I am so pissed off at the Congress of the United States!

[kentuck]

Not just the Republicans but the Democrats also. But mostly, the Republicans. They have created a monster and now they refuse to control it. They made all kinds of self-righteous speeches when they were ready to impeach Bill Clinton. In hindsight, they look like fools. To many, they looked like fools at the time.

However, now they stand by like meek little lambs as their Republican president invades and bombs and tortures and spies upon whomever he wishes. And they say nothing...

Because of the Republican silence and their collusion with a person that is not stable leading our country, the Democrats have been handcuffed and intimidated into doing nothing in the interest of our nation. They, the Democrats, are more interested in their political viability than in actually doing something to save our country. There are no profiles in courage.

The little red piss ant in the White House keeps slapping Congress in the face and dares them to do anything about it. Granted, the Democrats are just getting started. But, who really thinks they will stop this insanity? We will keep slogging along, with our fingers crossed, hoping we will survive until he is gone. Don't expect anything from the Republican Party. They have shown they do not have the interests of this nation at heart. From their taxcuts to their rubberstamping to their huge deficits, we could not as a nation, have found a more dangerous enemy, foreign or domestic.

[Skidmore]

1. kentuck, A lot of us have felt this way for a while, but

everytime we attempted to communicate our concerns, we were jumped on with combat boots and stomped by I don't know what wing of the Democratic party on this board. I did not cast my vote for more insanity and I will not throw it behind more insanity in the future. If this Congress does not take meaningful steps toward ending this war, the Democratic Party will have lost 4 voters between me and my spouse and our daughter and her husband. I will not vote for the Rs, but I will not cast my vote for a party that refuses to do its job when charged with it.

[crispini]

11. "I dont know what wing of the Democratic party" ?

How about the REASONABLE wing that says, "Let's give them more than a week in power before we start declaring that they are all facist corporate sell outs."

Jesus Christ on a cracker, I wonder if anyone on this board who are so shrilly speaking out against the Democrats WHEN THEY'VE BEEN IN POWER FOR A WEEK have EVER paid any attention to their local or state government, or has ever been involved as an activist in ANY kind of capacity. Because if that kind of involvement teaches you ANYTHING, it's that Change. Takes. Time.

[Skidmore]

18. We don't have forever, and especially the troops and their families

or the Iraqi citizens do not have time for a game of political chess. Somethings should be done in a straightforward manner because they are the right thing to do. One of them is stopping this war and the administration with its neocons. I'm sorry, I just don't agree with you. Those who have remained in office over the past six years have had every opportunity to speak out and try to do the right thing in the absence of power. The few who took a stand deserve praise. Those who are too timid to step forward now to join them, even as we know that there are many Rs who would join them in a stand, are deserving only of scorn.

[crispini]

24. Yeah, it's sad isn't it?

When an individual is in danger (like that guy that fell on the tracks) it is (comparatively) simple for one person to be a hero, stand up, and be decisive and make the move to save that person. It just takes ONE person to have courage. But somehow things are different when people are in groups. One person standing up COULD be a hero or a leader -- or that one person standing up COULD be a nutcase, an outlier, too far ahead of the herd. Meanwhile individual soldiers are dying in Iraq, but they are not right there to see it and so it's less remote for them. IUnfortunately it's part of human nature as far as what groups. All we can do as citizens is continue to pressure them and tell them that if they are standing up, they won't be standing up on their own.

[bdamomma]

35. I agree, they are not miracle workers, if we are so hot to do

something and we know what is going on, WE MUST DO SOMETHING.

[bbgrunt]

38. and it also takes a clarity of purpose indicated by their public statements.

somehow, with Barney Frank willing to push fast track and wobbles on what can be done about bush and taking impeachment "off the table", one does not feel a lot of confidence.

[Jackpine Radical]

2. My thought s that we need to cut them some slack at the beginning.

I really liked Lakoff's framing of the 100-hour campaign & subsequent, more ambitious agendas.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x12076

And we really are awfully thin in the Senate.

[cascadiance]

12. I'm willing to be reasonable too, but they DON'T have a lot of time to doddle!

We cannot just be "nice" and delay what should be done to the point of being impotent.

I DO think we need to get some evidence on record through investigations, etc. and hopefully find our "watergate papers" moment of truth that everyone will accept as compelling evidence for impeachment before going that route. But we need to start that effort HARD AND FAST now as soon as we're able! I'm hoping that Mr. Waxman isn't holding back and is going after every nibble of evidence he can find to put together means to go after these people.

