Here is why Dennis is "wasting our time"

[nadinbrzezinski]

"I, (name of Member), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or 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."

[libnnc]

1. YOU.......

I love.

:toast: :loveya: :yourock:

[Drum]

3. echo THAT!

:toast:

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. Just reminded my DINO about it as well

not that it will do any difference in her case!

[seemslikeadream]

2. I think he had his fingers crossed

[IDemo]

5. We're speaking here of Dennis's oath, not the Boy King's n/t

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

99. Are "WE"!!!

:silly:

[IDemo]

111. Yes, we are

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=3416069&mesg_id=3416205

[pacalo]

6. I love that picture!

:toast:

[nadinbrzezinski]

9. And I do hope when all is said and done, he gets less cozy accommodations

at the Hague

[OwnedByFerrets]

42. The guy who has written the book about the

crimes of monkeyboy.....Vincent Bugliosi, said to day on Stephanie Miller that monkeyboy could NOT be prosecuted by the Hague. I think he should know.

More here about Bugliosi...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/vincent-bugliosi/the-prosecution-of-george_b_102427.html

[nadinbrzezinski]

52. I hate to point out that yes he could, and we set the precedent

it's called Nuremberg. Granted, we may have to be an occupied country, but there are precedents

The other, Pinochet.

There are precedents, even if WE do not recognize the World Court. Neither did Chile

[petgoat]

67. I'd like to hear Bugliosi's argument as to why Bush is Hague-Immune. nt

[OwnedByFerrets]

74. I "think" it had to do

with the fact that we do not recognize the World Court, but please dont quote me.

[petgoat]

142. We don't, huh?

I guess that reminds me of the punch line to that old joke:

"What do you mean, 'we,' Keemosabee?"

[Raster]

7. THANK YOU!!! Go Dennis Go!

Thank you for posting!

[SpiralHawk]

8. GIGADITTOES. Thanks for all your great work, Nadine

k and r

[Fire Walk With Me]

10. K&R.

[malaise]

11. Bingo n/t

[Individualist]

12. ...and

"...when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

[nadinbrzezinski]

15. We may come to that, and given how the corpomedia has refused to cover

most of this, it will be a surprise to most

And I will remind people that only one third of Americans followed up to arms in 1776

[magellan]

86. One of them was my gggggg-grandfather

And I'd be proud to uphold the tradition.

[New Dawn]

13. K&R

[countmyvote4real]

14. I reminded my rep that to ignore these articles is to be complicit in the crimes. n/t

[elocs]

16. There are some well respected people who have a different opinion and they are not DINOs.

Such as, my Senator Russ Feingold.

Here:http://feingold.senate.gov/opinion/07/20070616blog.htm

UPDATE: I know that many of you disagree with my approach to this issue, but I thought it was important to make it clear where I’m coming from and explain why I am not calling for impeachment.

I certainly do believe in holding this Administration accountable and upholding the Constitution and the rule of law. That’s why last year I called for the President to be censured for his authorization of the illegal wiretapping program. I thought that was the appropriate course because it would have put the Senate on record in condemning the President’s wrongdoing. I still think that the censure resolution played an important role in focusing the public and the media’s attention on the issue. And I am working to make sure that Congress finally exercises its oversight responsibility by holding hearings and demanding information about the wiretapping program, the U.S. attorney firings and other abuses of power.

Many of you also wrote that if I recognize that the President and Vice President may have committed impeachable offenses, than it is our responsibility to impeach. As I pointed out, it is the role of the House to impeach, and it is the role of the Senate to try impeachments. But the Constitution left it up to the judgment of members of Congress whether or not moving forward with impeachment is best for the country.

Please keep the comments coming. I’ll do my best to read them all. I very much appreciate your honesty and directness. This exchange is very important to me.

So try and leave some room for those of differing opinions. I think Russ Feingold also knows a little bit about the Constitution and he takes it seriously. That he does not support it does not make him a DINO, a second class Democrat or a second class citizen. I realize he is a Senator and not a member of the House, but he does have a valid opinion. Many here at DU also have opinions about impeachment and my guess is that none of them are members of the House either.

[nadinbrzezinski]

18. Russ does not have a say on impeachment since he does not seat at the Grand Jury

that is the House.

And history will prove that this grand jury was wrong in not convening

[elocs]

32. Russ is entitled to his opinion as well as everybody here.

And nobody here has a "say" on impeachment either unless they are a member of the House of Representatives.

[nadinbrzezinski]

36. AND? Your point

Remember that it took more than ONE TRY to get Nixon...

And that a President CAN BE IMPEACHED AFTER they leave office

I know, accountability is not a high priority in DC... I wonder why?

Oh and Nixon was not impeached, before you remind me of it, but he had THE TALK

[elocs]

41. My point is that as Democrats we are allowed to have different opinions and not line up like sheep.

Republicans like to tag us as being unpatriotic when we do not support their aggression. Concerning impeachment, here at DU if you have an opinion that does not support impeachment right now then you tend to be branded as a DINO, not a real Democrat, or somebody who does not support the Constitution. That's my point.

[nadinbrzezinski]

43. Well if a US Congressperson, regardless of party, refuses to

even consider impeachment, I have the right to call them a DINO, and work against them... and chiefly NOT vote for them

By the way... I took that oath... and that line about enemies both foreign and domestic goes back to 1782 and it is correct.

IF they refuse to defend the country, then they have joined those enemies.

Yep, I am hard core about the Consitution

[elocs]

45. Exactly in the same way that Republicans will tag all of us as unpatriotic

when we do not agree with them. You'd reckon that Democrats would be more supportive of differing opinions without smearing, but I guess not. I've seen it done plenty of times here if you won't toe the popular line.

[nadinbrzezinski]

47. We are taking quite possibly high treason

yes, meeting the legal definition of high treason,,, or didn't you listen to even ten of the crimes listed by Kucinich?

