July 23, 2007
Don't Demean Almost Half the Country on Impeachment (Brent Budowsky)
This is my reply to A.B. Stoddard:
You write that all the Congress has done is have Iraq votes and investigate, which, BTW, happens to be the Republican talking point.
First, the reason Democrats have not been able to "muster the votes" to change Iraq policy is not because of Democrats, but because of Republicans.
The House has passed legislation to change the policy. Democrats nearly unanimously vote to change the policy. Some Republicans now vote to change the policy and a majority of the Senate has voted to change the policy.Â
The reason it has not changed is Republican obstruction and filibuster, which thwart the will of the majority of the House, the Senate and the country. If Republicans and their friends in the media want to campaign for filibusters to continue the Iraq escalation, be my guest.
Next: Congress has done nothing except Iraq votes and investigations?
First, the reason for investigations is that the Democrats, like an overwhelming majority of Americans, believe the Republican Congress abdicated its responsibility for oversight.
If Republicans want to run as the party of perjury, pardons, privilege and abuse of power, that is certainly their right.
If Republicans want to run as the party that believes that oversight should be ended and corruption should not be investigated, that, too, is certainly their right and the right of their friends in the media. Be my guest.
Secondly, the reason more legislation has not been passed is, again, Republican filibuster and obstruction.
The Democratic House passed a series of major bills early in the year. That is a fact.
One of them, minimum wage, was enacted only after the application of great Democratic pressure. That is
a fact.
The other bills have near-unanimous support among Democratic senators, and have majority support in the Senate, including a number of Republicans. That is a fact.
Those bills are held hostage by Republican obstruction and filibusters. That is a fact.
Those Americans concerned about the lack of action will direct their ire at the do-nothing, obstructionist Senate Republicans who launch filibuster after filibuster. I predict there will soon be major television ads to this effect.
The Democrats in the House have moved; the House as an institution has moved; Democrats in the Senate are ready; a majority of senators are ready; overwhelming majorities of the public are ready; it is the Senate Republican minority that blockades changes that Americans want.
If Republicans and their friends in the media want to travel the country and advocate filibuster and obstruction against the vast changes that Americans want, which the House has passed, which almost all Democrats want passed, which a majority of the Senate wants passed: Be my guest.
Here is a little punditry: When some polls now show that impeachment is supported by close to 45 percent of the entire nation, that is not only an extraordinary situation, it is a leading indicator of huge voter turnout among those who favor change. It is a current indicator of one major reason that Democrats have a dominant lead in fundraising for 2008.
I am neither advocating nor opposing impeachment in this post, but making a larger point.
With all due respect, when you repeat the Republican talking point and return to the demeaning of Bill Clinton, who was attacked on grounds that were trivial compared to the grounds involving Bush, you insult and you demean almost half the nation.
Set aside the fact that compared to George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, Bill Clinton and Al Gore deserve Mount Rushmore; and set aside that cheap and partisan attacks on Bill Clinton are the last refuge of desperate Republicans and their friends in the media.
When you suggest that the proposed reason for impeachment is that Bush did not prepare for Iraq, you are again insulting and again demeaning the nearly 45 percent of Americans who have clearly, repeatedly and
very publicly asserted far more grave and serious grounds than that.
You can certainly disagree with them, but give them the respect and intellectual honesty of accurately portraying what they are saying.
To misstate what they are suggesting, and then ridicule and demean the opinion of close to half of America is exactly what brings politics and journalism into widespread disrepute.
This is why Democrats won an overwhelming victory in 2006 including a surprise takeover of the Senate. This is why Democrats have such an overwhelming advantage in campaign fundraising for 2008. This is why Republicans in Congress are now experiencing mortal dread about their fears of what the voters will do in 2008.
Americans want change, and that change is being blockaded by obstructionist, do-nothing Republican senators abusing the filibuster to thwart the will of the majority of the House, the majority of the Senate and the vast majority of the country.
The day of reckoning is coming.
