michelle
Administrator
I have broken any attachments I had to the Ascended Masters and their teachings; drains your chi!
Posts: 2,100
|
Post by michelle on May 4, 2006 16:05:39 GMT 4
Vermonters deliver impeachment resolutions to CongressBy Shay Totten Vermont Guardian Posted May 1, 2006 WASHINGTON — An effort that began in March culminated Monday when three Vermont communities delivered a message to House Speaker Dennis Hastert: Start the process to impeach Pres. George Bush. Six Vermont towns passed resolutions on Town Meeting Day calling for Bush’s impeachment. On Monday, Ellen Tenney, a bookstore owner from Rockingham, hand delivered petitions to Hastert, an Illinois Republican. Neither Hastert nor his chief of staff was there when the office opened, as many members of Congress are not in Washington on Mondays. Tenney described the meeting with Hastert’s staff members who were in the office as “bland and not very friendly.” She said it should have been no surprise that the petitions would be delivered. “I had called and told him that we were coming, but I couldn’t get anyone to call me back to set up an actual appointment,” said Tenney, who was joined by representatives from AfterDowningStreet.org and ImpeachPAC.org, two web-based organizations that have been encouraging Bush’s impeachment. She was also joined by Julia DeWalt, daughter of Newfane Selectman Dan DeWalt, and a chief author of that town’s resolution, which sparked interest by other towns in Vermont. Julia DeWalt handed the first of the petitions, that of Newfane’s, to Hastert’s staff. “It feels like my child's first steps,” Dan DeWalt told the Guardian, “simultaneously a huge event, and painfully reflective of the enormous distance yet to go.” After meeting with Hastert’s staff, Tenney delivered copies of the resolutions to Rep. Bernie Sanders, I-VT, and Rep. John Conyers, D-MI, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, where an impeachment probe must originate in Congress. Tenney said she paid those visits to ensure others in Congress knew of the Vermont towns’ intentions, and to keep them apprised of the process from here. She hopes to enlist volunteers in the coming weeks to deliver copies of the resolutions to every member of Congress. Messages left by the Guardian with the offices of Hastert, Conyers and Sanders were not immediately returned. Tenney said no major media outlets covered the event at Hastert’s office, even though one news organization, Reuters, had said it would send a reporter and photographer. “In some ways it might have been better to have waited until we had them all in hand, but I think it might be better to have them trickle in from all over the place instead of one big bang, and as the numbers get larger as more resolutions get passed, perhaps the press will start turning their heads,” said Tenney. She added that she did not expect “wild” or “massive” press coverage. “But, this is the little people, this is the grassroots and going to Conyers office symbolized the coming together of the grassroots with the people on the inside,” she added. Earlier this year during Town Meeting Day votes, Brookfield, Dummerston, Marlboro, Newfane, Putney and Brattleboro approved measures calling for Congress to begin impeachment proceedings against Bush. Not all were identical, but all were modeled after Newfane’s resolution. Dan DeWalt said he has hopes of delivering the other Vermont resolutions later this month. Both he and Tenney are working with activists around the country to keep more resolutions coming. In a separate statement (see below), Dan DeWalt called the petitions “our declaration of independence and battle of Bunker Hill. If the speaker of the House is on the run, let’s give him something to run from and keep a barrage of resolutions and declarations coming his way.” On Sunday night, Tenney visited the Jefferson Memorial, ceremoniously laying the petitions at the feet of Thomas Jefferson. Many of those calling for Bush’s impeachment are using the Jefferson Manual of rules for the U.S. House of Representatives, which allows state and local governments to initiate impeachment proceedings by submitting charges to Congress. Aside from these town-level resolutions, measures have been introduced in three state legislatures — California, Illinois and Vermont —calling on Congress to draft articles of impeachment against Pres. Bush. In Vermont, Rep. Dave Zuckerman, P-Burlington, the lead sponsor of the measure, was joined by 23 of his colleagues, all Progressives and Democrats except for one independent. The bill was introduced on April 25. The bill is currently in the House Judiciary Committee. Zuckerman’s resolution lays out a broad case for impeachment, ranging from wiretapping U.S. citizens to lying about reasons for going to war in Iraq. It is modeled, in part, after recent resolutions approved by county Democratic committees. Vermont Democrats earlier this month sidestepped the Legislature in response to a grassroots effort among various county committees to get lawmakers to initiate such proceedings. All 13 county committees voted to support some form of impeachment resolution — eight supported calling on the Legislature to act, four counties voted for an impeachment resolution to go directly to Washington, and one voted to support the censure effort of Sen. Russ Feingold, D-WI. In addition, a letter written by state Rep. Richard Marek, D-Newfane, which was signed by 56 members of the House and 13 members of the Senate, none of them Republicans, also asks the House Judiciary Committee to begin impeachment proceedings. That letter was sent to Hastert last month. The members of Vermont’s congressional delegation, who are not enthusiastic about impeachment, support hearings that could lead to possible censure. Statement from Dan DeWalt on the delivery of Vermont’s petitions to impeach Pres. George W. BushMrs. Tenney went to Washington, and the speaker of the House ran for coverBy Dan DeWalt Three years ago, Pres. George W. Bush stuffed some padding in his pants, flew dramatically onto an aircraft carrier anchored a few hundred yards offshore, and declared “mission accomplished.” Today, in memory of the thousands who have since died in Iraq, and fulfilling their obligations as citizens to protect the U.S. Constitution, Ellen Tenney and Julia DeWalt presented the first three Vermont town resolutions calling for Congress to impeach the president to the U.S. speaker of the House. Except the speaker was afraid to meet them. He was afraid to face the naked truth that Congress will now have to be dealing with the wrath and determination of forthright U.S. citizens who are calling their government to accountability. Congress now has to answer to a public that does not rely on timid political advisors, repeating the same outdated and losing conventional wisdom, worrying about potential “backlash” to ideas that are true and to demands that are just.The night before her scheduled meeting with the speaker, Tenney went to the Jefferson Memorial and laid the petitions at his feet. It is, after all, section 603 of Jefferson’s manual that gives towns the right to bring impeachment resolutions to Congress. From the memorial, Jefferson looks directly at the White House, and we can be assured that he doesn’t like what he sees. Section 603 is a natural outcome of his distrust of an all-powerful executive branch of government. America had just freed itself from the tyranny of King George, and Mr. Jefferson was determined to prevent another one from taking his place. We see that the so-called opposition politicians, as well as their supporters in the popular and news media, are unwilling to take seriously their duty to uphold the Constitution. Therefore, we must step into the breach and take action before the nation sinks under the weight of corruption, corporate domination and creeping fascism. Some nations have proud histories of “peoples’ revolutions” wresting power from corrupt governments from the Philippines to South America to Eastern Europe. Tens of thousands would take to the streets and stay there. Or most of the nation would go on strike, or as www.therudeguy.com puts it, they all call in “well,” saying I’m not sick, but I’m not working until you and your lousy government are out of here. For whatever reason, America today is not ready for those sorts of mass actions. When massive protests greeted the Iraq war, they were met with a collective yawn and a few dismissive jokes by the government and the media. Protests just aren’t seen as part of the process. Impeachment however, is absolutely part of the process. Correctly worded impeachment resolutions must be passed from the speaker to the Judiciary Committee. If only one member of the House brings one of these resolutions to the floor, the House must debate it. Thanks to Jefferson we have the power to force this conversation. The time for a constitutional People’s Revolution is at hand.The March town meetings followed by The May 1 delivery of the petitions/resolutions are our declaration of independence and battle of Bunker Hill. If the Speaker of the House is on the run, let’s give him something to run from and keep a barrage of resolutions and declarations coming his way. Now is the time to take your senators and House representatives to task for not upholding their obligations to the country and its Constitution. Now is the time to write letters to the editor demanding that we begin a national conversation about the rule of law. Now is the time that we demand that morality and truth take center stage in our governance. Thomas Jefferson said that the tree of liberty must be watered from time to time with the blood of tyrants. Charlie Parker said, “Now’s the Time.” Dan DeWalt is a member of the Newfane Selectboard.Source:www.vermontguardian.com/local/052006/ImpeachmentPetitions.shtml ALSO SEE [action link YOU can take here]:April 22, 2006 Bush Impeachment - The Illinois State Legislature is Preparing to Drop a BombshellUtilizing a little known rule of the US House to bring Impeachment charges Steven Leser SNIP:The Illinois General Assembly is about to rock the nation. Members of state legislatures are normally not considered as having the ability to decide issues with a massive impact to the nation as a whole. Representative Karen A. Yarbrough of Illinois' 7th District is about to shatter that perception forever. Representative Yarbrough stumbled on a little known and never utlitized rule of the US House of Representatives, Section 603 of Jefferson's Manual of the Rules of the United States House of Representatives, which allows federal impeachment proceedings to be initiated by joint resolution of a state legislature. From there, Illinois House Joint Resolution 125 (hereafter to be referred to as HJR0125) was born.Detailing five specific charges against President Bush including one that is specified to be a felony, the complete text of HJR0125 is copied below at the end of this article. One of the interesting points is that one of the items, the one specified as a felony, that the NSA was directed by the President to spy on American citizens without warrant, is not in dispute. That fact should prove an interesting dilemma for a Republican controlled US House that clearly is not only loathe to initiate impeachment proceedings, but does not even want to thoroughly investigate any of the five items brought up by the Illinois Assembly as high crimes and/or misdemeanors. Should HJR0125 be passed by the Illinois General Assembly, the US House will be forced by House Rules to take up the issue of impeachment as a privileged bill, meaning it will take precedence over other House business. The Illinois General Assembly joins a growing chorus of voices calling for censure or impeachment of President Bush including Democratic state committees in Vermont, Wisconsin, New Mexico, Nevada and North Carolina as well as the residents themselves of seven towns in Vermont, seventy Vermont state legislators and Congressman John Conyers. The call for impeachment is starting to grow well beyond what could be considered