Pelosi on Kucinich's Impeachment Resolution

[OzarkDem]

...(Kucinich) needs support from Democratic leaders for the impeachment measure to pass through the Judiciary Committee to a House vote, then to the Senate for a trial. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told The Plain Dealer that Democratic leaders don't back impeachment "because we are here to go in a positive direction for the American people," and are focusing instead on stopping the Iraq war.

She suggested that impeachment backers around the country "use their energy in the next election to make sure that we have a Democratic president and vice-president."

Told of Pelosi's preferences, Kucinich said, "The American people will be the final arbiters" of the matter.

http://blog.cleveland.com/openers/2007/04/kucinich_cheney_deceived_ameri.html

Go, Dennis!

[Little Wing]

1. Under the bus he goes

Thanks, Nancy :eyes:

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

89. Uh, he's been under the bus for a long time. n/t

[DKRC]

102. And with our help he's taking it apart from the frame up!

Kucinich :yourock:

[Martin Eden]

114. Monkey-wrenching!!!

DISMANTLE
DISMANTLE
DISMANTLE

[Ron Green]

2. What's wrong with doing both?

She's being a coward.

[Captain_Nemo]

6. She's being a smart strategist.

[Ron Green]

19. I thought about it...

nah, it's not smart strategy. It's time for the tide to turn. Enough is enough.

[Captain_Nemo]

29. Then think about this....

If we had impeachment from the time Pelosi took over we wouldn't have had the investigations. No, its not possible to do both.
Do we tie up the entire house with impeachment and neglect the soldiers?

No. Not a smart strategy.

The goal is to get the soldiers out of there. And, look how long this is taking.

[uppityperson]

39. Investigating neglects soldiers? WTF?

You do realize that impeachment proceedings include investigations, right? And how does investigating lies and such mean that soldiers are neglected?

The goal is to stop the madness, to slow down the damage. That is the goal.

[Captain_Nemo]

49. Impeachment takes up all the resources of the House. ALL OF IT.

[uppityperson]

53. Nonsense

Maybe a Republican House looking to tar and feather someone they personally dislike.

[Captain_Nemo]

57. When Nixon was about to be impeached that is all the MSM talked about that

is all the congress debated and talked about.

Tell me why you think it is otherwise - if my opinion is nonsense.

Pelosi said it best - We don't have time for impeachment.

Where we are now is the best reason for being an infomred voter and voting for the person who will move the country/world forward. ie; The 2000 Nader nonsense that took votes away from Gore.

Once you get these crazy repubs in the governemetn it is very hard to get them out.

[KharmaTrain]

81. Shhh....You're Making Too Much Sense...The Natives Want Blood

You nailed it...a full-scale impeachment would destroy a lot of what Pelosi is trying to do in moving investigations along and getting the troops out. She's had to re-educate a party that was used to being shut out and in the minority to exert both muscle and unity and to do so in a positive manner. Few people here note the hike in the minimum wage or revision of prescription drugs or other really important issues that Pelosi has pushed through...things that will make a different in everyone's life. Impeachment would distract.

The Repugnicans would love an impeachment fiasco...it would give them a reason to rally their demoralized forces. They may hate booosh or cheney but they hate Democrats even more...and whatever differences would vanish.

While I'm curious where Cong. Kucinich's articles will lead, and I do support them, not at the expense of keeping the Repugnican demoralized. Yes, I'm a damn opportunist...I want a large Democrat majority in both houses and a Democratic President...then we can start making real positive change.

Cheers...

[mmonk]

98. Sure.

Democracy and lives in the balance can surely continue to wait.

[Captain_Nemo]

106. Thank you for the support!

[napi21]

111. I disagree with this "can't do both" attitude! Are you really trying to make me

believe that a group of 400+ people can't do more than one thing at a time? BS!

And to your comment aboutinformed voters...what the hell are ya going to do if the 08 election isa fraud too?

I was listening to Gore Vidal the other day when he was talking about how bad things were, and how dishonest this admin. is. The interviewer asked him "So what cure do you suggest?" His responses were quite interesting.

1. Get rid of the damn electronic voting machines, or at the very least, insure there will be individual ballot data that can be RECOUNTED!

2. Impeach Cheney! His ratings are 9% or less! He has no support groups! It should be relatively easy, and once you get a guy like him under oath, you'll get enough info to hang the rest of them! You don't want to begin with Shrub, because nobody want a President Cheney!

He did have a few others, but the first two stuck in my mind so firmly, I can't recall the rest of them.

Gore was asked why we have to go for impeachment? He said "What the hell are you going to do if they steal the 08 election too????? Think about that!

[cassiepriam]

25. What is the smart strategy here on her part? She acts cagey?

And goes along with impeachment only reluctantly?

[eridani]

75. She's in the line of succession--it would look cheesy for her to support impeachment

That doesn't mean that the public shouldn't be putting pressure on all the other congresscritters, though.

[cassiepriam]

99. Gotcha, that makes sense. Also a good cop/bad cop strategy.

[warren pease]

27. Oh nonsense

This goes beyond strategy and political maneuvering and trying to offend the fewest number of voters -- as if voters who would be offended by impeachment of Cheney would vote Democratic anyway.

This is about putting the handcuffs on a key member of the right wing coup that seized power in 2000 through its surrogates on the supreme court, tap danced over the charred corpses at the WTC to gain the political legitimacy it lacked after the stolen election, and has committed so many high crimes and misdemeanors that I'd get typist's cramp trying to list them all.

It is long past time for this god-awful administration to face the criminal charges it has so richly earned. And it's long past time for the goddamn enabling democratic "leadership" to interrupt the BushCo crime wave.

If Cheney isn't impeachable now, what would he have to do to warrant impeachment? Murder a baby in full view of CNN's cameras, then eat its entrails? Get caught passing nuclear secrets to the North Koreans, then killing a Korean baby and eating its entrails? Or maybe the only impeachable offense left is an indiscreet blow job from a willing staffer.

Fine. Nancy can certainly call in a few favors and set it up, complete with sound and video. Personally, I don't give a damn how or why he's impeached -- I only care that he's tried, convicted and sentenced to life without possibility of parole with a gigantic cell mate named Spike who thinks the Dickster is pretty cute for a guy his age.

That's not quite horrible enough, but it'll do for the time being.


wp

[Captain_Nemo]

30. We deserve to know all the facts from every crime they have committed

That will bring us a much longer way forward. You can't have impeachment and all of these investigations at the same time.

