Court Of Impeachment And War Crimes: Impeach Bush and Cheney, Wexler Working, Obama BOMBS!
Loading...

Click for a full report.

Imbush Peach

An interview with Naomi Wolf about the 10 steps from democracy to dictatorship!

Stop The Spying Now

Stop the Spying!

Sunday, February 10, 2008

Impeach Bush and Cheney, Wexler Working, Obama BOMBS!


Impeach Bush and Cheney Updates

Obama Bombs On Impeachment

( Impeachment Petition 6,500 Signatures Away From 1 Million)

And Just Who The Hell Am I Supposed To Vote For On Potomac Tuesday. What A Crock Of Shit! (I think Kucinich is still on our Virginia Ballot!)

Obama: Impeachment is not acceptable

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-06-28-obama-impeachment_N.htm

WASHINGTON (AP) — Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama laid out list of political shortcomings he sees in the Bush administration but said he opposes impeachment for either President George W. Bush or Vice President Dick Cheney.

Obama said he would not back such a move, although he has been distressed by the "loose ethical standards, the secrecy and incompetence" of a "variety of characters" in the administration.

CAMPAIGN 2008: Barack Obama

"There's a way to bring an end to those practices, you know: vote the bums out," the presidential candidate said, without naming Bush or Cheney. "That's how our system is designed."

The term for Bush and Cheney ends on Jan. 20, 2009. Bush cannot constitutionally run for a third term, and Cheney has said he will not run to succeed Bush.

Obama, a Harvard law school graduate and former lecturer on constitutional law at the University of Chicago, said impeachment should not be used as a standard political tool.

"I think you reserve impeachment for grave, grave breaches, and intentional breaches of the president's authority," he said.

"I believe if we began impeachment proceedings we will be engulfed in more of the politics that has made Washington dysfunction," he added. "We would once again, rather than attending to the people's business, be engaged in a tit-for-tat, back-and-forth, non-stop circus."

Obama, son of a Kenyan father and American mother, spoke at a weekly constituent breakfast he sponsors with Illinois' other senator, Dick Durbin. He was asked about impeachment.

Neil Young said on Friday that he had lost all hope that music can change the world, as he presented a documentary about 2006 antiwar concert tour by Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young at the Berlin film festival, Agence France-Presse reported. “I know that the time when music could change the world is past,” Mr. Young said. “I really doubt that a single song can make a difference. It is a reality.” Mr. Young made no distinction between the Vietnam War, during which Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young earned a reputation for political activism, and the war in Iraq, which their tour condemned with songs like “Let’s Impeach the President.” “It is all the same war, and it hurts everybody,” he said. “It’s a wrong way to solve a problem,” he said, adding that Americans were deluded if they thought they were liberating Iraq.

Failure to impeach will haunt Democrats and the country

http://www.petitiononline.com/everyman/petition.html.

http://thelastmovement.blogspot.com/2008/02/we-must-impeach-now-resubmit.html

Without Impeaching, an Election Will Fix Little or Nothing
Undoing the Bush Legacy By Aziz Huq, The Nation. Most people who cast ballots on Super Tuesday believed they were voting not just for a new face in the White House but also for sweeping new policies. Few believe a President McCain, ...

http://smirkingchimp.com/thread/12704

On Thursday, Chairman John Conyers' House Judiciary Committee held a hearing at which Attorney General Michael Mukasey said that he would not investigate torture (video) or warrantless spying (video), he would not enforce contempt citations (video), and he would treat Justice Department opinions as providing immunity for crimes (report).

None of this was new, but perhaps it touched something in Conyers that had not been touched before. Following the hearing, he and two staffers met for an hour and 15 minutes with two members of Code Pink to discuss impeachment.

Conyers expressed fear of what might happen following an impeachment, fear of installing a Bush replacement or losing an election. The "corporate power structure", he said, would not allow impeachment without unleashing "blowback." Conyers told Ellen Taylor and Manijeh Saba: "You need to be more than brave and courageous. You need to be smart."

Their response? They are asking people who care about justice to help them let Conyers know that the smart thing right now would be bravery and courage.

On Rosa Parks' birthday last week, Leslie Angeline began a fast for impeachment. Taylor and over 20 other activists have joined the fast. Conyers has agreed to meet with Angeline to discuss impeachment on Tuesday.

