Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
House Judiciary Trio Calls for Impeach Cheney Hearings
Three senior members of the House Judiciary Committee have called for the immediate opening of impeachment hearings for Vice President Richard Cheney.
Democrats Robert Wexler of Florida, Luis Gutierrez of Illinois and Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin on Friday distributed a statement, "A Case for Hearings," that declares, "The issues at hand are too serious to ignore, including credible allegations of abuse of power that if proven may well constitute high crimes and misdemeanors under our constitution. The charges against Vice President Cheney relate to his deceptive actions leading up to the Iraq war, the revelation of the identity of a covert agent for political retaliation, and the illegal wiretapping of American citizens."
In particular, the Judiciary Committee members cite the recent revelation by former White House press secretary Scott McClellan that the Vice President and his staff purposefully gave him false information about the outing of Valerie Plame Wilson as a covert agent as part of a White House campaign to discredit her husband, former Ambassador Joe Wilson. On the basis of McClellan's statements, Wexler, Gutierrez and Baldwin say, "it is even more important for Congress to investigate what may have been an intentional obstruction of justice." The three House members argue that, "Congress should call Mr. McClellan to testify about what he described as being asked to 'unknowingly [pass] along false information.'"
Adding to the sense of urgency, the members note that "recent revelations have shown that the Administration including Vice President Cheney may have again manipulated and exaggerated evidence about weapons of mass destruction -- this time about Iran's nuclear capabilities."
Although Wexler, Gutierrez and Baldwin are close to Judiciary Committee chair John Conyers, getting the Michigan Democrat to open hearings on impeachment will not necessarily be easy. Though Conyers was a leader in suggesting during the last Congress that both President Bush and Vice President Cheney had committed impeachable offenses, he has been under immense pressure from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, to keep Constitutional remedies for executive excesses "off the table" in this Congress.
It is notable, however, that Baldwin maintains warm relations with Pelosi and that Wexler, a veteran member of the Judiciary Committee has historically had an amiable and effective working relationship with Conyers. There is no question that Conyers, who voted to keep open the impeachment debate on November 7, has been looking for a way to explore the charges against Cheney. The move by three of his key allies on the committee may provide the chairman with the opening he seeks, although it is likely he will need to hear from more committee members before making any kind of break with Pelosi -- or perhaps convincing her that holding hearings on Cheney's high crimes and misdemeanors is different from putting a Bush impeachment move on the table.
The most important immediate development, however, is the assertion of an "ask" for supporters of impeachment. Pulled in many directions in recent months, campaigners for presidential and vice presidential accountability have focused their attention on supporting a House proposal by Ohio Congressman Dennis Kucinich, a candidate for the Democratic presidential nod, to impeach Cheney. When Kucinich forced consideration of his resolution on November 7, Pelosi and her allies used procedural moves to get it sent to the Judiciary Committee for consideration. Pelosi's hope was that the proposal would disappear into the committee's files.
The call for hearings by Wexler, Gutierrez and Baldwin puts impeachment on the table, at least as far as activists are concerned, creating a pressure point that can serve as a reply when House Democrats who are critical of Bush but cautious about impeachment ask: "What do you want me to do?" The answer can now be: "Back the call for Judiciary Committee hearings on whether to impeach Dick Cheney?"
"Some of us were in Congress during the impeachment hearings of President Clinton. We spent a year and a half listening to testimony about President Clinton's personal relations. This must not be the model for impeachment inquires. A Democratic Congress can show that it takes its constitutional authority seriously and hold a sober investigation, which will stand in stark contrast to the kangaroo court convened by Republicans for President Clinton. In fact, the worst legacy of the Clinton impeachment - where the GOP pursued trumped up and insignificant allegations - would be that it discourages future Congresses from examining credible and significant allegations of a constitutional nature when they arise," write Wexler, Gutierrez and Baldwin.
"The charges against Vice President Cheney are not personal," the House members add. "They go to the core of the actions of this Administration, and deserve consideration in a way the Clinton scandal never did. The American people understand this, and a majority support hearings according to a November 13 poll by the American Research Group. In fact, 70 percent of voters say that Vice President Cheney has abused his powers and 43 percent say that he should be removed from office right now. The American people understand the magnitude of what has been done and what is at stake if we fail to act. It is time for Congress to catch up."