28 Comments
»
The Hill welcomes comment from anyone and will almost always post it whether it is favorable or critical, as long as it is substantive and advances debate.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
If the Democratic party won such an overwhelming sweep, how come they can't get anything done? Americans want change allright. And it's not passing a phony immigration bill like the Congress tried. The American public is getting tired of the impeachment farce and the waste of time with the phony never ending partisan investigations. Is this the best you got? You're part of the problem.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — July 23, 2007 @ 5:38 pm
Soon the Democrats won't have such an overwhelming advantage. The truth is getting to the American people in spite of the Democrats best efforts to hide it:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/07/23/poll-american-support-for-war-inches-up/
Comment by Igor R. — July 23, 2007 @ 5:54 pm
Brent, the dems, who I support as an independent have frustrated me to no end. They say they don't have time to impeach but that is not the point. Truth is, the dems side with the Neocons, I call them the Demcons, on the stealing oil benchmark. They want that oil just like Bush. So they don't look into 9/11, they don't look into oil as a factor for the PNAC invasion, and they don't impeach. At a critical time in our history we need a strong congress, and their polls are low because they are wimps.
Comment by Gary Anderson — July 23, 2007 @ 6:40 pm
The TRUTH is that Republicans are blocking virtually all legislation ( and ALL investigations), even beneficial things, to make it look like a do-nothing Congress.
The Republicans are running scared…as well they should be. They have immense corruption - and blood - on their hands…
Comment by BBC — July 23, 2007 @ 6:42 pm
The "impeachment farce" is growing in momentum. There are now 80 communities who are calling for impeachment and a million or more signatures on petitions to Congress requesting that they begin impeachment proceedings.
The Republicans are obstructing the Democrats at every turn. This is the great truth that will be increasingly revealed to the Amercan people. The great truth is that the
entire Republican Party is corrupt.
The American people are very angry and will be even angrier come 2008. That anger
will wipe out the Republican Party for a generation. Thank God.
Comment by banjobailey — July 23, 2007 @ 6:47 pm
We must impeach, the Republic may not survive. President Bush has enacted several different Security Directives, since May 2007. Any emergency, and our government is now completely in the hands of George Bush.
Comment by dee dee — July 23, 2007 @ 7:16 pm
Democrats had enough votes regarding Iraq?
Is that why they had to attach billions in pork to the bill? LOL!
Fact: Former Democrat Senator Joe Lieberman was tossed out like garbage by the Democratic Party and replaced by an anti-war liberal. Lieberman stuck by his guns in his support for the Iraq War–and still does.
Yet Lieberman got elected despite his pro-war stance. How do you explain that???
The 2006 election was not about Iraq, it was about negative propaganda, repetitiously presented by the media.
Did you notice how quickly Mark Foley–who did NOT do anything illegal–disappeared from the news after the election???
Comment by DFAL — July 23, 2007 @ 7:24 pm
Oh, one more thing:
"Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons…
The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi government."
Bill Clinton said that in December 1998.
There was no shortage for the Iraq War on the part of Democrats. Perhaps Hillary should be impeached, too??? LOL!
Comment by DFAL — July 23, 2007 @ 7:26 pm
Ms. A. B. Stoddard reminds me of the White Queen in Alice in Wonderland who made it a practice to believe six impossible things before breakfast. In Ms. Stoddard's case, of course, she just dials up the Republican Party talking points and begins her day by repeating these implausible innuendoes until she has them memorized for instant repetition. To summarize her problem in formulaic terms:
Shortsighted ideology + incompetent cronies = Republican malfeasance and misgovernment. Ms. Stoddard either simply can't fathom this truth or simply doesn't wish or intend to.
I would hold out some hope (as you seem to do) that electing more Democrats in 2008 will materially change America's disastrous military policy in Iraq — except for the fact that the "leading" Democratic contenders for President and Congress want to steal Iraq's oil and bust up that country for Israel every bit as much as the Republicans do. America has become a deadbeat thug who can't earn and pay for what it wants and so just plans to take what it desires at the point of a huge gun that unfortunately has a demonstrated tendency to backfire.
Yes, I favor booting every single Republican out of office as just punishment for the wanton wreckage at home and abroad that they have proudly produced. If that takes voting the Democratic ticket this time around, then OK by me for the present. Then, of course, I favor the development of an anti-imperialist, non-zionist Independent American party to boot all the Democrats out of office starting in 2010. Both Republican and Democratic Parties have become so hopelessly corrupted by Warfare Welfare and Makework Militarism that neither of them deserves the public confidence any longer.
Americans and the world need a new America. The old one simply doesn't work for average, working Americans. I don't think that Ms. Stoddard gets this fundamental truth, either.
