The meeting at the Jones Library in Amherst, Massachusetts on July 5, 2007 was anything but routine. Seated before Cong. John Olver (D-MA) were twenty seasoned citizens from over a dozen municipalities in this First Congressional District which embraces the lovely Berkshire Hills.
The subject-impeachment of George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney.
The request-that Cong. Olver join the impeachment drive in Congress.
More than just opinion was being conveyed to Cong. Olver, a then 70 year old Massachusetts liberal with a Ph.D. in chemistry from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. These Americans voted overwhelmingly during formal annual town meetings in 14 towns and two cities in the First District endorsing resolutions to impeach the President and Vice President.
Presented in the form of petitions to be sent to the Congress, the approving citizenry cited at least four “high crimes and misdemeanors.”
They included the initiation of the Iraq war based on defrauding the public and intentionally misleading the Congress, spying on Americans without judicial authorization, committing the torture of prisoners in violation of both federal law and the U.N. Torture Convention and the Geneva Convention, and stripping American citizens of their Constitutional rights by jailing them indefinitely without charges and without access to legal counsel or even an opportunity to challenge their imprisonment in a court of law.
Forty towns in Vermont and the State Senate had already presented their Congressional delegation with similar petitions.
Impeachment advocates reported the results to Cong. Olver from each town meeting. Leverett’s vote was 339-1; Great Barrington was 100-3. No vote in any of the towns or cities was less than a two-third majority “yes” in favor of impeachment, according to long-time activist, Atty. Robert Feuer of Stockbridge, Mass.
With three fourths of reports completed Cong. Olver, who voted against the war, raised his hand and said, “Spare me, I know full well the overwhelming majority of my constituency is in favor of impeachment.” He then told them he would not sign on to any impeachment resolution whether against Bush or against Cheney (H.Res. 333 introduced by Cong. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH)). He was quite adamant.
In taking this unrepresentative position, Rep. Olver’s position was identical to that of the House Democratic leadership and many of his Democratic colleagues.
The Democratic Party line on impeachment is that Bush and Cheney are the most impeachable White House duo in American history (they believe this privately). The Democrats do not want to distract attention from their legislative agenda, and need Republican votes for passage. Moreover, they do not have the votes to obtain the requisite two-thirds of the members present for conviction in the Senate.
Strangely, none of these excuses bothered Republicans when they impeached Bill Clinton in the House for lying under oath about sex and proceeded to a full trial in the Senate where they failed to get the required votes. Can Clinton’s “high crimes and misdemeanors” begin to compare with this White House crime wave?
The last question to Cong. Olver was from a young veteran back from Iraq and Afghanistan. “What could we possibly do to bring you around to our way of thinking,” he asked?
Cong. Olver’s response, after several seconds of silence, was “You have to prove to me that impeachment will not be counterproductive.”
Members of Congress should apply the same standard to themselves that they like to apply to members of the Executive and Judicial branches-namely to honor their oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. That Oath is supposed to transcend political calculations.
Maybe the Democrats think that Bush and Cheney are such wild and crazy guys that a serious impeachment drive in Congress would provoke the two draft-dodgers to launch a military emergency, strike Iran or otherwise generate a crisis, based on their continual fulminations about the “war on terror,” that would engulf the Democrats and throw them on the defensive for 2008.
In short, the Democrats may be viewing Bush and Cheney as being so defiantly, aggressively impeachable on so many counts as to be unimpeachable. That is, with the White House harboring so much political nitroglycerine, don’t even try to remove it.
Such a cowardly position would make quite a precedent for future Presidents who want to illegally elbow out the other two branches of government and our Constitution.
Ralph Nader is a consumer advocate, lawyer, and author. His most recent book is The Seventeen Traditions.
The Republicans were willing to go to any length to impeach and discredit a liberal, Bill Clinton. They did a terrible disservice to America by distracting nearly our entire country with Monica-gate at a time we all should have been focused on anti-terrorism. Then, they also failed to get a conviction. The whole darn thing failed.
I can’t prove it, but I’ve always believed we might have struck back much sooner at Al Qaida, and monitored more effectively, possibly even preventing 9/11, had the Republicans not insisted on grandstanding to the point of paralyzing President Clinton.
Although there is no doubt that a more meritorious case could be brought against George Bush and Dick Cheney, the Senate WILL NOT vote in a 2/3 majority to convict. They WILL NOT. The end result would be wasted time, and failure.
The “impeachment” needed and the one that can succeed is at the ballot box in November, 2008. There, it is possible for Republicans to be blown so far out of Washington control that they do not recover politically anytime this century. Every American can vote in that “impeachment”, not just the Senators. And it’s our privilege and duty to get it done. We can not only impeach men, we can impeach an entire philosophy of overpowered “executives”.
Just in from Yahoo news: Rice worried by Putin’s broad power.
Well I guess the bitch should know all about “broad Executive powers and what could happen as she has seen and been complicit in George Bush’s overextended Executive powers and the spin that keeps Congress from impeaching him.
If impeachment fails so what? At least we have shown the World that We the people do not approve of George Bush and perhaps it would “come to the point of paralyzing President Bush” which aint all that bad.
Thank you, Ralph, for great, common sense perspective on the impeachment issue. Political calculation is work that goes into developing a position. It PRECEDES the position taken. In this case, the position arose from fear, and what has been called political calculation is in fact nothing more than a weak attempt to justify the position. We did not elect representatives to Congress to engage in political calculation. We elected them to do the people’s work. People’s Job 1 is repudiating this rogue administration and holding it accountable for its crimes.
“You have to prove to me that impeachment will not be counterproductive.”
This is a demand to prove a negative.
How about the argument that if Bush/Cheney are busy defending themselves they won’t have the opportunity to do more damage around the world?
Ask the Congressman, with all due respect, to prove that keeping them in office won’t be counterproductive.
As if the last six years haven’t been proof enough.
Barn, just replace US for Russia, Congress for Duma and Vlad for George.
Do you think that Condi has any sense of irony?
MOSCOW - The Russian (US) government under Vladimir Putin (George W Bush) has amassed so much central authority that the power-grab may undermine Moscow’s(Washington’s) commitment to democracy, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Saturday.
“In any country, if you don’t have countervailing institutions, the power of any one president is problematic for democratic development,” Rice told reporters after meeting with human-rights activists.
“I think there is too much concentration of power in the Kremlin(White House). I have told the Russians(Americans) that. Everybody has doubts about the full independence of the judiciary. There are clearly questions about the independence of the electronic media and there are, I think, questions about the strength of the Duma(Congress),” said Rice, referring to the Russian parliament(Us congress).
What exactly does Rep. Olver mean by “counterproductive”? You won’t change his mind until you can draw him out and deal with his fears. There is a lot of stuff the Dem. leadership is not owning up to.
I think the Republicans got what they wanted with the Clinton Impeachment proceedings. Clinton was discredited. He became a negative for the Gore campaign when he should instead have helped Gore to a landslide. Even now, the prospect of Bill Clinton anywhere near the Whitehouse will cost Hillary votes.
The Impeachment of Cheney and/or Bush will bring into question and discussion every dirty deed the two have conspired on the country. This is a chance to pound nails into coffins for the far-right, the neo-cons, the war profiteers, etc.
But even if not for that; do it for the Constitution.
If no impeachment of them for this, then of whom ever for what?
Daniel David,
Elections are NOT IMPEACHMENT. They are the orderly product of political business as usual in a would-be democratic state. Impeachment was written into the Constitution to address precisely the extreme circumstances we now face - a runaway Executive, consolidating and abusing power and amassing disasterous results faster than the American people and their Congressional reps can track it. We ignore the consequences of leaving stand the Bush administration’s usurpation of power at our own and the world’s tremendous peril. We are far, far beyond the point where elections alone can solve the constitutional crisis we face. It’s not a bad dream from which Election 08 will awaken us, Daniel.
It’s a shame that the next question to Congressman Olver wasn’t “How could the public tell if an action was counter-productive?”
The Democratic Congress isn’t very productive now, with Republicans still propping up Bush’s policies and Bush vetoing worthwhile legislation?”
Why not impeach congressman olver? There must be some kind of action the constituents can take to remove him from office for not carrying out his sworn duties in office.
I would argue not that Clinton’s “crimes” were any more or less valorous than the current regime’s, but that Bush and Cheney’s crimes put us in immediate or continuing peril, and that’s the essential differentiation.
If you debate Clinton you will find yourself embroiled in endless arguments over morality and so forth, some of them having a sort of validity not worth really getting into here. In short, those arguments go nowhere.