Arguing that hearings need not distract Congress, Wexler, Gutierrez and Baldwin note that the focus is on Cheney for a reason: "These hearings involve the possible impeachment of the Vice President -- not our commander in chief -- and the resulting impact on the nation's business and attention would be significantly less than the Clinton Presidential impeachment hearings."
They also argue, correctly, that the hearings are necessary if Congress is to restore its position in the Constitutionally-defined system of checks and balances.
"Holding hearings would put the evidence on the table, and the evidence -- not politics -- should determine the outcome," the Judiciary Committee members explain. "Even if the hearings do not lead to removal from office, putting these grievous abuses on the record is important for the sake of history. For an Administration that has consistently skirted the constitution and asserted that it is above the law, it is imperative for Congress to make clear that we do not accept this dangerous precedent. Our Founding Fathers provided Congress the power of impeachment for just this reason, and we must now at least consider using it." John Nichols' new book is The Genius of Impeachment: The Founders' Cure for Royalism. Rolling Stone's Tim Dickinson hails it as a "nervy, acerbic, passionately argued history-cum-polemic [that] combines a rich examination of the parliamentary roots and past use of the 'heroic medicine' that is impeachment with a call for Democratic leaders to 'reclaim and reuse the most vital tool handed to us by the founders for the defense of our most basic liberties.'"
Copyright © 2007 The Nation
128 Comments so far
Show AllIMPEACH MULTI-MILLIONARE NANCY "WATERBOARD" PELOSI
SHE IS A NEOCON 5th COLUMIST
Long overdue. To bad it is for his lesser crimes. He was after all the one who let the plane hit the pentagon.
Cheney: "The orders still stand" as Flight 77 approaches the Pentagon with no action taken to defend it
Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta was in the
Presidential Emergency Operating Center with Vice President Cheney as
Flight 77 approached Washington, D.C. On May 23, 2003 in front of the
9/11 Commission, Secretary Mineta testified:
"During the time that the airplane was coming in to the Pentagon, there
was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President, "The plane is 50 miles out." "The plane is 30 miles out." And when it got
down to "the plane is 10 miles out," the young man also said to the Vice
President, "Do the orders still stand?" And the Vice President turned
and whipped his neck around and said, "Of course the orders still stand.
Have you heard anything to the contrary?"
This man is destroying america, so save your country and impeach this criminal.
Strange that congress is worried about being distracted—from what? its duty to uphold the Constitution? Impeachment would focus attention on just how loathsome Republicans Cheney and Bush have been. We need this focus of attention; Americans could use some continuing education so that Republicans and their all too numerous Democratic allies can be driven out of office in 2008. Democrats don't seem to understand their need to lead, to educate, to act courageously and morally. They don't seem to understand their oaths of office. It still seems curious to me that Kucinich, the only candidate who had the courage to suggest impeachment, is considered fringe and not even allowed to debate in Iowa.
Good for Wexler, Gutierrez and Baldwin. Rich entertainment for an election season, and perhaps it would help our helpless candidates get their priorities straight.
greenuprising: yeah,Amen to what you said!
That's good news, although Nancy Pelosi, being a Bush collaborator, will of course do whatever she can to obstruct impeachment hearings.
It's unfortunate that the Democrats still allow their words and attitudes to be controlled by the Republican spin machine, even as they try to fight the Bush administration. "Arguing that hearings need not distract Congress, Wexler, Gutierrez and Baldwin note ..." Distract Congress? From what? From performing its constitutional duty to impeach Bush and Cheney for their crimes and their attacks against our Constitution?
Pelosi doesn't get it. She's saying, "It's the election cycle, stupid!", and she can't hear us yelling back, "no, it's the Constitution, stupid!"
No doubt she will take the lazy-ass way and leave the constitution wounded and bleeding to death.
The constitution cannot right itself into happy exultation when these rapscallions are out. It will remain wounded and bleeding in January 2009, distended beyond all recognition of its former self, to be walked over by the next executive who wants it so.
So, assuming Cheney knows that he will defeat Pelosi in his game of "Beat the Clock", how will he ever be brought under the law from his Presidential Suite in Dubai?
