Impeach Obama! (A Rocky Mountain Mike Song Parody)

This would of course be the sentiment of the new Congress and their seemingly very confused voters (except for the ones who also voted for pot, minimum wage, and against personhood laws?!?). Ugh. Anyway, it's all very festive, thanks to Rocky Mountain Mike. To the tune of Jose Feliciano's Feliz Navidad.

For more Mike, go here. And buy his album, Politically Incoherent on Amazon!

 

So, Obama's Immigration Executive Action is Unconstitutional? Really?

When people say both parties are the same, I get grouchy, because there are many very clear differences (even if I wish there were more than two options sometimes). But one area where they are alike: when the balance of power shifts, they often develop policy amnesia.

For instance, remember when Democrats were in the minority last time, and Republicans' never-ending mantra was, "up-or-down vote?" Angered by what they saw as obstruction, Republicans aimed to browbeat Democrats by drilling that phrase into voters' psyches, and it was relentless. Then, when Republicans found themselves in the minority, suddenly they were the lord-god-kings of obstruction. Unfortunately, Democrats are very, very bad at phraseology, or speaking with one strong, consistent voice. Republicans are very, very good at it. So there is a difference for you. Another is that Republicans are absolutely unafraid to be disingenuous or dishonest in their wordsmithing. Just repeat, repeat, repeat.

But back to my point: now that Republicans are shifting into power, they seem to have forgotten that presidents have some executive power themselves. And any flexing of it by a Democratic (black) president is obviously unprecedented, obviously lawless and unconstitutional, obviously impeachable! Even though George H.W. Bush did something similar. Even though "Ronaldus Maximus" Ronald Regan did pretty much exactly the same thing. Can you remember any Republican outcry for the impeachment of Saint Ronnie?

[Excerpt]

Remember How St. Reagan Got Impeached For Executive Order On Immigration?

Monday’s Rachel Maddow Show kicked off with one of those “where’s she going?” bits, about the odd technologically outmoded conversations between Pope Francis and his best American bud, Cardinal Seán O’Malley — they fax each other all the time, as a 60 Minutes profile detailed this week. Turns out, one of the things O’Malley is big on is immigration reform, and there’s the hook for the real focus of this segment: The Catholic Church didn’t like several provisions of Ronald Reagan’s 1986 immigration reform act, and when Congress couldn’t get the votes together to fix them, Reagan issued an executive order to change how the immigration laws were enforced. George H.W. Bush also issued executive orders to exempt some categories of people from deportation. In total, the tweaks allowed some 1.5 million people to stay in the country, without any approval from Congress. . .

Read more (with video) at: Wonkette

It's Impeachable (A Rocky Mountain Mike Song Parody)

To anyone who lived through the Clinton impeachment imbroglio, I for one would like to say, knock it off, GOP. It's exhausting, you'll overplay your hand, and you'll ensure Democratic success in 2016. On second thought, "Please proceed, Governor."

Rocky Mountain Mike has put the idea to music, to the tune of Perry Como's It's Impossible. For more Mike, go here. And buy his album, Politically Incoherent on Amazon!

 

Obama: No, I Won't Let Them Repeal ObamaCare

Image from source, Talking Points Memo

A lot of people have pointed out that the GOP won largely on a single rallying cry: "We hate Barack Obama." Beyond that, there really wasn't much of a platform. So, what are they going to do with all this power? Well, impeachment is a possibility. Why? They don't need a why. They'll find a why, like they did with Bill Clinton. And as that episode proved, it doesn't even have to be a good reason.

But it's risky. It only made Clinton more popular. If Al Gore hadn't made the decision to distance himself from Clinton (a lesson Democrats hopefully have now learned by doing the same with Obama), he very well might have won. Or rather, won more decisively, so that SCOTUS couldn't hand it to Bush. I know, I know, get off the tangent. Okay.