I do not want to go in with guns blazing half cocked and have the effort stalled in congress without the votes to convict the bastards. I want them OUT! So I'm pragmatic as to know that we need to be ready for that before we go in to fully go after them.

Even if we don't get enough evidence very soon to impeach very soon, having even close enough evidence to impeach will do wonders to force Bush's hand into signing legislation that he might otherwise veto, if he doesn't want to get hit even harder through impeachment. The more evidence we have, the more cards we have to play. Even with a slim majority in the Senate.

One way or anther, increased investigations now will only serve to help us.

The problem is that until we have public financing in place, the Dems will be just about as vulnerable to corporate arm twisting as the Republicans. That is why finding a candidate for 2008 with NO ties to the DLC and corporate America is so essential! Damn I wish Russ Feingold were running!

[Totallybushed]

22. Naturally,

I hope that the evidence is there and can be got to. I'd love to see high administration officials frog-marched off to the Hague.

But, and it's a big but, this kind of thing had best be set up carefully. Make sure the barrel is unblocked before pulling the trigger on your 12-gauge.

The Repukes won't go down easy, or without a fight. Most likely there will be a price to pay. And what I question is whether our Democratic "leaders" will be willing to pay it.

Well, we'll just have to keep the pressure on.

[atreides1]

3. At this point in time

I don't expect anything from either side! I'll wait until the Democratic "controlled" Congress does something.

[dogday]

4. We cannot protect anyone who is enabling

this war and other wars to continue... The war mongers are on both sides of the aile... Nobody should get a free pass.

[Captain Hilts]

5. Chill out! They've been in power only a week! nt

[earthside]

9. No - Don't Chill Out!

Keep the heat on ... make them do the right thing and end this river of American blood and treasure flowing into Iraq; make them work to end the killing of Iraqi civilians and the destruction and looting of Iraqi property.

If we all do not keep the pressure on ... then we will surely be hearing a different version of the same tune:
"They've been in power only a month."
"They've been in power only three months."
"They've been in power only half a year."
And so on and so on.

[Captain Hilts]

14. Yes, I'll be outside my congress member's office on Thursday to keep the heat on...

but it's not fair to be so critical at this point.

[crispini]

15. See, now YOU are sensible.

Keep the heat on and STILL keep cool.

Honestly, these people who are flipping out NOW, when they've been in power for a WEEK -- have they never been involved with trying to get a local ordinance or a state law through? Because, shit, change takes time, it's not like Pelosi has a fucking magic wand she can just wave and make it all better. 'Scuse my French.

[kentuck]

17. You don't have to be in a majority to speak out....

With that said, my post lays most of the blame on the Republican Party - not the Democratic Party. Although, when it was discovered that Bush was using the big communications giants to spy on over a million Americans, impeachment should have begun at that moment.

[rosesaylavee]

51. Actually, its not been a week.

They had their swearing in last Thursday and started work on Friday. Friday, Monday, and today.

Yikes. What's taking them so long? They've had 2 1/2 days!!!!111!!

[Beelzebud]

23. Exactly. I don't want to be hearing "They've only had the majority for a year!"

Keep the fire lit!

Don't let them forget why we gave them our TRUST.

[kentuck]

10. Chill out?

I've been chilled for 6 frigging years. Those that argue that it is more important to pass our "agenda", minimum wage, stem cell, education, etc don't know their asses from a hole in the ground. The number one agenda is trying to rescue our democracy from a madman. It is trying to get "our" Congress to do something to save our Constitution and to prevent these fascist activities from this White House. That should be our agenda.

[bbgrunt]

41. wholehearted agreement!

[dogday]

19. They know their own stance on the war

Does not take a week in power or a year... They already have their own stance on this war, and it is up to us to make sure that their stance is to end this war, and stop starting other ones as well...

[I_Will]

20. They have been witnesses to the damage for much longer than a week, though...

...when will the peoples' voice be raised? Or heard? When will the enabling of this insanity end, and the return to what America is supposed to be begin?

[KarenS]

6. Well said!! K&R n/t

[NRaleighLiberal]

7. My view is that they are all politicians, hence all suspect, and all

complicit. They are all part of the machine that is enabling them to be conflicted in their priorities - primarily in terms of wanting to maintain their own power and influence.

