Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

So You Think You Want to Impeach?

By Tim Dickinson, Mother Jones. Posted November 15, 2006.


There's little doubt that, both legally and morally, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney have earned an early retirement. But impeachment isn't a practical option.
Tools
email EMAIL
print PRINT
320 COMMENTS
111506story
111506story

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Atheists, It's Time to Stand Up to Jesus
Russell Blackford, Udo Schuklenk

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
As Foreclosure Nightmares Increase, Will More Homeowners Pay Off Their Bankers in Violence?
Scott Thill

DrugReporter:
Lies About Marijuana Drive People to a Much More Harmful Drug -- Booze
Steve Fox

Environment:
Why We Need Bees and More People Becoming Organic Beekeepers
Makenna Goodman

Food:
Despite Censorship By Beef Magnate, Michael Pollan Spreads Message About the Real Price of Cheap Food

Health and Wellness:
New York May Stop Heartless Health Insurers from Dropping Coverage When It Stops Being Profitable
William Ehart

Immigration:
NYC Marathon Raises Question of Who Is American Enough?
James E. Johnson, Jr.

Media and Technology:
Focusing on Fort Hood Killer's Beliefs Is an Easy Out to Avoid the Deeper Reasons for the Massacre
Mark Ames

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
What Michelle and Barack's Marriage Has in Common with 56 Million Other Ones
Annabelle Gurwitch

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Fetus-Shaped Potatoes? Going Undercover Inside the Weird World of Right-Wing Abortion Foes
Ann Neumann

Rights and Liberties:
"My Kids Want to Hide Their Identity; They're Scared Someone Will Attack Us": U.S. Muslims Being Targeted
Jaisal Noor

Sex and Relationships:
Instant Sex: Has the Digital Age Destroyed Relationships or Made Them Better?
Vanessa Richmond

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Why Natural Gas Is Not a Clean Energy Panacea
Stan Cox

World:
With Unemployment at 40 Percent, Afghan Teens Enlist in Army, Police
Lal Aqa Sherin

More stories by Tim Dickinson

RSS icon Main AlterNet RSS Feed

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Book Review:

The Genius of Impeachment: The Founders' Cure for Royalism and Why It Must Be Applied to George W. Bush
By John Nichols
The New Press. 217 pages. $15.95.

Pretensions to Empire: Notes on the Criminal Folly of the Bush Administration
By Lewis Lapham
The New Press. 277 pages. $24.95.

The Case For Impeachment: The Legal Argument for Removing President George W. Bush From Office
By David Lindorff and Barbara Olshansky
St. Martin's Press. 275 pages. $23.95.

Articles of Impeachment Against George W. Bush
By the Center For Constitutional Rights
Melville House Publishing. 141 pages. $9.95.

The Impeachment of George W. Bush: A Handbook for Concerned Citizens
By Elizabeth Holtzman and Cindy Cooper
Nation Books. 256 pages. $14.95.

On October 7, 2003, citizens of the world's fifth-largest economy swarmed to the ballot box to oust their feckless chief executive in a special recall election. The wellspring of their discontent? A fiscal emergency, linked to a bungled electricity crisis, which had left constituents sweltering in the dark. Vying for votes against a motley crew better suited for a season of hijinks on VH1's The Surreal Life -- a midget, a porn star, a Greek millionairess, an ex-Mr. Universe -- Governor Gray Davis was thus rudely ushered out of power and Arnold Schwarzenegger installed as commander in chief of a state reborn, in a guttural instant, as "Galifornia."

With the benefit of hindsight, it's now clear that the wrong politician got the boot for the Golden State's woes. The energy crisis had nothing to do with Davis, the tone-deaf technocrat. Instead, it was a criminal conspiracy by Enron to plunder state coffers with schemes so malevolent that company traders code-named their effort "The Death Star."

If dead men could tell tales, Ken Lay might now regale us with the secret back story of those infamous energy meetings in the White House -- the ones whose opacity Vice President Dick Cheney defended all the way to the Supreme Court -- and expose the role of the Bush administration in suborning that faux "crisis." At the time, our president laughed off calls to investigate market manipulation by his chief corporate benefactor, even as he used California's blackouts as cover for abandoning his most important campaign promise. "We're now in an energy crisis," Bush declared in the spring of 2001. "And that's why I decided to not have mandatory caps on CO2."

And perhaps, then, we as Americans would demand ultimate accountability. For if lying under oath about a sexual dalliance with a Botero-esque intern is an impeachable offense, so certainly would be administration complicity in the effort to (as one Enron trader put it so coarsely) "jam Grandma Millie...right up her asshole for fucking $250 a megawatt hour."

But why limit ourselves to speculation about misdemeanors when the administration's high crimes are hiding in plain sight:

  • Whereas the administration "fixed" intelligence to embark on a war of choice, unsanctioned by international law.

  • Whereas a criminally incompetent lack of planning has caused that conflict to drag on longer than U.S. involvement in World War II, while spurring the nuclear ambitions of the mullahs in Tehran.

  • Whereas the president authorized the National Security Administration to engage in warrantless wiretaps of American citizens in violation of the First Amendment, the Fourth Amendment, the doctrine of separation of powers, and the express will of Congress in establishing the fisa courts.

  • Whereas the president has authorized the use of torture in contravention of military law and Article Three of the Geneva Convention, violations of which, as Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy pointedly observed in the Hamdan decision, "are considered 'war crimes,' punishable as federal offenses."

  • Whereas the president has subjected "enemy combatants" to unconstitutional trial by military tribunal, and held American citizens in indefinite detention without access to lawyers or criminal courts.

  • Whereas the administration's homicidal dithering left more than a thousand of our most vulnerable countrymen to perish, needlessly, under the waters churned by Hurricane Katrina.
    • The articles of impeachment write themselves. In the case of Articles of Impeachment Against George W. Bush, it seems, the book has as well. The same charge might be levied against The Case for Impeachment, The Impeachment of George W. Bush, and the raft of other contemporary and largely indistinguishable impeachment tomes now flooding the shelves of the nation's independent booksellers. Each offers a slightly different flavor of the same soporific cocktail: detailed recitations of the president's abuses of power and faithlessness to his oath of office, crafted in limp legalese. For their collective weight in pulp, not one of these volumes has the heft of the rousing 16-page case for impeachment put forth by former Harper's editor Lewis Lapham -- that loquacious lion of the literary left -- in Pretensions to Empire, which closes with a clarion call for Congress to amputate the gangrenous reign of George W. Bush, "cauterize the wound and stem the flows of money, stupidity, and blood."

    In this undistinguished crowd, John Nichols' nervy, acerbic, passionately argued history-cum-polemic, The Genius of Impeachment, stands apart. It concerns itself far less with the particulars of the legal case against Bush and Cheney, and instead 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."

    Nichols, The Nation's Washington correspondent, traces the practice of impeachment to the 14th century, when the House of Commons first impeached two lords who were, quite literally, fleecing the government by absconding with wool from warehouses in Calais. For our Founding Fathers, impeachment wasn't a nuclear option, to be deployed only in the most dire of circumstances. Indeed, the bar for presidential removal was terribly low: In an early draft of the Constitution, George Mason followed the impeachable crimes of "treason" and "bribery" with the agreeable catchall "maladministration." James Madison prevailed upon his colleagues to turn instead to the historical language of "high crimes and misdemeanors," but as Nichols demonstrates, the two terms are roughly synonymous; the latter dates to a case from 1386 in which an earl was impeached for, among other offenses, "squandering away the public treasure" and "procuring offices for persons who were unfit, and unworthy of them." (Mike Brown, anyone?)

    Nor are efforts to impeach at all uncommon. Although only two presidents -- Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton -- have actually been impeached by the House, formal articles of impeachment have been brought against 9 of our 43 chief executives. Impeachment -- derived from the Latin word meaning "to fetter" -- is not just a tool for replacing an individual officeholder, Nichols argues; even a failed impeachment offers a vital check on the office of the presidency, a tool by which, in the words of Jefferson, Congress can "bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution." This, Nichols says, "is the true genius of impeachment... It can be stalled by partisan majorities loyal to an irresponsible leader and still extract a measure of accountability from him." One might argue this is exactly what happened to Clinton.

    In the case of Bush, impeachment would have less to do with the (admittedly far-fetched) chances of removing the man from office, Nichols argues, than with the opposition standing up for the rule of law and the Constitution, which is The Right Thing to Do -- regardless of how it might play in 2008. For Nichols, every failure by a Congress to dust off the chains of impeachment -- whether for Reagan at the height of Iran-Contra, or for Bush today -- allows the office of the presidency to creep toward what Jefferson warned of as "an elected despotism."

    Accordingly, Nichols celebrates the quixotic impeachment quests of Democratic Rep. Henry B. Gonzales, who sought to impeach Reagan over the invasion of Grenada; Republican Rep. George Bender, who did the same after Truman nationalized U.S. steel mills during the Korean War; and even a young Abraham Lincoln, who nearly scuttled his political career by seeking to impeach James K. Polk for waging war on Mexico. And Nichols savages House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, who has vigorously denied that her party will launch any impeachment proceedings should Democrats recapture the House in November -- a calculated effort to rob Republicans of an electric campaign issue with which to mobilize their base. "Pulling punches in a political battle," Nichols writes, "usually results in a knockout, with the party that holds back collapsing to the mat."

    Like many of today's progressives, Nichols believes that Doing the Right Thing and Taking a Stand have dramatic ripple effects. In this, he's an unabashed democracy idealist; you can almost hear the strains of the "Battle Hymn of the Republic" swell in the background as he writes that a push to impeach Bush could "turn the ship of state in a new direction. That turn, which will eventually be supported by Democrats, Greens, Libertarians, independents and, yes, Republicans of good will, is in a homeward direction -- back to the Constitution, to the system of checks and balances and to the most appealing of all American principles: that the rule of law applies to every citizen, 'be he President or pauper.'"

    Back in the real world, there's little doubt that, both legally and morally, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney have earned an early retirement. Hell, the administration has even lost the father of modern conservatism, William F. Buckley Jr., who said of Bush in late July: "If you had a European prime minister who experienced what we've experienced, it would be expected that he would retire or resign."

    But we don't live in Italy, and our Founding Fathers certainly never dreamed of the kind of Total Recall we saw in 2003. So we're stuck with Bush ... or with impeachment -- a truly confounding choice that none of these authors thinks through to its logical conclusion. For it to succeed -- and not just morally as Nichols suggests but in actually dethroning Bush -- articles of impeachment passed in the lower chamber would have to be approved by two-thirds of the upper, meaning more than a dozen Republican senators would have to break faith with the administration.

    Impeaching Bush alone, of course, would be of no use -- for Cheney, equally if not more culpable, is but another head of the same abominable Hydra. And there's the rub. Take away Bush, take away Cheney, and the line of succession would point to... President Nancy Pelosi. In order to replace a president who (for his many grievous sins) was popularly elected in a national election after the fiercest campaign in memory, we'd anoint a politician who hasn't faced serious opposition in two decades and was last elected by 225,000 true blue citizens... of San Francisco.

    No, I'm confident the American people would far prefer a porn star or a midget, fairly elected -- or, for that matter, two more years of the disastrous presidency of George W. Bush -- than to see the White House change hands in what could only be described as an administrative coup.
    View as a single page

    Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

    See more stories tagged with: bush, impeachment, cheney, pelosi

    Tim Dickinson is a contributing editor for Rolling Stone and also writes its political blog.

    Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


    AlterNet Home » Story Tools: email EMAILprint PRINT 320 COMMENTS
    Advertisement
    Advertisement

     

    Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
    Comments closed.
    The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.     		View:
    IMPEACH X 1000
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: rsaxto on Nov 15, 2006 12:36 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    While Dickinson wrote an interesting and readable piece, he came to a wrong conclusion. He didn't even mention the fact that the Bushies criminally stole both of their elections which means he is a false president unworthy of he office without signing a single law. Since becoming "president" he/Cheney have committed numerous crimes against the people of the USA and against the peoples of the world including the mass murder of hundreds of thousands of people in an illegal war. Impeach? Yes, yes: a thousand times YES!

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: IMPEACH X 1000 Posted by: Intraspecto
    » RE: IMPEACH X 1000 Posted by: Conservasaurus
    » RE: IMPEACH X 1000 Posted by: rsaxto
    » RE: IMPEACH X 1000 Posted by: Floradora
    » RE: IMPEACH X 1000 Posted by: tiellis
    » RE: IMPEACH X 1000..Not only would..sickofsleaze Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
    » RE: IMPEACH X 1000 Posted by: sheena2u
    Use impeachment as a threat to get past the predictable Bush vetoes.
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: Sojourner on Nov 15, 2006 1:22 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Speak softly but carry a big stick? Bush has nothing to lose by vetoing Demo legislation coming to his desk. So keep impeachment at the ready. Maybe it will get his attention.

    And then again, maybe not. That wouldn't surprise me at all.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    No alternative to Impeachment
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: bob357 on Nov 15, 2006 1:26 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Well argued article. However after listing the crimes of this administration in the article, the unmistaken conclusion must be to impeach the President and to do it as soon as possible. Before he has a chance to cause the Country any more harm by his feckless behaviour.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    A Reasonable Alternative to Impeachment
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: LeftWright on Nov 15, 2006 1:29 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    1) Cheney resigns due to health reasons,

    2) Bush appoints someone acceptable in his place (McCain?),

    3) Bush then resigns and moves to his ranch in Paraguay.

    Obviously, Bush will not do this without encouragement, so real investigations into 9/11, the pre-war intelligence book cooking, warrantless wiretapping, torture, Katrina failures, etc. will be needed.

    Bush gone and no "Pelosi problem."

    And this can all be done by July 2007 or sooner!