So, while I'm sure somebody is going to bring up impeachment, it's far from a sure thing. So, what's next? ObamaCare. Obviously. Even though it's working (after an admittedly fumbled rollout), and millions of previously uninsured people now have insurance. Even though they don't have an alternative. Even though the cry for repeal only really exists at the base level. They've got to reward that base. So, you know they'll at least make some noise about it. I mean, how many times did the House vote for repeal, 50?

Anyway, barring an astounding turn of events, repeal of the whole thing is very, very unlikely. But don't be shocked if they go for some changes. And you know they won't be the good kind.

[Excerpt]

Obama: No, I'm Not Going To Allow The GOP To Repeal Obamacare
 
President Barack Obama said Wednesday that he would be "open and receptive" to "responsible changes" to Obamacare proposed by the new GOP Congress, but asserted that there were some policies that were off the table. . .

Read more at: Talking Points Memo

House Conservatives Not Gung-Ho on Impeachment

Sorry, Sarah. Not right now. Put your hand away,
you look like an idiot. Er...more of an idiot.

High crimes and misdemeanors. That phrase is important, because it was largely ignored back in the late 90s when Congress impeached President Bill Clinton. His "high crime" was to lie about having sex with a woman who was not his wife. In a question that was immaterial to the case. In a case that was later dismissed. It was and remains ridiculous.

Now, I'll acknowledge that lo about seven, eight years ago, I really would like to have seen George W. Bush impeached. At the time, there was a very lengthy list of offenses, the majority of which couldn't even be called a stretch. And even if you don't think so, they certainly hit a higher water mark than did the Lewinsky affair. But, as Nancy Pelosi said, impeachment was off the table.

And now, the hard right--having hated President Obama from his first election day or before, and thwarted in his second--has a similar bottled-up rage. From my vantage point, it's misdirected, viewed through a ideologically distorted prism. Though I don't agree with the President on everything (not big on drones, wish the war was over), the "scandals" he's been through have mostly been nothingburgers, or--funny enough--extensions of Bush Era policies.

But, the red meat base wants impeachment. But you can tell there may be a lot of hot air behind it when they can't seem to agree on a charge. Sarah Palin wants the impeachment to be based on the border crisis, which makes no sense (surprise!). I've seen others that want it to be the IRS "scandal," something that has never implicated Obama, and has fizzled out. I'm sure Darrell Issa would point to Benghazi!!! But what's the crime? If Benghazi a crime, what was 9/11? I mean, come on.

Fortunately, it sounds like Congress isn't really in the mood anyway. Who knows what will happen if the GOP takes the Senate in November (something that wouldn't be possible in a sane world). But for now, sounds like impeachment is off the table.

[Excerpt]

Sorry, Sarah Palin: House Conservatives Oppose Impeachment Of Obama
 
Sarah Palin, your wish is not granted. A panel of the House's staunchest conservatives on Tuesday rebuffed the former Alaska governor when asked about her call last week for impeaching President Barack Obama. Some said impeachment was impractical, some said it would hurt the GOP politically and others cautioned that Obama hasn't committed high crimes and misdemeanors. . .

Read more at: Talking Points Memo

Right Wing World: Sarah Palin Advocates Impeachment

You know, because when it comes to matters as serious as the impeachment of the President of the United States, I always look to half-term, half-wit governors from states with a population that is dwarfed by 17 US cities. I'm aware that I should ignore this shrill, past-her-prime mean girl, as attention (and money) is what she thrives on. But as long as Right Wing World looks to this clueless twit as some sort of political guru [get better heroes!], she's not going away. And when she stirs up shit, it tends to splatter around.

So, Palin adds her endorsement of the idea of impeachment. Someone will have to explain to her that it doesn't involve actual peaches, I suppose. Her reasoning seems sort of screwy to me. But we know from the Bill Clinton impeachment that the right will use absolutely anything as a reason. It's not so much an impeachment for a specific reason, but one just for the sake of it. Just like last time. But last time, it just made Clinton more popular, set his wife on a wave of sympathy and congratulations, and probably lead to the upcoming candidacy of Hillary Clinton.

