archived: 17 - 31 Nov, 2006 Back Next
UPDATED: November 16, 2006
JAY GREENE*
“GRESHAM’S LAW”
Listening to a podcast of "On the Media, an hour long commentary on the various ways in which news was handled during the week, airing on WNYC Fridays, some sap on the same show with another sap, Chris Matthews, was heard to say Tuesday night "...once again we are seeing the instinctive bias of the exit polls toward the Democrats...." LOL, baby - that was not "instinctive bias" - the exit polls were recording the sweep!
Are all talking heads fatuous and irrelevant or only those hanging out with Ol' Raspy Voice Chris?
You know what the real problem is, bunkies? There is too effing much airtime to fill! When that occurs, the Gresham's Law of Broadcasting (which applies with equal force to blogging) takes over and cheap talk drives out cogency; hot air replaces substance.
_____
* *Jay Greene is a frequent contributor to TPJ. Greene is retired, but he held top management posts in the steamship industry and international trade on the Pacific Coast.
F. DEMARCO
“ROVE”
Mr. Rove, one of the most dangerous threats to American Democracy, will be proven correct if the House Dem's start a "power play" before January 2007. The Caucus should elect their leadership; there is far too much to do about the Murtha-Hoyer friction. Murtha should chair the Armed Service Committee, and Hoyer should be whip, in my opinion.
DOUG JOHNSTON
“DANGEROUS NON-PARTISANSHIP”
A number of polls indicate many voters are skeptical of both parties on this count. I can feel Karl Rove picking off many who supported progressive candidates whom they saw as less partisan than the Republican candidates. A hard-hitting progressive offense and an agenda which most Americans support is sure to become the core of a Democratic response.
I hope you will find time to give further consideration to the dangers and difficulties of non-partisanship for Democrats.
Even now, Karl Rove is preparing to show Democrats that no good deed goes unpunished. Rove is still at Bush’s side with a brand of radically partisan politics that aims to sharpen differences with the opposition, use wedge issues to energize his own base, and micro-target voters to pick off selected parts of the constituency Democrats have gained.
Republicans will certainly use whatever mess Iraq has dissolved into by 2008 to turn the tables on the Democrats. The slightest dissent or honest demand for real change will be characterized as partisanship. Democrats must make a concerted effort, not only to be nonpartisan, but also to show that Republicans are staying the course of their own destructive partisan style.
ERIC COX
“GENTLEMEN DON’T….”
Gentlemen don't brag about their victories--but no person is perfect. I had three pieces on the Junkies prior to the election predicting there would be a wave, as there was. If you check my last two postings, and my prediction about a week before the election stating that the Dems would win both chambers, you will see I it got it right.
I was not always that prescient. I did predict on the Junkies a Kerry win but I had no prior indication that he would be such a bad candidate. Like wine, we can improve with age. And just wait until I take the field as the new quarterback of the faltering Skins and save the honor of that sinking team.
RICK RYAN
“FASCISM”
"When fascism comes to America
it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross"
(Sinclair Lewis)
A week ago we managed to beat back the forces of evil and stall the efforts of those who would take our country down the path to a totalitarian theocracy. We must be ever vigilant to the incremental erosion of our civil liberties in the name of security. The true goal of terrorists is to cause fear, then a backlash by the government which causes it to repress the populace and leads to its' fall. While terrorism is a threat, it has produced an irrational level of fear. Terrorism is the danger we are not used to.
In 2001 many times more people were killed in auto accidents than in the terror attacks, but we're used to car crashes. Many times more people were killed by firearms, but we're used to that. It is the unpredictable nature of the terrorist attack that causes the fear response. We know, but choose to ignore, the risks when we get behind the wheel. Consider how few people are killed in airplane crashes every year, statistically much less risky than driving. Yet we all know someone who won't or is afraid to fly. If a light plane goes down, even if no one is injured it makes the local news, if someone is killed it will go on CNN, Fox and the networks; it is news because it is rare. On the same day across the country scores are killed on the roads with barely a mention. The media do us all a disservice when they don't put the dangers of terrorism into context and perspective.
