Letters to the Editor
-
Circular firing squad
That pretty much describes what will happen if Sheehan follows through on her threat. If she were running against Doolittle, or any other republican criminal, then she'd be completely in the right. Does she really think that Pelosi is worse than the republicans? That's what's so foolish about her intentions. She's weakening the opposition to the real problem, the REPUBLICANS. She's ignoring where the blockade to investigating and removing Bush/Cheney, the REPUBLICANS.
I'm very sorry for what happened to her son. I was against this war long before it got started, and I believe her son did not die for any noble cause. He died for Bush hubris and Cheney incompetence, nothing more. It was all stoked by Republicans who pushed through these things. Does she REALLY think that democrats would have initiated this crap, or the war? I don't think so, so why go after the people who didn't/wouldn't initiate this useless death? It's not reasonable, and is just to sickeningly reminiscent of the Nader run for president that brought on this national nightmare.
--Ron
-
You started this round of shooting
The first shots in the Democrats current round of circular shooting were not fired by Sheehan. They were fired by everyone - yourself included - who jumped at first opportunity to attack our elected representatives for not being able to somehow end the war in the face of an insurmountable veto and a recklessly obstinate commander in chief. Their decision to allocate money to the troops was not, as you so carelessly and counterproductively describe it, a "cave in." It was a recognition of cold hard reality: (1) Bush will keep the troops in Iraq as long as he is Commander in Chief; (2) cutting off funding for the war will NOT stop him from doing this; and (3) anyone who thinks that the ensuing budget shortfall for military action in Iraq will not fall on the troops is DREAMING.
You helped start this civil war, Joan. Cindy Sheehan is just taking the next logical steps.
-
What does this say???
If Bush and Cheney cannot, and will not, be impeached for running what amounts to a criminal enterprize out of the White House, what does it say about our country? About our system of government? about our legislative institutions, and most of all, about our voters?
What does it say?
It says we are in some very serious shit.
Now, Frank Zappa's dead-on comment that "government is the entertainment arm of the military-industrial complex" makes it pretty clear that our system has been busted for awhile.
Not busted from the point of view of a CEO of Lockheed, or General Dynamics. But busted from the point-of-view of those of us who would like to see some preservation of the Commons.
As long as we could occasionally push back against the depredations of the plutocratic oligarchy that rules *all* societies to one degree or another, there was some hope.
(and, by the way, someone like Nancy Pelosi, for all the good she may have done, or will do, however you may define "good" is a full member of that oligarchy, both measured by wealth, and political power..)
Now, though, it appears we cannot push back. If Bush and Cheney can do what they did with nearly total impunity, what's next?
I think maybe the editors of all major newspapers, and the owners of all major businesses should be asking themselves that question...let alone the rest of us. What's next? If Bush and Cheney can do what they've done, with the support of nearly half the country...what's next?
(the stone realists among us would say that our system was designed to protect the Bushes and Cheneys whenever they appear, and I would have trouble disagreeing. There are some strong arguments to make that our system of government was designed, from the start, to allow the rich to pillage the rest of us with impunity. If that is the case, then we need another revolution. One we won't have.)
-
Dems' "political capital."
Repectfully, Joan, you're wrong this time -- wrong on two counts.
First, the Dems' declining poll numbers have mostly to do with public frustration at the way they're letting Bush push them (and, by extension, the country) around, even after the powerful mandate of the '06 elections. They'd gain "political capital" by confronting Bush about his crimes head-on, not lose it. (What's more, there won't be an opportunity to bring Bush to justice after he leaves office; even if we keep both houses and win the White House, the media will accuse the new Democratic leadership of pettiness and revenge-seeking should they make any attempt to restore accountability, and will mindlessly repeat the usual talking points about the need for our country to "turn the page" and "begin to move on" by leaving criminals unpunished and even richly rewarded.)
Second, and more importantly, something more valuable than "political capital" is at stake here. I've been a door-knocking Democrat all my political life, but I'm getting fed up with my party's willingness to treat crime like "scandal," and to play politics with the U.S. Constitution. The sacrifices they're permitting -- allowing a president to escape impeachment after openly admitting the most serious kinds of felonies -- are totally inappropriate.
Once you open certain doors, you'll never close them. The powerful taboo associated with official kidnapping and torture, for instance, will never again be as powerful as it was six years ago.
There is a meaningful time limit ticking away here. If the Dems let this guy slink out of office without facing impeachment, our country -- which has already lost so much -- will again have lost something irreplaceable.
The Democrats have been losing and losing by doing the wrong thing in the interest of long-term political gain. It's time for sombody to demonstrate some actual leadership -- some character -- by doing the right thing, "political capital" be damned. That the right thing, in this instance, would also be a tremendously popular move is what makes the Dems' wimpiness so maddening.
I'm the definition of a moderate Democrat -- and if I were in Pelosi's district, I would consider voting for Sheehan.