Dem leadership decision to take impeachment off the table...

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

Poll question: Dem leadership decision to take impeachment off the table...

...if we take back the House.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/11/AR2006051101950.html

[Atman]

1. It's just a ploy to calm the republicans

Nancy can take anything off the table she wants. She's not the only one in the House. The day after we take it all back, the investigations leading to impeachment will begin, and there isn't shit Pelosi can do about it. For now, though, by saying it's off the table, what it does is take the ISSUE off the table and away from the whining cry-baby pussy-ass shithead lying criminal republican talking head accomplices to the regime.

[alfredo]

14. You're right. Talking impeachment is premature. We want to win

back the house and senate, then we will take a look at his crimes and determine which one will stick.

I think if it comes down to it, he will step down, cheney will fill in and appoint as veep the person he wants to be the next president. Once the new veep is in, cheney will step aside.

[uppityperson]

2. I'm not predicting anything. Waiting and writing and calling & seeing. nt

[Skip Intro]

3. I don't think she's saying what you think she's saying.

She said impeachment would not be a goal of the investigations, but she added: "You never know where it leads to."

Last week.

Now she says not interested in persuing it.

She didn't recant on the investigations, and you still never know where n investigation will lead.

We have to win first. That seems to be the message Pelosi is trying to send, at least to me.

That is not taking it off the table. Maybe thru November, but not for good.

Imho.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

8. You might be right...

...that's not how I interpreted her remarks though. It sounded to me like she was taking it off the table.

To me, it's tantamount to exhibiting fear to a bully. The bully may frighten you, but showing him fear is the last thing you want to do. It's what Dem leadership repeatedly does.

[longship]

4. It's not too relevant.

It was done only to defuse the Repug "possible judiciary committee chairman Conyers wants to impeach" screeching.

Once we get a hold of Congress and hearings are in process and the shit hits the fan, the people will likely be screaming for it. Then, the "off the table" remark will be old news, way down below the noise floor.

What's done is done. Let it go.
Better yet, do what I did. Call Pelosi's office and tell them (nicely) that they could have handled it better. They missed a clear opportunity to really nail the Repugs on this.

[Pale Blue Dot]

7. This Republican "screeching" has no power anymore

And the sooner the Democratic leadership wakes up to that fact, the better off we'll all be.

[longship]

10. Correct!

nt

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

11. Let it go...

...just like their unwillingness to filibuster (that worked out great BTW), their unwillingness to support Feingold's very modest censure proposal, their unwillingness to speak of two consecutive stolen presidential elections, their unwillingness to meaningfully challenge the Patriot Act (again Feingold stood virtually alone), and just generally their unwillingness to be the courageous, in your face, kind of challenging force that a REAL opposition party would, could, and should be against a crooked, fascist regime like BushCo.

They rationalize all these do nothing, don't take a stand, decisions with 'just be patient', 'keep your powder dry', 'they'll hang themselves' rhetoric and I just don't find it compelling. The Ameircan people would respond to courageous, forceful, challenges to this corrupt regime. They know BushCo has lied to them repeatedly. Dems should be casting themselves in the role of John Wayne and be out to kick ass at every opportunity--no prisoners. The public would eat it up, and support the Democratic Party like never before. Just my opinion.

I'm tired of letting stuff go. Dem leadership's not doing their job--not by a long shot.

[longship]

15. You compare this to the lack of a filibuster?

There's no way that a pronouncement which Pelosi cannot possibly fulfill compares in any way to the lack of *action* on another issue.

Words are cheap. When the Dems have the majority and Pelosi attempts to block investigations, then you can screech. But that ain't gonna happen. So relax, my friend. No Dem is going to stop the impeachment train.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

16. I would respectfully disagree...

...with you regarding the comparison validity of the examples I cited, they share the common thread of Dem leadership exhibiting fear and weakness rather than courage and strength--a fairly well established pattern for them over the past few years I'm afraid.