Be on guard against those who would protect you if they ask you to give up your freedom in exchange.
DAVE SOKAL
“WHAT DOES TPJ THINK”
Hi Stephen G/ Michael / Steven J:
What are your thoughts on the best strategy / timing for an effort to impeach Bush? Or do you think that we should not try to impeach Bush?
I'd appreciate TPJ's thoughts / advice in a future column.
_________
JUNKIE: A great question Dave and our respective answers appear below.
Michael Carmichael:
Mr. Sokal poses an intriguing question about the timing of the impeachment of President George W. Bush. The House of Representatives can impeach a sitting president via a simple majority vote. Following the bill of impeachment, the impeached president would then be tried in the Senate where a two-thirds vote would be needed for conviction triggering his immediate removal from office.
In order for a bill of impeachment to be taken seriously, there must be a body of evidence to substantiate presidential "high crimes and misdemeanors." Since the Democratic Congress will not take up their duties until January, 2007, we can safely predict that it will take some time to accumulate substantial evidence against a sitting president. While there are many committees that will be generating critical information concerning the policies and practices of George W. Bush, my guess is that the House and Senate Judiciary Committees will become the forums for the most relevant criticism of his presidency.
The House Judiciary Committee will be chaired by The Hon. John Conyers of Michigan, and the Senate Judiciary Committee will be chaired by The Hon. Patrick Leahy of Vermont. As we know, while the House is a populist body, the Senate is much more solemn and officious. In order for impeachment to become a viable strategy, the Congress would need to discover a body of evidence so incriminating that all 49 Democratic senators, both Independents and say, 16-17 of the sitting Republican Senators would vote "Yea" for conviction. For this reason, I do not think it likely that impeachment will become a compelling issue until quite late in his term of office, say - summer 2008 - when such a move could become tinged with political repercussions from the presidential campaign.
In order to remain as president, Bush would only need to retain the loyalty of 32 or 33 Republican senators - as well as the Independent whom he kissed on the face following his State of the Union address in 2005, the self-described Independent-Democrat, Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut. Another person whose loyalty would be vital for the sitting President is his Vice-President, Richard Cheney - a man who is considered to be so undesirable that his mere presence at the National Observatory might discourage any serious move toward impeachment.
If that situation were to change - and Richard Cheney should for any reason retire or disappear from his office - the mood for the impeachment of George W. Bush could accelerate with marvelous rapidity - for an absence of a sitting Vice-President could throw the presidency to the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, through impeachment. That said, the political climate at the time of these hypothetical developments will drive them forward - or not - as the case might be.
The fast track scenario would be for major discoveries of "high crimes and misdemeanors" by mid-2007, a retirement of Dick Cheney - and any move to appoint a new Vice President - say John McCain - Jim Baker - or Condoleezza Rice who would be the most likely nominee in my humble estimation. None of this could realistically take place in less than one year - and probably longer. During Watergate, Nixon survived 18 months of devastating official scrutiny before he was forced to resign by a head-count of Senators. More than 80 senators were prepared to vote
in favor of the impeachment of Nixon. Although the impeachment vote had not taken place, it had become a foregone conclusion that ultimately forced him to become the sole President compelled to "resign" from the oval office in the history of the United States.
Andrew Johnson and William Jefferson Clinton were both impeached, but both presidents were acquitted at their trials in the Senate. At this time, the parliamentary peculiarities of impeachment would seem to argue against it as a practical political strategy - but, the potential for the discovery of incriminating evidence is obviously alive and kicking from an abundance of sources.
