Okay... NOW What?

OK now what is exactly what I was typing about Rick:

"I don't think '04 should have been as much about abortion as it was," said truth.

unfortunately it was truth and that is a challenge that we must overcome between now and '08. For instance, it was claimed, wrongly so that Governor Casey was prohibited from speaking at the '92 convention b/c of his stand on abortion. Actually it was b/c he refused to endorse Clinton. The question will then be if allowing his son to speak in '08 in the Denver Convesntion will be a smart message to send to the folks I met at our booth at the Treemont festival in Cleveland who were our one issue voters we tried to redirect to the more important issues to Ohions of economic populism or would that just open old wounds we would rather not get into? Either those one issue voters it is unlikey that we will ever persuade, should be ignored or it must be done with authenticity, not pandering.
In Colorado the Hispanic liason told me that we would have won Colorado in '04 had we not been flooded by tons of very late money targeted directly to cultural conservative Hispanic voters in rural parts of the state like Pueblo. We had a Hispanic Senatorial candidate and a wonderful state operation that put 90% of our effort into carrying Denver for JK and Salazar, which the campaign campaign did by an unprecedented 76% but that was still not enough to overcome the conservative parts of the state. Claire McCaskill smartly learned from her mistakes from a previous run for state office and targeted rural voters this time. But we need to learn one thing from this election: the Iraq war and ethical lapses by Republicans are unique to '06 and we should not presume that this opportunity will repeat itself in '08. There will be new challenges in '08 that we have not even thought about yet.
Unfortunately while we made much progress this election cycle we still have miles to go to reach out to rural and antiabortion voters. Spreading the Air America voice to channels in rural America and the Hispanic Air America voice, while discussed ere last year by chuck and others, never materialized, perhaps b/c of Air America's financial problems. Curious what others dcp members in different parts of the country learned from their '06 experiences with voters, since we are here at dcp to learn and grow and to prepare ourselves for a grueling and all important Presiential campaign not that far off.

incidentally the experience I had in '04 in Denver was that all of the late money($1 million) in the Colorado Presidential campaign to the Republican state party was targeted specifically towards cultural conservative antiabortion Hispanics in Pueblo. It worked for them and narrowly carried Colorado for Bush: my question, is that fighting the last battle while ignoring challenges of future unforseen Republican slime machine efforts?

Ira, what I saw was a lot of frustration with politicians who weren't accomplishing very much of anything, and especially not passing the legislation or accomplishing the other goals of the conservative Christian voters who put them there. In the end, white male Christian millionaires is just not a lot of voting power. A lot of Republicans didn't vote at all because they weren't excited by their choices and we certainly can't count on that the next time around. Especially if we draw down forces in Iraq but relaunch (or threaten to) in Korea or Iran. A new war or some saber rattling is always good for shoring up the base.
I do think the "down ticket" approach is good and to see victories in governorships and state legislatures is quite heartening. I think we need to continue to focus on rebuilding the party for the long term and staying ahead of any nasty media-driven brainwashing. It is also instructive to remember that Americans preferred a Democratic Congress and a Republican president for many years: Dems to run internal affairs and a Republican to handle foreign affairs. We cannot count out that rationale and should remember that our newly elected representatives need to look towards home and clean out the Aegean stables of all the stinky legislation that has passed recently.

And there is one thing missing from that to-do list:
Dust off the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Re-enact them.

And a good Veterans Day to all. Go find a veteran and thank him or her...and their families.

Thank you, V.

and the vessel you rode in on,
Otter

January 3, 2007 needs to be an official day of celebration where we proudly fly our flags from sea to sea and proudly pronounce that a new day for America has arrived. Lets start a national January 3, 2007 flag day.

(Quoted without comment, except to remind us of how & why we got here... these lyrics from the album "Iraq: Songs of Life and Death" by http://riotfolk.org musician Ryan Harvey...)

They won't grant you land
But they'll hand you evictions
Won't ban pollution
But they'll hand you prescriptions
Won't plan a clinic
But they'll plan you a prison
To expand their restrictions
Demand your convictions
All for a scam to bring the man riches

And the laws are all written in encoded encryption
Like Egyptian inscriptions
So you can't read the text or transcribe the depictions
And you end up a victim of this merciless system
A fool to the rules
Unless you resist them...

While Bush is discreet with his hard drug connections
And lies through his teeth about weapons inspections
Starts wars on the poor to protect his investments
Shackles the rest in his halls of "correction"
The empire rises with threat of aggression
And free enterprise all we get is recession

So we protest elections and move on in directions
To spawn insurrections
Maintaining the movement for public protection
From the morbid extension of corporate oppression

But the media ignores it or turns their attention
To stories of glory or outright suppression
When the people rise up and the press gives no mention
They like to pretend it's a leftist invention

Now CIA henchmen plot out interventions
To silence the people who stand up and question
Our secret detentions or chemical weapons
Or mass violation of Geneva Conventions
From all the president's men there's no talk of prevention
Just talk of revenge and of lethal offenses
While soldiers are dying alone in the trenches
Here back at home we're thrown behind fences

And they call it freedom, flag waving with grace
Yeah we're gonna beat 'em we're saving this place
But reality strikes, they're creating disgrace
And killing the hungry, the poor and displaced
While paving the way for the state to erase
The rights of the people, move forward with slaves
Keep digging the deep hole of court-ordered graves
Now only the biggest rebellions will save

Our only alternative to fear and defeat
By the rule of fortunate is here in the street
It's the sound that we make when we rise up and speak
In defense of our world, the freedom we seek
The wrongly convicted, the wrongly released
All captive belongings of capitalist greed
And until we've deleted the powers that be
There will never be peace in the land of the free

so let's work to create real peace in our time,
Otter

Song & pictures say it all:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orlDffk29aI

"'There are no atheists in foxholes' isn't an argument against atheism. It's an argument against foxholes."
-- James Morrow

If you get a chance to listen to NPR's "Wait, wait, don't tell me..." show today (or this weekend), I promise you won't be disappointed. I realize I'm still slightly giddy from Tuesday's results, but today's show was a hoot.

Here's a little teaser...

"Nancy Pelosi will be the first female Speaker of the House, but she won't be the first one to wear women's underwear..."

Install Lincoln Chaffee at the UN :)

Help Waxman pick out his first investigation

Free the Internet

Investigate Halliburton and other war profiteering/corruption

Redeploy US troops to Afghanistan to bolster Democracy where they may actually want it, and oh, how about Bin Laden's head on a stick?

Windfall Profit Taxes on the oil companies to pay the war bill, instead of my freakin kids

Address global warming

Fair Trade

Get us the 6 for 6

Repair our diplomatic standing in the world

Help Katrina victims rebuild

Restore the writ of Habeus Corpus in America

Charge Bush Adminsitration officials with war crimes....oh, wait....check!

That should keep the Dems busy for awhile.

Lincoln Chaffee at the UN, what a great idea, unfortunately we have no say so about that.

I found this gem on MichiganLiberal.com.
I think it speaks for all of us.
I posted it a Dem Daily and Lib Values...

————————————
I always get a lump in my throat when I stand up to sing the Star Spangled Banner, but it often seems as if I’m the only one. The daughter and granddaughter of several of America’s heroes, I believe that to have given all or a part of your life to our country and what it stands for is truly one of the most selfless acts, ever.

My dad is a Vietnam Veteran, and I will never know exactly what he suffered, or how wet a monsoon really is, or how terrifying the jungles appear at night. I couldn’t tell you what it’s like to spend months and years knowing that it could all be over in a flash, sometimes only because you fly a different flag than the guy at the other end of the gun. I don’t know what it’s like to return to a country only a year or two older than when you left but be aged beyond words. But our heroes can - and those who serve even now, will return with their own age spots, both emotional and physical.

