and all these sophomoric epithets. They’re there for all to see and to comment.
Finally, if one simply refuses to educate themselves and continues to perpetuate nonsense out of their own brand of tribal allegiance girded by a resolute ignorance of their own making, I’d call them a Republican, simply because they’d fit the profile to a “T.” Indeed, many Republicans were Nader contributors in 2004. Nader likely set a record for contributions received from people who had no intention of voting for him, contributions he scooped up greedily with no compunction about compromising his lofty values. To think the Republican Party, the party of dirty tricks, wouldn’t seed this blog with operatives is naive.
One would be a peculiarly belligerent fool to deny that the entire planet would be far better off had Al Gore become President in 2000, no matter how indistinguishable one asserts the parties to have been. With the benefit of hindsight, that assertion now seems preposterous. Our collective experience tells us that, in point of fact, the parties were indeed significantly and meaningfully different. They remain meaningfully different despite all the well-aired deficits of the Democrats, which incidentally I do agree with. This is coming from one who regularly refers to the two parties as two sides of the same tarnished coin.
But people of conscience must recognize that we simply cannot endure four more years of a Republican administration, no matter how much we despise the alternative.
Recognizing that doesn’t make a person a loyalist — it makes them a realist. We all have the benefit of a shared experience — no, a shared disaster — and all we need do is learn from it. To do that we must confront the world as it is, not avert our eyes because it disgusts us.
As I stated before, casting a vote to support your values is not an absolute, it is dependent on context. If you are in a swing state and throw away your vote against the Republican candidate, you may just as well join their party, because while you’re riding your high horse, they’re maintaining control to our collective peril. And like it or not you will be accountable for the consequences, as those 90,000 voters in Florida are directly accountable for the state of affairs we’re in today.
It’s not Nader’s fault: it’s our fault.
Will you Nader bashers please just get over it already??? What a bunch of crying, whining, buck-passing little children. Just shut up about it. Seriously, blaming Democracy, your blaming the people who actually had an original thought and voted for someone with actual integrity, is getting morbidly tedious. Think for yourselves for a change.
ERMA: I’d like to talk about the issue of people turning off the FACTS of life. The culture is dominated by a marketplace media that instructs on the RIGHT to have, to purchase, and to purportedly BE happy. MANY studies link stress to illness. A great many people are deflecting the stress that is so much a part of modern life by zoning out as you have stated. I feel saturated in every pore with what’s going on, and naturally like to discuss these things with people. Part is the wish to make sure they are IN the know, and part (although it’s largely satisfied in this forum) the desire for meaningful, engaging (is anyone alive out there?!) feedback. I, too, have met the responses you describe. A very intelligent woman friend who is well-traveled has asked me NOT to discuss these things in her home. She says “it’s just some karma playing out.” Her selfish indifference to what our nation is doing to LIVING human beings blows my mind! Another friend, overwhelmed by personal family issues brought on by an irresponsible daughter who’s left the parenting to her, asks me “How can you LIVE with what you know?” So these people have adapted their own “ostrich” measures as a means to maintain sanity in a world gone amok. I call it the Jeffrey Dahmer incredulity factor. As I’ve related before in this forum, when police knocked on the serial killer’s door because the stench of rotting HUMAN flesh overwhelmed his neigbhors, Mr. Glib (serial killers as sociopaths are quite good at appearing calm and natural while the rest of us go off on REAL emotions) managed to convince the investigating officer he had merely burned a pot roast.
I don’t think people are necessarily equipped to stare at the abyss ahead. It’s far easier to eat the junk food, watch some mind DULLING TV show, and pretend your tax dollars will pay “the usual suspects” to fix the matter. This culture of convenience is coming to a halt real soon, whether Mother Nature, our economy, implosion from within (political controls) or without occur. Madness is only tolerated so long by the higher powers that be.
Good Morning! Man, reading this thread is like a Woodstock moment: don’t you people ever sleep? Your health is more important than Nader, the Dems, the Repubs, koolaid, Fundamentalist whatevers…etc etc etc. That being said, the overnights provided a rare gem and proof to all of us that what ever democracy is, it still exists:
It came from emma at 1:13 this morning, and with the new day it is the reason to have hope: Commondreamers can still agree, still be unafraid to post and discuss as rational human beings, still argue fine points and yet stay united over major goals.