We the people deserve this impeachment because without it we face the imminent possibility expressed here at Common Dreams and elsewhere, of being plunged into darker times than any of us have ever seen in our lifetimes. And that possibility is dreary.
The future is not about what the next president will do about the precedent being established at this moment in time, the future is about what is going on behind the scenes preparing us for the next few months. Impeachment is the only way to stop that, otherwise we are being rushed headlong to the slaughter. Of whom still remains somewhat obscure.
I do admire Mr. Nader!
Not only Bush and Cheney, but also Pelosy should be impeached. Actually almost the entire Congress should be impeached for having destroyed our democracy for ever.
(yes, I sound very pessimistic. But the only way out would be a revolution, which I not only not see coming. Even if it came that might destroy the entire world).
it was indeed strange how easily,barely a whimper over impeachment of clinton.all i can say is..keep on..keeping on..trying to hold the cloven hooves of bush and cheney,to the fire…the real problem is the’brotherhood’and their behemoth blueline.ordinary people are justifiably terrified of them….i hear that now the criteria for declaring any genocide as actual’genocide’will also be extemely daunting as to ’semantics’ it is a shame,but not surprising..when it comes to bush and cheney..impeachment would have been the one SANE act in a freak show…..i agree wholeheartedly with daniel david,elections are not impeachment !we still need to impeach and then some,now OR later..the status quo seems to be leaning in the direction of labling al gore the superhero..who will sweep in,clean up the mess the american people have made and wipe their butts,for them…truly pathetic..
There is no way the current players are going to try and impeach Bush. They know the political fallout will destroy their political futures. Even though it’s the right thing for America, it’s not the right thing for their political careers so they won’t do the right thing. Listen to what Secretary Rice had to say about the Armenian genocide resolution recently passed by Congress. “The Turkish government, I think, is trying to react responsibly. They recognize how hard we worked to prevent that vote from taking place”. This attitude shows complete contempt for the Democratic process.
Hoa binh
namvet,i beg to differ, their fallout would SECURE a political future.
dolkar,
Tell me where you’ll get the votes to convict in the Senate, and I’ll happily agree with you. I do know that elections are not the same as impeachment. I also know we can get a Democratic blowout in 2008 that can be progress, or we can lose both the trial and the election. Putting on a trial that has no chance of success–in the middle of a war—ain’t gonna fly.
The utter futility of it would likely cause defections of centrist (yes, there are such people) Democrats on the “patriotism” theme alone.
I don’t like Bush/Cheney either. But reality is reality. Where are those 67 votes?
Thank you, Ralph. I think you nailed this one. It may well be that a true democratic revolution lies ahead — but not yet.
I could imagine a new constitutional convention in 5-10 years. But first American’s would need to have a greater sense of moral revulsion and alarm regarding the weaknesses in the constitution. The weaknesses that actually allowed for a coup d’état to occur via the workings of our alleged democratic process.
This level of intensity of awareness and outrage could conceivably occur following further revelations of what actually took place under the umbrella of the current administration. Further revelations would likely include the deeds of previous administrations, both democrat and republican.
It may well be that, for the sake of our country and the world, it is necessary that impeachment not occur. More time must pass if the people are to gain greater sense of:
the vulnerabilities of our current system,
the potentially disastrous consequences of these loopholes,
And, the dangers of offering political power to individuals whose primary tools are deception and mendacity.
Perhaps, our “see no evil” illness must get worse before it gets better.
In the mind of a Democrat, “counterproductive” means “Democrats not winning elections.” This mindset is incapable of even comprehending the long-term damage done to US society by permitting criminals like Bush & Cheney to serve out their terms without the slightest hint of official rebuke. In fact, Bush & Cheney are not only NOT being “rebuked;” they are for all practical purposes leading without any opposition to speak of.
They have been extraordinarily successful. They’ve gotten their way on almost every issue. Almost no one dares to even speak against them, neither in the media (with the exception of Olbermann) nor in Congress. They’ve violated the Constitution blatantly, repeatedly and unapologetically — and no one has the guts to stand up against them.
The contemptible small-minded weasels of the Democratic Party can think only of “Will we win in 2008?” To them, it’s of no consequence that all the precedents set by Bush-Cheney will stand forever, available to all future White Houses as justifications for continuing the same exact criminal policies. We see clearly that Democrats are incapable of opposing Bush-Cheney; that they refuse to defend the Constitution when it’s defiled. Why should anyone believe they would behave differently in office? Their “top tier” candidates already told us they “can’t promise” to have US troops out of Iraq by 2013. This is an explicit admission that though the tone of the rhetoric may change, the policies of empire will continue, no matter who’s in the White House — for as far as the eye can see.
Impeachment is absolutely necessary in order to affirm the meaning, the legitimacy, and the potency of the Constitution. The logic behind seeing “impeachment” as “counter-productive” is terrifying. It demonstrates that this Congressman, and most of Congress, thinks that governance is about expediency, about “what is convenient for the moment,” rather than being founded on any enduring principles. This Congressman’s logic shows that he is as far from respecting the rule of law as Bush and Cheney.
I heard the author of a new book on the “Imperial Presidency” the other day on CSPAN (sorry, forgot the author, a reporter, I think, for the Boston Globe), who said he was surprised to hear so much talk about impeachment on the road on his book tour, because he barely ever heard it discussed within the beltway.
We are in the strange situation in this country where the “people” have more cognizance of the law than the supposed representatives running the government, who claim they are being “efficient.” Claims of efficiency and expediency scare me. They usually cloak dodging the law in the name of securing power. The Democratic party no longer has any identity other than as the “mini me” of Bush and Cheney. How shameful.
“Cong. Olver’s response, after several seconds of silence, was “You have to prove to me that impeachment will not be counterproductive.”
What is proof behond a doubt, is that their occupying the White House has been not only counterproductive to carry out their elected offices, but disasterous as well!
Daniel David,
“Tell me where you’ll get the votes to convict in the Senate, and I’ll happily agree with you.”
The Repugs have operated in secrecy in order to avoid evidence of crimes being brought to light. A public, televised trial in the Senate would either (a) change the votes of those determined to survive politically and (b) concentrate the political will in the citizens to remove from power all who do not vote to convict.
The reverse — waiting for votes to magically materialize BEFORE YOU ACT — is the absolute antithesis of political action. Act, and you change the balance of forces.
Once again, this is why Liberalism is a worthless philosophy of civic inertia.
pleasethink,
“he logic behind seeing “impeachment” as “counter-productive” is terrifying. It demonstrates that this Congressman, and most of Congress, thinks that governance is about expediency, about “what is convenient for the moment,” rather than being founded on any enduring principles. This Congressman’s logic shows that he is as far from respecting the rule of law as Bush and Cheney.”
An article elsewhere on CD brought to mind comparisons with the colonies’ attempt to seek redress from the Parliament. The ministers & MPs saw themselves as subject & instruments of royal power, though; and in the same way, our “Representatives”, without sayings so, share the belief that power stems from the presidency, and that convicting the holder of the office destroys their own power, and their own dream of holding the office itself in 16 months.
The Democrats started this nonsense back when they started pleading for “civility” towards Clinton SOLELY on the basis that he was president; and they continued it during the impeachment proceedings. Their aim throughout Clinton’s term was not to protect the Constitution, but to protect the person they had elected, and through that, their own positions in the cabinet & elsewhere in the government.
We are all proud that Ralph Nader told it like it is. However Ralph forgot to tell the people about snake in the puloit Jerry Farwell,Pat Robertson and Pat Pukecannon all supported him to pull votes away from Al Gore so that the nasty five on the axis court could make it easier to STEAL the election. Bushieboy and Darth Vader has never been elected to anything.
very poignant article.
for me impeachment and subsequent convictions are imperative.
for so many reasons, but none as important as this.
The Bush Crime Family that goes by so many names (NWO, Illuminati) have been the “shadow” forces behind our governmental policies since the early 1900’s. Its bona fide fact. It was the Bush business consortium that placed an ad in a California newspaper for a viable political candidate that was answered by none other than “Tricky Dick Nixon” yeah, Nixon was a Bush employee. but I digress. The force that they have had on our policies have been for their own monitary benefit and those like them around the world. And starting this war in Iraq is no exception. Impeachment and Conviction is imperative for restitution.
Restitution for the American people whose sons and daughters have been murdererd under the guise of legitimate confrontation. And back to my original digression the restitution of our collective American conscience over all the evil reigned down upon the world by the Bush Crime family. Who are by the way not satan as Dick Cheney would like you to believe in order to fear them, but nothing more than common organized crime punks and gutless cowardly thugs.
Actually, impeachment is the far more practical course, the one that will do the least damage.
