Friday, November 10, 2006

(POST ELECTION UPDATE) Arguments Against Bush Impeachment...

• If we impeach Bush, we’ll get President Cheney!
Initiating the impeachment process will lead to an investigation that will implicate lots of people in the Bush administration who are guilty of committing crimes, including Cheney.

In addition, no matter who we get to replace Bush, we’ll be showing those in power that anyone who breaks the law will be held accountable.

• Promoting impeachment will seem too “extreme.”
Demanding that crimes be investigated is NOT extreme. Some previous impeachment attempts were considered extreme because they were pursued for actions that didn't rise to the level of a Constitutional crisis, which is what the impeachment tool is meant to be used for. Nixon's impeachment, however, was bipartisan.

• We should wait to impeach...
Wait to impeach? We've waited 3 or more years too long already. We had enough evidence to impeach years ago. Remember, an impeachment only means you have enough evidence to warrant a trial, just like an indictment. Our congress people didn't take an oath to bipartisanship. They took an oath to the Constitution. Besides which, our troops, Iraqi civilians, and our own civil liberties are all waiting for this.

• Before we impeach, we should get some legislation passed...
And with unconstitutional Presidential Signing Statements, veto power, and the power of "Commander in Chief" at his disposal, how do you think Congress is going to get ANYTHING accomplished without first impeaching Bush?

If your tire blows while you're driving, do you stop to fix it? Or do you continue driving on your rim because to stop would take too much time?

• It hurts the democracy to go through a presidential impeachment. And Bush is a lame duck anyway.
Holding government officials accountable for their actions strengthens our democracy. Letting lawlessness stand weakens it.

Sometimes reprimanding a child (president) doesn't make the family (Washington) a happy place. But you still have to do it so the child and his siblings (future presidents) learn about accountability. Impeachment is horribly UNDERUSED, which is part of why there's so much corruption at the top. Politicians must learn to fear it. People think things are better because we improved the make-up of our law-making body, Congress. But Bush is BREAKING LAWS. So, it doesn't matter how many laws Congress passes if they don't serve their OVERSIGHT duties as well by impeaching. They swore to defend the Constitution. What are laws without enforcement?

Besides, Bush can still do a lot of damage. Our troops, Iran, and our Supreme Court are all endangered so long as he remains in office. Waiting until Bush is out of office will leave us complicit in any further crimes he commits. The Union of Concerned Scientists has estimated that the death toll from a "tactical" nuclear weapon of the kind Bush is contemplating using in Iran would be at minimum 3 million men, women, and children. The path of death would stretch across country boundaries into India.

Perhaps worst of all, we set a terrible precedent by allowing Bush to stay in office after he's broken so many laws. Impeachment will stop future presidents from using Bush's actions as justification for even more lawbreaking and erosion of civil liberties.

• I'm a Democrat/Republican. If we support impeachment it will lower the chances of my party winning in 2008.
So, your party would rather win elections than do what's right for the country? I hope you're wrong. I also hope the public is willing to throw additional support to any party that holds our elected officials accountable for their actions.

• Impeachment will never happen. The Republicans will block it.
Well, all we need is a majority of support in the House. And 2/3rds vote in the Senate to remove Bush from office will happen once the evidence gets aired on CSPAN. The political pressure will become too great.

Today's impossibility is tomorrow's reality. Republican Congress members will realize that tying their political future to Bush reduces their chances of getting elected. Remember, one way or another, Bush is gone by 2009— but members of Congress may retain their offices beyond that date. Bush's poll numbers are extremely low, and most Americans support impeachment. This is a bipartisan movement. This means that if we make the pressure unbearable for Members of Congress, they'll turn on him to keep their own seats (like they did with Nixon). It's already starting to happen. While many Members of Congress have behaved unethically in the last few years, it's important to understand that this is related to their warped view of what's in their self-interest. Let's wake them up to their true self-interest (impeaching the president), by showing them our support for impeachment.

And even if we only impeach, and the Senate fails to do their duty and remove him from office, it will only implicate the Senators who fail to do their sworn Constitutional duty.

• But Speaker of the House Pelosi said that Impeachment was "off the table."
Pelosi most likely said this to remove any appearance of conflict-of-interest that would arise if she were thrust into the presidency as a result of the coming impeachment. What we need to do is to pressure Pelosi not to interfere with impeachment maneuverings within her party. Sending her Do-It-Yourself impeachments legitimizes her when she joins the impeachment movement in the future.

• But the public doesn't support impeachment.
Newsalert: Newsweek's recent poll shows 51% support for Impeachment. Not to mention that support for Bush's impeachment is more than it was before Nixon's investigation.