I accept and agree with your observation that Pelosi's words in this case are not binding, but they are damaging to Dem leadership's image by making them appear weak and spineless--once again.

There are many rank and file Democrats who consider the impeachment movement to be important if not crucial, which these poll results seem to support. What good reason could there have been for Pelosi to make such a statement? It only deflates the people who have been working so hard to push the impeachment movement, which despite Dem leadership, has picked up some steam in recent weeks.

All this said, I will take your advice in the good spirit I know it was intended and try to relax. I know we are on the same side in this vital effort to save our country from the grip of fascism and I appreciate your input on this thread.

[AndyTiedye]

23. Their Fear is Justified, and Their Weakness All Too Real

All Bush** has to do is start another war, and his polls will rise again
(even if it's just because the media is obliged to rig them) and the
elections become easily close enough to steal again. (As we saw in Ohio,
even a 30% margin is close enough to steal now).

It is obvious that Nanci Pelosi does not expect us to retake the House.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

27. I can only say that I hope you are wrong. nt.

[AndyTiedye]

28. So Do I

[Pale Blue Dot]

5. WE ARE IN CONTROL NOW

The American people want change. They want people held accountable. If the Republicans try to steal the 2006 elections (and they will), they will be called on it.

YES, we need to impeach the President. THE AMERICAN PUBLIC WANTS THAT.

YES, we need to get to the bottom of all of the lies. THE AMERICAN PUBLIC WANTS THAT.

YES, we need to expose the crooks. THE AMERICAN PUBLIC WANTS THAT.

Then, and only then, after all of that,

YES, we need to make peace with the Republicans. THE AMERICAN PUBLIC WANTS THAT TOO.

[KAT119]

12. True!! IMPEACH -INDICT-IMPRISON ASAP!! WE NEED JUSTICE.

[ginnyinWI]

21. I'm not so sure the do.

People hate that the Repubs and Dems in Congress fight each other. They hated the Clinton impeachment and gave him high approval ratings as the Repubs raked him over the coals.

They want peace, not another big brawl in the Congress over this. They might wish he would resign, but they don't want impeachment I don't think.

We on the LEFT really do--but we are only 20%.

[bemildred]

6. These are the same weasels that allowed Clintoon to be impeached.

For "lying" about a blowjob.
We need to take these "leaders" off the table.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

13. Well said. nt.

[lonestarnot]

9. Bastards better not ignore the facts!

[stopbush]

17. Here's the CORRECT response:

"Of course, Congress can NEVER take impeachment off the table because it is the SOLE remedy
for removing a president per the Constitution. Do we already have plans to impeach bush? No.
Will we have plans in the future? Unlikely. Is it possible? Yes, it's always possible. Impeachment is one of the checks
that our Founding Fathers put in place to give a president pause, just as we Congresspeople are given pause by the Constitutional
mechanisms that could remove us from Congress before our terms end.

"To say that impeachment is off the table would be a dereliction of our duties and an attack on the Constitution itself."

But Pelosi didn't say that, did she?

[napi21]

20. YEP! And Pelosi didn't say that is right too!

There was a thread earlier today saying that Nancy is not the leader we need right now. Everybody agreed she's a nice lady, and is very good at fund raising and getting the agreement of her fellow Dems in congress, but she should go back to doing that! We need a LEADER who s better able to state the Dem position than we as DUers are! I like her too, and I'd be proud if she was MY Rep, but I don't live anywhere close to Ca!

Someone like Murtha would do a much better job, and THAT'S what we need NOW!

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

22. From the WAPO article...

"...the House's top Democrat has told colleagues that the party will not seek to impeach President Bush even if it gains control of the House in November's elections, her office said last night."

This has clearly been widely interpreted to mean "off the table," which doesn't seem an unreasonable stretch to me. Of course, they're not talking about removing impeachment as a legal remedy for the unlawful behavior of a sitting President. They're just saying they don't intend to pursue it. And why anybody in the Dem leadership would think it a good idea to make such a statement is beyond me.

