So what is more important, proving that we can govern and making the case for future Democratic majorities? Or a high-profile vendetta campaign against Bush? It really is just one or the other.You bet it is. Democrats can never and will never be able to govern effectively as long as the right controls this country. I do not mean Congressional control or even executive branch control -- I mean thought control. Control of the debate. Control of the underlying political assumptions that most people carry with them.
It's an easy call.
Until the right-wing ideologists who maintain that level of control are crushed and forevermore discredited, any Democratic victories will be short-lived and, of necessity, heavily compromised. Governance -- true governance -- is not now possible. A progressive politician requires a progressive populace.
I'm sorry to break the news to you, but despite the nation's momentary annoyance with Mr. Bush's war, most Americans remain, in their hearts, thatclose to fascism. Do you see any evidence that members of the Booboisie (to use Mencken's term) are no longer thoughtless, ill-read and poorly-educated? Mr. and Ms. Average Americano remain easily swayed by the Id-based appeal, by greed, by ethnocentricity, by bigotry, by superstition, by jingoism, by short-term thinking, by appeals to fear. The old SubGenius joke still holds true: "You know how dumb the average guy is? By definition, half the people are dumber than that."
How can progressives hope to speak to a citizenry raised on Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, a citizenry frenzied with religious madness, a citizenry which has forgotten that this country prospered under a steeply progressive income tax system, a citizenry which refuses to understand its own best interests?
The only way to create an ideological shift is to humiliate Bush and to obliterate everything he stands for.
Only impeachment can accomplish that goal.
Do not trumpet your virtues, Democrats. Do not attempt to do anything in a positive sense. Not now, not yet. First crush the enemy. Obliterate him. Grind him into dust and then dissolve the dust in acid and then bury the acid in the desert and then drop a nuclear bomb on that patch of desert. Do so while you can. You have only a short space, for the foe retains the advantages of money, media and sheer shamelessness. The bad guys will regain their muscles -- and soon. Within months.
Aux armes citoyens! Formez vos bataillons! SCREAM IMPEACHMENT -- EVERY DAY, EVERY HOUR -- UNTIL WE GET IT!
(And I swear, if any of you fucking progressives "purists" write "But Nancy Pelosi said..." you will be banned forevermore from these pages. Rome has spoken, and heresy has no rights -- at least not on my blog.)
17 comments:
Can't we come up with something stronger than impeachment? They can't get off that easily!
Hey Cannon, I agree that if you get impeached for a blow job, then blowing away Iraq probably qualifies too. I don't think impeachment should be off the table. I am also much more inclined to not go for impeachment and go straight for a war crimes charge because it will stick. Impeachment depends on the wrong people kinda sorta, War crimes doesn;t.
I think the 110th Congress could and should repeal the Patriot Act and this wiretapping without warrant.
You see, what Americans are forgetting and Bush told us first, is that terrorists seek to change our way of life.They hate how we live. Then we got Patriot Act, changing our lives, then we got bogged down in Iraq changing our lives again.
Who are these terrorists by the way..... from the looks of things, according to Bush's definition????
Did anyone hear or read that Newt wants to limit free speech to catch terrorists.... Now remember the terrorists want to change our way of life....
Who is winning ?
Aw, come on. No posts from naysayers? I wanna see Joseph ban some people for life.
Also, Kos is a schmuck.
Everything you said is true, Joe, but I don't think it needs to be that complicated. This is the heart of the matter: if we don't impeach, we lose our very souls.
Screw Kos. He lost his soul a while back, which is why he can't see what's plain as day to those of us who haven't.
But I'd settle for Jen's proposal--war crimes prosecution. And Blair better be sitting right there next to Bush as co-defendant. They can hold hands.
How will impeachment -- at this stage -- alter the political consciousness of this country (if that, in fact is the goal)?
Didn't the Republicans try that one?
How will impeachment -- at this stage -- alter the political consciousness of this country (if that, in fact is the goal)?
Didn't the Republicans try that one?
It will alter it by educating the populace about the true nature of the crimes that have been committed. What the Repubs did was empty political theatre, done purely and simply to whip their base base (not a typo) into frothing lunacy, which helped them hold onto power. The people learned nothing except to fear the power of the R's to dominate the media agenda.
What I hope will come from any investigations is that it will form the basis of infomation to be used by the Hague.
Folks, this isn't 1973....
The public ignorance and sheer idiocy which Joseph was lamenting won't be cured by impeachment. While it's certainly true that rigorous investigation could reveal a level of unforeseen criminality, even enough to appall the Jesus-freaks, this Administration's record of lies and malfeasance is already known to anyone disposed to see it.
You all talk as if politics -- and consciousness -- were rational processes. Remember, only about half the country (if that) belongs to the reality-based community. The rest are lost in a medieval fantasy of divine revelation and posthumous rewards.
Don't get me wrong: I'd love to see Bush and Cheney led off to jail. But that won't change the country (or the corporate media), which is perfectly capable of electing another stooge like GWB. His current name is John McCain.
That said, I'm all for impeachment and trial. But it's mad to suppose the process will redeem the know-nothings of this country.
How will impeachment -- at this stage -- alter the political consciousness of this country (if that, in fact is the goal)?
Didn't the Republicans try that one?
Yep. Worked, too. Maybe Clinton did not get hounded from office, but look who suceeded him. Without impeachment in 1998, and without the constant attacks from the right, W stood no chance in 2000.
The idea is to chance consciousness.