    The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

    Be well.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » Excuse me... Posted by: WhuThe?!?
    » RE: Ignoramus? :) Posted by: Scientz
    » RE: I know Tarpley's work. Posted by: Scientz
    » Not so sure I like that... Posted by: WhuThe?!?
    It's too late to screw around.
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: RYancey on Nov 15, 2006 1:41 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    People are dying because of Bush and Cheney. They need to be impeached and imprisoned. To do anything thing else makes our country a joke. Pelosi can pledge to not run for reelection and the world will be a better place.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: It's too late to screw around. Posted by: Intraspecto
    Teaching Justice and its opposite
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: JoeCraine on Nov 15, 2006 2:32 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Horrible crimes should be punished. It is a continuing assault against the victims and it send the worng message to those who would emulate to do otherwise.

    The investigation should begin. Let the people demand what the people will demand.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Well, this piece is not what passes for intelligent thought on the Left.
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: doinaheckuvajob on Nov 15, 2006 3:03 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    In fact it's dumb. Coming from the same magazine that mostly ignored vote fraud for 6 years too.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Riddle me this...
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: equidave on Nov 15, 2006 3:07 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    "Impeaching Bush alone, of course, would be of no use -- for Cheney, equally if not more culpable, is but another head of the same abominable Hydra. And there's the rub. Take away Bush, take away Cheney,..."

    *gasp*
    *sigh*

    People, help me here...

    Since when is being held accountable to the laws of our nation (not to mention international human rights conventions) merely a relatively high priority subservient still to the twisted trade-off thinking of modern politicking?

    How did we loose our collective anchoring upon the bedrock of clear, and clearly essential, constitutional principals to the tragic extent that each of us can, far too easily I'll admit, entertain the "logic" of Mr. Dickinson's point here? I hear him saying that impeachment, while no doubt a fate well due this mummery of an administration, is less strategically precipitous (given whatever he perceives to be the Democrats own ulterior motives to be now) than all of us animals being happy that our stall doors are now open, wandering mannerly and grateful from the barn up to the farm (White?) house and joining in a feast of humble-pie, even with our old tormentor still at the head of the table.

    Join me in shaking-off enrollment in this Orwellian endgame mindset; this browbeaten herd mentality that settles for selling-out. The key here is to realize exercising our rights to keep REALITY front and center in US democracy is not an "either/or" matter at all. Our rights guarantee us ALL our rights, not Kafkaesque trade-offs, pay-offs and dirty-pool jockeying to get the most of the least that "business as usual" has taught us to either hope for or give up on.

    Who's buying this BS?

    If the state of human affairs here on planet earth today was any less tragic, phantasmagoric and melodramatic, I'd expect to deserve having the novelty of my so-called "idealistic" questions here dismissed with a paternal snigger. But when the "parents" (or any form of higher, worthy or effective realism) are absent, nuts or pathological who are we simple people to fear for asking the right questions, no matter how apparently basic?

    Is the limit on our ability to multi-task here (carry out investigation and justice even while forwarding a redesigned set of national and international policy) a resources issue? Could someone here with stronger math skills (or better stomach for such a shameful tally) please tell us all: for what small percentage of what is being spent on Iraq (DAILY) could we, The People, fund, staff and see carried out both a thorough clean-up agenda on "accusations" of this administration's wrong-doings even while moving on with authoring an agenda of renewed purpose, service and change? (Hell, a proxy board of Kindergarden teachers, social workers and union janitors would be just fine by most of us for an unbiased examination of possible wrong-doing, no?).

    People, this is about the power of "AND"-thinking. We need not being cornered into integrity trade-offs that are tantamount to signing up for mutual culpability in nothing short of mass murder, billions in wrongful profiteering, purgery, and what all else.

    While redesigning and realigning our congressional legislative agenda to what is really fair and sustainable for a balanced and democratic American (not to mention healthier planet and happier humanity), we will ALSO exercise our rights in the service of truth, liberty and accountability to call for wholly independent investigations into all aspects of:
    1. 2004 presidential elections
    "AND"
    2. 911 attacks
    "AND"
    3. Invasion of Iraq
    "AND"
    4. War-time profiteering
    "AND"
    5. War spending accounting/misappropriations
    "AND"
    6. Civil liberties violations
    "AND"

    (tb cont'd)

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: iddle me this... Posted by: atom6277
    » 7. Mass Murder Posted by: eyeman
    » Who's buying this BS? Posted by: WhatNow?
    Riddle me (pt 2)
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: equidave on Nov 15, 2006 3:07 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    ...

    7. National disaster responsiveness
    "AND"
    8. (you add, reorder, upgrade wording here please)

    Why the hell not? What do the American people have to hide from? Are the actual mathematical majority of American voters privileged rich right-wing 'christians" who have "benefited" (as if that word had any real meaning in this context when the true costs of such greedy shortsightedness are finally accounted for) from and therefore have vested interest in NOT having all this looked into?

    We, the american people, don' t have to pre-trade away our rights to have the truth be known and accountability to core principals and laws be upheld when the only cost is our tax money to fund such exercises of democratic maintenance and the only "troubling of others" to make it their priority are to those others we supposedly elected to go to Washington to serve just such interests of our common good.

    What does adulthood, stewardship, patriotism, or even simple personal integrity mean in America today when even our children, in any local court and for even any minor offense of local town ordinance, would be held 100% accountable to the letter (of even often silly local) law, do we let those in Washington, our SERVANTS, dictate to us (whether directly through propaganda or indirectly through disempowering education that has us thinking that "logic" such as this article demonstrates as "realistic") what ercentage of our constitution and personal rights we can reasonably hope to see maintained?!


    Well???
    (!!!)

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: iddle me (pt 2) Posted by: Joyleaf
    » RE: iddle me (pt 2) thanks Posted by: dovelight
    » RE: iddle me (pt 2) Posted by: marianne
    » RE: iddle me (pt 2) Posted by: inanaturallight
    » RE: iddle me (pt 2) Posted by: symphonylee
    » Best comment so far... Posted by: BillC
    » RE: iddle me (pt 2) Posted by: Basenjis
    You must be joking ...
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: paul_revere on Nov 15, 2006 3:32 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Gee willikers! Let's see. Biggest mass murderer in our history. All those offenses against our nation and humanity laid out nicely. Let's forget about it? Not a chance.

    Clinton gets some blow jobs and inquiring minds want to know, but he lies when questioned because it's nobody's damned business. Nobody dies because of his impropriety. Millions spent to investigate and impeach.

    Then, some eco-enthusiast burns up three SUVs in Oregon. Nobody killed. 22 years in jail.

    I say -- GFY!

    The only moral and judicial thing to do is to investigate and impeach. It also bodes well for our credibility as a nation based on law if we hold people like Bush and Cheney accountable for their actions.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: You must be joking ... Posted by: Intraspecto
    » RE: Just interested Posted by: livopete
    » RE: You must be joking ... Posted by: outsidea
    » I am not joking either Posted by: jwg
    » RE: You must be joking ... Posted by: aonghus36
    » RE: You must be joking ... Posted by: outsidea
    Are we ready to go yet?
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: Joyleaf on Nov 15, 2006 3:39 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    I mean, from the sound of it some of us are. I think some action is in order, and I have this little feeling that weight's shifting in that kind of way that can signal changing tides. A little push from a lot of us could get the show on the road.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Impeachment IS an option!
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: keefus55 on Nov 15, 2006 3:51 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    If impeachment is not an option, then why did our founding fathers put that procedure in our Constitution in the first place? Clearly, this crowd has committed MORE than their fair share of "high crimes and misdemeanors".

    It seems to me that the unprovoked invasion of another sovereign state in a trumped up war which has resulted in the needless killing thousands of our own sons and daughters (not to mention hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians) would CERTAINLY beat white stains on a blue dress hands down

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: Impeachment IS an option! Posted by: markusmark
    Revolution
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: oneyedjack on Nov 15, 2006 4:06 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Number one, ain't nothing credible about Mother Jones (the magazine); number two, it needs to be a people impeachment. If we want to impeach Bush and Company we the people need to do it ourselves. Kinda like the Italians and Mussolini during WWII. It is the people (all humanity) that have been harmed and murdered during the Bush regime, it is the people (all people's) who should mete out the punishment; not a bunch of wimpy Democrats who couldn't hit their asses with a board. And I count Mother Jones (the magazine) among them. If MJ wanted to live up to its namesake they would take to the streets and raise some hell, but that ain't gonna happen.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: evolution Posted by: BillC
    » Viva La Revolucion! Posted by: crisman
    You want two more years of death and destruction?
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: NonnyO on Nov 15, 2006 4:06 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot...?

    At every turn I encounter naysayers who STILL refuse to deal with reality. Hundreds of thousands of people have died for the sake of LIES and oil (not to mention record profits for oil corporations). They have all died in vain, not for "our freedoms," that's for sure! We do not have any "freedoms" left!

    The Military Commissions Act of 2006 (aka 'detainee bill' to Lamestream Media, aka 'torture bill' to most bloggers) obliterated the US Constitution, The Bill of Rights, the Geneva Conventions, and US laws. It also gave Dumbya dictatorial powers (which I don't think he wants passed on to the next president). Dumbya and his administration are retroactively exempt from being charged with war crimes uncer MCA '06. TECHNICALLY, we do not have the republic the Founding Fathers gave us. TECHNICALLY, we are right now living in a dictatorship!

    First our Congress Critters need to deal with that bit of toilet paper legislation and repeal it immediately! Other crappy legislation like the so-called Patriot Act and its amendments need to be repealed, as well as the other legislation that has taken away our rights and privileges and privacy. The other legislation the Dems want to pass can be written right now, if it hasn't been already, and it can be read, understood, and voted on in the first month after they're sworn in on Jan. 3 - IF they want to do the will of the people who elected them, that is, and not keep flapping their jaws while more people die. They also need to get the guard and reserve troops home immediately, and redeploy the regular military elsewhere. There's no "victory" to be had in Iraq for the simple reason the invasion was unconstitutional, and a war crime under the Geneva Conventions - just as torture and concentration camps at Gitmo and elsewhere are war crimes.

    With investigations into what we already know are war crimes and so many lies we've lost count, impeachment proceedings could start as early as March, more charges could be added as more crimes are revealed. After they're impeached, they can be turned over to the World Court at The Hague and be tried for war crimes.

    Put Congress in gridlock until the criminals are out of office? I'd be only too happy if that happened. Ecstatic, even.

    It won't. But that's my daydream..... I don't think Congress has a set of stones between all of them. They're all still afraid Georgie might call them unpatriotic, when the only patriotic thing they could do is impeach, stop this bloody awful war based on LIES. The dead who died for those lies are crying out for JUSTICE!

    IMPEACH! Then send the criminals to The Hague to be tried for war crimes...!

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    A Ridiculous Arguement!
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: theskywolf on Nov 15, 2006 4:12 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    The idea of not impeaching is beyond reasonable.

    It does not matter who the President is if they are from either Democrat or Republican Party. Both suck at the teat of corporate America. Bush/Cheney have repeatedly violated the Constitution and the moral principles of right and wrong that guide this world.

    Impeachment sends a message: Do what's right by the people or pay the price!

    We've had enough of this namby-pamby bullshit. Bush and Cheney and the rest of their cabal have violated the trust of the American people as well as the people of the world. They must pay.

    And if Pelosi becomes President, something I don't particularly relish, and she steps out of line, IMPEACH HER TOO! And continue right down the line until they understand:
    IT'S OUR COUNTRY AND BY GOD YOU'LL DO THE JOB WE SEND YOU TO DO!

    Skywolf.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: A Ridiculous Arguement! Posted by: Scientz
    » RE: A Ridiculous Arguement! Posted by: livopete
    » RE: A Ridiculous Arguement! Posted by: Scientz
    » RE: A Ridiculous Arguement! Posted by: aonghus36
    » RE: A Ridiculous Arguement! Posted by: Scientz
    No time for impeachment
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: robchapman on Nov 15, 2006 4:14 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    The Democrats and the progressive movement have just erased Reaganism as a political force in America. There is no time in the political agenda now for retroactive score settling.
    Bush is clearly irrelevant. His dispatch to Vietnam without a signed trade agreement is demonstrative of his lack of clout.
    Now is the time for the 110th Congress to establish a legislative blueprint of progressivism.
    Whether the legislation is signed into law or vetoed is less important than that the Democrats craft a tenable vision for progressive governance.
    Impeachment is a waste of time and effort.

    Robert Chapman
    Lansing, NY

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: No time for impeachment Posted by: Scientz
    » Yes, time for impeachment Posted by: Earthie
    » RE: Yes, time for impeachment Posted by: markusmark
    » RE: No time for impeachment Posted by: Zarquan
    » RE: No time for impeachment Posted by: Basenjis
    » RE: No time for impeachment Posted by: Zarquan
    » RE: No time for impeachment Posted by: mdruss42
    Impeachment is an option
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: Tom Degan on Nov 15, 2006 4:27 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    The important thing to remember, I believe, is that a precedant needds to be established. Bush and Cheney need not only to be forcably removed from office by means of a constitutionally viable option, but they also need to be punished, severely, for what they must have known were high crimes. Why do you think they have gone to such lengths to cover their tracks? Why do you think the VEEP went all the way to the Suprmem Court to keep his so-called energy task force secret from the American public?

    No president in the history of this once great nation has ever removed from office by the legislative branch of our government - in spite of overwhelming evidence that more than one of them should have been. Please, let's make an example of not only George W. Bush, but his entire admiministration. Not only is the evidence there, it's overwhelming and undeniable!

    Pray for peace.

    Tom Degan
    Goshen, NY
    "The Rant" by Tom Degan

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: Impeachment is an option Posted by: mdruss42
    impeachment isn't good enough
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: schnoggi on Nov 15, 2006 4:29 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Bush and Cheney are guilty of high treason on so very many counts, the punishment needs to be fit the crimes. They really do need to be hung at high noon. No, it won't happen, but it would most certainly be appropriate. Hey secret service guy who's going to drop this in my file, stop being such an idiot and do something useful with your life.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: impeachment isn't good enough Posted by: Intraspecto
    Brass Tacks
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: equidave on Nov 15, 2006 4:36 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    What organization (grass roots or institutional) is the most organized, capable and already leading in impeachment centered ACTION?