The Chairman told Taylor and Saba that he is listening to several advocates for impeachment, including Liz Holtzman and this author, and asked "So how would it look if I allowed two women to push me over the edge?" Conyers leaned out of his chair for dramatic effect.

A number of organizations will be sending their members this alert Monday morning:

Angeline, whose father was on the original Freedom Riders bus that was firebombed in Anniston, Ala., in 1961 began her fast and a sit-in in Conyers' office on Rosa Parks' birthday, and within a few minutes had been granted an appointment with Conyers for Thursday. He postponed it until Tuesday because of the duration of the Mukasey hearing. Taylor, Saba, and others attended the hearing and were told by Conyers' staffer Therise West that they would be removed by force if they did not cover up shirts and pins with messages including "No Torture," "Arrest Bush," "Not One More," and even the text of Article II Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution. Rather than comply, Taylor and Saba wore shirts displaying that section of the Constitution, were not removed, and were granted the meeting with Conyers to discuss it.

The meeting took place in the rooms attached to the committee room. After an hour delay, Conyers came in with three beers, a bag of nuts, and two staffers. Nobody drank the beers. Conyers ate the nuts. The staffers were Perry Appelbaum, who left early, and George Slover.

As Taylor recounted it to me, she and Saba pushed Conyers on the importance of the Constitution, on the crisis it faces, and on Congress's lack of action. Of course, Conyers wrote a book two years ago called "The Constitution in Crisis," which details many of Bush and Cheney's impeachable offenses.

Conyers' initial reply was along the lines of "Didn't you see the hearing we just had? Do you know how many people saw that?" To their credit, the two Code Pink women replied "Not very many, since most people don't get C-Span." Conyers said he would keep following up with Mukasey, but Taylor and Saba asked to what end he would do so and advised him to shift his focus to the executive.

Conyers, Taylor said, then began giving reasons why he was afraid of impeachment. That wasn't the word he used, but Taylor understood his concerns to all be expressions of an inchoate fear. Conyers spoke of "potential ramifications that haven't been examined." Interestingly, among his concerns was not the one he has used a lot recently, namely that impeachment would not pass the House. Instead he was concerned about what might happen after a successful impeachment and removal from office. Of course, the inconsistency in the excuses Conyers uses could simply be a reflection of the lack of importance he places on the choice of excuse.

The two women argued for the wisdom, bravery, and courage of Congressman Robert Wexler's proposal to simply begin impeachment hearings on Dick Cheney and see where they go. The impeachment movement is urging people not only to contact Conyers but also to ask their own representatives to sign onto a letter Wexler has written to Conyers, and to themselves sign Wexler's petition at http://wexlerwantshearings.com

Conyers said that he knew all about Wexler's idea and that he was listening to various impeachment advocates. The two names Taylor remembered him mentioning were mine and Holtzman's. He's certainly not listening closely to me, and I would love to meet with him at his convenience. Holtzman, I know, has wanted to meet with Conyers on this topic for quite some time, but to my knowledge has never been able to do so.

I think the people Conyers is really listening to are too smart for their own good but lacking a bit in the bravery and courage area. Their wise strategy places the outcome of elections ahead of preserving the democracy in which those elections are held or even the verifiability of those elections. And, on their own terms, they are probably wrong. Nothing (except perhaps hand-counted paper ballots) would benefit the Democrats in the next election more than a real fight to stand up for justice. If Congress chooses to cede all power to the White House and move to the back of the bus, Conyers' legacy will not be what it might have been.

As People of Faith . . . We Must Impeach

Wexler wants help.....
By jpeg(CitizenSteve)
New members of Congress added to letter to Chairman Conyers Congressman Wexler urges support for Cheney Impeachment Hearings The following members of Congress have joined as signatories to my letter to Chairman Conyers in support of ...

For Holocaust heirs, a new struggle
MiamiHerald.com - Miami,FL,USA
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a Miami Republican, and South Florida Democrats Robert Wexler, Ron Klein and Tim Mahoney. Ros-Lehtinen and Wexler have introduced ...