Comment by Michael Murry — July 24, 2007 @ 1:06 am
dee dee, so you think George Bush grew up to be a dictator? You see a lot of indication that he is like Hugo Chavez or Hitler, and once elected in a democratic-like election wants to stay for the rest of his life? Or is he just fighting terrorist to the best of his abilities?
Comment by Igor R. — July 24, 2007 @ 1:08 am
Democrats have the votes to defund the slaughter. It's filibuster proof and veto proof. Our GIs could stop driving their targets around Iraq tomorrow and most could be home in 30 days.
But Pelosi is focused on the important stuff - protecting Cheney, extending the war profiteering to next April, and taxing our grandkids to subsidize millionaires. Dead GIs just have to accept that they were not wealthy enough for Neocon Nancy to give a damn.
Comment by Mike5000 — July 24, 2007 @ 1:23 am
Brent: You keep posting your dreams. Please get back to reality.
Banjo - A million signatures in a nation of 300 million; Hmmmm! Math majors please…
Comment by Rich — July 24, 2007 @ 1:25 am
Impeachment is imperative, an absolute that it happen. The GOP will rise like a pheonix if impeachment is not taken seriously by the Dems. Who wants to vote for a spineless, incumbent-minded politician?
I will not vote for a candidate who wont entertain impeachment. If you are not for impeachment your gutless, or an Orwellian, alternate universe neocon.
Comment by Lester Fields — July 24, 2007 @ 1:33 am
Tripe.
I'm with Gary Anderson.
The dems have shown themselves to be complicit. They know they'll have to answer to the real power…the global elite…after they are allowed to "win" in 2008, and they know DAMN well that America isn't gonna leave Iraq any time before 2020. It's also been Dems who've been pushing for the Iraqi oil theft law the MSM has bent over backward to avoid explaining to Joe Sixpack.
The Dems have been publicly resisting while their votes tell a completely different story.
Tripe.
Anyone with half a brain…and by that I mean anyone who doesn't watch television for information, knows that 911 was when the "powers that be" declared war on the rest of us.
They are claiming a stake in Iraq, just like they wrote they would do in their PNAC manifesto, Rebuilding America's Defenses http://newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf, for the last fossil fuel resources on the planet.
They are quite aware that global warming is real, hence they spend billions on keeping the rest of the unwashed masses confused and divided on the subject…while they quietly set up private fortresses over the last of the world's fresh-water aquifers.
All the talk, all the bluster, all the outrage, all the debates, all the all night political theatre, all the filibusters, all the media attention, all the "liberal" talk, all the "conservative" talk…all tripe.
We're being led like lambs to the slaughter.
Comment by Steve — July 24, 2007 @ 1:48 am
I love the way the freepers come in here and post their standard arguements without seemingly reading the article.
Impeach now! And when the facts are on the table, if a Republican is so bold as to try to vote against impeachment, they will not be in office come their next election.
The people are watching.
Comment by Dean — July 24, 2007 @ 5:13 am
What seems to slip the mind of those like DFAL above is the fact that there is a huge difference in rhetoric used as part of the diplomatic process and an invasion resulting in the deaths of thousands of innocents. Yes, Clinton advocated a new government in Iraq, as did almost everyone. But to say that making that statement is the same thing as lying the nation to a war shows an amazing lack of logic, and is in fact quite laughable.
Also, what Hillary and others voted for was to allow Bush to work through UN channels to begin the process to war, and this was based on false and cherrypicked information, as well as pure lies, by the administration. He di not work through proper channels. The vote was not to go to war, but to begin a process which he immediately (and illegally) abandoned. To not see the difference there shows an immaturity and naivete that is unfortunately all too popular in a world which people like you seek to make into a black and white children's show about "good guys" and "bad guys". Look at the facts and try to understand the depth rather than insulting everyone's intelligence (including your own) by blathering on with illogical half-truths.
BTW The old standby of "attack the Clintons" is completely played. Defend your guy on his own merits.
Oh, and sign up for a logic class while you are at it.
Comment by Kurt — July 24, 2007 @ 9:08 am
Once again, Brent Budowsky shows the world that he doesn't know his rearend from whole in the ground.
The reason Dems can't get enough votes is because they are trying to pass bad legislation. There are people in their own party who vote against some of the legislative garbage being offered.
