Should we pressure congress, demanding them to impeach the filthy lying whore George Bush or should we just let them go about their business of granting amnesty to illegal aliens, socializing our healthcare industry, and enlarging the nanny state with more intrusive and freedom restricting laws?
Impeachment rallies held coast to coast
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Impeachment_rallies_held_coast_to_coast_1210.html
Ron Brynaert
Published: Sunday December 10, 2006
This Sunday, Human Rights Day has been renamed "Human Rights and Impeachment Day," as groups hold rallies from coast to coast across the United States calling for President Bush and Vice President Cheney to be impeached.
"The purpose of the events is to organize people to lobby their Congress Members for investigations and impeachment and to lobby their local and state governments for resolutions in support of impeachment," Democrats.com co-founder Bob Fertik writes.
The rallies were "kicked off" yesterday at a New York City forum which featured former Rep. Elizabeth Holtzman and anti-war "peace mom" Cindy Sheehan.
As her final legislative act on Friday, outgoing Georgia Rep. Cynthia McKinney introduced an impeachment bill, although it was just a "symbolic parting shot" by the controversial Democrat and has no chance of passing.
According to After Downing Street, one of the activist groups helping to organize this weekend's events, there "will now also be rallies to honor and thank Cynthia McKinney."
Events scheduled for today include rallies and parades held in such cities as Seattle, Madison, Chicago, Detroit and Tallahassee.
At a beach in San Francisco, plans were made to use a mass of human bodies to spell out the word "Impeach!" However, a blogger from the Beach Impeach Project announced late Saturday night that "dangerous surf conditions have forced postponement" until the first weekend in January.
Also in San Francisco, "under the spot where the UN signed its charter 60 years ago," activists will sing "carols" while clad in orange jump suits, similiar to the ones that detainees at Guantanamo Bay are forced to wear.
Coddling Criminals
http://www.takebackwashington.com/articles/coddling_criminals.html
Whether or not you think impeaching Bush is a winning strategy for the incoming Democratic majority in Congress, in light of all the damning evidence accumulated by Conyers (as well as a growing number of independent inquiries--see below), doesn't it seem that ruling out impeachment at the outset, which presumably means not gathering any evidence that demonstrates illegal activity by the Bush administration, is grossly irresponsible at best? And maybe colossally stupid politically? Why not just issue every administration official a "Get Out of Jail Free" card?
Once again, the Democratic Party has shown how to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory. As a result, we all lose. Unless, of course, the majority of Americans can convince the new Democratic Congress to do its job and hold government officials accountable for breaking laws.
How? The usual: Organize to build public pressure. Contact our Congresscritters to demand accountability. Let Conyers know we think he was right the first time and should feel free to ignore Pelosi's triangulations.
Building pressure outside of Congress may not be a bad idea either. In Olympia, the Citizens' Movement to Impeach Bush/Cheney has collected over 2,000 signatures and has asked Olympia's city council to adopt a resolution calling for an investigation to launch impeachment proceedings. Municipal governments may be more responsive than Congress to public pressure. If a groundswell is created at local levels, Congress will eventually have to pay attention.
Let's get busy. The Democratic Party leadership has announced that it won't do the right thing without us.
We're not haters, we're educators!
We're not here to spew hate,
We're here to Educate!
If you worship your enemy, you are defeated.
If you adopt your enemy's religion, you are enslaved.
If you breed with your enemy, you are destroyed.
Haha another delusion. Bush will never be impeached. Even is he were, there isn't enough votes to convict. The demoncrats and the republicunts are wings on the same bird.
How many black people will riot in the streets to have the Evil Racist Bush impeached? Especially after he fucked over all those niggers after the flood in New Orleans? Come on Subrosa isn't Rep. McKinney our saviour?
"No American is above the law"
http://gnn.tv/articles/2792/_No_American_is_above_the_law
Rep. McKinney's floor statement on the impeachment of George W. Bush
Download a PDF of the Articles of Impeachment (H.R. 1106) here.
http://www.gnn.tv/_var/blogs/20357-7c20362eb1057347958a7d0556d87323.pdf
December 8, 2006
Mr. Speaker:
I come before this body today as a proud American and as a servant of the American people, sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States.
Throughout my tenure, I’ve always tried to speak the truth. It’s that commitment that brings me here today.
We have a President who has misgoverned and a Congress that has refused to hold him accountable. It is a grave situation and I believe the stakes for our country are high.