[uppityperson]

37. Investigations are part of impeachment.

Start investigating.

[Captain_Nemo]

51. When Pelosi got the Speakership she was asked about impeachment..

she said, "we don't have time for impeachment." There is too much screwed up to fix.
She's right.

where we are at right now is indicative of why it is so important to strategize. Let's look at what the Nader campaign did - it took votes away from Gore.

Look where we are.

[uppityperson]

56. read #48 right below. Poster puts it well.

Nader took votes away from Gore, so this proves that investigating lies and deceits takes something away from soldiers? Poor logic.

[Captain_Nemo]

58. poor logic? Ok.....here it is

A lot of people emotionally got on the Nader bandwagon. Even though the facts were clear: Bush would be a disaster. A well informed voter would see this in everything that was printed about him.

Yet, people wanted to vote for Nader because they believed (helped out by Nader himself) that there was "no difference between the parties."

Now we know there is a difference. We know this from a very sad place where we all stand today. We know it from a very dangerous administration.

This is similiar to having Nixon in the WH. He got in. It took until his SECOND TERM to get him out. and he got our with investigations. Not impeachment.

The soldiers: we have to get out of Iraq to save our soldiers lives.
We are in Iraq because a dangerous man was allowed to become president becasue votes were split. It made it easy for them to steal.

So here we are. We are in a quagmire of sorts. And, that is the result of an election (2000) that was not taken very seriously-a lot of people could not perceive that Bush could be this bad. But he is. And, we are stuck in some ways. We are stuck with the mistakes, the lost lives.

Here is an article from the Post.

"Some House Democrats, including ranking Judiciary Committee member John Conyers Jr. of Michigan, have called for impeachment hearings into allegations that Bush misled the nation about Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction and that he violated federal law by approving warrantless wiretaps on Americans. In an interview with The Washington Post last week, Pelosi said a Democratic-controlled House would launch investigations of the administration on energy policy and other matters. She said impeachment would not be a goal of the investigations, but she added: "You never KNOW WHERE IT LEADS TO."

She's a great strategist.

[uppityperson]

59. I understand your point, but disagree.

Are you saying that investigations leading to stopping Cheney from attacking Iran is a bad thing, something that should not be done now? I disagree. Working for peace, multi-tasking.

[Captain_Nemo]

64. Thanks for understanding my point - I appreciate it.

An investigation about cheney seems like a great idea but they are fighting Bush right now on getting our soldliers out of Iraq. The bill involves a fight with Bush and it involves major media monitoring. The MSM will crush us if the Dems don't stay on top of it. Where are our priorities? Impeach and get crushed on Iraq by the newcons? Or stay focused? I say stay focused. Look at what she has done in four months! IT's amazing. She's amazing.

Working for peace is a great idea too. And, Pelosi is doing just that in forcing Bush's hand on this bill. He will be in the embarassing position of having to veto it. That weakens him.

Do you really think Pelosi could be doing an impeachment right now too? I don't.

I hate cheney and Bush with a vehement passion. I am 100% feminist and pro-choice and I am very upset with what is happening to our country. Yet, I trust Pelosi.

I think there are two things going on in this thread

The two things:

1. She is smarter than I when it comes to being in congress. I've never been there.
Yet, when she says things like she did in the Post - I think, "She knows what's going on. Give her the chance and the space to deliver the facts of the crimes to the people. "

2. The disdain for her decision shocks me. I believe wholeheartedly that having Hillary in the WH is a good thing for the 3 things that plague us; global warming, Iraq, economy. I know she can move the country forward on these things.

I like Obama A LOT - I just don't think he has the experience right now. He makes people feel good (like Nader did).

But, here on DU the virulent hatred for Hillary is indicative of the virulent hatred the right wingers have for her. And, that shocks me.

Today, on this thread, I see the same hate for Pelosi. Quite distressing for a Speaker who is so invaluable and monumental.

I wish the left would stop being its own worst enemy.

[cascadiance]

84. Unless Bush feels pressure, he will veto everything congress sends him!

And the Republicans also won't feel as much pressure to try to contend with his vetos either, and we STILL will get nothing done (and won't even have Bush be held accountable either!).

Daniel Ellsberg has noted in his recent speeches (I attended the one he gave here in San Diego) that it was only by having pressure from the Pentagon Papers, protests, and subsequent impeachment efforts that we avoided trying to nuke or do other more severe attacks on North Vietnam during the Nixon era. It was precisely because congress went after Nixon that we avoided a huge disaster then that he had earlier been planning! I think we might be headed to similar disasters with Bushco if we don't tell him that we're shutting him down now, or at least have a serious threat of doing so unless he *complies*!

I can understand Pelosi trying to keep a low profile and not sound like she's "after" Bush's job because she's in line if Bush and Cheney are pushed out. That makes sense. But there's got to be a way she can be subtle about it so that she isn't committed at all to impeachment until the right circumstances happen, but that she DOESN'T exclude the possibility if circumstances require it. And that IS congress's real function, to be ready to impeach IF circumstances require it!

And by the way, I DO have a "Pelosi - 2007" sticker on my car (right next to my "Impeach Bush" sticker) so I would like to see her in charge. I don't think I'm anti-woman at all. I've also tried to help with efforts to contend with the recent supreme court decision threatening Roe v. Wade too.

I and many other DUers concern about Hillary for president (which I'm not sure is relevant to this conversation topic) are more to do with her more extreme and unabashed big money corporate ties. That in my book is the BIG issue that I will be voting on in 2008. The Corporatocracy is the big problem that needs to be fixed, if we're going to substantively fix all of the other issues (Iraq, global warming, universal health care, outsourcing, medicare bill, campaign financing, etc.). Unless she comes out and really shows substantively that she's for public campaign financing, she's a no go in my book. Just like I (and I assume you as well) wouldn't vote for Condi Rice just because she's a woman or an African American, I also won't vote for Hillary just because she's a woman too. I'd vote for Barbara Boxer in a heart beat if she was running, but she isn't. I also might support Obama too, but he's not strong enough on public campaign financing either for me to jump on board just yet. Richardson has though, and has attracted my attention more recently.

[Captain_Nemo]

104. All very good points - thanks. I will take them into consideration.

[warren pease]

67. "You never KNOW WHERE IT LEADS TO."