The reason an impeachment won't happen is because, unlike Clinton, Bush did not commit any crime. You can't impeach a President just because you don't like him.
Again, I challenge anyone to prove that Bush knowingly lied about the reasons for going into Iraq.
Also, 45% of the country favors impeachment??? Where did you get that stat? Air America or CBS? Still, that's a majority who DON'T want Bush impeached. The only people who do want him impeached are liberal leftwingnuts like Mr. Budowsky.
Comment by John Simmons — July 24, 2007 @ 9:42 am
To all loyal bushies,
When the democratic president is elected next year, I sure hope you will not have a problem with the precedents set by your hero.
1: Appoint political director (James Carville) in the white house who will use dnc emails to conduct government business. Give power point presentations to nonpartisan government agencies on vulnerable republicans and how to help Democratic candidates.
2. Appoint Attorney General who make it his policy to go after republican office holders 7 times as often as Democratic. To wiretap American citizens without warrants. To never recall any of the actions taken by his office. To have his staff have to plead the fifth to congressional oversight. To circumvent congressional approval of the US attorneys to appoint loyal demies. (luckily this was rejected by the new Democratic congress). To hire only loyal Democrats to career "nonpartisan" positions.
3. Appoint new surgeon general who will promote condoms, abortion and praise the president at least 3 times per page of any speech given.
4. Have a secretary of war who will spend lavishly on big ticket items but ignore the grunts on the ground. To ignore and fire generals who give differing (but correct) info
5. Appoint Democratic party leader as head of the Veteran administration who will do everything in his power to deny benefits by claiming pre-existing conditions or just delay benefits for 177 day or appeals to 766 days. But the best part is that he can give out bonuses of 3.8 million dollars for doing such fine
work.
6. To use signing statements over 1000 times saying the law does not apply to their administration.
7. To have your appointees take an oath to the president rather than the constitution like Sara Taylor said.
8. To call anyone who disagrees with the presidents policies un-American and traitors. To use fear to silence opposition. To tell a sitting senator to go F*** himself on the senate floor.
There are so many other precedents that are being established that would I abhor no matter who is in the white house. That is why impeachment needs to be started now to not allow future presidents dictatorial powers.
Comment by Charlie S. — July 24, 2007 @ 10:08 am
Thanks for laying it out logically, Mr. Budowsky. The facts speak for themselves, don't they?
A.B. is usually pretty logical, so I don't know what she's thinking here; my guess is that she's projecting the fears that she may be picking up from some of the lawmakers themselves.
Those fears are unfounded; the U.S. citizens want Congress to act, and what better action could there be, both politically and for the country's sake, than defending the Constitution?
Comment by Derek D. — July 24, 2007 @ 2:25 pm
Derek, since the Constitution is not in danger, acting to protect it would be political posturing. Why not issue proclamations against murder and rape?
Comment by Igor R. — July 24, 2007 @ 3:47 pm
The reason the lunatic fringe left despises Bush so much is because of his tax cuts.
Did you hear the left criticize any Democrats when they supported the war? Or even now? No.
Hillary is getting no criticism from the left. Why? Because she is a phony as is the left. All you have to do is say what these unthinking liberals want to hear and they will blindly support you. Look at Hillary's poll numbers for proof.
Welfare-loving Democrats are going to hate Republicans no matter what.
Democrats want to steal money from everyone and shower it on themselves. Anyone who gets in the way of their socialist/communist ideals is an enemy and must be destroyed.
Saddam Hussein WAS a threat. Read UN Resolution 1441 from late 2002. Even the United Nations said Saddam was a threat. As did both Clintons, Kerry, and tons of Democrats.
Almost EVERYONE believed Saddam was a threat.
You delusional left-wingers are only lying to yourselves with your revisionist history.
Hillary staunchly supported the war. Bill Clinton defended Bush for going to war on Larry King.
The Democrat Iraq quotes are out there for all to see. Will you look at them, or not?
You left-wingers are so blind with wealth-redistributing rage that you fail to see that YOU YOURSELVES supported the Iraq War by your support of the Democratic Party!!!!!!
If you support Hillary, you are supporting a warmonger (your words, not mine).
I believe that there will be another Revolution in this country. And the cowardly liberal left is going to get a backside full of lead because we are NOT going to tolerate you stealing our money and robbing us of our freedoms!!!
