How can the House vote to censure Stark, but NOT vote to impeach Shrub or Shooter?

[RiverStone]

I don't get it.

Without debate, the House voted today 196-173 to kill the proposal to censure Stark for "his despicable conduct."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,,-7018178,00.html

So can anybody tell me why the fuck we have not even voted - simply voted to impeach Shrub or Shooter for "despicable conduct"? Even if the vote failed, it would serve to remind history that some folks tried! How is it the rethugs managed to call for a vote on Stark in a couple of days, yet the Dems seem impotent to even bring a vote to the table after 5 years of a war based on lies?

The closest we have come so far can be read here:

http://kucinich.house.gov/UploadedFiles/int3.pdf

Kudos to Dennis for that! :thumbsup:

And by the way Pete, you did not need to apologize for a damn thing!

[mmonk]

1. Their loyalties may not be pure.

[atreides1]

2. Because Nancy and Steny are the "Leaders"

We the voters are insignificant to them, just like Congressman Stark.

[TechBear_Seattle]

3. Because Nader was only seven years away from being correct? n/t

[SeussTree]

11. Good one. (nt)

[patrice]

4. Note to self: Send Pete Stark money.

And I give you all permission to ask me about this later to see if I actually did it.

[villager]

5. Because in an age of lies, the truth-tellers are condemned....

n/t

[n2doc]

6. You know the answer

The House and Senate Leadership are a wholly owned subsidiary of Bushco. Payments have been made in the form of campaign contributions, cushy jobs for family and friends, and nice trips. Congress' purpose is to provide cover and keep an angry populace somewhat mollified while they continue to loot the Treasury.

[cali]

7. LOL!

Did you major in hyperbole?

[TechBear_Seattle]

13. I don't think it was hyperbole

Hyperbole involves the use of grand exaggeration. I see very little exaggeration.

Added to clarify: The only exaggeration I see is that both Bushco and the members of Congress are wholely owned subsidiaries of Big Whatever. They are the ones setting the agenda and writing the paychecks... I mean campaign checks.

[JuniperLea]

16. I see very little as well...

In fact, I'd go as far as to say it was an exceedingly accurate description.

[Individualist]

14. DLC wanted to turn the party into a submissive branch of the republican party.

It seems they've succeeded.

Let's just look at the cold, hard facts about the DLC and its record. The DLC has pushed, among other things, the war in Iraq and "free" trade policies, using bags of corporate money to buy enough Democratic votes to help Republicans make those policies a reality. They have chastised anyone who has opposed those policies as either unpatriotic or anti-business -- even as a majority of Americans now oppose the war in Iraq, oppose the DLC's business-written trade deals, and are sick of watching America's economy sold out to the highest corporate bidder. Additionally, in brazenly Orwellian fashion, the DLC has also called its extremist agenda "centrist," even though polls show the American public opposes most of their agenda, and supports much of the progressive agenda. http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0727-32.htm

The progressive movement has not just threatened this message monopoly -- it is undoing it. Through MoveOn, the rise of popular documentaries, blogs, think tanks, etc. It's not just that we talk about real values and innovative strategies. It's because we're talking, period, that the centrists feel threatened.

Hence the DLC's vicious attempts to discredit the movement. And that's what they want. They don't seek to win an argument over policy. They seek to destroy the credibility of their opponents and restore their message monopoly. http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=721

This is why the DLC is dangerous. For all their claims of supposedly wanting to help Democrats, they employ people like Marshall Wittman who specifically try to undermine the Democratic Party, even if it means he has to publicly defecate out the most rank and easily-debunkable lies. They reguarly give credence to the right wing's agenda and its worst, most unsupportable lies. They are the real force that tries to make sure this country is a one party state and that Democrats never really challenge the Republicans in a serious way. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/why-the-dlc-is-so-dangero_b_13640.html

"The Democratic Leadership Council's agenda is indistinguishable from the Republican Neoconservative agenda," http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Kucinich_DLC_agenda_undistinguishable_from_Neocon_0813.html

DLC Watch, the wicked shall not escape justice http://dlcwatch.blogspot.com

Without a doubt, the DLC is the most fundamentalist organization within the caucus, the most ideologically rigid, and the most destructive to the progressive cause.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/5/24/1712/23448

These DLC types are amazing, they really are. Their pathology is unique; they all secretly worship the guilt-by-association tactics of Lee Atwater and Karl Rove, but unlike those two, not one of them has enough balls to take being thought of as the bad guy by the general public.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/11275627/the_low_post_democrats_walk_themselves_to_the_gallows

[TornadoTN]

19. G.O.P. - Lite

Just another arm of the Corporatocracy that is so pervasive in our lives today.

