Speaker Pelosi, You Are Part of the Problem

[Demeter]

OpEdNews

Original Content at http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_james_br_070709_speaker_pelosi_2c_you_.htm


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
July 9, 2007

Speaker Pelosi, You Are Part of the Problem

By James Brett

We noticed yesterday online and again this morning in the local newspaper that Cindy Sheehan will, as an independent, challenge the Congressional seat of Nancy Pelosi out in San Francisco. If this is the way it has to work, so be it. Speaker Pelosi is outside the Constitution by declaring impeachment to be off the table. No one, not even the nurturing first femme Speaker can put aside essential features of our Constitution. Let me be plain, it is OUR Constitution, not Nancy Pelosi's or Rahm Emanuel's or Steny Hoyer's.

The Founding Fathers understood in clear detail the failings of human beings. The Constitution is specifically written to curb the power lust of individuals. Yet, as many have said, the Constitution does not make the checks each of the separate and equal branches of government have against the other branches so easy to employ that they would be used indiscriminantly. That is the genius of the Constitution. It is all the more folly, then, for the Legislative Branch to remove its own teeth and sit idly by while Washington sinks deeper into the consequences of a corrupt and dishonest Executive.


The calls for impeachment are growing, Speaker Pelosi. Your illegal act has been called out and you have, given the goodwill you are blessed with, a few days in which to reverse your unconstitutional position. You have only a few days in which to vindicate your gender, for if you do not get back within the real and necessary provisions of our Constitution, then you will have sullied the reputation of women politicians immeasurably. You need to know how to fight in this world, and you need to know that a political fight is honorable and necessary.


Cindy Sheehan should understand that impeachment of Dick Cheney is the first step toward impeachment of George Bush. Let us hope that she is flexible enough to make this change in her challenge to Mrs. Pelosi.


Yes, it will be an process fraught with misgivings and distress. Impeachments always are full of emotion and inefficiency and almost intolerable confusion. Impeachments are necessary when the facts say they are and, Nancy, there are volumes of facts now, and they all speak to the one compelling conclusion. Dick Cheney and George Bush have lied, misrepresented, broken U.S. and international law, and are in a massive coverup operation to obstruct justice. Their lackey, Alberto Gonzales, is just as culpable, and must also be impeached.


Your job, now, Speaker Pelosi, is to put it back, reverse your position based on the evidence, and find a Sam Ervin and Sam Dash to lead the process.


JB



Authors Website: http://americanliberalism.org

Authors Bio: James R. Brett, Ph.D. taught Russian History in several universities before becoming an academic administrator. His academic interests have been in the history of science and the history of ideas, particularly Marxism and classical liberalism, but also psychology and consciousness studies. He became an acknowledged expert on curriculum and faculty research administration. He is a frequent contributor to liberal and progressive blogs and is the founder and publisher of The American Liberalism Project.

[mike_c]

1. excellent article-- rec'd!

:thumbsup:

[AndyA]

2. Pelosi is the problem. She was out of line by declaring impeachment

was off the table.

It doesn't matter if they have the votes to do it.

It doesn't matter whether or not they have the time to do it.

It doesn't matter whether or not she wants to do it.

It is a matter of doing what's right.

It is a matter of living up to your oath of office.

It is a matter of taking steps to protect the Constitution, and by doing so, they would be looking out for and protecting every man, woman, and child in America.

Congress MUST IMPEACH because it is the right thing to do.

[sharp_stick]

3. Without a conviction who cares

unless we can actually convict the pricks in the Senate they skate plain and simple.

I want more than a simple little congressional impeachment, I want shrub and cheney gone. Unless the threat of a conviction is there nothing will drive those power mad assholes out of office. I for one am willing to wait.

[jgraz]

5. Impeachment proceedings trump executive privilege

If the Dems really want to get at the truth, they'll start impeachment proceedings.

[AndyA]

6. You think for one minute that Bush and Cheney are innocent?

Have you been paying attention?

At one time, there were those who thought Nixon was above the law. We all know how that turned out.

There will be enough incriminating evidence to convict, but we're talking MONTHS before it gets to that point. They need to get the ball rolling. The GOP will side with the Dems on this, they will have to in order to get re-elected.

By the time we're looking at conviction in the Senate, there will have been a whole slew of new incriminating news on Bushco. Sadly, there will be many more dead soldiers in Iraq as well.

Americans are beginning to see the light the Bushco is a crook, and has been lying to them.

Congress will have the votes to impeach and convict when necessary, but they need to get the long process started. Impeachment must be put on the table, and all it will take is for Pelosi to say based on everything that has happened in recent months, she must retract her statement that impeachment is off the table.

