Support Impeach PAC
You know, whomever said political bloggers just sit around typing away as opposed to being in action ought to be slapped upside the head. I am most of the time 'on the go' with barely any time to sleep since I use the night time to do wed dev and design, research and blogging. I actually cannot take on all the activities or writing projects people throw my way all the time. But this one, coming from the people behind Democrats.com and AfterDowningStreet is right up my alley.
I have been appointed to the steering commitee of ImpeachPAC' Citizen's Impeach Commission.
ImpeachPAC is a political action committee created to support congressional candidates who favor impeaching Bush and Cheney. The response has been amazing. Since it was created on November 5th, ImpeachPAC has raised almost $40,000 to fund candidates that fulfill the following criteria :
ImpeachPAC Raises Over $20,000 in First Weekend | ImpeachPAC :
* Democratic candidates for U.S. Senate or House of Representatives, both incumbents and challengers
* Incumbents must introduce or co-sponsor Articles of Impeachment for George Bush and Dick Cheney in 2005 or 2006
* Challengers must pledge to co-sponsor Articles of Impeachment for George Bush and Dick Cheney as their first action after swearing-in in 2007
* Endorsees must be "aggressive progressives" - fearless, outspoken champions of progressive values - and have the endorsement of a progressive PAC
* Endorsees must run a grassroots, internet-based campaign using cutting-edge technology
ImpeachPAC's initial goal is to raise $100,000 over the Internet "to prove to President Bush, Congress, and the media that there is intense grassroots support for impeachment, as reflected in the new Zogby poll."
The results of the Zogby poll basically validate the independent poll conducted by Ipsos and commissioned by Democrats.com. In that October poll, Ipsos had found that 53% of US citizens favor impeachment if Bush lied about the reasons to go to war.
Believe it or not, there is a faction of the liberal blogosphere that does not think this is worth the effort. I say this is one of many elements Democrats need to focus on. As the minority in Capitol Hill, progressive democrats cannot afford to consider accountibility for the culture of corruption that has taken over our government an expendable political item in their "to do" list.
George W. Bush gets that impeachment is coming his way. If this were not true, why is he taking responsibility for the war today?
[via Bush: Iraq Invasion My Responsibility]:
WASHINGTON -- President Bush said Wednesday the responsibility for invading Iraq based in part on faulty weapons intelligence rested solely with him, taking on the issue in his most direct and personal terms in the 1,000-plus days since the war's first shots.
"It is true that much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong," Bush said. "As president, I'm responsible for the decision to go into Iraq."
The president's mea culpa was accompanied by a robust defense of the divisive war.
"Saddam was a threat _ and the American people and the world is better off because he is no longer in power," Bush declared, as he has before.
Democrats were not moved by Bush's speech, the last of four designed to boost his credibility on the war and the public's backing for it.
"There was no reason for America to go to war when we did, the way we did, and for the false reasons we were given," said Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass.
Bush offered few qualms about the failure to find any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. He said foreign intelligence agencies _ including several for governments who didn't back his decision to invade _ also believed before the war that Saddam Hussein possessed them. And he said his administration has begun making changes to the U.S. intelligence apparatus to head off future errors.
He is not an idiot as many people on the left want to paint him. The man is smart enough to know he is buying time on his comeuppance.
Working with ImpeachPAC and helping them raise the money and resources to introduce articles of impeachment into Congress and the Senate will only bring the Bush Administration's just desserts sooner and not later. Give whatever you can to make that happen.
Activism | Culture of Corruption | Impeach - Remove - Jail | Dick Cheney | George W. Bush
Politics on the Hill is an industry and a business
and to a lot of people, raising money for the 2006 elections is the #1 priority. Notice I did not say WIN the elections but RAISE MONEY.
Impeachment is something that unfortunately is not going to happen due to the midterm elections. I personaly think it would be realistic to introduce articles of impeachment on November 3rd, not before that date.
The point is that the conversation about accountibility and corruption needs to be sounded loud and clear. Not only to pressure Republicans but to not let Democrats idle by for a couple of votes or political pats on the back.
Raising money to get to congress and the senate candidates that will introduce articles of impeachment is, I believe, a good move. We're talking about people willing to fight the culture of corruption and deceit all the way up to the White House. The candidates that will come out of this campaign, hopefully, will have a solid foundation in social justice and political activism.
Sounds like a long shot right now but I believe it's doable. Look at how fast this year went. Believe me, with the Scalito filibuster, Plamegate, the war, elections and grock knows what other scandals, 2006 is going to come and go in the blink of an eye.
Just checking...
Hey, Liza
I've been calling for Impeacment since 2001, so I'm in, but I want to clarify something - do those "Progressive values" include reproductive freedom for women? Because a lot of the "Progressives" out here don't think that's a priority, but I won't support an anti-choice candidate for any reason. There are too many options in politics to settle for the lesser of two evils.
Support the Women's Autonomy and Sexual Sovereignty Movements!
I totally agree with you on that
The purpose of the PAC is only focused on impeachment BUT I wouldn't hesitate to ask a candidate about their position on not just reproductive freedoms but the whole spectrum of choice, privacy and autonomy. If I am going to approve or reject a candidate, these would be as important a consideration as their position on impeachment.






























not the right time
we have one of the great congerspeople here in Oregon, Rep Peter DeFazio. he's a rock solid progressive, someone we trust fully. when Pete tells us what's going on in DC, we listen and pay attention.
so we asked him (via his staffer) why some Dem in the House (like Pete, who has the guts to do it) doesn't file charges towards censure and/or impeachment. Pete would love to, but the Ds have to be careful because they are in the minority. here's the problem they see:
they begin impeachment proceedings, and the Rs say, sure go ahead. and they do, and the Republican Senate "considers" -- doing dick in terms of real investigation -- and rejects the charges. later on, when the Dems win back the House and/or Senate, and they want to hold real hearings, the Rs can protest -- and get away with -- saying "But we've already done this!"
so as much as Pete and other Dems would love nothing better than to come back to DC in January and start the process of sending Dubya to federal pound me in the ass prison for the rest of his life, it ain't gonna happen. they have to wait until they have a realistic chance of doing proper investigations. as tempting as the idea of impeachment is, far far more important is the need to drag all their evil-doing out into the clean light of day. they will not jeopardize that responsibility by acting rashly.
so the sooner we win back the House (more likely than the Senate), the sooner Peter DeFazio and his colleagues can begin the process of proving what we know: Bush lied us into this war.