But, I'm telling you. When Nancy Pelosi said, "impeachment is off the table," in regard to George W. Bush, the right should have taken that great gift, and returned the favor. Because if any president deserved impeachment, it was Dubya.

Image from source, NewsCorpse

[Excerpt]

Impeachment Fever: America Rejected Sarah Palin, Now She Rejects America
 
The “Quitta From Wasilla” is making headlines again by displaying symptoms of acute Obama Derangement Syndrome. Sarah Palin, the 2008 GOP nominee for Vice-President, who was soundly rejected by American voters, is now calling for the impeachment of President Obama (again), who was elected twice with significant majorities. . .

Read more at: NewsCorpse

Louie Gohmert Wants to Impeach Obama for Congress Defaulting

The face of a Republican hero. Mindboggling.
Image from DailyKos

This is just so idiotic. Of course, if Louie Gohmert is involved it is--by definition--idiotic. But I mean, come on.

[Excerpt]

Louie Gohmert: A Debt Default Is 'An Impeachable Offense By The President'

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) isn't sure whether he'll support a debt limit deal, but he is sure of one thing: a debt default would be President Barack Obama's fault. A reporter for The Young Turks asked Gohmert whether he'd support a bill that would raise the debt ceiling at the Values Voter Summit on Friday. "The word 'deal' concerns me," he said. "If it's good for America. . ."

 

Read more at: Huffington Post

"Impeachment" Should be Off the Table

Rep. Steve Stockman, paragon
of virtue. Image from ThinkProgress.

Godwin's Law states, "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1." As such, it is usually common practice that if a person uses Hitler as an analogy, their argument fails, immediately. The response, "Godwin's Law" is all that is needed to end the discussion. I propose the same be true with the impeachment of the president except as a last resort, for obvious and clear violation of law.

Why? Because it's getting ridiculous. Ever since President Obama was sworn in, Right Wing World has been buzzing about impeachment with varying degrees of passion. It's been an impeachment in search of a reason, in their eyes. They'd literally go after him for anything they thought would stick. And we know this, because we have evidence. Recent evidence. Impeachment has only been tried twice (Nixon escaped by resigning), and one of those times was brought over a lie about a blowjob.* In a question no pertinent in a case that was ultimately dismissed.

There he is, pointing that finger.

If I didn't know how much the right hated Bill Clinton at the time, I'd have sworn that his impeachment was a deliberate dodge, in order to make the next Republican president bullet-proof. I mean, after all the loud protests about the ridiculous impeachment of Clinton, how could Democrats really go and do the same thing, right? And though it may not have really been that kind of genius behind the impeachment, that's what we got.

Yes, during Bush's second term, when the Democrats took over, and their base was ravenous for some sort of repercussions for what they saw as war crimes (and so many other things), impeachment was off the table. Even later, after President Obama was elected, we were all told that we were looking forward and not back. To my knowledge, the only Bush Era toadie to pay any kind of price (and it was light) was Scooter Libby.

So Bush/Cheney (Rice/Rumsfeld/et. al) got off clean and clear. Whether you despised the lot of them or were in their corner, there is no doubt that there were things in there that were stronger reason for hearings (at least) than a freakin' lie about a bj. And yet--even though the lot of them got a "get out of jail free" card--you can find righties, be they bloggers or actual elected officials who float the impeachment balloon.

Stop it. Just stop it. Before Bill Clinton, you have to go back to Andrew Johnson in 1868 for pete's sake.  Impeachment is a serious charge, and it should be reserved for the very last resort, when there is no other remedy, for a serious, serious reason. It's not for revenge. It's not to get rid of a guy you don't like and didn't vote for. It may be asking a bit too much, but could we just grow up already, with the political back-and-forth? It's embarrassing.

[Excerpt]

Rep. Stockman threatens Obama impeachment over guns

Rep. Steve Stockman (R-Texas) is threatening to file articles of impeachment against President Barack Obama if he moves to change gun regulations through executive order.

“I will seek to thwart this action by any means necessary, including but not limited to eliminating funding for implementation, defunding the White House, and even filing articles of impeachment,” Stockman said. . .

