This is why Cindy Sheehan's candidacy makes no logical sense.

(At least not to me. This is at the risk of beating a dead horse, of course...)

I'm going to assume that Sheehan is running against Pelosi for the reasons she has stated: to pursue Impeachment more aggressively and end the war in Iraq. Nothing wrong with these goals. And if Pelosi isn't doing her job as Speaker, I certainly endorse someone who will.

But Cindy ISN'T endorsing a new Speaker of the House, I notice. In fact, she's now going out of her way to denigrate members of both parties--see her rant on the Democrats as the "Party of slavery" that "started every war in the 20th century." Whether Democrat or Republican, according to Sheehan's current way of thinking, we're equally screwed. So why create upheaval in the current leadership at all?

"Now, wait a minute," you're saying. "Pelosi is perfectly entitled to run for office. And she's not trying to win--she's trying to make a point." But then, what point would that be? After all, as many here have pointed out, Cindy doesn't reside in Pelosi's district; she's not running for House Rep of Vacaville, CA, where Casey grew up, or Crawford, TX, where her base of operations has been until recently. Apparently, she's going out of her wayto embarrass, if not depose, Nancy Pelosi, while offering no alternative to her leadership. (I need hardly mention that Cindy could never become Speaker, even on the off-chance that she DID upset Pelosi.)

And I don't buy the idea that this a bluff to "light a fire under Pelosi's ass." Once I believed this, but her rhetoric (not to mention the rhetoric of her supporters) already suggests that she is dead set on blaming the Democrats in general and Pelosi in particular for many of our country's current ills. Not only do I believe there WILL be a campaign, but it will be fought tooth and nail, and Pelosi will be tarnished because of it.

While Nancy Pelosi may be a flawed Speaker, perhaps a lousy leader, her past and current record suggests that is serving with at least her district's best interests in mind--why demonize her, dub her a cancer on the Congress, as many here have already done? And even if she WAS, why not only refuse to suggest an alternative Speaker to Pelosi, but burn all bridges to the Democratic party so recklessly? No one, not even a progressive, pro-impeachment Rep like Kucinich, would accept an endorsement from Sheehan now, proud members of the "party of slavery" such as they are.

I can understand wanting to criticize, hold accountable, demerit, or even demote Nancy Pelosi. Why does Sheehan want her PUNISHED so very badly?

You may argue, but I think Sheehan's interests at this point are very, very personal. Understandable, of course. Her son died because of George Bush's war, and at first, I believe she wanted nothing more than to stop the fighting, so that other parents would not feel her pain. At this point, however, her overriding goal is merely to punish Bush for this pain, no matter how much trying to do so would disrupt those currently trying to find a way OUT of Iraq. And because these legislators are not rising to punish Bush, she wants to punish THEM as well, no matter what the cost to the process.

I admire Cindy's zeal, and I'm sure her pain and sorrow are very, very great, past my understanding. But is someone so vindictive, so thirsty for revenge, so completely overcome by her own personal interests and emotions that they trump all practical concerns as Cindy Sheehan worthy enough to be compared to Ghandi and Martin Luther King, much less be taken seriously in her current quest to assault the Democratic party and its leaders?

You tell me...

they get things done.

What does threatening Pelosi and smearing the Democratic party accomplish?

to remember many of us talking about.

My own congressman is a blue dog Dem and he and I rarely agree on anything. But I still call his office and talk to him as often as I can. I tell him I am pulling him over to the left. He understands.

Every American has a voice and the right to appeal to our representatives. That's what this is about.

Nancy Pelosi can. Harry Reid can. They know that on significant measures they are going to lose. All that they have to decide is how much can be accomplished by orchestrating these losses and showing who is jamming up the works. This is an incremental thing and the movement you are looking for has to come from the voters in the next election.

Hulk want smash NOW!

Seriously, I'd rather continue to put pressure on Republicans by making them look like obstructionists, eventually forcing them into a showdown with the White House that pulls our troops out of harm's way...

...then wasting the next year or so in impeachment hearings. With the numbers we have now and the time we have left, we just can't do both. Cindy should be reminded that other people's sons and daughters are still in harms way.