a fringe movement. An ABC News/Washington Post Poll Conducted April 6-9 showed that 33% of Americans currently support Impeaching President Bush, coincidentally, only a similar amount supported impeaching Nixon at the start of the Watergate investigation. If and when Illinois HJR0125 hits the capitol and the individual charges are publicly investigated, that number is likely to grow rapidly. Combined with the very real likelihood that Rove is about to be indicted in the LeakGate investigation, and Bush is in real trouble beyond his plummeting poll numbers. His cronies in the Republican dominated congress will probably save him from the embarassment of an impeachment conviction, for now, but his Presidency will be all but finished. READ THE REST/GO TO: www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_steven_l_060422_bush_impeachment___t.htmMORE:From: www.opednews.com/articles/genera_david_sw_060424_california_becomes_s.htmCalifornia Becomes Second State to Introduce Bush ImpeachmentApril 24, 2006 Joining Illinois, California has become the second state in which a proposal to impeach President Bush has been introduced in the state legislature. And this one includes Cheney as well. California Assemblyman Paul Koretz of Los Angeles (where the LA Times has now called for Cheney's resignation) has submitted amendments to Assembly Joint Resolution No. 39, calling for the impeachment of President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard Cheney. The amendments reference Section 603 of Jefferson's Manual of the Rules of the United States House of Representatives, which allows federal impeachment proceedings to be initiated by joint resolution of a state legislature. The resolution, in the words of Koretz's press release, "bases the call for impeachment upon the Bush Administration intentionally misleading the Congress and the American people regarding the threat from Iraq in order to justify an unnecessary war that has cost billions of dollars and thousands of lives and casualties; exceeding constitutional authority to wage war by invading Iraq; exceeding constitutional authority by Federalizing the National Guard; conspiring to torture prisoners in violation of the 'Federal Torture Act' and indicating intent to continue such actions; spying on American citizens in violation of the 1978 Foreign Agency Surveillance Act; leaking and covering up the leak of the identity of Valerie Plame Wilson, and holding American citizens without charge or trial." Koretz submitted amendments gutting AJR No. 39, a resolution unrelated to impeachment, to the Assembly Rules Committee. The Rules Committee may take up the bill this week for referral, allowing him to formally introduce the amended resolution. AJR 39 is a bill introduced in January by Koretz calling for a moratorium on depleted uranium: www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/bill/asm/ab_0001-0050/ajr_39_bill_20060104_introduced.html"At both the state and national levels," Koretz said, "we will be paying for the Bush Administration's illegal actions and terrible lack of judgment and competence for decades—not only in the billions of dollars wasted on the war and welfare for the rich, but in the worldwide loss of respect for America and Americans. Bush and Cheney must be impeached and removed from office before they undertake even deadlier misdeeds, such as the use of nuclear weapons. There are no bounds to their willingness to ignore the Constitution and world opinion—we can't afford to wait for the next disaster and hope that we can survive it." For more inormation and to thank this American hero, contact Paul Michael Neuman in Koretz's District Office: (310) 285-5490 paul.neuman@asm.ca.gov or go here: democrats.assembly.ca.gov/members/a42/contact.htmHere is a kit to help with promoting this resolution and with passing others in your towns and cities and states. Also on this page is information on activities in other states and localities:www.impeachpac.org/resolutionsGet organized in California to pass this bill!pdamerica.org/statecaucus.php?s=caIllinois Legislators Were First to Introduce Bill for Bush Impeachment CLIP READ THE REST AT www.opednews.com/articles/genera_david_sw_060424_california_becomes_s.htm--- See also:"Impeach Bush and Cheney"www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/290081783Impeachment is started by the people and finished by Congress. Also a little known precedent allows a State Legislature to pass a Resolution of Impeachment and transmit that to the US House through their Representative. Please take a moment to read about this important issue, and join me in signing the petition. It takes just 30 seconds, but can truly make a difference.
|
|
DT1
Moderator
You know, it's not like I wanted to be right about all of this...
Posts: 428
|
Post by DT1 on May 6, 2006 8:42:29 GMT 4
May 5, 2006 More Gruel, Please! by Missy Comley Beattie www.opednews.comThe April 26 Bob Kerr article in The Providence Journal is circulating in cyberspace. I've forwarded it to many Bush-bashers and it's causing more than a stir. In fact, Bush-bashing will be played on every stage and in every park across the United States. I predict it will be an Olympic event. For countless reasons, George W. Bush is being hammered. Many who speak out about the lies that have led to 2,415 troop deaths in Iraq have been sledging George for more than three years when the war drums first were beating. Some started when they learned that there really were no WMD. Others joined the pummeling of the president when it was revealed that our troops have inadequate body armor. Now, more will join the pounders with this latest information that our troops are hungry, that our troops are asking Iraqis for food because our government isn't providing them enough to eat. According to Kerr, Nick Andoscia, a Marine, called his mother and also wrote to ask her to send food, packages of tuna because he and his buddies who go on 22-hour patrols are receiving two meals a day and that the food is inadequate--so much so that the men in his unit have each lost about 10 pounds. So, like any good mother, Karen Andoscia began sending the packaged tuna. And when she mentioned this at work, people started donating food to be sent to the hungry Marines. Now, picture George at one of his fundraiser banquets, the White house, or lounging while someone fires up the poolside grill at Crawford. Do you think he's asking anyone for food? Of course, he is--a staff of servers whom we pay with our tax dollars. Yes, I'd like filet mignon, he's probably saying. And make that organic, grain-fed beef. I don't want any of that stuff the masses eat. You know, the meat I tell Americans to go out and buy even though we've had a few mad cow cases reported. Okay, read the article by Bob Kerr. And join with me (I have to admit being a Bush critic long before the war--I think it dates to when I first heard him open his mouth and attempt to speak the English language) in America's soon to be most popular pastime--Bush-bashing. My 80-year-old mother may just take the gold medal. She'll have plenty of competition. His poll number today is 33 percent. Missy Beattie lives in New York City. She's written for National Public Radio and Nashville Life Magazine. An outspoken critic of the Bush Administration and the war in Iraq, she's a member of Gold Star Families for Peace. She completed a novel last year, but since the death of her nephew, Marine Lance Cpl. Chase J. Comley, in Iraq on August 6,'05, she has been writing political articles.
|
|
DT1
Moderator
You know, it's not like I wanted to be right about all of this...
Posts: 428
|
Post by DT1 on May 10, 2006 9:34:58 GMT 4
MADNESS OF KING GEORGE CONTINUES By Bill Gallagher
"A little Madness in the Spring
Is wholesome even for the King."
-- Emily Dickinson
American Poet 1830-1886
DETROIT -- For our loathsome king, madness is always in season. His newfound "passion" for cycling is yet another excess in exercise, a diversion from the demons that usually grip him. But, gratefully, when he's outside peddling, he's not clowning in the Oval Office where the "decider" and his "gut" create more suffering and havoc for the world.
Washington in the spring is lush and green, brimming with blossoms, freshness and hopeful renewal -- a state of nature not found in the state of our union.
It's too much to hope that someday, when tooling around on his expensive bike, Bush might actually think about how fragile and threatened our green Earth is and how imperative good stewardship is to save it for other generations.
Bush says cycling allows him to "chase the fountain of youth." Yet, six years into his presidency, he has done nothing to deal with the greenhouse gases that spur global warming and shorten the life expectancy of our entire ecosystem. He has fostered our national addiction to petroleum. His energy policies encourage wasteful consumption and add to the already-obscene profits of oil companies and their executives.
Bush permits his favored industries to poison the air we breathe and imperil the health of millions of people, especially children. He devotes his energies to enhancing the wealth of his family and his Houston cronies.
Issues like clean air and the survival of the planet don't occupy any of King George's precious time. Once, though, he did sit down with half a dozen cycling enthusiasts for a chat about their shared hobby. They met for 35 minutes.
That's 34 minutes and 45 seconds longer that Bush spent reacting to the intelligence report he received in August 2001 titled, "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S."
Bush spent more time in one cycling seance than he has personally devoted -- during his entire administration -- to working on the creation of the nation of Palestine, the single most important deed required to even begin quelling violence and terrorism in the Middle East.
Bush's spring offensive, aimed as jolting his tanking poll numbers, is another flop. His staff shuffle and the new branding of the struggle with terrorism as "World War III" no longer fool the long-fooled American people.
The latest CBS poll shows only 30 percent now say they approve of Bush's handling of his war in Iraq.
CIA Director Porter Goss got sacked amid reports one of his top deputies attended hooker-graced poker parties at the Watergate Hotel in Washington with former Congressman Duke Cunningham, the convicted bribe taker. Goss may have played a few hands himself.
He was a disaster from the get-go, filling top CIA posts with his own political hacks. Goss had an undistinguished stint with the agency decades ago, but built his political stock as a Florida congressman and House Intelligence Committee chairman.
During his oversight, he presided over the colossal intelligence failures prior to the 9/11 attacks. He also allowed his predecessor, George "The Whore" Tenet, to get away with blaming the agency for Bush's "intelligence failures" on Iraq's weapons programs.
The Busheviks are back-pedaling on any real diplomatic initiatives. Their essential foreign policy is protecting oil interests and corporate greed.
When big oil beckons, big Dick rises to the occasion. Vice President Cheney made a rare trip from the bat cave and accused Russia of using its oil and gas resources as "tools of intimidation or blackmail." Cheney wants to rekindle the Cold War and rattle the Russian bear. His disgraceful hypocrisy is as transparent as it is dangerous.
In his speech to European leaders in Vilnius, Lithuania, last week, Cheney dared to pretend the United States can preach civic virtue and democratic values to the Russian government.
He accused the Putin government of alienating allies and "other actions by the Russian government have been counterproductive, and could begin to affect relations of other countries."
Dick Cheney has systematically and repeatedly attacked the fundamental constitutional rights of the American people. He favors illegal spying, denial of due process and claims unlimited executive authority. He and his boy Bush should be impeached and tried for treason.