Rep. Wexler Diary: Attorney General would not enforce contempt.
By Wexler For Congress Campaign
Our Constitution is under threat and the most basic principle of checks and balances is being undermined. Not since Watergate has a president so openly disregarded the will of Congress. During hearings in the Judiciary Committee ...

Rep. Robert Wexler Explains Why Mukasey Testimony Means Congress ...
Go here.

[Video] Congressman Wexler questions Mukasey on Impeachment and ...
By Jodin Morey
Congressman Wexler questions Mukasey on Impeachment and Contempt February 07, 2008 Congressman Wexler questions Attorney General Michael Mukasey on impeachment and enforcing contempt citations.

Congressman Wexler Questions Bush’s New Attorney General About ...
By jurnei
Their refusal to appear suggests they have been told not to do so and it appears that the Mukasey is poised to support their refusal. The following video shows the questioning of the Attorney General by Congressman Robert Wexler.

Wexler's Plea for Impeachment is Compelling for Any Caring Citizen
By admin
Robert Wexler (D-FL) has been, along with Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), America’s two lone voices calling for the impeachment of Vice President Dick Cheney and the Bush Administration. Wexler stated it best in his plea to American ...

The Unitary Decider and the Enabling Democrats
By Turkana
And despite the best efforts of people like Representatives Delahunt and Wexler, no one should be shocked that the Democratic "leadership" will once again prove unwilling to do anything about any of this. Consequences are off the table. ...

More Reps Sign Wexler's Impeachment Letter
By Jodin Morey
ImpeachPac – Congressman Wexler urges support for Cheney Impeachment Hearings. The following members of Congress have joined as signatories to my letter to Chairman Conyers in support of Cheney Impeachment Hearings: ...

Mukasey: CIA Waterboarding Will Not Be Investigated
The Gate - National Journal - Washington,DC,USA
Pressed last week by Senate Judiciary Committee members, Mukasey did not explicitly rule out the investigation addressing illegal acts shown on the tapes. ...

Mukasey Rejects Criminal Probe Into Waterboarding
Washington Post - United States
In testimony before the House Judiciary Committee, Mukasey said that because waterboarding was part of a program approved by Justice lawyers, ...

Mukasey: No, I Will Not Investigate Waterboarding
Talking Points Memo - New York,NY,USA
Conyers protested that every member of the committee was cleared to see top secret material, but Mukasey was unmoved, though offered to continue "ongoing ...

Mukasey: No, I Will Not Enforce Citations for Contempt of Congress
Talking Points Memo - New York,NY,USA
Dave Wexler (R-FL) was the one who first popped the question. If Congress passed a citation against White House chief of staff Josh Bolten, who, ...

VIDEO: Mukasey Testifies He Will Not Enforce Contempt Citations ...
Brad Blog - USA
Here's just one sample from Mukasey's testimony today, answering (or not) Robert Wexler's questions asking if he's been given White House instructions on ...

Acquiescent Dem gift Mike Mukasey keeps on his illegality giving
By Gadfly(Gadfly)
WEXLER: Should Congress pass a contempt citation, will you enforce it? MUKASEY: A contempt citation of... WEXLER: With respect to the subpoenas, with respect to Mr. Bolten? MUKASEY: If you're talking about a contempt citation based on ...

Emptywheel - » Mukasey Refuses to Say Whether He Was Instructed ...
By throwingstones
But for now, understand that AG Muksey refused to answer Robert Wexler’s question of whether or not the AG had been instructed not to enforce the subpoenas of Harriet Miers and Josh Bolten. Here’s the liveblog excerpt: ...

Wexler Asks Mukasey If He Will Enforce Contempt and Of Course He ...
By davidswanson
Watch Mukasey claim that there is precedent for refusing to enforce contempt citations. Then watch Wexler ask him to name a single precedent, which he cannot. As Wexler then informs him, there isn't any.

Are you the people’s lawyer or the President’s?


By Mickey


Representative Wexler: Failure to reply to Congressional subpoenas. Refusal of Bolten and Miers to even appear. Have you been instructed by POTUS to enforce or not to enforce subpoenas. Attorney General Mukasey: I can’t say. ...

