Duckworth and the Impeachment Agenda
Lynn Sweet writes today on the bucks rolling into the 6th and 8th CDs. She also quotes Duckworth's spokesmen Bill Weinberg on Roskam's failure to have an issues page on his website, saying,
Tammy is showing that she will compete head-to-head with Pete Roskam on generating the resources needed for this campaign -- while Roskam's position on key issues is still 'under construction.'
The only issue that counts in this election for me is Feingold's Impeachement Agenda.
Duckworth has to take a stand and so far I haven't seen it. It's not on her website. I think it's still under construction too.
WSJ was right here. Feingold did us a public service. Duckworth should respond,
He's doing voters a favor by telling them before November's election just how Democrats intend to treat a wartime President if they take power.
Not only do they want to block his policies, they also plan to rebuke and embarrass him in front of the world and America's enemies. And they want to do so not because there is a smidgen of evidence that he's abused his office or lied under oath, but because they think he's been too energetic in using his powers to defend America. By all means, let's have this impeachment debate before the election, so voters can know what's really at stake.
15 comments:
But Larry, do you agree voters deserve Duckworth's opinion before they vote?
I know where Roskam stands despite his webpage being under contruction.
I know were Duckworth stands on the minimum alternative tax.
I want to know where she stands on the Impeachment Agenda and I think she's still contructing it....
...what's taking her so long? You seem pretty clear. Why not her?
I hope they read Illinoize instead.
They can respond here unfiltered.
This is without question the most important crisis currently facing the nation--though obviously not the issue garnering the most attention. (Tom Cruise's wedding is so much more important!)
Impeachment is the only option for a president who has publicly admitted to violating the Constitution and statutes of the United States and asserts a continued right to do so. I, for one, do not want to live in a country where the president is allowed to make the law up as he goes along.
This cannot be allowed stand.
There are also grounds for Bush's impeachment beyond his assertion that he has the right to break the law, but I won't get into those now.
Our founders are spinning in their graves. Their worst fears are coming to life.
P.S. If you think it's just a-ok for Bush to have the power to break the law at will, imagine President Hillary Clinton with the same power. Still feel the same way about unchecked executive authority?
Bill -- Don't you think it's a little over-the-top to criticize Duckworth for not answering a question you haven't asked her yet? She's a war hero, not a psychic.
Like everybody else here, I'd like to know what could possibly be more embarrassing to a "wartime President" than half-a-dozen generals with intimate knowledge of Iraq calling our war effort an abyssmal failure and demanding the Secretary of Defense resign.
As for impeachment, while I agree Bush deserves it, I don't think it will accomplish much. When I look at Bush, I think "Dead Man Walking." We need to focus on getting our brave soldiers out of harm's way, not getting Bush out of the White House.
anon 10:58 AM
I deleted. I would left it if you had a name. Get a name if you want to talk sex here.
No, I don't YDD. Although I might call.
I'm fond of that Bill Ayers Bernnette Dorhan weatherman phrase, you don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing.
If Duckworth needs a psychic to realize this, as the most important crisis currently facing the nation, we're in trouble...
...now she may be avoiding it because her party conflicted on it.
But I happen to aggree with Jason to the extent once you make this charge, Democrats have come to terms with it. If it's that important you need to tell voters you think so.
The Party can't walk away from it as the rant of oddballs in the ranks.
Bill -
Call her. I assume that when she tells you she doesn't support impeachment, she'll have your full support? Or are there other red herring arguments we need to get out of the way?
While we're at it, can we find out where Peter Roskam stands on prayer in schools, teaching creationism, banning abortion in the cases of rape, incest or when a woman's life is in danger, and a federal ban on the right to die?
You say the Democrats "plan to rebuke and embarrass [Bush] in front of the world and America's enemies".
Hot news flash: Bush has already, repeatedly, embarassed himself in front of the world and America's enemies -- and America's allies.
Only his domestic allies refuse to recognize that.
I guess when you support a right wing extremist like Roskam and his pals Cheney, DeLay and Armey, you need to cook up any diversion possible.
It is good strategy for Republicans. Talk about Rosksm and his wacked out views on abortion, or talk about impeachment? Looks like Roskam's people are taking the right approach.
Of course it won't work. Eventually Roskam will have to talk about real issue and when he does, people will be boggled that anyone voted for him for anything.
How do you think that district is going to respond when it turns out that Roskam opposed abortion even when the mother's life is at risk?
Well said, Mr. Mayor.
Have we forgotten how the world united behind the US after Sept. 11th? Bush managed to single-handedly squander the goodwill of the entire world in about 18 months flat.
The law of averages tells us that if you put enough chimpanzees in a room for long enough, eventually they'll churn out Shakespeare.
Well, I'm hear to say that Bush couldn't have been more wrong -- about everything -- if he were trying.
We'd be better off with a Magic Eightball calling the shots in the Oval Office.
It's been almost five years, and we still haven't brought Bin Laden to justice. Embarrassing.
"The President of the United States has committed a serious transgression," said Representative Dick Armey of Texas, the House majority leader. "Among other things, he took an oath to God to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and then he failed to do so, not once, but several times." To ignore this, he said, is to "undermine the rule of law."
To think that he was talking about a blow-job.
What would Dick think about our current situation.
I think the bigger issue for Tammy Duckworth is how we should prosecute the war in Iraq, not whether the President should be impeached. Like it or not, President Bush has failed miserably. Our enemies are stronger, not weaker. Either we substantially increase our troop committment to stablize the country, or leave. It's that simple Bill, but you go right on diverting attention with this impeachment nonesense that most of the country could care less about.
Amazing how whenever someone posts about Duckworth everyone feels the need to comment.
anon 8:34
Duckworth on the alternative min tax got five comments.
Bill,
Why hasn't Roskam come out with his statements about how he feels about lying (aka, distorting the truth and cherry-picking facts while ignoring others)?
Huh?
I would think he would be against lying, and if so, he would rightly be in favor of impeachment, if not censure.
But, no, he is against impeachment (which isn't even being discussed, Feingold's motion was for censure -- as I'm sure you know impeachment proceedings must be initiated in the House, which is why the filandering Henry "Youthful Indiscretions" Hyde was the leader in getting back at the Dems for investigating Nixon's role in Watergate).
As always, even when it comes to blatantly violating the Constitution, It's OK If You're a Republican.
Well, Bill, enough is enough. It doesn't matter if Major Duckworth is in favor of impeachment or not.
Roskam is ok with lying and violating the Constitution -- that says it all right there and is plenty of reason to vote *against* Roskam and for an Army Major who literally gave her limbs for her nation.
Post a Comment