For "enemy combatants," Cheney supports torture, imprisonment without charges, kidnapping and the rejection of international law and the Geneva accords. He claims the "war-time president" can do anything with no accountability to any one. In a just world, those actions would assure Cheney and Bush a war crimes trial in the Hague.
Of all people to lecture the Russians on human rights and democratic principles, no one is more unfit than Dick Cheney. The hypocrisy of his mission was even more apparent when he went to Kazakhstan to cozy up with its despotic leaders and promote U.S. oil interests, especially -- surprise, surprise -- Halliburton's.
If freedom and democracy are taking lickings in Russia, they are getting killed in Kazakhstan. But Lord Halliburton didn't utter a syllable about those abuses. He was too busy cutting deals for his former company -- in which he still has a financial stake -- and pumping up other U.S. energy interests there.
Nursultan Nazarbayev, the Kazakh president, won re-election to his third six-year term in 2005 with a Stalin-like 91 percent of the vote. In the last six months, two of his political opponents have been murdered. Amnesty International has cited Kazakhstan for a litany of human rights abuses.
But when did a little blood in the pursuit of oil ever bother big Dick? He's plunged into the geopolitical conflicts in the region sucking up to the Kazakhs to assure a U.S. claim on its vast energy resources. Halliburton runs an oil services operation there and wants to build new export routes for the nation's enormous reserves.
While every single organization monitoring human rights abuses ranks Kazakhstan's record much worse than Russia's, Cheney chose to ignore that unpleasant truth. He expressed support for the Kazakh government, without hesitation or reservation.
He told reporters, "I have previously expressed my admiration for what has transpired here over the past 15 years both in terms of economic development as well as political development."
The murders, torture, political prisoners and rigged elections don't mean a damn thing to Cheney. Like in Iraq, it's all about oil and the use of the U.S. military power and influence to assure its steady flow.
The Busheviks use stunning arrogance to pressure and demand that nations in Central Asia and the Middle East cater to our insatiable thirst for oil. We wage wars and support tyrants to get it. We claim foreign energy reserves as our "own," usually depriving impoverished people of their resources. Our greed creates more unrest in already troubled regions and encourages terrorism.
Nations around the world, including many long-time friends, distrust, even despise us. George W. Bush doesn't really care. He and his people are wealthy and content. Now, in another spring of the world's discontent, Bush is taking carefree rides on his bike, isolated from the disasters he inflicts on suffering people and our environment.
Emily Dickinson concluded the poem from which the words at the beginning of this column are taken with the following:
"But God be with the Clown
Who ponders this tremendous scene
This Experiment of Green
As if it were his own!"
God save us from our clown-king
|
|
DT1
Moderator
You know, it's not like I wanted to be right about all of this...
Posts: 428
|
Post by DT1 on May 13, 2006 8:00:46 GMT 4
Has Bush crossed the Rubicon? by:Len Hart existentialistcowboy.blogspot.comIs it too late to impeach him?The issue is pressing. If Bush is not successfully challenged, the consquences are unthinkable. Consider the following remark by Senator Russ Feingold: If that's the law, then "...the President could even order the assassination of American citizens." In 49 B.C. Rome found itself at war with itself. Though it was prohibited by the Roman constitution, Caesar crossed the Rubicon and defied the civil authorities. The law was on the side of the Senate and the citizens of Rome but Caesar had the force of arms. Who could oppose him? Though he had violated the constitution, he marched his legions into Rome where he was elected consul and dictator for life. Cicero lamented, “Our beloved republic is gone forever.” He was right. Over the last two days, it's become apparent that Bush lied to the nation about the extent of his widespread program of domestic surveillance. The revelations have renewed the debate: should Bush be impeached? I wonder if it is too late to impeach Bush. Has he already consolidated dictatorial powers? Has he crossed the Rubicon? Is it possible to know until he is impeached, convicted and refuses to leave the White House? When Democratic Senator Russ Feingold introduced a resolution to censure Bush, the GOP outcry was hollow and disingenuous. Feingold, however, made a succinct case for impeachment on ABC This Week: FEINGOLD: Not at all. You know, we’ve had a chance here for three months to look at whether there’s any legal basis for this, and they’re using shifting legal justifications. First they try to argue that somehow, under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, they can do this. It’s pretty clear that they can’t. Then there’s the argument that somehow the military authorization for Afghanistan allowed this. This has basically been laughed out of the room in the Congress. So the last resort is to somehow say that the President has inherent authority to ignore the law of the United States of America, and that has the consequence that the President could even order the assassination of American citizens if that’s the law. So there is no sort of independent inherent authority that allows the president to override the laws passed by the Congress of the United States. Let's assume the Senate found Bush guilty following an impeachment and trial. What would the Senate do if Bush simply refused to leave? The Congress cannot send in the troops; Rumsfeld takes his orders from Bush. When it comes to the military, the Congress has only budgetary control. President Abraham Lincoln issued a warrant for the arrest of Chief Justice Roger B. Taney but I know of no incident in which the Senate has issued a warrant for the arrest of the President of the United States. Lincoln's biographer's have notoriously omitted the incident involving Taney but you can find an authoritative account at: Lincoln Crossing the Rubicon If the Senate sent Federal Marshalls to the White House, would Bush's secret service officers bar them from entering? Dick Cheney, as I recall, has already turned away process servers and threatened them with arrest if they persisted. We are rapidly running out of options short of revolution or armed insurrection. Some may have seen my article on OpEd News in which I advocated Ted Rall's idea of a "national recall". But that requires a Constitutional amendment. We don't have that kind of time. I wrote another article supporting the invocation of Article 5 of the Constitution which provides for the creation of a new National Convention upon a petition by a specified number of state houses. As the late Sen. Sam Irvin said, a new national convention could literally rewrite the constitution, and, in this case, undo the harm done to it by Bush. But again —should such a convention literally write Bush and his cabal out of a job, who would enforce it? Rumsfeld will simply ring the White House with tanks. Washington will look like Tiananmen Square. A new "government" citing such a new charter would be rounded up —possibly shot even though their every action would be in accordance with the provisions of Article 5 of the current Constitution. We are approaching a dramatic showdown not unlike the Supreme Court order that Nixon release the tapes of his White House conversations. The nation held its breath. Would Nixon refuse? Who would enforce an order of the Supreme Court? It is my belief that we might yet save the republic. But, if Bush has already crossed the Rubicon, we might not know it until he refuses to leave the White House. If that is the case, it will already be too late to impeach —and sadly, we won't know that until the impeachment resolution is passed. The alternative to success, however, is too terrible to contemplate. As Billie Holiday said "God bless the Child that's got his own". As Ed Murrow would say: "Good night —and good luck"! We're gonna need all we can get.
|
|
michelle
Administrator
I have broken any attachments I had to the Ascended Masters and their teachings; drains your chi!
Posts: 2,100
|
Post by michelle on May 14, 2006 5:05:02 GMT 4
5/13/06 9:00 pm EST Tell Nancy Pelosi Impeachment Is Good for DemocratsDemocratic House Leader Nancy Pelosi has instructed the Democratic Caucus and promised the corporate media that the Democrats will not impeach Bush and Cheney even if they win a majority in Congress. Of course, such timidity is the most likely way for the Democrats to not win a majority in Congress. While 90% of Democrats and 81% of Independents disapprove of Bush in the latest Harris poll, only 67% of Republicans approve of him. Every poll done on impeachment www.afterdowningstreet.org/polling shows very strong support among Democrats and weak opposition among Republicans. Moreover, an off-year election is won by inspiring your "base" to turn out in higher numbers, and nothing inspires Democratic voters like impeachment. Here's an article about Pelosi's position:www.afterdowningstreet.org/pelosiHere's where you can send her your own thoughts:sf.nancy@mail.house.gov Tell your own Representative and Senators to support impeachment:democrats.com/peoplesemailnetwork/65Help us elect pro-impeachment Democrats:impeachpac.org ____________________ Delivery Planned for DontAttackIran.org Petition--Cindy Sheehan to Lead Delivery of Petition to White House --Ray McGovern to Lead March to Sec. Rumsfeld's Home Delivery of petition to White House opposing attack on IranWhen: 1-3 p.m., Thursday, May 18 Where: Lafayette Square Park, in front of White House, Washington, D.C. March to Secretary of War Donald Rumsfeld's HouseWhen: Departing at 3 p.m., Thursday, May 18 Where: Lafayette Square Park, in front of White House, Washington, D.C. JOIN US!Take the Metro to McPherson Square. A broad coalition of organizations has collected over 40,000 signatures on a petition opposing a U.S. attack on Iran. See the list of participating organizations, the petition, signatures, and comments at: www.dontattackiran.org Cindy Sheehan plans to lead the delivery of the petition and signatures to the White House between 1 and 3 p.m. on Thursday, May 18, in cooperation with a "Pray In" in Lafayette Square Park organized by the Network of Spiritual Progressives: www.tikkun.org/community/spiritual_activism_conferencePrayer leaders will include: Bob Edgar, Rev.Lennox Yearwood, Rev. Joan Brown Campbell, Ahmed Ahrar, Holly Near, Rev. Osagyefo Sekou, Rev. Jim Winkler, Rev. Penny Nixon, John Dear S.J., Archdeacon Michael Kendall, and Pledge of Resistance to the Iraq War: Ken Butigan. Also speaking in support of the petition delivery will be Cindy Sheehan, founder of Gold Star Families for Peace, Medea Benjamin, Co-Founder of Code Pink: Women for Peace, and David Swanson, Co-Founder of the After Downing Street Coalition. Following remarks by these speakers and delivery of the petition, along with boxes of signatures and comments, to the White House, Ray McGovern, U.S. Army veteran and retired 27-year CIA analyst, will lead a march through downtown Washington, D.C., to the home of Donald Rumsfeld, where protesters will gather to ask Rumsfeld why he lied about the need for a war on Iraq.www.afterdowningstreet.org/rumsfeld Representatives of many of these organizations, which promoted the petition, will be present and available for comments: Gold Star Families for Peace, CODE PINK, Progressive Democrats of America, Democrats.com, Traprock Peace Center, Global Exchange, Velvet Revolution, Democracy Rising, Truthout, OpEdNews, Backbone Campaign, Consumers For Peace, Campus Antiwar Network, The Young Turks, Citizens for Legitimate Government, Counter Punch, United for Peace and Justice, Stop the War Coalition, This Can't Be Happening, Voters Evolt, Springs Action Alliance, Radio News America, OrbStandard, International Socialist Organization, Voters for Peace, Thom Hartmann Show, Environmentalists Against War, U.S. Peace Council, Grandmothers for Peace, Justice Through Music, Campaign Against Sanctions & Military Intervention in Iran, World Can't Wait, The Rational Response Squad, Idriss Stelley Foundation, Bush Free Zone, Voice International, Foundation for the Development of Human Resources, Tbilisi, Georgia, Political Cooperative, City Sites, Agir contre la guerre (France), Americans Against the War (France), Spiritual Activism Conference, Muslims for Peace (Australia), AndrewBurgin.com, Peace Movement Aotearoa, Not in Our Name Aotearoa New Zealand, Pixel4Peace, Liberty News TV, IntelligentFuture, CampUS Strike for Peace. www.dontattackiran.org FLYER:www.afterdowningstreet.org/downloads/daiflyer.pdf____________________ Cindy Sheehan and Ann Wright to Speak in VirginiaMay 17, 2006 - 7 p.m. Martin Luther King Jr. Performing Arts Center Charlottesville, Virginia Music -- Speakers -- Question & Answer Period Cindy Sheehan is co-founder of Gold Star Families for Peace and the mother of Army Spc. Casey Sheehan, KIA April 4, 2004, Baghdad. In August, 2005, she camped outside President Bush's home in an effort to ask him for what noble cause her son was sent to die. Ann Wright resigned from the U.S. State Department in protest the day the Iraq War began. She had served as a diplomat for 16 years and received the State Department's Award for Heroism. She also served for 29 years in the US Army/Army Reserves and attained the rank of Colonel. Terri Allard is a singer/songwriter with an extraordinary talent for capturing the human spirit in her songs. With power-packed vocals and infectious energy she has the uncanny ability to move her audiences to pin-drop silence. Charlottesville Center for Peace and Justice 434-961-6278 www.charlottesvillepeace.orgFLYER:www.afterdowningstreet.org/downloads/may17color.pdf The MLK Jr. Performing Arts Center is located at 1400 Melbourne Rd Charlottesville, Va. Suggested Donation - $5.00 (No one turned away) ________________________________ Wear This Shirt!www.wavelengthclothing.com/impeach_bush.html ________________________________ Read This Book!www.gsfp.org
|
|
michelle
Administrator
I have broken any attachments I had to the Ascended Masters and their teachings; drains your chi!