First I've heard of that. If all roads lead to impeachment, and Pelosi supports these efforts, then I will publicly recant my assessment of her as a cowardly enabler and appeaser. However, until she puts impeachment back "on the table," the jury's still out.


wp

[OzarkDem]

72. Dems can't advance their agenda

Bush is vetoing anything worthwhile and the GOP in Congress is still hanging together on most legislation to protect Bush's veto.

For now, their only options are to water down their agenda with compromises or watch it stall.

I fear their strategy is to just hold hearings and try to score political points to use in 2008. To most voters, its not enough.

Impeachment might heighten the "ick" factor for Bush and the GOP and may make more GOP'ers willing to distance themselves from Bush's policies.

[orleans]

121. we have started investigating (look at waxman & leahy go!)

so the ball is rolling--we just need some support.

[warren pease]

48. Why not?

Why on earth can't they continue investigating and proceed with the impeachment process simultaneously? God knows they've got enough staffers to sort through all the verbiage and keep the campaign dollars flowing. What's wrong with dragging Rice or Rove in front of a Judiciary Committee hearing while investigators pour over the mountain of evidence linking Cheney to an assortment of high crimes and misdemeanors?

There are at least three really good reasons to impeach Cheney, along with the rest of this hideous administration:

1 Simple justice says they must be held accountable for their crimes, and punished to the full extent of the law.

2 Their agenda must be exposed so that the American people understand the magnitude of their unprecedented criminality.

3 They must serve as an example of what will happen to the next right wing cabal if it tries to replace representative democracy with fascism.

I think #3 is perhaps the most important. Right wing dictators never die; they just go into hiding while the next plot develops. Given the sheer stupidity and hubris this pack of thieves has exhibited, it's really amazing they got this far. The next group of fascist megalomaniacs probably won't be as careless.

And be honest. Wouldn't you really like to see these pigs slowly roasted on a spit? I simply can't imagine watching them fade away into comfortable retirement, their crime wave unpunished, their pockets stuffed with the stolen loot of the treasury, their riches insulating them from the toxic results of their tenure in office, their mere existence a sign to budding dictators everywhere that crime does in fact pay very, very well.

Unacceptable.


wp

[Captain_Nemo]

54. Yes, I want to see the roasted - and that is what is happening now.

I agree with Pelosi when she got the Speakership - she said there was no time for impeachment. Things were too screwed up.The dems in congress had to fix it.

She is right.

[warren pease]

65. No time?

No time to address the most critical issue of the new century? What the hell time constraints are these people under that they can't handle several things at once?

I can multi-task just fine. My attention span isn't compromised when I have several different projects. I can focus on the work to be done, and serve my clients accordingly. I've yet to tell a single one that I'm so deficient in concentration level that I can't deal with their stuff until I've eaten, washed up, watched a little TV, brushed my teeth, caught a quick nap, read a while, called a couple of friends, watched a ball game, went to bed, slept like a baby, and ooops! Sorry, but it's already tomorrow and I can't deal with your stuff today either. I'll get back to you.

This excuse doesn't stand up to real world conditions. If they can balance the influence of multiple campaign "donors," which they seem handle quite easily, they can damn well devote the time and energy required to restore Constitutional democracy. And it's apparent to anyone with a child's attention span that the only way to accomplish that is through impeachment, because they only thing BushCo understands is brute force.

So be it. With what's left of their reputations dragged through the mud every evening in prime time, their criminal enterprise exposed for all to see, they'll simply have to hold off on new ways to screw up the world while they prepare their "plausible deniability" defense for use on the witness stand. And in trying to save their sorry asses from jail, I can believe they'd have no time for anything else. Not true of the House dems, though. It's a bullshit excuse and only demonstrates contempt for the reasoning powers of the American people -- which is another subject entirely.


wp

[Captain_Nemo]

66. If this is your opinion you should run for congress.

[warren pease]

68. Which would convince me of what exactly? n/t

[Captain_Nemo]

105. It takes time and relationship building to get people thinking your way.

You can't just go in there and say "We're going to impeach" when you know the majority are not with you. This is a great article on Pelosi that illustrates why we need her so badly:

By Faye Fiore

Los Angeles Times

April 14, 2007

WASHINGTON - Nancy Pelosi knew Earl Blumenauer would be a hard case, but she left two messages on his cellphone anyway.

A liberal, bow-tied, bicycle-riding peacenik from Oregon, Blumenauer had voted against the Iraq war and every dollar since to pay for it. He was not about to embrace a bill that threw $100 billion more into the fighting, even if it would force the president to bring the troops home.

'I've been trying to get ahold of you,' the House speaker said when she caught up with the Portland Democrat in the Capitol's basement. They sat down. She said she empathized with his dilemma - she too had opposed the war from the start and wanted it ended fast. But in her mind the choice was simple: Hand President Bush a victory or hand him a rebuke.

'She convinced me,' said Blumenauer, whose vote helped give Pelosi her most important legislative victory. 'For me, there was no attempt at pressure. I was able to convey my concerns. She was there. She was listening.'

And, The Washington Post reported that she said, on the topic of impeachment, 'we will investigate adn see where the facts lead us.'

[warren pease]

108. I guess you see brilliance where I see appeasement

Blumenauer happens to be my Congressman. I've talked with him several times and exchanged emails every month or so. One of his local staffers is a good friend, and she tells me Earl actually reads and responds to emails himself when he has the time. I know his positions on funding the war, as well as on impeachment. He's one of the good guys, and he absolutely detests BushCo and all it stands for.

Which is why I'm a bit surprised at the LA Times piece. I'm sure Pelosi presented a good political case for the supplementary spending bill, and Earl is very focused on the big picture -- continuing investigations, issuing subpoenas and ultimately winning the presidency next year and methodically erasing the Bush legislative legacy one repressive law at a time.

However, with due respect for Pelosi's political skills, I fail to see how a bill that not only funds the ongoing Iraqi/Islamic genocide campaign, but contains some huge loopholes that permit indefinite deployment under very lax conditions, making a joke of the timeline for withdrawal. For instance, US troops can remain in Iraq past next year's deadline if they're engaged in training Iraqi law enforcement or pursuing terrorist suspects.

In Bushland, everyone's a suspected terrorist, including me and thee, and I see no reason why the pattern of indiscriminate killing or imprisonment of people who are labeled terrorist suspects will change. This bill provides no incentive to change because there are no penalties for continuing these practices indefinitely. As to training Iraqi forces to take over if the US military ever leaves, that's pretty much their job description these days. That and getting blown to bits to protect the profits of the fossil fuels industry.