"If the impeachment provision in the Constitution of the United States will not reach the offenses charged here, then perhaps that 18th-century Constitution should be abandoned to a 20th-century paper shredder." Rep. Barbara Jordon, July 25th, 1974
Pelosi is a coward – Conyers is AWOL
"The reign of witches will end someday soon" - Thomas Jefferson
There are 403 days 'til Jan. 20, 2009…
Well, now that we know that Pelosi has been conspiring with the Bush regime all along, for God knows what monetary benefit, it's pretty simple to conclude she will do everything she can to obstruct impeachment hearings. The fingers will start pointing at her also...
Pocupine, you have quilled some very pointed arguments!You are right on target!(couldn't resist the puns) Our elected officials duty is to uphold and protect our constitution. It is about time that they got busy doing their duty! They are swimming in a cesspool of corruption.
Impeach him or remove his battery.
Since the Brazen Trio are close to Conyers; maybe they will take a look around his office and see if they can help him find his lost convictions.
'distaction' and 'media holiday/feeding frenzy' are just two really poor excuses for the 'bought and paid for' congress to do nothing that benefits the People.
We must make every effort to insure that we remain a democratic government! This corporate facist must be removed! If Nixon brought this animal into government it must have been for a good corporate reason. Impeach and remove!!!
Wow, imagine that, wonder how far this one will go? I also wonder if Cheney is laughing about it? ___ I'd guess he is.
[Conyers] has been under immense pressure from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, to keep Constitutional remedies for executive excesses "off the table" in this Congress
...thus paving the way for executive excesses by the next White House administration.
It is about time!
What Constitution?
Bush and Cheney have trashed it, Pelosi has insured it stays trashed and Conyers is the ONLY person on this planet who can uninsure her stand. And for some damn reason, we Americans allow it to continue. ___ No logical reason.
With the ILLEGAL wiretaps Bush and/or Cheney had installed in the telecom network closets, they must have picked up some real "dirt" on Pelosi and/or Conyers for them to keep impeachment off the table!
willybill says: I long ago gave up trusting either party. There is no doubt in my mind that Cheney's actions demand impeachment…and conviction.
Which do you consider more likely - impeachment or conviction?
Someone from Germany asked my why they haven't already impeached Bush like they did Clintion and then went on as to why (gender omitted) figured that Bush deserved it right down to his low popularity. And it dawned on me - Bush's low popularity acts as a protective factor. Clinton's impeachment over lying about - well, you know - was because Clinton was still popular.
Think of how much good a Bill Clinton with an untarnished reputation could have done Gore!
I doubt that any of the Republican candidates wants Bush to be their Ophrah or Steisand.
KEM PATRICK - Bush and Cheney did not trash your constitution - he just painted over it. The tricky part is to remove the new paint without damaging the document which still lies underneath.
And support Maher Arar in his case against the American Government - not only was his treatment in violation of your Constitution, but it seems that it was also in violation of the Patriot Act. Hard to believe that anything can be in violation of the Patriot Act, but it seems that there are things that still are!
Who would you rather see Cheney share a prison cell with?
a) Robert Picton
b) Lord Conrad Black
c) Ronald Allen Smith
d)
e)
f)
g)
Smith being interviewed on Death Row
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20071112/ron_smith_071112/20071112/
And what are the odds that Karlheinz Shreiber did business with Cheney? I think that someone should be asking him that question!
Hi KEM! I agree with you...I'll believe it when Conyers gets this to the floor of the House. Not before.
In the meantime, I want to thank the 3 Dems for standing up. Along with those that have signed on as co-sponsers of HR333. But we need more! This is not a partisan issue. Repugs are Americans too. They have also lost their rights under the Constitution and the Rule of Law. So, call your House Congress critter, no matter what strip, and get them on the side of the people. If they don't want to get on the wagon, then the Congress itself becomes irrelevant. If they don't represent the people and the Constitution, what the hell are they good for?
ezeflyer: You are getting funnier by the day! Keep 'em comin'.....
vaudree December 14th, 2007 3:24 pm ....Am I missing some subtlety here? How can we have conviction without impeachment?
"...it is likely he will need to hear from more committee members before making any kind of break with Pelosi..."
Time to send some e-mails folks, especially if your representative is on the committee.
http://judiciary.house.gov/CommitteeMembership.aspx
Yawn!
This is a minority of members of the committee asking the chair to do something that the chair has been refusing to do for a year. Nothing going to happen here folks.
