WTF is wrong with Conyers? “We’re not doing impeachment, but he [Kucinich] can talk about it”

[JFN1]

WHAT...THE...FUCK?????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

How can he say that? How much blood must be spilled? How much treasure looted? How many lives destroyed?

WHAT...THE...FUCK?????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So is this the new standard for America? BECAUSE IT HAD BETTER BE!!!!

It seems to me under the Equal Protection Clause in the Constitution, if Conyers and Congress are going to give a pass to Bush, Cheney, and the rest of the cabal, then the same must apply to EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN!!!!

So if we want to lie and people die, or "lose" billions of dollars we're entrusted with (or any amount of money for that matter), or commit any of the THIRTY FELONIES Bush and his buddies have committed, then we should get a free pass, too!!!!

FUCK accountability.

FUCK the rule of law.

FUCK the American people.

FUCK the Constitution.

Apparently the only thing that matters to these fucking POLITICIANS is to protect the village fucking idiot THEY HELPED MAKE KING.

[mikelgb]

1. Like I said in another thread, Jesse Jackson clearly already got to Conyers

so disappointed in John Conyers

[Matariki]

2. What happened to Rove's subpoena?

And begging his lawyer to reconsider ignoring it? And the "we really mean it this time" schtick?

[JFN1]

3. That's all it is - shtick

These people, many Democrats among them, obviously see us all as mere chumps - powerless, and unimportant.

God I am pissed at Conyers...

[Crabby Appleton]

25. Just a show put on for the rubes out in Cabbageville

[redqueen]

50. Yep - good cop / bad cop. (nt)

[Kutjara]

4. There simply isn't time.

Congress has a full calendar of catering to every single one of Shrub's whims during the next six months. There just isn't any time for anything else.

[GreenPartyVoter]

7. 7 years was not enough time??

[Kutjara]

9. Shrub had a lot of whims.

It's a full time job keeping up with them.

Did I really need to put a sarcasm smiley on my last post? Sheesh!

[GreenPartyVoter]

15. Well, no. My thought was really directed more at Congress itself, I guess. :^) Clearly we are

on the same page, you and I. Sarcasm and all.

[tavalon]

31. Apology,

and yes, you clearly did need the sarcasm tag. My bad. I'm a little twitchy around this and there are a lot of people who actually do espouse the very position you took but it's no reason for me to yell. Sorry. :blush:

[Kutjara]

36. No problem, Tav. These are twitchy times.

I think we're all extra sensitive to the incipient cretinism that seems to lurk just under the skin of people we thought knew better. :hug:

[Greyhound]

22. BS, 3 months, tops. n/t

[Kutjara]

23. Wow, I guess I did need to use the sarcasm smiley.

Now I know how the New Yorker cartoonist feels. :eyes:

[Greyhound]

29. Sorry, we've been fed that lie here numerous times in the past by the Vichy Dems.

Didn't get your intent.
:hi:
:kick:
:thumbsup:

[proud2BlibKansan]

27. And can be done in 3 weeks

[tavalon]

30. And six months ago, was there time?

How about a year ago? OR EIGHTEEN FUCKING MONTHS AGO, WAS THERE TIME!!!???!!!!!:nuke:

[Kutjara]

35. Jesus Christ, does noone here get sarcasm!?

For fuck's sake, I should just send the contents of this thread to the New Yorker to show them that it isn't only backwoodsmen and fundies who don't get sarcasm. This place is really beginning to depress me.

[JFN1]

37. I thought your comment was funny

and you bring up an excellent point: As long as we buy into the idea that impeachment CAN'T happen; it WON'T happen.

[Zhade]

45. Not when too many here say seriously what you said in sarcasm.

Such cowardice has been suggested here many times.

[hack89]

39. All they are thinking about is the November elections. nt

[JFN1]

40. But if that is so, they are soooo far from reality

It's almost Rovian. All the recent polls show a majority of Americans in favor of impeachment, so if they're thinking about November, their is wrong AGAIN...

[Zhade]

44. Yeah, just let the criminals walk without even trying to stop them!

It's the American way!

EDIT: Yep, you needed to use the sarcasm tag. Too many people really do mean what you didn't...

[Overseas]

48. SO SAD our Democrats have been so presssed for time for so many years now.

And they've been so concerned not to hurt the 25% of people who support GWB.

