Remember how impeaching Bush was "off the table" so the Congress could get important work done? For a refresher, here is one conversation with Speaker Pelosi on this:
Dave Johnson (of Seeing the Forest):We seem to be at a historic time right now with an administration that is starting to frankly assert that they are above the rule of law, and I'm wondering if you as Speaker can give us a short statement on this issue and what Congress is prepared to do to re-assert the rule of law of the people of the country.(Follow [this link and scroll down] to read her response.) Then Mike Stark asked about impeachment. Her reply,
I made a decision a few years ago, or at least one year ago, that impeachment was something that we could not be successful with and that would take up the time we needed to do some positive things to establish a record of our priorities and their short-comings, and the President is... ya know what I say? The President isn't worth it... he's not worth impeaching. We've got important work to do... If he were at the beginning of his term, people may think of it differently, but he's at the end of his terms. The first two years of his term, if we came in as the majority, there might be time to do it all...Mike, of course, responded,
Mike Stark: Respectfully, that's not the question. Respectfully, the question is whether or not the Constitution is worth it.Many argue that impeachment will distract the Congress from passing a progressive agenda. That is a pipe dream. The Republicans in the Senate are blocking everything. The President will veto anything that passes. And if something somehow manages to become law the Republicans and the President will just ignore it anyway.
The following from today's Wall Street Journal is right-wing propaganda so of course doesn't explain that the reason nothing got done is that Republicans blocked everything. But this was the point we in the Netroots were trying to make -- the Republicans are going to block everything anyway... Here is the right today: As U.S. Economic Problems Loom, House, Senate Sweat the Small Stuff,
Barring a burst of legislative activity after Labor Day, this group of 535 men and women will have accomplished a rare feat. In two decades of record keeping, no sitting Congress has passed fewer public laws at this point in the session -- 294 so far -- than this one. That's not to say they've been idle. On the flip side, no Congress in the same 20 years has been so prolific when it comes to proposing resolutions -- more than 1,900, according to a tally by the nonpartisan Taxpayers for Common Sense.
In November 2007 I made some predictions for what we would see happen in time for this year's Presidential election. One of my predictions for the w008 election was:
3) Accusations that we have a Do-Nothing Ineffective Congress -- Republicans are filibustering everything, and Bush is vetoing the rest. Every single bill. The media is already running with a "Dems won't compromise' and "Dems can't get anything done" narrative and Congress is at a record low approval. You bet we'll be hearing this - they are hard at work developing it. Unless the Democrats start making a lot of noise about this and sustain it -and get the media to report the facts - the Republicans will get away with it.Guess what, the Republicans blocked everything, and now say the Democratic Congress is not getting anything done. Duh!
But who could have seen that coming?
Follow Dave Johnson on Twitter: www.twitter.com/dcjohnson
who are those who are worthy of an impeachment then,the good guys?
the kind of Pelosi is another reason why Washington really needs to change. I believe that even senators should stand for more than 3 terms. When u spend 20 years in Washington,you can never get anything done. By that time,u r part of it and under direct control of the real rulers of Washington,which isnt the president of the USA nor his administration.
Funny...it's simply role reversal. It was only a couple of years ago that Democrats blocked everything all the while complaining that nothing was being done. That is precisely why the next Prsident needs to find a way to unite the parties (or a fair majority of both) so that we can actually witness some progress instead of partisan bickering.
Why do Republicans think that people aren't going to check the record? Of course Democrats never did any such thing.
If you're looking at history, Democrats have a much worse record than Republicans. But I imagine your only talking about the last eight years (Liberals don't bother to look at something as silly as history). A look at history proves the Democrats the party of war.
WWI -- Wilson: Democrat
WWII -- FDR: Democrat
Korea -- Truman: Democrat
Viet Nam -- Kennedy/Johnson: Democrats (Eisenhower did send the first advisors, but Kennedy armed them and let them participate in fighting).
How many Americans have lost their lives because of Republicans' wars compared to Democrats' wars?
Republicans the party of war? wake up -- read a history book.
The Republicans still haven't forgiven FDR for going to war against Germany.
The results of WWI were Versailles (the root cause of WWII), the Mandate System (which extended European Imperialism in the Middle East for three more decades and led to the formation of Israel), and Communist Russia.
How did WWI cause the creation of Israel? See the McMahon-Hussein papers: http://www.mideastweb.org/mcmahon.htm
And Sykes-Picot agreement: http://www.mideastweb.org/mesykespicot.htm
And the Balfour Declaration: http://www.mideastweb.org/mebalfour.htm
Without U.S. involvement in WWI, Israel is never created, and WWII doesn't happen (Hitler would have never come to power without the "burden of Versaille."