[Peace Patriot]

32. Yup, the Junta is throwing down the gauntlet--opening our mail, with

another "signing statement" saying the laws don't apply to them, ESCALATING a war that 70% of the American people want ended, continuing with torture and detention, putting the entire US naval fleet into the Persian Gulf planning God's knows what (Gulf of Tonkin II?).

And Congress is not up to strength, as to sufficient true representation of the American people--due primarily to rightwing Bushite corporations "counting" all the votes with TRADE SECRET, PROPRIETARY programming code, and virtually no audit/recount controls*, thus giving them the ability to put a 5% to 10% "thumb on the scales" for Bushites, warmongers and corporatists, leaving no trace. The American people did their best to outvote the machines, but I think we are less 10 to 20 seats that we actually won, but that non-transparent vote counting denied us. The weakness is also due to the fact that the Senate had only one third of its members up for reelection this time--and to corruption/lobbying--many members of Congress hogtied to the "military industrial complex."

It's Magna Carta time. And is this group up to it? Maybe. It's a bit early to judge them--but I think the Constitutional crisis is coming upon us very fast--faster than expected. Some expected a long leadup, via Congressional investigations, with the crunch coming over subpoenas. It looks more like it could come next week--or soon--over bifurcation of the Iraq War funding (funding current levels, denying escalation funds). The Pelosi/Reid letter on Iraq was very strong. And many known warmongers and militarists are saying get out of Iraq. The two retiring (kicked out?) generals just said no to escalation! It's looking like a very broad consensus, and this means that Congress has backing in the REST of the nation's establishment, to stiffen their spines.

I'm hoping and praying that the fleet buildup is cover for withdrawal. That's more worrying than anything--that the Junta is going to preemptively strike Iran, or Israel is, with US fleet backing. Horror scenario: end of the human race and of planet earth within 2 years or so, due to dust filling the atmosphere from a nuke exchange in the Middle East, combined with already crazy weather. (Read Carl Sagan's "The Cold and the Dark"--it doesn't take much, a limited nuke exchange would do it). Peace scenario: that Israel's leaders are not as insane as Bush and Cheney; that Europe, Russia, China, and immediate neighbors of potential fallout--Egypt, the Sultanates, Italy, Greece, Turkey--intervene.

Unfortunately, I could see our not very representative Congress falling for any number of contrived war triggers vis a vis Iran, and one mistake by anybody and the Middle East could go up in flames. The place is a tinderbox, and then some.

I find this....the way the Junta is building up tensions there...extremely disturbing and enraging. This ignorant, callous, incompetent, delusional man we have in the White House--a man who can't read--could end it all--the entire evolution of life on earth, and the development of consciousness, the ability to see, understand and contemplate the beauty of existence. Somehow we have allowed a man who seems to have no appreciation of any human endeavor, except killing, to gain the power to destroy everything we love, everything we are and everything we might be.

And it all may hang on the thread of the "balance of powers," written into the Constitution with such fervor by Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and others. This is what the "balance of powers" was FOR. THIS situation.


----------

*(Know how much of the paper ballot backup they handcount in Venezuela, as a check against fraud in the electronic voting machines? 55%! Know how much we handcount?)

[Bluerthanblue]

8. I agree Kentuck- it seems like things are only getting more out of hand.

I WANT to believe that change is coming.

But the most important issues- War, killing, and the abuse of power- seem like the ones that won't be addressed.

Not in time anyway.

Oh, how I want to be dead wrong.!

[mmonk]

13. Part of the republican plan was that congress be

a vestigial body. Power is to go to the executive branch and government agencies fold under it's wing (unitary executive).

[kentuck]

16. In other words....

a dictatorship.

[mmonk]

21. Pretty much.

A dictatorship with elections designed as a veil to its true nature.

[Solly Mack]

25. recommended

Because this is about Americas survival...the peoples survival.

How do we want to survive as a nation? as a people?

Under continued and worsening tyranny? or????


If the system doesn't allow for Congress to stop Bush - then the system is not working.


Either Congress has checks and balances or it doesn't.

Either they use it to preserve America...or they share the blame for what happens.

I'm all for giving time to the "new" Congress...but a few things can't be denied. The big one being - Bush is a rogue criminal President and MUST be stopped.

[kentuck]

26. Exactly!

If our Constitution and our system cannot stop a tyrant from doing whatever he wishes, then it is clearly broken.

[Skidmore]

27. I'd recommend this thread based on this point alone, but

I've already recommended it once so I'll just kick it up to the top again.

[bdamomma]

37. we are all saying the same thing, it has to stop, but how can we

stop it, scale the WH walls or we have to wait until he attacks another country, we are all sitting ducks for this stupid man.

