Reply #11: should we only act where victory is possible?

[welshTerrier2]

or are you confining your theme solely to impeachment? is your argument that nothing is served by trying if losing is the inevitable result? because, if so, I disagree. sometimes, even in a hopeless cause, putting a team on the field is a starting point. making the case, even a hopeless case, still gives voice to your ideas. it begins the process of persuasion.

sometimes even hopeless battles are worth fighting. and while I don't think this is the time for impeachment, yet, I dislike the fact that you don't even weigh the issue of justice in considering how to proceed. if evidence exists that bush is guilty of violating the Constitution, it seems a perfectly reasonable argument can be made that the Congress has an obligation to take that case to the American people.

you want to measure the vote count based on today's situation. do you think the day after the Watergate break-in that Dems had the votes to impeach Nixon? how about a month later? how about a year later? the point is that we should continue the investigations and NOT close the door on impeachment. we should not start impeachment hearings without better information. but neither should we focus solely on "looking like jackasses" and "votes to convict". part of our focus should include the evidence we discover as the investigations continue.