Read more at: Politico


*By the way, one thing that can still--oddly--get a staunch conservative riled up is to make light of the impeachment of Bill Clinton. I still maintain it was a stupid reason to impeach a president. Yes, Clinton himself was stupid to put himself in that position, and was also stupid to lie. But it was an irrelevant lie, in an ultimately irrelevant case. As political lies go, it was utterly and completely meaningless.
"But, he LIED to Congress! He LIED to the American people!" As have--likely--every single president before him. As certainly Bush did. Over much, much, much more serious matters. Congress lies to Congress. Nearly every politician who has ever gone on Meet the Press or Face the Nation has lied to us about something. They may call it "spin," but spin is spun with lies. So, save your indignation over that particular lie, alright? It doesn't rise to "high crimes and misdemeanors," it just doesn't. If the identical lie was told in the identical case, and Bill Clinton was just an Arkansas lawyer, the chance he'd have been brought up on perjury charges over it are virtually nil. Again, stop it.

Grover Norquist Tries Blackmailing President Obama

I ask for the hundredth time, who the f**k is Grover Norquist? Why is this unelected, irrelevant asshole given any attention by anybody at all? And to have the nerve to threaten the President with impeachment? The gall. Honestly, he's not a Congressman. He has no ability to make good on this blackmail threat unless he also does the same to some GOP Senators or or Representatives, or at least has them at his beck and call.

Image from source, Addicting Info

I don't want to pay higher taxes any more than you do. But I do know that the "Bush tax cuts" were designed to sunset. They've been extended once, and are due to end at the end of the year. By any real measure, they should all be allowed to expire. But President Obama and the Democrats want to keep those for the middle class in place (whether that is a good idea or not, it is good politics). Grover Norquist isn't upset about that, he's only pissed because rich people would lose their tax cut. It isn't technically even an increase. It is reverted to its original rate, and expiring one year after it was supposed to expire! 

On a side note, I predicted more than three years ago that there would be those in the GOP (and its base) who would attempt to impeach President Obama, or at least make noise about it. As it was with Clinton, it is an impeachment in search of a reason. Any reason--even lying about a blow job--will do. You'd think that since Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and Obama let Bush, Cheney and the rest of that corrupt bunch off the hook, they'd cut him some slack, but no.

[Excerpt]

Grover Norquist To Obama: Extend Bush Tax Cuts Or Be Impeached 

You almost have to admire the chutzpah of Grover Norquist. For a man with no elected office and lacking the billions of the Koch brothers, Norquist exerts a phenomenal amount of influence on American politics. From his ability to force the entire GOP to pledge not to raise taxes under any circumstances (except on the Middle Class and poor, of course) to his latest act of arrogance in essentially threatening the President of the United States, Norquist is quite sure of himself. . .

Read more at: Addicting Info

Anti-gay Iowans Trying to Impeach Judges

The Hate Bus, from TPM Muckraker

Oh, for crying out loud. As wrong as it seemed to me that three judges were successfully un-retained in the November election, this is more wrong. The Supreme Court of Iowa declared that the law against same-sex marriage was unconstitutional, and that threw the bigots into a frenzy. So, in the vote to retain the three judges up for reinstatement--something that almost always happens--a successful campaign was mounted to get them bounced. Now, they're going to try to impeach the rest of the bench.

If the judges had done something illegal, or something unethical, I'd get it. If they'd overstepped their bounds, I'd almost get it. But they didn't. They performed their jobs as they are supposed to. They just came to a legal conclusion that a small but loud group of homophobes didn't like. I hope this fails, because impeachment should be reserved for something other than ruling in a way that torques off a hate group.

[Excerpt]

Anti-Gay Iowa Republicans Will Try To Impeach Supreme Court Justices



For conservatives angry over the Iowa Supreme Court's unanimous decision last year to legalize gay marriage, getting three of the seven justices booted from the bench just isn't enough. Now, a handful of Republican lawmakers are now trying to impeach the remaining four. . .
 
