Ending the War vs Impeachment: Following Up on the Pelosi Interview
Thanks to the many commenters who have posted regarding my interview with Nancy Pelosi. I want to respond with three quick points.
First, as I wrote in my post yesterday, I believe the most important issue facing Pelosi and Congressional Democrats right now is their reluctance to use their congressionally mandated power of the purse to stop funding the war in Iraq. So that's what I focused on. Over the course of the interview I asked Pelosi about this four different times in four different ways: 1) a direct ask from our commenters to "please, please, please stop funding this war" 2) asking why she doesn't force the president to present his new "emergency" war funding request as part of the budget 3) pointing out that the Constitution gives her the power to tell President Bush, "We will fund the troops to come home safely and responsibly, but not a penny more." 4) asking, "Can you guarantee that there will be no appropriations bill without a fixed date for bringing the troops home?"
In addition, I also asked her if the "American people have to take to the streets to end this war?" and about why she seems to have lost her "fierce urgency" about ending the war and entered into a "cooling off period on Iraq."
Second, I did not raise the question of why Pelosi has taken impeachment off the table because, as I've said on many occasions, while I believe that Bush and Cheney deserve to be impeached (ten times over!), I also believe that focusing on impeachment would force Congress to take its eye off the ball on the most important issue of our time -- ending the war in Iraq. Putting impeachment on the table would inevitably drain resources of time, energy, and outrage better spent on bringing our troops home. And, on top of it, impeachment, even if pursued, would not lead to George Bush leaving office an hour earlier than he already will. Of course, there are many times it is worth doing something on principle, even if it is destined to fail. But not if the effort comes at the expense of taking a much more important stand on principle that actually has a chance to succeed. Many of you clearly disagree with me on this point, but it's what I believe.
Third, over the course of the interview, Pelosi made three specific promises on the question of funding the war and on the Congressional battle over FISA: 1) that the House will not take up a war appropriations bill this year 2) that there will be no war appropriations bill next year that doesn't include a fixed date for bringing the troops home 3) that House Democrats will put up a major fight over the Bush administration's desire to make permanent the FISA law passed in August, particularly over the issue of retroactive immunity that the Senate has already given in on. (See the video of these promises below.)
So she's on the record with these promises, and therefore can -- and I'm sure will -- be held accountable for keeping them.
Watch more of the interview here.
Follow Arianna Huffington on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ariannahuff
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Arianna,
Thank you so much for asking your readers to submit questions to ask Ms. Pelosi and then ignoring the one that we asked the most!
Your statement, "Second, I did not raise the question of why Pelosi has taken impeachment off the table because, as I've said on many occasions, while I believe that Bush and Cheney deserve to be impeached (ten times over!), I also believe that focusing on impeachment would force Congress to take its eye off the ball on the most important issue of our time -- ending the war in Iraq." makes no sense to me whatsoever. Congress doesn't have its eye on any ball at all; they have capitulated to the criminals in the White House over and over again. Putting impeachment back on the table would go a long way to improving our image as well as putting the next administration on notice that the American people will not tolerate criminal behavior.
Arianna, you let us down. You had a chance to corner her and get her to explain why she believes committing war crimes and treason is not enough to warrant Impeachment proceedings and you punted? Impeachment is the ONLY issue we care about at this point. Nothing can improve until we get this crimminal element out of our White House! You know damn well Bush/Cheney will never let go of their WWIII fantasies. NEVER. You are no longer credible as a media critic. You gave Nancy a pass and I'm sure she is grateful. When Bushco strikes Iran and declares Martial Law ending our ability to rid them of office I hope you have the grace to keep your mouth shut about how the media, "journalists" and politicians (ESPECIALLY PELOSI) failed us.
HERE HERE! Well put. I feel much the same way.
Thank you, interview participants, for adding a new basement to justified cynicism.
It's all just excuses... sure any single instance they might be able to convince people that there's nothing they can do, but when it's across the board like this is speaks volumes.
That and allowing Bush his measures to make sure the elitist ruling class never has to be accountable to us.
None of the questions raised in this thread are likely to get answered I'm afraid. The on-deck rulers have un-spoken. Welcome to your new pigeonhole, America.
On this topic, did any of you catch comedian Mark Fiore's latest cartoon, Spineocrat? Still laughing......
hehe. just looked it up. Quite amusing. It makes me think I should be using my illustration/flash skills for good.
link for those who could use it:
http://www.sfgate.com/comics/fiore/
It's no big deal that Huffpo would serve up soft questions to Pelosi.