A tad different than not wearing a flag pin

By the way, when republicans do it, it is called projection

Look the term up.

And I tend NOT to overlook HIGH TREASON...

It is your right and prerogative to do such...

But I suspect somewhere the Founding Fathers are shaking their heads, with the possible exception of Adams

[AuntPatsy]

82. Go get em Nadin.....it is treason, nothing more nothing less...

[druidity33]

90. um, well...

the LAW is the LAW, and what's WRONG is WRONG. No line toeing. Prosecute Criminals. Is that really such a difficult concept? Whether it's politically astute or not, that IS THE LAW.

Our Reps should follow THE LAWS. Otherwise we should prosecute them for breaking laws.

Could it be simpler than that?

:shrug:

[defendandprotect]

118. Now, DU'ers are "Republicans" . . . yet you're objecting to the very use of those tactics?????

This is hypocritical ---

Defend your issue ---
Certainy there are "DINOS" in the Democratic Party ---
They're not all DLC -- but we do have a co-option of the party by corporate interests, at the least.
And, by those who don't really support the ideals of the Democratic Party -- i.e., Blue Dogs.

It is our right to call out Democrats who vote with Republicans --

Now -- I don't think you have to support impeachment ---
I don't think your reps have to support impeachment ---

But it is undeniable that we have impeachable offenses by this administration ---
so the question is WHY ---

As offered tonight on the Olbermann show by Jonathan Turley in regard to impeachment being off the table for Democrats ---

"Democrats have made a political decision not a principled decision."
**********************************************************************

And that's how I see it ---

[Booster]

49. I believe it is in the best interest of this entire country to impeach Bush.

If we impeached a president for getting a blow job and don't impeach one who has broken our very own laws so blatantly, then we will be watched by the rest of the entire world, and we will be seen as fools. The world hated Bush before Americans finally got around to it and it would send a signal that we are truly a serious country and will not tolerate the likes of Bush/Cheney. It is our duty to impeach.

[elocs]

54. You know as well as I do that Clinton was not impeached for having a blow job,

but rather lying about it under oath. Or is lying about sex under oath permissible? He opened the door for the Republicans and they came right in. I still say that Democrats use words like "duty" to try and humiliate other Democrats to line up with their opinion. I'd stack my own Senator Feingold against anybody here and most here who wanted impeachment a year ago claimed it was a "duty", but Feingold did not agree then and as far as I know he still does not agree.

[nadinbrzezinski]

58. Are you also familiar with the term ENTRAPMENT? I am sure you are

and if you are not, I highly suggest you look it up.

I might also add, he wasn't convicted, but I am sure you knew that

That said, we did that for a blow job, but serious crimes that may very well include HIGH TREASON we don't

The republicans used that to inoculate the people, some have said, and there is some room to belief that this was partly the reason, the other to gum government

[elocs]

78. Right, they entrapped me to lie-wasn't he smarter than that?

Telling the truth would certainly have saved the country a lot of trouble. Sure, the Republicans were playing political games, but I am not naive enough to believe that Democrats don't do the same when it suits them. Politics is a dirty business.

Certainly, Bill Clinton was not convicted, but neither would Bush or Cheney be convicted in an election year. Reality is a harsh mistress.

[nadinbrzezinski]

96. Yeah, your reality is that of political expediency

we have another name for it... it's starts with a C

[defendandprotect]

117. Clinton was framed from beginning to end --- and what impact did his blowjob have on our lives?

There was a lot going on in this nation at the time --- and this was a big distraction --- and intended to be.

[Raksha]

132. NO THEY DON'T!!! What I'm seeing here is very much the flip side.

Republicans, and DLCers, and DINOs and Blue Dogs use the "honest differences of opinion" argument in an attempt to trivialize basic issues of right and wrong. What is or isn't TREASON is not just a matter of opinion! And when there is good reason to suspect treason, Congress' duty is clear. That isn't a matter of opinion either.

Re I still say that Democrats use words like "duty" to try and humiliate other Democrats to line up with their opinion.

[DainBramaged]

87. Don't you step out of line, you'll be branded as a naysayer

make sure you agree with everything the mega-posters say or you'll be ostracized and branded as not a loyalist, not Progressive enough, not Liberal enough to post here. Nod that head, pump that fist, agree with every position that you may disagree with and you will be brought into the inner circle and given multiple attaboys until your back hurts.




:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

[kestrel91316]

92. At least HE'S not working overtime to undermine a Dem, unlike you.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

94. He's working to undermine the MAJORITY

..of elected Democrats. Like far too many in the DU.
And the poster you are attacking is simply pointing that out.

Despite all the fringe-left sanctimony, the framers did not intend impeachment
to be used as a glorified vote of confidence. The high threshold set for an
impeachment to actually succeed was clearly intended to make it impossible to
oust a President who simply annoys his political enemies. It could only be used
to oust someone who scares his political friends.

Whine all you want. Invent all the false laws and courts with imaginary jurisdiction
you want, but the Democratic party is doing exactly the right thing in these waning
days of the Bush administration: forcing the GOP to choose between abandoning Bush
or sink with him. They seem to have decided on doing the latter, which is good.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[nadinbrzezinski]

95. Read the history of IMPEACHMENT which goes further back than the Founders

and yes, until RECENTLY it was used far more.

I wonder, lack of courage or sheer cowardice?

[ConservativeDemocrat]

105. Before the founders? Then don't quote the Consitution.

And the idea that impeachment was "used far more" until recently, is absurd.
Only two Presidents in history have been formally impeached: Andrew Johnson, during
reconstruction, and William J. Clinton.

Please, you're embarrassing yourself.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[nadinbrzezinski]

109. Read history books, instead of burning them

OUR theory of impeachment goes down to BRITISH COMMON LAW and the 1600s, the first Impeachment Trial was against the Mayor of London over the Black Death.