• You're just angry at what happened to Clinton
Impeachment is a nonpartisan issue. It's not about Clinton, Lincoln, or any other president. Some previous impeachment attempts were considered a waste of time because they were pursued for things that didn't rise to the level of a Constitutional crisis, which is what the Impeachment tool was intended for. The argument that we can't impeach Bush because there are previous presidents who also did bad things is the same as the argument you might hear from your child that you shouldn't punish him because the neighbor's kid did the same thing and didn't get punished. We don't want a presidential rush to the lowest common denominator. We have a duty to hold THIS president to the Constitution.

• If we don't support our president, we aid the terrorists.
We support terrorism when we fail to deal with its root causes (poverty, lack of education, support of dictatorships, etc.). We also support it by enabling a president who creates breeding grounds for terrorists — like Iraq has now become, thanks to our invasion and occupation.

Middle Eastern countries are upset with the oppressive international policies of the past and current administration. We might develop more healthy relationships with these countries if we appeared to learn from our mistakes by impeaching a president who has been so instrumental in that oppression.

• Impeachment is the wrong approach. Our government is tyrannical, and needs to be violently overthrown through a popular revolution.
What makes you think that if our government fell today, the U.S. population would replace it with something better? Violent revolutions are bloody business, and there’s absolutely no guarantee that even with the best of intentions the resulting new government would be an improvement over the current one. Indeed, it could be much worse. This is because revolution only makes sense once the people understand the problem. Thanks to a complicit media, most people don't have the information they need to fully understand what’s currently happening in the U.S., so before we can create positive change, we must help them to understand the situation we're in. We don't do that by pushing them away with what appears to be extremism. We must use skillful means to reveal the tyranny of this administration (and government in general). We can do this by making reasonable demands (for instance, that suspicious activities become subject to investigation). Each time we're denied, more and more people will see the injustice (especially when we take to the streets each time!). Slowly we’ll get enough people on board to create the changes we need, whether our goal is gradual repair of the system or revolution. But either way, the path is the same: First, we try to change the system. When the system shows itself to be tyrannical and unwilling to change, the people will move closer to revolution. If instead, the system allows the demanded changes, then we’ve won a victory — and maybe the theory that the system is hopelessly tyrannical is flawed. The real point is that political change is a process, and we need to have the resolve to see it through. Demanding immediate perfection is unrealistic and counterproductive, and too easily turns into a cop-out for failing to do the hard work of creating meaningful change.

Side note:
Some Democratic Members of Congress have indicated that they're not currently pursuing Bush's impeachment. While this is upsetting, they percieve it to be in their (and the Democratic Party's) political best interest, at least until the political pressure builds. There are other reasons they're waiting as well, and one of those things is us. They (as well as Republican members) need us to legitimize their support for the process. Having millions of ImpeachForPeace.org's "Do-It-Yourself Impeachment" arrive at their door is one powerful tool toward making that happen.

22 comments:

kittykatfish said...

Excellent points!

Just do it...if I may appropriate some corporate drivel.

Or, do it! to quote Jerry Rubin.

WE need to bring the politicos attention to what we want...and not let them off the hook just because they now have the power.

Anonymous said...

FROM YOUR COMMENTS TO MY BLOG (PARROTT TALK):

Sometimes reprimanding a child (President) doesn't make the family (Washington) a happy place. But you still have to do it so the child and his siblings (future presidents) learns about accountability. Holding government officials accountable for their actions strengthens our democracy. Letting lawlessness stand weakens it. Impeachment is horribly UNDERUSED. Which is part of why there's so much corruption at the top. They must learn to fear it.

People think things are better because we improved the make-up of our law-making body (Congress). But the whole point is that Bush is BREAKING LAWS. So, it doesn't matter how many laws they pass if they don't serve ther OVERSIGHT duty (they swore to defend the Constitution) by impeaching.

________________________________
Dear Casual:

I always thought that in a Democracy the voters were the main check on corruption.

Why is it that you Liberals always resort to litigation when you can’t get your way at the polls?

If you disagree with a president then you defeat him at the polls, not judicially. Why is it that politicians always try to legislate that which they can not achieve in an election. Impeachment was included in our system of government to address gross misconduct.

If you disagree with the prosecution of the War on Terror then vote the president out. Maybe you’d rather have a man that cheats on his wife Clinton), spends ten years bombing a country (Iraq), leaving American troops hanging out in the wind unsupported (Somalia), oh and don’t forget invading another country without UN sanction (Bosnia).

Didn’t hear any of you Democrats calling for Clinton’s impeachment then did we? Hell we’re still in Bosnia. Of course that’s President Bush’s fault, right?

I have lived and served all over the world, what we are doing now is probably the single most important military action the United States has undertaken since the Second World War.