Read more at: TPM Muckraker

Impeachment of Chief Justice Roberts Possible?

Image from source, Huffington Post

Interesting. . .

[Excerpt]

Rep. Peter DeFazio Investigating Impeachment For Chief Justice John Roberts



With Democrats increasingly outraged over the Supreme Court's Citizen United decision that allowed unlimited corporate spending in elections -- a change conservatives have been more successful at taking advantage of -- a Democratic congressman is raising the prospect of impeaching the Supreme Court's chief justice over the issue. . .
 
Read more at: Huffington Post

Bush Administration Wanted Iraq War from the Beginning

Image from source, PressTV

Anyone with a functional brain pretty much knows that George W. Bush and his administration wanted to go to war with Iraq before, not because of 9/11.  We suspected for years, as official "reasons" for the invasion shifted from one ridiculous thing to another.  Then the "Downing Street Memo" pretty much confirmed it, though it really didn't come to much.  Now, it seems that it's certifiably true. And still? Not much.  It's really amazing that Democrats wield this big club, and won't use it. Even the prospect of an impeachment-in-search-of-a-cause from the other side probably won't do it.  I can't wait to see what ridiculous "high crime and misdemeanor" the Republicans try this time. It would take a doozy to outdo "lying about a blowjob."  Maybe smoking in a no-smoking area?

[Excerpt]

'Bush team wanted Iraq war from start'

Declassified documents have reveled that advisors to former US president George W. Bush had focused on justifying a new war on Iraq as soon as he took office.

Official document released on Wednesday show that a few hours after the 2001 attacks on the Twin Towers in New York, the then Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld spoke of attacking Iraq.



Papers posted by the Washington-based National Security Archive shows Rumsfeld discussing war plans for Iraq just two months after the 2001 US invasion of Afghanistan. . .

Read more at: PressTV

George W. Bush Admits Torture

Right now, right-wing world is trying to drum up support for the impeachment of President Obama. Why?  Why isn't really the question. As they did with Bill Clinton, they are holding an impeachment wish and are in search of a reason.  With Clinton, they were actually successful, though at a distance, it is flat-out amazing (and for an amazingly stupid reason) that they were able to pull it off.  Impeached for lying to Congress? Hasn't every President at some point lied to Congress?

Anyway, what they're trying to nail Obama with is some "back room deals" with a couple of politicians, to get them to accept jobs or appointments in lieu of running against some of the White House's favored candidates.  Apparently, this does tarnish Obama's pledge to be more transparent, and be a "different kind of politician."  What it doesn't rise to--according to many political scientists and even former Bush people--is a high crime or misdemeanor. Kinda scummy maybe, but politics as usual.  That hasn't stopped FOX "News" from trumpeting it all day for days, but what do you expect from them.

From where I sit, Obama and just about any future president is pretty shielded from impeachment unless they do something absolutely horrible. Clinton was impeached for lying about a BJ.  President George W. Bush committed offense after offense, and yet (as Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi famously put it) impeachment was off the table.  That was a huge favor by the Democrats, one that didn't sit well with actual voting Democrats.  Do you think they'd sit still for an attempted impeachment of the very next Democrat to occupy the office for a very, very dubious offense?

And if the Republicans were to try such a thing, what do you think the odds would be that all of Bush's history would be dredged up for a fresh inspection? Actually, "dredging" is stretching it a bit, since you really don't have to look very hard. Take for example, the fact that Bush has admitted to torture. Take a look.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Stuck on Crazy: Conservatives Want to Impeach Obama

Yeah, another Rachel Maddow Show clip, but it's a goodie. Now that the decibel level of the birthers, the deathers, the tenthers, the tea baggers and all the rest has died down, they're on to something new. Impeach the President!!!

Why not, it worked before. They didn't start out trying to impeach Clinton for getting a little strange, no he kind of stupidly walked into that one. Clinton's was an impeachment charge in search of a reason. And they turned over every rock, and got nowhere until he slipped up. And now they're at it again. And you'd better believe they won't stop.

