271 comments so far and not one mention of the guy who introduced the impeachment bill, Dennis Kucinich. Why is the one guy who consistently calls for getting out of Iraq, single payer and vp impeachment given so little support from the so-called left? Really. What is w/ you people? Are you all star struck? Has the msm already decided for you what choices are permissible? I have come to the conclusion that the reason there is so little progress in ‘progressive’ is that the followers are just as cowardly as their leaders.

We don’t need to talk about Kucinich because he already favors impeachment (of Cheney). It’s everyone else we need to get on board — and we need Bush’s name added to the articles Kucinich has against Cheney. Impeach them both simultaneously.

In Scarecrow’s prior column, we find this passage:

Congressional Democrats are working to change our Iraq policies by persuading sufficient Republicans to join in imposing a different strategy on a recalcitrant President and Vice President. But as Glenn Greenwald rightly points out, what’s left of the Republican Party has so thorougly embraced this war and the mindset supporting it that it may be incapable of providing sufficient votes to rein in this Administration. This is their war, and their base won’t let them let go.

This is exactly why the Republican Congresscritters will never back impeachment. Much to their sorrow, come 2008.

What their base wants is diametically opposed to what the rest of us want.

This doesn’t mean we shouldn’t push for impeachment. But we mustn’t take it too hard if it doesn’t happen, because pushing it and then watching them run from it will be like allowing them to filibuster: Letting them shoot themselves in the feet, over and over again, until November of 2008.

Ok, so it’s the next day and I doubt you’ll come back to this thread and see this, but I’ll give it a go anyway…

Not even Rethugs get re-elected with 28% of the vote. Do not confuse “the base” with a sufficient majority of voters to win. Rethugs like their jobs, they’ll bend. Heck, they’re bending now on Iraq. Begin impeachment and watch their house of cards collapse.

Mrs. K8 @ 38

My illustrious (NOT!) Senator Kyl came out in support of Vitter, suggesting that no crime was committed (!!!).

I guess D.C. Madam Jeanne Palfrey will be happy to know that prostitution is no longer illegal.

Perhaps Kyl’s comments suggest it might be wise to look for Arizona area codes in Palfrey’s released phone records.

Ooops Another underlying crime wave

Maybe Vitter was the “underlying” one?

But maybe Kyl thinks that the only thing that happened was a little “Pampering”!

Laurie @ 62

Over at DailyKos 1400 people have already commented on a new Senator Russ Feingold post explaining why he thinks impeachment is a bad idea. He’s been flooded with replies and has written one update. He said to keep the comments coming. I suggest everyone reading hear go to this link and add your voice.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/7/16/133049/958

I’ve registered, but can’t figure out how to post. Help?

Have you figured it out yet? I’ve been out all evening. You do have to wait 24 hours if you just registered. If you’re OK in that regard, you should be able to post a comment by clicking on the “post comment” command right at the bottom of the diary itself. Hope this helps.

Published on Friday, May 12, 2006
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0512-28.htm

Cowardice asks the question: is it safe? Expediency asks the question: is it political? Vanity asks the question: is it popular? But conscience asks the question: is it right? And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor political, nor popular – but one must take it simply because it is right. — Martin Luther King, Jr.

fewer and fewer defenders of the first two categories here, and 1400 comments at the Orange Borg!

their rationales are crumbling, soon we will see whether the (D) party really wants to restore this country to a functional Constitutional Republic, or whether they are bought off by a few peices of silver and threats of blackmail, or or too far under the sway of the wishes of the government of a country other than the USA.

Pelosi could be acclaimed through history for doing the right thing, and get to be the first female President, even a few months ahead of the dreadful harridan Hillary Clinton, or she will be a footnote for scholars studying the demise of the US of A, the obscure answer to the question “was there anyone who could have stopped Bush/Cheney before the use of nuclear weapons against the people of Iran?”

see also http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts07162007.html

for an added note of urgency.

while Harry Reid’s parlaimentary pawn gambit is a laudable gesture, Cheny might just be about to release some giant uruk hai he has been brewing down in the sub-basement, and then these feints signifying boldness and defiance will be rather insufficient.

Because impeachment is a remedy, and because its never been used for its intended purpose, and because letting the criminals of the bush regime off scott free would FOREVER soil America, it is imperative that impeachment and removal be invoked and applied for their intended purpose – to protect the American people from criminals in the government. The bush regime crimes are exactly what impeachment was placed in the Constitution for.
.

If you’re new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

Lying about an affair vs actual constitutional abuse? There’s no comparison. If Clinton was impeached for that, Bush needs to be impeached NOW. Bill Moyers q…