#1 searched term on Technocrati
September 9, 2005 9:07 PM Subscribe
It should be mentioned wherever possible, and it should not stop until the mainstream media and all politicians realize that we, the people, will not stand for gross negligence, willful and wanton misconduct, nor the utter lies, any longer.
"We" the people? Or just a couple of blowhard bloggers? Do you feel a storm brewing?
"We" the people? Or just a couple of blowhard bloggers? Do you feel a storm brewing?
the problem is that unless we get the Senate back, there's no way to impeach. I've heard talk about a recall election too, but who has the power to call it?
posted by amberglow at 9:15 PM on September 9, 2005
posted by amberglow at 9:15 PM on September 9, 2005
ach!! my eyes! that orange!
( plus what amberglow said )
posted by troutfishing at 9:22 PM on September 9, 2005
( plus what amberglow said )
posted by troutfishing at 9:22 PM on September 9, 2005
we, the people, will not stand for gross negligence, willful and wanton misconduct, nor the utter lies
Insert wild, uncontrollable laughter here.
posted by deanc at 9:24 PM on September 9, 2005
Insert wild, uncontrollable laughter here.
posted by deanc at 9:24 PM on September 9, 2005
/me looks outside, notes the clouds on the horizon.
Yep, storm brewing. Been doing that since December 2000. Or maybe January, 2001. The man sitting in the Oval Office didn't earn the privilege. Party was put before Country by too many. The rest of the shit just flows from that.
I just wonder what will happen if a big earthquake hits California, or maybe worse, the New Madrid fault. At least with a hurricane some people could get out of the way.
posted by Goofyy at 9:39 PM on September 9, 2005
Yep, storm brewing. Been doing that since December 2000. Or maybe January, 2001. The man sitting in the Oval Office didn't earn the privilege. Party was put before Country by too many. The rest of the shit just flows from that.
I just wonder what will happen if a big earthquake hits California, or maybe worse, the New Madrid fault. At least with a hurricane some people could get out of the way.
posted by Goofyy at 9:39 PM on September 9, 2005
"We" the people? Or just a couple of blowhard bloggers?
The answer is B. What do I win?
posted by LarryC at 9:42 PM on September 9, 2005
The answer is B. What do I win?
posted by LarryC at 9:42 PM on September 9, 2005
You know, I linked to em on my blog. I donated money to ImpeachBush.org. I might even be willing to give my left nut to get Bush and Co put in jail. But... it ain't gonna happen. As much as I want it to, as much as I will dream about it, it ain't gonna happen. And even if it did happen, it's not going to "Make America Great Again" as their banner proclaims. We've all got to do a lot more work for that.
posted by papakwanz at 9:55 PM on September 9, 2005
posted by papakwanz at 9:55 PM on September 9, 2005
You guys can laugh, but these people look pissed to me. And they have coordinated signs. Not bad for the kind of ad hoc protest organized outside the White House yesterday. With the little FreedomBoots shindig this weekend and the civil liberty standoffs happening in NOLA, I think things could get interesting by September 24th.
The answer is B. What do I win?
Canada
posted by If I Had An Anus at 9:56 PM on September 9, 2005
The answer is B. What do I win?
Canada
posted by If I Had An Anus at 9:56 PM on September 9, 2005
Yeah, that's a great idea. Besides the feasibility issues raised above, if they somehow magically pull it off, we'd end up with Cheney in the Big Chair. Count me out.
posted by foozleface at 10:01 PM on September 9, 2005
posted by foozleface at 10:01 PM on September 9, 2005
two things:
1. Impeaching Bush would be tough for all the reasons stated and/or linked to above.
2. The Republican party, given sufficient reason (such as overwhelming incontrovertible evidence) will roll over on its own at the drop of a hat. So, it's still possible, but it'll require the kind of thing that, if they party DIDN'T abandon Bush, would drag them all down with him.
So, yeah. Good luck with that.
posted by shmegegge at 10:16 PM on September 9, 2005
1. Impeaching Bush would be tough for all the reasons stated and/or linked to above.
2. The Republican party, given sufficient reason (such as overwhelming incontrovertible evidence) will roll over on its own at the drop of a hat. So, it's still possible, but it'll require the kind of thing that, if they party DIDN'T abandon Bush, would drag them all down with him.
So, yeah. Good luck with that.
posted by shmegegge at 10:16 PM on September 9, 2005
There's a whole world of possibilities between "we won't stand for that" and impeachment. Their power rests on our consent, and that consent can be withdrawn in any number of ways.
posted by muckster at 10:43 PM on September 9, 2005
posted by muckster at 10:43 PM on September 9, 2005
I just read that Bush hates African-American children and steals their lunch money.