Stunning
By Susie
Wexler: Failure to reply to Congressional subpoenas. Refusal of Bolten and Miers to even appear. Have you been instructed by POTUS to enforce or not to enforce subpoenas. MM: I can’t say. Wexler: Can you tell me the individual that ...

US Attorney Investigation Going Nowhere
By Lawrence Hurley(Lawrence Hurley)
Robert Wexler, D-Fl., Mukasey said that Bolten's refusal to testify about why the White House wouldn't disclose documents was protected by executive privilege. "Will you enforce it?" Wexler asked, in reference to a subpoena. ...

Are We Sure that Mukasey Isn’t Gonzo in a Funny White Guy Mask?
Sometimes I find myself wondering if Attorney General Michael Mukasey is Alberto Gonzales with a funny haircut and silly glasses—---the same old song but without the Latin beat. The Bush administration pretended that they were bringing ...

Still Not Too Late
By doomsy(doomsy)
Also, here are stories on the impeachment efforts in California, New Jersey, and Washington State, as well as a link back to AfterDowiningStreet.org; here is also the latest I have from Florida Rep. Robert Wexler on the move to impeach ...

Dear Ed.

Our Constitution is under threat and the most basic principle of checks and balances is being undermined. Not since Watergate has a president so openly disregarded the will of Congress.

During hearings in the Judiciary Committee yesterday, I told Attorney General Michael Mukasey that I called for impeachment hearings because of the stonewalling and blatant abuses of the Bush Administration.

He responded by stating that he will NOT enforce a contempt of Congress citation against Harriet Miers and White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten for refusing to testify before Congress.

The video is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7M9sjRLCtQ

Alberto Gonzales may be long gone, but the Bush Administration continues its executive overreach with the new Attorney General.

We can debate the need for Impeachment hearings. We can argue its effects on the election or our agenda. But one thing is abundantly clear:

If Congress' right to require testimony is undermined, then our country's leaders - Democrat, Republican, or Independent - will be immune from accountability.

The power of the subpoena - to call officials before us - is one of the most fundamental safeguards in our system of government. To have it effectively discarded - by virtue of the President instructing Administration officials to ignore a congressional subpoenas and not even appear before Congress - is unprecedented. The idea that the Attorney General would willingly defend this position - despite Congress' constitutional right to call such witnesses, is outrageous.

Impeachment hearings could render this moot: The President, Vice President, and all officials under them would no longer invoke executive privilege. There would be no more smokescreens.

In one week, I will be delivering my letter calling for impeachment hearings to Chairman John Conyers. Already, 16 Members of Congress have joined my call, including 3 Judiciary Committee members.

I am hopeful for more in the coming days, but it is important for you to reach out to your representative in Congress to express how you feel. You can view the current list of signers, here: http://www.wexlerforcongress.com/news.asp?ItemID=230

I do not know how Congress will react, but I do know this: I will pursue this course aggressively. I will not compromise away the constitutional role of Congress. Your support is invaluable.

Please know that I am working everyday to ensure that the Bush Administration is held accountable.

Please continue to support this movement at www.wexlerwantshearings.com.

Yours truly,

Congressman Robert Wexler

Jennifer Van Bergen Writes to John Conyers at john.conyers@mail ...
Impeachment of the criminals who now run our country will also show your constituents -- and other Democrats across the country -- that you still believe in and will uphold the Constitution and your duty under it. ...

LETTER: Impeachment is only way to move forward, 02-09-08
Fall River Herald News - MA, USA
If there is not enough spine in Congress to impeach them, authorize funding to expand the Hague and the International Criminal Court. ...

Impeach Mukasey first
By Bill Carroll(Bill Carroll)
During hearings in the Judiciary Committee yesterday, I told Attorney General Michael Mukasey that I called for impeachment hearings because of the stonewalling and blatant abuses of the Bush Administration. He responded by stating that ...

Conyers: on 'Edge' of Starting Impeachment
By CausalCrunch
Conyers expressed fear of what might happen following an impeachment, fear of installing a Bush replacement or losing an election. The "corporate power structure", he said, would not allow impeachment without unleashing "blowback. ...

Impeachment Hearings: Conyers Said to be on the Edge
By markthshark
Myself, I’m still skeptical about impeachment hearings occurring in the 110th Congress at all but that doesn’t mean I can’t hope. Following his Thursday hearing with Attorney General Michael Mukasey at which the AG said he would not .