Dr. Steven Jonas:
My TPJ column for November 30th will be, "Let's Keep Our Eye on the Ball." That ball, in my view, is the restoration and preservation of Constitutional Democracy. That requires two things: getting repealed the worst of the recent changes in the law giving the president, any President, dictatorial powers, (Pelosi has committed to doing at some of this), and electing a Democrat devoted to Constitutional Democracy in 2008.
Impeachment, while totally justified, would be a very distracting sideshow, very politically damaging for the mainstream Democratic Party, and would take up an extraordinary amount of time that should be devoted to dealing with the substantive issues. Further, while indictment might be gained in the House, conviction could certainly not be achieved in the Senate.
That's a brief summary of my argument, to be continued in the column on November 30th.
Junkie:
I quote from Jay Greene’s article now appearing in TPJ’s BUSH WATCH, “Winning is the best revenge.” Not impeachment.
One, impeach Bush for Cheney? No thanks.
Two, as Dr. Jonas so eloquently writes above, impeachment would be a distraction to what Democrats were elected to do – straighten out the mess that the Republicans have made in both domestic and foreign policy. In particular, Democrats should be focusing on restoring the constitutional principles defiled under Republicans and creating a government free of corruption.
And, in building the case of Republican malfeasance Democrats will, in turn, also make the public case of why entrusting control of the government to Democrats is essential. The civic corruption of some Republicans will be evident as Democrats build their case; and appropriate criminal prosecution should ensue.
Three, Democrats need to be about creating a record over the next two years that will build upon the election results we achieved to elect a Democratic President.
Let Bush be consigned to the damnation of his deeds and the impeachment of his tenure by historians.
_____________________________________________
PATRIOTIC DUTY
[By CAROL ROSE]
I found your most excellent website quite by accident a few weeks ago - I am a political junkie also!
Every one of your writers are right on in a clear and chilling way - I have already voted (my very rural county votes entirely by mail) - but I don't hold out much hope - I'm one of those who are convinced that the current Administration doesn't dare lose power for fear of indictments and jail....not to mention their complete addiction to gross amounts of money and power. It's been so strange to see how far down this country has come in just 5+ years - I would never have thought that it would be possible for a President or Congress to so thoroughly gut our Constitution and Bill of Rights while people just stood by and let them do it - apparently they'd rather be watching 'Dancing with the Stars' or 'American Idol'.
Every single thing about this administration, from the very start with the Florida 'Hanging chads/Supreme Court' fiasco on, has been so blatantly illegal and immoral - what does it say about the average citizen's awareness or intelligence? There are so many intelligent people out there - I read on TruthDig, Smirking Chimp, etc - there are a lot of people who either knew at the time how wrong the war, economic policies, etc. of GW were (me, for one) and many more now who have realized how much America has been hoodwinked.....yet we still will (80% of us, anyway) vote on hackable electronic voting machines - these guys have gotten away with it twice, and NOTHING about them has changed - they will do it again, I fear.
I believe so much in our American values, but I am very afraid that it may be too late. I even thought of not writing on these websites, for fear of having to change my address to a detention camp - but I refuse to give in to their fear-mongering mindset. I am a patriot of the real kind - I DO question my government and consider it my patriotic duty to do so.
Thank you so much for your wise and insightful analyses - may God bless your efforts in future - America needs people like you!!!!!
__________
JUNKIE: On Tuesday, Democrats won the opportunity to resurrect the constitutional values we treasure. It was good people like yourself who did that – yes, they did! Before the Democratic Party’s task is done it will need more citizens like you.
Thank you for your most kind comments about TPJ. We are truly honored that you make TPJ a part of your political reading. We hope that TPJ played some small role in Tuesday’s victory
WAY TO GO!
[By GEORGE BROOKS]
Congratulations [TPJ] and thank you for helping save our Democratic Republic. Not since the Civil War, have we been threatened this seriously. Hopefully, Americans will take a keener interest in who they listen to, who they vote for, and why our government is structured the way it is.
No time to rest, though - keep 'em on the run.
Last Update: 12/03/2006