Why impeachment may happen before the 2006 House races

Yeah I know-- impeachment is a long shot- it ain't gonna happen-- we gotta get the house back.

A veneer of democracy

So far the Bush regime has maintained a veneer of a real democracy. And as long as that veneer remains-- they are all vulnerable to impeachment and indictments. At this point in time the BUSH regime has not pulled the trigger on martial law, or some similar power grab. It may be that they cant make the ultimate grab for power without losing what base that is left to the neo-cons. Without the Republican Party the Fascists dint have much in the way of support. SO, I'm guessing that for some reason-- they are not ready-- or are unwilling, at this point in time. And as long as that veneer remains-- they are all venerable.

Republicans in the House have to run for re-election in 2006. It may come to the point where they go after the BUSH Regime-- just to keep their seats in the House, this way republicans maintain power in DC, rather than give it up. If they dint go after BUSH--- the DEM'S may take their House seats and impeach & even Convict.

This just might be an advantage for the forces of Democracy.


Republicans throwing BUSH to the wolves

BUT, ask yourself, to maintain political power under the constraints of maintaining a veneer of a real democracy, does the Republican Party throw BUSH to the wolves? And is it better for the country to have republicans take out the Bush Regime prior to the 2006 Congressional races, possibly mitigating a pendulum swing to the left in the House, in 2006.

In my mind, that is the smart thing to do. but I dint see the Republican Party doing this. I dint see the bold personalities of quality leadership and thinking in the Republican Party. And I dint see a consensus forming quick enough to take advantage of throwing BUSH to the wolves. I dint think the republicans dint have what it takes, but the democrats do.

Merry freaking holidays and a better new year for us all. Bless you and your families and friends.

they have always incrementally done whatever they can get away with and backed off where they can't get away with it. witness the troop reductions in iraq, just as the latest example.

they can simply abandon the plan amid protest and say they thought it was the right thing to do at the time, it was blessed by white house lawyers but they'll drop it, whatever. congress will have a sham investigation and find that the white house meant well and gee, they could only come up with examples of wiretapping bad guys anyway, people who the fisa court would have approved anyway, they just didn't to test a power theory, nothing malicious, whatever.

actual impeachment would be a political disaster for the banana republican party. the only sympathetic way to actually get rid of shrub is for him to have a heart attack or something, god help us all if he actually exits prematurely in a way that promotes sympathy for him.

have a heart attack or something"

Right-- good alternative to the scenario that I posted.

SO how do the Neo COns keep the one party control in DC? thru 2006?

Unless they have absolute control of the voting machines--------

S/he will be the only one who can at that point.

The spying without warrants, the scanning of Muslim sites without a warrant, work in their favor. Americans are too stupid to understand the implications of what this administartion is doing. Many if not most Americans agree with these tactics. They see it as bush protecting America not as bush destroying the Constitution.

The Republican party will NEVER impeach one of their own.

unless they truly have the voting machines under control

If I was in the Neo con leadership-- I would consider throwing BUSH to the wolves. It facilitates getting re-elected and maintaining power. It would allow me to control the process. And folks could lean back and think-- "see the process works, everything is just fine."

If The DEMs get the HOuse back in 2006 that process will be controled not by me-- said the supposed Neo COn leader----

Throwing BUSH to the Wolves is a way to change the puppet on the stage (white house), and make repubs look like "REAL REASONABLE FOLK".

between him and The Abramoff Gang, they're lookinat some serious baggage. they might want to make it look like they're "doing something about corruption" besides blaming CLinton. Still a long shot though.

it would take a quick consensus amoungst the neo con leadership--

TOJ said-"they might want to make it look like they're "doing something about corruption" " There might be a huge upside to this -- I dont think they can get their brains wrapped around the idea soon enough.

he is doing damage to the Republican party. I'd jettison him now too, but the Repubs don't appear smart enough to make that move.
I think pretty soon the Repubs may figure it out, and cut Bush loose. It will be too late to stop the damage, however.:)

The best thing that may come out of the last 5 years is a Left-wing groundswell. Please Santa, that's what I want for Christmas!

upcoming 2006 congressionals? How do you see the possibilities?

the more likely it is to hurt the party in 2006 elections.

