Impeachment- One more supporting reason?

[Gregorian]

Let's think about what has happened. Bush and Cheney are figureheads. They represent a monstrous machine made up of corporations, essentially. Their outright lies are what opened the doors to the invasion of Iraq. But the beneficiaries of that invasion are not the administration, per se. But it is those profiting from the invasion are the companies this administration represents. A billion dollars isn't spent in lobbying for nothing. And these companies share in the responsibility and liability of this so-called war.

Impeachment would send a message to these corporations. In my mind, the message impeachment would send to them is far more important than the simple act of punishing a group of men (and perhaps one oil tanker namesake).

This may seem like a distant and light form of punishment. But it sends a statement. I hate to think of what it would say to those who are profiting from this war to think that their actions were essentially ignored. That is what abandoning our responsibility to impeach would send.

[merh]

1. I want the world to know that we don't approve of their crimes.

The only chance we have for resolving some of the hate and animosity is to dethrone the kings of the hate.

That is the most important reason, to hold them accountable and to the world know that they did not commit their crimes in our name.

I'm not making the Hilter correlation other than to point out that if the people of Germany had done something to stop Hitler, if they had tried to remove him from office, it would have been more apparent to the rest of the world that they didn't support his crimes. The healing might have been easier.

Does that make any sense?

[Gregorian]

3. Of course what you said is perhaps more important than anything.

I didn't mention that behind my thought on posting this was a mental image of Nancy Pelosi. None of us can imagine impeachment not being on the table. As flagrant as the lies and crimes have been, it's mind boggling to even think about that. So, I'm hoping there is one more idea that can push forward the process of impeachment.

Actually, I think the world knows there is a separation between the citizens of this country and what is being done in our name.

[merh]

5. The world has trouble understanding how we have let this happen.

After all, our government is based on the premise "We, the People" are the government. They know that Clinton was impeached because of a blow job (which was ridiculous to the majority of the rest). They are waiting on "We, the People" to act and have been waiting.

Pelosi needs to stop worrying what impeachment could do to the party and start focusing on how vital it is for the nation. We need to stop the criminals and we need to let the world see that We, the People, stopped them.

[Gregorian]

6. I'm nervous that our problem with democracy is systemic.

It goes against my post here. But it's a logical extension. I'm saying let's not focus on Bush, but who he represents. But I'm afraid the reality is, we the people are represented by the corporations.

I guess I'm agreeing with you, but worried that it really is US who have created this situation. I suppose it's early, and I'm just saying the obvious. I think it's time for an epsresso here.

[merh]

7. No, we are not represented by the corporations

our politicos have replaced us with the corporations. They forget that we, the individual voters, are who they work for. The corporations have no rights (despite the court's rulings) - they are not entities created by the constitution and recognized by the constitution. The only way to get back our government, to limit corporate influence is to change the campaign laws - limit the amount each campaign can spend and each station must give a certain amount of air time to the candidate. Also, the electoral college is outdated and needs to be abolished, imho.

[burrowowl]

2. IMPEACH ALREADY!

When, Congres do it before it too late!

[Gregorian]

4. Those of us who see the truth are getting impatient.

That's why I had this idea of one more reason to do it.

It's mind boggling how far this has gone on.

By the way, my very first post on any political forum was "Impeach Bush". That was early 2003. Haha. I'm very impatient.

[pat_k]

8. Greedy CEO's are feeling the costs of being an international pariah. . .

Your basic point is an important one, but I have a different take on it.

Yes, when we reclaim our sovereignty thru impeachment, we make it possible to reclaim our authority over Corporations. But corporations as entities do not respond to "messages" that are not backed by the force of law.

WE created corporate entities solely to participate in, and profit from, the "market." They are entities created under the rules that "We the People" lay down to serve a purpose within the structure of our economy. It is up to us to make rules that ensure they serve a constructive, not destructive, purpose. Step 1 is to reclaim our authority over corporations by reclaiming our authority over our government -- the institutions we established to turn our collective will into reality. Step 2 is to use that authority to change the rules.

Corporate America is a mixed bag. Certainly, some greedy CEO's and their minions have been a driving behind, or have a heavy stake in elevating and sustaining the bushcheney unitary executivecy.

But something that is often overlooked is that being an international pariah is costly. The "ick" factor tends to make USA-based businesses less desirable partners. It appears that much of the American aristocracy is feeling the consequences and has cut Bush loose. They are allowing the public's longstanding anger to be acknowledged and voiced within their ranks. Angry Americans are finally seeing their anger reflected in the DC press corp.

Regarding rhetoric that that invokes an amorphous corporate demon: Corporations are not in and of themselves evil entities. Corporations are run by people. They can be run morally or immorally.

I think that demonizing greedy CEOs, rather "corporate America" is a more powerful way to capture reality. Folks on our side tend to be reluctant to personalize when appropriate -- when a group of people are engaged in wrong-doing. Our depersonalized rhetoric fails to engage. Sure, propagandists manipulate by pointing at this or that group and saying "they are to blame,' but that doesn't make all personalization propaganda.

Regarding "the message impeachment would send to them is far more important than the simple act of punishing a group of men"

Impeachment is absolutely "far more important" than "punishing a group of men." Impeachment is a defensive act. It is a means by which Americans can reject the actions of officials when those acts violate the vision of a True America embodied in our Constitution. Perhaps some in Congress may mistakenly view it as a means to punish, but prosecution and punishment is for the courts, not Congress.