Ahahahahahaha!

Although I guess it helps that you have a picture of the Green One as your Avatar...

at impeachment hearings. The ONLY significant measure facing this country and this congress is putting the breaks on this administration. Nothing else is as important.

... before the crimes can be aired?

... until the investigations are over. Until the charges are legally founded it would just look like bitter flailing.

She has publicly called the Democratic party "the party of slavery". Think where have you heard that before. If she wants to protest the war or Congresses failure to end it instantly she is free to do so, but what she is doing now will only benefit the GOP.

If you were Pelosi, would Cindy's sheehanigans make you MORE likely to do what you want her to?

I for damn sure wouldn't.

all think impeachment is a pointless pursuit. No major Democrat thinks it's achievable.

DUers are just going to have to accept that it's not gonna happen.

I’d like to take a step back from the couch.

I think that it’s logical to assume that Democrats gained control of Congress in 2006 as a result of the * Iraq policy as well as domestic failures like the FEMA response to Katrina. The people are not happy with *.

And yet Speaker Pelosi immediately announced upon taking the office that impeachment is “off the table.” I accepted that then as an olive branch to the * regime in order to accomplish the will of the people. To her credit, they managed to get a few things done, but let’s face the facts. Nothing is now being accomplished by expecting any further cooperation with the * regime. The dictator/executive branch doesn’t even show up for an on-the-record soepena.

Obviously, the first target of our ire is * and his GOP Congressional rubber stamps. But what exactly are we supposed to do when our presumptive champions are egging us on with toothless amendments and false promises for swift action. The only swift action I’ve seen from Conyers and Pelosi is having an anti-war activist mom and company removed from the Capital in handcuffs after a scheduled meeting with Conyers.

The * regime crimes are there and already well documented. What exactly are we supposed to wait for Speaker Pelosi to do while our military die daily in vain (yes, I said it and mean it)? When “do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?”

Now let’s go back to the couch. Tell me why you are really offended that Sheehan would challenge Pelosi’s seat over these issues. I don’t think Sheehan is looking to be the Speaker of the House. That’s another election altogether among the new electives. Does she really have to endorse another candidate for Speaker before she is a credible opponent to Pelosi’s seat? I think not.

Are we afraid of MSM characterizing this challenge as a catfight, an implosion of the Democratic Party? Whatever. We already know that MSM will not treat or present our concerns and motives fairly. How long do we have to wait for that to happen? How silent, quiet and demure should we be in order to be taken as credible and serious about the destructive course of this regime?

So tell me, what’s really going on here? It will just stay in the privacy of this thread. ;-)

It obviously makes perfect sense to me.

If she even manages to get on the ballot in the first place. Her campaign, if any, will be an illustration of the old query concerning whether a tree falling where none can hear makes a noise; it will receive next to no coverage.

It is worth taking the opportunity, too, for a reminder that advocacy for third party candidates running against a Democrat in a general election is not allowed on Democratic Underground.

Or vote for lame Democrats sanctioned by DU.

I guess I should register as an Independent. Is there an IU board for fallen DU angels?

One issue candidates can only make it so far especially when their only platform issue will be a moot point after Jan. 20th.

I wonder how many of her left leaning supporters will stick with her when she is asked to discuss issues and starts spouting some of her Ron Paulesque bullshit.

You tried to link Cindy Sheehan and logical sense. Anyone that has been watching her since she left Camp Casey knows those two travelers will never meet. And, judging by all the posts on here that equate her to Mandela, MLK, and Rose Parks, her supporters aren't familiar with "logical sense" either.

She's pro-Bush impeachment and yet she's running in the year where we'll see Bush ultimately out of the white house and at a time where the war will likely be wrapped no later than 2009.

So now what does Cindy do? She'll have no party to back her, she'll have little committee support and ultimately her district will have little voice in congress.

And Pelosi was never the decision maker when it came to impeachment. That was John Conyer's ball game and he's even stated recently that if he has a few more names signed to the impeachment bill then he'll start the hearings. Ms. Pelosi knows better then to screw around with John Conyer's committee (and rightly so - Conyers rocks!)