On this Veterans Day, I am sad to see how little respect our veterans have been given by the press, by our government, and by the people in general. Just with those who have lost their lives in the last 6 years, it seems as if we’ve swept our heroes under the rug of our daily lives. Now grown men and women have to be told to take their hat off while our anthem plays, and too many still don’t know all the words to the Pledge of Allegiance. I’m tired of patriotism being played as a campaign card when it’s fashionable, and forgotten when it matters most. Our vets are our heroes, those who stand among us with scars that will always linger, and too often, those who are left behind us as we go forward. These men and women deserve so much more than the societal breadcrumbs we throw them when the media spotlight needs a new poster boy or girl.

So how do we honor our veterans and fallen heroes? I think of my dad, and my grandfathers, and I know that the greatest form of respect we can give them is to never, ever forget - what they’ve given, what they endure to this day, and the battle that they face even now, on our own soil, through finances, education, and healthcare. Perhaps we all need to stand as a state and a country, remove our hats, and swallow the collective lump that should form in all of our throats. Wipe the tear that forms in the corner of our eye, and turn to salute our veterans, our heroes. Contrary to what many may think, they are what keeps us great, not the other way around.

Dems should not even think about impeachment unless they have the necessary votes to finish it.

Dems were elected to fix the mess Dumbya left; not get bogged doen in years of mud wrestling.
I believe Clinton's popularity actually went up during his troubles as it was pretty obvious the Repubs put way to much emphasis on lieing about BJs.

There should be investigations into torture, how we got into Iraq, contracts to Haliburton. In the end, censure Dumbya for every thing he did wrong. We need to not only bury Bush, but Conservatism.

Let the European Courts rip him a new one.
But do not start impeachment unless the entire body of Congress and the public are clamoring for it.

While there are certainly many things that could be brought forth to impeach George W. Bush, it may not be in the long term best interests of the Democratic party...it may be the right thing to do though...so if there are enough votes to accomplish that, and the it is in the best interests of the American people moving forward through Bush's lame duck years here, then yes, do it, but remember, this may come at the sacrifice of actually accomplishing the democratic agenda in Congress.

Good news in new Newsweek poll for Bush. He is now at 31%, but still ahead of where Richard Nixon was when he left office. Just barely.

Dems should hold investigations into everything.

They should push the agenda forward for the American people. An agenda which had better include media reform and election reform as well as issues like healthcare, ending the Iraq war, etc...

They should do these simultaneously.

Morally...impeachment is absolutely correct. These people are exactly what the founding fathers warned us about.

These people belong behind bars.

Yet, as we work with those goals, censure should be the minimal outcome, and if we can get war profiteers to return the money they took then we should do that too.

But we cannot stop Congress to work on Impeachment and we can not work only on bills and laws to the exclusion of investigations.

(And if you understand what I just wrote, give yourself a pat on the back.)

Posted by: KerryDemocrat at November 11, 2006 02:00 PM

I don't think the public will stomach an impeachment while so many problems exist.

Make Murtha the House Majority Leader and charter him with developing a course to get us out of Iraq. He has the stature and the clout to do it.

Pick a few easy ones such as raising the minimum wage. Get some victories first, Then go after the tougher problems and pass legislature on issues that people want that Bush will veto. Then pound it over Repub heads in 2008.
Have hearings and censure whenever there is wrong doing. Do not impeach as we will never have the necessary votes. We need legislative victories to show the public we know how to govern wisely.
If I had my way, the Bush crowd would be waterboarded and glowsticked in abu Ghraib. But that will lead to disaster in 2008.

Buy one-way tickets to the Haque for the Bush cabal..along with orange jump-suits, tin plates and soap.

If we screw this up and loose 2008, it will be a lot of years before we are in this position again.

To continue to win, the Conservative movement must be discredited. These are not Bush failures, they are Conservative philosophy failures.
To only make this Bush failures invites smarter Conservatives.

From Wikipedia...
The necessary two thirds Senate vote will never pass.
---------------------------------------------
The impeachment procedure is in two steps. The House of Representatives must first pass "articles of impeachment" by a simple majority. (All fifty state legislatures as well as the District of Columbia city council may also pass articles of impeachment against their own executives). The articles of impeachment constitute the formal allegations. Upon their passage, the defendant has been "impeached."

Next, the Senate tries the accused. In the case of the impeachment of a President, the Chief Justice of the United States presides over the proceedings. Otherwise, the Vice President, in his capacity as President of the Senate, or the President pro tempore of the Senate presides. This may include the impeachment of the Vice President him- or herself, although legal theories suggest that allowing a person to be the judge in the case where she or he was the defendant wouldn't be permitted. If the Vice President did not preside over an impeachment, the duties would fall to the President Pro Tempore.

In order to convict the accused, a two-thirds majority of the senators present is required

In this post at TPMCafe, "Opinion Roundup: Who Gets Credit, Rahm Or Netroots?", Greg Sargent posted clips from a bunch of different bloggers about the who gets credit issue. There were some interesting and erudite comments on the thread but the following one framed it in such a way that I went, “Of course – how true that is.” I wanted to share it with you because I just haven’t seen it framed this way anywhere else.

On November 10, 2006 - 10:35am CommonDreamer said:

Talk about your false choices.

Conservative Democrats should welcome the leftward pull of the netroots. By defending liberalism head-on, the netroots blunt the force of the liberal label and they allow Conservative Democrats to run as moderate by redefining the middle. The more legitimacy we create for a liberal politics in this country, the more breathing room moderate Democrats have.

At the same time, liberal-left Democrats must recognize -- and I think they do - that when it comes to governing we are obliged to govern all the people, not just liberals. Therefore governing from somewhere near the center is really the only choice. Therefore it will usually be centrist candidates that run and are elected.

It's the job of the pragmatists in the party to run the country and deal with the present while responding to liberal concerns and incorporating liberal ideas where it can.

It's the job of the liberals to actually change the country, hope for the future, build support for Dems and liberalism and prod the leadership to think in new and different ways.

It's neither side's job to get into some kind of pointless pissing contest about who is more important.

The whole thread is here…
http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2006/nov/09/bloggers_versus_rahm_opinion_roundup#comment-179509

We need to plan to sustain our Majority.

We need to do something about the debt, budget deficit and trade deficit. The dollar is down almost 50 percent against the Euro since the start of the decade and just fell further because China has chosen to diversify its holdings.

Democrats Are Set to Subpoena
The new majority is expected to hold hearings on military spending and the Iraq war -- just for starters.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/1110-01.htm

This makes sense...
[snip]
"The Democrats are going to be cross-pressured. They could hold impeachment hearings. They could make people in the Bush administration look absolutely terrible. It wouldn't be hard," said Joel Aberbach, a UCLA political science professor. "But there may be a little restraint because of their political needs in terms of consolidating themselves and looking to the 2008 election."

Democrats are expected to bore into the Iraq war, including review of no-bid contracts for reconstruction, intelligence failures and decisions to ignore the advice of military commanders about troop levels.

"Rather than focus on the failings of the war, though, these events will be staged in order to highlight the administration's incompetence and inflexibility," said William Howell, an associate professor at the Harris School of Public Policy at the University of Chicago.

The Democrats should begin all relevant investigations, but avoid any hint of a vendetta or witchhunt.

Bush is a lame duck President, and Cheney apparently has no political ambitions beyond the Vice-Presidency, so both are becoming more and more irrelevant every day. The last thing Democrats need to do make either a sympathetic figure, or a figure to rally around. Just allow the evidence to come out, piece by piece, day by day, until the sheer magnitude of their incompetence and duplicity bury both them, and anyone foolish enough to be still standing alongside them.