If a Democratic candidate wins the presidency (and doesn’t have it stolen) and a Democratic House & Senate are seated, the international community needs to know that the new administration regards international laws & treaties as binding, and not as things subject to the whim of the chief executive.
Though I’m sure also that Democrats are hearing from those regimes which harbor ‘black sites’ in Europe — impeachment would draw those countries’ elected leaders into the Hague as well . . .
We may need to experience not just revulsion at the behavior of our “fearless leaders,” but disgust with ourselves as well.
As Americans (citizens of the U.S.A.) we don’t seem to be anywhere near the moment at which the people Demand Impeachment. If we, as citizens, were there — congress would, like it or not, have no choice but to move on it.
“In short, the Democrats may be viewing Bush and Cheney as being so defiantly, aggressively impeachable on so many counts as to be unimpeachable. That is, with the White House harboring so much political nitroglycerine, don’t even try to remove it.”
Or, rather, if the Democrats want to inherit this cache of nitroglycerine, the best plan is to let the clock run out on Cheneybush and win the White House themselves next year.
This is the familiar one-two punch of the one-party, Republicrat USA.
Hello;
I am a frequent reader of the webpage but a first-time participant. I would like to offer this as an explanation of the rationale of the Dem’s actions. It seems as though the Democratic reaction to the public’s questions about the “Price of Power” is to offer a position as the “Other of the two parties”, who have a plan to fix this mess. I don’t agree with this position and I don’t see any plan with which they would fight the war on terror or fix the economy or increse our security from within or without. I haven’t seen much of any National discussion on the MSM dealing with the What if’s ? except for those fringe politicians who would be willing to say or do anything to increase their positions at the polls come primary time.
You can bet that if any Congressman (or Woman), wanted to inform the public about their interest in accusing or making charges they would be in commitee right now for the very same reasons that we as a public have expressed recently.
I feel that the political process that holds elections instead of solving our political problems IS NOT dealing with us fairly. I Read and Write my elected National Representatives frequently about these political problems and I get the “Thank You for your Response” answer, No other response. I am not expecting a response , all I’m saying is that the participatory level of exchange within the community has taken on more expensive avenues for discussion, (Contributions to Political Parties), in order to be heard at all. MY point is that it seems as though we have already reached an overstaed point of our conversation. Words no longer mean anything to the political opposition. They, (The Exexcutive Branch) do not believe in the participatory nature of the political process “The art of compromise”, they are using more subtle methods than discussion to make their point and for those of us who engage in these discussions to hope for a response to these and other questions from “them” either by political policy objectives or just by friendly converstion are going to be continually frustrated and hung up.
ROFLOL!!!!!!!
The Democrats are saying they don’t want impeachment to distract from their legislative agenda? What agenda? They ain’t doing squat. So far their ‘legislative agenda’ consists of 1)protecting big pharma from overseas sales, 2) protecting the money that funds the war and making sure it gets through uncut, 3)protecting Bush tax cuts and making sure there are no attempts to reverse them, and 4)protecting Bush ability to spy on Americans and expanding it upon request.
If you read the Democrats ‘legislative agenda’ as the fact that they really defend and push the Republican agenda, then yeah … I guess I can see where impeachment might detract from that.
zoya,
“Or, rather, if the Democrats want to inherit this cache of nitroglycerine, the best plan is to let the clock run out on Cheneybush and win the White House themselves next year.”
A few years ago, when a football team trying to protect a lead went into a defensive pattern call the “prevent defense”, the commentator said, “The only thing the Prevent Defense does for its team is prevent you from winning.”
The polls show the Democrats are proving this true in politics, by strategies that have made the Congress even less popular than the war criminals they refuse to impeach.
Impeach the Democrats too!
As some comedian on TV put it …. There are more people out there who believe Elvis is alive than who think the Democrats are doing a good job.
Hello;
I want to ask if anyone in the CD blogsphere if you would like to ask the elected leaders to speak for us. My Question to my two Senators and my U.S. Congress Rep. were intended to query the response as Would you initiate the impeachment process we are asking for? or do I have to come down there and do it myself?
The activists should have been ready for the congressman’s response. They should have said to Olver, “We thought you might say that. In response, we are withdrawing our support from the Democratic Party until it grows a spine. We will work for, support, and vote for only third party candidates from now on. Now go along, little feller, and f*** yourself. This meeting is over.”
The impeachment of Clinton was over a ’safe’ subject. A BJ = personal morality (I know he lied under oath but it was about a BJ).
Our politicians do not want to set a precedent by initiating impeachment of fellow politicians over something so ‘unsafe’ as a politician’s performance while in office or for corruption, malfeasance and lying us into war of his choice, warrantless wiretaps and other unconstitutional offenses.
As I say, such proceedings could set a precedent which could see our politicians held to such standards themselves. At present, our Congress (most) apparently believes that their malfeasance, corruption and incompetence should not be a bar to their reelection. An impeachment fight would cause the fossilized semi-permanent elite who believe this is their government (if not ours) and only they should be in it… to break ranks. The status quo does not break ranks.
We need to boot out as many of this old guard do nothing enablers of Bush in the 08 elections as possible. That is if we would save our democracy. They do what they wish (instead of what their constituents wish) because they have rigged the game in favor of themselves and do not fear losing their positions except to possibly another approved insider to the other side. That is the game. Breaking ranks? Them? Seems not.
We need to elect as many new people to Congress in 08 as possible to break this fossilized buddy buddy clique if we want them to represent us instead of themselves. New people would have less interest in keeping the seniority system of chairs etc. intact. They’d owe less and could do more. We need NEW people in government. Heck Nader may not have made it to the oval office but why doesn’t he run for Congress? Sombody who has America’s best interest at heart should. To many in thois old guard Congress have only their interests in heart… just like it always has been. Does somebody else notice we have a semi-permanent group running things? Even when they aren’t elected they appoint each other to high positions. Cheney has been around since Nixon/ford days. So was Rumsfeld and others in different appointed positions.
We better get new people in 08 or it’ll be too late to undo so much of what Bush has done. Save our democracy in 08. Get rid of as many of those who have failed it and us.
Hello;
I would like to offer a response to
pleasethink October 13th, 2007 3:25 pm
who mentions John Dean when he refers to an interview on Cspan he saw and credited him with the authorship of the upcoming “Imperial Presidency”.
hman,
“I feel that the political process that holds elections instead of solving our political problems IS NOT dealing with us fairly. I Read and Write my elected National Representatives frequently about these political problems and I get the “Thank You for your Response” answer, No other response. I am not expecting a response , all I’m saying is that the participatory level of exchange within the community has taken on more expensive avenues for discussion, (Contributions to Political Parties), in order to be heard at all. MY point is that it seems as though we have already reached an overstaed point of our conversation. Words no longer mean anything to the political opposition”
Yes — words, in an elective context, have become nothing but advertisements. Break out of the ad-box, and what you say, no matter how substantive, is indecipherable. As Rachel Maddow pointed out a few days ago, the journalists & political consultants script everything; step outside the script, and the interviewer or the interviewee have no idea what to say or where to go.
If your representive or senator doesn’t do as the voters requested and voted for, then they themselves are in violation of the constitution. whether the votes are there or not is not the question, the politician does as his constiuancy wants or he’s not re-elected and he’s nothing more than a traitor to his country. If every crime was judged by a few people who think because they won’t get a conviction that the criminal shouldn’t be subject to a trial and his peers decide if he’s guilty or not then that politician should resign if he has any honor or integrity inside his body. but we already know the answer. all politicians are crooks and have no honor integrity and certainly don’t deserve respect.
I know impeachment should be done, should have been done, but wasn’t done, and now with all the thumb-twiddling, won’t be done. There is no time, and with Republicans and the Administration stonewalling mightily (”how dare the Democrats pull a political stunt like this–don’t they know there is a war on?), it will be impossible for the House to conduct impeachment hearings, let alone a vote, before November 2008. So forget it. I hate it, but I understand why it’s no longer possible to impeach.
Would that we had something as simple as a vote of no-confidence, which would force elections now instead of a year from now. Or what if we the people could have a recall election, like California did? Although I thought it was a flawed process engineered by a small group of Conservatives, why can’t a small group of Progressives do the same thing?
“Rice pledges support to Russian activists”
America pledged support for Kurdish activivts…
America pledged support for Hungarian activists…
And so it goes.
JFK put missiles next to the USSR resulting in the Cuban Missile Crisis. A heartbeat away from a nuclear exchange.
Bush/Rice insist on putting missiles next to Russia… Are we ’safer’ now?
