Krugman vs. Reich on Impeachment

[chaska]

I can see positives and negative with both scenarios. I haven't decided what my opinion is yet. Regardless of what I finally do decide I do think it is important that we keep up the pressure for impeachment. Sometimes not getting what you want can be a good thing.

So let the discussion continue. But please, let's remember that we're all on the same team here. Let's be respectful of the opinions of others and work toward something resembling consensus (with mavericks (like John McCain ... snicker, gufaw, LOL!!!) going their own way - it's always an option). Let's remember (as John Dean's latest points out) that some liberals are capable of authoritarian behaviors too. Make your points, but try not to be mean about it.

Krugman:
http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2006/10/paul_krugman_do.html

Reich's response:
http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2006/10/what-dems-must-do-when-they-regain.html

[NRaleighLiberal]

1. Related to this, very interesting chat I had with a friend today...

first time we touched base post election. He is a social liberal, fiscal conservative, and I suppose a semi-libertarian, pretty much a moderate- but he was looking for balance restored, so is pleased with the outcome of the election. I told him that one of the first things I want to see is an investigation into Cheney's early Energy policy meeting, since I see it as potential root cause to our entry into Iraq and gas prices, amongst other things. His statement is that if the Dems start investigations, the public will get quickly fed up, and everything will go back to the right in 08. I told him that we owe it to the troops lost and to be lost, we owe it to the public, to find out the truth so that mistakes won't be repeated...

So, in a way, a microcosm of the Impeach/not impeach argument. There are people that just want to move on, but forget that the best indicator of future issues are past issues - Bush and Cheney are incapable of doing anything right, since their track record is of nothing but mistakes. We must get to the bottom of things. It is not about revenge (which is what he thought my idea was) or anger - it is about the truth!

[damntexdem]

2. Oh yes: it's very important that Democrats not presume to ...

exercise Congress' constitutional duty to provide oversight and to investigate suspected malfeasance.

If investigating possible high crimes and misdemeanors is not 'centrist,' then what the hell does 'centrist' possibly mean?

[NRaleighLiberal]

3. Incredible, isn't it.....election has impacted quite a few of my friendships...

then again, what sort of friends were they in the first place, if this is the case?!

[electropop]

4. Let it grow naturally, rather than as a blatant attack.

Let Conyers et al quietly start the investigations. As more and more scandalous truths emerge, the public will eventually demand impeachments.

We won't accomplish much (and may not even prevent much new damage) until the traitors are swept from power.

[chaska]

5. Plenty of dirt will come out without impeachment....

I want that bastard's head in the worst kind of way. Just don't want to screw this opportunity up, thus my ambivalence.

I have heard that Bush/Cheney will be up to their eyeballs in legal trouble AFTER they leave office.

Read the articles and see what ya'll think. I'm looking for more socalled expert opinions too (as well as DU opinions). Links???

[electropop]

6. I think we need to totally discredit and destroy the GOP before people

will understand that everything they did, was for corrupt purposes, benefits only the rich and powerful, and needs to be undone. We can't successfully go positive without graphically demonstrating why every GOP policy is negative.

Edit to add: I agree more with Krugman than with Reich, but I think the investigations need to be seen as an enabling force for change.