I say, it is Sunday Morning in America, we’ve discussed this all night, get up, get out of bed, get away from your keyboard, open the door, welcome the day and then, let’s meet again l8r, and see if anyone, like commondreamers have anything new to add or are involved in constructive discussion and critical thinking. Live your life, care for yourself and in that way, care for all of us.
NotOneMore posted:
“I’d rather vote for what I want and not get it than vote for what I don’t want, and get it.” - Eugene Debs
EXACTLY!
Please tell me, where is our present day Eugene Debs? We need you. Please come forward and lead us in our struggle for peace and justice!
The 2000 & 2004 elections showed that our system is broken.
After every election since JFK (all I can remember) someone says we must fix it, no one ever does. Why? Because it is the system that put them in power. Don’t rock the boat mentality. The electoral college needs a overhaul, if not eradication. 48 states have a winner take all policy, this I believe is unconstitutional, but I’m not a lawyer and never get a reponse when i bring this up, I have read the document though and it has guidelines as to what should take place when there are voting irregularities all made moot by the winner take all policy. That same policy leads to redistricting and voting manipulation, third party entries futile,and facism possible.
Nader could have been sharing recipes with us and the Democrats would still find a way to attack him for the 2000 election.
Eugene Debs and/or Gandhi could be you or be hiding in here:
http://www.progressivegovernment.org/
A Strike has been called and is being organized - join or support the Encampment:
http://mecawi.org/Sept.%2029%20Call.html
Composure, focus, solidarity, action - faith - the arc of Justice always bends toward Truth.
Fellow Citizens of this World of Ours. You have thought enough ,heard enough and seen enough. Save your energy, your own, your food and survival. This insanity has gone on for long enough - it is beyond the realms of religion and politics. Face them or we all perish in death or as slaves - to their amusement and massive profit.
sjc_1: You apparently are another one those ditto-heads who believe don’t know how to read, for if you did know how to read, or at least how to read critically, you would know, as does anyone who did a few hours of research, that Nader did not in fact give the election to Bush, Bush gave the election to Bush. Wake up! Voting machines, expunging voter rolls, “hanging chads”, law-breaking legislators in Florida and Ohio, and on and on, are the ones that gave this election to Bush. Add to that the mindless Supreme Court ruling, and it is an air-tight case. Wake up! Read the evidence.
You people piss me off to no end!
Our present day Eugene Debs et. al. are here, but they can’t run for President, because their history is such that they probably smoked pot, snorted coke, dropped acid, and marched at pro-immigration protests. Sorry folks, those who are the real speakers of the truth - those unafraid of throwing their bodies upon the cogs of the machine that has ruined our lives - are not going to run for the Presidency in the country. At least not until the whole system comes crashing down around our feet. Only when we are charged with rebuilding everything from the ground up will the truth seekers and soothsayers find acceptance in the political machine of the United States.
puck twain: Thanks for posting those web sites. I was impressed with the bottom one and the various progressives in that group.
Last November, at a Greenfest in San Francisco, I talked to Tom Hayden about pulling all of our troops out within thirty days rather than a year which Tom suggested in an article he wrote about six months before, reminding him that by 1968, LBJ, the Pentagon, the future president (Nixon), and members of Congress knew we couln’t win in South Vietnam, as the Vietnamese people were determined to rid their country of the American invaders, but “stayed the course”, and 20,000 more GI’s were killed and thousands more maimed, and God knows how many Vietnamese (we don”t count em’) were killed needlessly. We withdrew, the planet didn’t fall off it’s axis, and now we have sweatshops over there so the capitalist class can make even more money.
Mike Gravel was right when he said the troops died in vain! For What?
The country of Iraq is for the Iraqi people, and they will prevail.
I keep looking for concrete things ‘to do’.
I will let everyone I know about the Red, White, Blue Strike..but no one will notice if we don’t go to work..we are mostly retired..but we can not buy anything at all..gas, food, etc. Let’s add that if it is not already there.
I’m still placing my time and energy with Kucinich.
Impeach HR333 It will happen, I have known it all along. I just hope it is before November 2008.
As much as impeaching the president and vice-president may put many of our minds t