But I'm Canadian, what do I know?
posted by newfers at 10:44 PM on September 9, 2005
But I'm Canadian, what do I know?
posted by newfers at 10:44 PM on September 9, 2005
Just to throw a stinking piece of reality into the conversation, most people believe the media is liberal, god had something to do with the bible and that bush isn't a criminal but a good guy.
It will never happen no matter how many blogger scream in unison.
posted by 517 at 10:45 PM on September 9, 2005
It will never happen no matter how many blogger scream in unison.
posted by 517 at 10:45 PM on September 9, 2005
however unlikely it may be, i've called for bush's impeachment on my blog and i will continue to do so ... not every day, though ... that would get dull
posted by pyramid termite at 10:50 PM on September 9, 2005
posted by pyramid termite at 10:50 PM on September 9, 2005
For awhile there, when the shooting started, I was positive that people would rise up. Now, however, I am slowly beginning to realize that absolutely nothing can make Americans sit up and take control of their country again. The level of apathy is just past the point of no return.
posted by nightchrome at 10:51 PM on September 9, 2005
posted by nightchrome at 10:51 PM on September 9, 2005
Without a Chief Justice, there can be no impeachment procedings.
Roberts is a Bush NOMINEE, with immediate advancement to Chief.
There will be no impeachment.
Maybe later governments could officially expunge the Bush term from the official record, but there will be no impeachment of this sitting president.
*FSM cries and cries*
posted by Balisong at 10:53 PM on September 9, 2005
Roberts is a Bush NOMINEE, with immediate advancement to Chief.
There will be no impeachment.
Maybe later governments could officially expunge the Bush term from the official record, but there will be no impeachment of this sitting president.
*FSM cries and cries*
posted by Balisong at 10:53 PM on September 9, 2005
Um, yeah. Dick cheney would make a great president!
posted by delmoi at 10:54 PM on September 9, 2005
posted by delmoi at 10:54 PM on September 9, 2005
Balisong, I'm sure that if the president were to, say, assasinate the Cheif Justice, they could still be impeached.
I mean, the Suprime Court could just pick someone to stand in, and then the Suprime Court could rule that it was constitutional.
posted by delmoi at 10:57 PM on September 9, 2005
I mean, the Suprime Court could just pick someone to stand in, and then the Suprime Court could rule that it was constitutional.
posted by delmoi at 10:57 PM on September 9, 2005
Nope, I'm sure they would trot out some lawyers to say that EVEN THOUGH HE killed the Chief Justice, The rules are written in stone.
That was just the overwhelming reason why there won't be an impeachment, there are plenty of tangental reasons. None of them rely on him not commiting an impeachable offence.
(plus, it's supreme...)
posted by Balisong at 11:01 PM on September 9, 2005
That was just the overwhelming reason why there won't be an impeachment, there are plenty of tangental reasons. None of them rely on him not commiting an impeachable offence.
(plus, it's supreme...)
posted by Balisong at 11:01 PM on September 9, 2005
Any time the powers feel a disturbance, they reassert control by instilling fear. They will turn us against ourselves using divisions.
Gay marriage. Undocumented workers. Muslims. The poor.
They'll blame Katrina flood victims for living below sea level. People will keep saying stupid things like "Katrina was the best thing to ever happen to them."
I'm ready for more BS. Nothing will change. Hate rules.
posted by surplus at 11:02 PM on September 9, 2005
Gay marriage. Undocumented workers. Muslims. The poor.
They'll blame Katrina flood victims for living below sea level. People will keep saying stupid things like "Katrina was the best thing to ever happen to them."
I'm ready for more BS. Nothing will change. Hate rules.
posted by surplus at 11:02 PM on September 9, 2005
Good luck with that.
Well, I doubt it will happen in the next year, but if you're angry -- if you are really, really angry -- then right now is the time to start working for the Nov 2006 mid-term elections.
33 Senate seats will be up for grabs. Of those 33 seats, 17 are held by Dems or I's (Jeffords, VT), and 15 are held by Republicans. The Republican seats are:
VA (George Allen); MT (Conrad Burns); RI (Lincoln Chafee); OH (Mike DeWine); NV (John Ensign): TN (Bill Frist); UT (Orrin Hatch); TX (Kay Bailey Hutchison); AZ (Jon Kyl); MS (Trent Lott); IN (Richard Lugar); PA (Rick Santorum); ME (Olympia Snowe); MO (James Talent); WY (Craig Thomas)
See some names there you recognize? I thought you might.....