And so it goes. Hidebound christians jousting at windmills. Idiots! Valhalla ends when the Ice Giants win. Read your (other) scripture George or you and Dick may be the next ones chained to the roots of Yagdrasil causing earthquakes for eternity.
from Hman;
Thank you dichterfreund for response.
I would thank Mr. Nader especially for this and many posts that have enriched myself and many other readers of these discussions. Your interest and your objectivity help us to share ideas with each other. The Purpose of discussion by nature. Thank You.
By forcing the senate republicans to vote to acquit obvious criminals, who have violated their oaths of office, the constitution, numerous federal and international laws, and in countless other ways damaged this country, all people on earth, and the environment, in ways that will take decades to recover from, the spineless democrats get to run against these busheney traitors.
Counterproductive, see this from Ralph Nader, and you will get an idea what he may have meant.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIO-tCPSfHA
A congressman was quoted by Nader on his response why he would not support impeachment when that is what his constituents want.
Paraphrasing a bit, “If we were to impeach the president, he would attack Iran, declare a state of emergency, impose martial law, and suspend the 2008 elections”
I have heard of others who expressed the fears of another 9/11 attack as well should we proceed with impeachment.
Anthrax, right wing terrorism (Army of God), 9/11 (those buildings were charged people), add them all together, and you got a terrorized Congress and MSM. That in a nutshell is the only plausible explanation why there is no impeachment or any serious public debate about what really happened on 9/11.
As Ralph said in the clip, “Things are worse than I thought”
*Members of Congress should…. honor their oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. That Oath is supposed to transcend political calculations.*
Say it louder, Ralph!
Nader showed admirable restraint by not hitting the arrogant Cong. Volver in the face with a rotten tomato. If I were him confronted by such intransigence I’d begin right away to formulate a recall proceedure to throw the Tory bastard out.
Public “servants” do not take an oath to defend the Constitution when and if it is politically expedient, but whenever and however the Constitution is being violated.
Everybody’s a political consultant these days and rarely does a representative act on principle, and just as rarely do voters vote on principle.
Except for me, of course. I voted Nader because he was saying, like he has always said, the things I like to hear. I didn’t give a shit if my vote detracted from Gore’s tally and I wasn’t making political calculations. I voted my conscience. I felt good about it and it’s too damn bad our two party system doesn’t provide for the conscience-driven voter, but is designed instead for political calculators.
Our public life is populated by moral cowards, but to be fair to the cowards, they are also subjected to unprecedented political intimidation and old fashioned criminal extortion.
When and if records of NSA/CIA/DIA, etc, domestic surveillance ever come to light, we will learn the extent to which this “war on terror” is a cover for political dirty tricks and gestapo tactics. People in public life are the primary targets of domestic surveillance. Cong Volver is likely less concerned about the political consequences of acting on principle than he is about revelations of the skeletons in his closet. He’d probably like to act on principle because it would surely bolster his re-election chances, which have diminished considerably as a result of his unprincipled stand.
Take that to the bank.
An impeachment would be limited to Constitutional issues and highly politicized. What America and the world needs is a full (non-politicized) vetting of the truth. An international inquiry into the facts which are international in their scope can only be accomplished by an inappropriately charged international body, at an appropriate time, under appropriate circumstances. Impediments (legal impediments, etceteras) to the truth, have been created and continue to be created in United States and internationally; action is needed to prevent disruption and disbarment of the truth. We need to see beyond ourselves, beyond the moment, beyond punishment, beyond empowerment; we need to see the truth; then we will have a chance of preventing a recurrence or worse; then we’ll be able to see and act on our responsibilities to the rest of the world; then and only then will we recover the friendship of the world that we had after 9/11 and lost shortly thereafter.
Welcome hman,
We routinely solve problems here at Common Dreams that Congress will never solve; keep your seatbelt on while you read and don’t have any fluids in your mouth.
Just a reminder, the Senate didn’t have nearly the votes to remove Richard Nixon before impeachment hearings began either.
Of course, bringing up criminal charges only AFTER you KNOW you have a jury that will convict would be considered insanity in this culture (for good reason, innocent until PROVEN guilty) but I guess it’s a valid strategy when you’re dealing with crimes like megamurder (mega as in the greek root, meaning 1,000,000) torture, gross negligence leading to many deaths and billions of dollars in needed resources wasted… Yeah, for that you need a conviction before the trial begins.
Some seem to think that if evidence was aired in a trial then Republican Senators would become ashamed and behave like newby impartial jurors—voting to convict on the evidence.
Nothing could be further from reality. Republican Senators are already quite familiar and comfortable with “the truth”–in fact they’re complicit in it. They will vote their corporate constituencies in a trial just as they vote them every day in legislation.
The prospect of George Bush defending himself in a trial with “I have done my best to protect Americans from terrorism” and talk radio and FOX News defending him 24/7 from the “looney liberals” is frightening. It would be so flag-waving successful as to virtually ensure Republican successors in office for decades.
The problem with Naderites is that they’ve become so busy bashing Democrats that they have completely forgotten that a majority of voters are either moderate or conservative. Nancy Pelosi called impeachment off the table not because she’s spineless, but because she has a head attached to the top of the spine.
why, if clinton’s office sex was an impeachable offense is bush’s genocide of iraq not?
what does that say about our priorities?
if we could simply have an honest and complete accounting of the events of sept 11, 2001, we would unmask and uncover the faces of the people who caused that event to happen.
whoever and wherever they are.
be a patriot and demand an investigation.
then impeachment would be focussed on the reality of this moment.
we should be guided by the facts. we should expend the determination to do just that.
jack37: If no impeachment of them for this, then of whom ever for what?
that’s what i want to know.
Every one of you eager beavers should be investigating your own senators and representatives to figure out how you can have them removed from office if they won’t do as you want during their current term. Threatening them in the next electionw won’t work because they have MSM behind them. Find out if there is any legal way in your own state to remove recalcitrant representatives, and then get organized and get going! (Look at what happened to Grey Davis) We have enough corruption in all levels of government to get rid of nearly every mother’s one of them just on criminal charges alone - lean on your local lawyers. This is the only legal recourse that you now have - go for it - put up or shut up.
Personally, I’m extremely agitated and outraged at what’s been done to ‘our’ military - regular service, reserves, and guards - but nothing is going to change until we can scare representatives more than they can be frightened or bribed by hostile forces now occupying ‘our’ government. This is the real ‘grassroots’ problem - and it’s how the RightWingNuts took control in the first place. (Yeah, I’m a conservative - but not a RightWingNut.)
And for Pete’s sake, support guys like Ron Paul, Gravel, Nader, and anyone else fighting for YOUR SIDE - no matter what their political affiliation! Give until it hurts - because it’s going to hurt a lot more if you don’t.
I’m confused. What was being read in this clip, from two days ago?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIO-tCPSfHA
It chilled me to my core, watching that. But reading this, dated today, makes me wonder what he was reading from; it doesn’t appear that Olver actually said those things.
There aren’t too many individuals who could have prevented the criminalization of American government during the past 7 years, but Ralph Nader is one of them.
I don’t believe that he has even come close to apologizing for the gravity of his mistake in the summer of 2000 when he failed to acknowledge the danger of the extreme right and refused to stand with Americans who were aware of and working to prevent the catastrophe we now call the Bush Administration from happening. He was a key player in ushering in this darkest period of sustained government corruption and inhumanity American history.
I do agree, however, that working for Bush’s impeachment is the one and only thing Ralph should be putting his considerable energy for activism into now.
There appears to be some travel expense errors….impeach,impeach they cry.
The Republicans will move to impeach the very next Democratic President!!
How else can we say
“WE’RE MAD AS HELL AND WE AREN’T GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE.????
Impeach of course,We must,Sign petitions, tell your Senators and Represenatives.
As Ralph says ” Start a RUMBLE they can hear.”
Right on. Let’s also not forget the 250K Democrats in Florida who voted for Bush, The State of Tennessee, and all the other candidates who got several thousand votes in Florida. Also the supreme court should apologize for their part. It couldn’t possibly be that the fault would lie with the campaign itself.
Nader says it best himself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KV8shKupf2I
also see
http://www.cagreens.org/alameda/city/0803myth/myth.html
This coming from Ralph Nader? If he hadn’t run for president in 2000 we wouldn’t even be having this discussion!
