Kos diarist Think Blue argues against those who maintain that impeachment is impractical and a distraction from other legislation. The argument comes down to this: We do not know what investigation of impeachment charges will bring.
My argument: Even if such investigations do not bring about removal of the President, they will weaken him. I do not see a "1998 effect" taking place in 2007. The weaker W becomes, the easier it is for people within his party to oppose his policies. One does not need too much imagination to see a situation in which a few Republican senators decide to bargain: "I won't vote for removal, but I will vote with you on Iraq."
Pragmatism demands impeachment.
6 comments:
Well, perhaps. But perhaps it would harden Republican resolve in a way that would preclude their making concessions on Iraq or elsewhere.
For frankly, everybody in the GOP is tied into the Bush programme, and it is hard to see their percentage in discrediting their icon and brand name still further. And likely, impeachment grounds would include the fraudulent nature of the case for invading Iraq, which they all (save Ron Paul, I think) supported vigorously, and which their base still supports as the dead-ender 25% support this war still (incredibly) commands in the public.
Basically, even though political instinct would dictate every man for himself in such a situation, let the Devil take the hindmost, and let the president be buried in attacks from the other side, the Republican politicians must be mindful of their idiotic deluded base, who STILL support these failed policies and this moronic war criminal. I think they could neither roll over to meekly accept impeachment hearings, nor join in deadline legislation veto overrides, without serious political problems from their own side's propaganda drivers savagely attacking them as faint-hearted quislings.
I still favor impeachment hearings, a majority vote to impeach, and hope for a critical mass to convict and remove to be reached en route, via what would come out in this process. I just doubt that it would gain GOP concessions in the meantime.
sofla
I fear that the Senate Democrats are quickly forgetting the message from the last election.
Why would they STILL try to reach a compromise with a President who has no credibility left? How many American lives have to be lost so that w. can save face? Why do Reid & Co. want to allow this? Why?
Especially now, as the courageous Iraqis are getting ready for a two-month holiday while our soldiers are forced stay there and fight. I can think of no better time to get them out of that bloody god-forsaken sandbox.
I agree, Joe. Impeachment hearings would be the beginning of some real "compromise." Nothing should be off the table at this point.
Kim in PA
to my mind, for what that's worth, there is no conscionable position against impeachment proceedings. there are SO many fronts on which to attack, and SO many data more than suggesting criminal activities. to avoid this responsibility at this point is to be derelict as a citizen, and certainly as an elected official, no matter what the polls say.
and as for those who even think for a second about the '98 effect, say what??? if there is ANYthing that fiasco taught us is that the public sees right through a sham (if only eventually; again, lincoln was so right) and knew exactly what was going on with that.
this is why bush did not really win in 2000; he never captured the public who were already souring to newt's corrupt contract with america. the only intervening variable that shifted things was 9/11, and now the public sees way past how manipulative those calls have become.
again, to my mind, the recent drop in approval for congress is precisely because we all WANT impeachment, as least more aggressive investigations.
and look where we are: it's only may, for cryin' out loud, and so much has been exposed already! leahy said a month or two ago that he was amazed that they'd been at this for such a short time and every tree they go up, they find a cat. just think if they keep looking....
as for the legislation that does not get done; i am not the least bit worried about that. any legislation that is attempted now is hobbled by this bush albatross, and thus is not at all viable or truly legal. seems to me that, if we really want real legislation to happen we need to quit kidding ourselves and recognize that, until bush is gone, politics will be this ridiculous game of cat and mouse and nothing of any value will get done anyway.
only when we have rid ourselves of gonzo, then cheney, then bush - IN THAT ORDER - will be begin to recover our government enough to actually pursue real and meaningful legislation, with teeth and public support.
to my mind, anyhow; for what that's worth.
Amen to dr. elsewhere's summation. And here's one big plus to impeachment efforts, even if they fail: the rest of the world will hear and understand that Bush is a false king.
Impeachment - go for it.
Each and every rock that is turned over will reveal an odd/nasty insect and/or worm. There is nothing pretty or benevolent about this bu$$h mis-administration.
Hang their dirty, damp, shitty, pissy, and filthy laundry outside for all too see.
If the world knew 1/3 of what most devout liberals and progressives know of bu$$hCo - they too would be ill and repulsed by this fascist government.
Kim in PA.
Especially now, as the courageous Iraqis are getting ready for a two-month holiday while our soldiers are forced stay there and fight. I can think of no better time to get them out of that bloody god-forsaken sandbox.
And that is really only half of it.
The Iraqi people do not want their Parliament or government to support the Hydro-Carbon Laws/Oil Sharing Agreements. To avoid constant harassment from the American/European oil barons and the ambassadors of these foreign embassies to sign these petrol give away agreements - the members of Parliament is going off on a two month summer vacation.
The astounding thing the Democratic Party has done is miss the opportunities to bow out of the bloodbath that is Iraq - THEY WERE SERVED UP A GET OUT OF THE IRAQ WAR FREE - But the Demos have failed to take the ball and run with it.
The Gift from the Iraqi Parliament to the American Democratic Party that is being allowed to rot on the vine ?
The Iraqi Parliament declared themselves a sovereign state - no one argues about that except the ultra-fascists.
The sovereign state of Iraq wants all foreign military soldiers off their soil with in the next calender year.
WHY HAS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY NOT TAKEN UP THE CAUSE TO REMOVE AMERICAN TROOPS FROM THE SOVEREIGN COUNTRY OF IRAQ - THEY HAVE GIVEN US THE IDEA ON A SILVER PLATTER ?
Why doesn't the American Democratic Party exploit this opportunity to depart Iraq, honor the wishes of the Iraqi people to get this fumble fuck bu$$hCo out of Iraq and allow the sovereign state of Iraq to run their internal affairs as they want to. This bu$$hCo Iraqi war was a fraudulent and illegal invasion and it was an egregiously failed occupation - GW bu$$h, Cheney and Rummy are incompetent people to be running any war any where on the earth.
...
Majority of Iraqi Lawmakers Now Reject Occupation
By Raed Jarrar and Joshua Holland, AlterNet. Posted May 9, 2007.
More than half of the members of Iraq's parliament rejected for the first time on Tuesday the continuing occupation of their country. The U.S. media ignored the story.
On Tuesday, without note in the U.S. media, more than half of the members of Iraq's parliament rejected the continuing occupation of their country. 144 lawmakers signed onto a legislative petition calling on the United States to set a timetable for withdrawal, according to Nassar Al-Rubaie, a spokesman for the Al Sadr movement, the nationalist Shia group that sponsored the petition.
It's a hugely significant development. Lawmakers demanding an end to the occupation now have the upper hand in the Iraqi legislature for the first time; previous attempts at a similar resolution fell just short of the 138 votes needed to pass (there are 275 members of the Iraqi parliament, but many have fled the country's civil conflict, and at times it's been difficult to arrive at a quorum).
Reached by phone in Baghdad on Tuesday, Al-Rubaie said that he would present the petition, which is nonbinding, to the speaker of the Iraqi parliament and demand that a binding measure be put to a vote. Under Iraqi law, the speaker must present a resolution that's called for by a majority of lawmakers, but there are significant loopholes and what will happen next is unclear.
http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/51624/
WHY IS THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY NOT SCREAMING THIS FROM THE TOP OF EVERY HILL AND ON EVERY NEWS/MEDIA OUTLET ?
Post a Comment