    Let's get this forum practical with an assessment of optimal, viable "next steps".

    *is Googling now, but would like this community's inside advice/opinion*

    Standing by (to end all standing by),
    -dm

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: Brass Tacks start Posted by: dovelight
    It Must Come From Us
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: Earthie on Nov 15, 2006 4:46 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    It bothers me not at all that many in positions of leadership now speak of impeachment as "off the table". This is, after all, government of, for and by "the people", which is us. Many seem to want to forget the "by" part of this reality.

    We have a few months before the 110th Congress (which will be under a Democratic majority) is sworn in. This means that men of integrity such as Conyers and Waxman will chair key committees charged with oversight of the crimes that we have seen openly committed by Bush and Cheney. We (those of us who believe firmly that impeachment is both warranted and necessary) have those few months to muster and show support for this cause.

    Remember that Senator Rus Feingold (my Junior Senator from Wisconsin, thank you) stood up and called for censure of Bush just a couple of months ago. He was met with resounding silence. The silence of cowardice and complicity rather than reasoned judgement, if you want my opinion, but silence nonetheless. Not very encouraging to those in Congress who might now consider the more severe measure of impeachment.

    In short, impeachment is a remote likelihood without strong support from "we the people". And that support must be shown by means other than well reasoned books by a few authors and unscientific polls by "news" media. Certainly those have their place in the grand scheme of things, but they are mere prelude to the real work that must be done by US.

    Join a group, form a group, write letters, march, demonstrate and maintain the public dialog at a high level, it's the only way this will happen. And I'm convinced that for the sake of our country and the world, it must. We're doing it in my community, if you've not begun doing it in yours, please do so.

    One technique we will be utilizing, in addition to those mentioned above, is to place an ad in the local paper with a "clip and send" ballot for impeachment by which people can vote for the process to begin by mailing it to Conyers and others. Perhaps you have more and better ideas on how to get the word to Washington that we're behind this. Share them.

    I look forward to working with you on this.
    Peace

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: It Must Come From Us Posted by: symcokid
    What About The Low-Foreheads?
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: Narco-NYC on Nov 15, 2006 4:49 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    I dig it. Since Articles of Impeachment there seems to be even more reason to impeach. And once more, when the supoenas are finally issured. Wow! America is going to get the true story of a mind-blowingly-corrupt administration. Impeachment? Yes, way! But again, as I have asked for six years. Where is the populous outrage? What about the working folks, like the ones I work with? There were no mass demonstrations against the illegal wiretaps, bungled Katrina response, use of cheap hype to go to war and incredible dementing of consitution to imprison sans trial.
    Does it matter that none of the outrages of the bushies actually effect a family and their car payments? I don't know what I'm trying to say, only that there seems to be two Americas. My low-forhead cohorts don't want to impeach the president, but they couldn't say why. And pol. sci. grads like me, that do. Don't we have to be united for impeachment?

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: What About The Low-Foreheads? Posted by: inanaturallight
    trust the people
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: jeanbee on Nov 15, 2006 4:51 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    The pragmatic clincher for the anti-impeachment crowd seems to be the impossibility of getting 67 Senators - which would have to include at least 16 Republicans - to vote for conviction.

    What these people ignore is the role of public opinion in the success or failure of impeachment proceedings. Low public approval for Nixon caused him to see the writing on the wall, and he resigned; high public approval for Clinton insulated him from the purely ideological drive against him by Republicans in Congress, and protected him from conviction in the Senate.

    IMO as Congressional investigations, fully reported in a press kept even minimally honest by bloggers, reveal the colossal crimes, bungling and plundering of the treasury committed by this administration, public disapproval of Bush/Cheney will plummet further and faster than anyone can imagine. As they approach 20% & 10% respectively in public approval, you can bet that plenty of Republican Senators will be only too happy to vote to convict.

    The key, though, is to impeach both - not just Bush. The American people already despise Cheney; Bush they just see as feckless, not the dangerous, self-serving tyrant he really is.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    To impeach or not to impeach
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: Pau on Nov 15, 2006 5:05 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Terrible article by Dickinson.
    "to replace a president who was popularly elected". Where did he get that from? Cheating is how he got to be president. Therefore he can hardly be considered a legal president.
    To condone all the crimes the Bushies have perpetrated, for the sake of practicality, is completely amoral, contrary to what I thought should be the american values and permit politicians to ignore the constitution.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    This article is really bad
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: brad on Nov 15, 2006 5:06 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    It basically makes a case for impeachment and then says, nah, it would look bad. The only thing that would look bad is the republican (and some dems) corruption and collution with corporations. If we don't impeach the next time they take power, and there will be a next time, they will only start from where this admin ended and go further. The only way to save democracy is to have rule of law and that means impeaching those who deserve it.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    The right message?
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: jseas on Nov 15, 2006 5:19 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Sometimes humor can cut through people's defenses.

    The phrase, "Just One BJ Needed to Impeach" could serve that purpose. It's short enough for a bumper sticker--or a signature line on e-mails.

    It also lays bare the hypocrisy.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: The right message? Posted by: disgustedandamused
    » RE: The right message? Posted by: disgustedandamused
    www.onthetable.us : AVAILABLE! (chick REGISTER NOW $7.99)
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: equidave on Nov 15, 2006 5:28 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Someone hop on it!

    :))

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    No, I don't want Bush for two more years!
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: kgs1947 on Nov 15, 2006 5:33 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    No, I do NOT prefer Bush to any other alternatives. We do have an obligation to stand up for the Constitution and for all those who have been tortured or died in defending it. That is the obligation of our elected officials. So, let's go for President Pelosi.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Idon't think that's what I want - I know what I want.
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: symcokid on Nov 15, 2006 5:33 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    I want GW Bush to be IMPEACHED and to be charged with WAR CRIMES in the International Criminal Court!!! The last I read, 87% of the American people want to see the Bush gone, he can hide out at his 98,000 acre farm in Paraguay if he goes into exile.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Wildman
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: Wildman on Nov 15, 2006 5:40 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    I favor a "truth" commission with plenty of immunity so the real story of the crimes all gets into a historical record, but I don't rule out impeachment.

    Here is the way:

    Impeach Cheny first. Name a Gerald Ford to replace Spiro Agnew and then it is safe to go after Nixon. Worked like a charm before.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: Wildman Posted by: gwpinetree
    No way out...impeach impeach....
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: Zemiti on Nov 15, 2006 5:40 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Tell you what, go on bury your head in the toilet bowl this time and see what happens; dang! whadaya waitin' for, begin impeachment NOW; that is if anybody is concerned about The US's rightful standing in the world community, then do it! Unless of course you feel all that has happened during Bush's tenure was the right thing, he and his cronies did nothing wrong, the war in Iraq is good and just, the renditions and tortures in Guantanamo etc...; then I ask, what does the Dems victory of Nov 7 truly signify?? How quickly we forget events of just three weeks ago, as some are still unfolding in Iraq, Guantanamo, Afghanistan etc as we speak! Impeachment will set a precedence of never to abuse power, callously and brazenly undermine and manipulate the constitution in the manner that he did; all that Bushco did needs to be investigated, how they did it and laid bare for public scrutiny. That way everybody will learn that it should never happen again, and people will know HOW it usually happens and see the danger/warning signals quite early. It will also send a strong message and set a benchmark on what participative constitutional democracies are all about; the lessons learnt! Otherwise as I said at the begining, go on America, bury your heads in the toilet bowl and occasionally flush it so that the noise in your ears drowns out any cries, shouts or howls of protest that you may not want to hear. Impeach for a return to civilisation, not a state of despotism and neo-fascism.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Such tough talkers here today . . .
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: MAD on Nov 15, 2006 5:45 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    I'm sure Bush and Cheney are quivering in some Washington bunker, absolutely petrified with fear. And such strong, patriotic language in here today - oh my!! Makes me wonder where all this tough talk was in the run up to the war? When there was a chance to stop this thing dead in its tracks, where were you, oh Alternet faithful? Where was this strong condemnation when Dems were merrily sending "the boys" off to war? Where were the 60's style street protests you witnessed during the Vietnam War? I'll tell you . . .

    You, hmmm, "progressives" were out shopping and consuming just like Neocon America. You were out fly fishing somewhere with your $700 Orvis split-bamboo rod and heading to the mountains in your $40,000 4Runner with the $2500 Cannondale strapped to the roof. You were busy snapping up that Panasonic 50" flat-screen and watching CNN and complaining to your sympathetic friends when you could. You were separating paper from plastic and doing your best to get those aluminum cans to the recycling center and you were feeling pretty damn good about yourselves. While you quickly threw up your hands in despair, Bushco saddled up, laughing at how quickly you and the Dems rolled over. So keep it up you tough talkers you. Keep talking and doing nothing. While you're composing your snide and haughty replies, remember one thing - I'm right on the money and you know it!! It's amusing watching Americans bluster like this . . .

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: Such tough talkers here today . . . Posted by: Joshua Holland
    » Missing the trees for the forest . . . Posted by: Joshua Holland
    » RE: Such tough talkers here today . . . Posted by: inanaturallight
    » RE: Such tough talkers here today . . . Posted by: disgustedandamused
    Nancy
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: marianne on Nov 15, 2006 5:51 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Nancy Pelosi did the right thing--any mention of impeachment would have mobilized Republicans and we wouldn't see the power shift that so many of us have waited for. I expect that Nancy Pelosi will become the most influential and effective Speaker of the House this nation has ever seen.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: Nancy Posted by: Zarquan
    Not just impeach, bring criminal charges
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: ng1944 on Nov 15, 2006 5:53 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Or next time You will have another mad Jorge
    installed by Corporations.
    Impeachment will be just a bone thrown to people.
    The whole system should broken and rebuilt from the beginning

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Modifying the system by using it... a novel concept!
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: winds on Nov 15, 2006 6:04 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Ok, the system is a republic in which one uses a vote to buy candidates AND the constitution allows for impeachment and removal of those who commit "high crimes and misdemeanors".

    How about we impeach these guys who have done such criminal behavior and by so doing we as a nation under this system learn about how to use this impeachment process effectively and swiftly, to transform the impeachment process so that it simulates the European parliamentary process of having a "vote of no confidence" to get rid of a lousy administration.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    I'm callin' B#LLSH!T...
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: MonkeyBoy on Nov 15, 2006 6:22 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    We need to start the Impeachment proceedings ASAP in 2007. There is ample justification for this, not the least of which is John Conyers' document from a year ago. I encourage everyone to read it.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Impeach the people!
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: jjason on Nov 15, 2006 6:34 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    GWB didn't just happen. The voters demolish anyone who asks them to give up a little of their pig lifestyle... SUV's, air conditioning, cheap consumer toys, etc...
    You can have it all, America! And everybody else and all future generations can have nothing!
    Forget about Bush. Impeach the people! Impeach the f-----g people!

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Impeach President Bush
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: bswebs on Nov 15, 2006 6:36 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    I don't think that impeachment would help. The grievous offenses of Bush and Company should mean jail and treason.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » Impeach President Bush: the Recipe Posted by: disgustedandamused
    Common decency
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: xenacat on Nov 15, 2006 6:45 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    requires that we impeach those somabitches Dubya and Deadeye Dick. This article is pure convoluted nonsense. We must hold these two criminals responsible for their numerous crimes against both American citizens and everyone else in the world. It is time to clean house - literally. I can't think of any legitimate reason to delay impeachment procedings since the magnitude of this adminstrations' misdeeds are so great. If we don't move to impeach, than shame on us for being sheeple of a corrupt empire.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: Common decency Posted by: willymack
    The author is HORRIBLY WRONG
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: jreinhart1 on Nov 15, 2006 6:53 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Republicans and Democrats worked together to move Johnson to not seek another term for his criminal behavior and got Nixon to resign. The Criminal cabal in Washington with George W. Bush is far far worse and his actions of creating a war of agression, ignoring the Constitution, his use of torture, illegal weapons use, spying w/o FISA court, ignoring most of the Geneva conventions, ignoring American environmental law, Nuclear proliferation of radioactive materials against the IAEA and nuclear information to India ...

    If the Republicans and Democrats in office can't perform their oath of office as they did in 1967 and 1973, then they should be removed from office and new elections should be held immediately. The entire 2006 elections would have been a worthless and gratuitous entertainment event in the entire lot of criminals.

    The Oath of Office:
    I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    A real lame duck...
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: tweedster on Nov 15, 2006 6:58 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    This article seems to encapsule the simpering and timidity that has plagued the Democratic party for years. The inane overanalysis that suggests keeping the dogs at bay would be better than having Cheney as Prez is just idiotic. Could Darth Vader gain that much more sway over the executive offices anyway, no matter what the title? Also, if things are to be handled properly, some process must be undergone to also remove Cheney anyhow!

    But then again, politics has never been about doing the right thing - a reality that this Dickinson character seems to flaunt.

    Disregarding the author's advice to ride out one of the worst Presidency's in history, IF Speaker Pelosi were to assume control of the Presidency and did not jump the gun on controversial issues that rally the Repub base it could deflate her portrayal as a raving left-wing radical AND prove that we can have a woman leading this country.

    But no, I'd rather not even tempt that fate and let GW and Co. stick around to commit more crimes against the people of the world.

    Thanks but no thanks.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » I've already stopped reading Time... Posted by: disgustedandamused
    Cynicism is no basis for political decisions
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: chesapeake on Nov 15, 2006 7:04 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    A long time ago doing the right thing became a joke among the commentators. In America, "pragmatism" and the bottom line are the only measures of the worthiness of an idea.

    The failure to see the precedent set by allowing the executive branch to ignore the law and allowing gangsters to steal national elections is dangerous and certainly impractical.

    There will be many "experts" in the coming months whose job it will be to sap the strength of the popular movement (as there have always been). They will write about the "practical" benefits of doing nothing (as long as someone else is doing the dying). Ignore them. They are nothing more than hecklers. They add nothing to the equation.