When Bush was in office, there was a similar effort, of course. But I think a pretty strong argument could be made in Bush's case. But impeachment was "off the table." And it's too late to do it now. But don't you think that if the conservatives start on a relentless case to find a reason to impeach Obama, that the President just might start to warm to the idea of investigating the Bush Administration? I do.

Rod R. Blagojevich Impeached, No Longer Governor

Well, thank goodness that is over. Now, will the ever-bizarre Blagojevich continue to give media interviews, a la Sarah Palin? Or will we be mercifully spared the insane ramblings of at least this politician?

[Excerpt]

Impeached Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich has been removed from office

The Illinois Senate voted to remove Gov. Rod Blagojevich from office Thursday, marking the first time in the state's long history of political corruption that a chief executive has been impeached and convicted. . .

Read more at: Chicago Tribune

Gov. Blagojevich Impeached

Photo from source, LA Times

This doesn't come as a huge surprise. What's surprising is that Blago is so tenacious, and seemingly convinced that he's a victim, who did nothing wrong. So, there he has something in common with Alaska's governor, Sarah Palin.

[Excerpt]

Gov. Rod Blagojevich impeached by Illinois House

Hours after he became the first Illinois governor to be impeached, Rod Blagojevich today insisted he is innocent of corruption charges and will continue to fight to fulfill his job as the state's chief executive.

At a televised news conference, Blagojevich, 52, argued that the impeachment was expected given his tortured relations with the Legislature. . .

Read more at: Los Angeles Times

Democrats, Don't Forget the Downside to an Obama Win

Image from From the Wilderness

Map from Electoral-Vote.com

Barack Obama is not only up in the polls, he's trending upward as well. And that old red & blue map with "Dumbf**kistan" in the middle, is being encroached upon from all sides with an influx of blue. Those red states are sticking together, border to border, but they're losing on all sides.

Now, before I count my chickens, I am quite aware that these things can turn on a dime sometimes, for the strangest of reasons. We may only have 30 days to go, but we know that Karl Rove and his like-minded cronies and proteges do not want to relinquish power. We should plan for and expect at least one, and possibly several "October surprises." I wouldn't be surprised to see a rapid-fire machine gun fire of surprises, with the hope that at least one brings Obama down.

But the fact is, the trend is with Obama, time is short, and people are already early voting. So, while we can't be sure, the odds are that Obama will win. What we need to keep in mind, should this happen, is that Republicans and conservatives are not going to take that well. And that's putting it mildly. It will make the sour grapes attitude of the PUMAs look like a 5-year-old's temper tantrum.

Remember how Republicans acted during the Clinton administration? Every nit was picked, everything was blown up into a scandal, no matter how frivolous or stupid. Millions of dollars were spent on investigations that proved nothing. Right-wing think tanks worked with right-wing media and politicians to impeach Bill Clinton, for anything they could. It was an impeachment in search of a reason. Unfortunately, Clinton walked right into the trap, and what a stupid trap it was.

But that may have been just a preview of what Obama might have to deal with. The right had power for 12 uninterrupted years before Clinton, but they hadn't tasted real power yet. After Clinton, they sunk their teeth in, with Karl Rove's attempt at a "permanent Republican majority." Rove tried to spin every situation, every issue into a political advantage for Republicans. He redistricted, shut Democrats out, and tried to convince the public that his "reality" was more real than the actual reality they could see with their own eyes.

The problem with Rove is that real reality is sometimes impossible to ignore. But even though Rove lost both houses of Congress in 2006, it is clear that the failure didn't deter him. He's working both as an adviser to John McCain, as well as a political commentator for right-wing propaganda organ, FOX "News." This conflict of interest doesn't bother right-wingers much, since to them he is referred to as "Karl, you magnificent bastard!" They love the guy. And McCain's army of aides is emulating him.

So, if Obama wins, this team of "win at all costs" partisans will have nothing to do, except pick apart the Obama Administration. And pick they will. Every. Little. Thing. You think you're tired of the blowholes like Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter and Bill O'Reilly now? They will be in full-on attack mode.