Any chance W had in 2000 was due (I'd argue) solely to the hostility the MSM had to Al Gore, and the extraordinary indulgence granted W. And god knows, they're still at it.
The Clinton impeachment fiasco MAY have helped W, but it's also true that the house impeachment managers lost their [southern!] seats.
Among all the arguments for impeachment, this one seems the weakest. We are not a rational, deliberative society, we more closely resemble pre-literate peoples than informed citizens of an industrial democracy.
What did people learn from Richard Nixon? A brief interlude with Jimmy Carter, followed by two terms of Ronald Reagan.
It was once said of Tiger Woods that he wins because he is not afraid to win.
I wish the Democrats oculd understand this idea at its most visceral level. Starting in January, they need to seize the moment, define the debate, dictate the talking points, and take no compromises from the corporate media looking to the future when the progressive "moment" is passed.
Self-appointed gatekeepers like Kos need to either get on board or STFU. "Moderate" voices with their own selfish agendas should be crushed. I detest these cowards.
There have been times in history when the political moderation was essential. Now is not one of those times. We may never know such times again.
Impeachment is not just about a single outcome, it is about the process of Discovery, public hearings, public humiliation of an entire Party, Prime-time Senate interrogations, and ultimately an identifiable, historical change in course. This is no third-rate burglary, after all.
Joseph is right about something else here, too. We may only have months. Some are saying that Bush not only will send more troops in to massively escalate the Iraq "conflict," but he will do so within months because he is so incensed by the strengthening opposition, namely the ISG findings. Scary. We cannot be afraid to win.
Kim in PA
joe, SO glad you took up this topic. and if it will not be seen as doubling up, i may well post what i've been working on for this kos nonsense. he and his ilk have just...well, i have a host of analogies i'll save for the post.
in the meantime, unirealist is absolutely correct, as ever. those of us old enough to remember the watergate hearings (THE best TV, EVER!!) know the difference it made. it wasn't just the resignation of a president, it was the church commission and all those rules to try to contain the cia and special operations, etc. and the wave brought in jimmy carter, arguably the finest person to ever sit in our modern oval office. the short duration of his office was so much a function of dirty tricks and all those things that were supposedly brought under control after watergate, it's clear the message for us today is to get to the bottom of all that motivation for undue - and unconstitutional - power.
i'll have more soon, but in the meantime, it wasn't sam ervin who asked that famous question of john dean, 'what did the president know and when did he know it?' it was republican senator from tennessee, howard baker.
though sam ervin was worth the price of admission all by himself, every single night. with cspan in play these days, we could easily get a replay of executive malfeasance on display.
but, again, more on all these details soon. and thanks again joe; this is just so important.
and bozosrnot4bush, i urge you to stay tuned. you have taken the general position of kos and chris bowers, and i submit that it is erroneous. for numbers of reasons, not least of which is the fact that there was no public or congressional support for impeachment when the hearings first began in 73. it was what unfolded that forced the issue. because the citizens are not the idiots politicians and the media take them for when they are presented with the truth. and because members of congress are ultimately beholden to their constituents.
more sooner....
HA!! booman has the right idea here. though there is so much more to it than this, particularly with respect to the lame views of kos and chris bowers. booman speaks directly to the iraq crisis:
http://www.rawstory.com/showoutarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.boomantribune.com%2Fstory%2F2006%2F12%2F9%2F18846%2F1139
The president and company broke the law, continue to break the law, and flaunt the fact. They have to be held accountable.
It's as easy as that.
-Zolodoco
Broke the law, continues to break the
law, and flaunts the fact. They have
to be held accountable or every
President in the future will be able
to say "Bush did it so I can too!"
The fact that there are twenty comment support the fervent desire of Americans to hold their elected officials accountable, Unfortunately until the Democrats are a clearly defined opposite of the Republicans they will always be known as Republican lite.
The hold by corporations over our government must cease and all dems and progressives must be calling for publicly financed elections. This is a no brainer and even the average voter will recognize the merits of it.
This along with a voting system that is fraud proof will end the fascist slide in its tracks.
I believe America has three peoples, the Corporatists, The Average, The Progressives, maybe it is time for three political parties.
sofla said...
Hate to be pessimistic, but after the Nixon impeachment, the hard right spent billions (yes, with a b) of dollars in constructing a mighty Wurlitzer noise machine, from influential think tanks that provide sinecures for out of power cons, to major newspapers, hate talk radio, and the rest.
That huge network of communication and influence organs is not going anywhere, and provided the anti-Clinton forces with the ability to impeach Clinton even against substantial public disapproval.
We've already seen their power moves with regard to savaging presumptive Speaker Pelosi and her team, and their power is such that in this case, they had the Democrats take the bait, hook, line and sinker.
So, we are not simply up against GOP figures and this administration, but a whole media complex of considerable and lasting power, without anything comparable in place as a counterweight. The so-called liberal media either isn't liberal at all, or is so cowed and intimidated that they cease to function as liberal counterweights. I pick the first option-- they are not liberal at all, in the final analysis, but handmaidens to power.
Educating the ignorant public about this administration's crimes is important and necessary, but will prove harder than one might imagine with the kind of noise smoke screen these assets will gin up to confuse the issue.
As Robert Parry (consortiumnews.com) argues, unless and until the left creates a comparable media infrastructure to counter what the right has built up over several decades and with billions of dollars of investment, Democrats and liberals and those leftward of them will have a tough time making their case on the merits.
Post a Comment