If we (the Democratic Party) don't have plans to impeach Bush, we should. Clinton lying about a blowjob under oath was judged sufficient reason. Are we afraid to place President Bush under oath and ask him about DSM, Plamegate, NSA spying, authorizing torture, etc, etc? We shouldn't be. It IS in fact our duty to do it. The Constitution, particularly the Declaration of Independence, screams for it.

[ginnyinWI]

18. It's a good idea for three reasons, at least:

1) It won't give the GOP a club to beat us with before the mid-terms.

2) They really need to spend their time fixing all the bad legislation that's been going down the last five years, not tying up the Congress with impeachment stuff.

3) It would be better for the country if the chimp just resigns--it makes him less of a martyr or hero, and saves the Dems the trouble of throwing him out. If things get bad enough, he'll go--he has a history of cutting and running after all.

[No New War]

19. Missing Option: NOT THEIR DECISION

They are public servants, the represent the people. This administration's power grab must be stopped at all costs, immediately.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

25. You're quite right...

...that the people should be able to press this and force their public servants to carry out their wishes, regarding impeachment or any other issue.

My poll question was not so much whether the people have the right to exercise this power, clearly they do, but rather, was it a good or bad decision on the part of Pelosi and/or Dem leadership to indicate that they do not intend to pursue impeachment if they take back the House.

[progressivebydesign]

24. I voted "good move". It's not time...

Like Ed Schultz was saying.. it's pointless to go after an impeachment when you don't have control of the House or Senate. It's only talk at this point. I favor waiting for things to unfold in the next month or so. Impeachment, as much as I love the word, will not help us in the November elections. Let Bush get down to like... 18% approval rating, then impeachment might work. The media is taking their dear sweet time in implicating Bush in any of this shit.. wait for Rove to be indicted..

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

26. Every important...

...idea goes through the "talk" phase, and if it's a good idea (and most of us seem to think impeachment is) it hopefully moves through the talk phase, gains traction, and becomes a movement that will be acted upon. If there's any justice Bush WILL be impeached. I cannot understand how some Dems seem to think it's not worth pursuing, or only serves as a distraction and is not realistic. It's only unrealistic if we give up on it.

Playwright, Bill C. Davis recently wrote a great piece on the importance of the impeachment movement, please do give it a read.

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0502-28.htm

[upi402]

29. BAD decision

:mad: :puke:

[cyclezealot]

30. She did not call for Conyers to take Impeachment off his website?

As long as she does not harass others with her so called goals. With proper investigations, the chips should fall where they may. Does not the mail go into the COngress. It is up to the American people, not just COngress.

[sandnsea]

31. Oversight and accountability

That's what we people are saying they want. Remember, the people are only aware of the last few months of crimes, give them a few more months of the Democrats hammering away at all of this stuff, and the people may change their tune. One step at a time, and I think we should push for resignation before impeachment anyway. I just want these rat bastards gone.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

34. I want them gone too...

...I cannot imagine any circumstance under which Bush would resign, his Neocon keepers just don't think like that. Think of impeachment as compulsory resignation. It's something we should be pressing hard. It keeps republicans on the defensive trying to put an acceptable face of Bush's criminality and lying. It's a huge club for Dems to use and they're blowing the opportunity.

[nolabels]

32. Yea, I will agree with what ever kind of poll some corporate entity wants

Could we be a little more clear on this, THE CORPORATE MEDIA AND IT'S GOONS ARE IN ON THE TAKE. Believe nothing you hear from corporations when it comes to their great installed idiot and chief, mr bush. We can even now be pretty sure that he was not ever even elected.

btw, If you buy into any of their reasoning about bush you are also even more stupid than them.

[Disturbed]

33. Pelosi is so damn wimpy.

She looks like she is gonna cry all the time and can barely hold her own in an interview. She needs to be replaced with a strong leader with vision and boldness, someone like Feingold. Dems need to be the Opposition Party. Folding the cards before the game is not how to win.