Posted by: Matthew Carnicelli at November 11, 2006 03:10 PM

Just allow the evidence to come out, piece by piece, day by day, until the sheer magnitude of their incompetence and duplicity bury both them, and anyone foolish enough to be still standing alongside them.

______________________________________________________________________

You took the words right out of my fingers.

One thing I would really like to see are Tax Cuts, that's right Middle class tax cuts to show voters that Progressives believe in lower taxes for the working people. As Mark Warner did in Va. he swapped lower middle class taxes for rolling back some busness taxes, which Congressman Rangel could do with some of the give aways to Exxon.
I would also like to know if there is any way to repeal the earmark and Illiminate the Bridge to No where. That vote would have significant public support.

I would also like to add that there is a responsibility of convicting and punishing all the war profiteers who benefitted off of soldiers - dead and alive - and innocent Iraqis.

On this Veteran's Day, another bit of bad news for our National Guard.

More National Guard units may get second tours in Iraq

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The nation's citizen soldiers, already strained by long tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, could be tapped again under new plans being developed by the Pentagon.

National Guard combat brigades that have already served in Iraq may be called for a second tour, likely breaking the 24-month deployment limit initially set by the Pentagon, the Guard's top general said.

While active-duty soldiers and smaller Guard units and members have returned to Iraq for multiple tours, the new plans would, for the first time, send entire Guard combat brigades back to the battlefront. Brigades generally have about 3,500 troops.

The move -- which could include brigades from Arkansas, Florida, Indiana and North Carolina -- would force the Pentagon to make the first large-scale departure from its previous decision not to deploy reserves for more than a total of 24 months in Iraq. (Watch new directions U.S. could take in Iraq -- 2:01)

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/11/11/iraq.national.guard.ap/index.html

Sometime back I posted about this guy:

And one more quick thinker...

On Wednesday, March 1st, 2006, in Annapolis at a hearing on the proposed Constitutional Amendment to prohibit gay marriage, Jamie Raskin, professor of law at AU, was requested to testify.

At the end of his testimony, Republican Senator Nancy Jacobs said: "Mr. Raskin, my Bible says marriage is only between a man and a woman. What do you have to say about that?"

Raskin replied: "Senator, when you took your oath of office, you placed your hand on the Bible and swore to uphold the Constitution. You did not place your hand on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible."

The room erupted into applause.

His complete speech about the proposed anti-gay amendment is here...
http://www.raskin06.com/index.php

Posted by: dwahzon at March 13, 2006 03:28 PM

I just ran across this quote in looking for something else and decided to see if he won his race.

He certainly did. He has a very nice thank you letter up on his website now. Here's what leapt out at me from the letter.

You stood with me when the pundits said my candidacy was “impossible” and you were there when they pronounced our upset primary victory “inevitable.”

You brought me from being a long-shot with less than 15% name recognition in January to the winner of 98.85% of the vote in November (23,344 votes!).

You built in the precincts of District 20 an awesome grassroots organization that completely changed the politics of Montgomery County.

----------

Sounds like there were a lot of amazing stories this fall.

The problem with going for middle class tax cuts is that Bush will almost certainly sign that kind of bill, while refusing to sign on to any repeal of any of his earlier upper income tax cuts - making the deficit even wider for the next President. And with the moderates in the GOP having been largely purged in the mid-terms, there is little chance of getting enough Republicans to override a Bush veto of any tax increase.

From previous thread:
Nonny I read the play, but I gotta say, I was for Nancy P. paying attention to the health care for the kid. ;-) But all will unfold as it will. There are enough of us to do many tasks.
Posted by: kj at November 11, 2006 08:53 AM

I also agree with Pelosi's agenda, and our citizens need to be taken care of - health care, Medicare, Katrina, etc., and I want those problems resolved - as well as other common sense legislation that seems to have been put on hold for six years, or mangled beyond all reason by allowing corporations to write the legislation so that it benefits them, not the citizens of this nation. There are people enough that all of those things can be done with proper oversight - and like the DKos poster wrote from a link on the previous thread, it can all be put in plain and simple language, and each bill must contain only one piece of legislation that the senators and representatives must have time to read before voting on each separate piece, and nothing must be added after each bill has been voted on.

Every time I read the Constitution or the Bill of Rights, I'm still constantly amazed by the simple elegance of the language, since nothing about either document is above the understanding of the average kid in late grade school; it's all VERY easily understood because the language is elementary (no high-falutin' legal-speak, just plain words, none of which can be misinterpreted or misunderstood in any way because those documents are written with elementary, plain words).

We are capable of MULTITASKING (as long as the neoCons are not allowed to befuddle people in Lamestream Media Sunday morning yak shows and Dems are kept off those same shows, as has been the practice since before 2000). Common-sense legislation can be enacted, and in a very short amount of time (remember all the up-or-down votes Dumbya was allowed to shove through Congress in a matter of hours, or, at most, a couple of days, when no one had a chance to read any of it?!?).

While those things are being done, we ALSO need to get the hell out of Iraq and Afghanistan, close those horrible concentration camps and send innocent prisoners to their home countries, repeal the idiotic legislation passed since Bu$h was appointed to his office, starting with the last horror known as the Military Commissions Act of '06 that gives the executive branch dictatorial powers and obliterates the US Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the Geneva Conventions, and US law, and proceeding shortly thereafter to repealing the so-called Patriot Act and all its amendments, and repealing the laws that encroach on our rights and responsibilities and our privacy. If the legislators get busy immediately after they're sworn in, there's no reason these things can't be accomplished in three months (if they're serious about common-sense legislation and fixing things, the drafts of those bills have already been written!)... and while that's being accomplished, the investigative bodies need to detail the lies and crimes of the administrtion and draw up articles of impeachment....

IF - IF - we are truly a nation of laws and ideals as mandated by the Founding Fathers in our Constitution and our Bill of Rights and other Amendments, including our treaties (as mandated by the Constitution, and that very much includes the Geneva Conventions), and US laws (the ones on the books before 2000, at least, most of which were based on common sense), then IT IS OUR DUTY, AS LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS, to impeach Bush and Cheney and charge other members of their administration, past and present, with their war crimes (US law, Title 18, among others) for aiding and abetting the administration in their crimes (and lies to cover those crimes); at the very least, ALL can be charged with multiple counts of perjury (their public statements at 'news' conferences are a series of lies, and we all know it), some can be charged with absconding with funds provided by US taxpayers; at the most, war crimes that include the unconstitutional and illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq, torture, and illegally detaining innocent people. And, that's just for starters, what we know about already, before a thorough investigation into all the crimes and cover-ups can be revealed because this administration is steeped in layers and layers of secrecy. We don't yet know what further crimes would be uncovered by investigations.

Posted by: Matthew Carnicelli at November 11, 2006 03:10 PM
Posted by: oncall at November 11, 2006 03:23 PM

Let the evidence come out.... What Matthew said..., as seconded by oncall..., I third....

From previous thread:
Posted by: Carol at November 11, 2006 08:49 AM

Odom is right, and it's too bad he's been censored. Shame on Lamestream Media!

Other than control of oil, there is no purpose to our being in Iraq. All the rest of the "reasons" have been proved lies, but under the puppet government and the puppet constitution dictated by Bu$hCo, US oil corporations will still profit nicely.