In fact, the phrase High Crimes and Misdemeanors stems DIRECTLY from THAT Common Law, why many MODERN americans truly have NO CLUE what it means

I bet in your ignorance you do not know that the LAST British PM to be impeached was in the 1880s (William Pitt the Younger IIRC) and that partly Blair resigned after the threats became quite serious

[ConservativeDemocrat]

144. I'm perfectly well aware of U.S. legal history...

...and that under certain circumstances, it still guides U.S. courts when
interpreting U.S. law.

But clearly, there is no interpretation to make here. It's well established
that Congress has the right to decide what is or is not an impeachable offense.

But the founders deliberately also set the bar high specifically to make sure
impeachment did not become just another partisan weapon.

And for your information, since you've seem to forget it, the United States made
a legal break from using British Common Law around 1776, which is considerably
earlier than the 1880s. We also don't have a king, in case you haven't noticed.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[defendandprotect]

119. You're affirming the "high threshold" for impeachment . . .

as we still try to recover from the ridiculous abuse of impeachment by the GOP?

And you're attacking the "LEFT" of the Democratic Party as "fringe-left sanctimony" . . . ?
Isn't this objection to name-calling based on name-calling?

The framers included even CONSPIRACY between the president and VP -- and I think we
have that as well in the issue of TORTURE, if not other issues.

Are you suggesting, "ConservativeDemocrat" that we have a President "who simply annoys his political enemies"--???
Or that even Bush's "political friends" aren't "scared" by his behaviors---????
Many "Conservatives" are indeed pushing for impeachment and express GREAT concern over this
administration's abuse of law.

I would also venture to say that the nation made a great mistake in permitting Nixon to resign.
We should have gone forth with the impeachment and he should have been dealt criminal justice.
Additionally, not having dealt with so many of these conspiracies and criminal activities over
50-60 years -- from the coup on JFK, to the many, many acts of political violence which followed,
and the many criminal scandals from the "October Surprise" to the Savings & Loan Thefts and Embezzlements, Iran-Contra, BCCI -- etal ---now has put fascism on our threshold and it is poised to pounce.

The Bush bankrupting of our Treasury --- lies to take us to illegal war -- couldn't be clearer
on what our course of action should be.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

143. I think you're actually unintentionally supporting my points

Or that even Bush's "political friends" aren't "scared" by his behaviors---????
Many "Conservatives" are indeed pushing for impeachment and express GREAT concern over this
administration's abuse of law.

When I start hearing the words "the President should be impeached" out of the
mouths of Republican legislators, as opposed to Libertarian conservative activists,
then it's reasonable to bring the question up. Until then, all this talk about
impeachment is nothing more than partisan whining.

And look where a partisan impeachment process got the Republicans with Clinton.
You are aware that Bill's popularity went up, right? Do you really want
to do that with Bush?

- C.D. Proud Member of the Realty Based Community

p.s. By the way, I'm faintly amused by your view that there is some legal mechanism or
authority to prevent a President from resigning. Or that "impeachment" somehow has a
punishment aspect to it - other than losing a job.

[libnnc]

19. that was written almost a year ago

he might think differently now

[elocs]

29. The operative word you use is "might". Big word, that.

I haven't heard he changed his mind and the screaming here a year ago for impeachment was every bit a vocal as it is now.

[libnnc]

35. I'm just noting that the article you posted was not

latest breaking news

that's all

he might feel differently now

he might not

who knows


this is not a waste of time

it's in the record now

can't change that

good night

[elocs]

40. I have not hear any differently. Surely there are many here who thought it was not a waste of time

last year either. Senator Feingold did not call it a waste of time then either, but he did not support impeachment at that time. I am betting he does not support it now either.

[John Q. Citizen]

21. How is that over site coming along? Have they got the testimony? Or did they just let it go?

[mmonk]

48. You either have a constitution that is worth something or you

have bird cage liner. It is NOTHING MORE than BIRD CAGE LINER when you DON"T PROTECT and DEFEND IT. Dino is not the right term, I agree. It's more AINO (American In Name Only).

[nadinbrzezinski]

50. Ok I need paper for the cages....

:-)

But at the pace we are going, that is all they are going to be worth.

Hey, perhaps the Conure will get it! He's a smart parrot!

[petgoat]

65. Russ's excuse, that it would take too much time, is bogus

Bush admitted on Nat'l TV that he approved the illegal
wiretaps. That's a felony, it's impeachable, and the trial
could be done in a day.

Also, I note that Mr. Feingold's argument was made almost
a year ago, in July 2007.

I wonder if he would like to tell me what was so gosh-darned
important that he accomplished in the last year that it
trumped the need to protect the constitution and our
republican form of government.

[Senator]

70. Actually, your Senator Groupthink's "position/response" is not an opinion at all.

He does claim he'll "explain why I am not calling for impeachment." But then completely fails to do so. He simply passes the buck for having an opinion on impeachment off to the House.

If he does have a "valid opinion" about whether or not impeachment is warranted, he failed to reveal it in this "update." (What's even worse is that I'm virtually certain that he thinks he did.)

He may well "appreciate ... honesty and directness." He just doesn't seem to practice it.

----

[elocs]

85. Good luck with slamming Feingold. I don't think that will get too much traction here.

God forbid that somebody does not fall into line with the "impeachment now" crowd. Feingold was the lone vote in the Senate against the Patriot Act. What were the rest of those brave senators doing then? I am very, very happy to have Russ Feingold as one of my senators and I'm betting a lot of people wish they had him as their senator.

[Senator]

115. Sorry you consider the simple truth to be "slamming."

And I don't know to which "rest of those brave senators" you are referring.

On impeaching for torture and war crimes, your Senator is no different from the rest. That's why they call it Groupthink (and arguably a war crime in itself). It is the regime's firewall against accountability.

Some of us are not very, very happy about it. And are trying to reverse it.