And of course Bush whines and snivels about this bill tying his hands in time of war. And of course Limbaugh and his thousands of testosterone-poisoned imitators condemn Democrats for not supporting the troops. Democrats are condemned no matter what they do, and Bush lives by the primitive axiom that if you're not with him, you're against him. No amount of strategizing will affect those constants of daily life in America.

All the preceding is by way of explanation for why I simply can't see how this bill counts as a defeat for Bush and his endless war, no matter how it's spun. Or conversely, how if the supplemental had failed to pass the House, Pelosi maintains that Bush would have gained a huge win and been given carte blanche to "stay the course." Which brings us back to impeachment.

As I've no doubt prattled on about earlier, impeachment is not only authorized and required by the Constitution when the executive branch goes stark raving mad, but it's a necessary element in the battle to end the Iraq disaster. No matter what flexible timetable the Democrats try to implement, Bush will not abide by anything he disagrees with. That's his character, or lack thereof. He's incapable of admitting error, which is what abiding by a timetable drawn up by Democrats would mean to him. To end the occupation, you must first end the regime. And that's the practical side of the argument. Justice is the other side.

There must be consequences for taking the country into an illegal war, justified by fabricated evidence, resulting in the deaths of more than 3300 US military personnel and the maiming of tens of thousands more; the random slaughter of at least 600,000 Iraqi civilians (low end of UN and Amnesty International estimates); encouraging the shameless profiteering of the arms industry; cutting or eliminating social programs and oversight agencies to pay for the instruments of mass murder and genocide; and the resulting massive deficits which will probably cause the phasing out of the US dollar as an international reference currency.

So I maintain that Pelosi is fighting a different battle. She's letting politics get in the way of her moral obligations as Speaker, Congresswoman and US citizen. And I think that the US public, at least those not oblivious or drunk on celebrity worship, is about ready for a little BushCo ass kicking. By the time Tenet's book comes out, and if it's half as damning on the pre-invasion marketing and PR campaign as preliminary reports indicate, Kucinich is going to start looking like a prescient hero.

Media will focus on essentials, like he's got bad hair and he's not all that tall. The usual vital stuff. But I suspect millions of others who have suffered miserably for the past six-plus years -- particularly those whose votes were stolen first by the Supreme Court and then by Kenneth Blackwell -- are ready for a little revenge.

Maybe I'm attributing too much awareness on the part of the normally narcotized American public, but the rage has been building for a long time and, if Kucinich's evidence matches the severity of the three articles, impeachment is going to be the centerpiece of the table, whether Pelosi likes it or not.


End of tedious, long-winded, self-indulgent essay.

wp

[calimary]

116. Abso-fucking-lutely. Point number three is exceptionally well-taken.

If we don't send a signal to future would-be Constitution crappers, wannabe dictators, and flagrant abusers of power that THIS IS A CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE AND YOUR ASS WILL BE GRASS IF YOU TRY IT, they will indeed try it, and point to this era as precedent that they're ENTITLED to get away with it just like the bushies did.

We can't NOT do it. We MUST IMPEACH. We don't have an option here.

[Dangerman]

41. Amen, my friend.

[StarryNite]

55. Exactly!

If what cheney and * have done isn't impeachable then we might as well take impeachment out of our vocabulary. Thousands of innocent people have died as a direct result of their lying us into a war. For god's sake, impeach the bastards, now! And investigation is most definitely part of the process.

[Donnachaidh]

3. Pardon me Madam Speaker -- but you are WRONG on this matter

The PEOPLE want these criminals out. The ones YOU work for.

[Captain_Nemo]

4. She's right. If we didn't focus on stopping the was the criticism would be:

Those Dems aren't stopping the war.

[AnOhioan]

38. Only one problem with that premise

Nancy has not exactly come out for ending the war either...not with pushing a bill that funds it through the chimps term.

[mmonk]

44. It's all a false premise anyway. You think Dennis is against ending

the war?

[AnOhioan]

46. I know he wants to end it....

It is Pelosi and the Dem leadership that seem to have a problem with the verb "end".

[Captain_Nemo]

113. She is out for ending the war - and she's doing it on the most strategic terms

Los Angeles Times

April 14, 2007

WASHINGTON - Nancy Pelosi knew Earl Blumenauer would be a hard case, but she left two messages on his cellphone anyway.

A liberal, bow-tied, bicycle-riding peacenik from Oregon, Blumenauer had voted against the Iraq war and every dollar since to pay for it. He was not about to embrace a bill that threw $100 billion more into the fighting, even if it would force the president to bring the troops home.

'I've been trying to get ahold of you,' the House speaker said when she caught up with the Portland Democrat in the Capitol's basement. They sat down. She said she empathized with his dilemma - she too had opposed the war from the start and wanted it ended fast. But in her mind the choice was simple: Hand President Bush a victory or hand him a rebuke.

'She convinced me,' said Blumenauer, whose vote helped give Pelosi her most important legislative victory. 'For me, there was no attempt at pressure. I was able to convey my concerns. She was there. She was listening.'

[AnOhioan]

115. So she convinced one guy that throwing more money at...

Iraq will make it all right. Sorry...not buying it.

[Captain_Nemo]

117. Check out the whole article - yuo might see more about the person who has brought us all of these

investigations. Look how far she has brought us in four months.

Where would we be without her?

[Captain_Nemo]

119. I guess I see the glass half full

[lovuian]

5. Well then Nancy get ready to vote against impeachment

now that is going to be interesting to see Democrats kill the Impeachment

and her part of it

WOW does she want to get her hands dirty with that one???

[cassiepriam]

26. Yikes! She can't vote against it! She might as well turn Repug then.

[Freddie Stubbs]

90. She will not vote against impeachment

No vote will be taken. The impeachment resolution will br referred to the Judiciary Committee, and that will be the last it will be heard of.

[liberal N proud]

7. Hey Nancy! - Impeaching Cheney will help bring a quick end to the war

Cheney is the number one war monger in the bu$h regime. If we get rid of him, bu$h will not have the balls or brains to start another war or maintain the current ones.
Criminal acts need to be dealt with.
Jailing Cheney is a positive thing, trust us.

[OzarkDem]

13. It may give Dems momentum

to advance their agenda of getting out of Iraq. It would be a huge mistake to blunt the media momentum feeding public opinion to end the war.

[bananarepublican]

79. Didn't she say impeaching Bush would be a waste of time?

Cheney's numbers are worse than Bush's. He should be easy pickings. Even the Republicans could scapegoat him in an effort to scrape back a little credibility b4 '08.