Impeachment should of been on the table imediatlly after Bush’s first election, the fact that Americans just now seem to be waking up to the idea now that his second term is allmost over is beyond belief. The founding fathers must be rolling in there graves. This administration has taken the country for all it could since day one and only recentlly have you decided to “consider” impeachment, America is lost, and way beyond repair, as is evidenced by the fact that you cant figure out what the hell to do about the mess you are in. This administration stunk from the very begining, what happened to American revolutionists? what happened to “the land of the strong ,the free, and the brave”,?…. to busy watching what Paris, and Brittaney, are up to and sallivating over the goulish details of Ana Nicole’s demise, and seeing who gets kicked off Survivor next, to be concerned about the running [ruining] of there country. I would say you guys deserve whats coming at you for being so complacent. I mean just how bad does it have to get before you wake up and decide its maybe time to do something? I guess we will have to wait and see what happens to O.J. next before you get to the really mundane stuff. If the last 7 years were a movie noone would go to it and it would go right to video because its just to unbelievablly ludicrous. Democracy sounds like a good idea, it just dosent seem to work. Prove me wrong if you can, and good night America and good bye.
If Gore hadn’t stolen so many votes from Nader in 2000, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
Nader is right once again, except that Democrats are NOT cowards, they are mobsters, they are criminals. They belong in the Hague along with Bush and Cheney. In fact, they’re worse than Bush and Cheney, since they pretend to be on the side of the people while committing war crimes as horrible as the ones committed by Bush and Cheney.
DO NOT VOTE FOR A SINGLE DEMOCRAT IN 08. Vote for Sheehan, vote for the Dalai Lama, or just write your name on the ballot. BUT DO NOT VOTE DEMOCRATIC.
DEAR MR.RALPH NADER,WHAT IF THEY GAVE A VOTE AND NOBODY CAME ??THEN THEY COULD NOT LIE TO US ABOUT WHO WON !SHOULDNT WE BE DISCUSSING ‘BOYCOTT’BOYCOTTING THE NEXT ELECTION ?INSTEAD OF DISCUSSING WHOM WE WILL VOTE FOR ??
Blaming Nader for Gore’s losing used to piss me off, now it’s just boring. Nader speaks truth and has doggedly trudged thousands of miles over many, many, years warning about political and corporate misdeeds, corruption, lying and deception.
He continues to be proven correct, and if you Nader spoiler pansies would get over your self righteous nonsense and look at what is going on at this very moment you will realize what he has been talking about for the last 40 years.
BOYCOTT !!WE DEMAND THAT BUSH BE IMPEACHED AND THE TROOPS BROUGHT HOME,OR WE WILL NOT VOTE IN THEIR STUPID PRIMARYS OR ELECTION !!
IMAGINE THEY GAVE A VOTE AND NOBODY CAME !!
If we accept that we have really only one party, with two right wings, both committed to the interests and priorities of the imperialist US ruling establishment, then it becomes clear why the party cannot impeach its own. All other reason for the failure to impeach are secondary. We need a real, not bogus, opposition party that is committed to the interests of the people.
As unpleasant as it may be, it’s (impeachment) a necessary first step to bringing the Constitution back to “We the People”, as the Framers of that great document intended.
I’ve said it before in this forum, and I’ll repeat it again - the authors of our great Constitution never intended impeachment to be rare or extreme. It was meant to be used forcefully, and as often as necessary, to check the excesses of power, unchecked corruption, maliciousness, and inhumane actions and behavior of the executive, legislative, or judicial bodies of the federal government.
Conviction by the Senate may not be possible, given the bipartisan climate these days, but impeachment is “always on the table”. It’s a formal inquiry into the actions and intentions of the investigated party. By refusing to submit, to what the Constitution plainly places upon the House of Representatives of the United States, Ms. Pelosi is shirking her responsibilities to “We The People” and the oath she took to abide by, and uphold, the Constitution. Political reasons are not offered as respite from performing her Constitutional duties. Certainly Congressman Olver’s lame response of “You have to prove to me that impeachment will not be counterproductive”, before agreeing to sign-on to H.Res. 333 and following the will of his constituency, is not only incomprehensibly, but it’s an overt disregard for the Constitution that he, too, had taken an oath to uphold.
I’m sorry, Mr. Olver, but your reasoning is jaded and unacceptable.
whitewatersally October 14th, 2007 3:42 am
IMAGINE THEY GAVE A VOTE AND NOBODY CAME !!
spot on Sally.
I’ve been saying that for nigh on 40 years now.
or - no voting booths/machines - just a show of hands.
worried about anonimity?
everyone would be required to keep their blindfolds on.
All of the Democrats that believe that impeachment would be counterproductive should look at the recent poll numbers that show congressional approval ratings in the toilet at 11%. That is lower than Bush’s approval ratings and it isn’t just liberals that are putting them there. What is counterproductive is refusing to do anything about the Iraq war and the two criminals in the White House.
If the Democrats continue to refuse to do the will of the people they are the ones that will pay at the polls in 2008.
Lobo Gris
#
whitewatersally October 14th, 2007 3:18 am
“BOYCOTT !!WE DEMAND THAT BUSH BE IMPEACHED AND THE TROOPS BROUGHT HOME,OR WE WILL NOT VOTE IN THEIR STUPID PRIMARYS OR ELECTION !!”
The problem is Sally that some will vote and the politicians don’t care how low the vote count is as long as they are returned to office.
A much more productive strategy if I might suggest is to unregister as Democrats, re-register as independent, and then vote third party. Only when the Democrats lose elections because of their recalcitrance to do the will of the people will they begin to start to listen.
Lobo Gris
67 comments.
More than 90% of the CD’s stories.
Ralph……
We need you buddy.
There’s a void right now.
We know you had your nose bloodied twice.
But this is not a small league with a minor prize at stake.
What is at stake is nothing less but the freedom and liberty and survival of the planet!
I don’t think, Ralph, we could come up with bigger stakes if we tried.
Please, find the stamina that Reagan had.
Find the honor that old John Adams had.
Find the noble stature that George Washington had.
Find the dogmatism that Thomas Jefferson had.
You are right.
Run
Run
Run, before it’s to late, and the American Dream is all but extingished!
Please.
pacplyer
yeah, and i think citizens should “transcend political calculations” too, which is why i have no apologies for voting for nader over gore in 2000. so, right on ralph!
Canuckchuck, on your October 13th post about replacing US for Russia, Congress for Duma, and Vlad for George. Someone once said “Always accuse your enemies of doing exactly what you do.” Condi is simply following that advice.
I’m in Cong. Olver’s district. Along with others, I’ve lobbied Cong. Olver on the Iraq war, Palestine, and Israel’s invasion of Lebanon. I doubt that cowardice is the reason he refuses to support impeachment here in a district where it takes some courage to be against impeachment. He seems to really believe that it would be “counterproductive” and really wants evidence to the contrary. Cong. Olver voted against the authorization to use military force in Iraq in 2002, for a middle east “peace envoy” (meaningless, but a gesture in a positive direction), for a Palestinian unity government, and for funding assistance for Iraqi refugees. There are many in congress with worse records than Cong. Olver on a lot of issues. He has served the district well in many ways. I don’t know to what extent his key donor base opposes impeachment. There’s a ton of voter support for it. Fixed ideas are difficult to unfix, especially when there’s a lot of polarization.
Impeachment proceedings will give Congress authority to investigate the crimes committed by the Bush administration. The people should know of ALL the crimes committed and of ALL the people involved so they can be excised from the govorporation. Don’t concentrate on the votes needed to convict; concentrate on the investigations into the crimes committed. Expunge all of them from the govorporation process.
Impeachment proceedings will give Congress authority to investigate the crimes committed by the Bush administration. The people should know of ALL the crimes committed and of ALL the people involved so they can be excised from the govorporation. Don’t concentrate on the votes needed to convict; concentrate on the investigations into the crimes committed. Expunge all of them from the govorporation process.
Why not start with impeachment hearings? That way we could determine if there is sufficent evidence to impeach. Former Senator Lowell Weicker, R. CT didn’t have enough votes to impeach Nixon when he called for hearings, but he sure as hell got them before the hearings were over, didn’t he? It was much harder for Weicker to call for impeachment hearings, being a Republican, but he did it, much to his credit.
Democraps are so GD stooooopid it’s beyond pathetic. Dopey and Darth are never going to leave office. Now that they’ve sneaked all that fine print into recent legislation, allowing them to declare martial law, cancel elections and round up every big mouth “enemy combatant” and detain them in Halliburton-built detention centers, what the hell is it Democraps have to lose besides their own freedom, along with ours?
PowerofLove his on a key point (though inaccurately, I think) earlier in this thread about the country not being politically “ready” for impeachment. That is, if the majority of Americans were really THERE, then Congress would have no alternative but to act.
The same set of criteria didn’t apply to the Rethugian impeachment of Clinton. Impeaching Clinton was a totally non-representative political action (a key part of their ongoing takeover, like controlling the MSM and co-opting the “opposition” DLC). They impeached Clinton without any grassroots/popular political call for it whatsoever.
