< HOME  Saturday, March 25, 2006

NM Democrats call to Impeach Bush!

One state at a time, it's going to happen.
The New Mexico Democratic Party is calling for President Bush's removal from office.

Party Chairman John Wertheim said Tuesday that delegates to Saturday's state party convention supported a call for the president's impeachment largely because of "perceived abuses of power and corruption in the Bush administration."

He listed as examples of abuses of power, warrantless wiretapping of U.S. citizens, the misstatement of facts preceding the invasion of Iraq, and the scandal surrounding the indictment of Vice President Dick Cheney's former top aide in connection with the leak of the identity of a covert CIA operative.

"Everyone understands President Bush is not going to be impeached," Wertheim said. "But these abuses of power and corruption in the administration are deeply serious matters and there should be more talk about this abuse of power."

The one-sentence amendment, added from the floor to the platform's section on political and election reform, reads: "Resolved, that the Democratic Party of New Mexico supports the impeachment of President George Bush and his lawful removal from office."

Marta Kramer, executive director for the Republican Party of New Mexico, said Tuesday the Democrats "foolishly" voted to "to impeach and punish our president for aggressively waging the war on al-Qaida and terrorist organizations."

"How will dragging the country into impeachment hearings protect Americans?" she asked. "How will censuring the president protect Americans?"

The amendment, suggested by Bernalillo County convention delegate Robb Chavez, was accepted on a show of hands by about 80 percent of the nearly 1,400 registered convention delegates, Wertheim said. It required support by at least two-thirds of the delegates.

Kramer said the action proved the only plan the Democrats have "is to attack our president, undermine American resolve and demoralize our troops."

Wertheim said Democrats perceive a double standard between President Bush and former President Clinton. Concerns raised about Bush's actions are "much more serious than anything that was said about President Clinton," he said.
This follows Vermont and I've heard something about Iowa but can't find a link.

It's just a matter of time.

Many thanks to Connie at Larouche for the tip.


At Saturday, March 25, 2006, Anonymous Mighty Thor said...

I think this development (as in New Mexico) is genuine democratic instance of movement among the people, but still it will need more religious and outright antisemitism to give necessary, fullest character.

Religious revolution means RATIONALIZATION, hence antisemitism; they go necessarily together in logic and reality. Thor

At Saturday, March 25, 2006, Blogger Citisucks said...

The Green Party has been insisting on this for far longer.

The largers problem is though the whole system needs to be changed including real elections, corporations taken out of the government, and representation from all social classes. Bu$h can be impeached and I would enjoy seeing Bu$hed impeached, but that doesn't even mean he will be removed from office and anyway their will be another corporate terrorist (the next in line being the dick) to take his place.

At Saturday, March 25, 2006, Blogger qrswave said...

tri, I know that it might be unlikely that he will actually be impeached.

Nevertheless, these are extraordinary signs that Americans are awakening and that political revolution is in the making.

At Saturday, March 25, 2006, Blogger Citisucks said...

True, the fact that one of the mainstream parties is actually supporting this is a good sign. Maybe is they wake up to what a terrorist Bu$h is they will start to realize just how bad everything is. I just get concerned that a lot of people stop at how bad Bu$h is and don't end up realizing how bad the whole system is and how Bu$h is just one terrorist out of so many.

At Sunday, March 26, 2006, Anonymous Mighty Thor said...

"Citisucks": Bush II is rather a notable conspirator (frontman--spokes-flack--decoy) out of many--like especially the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR--see JBS.org).

Note impeachment is mere fruitless gesture to liable to being mere diversion (like last one against Clinton--see "Sellout" by David Shippers). Rather we need more meaningful, basic, deeper reform--like election of US Senators by state legislatures, as originally, just an example. Such reform of Senate elections is so much more practical, so readily do-able and understandable by common citizenry. Keep up all ur efforts of info and analysis. Honest elections and death to the Fed. Thor

At Sunday, March 26, 2006, Anonymous Allan said...

Bush deserves impeachment but we must be suspicious of the support this is being given by some whom it would seem might naturally allied with Israel.

I refer to the recent conference hosted by Conyers (intentions are unquestioned) which was also attended by Liz Holtzman, Lewis Lapham of Harpers (author of a recent article titled "THE CASE FOR IMPEACHMENT")and Howard Zinn. Howard Dean and some other notables also attended. This was televised by CSPAN recently.

If Bush is impeached do we then have Cheney as President? Who will follow. The medicine may be worse than the cure.

I would suggest following a parallel path. I would investigate the validity of the last presidential election as the primary effort with the impeachment option as a distant second. I believe the possibility of finding that the previous election was fradulent is significant and if we can prove that the previous election was a fraud the whole administration is thrown out. This is to be preferred over impeaching Bush by himself.

In addition if it is proved beyond reasonable doubt that the election was a fraud most Americans would have a hard time arguing that the administration should not be removed and the last election held invalid. I would expect that this would be so even with a large segment of Bush supporters who should be outraged if the election was shown to be stolen. This would create alot less friction than impeachment.

I wouldn't then try to declare Kerry as the president if this is at all possible. Rather a totally new election would be the best option.

Beware of what you wish for. This impeachment process could work in favor of the Neocons.

At Monday, April 03, 2006, Blogger Citisucks said...

Yup, the problem isn't one person in government, it is pretty much every single politician in the federal government.

Asking for a recount would be too easy. This is what the Green Party suggested doing. Yet, the suppossed main opposition party was too Dim to also suggest and fight for a recount. Instead they dimmly decided to blame the whole thing on the Green Party joining forces with their best friends the rethugs. It's been recount time for a while now.


Post a Comment

<< Home