This 'face-shooter' needs to be held to account!

[earth mom]

8. You are a co-conspirator Nancy-GET IT?!

:grr:

[flyarm]

9. NANCY THE MOST POSITIVE DIRECTION YOU CAN GO IS IMPEACH!

i have not been a big impeachment person..but now i am..pissy pants gave the finger to all in congress over gonzo..now it is time to give the finger back..but mean it!!

fly

[Sapphire Blue]

10. Call/email your US Representative RIGHT FUCKING NOW! Tell them to co-sponsor Kucinich's H Res 333...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x745207

[calimary]

36. AND first thing in the morning, by Jove! Just. DO. IT.

And by all means, make one of those calls to Nancy's office. Tell her she doesn't DARE piss off The Base. That's US. WE are the ones who worked our tails off and gave til it hurt to make sure the Democrats would get back into power. She damned well better not forget about us OR turn her nose up at us. Because if WE don't vote next time, she's sunk.

Just a friendly little reminder, Nancy my girlfriend... WE put you where you are now. WE'RE OWED.

[WinkyDink]

11. Has she ever heard of.....NIXON??

WTH is she AFRAID of??

We need the TRUTH to be revealed under oath, so that PEOPLE DON'T ELECT REPUBLICANS next time around. We need the FACTS, so that, e.g., this Tweety "small potatoes" crap about Rove isn't the final word!!

[Captain_Nemo]

14. Has she heard of Nixon - that is why she is doing the investigations

Nixon was never impeached - he resigned under pressure from mounting evidence.

[slowry]

12. It's just not practical

to let these criminals continue to be held unaccountable, after so fucking long :mad:.

[MadBadger]

15. Very Smart Nancy.

[Captain_Nemo]

31. can you believe this thread? If its not Hillary its Nancy.....the hate , the hate

[Postman]

16. Strategic use of criminal occupiers of the WH.....

In a political context, there are light years remaining between now and the next election.

Some Democrats are willing to allow these criminals to stay in office and use them as an example to make sure Americans not vote for these f**kers again.

Is it right? Is it smart?

I say Impeach, indict, imprison every GD last one of them but i know where they are going with this...doesn't make it right...

[w4rma]

17. I don't even know what Pelosi could say in this debate since she would become President

if Bush and Cheney are removed by impeachment/conviction. Then again, I suppose Cheney would resign first and Bush would choose a new Vice President and then he'd be gone and the new VP would become President and choose a brand new VP and then we'd be in the same exact predicament that we are now.

[Roy]

21. Probably not the same predicament......

The newcomers will have seen what accountability is. I am sure they will take a different path.

[blogslut]

18. I love ya Nancy, but

we can't wait that long. There's been too much damage. That man has got to go.

[Gregorian]

20. Impeachment is initiated in the House.

She can distance herself until it's time.

I guess it's like the old wine commercial. There will be no impeachment before its time.


No need to panic. All in good time. We've got Rove emails to find.

[solara]

22. So.. it's ok then for people who hold the highest offices in the land to lie this country into a war

that is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands..not to mention the grievous injury to thousands more....or to change the constitution in order to give themselves even more power.. or to break the law as they break our military.. with impunity.

I guess that is a "positive direction for the American people".. and a great message for kids. If you are President or Vice President of the United States of America, you can do whatever you want to do without any consequences.. the Rule of Law be damned. Nice.

I guess their dream of "Unitary Executive" is coming true.

:cry: I want my country back.


INVESTIGATE IMPEACH INDICT IMPRECATE INCARCERATE :banghead:

[MedleyMisty]

23. I wonder if part of it is the reaction to Clinton's impeachment

Only they apparently don't realize that although most people thought that impeaching someone over their personal life was stupid and wrong, a lot of people would be quite okay with impeachment for lies that resulted in thousands if not hundreds of thousands of deaths.

[babylonsister]

24. Dear Ms. Pelosi, please make a list of all the major infractions

this admin is involved in, and then honestly tell me who would be more worthy, IN THE HISTORY OF THE U.S., of impeachment? If not now, when? Do the right thing and you'll get your 08 victories.

[JeffR]

32. That's it in a nutshell

Couldn't be said better!
:dem:

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

28. BS! She took an oath to defend the Constitution and the laws of our country, and she

is willing to deflect that responsibility! She is guilty of aiding and abetting.

[stirlingsliver]

33. Nancy: The PRINCIPLED Stand

Hey, Nancy:

The PRINCIPLED stand is to be FOR impeachment.

We elected you to be a LEADER!

Start leading!

Start speaking the truth -- that Cheney is but one of a number of officials who should be thrown out of office.

Of course we ALL want a Democractic President and Vice President.

But we also all want people of principle -- not people who are merely looking towards the next election.

[lonestarnot]

34. Well she better take a second look at the ground swell of support from the

American people that is about to unload on her. It is her "pleasure" to heed or not to heed the warning.

[AnOhioan]

35. Hey Nancy...wake up

Or risk losing Congress in '08. The American people voted a Dem majority on the premise that we would act in the best interests of the country. Backing down (again) is not exactly building a winning portfolio.

[karlrschneider]

40. If she jumped on the bandwagon (what there is of it) that would be perceived

(remember 'perception is everything') as a venal sort of coup. I'm NOT saying that would be the case, just that it would seem that way to a lot of people...like 100% of repigs and MOR Democrats. Lets wait for her to say "no way in hell" before we get too exercised over it. If that happens, I'll be right up there with the other "pissed-offers".

[Captain_Nemo]

60. The hate for pelosi and clinton on DU is difficult to stomach.

[mmonk]

42. Why should I Madame speaker?

[Joe Fields]

43. Nancy Pelosi is wrong! It is her duty to investigate, and then impeach,

if circumstances warrant it. She is negligent if she just wants to sweep this whole sordid mess under the rug and forget about it.

[Lint Head]

45. This is the email I sent to Senator Pelosi.

It will probably be read by a computer. I just hope it's not the same Republican computer (server)that counted the the votes in Ohio.

Why as Speaker of the House are you throwing a fellow Democrat under the bus? The criminals that occupy the peoples precious White House are destroying our country.

You do not have time to sit back and play a waiting game as if you are old and wiser than everyone else. Our country is in danger. I have been a life long Democrat. Right now Mr. Kucinich is the only Democrat I see with any backbone. It is a cowardly act if you do not pursue the Impeachment plus the criminal prosecution of these criminals. One more life should not be lost in their names!
:dem:

[mmonk]

47. False premises are the same as a lie Madame speaker.

Dennis Kucinich is for ending the war too. One does not preclude nor exclude the other.

