Censure supporters...you willing to support this instead of Impeachment ?

[SaveElmer]

I do support censure btw...

But this will close off any chance of impeachment. Feingold himself this effort was in lieu of impeachment.

In my view impeachment had no chance in any case...so I would accept this.

[Webster Green]

1. Censure will close off any chance of impeachment?

First I've heard that. Are you sure about that?

[SaveElmer]

6. Not legally...I should have been more precise...

I meant politically

[xultar]

2. Well not now. But winning in 2k6. YES we can impeach. 2k6 is important

I don't know why people aren't getting that.

[thoughtanarchist]

3. Censure does not close the door on impeachment.

Impeachment starts in the house. This action is happening in the senate.

[wordpix2]

8. that is right

[flpoljunkie]

4. It's not an either or. It's a first step to call imperial Bush to account

in the Senate. There is a whitewash going on of Bush's illegal wiretapping in Pat Robert's Senate Intelligence Committee. Roberts will go to the mat to protect his good buddy Cheney's boss, as well s Cheney himself, from accountability in the Congress of the United States.

[radio4progressives]

7. exactly..

[radio4progressives]

5. that's not exactly what he said..

he said that impeachment is a consideration, but that needed be well thought out as to political ramifications, do we really want to turn this government inside out etc...

but he did not rule it out. what he did say, was that this is an important action in lieu of such drastic measures - that doesn't mean that it's an either/or situation..

Feingold is handling this quite well, and framing his position very intelligently., imo.

impeachment has no chance at this time, and even if we win the house, i think Feingold is thinking like some of us, that the Dems even given a majority would still be weak kneed and cowardly in moving for impeachment, but it would be nice to be proven wrong... :hi:

[SaveElmer]

9. Say we do go through a censure fight thought...

Do you think the country will be in the mood for an even bigger fight? And say we do get back the majority (which I pray to {insert deity here} that we do)...do you think it would be good for the party to immedietely get into that? :hi:

[ClassWarrior]

30. It would be good for the COUNTRY to immediately get into that.

The criminals in this Administration** committed heinous crimes. It's their fault we have to go through this. But we're responsible, so we will do the right thing.

Contact your Senators and ask the Magic Question:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2512789&mesg_id=2512789

NGU.

[Sammy Pepys]

10. How does it close off impeachment?

Right now, censure is what we've got. We can't count our chickens before they've hatched.

[SaveElmer]

11. Poltically speaking...

Say we go through a censure fight...then get back the majority in 2006. Do you think the country is gonna want the new Democratic majority to immedietely get into an impeachment battle?

[Sammy Pepys]

14. I don't know....

...but I don't think we can wait around for that. If we don't do something now and don't get the majority back, we'll have nothing at all to show for it. I think it's more dangerous politically waiting until the elctions to get the ball rolling. It would look even more desperate remaining in the minority after November 2006 and trying to bring up censure.

[The Magistrate]

21. After Suitable Investigative Groundwork, Sir

They probably would not mind....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[SaveElmer]

22. But you would agree...

That it cannot appear to be the priority of a new Democratic majority? They would probably have been elected to reverse the devastating policies of the administration, and if we consume ourselves with what might appear as reprisal, we may be back in the minority alot sooner than we would hope.

[The Magistrate]

23. Not Really, Sir

It is possible to do both things, and a fair proportion of the vote would have been cast, should that situation eventuate, as the only available means of striking against the current regime and its leaders.

[SaveElmer]

24. Sorry Magistrate...

I usually am in sync with you on most things. But I believe that impeachment would not appear high on the list of priorities for most Americans...and I think if it appeared to be our main goal once we regained the majority, that effort would backfire on us.

[The Magistrate]

25. If We All Always Agreed, Sir

This place would be awfully boring....