What is damaging to the integrity of Huffpo is all the huffing and posing about asking readers to submit questions and then ignoring what people came up with.
Basically: since she finds that Bush Cheney are not impeachable, does Pelosi think there is anything that constitutes an impeachable offense? And if not, why is it in the constitution?
Loitering maybe?
;-)
The fact that impeachment is "off the table" leaves ZERO accountability in the executive branch.
Impeachment MUST remain ON THE TABLE or the checks and balances has failed!!!
Bush reiterates his "relevance" through the use of his veto pen. While Bush blatantly strokes away any/all measures taken to slow his invasion, Congress sits on its hands. The only counter to a presidential criminal is impeachment.
If our goverment was functioning as it was meant to cheney and his sock puppet would have been indicted long ago for the breaking of any number of laws. Hiding behind the proclamations of their "mall lawyers" Gonzalas, addington, etc...does not absolve them from conspiracy to start a war, lying to the american people about their reasons going in, awarding no-bid contracts to cheney's former company of which he still holds a half million shares in and profits from yearly ( an outrageous conflict of interest ), the fleecing of our treasury by the incredible incompetance with which they have wasted money with little or no oversite to the tune of billions, held supposed enemy combatants without any ability to be represented and torturing them either directly or thru a third party country, massive election fraud in the last two elections and the upcoming 2008 as well no doubt. Creating tens of thousands of new terrorists thru there illegal war thereby guaranteeing a much larger crop of people worldwide who would work to harm us making america very much less secure, dismantling every goverment agency by replacing qualified individuals with corporate shills - in doing so rendering out goverment in-capable of responding to disasters like Katrina. Allowing private mercenairy companies on american soil paid by tax payer dollars who are answerable to no one. You add this up and you can only come up with the conclusion that these criminals in the white house are traitors to our country. Every decision they make drips of contempt for our democracy / people. To hell with impeachment - They should be INDICTED as traitors first, war criminals second. Anyone who doubts this should take the time to review the four indictments brought against the nazi leadership during the nurenberg trials...line for line our pres. & vice president match each one.
Ehem... one more onemore.... I'm interested in finding a bulletin board where I can participate in conversations like this. Is anyone here a member of a message board that others here like myself might like to join?
try the home link here. posting is open without the delay in the blog section and the debate is ongoing.
try it; you'll like it.
"try the home link here. posting is open without the delay in the blog section and the debate is ongoing.
try it; you'll like it."
----------------------------
This is a joke, right?
Oh.
Hahahaha.
I'm slow....as usual.
We must begin to ask: when did our government stop representing us (even in a perfunctory way) and start representing only itself? Are they all just hacks worried about being re-elected by making the fewest waves?
Pelosi is indeed the first and last female speaker of the House. There are few time as dangerous as this in which we depend upon Congress to act for the good of the American people. They have let us down. Hopefully, the ramifications of this presidency can be reversed in the next 20 years, but I doubt it.
I think the CONSENSUS is that we need to see more activism and less politics from our Democratic politicians RIGHT NOW.
Americans are fed up with bullshit. No deals with the devil.
For example, the Dems could stop all work unless the President cooperates with legislation. VETO THE PRESIDENT.
No legislation until the White House is purged, or cooperates.
A political strike: I am sure Americans will support such activism.
I agree.
And maybe someone should reconsider having the veto available to begin with. Who does it serve?
Maybe when the alternative was a Monarchy this current form of 'democratic' republic seemed like a good idea. Not now.
less leading; more serving.
I second you on that, and I would take that several steps further but as anger is clouding my judgement I will end this post here
I'm a fan of word play but not when it's insulting to one's intelligence. You didn't give her a hard time here at all. At best, you set her up a platform to make soft, vague promises.
This seems to me like a friend helping a friend with a little damage control.
Moreover I'm getting the impression of a new right in the guise of a moderate left (as if there were no up and down).
I'm tired of leaders and heroes. I'm looking for people who know how to do their job, realize that war is a major catastrophe and not something to be lightly debated outside of that modality.
I'm tired of patriotism. I'm a world citizen and I want leaders who can reflect that.
Yes, I'm dreaming.
I can take a little more "It's the Constitution, stupid" patriotism. If we abided by the Constitution and trusted in each other instead of fear, which is the foundation this Constitution is supposed to provide us, I could take it. If we had a little more "decent respect for the opinion of mankind," which is what we told the world in our Declaration of Independence, I could take it. And I think if we lived those principles, the whole world might say "We're all Americans now," like it did one lost day ago, and I think that's the world I want to be a citizen of. Not an American military-congressional-industrial empire twisted by religion, but an American dream of equality, liberty and justice for all, based on reason. I spell it r-e-s-p-e-c-t.