[bdf]

5. Perhaps...

It could be a stupid political miscalculation that he (and/or the party) has more to lose by going after impeachment than by preventing it. Or perhaps it's a shrewd, correct political calculation to the same end - impeaching is worse than not impeaching.

Or it could be that he's been on the wrong end of one of Dubya's illegal wiretaps. "Try for an impeachment, or try to block the FISA immunity-for-telcos-and-presidents bill and guess what secrets of yours are going to be 'leaked'." A tactic which might work even if he hasn't yet been listened in on.

And that is why Dubya should be impeached. Over the wiretapping. Because it allows him to undercut the other two branches and become king.

Don't forget that this wiretapping started before he had the excuse of 9-11, so he was using it for nefarious ends right from the start. There's absolutely no reason to think that after 9-11 he made a vow to use his super-powers only for the good of mankind instead of, as previously, to shaft everyone but his ultra-rich cronies.

[AndyA]

6. John Conyers is obviously a DIRTY POLITICIAN.

Bushco, or someone else, has the goods on him and he can't do anything that goes against their demands for fear of exposure.

CONYERS NEEDS TO GO. HE'S NOT DOING HIS JOB.

[librechik]

33. maybe not dirty. But ineffective and duplicitous.

Yes. He needs to go. He is now complicit in the cover up, and should probably be charged as an accessory to war crimes.

[onenote]

51. or maybe he's just a politician who is viewing impeachment through a political lens

and has decided that the upside, politically, from pushing impeachment is not great enough to warrant pursuing it, particularly if it risks being divisive within the Democratic caucuse just months before a national election.

Politicians make political judgments. They don't have to be "dirty" to make them. Some politicians put other principles above political judgments, but they are the exception, not the rule.

[elocs]

8. How can I take your impeachment post seriously when you only used "FUCK" in bold 6 times.

To clearly indicate your immense outrage, 8 or 10 times is the minimum otherwise you are simply taken as a ranting amateur. Remember, this is DU and there is a direct correlation between between honest, believable passion and using the word "fuck" (or its variations). You can never use it often enough--all the best posters here do. In fact, if Kucinich had used the word "fuck" in his articles of impeachment the rest of Congress would sit up and take notice. So clearly the serious lack of use of the word "fuck" has kept King George in power.

[Mira]

13. Can I redommend this answer for a DUzy award?

[elocs]

16. Really? I thought it was much more likely somebody was going to tell me, well, you know. nt

[tavalon]

32. Like, um, go fuck yourself? Naw, that was out and out funny, actually

Well done. DUzy level, in fact.

[JFN1]

17. I'll try to remember that

next time I feel like I'm going crazy...

[elocs]

24. One of my favorite Northern Exposure clips...it's the song at the end.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmnCteBCUi8

[JFN1]

26. OYG

That is too funny - thanks, I really needed a good laugh!!!! Crazy...

[mmonk]

10. He's holding onto his chair and keeping investigations

of his wife at bay.

[Raine1967]

11. Can I get a link?

I would like to know when he said this and where and stuff like that... I seemed to have missed it here on DU.

Can you help a gal out? I did a quick google search and can't find it. :dunce:

[MadrasT]

14. Link

http://kucinich.us/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2361&Itemid=1

[tavalon]

41. "We're not doing impeachment"

"Impeachment is off the table" Aaaaarrrrrgggghhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That knife in our back is not being held by the Republicans.

[windoe]

46. Whose up for a naked run down Constitution Avenue

-that should short circuit those fucking surveillance cameras, no? They took everything from us but our naked collective butts, they would deserve it!!!

If we are going crazy, lets do it in style!! B-)

(response to the naked run on Northern Exposure!!)

[rateyes]

12. Honor among theives. nt

[librechik]

18. but but--as a Democrat, wouldn't it break your heart to send Harman & Rockefeller

to prison for complicity in war crimes? After all they are our Democratic leaders!

(who don't seem to have very good moral judgment or historical perspective)

I say let the chips fall where they may, and if Dems go to jail for war crimes, so be it!

[JFN1]

20. Either we are a nation of laws

or we are not. Politics be damned!!!! How about some justice????

[librechik]

21. justice, even when it hurts, if it is true, feels so much better than winning

too bad the Republicons don't ever find this out...

[kenny blankenship]

19. Between the politicized DOJ and warrantless wiretaps, you really need to ask?

He's compromised.