Democrats are nothing more than theives. Dirty, rotten thieves.
How do you Democrats look in the mirror each morning knowing that all you live for is stealing other people's money?
If you Democrats got off your lazy butts and did something productive, maybe you would not need to depend on the government so much. Ya think?
There are millions of life-long welfare dependents in this country. The Democratic Party isn't satisfied and wants more.
Comment by DFAL — July 24, 2007 @ 4:24 pm
Well obviously it's not "my" country anymore.
Ah, did I watch the "debate", no, I thought it more constructive to clean my gun!
Comment by Lasthorseman — July 24, 2007 @ 5:35 pm
I say full steam ahead with impeachment. If it fails, I'm looking forward to taking a headcount of all those Republican Senators siding with what the public will surely recognize by then as crime and treason.
Comment by Al Meddlemann — July 24, 2007 @ 5:36 pm
DFAL, are you one that benefitted from the tax cuts. Are you upper or upper middle class? If you are you should care more about your country. If you are one of us, one of the average or poor, then you are a pawn for the rich, a pawn for the Republicans. The greed of the rich is based upon a house of cards based on bad debt dressed up to look like good debt. It is possible that this credit crunch (as people figure out that the debt is bad) could wreck the economy. Maybe it will only wreck the American economy. That would be better than wrecking the world economy.
Comment by Gary Anderson — July 24, 2007 @ 6:02 pm
Excellent post DFAL.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — July 24, 2007 @ 7:50 pm
Igor says the 'constitution is not in danger'?
How did you get to Mars Igor? You must share it with us here in the scientific community. Are there any valuable natural resources where you at there (Mars) Igor? You are way out there and way too funny. Do you, Igor, also think Nixon was just a victim and really meant well?
Comment by Chris in NM — July 24, 2007 @ 8:32 pm
DFAL, I beg to disagree.
Let's put the "billions" of dollars in context. First of all the House passed 8 of 12 appropriation bills for 2008 in which Bush threatens to veto 5 claiming they are irresponsible & excessive. The disagreement involves LESS than 1 % of the entire federal budget!
Insofar as Lieberman: The GOP abandoned their own candidate and backed Lieberman with not only financial support several Republican Senators traveled to Connecticut to endorse him. He won only by a small margin because of the republican votes. While it is not out of the ordinary for a politician to break promises they never intended on keeping anyhow, Lieberman failed to make good on his promises to his democratic constituents — he forgot apparently.
People do not "hate" Bush, certainly not because of tax cuts! Criticism is not hatred. Americans: left and right, conservatives and liberals, republicans and democrats are rightfully angry — some are outraged — at him for the damage he's done to the country.
Granted Iraq is his biggest overall problem, however, there are so many other concerns that transcend well beyond party lines wrt moral and ethical shortcomings and some legal issues, too.
I agree the democrats are in-part responsible for allowing Bush to steal some of our civil rights and liberties. Bush did so with 100% of republicans supporting it.
Insofar as stealing your money, at least the Dems did not try to pass legislation that included the million dollar bridge to nowhere! LOL The 109th Congress passed it, but it died in the Senate if I re_member correctly. Senator Stevens (R-Alaska) slipped that into a huge bill that was already padded with all sorts of pork: subsidies and tax breaks for the oil companies, etc.
One last comment, with all due respect, while the depth of your loyalty to the president is admirable it seems misplaced. It is okay to criticize one's party; it is a self-correcting mechanism.
Comment by serena1313 — July 24, 2007 @ 9:10 pm
Rosencrans, DFAL is wrong. Yes many knew that trumped up terrors of Saddam. We also knew of the real ones, like his terrorism against Israel.
But we didn't know about PNAC. We didn't know, and if we had known we would have stopped Bush after one term. The ones that did know did not have access to the mainstream traitorous media. I hope this media realizes that one day, no one will listen to them, and no one will allow them to charge for their commericials.
We have buffoons like Glenn Beck, Tucker (I don't know why we went into Iraq) Carlson, the Foxs news loonies and neocons,CNBC, the Bubblevision business channel and AB (parallel universe) Stoddard.
If the stock market tanks, even the rich people will realize that they have to go elsewhere for their news.
Comment by Gary Anderson — July 25, 2007 @ 1:58 am