Sadly, the Democrats are likewise guilty of non-representative government. As Ralph’s article here underscores, and any roadtrip across much of the US will tell you, there are people all over the place calling for Bush’s head — but the Democrats ignore it.
It seems we have non-representational government on both sides. And the Bush junta remains untouchable. One only wonders what the Democrats will allow next. If Bush/Cheney didn’t deserve impeachment, what’s the theoretical point at which they actually would do so? There seems to be no such point. By taking impeachment off the table, Pelosi gave Bush carte blanche. I can’t imagine the pleasure Bush must feel to know that his opposition won’t impeach him for past crimes or future ones.
They should bring their own bottled water to D.C. It’s got to be tainted there or something.
I can’t wait to see what future Presidents will do now that the current Executive Branch has gotten away with treason and murder. And there’s still time for these emboldened thugs to carry out their wet dream of using nukes on Iran or others.
I’m very surprised that someone hasn’t attempted assassination of at least one of the major players.
skien dhiu wrote: “Impeachment should of been on the table imediatlly after Bush’s first election, the fact that Americans just now seem to be waking up to the idea now that his second term is allmost over is beyond belief.”
when the supreme court dismayed us by stopping the counting of votes, i counted on the gravity of the office to influence the frat rat taking office. none of us expected him to become the destroyer he has become. i cannot believe how the republicans stand behind him in his criminality.
perhaps there is a world court where he can be tried for what he has done to the rest of the world. i do not understand why impeachment is off the table.
Just our corporate dems covering their asses.
They don’t want to be subject to any kind of accountability in their own actions…
We need new grassroot candidates, but for some reason people are terrified of change.
another reason for impeachment (if you need one): to show the world that we aren’t all loyal bushies, that many of us vehemently oppose the rule of gangster capitalism through state terror, so that we might make ourselves and our families and friends less tempting targets for acts of terror on a retail scale.
The thugs who run the government of the USA know that their crimes are sufficient for a death penalty by the USA standards practiced at Nuremberg.
They know it and also know they can never let go of their power for fear of justice.
I suspect it will take a lot more than a vote of impeachment to get that gang removed.
The last guy I heard of who had to prove a negative was Saddam Hussein (that he had no WMD). To bad he never got a fair trial before he was hung, I don’t argue he didn’t need hanging, I argue WE needed a fair trial.
Hell in Texas just recently the gov wanted to kill a young man who unwittingly drove a murderer away from the scene of a homicide.
Ralph, as usual, raises valid points.
IMO, the recreant congressman’s benighted choice of “not counterproductive” as the standard for supporting impeachment is a true obscenity. It confirms, for the umpteenth time, that the US modern political process has metastasized into fatal malignancy; I doubt it can recover.
The proof of this malignancy is that impeachment is considered exclusively as a political issue, in the basest sense of the term. Political power is an end in itself, so political calculation is the only consideration. The fact that elected politicians have solemn responsibilities and constititutional duties has become, like Gonzalez’s view of the Geneva Conventions, merely “quaint”.
In this devolved, depraved, Bizarro-world status quo, all of the co-opted professional political elites– from office-holders, corporate media infotainwhores, and centrist, accommodationist blog commenters– disdain or dismiss impeachment because it’s a difficult political ordeal. There is the usual self-confirming, self-sealing Mobius strip logic that rejects impeachment because of alleged insufficient political will and the daunting prospect that the risk won’t be worth the potential political payoff.
This reduction of a question of high principle and solemn duty into quotidian political strategy is pathological, and proof that the political system founded in the bright morning of the Enlightenment has decayed into a spectacle like crabs in a barrel, clambering over each other while jockeying for position– locked into a lizard-brained philosophy that suspends virtue in the doomed belief that power must first be acquired by any means necessary in order to promote “productive” policies and political action.
TO THE DEMS and Nader is correct. Tony
I have been meaning to write something like this for awhile because of your feckless responses and kowtowing to a president who is out to destroy this country. Why? Because you are cynical and political to an extreme. It is either that or you want to have all the stuff that is on the books now plus a war that you think will help you and without the blame. This is neither humanistic or morally defendable. Petraeus got what he deserves and cutting off funds for this war is the way to go because when it comes to priorities for this occupation it is contractors first and troops last. You can see this from any facts that you look at. So who cares for the troops? Some of you have been doing a lot of talking but nobody has thrown a rock at this glass house of an administration. Leave it to the people thru MoveOn.Org to do the heavy lifting for what you are supposed to be doing. You will not get my vote because you are no better than the repubs. Is there any difference in dictators, if one is a dem. or a repub? The way that you are acting you just want the whole pie for yourselves and forget the people again. I’m 71 and cant help but wonder what of the younger people? Because of your feckless nature it is a bleak future for them. Tony
What legislative issues are they that the Dems don’t want overshadowed by impeachment? I don’t remember any that really matter.
I submitted the substance of this article to Ralph’s staff after it came to me from the the MA oragnizers of the Olver meeting. Ralph left out a key part: Olver said that if he pursued impeachment the Bush cabal might suspend the 2008 elections and declare martial law. Olver now denies this, claimng he raised this as a “theory” of cabal response, but the MA activists are preparing affidavits of meeting attenders to document that they heard Olver clearly say, without any theory, that Olver feared this could and perhaps would occur.
One of the lawyers is so outraged at Olver’s denial he is contemplating a run for Olver’s seat to set the record straight. A meeting attender called me last week to say that not only did Olver not claim this was theory, but that Olver seemed much relieved, as though confessing a great burden, after his statement sucked the air from the room.
There is a clear pattern of congressional fear, self interest, denial and complete contempt for the public by such statements, where congress does not immediatelty call for hearings in their light. Our Republic is in shambles, our Constitution hangs by a thread, and it is clearly up to the people, like those in the Stockbridge region, to try to set things right. I have decided to run for Congress to press all of these issues in CT’s 5th district before matters gets worse. The hope is to pressure the present House to impeach, but failing that, to bring these issues clearly to bear in the 2009 congress. I urge like minded citizens to find as many new candidates as possible to do the same in their states.
Talk about DISGUSTING!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I’m a registed lifelong registered Democrat and I am utterly DISGUSTED with these creatures. They should be sent home packing as far as I’m concerned. Why don’t they just shut the doors to their offices and go home. They’re utterly useless. I guess their oath to defend and protect the Constitiution is nothing but words. It means nothing to them. All they care about is money…power…and re-election. They are reprehensible!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And, if it means anything, I will no longer vote for them.
The Republicans are running a bluff and/or there is another unstated reason the Democrats will not approach impeachment. The facts are so clear and the evidence so overwhelming that in order to protect themselves (have a chance at being ever re-elected) even the staunch Republicans would be forced to support impeachment and conviction. A properly prosecuted impeachment hearing would arouse the American people to such a state of anger at these criminals, that a vote of support for them would be political suicide.
==The Democrats do not want to distract attention from their legislative agenda, and need Republican votes for passage.==
WHAT legislative agenda? They’re supporting Bush’s legislative agenda by adding their votes to those of the minority Republicans to pass critical bills for the Bush agenda, not a Democratic one.
Best wishes to you, Harold Burbank.
The way the executive fascist cancer and congressional paralysis have progressed, only organized revolutionary effort by a PEIOPLE’S MOVEMENT can stop the slide into the abyss. Nothing less will do. Only the effort to knock out and replace the tenets -economic and political- of capitalism can put the country on the road to peace, justice and harmony with the world and planet Earth. Our method will be peaceful,electoral,democratic. Usually capitalism, when it loses or thinks it is going to lose, does not respect democratic processes and strikes insiduously and violently. If that happens, then “we the people” will continue defending our Constitution by bringing down the OUTLAW government by using all appropriate means.
It is futile at this moment to discuss methods of arriving at a detailed exhaustive list of programs. It is clear by now that the masses of the people and the progressive political organizations want solutions to a few vital problems, such as PEACE, WORLD DISARMAMENT & DRASTC CUTS of MILITARY BUDGETS, NOT FOR PROFIT UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE, FREE PUBLIC EDUCATION, ELIMINATION OF POVERTY, PROTECTION OF PLANET EARTH AND SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. These demands can be expresed with fewer words, such as
PEACE, DISARMAMENT, JUSTICE, ENVIRONMENTAL SANITY.
It is not important if the local organizations of a People’s Movement differ about how many and which of the key demands they want to emphasize or campaign for. They can add or substract as many as they want, if they feel that their effectiveness will be boosted at their local level. What is important is that the locals are free to develop their initiatives, but, while retaining their organizational identity, they consider themselves a local branch of the big tree of the PEOPLE’S MOVEMENT which fights for PEACE - JUSTICE - DISARMAMENT- ENVIRONMENTAL SANITY against the “two” political stooges of the merchants of war, exploitation and environmental degredation.