The trick here is to hold all 17 D/I seats, and pick up at least, oh 7 or 8 of the R seats. This is not an easy task. At least 3 D/I's have already said they won't seek re-election (including Jeffords), so the D/I's will need to run strong candidates in those areas (although I'm sure another D/I will pick up VT), as the races will have no incumbent. Also, Frist has also said he's done, so that's another 'open' race on the R side.
If you seriously think that Bush should be impeached, you need to do the following:
a) accept that, however much you might feel hate and frustration toward the Democratic party, they're the only other horse in this race. There might be a time to challenge the two party system in this country, but now is not it.
b) contact your local dems or other progressive citizen action group, and volunteer as "feet on the street" for this election, the one coming up this November. Every state in this nation has important issues on the Ballot this November. This is where we start the ball rolling, and part of how we do that is for you to get involved now and understand both how the process works and make yourself known to the people who organize campaigns.
Here are some groups to contact:
US Action Affiliates
Democracy for America
Center for Community Change
or your local statewide Democratic party....
Once you have your foot in the door, you'll have a year to help identify strong D/I candidates, work on campaigns, and help Get Out The Vote. If 2004 taught us one thing, its that its the GOTV efforts that make the difference, and they don't have to be high profile efforts. The Church Vote was the deciding factor in this past election.
Whatever you might think of Dean as a person, Democracy for America has the right idea for meeting long term goals -- nurturing progressive candidates for local positions: school boards, city councils, local representatives -- this is the only way to build a generation of progressive leaders, which the Dems up to this point have sorely lacked.
This is a long term plan, and it takes hard work. Its not a sexy, perhaps, as blogging for Impeachment, but in the long term its going to make a more effective change in America.
posted by anastasiav at 11:21 PM on September 9, 2005
Well, I doubt it will happen in the next year, but if you're angry -- if you are really, really angry -- then right now is the time to start working for the Nov 2006 mid-term elections.
33 Senate seats will be up for grabs. Of those 33 seats, 17 are held by Dems or I's (Jeffords, VT), and 15 are held by Republicans. The Republican seats are:
VA (George Allen); MT (Conrad Burns); RI (Lincoln Chafee); OH (Mike DeWine); NV (John Ensign): TN (Bill Frist); UT (Orrin Hatch); TX (Kay Bailey Hutchison); AZ (Jon Kyl); MS (Trent Lott); IN (Richard Lugar); PA (Rick Santorum); ME (Olympia Snowe); MO (James Talent); WY (Craig Thomas)
See some names there you recognize? I thought you might.....
The trick here is to hold all 17 D/I seats, and pick up at least, oh 7 or 8 of the R seats. This is not an easy task. At least 3 D/I's have already said they won't seek re-election (including Jeffords), so the D/I's will need to run strong candidates in those areas (although I'm sure another D/I will pick up VT), as the races will have no incumbent. Also, Frist has also said he's done, so that's another 'open' race on the R side.
If you seriously think that Bush should be impeached, you need to do the following:
a) accept that, however much you might feel hate and frustration toward the Democratic party, they're the only other horse in this race. There might be a time to challenge the two party system in this country, but now is not it.
b) contact your local dems or other progressive citizen action group, and volunteer as "feet on the street" for this election, the one coming up this November. Every state in this nation has important issues on the Ballot this November. This is where we start the ball rolling, and part of how we do that is for you to get involved now and understand both how the process works and make yourself known to the people who organize campaigns.
Here are some groups to contact:
US Action Affiliates
Democracy for America
Center for Community Change
or your local statewide Democratic party....
Once you have your foot in the door, you'll have a year to help identify strong D/I candidates, work on campaigns, and help Get Out The Vote. If 2004 taught us one thing, its that its the GOTV efforts that make the difference, and they don't have to be high profile efforts. The Church Vote was the deciding factor in this past election.
Whatever you might think of Dean as a person, Democracy for America has the right idea for meeting long term goals -- nurturing progressive candidates for local positions: school boards, city councils, local representatives -- this is the only way to build a generation of progressive leaders, which the Dems up to this point have sorely lacked.
