From the King Of Blogging, Sean Conners. Various articles and op/ed's on just about anything from A to Z. Politics, religion, entertainment and whatever else seems interesting at the moment. Members and non-members alike are welcomed to participate in th
it will fail, but that doesn't matter.
Published on April 24, 2007 By Sean Conners aka SConn1 In Democrat
Everyone knows Dennis Kucinich is an anti war, pro labor liberal democrat. He is the most liberal of all the democratic candidates for President.

Kucinich plans on offering articles of impeachment against vice president Dick Cheney. After he submits his impeachment charges, the matter will be reviewed, inspected, negleted, rejected, disinfected and so on...

And in the end will probaby never be seriouly brought up on the house floor before Mr Cheney heads off into the sunset in 2009. Kucinich will surely be blasted by the right wing punditry and the centrist democrats who will see Kucinich's attempt at impeachment a polarizing move.

I have written in the past about the Ohio congressman. And not particularly favorably. While he is, at least in my mind, an honest and decent man, his radical left wing stances have often been accompanied by over the top rhetoric. One of the points I have made against Kucinich in the past is that it's ironic how such a left wing politician who speaks out so much about abuse of power from the executive branch would, in his 1st act of office as President, be signing "executive orders" that are not voted on by anyone, just mandated by him, in getting us out of the war.

Whereas I want out of Iraq as much as he does, and am on the same side as being amongst the 25% of this country that didn't buy the Iraq war sales pitch, his methodology in fighting absolute power with his own brand of dictitorial leadership is hypocritical at best.

But I support this measure by Kucinich, as it is brave and admirable.

It is also akin to how the modern religious conservative movement began in the 80's. Religious representatives and their leader Ronald Reagan suggested and submitted legislation for many things that never had a prayer (pardon the pun) of making it out of any democratically controlled, decidedly liberal congress. But that wasn't why they did it.

These representatives were actually representing their constiuents. They were standing on their principles and showing that they weren't in Washington to swing with whatever the most popular breeze in the air was, but to represent the people that sent them to Washington.

Kucinich is doing the exact same thing. And unlike his ideas about running the oval office as his personal mandate factory, he is doing it the right way.

In the 80's, those principled individuals motivated more religious folk who became more active in politics and began casting votes in their districts. Eventually, they got a majority in the house of representatives and eventually got their guy in as President. It took 20 years and then a few more to get that majority and get the issues that concerned them to the forefront of American Politics. And where I disagree with much of the positions and agendas of some on the religious right of the spectrum, I admire their principled stand, long term thinking and determination.

Kucinich is every bit as principled as those early true believers on the right and it has to be admired, regardless of the position and one's agreement or disagreement with it.

A few other moves have shown the same principled approach. The Congress's bill that attaches measurable and accountable benchmarks and timelines to troop funding is the same kind of thing. Members of the legislative going on record with their principles, knowing that ultimate success will not be hand most likely. Representing the people that sent someone to Washington rather than trying to merely position themselves, short-term for an upcoming election cycle.

There are a few more examples of some spine with some of the anti war crowd in Congress. And that is on both sides of the aisle. If i'm Joe Wilson, Congressman from a "Ruby Red" South Carolina district that includes Paris Island and the Marine Air Station that was the site of the tragic Blue Angel crash over the weekend, i expect him to vote in lock step with the President. That's what his constituents want. But if i'm John Sununu, in a State where anti war sentiment is much higher, I expect Mr Sununu to represent his constituents position as well especially when it differs from his party stance.

When Congress sits down to put together a compromise bill to send to the President to sign or veto, I would like to see one without all the pork that the congress needed to get the initial passage of the bill in the house. I would like to see more of Congress show the spine that Kucinich has shown in his impeachment offering or Sununu has shown in his recent voting record. Seeing some principled stance in Congress rather than radicalized party loyalty, a desire to be "on the winning team" and short term posturing is refreshing.

I'd like to see more of that message, regardless of the messenger.



Comments
on Apr 24, 2007
I agree with most of what you posted. There is far too much polarization in politics. I do not care if a bad policy is from the GOP or the Democrats-- If it’s not good for the majority of the country I can not support it. This idea that if you do not support the President you are some how disloyal is a ridiculous argument. If the President takes a stand that warrants support he should be supported by GOP, Democrats and independents. When he takes a stand that does not make sense and which does not help solve the issue at hand he should not be supported. I have friends that are so bound up with being Republicans they can see nothing else. They do not look at what the GOP is proposing and they will not vote against a Republican. That is what is wrong with our government and what must change.

Several weeks ago it was reported that the Independent voters now outnumber either the Republican or Democrat voters. That may be a good sign for the future!

I agree we should IMPEACH both Cheney and Bush!!!!!
on Apr 24, 2007
Several weeks ago it was reported that the Independent voters now outnumber either the Republican or Democrat voters. That may be a good sign for the future!


i saw that too,,,i really liked that.

I agree we should IMPEACH both Cheney and Bush!!!!!


i support impeaching cheney 1st if one is going to impeach bush. the 4 most dangerous (and scariest) words in the english language are "good morning president cheney."

on Apr 24, 2007
how pathetic...the lil liar and hypocrite is so desperate to attack she still posts despite knowing she is b/l'ed.


can't shake my dust? hehehe...

you're not a conservative lil girl. just a narrow minded, inmature neoconservative hater who can't seem to get simple ideas thru her thick skull.

call me what ya want, but my voter registration card still says libertarian. and attacking my sexuality falsely and recklessly kind of sums up your sleaze. so, you are wrong on all counts.

but run along now lil girl, go play your attack games somewhere else. you are not welcome here. have i made myself clear?

all future posts by you will be subject to deletion. feel free to write more rants about me in your little hole in the wall or hijack other people's posts to throw shit on me like on my birthday with absolutely no provocation whatsoever like the lowlife scum that you are.

on Apr 24, 2007
"good morning president cheney."


Wrong! It would be Good morning president Pelosi!
on Apr 24, 2007
Wrong! It would be Good morning president Pelosi!


whereas it's not comforting, president cheney is scarier, lol.
Meta
Views
» 803
Comments
» 5
Category
Sponsored Links