The smart thing for any Republican facing re-election in 2006 to do would be to immediately begin publicly distancing themselves from Bush. But that is likely easier said than done. I'm fairly uninformed about campaign financing, but I assume all Republicans (and Democrats too) are to some degree financially dependent on the Party for re-election funds. It is significant that the Repubs who have defied Bush are all very established (like Arlen Specter), and thus able to withstand Party censure, both financial and ideological.

....do martial law unless something really, really bad happened like maybe a nuclear bomb.

I think Bush is trying to create a dictatorship but I think he wants to do it in a more subtle way. He wants to make little changes that gradually take us in that direction. If he declared martial law, not only would most of the population object to it but many Republicans would too!!

which keeps the BUSH regime vulnerable to impeachment and/or indictments.

I think they will sit there like frogs in the pot, as the water slowly and steadily comes to a boil. The hallmark of Republicanism is an inability to think for oneself, to accept and deal with Reality in all its facets, and an overwhelming desire to follow anyone who looks stronger or projects a better facade.

Well, that facade may be tarnished, but it isn't crumbling (because shamelessness is another feature of rampant ring-wing fanaticism). So the lemmings will in the main go off the cliff--and we must see to it that they and their diseased ideas do not survive to return, like Nixon's henchmen: Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc.

I Don't Think The GOP IS Smart or Independent Enough To Off Bush
I think they will sit there like frogs in the pot, as the water slowly and steadily comes to a boil. The hallmark of Republicanism is an inability to think for oneself, to accept and deal with Reality in all its facets, and an overwhelming desire to follow anyone who looks stronger or projects a better facade.
you forgot- stay the course. If the NEo COns stay the course, they will face being unseated in Congress

Well, that facade may be tarnished, but it isn't crumbling (because shamelessness is another feature of rampant ring-wing fanaticism). So the lemmings will in the main go off the cliff--and we must see to it that they and their diseased ideas do not survive to return, like Nixon's henchmen: Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc.

Great analogy, lemmings running off the cliff, if you are right we may see a majority in both the House and the Senate come January '07

Well we don't call them "whores" for nothing.

I think your points are excellent. Particularly this one "Republicans in the House have to run for re-election in 2006."

No matter what they try to do, the WH, they can't break 40% approval, the reciprocal of which is high 50's to 60's disapproval. That gets ugly.

Since not everyone is in on the vote stealing strategies, they may think that Republicans actually have to show up;) Ignorance is our friend. Let's get these people to fear for their jobs.

Great post.

the window? The Bushes hijacked the party back in 1980 and have yet to give it back. Who can wrest it from them and at what price?

The Abrahamoff & Delay scandals show how money was worked thru the system.
That sort of fundraising may not be as effective going into the 2006 cycle.

Would that cripple the current RNC fundraising capacity ?

And with an energized liberal base, can DEMs fundraise in small amounts, just more donors, to counter the corporate- DLC-RNC- type fundraising?

Let me speak in more general terms-
1)Repubs have to run in '06
2)Zogby poll was IIRC 53% say if Bush lied about WMDs he should be impeached.
3)I expect another poll centering on spygate will be done soon. Does that poll come out like the Zogby poll on WMDs?
4) The "I" word is being used on TV.
5) What does the typical repub run on? Stay the course?
6) Or does that repub distance him/herself from BUSH? And how far-

Party/RNC: What is your national strategy to keep the House? The RNC must counter the DEM effort at impaechment and the must counter the DEM push to take the House back.

HOw do the Repubs keep the House? DO they play the VOte hacking card and the voter supression card to keep the House? Or do they run from Bush as fast as they can? The above 2 scenarios seem to be the 2 best bets at this time,in my mind. What do you think?

Any investigation will reveal their complicity. They have been aiding this Administration at every turn...

"if" repubs control the process-------- Thats why I used the phrase--
"throw BUSH to the Wolves". Think of it as Damage control--

Where as if the DEMS do it after Jan 2007-- the DEMs control the process.
After all, impeachment is our message-- we cant let the repubs frame this issue.

nice thought.