This is a long term plan, and it takes hard work. Its not a sexy, perhaps, as blogging for Impeachment, but in the long term its going to make a more effective change in America.
posted by anastasiav at 11:21 PM on September 9, 2005
/me applauds anastasiav.
indeed. don't waste energy on calling for impeachment. yes, it should happen, but it won't. besides which, the democrats need to ... "find themselves", you know? they've become marginalised on issues on which they should be strong. well, katrina touches on a lot of those issues, so now is the time to start making some hay.
posted by piranha at 11:30 PM on September 9, 2005
indeed. don't waste energy on calling for impeachment. yes, it should happen, but it won't. besides which, the democrats need to ... "find themselves", you know? they've become marginalised on issues on which they should be strong. well, katrina touches on a lot of those issues, so now is the time to start making some hay.
posted by piranha at 11:30 PM on September 9, 2005
Sorry to say it, but screeching w/o cease is probably a good way to slow this neocon juggernaut down, way down. Just keep throwing shit at these assholes. Aim for their heads. Maybe they won't get around to privatizing SocSec.
posted by pointilist at 11:36 PM on September 9, 2005
posted by pointilist at 11:36 PM on September 9, 2005
Maybe they won't get around to privatizing SocSec.
But, see, again its all about local pressure. From where I sit (admittedly a biased seat), Social Security privatization will never get out of committee in the Senate, in large part because of the enormous, enormous amount of pressure being put on Sen. Snowe by her local constituents.
Granted, our lovely Ms. Olympia is a bit different from most R's out there, in that she actually gives a damn about the people back home, but nevertheless the process of local pressure -- of volunteers, walking door to door with petitions and pre-stamped postcards, asking people to pledge their support and push their opinion -- has done its work exactly as planned.
posted by anastasiav at 12:14 AM on September 10, 2005
But, see, again its all about local pressure. From where I sit (admittedly a biased seat), Social Security privatization will never get out of committee in the Senate, in large part because of the enormous, enormous amount of pressure being put on Sen. Snowe by her local constituents.
Granted, our lovely Ms. Olympia is a bit different from most R's out there, in that she actually gives a damn about the people back home, but nevertheless the process of local pressure -- of volunteers, walking door to door with petitions and pre-stamped postcards, asking people to pledge their support and push their opinion -- has done its work exactly as planned.
posted by anastasiav at 12:14 AM on September 10, 2005
I think that Bush is probably the worst president in history (although trends that he is somewhat a part of will probably cause future historians to give him more credit then he is due, especially as it will be 'unfashionable' to do so.
But until the Dems actually communicate an ideology that is appealing, they will have no power.
Just being not Bush is not going to be good enough, because people have shockingly low standards.
posted by cell divide at 12:33 AM on September 10, 2005
But until the Dems actually communicate an ideology that is appealing, they will have no power.
Just being not Bush is not going to be good enough, because people have shockingly low standards.
posted by cell divide at 12:33 AM on September 10, 2005
The best hope of ridding the world of George Bush lies with the Republican party and the neo-cons, who by now must have noticed that he's become a liability. Only when Fox et al start questioning Bush's leadership will there be any hope of an impeachement. So far though, the right wing have dealt very well with the counter media and Bush appears safe for the time being.
posted by piscatorius at 2:04 AM on September 10, 2005
posted by piscatorius at 2:04 AM on September 10, 2005
Impeach Bush? Get Cheney as President? Count me out too.
How about, in 2008, electing Kucinich or Nader?
posted by davy at 2:04 AM on September 10, 2005
How about, in 2008, electing Kucinich or Nader?
posted by davy at 2:04 AM on September 10, 2005
Good points, anastasiav, but you're funny. Pick up 7 or 8 Senate seats? You're kidding, right?
After recent dismal performance, the Democrats are going to be ginormously happy merely to stop the slide. My guess is that if Bush's popularity stays in the toilet, next year we could -- if really lucky -- grab 3, perhaps 4 seats, and get back up to a fighting minority. The last time we got that many (+8 seats) was '86, when the "coattail" Senators who'd come in with Reagan lost their tenuous seats. Bush had no real coattails in '00 so there isn't a cadre of unsafe seats, not that large anyway.
In fact, here's the scary part -- the majority of Dem Senators coming up for re-election in 2006 are freshmen elected in 2001 (like Clinton). That's a high number and a red flag of vulnerability. So losing even more seats, despite everything, isn't out of the question, just because of local situations.
Now, the House -- we might be able to snag 20 or more seats this round. I wouldn't be at all surprised. The mid-terms are generally considered a referendum on the performance of the White House.
posted by dhartung at 2:21 AM on September 10, 2005
After recent dismal performance, the Democrats are going to be ginormously happy merely to stop the slide. My guess is that if Bush's popularity stays in the toilet, next year we could -- if really lucky -- grab 3, perhaps 4 seats, and get back up to a fighting minority. The last time we got that many (+8 seats) was '86, when the "coattail" Senators who'd come in with Reagan lost their tenuous seats. Bush had no real coattails in '00 so there isn't a cadre of unsafe seats, not that large anyway.