[Generator]

8. Complicity

I know some will cling to the corpse of the dead democratic party forever. But at some point if you ain't part of the solution you are part of the problem. (I'm refering to the Democrats that "represent" us.-you know the majority that are against everything that Bush is for-even some Republicans are more liberal than our Reps.)

[TornadoTN]

9. I'm losing my patience with our party - even more so now

We finally get a guy to stand up and say in no uncertain terms just exactly how our President views our nation, and he gets lambasted for it.

Our party gains power, yet we take three steps back in the process, all because theres a fear that perception will be negative if we hold the G.O.P. to account that we will lose power. What good is the majority when nothing is done with it?! The G.O.P. as despicable as they are, knew that once they seized power that they had to move quickly to use it for maximum effect.

Meet your new masters, same as your old masters.

[RiverStone]

23. ironically the Dems who are pandering...

..to the middle or right because they don't want to "appear" weak --- actually appear WEAKER!

That wimpy perception could hurt us next November.

Something needs to differentiate the red team from the blue team; there was a time when being a Democrat stood for something unique. Now (like you said) old master/new master - hard to tell em apart. One thing for sure, they all answer to the corporations!

[KingFlorez]

10. We're talking about 2 different things

A censure is a different procedure than voting for impeachment.

[RiverStone]

18. We know that.

Nevertheless, the end result would probably be the same with both actions. Both would fail, yet there is much symbolism in the act of trying!

Trying itself says as much about the mood on The Hill as ultimately whether it succeeds or not. I want future history students to read years from now that some folks back in early 07/08 tried to hold a corrupt administration accountable for high crimes.

How can we let this administration off the hook without even trying?

[JuniperLea]

12. Sticks and stones... but words...

Won't get fooled again!


ugh


I've always said... we appear to be complacent because we do not act on the obvious crimes of BushCo. That which we ignore, we condone. Soon, the world will not merely hate us for our leaders. They will hate us personally for being "Good Germans".

[Horse with no Name]

15. Don't forget--they also voted to censure Move On

can't have those grass roots liberals getting too uppity now.

[TornadoTN]

17. We have to know our place

Apparently they want to make sure that all of us peons that don't fall in the 25%er designation know that we don't have a voice or a say-so in our process. Things will continue exactly as the Decider and his corporate masters have preordained.

[Cha]

20. Because by now we're getting

the very Stark Realism that they're mostly fucking bush Appeasers.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

21. Any excuse is lame under the totality of circumstances. Just my opinion. nt

[Bozita]

22. It's all about courage. Repiglicans have plenty. Dem leadership has none.

Pelosi was Tavis Smiley's only guest last night. I had to turn it off after about 10 minutes. I was surprised to have lasted that long without throwing stuff at the TV.

[Bleacher Creature]

24. How was the MoveOn ad "unpatriotic", while Rush's comments went "unpunished"?

[Virginia Dare]

25. Didn't Feingold try to censure Bush?

as I recall only a couple of Dems showed up for the vote, Leahy was one.

[bdamomma]

26. and they have criminals right in front of their faces and do not do shit.

and they go after a man who spoke the truth.

[WI_DEM]

27. And they can't even get a proposal to censure Bush and/or Cheney!?

[Yukari Yakumo]

28. God we have a bunch of idiots here...

Did any of you who are saying "Dems are cowards" bother to look at the vote? It's straight down party lines. How the fuck do you get "Dems are cowards" from this? It's time more than just a few tombstones are awarded, because I see a bunch of disrupters who'll latch onto any negative meme just to smear, slime, and slander any and all Dems in office.

[focusfan]

29. sounds crazy doesn't it

why can't we impeach Bush and cheney