The Democratic Party runs in a top-down fashion, not bottom-up. So it don't matter a bit what the people at the bottom say. Conyer takes his orders from Pelosi, who gets her orders from the big money backers of the party who want Bush and Cheney protected from impeachment.
Although at some point, I do kinda expect the Dem to do some sort of phony BS\political theater type of thing with this. When the Dems feel that they've run the clock out sufficiently that the full impeachment process can't complete before Bush leaves office, ,then the Dems will do something phony just for show.
Someone wake me up when the Dems actually do something. On second thought, cancel that. Rip Van Winkle's 20 years of sleep would be short compared to that wait.
Hmmm, you can't impeach a member of the House of Reps.
The only way they can be removed from office is by a vote of the full House. Not even any concepts like 'recall' that you see in more serious democracies are available.
But, that's an interesting idea. A member of the House could start a motion that would remove Ms. Pelosi from her seat in the Congress. The very legitimate reason for doing this is that she is in flagrant violation of her oath to uphold and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic.
Of course, no Dem will do that. It would pretty much be a declaration of war, and it probably should be accompanied by said member also submitting their notice that they are no longer a Dem. And ALL the congressional Dems place their continued membership in the Dem party as being more important than anything else ... principles, law, defending the Constitution. All of that is less important than staying a member of the club.
The only possible way to force an impeachment of Bush would be to clearly and loudly support an independent or third party challenger to EVERY Dem that refuses to push the issue.
That would send a clear message that if they don't support impeachment, this could be their last term as a congresscritter. We might or might not be able to have the pro-impeachment candidate win in the next election. But in a lot of cases, the fact that a big part of the Dem base was leaving for another candidate would ensure the defeat of the traitor-Dems. That's the only club to wield that might possibly cause the corporate Dems to change their policy of protecting Bush and Cheney. Let them know that if they continue to do so, it means the end of their own political careers.
VAUDREE, if they haven't trashed it, and only painted it over, we sure are living in a land where 'OUR' Constitution, the supreme law of the land, is being ignored by Congress. They have a sworn duty to impeach Bush and Cheney and they are in violation of the SUPREME law of our land for not doing their SWORN duty.
As Bush stated one fine day, "Don't tell me about the Constitution, it's just a G-damn piece of paper." You know, Bush is not always wrong, he proved that statement is correct and we allow it to continue. ___ Shame on our 'elected' Congress and on us.
Conyer's convictions are not 'lost'. They have been sold off and are now gone. Selling off those convictions was the price he paid to be the committee chair. If he hadn't been willing to sell them off, Pelosi would have made sure someone else was the chair of the committee.
That's the Dems for you, always willing to sell off any beliefs or convictions to obtain personal power or position.
Pelosi knows the game. She made the same deal. She had to sell off her previous kinda-sorta progressive past in order to get her job. Its the price of admittance into the top levels of the Dem party that make all the decisions. Anyone who's not willing to sell off what they believe in won't be admitted.
No room mate for Cheney, isolation, with painted pictures of dead Iraqi babies on the ceiling of his 24 foot square windowless cage.
Impeachment!?! What good will that do? Can't he be sent to Gitmo for a waterboarding session? Then let's discuss impeachment!
Pelosi was interviewed last night on The News Hour by Gwen Ifil. What a loser woman is Pelosi! She made my stomach turn, and I had just had dinner.
I am glad that three more reps have signed on to HR 333, but it is not enough. I regularly call Conyers' office each week to ask him to do his job since I am one of "We the People" for whom this country is about.
Imagine it, picture it, Believe
Can it be the sleeping giant that is America is awakening and he is not happy that someone has replaced his toilet paper with the US Constitution?
As for the politicians shouldn't they all be Americans first, then whatever party they choose? And a few statesmen scattered amongst the pols would be refreshing as well. And for those who have done the crime is it not your turn to serve the time?
You're either with us or against us may come back in a huantingly unexpected way.....looking to the day.
Let's hope this bears fruit -- Cheney's butt out of office. And W's butt to follow.
Wexler carried out a survey of constituents and the result was so overwhelming in favor of impeachment that he just cannot ignore it. Either Cheney is impeached or these people will lose their seats, simple as that. Pelosi is playing the political game of having somebody so obnoxious on the other side their life is easy, not only that the upcoming election will be a walk over while ever Cheney and Bush are their as a reminder of what the Repubs are.