===

[defendandprotect]

120. Feingold is OK, but let's not get into icons here . . .

he has his quirks --- one very excellent one was not voting for the Patriot Act!!!

[bean fidhleir]

76. Feingold also said he believes the president should get his scotus picks confirmed

Even, apparently, an unelected one, because he voted to confirm at least one of them (Alito?)

He's another aristo ruling over us.

[lastliberalintexas]

139. I think Feingold only said that about the Cabinet

I can at least see an argument for that, since they serve at the pleasure of the president and only during the president's term(s), rather than for life like a justice.

I disagree with him on impeachment, though, as much as I like him.

[defendandprotect]

116. I don't see that Feingold gave reasons here . . . except . . .

That was July '07 . . .

Here:http://feingold.senate.gov/opinion/07/20070616blog.htm

What he's saying is he preferred his method of accountability on wiretapping which was to CENSURE Bush. Nothing wrong with that, but it didn't remove the president from office nor stop his illegal activities.

I also take exception with this . . .

And I am working to make sure that Congress finally exercises its oversight responsibility by holding hearings and demanding information about the wiretapping program, the U.S. attorney firings and other abuses of power.

And I will take it around with only one very specific issue: SIGNING STATEMENTS
It is the responsibility of the Congress not only to pass our laws but Congress also has the
responsibility to ensure that the legislation they pass is "carried out with the intent and spirit
with which it is passed." Obviously in almost 2,000 cases or more, Bush has declared that the
laws which Congress passes will be carried out only to the extent with which he agrees with it.
This is an undermining of Congress; it is an undermining of our system of government; it is an undermining of our system of law; and an undermining of protections for citizens of our nation.

Further . . .
Feingold made it clear that it isn't up to the Senate to impeach, but up to the USHR ---
however, that still isn't a reason for a Senator not to support impeachment, or not to call for
impeachment in light of the corruption and abuses of power.

Many of you also wrote that if I recognize that the President and Vice President may have committed impeachable offenses, than it is our responsibility to impeach. As I pointed out, it is the role of the House to impeach, and it is the role of the Senate to try impeachments.

And I deeply disagree with Feingold's final claim . . .

But the Constitution left it up to the judgment of members of Congress whether or not moving forward with impeachment is best for the country.

I don't think that's accurate. I think the Constitution calls on members to protect the Constitution as their primary duty. And I don't think that Feingold would be willing to say that Bush has not committed impeachable offenses.

I also noticed the use of the word "Guards" and think it quite appropriate ---
If Congress does not GUARD our Constitution/Bill of Rights, who will?

[SeattleGirl]

17. You know it!

Too many politicians forget that oath the second they finish reciting it.

Dennis never did!

[nadinbrzezinski]

20. I never did either, but I suspect the other 3000 folks who took it with me

probably did...

San Diego Convention Center, 1998, naturalization ceremony

[SeattleGirl]

23. I didn't know you were a naturalized citizen.

That must have been a great day for you, nadin.

[nadinbrzezinski]

24. It was, the last seven years make me wonder if I made the right choice

and my hubby got special leave and all to attend, he was my fiancee then. Ah but the Navy had other ideas

I went to a local diner, since long gone, and had some quiet dinner to celebrate...

[RNdaSilva]

130. Interesting...

I've represented many of my students at naturalization ceremonies. Very solemn, and very happy, proceedings.

I’ve always felt that all voters should be able to pass the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Test, required of all immigrants applying for citizenship, prior to being allowed voting privileges.

Considering the demographics supporting some candidates this would greatly favor ______ _____. But then, this would be unconstitutional. Amendment?

Elitism? So what?

Some sample INS Citizenship Test Questions:

http://usgovinfo.about.com/blinstst.htm

Would others qualify? I would venture a guess that less than 20% of voting Americans could pass this test. Sad.

[bleever]

22. He took the oath.

He believes in it.

K&R.

[Breeze54]

25. Thank You! I can't believe DUers are complaining about him DOING HIS JOB!!!!

:wtf:

:kick: & Recommended

[nadinbrzezinski]

26. DLC???????

Just a theory.

[Breeze54]

28. LOL... isn't it obvious?!

:P

Good job, nadinbrzezinski ! :toast:

[nadinbrzezinski]

31. Well they may be loosing the reins of control

so we may... see some progress

Remember IMPEACHMENT can also follow a President AFTER they leave office.

And pardons do not prevent that.

So I do hope Obama will sweep and not under the rug, like Clinton did for the BCCI and Iran Contra messes.

[defendandprotect]

121. Unfortunately, Obama has already said . . .

he doesn't see any basis for impeachment ---
not the actual words, but close ---

I'm supporting Obama --- but crap like that worries me ---

[nadinbrzezinski]

127. He does that, I guess I will stop voting

why bother?

Oh yes, so I can bitch....

[defendandprotect]

129. It's difficult not to try for some improvement . . ..

I knew I wouldn't vote for HRC because she is DLC ----

Well, not without banging my head against a concrete wall before voting, anyway --- !!!

And I was pulling for Kucinich and Edwards --- but we didn't make it ---

Moving them aside early, I think hurt us ---

All of this BS goes on absolutely too long ---

at this point who remembers what anyone's positions were --- ???

I guess I love to bitch too --

[nadinbrzezinski]

131. Sadly I fear that this will end at the ammo box

I am serious.... we are in for a serious head down that road of history

[defendandprotect]

133. How do you mean that . . ..???? . . .

in the revolutionary sense . . . ?

or, in our blowing ourselves up with nukes sense . . . ???

[nadinbrzezinski]

136. In the hot civil war sense

I don't expect the right to let go, and you will see militias, which have been awfully quiet during the last seven years,

Become very active

This is the ever so popular reap what you sow

[defendandprotect]

137. I certainly hope that you are WRONG . . .

but I have no insights into this . . .

I'd say very strongly however that this warmongering by Bush could end up in our blowing up the planet --- !!!