[porphyrian]

28. Don't give up on them yet, but keep the fire to their asses.

Call them. Write them. Every day, if necessary.

[Gregorian]

29. We don't have veto power.

I tend to agree with you. But keep that in mind. We cannot do whatever we want with the ratio in Congress.

Yes, it's sad to see the son of the son of a Nazi sympathizer getting away with murder.

Just last night I was discussing this. The anthrax attacks was about my only argument. But remember, a number of Dems did not vote for the resolution to attack Iraq.

[Peace Patriot]

42. One hundred and twenty-five members of Congress voted against it!

That contrasts favorably with the number that voted against the "Gulf of Tonkin" resolution in 1964 (Vietnam War): 2.

Progress.

But because of that very progress--and its strong reflection in the American people as a whole, 56% of whom opposed Bush's war on Iraq from the beginning, before the invasion (Feb. '03)-- the Dark Lords had to figure out how to shove their illegal, horrendous, corporate resource war down our throats, and found the perfect solution in "fixing" the "broken" US election system that gave us Gore, but, somehow... not Gore. And, within two years, they had 80% of the country voting on electronic voting machines, run on TRADE SECRET, PROPRIETARY programming code, owned and controlled by Bushite corporations. You can't really perpetrate an unjust war, in a democracy--especially a democracy that had been through it before--without rigging the elections. So that's what they did. And it is the bitterest irony of all that they used the "hanging chads" of Florida as the excuse.

In any case, I'd say, don't rag on the newly elected Democrats, whom the people put in office despite every handicap imaginable on the voters. It's not about them. It's about us--We, the People! It always has been. We need to be worthy of great leadership in order to get great leaders. I think there are a number of potentially great leaders in the new Congress. Pelosi is one of them. Give them the support they need, and I think they will rise to the challenge. They are already showing strong signs of it. And, whatever happens, there is really nothing we can do except to NOT GIVE UP. We are at the center of this power--corporate power, military power--which is threatening the human race and life on earth. It is our obligation to persist in the struggle to restore democracy in the U.S. We owe it to generations past--who handed the torch of liberty to us--and to future generations, and to the whole world and all of its people.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

30. Republicans didn't turn Congress into a monster ...

... they turned it into a mouse.

Da prez don' need to listen to no pipsqueak mouse.

Let's see if this mouse can grow some teeth. Now that it's back to work after that day off (for the night-time football game)

[kentuck]

31. Unfortunately, few Congressmen see the situation as desperately..

as some of us may. They do not see the Constitution threatened. Surely, if they did, they would awaken from their slumber? As for the Republicans, they are nothing short of "traitors" to our country. This is not to criticize every Republican in their Party, but their leadership has failed them and our nation miserably.

[bdamomma]

39. do you really think they are listening to the people?? Not yet

they are, but they will soon if things keep on going out of control. We have maniacs running this country.

[JuniperLea]

33. Screw the first 100 hours! We need to stop the killing in hour #1!

Don't chill... never chill. Never be patient when our sons and daughters are dying. Never enable an illegal war, not for one second.

Every moment that goes by compounds the danger for our kids. I say no rest until we are out of Iraq!

[Captain Hilts]

34. Okay, Ted Kennedy's doing this...

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002307.php

[kentuck]

36. Did Bush ask Kennedy before he bombed Somalia??

Or was that not required? Since that was a part of the "war on terror"? He can expand his bombings to any nation he wishes?

[dogday]

40. Didn't you hear, some of the terrorist escaped

and are heading for Iran... Oh well I guess it is off to Iran we go....:sarcasm:



Who is going to stop this madness? :mad:

[Peace Patriot]

46. Kentuck, I was thinking the same thing, when I learned about Somalia...

what the hell is that? He's going around bombing people, anywhere? The mad bomber?

Jeez.