    In the meantime: impeach the lying, murdering gangsters!

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    So what happens if we don't Impeach?
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: billyboy43 on Nov 15, 2006 7:04 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    This article focuses on the obvious - both Cheney and Bush must go to stop this abusive, murderous, illegal administration, and then the Speaker of the House ascends - so it looks politically ambitious.
    But what happens if we don't impeach?
    * We stay in Iraq and loose even more American lives, and kill tens of thousands more Iraqi.
    * Abuse of power goes unchecked now and forever. The constitution does turn to 'just a g*d**n piece of paper'.
    This is not acceptable. They commited the 'high crimes', so they must be impeached! IT IS OUR DUTY!
    From an independent in Texas, billyboy42

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Smells of DLC
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: NoPCZone on Nov 15, 2006 7:12 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    I'm the author, a member of the DLC, and I approved this message.
    If we don't impeach this Hitler-in-training, we owe Richard Nixon an apology. Further, our Constitution is now officially approved for use as toilet paper.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Doomed to failure.
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: pball on Nov 15, 2006 7:23 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Amidst all this impeachment frenzy, nobody has yet come up with a concrete plan to get at least sixteen Republican senators to commit the ultimate party treason at a time when party lines are more important than ever.

    Sure, there's been a lot of "once the trial begins and the TRUTH comes out, the people's EYES shall be OPENED, HALLELUJAH!"...bullshit. I'm sorry, but you've been living under a rock if you don't think, or at least have heard, something's rotten in Denmark. Sure, the exact sordid details aren't public yet, but even if every single iota of the corruption and sleaze were drawn out into the light of day it still ain't gonna matter.

    Think about it this way - Bush's constituents are mostly now the fervent ultra-right arch-conservative Xtians who see him as God's Warrior; impeaching him is only going to look to them like upping the ante in the "final battle between good and evil" or some shit. Hell, put Pelosi in the Oval Office and you'll probably just confirm to them that she's the Antichrist, false leader promising false peace and all that. Evidence presented at trial will sway hearts and minds, you say? $20 says the frothing right either claims it's the necessity of war and these silly laws just stand in the way, or they go so far as to get all conspiracy-theory and call it outright fabricated.

    While an impeachment without conviction would be a good expression of the zeitgeist of some, and a loud and clear message about how some feel the country's being run, it would also inevitably mobilize the "Republicans" in numbers that would make 1994 look like a warm summer day. Plus, on a personal level, I'd rather see Congress spending their time being productive and fixing damage done rather than engaging in essentially partisan retributions. Put it another way, if a psychotic arsonist sets fire to a hospital, you put the fire out first, then worry about punishing the bad guy.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: Doomed to failure. Posted by: Zarquan
    » Alternative scenario Posted by: jwg
    » RE: Alternative scenario Posted by: Zarquan
    » RE: Doomed to failure. Posted by: disgustedandamused
    Meanwhile the Greenland iceshelves are slipping toward the sea.
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: Uccellla on Nov 15, 2006 7:28 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Excuse me, but while you all are ranting about rearranging the decks chairs, there's a mother of an iceberg heading our way.

    Have your hearings, your impeachments, your beheadings but only AFTER CONGRESS PASSES A CARBON TAX! Please.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Mother Jones /Kucinich
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: rwa on Nov 15, 2006 7:29 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    By Congressman Kucinich

    “Even now there are people who were urging President Bush to go to war who are staying that wrongful course. And people have to be held accountable. You can’t lead this country into a war that has lost thousands of U.S. troops and perhaps hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis, [and that has] cost the American taxpayers $400 billion–and maybe up to $2 trillion–and leave it with some kind of blithe apology. There has to be accountability. When the people elected Democrats, they also voted for accountability.

    The American people are relying on us–not just to take a new direction, which I believe is out of Iraq, but they’re insisting on accountability for those who led us wrongly into Iraq.”

    Send 500,000 impeachment letters to Pelosi by her first day as speaker Jan. 3

    We already have more support than that. When John Conyers took Bush his petition demanding he answer questions about the DSM, it had 540,000 singnatures, over ten times as many as wrote about Nixon. I would bet most of those people would write to demand impeachment of Bush, probably more.

    The great thing is, now we have someone to focus this demand on who can and possibly will act (in spite of her protests to the contrary): Nancy Pelosi.

    She should have a half million signatures waiting for her her first day as Speaker of the House.

    I think she and the many of the Democrats want to do this, but to overcome the reluctance of the DC etablishment and big money interests who are afraid their ox will be gored along with Bush & Cheney, she needs constant overwhelming evidence of public DEMAND not just support for impeachment.

    FAX: 202-225-8259

    Nancy Pelosi
    2371 Rayburn HOB
    Washington, DC 20515

    District Office:
    450 Golden Gate Ave.
    14th Floor
    San Francisco, CA 94102


    Write Your Congressperson
    http://www.house.gov/writerep

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: Mother Jones /Kucinich Posted by: chesapeake
    » RE: Draft Kucinich now Posted by: Ripcord
    » RE: Mother Jones /Kucinich Posted by: JimTheAnarchist
    as important as it is to start impeachment,
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: kellysgarden on Nov 15, 2006 7:38 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    it is even more important to re-open the 9/11 investigation. There is so much new evidence available now to undeniably implicate Cheney in his roll as accomplice to those staged attacks.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Impeachment is doable...
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: Lilah on Nov 15, 2006 7:46 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    ... if investigations can show the entent of Bush and Cheney's knowledge of misleading Americans.

    Once their misdeeds are thouroughly documented AND pulbicized widely (which Congressional hearings should do), the American people will demand impeachment (we're seeing some of this already.)

    At that point, let the impeachment go to the Senate. If it should fail, it will at the very least expose which of the Republicans are corrupt enough or cowards enough to put party before country and the Constitution.

    It's been a GOP tactic for awhile -- propose legislation you know won't pass but will put the other party on record as having voted for/against whatever the issue is.

    So, even if it didn't pass (I think it would) it would at the very least show the people who needs to be voted out next time around.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    My 2 Cents
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: patvic1405 on Nov 15, 2006 7:54 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Impeach, Indict, Imprison. Now.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    All in good time
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: Uncle Crabby on Nov 15, 2006 7:55 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    If the first order of business is to be impeachment, then the first order of business is also to lose the 2008 election in both the legislative and executive branches.

    1. We get the hell out of Iraq

    2. We provide our citizens with living wages

    3. We fix this health care debacle

    4. Election reform. We remove the rich and the corporations from the control process.

    5. We stop letting the investor class allow the rest of us who WORK FOR A LIVING pay all the taxes.

    6. We impeach Bush and Cheney and indict them for crimes against humanity.

    Hmmmmm ... pretty busy couple of years eh?

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: All in good time Posted by: Zarquan
    Who Are "We The People" Becoming? Part 1
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: MAT on Nov 15, 2006 8:10 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Who Are We?
    I have a feeling Mr. Dickinson has just discredited himself in front of a large majority of the American population by accepting a conclusion based on the status quo, 'broken politic think' attitude that has gotten us into all these politically and morally abysmal quagmires we face today as a nation and a culture. Hollow punditry such as this will, thankfully, contribute to its own demise.

    My real world experience has taught me that when you make a mistake (which evidence justifiably bears out) you must be, in some way, responsible for the consequences. Whether those consequences should incur rebuke or punishment are dependent on the severity of the mistake and conditions under which has been committed.

    If the accused offender is responsible, he/she will accept their responsibility with explanation or admission and move to make amends to minimize (perhaps, justifiably so) their own personal consequences.

    If the accused defender chooses to evade responsibility, he/she will resort to unscrupulous denial of culpability in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. It’s a very instinctual defense mechanism to do whatever it takes to survive. Make no mistake, George, Dick and company will do and say anything to avoid taking whatever lumps they may have coming. The scary thing is that whatever they may do will continue to have a great deal of impact locally (in the USA) and globally.

    Nonetheless, whether the accused offender is held responsible for their actions or not, the facts of history will bear the truth of the situation out as a beacon or a disfiguring scar of justice served or not. What does this reveal about us?

    So What

    When OJ got off, the conventional wisdom settled on, “yeah, he was probably guilty but you can always get off when you’re rich…” and/or, “yeah, he was probably guilty but it’s about time a black man got the same spoils of corruption as a white man would…” Both of these attitudes of resolve have come with the murky reservation of a tainted justice served at best and at worst, the acquiescence to a corrupted system of justice.

    Perhaps, we were about to witness the true resolution of the OJ residue with Ken Lay until his timely passing. Could it be that people are yearning to see accountability and justice served in transparently honest fashion?

    The outcome of any impeachment proceedings or lack thereof will reflect the state of our collective conscience as citizens of this country and the world. What does it say about who we are as a people, as individuals, as a collective nation? Are we ready to accept lying, manipulation for selfish gain, denial and cordial pardon as part of our cultural norm? In many ways we have already; when was the last time you lied, regardless of the circumstances?

    If and when the facts of investigation regarding impeachment (for Bush and Cheney) bear out any truth of the matter, history will begin to record the direction in which our national conscience will evolve. Will we cower to appease aggression and avoid sensitive conflict or will we start to face the reality of human nature and work towards overcoming our behavioral flaws while enhancing and implementing our ingenuity to create a peacefully sustainable society and world?

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Impeachment Must (and Can) Be Led By The People
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: sasha40 on Nov 15, 2006 8:14 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    We should all just listen to Elizabeth Hotlzman- her very sensible advice was posted here a few days ago (can someone find the link?). There is no way, especially after the Clinton debacle, that Democrats in Congress will lead the way to impeachment. If you want impeachment (as a first step towards removal and prosecution, for those of who would like to see those outcomes) and a thorough, independent investigation of what has gone on in this administration these last 6 years, call your Senator and Representative and tell them you want a through investigation and impeachment of the President and Vice-President, and charges brought against anyone in the administration who is found in an independent investigation to have broken the law. Call every week to remind them. Send emails. Encourage your friends and loved ones who agree with you to do the same. Start now, or in January, when the 110th Congress covenes.
    Then Pelosi can say, "I always said impeachment was off the table. But the American people have left me no choice."

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Who Are "We The People" Becoming? Part 2
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: MAT on Nov 15, 2006 8:15 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    What Are You Going To Do?
    I, for one and all, am not willing to complacently accept a societal construct based on the manipulation and aggression leaving the spoils of security and comfort to the few at the expense of the many. I expect that there are a growing number of people, globally who would agree with me. This growing number comes because at the same time we have been faced with many agregious and obvious actions, we are also becoming more engaged in the era of the internet providing us with the means of instant and widespread communication from a variety of perspectives.

    Personally, I am driven to the core of my conscience to courageously stand up, face and confront what I see around me to be the circumstances leading to the rapid corruption and degradation of our society and the world; call it my survival instinct. This means not only being aware of the issues and voicing my opinions but, actively engaging in creating solutions to solve these social/geopolitical/environmental/cultural maladies.

    I figure, what do I have to lose? If I do nothing and quietly conform, I will end up suffering with my conscience and given circumstance. At least if I make an effort and fail, I can find solace and pride in the attempt. However, I still think that I can put forth the effort and succeed, especially if that effort is part of a broader effort. I point to the midterm election results as evidence of such a positive outcome. When confronted with the opportunity to affect positive change, the American people stood up this time and let their will be known.

    Now all that is fine, but our traditional problem has been that we don’t utilize ‘the power of the people’ often enough to maintain or demand a consistent effort from ourselves and our elected/appointed officials in addressing and resolving the issues of imbalance and injustice before we reach critical mode. We seem to be stuck in a loop of 2 steps back, 2 step forward while the environmental carpet below us is wearing out fast.

    A Course of Action for Creating Solutions

    I’ve been implementing a web-to-real world initiative, ‘Sticking To The Issues’, based on my website MyAmericaToo.com since mid October. The goals of this initiative and website are to:

    • Utilize the power of “We The People” to maintain a persistent pattern of positive change regarding the many issues facing us as a nation and as citizens of the world.
    • Inspire a greater portion of the American populace to organize and participate in defining and acting to bring about the implementation of solutions via awareness and understanding of the issues, options and consequences inherent therein.
    • Make participation in such actions socially understandable, desirable, more convenient and economically feasible without presenting significant strains on people’s time commitments.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    don't impeach, even though he's evil
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: stoneinthestream on Nov 15, 2006 8:15 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Bush is evil, I agree. But we have more important things to do than tie up Congress in impeachment hearings. History will judge Bush accurately, and will also judge how the Dems handle this. Impeachment will be seen as revenge, I think, and do us no favors. Bush will go down as THE worst president in the history of the US. We don't need do anything more.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Who are "We The People" Becoming? Part 3
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: MAT on Nov 15, 2006 8:17 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Sticking To The Issues

    This initiative is meant to utilize the inherent effectiveness of advertising to keep the attention of significant issues front and center by displaying them in public. Simple repetition is the key to gaining attention, persuading opinion and getting action.

    I have developed a series of graphic depictions commenting on various critical issues. In no way is the current line complete, but you have to start somewhere. These graphics have been juxtaposed against the blue field of a cropped American flag, replacing the stars. Each flag is a 4.5 x 3.5 inch sticker representing commentary on what it is that you ‘want or don’t want for your America’. The special adhesive on the sticker allows them to be placed on any smooth surface yet be easily removed without damaging or leaving residue on common materials such as plastic, glass, metal, paper, wood or paint.

    Currently, each sticker has a link to the MAT website on it. When you go to the website you can select any of the graphics to get some background info on the topic in audio, video, news articles or links to various organizations or experts focusing on the topic.