Pelosi is not interested in the people, just a well paid job, her idea of a days work is walking about looking like a toothpaste model. Nothing will be achieved if she stays as speaker nor if Clinton gets back in the White house, they're both celebrity seekers.
How many shares of Halliburton stock has Cheney secretly placed in Pelosi's hidden account?
This is not just about money. This is about raw power. And the Dimms smell power in the water. But I think they may have miscalculated....
GO Cindy!!!
There's only 12 months left in their terms?
Why the hell bother now you useless pieces of shit!
DON THE E. There are some things money can't buy, and one of those is PRINCIPLE! The nation needs a spiritual enema... get this SHIT out of circulation!
EZEFLYER: I would love to see some creative lawyers, perhaps with now mutilated half-alive Iraqis as their clients, suing the COMPANY that put in Cheney's fake heart whatever, to keep this low-life ticking so that he could inflict interminable misery on so many. Hey, Jack McCoy comes up with creative lines of accountability, why the hell not this one?
willybill, if you can prove that Cheney committed a crime. If Robert Picton and Conrad Black can go to jail without being impeached, what is stopping us from doing the same to Cheney.
Impeachment is an American concept. But it does seem that Clinton can be Impeached without either losing office or going to jail.
COMarc, seems that, if you feel that way, the first step would be to replace Pelosi with another Speaker. Let her return to being a backbencher in Congress and then, make sure she loses the nomination in her riding (ie voting district) so that she doesn't face the electorate again. Not sure how much power a speaker has in the US - in Canada they can only vote to break a tie.
KEM PATRICK - Cheney operates under the principle that until a law is struck down as unconstitutional (which takes time) that he is free to act on it. Personally, I would not travel out of the country after leaving office if I was Cheney.
And there are worse things than solitary confinement and I doubt those pictures would have any effect on Cheney. I would like Cheney's pacemaker to withstand the pressure of living on Death Row.
Putting Cheney in with Picton is a bit cruel since I've heard the very graphic details of his crimes. Even alluding to Cheney's crimes got me deleted once. And Picton said he wanted to make it an even 50.
Actually, any jail time over 3 years would take a bit of the sting off of what Cheney did - though I would prefer much much more.
Jess, I would ask how many envelopes of cash Cheney took from Karlheinz Schreiber! Schreiber wants to avoid extradition to Germany for as long as possible so he is doing sort of slow motion strip tease - revealing just enough to keep us wanting more. Once he has nothing left to tell us, he's going to Germany (and he knows it). I know that Schreiber was in the US at least once. Schreiber admits to knowing about the giving money to various government officials in order to get government contracts - and we already know that Cheney was into this also.
Becase DON, it is crucial that we do.
If we wish to ever gain back an ounce of credibility with the other citizens of this world, If we even hope to ever have a voice that will be taken seriously on in the most important issues concernig the future of humanity, ours and their childrens, such as the global warming issue, then we MUST prove to ALL of humanity, that the American citizens truly believe in just standards, fair laws and that we have a fair degree of decency and moral character.
Currently the only thing other nations feel abut us is fear and hatred. Fear of our atomic weapons and of a madman who would not hesitate to deploy them and hatred fo rwhat we are allowing. ___ We have lost our honor.
That is why we must continue to fight, to have our absolutly legal Constitution obeyed, and impeach the president and the vice president.
If we just wait for another admnistration to take office, and we do not make a 'valid' attempt to correct the incredible wrongs commited by this corrupt one, then any others who may take the helm, will never have any credibility. If we don't demand that our well penned Constitution is a valid piece of paper, we do not desevre to call ourselves a leading nation, nor do we deserve to survive as one.
Yeah VAUDREE, that was just my opinion, we all have our opinions.
Has a Dick ever been impeached before? Oh yah, I forgot !
WOW. There is somebody home in the halls of Congress these days. Amazing!! And more power to them!!
I've been saying for 2 years now, that even if impeachment doesn't work, at least bringing it to the table shows the world that we are not behind this administrations reckless actions.
The Senate didn't confirm Bill's impeachment. The process brought out the crimes and the truths however. That will occur if and when Cheney is impeached and you can bet some will end up in jail or perhaps on trial in a world court.
Support Cindy Sheehan.