Posts: 2,100
|
Post by michelle on May 24, 2006 15:53:06 GMT 4
Cold shoulder05/22/2006 @ 11:35 pm Filed by Hannah Selinger - Raw Story Columnist When Condoleezza Rice took center stage at Boston College this week, I wonder what kind of reaction she was expecting. No one has ever accused Ms. Rice of being unintelligent and few would argue that her academic accomplishments are unimpressive. In her lifetime, after all, Rice has mastered much more than the piano. But when Rice went to receive her honorary degree from Boston College on Monday morning, the students protested. "About 50 students stood with their backs toward the stage," the Associated Press reported, "as Rice was introduced to give her commencement speech." Maybe 50 is a paltry number compared with the hundreds who graduated, but in academia, where respect is paramount, it means something that some graduates turned their backs to the Secretary of State. Just a short while before, the writer Steve Almond, who holds the position of adjunct professor of English at the college, wrote an open letter in the Boston Globe to William P. Leahy, the school's president. "Dear Father Leahy," Almond wrote. "I am writing to resign my post as an adjunct professor of English at Boston College. I am doing so--after five years at BC, and with tremendous regret--as a direct result of your decision to invite Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to be the commencement speaker at this year's graduation … But I am not writing this letter simply because of an objection to the war against Iraq. My concern is more fundamental. Simply put, Rice is a liar." Almond went on to say that the Secretary of State knowingly mislead the American people regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction and the war in Iraq. He argued that her behavior set a poor model for "impressionable seniors." The turmoil at Boston College comes in the wake of a similar--albeit more pronounced--disturbance at the New School University, where Senator John McCain offered a commencement speech last week. Graduates scolded the Senator from the audience, calling him a war criminal and criticizing his decision to sign off on the war in Iraq. The New School has always been known as the bastion of New York liberal thinking, but even for liberal thinkers, the reaction to last week's speech was surprisingly bad. When Bob Kerrey, the president of the New School, stood up to demand from his students some respect, they called him a war criminal citing a case during the Vietnam War where Kerrey supposedly bombed a civilian site, taking the lives of innocent men, women, and children. So what's with all the anger? In the past, have political affiliations caused so much uproar in the quiet, tree-lined world of B.A.s and PhDs? Maybe, but things have now reached a boiling point. The most obvious fact available--that we knowingly invaded a country under false pretenses and that someone, somewhere was responsible for that action--brings to light Americans' worst fears. We have been lied to. We have been kept at bay with false information. We elected people who would later turn around and convince our citizens to die in a fictional war. It has been the M.O. of this administration and the men and women affiliated with it to pass blame and responsibility on to the next unsuspecting sucker. Internal temperatures rose, and there went Paul Wolfson and Andrew Card, as well as a slew of other innies that seemed incapable of keeping a sinking ship afloat. Today, the national consensus is that these people are not doing a good job. I say this not only because of the obviously objectionable reactions to two high-profile commencement speakers, but also because the president's approval rating has reached an all-time low—and we still have two years left to grin and bear. What seems unfortunate is that the call-to-arms from everyday people has proven completely ineffective in changing the way the system works. Steve Almond's article was eloquent and moving, and it feels unfair that his students will no longer benefit from his take on English writing and literature, but he was proving a point. It was not okay for Boston College to offer an honorary degree to a liar and it was not okay for them to overlook the criticism surrounding her simply because she was academically successful. Plenty of people succeed at renowned universities; not all of them turn out to be good people. Academia is supposed to be the one place where knowledge and ethos are valued above all else. For that reason, academics are often pigeon-holed as liberal ostriches, too consumed with their intellectual holes to understand or process the world around them. But sometimes academics know exactly what is going on in the world around them. Steve Almond argued that a commencement speaker should be judged on the "content of one's character that matters here--the reverence for truth and knowledge that Boston College purports to champion." Of course, despite Mr. Almond's resignation, Ms. Rice took the stage anyway. And despite the protests of the kids at the New School, Senator McCain finished his commencement address, too. In the end, what they and the reaction to them have demonstrated is that the American people—or at least a healthy, well-educated cross-section of the American people—detest the dishonesty and immorality that have come to signify the American government. That may be the most refreshing thing to come out of the academic year. Source: www.rawstory.com/admin/dbscripts/printstory.php?story=2182Condoleezza Rice at Boston College? I Quitby Steve AlmondAn open letter to William P. Leahy, SJ, president of Boston College. Dear Father Leahy, I am writing to resign my post as an adjunct professor of English at Boston College. I am doing so -- after five years at BC, and with tremendous regret -- as a direct result of your decision to invite Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to be the commencement speaker at this year's graduation. Many members of the faculty and student body already have voiced their objection to the invitation, arguing that Rice's actions as secretary of state are inconsistent with the broader humanistic values of the university and the Catholic and Jesuit traditions from which those values derive. But I am not writing this letter simply because of an objection to the war against Iraq. My concern is more fundamental. Simply put, Rice is a liar. She has lied to the American people knowingly, repeatedly, often extravagantly over the past five years, in an effort to justify a pathologically misguided foreign policy. The public record of her deceits is extensive. During the ramp-up to the Iraq war, she made 29 false or misleading public statements concerning Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and links to Al Qaeda, according to a congressional investigation by the House Committee on Government Reform. To cite one example: In an effort to build the case for war, then-National Security Adviser Rice repeatedly asserted that Iraq was pursuing a nuclear weapon, and specifically seeking uranium in Africa. In July of 2003, after these claims were disproved, Rice said: ''Now if there were doubts about the underlying intelligence . . . those doubts were not communicated to the president, the vice president, or to me." Rice's own deputy, Stephen Hadley, later admitted that the CIA had sent her a memo eight months earlier warning against the use of this claim. In the three years since the war began, Rice has continued to misrepresent or simply ignore the truth about our deadly adventure in Iraq. Like the president whom she serves so faithfully, she refuses to recognize her errors or the tragic consequences of those errors to the young soldiers and civilians dying in Iraq. She is a diplomat whose central allegiance is not to the democratic cause of this nation, but absolute power. This is the woman to whom you will be bestowing an honorary degree, along with the privilege of addressing the graduating class of 2006. It is this last notion I find most reprehensible: that Boston College would entrust to Rice the role of moral exemplar. To be clear: I am not questioning her intellectual gifts or academic accomplishments. Nor her potentially inspiring role as a powerful woman of color. But these are not the factors by which a commencement speaker should be judged. It is the content of one's character that matters here -- the reverence for truth and knowledge that Boston College purports to champion. Rice does not personify these values; she repudiates them. Whatever inspiring rhetoric she might present to the graduating class, her actions as a citizen and politician tell a different story. Honestly, Father Leahy, what lessons do you expect her to impart to impressionable seniors? That hard work in the corporate sector might gain them a spot on the board of Chevron? That they, too, might someday have an oil tanker named after them? That it is acceptable to lie to the American people for political gain? Given the widespread objection to inviting Rice, I would like to think you will rescind the offer. But that is clearly not going to happen. Like the administration in Washington, you appear too proud to admit to your mistake. Instead, you will mouth a bunch of platitudes, all of which boil down to: You don't want to lose face. In this sense, you leave me no choice. I cannot, in good conscience, exhort my students to pursue truth and knowledge, then collect a paycheck from an institution that displays such flagrant disregard for both. I would like to apologize to my students and prospective students. I would also urge them to investigate the words and actions of Rice, and to exercise their own First Amendment rights at her speech. Steve Almond is the author of the story collections ''The Evil B. B. Chow" and ''My Life in Heavy Metal."Published on Friday, May 12, 2006 by the Boston Globe **************************************************** Why I Spoke Up An amazing speech and account of the New School Graduation ceremony from Jean Rohe, 2006 commencement speaker at the New School in New York City.The speech was given in the context of a major outcry by students and faculty protesting Senator John McCain being selected to address the graduating class. Clearly this is an indication of the ferment and outrage bubbling up on universities and the basis to connect up this message of: Drive out the Bush Regime and actions planned for October 5th. Check back with news from protests against Condoleezza Rice at Boston College.Click below for Rohe's speech and her essay in the aftermath of the McCain protests. [or cut and paste] worldcantwait.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1607&Itemid=5
|
|
michelle
Administrator
I have broken any attachments I had to the Ascended Masters and their teachings; drains your chi!