No American is above the law, and if we allow a President to violate, at the most basic and fundamental level, the trust of the people and then continue to govern, without a process for holding him accountable—what does that say about our commitment to the truth? To the Constitution? To our democracy?
The trust of the American people has been broken. And a process must be undertaken to repair this trust. This process must begin with honesty and accountability.
Leading up to our invasion of Iraq, the American people supported this Administration’s actions because they believed in our President. They believed he was acting in good faith. They believed that American laws and American values would be respected. That in the weightiness of everything being considered, two values were rock solid—trust and truth.
From mushroom clouds to African yellow cake to aluminum tubes, the American people and this Congress were not presented the facts, but rather were presented a string of untruths, to justify the invasion of Iraq.
President Bush, along with Vice President Cheney and then-National Security Advisor Rice, portrayed to the Congress and to the American people that Iraq represented an imminent threat, culminating with President Bush’s claim that Iraq was six months away from developing a nuclear weapon. Having used false fear to buy consent—the President then took our country to war.
This has grave consequences for the health of our democracy, for our standing with our allies, and most of all, for the lives of our men and women in the military and their families—who have been asked to make sacrifices—including the ultimate sacrifice—to keep us safe.
Just as we expect our leaders to be truthful, we expect them to abide by the law and respect our courts and judges. Here again, the President failed the American people.
When President Bush signed an executive order authorizing unlawful spying on American citizens, he circumvented the courts, the law, and he violated the separation of powers provided by the Constitution. Once the program was revealed, he then tried to hide the scope of his offense from the American people by making contradictory, untrue statements.
President George W. Bush has failed to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States; he has failed to ensure that senior members of his administration do the same; and he has betrayed the trust of the American people.
With a heavy heart and in the deepest spirit of patriotism, I exercise my duty and responsibility to speak truthfully about what is before us. To shy away from this responsibility would be easier. But I have not been one to travel the easy road. I believe in this country, and in the power of our democracy. I feel the steely conviction of one who will not let the country I love descend into shame; for the fabric of our democracy is at stake.
Some will call this a partisan vendetta, others will say this is an unimportant distraction to the plans of the incoming Congress. But this is not about political gamesmanship.
I am not willing to put any political party before my principles.
This, instead, is about beginning the long road back to regaining the high standards of truth and democracy upon which our great country was founded.
Mr. Speaker:
Under the standards set by the United States Constitution, President Bush—along with Vice President Cheney, and Secretary of State Rice—should be subject to the process of impeachment, and I have filed H. Res. _ in the House of Representatives.
To my fellow Americans, as I leave this Congress, it is in your hands—to hold your representatives accountable, and to show those with the courage to stand for what is right, that they do not stand alone.
Thank you.
We're not haters, we're educators!
We're not here to spew hate,
We're here to Educate!
If you worship your enemy, you are defeated.
If you adopt your enemy's religion, you are enslaved.
If you breed with your enemy, you are destroyed.
Time for Bush to Go!
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/120806.html
George W. Bush had a point when he disparaged the Baker-Hamilton commission’s plan for gradual troop withdrawals from Iraq by saying “this business about graceful exit just simply has no realism to it whatsoever.” It’s now obvious that there can be no exit from Iraq – graceful or otherwise – as long as Bush remains President.
Despite wishful thinking about Bush “making a 180” and taking to heart the bipartisan Iraq Study Group’s 79 recommendations, the President is making it abundantly clear that he has no intention to reverse course, negotiate with his Muslim adversaries or pull American combat troops out of Iraq.
Bush continues to present the Iraq War and the broader conflict in the Middle East as an existential battle between good and evil, a scrap between black hats and white hats, not a political struggle that can be resolved through respectful negotiations and mutual concessions.
In Bush’s view, the only resolution is for troublesome Muslims to submit to his terms. But that is a possibility receding with the speed of water being pulled out to sea before the surge of a fast-approaching tsunami. In this case, there is a tidal wave of anti-Americanism about to crash across the Middle East.
While the Democratic congressional election victory and the scathing assessment from the Iraq Study Group may have shifted the political ground in Washington, Bush refuses to let go of his uncompromising vision of an “ideological struggle” requiring a near-endless war against Muslim militants abroad and elimination of constitutional liberties at home.
Tough Talk
At a joint news conference with British Prime Minister Tony Blair on Dec. 7 – just a day after the release of the Iraq Study Group’s report – Bush jumped back into his stump-speech rhetoric demanding “victory in Iraq” as the only acceptable result for “the civilized world.”
