Skip to main content

View Diary: The Impeachment Cure, Bruce Fein & Not So Strange Bedfellows (257 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I don't think you would like to have (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    flumptytail, FreeFallin

    Bruce Fein as President.  He has a bit of an impeachment fetish and clearly is great lover of the Constitution.  But trust me, you don't want him to have a veto pen.

    •  Fein himself is not the point (8+ / 0-)

      The Constitution is the point.  

      The Democratic leaders are willing to risk everything we stand for, everything that protects us in this democracy - we citizens - all because they want to win in 2008.  That is the only plausible excuse they have given.  I'm not knocking all Democrats of course, because the progressives are screaming for this too.  Right now I am determined to vote for Kucinich because he has represented me.  Does he get any party support?  

      Do WE get any party support?

      I still remember Conyers' support of impeachment in his appearances at rallies.  And in his book.  And I am trying to somehow grasp his apparent words to Cindy Sheehan in his office -- about how he wasn't going to risk his career over impeachment.  We have an entire history filled with people who have given their very LIVES for our Constitution and our democracy, and our own representatives think only of their careers and elections.  No -- that would be the lobbyists.  They are listening to the people who pay for these elections, and they're willing to risk the 'rule of law' to keep them happy. Murdoch's media machine... how it 'might look.'  

      So no, I wasn't talking about Fein.  I am talking about the Democrats in charge.  I am talking about the Blue Dog obstructionists.  I am talking about the rule of LAW.  It's not negotiable.  We've made our voices heard loud and clear.  The ball is in their court, and I for one am watching.

      •  I was being humorous about Fein, (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        feduphoosier, NonnyO, Jimdotz

        because he really is a conservative, you know, and an oddball.

        And I am trying to somehow grasp his apparent words to Cindy Sheehan in his office -- about how he wasn't going to risk his career over impeachment.

        You know, John Conyers has obviously been muzzled, and I can't say I am happy about it and want to find the magic cure to get him moving again, but I frankly would not put much credence in this third-hand report of someone's interpretation of something he said while there was a big protest going on in his office.  Think about it:  John Conyers is like 800 years old and he only says what he wants to say.  Why in God's name would he say something that totally stupid even if that's what he was thinking?  John Conyers is not a man prone to flap his lips for no good reason.  I take that with more than a grain of salt.  I mean, it is just not credible.  And really, the important thing is why is he spooked and what will it take to get him moving again?

        Have you heard anything more about the supposed rumor of him supposedly saying (again I take this with another huge grain of salt) that he would move forward if three more Reps signed on to Kucinich's bill?

        •  You know, I almost posted a second... (5+ / 0-)

          comment to let you know that I wasn't directing my second rant at you at all... and then the phone rang, sorry.  :)

          This happened yesterday (the death threat -- and the email was so... unbelievably violent that it really has me spooked.)  I live, still, in Klan country and I have never seen anything like that.  

          I know I've written so many letters, signed petitions - and yes, my own name is listed on the internet as a signer of the 'World Can't Wait' impeachment petition.  We are all on record... but our representatives are afraid?  Of what exactly?  At least they don't have to worry for their lives.

          So if I'm a little more... heated tonight, it is because this diary tapped into my growing rage against this obstructionist behavior in my party -- it was my party all of my life.  

          I saw today, when reading my megavote email, that my Blue Dog 'representative' even voted against the extension of the Children's insurance bill!  It passed of course, in spite of him.  But imagine my confusion when I saw that Senator Lugar, my Republican Senator voted for the Senate version, but my stinking DEMOCRAT Blue Dog voted against it.  And Lugar didn't vote for the FISA bill (and no, he isn't up for re-election next year, he just refrained from voting.)  Of course, we know my Blue Dog voted for it with his kennel.

          I'm fed up with him and others like him.  I'm tired of hearing Conyers and now Waxman and other Democratic leaders making veiled requests for more public outcry, and then when we give it -- they cave.  I see Feingold trying to censure the president - which is all he can really do from the Senate - and getting very little support even for that.

          Heh, see?  I'm still ranting.  Sorry, I cannot seem to stop.  ;D

          •  Your ranting is absolutely (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            feduphoosier, FreeFallin, junta0201

            appropriate IMHO.  Gosh, those requests for more public outcry aren't even particularly veiled anymore.  I'll be honest with you:  I am inclined to give the Waxmans and Conyers the benefit of the doubt.   I don't think either of them have caved in any significant way (yet), but I see them holding back.  I do think that if there were a much larger public outcry, probably in the form of street protests around the country and regular picketing in front of Congressional offices and the like, I think it could possibly make the difference.  

