impeach- Page 2

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 8/20/06 at 3:27pm

well, ywiw, i'm not saying they can influence the elections on their own, but if their actions are picked up by media outlets and given attention on say, the evening news, their influence is multiplied substantially, isn't it?

[kjklo]

Posted: 8/20/06 at 3:38pm

Aren't there really only a relatively small number of blogs that are taken seriously enough to influence the mainstream media? And those few would almost surely not participate. And it's unimaginable that the Democratic party establishment would talk impeachment prior to the election. I just don't see this as being of a whole lot of significance in the grand scheme of things.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 8/20/06 at 3:40pm

why would it be unimaginable?

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 8/20/06 at 3:45pm

along with any non-partisan blogs.

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 8/20/06 at 3:45pm

I am not sure - as no one is privy to what has been authorized and approved by Congress, and what has not.

I tend to believe that the abrogation of the 4th Amendment via the NSA taps do rise to the level of a high crime, and violates the law.

But, I don't have all of the information. And, as much as I detest the man's policies, that is not enough for me to remove someone from office.

Lying to the American public about the basis for war is not, to my knowledge, a High Crime or Misdemeanor. And, he was not under oath when he talked to the 9/11 Commission, so I do not believe that he can be held legally accountable for anything he said then.

I do not believe that Bush was involved in the outing of Valerie Plame, that was Cheney's doing. And, the crime there may have been the cover-up, not the actual release of information.

I just think we will not be able to really know what he did and whether there are grounds until a full investigation takes place - which will not happen until Democrats get back a house.

And papa, it depends on whether the news is picked up and followed and not ridiculed. I guess it really depends on who picks it up and how it is portrayed.

[kjklo]

Posted: 8/20/06 at 3:47pm

Unimaginable because it would cost them votes.

One other thought: the influential bloggers, on both the left and right, are self-styled independent thinkers. I don't see them jumping into something that smacks of a herd mentality.
Updated On: 8/20/06 at 03:47 PM

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 8/20/06 at 3:49pm

so you're saying kjklo that the impression that the democrats will impeach bush would cost them votes? why?

[kjklo]

Posted: 8/20/06 at 3:54pm

There's a lot of dissatisfaction with Bush but I have the feeling that most of the country is not really "up" for the prospect of an impeachment process. Yeah, some are. I know I am. I think it would sound too extremist and lose more votes than it would attract. Unfortunately. And you know how terrified the Democrats are of offending anyone.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 8/20/06 at 3:57pm

do you agree that the democrats should be careful here not to sound, in your words, extremist? why not play to their base? if you agree with it, why wouldn't you promote it as a policy?

[YouWantitWhen????]

Posted: 8/20/06 at 4:04pm

I think stopping Bush, and impeaching Bush, are two very different things.

I think that the Democrats need to play up the fact that they need to be a counterweight to Bush, and come up with some ideas and initiatives that make sense. Like it or not, we are at a time of war, and impeachment procedures are not going to play well against images of 9/11.

If, after we get the ability to investigate this Administration fully there are grounds for impeachment, well then we can deal with that when we have the subpoena power to fully investigate what is going on.

But, I have always been a fan of a split between the executive and legislative branch. Which is why I will vote for Arnie for Gov but vote Dem for my local rep.

[kjklo]

Posted: 8/20/06 at 4:05pm

Personally, I would applaud with glee to see Bush impeached, but it's probably not going to happen. The important thing right now is to get the Republicans out of office, get the country out of Iraq, and then start reversing the whole list of everything this administration has screwed up. Impeachment would be emotionally satisfying but it's not really the point. He'll be gone soon enough anyway, and he's already badly crippled.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 8/20/06 at 4:22pm

so you two agree that talk of impeachment would hurt the democrats chances if it becomes widespread?

[FranklinShepard-Inc.]

Posted: 8/20/06 at 4:25pm

Interesting thought. But I'd say, only if they support it or even just sympathize.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 8/20/06 at 4:29pm

politics is as much perception as reality, so my question is if democrats are tied to the idea of impeachment, whether or not they come out in support of it, would that hurt their chances in the fall?

*edit* if i say, "so my question is..." once more, someone slap me, k?

Updated On: 8/20/06 at 04:29 PM

[LionessInWinter]

Posted: 8/20/06 at 6:15pm

Much as I'd like to see an impeachment, it may not be a great idea as....

Dick Cheney would become president (though not sure what would be the difference from now for all practical purposes). Unless he can be indicted for something and resign a la Spiro Agnew.

And...

It would be bad for Dems to start touting impeachment before the fall elections as it will make them look spiteful, possibly arrogant, unsympathetic to the country's problems (not unlike Joe Lieberman incidentally) and give the impression that the only reason they want to win is to go after Bush vs. fixing what is wrong with our country and government.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 8/20/06 at 6:15pm

i liked glenn better in "the fastest gun alive."

[kjklo]

Posted: 8/20/06 at 6:39pm

Papa, it almost sounds as though you're trying to get everyone here to admit that Bush and his policies must have widespread support because otherwise why wouldn't impeachment be a national priority. I'm sure you know that it's possible for a president to be deeply unpopular without the country necessarily clamoring for the national ordeal of an impeachment. Are you genuinely denying that there's a growing consensus, even among certain conservatives, that Bush's presidency is a "failed" one and that we're overall moving in the wrong direction?
Updated On: 8/20/06 at 06:39 PM

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 8/20/06 at 6:42pm

i'm looking at one specific thing in this thread: the possiblity of a blogswarm in support of impeachment and what effect if any it would have on the fall elections.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 8/20/06 at 6:50pm

trust me, if i was trying to make the argument you attribute to me, k, i'd do so in a clear and concise way leaving no doubt as to my position. however, it's a flawed argument and one i don't agree with, so i won't be doing so.

[kjklo]

Posted: 8/20/06 at 6:58pm

So, basically, you're just trying to gather opinions on whether this particular scheme will fly? I doubt that it will. Now if every blog and personal website posted the "impeach" message on Sept 1, that would indeed be big news and, yes, the msm would be all over it. It's not going to happen though.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 8/20/06 at 7:00pm

not every blog, but a large number of them.

*edit* and the larger question of whether being tied to the prospect of impeachment would hurt democrats.

Updated On: 8/20/06 at 07:00 PM

[kjklo]

Posted: 8/20/06 at 7:04pm

Well, looking at the list of blogs and websites that are listed on the right hand side as supporting it, I don't see any names that I recognize as biggies or heavy hitters. Not that I'm an expert on the blogosphere, but they all look pretty marginal.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 8/20/06 at 7:08pm

hey, the 1st is still almost 2 weeks away. who knows what kinda support it could gather between now and then.

[kjklo]

Posted: 8/20/06 at 9:44pm

No offense to Daphne, but I don't think Weddings By Daphne is on the Technorati 100.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 8/20/06 at 10:20pm

You know of course that most liberal blogs and Democratic candidates are choosing not to address the issue of impeachment, don't you?

So your question is moot.

The focus is on winning the House and the Senate, in a more goal-oriented manner than has been the Democratic wont for many elections.

So far it's working.

Why not instead table all discussion of impeachment for the time being, and focus on the incompetency of the administration and the rampant corruption of the Republican-controlled Congress.