Impeachment is not important. Production by Democrats is important

[Jersey Devil]

A whole generation has been taught that Democrats a/k/a "liberals" are evil, not to be trusted, weak on national security, last of the big time spenders, tax happy and on and on and on.

Don't fool yourself. We got the majority not because people suddenly fell in love with Democrats. We got it because they were pissed off at Bush, especially about Iraq.

But, since we do have the power now, it is time to demonstrate that Democrats can be trusted, that we are strong on national security, that we are responsible spenders and that, unlike Republicans, we have a social conscience. Then they WILL vote for our candidates because they like what they have done and not just when they are pissed at Republicans.

So our Dem representatives have to roll up their sleeves - End the war in Iraq, raise the minimum wage, do something about health care, take the sleaze out of Congress, etc., etc. If they do a good job with the two year trial they've been given then the voters will renew their contracts. If not, well then maybe they will go back to what they are used to, Republicans.

Impeachment would tie up the Congress for two years so that nothing would get done. So I say impeachment isn't important. It will prevent us from doing what we should be doing to win the trust of the voters. We'll get our pound of flesh in the history books when Bush's "legacy" is considered. That should be good enough.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

1. Tell it to her:

[Jersey Devil]

4. Will impeachment bring her son back or

will it prevent more young men and women from dying?

What will prevent such senseless deaths is production by Democrats in implementing a plan to end the war in Iraq.

Impeaching Bush will do nothing to end the war.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

7. Don't tell it to me.

Tell it to her.

[Jersey Devil]

12. When has Sheehan proposed impeachment?

She wants to end the war in Iraq. That is her goal. I have never read or heard her say one single word about impeachment. If I am wrong then correct me.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

15. Why don't you ask her?

After telling her why Bush should remain in office for two more years.

[Jersey Devil]

20. You're the one waving the red herring

Try The Googles. Maybe you can come up with a statement by her that she wants impeachment.

[rinsd]

10. Cindy, I am sorry impeachment will not bring Casey back.

Is that enough for your reprehensible emotional blackmail?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

13. I'm not Cindy.

Go tell it to her, she's easy to find. But apparently some people have problems saying things to her face.

[Pachamama]

47. I love Cindy and I support her and think she is great - and I would have no problem saying to her

when I see her sometime again that I think impeachment is not the way to go - right now.

Reasonable people can disagree. Cindy is a smart person and she is dealing with the pain of the loss of Casey and her desire for protecting all the children of ours in Iraq. She might not change her position on impeachment because of her feelings, but she wouldn't fault or be angry at any of us who think we need to take care of our citizenry, proceed with investigations and focus on putting back our Constitution again and to having some oversight and accountability. And the one thing I know that she would agree on - that given a choice between "impeachment" or having the 110th Congress focus on getting our troops out of Iraq - I think we know what she would choose.

[Odin2005]

41. FALLACY ALERT: Appeal to Emotions!

:spank:

[SoFlaJet]

I agree...for now anyway

there's alot of stuff that needs immediate attention before the luxury of investigations of all they have done to undermine this republic.

[Hobarticus]

2. Hear, hear....we have MUCH bigger fish to fry

Impeaching Dubya would be immediately satisfying, but I'd much rather see some long-term changes made to this nation's healthcare system, energy and resources policies, and foreign policy.

If that means Dubya stays in for two more years and tries his best to gum up the works, then so be it. Let the GOP be seen AGAIN as the obstructionist party. Dems need to be the "put up or shut up" party.

[Laelth]

11. The only fish that's been fried ...

... is the Constitution of the United States of America.

I doubt you're really OK with that. There is, simply, no bigger fish. The preservation of the Constitution ought to be our principal concern.

imho ...

-Laelth

[bobbolink]

45. Absolutely, Laelth!

Country trumps party!

[Howardx]

3. whats "good enough" for you

isnt whats good for me, i may be dead before bush gets his comeuppance in a history book, jeez that sounds lame just repeating it, seriously you want us all to just wait till someone writes a scathing book about bush then read it? lame

[Ringo84]

5. I agree completely with every word. (nt)

[Laelth]

6. If we don't impeach ...

... we will be condoning the wholesale shredding of the Constitution. We will be saying to the world that it's OK to invade a sovereign nation based on lies.

The American people just voted to hold * accountable for his and his party's actions. The world is waiting to see whether or not the Democratic Party stands for justice and whether we Democrats truly believe in the principles we espouse ...

and you say don't impeach!!! :puke:

Bush MUST be impeached! More here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2657058

:dem:

-Laelth

[Jersey Devil]

9. No - You undo what he's done by proposing legislation

that undoes it and then let him veto it so that in 2008 there is a clear choice.

Certainly you investigate. But you do not impeach unless you are prepared to stop Congress in its tracks for the entire two years before 2008. I just don't think that would be very smart.

[Laelth]

27. Legislation that he will simply veto?

I agree with you about starting investigations, but it's naive to think we can accomplish anything legislatively. Bush will veto and the Senate will not override. The only power we have , now, is the power to stop the pResident, and the power to investigate and impeach.

I disagree with those who say we should not use the power we have.

-Laelth

[JuniperLea]

31. What makes you think it will cause Congress to stop?

Nonsense.

[Swamp Rat]

8. False dichotomy. n/t

[porphyrian]

14. Impeachment is only unimportant if you don't care about the Constitution.

If you do care about the Constitution, impeachment is an imperative. A nation of laws cannot ignore the highest officials of that nation breaking those laws and disregarding the Constitution. There is no option.

[Jersey Devil]

18. How would impeachment repeal the Patriot Act?

It wouldn't. Only legislation amending or repealing it would repair the damage to the Constitution. All impeachment would do is stop congress in its tracks and prevent any legislation from being discussed or voted on.