I think we should end the war AND impeach bush/cheney. If the congress wants to wait until a new prez/vp is elected fine. After all, Nixon's march towards impeachment did not end because he left office, it ended because Ford pardoned him - which cost him ever getting ELECTED President.
That pardon set a bad precedent. I didn't understand that at the time.
Is it not true that Democrats in the Congress have been defeated on every major issue by a President with 24% approval rating?
Is it not true that Democrats have failed?
Is it not fair that Democrats should have to pay a price for their failures, just as the Republicans did in 2006?
Sure, they don't have "super majority" in the House and the Senate. But have they done all they can do with a simple majority?
And against a President with 24% approval rating?
I don't think so.
So true. We need to have some: "The Buck Stops Here" desk signs made-up for our congressional members with "Buck" meaning lobbyist dollars.
"I did not raise the question of why Pelosi has taken impeachment off the table because... I also believe that focusing on impeachment would force Congress to take its eye off the ball on the most important issue of our time -- ending the war in Iraq."
I'd settle for ending the war, but Congress has given us not a scintilla of evidence they intend to do so. So, with all that time on their hands, don't you think impeachment might be a good use of their efforts? How about a strongly worded censure?
My tiny little input.
I'm very impressed with the people/posts on this thread. Very impressed. There is hope.
I was under the impression that most people were similar to the regular posters who usually post on the main thread. Not the case and thank god.
Again, there is hope. Great people here. Great posts. Thinking. Sincere. Passionate. Pissed/Angry but in a constructive way. All positive signs.
Best thread I've ever read.
Your feelings on these matters match my own. Thanks for articulating them so well.
The best thing about the Huffington Post are the interesting and knowledgeable commenters. (The headline threads have become a partisan bitch-fest though)
This thread, along with the two related previous threads, prove that you can have huge numbers of responses, without it degenerating into name calling and the old whack a troll routine.
I sincerely hope that Ms Huffington takes note of this outpouring of constructive criticism.
"This thread, along with the two related previous threads, prove that you can have huge numbers of responses, without it degenerating into name calling and the old whack a troll routine.I sincerely hope that Ms Huffington takes note of this outpouring of constructive criticism."
Like so many others on this thread, good post and thank you.
Amen to your comments about whack a troll. I've bout had a bellyfull of that crap. Who's the cop and who's the robber? (rhetorical)
Re: little George and little Dick.
It's as simple as this. They HAVE to be punished and punished severely. Not because 'we' don't like them, but because their actions are criminal. If not, we will pay a HUGE price down the road. Why do some people (obviously not on this thread) have a hard time understanding this simple fact?
I also hope that AH and Nancy P take note ... (verrryyy doubtful Nancy will)
GREAT thread. The Huffy people should keep it active, forever. Each and every day the #1 priority SHOULD be how to deal with (punish) our elected employee's (not a different headline every 10 minutes) That's just life. Commit a crime - do the time. SIMPLE.
Oh well.......just my opinion.
Could you explain what do you mean by "partisan bitch-fest?"
Arianna - you asked us for what we thought what the most pressing issue, then you went ahead and asked what you thought was the most pressing issue.
I disagree that the war in Iraq is a more important concern that punishing Bush's rampant lawlessness, not only because it is the appropriate response of congress, but to stop any future president from so imperilling our nation.
I am deeply disappointed in you.
the precedent set by Bushco's regime will have deeply resounding effects for the future of America and the world as we know it.
i can't help but wonder what the Roman's would have been writing in forum's like this.
when a criminal is allowed to propagate his antics unchecked, how can we even show our faces in the international community.
i fear for the future of our country, and i fear for the future of my American brothers and sisters.
when the "world police" are corrupt, who arrests them?
i support our troops 199%! bring them home NOW!
Garbage in and garbage out--thats all that last years november elections meant when the democrats came into power. These political parties have their hands in each others pockets and just take turns screwing the people over, both here in America and in other countries. our founding fathers would rise up in revolt a second time. and as far as our so called allies, we fought the united kingdom 5 times! we have never had a war with france but yet Bush threw dirt on france because they werent "WITH US". oh wait--maybe because he is of english heritage? I think its time to put a 3rd party in power to watch the back door!
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