I'd say the religous fanatics are somewhat more militant and dangerous that the "militias" . . .
at least, IMO.

[nadinbrzezinski]

138. Many of our militias are also part of the nutfuckery that is the

religious right.

Was doing some research for a novel around the time of Columbine. Did a lot of readying on them... stopped when Columbine broke into my TV... I had a similar event in the novel, for similar reasons. I figured that when reality becomes scarier than fiction it is time to close that file...

And yes, some of these folks are down right fanatical.

I also will continue to hold the view that we are in the midst of a cold war, the prelims to a hot one

And yes, I do hope I am wrong... for many reasons

[defendandprotect]

148. Swell . . . we have Evangelicals helping to steal elections for the GOP . . .

as least as suggested by Prof. Mark Crispin Miller in his book --- as I understood it.

And we have militias still running racism and sexism and presumably anti-Semitic hatreds under
the cross and the Bible ---

It's enough to fizzle your brain . . . EXCEPT when you understand that everywhere around the world
our corrupted government policy has been to send our intelligence people out to round up these
fanatics and get them fighting for our interests. Afghanistan/Taliban-Al Qaeda which we CREATED
is one example of that and we further ENTICED the Russians into Afghanistan "in hopes of giving them
a Vietnam-type experience."

I'd say the same thing for Israel on a really big scale where we have a nation with NUCLEAR WEAPONS . . . Nixon armed their right-wing religious fanatics --- and their peace-loving liberals have all been subdued, shut up. Of course, they also killed Rabin in order to accomplish that.

Also, ISRAEL's weapon production and America's weapon production ... "are so closely intertwined as to be nearly indistinguishable from one another." !!!!!!

Add it all up and its simple violent right-wing corruption . . . !!!!

Religion is just the icing on some idiot believer's cake ---

But for over 2,000 years now, organized patriarchal religion has been the UNDERPINNING for patriarchy and capitalism. "Manifest Destiny" and "Man's Dominion Over Nature" the license
for exploitation of nature, natural resources, animal-life --- and even other human beings
according to various myths of inferiority. The many exploited by the few.

Patriarchy, organized patriarchal religion, capitalism . . . suicidal concepts!!!

[lovuian]

27. k&R

:kick:

[Imagevision]

30. Dennis sounds like he's documented everything Bush has been guilty of from day one, and why

is no-one doing a GD. thing to see this thru!

[wildbilln864]

80. Exactly what I'm wondering....

why these spineless S.O.B.s won't join DK and do their fucking jobs and defend our Constitution! :grr:

[defendandprotect]

122. Keith Olbermann spent some time on this tonight; noting that corp-press didn't . . .

Jonathan Turley commented that the Democrats --- and he cited Pelosi -- and OBAMA --
had made a decision to stay away from this issue ---

That the "Democrats made a political decision not a principled decision."

*************************************************************************

[Wizard777]

33. PLEASE waste my time! Pretty please with sugar on top!

[nadinbrzezinski]

37. Here's a cherry!

[Ichingcarpenter]

34. thanks Gramps Bro

You Rock!!!

[MzNov]

100. Gramps! you're out

:rofl:

[1]

38. someone suggested he should have pared his 35 issues to a smaller list...

i agree.

if you present the strongest arguments, the best 3 or 5, in a strong manner, then perhaps people will take notice.

by rambling on and on, for hours and hours and hours, dennis appears to be a loon. something that has been strongly suggested in the past.

yeah, i know, it gets it in the congressional record. so what? there is all sorts of horse shit in the congressional record. do a google search on "slavery" or any other controversial subject. being in the congressional record doesn't mean shit.


i love you dennis. salute and god bless. but edit yourself, bud.

you dilute your argument by talking so much. and too much.

[Breeze54]

44. No, you're wrong. He was right to say it in detail to get it all on record!

He's not in court...

he's presenting to the American people the why's and 'what for's'!

I think he did it the correct way, in detail!

To much is brushed under the rug already!

These are talking points now, against McLame!! ;)

[1]

53. ok. i may be wrong. i just don't think it's necessary to give people a reason to refute...

it gives them too many reasons to discount the really important issues he brought up.

present just one issue that folks could have a problem with, and they will say... screw dennis, he is just rambling. as much as we love dennis here, his credibility in the real world is not that great.


you don't need 35 reasons to impeach bush. one or two or three will suffice. bring up 35 and you dilute the message. you give them a reason to ignore the one or two or three that are truly important. pat tillman and global warming are not reasons to impeach a president.

i'm surprised you don't get that...

[Breeze54]

55. Yeah, okay, that's why there have been books and books about Bush's crimes?

:wtf:

Bugliosi: George W. Bush Should be Tried for Mass Murder

http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bin/blogs/voices.php/2008/05/12/p25406

It has been my position for yeas that George W. Bush should be prosecuted for various capital crimes, not the least of which are the deaths following from his wars of naked aggression in Afghanistan and Iraq. (See: US Codes, Title 18, Section 2441) I have urged that a Federal Grand jury bring indictments against George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Condo Rice, Don Rumsfeld and numerous other co-conspirators, accomplices and accessories-after-the fact. Now --a heavy hitter, a tough-minded, legendary prosecutor wants to see George W. Bush stand trial for mass murder. Vince Bugliosi is famous for his prosecution of Charles Manson and his ascerbic critique of a Supreme Court decision that made no law --Bush v Gore. He now claims that George W. Bush should stand trial for the crime of mass murder of US citizens.

When George W. Bush said of our "Constitution that it is "... just a Goddamn piece of paper!", he declared himself an outlaw at war with the American people. The Bush administration's culture of fear, hate and contempt for law inspires an epidemic of police lawlessness and thuggery that now terrorizes law-abiding Americans all over America. You can be thrown in jail if 'authorities' merely 'deem' you a 'terrorist'. Under Bush, the high standards found in the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the US Constitution no longer apply. You don't get to make a phone call. You don't get to call your lawyer. You don't get to call your wife or husband. You don't get visitors. It is a state of treasonous war, a capital crime for which George W. Bush must answer. The following material consists of Bugliosi's article in blockquotes followed by my comments.

