Future generations will curse us for our stupidity in allowing the administration free rein.
I'm very pessimistic about any chance to stop this mess. People are too comfortable and too unwilling to give up even a modicum of their petrochemical-enabled comfort or any of their petrochemical-produced toys. I'm not talking about giving it all up--I mean cutting back and finding new ways to get by, relearning how to live with less stuff.
Boy, do I sound like a freak!
< sarcasm alert >
Yes, C. corax, you do sound like a freak. Conservation is, after all, a liberal idea because everyone knows that God will provide for his faithful.
< /sarcasm alert >
I think that Shrub and his lot should be brought up on pre-meditated murder charges for each *individual* who has died since his "administration." They should be tried in Texas and put on death row, where everyday they are told "today's the day boys, your life is gonna end" only to not be executed.
Let them sit and wait with baited breath until they die of old age.
Nio
For some reason, the rest of my post didn't get posted:
I don't believe in the death penalty, but I do believe in psychological torture for psychopaths such as Bush.
So I've been out of it for the last week and a half. Does this Impeachment movement have legs? Who among our elected officials would push for it? All the money is on the side of the Status Quo. Still, it's terrific that there's a real movemnet starting to take legal action.
Can the people sue for impeachment without involving Congress?
as i understand the process, it begins with an inquiry by the house of representatives, followed by a vote on impeachment, which is akin to an indictment, not a conviction. then the senate tries the case and convicts, or not as in clinton's case.
john conyers is pushing for the inquiry.
go to http://tinyurl.com/76b5r to read his letter to the president and sign your name to it, along with the bums and millions (we hope) of our fellow citizens.
Ahh, you want to know what I think about all that? I'm not sure you really do, though I suspect you already have a general idea.
Perhaps it is time for me to compose a rant. It's been a while . . .
Seems like we're all putting our names on the hanging list...but I suppose we've been on that list for quite some time already.
And at the same time it's hard to tell if these sort of efforts show the perpetual optimism and gullibility of we the people, or if this is the light shining from the far away gloom of the tunnel's end. Is there a light? Is there a tunnel or is this just ordinary life?
Some categories of response to the situation at hand are:those who get mad and organize. Those who get mad. Those who don't notice, or if they do notice wish that they hadn't because they would rather be free to shop etc. Those who feel helpless and hopeless.
I appreciate the efforts of those who do organize, though boy does it feel futile.
Blogs are about the only way this story is getting out. I did a Google news search on it and the first two pages of news entries were all from the foreign press or outlets no one has ever heard of. The first big media report to come up was from the Christian Science Monitor reporting on why the memos were a "dud." They quoted several American newspapers whose attitude was basically "move along folks, there's nothing to see here."
So the problem is the right wing and/or co-opted media.
Oops. "The story" in my previous comment refers to the Downing Street Memos, which, of course, are only part of the larger story.
Well, I sent along my letter. I can't imagine an impeachment happening in war time...Shrub planned this right, all right. Who's going to impeach while our men and women are in harms way? It would completely destablize the country and military.
Hey, besides, he didn't exactly lie...he was "misinformed!" Kinda like Clinton didn't have sex with "that woman" because there was no penis to vagina penetration! However, no one died because of that dalliance...well, actually, there was a suicide. And people's careers were ruined...thanks again asshole republicans.
I sent my letter to Conyers already.
Since the House has to vote impeachment, I don't see that happening either unless Bush pisses of a lot more Republicans.
Just for your reading pleasure, I copied these words from our dear leader's press conference before they are removed from the White House web site. This is in answer to a question about the Amnesty International condemnation of "the new gulags":
It seemed like to me they based some of their decisions on the word of -- and the allegations -- by people who were held in detention, people who hate America, people that had been trained in some instances to disassemble -- that means not tell the truth. And so it was an absurd report. It just is. And, you know -- yes, sir.
i don't hold out much hope for impeachment, but an inquiry might happen, which would at least generate some news. maybe bring back some things that slid by, like w awarding a medal to the guy, tenet, who "misinformed" him about iraq. and a medal to bremer, who supervised the post-war non-success. and a review of the photos we did see of prisoners at or going to gitmo in chains and hoods. the photos of cheney's "we don't torture" at abu ghraib. an inquiry could bring more of those spunky british pols over to testify too.
So Why TF don't we have more spunky American pols?
As best I can find out here's how it would work:
After an inquiry of impeachment is filed, it would go to the Rules Copmmittee; the members would deliberate and receive evidence or testimony as it believes necessary. Then the members would vote on sending the inquiry to the full House where it would be voted on.
It seems the Republicans would still be in control. And I am not disassembling here.
"It seemed like to me they based some of their decisions on the word of -- and the allegations -- by people who were held in detention, people who hate America, people that had been trained in some instances to disassemble -- that means not tell the truth. And so it was an absurd report. It just is. And, you know -- yes, sir."
How did this happen? How did we get here? What is it about this man that is in any way presidential? This guy is whacko and we're in bizzaro world. I tried to listen to him during the Q&A's but it was just too painful listening to him throw around his own special brand of nonlinear phrases that end up not saying anything. I'm so let down.
JSK-- I thought about listening to it. Usually I do listen, but this time I just couldn't bring myself to it. The sound of his voice, this smirking face-- I couldn't subject myself. I read the transcripts and other analysis.
Listening to this man speak requires time of deep breathing and meditation, and then you have to steel youself for it, as if readying for an assault.
I just want you folks to know that I scooped the Washington Post with my quote above last night. The Post included the words in their story with no comment. I think they just might be beginning to smell blood.
I watched most of the press conference online in the video, and it is hard to take. When he misspoke and then went on to explain the word he had just misused to the rest of us ignorant folks, I could not believe it.
There's certainly a case, open and shut IMO, for impeachment and conviction and for all the reasons you give, DPR, AND we still have the malign neglect of the environment with all its implications. But it will require a major change in Congress in 2006, or the solidification of uneasy feelings in Republicans to do it. So I'm hoping the tide will turn, although without much optimism yet. Still, it would be nice if GWB didn't finish out his second term because of getting kicked out.
Every time Bush is on TV, I am reminded of why I am happy to have never owned a TV. In fact, I was surprised to see his facial expressions and body language during the debates because that was the first time I'd seen him "in action" (I'd only ever listened to him on the radio or read his blathering in the newspapers). I am still surprised he won the election this time after those performances, and I am deeply suspicious of "my fellow americans" as a result.
Good post! Very thoughtful and thought provoking, too.
Gotta get the facts straight. Clinton was impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice, not- repeat:
not- for having sex. Tell it right, brothers and sisters, or no one will take you seriously.
Re: WMD's, Bush didn't lie about them, as the consensus even among the "win without war' crowd was that
Saddam Hussein had them or was developing them.
The Iraqi saecular left supports what the USA is doing in Iraq & it's only
the atavistic jihadis and mad mullahs who oppose it. Food for thought, comrades: food for thought.
Sorry- it is atavistic jihadis, mad mullahs, and Saddamite thugs, who oppose what the USA is doing.
cdf676 ef83ac4b5e
Commenting by HaloScan