The big question is to have a starting spark for a People’s Movement by someone who is respected in the progressive movement for his/her courage, honesty, intelligence and leadership qualities. No matter how many times I have tried to think of the right person, I always come up with the same conclusion: CINDY SHEEHAN. Her run against Pelosi can also serve the local initiatives for setting up People’s Movement branches by rallying support
for her election, by adopting all or some of her PEACE-DISARMAMENT-JUSTICE-ENVIRONMENTAL programs
and organizing financial assistance for her election. Let us hope that Cindy has noticed our chattering and gives us some clue
they need to be convicted, and jailed for the rest of their lives. forget impeachment, i want some REAL justice!
We didn’t protest vigorously when the likes of Rupert Murdoch, gained control of the media, and any pretense of fair, balanced, or accurate reporting of information was exchanged for manipulation and propaganda. That represented the lose of one of the “checks and balances.” We don’t know what to believe.
We didn’t protest vigorously when the War on drugs allowed the foundation of a police state. We thought unreasonable search and seizures, confiscation of property and the imprisonment of millions of nonviolent offenders would keep our children safe. Drug use has not declined, the police no longer serve and protect, and we lost another safe guard “check and balance”
We never bothered to question the use of our intelligence apparatus and military to destabilize sovereign governments, or ask who benefited from the carnage and exploitation. So we fear reprisals from Terrorists. You know, those folks we’ve been messing over, the ones with natural resources or markets.
We are too late to prevent the rise of mercenary armies, and have no way to prevent them from repressing our own population, if so ordered by a government that is no longer under our control. Another check and balance gone.
We have accepted public education for our children, that has phased out Civics, Citizenship, and Critical Thinking as subject matter. No checks and balance from that poor, largely ignorant group we have allowed to be undermined.
We have allowed vote fraud to become so rampant that the results of every election is questionable. And no “elected” official seems accountable to the populace. Checks and balance, anyone?
There is no possibility of reigning in this government, they have through long strategic planning, usurped the peoples power. There are no checks and balances remaining. Neither Bush nor Cheney has anything to worry about. They reign by Divine Right.
SCIENTIFIC BETRAYAL March, 06
Never before have Americans experienced such dangerous manipulation of essential scientific data, as used by this administration to derail vital environmental reforms, conservation, family planning– and the list goes on. The resulting long term environmental and social damage are beyond measure, and can only worsen if not curtailed.
Despite their clandestine cloak, or environmental friendly disguise, these sellouts have been evident since Bush first was handed the presidency. They have been exposed by defectors from the EPA, health & human services, etc; and have been documented and chronicled by numerous dedicated environmental organizations including The Union of Concerned Scientists.
The gravity of these unprecedented betrayals eclipses the Monica Lewinski scandal which led to an impeachment, and pose greater dangers than Watergate which terminated a presidency. Blame falls mainly on the populace and our legislators for tolerating this reckless and arrogant occupant of the White House.
Blame for these dreadful consequences falls mainly on the five supreme court justices who placed politics ahead of the law and put him in office against the voters choice; our legislators for allowing such reckless and dangerous behavior from this unlearned president guided by his financial and radical supporters; and especially the apathetic populace for tolerating this unprecedented outrage
The problem with those who say impeachment is a waste of time and to focus on 2008 is the Democratic frontrunners, confident that progressives can be Nader-baited into voting for Xena, the Warrior Princess, have decided to give progressives, and the American electorate, the finger. Progressives have deluded themselves to such a degree, that they are willing to vote for one of three Democratic frontrunners all of whom refuse to even commit to having our troops out of Iraq by 2013. (2013????????????????)
The Democrats have been bi-partisan in their support of assaulting civil liberties and authorizing and funding Bush’s war in the manner Bush requests. It is foolhardy to say they do this because they fear being seen as weak or because of the dishonest 67/60 talking point. The reason they have given bi-partisan support to authorizing the war and funding the murder of young American and Iraqis is they are on the same payroll as the Reps. and want to talk against the war while supporting it. If you analyze the 67/60 argument, it would require at least 80 Democratic Senators, as at least 13 of them would defect and not vote to override a Bush veto. It is Bush who needs 60 votes to get his funding as he wants it, not the Dems, who can simply put forward nearly identical Bills that support troop protection and rapid withdrawal of all US forces and contractors.
But the Dems joined the Reps in a 94-1 vote just last week in the Senate to give Bush the exact funding he wants. What good was it to vote in McCaskill, Cardin, Casey, Tester, Webb, Whitehouse and Brown to end the war if all of them voted to fund the war in the exact manner Bush requested and as those whom they defeated would have voted? That’s not fear, that’s support.
So they manufacture the 67/60 talking point and the progressives just mouth it, just ignoring the truth — they have the power not to present the Bush bill, even if he vetos it. Also, by putting forward a Bill over and over again that funds troop protection and rapid, complete withdrawal, the Reps. would end up voting for it, as it would be they who are voting against protecting the troops.
Simultaneous impeachment/removal has a good chance of working. Once the American people hear a competently presented, uninterrupted case about impeachment, which Articles of Impeachment would require, they would overwhelmingly support impeaching these two lawless, murderous thugs who current occupy the Presidency and Vice Presidency. And the rest of the 67 votes to remove would come from incumbent Republicans running for the 22 Senate seats up for election in 2008. Those incumbent Republicans would have the choice of voting to remove or being removed by the voters in their state.
But this won’t happen and progressives will coronate Xena, the Warrior Princess to continue the war in Iraq and take military action in Iran, just as the Republican would do.
Dainel David.I think impeachment would be worth the try but I agree with you that we can get rid of the republicans in 08 by voteing them out of office. What I hope will happen is that Bush/Cheney have destroyed the republican party.Facts mean nothing to a republican making it impossible to reason with them.The republican’s stand for nothing that is moral or honest they are the party of perverts,adulters and molesters.The 30 percent who defend Bush/Cheney are fools as are those who listen to Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly and watch the Fox Liework
Life in the United States must become so uncomfortable that the populace realizes what has gone missing, what has been stolen from under their noses. September 11th did not affect the necessary amount of people; the hurricane Katrina did not affect the necessary amount of people. Only when the govorporation cuts into the freedom of consumption will the populace become uncomfortable and act. Keep your rifles clean. Protect the 2nd Amendment because KBR prisons & Blackwater are now in the position to arrest & detain the thinkers. Teach your sons & daughters about guns & rifles because the day may arrive when they are needed–sons & daughters with guns & rifles.
First, we vote out the fossilized members of the govorporation, the Feinsteins, Pelosi’s, the Clintons, the entire GOP, and then we improve the local & state govorporations w/ people interested in and committed to the transition from govorporation to positive government. It could take a couple of decades.
I think we all should call our senators and reps tomorrow and demand impeachment of Bush AND Cheney! There are many grounds and to NOT do it is to invite the same lawlessness from the next administration and if you’re a Repub., I can guarantee that you’re going to be upset to see a Dem doing half the things Bush has done….signing statements, preemptive war, war without declaration, spying on US citizens without warrants, suspension of habeaus corpus, do you need more? If they won’t impeach, then we should hold referundums and get rid of THEM TOO!
view the video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIO-tCPSfHA
The article fails to mention Olver’s volunteered opinion at the meeting:”That the current autocratic executive (the White House)would attack Iran from the air, declare a national emergency, institute Martial Law and call off the 2008 election.”
And he’s still unwilling to vote for impeachment. What does he really know?
The military has far more powerful weaponry than guns and rifles. You better believe that Blackwater does too. Impeachment is essential. First, an open trial would make evidence public and undeniable. Note that Nixon never got to the trial part. The Republican leaders went to Nixon and told him the jig was up. We’ve never had a vice president who was the power behind the throne as it were. Cheney needs to be picked off first. Kucinich is right, as usual. The evidence against Cheney is public. Of course, like an iceberg, there is far more evidence still hidden. This would be a way to get at some of it. And with that, Bush could be impeached. Second, we must re-establish constitutional law and restore a balance of powers if our government is to survive.
After being an activist in my youth, for may years I simply went away from the fray and tried to lead my life in a way that would produce the reality I seeked through politics. I even stopped voting.
Recently I have gotten involved again - this time simply informing myself and an occassional march or conversation. I have begun to vote again but am rapidly losing heart (once again).
We really don’t have representation. The two dominant parties basically share a constituency that is something other than “the people.”