The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder by Vincent Bugliosi

There is direct evidence that President George W. Bush did not honorably lead this nation, but deliberately misled it into a war he wanted. Bush and his administration knowingly lied to Congress and to the American public — lies that have cost the lives of more than 4,000 young American soldiers and close to $1 trillion.

A Monumental Lie

In his first nationally televised address on the Iraqi crisis on October 7, 2002, six days after receiving the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), a classified CIA report, President Bush told millions of Americans the exact opposite of what the CIA was telling him -a monumental lie to the nation and the world.

On the evening of October 7, 2002, the very latest CIA intelligence was that Hussein was not an imminent threat to the US This same information was delivered to the Bush administration as early as October 1, 2002, in the NIE, including input from the CIA and 15 other US intelligence agencies. In addition, CIA director George Tenet briefed Bush in the Oval Office on the morning of October 7th.

According to the October 1, 2002 NIE, "Baghdad for now appears to be drawing a line short of conducting terrorist attacks with conventional or CBW against the United States, fearing that exposure of Iraqi involvement would provide Washington a stronger case for making war." The report concluded that Hussein was not planning to use any weapons of mass destruction; further, Hussein would only use weapons of mass destruction he was believed to have if he were first attacked, that is, he would only use them in self-defense.

Preparing its declassified version of the NIE for Congress, which became known as the White Paper, the Bush administration edited the classified NIE document in ways that significantly changed its inference and meaning, making the threat seem imminent and ominous.

In the original NIE report, members of the US intelligence community vigorously disagreed with the CIA's bloated and inaccurate conclusions. All such opposing commentary was eliminated from the declassified White Paper prepared for Congress and the American people.

The Manning Memo

On January 31, 2003, Bush met in the Oval Office with British Prime Minister Tony Blair. In a memo summarizing the meeting discussion, Blair's chief foreign policy advisor David Manning wrote that Bush and Blair expressed their doubts that any chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons would ever be found in Iraq, and that there was tension between Bush and Blair over finding some justification for the war that would be acceptable to other nations. Bush was so worried about the failure of the UN inspectors to find hard evidence against Hussein that he talked about three possible ways, Manning wrote, to "provoke a confrontation" with Hussein. One way, Bush said, was to fly "U2 reconnaissance aircraft with fighter cover over Iraq, painted in UN colors. If Saddam fired on them, he would be in breach" of UN resolutions and that would justify war. Bush was calculating to create a war, not prevent one.

Denying Blix's Findings

more..... much more....

[nadinbrzezinski]

56. Problem is two fold

1.- You present articles of impeachment detailing EVERY CRIME committed. This is for the Grand Jury, not outside the Grand Jury

If you have ever seen legal proceedings you'd get it

2.- Dennis did what? Or rather the most likely response outside this little corner of the intertubes, Dennis WHO?

The press will not cover this in the detail they did in 1973

It would not matter if he filed this with one or five hundred articles, as long as the media keeps it off the consciousness of the average American, this didn't happen. Ok... they control reality

[Breeze54]

57. Except that there are over 2,179 articles on the web tonight about what DK did!

[nadinbrzezinski]

59. And... I am willing to bet that tomorrow morning your friends who

spend the night watching (insert teeveee here) don't know what happened

The story would have legs if it goes OVER the fold on major papers, otherwise, it is DOA

Seen this way too many times. He did the right thing, but those who control the message are very good at it

And CNN et al should have broken programming into breaking news

Wait, was there a blonde missing tonight?

[Breeze54]

60. But you're also forgetting about YouTube and MYSpace and FaceBook... thay count MORE nowadays!

Remember? ;)

I hear ya but this story is all over the web tonight!

[nadinbrzezinski]

61. I will not be convinced that this has truly changed

and the balance of power has shifted, until I see real evidence of it....

Sorry to be skeptical, but the last seven years have been hard on all of us

[Breeze54]

62. You think the rest of us don't KNOW this?!

:wtf:

Look, we KNOW it BUT it's NOW ON RECORD and sets the stage for possible court proceedings

not to mention great talking points against the GOP and McSame!

[nadinbrzezinski]

63. I know it is on record, that is good

I just said I still have my doubts that intertube watchers are enough to get the pressure on.

That is all

Most americans are still quite ignorant

Now I DO HOPE, sincerely, that the Intertubes will replace the MSM... and this is exactly why DoD sees the intertubes as a threat... a weapon system

[Greyhound]

69. Joke, right? n/t

[1]

64. someone else suggested that you shut up tomorrow...

don't bring it up...

listen and hear what your fellow workers are discussing.


do that. don't do that. it is an interesting exercise...

if i were a betting man, i'd go with "no one mentions the word "impeachment" for $1000, alex."

hate me, love me, ban me, i'm just saying...

[lonestarnot]

84. You just lost your bet! But you're not a betting man!

Office buzzing about it here this a.m.

[nadinbrzezinski]

97. GOOD!

[defendandprotect]

123. If you were around during the time of Nixon, you know ALL the articles of impeachment were read ---

and listed ---

[ColbertWatcher]

46. Short lists are for bumper stickers. n/t

[lonestarnot]

39. Amen!

:patriot:

[Swamp Rat]

51. k&r

:patriot:

[ConsAreLiars]

66. K&R because

those lay down, get fucked and like it because "that is they way thing are" are both defeatist and empower the dominant powers that be. If they are not getting paid, they are suckers, but they are sure loyal servants.

[TheWatcher]

68. Nothing more need or should be said.

Except Thank You. :hug:

[SalmonChantedEvening]

71. K&R!!!

:patriot: :yourock: :)

[MzNov]

102. Ditto! K&R

I resemble that remark!