[porphyrian]

22. Who is suggesting impeachment be used to repeal the Patriot Act?

That's an interesting idea of what impeachment is you have there. Now I understand why you don't get it.

[Jersey Devil]

24. You suggested that impeachment would be a remedy for

Bush's shredding of the Constitution and clearly it would not. Only legislation by Congress can undo the things he has done. If Bush is impeached, convicted and tossed out of office it will do nothing to repair the damage to the Constitution.

[porphyrian]

25. No I didn't. You have comprehension problems.

I said impeachment is an imperative if you believe in our Constitution. And it is, whether you understand it or not.

[Jersey Devil]

28. That's the second time you have attempted to insult my intelligence

Sorry but that won't work. Impeachment is a form of punishment. It will solve not one single problem that the voters expect Democrats they sent to congress to solve. It will only satisfy your thirst for vendetta.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

29. Are you saying...

that you didn't have a problem comprehending? Because it sure seems like you misunderstood to me.

"It will only satisfy your thirst for vendetta."

What's your position on law enforcement? I myself am for enforcing laws.

[porphyrian]

34. You have no idea what you're talking about.

Keep stabbing, though, you're bound to get something right eventually.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

26. Not impeaching would be shredding the constitution.

The Constitution clearly calls for impeaching the President over high crimes and misdeamors.

Now- do you believe that Bush has committed high crimes and misdeamenors, or do you not believe the Constitution?

[Old and In the Way]

16. Fair enough - Now please tell me what your threshold is for demanding

impeachment. What would a sitting President have to do for you to demand immediate investigations and impeachment, if the facts bear out that the crimes have been committed? Please give me some hard numbers....# of Americans/non-Americans dead that would make you demand justice. Apparently 3000 dead on 9/11, 2000 dead in New Orleans, and 100's of thousands of innocent Iraqi's don't meet your threshold for impeachment. So, what's your number?

[Mythsaje]

17. Oh, stop with the strategy already!

You're going to piss off the "instant gratification" crowd.

They smell blood in the water and they're going for the kill. Too bad their only target's still IN THE BOAT.

[MazeRat7]

39. I like to think of them as the "whack-a-mole" crowd.... (n/t)

[JuniperLea]

19. Ignoring criminals is criminal

Anyone who suggests we turn a blind eye or give a free pass to a criminal is a criminal.

In the course of setting things right, many things will be uncovered. Those things need to be used to prosecute, impeach and imprison. Period.

It's all part of the work that needs done.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

21. And cowardly.

[JuniperLea]

30. Not to mention just plain stupid

It only serves to empower the slime to do more!

What are people around here thinking? It's bullshit!

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

32. It's 2002 thinking.

Bush apologists.

Maybe it's a form of Stockholm Syndrome.

[JuniperLea]

35. LOL!!!

:rofl:

[bridgit]

23. clear-eyed, level-headed Dem governance is key imo...

a real-time exhibition of; knowledge of process & democratic resolve as well

[kestrel91316]

33. I'm sure Lord Pissypants agrees wholeheartedly.

[Raine]

36. I agree. nt

[goforit]

37. Quite frankly, I'd like to see the World Criminal Court take care of * for in the

near future!!!

WTC-Afghanistan- Iraq

[MazeRat7]

38. I absolutely agree... Lead and people will follow...

Prove we can do the job first - then, and only then, use that "earned status/respect" to extract "justice". Like I said in a previous thread...
"we are playing chess not whack-a-mole"... if your not thinking strategically (like 2-4 years out) then, IMHO, your just not thinking.

MZr7

[LiberalPartisan]

40. You are so right...n/t

[buddysmellgood]

42. We need to have hearings on all the dirt. Only then can we repair it. Then

we can decide whether to impeach.

[walldude]

43. Impeachment was important

to the republicans when Clinton got a blow job. Now we have a president who actually broke the law, subverted the constitution, and spent the last 3 months telling the American people that Osama wanted the Dems to win, and you want to let him walk? I'm not saying start impeachment hearings tommorow but the investigations need to get rolling. Think about all the shit we know the neo-cons pulled. Now imagine the shit they did behind closed doors. If we can get un-impeded investigations under way Impeachment will take care of itself.

edited for speeling

[WA98296]

44. What TOTAL Bullshit. There is an OBLIGATION to deal with crimes. No excuses!

[NancyG]

46. I'm for the positive message of Pelosi's First 100 Hours

to get something positive done.

Here's to San Francisco Values.

[OneBlueSky]

48. impeachment is a POLITICAL action . . . it's not about justice . . .

impeachment is intended to protect the nation from irresponsible and/or criminal leaders . . . we can accomplish the same thing with the checks and balances of the Constitution now that we have a Democratic Congress . . .

if we want justice, we bring the prepetrators of crimes before a court . . . or courts, as the case may be . . . that can be done after they leave office . . .

we need to spend the next two years addressing the myriad of CRUCIAL problems created by BushCo and proving to the American people that we can govern . . . if we don't do that, our reign as a Congressional majority may be a short one . . .

[sweetheart]

49. Dems simply need to reconcile the credit card bill

Impeachment is too direct an action given the political position. Rather, the dems need to go
over the credit card bill line by line, in the interest of the people's fiscal prudence, and demand
that the bush admin find cutbacks in their extravagant spending.

The public is PO'd about the credit card bill, and they haven't even seen it yet. Just give the
public the information and empowerment to take matters up directly. By 2008, the republicans will
be exposed for every golden toilet seat, every free pass and vote sold. An impeachment is as artless
as the iraq war was. Give the UN a try, let us all see the credit card bill.

[lamp_shade]

50. Totally agree...

And we have to move fast, fast, fast