There is NO reason for the US military to stay in Iraq other than to control access to oil wells that currently exist, and/or oil fields that have not yet been drilled, and there is NO reason for the US military personnel to stay in Afghanistan other than to guard the oil pipelines that run through the country, and there is NO reason to build permanent US military bases in either of those countries. When all the other kerfluffle "reasonings" and "complications" have been thought through and uncovered as lies, OIL, and all things associated with oil wells and oil pipelines and profit margins for oil corporations become the bottom line for anything done in Iraq or Afghanistan. Period. End of bottom line.

That being the case, Halliburton's DynCorp or KBR or other corporations interested in protecting their profit margins can send their hired mercenaries to guard the oil wells and pipelines if they can find any takers for their five-figure monthly salaries that "private security guards" get. It's Halliburton and the rest of the corporate cronies who profit from Iraq's oil wells and from oil pipelines running through Afghanistan; let them pay the costs and suffer the casualites, not the US military! Protecting oil wells and oil pipelines for private corporations is not in the job descriptions for our military, nor in the oath taken by the US military personnel.

US military personnel joined up to protect this country and the citizens of this country, not the private interests of corporations. Thousands of US lives and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi and Afghani people have been killed for the sake of private corporate greed. All those lives lost; and for what? Certainly not for any patriotic ideals as espoused by Bu$hCo or PNAC. All those people are dead because of PNAC objectives and the greed of private oil corporations....

The US and 'coalition' military presence destabilized the region, but we still do not need to be caught in the crossfire of their civil wars, since the reasons for their disputes go back some 1500 years and we have no understanding of the underlying reasons. They need to resolve those issues on their own, or with the help of UN mediators, and without the interference of PNAC or private oil corporations. A US military presence in Iraq or Afghanistan can only serve to keep the region destabilized indefinitely and serves the purpose of filling the ranks of the criminal gangs who commit terrorist acts aimed at getting our presence out of their country. The invasion and occupation of Iraq, based on lies, was/is a war crime, as is the illegal detention and torture of innocent people. The rest of the world that still abides by the Geneva Conventions knows that, even if Lamestream Media hasn't aired any information here in this country about the war crimes perpetrated by the current administration. All we get in Lamestream Media is bandwagon patriotism and infotainment, not facts and truth.

Haven't enough lives been needlessly lost, wasted, for PNAC and private oil corporate profits...???

NannyO
We will not be able to impeach Bush and remove him from office because there will never be 2/3 of the Senate willing to go along with it.
We can investigate...hold hearings...call for impeachment from the house and settle for censure.
No jail time as the Senate will never vote for removal.
It sucks but doing otherwise will cost us dearly.

But unless we do the job of solving our many problems we will be a one-term donkey.
And deservedly so.

We will have to be satisfied by dragging the Bush cabal through as much mud as possible. History should show Bush as one of the worst if not the worst pres in history. History will show his supporters as the most misguided and gullable group of people in history. Histroy will show the Repub party as the most illegal and criminal in history.

The goal is to bury conservatism as a viable social and political force.

About the Dem victory and conservative media...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rj-eskow/what-a-mandate-popular-_b_33882.html

Matthew any tax swap needs to be done as one bill so that Bush can't do exactly what you suggest to explode the deficit. It can either be done as a repeal of the upper 2% cut or repeal of the Exxon Giveaway Tax bill. Fine let Bush veto it and then let Repubs go to voters in '08 and explain why they stood against Middle Class tax cuts. I would take that bet any day of the week. We can't give more tax cuts to the middle class because we need to protect tax breaks for Paris Hilton? A very conservative Va state legislature said they wouldn't support a tax swap either and they eventually buckled. Its smart politics but it also means Dems can say they are siding with the working class, its a great Populist message for '08. I don't want to ever see a Conrad Burns or Corker type campaign commercial ever again saying that Dems want to raise your taxes. Every Presidential election season we here the Republican mantra my Dem opponent pledges to raise your taxes 1000% regardless of the facts. Taxes are an issue that we are going to have to attack head on in the next two years and not keep running away from.

Nonny,

I'm 100% with battlebob's posts above re: impeachment proceedings the next two years. And with dressing the whole neoconcabal in neonorange and shipping them to the Hague.

Abu Ghraib must be investigated along with war profiterring (that oughta bring to light much about many). Murtha as majority leader, yes. Chafee to the UN, great idea! Minimum wage increase coupled with corporate tax cuts.

Sorry, very tired and not too coherent. Great thread.

Nonny, btw, love your links. You and DiAnne and your eclectic links! @;-)

Battlebob I would love to see Mudcat Saunders put in charge of the '08 Democratic Presidential campaign. Saunders was Webb, Kaine and Warner's campaign manager.
And did we say a big Booya for finally ridding us of JD.

Impeachment hearings would = a two-year television bonanza covering the War Between the Parties.

The notion that politicans (on both sides) care only for their own hides and not a whit for the people they are elected to represent, even when the people who voted them into office are out here drowning in debt without access to decent jobs or healthcare or hope for their children's future and their own retirement would be encased in cement. Two years of televised fiddling while Rome burned and the Republicans scrambled for 2008.

Not that I wouldn't love to see it happen. I put my disgust with the entire Bush family up against anyone's in terms of wanting to see them all hung out to fry and dry. I just don't believe that sort of huge attention getting action would be in the best interests of the country. (I was glued to the set during Clinton's impeachment. Watched every day all day. It was the only thing I could think or talk about. It was insane.)

In this culture today, impeachment hearings would be like watching Gawker & TMZ, all day, all the time, on speed. Just another "war." Just another reality show spectator sport.

There wouldn't be an ounce of multi-tasking going on... it would be nothing sort of all consuming theatre for everyone.

There are more pressing issues that need our attention. That's my pov. Hope it made some sense. Tired and sort of brain dead at the moment!

How do we pay for Bush's War in Iraq? Is there anyway to link the profits made by Halliburton and Haliburton's stockholders (and other companies involved in the "rebuilding" of Iraq) with the payment? Make it clear that middle-class and lower-income American taxpayers will not be beholden to this mess? Could we put anyone on trial here in the US?
Not really good with numbers so these are probably dumb questions.

River of Freedom

We've been building this ship for years
'cause the river is made tears
And now we're drifting
down the river of freedom
And now we're on our way
on our way...
The sails are made from our dreams
there'll be better days downstream
And now we're drifting
down the river of freedom
And now we're on our way
on our way...
Please let our spirit last
we're raising up our last mast
And now we're drifting
down the river of freedom
On our way
On our way
On our way

Deeelite

KJ

I say The Hague.
If it's good enough for Slobodon Milosovic it's good enough for Bush.

Remember that he bought a new ranch in Paraguay.
Would be a perfect place for exile.
Isn't that where some of the Nazis fled?

There For You

Vexation of spirit is a waste of time
Negative thinking don't you waste your thoughts
Verbal conflict is a waste of word
Physical conflict is a waste of flesh
People will always be who they want
and that's what really makes to world go round
Unconditional love is scarce

Damian "Junior Gong" Marley

DiAnne, I think so. And Argentina also? Yes, the Hague. International trial. Out of the hands of our political parties. Highlight the Dems responsible approach to cleaning up the mess created by GWB. Grownups vs Greedy Children. Highlight that the actions of a few in power have consequences around the world. Build America again and regain the admiration of the world for our attention to "We the People."

And do NOT give Poppy Inc anytime to plot for the next election.

LOVE the verses in that song. Long fight, it's good to feel good. :-)

We're Democrats, We Fix Things b;-)

Woooooo Hooooooo!!!
Bush approval drops, Democrats' goals backed -poll
Reuters: http://tinyurl.com/yesers

Just days after Democrats took over Congress, Americans embraced their top goals and President George W. Bush's job approval rating slid to 31 percent, according to a Newsweek poll issued on Saturday.