[Raksha]

50. I think Pelosi is deliberately allowing the impeachment movement

to build from the grassroots like a tsunami, so that she can say truthfully that she didn't support it (I doubt that she actually opposes it either), but that the American people absolutely DEMANDED it. She's right, too--we damn well do demand it!

[GreenTea]

52. Pelosi is fucking WRONG! It is Congresses constitutional duty to investigate & impeach if hearings

prove laws were broken by Cheney & Bush.

That is congresses duty, one which the republican congress ignored...If the excutive branch has broken laws Pelosi is derelict in her duty NOT to have hearings and move towards investigations, hearings and impeachment.

Pelosi has no other authority but to protect and obey the Constitution....Kucinch is doing his job and taking the correct steps.

[L. Coyote]

61. Kucinich said, "The American people will be the final arbiters" of the matter.

I sent $3.33 to Kucinich for President.

Should Americans vote for impeachment by sending just $3.33 to Kucinich?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x746432

That's my message to Pelosi. Money talks in $3.33 increments!!

Dennis is one lovable menace today!!!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

62. So, it's about elections rather than morality?

More "keeping our powder dry"?

[mmonk]

63. Welcome to America in the 21st century.

Real morality shall not tread.

[Disturbed]

69. "The goal is to get the soldiers out of there."

So far she and the Dems that put forth the Supplemental Bill are not calling for all US Troops to leave Iraq. An undetermined number will stay to train Iraqi Troops, defend the Green Zone and the 14 US Bases and more to fight al Q and factions of the Insurgency, Sunni and Shi'ite. The US Media has distorted this Bill. The majority of Dems are not calling for a complete US Draw down in Iraq and are providing all the $$ that Busholini has demanded.

The avoid Impeaching Cheney is being complicit with this Fascist Regime.

[JVS]

96. Is this a surprise. Have we not grown to expect this of "democracies"

[rinsd]

109. Morality is useless for the powerless. (nt)

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

112. Unfortunately, when they get power, Lord Acton's axiom kicks in.

I prefer morality to power.

[LWolf]

70. So, according to Pelosi,

I should be happy to elect Democrats, but I shouldn't expect Democrats to take action to represent me when called for.

It's more important for us to elect them than it is for them to actually work for us on critical issues while in office.

Interesting.

[StarryNite]

71. Get with the program Nancy.

Do your fricken job and impeach the bastard.

[porphyrian]

73. How is impeachment not a positive direction focusing on stopping the war, Nancy?

Methinks you're full of shit.

[mikelgb]

74. Seems I'll have to give Mrs Pelosi another call tomorrow

[sellitman]

76. The DNC has spoken

This is why Dennis is the best possible choice for Democrats.

[Freddie Stubbs]

101. How has the 'DNC' spoken

Has its chairman, Howard Dean said anything?

[chknltl]

77. Madam Speaker:

If you will not support impeachment then spend a little time forming your own bill: The Removal of Impeachment. Why mince words here: If This administration is not impeached, NO future admin will be impeachable either! After this administration gets away from impeachment the bar will be raised far too high.

The bush administration is a gang of crooks who do NOT represent the will of the people. The will of the people is calling for the TRUTH. What side of that truth do you choose to enable, the people or the crooks? Let the will of the people be done. For this YOU were elected!

[Individualist]

78. Utterly disgusting!

Once again our leadership is ignoring the voters. :mad:

[SaveElmer]

80. Pelosi is absolutely correct...

She knows...better than anyone...that an all out effort at impeachment would end all progress on issues by this Congress...

It would be just the issue to unite dispirited Republicans...

And it would fail...

[Jack Sprat]

82. I want the crimes of the BushCo Crime family

investigated, prosecuted, and discussed for the next 1000 years, and how democracy can be kidnapped and taken hostage by a rogue and complicit news media. When they own the nation's media, they can bury democracy in total.

[cqo_000]

83. Pelosi makes Dems look weak n/t

[passy]

85. The bullshit has to stop.

Seriously I thought that Nancy Pelosi was an experienced politician. "Focusing on ending the war", oh yeah that is working just swell, with * about to veto your weak little bill that actually does nothing to stop the war or withdraw all troops and contractors.
As for her being limited in expressing her support because she is 3rd in the line of succession that is even more bullshit. She is only third in line if the president and the vice president die simultaneously. The impeachment of the VP only leads to the president nominating a new VP. If then you impeach the P the new VP will become P and nominate a new VP, and so on. Unless someone actually manages to impeach both * and dick at exactly the same time I doubt that Nancy will ever become president.
Nancy Pelosi should realize that impeachment is the only way to stop this war, as for an investigation taking all of congress's time, she must be kidding right! I mean any number of crime committed by either * or dick has been very well documented already and you only need to make that pig Rove squeal under oath for five minutes to get enough dirt on those traitors.
So Nancy explain to me how you will bring about the end of the war when * can simply veto what ever you bring to him. If that is what you intend him to do, then you are playing politics with no bargaining power at all, do you really think that the MSM is gonna portray * as failing to support the troops because of his veto?
Come on, you know public opinion is for impeachment don't listen to the shills on the MSM, they are not the ones you are trying to please; as for 2008, how are you gonna get support for your candidate when people who have previously voted for democrats like you realize that you have done absolutely nothing for them ?
It seems to me that politicians with a few exception, really fail to realize that the rules have been changed a long time ago, they are totally disconnected, they see the world and their place in it through the distorted lens of the media, they constantly play to the gallery. How badly out of touch with reality must they be to think that the majority of people are not for getting rid of * by any means necessary. If they ever came out of their bubbles filled with advisers and sycophantic assistants they might realize that the administration has being behaving like criminals ever since they took office. Investigations, WTH, a mildly informed citizens is well aware of the crimes that have been committed: negligence ( 9/11 and New Orleans ), starting a war of aggression under false pretenses( Iraq and maybe soon Iran ), politicization of the intelligence service and the justice department, failing to seriously address the threats posed to us by Global Warming and so on.
The threat of impeachment and criminal prosecution is the only thing that will help put an end to this war and if it doesn't happen before 2008, then which ever democrat gets elected president will inherit this quagmire and get bashed by the media and the GOP on a daily basis for failing to put an end to the carnage.
I am constantly amazed that no one ever blames * and the rest of the administration for the mess in Iraq. Their willful incompetence is never attacked, it's like, well, now it's too late to do anything because that would be like criticizing the troops who are fighting the war.
Has everyone become too stupid to realize that this war is not what they sold us in the first place, it's like going to the dentist to fill a hole and getting strapped to the chair indefinitely having all your teeth ripped out with no anesthetic and bleeding slowly to death, while the dentist is too busy beating up his assistant to ever release you; would you fell cheated?
The reason the war is still going on is because it was a stupid idea to invade Iraq in the first place. Shouldn't stupidity be punished?
Then again we all know that the war was all about controlling the oil and nothing else, but almost everyone realizes that it was a stupid thing to do, especially since there was no WMDs. At the very least the war was a mistake and someone should pay for that.
So impeachment in that context makes perfect sense to even the most stupid * supporter; the man fucked up, shouldn't he be held responsible? Would they let a murderer walk free because he claims that he hadn't expected anyone to die because of his actions.
If a man was to kill someone because he thought that maybe that person might possibly, if he had a lot more time and resources, try to throw a spit ball at him from 200yards away, then I doubt that any judge would look kindly upon his murderous act.
So why are we even discussing impeachment we should be talking jail time.
Nancy borrow a backbone from Kucinich, Conyers or Feingold and send the fuckers to do some hard-time.

