Go Cindy Go!

For a long time it has seemed to me that the Pelosi-led Democrats have abandoned a key weapon in the campaign against Bush's war in Iraq - impeachment. I don't think any hostage negotiator gives up a key negotiating tactic before the hostage crisis is solved. And it's abundantly clear that Bush is holding the U.S. hostage to his and Cheney's war in Iraq.

So it's time to support someone who isn't in the sway of the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) which has snatched defeat from the jaws of victory once to often.

Here's what the DLC said after the 2006 election:

"Democrats will need to show that they have a forward-looking national security agenda and can wage a more effective fight [than the Republicans] against terror. The party seems well on the way toward achieving that goal. Speaker-designate Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) squelched talk of Iraq-related impeachment proceedings, and helped orchestrate a 'Real Security' plan that pledged House Democrats to such measures as implementing all of the 9/11 Commission's recommendations, locking down dangerous nuclear and chemical materials in the former Soviet states, and strengthening the overstretched U.S. military. Obviously, the biggest test will come on Iraq. Democrats need to show they can provide a new direction in Iraq without forcing a hasty withdrawal or unconscionably surrendering the Iraqi people to even broader civil strife and slaughter."

This is clearly different from what Cindy Sheehan proposes.

Cindy Sheehan
(photo by Dan Cohen)

Sheehan Considers Challenge to Pelosi
By ANGELA K. BROWN
(Associated Press Writer)

"CRAWFORD, Texas - Cindy Sheehan, ... said Sunday that she plans to run against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi unless she [Pelosi] moves to oust President Bush in the next two weeks.

"Sheehan said she will run against the San Francisco Democrat in 2008 as an independent if Pelosi does not seek by July 23 to impeach Bush. That's when Sheehan and her supporters are to arrive in Washington, D.C., after a 13-day caravan and walking tour starting next week from the group's war protest site near Bush's Crawford ranch.

"'Democrats and Americans feel betrayed by the Democratic leadership,' Sheehan told The Associated Press. 'We hired them to bring an end to the war.'"

This is from the Nation:

"Many more House Democrats would sign on for impeachment if the leadership of their caucus was not pressuring them to back off.

"Thus, the greatest barrier to the movement to hold the president and vice president to account is House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California."

"Unfortunately, Pelosi has misread her moment in history."

e

Are we once again back to the imperial presidency?

Why is the U.S. the only democratic nation that treats its leaders as untouchable? Shouldn't the current events in Israel tell us something?

"[A] report, by an Israeli government commission, set off a furious debate in Israel on whether [Prime Minister Ehud] Olmert should remain in office.

"The commission accused him of having decided hastily to go to war, neglecting to ask for a detailed military plan, refusing to consult outside the army and setting “over-ambitious and unobtainable goals.

"One result, the commission said, was that Mr. Olmert had been responsible for 'a severe failure in exercising judgment, responsibility and prudence.'" (N.Y. Times)

Doesn't all this sound familiar? Shouldn't the Bush administration be subjected to the same questions, only more so. The Bush administration has proven over and over again its historic self-indulgence and incompetence.

I don't know who is actually responsible for the disasters in New Orleans, Iraq, Walter Reade, for the politicization of every aspect of this administration, Justice, science, etc. Only history will tell us whether the real culprit is named Bush, Cheney, Rove, the ridiculous neo-cons, or maybe all of the co-conspirators, but since Bush claims to be the "decider," let's take him at his word. And investigate him for "a severe failure in exercising judgment, responsibility and prudence."

In the past it's been a two-bit robbery and cover-up (Nixon) and lying about blow jobs (Clinton) that has been grounds for impeachment (even if neither was ever convicted), these are penny ante "crimes and misdemeanors" compared to the behavior of Bush and his gang of war criminals.

Even arguments against challenging the Commander-in-chief in time of war pale before the Israeli situation. There they investigate the prime minister here we take impeachment off the table. The question is what's wrong with us? And what are we going to do about it?