In fact, here's the scary part -- the majority of Dem Senators coming up for re-election in 2006 are freshmen elected in 2001 (like Clinton). That's a high number and a red flag of vulnerability. So losing even more seats, despite everything, isn't out of the question, just because of local situations.
Now, the House -- we might be able to snag 20 or more seats this round. I wouldn't be at all surprised. The mid-terms are generally considered a referendum on the performance of the White House.
posted by dhartung at 2:21 AM on September 10, 2005
In terms of impeachment, even in fantasyland, you gotta have your priorities straight.
Pull a Spiro Agnew on Cheney first. He's much more dangerous than Bush and you'll have to get him out of office first. With all the Haliburton shenanigans, you shouldn't have to look too hard to find a good enough reason to hang something on him.
Once Cheney is gone and replaced by someone more moderate or stupid, then you can go after Bush.
posted by pandaharma at 2:35 AM on September 10, 2005
Pull a Spiro Agnew on Cheney first. He's much more dangerous than Bush and you'll have to get him out of office first. With all the Haliburton shenanigans, you shouldn't have to look too hard to find a good enough reason to hang something on him.
Once Cheney is gone and replaced by someone more moderate or stupid, then you can go after Bush.
posted by pandaharma at 2:35 AM on September 10, 2005
As a person who truely loathes our current president, all I can say is "Who in their right mind would want to try impeaching him?"
No impeachment today. No impeachment after the congressional elections. No impeachment unless he is investigated and shown with detailed evidence to be a liar and a criminal. Bush is a consumate fuck up, but he's OUR fuck up, and if we leave him alone, he'll drag the rest of his party down with him.
The pendulum is swinging back *HARD*. I suggest that we let it do so.
posted by insomnia_lj at 3:20 AM on September 10, 2005
No impeachment today. No impeachment after the congressional elections. No impeachment unless he is investigated and shown with detailed evidence to be a liar and a criminal. Bush is a consumate fuck up, but he's OUR fuck up, and if we leave him alone, he'll drag the rest of his party down with him.
The pendulum is swinging back *HARD*. I suggest that we let it do so.
posted by insomnia_lj at 3:20 AM on September 10, 2005
When I was a teenager I thought that if I could just pop the huge zit on my left cheek then Farrah would be mine.
I popped it. No Farrah.
Turned out the zit wasn't the problem. I was.
posted by srboisvert at 4:15 AM on September 10, 2005
I popped it. No Farrah.
Turned out the zit wasn't the problem. I was.
posted by srboisvert at 4:15 AM on September 10, 2005
Amen to both insomnia_lj and srboisvert!
Also, looking at the comments section on that web site, it looks like that sort of call to action serves mostly as rotting-meat to neo-con snark-jackals.
posted by mmahaffie at 5:51 AM on September 10, 2005
Also, looking at the comments section on that web site, it looks like that sort of call to action serves mostly as rotting-meat to neo-con snark-jackals.
posted by mmahaffie at 5:51 AM on September 10, 2005
we, the people, will not stand for gross negligence, willful and wanton misconduct, nor the utter lies, any longer.
We're shutting down the internet?
posted by jcterminal at 6:19 AM on September 10, 2005
We're shutting down the internet?
posted by jcterminal at 6:19 AM on September 10, 2005
Expanding on srbosisvert
The bloggers have the wrong goal. If you don't like this administration (and I certainly don't), expending energy fighting to get them out is mostly wasted. Expending energy to find someone(s) that can push them out is a better idea. It would be much better to find somebody with vision and popular appeal that will stand up and galvanize people toward a goal of common good. Clinton did this. People want to see someone fixing the problems. Right now the people that will gather significant public support out of this disaster are Gen Honore and Vice Admiral Thad Allen. Trent Lott isn't doing to badly either, much as I hate to say it.
If you can find somebody with leadership, action and direction, they will be able to challenge Bush.
A storm isn't brewing yet ... but the conditions are ripe for one.
posted by forforf at 6:40 AM on September 10, 2005
The bloggers have the wrong goal. If you don't like this administration (and I certainly don't), expending energy fighting to get them out is mostly wasted. Expending energy to find someone(s) that can push them out is a better idea. It would be much better to find somebody with vision and popular appeal that will stand up and galvanize people toward a goal of common good. Clinton did this. People want to see someone fixing the problems. Right now the people that will gather significant public support out of this disaster are Gen Honore and Vice Admiral Thad Allen. Trent Lott isn't doing to badly either, much as I hate to say it.
If you can find somebody with leadership, action and direction, they will be able to challenge Bush.