:hi: :hug: :loveya:

[Echo In Light]

72. While discussing politics last week in an elevator with a dem woman who is a lawyer, she exclaimed

...that "DK is crazy." And she meant it. And that speaks volumes about what's wrong with this party.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

110. While I agree that that lawyer, I do have to admit...

...that insanity is ever so much more entertaining.

Now if someone could only convince DK to wear antenna ala My Favorite Martian, my day would be complete.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[defendandprotect]

125. I think you mean DK and the millions of others . . .

who have reported seeing Unidentified Flying Objects ---
including military personnel --
commercial pilots --
doctors -
lawyers -
military pilots --
presidents ---
astronauts ---


That anyone at this point in history would have so little knowledge of these events and such
an "I Love Lucy" outlook on what's going on in our world and kind of brag about it is worrisome.

Next you'll be telling us that you don't buy Global Warming?

[rucky]

73. Oh, that old thing.

DENNIS!

[goodhue]

75. impeach

[MessiahRp]

77. Great stuff

I used the oath you put in when I sent my letter to my representative today....

Congressman Dennis Kucinich introduced 35 powerful articles of impeachment today on the house floor. Certain members of the Democratic party have for far too long allowed Bush to get away with a wide variety of criminal acts. It seems after the Clinton impeachment, Democrats view the process as a political one that angers or disenfranchises the public in some way.

Let's set the record straight. The majority of Americans didn't feel committing perjury about a personal affair was worthy of an impeachment (nor a $60 million investigation by supposedly "Independent Counsel").

Also President Clinton was a popular President at the time of the proceedings and those reasons were why the Republicans lost some seats in the next election (not enough because they maintained control of Congress for the first six years of Bush).

Bush is unpopular to record degrees. He is in the 20-23% approval range. He has committed more crimes than any sitting President EVER. His entire duty was to protect the Constitution which he declared "just a goddamned piece of paper".

Your job also is to protect the Constitution and defend your constituents from the illegal acts of a tyrant.

Please support the Impeachment of George W. Bush and don't stop there. Support Impeaching Dick Cheney as well as both need to go for the crimes they have committed. Lobby your fellow Congressmen and get them on board. Most certainly Bush's time is short but we need future leaders to recognize the consequences that occur when you break the law and subvert Constitutional Authority.

John Conyers in his foolish opinion on Impeachment claimed the public wasn't behind Impeachment. The problem is media deregulation, which Democrats allowed under Clinton has meant a Republican leaning press has covered up and not allowed true representation of the facts. However polls still have shown support for impeachment as high as 50%.

One thing we know about the corporate media, they love a scandal and impeachment will draw ratings. They will cover the entire trial and people will be able to hear all of the charges and facts supporting these claims.

For internet bloggers, these facts have been easy to come by but for the average network news viewer they will be learning of many of these charges for the first time and you can bet as the case is laid out public support will grow more immensely in favor of impeachment.

As the public starts to realize what Bush and Cheney have done their anger will intensify and even the most loyal Republicans in the House and Senate will feel pressure to save their own jobs instead of saving a lame duck President who could bring them down with him.

We have the necessary facts. We have Scott McClellan willing to testify.

We just need backbone from our representatives to stand up for us and the laws that hold our country together.

Remember your oath.

"I, (name of member) , do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or 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."

Thank you

[Zorra]

79. Yep, there ya have it. n/t

[AuntPatsy]

81. Go Dennis....perfect..

:yourock:

[lonestarnot]

83. Why I oughta...

since I don't see muse rider on this thread! K & R

[indepat]

88. The public should legally be able to cut off the heads of elected officials who betray their oaths

of office imo, figuratively speaking of course, but to the point, actually have them shorn from office. :D

[Fire Walk With Me]

89. Kick.

[kestrel91316]

91. Yee haw!!! THANK YOU.

[blues90]

93. I am glad Kucinich brought this up but

I have to remain skeptical and say why did it take this long and why now. Does it have all to do with the dem's doing nothing other than a min wage increase since jan 2007?

Is it now they want to lead us on to think they are now working for the people within the law?

The timing bothers me. This had always been ignored and there are criminals who were summoned and have not appeared yet nore were they arrested or held in contempt.

I just question the entire thing and after all this time now they are going to have impeachment hearings?

Something we can't see or know really stinks here. Are we this stupid or hopeful or is this the real deal? I personally really don't know in this Alice in Wonderland world we are floating in.

[MzNov]

98. Impeach Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee !

now is better late than never.

Dennis Kucinich = one true patriotic American.

[DainBramaged]

101. Watch out you speak truth, you will be attacked by his fans

for disagreeing with them.

[Name removed]

104. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DainBramaged]

108. Excuse me, attacking me, who are you and what right do YOU

have to insult me or attack my Union???

Get lost

[Breeze54]

112. The Teamsters Endorsed Kucinich!!! You ARE a Teamster, right?

Teamsters, Kucinich team up vs. union-busting

>Archive - PWW Print Edition Archive - 2008 Editions - March 1, 2008

http://www.pww.org/article/articleview/12597/1/412

CLEVELAND — Congressman Dennis Kucinich has gotten behind embattled truck drivers and warehouse workers fighting to recover jobs from a union-busting beer distributor.

When Superior Beverage took over the delivery contracts in the Cleveland area for Coors, Great Lakes, Iron City, Molson, Fosters and some smaller brands on Jan. 7, it refused to hire all but six of the 42 workers, members of Teamsters Local 293, who had worked for the previous company, many for 30 years or more.

This marked the first time in 75 years that any nonunion beer has been distributed to bars, restaurants and stores in Cuyahoga County. The union called for a boycott of the brands handled by Superior and invited Kucinich to attend its Feb. 21 meeting.