[B Calm]

88. good post!

[passy]

86. The bullshit has to stop.

Seriously I thought that Nancy Pelosi was an experienced politician. "Focusing on ending the war", oh yeah that is working just swell, with * about to veto your weak little bill that actually does nothing to stop the war or withdraw all troops and contractors.
As for her being limited in expressing her support because she is 3rd in the line of succession that is even more bullshit. She is only third in line if the president and the vice president die simultaneously. The impeachment of the VP only leads to the president nominating a new VP. If then you impeach the P the new VP will become P and nominate a new VP, and so on. Unless someone actually manages to impeach both * and dick at exactly the same time I doubt that Nancy will ever become president.
Nancy Pelosi should realize that impeachment is the only way to stop this war, as for an investigation taking all of congress's time, she must be kidding right! I mean any number of crime committed by either * or dick has been very well documented already and you only need to make that pig Rove squeal under oath for five minutes to get enough dirt on those traitors.
So Nancy explain to me how you will bring about the end of the war when * can simply veto what ever you bring to him. If that is what you intend him to do, then you are playing politics with no bargaining power at all, do you really think that the MSM is gonna portray * as failing to support the troops because of his veto?
Come on, you know public opinion is for impeachment don't listen to the shills on the MSM, they are not the ones you are trying to please; as for 2008, how are you gonna get support for your candidate when people who have previously voted for democrats like you realize that you have done absolutely nothing for them ?
It seems to me that politicians with a few exception, really fail to realize that the rules have been changed a long time ago, they are totally disconnected, they see the world and their place in it through the distorted lens of the media, they constantly play to the gallery. How badly out of touch with reality must they be to think that the majority of people are not for getting rid of * by any means necessary. If they ever came out of their bubbles filled with advisers and sycophantic assistants they might realize that the administration has being behaving like criminals ever since they took office. Investigations, WTH, a mildly informed citizens is well aware of the crimes that have been committed: negligence ( 9/11 and New Orleans ), starting a war of aggression under false pretenses( Iraq and maybe soon Iran ), politicization of the intelligence service and the justice department, failing to seriously address the threats posed to us by Global Warming and so on.
The threat of impeachment and criminal prosecution is the only thing that will help put an end to this war and if it doesn't happen before 2008, then which ever democrat gets elected president will inherit this quagmire and get bashed by the media and the GOP on a daily basis for failing to put an end to the carnage.
I am constantly amazed that no one ever blames * and the rest of the administration for the mess in Iraq. Their willful incompetence is never attacked, it's like, well, now it's too late to do anything because that would be like criticizing the troops who are fighting the war.
Has everyone become too stupid to realize that this war is not what they sold us in the first place, it's like going to the dentist to fill a hole and getting strapped to the chair indefinitely having all your teeth ripped out with no anesthetic and bleeding slowly to death, while the dentist is too busy beating up his assistant to ever release you; would you fell cheated?
The reason the war is still going on is because it was a stupid idea to invade Iraq in the first place. Shouldn't stupidity be punished?
Then again we all know that the war was all about controlling the oil and nothing else, but almost everyone realizes that it was a stupid thing to do, especially since there was no WMDs. At the very least the war was a mistake and someone should pay for that.
So impeachment in that context makes perfect sense to even the most stupid * supporter; the man fucked up, shouldn't he be held responsible? Would they let a murderer walk free because he claims that he hadn't expected anyone to die because of his actions.
If a man was to kill someone because he thought that maybe that person might possibly, if he had a lot more time and resources, try to throw a spit ball at him from 200yards away, then I doubt that any judge would look kindly upon his murderous act.
So why are we even discussing impeachment we should be talking jail time.
Nancy borrow a backbone from Kucinich, Conyers or Feingold and send the fuckers to do some hard-time.

[ima_sinnic]

94. what you said!!

fabulous rant! I too am tired of dicking around; these parasites have been so obvious, the population must have its collective head up its @$$ to let them get away with it for so long.

[RestoreGore]

87. Nancy Pelosi then enables treachery n/t

[passy]