A storm isn't brewing yet ... but the conditions are ripe for one.
posted by forforf at 6:40 AM on September 10, 2005
It seem monumentally stupid to even talk impeachment regarding Katrina when, in fact, the bottom-up structure of federal disaster relief provides the scape-goat, as we've seen. Look, if Iraq couldn't get him impeached how the hell do you really expect to make a case with Katrina when a democratic governor and mayor dropped the same ball?
"But until the Dems actually communicate an ideology that is appealing, they will have no power."
How about an ideology, period....
Seriously, what is the democrats ideology circa 2005? It strikes me that here we see another Bush debacle and all the democrats can do is point fingers and say how evil he is (yawn). Clearly, that tact has not worked but they just keep on keepin' on.
And somebody actually suggested NADER for a nominee?? Are you serious? I'm all for a third party, hell, I'm for a fourth party too but as long as we continue to have the Nader's of the world leading those efforts, we're fucked. Right now, I think McCain is the best possible choice for the formation of a, somewhat reasonable third party system. He's going to run and the Republicans won't support him. The dems will be too busy saying how evil Bush is to bother with him. I think he will have no choice but to run as a third party candidate.
could be interesting.
posted by j.p. Hung at 8:52 AM on September 10, 2005
"But until the Dems actually communicate an ideology that is appealing, they will have no power."
How about an ideology, period....
Seriously, what is the democrats ideology circa 2005? It strikes me that here we see another Bush debacle and all the democrats can do is point fingers and say how evil he is (yawn). Clearly, that tact has not worked but they just keep on keepin' on.
And somebody actually suggested NADER for a nominee?? Are you serious? I'm all for a third party, hell, I'm for a fourth party too but as long as we continue to have the Nader's of the world leading those efforts, we're fucked. Right now, I think McCain is the best possible choice for the formation of a, somewhat reasonable third party system. He's going to run and the Republicans won't support him. The dems will be too busy saying how evil Bush is to bother with him. I think he will have no choice but to run as a third party candidate.
could be interesting.
posted by j.p. Hung at 8:52 AM on September 10, 2005
What politician could stay in office if lying and getting things wrong were impeachable offences? How about instead we focus on the incredibly corrupt Democratic regieme in Louisiana that wasted billions of dollars given to them by the Federal government for construction purpouses?
Ever since this stupid weblog thing started everyone thinks that posting their opinions to the internet means they're suddenly worthwhile and interesting. I've been doing that a lot longer than these Bloggers and my opinions sure haven't gotten any more important.
posted by Mr.Encyclopedia at 8:53 AM on September 10, 2005
Ever since this stupid weblog thing started everyone thinks that posting their opinions to the internet means they're suddenly worthwhile and interesting. I've been doing that a lot longer than these Bloggers and my opinions sure haven't gotten any more important.
posted by Mr.Encyclopedia at 8:53 AM on September 10, 2005
The Dems could pick up Senate seats if they can manage to prove that people should vote for them, as opposed to saying that people should vote against Republicans.
posted by clevershark at 9:02 AM on September 10, 2005
posted by clevershark at 9:02 AM on September 10, 2005
Expanding on srbosisvert[sic]
Actually, my point was that in a democracy leaders are not that important. Failure belongs to the nation not any individual in it. If you need a great leader than you are a weak nation.
posted by srboisvert at 9:14 AM on September 10, 2005
Actually, my point was that in a democracy leaders are not that important. Failure belongs to the nation not any individual in it. If you need a great leader than you are a weak nation.
posted by srboisvert at 9:14 AM on September 10, 2005
Okay, to be pedantic.
There will be no impeachment until the democrats gain a majority in the House of Representatives
The Senate does not impeach, the House does. The Senate tries an impeached officer, if they convict, that officer is removed. Two presidents have been impeached, neither was convicted, thus, both served full terms.
Furthermore, you'll need more than a few seats in the Senate to convict -- you need a 67 vote supermajority to convict.
So, you want to legally get rid of Bush, you'll need to win about 30 House seats, plus 30 Senate seats (which is impossible, there aren't that many GOP held seats open in the next cycle) and then get ready to do it again, because you just made Cheney president.
Dream on. We're going to kill a few more thousand people before Bush is out of office, and he's going to walk away scot free after all is said and done.
posted by eriko at 9:29 AM on September 10, 2005
There will be no impeachment until the democrats gain a majority in the House of Representatives
The Senate does not impeach, the House does. The Senate tries an impeached officer, if they convict, that officer is removed. Two presidents have been impeached, neither was convicted, thus, both served full terms.
Furthermore, you'll need more than a few seats in the Senate to convict -- you need a 67 vote supermajority to convict.