Doing that puts pressure on Pelosi, who can be remembered in the history books as "Pelosi, the woman who saved America" or "headmistress of the Pe-lousiest Congress that ever was". Polls lower than Bush's!
Be sure to tell Pelosi that she could be President already, if she hadn't wasted the last year waiting for the Republican party to split with its past, all due to self-enlightenment on their part. She's wasting our time, her own time, her legacy and our future.
All I want for Christmas is a brand new President.
Don't want no job or money that would help to pay my rent.
Don't want new cars, nor to dance with stars, it is clear what I have meant.
If I catch the ear of ol' Santa dear, bring a brand new President!
No rights reserved. Any rebroadcast or other use is strictly hibited.
You know, I think there is something especially repugnant about the dems' weakness in pursuing impeachment. At least I can respect republicans for having a perspective on the world and fighting tooth and nail to make it happen. It's a horrible vision, but they get high marks in my book for execution.
The dems on the other hand are clearly not up to the task, and even their rhetoric is shown to be hollow, worthless, pablum. Pelosi may as well be a republican because that's how she behaves. And I used to respect Conyers, but he just laid down and died.
As mentioned earlier, it begs the question if Bush and pals have dirt on Pelosi and Conyers. Then again, maybe they were just bullied and threatened with extradition and waterboarding if they stepped out of line.
But I would never, in a million years, ever, ever vote for a democrat again. Period. I don't care how much brow-beating goes on around here about the lesser of two evils. Evil is evil. I mean really, how many times do folks have to sit through the 'good cop, bad cop' routine before you figure it out. The party in power here is the corporate capitalist party; Rs and Ds are just different flavors of the same poison.
I hope ... I hope ... Oh how I really hope he gets impeached!!!!
KEM PATRICK, I have a sore throat so my fantasies about Cheney going to jail are apt to be a bit inappropriate because it makes me feel better about my sore throat.
I hope that Cheney is eventually brought down as much as you do.
It takes money to try to get an impeachment. Starr did not work for free! The reason Starr went after Clinton was to make it easier for the Republicans to beat the Democrats.
Going after Bush doesn't make it easier for the Democrats to beat the Republicans - and right now all the money they can get their hands on is going to fund the war between Democratic candidates for President. I am not saying that this is OK, just the way it is.
Still say your best hope is Shreiber.
culicomorpha says: Evil is evil. I mean really, how many times do folks have to sit through the 'good cop, bad cop' routine before you figure it out.
Actually I watched Bon Cop Bad Cop once and figured that it didn't live up to the hype.
Cheney is evil. Cheney is also quite clever and plays dirty. He is not an easy person to take down. There was a law in the United States making it illegal to do trade with Iran during the Clinton years. Cheney was CEO of Haliburton at the time and Haliburton did trade with Iran, but they could not pin it on Cheney. Being evil doesn't prevent Cheney from covering his asterix.
The Unauthorized Biography of Dick Cheney - (Haliburton Years) - link to doc near top:
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/dickcheney/halliburton.html
"They also argue, correctly, that the hearings are necessary if Congress is to restore its position in the Constitutionally-defined system of checks and balances." --
Any sane person in this country with eyes to see knows that this great country is on the brink of changing into another (as was true previously) poor Latin American nation. Why? because the greed was too easy to pass up after 9/11 when the people were stunned, like a purse snatcher taking advantage of an opportunity. That is bad enough, except that it wasn't just money that has been stolen. This just may be our last chance, for a very long time to come, to set right, and secure the Democratic state of our nation as it should be.
What kind of political parties do you have here anyway?
Real political parties have positions. For example: Party X is for the death penalty, presumably because someone else, Party Y is against it. If you like the death penalty vote for Party X, if not, vote for Party Y.
Here, you have Democrats, ostensibly a political party, with some supporting the Republican bills and others (hopelessly outnumbered) making symbolic but futile gestures to introduce legislation favored by a majority of the people.
Don't you think they are just trying to do enough to retain the minimum public support they need to get reelected for the umpteenth time?
Wouldn't it be simpler to vote for someone who has shown that they are serious about giving you what you want and who wants it as well?
And what's with this "unelectable" nonsense? If you want electable, vote Republican. They are clearly electable.
How can a politician who advances the cause of a majority of the people be unelectable?