But if you read Kennedy's speech, and his Resolution, I think you will see that this is Step No. One, of a series of steps to curtail Bush, STARTING with the Iraq War--which I have to tell you, is a surprise to me, and a very welcome one. This is the heart of the matter. This is THE most difficult and hottest "balance of power" issue--optional presidential war--war at the president's whim. If they can curtail him on this, they can begin to peel back his unconstitutional assertions, one by one. I did not really expect this confrontation so early. Like others, I expected it to come later, as the result of White House defiance of Congressional subpoenas. But instead the Democrats have chosen to go right at him NOW--and in the Senate. This is amazing! All talk up to...what was it? ...yesterday? --when Pelosi and Reid issued their very strong letter to Bush on Iraq--seemed to soft-peddle the "commander in chief" issues, and go for the underbelly, tests on the minimum wage and so on. I am very surprised by this, and it indicates strength--that THEY feel they have the strength to push this "balance of power" matter to crisis now. Some of that strength may be coming from the fact that war hawks and many generals--including the two just recently in charge of Iraq--oppose escalation. I hope these hawks are not reserving further military action for a strike on Iran. Dunno. The situation is so fluid and volatile. But there does seem to be broad consensus about not escalating in Iraq. (--as someone said yesterday--Randi?--we don't HAVE 20,000 troops!). And, with that--with broadbased backing from both the people (70%) AND other parts of the country's establishment--the Democrats, though somewhat thin in truly representative numbers (due to election theft), can take it on--and ARE taking it on.

But Bush and Cheney, and the war profiteers behind them, are claiming that Bush/Cheney can do whatever they damn please. That's what they are asserting. They originally claimed authority from that rather modest IWR, which stressed diplomatic efforts and options, to jump in and invade the country--preempting all diplomacy and other options, including on-going UN inspections--and to occupy the country, to in fact destroy the country, and now to escalate the slaughter--and to perpetrate God knows what horror in Iran on top of it. And this is where Congress comes in. They did not authorize this! They authorized dealing with the THREAT of WMDs in Saddam Husseins' hands, whom they claimed had ties to Al Qaeda--all of which turned out not to be true. So what is their authority now to make war? Only Congress holds that authority, according to the Constitution and also according to the War Powers Act. And Congress can RESCIND that authority.

"The issue is joined"--as Howard Baker once said in the Watergate hearings.

[Peace Patriot]

44. Kennedy's speech is wonderful...

Here's the conclusion:

"Many of us felt the authorization to go to war was a grave mistake at the time. I’ve said that my vote against the war in Iraq is the best vote I’ve cast in my 44 years in the United States Senate.

"But no matter what any of us thought then, the Iraq War resolution is obviously obsolete today. It authorized a war to destroy weapons of mass destruction. But there were no WMDs to destroy. It authorized a war with Saddam Hussein. But today, Saddam is no more. It authorized a war because Saddam was allied with al Qaeda. But there was no alliance.

"The mission of our armed forces today in Iraq bears no resemblance whatever to the mission authorized by Congress. President Bush should not be permitted to escalate the war further, and send an even larger number of our troops into harm’s way, without a clear and specific new authorization from Congress.

"Our history makes clear that a new escalation in our forces will not advance our national security. It will not move Iraq toward self-government, and it will needlessly endanger our troops by injecting more of them into the middle of a civil war.

"... Comparisons from history resonate painfully in today’s debate on Iraq. In Vietnam, the White House grew increasingly obsessed with victory, and increasingly divorced from the will of the people and any rational policy. The Department of Defense kept assuring us that each new escalation in Vietnam would be the last. Instead, each one led only to the next.

"There was no military solution to that war. But we kept trying to find one anyway. In the end, 58,000 Americans died in the search for it.

"Echoes of that disaster are all around us today. Iraq is George Bush’s Vietnam.

"As with Vietnam, the only rational solution to the crisis is political, not military. Injecting more troops into a civil war is not the answer. Our men and women in uniform cannot force the Iraqi people to reconcile their differences.

"The President may deny the plain truth. But the truth speaks loudly and tragically. Congress must no longer follow him deeper into the quagmire in Iraq."

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002307.php

------------------------------

He is introducing his resolution later today, to deny Bush authorization and funding for an escalation. This is it. The Constitutional crisis that we have all been expecting is here. THIS WEEK!

[kentuck]

45. We need a 'constitutional' crisis..

And what do they do when Bush ignores them? That is the question? Do they do nothing? What can they do? What must they do?