So, you want to legally get rid of Bush, you'll need to win about 30 House seats, plus 30 Senate seats (which is impossible, there aren't that many GOP held seats open in the next cycle) and then get ready to do it again, because you just made Cheney president.
Dream on. We're going to kill a few more thousand people before Bush is out of office, and he's going to walk away scot free after all is said and done.
posted by eriko at 9:29 AM on September 10, 2005
Well, the funny thing about needing a solid majority in Congress is that there are elections next year. It's never to early to start planning. You think Rove comes up with all his shit the night before?
posted by mkultra at 10:10 AM on September 10, 2005
posted by mkultra at 10:10 AM on September 10, 2005
Hey, everybody, I have an even better idea. I think that there should be a mass suicide. My logic is based on several points:
- Those who participate don't have to do anything ever again. No more crappy job that barely pays enough to get you by, no more listening to the constant squabbling of people who can't agree on anything, no more trying to decide what you want to do with your life amidst all the other people who want to tell you what you should be doing.
- A large enough group of people killing themselves all at once will pull even more pins out of an already unstable structure. (The trick, of course, is getting enough people to participate...people are so pro-life where their own lives are concerned.)
- It's the ultimate protest. No placards, no marches, no petitions (well, maybe one defining our intentions). Just empty space where a few hundred thousand people once were, and the anguish, frustration and finger pointing that follow. A large enough mass suicide will create a nationwide spectacle that could be even larger than the disaster in New Orleans...not to mention reduces the workforce by that much more, speeding the economic collapse of the country (and possibly even triggering chain reaction suicides in its wake due to the resulting wave of despair and depression over the loss of loved ones worldwide).
Just speculating...
posted by deusdiabolus at 10:55 AM on September 10, 2005
- Those who participate don't have to do anything ever again. No more crappy job that barely pays enough to get you by, no more listening to the constant squabbling of people who can't agree on anything, no more trying to decide what you want to do with your life amidst all the other people who want to tell you what you should be doing.
- A large enough group of people killing themselves all at once will pull even more pins out of an already unstable structure. (The trick, of course, is getting enough people to participate...people are so pro-life where their own lives are concerned.)
- It's the ultimate protest. No placards, no marches, no petitions (well, maybe one defining our intentions). Just empty space where a few hundred thousand people once were, and the anguish, frustration and finger pointing that follow. A large enough mass suicide will create a nationwide spectacle that could be even larger than the disaster in New Orleans...not to mention reduces the workforce by that much more, speeding the economic collapse of the country (and possibly even triggering chain reaction suicides in its wake due to the resulting wave of despair and depression over the loss of loved ones worldwide).
Just speculating...
posted by deusdiabolus at 10:55 AM on September 10, 2005
My buddy Jim Jones tried that out once. It didn't quite take.
posted by sonofsamiam at 11:05 AM on September 10, 2005
posted by sonofsamiam at 11:05 AM on September 10, 2005
Impeach? No chance. Bush and company are going to ride this miserable failure out just as easily as they survived Enron, 9/11, Iraq, Abu Ghraib, the list goes on and on... c'mon, they haven't been held accountable for any of their previous lies and chicanery, what makes you think this one will be any different? They're going to come out smelling like roses.
Accountability for the failures in NO is already being diffused. It's just a "blame game", see, which they don't think people should engage in. Except to point fingers at the local officials, of course. Muddy the waters with wild accusations; denounce opponents as crackpot conspiracy theorists; make the story sound complicated enough that the public loses interest. The strategy has worked every time, and it's working this time.
Far from a setback, they're already using this as an opportunity to push their agenda still further.
Attacked by terrorists? Go massive. Sweep it all up. Things related and not. Hit by a hurricane? Obviously, the best response is to cut medicare benefits and push faith-based initiatives and school vouchers.
This administration has turned chutzpah into its primary governing principle. And it works. Chaos and disasters are opportunities to slip things in under the radar. Katrina is helping Bush, not harming him.
posted by ook at 11:24 AM on September 10, 2005
Accountability for the failures in NO is already being diffused. It's just a "blame game", see, which they don't think people should engage in. Except to point fingers at the local officials, of course. Muddy the waters with wild accusations; denounce opponents as crackpot conspiracy theorists; make the story sound complicated enough that the public loses interest. The strategy has worked every time, and it's working this time.
Far from a setback, they're already using this as an opportunity to push their agenda still further.
Attacked by terrorists? Go massive. Sweep it all up. Things related and not. Hit by a hurricane? Obviously, the best response is to cut medicare benefits and push faith-based initiatives and school vouchers.