Posts: 2,100
|
Post by michelle on Jun 14, 2006 11:56:53 GMT 4
|
|
michelle
Administrator
I have broken any attachments I had to the Ascended Masters and their teachings; drains your chi!
Posts: 2,100
|
Post by michelle on Jun 16, 2006 14:13:19 GMT 4
|
|
michelle
Administrator
I have broken any attachments I had to the Ascended Masters and their teachings; drains your chi!
Posts: 2,100
|
Post by michelle on Jul 5, 2006 16:31:26 GMT 4
Here's the exact type of story I was searching for. History repeats itself again and again until we learn our soul's lessons. Same goes for each of us as individuals......Michelle This article is available as a PDF leaflet to download and distributeJuly 4th 2006: The state of US democracy 230 years after the American RevolutionBy Bill Van Auken 4 July 2006This July 4 marks the 230th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, a document that launched a revolution against colonialism and despotism, inspiring peoples all over the world. The creation of a new nation, founded on Enlightenment concepts of democracy, equality and the rule of law, foreshadowed the French Revolution thirteen years later and had international reverberations for generations thereafter.The document signed in 1776 had a profoundly liberating character, proclaiming the right of the people—not only in America, but everywhere—to employ revolutionary means to dislodge governments that trampled on their “unalienable rights.” Those who led the insurrection against the British monarch were quite conscious of the international implications of their actions and the world historic significance of the Declaration. As Thomas Jefferson wrote to John Adams—both, in a poignant and fitting historical coincidence, were to die on the 50th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence—“The flames kindled on the Fourth of July, 1776, have spread over too much of the globe to be extinguished by the feeble engines of despotism; on the contrary, they will consume these engines and all who work them.” The Declaration of Independence was imbued with the ideals of the Enlightenment and its abhorrence of ignorance, exploitation and inequality. Marxists, of course, are well aware of the inherent limitations in realizing these democratic ideals, given the socio-economic framework within which they developed, characterized in eighteenth century America by capitalist property relations and chattel slavery. Yet the democratic content and universal significance of the opening passages of the Declaration are undeniable: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, —That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”Can anyone claim with a straight face that a document containing similar language would win the approval of either house of today’s US Congress or escape a veto by the current occupant of the White House? The entire content of the policies and actions—both foreign and domestic—of those who now run the American government amounts to a wholesale repudiation of the ideals and principles of 1776. Much of the Declaration of Independence consists of a bill of particulars against King George III that could be appropriated, with little revision, either for an indictment of the present Republican administration and its Democratic accomplices on war crimes, or a document politically justifying the actions of Iraqis now resisting the US occupation of their country.The old British king was charged, among other things, with having “affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power,” an abuse that has become the hallmark of an administration in Washington that continuously justifies its arrogation of unprecedented powers by invoking the president’s status as “commander in chief.” The declaration accuses the British monarch of “quartering large bodies of armed troops among us,” and “protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States.”It continues: “He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.“He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to complete the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.”Every word—“plunder,” “death,” “desolation,” “tyranny,” “cruelty,” “perfidy”—applies, and with far greater force today, to Washington’s brutal conquest and occupation of Iraq.Two hundred and thirty years after the revolution against British colonialism that brought it into being, the government of the United States is waging a colonial war aimed at subjugating the people of Iraq and appropriating that country’s oil wealth. In his own defense, King George could at least argue that he was fighting to preserve an existing empire and defend his rule over lands and subjects long recognized as British. The US colonial venture in Iraq, on the other hand, is an unprovoked war of aggression launched on the basis of lies about non-existent weapons of mass destruction and terrorist ties. Inevitably, it is producing all of the horrors and crimes associated with such interventions, with the soldiers sent to kill and die on the basis of these lies becoming ever more brutalized, leading to an unending series of war crimes. This criminal enterprise has turned into a political and even moral catastrophe, which no section of the political establishment can or will bring to a halt. The Declaration of Independence further indicted the British monarch for “depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury,” and “transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences.”Again, the charges against King George have an eerily contemporaneous ring, in the context of a US government that has claimed the right to indefinitely detain without trial or charges those whom it decrees “enemy combatants,” while routinely practicing “extraordinary rendition,” transporting beyond the seas alleged terror suspects, in this case not for trial but for torture.In an incisive column published by the New York Times Monday, Brooklyn College history professor Edwin G. Burrows calls attention to the fate of American colonists imprisoned by the British in New York City during the revolution. He estimates that 12,000 or more died due to the abominable conditions of their confinement, packed into makeshift prisons in public and private buildings as well as on broken-down ships in New York harbor, without adequate food or water or any semblance of sanitation. He notes that the brutalization of the American insurgents was justified by the British monarchy on the grounds that they “weren’t soldiers but ‘rebels’ and that defining them as prisoners of war amounted to de facto recognition of American independence.” The tragic fate of the American prisoners, he points out, gave rise to the first treaty, signed in 1785 between the newly independent United States and Prussia, prescribing humane treatment of prisoners of war, a document that served as a precursor of the Geneva Conventions. Professor Burrows concludes by noting that even if such a treaty had been in effect earlier, it might not have saved the American prisoners. “Britain was the world’s superpower in those days, as the United States is now, and if King George didn’t want to treat the ‘rebel’ prisoners humanely, only principle and conscience stood in his way.” The historian apparently did not feel a need to spell out the implications of his remarks. The parallels with George W. Bush’s use of the term “enemy combatant” to override the Geneva Conventions, deny minimal rights demanded by international law to those captured in Washington’s “global war on terror,” and even justify their torture are all too obvious. The nation’s revolutionary founders subsequently spelled out the “unalienable rights” of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” in the Bill of Rights, guaranteeing freedom of speech, religion, the press and assembly, freedom from detention without trial, and freedom from arbitrary searches and seizure.The gangsters who now control the government are attempting to reverse all of these centuries-old democratic rights, engaging in massive and illegal spying operations against virtually the entire American public in a wholesale repudiation of the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment.The administration has answered the media’s limited exposure of some of these crimes with a campaign of naked intimidation, its prominent Republican supporters in Congress accusing individual newspapers of “treason” and demanding criminal sanctions. The sinister rationale is that the “global war on terror” has rendered freedom of the press—like so many other basic democratic rights associated with 1776—inoperable. What is being constructed—with little opposition from within the political establishment—is a presidential dictatorship, free from any of the checks and balances that the American republic’s founders enshrined in the Constitution, and in direct opposition to the fundamental principle enunciated in the Declaration of Independence that the government must derive its “just powers from the consent of the governed.”
Congress has supplemented the executive branch’s assault on democratic rights with a grotesque drive to amend the US Constitution with reactionary and undemocratic measures ranging from a ban on gay marriage to the criminalization of flag burning.
In an attempt to appeal to the most backward sentiments, the Republican right is waging a full-scale war on the secularist foundations of the American revolution and its assertion of freedom not only of religion, but also from religion, as embodied in the separation of church and state spelled out plainly in the First Amendment. There are myriad attempts to legislate religious bigotry and curtail the development of science in relation to everything from global warming to stem cell research and the treatment of sexually transmitted diseases.The contradiction between the democratic ideals of the revolution and the social, political and economic realities of American society has never been sharper.Underlying this ever-widening gulf between ideals and reality is the unprecedented social polarization between a narrow layer of the financial-corporate elite and the American working class—the overwhelming majority of the population. The former controls both major parties and all of the institutions of government, while the latter is in practice politically disenfranchised. The ruling elite of billionaires and multi-millionaires uses its grip on government to repudiate all policies aimed at ameliorating social deprivation and inequality through programs addressing poverty, health care, education, etc. All such measures are rejected as intolerable impediments to the unrestricted accumulation of personal wealth. Instead, those confronting socially created catastrophes are told to rely on the philanthropic largesse of billionaires like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett. It is impossible to reconcile the democratic principles contained in America’s founding documents with the uninterrupted deepening of social and economic inequality. The underlying social tensions created by this polarization must inevitably find their expression in social and political struggles involving masses of working people, who are becoming increasingly alienated from and hostile to a government that is run exclusively by and for the super-rich. On July 4, 2006, it is appropriate to recall once again the affirmation in the Declaration of Independence of the people’s right to “alter or abolish” any government that abrogates their “unalienable rights,” and to replace it with a new system that “to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.”The Socialist Equality Party looks forward confidently to the day when American working people will exercise this universal right, uniting with workers all over the world in a new revolution that will put an end to war, poverty and oppression, establishing a socialist society organized to meet the needs of the majority rather than the profit interests of a ruling elite. Source: www.wsws.org/articles/2006/jul2006/july-j04.shtml
|
|
DT1
Moderator
You know, it's not like I wanted to be right about all of this...