Kucinich, whose father was a truck driver and member of a Teamsters local for 35 years told the workers that he had “Teamster blood flowing” in his heart and understood well from his own life experience the pride that drivers take in their work, the struggle they face and the need for unions to protect the well-being of workers and their families.

“I am proud to stand with you in this fight,” he said. “I have written to Superior about this situation and am ready to do whatever it takes to win back your jobs.”

Kucinich said that he is also the target of an anti-labor corporate campaign seeking to defeat him in the March 4 Democratic primary.

“The seat I hold in Congress is not my seat. I only hold it in trust. This seat belongs to you, to the Teamsters, to the labor movement, to the working men and women of the 10th Congressional District and the whole country.”

Kucinich appealed for the Teamsters’ help to stop the effort to silence his voice on behalf of labor in Congress and received a standing ovation. Afterwards Max Zemla, the local’s principal officer read from the list of corporations that have donated nearly $500,000 to Kucinich’s main opponent, Cleveland Councilman Joseph Cimperman.

In letters and meetings of area unions and the North Shore AFL-CIO Federation of Labor, Zemla has appealed for support for the boycott, especially of the notoriously anti-union Coors and Great Lakes, a popular local brewery.

The list of boycotted products is spreading throughout the county and already 250 bars and restaurants have removed tap handles of the targeted brands, Zemla said. When a beer is not on tap, sales decline sharply.

“These knowledgeable and experienced warehousemen, drivers and salespersons have lost their jobs and had their lives and their families’ lives disrupted, apparently solely because of their union membership,” Zemla stated in a letter to the Cleveland labor movement.

The danger of nonunion deliveries is serious, Zemla said, adding that Superior is searching for a location to build a “mega-warehouse” to provide beer to all of northern Ohio. It is expanding operations as far south as Columbus and has tried to break Teamster Local 377 representing its workers in Youngstown.

Zemla said Kucinich had always stood up for workers and needed to be re-elected to work for repeal of the striker-replacement law allowing companies to issue permanent lay-offs to workers forced on strike and to replace them with scabs. The Teamsters are asking unions to send letters to Joe McHenry, executive vice president of Superior, 425 Victoria Rd., Youngstown, OH 44515.

Tuesday, February 26, 2008

BEER!!! Kucinich stands with union truck drivers for jobs

http://rjones2818.blogspot.com/2008/02/beer-kucinich-stands-with-union-truck.html

Dennis is fighting for Union truck drivers against a union busting beer distributor.

Via pww.org and author Rick Nagin:

Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) has gotten behind embattled truck drivers and warehouse workers fighting to recover jobs from a union-busting beer distributor.

When Superior Beverage took over the delivery contracts in the Cleveland area for Coors, Great Lakes, Iron City, Molson, Fosters and some smaller brands on Jan. 7, it refused to hire all but six of the 42 workers, members of Teamsters Local 293, who had worked for the previous company, many for 30 years or more.


The article points out that this will be the first time in 75 years that non-union beer has been distributed in the Cleveland area. The question raised is why, after 75 years, does the Union have to be dumped? Was Cleveland not getting their beer delivered properly?

Kucinich, whose father was a truck driver and member of a Teamsters local for 35 years, told the workers that he had “Teamster blood flowing” in his heart and understood well from his own life experience the pride that drivers take in their work, the struggle they face and the need for unions to protect the well-being of workers and their families.

“I am proud to stand with you in this fight,” he said. “I have written to Superior about this situation and am ready to do whatever it takes to win back your jobs.”

Dennis, a union member himself, is in a fight for his OH-10 congressional seat. As you can imagine, the corporate anti-union forces are out to defeat him.

More...

[DainBramaged]

113. You can stop answering I won't see your replies

and your attack message was deleted.

[Breeze54]

114. You better NOT send me ANY MORE PM'S, Buster!!!

Good Bye..... You're out of gas!

[MzNov]

106. Article XX: Imprisoning Children

!!!

http://kucinich.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=93581

[defendandprotect]

128. ...he didn't mention TORTURING and RAPING them . . . !!!

But we have heard that went on in our prisons -- !!!

[Runcible Spoon]

140. wow that's rich coming from you. Mr. Ignore Everyone for no Sane Reason!

Why am I under teh impression your echo chamber has a population of one? I suggest yoga for the anger and fiber for your incessant anal spasms on this board.

[Breeze54]

103. Impeachment has been off the table since '06 but Bush is GONE in 6 months!

The timing is ... DO IT NOW!!! File the Articles NOW, before he leaves office and get it on Record!!!

I can't WAIT to see his Murder Trial!!

[nadinbrzezinski]

107. Remember HE used Special Privilege to file for Chenney about

what six months ago.

He is being methodical and trying to PUSH the rest to do something

[mcollier]

124. Excellent documentation for the historical record

Its on the books in congress now...

That alone is history making.

[defendandprotect]

126. I agree -- notice how much legislation the GOP in the minority is killing ---

while when Dems were the minority they could accomplis zip ---

And when the Dems are in the majority they can accomplus zip --

Think we're being taken for fools by any chance?


Reality is that we have a co-option of the Democratic Party ---

and Democrats who are NOT supporting the party ideals ---

And a DLC-corporate-sponsored wing in the party which is there to move the party to the RIGHT.

Lots of people on DU do not want to discuss this ---

Many people don't even realize what the DLC is or what "blue dogs" are ---

[defendandprotect]

134. Push & Recommend

[frog92969]

135. K&R

:patriot:

[Runcible Spoon]

141. KICK

Making that fucking vile administration publicly face their crimes against the humanity is top priority!

[ColbertWatcher]

145. Hope had 2 kids...

Anger at the way things are,

and Courage to make them better.

[Fire Walk With Me]

146. Kick for the GD:P newcomers.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

147. Doing the right thing is seldom politically popular. Or, politically expedient.

Fortunately, Dennis is a troublemaker who actually believes ethics trumps politics-as-usual and poll watching.