Huge majorities of those polled said they approved of the legislative priorities cited by Democratic leaders after their party seized control of the Senate and the House of Representatives from Republicans, the magazine said.

But they also expressed concerns that Democrats might seek to pull U.S. troops out of Iraq too quickly or hamper the administration's efforts to combat terrorism, it said....

Newsweek article that goes with post @ November 11, 2006 07:31 PM

Feeling Blue?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15667442/site/newsweek/#

found on Wikipedia while researching "Borat," which I intend to see, though the humor is not politically correct.

On September 29, 2006, Cohen appeared in character as Borat at the White House gates to give a press conference and invite "Supreme Warlord Premier George Walter Bush" to a screening of his forthcoming film, along with "O.J. Simpson", "Melvin Gibsons" and other "American dignitaries." Not surprisingly, Secret Service agents would not admit him to the grounds.

In lieu of impeachment, I'll settle for Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Gonzales, et al., being tried for war crimes, even as I realize that may not happen until after those lying criminals are out of office and a new president signs on to the World Court again.

I STILL want justice for all the US military and private citizens and illegal torture of innocent prisoners of Iraq and Afghanistan that the lyin' sacks of $h!t have put through hell and/or have died for the sins of PNAC and big oil corporations since Bu$h was given his office in 2000.

JUSTICE will not be served until the lying criminals who are "leading" this nation are put on trial for all their lies and war crimes and high crimes and misdemeanors.

If I, as one person, can multitask as easily as I do, then certainly several people who are charged with only one or two duties to investigate can do better at itemizing the lies and crimes if they don't have to do three or more things at once... yes?

Hmmm.... when are moderate Repubs going to figure out that they would be wise to let go of the falling comet's tail of the Bu$hCo administration?