Posts: 428
|
Post by DT1 on Jul 13, 2006 12:11:05 GMT 4
Republican Congressman Says Bush Should be Removed From Officeby:David Swanson www.opednews.comBy David Swanson A radio show reported yesterday that Republican Texas Congressman Ron Paul said the following: "I would have trouble arguing that he's been a Constitutional President, and once you violate the Constitution and be proven to do that I think these people should be removed from office." And this: "Congress has generously ignored the Constitution while the President flaunts it, the courts have ignored it and they get in the business of legislating so there's no respect for the rule of law." And this: "When the President signs all these bills and then adds statements after saying I have no intention of following it - he's in a way signing it and vetoing - so in his mind he's vetoing a lot of bills, in our mind under the rule of law he hasn't vetoed a thing." And Paul said the United States had entered a period of "soft fascism." The report of these statements might surprise some people, especially people who rely on the corporate media for their news, but it fits with previous remarks by Congressman Paul, including these wonderful speeches recently made on the floor of the House of Representatives by Rep. Paul and Rep. Walter Jones, a Republican from North Carolina: www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/12673 The report also comes from a media outlet that has repeatedly interviewed Paul, and they've posted a link to the audio of the interview here, although you have to join the site to hear it: www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2006/100706impeachbush.htm Rather than do that, I phoned up Congressman Paul's communications director in Washington this morning. More than confirming this report, I wanted to ask Rep. Paul why he would declare that the President should be removed from office, yet fail to introduce an article of impeachment or even sign onto Congressman John Conyers' (D., Mich.) bill, H. Res. 635, to create a preliminary investigation. I also thought I wouldn't mind knowing why Paul used the plural: "...these people should be removed from office." Whom would he include along with Bush? Cheney? Rumsfeld? Rice? Paul did give something of an answer in the interview to why he would not act on his conviction that impeachment was merited, namely he asserted, without any evidence, that the Democrats, if they won a majority, would probably try to impeach Bush for the wrong reasons: politics and revenge. There are a couple of problems with this excuse of Paul's for his inaction: 1. Out here beyond the Beltway it's progressives who couldn't stand Clinton and have no use for defending him and spend their time these days attacking his wife who are pushing impeachment. 2. The Democrats, even if they have a majority, will have to be dragged kicking and screaming to attempt impeachment, having - as they do - significantly less in the way of spine than Congressman Paul, who is probably failing to realize entirely how timid and useless they are. 3. If a president has committed high crimes and misdemeanors - as we all know this one has - then whether some Members of Congress might support impeachment for impure reasons can in no way justify a failure to impeach. In persuading nonprofit groups to work for impeachment it is often necessary to explain to them that supporting such action by Congress is not partisan just because the President belongs to a party. Is it really necessary to explain to Congressman Paul that impeachment is not partisan just because Congress Members belong to parties? This is about defending the Constitution, and either you obey your oath to do so or you violate it. Millions of U.S. citizens, like Paul, support impeachment and removal from office. And we can rightly be challenged by anyone as to whether we are sacrificing enough to make it happen: are we working every moment of the day that we can to drag a few more Congress Members onto H Res 635? Are we passing resolutions in every town and city and state possible? Are we straining enough to try to shove the peace movement and the labor movement or other potentially helpful organizations onto the impeachment agenda? Are we protesting? Going to jail? Fasting? Do we wear our Impeach Bush and Cheney shirts every day? Just as we can very reasonably be asked such questions, Rep. Paul can be asked this one: Why have you not introduced articles of impeachment, or at least signed onto Conyers' bill for a simple bipartisan investigation? How does Congressman Paul think history will look on one of the 435 people in a position to act who declared action needed and then sat down and did nothing, who actually summoned the courage to admit publicly that he recognized the slide to fascism, but stood aside and wished the country well as it slid down the slope? Will history smile on such behavior? Were Paul to put his signature where his mouth is, he would become an instant hero, the chances of impeachment would dramatically increase, and the chances of impeachment being dominated entirely by partisanship would be eliminated. And Paul would catch a ton of flack from partisans, btu they'd be partisan Republicans, and I think he could handle it. But I digress. So, anyway, I phoned Paul's communications guy, whom I'd never spoken to before, Jeff Deist. But Deist turned out to be, like most Hill staffers, more cautious than his boss. Deist did not deny what Paul had said on the radio, but changed the topic to telling me what Deist believed. For those who care, Deist believes that the issue that matters is Congress's failure to insist on its power to declare war. "Bush is not really the culprit, the blame is with Congress," Deist said, complaining of "Congress's cowardice." I asked Deist if I could check with the Congressman on whether he agreed, and Deist said I could do so by sending a detailed request, explanation of the article I was writing, etc., to rep.paul@mail.house.gov While Deist made it very clear through his defensiveness and hostility that I'd never get an interview on this topic, I'm not sure it wouldn't have an impact if, say, 10,000 people sent an Email to that address thanking Paul for his statements and asking him to do more than talk. Can you do that please? We thank you, Congressman, but we can all talk, and talk is cheap. Take action -- click here to contact your local newspaper or congress people: Demand Impeachment Now impeachpac.orgClick here to see the most recent messages sent to congressional reps and local newspapers www.davidswanson.orgDAVID SWANSON is a co-founder of After Downing Street, a writer and activist, and the Washington Director of Democrats.com. He is a board member of Progressive Democrats of America, and serves on the Executive Council of the Washington-Baltimore Newspaper Guild, TNG-CWA. He has worked as a newspaper reporter and as a communications director, with jobs including Press Secretary for Dennis Kucinich's 2004 presidential campaign, Media Coordinator for the International Labor Communications Association, and three years as Communications Coordinator for ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. Swanson obtained a Master's degree in philosophy from the University of Virginia in 1997.
|
|
DT1
Moderator
You know, it's not like I wanted to be right about all of this...
Posts: 428
|
Post by DT1 on Jul 13, 2006 12:35:35 GMT 4
Cindy Sheehan to Move Camp to National MallSubmitted by davidswanson ( impeachpac.org/blog/4)on Thu, 2006-07-06 11:43. Impeachment Process Washington, D.C., September 8 to 21 Camp Casey to Expand into Camp DemocracyCindy Sheehan and activists in the growing peace movement plan to establish Camp Casey in Crawford, Texas, again this August 16 to September 2. They then plan to move the camp to the National Mall in Washington, D.C., beginning September 8. The camp on the Mall will carry the name Camp Democracy at Fort Fed Up, and details are available at www.campdemocracy.org . Organizers intend the camp to bring together peace activists and activists for social justice, united in demanding a shift of public resources from war to the needs of people. Participants will lobby Congress to end all funding of the occupation of Iraq, and will demand that Congress hold the Bush Administration accountable for the falsehoods that launched the war and the abuses of power here at home that have accompanied it. President Bush has yet to answer Sheehan's question, "For what noble cause did my son die?" If it chose to do so, Congress could compel the President and members of his administration to answer that question. Participants in Camp Democracy will encourage Congress Members to do so. Camp Democracy is launching an outreach effort today to include organizations in the planning of the camp's activities, which are all in the initial stages. Organizations already on board include Gold Star Families for Peace, AfterDowningStreet.org, National Immigrant Solidarity Network, Traprock Peace Center, CODE PINK, Global Exchange, Progressive Democrats of America (PDA), Democrats.com, Democracy Cell Project, The World Can't Wait, Velvet Revolution, Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), New Orleans Voices for Peace, Cities for Peace, Backbone Campaign, Hip Hop Caucus, Democracy Rising, VotersforPeace, DC Labor for Peace and Justice, U.S. Labor Against the War, National Organization for Women (NOW), Reclaim the Commons, Veterans for Peace, Stop the War Coalition (UK), San Juan Peace Network, Consumers for Peace, Texans for Peace. Others are being encouraged to join here: campdemocracy.org/node/3The Camp Democracy website describes the event as "a camp for peace, democracy, and the restoration of the rule of law…focused not only on ending the war but also on righting injustices here at home and on holding accountable the Bush Administration and Congress." Tents will provide activist activities, trainings, workshops, and entertainment on at least these themes, if not others: War/ Peace The Constitution/ Accountability/ Censure/ Impeachment Poverty/ Katrina/ Immigration/ Labor Environment/ Health Care/ EducationParticipating organizations and guest experts and celebrities will provide workshops and training sessions on the above topics, as well as on communications, voter registration, nonviolent civil disobedience, lobbying, organizing, media production, and performance arts. Congress Members and congressional candidates will take part. Local elected officials will instruct attendees on participation in local government. Musicians will perform concerts. New films will be shown on a large screen. The intention is for participants to go home having acquired useful skills for civic participation, to enjoy themselves, and to demand fundamental change from a government whose actions so rarely follow majority opinion. Trainers, speakers, and performers who want to propose activities are being encouraged to contact Camp Democracy here: campdemocracy.org/node/4While civil disobedience is not planned for Camp Democracy, education in civil disobedience will be provided in preparation for the activities of Sept. 21 to 28 being organized by the Declaration of Peace: www.declarationofpeace.org Cindy Sheehan, Co-Founder of Gold Star Families for Peace and mother of Casey Sheehan, KIA in Iraq, said: "We are going to bring to the front door of Congress our demand that they fulfill their Constitutional obligation to check the abuses of the President. We will ask them to compel President Bush and members of his administration to answer the question 'Why was my son sent to die in Iraq?' And we are going to ask Congress Members themselves why they are allowing the killing to continue, together with the drain on resources that is putting at risk all of the needs of people in this country and abroad." NOW President Kim Gandy said of Camp Democracy plans, "We must keep raising our voices for peace -- and the harder that becomes, the more necessary it is." Nancy Wohlforth, Co-convenor of U.S. Labor Against the War, and President, Pride At Work, AFL-CIO, said, "The hard-earned tax dollars of every working person in the United States are being squandered on the war in Iraq. Working people must use the power of their labor, organized through unions, to demand a reordering of priorities, to peoples' needs rather than corporate greed. Through participating in Camp Democracy, U.S. Labor Against the War joins the surging, broadening movement to bring our troops home now and end the war on Iraq." Sunny Miller, Director of Traprock Peace Center, and daughter of a Vietnam Vet said, "The first woman elected to Congress, Jeannette Rankin, had it right -- 'You can no more win a war than you can win an earthquake.' The bloody warring and profiteering must be stopped, or we're headed for calamity. Women know this. Ordinary people know this everywhere. I think it's time to support real reparations with a women's strike for peace, and a time to live the dream that Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., held up for us." Kevin Zeese, Director of Democracy Rising, said: "Anti-war and social justice voters need to bring their message to Washington, DC, to kick off the final months of the mid-term elections. Join us so we can present a unified presence and energize anti-war voters throughout the United States. Let's make the anti-war vote a powerful one in 2006 and 2008." Added Karen Bradley of Democracy Cell Project: "Come and learn how we will take the country back." Former U.S. diplomat and U.S. Army Colonel Ann Wright said, "Camp Democracy is an critical event to continue to put pressure on the Congress and the Bush Administration to end the war in Iraq and bring the troops home, as well as for discussing the criminal activities the Bush administration is involved in." Tim Carpenter, Director of PDA, said: "Progressive Democrats of America is proud to be a part of this historic effort to organize and mobilize the progressive community from across this country to focus the upcoming election on ending the occupation of Iraq, cutting off funding for the war and holding the President, Vice President and the entire Bush Administration accountable for the lies that lead to this war." Medea Benjamin, Cofounder, CODEPINK: Women for Peace, said, "We need to be in Washington DC, where the decisions are being made to continue this immoral war. Elected officials need to hear our voices and feel our pressure when we, the people, say 'Bring the Troops Home.'" Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence, added, " To secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."*mod's note:Wonder what Geedubya thinks of that... Never mind.He couldn't read it off a teleprompter with Rove whispering into his earpiece. The time has come to have done with this shameful chapter in our nation's history.