The Democrats and the Republicans don’t represent two sides of the same coin, they are simply two different sections (with some common areas) of the same side of the same coin.
Nader’s story serves to illustrate this. Even when a majority of Americans favor impeachment, Congress still refuses to act. Why? The will of the people be dammed, there are others who need to be listened to. The Democrats where given control of Congress to end the Iraq occupation. Not only are we still in Iraq, we are even more mired there than before with more troops than before.
I know the Democrats do not have the two thirds needed to counter a filabuster or veto. No one said this is going to be easy and not require courage. For God’s sake, I only see a handful of people showing any gumption and courage and the rest playing politics as if we don’t matter. They don’t even try to justify their cowardice because they know there is nothing we can do to them. Both the Democrats and Republicans could care less what “the people” think or want.
How different could these two parties be when they both show contempt for the people, comtempt for the constitution, and contempt for their duties?
I am fast coming to the conclusion that not voting makes more sense than voting. Why bother? Why do you think that we don’t get a better class of individuals running for office? The system is set up for the mediocre manipulative self-serving individual devoid of any kind of self-awareness or even self-examination.
As an example, by all rights in a sane and healthy political system, someone like Kucinich should be a front runner for a progressive platform. Instead he is treated as a joke and even the so-called “enlightened” progressives buy into this hogwash nonsense of how he looks or how tall he is or any of a number of other equally stultifying ignorant bullshit nonsense.
By the standards we allow to be the parameters of who gets taken seriously - Mitt Romney should be our leader since he looks straight out of central casting for the role of President (another startling empty shirt like Reagan).
The idiots are running the asylum and we lsten to them, encourage them, take them seriously, and then ask them to be our leaders. As if this wasn’t insane enough, then we are truly disappointed and frustrated when we look around and see just how insane everything is.
With this cast of characters we choose, of course someone like Bill Clinton looks good. How low must our standards be when an individual who lies and cheats looks good in comparison to our other choices. So all of this wrangling and outcry these last few years has given us a Congress where everything keeps going on (albeit with more contention) as before and we get front runner cnadidates who only seem to promise more of the same kind of BS we’ve grown accustomed to and I guess expect.
We have to ask ourselves - this must be what we want?
“The Democrats do not want to distract attention from their legislative agenda, and need Republican votes for passage.”
That is simply crapola! They are not getting Republican cooperation anyway!
“Moreover, they do not have the votes to obtain the requisite two-thirds of the members present for conviction in the Senate.”
So what? What if our court system took that approach and let proven felons walk. The Democrats do not know what the Senate will do in advance, and once in the Senate it’s up to the Democrats to present such a strong case that enough Republicans will sign on.
If there are not Articles of Impeachment drawn against this criminal crew, Bush & Co. it will set the precedent for all future presidents and cause the public to lose all respect for law.
LOBOGRIS..I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH VOTING,IF BUSH IS NOT IMPEACHED–FIRST..I THINK ALOT OF PEOPLE WOULD FEEL THE SAME…I AM AGAINST GIVING THE RULING ELITE WHAT THEY DESIRE (OUR VOTES)
Most of you believe that Bush & Cheney should be impeached.
But you haven’t confronted the question that most critics will ask, which is “what is the purpose if you don’t have the votes to convict?”.
If we want to push impeachment, we absolutely must answer this question.
The correct response, IMHO, is to challenge the premise that everything hinges on a conviction and that the lack of a conviction is a fore-gone conclusion. Clearly this is false– there was no conviction of Clinton, nor of Nixon. So, its NOT all about conviction.
In my view, the key is that an impeachment is an official investigation, with official witnesses, of Bush’s crimes.
Our public discourse in the US about torture, aggressive war, spying, etc, will utterly change when it is taken out of the hands of the corporate media and turned into a formal investigation that culminates in a *trial*, held in the austere environs of the Senate, where there are rules of evidence and witnesses that testify under oath and are cross-examined.
In the mass media circus, Bush can be made to seem like a war hero while his opponent Kerry, who had 3 purple hearts, can be made to seem as an effete poser. This could never happen in a trial.
This is the glory of impeachment. Those of us who read commondreams know about Bush’s crimes. We have heard from rendition-torture victims like Maher Arar. We have heard from constitutional scholars. People, you have to understand that most of America has NOT heard this. To them it all seems like “he said, she said”, it all sounds like “politics”, because that is the way the MSM plays it.
That is all going to change when the impeachment trial starts.
Republicans are going to have a hard choice. They can choose to stand behind Bush, stand behind someone who will have been exposed to all the world as a villain, torturer, liar and sneak, and they will have to say he’s their president and they support him. Or they can vote to impeach.
The true absurdity is the assumption of pundits that there will NOT be a 2/3 majority. After all this is a slam-dunk case.
Ralph is right. He always is.
Just remember, folks: Gore lost Florida, not Nader; 200,000 registered Dems voted for Bush in FLA and Gore also lost his home state.
I hate Ralph Nader, I consider him the reason Bush is president (FL - 2000, remember ??). I NEVER read anything Nader writes, because I absolutely hate him. Look what he has saddled us with, just look — Bush.
I HATE BUSH !!!!!!
Nader is the reason we have George W, — please someone, tell me why I should read anything Nader writes. Seriously, I’m looking for a reason not to be so angry at Nader. HELP ????
A bunch of sniveling progressives whining about their candidate that took money from the RNC to run for the presidency, and took votes from gore, is it any wonder that the mainstream democrats look upon as you [pariahs] of the electorat? Your votes for this disgusting piece of shiet put Bush in the White House, and yet you don’t accept the responsibility for your ignorance, not surprising considering your rants are just as bad as Nader’s op ed peice.
The purpose of impeachment hearings is to expose the criminal acts & conspiracy of members in the govorporation. Indy media may play a part in the dispersal of information regarding the facts of criminal intention & criminal acts. We need to know what the govorporation has done & what it has planned for the future.
Regarding the 2008 presidential election & the rumors about canceling the elections, well, I think I’ll buy a gun. We all should declare that we are buying guns to protect the country. How could the Nat’l Guard intervene when they are deployed in Iraq? Do companies like Blackwater have enough personnel to police the entire country? First, we make it very clear to the governors of each state that any talk or action about canceling the elections will not be tolerated. We make it clear to the local boards of elections that any preparations for the cancellation will not be tolerated. This time we must be prepared for election fraud AND election cancellation. We should not only be in the streets, but we may have to attend some protests armed, armed w/ the 2nd Amendment.
i have said many times that we have allowed our elected representatives’ jobs to become ‘careers’ instead of a ‘public service’. this fact has been cemented into the national psyche for at least the last 30 years. the democratic leadership’s response to impeachment reminds me of an historical event of the late 1930’s. chamberlain and others reacted the same way to hitler’s nazism. we have been inundated with the same form of propagandism by the bush/cheney administration for the last five and half years. we need to educate the voter better. there are many ways to do this. it seems to me an educated voter can implement ‘term limits’ on any elected official who doesn’t do ‘the peoples’ business’. i have never known this country to be so fearful! after the ‘terrorist’ attack on pearl harbor, we, the people, wanted to ‘kick butt’! after the mccarthy era, we raised our heads and defended ourselves. now we cower at every conceivable shadow! as a result of this administrations actions, there have never been the numbers of ‘terrorists’(using the administration’s definition)that we have today! and we are continually told how much safer we are! worse yet, we believe it! a third party, a people’s party, isn’t such a bad idea! a third party would actually give us two different parties to choose from in an election. no difference between democrats and republicans now. god help our children and grandchildren! peace,
When will Dems discover that the Right has declared war? The dems are scared of the right, simple as that, remember these are different wings of the same bird. As long as the privileged dems view anything but capitulation to the right they run the risk of losing their favor with the same funding class.
Gore won the 2000 election. Read all about it. Stop blaming Ralph.
I totally agree with “COMarc”, the Dems have no legislative agenda. If they pass anything good, it gets vetoed by Bush. Otherwise they pass Bush’s agenda. It doesn’t help anyone to expose the Republicans on for instance the Children’s Health Care bill. Most of their constituents probably agree with their vote and probably agree with Bush’s vote. Nothing to be gained running into that brick wall.
However the impeachment proceedings are another matter. As far as I understand there is a discovery phase to the proceedings during which Bush and Cheney could answer questions or alternatively could expose their contempt for the law. This would be valuable to swing “law and order” voters. The prosecution case for impeachment would go on record and could possibly be reviewed by many people who don’t have the information to believe they lied about Iraq and the gravity of the authoritarian powers they have accumulated. This would be of benefit for the swing “morality” voters. These revelations could have been of benefit during the primaries to