Conyers Says He's on Edge of Starting Impeachment
By davidswanson
Conyers expressed fear of what might happen following an impeachment, fear of installing a Bush replacement or losing an election. The "corporate power structure", he said, would not allow impeachment without unleashing "blowback. ...

[Video] Congressman Wexler questions Mukasey on Impeachment and ...
By CausalCrunch
Congressman Wexler questions Mukasey on Impeachment and Contempt February 07, 2008 Congressman Wexler questions Attorney General Michael Mukasey on impeachment and enforcing contempt citations.

Washington admits to torture, analyst calls for impeachment
American Chronicle - Beverly Hills,CA,USA
By Chris Gelken The director of the Central Intelligence Agency has revealed to the House of Representatives Intelligence Committee that waterboarding was ...

Time’s Arrow: The Irreversible Government
By rob payne(rob payne)
We can also look at leaders like Nancy Pelosi who took impeachment off the table at the beginning or her sorry career as speaker of the House of Representatives. As some have pointed out the reason for Pelosi’s refusal to pursue ...

Nancy Pelosi as war criminal
By wigwam
The White House now admits that President Bush authorized the CIA to waterboard detainees and will again whenever he thinks circumstances warrant. Common Article 3 of the Senate-ratified Geneva Conventions prohibits cruel treatment of ...

A once-bitter rival now slow-dances with Pelosi

By Alexander Bolton

Posted: 02/07/08 07:51 PM [ET]

When she picked a man to be her partner in power a little more than a year ago, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) didn’t choose Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), but she was in his arms last week for a slow dance at the Democratic retreat.

After Hoyer trounced Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) for the majority leadership, his embrace of the Speaker was merely the stiff price of doing business together. But last weekend, on the final night of the Democrats’ retreat, it sealed a rapprochement rather than a mere d├ętente.

While it remains in doubt who was leading during their slow waltz, relations between the top two House Democrats are a far cry from the enmity that was apparent in the 109th Congress.

“He was undercutting her all the time,” said Murtha of the relationship between Pelosi and Hoyer when they held the posts of minority leader and minority whip, respectively.

That may be why, after the 2006 election, Pelosi endorsed Murtha’s challenge — a fiasco that raised doubts as to whether Democrats could (or even wanted to) unify and govern effectively. Would they instead lapse into the fractious disorganization that has characterized the party in the past?

The answer, it has turned out, is no. Power seems to agree with Pelosi and Hoyer, and it has done a world of good for their relationship with each other. Ironically, Pelosi’s opposition to Hoyer in late 2006 seems to have improved their relationship; a fight, after all, sometimes clears the air.

Rep. Ed Pastor (D-Ariz.), a 16-year House veteran, said the mutual lack of affection was obvious.

“When we were in the minority there was a lot of friction,” he said, noting that Pelosi and Hoyer rarely joked and their body language was noticeably stiffer when together.

“Over the years they have improved,” he said. “Now they joke a little bit more and are more sociable.”

Another Democrat said that after Pelosi supported Murtha, her relationship with Hoyer “had nowhere to go but up.”

Hoyer said he and his one-time rival realized the success of their own careers depended on setting aside their old feud.

“Nancy and I are professional in the sense that we understand essentially that if we’re not together neither one of us is going to be successful and our caucus is not going to be successful,” said Hoyer in an interview in his spacious offices on the first floor of the Capitol, one of the many new perks he has accrued since Democrats captured the House.

The trappings that come with majority control have eased tensions that once flared between the two leaders.

Fundraising dollars have poured into party coffers, committee assignments are plentiful and, most importantly, Pelosi and Hoyer control the agenda and have the power to tailor legislation precisely to their liking.

“Being in the minority, you always have less of everything and there’s always fights about stuff,” said Steve Elmendorf, who served as chief of staff to former Rep. Dick Gephardt (D-Mo.), who led Democrats during eight of their years in the minority. “The majority has focused everyone’s attention on staying in the majority and trying to get something done. They spent almost 12 years in the minority, and they didn’t like it.”

Hoyer took the votes to back him — and Pelosi unanimously — as a clear instruction from colleagues to both himself and Pelosi that they must sheathe their daggers and work on the party’s sweeping campaign agenda.