    The Evolution of Concept Through Reality

    In the next several months the site will evolve into a much more comprehensive tool which will:

    • provide a comprehensive explanation of the topic, define its jargon and link its relevance to other related topics

    • provide an explanation of what direction resolution of the issue is headed in from the perspective of the government

    • provide a comprehensive set of alternate solutions listing the associated pros and cons

    • allow for users to participate in polls evaluating various solutions and utilize the data to support the resolution of issues

    • organize local an national initiatives which are convenient to participate in and have noticeable impact in the real world.


    In Closing

    I guess at the end of the day, I think that if we, as members of a nation, become more engaged in determining the fate of our nation, George, Dick and all of their ilk will be impeached, prosecuted and punished for their deeds. If not, what does it say about who we are and what will become of us?

    If you believe we can, in fact, make a difference together, I invite you to join me with whatever resources you can reasonably commit to in implementing this initiative or any other in which you find merit. The time is too critical now to hit the snooze button after the midterm election only to wake up to another set of nightmare scenarios in the days, weeks and years to come.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Walden Bello:
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: rwa on Nov 15, 2006 8:19 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    " ...the (anti-war) movement cannot even think about relaxing for a second. The moment is critical. Now - the immediate post-election period - is the time to raise the ante. Now is the time for the US anti-war movement to escalate its efforts - to mount demonstration after demonstration - to effect immediate withdrawal. Electoral choice has created the momentum that can be translated into street action that can, in turn, translate into strong pressure on the Democrats not to agree to a protracted exit strategy. The movement cannot afford to squander this momentum, for the price of stepping back and letting the Democrats come up with the strategy will be more Iraqis and Americans dead, sacrificed for a meaningless war with no real end in sight."

    Foreign Policy in Focus columnist Walden Bello is professor of sociology at the University of the Philippines

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    alternet needs better editing
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: harrysf on Nov 15, 2006 8:21 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    I agree with other commentators who wrote that the author came to the wrong conclusion, after laying out more than enough evidence to support impeachment.

    I wonder if anyone at Alternet bothered to edit this article? The title and preamble suggested the author would explain why impeachment was a bad idea. He didn't get around to doing this until the very end of the piece, and I didn't find the arguments convincing.

    I expect better from Alternet.

    Anyway, regarding the issue itself, if it was acceptable to impeach Clinton because he lied about an extramarital affair, it should also be acceptable to impeach Bush & Cheney because of the offenses of which we are all aware. The political matter of who might succeed them is important but certainly secondary. We cannot allow the principles and laws of our nation to be flouted without bringing the offenders to justice.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » Erm, no? Posted by: stormchilde1975
    To impeach or not to impeach; that is the question.
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: monkeywrench on Nov 15, 2006 8:22 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Well, I wouldn't call the impeachment of Bush/Cheney an administrative coup; it would be an acknowledgement that we stiill have and believe in our Constitution.

    However, the practical concerns of politics and human nature could invoke another law: The Law of Unintended Consequences. As sick as it makes me feel, in the current atmosphere of little understanding of the rule of law by both political parties and the population at large, we may be better off leaving the Little Dictator and AntiChrist in office (excuse me...I have to go and be "unwell"...).

    O.K., I'm back.... Maybe what the Democrats can do in this lamentable situation of being stuck between Iraq and a hardhead is use a little p.r. to educate the population while obstructing virtually anything the Republicans try to pass in Congress. Of course, we still have the problems of signing statements and – oh, God! – Executive Orders.

    Oh, hell...never mind...impeach the bastards.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    A "No-Brainer"
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: fanny666 on Nov 15, 2006 8:37 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Of course he should be impeached. Pelosi made a bad mistake by saying it was off the table. Whether or not he will be *successfully* impeached is certainly debatable. Impeachment is the process: Clinton was impeached, just not successfully.

    Read Article 2 Paragraph 2 of Nixon's Letters of Impeachment. Compare to Bush's NSA programs.

    Read Article 6 Section 2 of the US Constitution. Compare to Bush's treatment of the UN Charter, Non-proliferation Treaty, UN Convention Against Torture.

    We should be mentioning these specifics in letters to the media and politicians.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Maybe we should just . . .
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: covalentbonded on Nov 15, 2006 8:45 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    say a heartfelt "Oops". There are thousands and thousands of dead people. They deserve accountability and a placement of responsibility.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Popular Complicity
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: edhowes on Nov 15, 2006 8:45 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    My thanks to the few posters who have touched upon complicity here. Concerning only the high crime of treason. Seymour Hirsh reported on a late February 2003 edition of PBS' Now With Bill Moyers of the U.S. White House sanctioned airlift of Pakistani Generals and thousands of Al Qaeda from Konduz, Afghanistan in November 2001, just two months after George Bush declared war on terrorists and state sponsors of same.

    These enemies of America were given safe passage to Pakistan to save Pervez Musharraf the embarrassment of having his generals caught up in a dragnet or fire fight with the U.S. Delta Force, which had them effectively pinned and in their gunsights. This is providing aid and comfort to the enemy in time of war - High Treason - a capital crime.

    The Treason chain of command goes from George Bush to Donald Rumsfeld to Tommy Franks down the line to Delta Force field commanders who honored the no fire zone permitting a substantial Pakistani airlift.

    If all members of Congress are unaware of this treason, why? If I know about it and have reported it on several occasions, there is no excuse for Congressional ignorance. Therefore, they know they have been supporting and enabling high treason. They do not want to admit their own culpability in this treason and an impeachment could easily make this an issue.

    All military officers and enlistees have sworn an oath of loyalty to both the Constitution and the Commander In Chief. They know they are serving a traitor or a chain of them and will not resign or speak out. They who serve treason are also traitors by definition.

    And this brings us to the good people of America, who reelect traitors, pay no attention to the Congress and guarantee the credit financing with their income taxes to make the treason possible in the first place. So here we are, anxious to attack the head of the beast and get started, completely ignoring the role enablers have played in this treason and all others. No, the 109th Congress, does not want this discussion. The Pentagon does not want this discussion. The combat soldier does not want this discussion. The voter and the taxpayer does not want this discussion. But if a few hundred honest citizens can force the issue in the Congress, count me in.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: Popular Complicity Posted by: chesapeake
    » RE: Popular Complicity Posted by: Basenjis
    Hold them accountable - no apologists!
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: nopuppy on Nov 15, 2006 8:55 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Morally, legally, there is no question. Impeachment is the only proper thing to do. This sort of apologistic behavior is not even up to Machiavelli standards. They are criminals. They have committed crimes. Why is removing Bush and Cheney a long shot? WHY? These people have committed crimes, easily proven. The simplest one to prove is Bush's violation of his oath of office, when he rammed through the Military Commissions Act that destroyed the Constitution. Bring these to court and such behavior will be impossible (or at least invisible) for the next fifty years, which may give us time to restore our ancient liberties and rights. The author of this article is not thinking clearly. Been listening to politicians too long. I'm as real-politik as possible, but when a man rapes your wife and murders your children and runs over your dog, it is time to hold him accountable. IMPEACH!

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    joyceguard
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: joyceguard on Nov 15, 2006 9:19 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    The reasons to impeach Bush and Cheney far outweigh the fact that Nancy Pelosi would become President. The law says the Speaker of the House is next in line if both the President and Vice President are removed from office. I wonder if the writer of this article would feel the same way if the Speaker of the House was male. Would members of Congress fail to impeach Bush because it would effect their candidacy for President in 2008 if Nancy Pelosi became President. These are not valid reasons for not impeaching Bush and Cheney, They need to be removed from office for their failures to uphold the Constitution, the laws, treaties, Geneva Conventions and for waging an illegal and immoral war.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Focus on the future we want, not the past we didn't like.
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: ggmurray on Nov 15, 2006 9:29 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    In my view, no one in US history deserves impeachment more than George W Bush and Dick Cheney. But the problem is that we have two years to do some good for the American people with our newly elected Democratic majority. Let's not waste our fire by shining a long and bitter spotlight on this shameful period in our history. What we get is what we give our attention to. How about a Manhattan Project for new sources of energy - to make reliance on fossil fuels and Middle East politics irrelevant? How about health care for all Americans? How about taking the money and greed out of elections by real campaign finance reform?

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    We're a Democracy, Let's Vote!
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: BillC on Nov 15, 2006 10:14 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    I say:

    IMPEACH

    Reply!

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    A Nation of Laws
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: rovinggrover on Nov 15, 2006 10:56 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    WE ARE A NATION OF LAWS. This is what we are told from the first remembrances of CIVIC COOPERATION. WE ARE A NATION OF LAWS. We are conditioned to follow the laws of our communities, respectively. We are taught that hard working, honest, people that FOLLOW THE LAW are rewarded, and people that BREAK THE LAWS suffer consequences.
    This band of TREASONOUS CRIMINALS have lied to get AMERICA into an ILLEGAL INVASION of A SOVERIEGN NATION, that had absolutely nothing to do with TERRORISM, PERIOD. They have set it up so that AMERICAN TAXPAYER MONIES are distributed amongst SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS by way of awarding NO BID CONTRACTS to the very companies that those EXECUTIVES were in charge of just prior to them taking their respective positions in this current administration.
    This administration has TOTALLY DISCARDED OUR CONSTITUTION, and attempted to implement laws that will undoubtedly be found to be UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
    This administration has constantly INTRUDED into the personal lives of ordinary citizens, breaking so many of our laws that one would have to consult an attorney just to know where to begin.
    All of this and I haven't even gotten to THE OATH that these CRIMINALS all took to hold their respective positions in this current administration, which actually charges each and every one of those TRAITORS with the task of PROTECTING AND DEFENDING THE CONSTITUTION, not the PEOPLE, or THE CORPORATIONS.
    Now I will add to the CULMINATION of CRIMES that which is the most DISPICABLE.
    The amount of AMERICAN BLOOD, which at last count stood at 2842 soldiers killed in action, not to mention the IRAQI BLOOD, which depending on whatever poll you choose to believe, ranges from approximately 45,000 INNOCENT CIVILIANS to over 600,000(IRAQI) people killed, pouring over the hands of those EXECUTIVE ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS of this CURRENT ADMINISTRATION.
    This BAND of TREASONOUS CRIMINALS cannot be allowed to ESCAPE from OUR LAWS without being held ACCOUNTABLE for the crimes they have committed against the AMERICAN PEOPLE. They must also be made to stand for the HORRIFIC ATROCITIES committed against the country of IRAQ.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    In the US the PEOPLE don't impeach, the ELITE does.
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: Franco33 on Nov 15, 2006 11:30 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    This is the US. The PEOPLE don't impeach. The ELITE impeaches whenever whatever moves them gets them going. It's not even on the table.

    In other words, what the elite is saying to us is: mind your own f*ing business.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Rolling Stoned?
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: mime on Nov 15, 2006 12:05 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Mr. Dickinson,

    If your intent was to rally support for and clarification of the justifications for impeachment, well done. Read what your extremely well-informed readers have said. They prove to hold a deeper understanding of the situation our country finds itself in and the necessary path to recovery than you have revealed.

    Your view that America would prefer retaining a "freely elected" multiply confessed felon in the Oval Office ignores the basic historical fact of the stolen 2000 election/bloodless coup that first installed "W". Fraud and voter repression in Ohio in 2004 - Deja vu all over again as the nation, once Harris'ed, was then Blackwelled.

    The seminal research article by Robert Kennedy, Jr. appeared in a magazine called "Rolling Stone" awhile back... perhaps you've heard of it?

    Impeachment of Bush/Cheney is a bad idea because the transition would appear "adminstrative"? I take umbrage with dismissal of House Speaker Pelosi as a qualified candidate and question your prioritizing that which is politically expediant and comfortable over what ultimately is best for the nation and the world.

    Your flippant "porn star or a midget" comment takes nothing away from Pelosi's stellar career representing one of the most highly educated, informed and politically active cities in the nation. She will make a fine President.

    Your minimization of SF fails to take into account that her Legislative District is the single most politically involved of the 435 in the U.S. based on per capita volume of communication with their Rep. My MPLS, MN 5th ranks 2nd only to Pelosi's. She has to be a factor in inspiring that sort of involvement by and communication with her constituency.

    Wouldn't it be refreshing to have a President that inspires, encourages and welcomes communication with the electorate? Of course, but not the point. Pelosi is imminently qualified to lead the nation in this time of grave crisis, but her abundant qualfications pale by a wide margin the priority of removing in great haste those who have proven in so very many ways to be not only chronically incompetent, but most importantly - pervasively immoral, self-serving and insidiously vile.

    So I think I want to impeach?

    Uhhhh... yes... Duh.

    But what matters most is that investigations are thorough in all areas of corruption over the past six years and that the American people are allowed to know what has been going on and then "We the People" can tell "The People's House" of Representatives what course of action to take from there.

    They work for us. Impeachment is most definitely ON the table.

    For further clarification of my position on this matter:

    www.ImpeachforPeace.org/blog
    (November 14th entry and as published on OpEdNews)

    Mikael Rudolph
    WorldCantWait.org
    ImpeachforPeace.org

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Impeach the people! (2)
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: jjason on Nov 15, 2006 12:12 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    What a laugh! Impeach Bush and everything will be just wonderful! All the little piggies will happily return to their SUV's and widescreen TV's, and the future will simply disappear.
    IT'S THE PEOPLE, STUPID!
    So what if they go back to the fuck-the-poor welfare-reform Democrats. Carbon emissions increased 15% while Clinton was in the White House. Now Gore makes a movie, but when he was one heartbeat from the Presidency, he rolled over and played dead for 8 years.
    IT'S THE PEOPLE, STUPID!
    All they really care about is their pig lifestyle, and if the Democrats can give them more goodies from WalMart, they'll take the Democrats, and if Bush could have wrapped up the Iraqi oil, there wouldn't be a Democrat left in the Senate.
    Forget about Bush. Impeach the people!

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: Impeach the people! (2) Posted by: Scientz
    Lyn Maren Jensen
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: lynmarenjensen on Nov 15, 2006 12:14 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    What a bunch of flakey excuses to sit on Mother Jones' fat behind and do nothing, while those of us that believe in the Constitution are left to do the work despite the bunch of BS this writer tries to put in our way!