[Peace Patriot]

48. Well, let's think it through. Kennedy introduces his resolution today, to

cut off funding for any escalation. Reid joined with Pelosi yesterday (or the day before) in a very strong letter to Bush saying NO to escalation. So Reid, the Senate majority leader, likely favors the Resolution and will help it along. Someone, meanwhile, will likely introduce a similar resolution in the House. Kennedy said he wants debate, wants everybody out in the open, and a vote. I think he must know he has the votes. So the Senate passes it, the House passes it, and it goes to budget committees, to sort out the money that would be used for escalation. Bush and Cheney have a lot of hidden, unaccountable money. And here's where the rubber hits the road, so to speak, as to curtailing Bush on this issue. He/& Cheney dip into unaccountable funds to escalate. Where they are going to get 20,000 troops I don't know. But they send more troops, and also lengthen tours of duty and increase multiple tours of duty. Then the Congressional investigations begin, into the dark parts of the budget--no doubt a Pandora's Box of monumental scandals. Congress follows up with Bush, with some kind of second Resolution saying, Why are you escalating, when we told you not to, and maybe also, where are you taking the money from? Bush/Cheney ignore this "sense of the Congress Resolution" and any accompanying subpoenas on their budget shufflings. One final warming--maybe another Pelosi/Reid letter (I'm thinking "Magna Carta"), demanding that they answer the subpoenas on the source of escalation money. Bush/Cheney ignore it, or say no. Waxman and Conyers introduce a bill of impeachment in the House.

This is one possible scenario--that the issue will be the money, as it so often was between the Kings of England and Parliament. There are other possibilities. But several leaders have already mentioned cutting off the funding for escalation, so I presume this is the ground they want to fight on. And they have very good Constitutional grounds for this, as well as the wording and argumentation around the IWR (which Kennedy mentions--the reasons for the IWR are gone, they were lies--there is no authorization for escalating troop levels now).

Or, rather than go straight to impeachment, they might instead start cutting--and putting strings on--other funds, maybe funds for combat, attack, aggression, permitting only funds for defense and withdrawal. Or funds for the White House or the Justice Department. Congress owns the purse strings. And I imagine that there aren't many bureaucrats in DC, or many in the military, who have any sympathy left for Bush. Here's their chance to "letter of the law" Bush.

I imagine that more knowledgeable heads than mine have run through this and similar scenarios. I'm just guessing here. But it is heartening that the Democrats seem to be pursuing a course straight to the heart of the matter--the "balance of powers"--on the biggest issue, as to both deadly consequences and high cost. The War.

[murray hill farm]

49. Thank you, PeacePatriot!

That "possible scenario" makes so much sense...and gives me hope that they are doing whatever can be done as quickly as it can be done. Thank you for just laying that out so well.

[tigereye]

43. um, they've only had the majority for a few days.....

you have to give them some time. Many of these folks are totally new to Congress.

[Usrename]

47. Uh huh, yep,

... gotta keep that powder dry ...

[earth mom]

50. I am so sick and tired of the dems playing politics with the thugs!

Excuse me, but do they even realize that they are playing politics with people LIVES?!!! Damn it! Enough is enough! I don't care if the dems have "only" been in power less than a week! Anything past the one minute it takes to say the words "NO MORE" is too damn long! :grr:

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

52. We can only stop Bush with 67 Senators voting to remove him from office

Stopping the funding of the war and even de-funding the entire defense department will not remove money that has already been appropriated from the pipeline. Bush will do as he pleases so long as he is in power and will simply take money designated for this or that defense purpose and spend it on Iraq.

This is unconstitutional, but * has already committed dozens of impeachable, unconstitutional acts. It is folly to believe he'll even hesitate to do this. There may be ways to prevent it, but the executive branch has a checkbook and there is money in the account. I don't know how Congress can force * to follow the budget.

I'm sure this is grossly oversimplified and welcome anyone with insight into what congress can do to prevent the executive from spending as it pleases.

Back to the real problem: We have a madman running the country. I'm convinced at this point that Bush Jr is certifiably rubber-room crazy. The problem is how to get him out of office.

To convict Bush and remove him from office requires the votes of 67 Senators. Frankly, I want Cheney removed first, because he may be saner than Bush, but he is more evil.

This is possible, but we can't do it this week and probably not for several months.

The hearings have to present the American people with just how bad the Bug-nuts administration has been. C-SPAN is our friend here, because the dems will be allowed to broadcast hour after hour of unvarnished truth about Bushco.

Hopefully there will come a time, before it is too late, that a group of R-labeled senators visit the WH and tell WhackenBush that the jig is up. Given his personality, he may flip them the bird and continue his madness until the day he is convicted and hauled bodily out of the White House.

I'm also disgusted with Congress but I have to be patient. Congress has the power to change things, but unfortunately it will take some time.

[WiseButAngrySara]

53. Don't buy M&M's and Peaches until we MPEACH! Dumb, but

maybe as effective with large numbers as the Boston Tea? We have to do something symbolic, and we can't all line up in union on a beach!