Please tell me which laws President Bush is breaking? I’m so tired of hearing that, point out the laws he is breaking and we’ll talk about it.

Democrats just seem to be unable to admit that President Bush has done anything right. And I mean anything!

You people whine about the economy. Well let me tell you. I was looking for a job in Clinton’s economy. You know the one that suddenly became a recession the day after President Bush took office?

I remember jobs in my field (Information Technology) drying up, and the pay of those available plummeting. There were the Democrats denying that we were in a recession right up to the inauguration. (You can do that when you have the active collusion of the major media outlets.)

The current economy is very strong. Not perfect, but strong.

We’ll see how strong it is after your party raises taxes again. And don’t tell me that President Bush’s tax cuts were only for the rich. Save that for your welfare and minimum wage class party members’ comrade.

Your analogy is both childish and simplistic. However, it does highlight an area in which we agree. There is way too much corruption in government. And not just our government!

Just look at the mismanagement and outright corruption in the perfect —
to Liberals — United Nations. (Can you say Oil-for-Food scandal? Darfur? Just to name two…)

My father taught me that just because someone is doing something different than what you want them to do didn’t mean they are wrong. Maybe you Liberals should take that to heart.

Don’t get me wrong, part of the strength of the United States our ability to disagree with each other. What I’m trying to figure out, is the point at which we moved from disagreeing with each other to attempting to ruin those with which we disagree.

With the constant barrage of bad news by media outlets like the New York Times, CBS and CNN is it any wonder that Americans are confused about the issues.

So Mr. Casual, please tell me just what laws President Bush is breaking. Oh and why don’t you use your real name? If your opinions are worth expressing they should be worth owning up too.

two crows said...

The problem with impeachment is that it would not remove Bush from office. Nixon had to resign from office before we were rid of him.

And, ever since that happened the Republicans have been attacking every Democrat who has held high office.

This is partly to try to prove, 'Everybody does it' and partly out of vindictiveness.

While I would love to get Bush out of office, he would never resign UNLESS he received immunity [as Nixon did] before resigning.

If we DO wait till he's out of office, we at least stand a chance of convicting him of his crimes. If we do it now, we don't.

Anonymous said...

Thanks to a complicit media, most people don't have the information they need to fully understand what’s currently happening in America, so before we can create positive change, we must help them to understand the situation we're in.

I read the rest of your blog. This is the only statement in it that you and I agree on.

The media is responsible for the way Americans perceive the world.

Their sensationalism and outright lies in Vietnam caused untold hardship for returning soldiers.

Their slanted reporting about the current conflict is attempting to do the same thing. You can’t tell people you support the troops then sensationalize things like the pictures taken at Abu Ghraib.

Yes there was a breakdown in discipline, but there was no torture. And the Army handled the problem.

People like you know that Americans would not put up with direct attacks on our troops; so you hide behind attacking the President and anyone else who supports the war.

You are right if Americans ever really come to understand just how badly the American media has betrayed their trust things will change.

Jodin said...

Parrott.

Bush has committed a legion of impeachable offenses. Here's a small list

Regarding how our democracy works? Our founding fathers, in their wisdom, realized that there could be corruption in a democracy. They therefore gave us other tools as checks and balances. One of them is the oversight that our other elected officials (congress) can use to impeach a president. Voting is not the only tool in this democracy. And thank goodness.

Jodin said...

Crows,
The impeachment process does include removal by the Senate. Nixon resigned before we got that far (he was never actually impeached or tried). What you point out, is that we must not let our representatives offer Bush a pardon as part of any kind of deal. Which they might do regardless of whether an impeachment process is started. But for our democracy, we must also demand oversight of this presidency if we are to continue to sustain the belief that we live in one.

Jodin said...

Parrott,

You and I differ on what's wrong with the media. I don't blame individual reporters for having an agenda. They're human. I blame the system for being a corporate monopoly. The air waves are owned by the public. And we have the right to demand that they represent the needs of our democracy. This means breaking up that monopoly and bringing competition back into the media market. That competition will bring the diversity of political thought which will bring back the kind of thoughtful reporting that came through in the Vietnam conflict (although it was still quite stifled back then as well). The horrors of this war are severely hidden by this administrations manipulation of the media. If people understood what was being done in their name, they would have demanded the end of the war long ago.

Torture? Of course they're torturing. If they weren't they wouldn't have forced through legislation that pardons any torture they might have done since 9/11. Bush also wouldn't have signed a presidential order allowing the CIA to torture, or have set up secret prisons in Europe. He also wouldn't have forced through subsequent legislation allowing him to get to define what torture is.

Anonymous said...