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    true enough, Nixon stepped down
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: jeffersonian on Nov 15, 2006 12:21 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    rather than face impeachment. They thought it would work on Clinton but didn't because the majority of the people disagreed.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    GUILTY AS SIN
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: Burtonger on Nov 15, 2006 12:32 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    If america had any real soul or consciousness it would not only impeach or fire all of Bu$hco then Prosecute and EXECUTE these major criminals and seize all their assets to rebuild the destruction and murder. Also ban all their relatives from holding any public office,they will seek revenge.
    Would you want the karma of Bu$hco for america ?

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    What a load of horseshit!
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: allthingslucid on Nov 15, 2006 2:59 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    And Dickenson writes:

    "we'd anoint a politician who hasn't faced serious opposition in two decades and was last elected by 225,000 true blue citizens... of San Francisco."

    So, what???????????????? Why does Pelosi need to face "serious opposition?" Bush and Cheney violated federal law!! Pelosi is President. My goodness, I feel better already!

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Impeach or discount the USA
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: IanA on Nov 15, 2006 2:54 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    To us dumb foreigners, who of course do not figure in your thoughts on impeachment, when we listen to the likes of Hillary Clinton we do not see too much difference between your two parties. Those that bought the lies, or the ones that sold them seem to merge quite seamlessly. Many are aware that it’s the same corporate millions that pay for the politicians on both sides of the apparent divide. Is the whole thing not an illusion fed to the masses to go along with the bread and games, while the real power is a very local and domestic issue in the same hands come hell or high water? Perhaps we’re wrong. Perhaps your system works?

    Never the less, not impeaching Bush and Cheney will not only reinforce such a perception of America overseas, but in fact show the underlying complicity of both parties to maintain the status quo and continue the myths of the “war on terror” and the “weapons of mass destruction” to justify the billions, no trillions of military expenditure and the global horrors caused.

    To have such virulent enemies one might ask, why? If any one at all felt that 9-11 should have helped to cause at least a tinge of awakening to realise that a great number of people in the world are rightly or wrongly pissed at your country’s neo-colonial militarism and hypocritical global hegemony, while it proceeds irresponsibly in a myopic stupor ignorant of global realities further than its domestic issues, you must impeach Bush and Cheney. The purge of the system must begin somewhere, and its already too late. The rot covers various and many administrations, most all of them, but looking at the issue of Iraq alone you have administrations supporting Hussein, then supplying weapons to Iran, then justifying the killing of over half a million children with illegal sanctions before a war as an acceptable price and then thereafter directly cause the deaths of a further 650,000 probably more innocents through an illegal war and occupation, all to be culminated as a “domestic” political matter, principally because this war and the lies it was compounded on and conducted with, is being lost at the cost of too many “American” lives.

    Had the US been winning “oil for blood” in Iraq, despite the deaths and lies, the torture, destruction, corruption and shame there would be no Democrat victors, no talk of impeachment, not even a chance of righting any wrongs. There would be victory and glory. If you do not uphold your responsibility to serve justice at this point at home, nothing to do with revenge or retribution, how can you ever expect any respect for your country aboard? What values has a country that breeds tyranny at home, and does not enforce its laws to prevent it? What kind of people inhabit such a country and still have something to say on the regimes of others, in order to better divest other lands of resources or exploit their labour or markets? No wonder you have so many enemies and need such military might to maintain your position. Only other criminals and tyrants can be friends.

    Impeach or discount the USA as a land of insular delusional dreamers, seduced purely by material, while wallowing in debt, without an anchor, direction, or moral, paying lip service only to grander concepts of freedom and democracy the meanings of which are long forgotten by them, feeding on lies as they grab for more, revel in their ignorance and cause the suffering and destruction of the real world, themselves not least.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    It's thinking like this...
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: opeluboy on Nov 15, 2006 3:29 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    ... that will guarantee the end of a Democratic majority in 2008. What planet are the numbnuts who write these wimpy articles from? Planet Pissinmypinktutu? I mean it's bad enough that we have to threaten those we just voted for, just to get them to act like real Democrats, do we have to also tolerate triangulation from fucking "liberal" writers?

    If this president does not deserve, at the very least, impeachment, no one ever will. Personally, I'd prefer an immediate firing squad, but will settle for the constitutional remedy. Question the motives of those arguing against it.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Stanimal
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: drfun on Nov 15, 2006 3:30 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Not only all former and current Bu$h administration officials be impeached, they should have trials of Treason before being marched off to the Hague to have War Crimes trials for these fascist thugs, and have them rot at Gitmo.
    Confiscate their illegally amassed fortunes and give it to U.N. humanitarian projects in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Lebanon.
    Then the world will see that the U.S. is truly committed to prosecuting its war against terrorists.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    CIRCUS CESSPIT
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: Hal on Nov 15, 2006 3:49 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    This column (like so many others at Alternet) is pure drivel. Like a low rent carnival barker, T. Dickinson frames the debate in a way meant to diffuse, distract and delude the suckers.

    #1] Rodeo clown GW Bush and his calamitous White House front was not popularly elected in 2000 or 2004. Both were stolen “elections”. What most don’t recognize is that the alternative was every bit as tainted – and that was why the “loyal opposition” never cried foul.

    #2] A BushCo lapdog regime and its poodle Congress are sellout shills for a de facto CORPORATE CRIME MONOPOLY STATE. Ditto for the rest of DC and its craven MSM.

    #3] 911 cover-up and its likewise bogus “war on terror” are as good as proven Constitutional crimes that would require genuine and thorough investigation to prosecution in a real democratic republic.

    #3] IMPEACHMENT would be the 1st order of business in a real democracy (backed by a valid MSM) faced with high crimes committed by officers who betrayed the constitution and the nation.

    To suggest that fellow shill cum sellout Pellosi and her crew are the only option other than sock-puppet GW Bush is beyond the pale. She and her Congress are complicit in virtually every crime foisted on the American people and on the planet at large. This grotesque collaboration with corporate crime (above all) is why she and her DC-MSM enablers have taken impeachment “off the table”.

    Crimes committed from 911 cover-up thru “war on terror” at public cost for what amount to private corporate mobsters would inevitably bring down the whole government in a real republic.

    Thus, to put it simply: the government is not only dirty and corrupt as a circus cesspit; it is NOT a democratic republic. It only pretends to be one for parasite criminal cartel mobsters behind the curtain.

    Bottom line: Like all well informed bloggers, Democrats knew from the beginning a Bush White House front lied about 911 and its “war on terror” offspring in Iraq War. When an entire government betrays its people, it acts unconstitutionally and illegally. Therefore it ceases to be the legal government of the nation.

    But the founders predicted all this. A nation once home to a great America Revolution rots like a fish from the head down as its people have become either patsies or sellouts for corporate crime.

    Times change. Human nature does not.

    “THE END OF DEMOCRACY AND THE DEFEAT OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION WILL OCCUR WHEN GOVERNMENT FALLS INTO THE HANDS OF LENDING INSTITUTIONS AND MONEYED INCORPORATIONS.”
    PRESIDENT THOMAS JEFFERSON (a founder of America in condemnation of present and future cartel money power crime. 1743-1826)

    "THE REAL TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS, AS YOU AND I KNOW, THAT A FINANCIAL ELEMENT IN THE LARGER CENTERS HAS OWNED THE GOVERNMENT EVER SINCE THE DAYS OF ANDREW JACKSON.”
    PRESIDENT FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT (describing oligarch rule in a letter to handler “Colonel” Edward M. House, confidence man for the cartel and founder of the Council on Foreign Relations. House also handled President Wilson in the foisting of a private and unconstitutional “Federal Reserve” Corporation and its IRS in 1913. FDR speaks of monopolists at cartel centers of New York & London that own the U.S. Government. November 21st, l933)

    "THE REAL RULERS IN WASHINGTON ARE INVISIBLE AND EXERCISE POWER BEHIND THE SCENES."
    SUPREME COURT JUSTICE FELIX FRANKFURTER. (on the nature of political and money power 1951)

    “BRITAIN IS THE SLAVE OF AN INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL BLOC.”
    BRITISH PRIME MINISTER DAVID LLOYD GEORGE (on the money cartel June 20, 1934)

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    a rock and a hard place
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: monkopotamus on Nov 15, 2006 4:12 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    if they're not punished for such crimes against so many, worse will follow within our lifetimes. and this moment when the scale could be tipped will be lost. the next radically criminal administration will begin where this one left off... and go that much further.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Twisted logic, asinine thinking
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: thweems on Nov 15, 2006 4:25 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    If some gang-banger in south central L.A. jacked a car, would anybody be debating over whether or not he should be prosecuted? If some jackass robbed a bank, or raped a woman, would anybody be questioning whether or not accountability should be "on the table"?

    So why are we even having this discussion? This administration has broken the law, and as a result, thousands of people have been tortured, killed, or unjustly imprisoned. To argue that these monsters should be allowed to rape America and rape humanity as they have done, and just get away with it, is nothing short of perverse. And I hear people saying that we should just put it all behind us "for the good of the country"? Well that's f***ing brilliant. Let's show the whole world that you can trample and piss all over the Constitution and not have to suffer any consequences for it. That'll be great for America!

    This argument is unspeakably stupid, but it just goes to show the depth to which our political discourse has sunk.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: Twisted logic, asinine thinking Posted by: disgustedandamused
    » RE: Twisted logic, asinine thinking Posted by: disgustedandamused
    » RE: Twisted logic, asinine thinking Posted by: disgustedandamused
    » Exactly right Posted by: chesapeake
    » RE: xactly right Posted by: mdruss42
    So what's the solution? Let the bygones be bygones and move on
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: cold2touch on Nov 15, 2006 4:32 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Why not? All he did was caused 3/4 million deaths, untold injuries, suffering, destruction, environmental damage and made this country a total world's pariah, pushed it into the greatest debt ever seen from which there is simply no way out, raped the Constitution, all the while shoveling public cash at his venal, avaricious buddies.
    Yep, what's the big deal, let's forget, kiss and make up and move "forward". What is forward? We'll work that out with Karl Rove.
    Why wasn't this bosom buddy friendly paradigm activated towards the end of WW2?
    We are all happy Germans, Nazis, whatever, let's move on! It is also politically expedient and keeps the pundits smiling.
    And there is room at Mt. Rushmore for both W and Adolph.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Concerned for free speech
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: Melvin on Nov 15, 2006 4:36 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Hal has put it in a rather large nutshell. The so called "Democrats" are nothing more than the corporate USA wearing another badge.
    The USA Ltd (limited liability) is here to stay under whatever banner.
    Pure Democracy is a thing of the past & nothing short of taking to the streets will change it.
    Forget Republicans vs Democrats but DO NOT FORGET that big business wishes to control the Internet!
    Freedom of speech is the last bastion free thinkers have & is under attack. Don't let it happen.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Unbelievable
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: stupidicus on Nov 15, 2006 5:07 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    When I read opinion pieces like this, it makes me wonder if the author actually feels capable of defending it outside of their padded cell.

    Alternet should be ashamed that they allowed an opinion like this to soil their server.

    Will they be posting the work of the O'Reilly's, Limbaugh's, Hannity's, Savavge's, and Coulters next?

    Any of the above could have penned that tripe..

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Impeach now
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: Donna_Darko on Nov 15, 2006 5:56 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Of course we should impeach now. It would galvanize the electorate more than any other issue. The voters will be happier and will continue to vote Democrat.

    It's not so hard to get people's votes. All you Dem pols have to do is do the right thing all the time and you will win every election. Impeach now. Always put the people's needs before corporations and lobbyists and you will keep your (cushy) job.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Not Convincing...
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: chamoru on Nov 15, 2006 6:38 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Mr. Dickinson's article left me wondering if his conclusion was a bit "tongue-in-cheek." To end the article with the only reason that Bush and Cheney should NOT be impeached as the fact that Nancy Pelosi would become President is not at all meaningful. It seems like Bozo the Clown would be a better president that who has held office for the past 6 years! Why not surgically remove the two tumors, and start with a fresh Pelosi perspective? There is no glaring reason that I can see that would continue our country back towards reason and integrity.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Not an option, a duty
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: Ellen Remore on Nov 15, 2006 7:11 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    The author ignores the one overriding reason that compels us to pursue impeachment: the setting of a very dangerous precedent. Bush's high crimes must not be allowed to stand. He's butchered the Constitution in order to make himself Tsar Of All The Russias. He's done it virtually unopposed. Let's assume he does it with ultimate impunity. Given the fact that power is the most irresistible drug, and given the frailties of human nature, there would quite likely be more than one "unitary president" in the nation's future. After all, Bush got away with it. We cannot allow this! We absolutely must declare once and for all that we will not stand for the machinations of another aspiring tyrant. If we do not, our democracy will continue to be only one rogue president away from autocracy. As for Nancy Pelosi's credentials; personally, I'd prefer to see the gentleman who just lost the mayoral race in my small suburban town take over the Oval Office, rather than have to keep bearing the idiocies of the loose cannon who's currently occupying it.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    WHAT ABOUT THE 14%?
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: Scientz on Nov 15, 2006 7:20 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    On December 19, 1998, the House of Representatives approved two articles of impeachment against President William J. Clinton, claiming the president had "willfully corrupted and manipulated the judicial process." The Senate trial began on January 14, 1999, and once again arguments focused on the definition of "high crimes and misdemeanors." Falling short of the necessary two-thirds vote on either article of impeachment (Article I, 55 to 45; Article II, 50 to 50), the Senate acquitted President Clinton on February 12, 1999.

    Last I checked, the Democrats had a 52.6% majority. Which is *NOT* 66.6%

    So, my question to those of you rabidly seeking impeachment, anyone have any idea how to convince 14% of Republicans?

    Not with your indignation, I hope. Anyone have a plan?

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: WHAT ABOUT THE 14%? Posted by: Scientz
    Our responsibilty doesn't end with the Law
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: BobbyGreyFriar on Nov 15, 2006 8:04 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    If we do not intervene to stop this crime then under the Nuremberg laws we become complicit ourselves. Whether impeachment can work or not to stop the agents in question from committing atrocities, one way or another of acheaving this result must be found. One option is simply to stop obeying the government -- this is both practically feasible and there are numerous historical precedents for it. If laws function to protect criminals, they appear to do so in this case, then we are obliged, if we regard ethical truisms, to (explicitly) break the law.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Impeach? You might think twice about that one...
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: longlivecheney on Nov 15, 2006 11:29 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    I understand that most of you hate Bush so much that impeaching him shouldn't even be given a second thought. That's fine. Everyone's entitled to their opinions.

    But there will be consequences to your knee-jerk hatred for Bush if you try to impeach him. He won't get thrown out of office, as there simply aren't enough votes to impeach him in the Senate. He'll be impeached in the House, much like Clinton was, but will stay in office for the next two years anyway. Point being - you're not going to get rid of him. You will make the Democratic Party look like the Republicans did when they tried to impeach Clinton. That turned out to be a bad move on their part, remember?

    You guys can rest assured that Bush will go down in history books as one of the worst presidents ever. Nothing will change that. If you try to impeach him, even if just to embarass him in front of the country, you should expect to see a Republican president in 08. Are you really willing to give up your chances in 2 years just to satisfy your thirst for blood?

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Scientz
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: jimbobuddy on Nov 15, 2006 11:40 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Here's my idea. Conduct investigations into the various scandals that the GOPer in Chief has begat, and then go where the facts lead. Dont you agree? Oversight hearings first. The author presumes to know what the outcome of the impeachment hearings would be. How arrogant. Typical of inside the beltway 'droids. Objectively speaking, considering that this President's behavior have brought death, shame ,and ruin upon our great republic, if articles of impeachment are not brought against him, then no future president need EVER to fear the consequences of any malbehavior on his part - no matter how eggregious. Impeachment IS the costitutionally specified tool to use in situations like this. Bush is in denial, and drunk with his fascistic theory of unitary executive power. Impeachment is the cure.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: Scientz Posted by: Scientz
    » RE: Scientz Posted by: jimbobuddy
    » RE: Scientz Posted by: longlivecheney
    » RE: Scientz Posted by: thweems
    » RE: Scientz Posted by: longlivecheney
    » Agreed Posted by: cold2touch
    Enough people have to demand it.
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: equidave on Nov 16, 2006 12:53 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    When enough people demand INVESTIGATION, thorough, impartial and public, and learn what the fully laundry list is of wrong-doings then PUBLIC OPINION itself will sway that 14% (and more).

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: nough people have to demand it. Posted by: longlivecheney
    Straight forward
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: Straight Forward on Nov 16, 2006 7:11 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Impeachment has nothing to do with political gain, if you consider the concept and reality of what the Unites States Constitution means. Quite simply, either the Constitution is the sacred governing document of the U.S. or it is not. If it is, then impeaching the president is an obligation predicated upon law. If you do not impeach him, then let's just throw the Constitution in the pail, in the dirt. Remember, that is what Bush did when he stated that it was "just a goddamned piece of paper."

    If one is satisfied that is all it is, then Constitutionally do not go after him or any other politician who abuses the sacred trust of office that is envisioned in the Constitution.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Better just to cut off their b---s, I mean MONEY!
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: ggmurray on Nov 16, 2006 7:16 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    The voters have clearly spoken and it is a new ballgame in America, with a Congress that controls the public purse. We all would like to see Bush & Co punished for war crimes NOW not later, but the American people can only pay attention to a few big things at once. So now we take away his money which is essentially his power, since he cannot wage war without Congressional approval. And we focus focus focus on new sources of energy, healthcare, and building lasting and constructive relationships with other countries. The American dream is not dead. It's just been taken for a terrible ride. We won't forget this shameful period in our nation's history.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    idealism
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: imors on Nov 16, 2006 9:31 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    I'm so sick of hearing how idealistic we non-compliant, or those progressives are in our/their thought processes. Have we all succombed to some sort of cultural insanity? If we, the people, do not right the wrongs perpetrated upon the world and the planet, we are complicit in their actions and deserve no less than they.

    Take action. Write letters. Demand justice.

    Or is that too much idealism for the insane to swallow?

    Thanks.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: idealism Posted by: jimbobuddy
    IDEALISM
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: jimbobuddy on Nov 16, 2006 11:01 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Idealism is not a required element, in this case. All that is needed is adherence to costitutional process. Oversight hearings ,which we havent had , Congressional subpoenas, which have never been issued from this congress, congressional subcomittees investigating the_ __ scandal[take your pick], which will happen since we now have an opposing power structure facing the Pres. [It's the 'balance' of checks&balances'] It seems that some of you MIGHT not be old enough to remember Watergate. It DIDNT take 'millions in the street', it took PUBLIC hearings that galvanized, and informed public opinion. And to quote John Dean, Nixon's counsel, Bush is WORSE than Watergate. Some of you say ,' AWW, it's gonna be hard! We cant doo it!!' Poor babies. GROW SOME BALLS. If you think that Bush is great - 'God is in the Whitehouse' - then keep on dragging your feet. If not , then step up to the plate. Enough of all your insipid political triangulation. LET'S GO!

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    long live
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: jimbobuddy on Nov 16, 2006 11:10 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    You REALLY DONT get impeachment , do you. Read my other post on that. Plus, try googling 'impeachment'. W/the resources that we have online these days , it's really inexcusable to exhibit the ignorance that you do concerning this vital subject. Educate yourself!
    Do you really think that Iraq is the ONLY crime that Bush has committed against our country? How about the whole 'unitary executive' theory that he's put into place? ..NO? I dont think you've been paying attention to the debate, these last5 years

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    82nd Airborne vs. Impeachment
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: jjason on Nov 16, 2006 11:21 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    "I knew something was up when the general walked into the barracks."
    "Boys, the abortionists are trying to overthrow the duly elected government of the United States. Are we going to let them do it?"
    "HELL NO, SIR!!!"
    "36 hours later every abortionist (Democrat) in the Capitol was in a holding pen in Maryland, Virginia, or DC waiting for us to do to them what they did to the unborn."

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: 82nd Airborne vs. Impeachment Posted by: jimbobuddy
    Yes, impeach, yes
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: Reader11722 on Nov 16, 2006 4:47 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Impeach for the following violations of our Constitutional rights:
    They violate the 1st Amendment by caging demonstrators and banning books like "America Deceived" from Amazon. America Deceived (book)
    They violate the 2nd Amendment by confiscating guns during Katrina.
    They violate the 4th Amendment by conducting warrant-less wiretaps.
    They violate the 5th and 6th Amendment by suspending habeas corpus.
    They violate the 8th Amendment by torturing.
    They violate the entire Constitution by starting 2 illegal wars based on lies and on behalf of a foriegn gov't.
    Fix up that and while you are at it, investigate 9/11 a bit more thoroughly.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    New Bumper Sticker
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: Sprocketman on Nov 16, 2006 5:12 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    How about "Pelosi for President 2007"?

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: New Bumper Sticker Posted by: opeluboy
    ImpeachThem
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: chomsky on Nov 16, 2006 5:46 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    I don't like the idea of impeachment but I don't think we have a choice. After reading various and diverse places I have come to the conclusion if we don't impeach them we will end up in war in Iran before we are out of Iraq even. That along with a war in Iran promises to be much more devastating that Iraq even. Impeachment isn't nice, even for a bad President, but I would rather deal with impeachment then a war with Iran, Iraq, and about every other country in the mideast if not the world involved.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    First Flaw of Logic
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: Jeanne on Nov 16, 2006 6:29 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Bush was NEVER popularly elected. 2000 was stolen and so was 2004 (Ohio, and probably Fla). He and his administration would be the first president impeached who wasn't elected. So, as painful as it might be, a coup it isn't.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Save it
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: solorepub on Nov 16, 2006 7:15 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Lets think about this you have 2 years left. Is it really worth the effort? In my opinion I think a lot more worthwhile developments could be made in this time. I argue that Democrats should take advantage of the opportunity at hand. With control over Congress, it is a prime opportunity to accomplish what everyone has been bitching about wanting to change. We can all sit around thinking could have/should have but the fact is that it is that better things can get done by moving forward.

    My teacher sent out a link to our class the other day that I believe highlights this issue perfectly.
    http://www.uexpress.com/tedrall/
    My response to this article is that if all else fails, at least Democrats will have appeared to make a change and hell blame the rest on the Republicans, or should I say continue to blame the rest. The article may seem extreme in its agenda but I think the underlying point makes a strong argument, which is make a change. It is easy to say what you will do in power versus actually getting the job done but hey here’s your chance so lets see what you can do.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    You apparently did not read the whole article you linked to
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: chomsky on Nov 16, 2006 8:41 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    You seem to be saying not to impeach, yet this is not what the article says.

    http://www.uexpress.com/tedrall/
    This is a paragraph from the article:

    It's high time for vengeance. Impeachment is essential, to cleanse our national soul, as a downpayment of good will toward the rest of the world, and because they did it to Clinton for far, far less. And we need investigations--lots of them. Special prosecutors ought to track down everyone, up to and including Bush, who lied about WMDs in Iraq, chose not to pursue Osama in Pakistan after 9/11, deliberately withheld help that could have saved lives during the Hurricane Katrina, and signed off on warrantless wiretapping of American citizens. Law and order starts at the top.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Response to Dickinson in Mother Jones Backtalk
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: Pat K on Nov 16, 2006 11:03 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Mother Jones published a couple excerpts from my response to Dickinson's piece. See "Impeaching Negativity" in the Backtalk.

    ------------------- original letter -------------------

    Dear Mr. Dickinson,

    In "So, You Think You Want to Impeach?" you use your review as a platform from which to tell Americans not to bother with impeachment; that it's not in the cards. (Effectively saying "it won't happen, so shut up."). But if you told people who are fighting to eradicate AIDS or poverty or hunger that "it won't happen, so shut up" I can't imagine you would expect -- or even want -- any of them to listen to you.

    If you had argued that the charges against Bush and Cheney were baseless, your desire for people to give up the fight might be understandable. But when you point out that their attacks on the Constitution are blatantly self-evident ("hiding in plain sight") and that "the articles of impeachment write themselves," and then criticize the "tomes" for merely introducing unnecessary complexity, you simplify and strengthen the case for impeachment.

    Your desire for people to give up the fight is apparently based solely on your pronouncement that the fight is futile.

    Your blind assertion that "the American people would far prefer . . .two more years of the disastrous presidency of George W. Bush than to see the White House change hands in what could only be described as an administrative coup" can never be tested because the scenario you present is not necessarily the one the American people would face. As the threat of impeachment becomes real, Bush and Cheney have choices too. If they choose they can keep the Presidency in Republican hands.

    If Bush and Cheney choose to be removed through impeachment rather than resignation, then the succession We the People established in the 25th amendment will govern and the Speaker of the House will take the office of the presidency. As long as the succession is in accord with the laws we established it reflects our will. Some may call it an "an administrative coup" but name calling can't change reality.

    Of all the rationalizations for inaction, some form of "it won't happen, so shut up" is perhaps the most insidious. Failing to fight because "it's futile" is a self-defeating prophesy. The things worth fighting for will never happen if nobody takes up the fight. Fortunately for the nation, the question for Members of Congress is not "will we win?" The Congressional oath to uphold the Constitution is not an oath to win -- it is an oath to fight -- to "support and defend."

    To fulfill their oath each Member of Congress must be on the lookout for threats (turning a "blind eye" is not an option). When they identify a threat, their First Duty is to notify us and tell us what they believe we must do to defend against it. (Not what they think we will do; not what they think they can do; not what they think other Members of Congress might do. Rather, they have a duty to tell us what they personally believe the nation must do.)

    Hopefully you and others promoting the "Won't happen, so shut up" mantra will recognize that when principle demands action, outcome expectations do not enter into the decision to act. The choices are simple: you act or betray principle; silence is complicity. Whether or not the establishment continues to be immobilized by rationalization, we can hope that more and more ordinary Americans choose faith and courage over pessimism disguised as "realism." (Though not that many more Americans are required as the new Newsweek poll shows 51% want impeachment to be a priority in the new Congress.)

    Sincerely,

    Pat K

    -----------------------------------------

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Impeachment Meetups in the D.C. Area
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: alanmcc on Nov 17, 2006 5:08 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    The impeachment movement is not new. We in
    the D.C. area have been selling "I M P E A C H
    H I M" buttons for $1 since last May. Each seller
    can bring in about $25 an hour. We've sold
    over 5000 buttons, and have used our quite
    substantial profits to put ads, reading simply
    "I M P E A C H H I M" in lots of our local
    weeklies. We've inserted eleven ads so far.

    To learn more about this project, go to
    www.waifllc.org
    If you are in the D.C. area, please join us!

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Hello, Mr. Precedent
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: peachmcd on Nov 17, 2006 6:06 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    It's not just that Bush and Cheney actually have committed the high crimes listed in the articles of impeachment. It's not just that the Constitution has been raped and tortured by them, and left bleeding in Gonzales' office to die.

    What makes impeachment a true imperative for America is the precedent these people have set with their crimes. If the crimes are given a pass, it won't just be Republicans who claim unitary executive privilege, military tribunals for domestic dissidents, and the right of preemptive, aggressive war.

    All future leaders, world-wide, will claim these precedents. Any tinpot dictator who takes over a country with nuclear capacity can point to the 'beacon of democracy' and say, "I'm doing it exactly the way the Americans do - what's your problem?"

    I don't want to see what the world will look like 10 years after we give Bush and Cheney 'get out of jail free' cards. Those precedents are way too scary. Impeachment and removal from office are nasty, necessary, and urgent measures.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Impeachment would be suicide
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: peaceforearth on Nov 17, 2006 6:54 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    1. If we fail to work together to address global warming immediately, life as we know it on this planet will likely end soon. Amory Lovekin predicted last year that we have 10 years to turn it around before we pass a point of no return. One precious year already wasted with little obvious gain - 9 to go, if his dire prediction is accurate. (Maybe he is off - maybe 5 years to go and maybe 20 or 50 to go.) Yes, this is a very inconvenient truth.

    So shall the future few say this of us?
    Clinton lied, Hilary cried
    Bush lied, thousands died
    Dems vilified, millions died

    2. Bush thinks in terms of good and evil and has refused to talk with "evil nations" while Kerry was more nuanced and ready to work with the UN, France and other countries to arrive at a solution we could all support. There are two sets of values here. Which will we follow - the good vs. evil model or the cooperate to build the future model? If we cannot find a vision of cooperation and the courage to follow it, I fear the United States will continue labeling people "evil" and declaring war on them and eventually the world will explode into WWIII. We would all be losers.

    3. If Democrats want to unite the country to move it toward a country of values and integrity again, we need to proclaim a vision and go forward, to act in a way we would welcome if others acted toward us in that manner.

    4. Bill McKibben, concluded his article on global warming, in the New York Review of Books, http://www.alternet.org/story/43606/

    The technology we need most badly is the technology of community -- the knowledge about how to cooperate to get things done. Our sense of community is in disrepair at least in part because the prosperity that flowed from cheap fossil fuel has allowed us all to become extremely individualized, even hyperindividualized, in ways that, as we only now begin to understand, represent a truly Faustian bargain. We Americans haven't needed our neighbors for anything important, and hence neighborliness -- local solidarity -- has disappeared. Our problem now is that there is no way forward, at least if we're serious about preventing the worst ecological nightmares, that doesn't involve working together politically to make changes deep enough and rapid enough to matter. A carbon tax would be a very good place to start.

    What kind of local and national community work could possibly be done if our next step is to focus on labeling and punishing Bush and gang as evil? Half of the voters voted for him. And sneering at any failure by any Republican or Evangelical is disconnecting us even further from our neighbors who indeed have many common concerns, fears and hopes. And, in any case, are the exact people we need to work with.

    Never has a choice been clearer. Do we put all effort into building a better world? Or do we continue exchanging tit for tat, mudsling for mudsling, and leave our children a world that is falling apart, at best?

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Great idea--so who's the best group to make this happen? Moveon.org?
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: tlannin on Nov 17, 2006 9:26 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Bush's litany of egregious acts performed in the name of freedom warrants impeachment, so I'll all for it in theory. Making it actually happen could be impossible, though, given the conciliatory nature of many Democrats and the well-organized and hateful tenacity of many right-wing Republicans. There's also the non-stop propaganda disseminated by mainstream media, so the general public will probably be against it (simply too misinformed, tired, and distractable).

    As someone with a modicum of insider knowledge about the DC Beltway, I doubt that the new Congress will argue for impeachment; new Senators and Representatives will spend three months figuring out where their staff and important documents are located, and another half year figuring out who the right people are to talk to about getting any real work done. Older members will dig in and hope for business as usual and argue why impeachment would divide the country even more than it is now. The trick is to find the "tipping point" that will drive mainstream America to engage the right politicians to make impeachment proceedings happen. That will take a highly paid and sympathetic lobbyist's Golden Rolodex of connections....

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Steven Impeachment is a necessary
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: steven_09 on Nov 17, 2006 9:32 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    I've read some of your comments on impeachment. And some of you have a great deal of thought on the fact and I do agree with everyone. Mostly the main reasons why any of us want to impeach bush is because of the war in iraq and the crimes that Bush and Cheney have both done. Thus including the wire taps. Now we don't need to pull all of our troops out of Iraq. If we did there whole country would be taken over and again. Do you people not think of that? Ok imagin this your sitting at home watching tv. and someone slam in through your door with an AK47 in your face. Ok now how would you feel about this. This is exactly what the people of Iraq had to deal with before the fall of Sadam. If we left Iraq it would go to hell. But we still need to impeach Bush. It would be nice to pull some of our troops out but not all of them.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    IMPEACHMENT POSTCARDS: send to Pelosi, your rep & senators
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: yurbud on Nov 17, 2006 1:34 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Both are 4 x 6.

    I made a separate one for Pelosi because I thought I could put her address on the other side, but they don't let you customize that.

    If you got the generic ones, you could send one to Pelosi, your congressperson, your senators, and give another set to someone else to do the same.

    Get 'em here:

    http://www.cafepress.com/fascart/2097421

    The back of both is a generic postcard format with layout for stamp, address, return address, and room for additional comments.

    To Pelosi:

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/51035547307@N01/296843646


    Send to:

    Nancy Pelosi
    2371 Rayburn HOB
    Washington, DC 20515

    District Office:

    450 Golden Gate Ave.
    14th Floor
    San Francisco, CA 94102

    It would be nice if she had a half million or more of these waiting for her the first day she's Speaker of the House.



    No name specified:

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/51035547307@N01/296843641

    Find your congressperson or senators & their addresses:
    write your congressperson or senator

    If you want to use or modify the content in a letter of your own, you can find the text to copy here:

    http://professorsmartass.blogspot.com/2006/11/send-5000...

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    NetWeenies vs 82nd Airborne
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: jjason on Nov 17, 2006 2:17 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    After the 82nd Airborne locked up the Congressional abortionists (Democrats), the NetWeenies buzzed angrily on their blogs.
    Nobody cared.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Dream On
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: john2006 on Nov 18, 2006 5:31 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    There's no chance of impeachment because there is no justification. The liberal indiots are drooling for it to get even for their boy toy's impeachment. We'll forget it. Get another wet dream. The Republicans will be back in charge in two years and there will be no impeachment. So take that and shove it!

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Impeachment is a detour from where we need to go
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: jgdewey on Nov 18, 2006 10:33 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    YEP, HE DID WRONG, REALLY REALLY BAD THINGS. I agree, totally. But before we go will nilly into get the bad guy, let's think of the possible consequences. Our country right now is divided beyond anthing I've ever seen. People literally hate the opposing party. We are in debt to foreign countries beyond belief. Our economy really isn't good, if you take the debt into consideration, and so few do. We desperately need a decent health care system, to fix the hedious no child left behind act, to get our foreign policy back on tract and out of war, to get those poor kids home and stop them from being daily maimed, to beef up homeland security, to address global warming and it's dire consequences. This list my friends is endless. To take time out to further divide the country to further tie up our resources and time when we face huge problems doesn't make sense. George will be exposed for who he is and what he did. His 31% approval rating alone is a start. The supoenas will come, the house won't sit still and let him and his cohorts just do anything they want to the constitution and the country. He will be exposed, the books will be written, his cohorts will break their silence, but impeachment will put the brakes on fixing any of those problems we so desperately need to address. Revenge isn't sweet when it involves getting us mired even deeper in the mud, instead of getting out of the deep deep mud hole we are already in..

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    How to Win the War on Terror
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: without_prejudice on Nov 19, 2006 9:40 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    Proposed bumper sticker and course of action:

    WIN THE WAR ON TERROR IN 2007:
    IMPEACH, PROSECUTE, & EXECUTE BUSH & CHENEY
    IF THEY SURVIVE, AMERICA DIES!

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    9/11
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: wrongo on Nov 19, 2006 8:08 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    I don't know what the point of it would be if I started a comment thread on 9/11. Searching this site for 9/11 and 9/11 truth and 9/11 truth movement did not return any results. Maybe I searched it wrong, but if not, alternet is either woefully deficient in this crucial and most powerful perspective--the people's reinvestigation of the day 3,000 of us died--or else the topic is taboo and alternet is censoring discussion.

    Before I go on, I don't like the feeling that I get when I think that I am the first one to try and start a discussion on this topic, namely, that the 9/11 attacks were not what we were told, and that the truth about that day is far more sinister, and unfortunately far more difficult for us to accept. I don't like this feeling because it means that, in broaching this subject, I am exposing myself to ridicule, harrassment, or worse, although the point of view I am espousing is no longer in the minority, according to recent scientific polls.

    We've known for quite some time that the media are not reporting stories of real consequence, nor are they working for the people, but all too often they disseminate official party lines, or executive decisions on news content. Alternatives to media monopolies are always springing forth, being co-opted, and springing forth again. Accordingly, to get the forefront of real news, we have to look for outlets with resistance or, even better, immunity to this process. Myself, I was addicted to our so-called National Public Radio, until my counter-culture girlfriend turned me on to a local public affairs program airing on weekend mornings, a three-hour summary of high points from the nation's alternative news broadcasts, KEXP's Mind Over Matters show (www.kexp.org).

    I began archiving the programs, because the news was so refreshingly hard-hitting, but nothing could have prepared me for what I heard on the morning of April 1, 2006. Apparently two men speaking about alternative theories about 9/11 had come to Seattle and were going to be giving a lecture at the University of Washington later that night. The program host had them on for the Community Forum segment. The two men were Canadian independent film-maker, journalist, and media critic Barrie Zwicker and the golden-tongued Webster Griffin Tarpley, whose eloquence in exposing state-sponsored terrorism I have not since heard equaled.

    It was Tarpley's words, I will always remember, that stirred me from my sleep that sunny Saturday morning. Just a few seemingly innocuous phrases was all it took, and the implications of what he was saying came barrelling into the forefront of my consciousness with an impact that bolted me upright in bed and brought me to full alertness. On the morning of 9/11, he was saying, before the planes had even been rerouted, let alone hijacked, in the predawn hours of EST, at approximately 4:00 a.m., there were already US B-52 bombers fully loaded with nuclear-tipped warheads over Russian airspace. Not only that, he went on, that morning in New York and Washington, there were military drills in progress bearing an eerie resemblance to the events that later unfolded, including simulations of hijackings, with FAA and NORAD radar screens displaying as many as 30 training blips all broadcasting the distress signal for a hijacking. There were drills simulating planes being crashed into buildings. For some reason, most of our F-16s were sent far abroad on other drills, leaving the northeast corridor of the United States virtually unprotected.

    By now, in the radio program, I was beginning to feel like Neo in the Matrix. I googled around and found Loose Change (watch the 2nd Edition, Recut) and, although I didn't vomit, my heart beat fast and hard for the entire night, and I did not sleep. There were so many problems with the official account of what happened that day. The more I researched, the more I found. And understand, they are not the

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    » RE: 9/11 Posted by: wrongo
    » RE: 9/11 you must read Posted by: steven_09
    » RE: 9/11 Posted by: wrongo
    » RE: 9/11 Posted by: steven_09
    CENSURING MORE EFFECTIVE
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: donniegoodwin on Nov 20, 2006 5:31 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    This very article very cogently states the truth. So, what should we do? The best thing to do is censure the hell out of them.

    With that process congress can investigate, take in evidence and make findings of fact and truth; then humiliate the Bush administration. Congressional oversight will be restored while leaving Bush/Cheney politically disabled, and, historically put to shame. Because there are several distinct causes of action for congress to censure on, there can be several censure actions. The public will generally and widely approve of this truth finding mission. The Democrats could and should make the 2006 election debates last another two years. ~Donnie G.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Are we all insane...????
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: Honesty on Nov 21, 2006 10:57 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    We live in a country where a president already was impeached for doing what...? Cheating on his wife? For simple sleaze? If that was an impeachable offense what about selling away an entire super power????

    What are laws for?

    Messrs Skilling and Ley...? Maybe we should wait for another time to sue those people too...? Huh...?

    After all were they not adding to the thousands of stock brokers well being?

    This logic is truly insane and dishonest... It's not convenient? What is not convenient?

    Impeaching one for oral sex is suitable, but lying to an entire nation, sending thousands to their death march and completely messing the Middle East for decades to come, sinking our entire land into an immeasurable debt for dillusional war grandeur... Not convenient???

    Sorry I don't respect it when one thinks law is something that can be postponed and altered for some and not for others...

    If you believe this nonsense, then stop calling this a Democracy....

    This kind of passive and timid thinking is exactly what nurtured the culture of corruption... No one has a monopoly of corruption. You let these hyenas of the hook today, tomorrow you may need to do this for the Democrats version.

    I despise brainless and unrealistic political thinking or maneuvering as they call it in D.C.

    I wonder if Taliban chieftains are reading these comments. Because if they are, they must be rolling on the floor high fiving their successes!

    Pleaaaaazzzeee!!

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    So?
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: wireup on Nov 22, 2006 5:58 PM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    So, according to this author, these SOBs are supposed to walk free? We're not supposed to hold them accountable? Is King George NEVER to be held accountable for ANYTHING? His entire life OTHER people have always picked up after his garbage and is the same thing to happen again?

    NO WAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Gonzalez (and Ashcroft before him), Pearl, Wolfowitz, Rice, Powell, and the remaining Supreme Court Justices who facilitated the whole coup - all these creatures MUST be impeached, tried, and imprisoned if their trials lead to this.

    If nothing is done and they are permitted to continue on with NO CONSEQUENCES to their behavior then this sets a precedent for all future administrations and all future politicians.

    How dare ANYONE suggest that nothing be done? Are these bastards above the law? If anyone of us had done what they have done, we would have been put in jail long ago.

    As far as the question of conflict of interest goes, the solution is simple. Impeach Cheney first. Then an appointment is made for vice president. Then impeach Bush. The new vp becomes president and then there is no question of conflict of interest. Using CONFLICT OF INTEREST as an excuse NOT to impeach is the coward's road.

    IMPEACH CHENEY AND BUSH NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    cancel mother jones impeach bush
    [Report this comment]
    Posted by: w91 on Dec 30, 2006 12:55 AM   
    Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
    that's why i know longer read mother jones or salon. you want to slap the criminals on the wrist. but if they were black you'd be calling for a hanging.

    [« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

    Newsletter

    AlterNet Headlines

     
    • AlterNetYour turn

    Support AlterNet
    Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


    Feedback
    Tell us how we're doing.

    Advertisement
    Advertisement