|
|
DT1
Moderator
You know, it's not like I wanted to be right about all of this...
Posts: 428
|
Post by DT1 on Aug 20, 2006 11:46:58 GMT 4
A message from Charles W. Sanders: A FEDERAL JUDGE HAS RULED, RENEW THE CALLS FOR IMPEACHMENT NOWACTION PAGE: www.charleswsanders.org/petitions/pnum262.phpOn Friday, August 18th, I filed the necessary nominating petition signatures to compete for the Democratic party nomination for the U.S. House in the 3rd District of OH. Due to the sudden and unexpected withdrawal of our candidate, it has been determined that there must be a special election on September 15 to fill the election vacancy We now have a fresh opportunity to make the case to my constituents that the Bush administration must be peaceably removed from office. This is made all the more urgent by the ruling of a federal judge that the president has categorically broken the law in deliberately violating the 1st and 4th amendments to the Constitution by wiretapping American citizens without warrant. He did so by defying the secret FISA court expressly created to not only prevent such abuses of power but also to protect our real national security in the most diligent possible way. We hear about the recent police action in Great Britain which successfully disrupted a possible terrorist plot before it was even remotely close to being operational. And all this was done by proper warrant and scrupulously so by our British counterparts. Why is it that our own president cannot protect us without acting as a Constitutional outlaw? Indeed, why cannot he protect us from threats that were of widespread public knowledge, like Hurricane Katrina? To all my loyal friends an supporters, I ask you again to join me in the fight for real policy change. Based on the momentum we had already developed, and with your continued support, I am confident that my constituents will recognize that the there is one candidate they will always be able to count on to stand strong on the critical issues of our time, Charles W. Sanders. Please submit my renewed action page on impeachment today to keep the pressure on. Thank you Charles W. Sanders ACTION PAGE: www.charleswsanders.org/petitions/pnum262.php
|
|
michelle
Administrator
I have broken any attachments I had to the Ascended Masters and their teachings; drains your chi!
Posts: 2,100
|
Post by michelle on Sept 20, 2006 6:18:47 GMT 4
Let the People Lead By John Nichols The Nation Sunday 17 September 2006 "... it may, perhaps, on some occasion, be found necessary to impeach the President himself..." - James Madison. On Sunday, September 17, I appeared on the National Mall in Washington as part of Camp Democracy's day-long session on impeachment. Camp Democracy organizer David Swanson's timing was, as always, impeccable. Though it is too little noted by the current guardians of the American experiment - and the media guardians of the American discourse - September 17 is Constitution Day. It was on September 17, 1787, that 39 of the founders signed the U.S. Constitution and took the first formal step on America's journey as a nation of laws rather than men., It is possible, and indeed appropriate, to debate the intentions of the founders on a host of issues. But there can be no debate about their determination that the document guarantee the most necessary of all democratic protections: the power of impeachment. George Mason, who along with James Madison was a definitional figure in the drafting of the Constitution, put it best when he said of the document's contents: "No point is of more importance than that the right of impeachment should be continued." Madison's notes from the summer in which the Constitution was drafted, as well as his letters to Jefferson regarding the product of that summer, leave no doubt that the founders intended for impeachment to be utilized whenever necessary in defense of the Republic. They did not want the power to impach treated as a fetish or a fantasy, nor did they intend for its application to be seen as a Constitutional crisis. Rather, they wanted impeachment to be recognized for what it is: the cure for the crisis of executive excess. It was Madison's view that impeachment was an "indispensable" provision for defending the American experiment - and the American people - "against the incapacity, negligence or perfidy of the chief Magistrate." The promise of another election, at which a wrongdoing executive might be removed, was not enough to provide such protection, Madison had warned in his address to the Constitutional Convention that made provision for impeachment. "The imitation of the period of {the president's] service, was not a sufficient security," explained the man who would, himself, serve two full terms as the new nation's fourth president. "{The president} might lose his capacity after his appointment. He might pervert his administration into a scheme of peculation or oppression. He might betray his trust to foreign powers... In the case of the Executive Magistracy which was to be administered by a single man, loss of capacity or corruption was more within the compass of probable events, and either of them might be fatal to the Republic." Gouverneur Morris, the "gentleman revolutionary" whose pen Madison credited with providing "the finish given to the style and arrangement of the Constitution," was even blunter than his compatriot. Speaking of "the necessity of impeachments," Morris asserted that only the broad power to remove the president - not merely for corruption and incapacity but for the far more fluidly-defined act of "treachery" - would provide the essential insurance across time that: "This Magistrate is not the King... The people are the King." Two hundred and nineteen years after that first September 17, Swanson and the Camp Democracy organizers brought together many of the best thinkers in the nation to discuss the question of how best to maintain the mandate of the Constitution. Former federal prosecutor Elizabeth de la Vega, former Kennedy administration aide Marcus Raskin, former CIA analyst Ray McGovern were present, along with former U.S. Representative Elizabeth Holtzman, the co-author of The Case for Impeachment, and Constitutional scholar David Lindorff, the co-author of The Impeachment of George W. Bush. Activists such as Michael Avery, the president of the National Lawyers Guild; Dan DeWalt, the Vermont selectman who began the grassroots movement to pass local impeachment resolution and veteran political operative Steve Cobble showed up to talk strategy. There was little debate about whether George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and their compatriots have committed "high crimes and misdemeanors" - the deliberately broad term for executive wrongdoing that the founders intended to address both legal and political concerns. There was a good deal of frustration with the failure of Democratic leaders to accept the responsibility of the opposition party to hold out-of-control leaders to account. But there was, as well, a dawning recognition that the discussion about impeachment will be had - if not as quickly or as well as should be in Washington, then surely in the great expanses of these United States. Polls and practices suggest that the citizenry well understands the necessity of holding this administration to account - not to punish Bush or Cheney but to restore the system of checks and balances that has been so warped in this era of executive whim and lawlessness. And 219 years into this American experiment, as we honor the Constitution that is its foundation, the message from Camp Democracy is clear: It is time to remind the politicians and the pundits that: "This Magistrate is not the King... The people are the King." -------- For more on Camp Democracy, visit the website at: www.campdemocracy.org/ John Nichols' new book, The Genius of Impeachment: The Founders' Cure for Royalism (The New Press), will be published in October. Of it, Studs Terkel says: "Never within my nonagenarian memory has the case for impeachment of Bush and his equally crooked confederates been so clearly and fervently offered as John Nichols has done in this book. They are after all our public SERVANTS who have rifled our savings, bled our young, and challenged our sanity. As Tom Paine said 200 years ago to another George, a royal tramp: "Bugger off!" So should we say today. John Nichols has given us the history, the language and the arguments we will need to do so."Source: www.truthout.org/docs_2006/091906G.shtml
|
|
DT1
Moderator
You know, it's not like I wanted to be right about all of this...
Posts: 428
|
Post by DT1 on Sept 20, 2006 6:58:54 GMT 4
Would that "that God***n piece of paper" came with a No Confidence clause... I fear that most of the American people don't realise that we are now in a state of Constitutional Crisis. If we do manage to beat the Diebold spread and win back the House,or the Senate,will they have the stones to Impeach this smirking frat-boy? I wonder... Most people,when pressed,will confront a percieved enemy face to face, if for no other reason than to look them in the eye and take in their measure... As Bush The Lesser addressed(lectured) the United Nations this afternoon,his itinerary handlers went to great lengths to avoid Shrub 43 from being in the same room with the Iranian president.
It fits his pattern. He won't meet with Hugo Chavez,either. Or Cindy Sheehan,for that matter. The bravery of being out of range...
President Chickenshit.
Yesterday I watched T.V. news,something I rarely do... Number of CNN segments reporting on massive Bush protest at U.N.......ZERO. Number of segments reporting on the new "Tickle me Elmo"doll......fourteen when I stopped counting.
|
|
michelle
Administrator
I have broken any attachments I had to the Ascended Masters and their teachings; drains your chi!