"I believe we’ll prevail,” Bush said. “Not only do I know how important it is to prevail, I believe we will prevail. I understand how hard it is to prevail. But I also want the American people to understand that if we were to fail – and one way to assure failure is just to quit, is not to adjust, and say it’s just not worth it – if we were to fail, that failed policy will come to hurt generations of Americans in the future. …
"I believe we’re in an ideological struggle between forces that are reasonable and want to live in peace, and radicals and extremists. And when you throw into the mix radical Shia and radical Sunni trying to gain power and topple moderate governments, with energy which they could use to blackmail Great Britain or America, or anybody else who doesn’t kowtow to them, and a nuclear weapon in the hands of a government that is – would be using that nuclear weapon to blackmail to achieve political objectives – historians will look back and say, how come Bush and Blair couldn’t see the threat?
"That’s what they’ll be asking. And I want to tell you, I see the threat and I believe it is up to our governments to help lead the forces of moderation to prevail. It’s in our interests.”
Along with his grim vision of an open-ended global war, Bush added his usual mix of false history and faulty logic to fan the fears of Americans.
Back, for instance, was Bush’s old canard about how the 9/11 attacks ended American complacency that the two oceans protected the country from attack, a belief that actually disappeared more than a half century ago with the advent of Soviet nuclear missiles. Bush said:
"One of the things that has changed for American foreign policy is a threat overseas can now come home to hurt us, and September the 11th should be a wake-up call for the American people to understand what happens if there is violence and safe havens in a part of the world. And what happens is people can die here at home.”
Bush also continued to posit how his favored Middle East forces are pro-democratic and his enemies are anti-democratic, though the evidence actually is that the popular wave sweeping across the Middle East is one of intense anti-Americanism.
The surviving pro-American regimes are dwindling to a handful of dictatorships and monarchies – the likes of Egypt and Saudi Arabia – while opinion polls in every Muslim country reveal intense opposition to Bush and his policies.
Bush also left out other inconvenient facts, such as that the Hamas leadership in Palestine won parliamentary elections; that elections in Iraq deepened the sectarian divide by putting hardline Shiites in charge; that polls show most Iraqis want U.S. forces to leave; that Hezbollah has emerged as a potent and popular force in Lebanon, able to mount massive political demonstrations; that Iranians elected Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as their president and broadly support Iran’s nuclear program.
And, oh yes, the Iraq War was not started by Islamic militants who hate peace but by George W. Bush.
In other words, Bush still insists on living in a world of ideology and made-up facts, not one of reality and pragmatism. Bush has fixed in his mind what his neoconservative advisers sold him on in 2001 – and he can’t break with that.
‘It’s Bad in Iraq’
At the press conference, Bush’s only concession to reality was to agree pugnaciously to a question about the Iraq Study Group’s assessment that the situation in Iraq is “grave and deteriorating.”
Glaring at the questioner, Bush replied with anger and sarcasm: “It’s bad in Iraq. Does that help?”
Regarding the Iraq Study Group’s key recommendation for negotiations with Iran and Syria, Bush spiked that idea by continuing to lay down preconditions that he knows the two countries won’t accept, basically that they accept his goals for the region’s future.
"If people come to the table to discuss Iraq, they need to come understanding their responsibilities to not fund terrorists, to help this young democracy survive, to help with the economics of the country,” Bush said. “And if people are not committed, if Syria and Iran is not committed to that concept, then they shouldn’t bother to show up.”
So, Bush left little ambiguity about his intent toward the central recommendations from former Secretary of State James Baker, former Rep. Lee Hamilton and the eight other members of the Iraq Study Group, evenly split between Republicans and Democrats. Bush has no intention of implementing their comprehensive plan.
Bush appears not to have budged one inch from his longstanding hostility toward any questioning of his war judgments. He is determined to keep U.S. troops in Iraq regardless of the will of the American people or anyone else.
"I will not withdraw even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me,” Bush told key Republicans, referring to his wife and his dog, in an anecdote that author Bob Woodward described in an Oct. 1 interview with CBS News “60 Minutes.”
Bush also still has the support of Blair, who is widely derided in Great Britain as “Bush’s poodle.” At the press conference, Blair did nothing to shake that reputation, thanking Bush “for the clarity of your vision about the mission that we’re engaged in.”
But Blair is expected to step down as Prime Minister sometime in spring 2007, depriving Bush of his most enthusiastic booster among the “coalition of the willing” that joined the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.
