Response to Impeach
We posted about impeachment recently and Pearl, a friend of Kate Braun's, had something to say that we think is worth sharing.
Interesting. There are plenty of grounds. Is the country ready? Not yet. But events like these may help.
But the new congress has its work cut out for it with domestic policy: minimum wage, cut interest on student loans, tax breaks for small business, and a couple of things I can't remember. Get something done first before all Hell breaks loose. The Progressive Populist says everything W has done since the Baker group report started leaking, and after it was released, has been preparation to reject the report. They called it attacking the Rescue Squad. He thinks he can say now that he tried negotiation and it didn't work. (sacrifice of Condi). His idea of negotiatiing is to say, "Give me everything I want first, nothing for you, and then we'll talk." So what's to talk about? Also that he is appointing other study groups so that the Baker report will be only one of many. Same issue accused W administration of venality, meaning thinking only of their own (short-term) political interests, never of the good of the country.
America has never learned to be an ally of the Third World, only a colonial master. No reciprocity. My observation. Never learned from Chairman Mao, though he explained it thoroughly and wrote it out. First win the hearts and minds of the local people. But no, we bring in multinational corporations, which hurt them.
Also, the military intelligence people in Iraq are rotated so often that they are always in a state of training, never anyone knowledgeable to work. This from PP.
The Iraqi army we have built consists of Shia death squads. Our disbanding of the Iraqi army and civil service played a big role in causing the Sunni insurgency. And we hanged Sadam for killing the Shia we stirred up to rebel against him with the weapons we saw to it that he got, which have been against International law since WWI.
Things will only get a lot worse for the next 2 years with W in, and impeachment is the only way to get rid of W, but that leaves Cheney in control. If Cheney is impeached, and there isn't enough time for both, unless it's done simultaneously, then who succeeds? Isn't it the speaker of the house? That would make it look like Nancy had an ulterior motive, a conflict of interest, though the Senate must convict. We have only a one-vote margin there, and he's unconscious. No wonder Nancy is reluctant.