“I think the fact that the caucus spoke with such a large voice and voted for Nancy unanimously — it was a message to both of us that ‘You’re both good, we want you to both be our leaders, and want you to work together,’ ” Hoyer told The Hill.

Pelosi and Hoyer first met more than 40 years ago as interns in the office of former Sen. Daniel Brewster (D-Md.) and have climbed through the ranks of politics together, eyeing each other as they rose. Hoyer first won election to Congress 27 years ago. Pelosi joined six years later. Both landed seats on the Appropriations Committee, one of the chamber’s most powerful panels.

It wasn’t until 2000 that their competing ambitions clashed head-on during a race to replace former Rep. David Bonior (Mich.) as Democratic whip.

The race had its share of under-the-table kicks and jabs. But the bruises healed eventually because Hoyer and Pelosi kept their attacks behind the scenes.

“You know Nancy and I ran against one other for two and a half years and … there were no public attacks and no public assertions — I don’t mean there weren’t some private elbows thrown; we both wanted to win,” said Hoyer, adding:

“Nancy is a tough pol.”

Murtha said: “She’s the boss, so he’s got to adapt to her and he has. He understands his position. She sets the agenda and he does the day-to-day work, setting the schedule in the House.”

Elmendorf said that Pelosi needs an experienced and disciplined lieutenant such as Hoyer to take control of the details of running the chamber so she can concentrate on her party’s broader vision.

Freedom from the mechanics of the floor has allowed Pelosi to concentrate on setting the Democratic agenda and stepping in to solve major ideological disagreements.

Despite accusations from Republicans that the Democrats have accomplished little during their first year in power, congressional scholars argue that Democrats have done much to silence skeptics.

“In 2007, the level of energy and activity on Capitol Hill picked up markedly,” wrote Thomas Mann, a scholar at the Brookings Institution, in an essay published in The New York Times.

Hoyer defended his party’s record of accomplishment, noting that several components of its “Six for ’06” campaign promise have been signed into law.

Former Congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman on Impeachment
By Billy Sugarfix(Billy Sugarfix)
Among other things, Elizabeth Holltzman uses this article to spell out and then counter many of the arguments people have against impeachment. Congressional leaders don't defend the administration, nor do they contend that its actions ..

The Great Neo-Con


Now that you have a guy who could actually win, you don’t want him.

By David Kahane

You conservatives make me laugh.

Here you have a war hero taking control of your party — a real one, not like our guy last time, what was his name, you know, “Mr. Sixteen Weeks” — and you’re acting like he’s some weird combination of William Howard Taft and Leon Trotsky. Sure, he’s a little nutty after all those years getting his bones re-broken every six months at the Hanoi Hilton, and his hand more or less grazed the cookie jar during the Keating Five scandal, but compared to Mrs. Kazakhstan and the guy who has Tony Rezko for a slumlord, he’s as clean as a freshly wiped baby’s bottom.

I mean, come on. One-on-one against Barry Hussein Jr., John McCain can make two winning points for you.

1) “Victory“ in Bush’s illegal war in Iraq, supported by a grownup Naval officer, vs. immediate and unconditional surrender advocated by the jug-eared Punahou Kid with second-hand Sixties' sensibilities.

2) An end to profligate pork-barrel spending from a guy who’s made his bones on the subject vs. a big-government socialist who apparently thinks everybody in America is entitled to a free house and a college education.

Which, it goes without saying, they are. But I realize that a lot of you stone-hearted right-wing nuts don’t agree with us Hollywood liberals. Hey — if we could put a man on the moon, why can’t we achieve a Just Society where everybody lives in solar-powered grass huts and Harvard professors come to your door to teach medieval gay African history?

As for Herself, well… if your side can’t beat a little woman who’s been fighting for change at the highest levels of state and national government for 35 years and hasn’t accomplished a damn thing; who’s a thinly disguised end-run around the 22nd Amendment on behalf of her husband, and who’s a willing helpmeet in what’s basically an international criminal enterprise based in the old gangland town of Hot Springs, Ark., then you’re too stupid to elect a president.