Oddly enough, some show on PBS I saw last night talked about Dem base voters not being satisfied with "moderate" stances on issues, but want politicians who are more left-leaning than center. I'm one of the left-leaning voters who wants Dems to stand for something, not fall for anything in the center that smells like, looks like yet more compromises with Dumbya who says he wants a consensus, when all he really wants is to speed his crappy legislation through Congress without even giving them a chance to read or debate any of his crappy legislation - doing things his way or no way. I'm sick to death of just exactly that, since it's all we've seen Dems do for the last six years: cave in to whatever Dumbya wanted out of fear he'd call them names. That's what's lost elections for Dems.
~~~~~~~~~~~~

Posted by: kj at November 11, 2006 06:15 PM
Thanks. :-) I try to keep myself informed, and the only way I can do that is read, read, read, and then read some more, and then read this blog, other blogs, try to get as much info as I can about any issues, topics - sometimes I change my mind, sometimes my opinions are reinforced, and other topics I don't yet have enough info about to have an opinion yet.... But I share what I think might be of interest to others....

I'm like Andrew on the old blog - I want to know what they don't want me to know.

DiAnne- Already saw Borat, and I recommend it, except for the nude wrestling scene. One of our best known local attorneys, who was running a Democratic phone bank from his office on Tuesday, was there on Monday night when I went to see the movie. I think we both had the same idea- some well deserved rest and just to get away from politics the night before the election. At any rate, I'm glad I'm not as well known as this fellow is- I suspect he would have liked to have hidden his head in a bag during that particular scene, so no one would know he was at the theatre. I asked him about that on his local cable access show a couple of nights later, and he fully agreed with me. It was a good movie otherwise- at least to those of us who like "booger" humor, but that scene should not have been included in the movie. As for what we should do now that the house and Senate are secure- my answer would be to begin to look forward to the 2008 election, and to thin out the field as soon as possible. I don't want to see 10 Democrats debating on TV again this election, and I don't want the animosity that was left over after the 2004 primary season. If we have 3 or 4 viable, ELECTABLE candidates before the debates begin, that would make me happy. Sorry, but no matter what anyone thought of Kucinich, Lieberman, et al in the last debates, they had no reason to be there, because they had no hope of getting the nomination. I know there will be some who disagree with me on this, and I'm certainly not naming the candidates who I think will be in the final 4 or 5, though Hillary and John Edwards will probably be two of them. I just think there needs to be more unity this election than there was in '04, and a lot less infighting. That's what I'm hoping for anyway, and also that we don't try to impeach Bush , even though I detest the ground he walks on. I don't think the people who came out to vote this week were voting for impeachment- they're pretty sick of partisan politics right now. Anyhow- check out the movie for yourself- just shut your eyes during the truly gross part. And it is really, really gross, trust me on that.

Carol Mosley Braun was also in those debates and a total waste of oxygen. How does the Democratic Party begin to say that only serious candidates can debate?; you are right it needs to be done.

Who couldn't want Al Sharpton at a debate? He had no chance at becoming President, but he certainly added some novel perspectives. Carol Mosley Braun was not a serious candidate, and I always thought she was placed there by the DLC as a foil against Howard Dean.

I agree that the debates ideally should be limited to a certain number of candidates, but as is always said, "The devil is in the details." Bubba asks a very important question, how does the party limit the number of cadidates at a debate? Howard Dean is going to have Soloman's wisdom to get the candidates to agree to a process which might lock some of them out of the process. Before the Iowa caucus, John Kerry would not have been included as he was polling so low. Perhaps anybody can be allowed to stand there, but their time allowed to speak be determined on the number of primary votes they have accumulated. There is no one right answer to this vexing problem.

The difference between Vietnam and Iraq is that Bush had a plan for getting out of Vietnam.

Linda
I'm kind of afraid he'll wear that Speedo-looking thing that goes over his shoulders too - I hope not! I'll close my eyes.

Ray McGovern | An Open Letter to Carl Levin: No Free Pass to Gates
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/111106A.shtml
"Dear Senator Levin," writes Ray McGovern, "the humiliation you felt was palpable when, as the ranking Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, you were unceremoniously diddled by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his deputies Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith, chief architects of the fiasco in Iraq. They all but thumbed their noses at you, and you often complained about their 'lack of candor.' In two short months, you will chair Armed Services and will no longer have to tolerate such behavior. Indeed, you can start practicing now by not letting the nomination of Robert Gates be a 'slam dunk.'"

oncall, I think all of us are on pins and needles about the Presidential race, and maybe we should just enjoy this week before getting emotionally wrapped up in the next election. I know many of us here have some very strong opinions about their favorite candidate. I am stubbornly sticking with my guy, but want to begin speaking with local Democrats to get a sense where they are leaning. I think all of us need to keep an open mind and begin speaking with local activists, friends, and non political types in our communties to see what kind of person they are looking for. Hopefully we will all keep our senses and not get at each others throats next year because I am sure all of us want to do this right. The selection of the host city is now b/w Denver and Colorado, I am hoping, though not optimistic that we go against the conventional wisdom and select Denver, although there are apparenty union issues in Denver to first deal with. In my mind New York sends a bad message to the country of us doing business as usual but I am partial to Denver for a reason. Curious what others here have read or think about selection of the host city. Unfortunately neither Columbus nor Cleveland is in the running which would have otherwise given us an opening to cement Ohio for '08

Posted by: Bubba at November 12, 2006 12:08 AM

If I seemed strident in my comment, that was not my intention. I thought I was making a joke about Al Sharpton. But we all know what can happen when a joke goes badly.

To be sure, I am thrilled with the election results. Finally this country will have a Congress that wont let an imperial Presidency run amok over America's best interests.

My pick for a convention city is Louisville. The Democrats want to have a fifty state presence. Louisville sits on the border of Indiana and Kentucky. That geographic location will give the Democrats some further credibility in a region that elected a Democrat to Congress (KY-3). That choice also stradles the midwest with its close proximity to Indiana.

Another choice would be St. Louis.

Many consider media market as an important factor in considering the convention city. In today's high tech, informatic world, that is less of a consideration in my mind.

I will always hope that New Orleans will get the nod. That would be ideal.

Interesting summary of why Brown/Strickland, campaigns I was involved, with did so well with a message of economic populism and breaking through with rural conservatives. Our check list should include how we go about cementing these new and sometimes first time Democratic voters, and expand our base. Its best that we begin to focus on what worked in '06 and fully understand how '06 and '08 will be different. to start with we had 2 very talented and experienced candidates in Ohio that I was proud to work for.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/10/AR2006111001454.html

oncall, we have had this discussion before, and I don't want to sound flippant about the Convention Site process but it just doesn't work that way. About a year ago the DNC took offers from cities that wanted to be considered, N.O.was one of them but subsequently backed out. Each must show that they are able to put up suffient resources, a state of the art Convention Center, and a requisite no. of hotel rooms before being given consideration and the 5 applicants are then narrowed down, which i believe they were around September to Denver and New York. The bidding doesn't reopen after that process so the choice will be either Denver or New York, although I thought I had read that Philadelphia was one of the finalists. No I wasn't dissing you, Sharpton was the best debator, I just think that we are in a very serious mood after 6 years of Bush, and aren't into jovialness with our candidates. Sorry oncall I am just no fun, and don't have much of sense of humor. Its my problem I am working on it and maybe after '08 it will get better.

Posted by: Bubba at November 12, 2006 12:37 AM

You obviously understand the process better than I do. I didn't realize that cities had to apply for the "honor" of hosting a convention. I thought the parties approached the city they were interested in.

Hey All, Chuck in Houston on topic for a change:

Personally, I think the big long-term issues now are:

1) A Manhattan project on sustainable energy independence;

2) Starting a new dialog in the Middle East (as Jim Webb suggested during his debate with Allen on Russert) so we can disengage without serious disruptions; and

3) Campaing finance reform and, what the heck, getting some kind of a movement for abolishing the Electoral College and federalizing (and simplifiying) voting standards and procedures (including the audit trail) including some measure to get rid of gerrymandering.

And some urgent (immediate) steps so we can get to the above are:

1) resuscitate the labor movements;

2) raise the minimum wage;

3) help Mexico (re-direct the immigration debate to the place where the real problem is);

4) end those pork-barrel procedures in congress (it would only hurt the GOP politically right now, so now's the chance);

5) Deal with the fiscal crisis (increase estate taxes and high-bracket income taxes, cut the pork-barrel, and maybe even indulge in a little protectionism);

6) Support the working families (more college aid, universal health insurance); and

7) Do SOMETHING for the urban and rural poor (crack/meth neighborhoods) -- I don't know what but SOMETHING positive! (I.e., something besides throwing more people in jail).

My two-bits anyhow!

Chuck in Houston