This administration has turned chutzpah into its primary governing principle. And it works. Chaos and disasters are opportunities to slip things in under the radar. Katrina is helping Bush, not harming him.
posted by ook at 11:24 AM on September 10, 2005
Impeach? No chance. Bush and company are going to ride this miserable failure out just as easily as they survived Enron, 9/11, Iraq, Abu Ghraib, the list goes on and on... c'mon, they haven't been held accountable for any of their previous lies and chicanery, what makes you think this one will be any different? They're going to come out smelling like roses.
Accountability for the failures in NO is already being diffused. It's just a "blame game", see, which they don't think people should engage in. Except to point fingers at the local officials, of course. Muddy the waters with wild accusations; denounce opponents as crackpot conspiracy theorists; make the story sound complicated enough that the public loses interest. The strategy has worked every time, and it's working this time.
Far from a setback, they're already using this as an opportunity to push their agenda still further.
Attacked by terrorists? Go massive. Sweep it all up. Things related and not. Hit by a hurricane? Obviously, the best response is to cut medicare benefits and push faith-based initiatives and school vouchers.
This administration has turned chutzpah into its primary governing principle. And it works. Chaos and disasters are opportunities to slip things in under the radar. Katrina is helping Bush, not harming him.
posted by ook at 11:24 AM on September 10, 2005
Accountability for the failures in NO is already being diffused. It's just a "blame game", see, which they don't think people should engage in. Except to point fingers at the local officials, of course. Muddy the waters with wild accusations; denounce opponents as crackpot conspiracy theorists; make the story sound complicated enough that the public loses interest. The strategy has worked every time, and it's working this time.
Far from a setback, they're already using this as an opportunity to push their agenda still further.
Attacked by terrorists? Go massive. Sweep it all up. Things related and not. Hit by a hurricane? Obviously, the best response is to cut medicare benefits and push faith-based initiatives and school vouchers.
This administration has turned chutzpah into its primary governing principle. And it works. Chaos and disasters are opportunities to slip things in under the radar. Katrina is helping Bush, not harming him.
posted by ook at 11:24 AM on September 10, 2005
The post so nice I had to say it twice. Sorry about that.
posted by ook at 11:26 AM on September 10, 2005
posted by ook at 11:26 AM on September 10, 2005
Is there anyway to impeach the American public? I think they are much more responsible for this mess than Bush is. Most people I talk to on a daily basis fill me with disgust due to their absolute delusion and ignorance of the world outside of their own life.
posted by any major dude at 1:17 PM on September 10, 2005
posted by any major dude at 1:17 PM on September 10, 2005
Finally, a post on MetaFilter PrimusParis can get behind!
posted by rough ashlar at 3:19 PM on September 10, 2005
posted by rough ashlar at 3:19 PM on September 10, 2005
From the Globe and Mail (Sept. 10, 05):
"There is also suddenly a sense that the American Empire is in decline, that the only successful wars it has ever waged are the ones against the environment and its own people.
There have been many other omens of such a decline this year."
posted by rumbles at 5:19 PM on September 10, 2005
"There is also suddenly a sense that the American Empire is in decline, that the only successful wars it has ever waged are the ones against the environment and its own people.
There have been many other omens of such a decline this year."
posted by rumbles at 5:19 PM on September 10, 2005
we'd end up with Cheney in the Big Chair
Hasn't he been there all along?
If you need to take out a charging rhino you ought to try for a good headshot, not kick it in the ass.
On Preview - the Globe article is thoughtfully written, if a bit of a downer.
posted by CynicalKnight at 7:17 PM on September 10, 2005
Hasn't he been there all along?
If you need to take out a charging rhino you ought to try for a good headshot, not kick it in the ass.
On Preview - the Globe article is thoughtfully written, if a bit of a downer.
posted by CynicalKnight at 7:17 PM on September 10, 2005
Mike Davis in 2004, on NO and Blacks and Hurricanes, etc: Poor, Black, and Left Behind
posted by amberglow at 7:54 PM on September 10, 2005
posted by amberglow at 7:54 PM on September 10, 2005
That's an excellent article, rumbles. I'd seemingly been talking to myself in 2003 when I kept asking "what about pegging oil to the euro?" whenever people would incredulously question why the U.S. would invade "for oil". That plus the China factor makes a world of sense. No matter. Russia and the U.S. can trade old stories about their glory days.
posted by dreamsign at 12:32 AM on September 11, 2005
posted by dreamsign at 12:32 AM on September 11, 2005
« Older Davis-Bacon Suspension | Solutions For Grandeur Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by wakko at 9:13 PM on September 9, 2005