So, no, FDR didn't cause WWII; Wilson did.
Nearly half of U.S. voters (49%) think it is at least somewhat likely that Hillary Clinton will overshadow the Democrats’ presumptive presidential nominee Barack Obama at the party’s national political convention next week. Twenty-three percent (23%) say it is Very Likely!!
Impeachment MUST be done for one reason -- to stop Bush from abusing his pardon powers.
The Contitution explicitly makes an exception to presidential pardon powers - in the case of
impeachment. Pelosi MUST indict Bush with impeachment (not convict hime) so that the exception
rule kicks in and halts blanket pardons Bush will almost certainly grant after the election.
If Pelosi fails to impeach Bush is off the hook and free to pardon anyone for anything. Just
watch. Bush will and then give the finger to Democrats as they prepare to occupy the White House..
Gerald Ford's pardon of Nixon was improper and that sorry precedent must be reversed.
No get out of jail free cards for these criminals.
This doesn't mean if the President is impeached he can no longer grant pardons, Bill Clinton still gave pardons after his impeachment. What it means is the President cannot pardon somebody for their impeachment, an example being that Bush cannot pardon Clinton.
Look we will have a VAST MAJORITY IN THE SENATE. THAT IS WHAT WE NEED. 6O VOTES. And a President that actually wants to work across the aisle.
But the recalcitrance of Republicans to do ANYTHING is obvious. They need to go from congress. They have just said no to everything.
And I agree, it's absurd that they are now saying it's not their problem. Of course it is. They are the ones voting the blockage.
You mean like the bill Senator Clinton co-sponsored that would have made flag-burning illegal?
"But the recalcitrance of Republicans to do ANYTHING is obvious. They need to go from congress."
Well, that's not going to happen. So the Democratic... -ahem- "leadership" can either stomp their feet and complain about them big ol' meany Wepubwicans, or they can find a way to work with the more moderate ones to get legislation passed.
Therefore be it resolved that Republicans must be driven from any office in the land.
Further be it resolved that a fillibuster will have to be just that. Not meerly the threat or the suggestion, but the real down and dirty thing where these Republicans will actually have to stand up in the spotlight and declaim their ridiculous ideas until they drop.
Fact: President Bush has done more vetos than any President in history.
152 out of 153 times.......Exactly what does this say about Bush working with the house and senate.
Accept responsibility for having Joe Lieberman (I) as the Senator from Connecticut.
As I remember it, Ned Lamont was the Democratic nominee of the State.
But there were many prominent Democrats who supported Lieberman.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Endorsements_for_Joe_Lieberman_in_the_2006_Connecticut_Senate_Race
The only people claiming to be surprised by this is the Democratic leadership.
I don't believe them.
Neither party carries less blame than the other for the state of Congress.
Honestly, it's our most damaged branch of government.
Bush may have abused his power (although I think otherwise), but he'll be gone soon. The partisan Congress seems to never change.
I hear all this talk about Obama bringing change. Guess what, the minority party will still block and the majority party will only consider bills they approve of. Congress is nothing like the Constition wanted. I suggest reading Joseph Ellis' book, Founding Brothers. Ellis chronicles the art of debate and compromise used to write the Constitution, brilliant. Warning: reading this book will leave a foul taste in your mouth and make you despise the state of current partisan politics.
However, plenty still got done and signed. In 2005-2006 the Republicans decided to get nothing done by having so many days off that they became the new legendary Do-Nothing congress, beating out the old one from '47 by a mile.
I simply cannot understand HOW Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid came to be chosen to "lead" this Congress! They clearly do not know how to LEAD, how to attack, how to out-strategize the Repubs, how to place the blame for our paralyzed government where it belongs,--on the Republicans!
First BIG MISTAKE: taking impeachment "off the table"! There went the Democratic "high ground"! Bush know he could get away with anything without accountability! And, perhaps more important, they proved themselves to be what the Republicans have always accused them of being: WEAK!!!
But it is the REPUBLICANS who are refusing to work with the other side. They have filibustered far more bills than ever before in history. They even SAID their strategy was to block bills, and then campaign that the Congress isn't passing things.
Good Congressional leaders find a way to get things passed, by reaching compromises with both fellow party members and members on the other side of the aisle. Reid and Pelosi are 2 of the WORST I have ever seen.
That being said; it certainly didn't stop the Republicans from impeaching President Clinton.