earlier I said its b/w Denver and Colorado as to which city will be selcted the host city in the next few weeks, duh, its b/w Denver and New York City and my comment earlier that New York sends a bad message to voters remains. If we learned anything in '06 its that to win ,we must stop campaigning traditionally into only the big tradionally blue states and cities and must expand our base to places like Virginia, southern Ohio and Missouri, Montana and Colorado. One perception that progressives must break from is that we are primarily an eastern, unionized, big city party that doesn't give a damn about the west, midwest or rural voters. Linda has made that valid point here repeatedly and it is opinion that I deeply and honestly agree with. Let's not slip back into our bad habits in '08. That will be my test oncall as to which candidadte will get my unswerving loyalty: whatever candidate can prove that they best connect with voters in those unlikely states and communities. Not to slight anyone here from traditionally democratic strongholds like Pa, New York, Michigan, Illinois and Washington State. I want to choose those among our candidates who are best received in places like Roanoke, Richmond, Arlington, Pueblo,Bozeman,Branson and Sprinfield Mo. I have a wild idea. Why don't we schedule our Presidential primary debates in communities like that instead of traditional places like Detroit or Phildadelphia. Better stop before I offend some folks here.

Chuck in Houston for Bubba:

Soounds good, but aside from venues for conventions, what platform points would make a difference there? Beyond that, we need ORGANIZATION on the streets, which we seem to be developing (from heresay -- I live in Houston/Medical Center and Wong blew Cohen out of the water, notwithstanding which COhen won by a comfortable margin, but then again, this is inside the loop SW Houston). DiAnne and Wild_Salmon and me had many disucssions on this with respect to East/West of the Cascades Oregon/Washington back on the old Kerry blog. So, how do we get to Tom Foley's old people back in Spokane? How did Tester win? (And the Goevernor of Montana.) Virginia I understand (my mom's a Virginian and all her people were since about, oh, 1650-1750). OK, I don't care about guns much (I don't think we should be free to buy M-16's and rocket launchers or Stingers but I have no problem with hunting weapons). Water and range and forest amd fishing and mineral rights issues are important in the West and SW I remember, but I am not willing to sacrifice sustainable development for some yahoo that wants to destroy the local environment forever. But these communities out there are not thriving and need help. That is an interesting dilemma to me. I'd love to hear some solutions.

Chuck in Houston
(came up in SE Portland, Hosford GS '75 Cleveland HS '79)

I meant WOng blew Cohen out of the water on organization.

My bad.

Chuck in Houston (Southgate)

Cohen won easily (Texas House):

State Rep. Dist. 134 In: 100%
Martha Wong, R (I) 19,669 43.1%
Ellen Cohen, D 24,953 54.7%
Mhair S. Dekmezian, L 998 2.2%

Chuck in Houston

PS: Gerrymandering is a state legislative issue (cf: my first post tonight)

Posted by: battlebob at November 11, 2006 02:51 PM

Well, darn.

I think there should be accountability demanded from Bush, Cheney, et. al. And then justice administered.

If a citizen of these United States breaks a law, they should expect to be held accountable for it. IMHO, every thing they have done wrong should be exposed and prosecuted.

Then I don't think we would have to worry about another conservative take over of power for a long while. They didn't play nice. People died. Families suffered. Veterans will suffer from this war until their dying days.

No sweeping it all under the rug just to play nice. They should be brought to justice - and I don't care if it takes two years. That may not be politically correct, or even feasible, but it is my $.02 worth.

Posted by: Bubba at November 12, 2006 01:07 AM

Bubba, I agree wholeheartedly.

The ONLY way the Dems will win in '08 is if they appeal to moderates and indies. Period.

Whoever runs had better make a very good plan of how to keep from debating the abortion issue. I think alot of people are in favor of gays having the same kind of civil rights the rest of the population has, they just disagree about calling their unions "marriages". The term "liberal" has a very bad connotation with many moderates and conservatives.

A great theme for framing this next year could be frames that dispel the old images the term "liberal" relays to people's minds. I took a test online to see where I fit in, and even with my obvious preferences on wedge issues, I still came out of the test as a strong liberal. I think women and men alike might be surprised to find out that they identify with most liberal principles....the caring, nurturing, fair qualities most liberals have.

Yes, Bubba, '04 was decided over fear of terrorism and the abortion issue.

I pray that most people will examine their positions on making that a frontrunning issue for '08. I insist that if they don't appeal to the moderates they will not win in '08.

"Appealing to the moderate" somehow strikes me as artificial. But I agree with the premise that the Dems have to continue to enhance their acceptance among moderates. But in the last election, Senator Kerry stood up for his principles - which many today would call moderate. He got the stuffing knock out of him by a bunch of lying thugs. He was painted as a traitor to his country and as an indecisive unprincipled politician without any plans. The media lapped it up and regurgitated it. Still he received the second highest number of votes ever for President. I don't want to rehash the last Presidential election and I am not making a pitch for Senator Kerry, but I believe the next election will be focused not on gay rights so much as it will be focused on civil rights, economic rights, foreign policy, energy independence, and - the big one - choice. The democratic party had several "pro life" (an artificial term if ever there was one) winners in the last election. It is how they are perceived and how much they support their party's candidate that will influence who can appeal to the "moderate".

Too much coffee after dinner.

I notice 'Impeachment' is not on your list..

Even though EIGHTY SEVEN PERCENT of this nation feels he should be impeached.

Was that a selective oversight to not add it..?

Democrats were not elected so they could make nice, they were elected to confront a man who was never LEGALLY elected. A mass murderer.

All this talk of playing nice and going along to get along, IS NOT THE MAINSTREAM POSITION.

This man almost MURDERED our nation and he has in fact literally murdered over a half a million people for lies. You and me or ANYONE ELSE would have already been drawn, quartered and hanged. What in the hell is so special about georgie that he can not be impeached...?

All this talk of 'bipartisianship'is going to make me vomit.

Eighty four percent IS a bipartisian concensus. The biggest one I have ever seen.

If the democrats DO NOT impeach him, then they are not doing their jobs and they do not deserve the power they were entrusted with.

No man is above the law. If you let georgie become so then 84% of us are left to wonder if it is because those now in power are ALSO IMPLICATED in what georgie has done...? Some of them very well are.

Yeah, see, now 'bipartisianship' really only means as long as you don't catch me I will let you get away with it too"

The ONLY way for dems to win in 08 is to PROVE TO US they can do their damn jobs and do the PEOPLES bidding.

84% is almost ALL of us. Disappoint those numbers and your days on the throne are just as numbered as his.

Sorry that should have consistantly been...

EIGHTY SEVEN PERCENT.

I dare one single person on this blog to say georgie has NOT committed any impeachable offenses.

Anyone...?

But yet we are supposed to ignore it and just focus on health care....?

If the laws of this nation are not upheld then there is no nation.

If he don't have to follow the law, than NONE OF US do either.

You were elected to save this nation, not pet it as it dies.

"I want to choose those among our candidates who are best received in places like Roanoke, Richmond, Arlington, Pueblo,Bozeman,Branson and Sprinfield Mo. I have a wild idea. Why don't we schedule our Presidential primary debates in communities like that instead of traditional places like Detroit or Phildadelphia. Better stop before I offend some folks here."
~~Posted by: Bubba at November 12, 2006 01:07 AM

You've got my vote. :-)

"Too much coffee after dinner."
~~Posted by: oncall at November 12, 2006 03:47 AM

LOL oncall.
On Liberal Values Ron mentioned Paul Waldman's article in The Boston Globe and quoted him writing, “Democrats did not win by moving to the center; they won because at the moment, they are the center. According to exit polls, independents voted Democratic by 57 to 39 percent.”

I'm not sure what you mean by "appealing to moderates" as artificial. ?? For example, I didn't see McCaskill as a moderate, I saw her as an old-fashioned populist. So, I dunno. Labels like moderate and conservate and etc. sort of worry me, because of their ability to paint a candidate into a box.

I liked Chuck's list above, but want to see healthcare up in the top seven.

At the risk of sounding trite, I think we can go back to Carville's 1992 maxium: "It's the economy, stupid."

This country is broken. We have precious little R&D, decent (living wage + health care) manufacturing or high tech jobs and people are worried about their children's future. I continue to think a focus around alternative energy could be the "let's go to the moon" boost that we experienced on JFK's watch and touch on all the issues mentioned above, along with including the environment and national security.

I want to see "America Be America" again, only better.

America will be America again when the will of 87% of the people is upheld. When our laws again mean something.

39 to 57 % is the middle..?

Then 87% must be what?

Oh yeah, ignored.

"I want to choose those among our candidates who are best received in places like Roanoke, Richmond, Arlington, Pueblo,Bozeman,Branson and Sprinfield Mo. I have a wild idea. Why don't we schedule our Presidential primary debates in communities like that instead of traditional places like Detroit or Phildadelphia. Better stop before I offend some folks here."
~~Posted by: Bubba at November 12, 2006 01:07 AM

You've got my vote. :-)

Posted by: kj at November 12, 2006 07:43 AM

Bubba - I like that idea as well. Frankly, I don't care a hill of beans where these things take place, and if there is some kind of strategy that will help our party then for god's sake lets have them somewhere else!

I'm not sure that the local audience is so important - "how the candidate is received" - because the national viewing audience is so huge. I tend to agree with the following from oncall:

Many consider media market as an important factor in considering the convention city. In today's high tech, informatic world, that is less of a consideration in my mind.

Posted by: oncall at November 12, 2006 12:22 AM

Christy, where are you getting your numbers?

Both the figures you cite in your post, which seem to alternate between a numerical 84% and an all-capitalized eighty-seven percent, are significantly higher than any other poll numbers I can find regarding how many Americans do or do not favor impeaching Shrubya.

This somewhat confusingly-phrased analysis is from Newsweek's most recent polling on the subject, at : "Other parts of a potential Democratic agenda receive less support, especially calls to impeach Bush: 47 percent of Democrats say that should be a 'top priority,' but only 28 percent of all Americans say it should be, 23 percent say it should be a lower priority and nearly half, 44 percent, say it should not be done. (Five percent of Republicans say it should be a top priority and 15 percent of Republicans say it should be a lower priority; 78 percent oppose impeachment.)"

That data is consistent with the other numbers I can track down, all of which are relatively consistent for the period of the last 10-12 months and all of which indicate that the percentage of Americans who support impeachment is in the low 50's at best.