Posts: 2,100
|
Post by michelle on Sept 20, 2006 14:34:31 GMT 4
If we do manage to beat the Diebold spread and win back the House,or the Senate,will they have the stones to Impeach this smirking frat-boy? I wonder... Hey DT1: There is momentum growing for impeachment within Congress. We do have a few members who stand in the Light of Truth Others will join in when they realize it's electorial suicide not to. Independent candidates are behind impeachment 100%. At local levels of government, more and more cities are passing impeachment resolutions. Note the following article....Michelle38 US Reps for Bush Impeachment ReviewBy Matthew Cardinale, News Editor and National Correspondent, Atlanta Progressive News (September 12, 2006)(APN) ATLANTA – US Rep. Steve Rothman (D-NJ) became the 38th Member of the US Congress officially listed as a supporter of H. Res. 635, a bill which could lead to recommendations to impeach President Bush.The bill, sponsored by US Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), would create a Select Committee to look into the grounds for impeaching President Bush over misleading the public on the need to go to war; retaliating against public officials who disagree with him; and encouraging torture. US Rep. Rothman actually had indicated his support since March of 2006, but a clerical error led to his name not being listed until late last week, the Congressman’s Communications Director, Kimberly Allen, told Atlanta Progressive News. This would be a second time a clerical error has occurred related to this bill. US Rep. Rothman recently pledged his support at a constituent panel on leaving Iraq, “If Not Now, When?” "The only body that has the power to impeach the president is the House of Representatives. The effort, if I may be so bold, is to take back the House," US Rep. Rothman said, according to The Bergen Record Newspaper of New Jersey. “Rothman, building on one audience member's suggested metaphor, likened the war, and its aim of finding weapons of mass destruction that were never recovered, to an unresolved car theft,” The Bergen Record said. "Imagine if you will, if the police and prosecutor, they refuse to charge you with a crime," Rothman said, according to The Bergen Record. "You did it, but they refuse to charge you. What do we do as a society? We replace the police and the prosecutor." "This November, you can get a new prosecutor and a new police force and charge with a crime and have a trial... We will hold all those hearings, including one in which we look at whether an impeachable offense occurred," US Rep. Rothman said, according to The Bergen Record. "A number in the audience were very passionate that President Bush should be impeached. They even went so far as to say that he was responsible for war crimes ... and what would I do about it,” Rep. Rothman said according to The News-Leader Newspaper in New Jersey. “Having served on the House Judiciary Committee when President Clinton was going to be impeached for having sex with someone other than his spouse ... that was, in my opinion, an abuse of power and a violation of our Founding Fathers who allowed for an impeachment only for treason, high crimes or other misdemeanors," Rothman said, according to The News-Leader. "I'm reluctant to join any frivolous effort to impeach President Bush without clear evidence of bribery, treason or high crimes or misdemeanors." "The president's Republican majority said they will not convene any such hearings in regards to President Bush. A number of us in Congress supported the holding of hearings to determine if there was evidence for an impeachment hearing," Rep. Rothman said according to The News-Leader. 9% of US Congress now supports the impeachment review, including 18% of Democrats, 100% of Independents (1 out of 1), and 0% of Republicans.The best represented states on H. Res 635 are California (9), New York (6), Illinois (3), Massachusetts (3), Minnesota (3), Georgia (2), New Jersey (2), and Wisconsin (2). The current 38 total co-sponsors are Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D-HI), Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Rep. Michael Capuano (D-MA), Rep. Lois Capps (D-CA), Rep. William Lacy Clay (D-MO), Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), Rep. Danny Davis (D-IL), Rep. Sam Farr (D-CA), Rep. Chaka Fattah (D-PA), Rep. Bob Filner (D-CA), Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY), Rep. Mike Honda (D-CA), Rep. Jackson, Jr., (D-IL), Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX), Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA), Rep. John Lewis (D-GA), Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), Rep. Betty McCollum (D-MN), Rep. Jim McDermott (D-WA), Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA), Rep. Gwen Moore (D-WI), Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Rep. James Oberstar (D-MN), Rep. John Olver (D-MA), Rep. Major Owens (D-NY), Rep. Donald Payne (D-NJ), Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY), Rep. Steve Rothman (D-NJ), Rep. Martin Sabo (D-MN), Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Rep. Hilda Solis (D-CA), Rep. Fortney Pete Stark (D-CA), Rep. John Tierney (D-MA), Rep. Nydia Velazquez (D-NY), Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA), Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), and Rep. David Wu (D-OR). An Atlanta Progressive News analysis has found that, interestingly, 30 of the 38 total co-sponsors are members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus. However, only 30 of the 62 members of the Caucus have signed on. Atlanta Progressive News is calling out the other 32 self-described progressives who have not signed on. They are Reps. Becerra, Bordallo, Corrine Brown, Sherrod Brown, Carson, Cristenson, Cleaver, Cummings, DeFazio, DeLauro, Evans, Frank, Grijalva, Gutierrez, Tubbs Jones, Kaptur, Kilpatrick, Kucinich, Lantos, Markey, McGovern, Miller, Holmes-Norton, Pastor, Rush, Serrano, Slaughter, Thompson, Udall, Watson, Watt, and Waxman.In the US Senate, Barbara Boxer (D-CA), John Kerry (D-MA), and Tom Harkin (D-IA) are currently the three co-sponsors of US Senator Russ Feingold’s (D-WI) bill, S. Res 398, to censure President Bush. US Sen. Menendez told Atlanta Progressive News recently that several Senators are closely considering the censure resolution. In the last couple months, there have not been any new cosponsors to either resolution. The most recent activity involves US Rep. Rothman’s cosponsoring of H. Res 635; although his office is characterizing Rothman’s position on an impeachment review as not new. Atlanta Progressive News has provided near-exclusive–and during many times, exclusive–coverage of the progress of H. Res 635. A few months ago, H. Res 635 was discovered by the corporate media. While the corporate media has yet to give serious treatment to the grounds for an impeachment review, they have given voice to Republican scare tactics that, “Oh no, if Democrats take back the House, it will be impeachment hearings!” we paraphrase. US Rep. Conyers has been in an ideological tug of war in the meantime. Many progressives have criticized Conyers for not doing enough, saying the time has come for outright impeachment proceedings. One commenter on ConyersBlog accused the Congressman of essentially appeasing progressives with his bill to make it look like something was being done about Bush’s apparent lies, even accusing Conyers of being a secret agent of Republicans. Meanwhile, Republicans have highlighted Conyers’s likely upcoming promotion to US House Judiciary Committee Chairman as part of their fundraising efforts, while current Democratic Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has distanced herself from the impeachment movement as much as possible.“There has been massive support for House Resolution 635 from a very vigorous network of grassroots activists and people committed to holding the Bush Administration accountable for its widespread abuses of power,” US Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) said in a statement prepared for Atlanta Progressive News. “The Atlanta Progressive News has reported regularly on this bill,” Conyers wrote on ConyersBlog. On the local level, impeachment resolutions have been passing in more and more US cities. At least twelve (20) US cities, including Arcata, Berkeley, Fairfax, San Francisco, Santa Cruz, and Sebastopol, each in California; Brookline, Massachussetts; Hanover, New Hampshire; New Paltz, Plattsburg, and Woodstock in New York; Carrboro and Chapel Hill in North Carolina; and Battleboro, Brookfield, Dummerston, Marlboro, Newfane, Putney, and Rockingham, each in Vermont, have passed resolutions calling for Bush’s impeachment or an impeachment investigation, according to ImpeachPAC. State Assembly Resolutions are also being considered in California, Illinois, and Vermont, either of which would force the issue to be considered in the US House according to The Jefferson Manual.At least three members of Congress are prepared to sign Articles of Impeachment if they were to be introduced, sources tell Atlanta Progressive News. One of them is US Rep. John Lewis (D-GA), according to a radio interview he did. His press office later tried to spin this, saying of course Rep. Lewis meant it would only be introduced if it went through a proper investigation. Conyers’s bill was initially referred to the US House Rules Committee, which has not taken action. None of the US House Democrats on the Rules Committee have signed on as co-sponsors. The Ranking Democrat on the Committee is US Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY). Democratic members of the Committee are Alcee Hastings (D-FL), Doris Matsui (D-CA), and James McGovern (D-MA). Republicans currently outnumber Democrats on the committee by about a two-to-one ratio.The US House Rules Committee would need to take action on H. Res 635 because it calls for the creation of a Select Committee, in other words the creation of a new committee that is not a standing committee, Jonathan Godfrey, Communications Director for US Rep. Conyers, told Atlanta Progressive News. Such a Committee would need to be staffed, Godfrey noted. If not acted on this session, the bill would have to be reintroduced next session. It is possible a new bill could include new language regarding Bush's approval of illegal NSA domestic wiretapping. For now, however, sources in Washington DC tell Atlanta Progressive News that H. Res 635 is a venue for coalition among members of Congress who are willing to consider impeachment for a variety of reasons. Even though H. Res 635 does not specifically reference the NSA domestic wiretapping issue, some Members of US Congress have found the wiretapping issue a compelling reason to sign on as a co-sponsor, sources say. In other words, why introduce separate legislation to address a single issue when momentum has been built with H. Res 635? The thing about H. Res. 635 is, it deals with impeaching Bush over a cluster of issues from misleading the public to go to war, to authorizing torture. Wiretapping was not listed as one of the reasons to investigate the grounds for Bush's impeachment in the bill because the existence of the secret, illegal wiretapping had not come to light yet when the bill was being prepared. US Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) withdrew her name from H. Res 635 at the end of January 2006, whereas she had been listed as a cosponsor throughout January 2006. Lofgren cited a clerical error for her name having been listed in the first place. Lofgren's Office told Atlanta Progressive News the Representative learned of her being listed as a co-sponsor after reading an exclusive article by Atlanta Progressive News issued January 01, 2006. Atlanta Progressive News will continue to follow this story and any related developments. We have a juicy related scoop to be revealed soon. Matthew Cardinale is the News Editor and National Correspondent for Atlanta Progressive News. He may be reached at matthew@atlantaprogressivenews.com
Syndication policy:
This article may be reprinted in full at no cost where Atlanta Progressive News is credited.Source: www.atlantaprogressivenews.com/news/0088.html
|
|