The irony of course is that George W. Bush and his administration is guilty of so much, in many cases actual crimes. And that list of people above, in addition to the right-wing blogs, have excused it all. There is very little Obama could do that would even approach the shenanigans of Bush, and yet they will act like it is the worst thing a President has ever done, whatever it is.

So, be aware, liberals, progressives and Democrats. Be prepared to fight. Be prepared to rebut the inevitable inanity. If Obama wins on November 4, we will breathe an ecstatic sigh of relief. In fact, I think the emotion is going to be so strong, it will be hard to name (with the opposite being true with a loss). But the honeymoon is bound to be short. I wouldn't be surprised--again with an Obama win--if the conservatives went to work on November 5, and worked right up to inauguration day to start the slime from day 1.

Here is a quote, found on arch right-wing web site, FreeRepublic.com. The FReepers are already bracing for a loss, and ready to go after Obama, by laying a groundwork of ideas and talking points. One thing they'll try to do? Try to blame the current financial crisis on him. Check it out:

"The good news is, it’s starting to look as though 'America’s first
black president' is going to be in the Oval Orifice when the depression hits.
DemocRAT too! That’s got to be good for our side in the long run." Quote Source: FreeRepublic

Get Active: Join Dennis Kucinich's Impeachment Drive

There isn't much time left, in fact if he's going by EDST, your name must be added by 1½ hours from the time I post this. So, if you happen by this post before 12:00am Wednesday night/Thursday morning, sign up! And if you find it later? Sign up anyway, it sure couldn't hurt!




Sign the petition here: Kucinich.us

Conyers: We'll Talk About Impeachment, Do Nothing

Dennis Kucinich, photo from source, Raw Story

Most political junkies (like me) have their "heroes" in the Congress. Most of them you'd sooner see as greeters in a Wal-Mart, but there are the good ones you try to give the benefit of the doubt. For me, some of the good ones are Russ Feingold, Charlie Rangel, Henry Waxman, and John Conyers. Conyers in particular talks tough about all the things that liberal lefty moonbat bloggers like me care about most.

But he has a disturbing pattern of charging ahead like a [fill in the name of whatever football position runs with the ball], only to come to a screeching halt. He drops the ball, and moves on to the next big issue. It's enormously frustrating. Case in point, he will hear Dennis Kucinich's motion to impeach President Bush. He'll talk about it. But he isn't going to do anything about it, no matter what is discussed. Huh?

[Excerpt]

Conyers may hold hearings, but plans no action on impeachment

All Rep. Dennis Kucinich wants is a chance to present his case. The Ohio Democrat has made a crusade of his efforts to impeach George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, only to be ignored and ridiculed by many of his fellow lawmakers. . .

Read more at: Raw Story

Dennis Kucinich Still Pushing for Impeachment

Photo from source, Raw Story

As a liberal, and a strong believer in the rule of law, I'm still strongly in favor of impeachment of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. I believe that they've racked up countless legitimate reasons for it. But I'm realistic enough to know that it probably isn't going to happen. In fact, I'm realistic enough to believe that they're going to get away with everything, at least legally. I'm hoping for a little Karmic justice, but that's all I have to hope for.

But, Dennis Kucinich keeps pushing for it anyway, and bless him for trying. If we can impeach a President for lying about a little sexual indiscretion, it just doesn't seem fair that Bush & Co. should be able to flout the law (and the Constitution) with impunity. So, at least somebody is getting some stuff on the record. Keep pushing, Dennis!

[Excerpt]

Kucinich to bring single article of impeachment for misleading US into war

Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) is sticking to his drive to impeach President Bush.
Few in the House of Representatives have any intention of doing anything with the last 35 articles of impeachment Kucinich set before them last month, so the former presidential candidate appears to be lightening the load. Kucinich sent a letter to colleagues Tuesday asking them to support a single article of impeachment, to be introduced Thursday, which accuses President Bush of leading the country to war based on lies. . .

Read more at: Raw Story