What we like about McCain, of course, is that he’s not really one of you. He’s for more Mexicans, higher taxes, leaving the nuclear option on the table when dealing with the Arabs but taking it off the table when dealing with the Senate Judiciary Committee. He’s flanked by his flunky Lindsey on one side and that Jewish guy who, somebody told me, ran for vice president on our ticket eight years ago. (Is that true?)

He’s not really one of us, either, but — and this is just between you and me — we all harbor a secret lust for a man in uniform, since there are hardly any on our side, just knowing what Big John went through after he got shot down in 1967 during Nixon’s criminal and unjust war in Vietnam gives us a warm and fuzzy feeling.


O.K., Johnson was president at the time, but you know what I mean.

And yet, here I am, tooling along Sunset in the rain, hearing from all sides that we’re about to throw in the towel on the writers’ strike — the big WGA meeting is Saturday night — when my finger accidentally punches in KFI and there’s Rush Limbaugh, making this all out to be about him! That a vote for McCain is a vote against the Mighty Limbaugh! And Sean Hannity, too!

Now, I never listen to the Sage of Cape Giradeau, Mo., because even without tuning him in I just know he’s a crazed bigoted racist homophobe who wants to put liberals in concentration camps; all my friends say so. But here he is ranting about McCain, deploring the fact that guys like me say nice things about McCain, as if he were some kind of crypto-Democrat, when as we all know bipartisanship is where it’s at, kumbaya, and can’t we all just get along?

Which means: Do it our way and maybe we’ll pretend to like you.

But what choice do you have? It’s amazing how the scales have suddenly fallen from our eyes. For years, we’ve been prisoners of both the Clinton Myth, that only the Restoration of Mr. Bill could save us from the evil Bush-Cheney Rethuglicans; and of Bush Derangement Syndrome, which has as its central tenet the fact that all evil in the world can be laid at Bush’s feet.

We’ve since woken up to the Clintons. Then — just by accident, mind you — I read something your own Peggy Noonan said in print the other day: That the thing that fractured the Republican party was Bush.

Not the Bush of Bush’s Illegal and Immoral War in Iraq for Oil and Halliburton. No, the Chimp-in-Chief was far too clever for that. While you conservative chump neo-cons were all focused on “Mission Accomplished” and Petraeus and benchmarks and purple fingers, Bush — a genius! — was sneaking stuff in the back door. Stuff like No Child Left Behind, prescription drugs for seniors, tax-refund checks for people who don't pay income taxes. The Bush who rolled over for the Gang of 14, the Bush who signed the McCain-Feingold Act, the Bush who didn’t veto a single spending bill.

Who’s neo-conning whom now?

There’s a line in Road to Perdition where a little kid at a funeral sees a smile on the face of the gangster played by that new James Bond guy, and he asks him what’s so funny. “It’s all so [bleepin’] hysterical,” he says.

So if Rush is right, and Mother of Mercy this really is the end of Rico the Conservative, we here in Hollywood agree with Daniel Craig: After all, you’ve managed to parlay two presidential elections into the loss of both houses of Congress, a cratering stock market, a real-estate meltdown, and a looming recession. And now that you have a guy who could actually win, you don’t want him.

It’s all so bleepin’ hysterical.

— David Kahane is a nom de cyber for a writer in Hollywood. “David Kahane” is borrowed from a screenwriter character in The Player.

Washington admits to torture, analyst calls for impeachment
American Chronicle - Beverly Hills,CA,USA
By Chris Gelken The director of the Central Intelligence Agency has revealed to the House of Representatives Intelligence Committee that waterboarding was ...

CIA Veteran Calls for Bush's Impeachment
OhmyNews International - South Korea
You have called for the impeachment of George Bush -- on what grounds exactly, and what prospects to you see for impeachment in the final eleven months of ...

Impeachment..Lets show 'em how government works!
By lalepop'
Senator John Conyers, head of the house judiciary committee, is still teeter tottering over the issue of impeachment! You can help by sending an e-mail to: john.conyers@mail.house.gov. In the subject line put "Impeach Bush and Cheney" ..

Impeach then stabilize
Daily Press - Newport News,VA,USA
11 column by George McGovern called for the
impeachment of President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney ("There are very many reasons to impeach ...

No comments: