Why is Pelosi a done deal?

[God Almighty]

She has voted for every way appropriations bill that has come her way. Perhaps, the people want someone more like Stark or Waters or Kucinich or McDermott. The people didn't vote Democrat because they wanted Pelosi. They voted Democrat because they wanted to be rid of Bush. Pelosi isn't interested in impeaching Bush. Perhaps, we need a leader who agrees with the American people.

[bemildred]

1. Do you know how the Speaker is elected to that post?

Anyway, that's the reason, she has the votes, or so we are told.

[God Almighty]

4. Fox news called the caucus election for her on November 7th

I would prefer to pick someone Fox didn't pick.

[bemildred]

7. Go for it. nt

[Freddie Stubbs]

51. It doesn't take a Genius to tell you than it was common knowlegde

that Pelosi would be speaker long before Fox news declared that she would be Speaker.

[Kagemusha]

2. Get back to us when you find one.

Thanks :)

[God Almighty]

8. Kucinich, McDermott, Conyers, Waters, Stark, Grijalva, Woolsey

Lee, Hinchey, Baldwin, Watt, Markey, John Lewis, Tierney, to name a few.

[LWolf]

49. I love that list.

Any would be better than Pelosi; Kucinich would be my first choice.

[BOSSHOG]

3. Someone will have to step forward

and declare their intentions for the position and I don't think that has happened yet.

[rodeodance]

5. she had no right to take impeachment off the table.

[LynneSin]

9. PUL-LEASE

The impeachment will go much easier if we INVESTIGATE first without the right-wing screeds on Cable News screaming it's an impeachment. It was a smart move - you know they are going to investigate everything surrounding the war and the Bush Regime. If Conyers gets the good you think he's gonna back down?

[God Almighty]

12. Off the table is different from investigating first. It means BUSH STAYS.

[redqueen]

16. I'd rather she said "We currently have no plans to impeach."

Much more open-ended.

The way she put it kinda sucks, yeah.

[Zhade]

34. Agreed. It doesn't set her up to be labeled as a liar later.

Saying "it's off the table" is easier for conservatives to point to as a 'promise' to NEVER impeach (which better not be the promise - when they investigate, they damn well BETTER follow the rule of law).

[LynneSin]

20. Um.....I don't think so

I have alot of stuff off the table - but when I need it, it's in a cupboard for quick access.

Seriously, John Conyers is not a man to back down if there is corruption out there. But if the media keeps harping the impeachment it could hamper our investigation.

Plus, right now we do NOT have enough senators on our side to actually remove Bush. It's either 2/3 or 3/5 (I never remember the number), so even if we did impeach there's a strong chance that Bush stays in the White House.

But if we can pull off a strong investigation, coverage on C-Span along with a push from the bloggers and working to get some of the media on our side supporting the investigation we might just get some of those senators to cross, but I'm not holding my breath.

Impeachment is a chess game where if you do not have a strategy you will not win.

[tiptoe]

36. Also, Bush less a priority, until Cheney, first, is dealt with (thus 'I' == "off the table" for now)

I'm curious if Special Counsel Fitzgerald might be preparing for new Plame-investigation announcements, as Dems gear up for investigations (instead of impeachment).

Current U.S. Presidential line of succession:
Name -- Position
1 Richard B. Cheney -- Vice President
2 Dennis Hastert * -- Speaker of the House of Representatives
3 Ted Stevens * -- President pro tempore of the Senate
4 Condoleezza Rice -- Secretary of State
5 Henry M. Paulson, Jr. -- Secretary of the Treasury
6 Donald H. Rumsfeld ** -- Secretary of Defense
7 Alberto Gonzales -- Attorney General
8 Dirk Kempthorne -- Secretary of the Interior
9 Mike Johanns -- Secretary of Agriculture
   Carlos Gutierrez
   (ineligible; not a natural-born citizen)† -- Secretary of Commerce
   Elaine Chao
   (ineligible; not a natural-born citizen)† -- Secretary of Labor
10 Michael Leavitt -- Secretary of Health and Human Services
11 Alphonso Jackson -- Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
12 Mary Peters -- Secretary of Transportation
13 Samuel W. Bodman -- Secretary of Energy
14 Margaret Spellings -- Secretary of Education
15 Jim Nicholson -- Secretary of Veterans Affairs

======
Notes
* Transfer of Speaker of the House
The 2006 elections of Congress have indicated a switch in the majority party. Therefore a new Speaker of the House will be elected by the new members of the House in January 2007. The current Minority Leader, Nancy Pelosi, is expected to take on this position in January.
* Transfer of President pro tempore of the Senate
The 2006 elections of Congress resulted in a switch of the majority party in the Senate. Therefore, when the term of the current President pro tempore, Ted Stevens, expires on January 3, 2007, a new President pro tempore will be chosen. Robert Byrd, as the longest serving senator of the Democratic Party, will become third in the line of succession upon his election to the position.
**Retirement of the Secretary of the Defense
This historically powerful position will soon see a new holder; however, Donald Rumsfeld still holds the position until formally retired and a replacement is named and confirmed by the Senate. Robert Gates has been nominated to replace Rumsfeld.
† Non-natural-born citizens ineligible
It has been a subject of controversy whether cabinet officers such as Carlos Gutierrez (born in Cuba) or Elaine Chao (born in Taiwan), who are not natural-born citizens, are constitutionally ineligible to be Acting President, because Article Two establishes only eligibility requirements for the “office of President”. The same question exists for officers in the line of succession who are not at least 35 years old or have not resided in the United States for 14 years. The question also arose (with greater relevance, considering the higher position in the line of succession) with former Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger and Madeleine Albright, who immigrated to the United States from Germany and Czechoslovakia, respectively. To avoid a needless constitutional dispute at what would likely be a time of great crisis, the statute (3 U.S.C. § 19(e)) specifies that even the acting president must meet the constitutional requirements for the office of president. However, questions about the natural-born citizen requirement, especially the argument that it was superseded by the citizenship provisions of the 14th Amendment, would still keep this controversy alive; nonetheless, it is commonly believed that Gutierrez and Chao are ineligible, and that Kissinger and Albright would have been ineligible as well.
†† Secretary of Homeland Security not included
The Secretary of Homeland Security has not been put into the line of succession. S.442, a bill approved by the Senate on July 26, 2005, would place the Secretary of Homeland Security after the Attorney General and before the Secretary of the Interior in the line of succession if it becomes law.<1> A similar House bill, H.R.1455, is currently pending before the House Judiciary Committee.<2>
Acting officers ineligible
To be in the line of succession, an officer must have been appointed, and confirmed by the United States Senate, prior to the death, resignation, removal from office, inability, or otherwise failure to qualify of the President pro tempore. Therefore, acting officers cannot be in the line of succession.

[Imagevision]

40. Impeachment off table? - The investigations/oversight will be self serving, I promise...

[onenote]

44. why not?

[mike_c]

6. in broad terms I agree with you...

...but I'm willing to give Pelosi the benefit of the doubt and give her a chance to perform, rather than simply give press conferences. If her colleagues elect her speaker then that is fine with me, but I want a PROFOUND change in the direction of American government and if Pelosi cannot help deliver that, then I'll withdraw my support. This has always been about the most significant issues, IMO, not about individuals or even political parties. America needs real change. I hope that Pelosi can help usher in that change.

[partylessinOhio]

10. I hope Pelosi is not a done deal. Kucinich would be a fine leader!

Did you hear his one minute speech today? He got in more points than I could count in that short time. Dennis is for the people and we need more like him to end the war, bring our troops home, give health care to all and save Americans' jobs.

[beaconess]

35. Kucinich is not a team player - he'd be a disaster as a Leader

[oasis]

11. Nancy's an excellent organizer, coodinator and consensus builder.

That's just what the American people want.

[God Almighty]

13. She builds consensus best in funding Bush's wars.

She always votes to keep the funds coming for the war. If she were opposed to war, she'd cut the funding.

[oasis]

23. If "cutting funds for the war" was a winning issue, she would have trumpeted it

during the campaign. The right wing spin would be the "Demcocrats advocate cutting funding for our troops".

[God Almighty]

25. The people spoke on November 7th. Pelosi had nothing to do with it.

She ran in one Democratic district in California. This wasn't her victory. It was a victory for the American people.

[oasis]

29. If Pelosi would have said "As Speaker, I will push to cut Iraq war funding" during

her campaign, there would be no Dem victory or American people's victory.

But then, you know that.

[God Almighty]

32. The polls (conservative) all show people want her to do just that.

Haven't you been paying attention. People listed Iraq and Bush and their main reasons for voting Democrat this year.

[oasis]

33. What do the polls say about cutting funding for the war? That seems

to be you pet issue.

[lapfog_1]

28. You know, if we don't "support the troops", there won't be enough

Democrats in Congress to hold a tea party, much less a majority.

That kind of statement is just silly.

[partylessinOhio]

37. You are absolutely right. Shut off the water and drip of dead troops

will end.

You are either for the war or against it. Funding the war fuels it.

[Hippo_Tron]

14. The Minority Leader generally gets a good deal of credit if we win the majority

Basically, she's been our leader and under her leadership we've become the majority. You would have to make the case that we won the majority in spite of her and not because of her if you wanted to replace her. If you wanted to challenge her credentials as a liberal the time to do that was when she was in 2004 when she was re-elected Minority Leader.

[God Almighty]

15. People voted Democrat despite her. They wanted Bush impeached and the war over.

Most felt the best way to get rid of Bush was to vote Democrat. Taking impeachment off the table is a betrayal of the voters. This is why we lost in 2002. We'll lose in 2008 if we don't listen and stand up to Bush this time.

[Hippo_Tron]

17. And you have what evidence to prove this?

[God Almighty]

19. You don't believe that people want the war over and Bush out?

With all due respect, did you just drop in on Earth on November 8th?

[niyad]

22. you are aware, of course, that in order for bush to be found guilty of whatever

charges are in the bill of impeachment the house would send to the senate, it would require a 2/3 vote of the senate? we don't have the votes, first and foremost. it would be an exercise in futility to bring a bill of impeachment when we know it isn't going to pass.

[God Almighty]

24. All those who want to keep their seats will convict Bush and Cheney

If we show courage, the American people will applaud us in 2008. This isn't about sex. It's about torture, murder and spying on Americans.

[redqueen]

26. It's also not about starting impeachment proceedings right this minute.

It seems to me the main problem with her statements was their finality. Not that it wouldn't be immediate, but that she made it seem as if we were vowing not to impeach the liar.

I think after investigations show just how hard he and his cabal worked to mislead the American public so they could have their useless war, that we would have the votes. I truly do.

I think the public would applaud this too, unlike the trial for sex lies.

[God Almighty]

31. There is a difference between taking time and taking impeachment off the table

Because of Nancy's voting record and her past statements, I had no doubt she'd stand up for Bush on this issue. Look at her defense of Bush after Hugo Chavez spoke his mind (to a five minute standing ovation).

[loyalsister]

47. Saying it's on the table implies they have the evidence

That is not true. There has not been a thorough investigation.
It would be irresponsible to say that impeachment is part of the plans based on an investigation into what is minimally available, and without having heard from the other side.

How outraged would we have been if they had announced that impeachment was a priority the second the blue dress was found? Or, as soon as they won in 1994?
Of course, it was. But we surely would have considered it unjust for them to have an agenda when a full investigative process had not been followed.

"But they had no real evidence!"
Do we really have evidence that rises to a level of impeachable by a high legal standard.
And, most importantly, can they argue effectively against it?

"But it was just sex!"
Of course, but there is no guarantee that by they time articles are drawn up there will be agreement among the people in this country about the seriousness of things Bush has done.

[partylessinOhio]

38. Pelosi needs to clarify exactly what she meant before she becomes leader.

This matter is just too important for all this guessing - did she mean no impeachment ever - or did she mean no impeachment at the present time.

This is not a game - show us the money!

[Tellurian]

43. She means, for now, she does not have the power to Impeach..

so, Impeachment is off (read can't be on) the table.

simple, really.

[Hollow Shells]

46. Exactly...

Though I believe that she was stating a position, she was also stating a hard fact.

I would like to see Bush and Cheney booted, but there are other things that are more important to me. Health care, Iraq, min wage, advancement of science, education, civil rights... I fear that impeachment trials will take a lot of time and energy, by the time it comes down to a vote (which we probably wouldn't win) Bush and his gang could already be gone. But I have to admit, vengeance would be sweet.

[redqueen]

18. How about we make some calls in support of him?

Better than wishing and hoping...

[God Almighty]

21. Good idea.

[Ravy]

27. We should elect you... since you know why every person voted

the way they did.

[God Almighty]

30. Get off the Internet and go out and talk to people.

It's the best way to find answers. Maybe, you should check out the millions who have protested Bush in the streets of America. We knew we were going to win. We probably won bigger than the election shows. The people of Ameica (as a whole) hate Bush and want him gone.

[partylessinOhio]

39. Amen!

:toast:

[beaconess]

41. Really - you went out and talked tothe people of America (as a whole) and they all told you this

Wow.

[Tellurian]

42. Bush didn't even know everyone hates him until..

just the other day, when Baker sat him down and said:

"Listen-UP, Jr-"

"Everybody HATES you.
You are the most hated person on earth!"

To say Bush was dumbfounded would be redundant..
I'm lacking for the appropriate descriptive word..

[sandnsea]

45. She orchestrated those 30% Bush numbers

that led to winning the House for the first time in 12 years. That's why. :eyes:

[upi402]

48. this is America and she looks marvelous! eom

[Freddie Stubbs]

50. The people didn't vote Demcoratic because they wanted Stark or Waters or Kucinich or McDermott

It was widely assumed that if Democrats won a majority in the House than Pelosi would become Speaker.

[Freddie Stubbs]

52. The vote was unanimous

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/16/congress.leaders.ap/index.html

[savemefromdumbya]

53. Hurrah for Nancy (she could be President Pelosi?)