A current 'live vote' question on MSNBC's web site does indicate that 87% of those responding to the question there favor impeachment; however, as we all know, website-based 'poll' questions are very easily skewed and are statistically meaningless as a result.

Before you start ranting at me for not agreeing with your intensely-held beliefs on the subject, let me state for the record that I personally believe impeaching this president for high crimes and misdemeanors while in office is completely justifiable on moral, ethical, and even legal grounds.

I do understand, however, that in the real world Democrats have grasped only a slim majority in Congress as of this last week, and that their long-term hold on power is still shaky at best. There is no pro-Democratic mandate here, at least not yet. A strong anti-neocon backlash may have carried them into power, but it has yet to be consolidated into a solid base of pro-Democratic support instead.

So pushing hard for impeachment right away would be both premature and pointless, since it would not have a snowball's chance of succeeding at this time and since doing so would paralyze forward motion on all the other critical initiatives that urgently need to be addressed.

Do I believe this president and members of his administration should be impeached and tried in court for their thousands of egregious violations of law, not to mention of ethics, morality and common decency? Absolutely. Do I think that impeachment can realistically be made to happen right away? Absolutely not.

Do I think it can be made to happen somewhere in the next two years, at least? Possibly. That depends a lot on what events transpire between now and the time his term of office is over. And let's not forget that he and his minions can still be held liable for prosecution after that time as well.

Anyway, that's just my own personal take on the subject. Yours is different, of course, and that is how it should be. I don't disagree with you on principle, though I do on practicality. But in any case, these are huge and quite complicated issues here; so if you're going to repeatedly cite specific numbers in support of your positions, please include references to their sources so we can assess their relative merits for ourselves.

just (100% of) my $.02,
Otter

Apologies if this has been previously posted:

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1557842,00.html
Exclusive: Charges Sought Against Rumsfeld Over Prison Abuse
A lawsuit in Germany will seek a criminal prosecution of the outgoing Defense Secretary and other U.S. officials for their alleged role in abuses at Abu Ghraib and Gitmo
By ADAM ZAGORIN

Do you believe President Bush's actions justify impeachment? * 373512 responses

Yes, between the secret spying, the deceptions leading to war and more, there is plenty to justify putting him on trial.
87%

No, like any president, he has made a few missteps, but nothing approaching "high crimes and misdemeanors."
4.4%

No, the man has done absolutely nothing wrong. Impeachment would just be a political lynching.
6.5%

I don't know.
1.9%

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10562904

One more link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/12/us/politics/12class.html?hp&ex=1163394000&en=ceffce064221aee9&ei=5094&partner=homepage
Incoming Democrats Put Populism Before Ideology
By ROBIN TONER and KATE ZERNIKE
Published: November 12, 2006

Funny web based polls seem to be fine when it supports something we need it to support.

And this...

"Before you start ranting at me for not agreeing with your intensely-held beliefs on the subject,"

You know what... you say that then you wind up agreeing with me completely on legal moral and even ethical grounds.

"Before you start ranting.."

"intensely-held beliefs"...

"intensely-held beliefs"

"intensely-held beliefs"

You know what... On second thought... Nevermind.

Yall have a good morning.

Carol, Bubba, et al... having lived in cities where & when national political party conventions have been held, and having worked on them myself in logistical and technical support roles, I can testify from personal experience that there are a lot of factors involved that rule out most if not all of the available options when it comes to physical location.

The logistics involved are *huge*, and they severely limit the number of cities that have sufficient resources to support them. It's not just the size of the main venues available, though that's of course a major factor. But massive physical access by way of highways, airports, etc. is essential; many thousands of hotel rooms and restaurants and so forth must be available in close proximity for both the attendees and the huge throngs of media & support personnel that re required to accompany them; and, of course, there is also the issue of how successfully the venues and their surroundings can be made secure as well.

Only a relatively small number of American cities have the massive infrastructure required to support such a major national political party convention. It's a pretty short list, especially when you factor in the vast amounts of time & money involved as well as the necessary physical plant that staging such supersized conventions entails.

Shucks, just the sheer number of rental cars needed on hand for the duration of the event far outstrips the entire population of places like Branson and Pueblo... and don't *even* begin to contemplate the traffic jams on I-95 surrounding places like Richmond, ahem.

Until or unless the national political party conventions can be virtualized and the gigantic logistical demands they create can be greatly diminished, for better or worse we're pretty much stuck with their having to be held in large centralized locations like Atlanta, Denver, Chicago, etc. rather than in the smaller centers of population where most Americans actually reside.

which kinda sucks but what can you do,
Otter

Well Otter, you just blew my bubble with your spot on commen sense and experience, grrrr. So our little downtown and two hotels wouldn't cover it, eh? Rats.

I know! Virtually Linked Conventions!!!
What is that, you ask. Well... one convention held in 15 cities across the country... all linked via satellite feeds. We could do it. ;-)

Yeah, kj, but then what would we do with all the poor out-of-work hookers and meth dealers you'd be disenfranchising by decentralizing the conventions like that?

hookers and meth dealers need love too,
Otter

Posted by: Otter at November 12, 2006 08:34 AM

Good morning, Furry Guy. I was actually talking about debates, not the convention.

I agree with Bubba - the debates shouldn't be limited to the usual places, and iin my opinion could be held anywhere that has a major university.

Otter,

We'd be spreading the wealth around! Missouri is something like second in the country for meth production! Think of the opportunities... NY hooker comes to Springfield, teaches the latest techniques... CA meth tweeker comes to Springfield, learns the latest how to make meth in the trunk of your car techniques...
Now that's a populist approach, in my thinking.

My direction is different then anybody else’s direction.
Democrats want to stay in power for a long time; not just a short two year lease.

Here is a possible guide.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-weigant/happy-days-are-here-again_b_33844.html

First, get some easy wins such as raise the minimum wage.
Go after war profiteers.
Deal with Iraq after the Baker committee is done.
Notice what it says about impeachment, hearings and censure. Hearings should be ongoing and drag Bush through as much mud as possible.
Impeachment is only done if we know beforehand there is a majority in the House and a 2/3 majority in the Senate who would support it. We don’t want to make Bush sympathetic. Going for censure is easier. We can spend the next two years having investigations on various problems and pounding Bush at every turn and still get things done. The focus is on progress.

It only takes one Senator going to the Repub side to move the Senate back to Bush.

After a few victories and the public is happy about our direction, then go for the tougher issues such as health care.
We have to start talking realistically about Social Security and Medicaid. There are two Social Security factions: the CATO institute who wants to privatize it and economists like Paul Krugman who say just change the funding to two percent of GNP. Doing nothing is not an option.
Look at Medicaid and fix the prescription drug plan.
Look at our energy policy and move to a more comprehensive and renewable plan then just drilling holes in the ground.
Stop subsidizing polluters and demand clean air and water. Put carbon dioxide back on the list of dangerous gasses.
Give us our civil rights back and stop torturing people.
Each investigation should show what Bush did and what groups made the decision and dump as much crap on Bush as possible.
Get all sides in a room and hammer out the issues. Let the public see various sides of the problems.
If we decide to impeach first, that is the only thing the public will see and the important problem solving work Dems were hired to do will not be done. In 2008, we will loose the Senate and once again loose the White House. In the election after that, we will loose the House and we will be right back where we were on November 6; except the public will no longer listen to us.

We are at a point of time where we can change the direction of the country for a generation; but only if we are smart and disciplined about it.

The ideas are to solve problems; get the public to want us to hang around for a long time; bury the Conservative philosophy and pound Bush whenever possible.

If we concentrate on pounding Bush, we will not solve problems and we will loose the public again. Congress ground to a halt during Clinton’s impeachment and Clinton’s popularity went up.

Posted by: Carol at November 12, 2006 08:56 AM

Putting debates in colleges is done a lot.
Most have a decent sized auditorium and it gets the students excited about the issues.

When the third debate in 2004 was in Tempe, it really fired up the populace. Unfortunately, soon after that, the Dems abandoned Arizona and we got hammered.
So the lesson learned is to have the debates in colleges and have a strong state organization to take advantage of it.
We need more Howard Dean.

"So the lesson learned is to have the debates in colleges and have a strong state organization to take advantage of it.
We need more Howard Dean."
~~Posted by: battlebob at November 12, 2006 09:08 AM

YES YES YES

The isolation nearly killed us in 2004 and the inclusion in 2006 is THE WAY to keep the people connected in the future.

battlebob, what do you think about Gates?

I know many anti-abortion folks who have willingly moved the discussion to preventing unwanted pregnancies in the first place.
Think of it as a supply-side discussion.
This involves a lot more then Roe Vs. Wade. Now we get into social, economic and cultural issues; things Dems always talk about. The idea is to make people’s lives; before, inside and out of the womb; the focal point of the discussion.

I think the G/L discussion is moving to separating marriage and state. People get their civil rights from the state and their religious blessings from what ever church is willing to do it. People are seeing it as a fairness issue

And if not Gates, who?

Don't mean to put you on the spot, I'm just undecided about him and value your take.

I mean, he's Poppy's man, but is that necessarily a bad thing for the next two years?

In my research, Gates is another party hack who beat the Iran Contra rap by claiming he couldn't remember.
He is a career spy so being secretive and closed-mind is natural with him.
Shouldn't the Secretary of Defense know something about the military?

If Bush wanted to be bold, he would nominate Wes Clark; who is my nom