[wildbilln864]

28. They probably all are! nt

[JFN1]

34. Well, Bush was spying on SOMEONE before 9/11

And given the behavior of our Dems in Congress, it sure seems like he's got blackmail material - or who know what - on them all...except Dennis, of course. As the only Dem with the courage to do his job, isn't it a shame we aren't electing Dennis for President, just because he's not "pretty" enough?

[tavalon]

42. Yes, I'm sure he is

A true hero and patriot would stand up anyway, consequences be damned.

I am ashamed of him. I never thought I would feel that way about John Conyers.

[warren pease]

38. Protecting that 9 percent approval rating...

Thing is, no matter how dirty they are, they're pikers compared to the Bushies. It's like comparing muggers and smash and grab thieves to the Gambinos.

If there was a single ounce of integrity and personal honor left among the whole sorry lot of them, they'd set up on the Capitol steps, hold a mea culpa news conference and admit their sins.

But for each of their own screw-ups, they'd read one of Kucinich's articles and ask whether accepting a free ride on a corporate sponsor's plane is equivalent to, say, creating that insane rationale for torture and violating the Constitution and numerous international treaties in the process.

The location would be particularly ironic since it was the scene of one of their most embarrassing moments -- one of the top 10 anyway. Shortly after the PNAC-scripted criminal black op known as "the events of 9/11(tm)," the suckup dems gathered on the steps to recite idiotic loyalty oaths, sing hymns of American exceptionalism and vow solidarity with the war president.

Ooops... No more solidarity.

Nothing's easy when there's corporate mass media spin to deal with. However, a little push back might be in order. Instead of Conyers worrying about what names the Fux Nudes bimbettes will call him, maybe the dem "leadership" could hire some actual vertebrates as intermediaries, people who would be delighted to have a word with a few of the blow-dried propagandist hacks posing as real reporters.

A little something to take back to their overlords at GE, Viacom, News Corp, Time Warner and the rest of the big six. Stuff like how the coming democratic sweep means that things like concentration of media ownership, enforcing the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, kicking corporate cronies off the FCC and replacing them with actual regulators with teeth and a new agenda that serves the people.

Maybe even revisit the whole scam that gave away billions of dollars in the peoples' airwaves to these predators at no cost. Possibly filing charges against the Michael Reagans and Savages and Limbaughs of the world for using the public airwaves to advocate for murder or try to drum up a riot at the DNC convention. Even equal time for opposing views might be up for discussion.

So every hour of Savage's violent idiocy is followed by an hour featuring Mike Malloy or Thom Hartmann or Rachel Maddow. Same for every last one of the fascist motormouths Limbaugh spawned. We'll see who gets the advertising dollars after about six months of this.

Fantasy land, I know. But in a functional country with an actual free press and a real opposition party -- preferably a dozen of them -- this is just one alternative universe voters might be able to vote for. Not this horrible scramble for the center democrats feel is necessary to appeal to the lowest common denominator -- which is apparently where they think the votes are.

Plus, the center has shifted so far to the right since St. Raygun sold the people on predatory corporatism that Kucinich is considered an unelectable radical lefty when he would be just another moderately progressive mainstream politician in western Europe.


And another one-liner becomes a long disjointed essay. Ah well... If you read this far, my condolences.


wp

[Zhade]

43. Fucking cowards. Willing to let criminals walk.

And they wonder why their approval rating's at 9%.

[book_worm]

47. It means it's not going to happen. It should have happened two years ago

but now with a national election coming up the members will certainly not want to get into that can of worms which would divert the nation from their campaigns. Bush will not be impeached. Cheney will not be impeached.

[redqueen]

49. He's covering his own ass.

I can think of no other reason that he wouldn't hold a hearing to deal with the issue of how we were lied into a war, but rather would want to lump it in with all the other ways bu$hco has screwed us.

[onenote]

52. the reason is that he is viewing this through a political lens

He is approaching it from the standpoint of what he, and the rest of the leadership, believe will best serve the interests of the caucus moving into the election. Focusing generally on chimpy's misdeeds and failings rather than on the "lied into war" issue is considered a better strategy because proving that bushco lied us into war gives both Democrats AND repubs who supported the war the out of claiming that they were lied to. Painting a broader picture of the failures of this adminstration helps Democrats but doesn't let repubs off the hook.

That's what I believe is going on.