I would like some evidence of the following statements:

"most Americans support impeachment"

"This is a bipartisan movement" (show me some Republicans, not just independents, who are behind this)

"Newsweek's recent poll shows 51% support for Impeachment." Where is that poll - I haven't been able to find it.

Jodin said...

Republican for impeachment:
Dennis Morrisseau
http://www.2ltmorrisseau.com/

Newsweek's recent poll shows 51% support for Impeachment.

But impeachment is nonpartisan because it's about accountability, regardless of whether those who support it happen to be from one camp or the other. As it happens, though, there are Republicans who wish to see this president impeached.

Anonymous said...

We have had a hard-on for impeachment for so long that there is a whole bunch of premature ejaculating going on. This baby needs some long, deliberate foreplay and any early call for impeachment right now, before the new Congress is even sworn in would be viewed as partisan, and the GOP would just point and accuse the Democrats of "revenge politics", for the Clinton impeachment. Again they would get to beat the Clinton dead horse which has always been their favorite topic. I would hope that the investigations and hearings would be more important right now. Exposing the evidence for the AMERICAN PEOPLE to see for themselves. It won't have to be the Dems calling for impeachment or resignation. It will be the AMERICAN PUBLIC that will be calling for it.

yelling_at_the_radio said...

Even though I have driven on a flat tire before, I can say that I do agree with you. I gladly anticipate that Congress will investigate every crime Bush has committed. My fear is that it it will not be a bypartisan effort and the prosedure will take too long, making the Democrates incapable of making any progress. However, as you have pointed out, it is best to do what is right rather than what is more comfortable. I hope you are correct.

Jodin said...

Undeniably...
My group has been attempting impeachment since November, and it's been a nonpartisan push (including Republicans). So, it would be difficult to paint us as opportunists now that we have the Congress.

About the revenge point. Beyond what I say in the main post, I still don't agree. Just because a previous congress misused the impeachment process doesn't give them a free-ride on the next president they get elected. That's like rewarding injustice with a get-out-of-jail-free card. This isn't about revenge, and for justice's sake, we can't let them use that talking point as a tactic.

Anonymous said...

I linked to your Blog. I enjoyed your comment on my list the other day. I do not disagree with your point of view. At this point, if Karl Rove pulls off the Lieberman Republitard Switch, I'll be looking for Impeachment of someone in the Republitard community to satisfy my anger for the Lieberman. ARGH! I can not be articulate today about this man.

G'day!

Anonymous said...

Thanks for your comments on my blog: ofrhymeandreason.blogspot.com. Your comments were insightful and I will personally go to the DIY impeachforpeace.org and start my end of the deal. This is about empowering everyone who is thirsty for the truth and hungry for justice. Thanks for the heads up!!~markoolio42

Anonymous said...

Thanks for your comments on my blog: ofrhymeandreason.blogspot.com. Your comments are insightful and instructional for how we can take personal responsibility for how responsive our government is to we the people. We can pass progressive legislation in Congress as well as initiate impeachment proceedings. For all of us who hunger for truth and thirst for justice, impeachforpeace.org is a way to get there. Thanks~ markoolio42

Anonymous said...

Typical Liberal (socialist) fare...tell the lie long enough and..ta da!!! it becomes the truth. After the next major terrorist attack on one of our cities, I will think "I hope no conservatives were hurt!". It's FAR more likely that we will suffer another attack than Bush will be impeached...dream on babushka! And when that happens, most of "us" will thank the NY Times, CNN, CBS, the ACLU, and the Democrat Party at large.

Jodin said...

"Typical Liberal (socialist) fare...tell the lie long enough and..ta da!!! it becomes the truth."

I think you are mistaking who normally does this...

"See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda. "
George Bush (May 24, 2005)

You see, we actually have evidence...
http://www.impeachforpeace.org/evidence/

Anonymous said...

You're such a run-of-the-mill socialist. I've been dealing with your type of propaganda since the '60's. Same old lines, same old out-of-context cherry picking. *yawn* I can't WAIT to hear what you people say about Bush when NY, LA, 'Frisco, or wherever gets blown up/attacked next time. You'll blame Bush, just like 911. How transparent...you fuckers and your blind hatered for anything other than tin foil hat, moonbat liberalism sicken me. Impeachment? dream on...

Anonymous said...

BTW you already got your ass waxed by the Collective at People's Cube you dork...come get some more.
http://www.thepeoplescube.com/red/viewtopic.php?t=909

Jodin said...

It would be obvious to anybody with half a brain whose assed got waxed on that board. And it wasn't mine. ;-)

Jodin said...

I encourage you to prove the evidence we've researched is cherry-picking. Provide the fuller context from which we cherry-picked. Go ahead. I'd love to see it. We're waiting...

Anonymous said...

man you got pwned hard on that board...keep dreaming