Although the public hasn't applied nearly as much pressure on the House as
they should've to date to impeach Bush and Cheney, the blame for their lack
of determination ultimately rests with the new leaders they hired last
November.
I believe the blame can be separated into three main cateogories: (1) lack
of congressional leadership and political guts, (2) the media's numerous
distractions on other less important issues (such as sleazy celeb news), and
(3) the electorate's lack of cohesion, mass action and pressure on its
representatives.
We can argue about exactly why this current curious political and social
milieu has developed, but sneering critics on the Right really need to
examine the list of illegal activities of Bush and Cheney (and others in the
Cabinet), squarely look at them, and fairly ask themselves: is there real
evidence of corrupted leadership that has harmed our democracy, threatened
our rights, endangered our security?
People on the Left have already concluded there are more than enough
documented illegalities to impeach Cheney and Bush.
Instead of uselessly arguing about WHY no action has yet been taken, all
Americans really need to look at these lists of alleged unconstitutional and
illegal activities that John Conyers' committee and Dennis Kuncinich have
compiled.
It's very odd that those on the Right who claim some kind of special
position in caring MORE about the nation than those on the Left, have
instead spent their energy and time sarcastically asking the Left why
Congress has not yet moved to impeach Bush and Cheney.
AND THIS MEANS YOU, STEVIE....get off it, kid.
Doc :))~
Why Bush hasn't been impeached
Congress, the media and most of the American people have yet to turn
decisively against Bush because to do so would be to turn against some part
of themselves.
By Gary Kamiya
The Bush presidency is a lot of things. It's a secretive cabal, a cavalcade
of incompetence, a blood-stained Church Militant, a bad rerun of "The
Godfather" in which scary men in suits pay ominous visits to hospital rooms.
But seen from the point of view of the American people, what it increasingly
resembles is a bad marriage. America finds itself married to a guy who has
turned out to be a complete dud. Divorce -- which in our nonparliamentary
system means impeachment -- is the logical solution. But even though Bush
cheated on us, lied, besmirched our family's name and spent all our money,
we the people, not to mention our elected representatives and the media,
seem content to stick it out to the bitter end.
There is a strange disconnect in the way Americans think about Bush. He is
extraordinarily unpopular. His approval ratings, which have been abysmal for
about 18 months, have now sunk to their lowest ever, making him the most
unpopular president in a generation. His 28 percent approval rating in a May
5 Newsweek poll ties that of Jimmy Carter in 1979 after the failed Iran
rescue mission. Bush's unpopularity has emboldened congressional Democrats,
who now have no qualms about attacking him directly and flatly asserting
that his Iraq war is lost.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/kamiya/2007/05/22/impeachment/index_np.html
Why Bush Hasn't Been Impeached: Failure of Leadership, Not The People
by paradox
Gary Kimiya of Salon was brave enough to take on the extremely daunting task
of trying to explain why Bush hasn't been impeached in 2,800 words, and his
excellent summation of factors-Democratic weakness, denial of violent
nationalism, "wartime" ascendancy, Republican unity, successful fraud, rule
of law stolen, reason and epistemology diminished, evasion of
prosecution-are thorough enough, but at it's very core base Kamiya's
arguments flow from this premise: politicians and the media respond to the
will of the people, they're not the primary elements in creating and leading
the people's will. The people are.
Not. "Leader's lead," His Dickless, the worst of all time, always says when's
he's about to murder more innocents or break another law. Howard Dean ran a
hugely successful campaign from nowhere on the simple proposition that it
was "people-powered," endless exhortations to the fact that yes, really,
people could have power. In this time and place in the United States the
people are led, they don't lead their representatives.
"A society without memory, driven by ephemeral emotions, which demands no
consistency from its leaders but only gusty patriotism, is a society that is
not about to engage in the painful self-examination that impeachment would
mean."
In no way is this a work to demonstrate Mr. Kamiya wrong, a presumption I
would never undertake, I don't have the qualifications or talent to do so.
Action by leadership or will of the people isn't an on/off black or white
proposition, and there is no way to empirically know the correct answer. I
just happen to give more weight to the proposition that if Democrats and the
media lead (instead of enabling), impeachment would instantly proceed and
succeed, not that Democrats and the media are waiting around for some
magical mystical day when the will of people inspires them divinely for good
democracy.
Cost-benefit analysis by Democrats in aversion to impeachment isn't savvy
politics, it's leadership weakness. Impeachment requires work, media talent,
and cooperative skills Democrats haven't summoned. "Bad politics" is a
skinny rationalization for doing nothing and failing to perceive the true
threat of Bush.
Kamiya states that Bush's crimes are too great, that their wellspring of
violent nationalism, denial, dishonesty and immaturity won't and can't be
confronted by the populace. In fact it's a total lack of leadership talent
not up to the difficult-but certainly not impossible-task of showing the
people why the worst of all time must immediately go. That's what
impeachment hearings do.
The greatest hole in Kamiya's premise is that the American people have a
neutral media, a real political journalism corps that consistently delivers
the truth so the people can decide what to do. It's simply laughable, the
corporate propaganda filter the American people must use to perceive reality
and threats is horribly strong and pervasive.
There is no respect and adherence to the rule of law because no pundits
pound the table with it, they write about hair instead. There is no memory
because the media makes sure it's never published. The Straussian
rationalization that Bush meant well because Saddam was a threat is a rank
media failure: Saddam was never a threat in any way. A real journalism corps
never would have let that rationalization for lying take root in the first
place.
Spin is accepted and no logic employed because the main conveyor of fact and
events-the "journalism" corps-precisely insists that reason, facts and truth
be hidden as much as possible. Their mission is to enable, not inform, and
until that changes the will of the people can never be formulated or even
expressed, the mechanism to do so is plain busted.
Some would state that with real journalism gone Democrats can never summon
the bravery to lead. I don't agree, although it does make me much more
sympathetic and forgiving toward Reid and Pelosi.
Kamiya is precisely correct in the sacrosanct element to "wartime," the
patriotic duty to support the troops, country and President when in harm's
way. Bush has fully exploited it, and combined with criminal Republican
leadership, Democratic weakness, and an enabling "journalism" corps here we
are, the worst of all time with 16 more months totally free to commit more
atrocities, no impeachment in sight.
Stopping him means Democrats would have to lead. Lead with a caucus
strategy, a media strategy, a netroots strategy, then summon the energy and
courage of their lives to defend the country and impeach Bush. Democrats
haven't summoned the talent the bravery to do so-yet. If they did the
American people would follow, circumventing the clumsy media filter isn't
hard, and we all would finally stop being persecuted with the worst of all
time and his heinous war.
http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/010373.php
.
|
|
| User: "Woodswun" |
|
| Title: Re: Why Bush Hasn't Been Impeached !! |
22 Nov 2007 02:37:16 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 18:44:11 -0800, Docrodile wrote:
Although the public hasn't applied nearly as much pressure on the House as
they should've to date to impeach Bush and Cheney, the blame for their lack
of determination ultimately rests with the new leaders they hired last
November.
I believe the blame can be separated into three main cateogories: (1) lack
of congressional leadership and political guts, (2) the media's numerous
distractions on other less important issues (such as sleazy celeb news), and
(3) the electorate's lack of cohesion, mass action and pressure on its
representatives.
4) If Bush and Cheney are still in power during the next presidential
election, the Dems can run against them (safer than someone who would
replace them).
Woods
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