            I blame the leadership, though, and mainly Pelosi.  I think that for her own reasons - whatever they might be - she has simply declined to use the tools that are available to her and has inexplicably handed over tools to the Republican minority that the Republicans denied to the Democrats when the Democrats were in the minority.  From this position of weakness now, she has a constant struggle on her hands to control the Blue Dogs, but she isn't really doing much except appeasing them over and over again.  If Conyers and Waxman are not openly defying her injunction against impeachment, I have to think they might fear that if she were booted they might be stuck with a worse and more authoritarian Speaker.  I don't know how the caucus chooses its Speaker, so I don't know if there is any chance that a Blue Dog could grab the Speakership.  But they may fear that and the fact that the hearings would then be effectively shut down altogether.

            Sorry, I didn't put two and two together that it was you who had posted about the threats earlier.  Yeah, that is really scary.  Think of them as the throes of a freeper class that is going down the tubes of history.  I don't know how else to think of them. Hopefully they are nothing more than idle puffery of some freeper coward.

            •  My mother isn't nearly as worried as I am (0+ / 0-)

              But she remembers the 60s a lot better than I do, and has obviously seen... a lot.

              I agree about Conyers and Waxman, and that Pelosi is holding them back.  I suspect the Blue Dogs are the problem.  And I have no idea what to do with them, because I have no luck at all with mine.  We plan to try to oust him (if we can find a progressive candidate!) in 2008, but there is so much time between now and then, and he is actually voting to the right of Lugar now.  

              This in contrast to the conservatives I talk to every day, the ones I chat with, who are furious with Bush, furious about the war, and furious about being lied to by everyone.  They will listen to a Bruce Fein (I want to hug him.)  They will look at the Democratic party, however, and just see failure.  They will never guess that it is caused by these Blue Dogs who claim to represent 'both liberals and conservatives' but instead manage to represent no one but their lobbyists... and Bush himself.  Liebermans, all of them!

              •  September 15 (0+ / 0-)

                I don't how I can be so dense, except that my attention is so divided between two very young kids and trying to take action on global warming, drafting Gore, getting out of Iraq and also impeachment, that frankly I miss the most obvious things sometimes.

                September 15 in D.C. march for impeachment.  NOT the same as Sept 21 in D.C. march to end the war.

                Can you be there?  Can you go to and toss in a few bucks to keep the campaign alive and get the word out and help those who can get there to get there?

        •  The 'three more' comment (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Mother of Zeus

          Have you heard anything more about the supposed rumor of him supposedly saying (again I take this with another huge grain of salt) that he would move forward if three more Reps signed on to Kucinich's bill?

          You know - I'm going to look into this.  I remember being so excited (talk about Lucy with the football) when I saw someone's diary about that... and now we have three more signers, but of course the football was snatched up.  

          I thought I saw a second diary or comment, somewhere, saying that Conyers recanted; saying that he hadn't meant it (or perhaps hadn't even said it.)  I will dig through my comments... sometimes rants are useful later, like a 'trail of breadcrumbs.' ;D

      •  The coming Democratic landslide in '08 (6+ / 0-)

        Will fade away right promptly here, if they don't start listening to the seven out of ten Americans who want change right now.

        People will stay home in droves, or cast Green votes, or write in their dog's first and last Christian names, or just get gloriously drunk while toasting the death of the Republic if all we get in November, 2008 is the DLC-selected candidate with the most Wall Street backing, and the talk is all about looking forward, and putting our behinds in the past for the good of the nation and oh, yes, we've heard it before.

        There will be no landslide. There will be no mandate for the DLC to govern from the far-right edge of the Bush-Lite Party.

        The biggest political mandate in sixty years is screaming from the rooftops across the nation right now -- it is time for the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party to be heard, and for the dollars and the sense of the DLC to get down off their thrones, and get in line.

        "The rule of the wise must be absolute . . . rulers ought not to be responsible to the unwise subjects." ~ Professor Leo Strauss

        by antifa on Fri Aug 10, 2007 at 09:43:54 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I agree (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          Because my neighbors, Republicans (or I should say conservatives, because many now cringe at the word 'Republican',) are even more angry with the Democrats... they dared hope the Democrats would fix all of this, and now again -- for them this is the second -- betrayal.  

          If Al Gore were to run as an Independent right now, he'd win the entire country.  I wonder if he knows that?

        •  The Democratic politicians only see and hear what (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          .......they want to see and hear.  The great majority of Americans want action regarding impeachable crimes but the Democratic leadership appear to be comletely incapable of taking action.

          The criminal Bush administration shows no respect fot these jellyfish; they have neither earned respect nor do they deserve it.  The present day Democrats are a very different breed than the Democrats of the past, who would not for a moment have put up with the type of criminality committed by this administration over the past 6 1/2 (plus) years.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site