Looming Crisis
As Bush’s circle of support grows tighter and tighter – while he remains obstinate in implementing his vision of near-endless war against Muslim militants – the U.S. political system will confront a crisis of historic magnitude.
The current conventional wisdom is that the United States has no choice but to stagger forward with Bush in command for the next two years, absorbing the loss of hundreds or thousands of more dead American soldiers and watching the bloody civil war in Iraq possibly spread across the region.
After all, the thinking goes, if Bush will rebuff James Baker – the Bush Family fixer who secured the White House for Bush by blocking the Florida recount in 2000 – who will Bush listen to?
Bush has now ousted at least three Cabinet secretaries who voiced objections to his strategy on Iraq: Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill, Secretary of State Colin Powell, and – most recently – Defense Secretary Donald Rumfeld, who was fired on Nov. 8, two days after writing a memo suggesting a drawdown of U.S. forces.
Rumsfeld also committed the unpardonable sin of questioning Bush’s lofty rhetoric about transforming Iraq and the Middle East. The outgoing Defense Secretary said the administration should “recast the U.S. military mission and the U.S. goals (how we talk about them) – go minimalist.” [NYT, Dec. 3, 2006]
Beyond ousting Cabinet secretaries who disagree, Bush also disparages lower-ranking officials who dissent on Iraq, calling them defeatists or casting them as political enemies. Before Election 2004, Bush and his supporters frequently lashed out at CIA and other intelligence analysts who described worsening problems in Iraq.
Bush’s anger carried over past the election, according to an account by Salon.com’s Sidney Blumenthal. In December 2004, Col. Derek Harvey, the Defense Intelligence Agency’s senior intelligence officer for Iraq, informed Bush that the Iraqi insurgency was “robust” and growing, prompting Bush to turn to his aides and ask, “Is this guy a Democrat?” Blumenthal reported. [Salon.com, Dec. 7, 2006]
So, given Bush’s rhetoric and actions, there is little reason to believe that he intends to reverse course. If anything, he will continue toying with notions about expanding the conflict by bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities or seeking escalation of political confrontations with Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza.
That means that by 2009, whoever becomes the next President will face a likely conflagration in the Middle East, with the real possibility that Bush will have enflamed Islamic radicalism so much that the region’s few pro-U.S. pillars – such as the Saudi royal family or the Egyptian dictatorship – will be tottering if not already fallen.
Disruptions of Middle East oil supplies could wreak havoc on the U.S. and world economies. Plus, Bush might end up precipitating just the grim vision that he has long articulated – an interminable world war pitting the West against large segments of the planet’s one billion Muslims.
Faced with this looming catastrophe, the congressional Democrats may have no choice but to reconsider what incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and others have ruled “off the table,” the impeachment of President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.
Indeed, Bush’s cavalier dismissal of the key Baker-Hamilton recommendations creates a possible framework for a bipartisan impeachment effort.
A less confrontational approach could be Republican and Democratic pressure on Bush and Cheney to agree to sequential resignations, replacing Cheney first with a new Vice President who would then assume the presidency upon Bush’s resignation.
As unlikely – and extreme – as these scenarios may sound, the future of the American Republic may demand nothing less.
If Bush cannot come to grips with reality – and adopt a less ideological approach toward the Middle East – there may be no realistic choice but for the American people and their elected representatives to make clear that it’s time for him to go.
We're not haters, we're educators!
We're not here to spew hate,
We're here to Educate!
If you worship your enemy, you are defeated.
If you adopt your enemy's religion, you are enslaved.
If you breed with your enemy, you are destroyed.
Impeaching the douche serves a purpose. First off, he deserves it. He and his cabal of neocon jews ARE war criminals. Second, it serves as an example to the traitors who will follow that when the going gets rough, the jews will turn on you in a split second. Don't forget, it will be the jews leading the movement for impeachment to divert attention from their own involvement. Who knows, maybe a few of the elite traitors will figure it out and think twice about doing the kikes bidding in the future. At any rate, I think its a good thing, I even bought some "Impeach Bush" bumper stickers. Any grief that can be visited upon those who hold elected office is a positive.
The Western democracy of today is the forerunner of Marxism which without it would not be thinkable. It provides this world plague with the culture in which its germs can spread.
-Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
Yes. Send Zog and their Masters a message.
Note the opposition to this in this thread and remember.
The Words of the Prophet Linder