She must say all options are being kept open. That's all it will take to get the ball rolling. It wouldn't hurt for John Conyers to make the same statement, especially given the position he's been in to see things first hand.

[sharp_stick]

9. Thanks for putting words in my mouth

When in any post have I ever even made an attempt to say that shrub is innocent of anything, really? I think he's guilty of all kinds of shit and for you to imply that I think otherwise based on absolutely nothing I said is pretty much insulting, thanks a lot.

These notions of there eventually being enough incriminating evidence to convict later is an idea that has resulted in the release of a lot of guilty people throughout history. You never go to trial without the evidence in hand if you want to win, never.

Saying the GOP will side with the Dems is just weird. Actually betting a trial on the possibility of support from a club of lying scumbags like the GOP is idiotic and IMO suicidal. They have never sided with the Dems and they won't on this, I'd put a lot of money on that. We can't even get these pricks to help overturn a stem cell veto. The GOP members are less afraid of losing elections than they are of falling out with the party.

You don't need to start impeachment hearings now to move quickly on it later. Nixon was forced to resign because they were able to gather the evidence against him, it didn't happen quickly either, it took a lot more than 6 months. It took almost 2 years just to get an indictment of the White House (from June 72 to March 74 IIRC). Impeachment hearings began in May of 74 and by August he was gone, because they had the evidence and the people needed to convict him.

Who gives a shit that Pelosi said that impeachment was off the table? Did she swear in some kind of secret Congressional ceremony that it can't ever happen? She could start impeachment hearings anytime she wanted to. Focusing on this one statement by Pelosi as some kind of a binding promise isn't the least bit helpful to anything, and it's getting kind of old.

[snappyturtle]

7. With all due respect, shrub and cheney can't be convicted

without impeachment. Wouldn't the impeachment process dictate threat of conviction?

In the larger picture, I think it's time to impeach. Failure to do so results in hints of compliance with the administration.

[sharp_stick]

10. You're right

but to bet that they would be convicted is betting on the support of the GOP in the Senate and I for one don't trust a single one of those assholes. To go through the motions just to have John Roberts declare them acquitted would not be good for us in the next election and that's where I'm looking now. I want a Democrat in the White House come 2009.

I would not move on any impeachment until I was pretty damned sure I had way more evidence that could be made public than needed to convict them. The GOP will not support an impeachment endeavor until it's black and white to them that they will be held accountable for a failure to do it.

It's going to take some time and I think it's time that we realize that it won't happen fast. The GOP are a very disciplined bunch of asshats, they don't fall out of line for long or easily. Just watch what happens now that shrubbo is sending some heavies in to whip the disloyals back into shape on Iraq. I bet by next week we have the "renegades" back in line.

[snappyturtle]

12. Your're right too! I just don't want to miss this opportunity and have

these matters pass into oblivion..........again........like they always do.

[Maribelle]

15. The GOP would not support an impeachment period.

The GOP would stand united on this, they are that corrupt.

Therefore, there is no way there would ever be enough votes to convict Bush and Cheney for the duration of their terms. An impeachment would fail. Bush and Cheney would go on record as innocent.

[Harry Monroe]

4. How about a call for Pelosi to either lead or get out of the way!!!

If she continues in her refusal to consider impeachment, I propose that she step aside as Speaker of the House and that the Democratic majority choose someone that is up to the task. So far, I am not impressed at all with her leadership abilities as Speaker.

[whistle]

8. I agree totally, Pelosi owes this much to the voters who made it

...possible for her to assume the position of Speaker of the House, the third most powerful position in the federal government.

[truedelphi]

13. Pelosi is part and parcel of a machine

And a politician who lives and breathes inside the world of machine politics does not feel that they owe anything to us the voters - they have the power (and mighty it is indeed) - and they know we need to sidle up to them

If we buy into the mentality that machine politics bestows, then we enable that power.

(I am a survivor of Richard M Daley the First's machine politics in Chicago)

[partylessinOhio]

11. Pelosi the enabler: "George is a lovely man."

Why would she say that after taking impeachment off the table? You have to wonder how she really feels about *.

[marmar]

14. I want Pelosi to do well, I really do - I like her a lot....

.... but she, and Harry Reid, have frankly been disappointing. I know that they're in very positions, but the leadership hasn't been there. Even if your timetables-included war resolution goes down to defeat, be resolute and strong about it. Stand for principles and stop compromising, especially when the masses are on your side. They're doing to dispel the "effete" Democrats stereotypes.

[marmar]

16. Sorry about my gramatically goofy post. It should read:

"I know they're in very DIFFICULT positions" and "They're doing NOTHING to dispel the "effete" Democrats stereotypes.....


Je suis desolee. It's been a hectic day. I really am an edumacated person! :)

[Vidar]

17. K&R.