Indeed, you may well be correct. But two factors appeal to me about it. First, whatever the common wisdom may assert, the people love a stiff political fight, finding them vastly entertaining. All statements about disliking partisanship and bickering and the like are merely people making polite noises they think are what they ought to say tomsound respectable and concerned. Second, there really have been impeachable offenses committed; the sort of grave crimes against the State and Constitution envisoned by the Founders as grounds for the action not only have occured, but are widely known to have occured. In such a circumstance, a Congress which does not act is like a policeman who walks past a felon busy at at his trade, and just keeps walking....

"Justice must not only be done: Justice must be seen to be done."

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[SnoopDog]

12. ah, it does not close off impeachment proceedings...

This is the purpose of censure: The president is breaking the law. The House are a bunch of Republican cowards so they will not start the impeachment process. Mr. Feingold is doing exactly what he should do - censure the president so that the president IMMEDIATELY stop the illegal wire taps.

Now, in 2006, I hate to say this but we may not regain the House. Why - because our elections are rigged. But if we do, we have one more tool in our toolbox - they already have censured the president therefore to impeach is made easier.

Ok, some would say that "censure is enough, lets not impeach him'. I disagree - this censure is to stop him from spying on us - impeachment would be for starting an illegal war.

[SaveElmer]

13. Well I would disagree that it would be easier...

I am for censure...but do you think if we regain the majority, having already gone through a censure fight, that the American people are really going to want to immedietely get into an impeachment battle?

[SnoopDog]

16. Am I the only person in America

that thinks this so call president is the most evil bastard ever to hold that office?

President Bush has looted our treasury, started an illegal war, murdered innocent Iraqis, caused the deaths of our soldiers, illegal spied on us, and is systematically destroying America.

60 plus percent of Americans think this guy is doing a rotten job. I think the American people will JUMP to impeach this prick (and the VP as well).

[SaveElmer]

19. No you aren't...

And I imagine most people if you asked them in isolation whether they supported censure or not you might get a yes response...however...

If you asked them to rank censure or impeachment among a list of issues, I doubt it would be a high priority for most people.

[SnoopDog]

20. If they even know what censure is...

they would understand the points I make.

Sadly, and unfortunately, most people are can only comprehend the 'talking points' fed to them and make that their position - no matter how wrong it is.

[Bouncy Ball]

15. Yes, I would accept this.

Censure the law-breaking BASTARD.

[Vidar]

17. Step1 Censure

Step 2 Impeachemnt
Step 3 Trial for High Treason
Step 4 Hang him.

[calimary]

18. IMPEACHMENT only has no chance as long as the TEMPORARY

condition in the House of Reps and elsewhere still exists. I suspect conditions will change rather drastically in November - at which point IMPEACHMENT becomes WAY more than just an option. By then, too, the pack mentality will take over and nobody will want to be left off this train before it leaves the station. There will also be a few remaining republi-CONS who may join up - strictly out of self-interest (those who - by then members of the MINORITY party - get back in by the narrowest of margins, perhaps, or those who are more moderate and have been sat on by the extremists in their party for far too long - and who also have moderate-leaning constituents).

Don't forget, it was the republi-CONS on Capitol Hill who went to Nixon and told him he better throw in the towel first, before being impeached, because impeachment was imminent. They advised him to jump before he was pushed, which he did. That would NOT have happened if people from his own party - like then-prominent elder statesman Barry Goldwater Sr., and others - had not gone to him to tell him he had lost the support of his party and that the way was cleared for impeachment. It was the loss of republi-CON support within his own party that nailed it, and him. I daresay we'll see a latter-day version of this, maybe about this time next year.

[leftofthedial]

26. censure does not preclude impeachment

not having a majority in the House does.

[SaveElmer]

27. Yes I was speaking politically....

Of course in order to actually remove him we would need a Senate majority as well..

[leesa]

28. I want the Bush bastard and the rest of the criminals in jail.

[Jack Rabbit]

29. I support censure as a prelude to impeachment

I support impeachment as a prelude to war crimes trials.

[Vidar]

31. No, but impeachement can't happen untill we control Congress.