91. Stop the bullshit already!

Seriously I thought that Nancy Pelosi was an experienced politician. "Focusing on ending the war", oh yeah that is working just swell, with * about to veto your weak little bill that actually does nothing to stop the war or withdraw all troops and contractors.
As for her being limited in expressing her support because she is 3rd in the line of succession that is even more bullshit. She is only third in line if the president and the vice president die simultaneously. The impeachment of the VP only leads to the president nominating a new VP. If then you impeach the P the new VP will become P and nominate a new VP, and so on. Unless someone actually manages to impeach both * and dick at exactly the same time I doubt that Nancy will ever become president.
Nancy Pelosi should realize that impeachment is the only way to stop this war, as for an investigation taking all of congress's time, she must be kidding right! I mean any number of crime committed by either * or dick has been very well documented already and you only need to make that pig Rove squeal under oath for five minutes to get enough dirt on those traitors.
So Nancy explain to me how you will bring about the end of the war when * can simply veto what ever you bring to him. If that is what you intend him to do, then you are playing politics with no bargaining power at all, do you really think that the MSM is gonna portray * as failing to support the troops because of his veto?
Come on, you know public opinion is for impeachment don't listen to the shills on the MSM, they are not the ones you are trying to please; as for 2008, how are you gonna get support for your candidate when people who have previously voted for democrats like you realize that you have done absolutely nothing for them ?
It seems to me that politicians with a few exception, really fail to realize that the rules have been changed a long time ago, they are totally disconnected, they see the world and their place in it through the distorted lens of the media, they constantly play to the gallery. How badly out of touch with reality must they be to think that the majority of people are not for getting rid of * by any means necessary. If they ever came out of their bubbles filled with advisers and sycophantic assistants they might realize that the administration has being behaving like criminals ever since they took office. Investigations, WTH, a mildly informed citizens is well aware of the crimes that have been committed: negligence ( 9/11 and New Orleans ), starting a war of aggression under false pretenses( Iraq and maybe soon Iran ), politicization of the intelligence service and the justice department, failing to seriously address the threats posed to us by Global Warming and so on.
The threat of impeachment and criminal prosecution is the only thing that will help put an end to this war and if it doesn't happen before 2008, then which ever democrat gets elected president will inherit this quagmire and get bashed by the media and the GOP on a daily basis for failing to put an end to the carnage.
I am constantly amazed that no one ever blames * and the rest of the administration for the mess in Iraq. Their willful incompetence is never attacked, it's like, well, now it's too late to do anything because that would be like criticizing the troops who are fighting the war.
Has everyone become too stupid to realize that this war is not what they sold us in the first place, it's like going to the dentist to fill a hole and getting strapped to the chair indefinitely having all your teeth ripped out with no anesthetic and bleeding slowly to death, while the dentist is too busy beating up his assistant to ever release you; would you fell cheated?
The reason the war is still going on is because it was a stupid idea to invade Iraq in the first place. Shouldn't stupidity be punished?
Then again we all know that the war was all about controlling the oil and nothing else, but almost everyone realizes that it was a stupid thing to do, especially since there was no WMDs. At the very least the war was a mistake and someone should pay for that.
So impeachment in that context makes perfect sense to even the most stupid * supporter; the man fucked up, shouldn't he be held responsible? Would they let a murderer walk free because he claims that he hadn't expected anyone to die because of his actions.
If a man was to kill someone because he thought that maybe that person might possibly, if he had a lot more time and resources, try to throw a spit ball at him from 200yards away, then I doubt that any judge would look kindly upon his murderous act.
So why are we even discussing impeachment we should be talking jail time.
Nancy borrow a backbone from Kucinich, Conyers or Feingold and send the fuckers to do some hard-time.

[Skidmore]

92. Is it possible that Dems are doing a "good cop-bad cop" thing?

One comes out blazing and the other says something like "calm down now" and that lulls the Rs into thinking that they are safe. Meantime, the public anger builds and, dare we hope, rebellion in the streets?

[MadHound]

93. So what, exactly, does Pelosi think that she's going to do?

Send up war funding bills with no chance of being signed? Send up non-binding resolutions?

Well she certainly isn't taking the certain path to stopping this war, defunding it. She took that off the table at the same time she took impeachment off the table. So thus hamstringing the Dems, what's left?

Kucinich is one of the few in both the House and Senate who know what the right thing to do is, and has the spine to stand up and do it. So sad that it is so very few.

[JVS]

95. "focusing instead on stopping the Iraq war"

Yeah, you've been doing such a bang-up job on that for the last 4 years

[camero]

97. Um Mrs. Pelosi

Mr. Kucinich is doing what he is being paid to do. LISTENING to his constituents. Are you? After your last speech, that's highly doubtful.

[ecstatic]

100. wow. failed at both (ending war & pos. direction). And why should we use energy for that

when they won't even at least pretend to be fighting for our ideals? :eyes:

Her response to Dennis Kucinich fulfilling his patriotic duties was both smug and offensive. I tried to be positive and give her time but now it's all crystal clear.

A "positive direction" can't begin until the thugs responsible for 3100+ American troops and 650,000+ Iraqi civilians are held accountable for their crimes.

[Matsubara]

103. I couldn't DISAGREE MORE with Pelosi.

But her remarks are illustrative of the problem we face with these people - for them, it's about nothing more than getting themselves elected. They backslap those GOP thugs on a daily basis.

But for me it is about JUSTICE. Mr. Cheney. Mr. Bush, Ms. Rice and all the other knowing architects of the Iraq war are guilty of heinous crimes against humanity and should face justice. Impeachment is one way to make that happen, at least to a degree. Life in prison would be ideal, but leaving office in disgrace would do.

Doing as Ms. Pelosi suggests would let them off the hook entirely - free to move on to lucrataive positions on corporate boards and right-wing think tanks.

And Mrs. Pelosi? Impeachment would be a VERY positive direction for the American people. You can't pursue that and ending the war at the same time? Then maybe you're not up to the job.

[Jcrowley]

107. Her sworn duty

is to protect the Constitution not to consider political expediency. She is not doing her job. She is shirking her duty. This is really just political cover. It's disgusting.

[Buttercup McToots]

110. You know what?

I am getting real possessive
with my country and tired
of being hijacked...

[Greeby]

118. Have any of the people going off the deep end here considered

That she has to be careful how she approaches this, because if she stood under a banner saying "Impeach the bastards!" she'd be accused of just doing it coz she wants the Presidency. That would muddy the waters with politics, something Dennis wants to avoid to the extent that he has forbade his campaign staff from speaking about impeachment.

If she acts to block the Articles, then by all means, go nuts. But until then, please stop with this kneejerk "Off with their heads" mentality

[Captain_Nemo]

120. As librals we can be our own worst enemies. Don't you think the repubs LOVE hearing Nancy bashing?

[Truth2Tell]

122. Nancy could always say that

she wouldn't accept the Prsidency upon an impeachment and kill that argument for timidity - if she wanted to. It's higly unlikely it would fall into her hands regardless.

[Truth2Tell]

123. Who's not worth it?

Raw Story quotes Pelosi thus: "We will do more to make for our own reelection, and maintain a Democratic Congress...and have a Democratic President," she said. "And frankly, for impeachment, George W. Bush is just not worth it..."

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Californians_prepare_to_confront_Pelosi_Democrats_0425.html

Not worth it? What exactly does that mean? Are his crimes not worth it? Is the constitution not worth it? Are the American people not it? Is what we teach our children about right and wrong not worth it? Is our standing in the world not worth it? Would we only impeach a better man? WTF is she talking about?