Impeachment Is Like The Final Stages Of A Serious Chess Game

[cali]

You have to be able to see the whole board and figure out how to win. That means you don't rush it.

To succeed means to convict in the Senate. That means you need to do two very important things: You have to persuade the American people to support and understand why it must be done, and you have to make a case so compelling that foot dragging red state dems and the majority of the repubs must vote for conviction or suffer the political consequences.

Howls for the virtual heads of bush/cheney on pikes, aren't gonna cut it. We need investigations before impeachment articles are introduced, not so much to make the case to the Senate, but to make the case to the American people.

I could go on and on about how I think the dems should sell this hard to Americans, but I'll spare you. It can be done. It won't be that hard.

Patience.

[porphyrian]

1. Who in the fuck is suggesting we don't investigate?

Stop creating a false wedge issue already, would you? We want impeachment now. We want investigations now. The procedure for impeachment involves investigations before impeachment, and our elected representatives know the fucking procedure. However, when you want brownies, you don't say "I want brownie mix, some oil, an egg and something to bake them in." You say "I want fucking brownies, now." Stop this shit already.

[cali]

3. My post was respectful

calm and hopefully, thoughtful.

There have literally dozens of threads with people shrieking in caps. Quite few have argued that you don't have to wait to conduct investigations to introduce articles of impeachment. One demanded that we jail him immediately, cut off the funds to airforce 1 and post guards at the Whitehouse. I didn't notice you on any of those threads complaining about the divisive false wedge issue.

No, the procedure for impeachment does not demand investigations.

Now go eat your brownie, even if you did use oil instead of butter.

[porphyrian]

18. People are expressing feeling, emotion, passion.

They don't have to include procedural instructions.

We don't have to wait for impeachment, this administration ALREADY MEETS the requirements for it.

Calls for impeachment aren't themselves divisive, they're overdue. I feel the same way. I also understand, as do our elected representatives, that we need to have proper support for impeachment if it is to be entirely effective. Passionate calls for it here don't change that, and are necessary, given the glacial speed of change in government and the number of people clinging stubbornly to the idea that impeachment is a bad thing.

Impeachment DOES demand investigations, given that the corporate media has done nothing but sing the praises of this criminal administration since it was foisted upon us by the Supreme Court if there is to be the support necessary for impeachment in the citizenry and thus in Congress.

Don't disregard my metaphors when they are good, because that isn't usually the case.

[earth mom]

19. Word. The OP has proven time & again he doesn't like to play chess. nt

[elocs]

36. There was already an ongoing investigation which resulted in the Clinton impeachment.

And then it took a year for the vote in the Senate. Watergate happened in the 1972 election and Nixon did not resign until August of 1975 with his impeachment pending. In both of these cases there were already ongoing investigations which pushed along the impeachment and pending impeachment. It is doubtful that there is not enough time for impeachment to be done properly. You investigate first, then when that provides the grounds for impeachment, you do that. Can impeachment be done? Sure, why not? Democrats have the votes to do it. Realize that impeachment is unlikely. Resignation a la Nixon is more likely.

I hope that if impeachment has not happened by 2008, the Democrats who are in a crazed frenzy over it can channel some of that energy into electing a Democrat. Because right now, before the Democrats have even taken control in the Senate, we have people who are challenging the decisions of our leaders in the House before even seeing how they play out.

[Loge23]

2. Resignation will come first

I agree with your assessment of the possiblity of impeachment but I don't think it will come to that.
I see the wheels flying off the cart lately with the end result being the idiot left alone, exposed.
It will soon be clear to everyone that he has bungled his way through his entire regime.
With the game all but over, and with the internal support group having long since fled, the idiot will lose interest and just leave. There's no way he'll allow others to evict him.
Personally, I could care less how - as long he's out of office soon.

[cali]

8. I actually agree with you, but I think

that investigations are crucial to any resignation, and the propects of a looming impeachment and conviction are are great resignation motivators. That and I wanted to point out to the "do it now" crowd, that actually getting bush out, is more important than immediate gratification.

[Jack Rabbit]

9. To extend the analogy

Some chess writer once remarked that checkmate is what happens to people who don't know how to say, "I resign."

[cali]

10. Excellent.

Thanks. I'm relieved that you don't take objection to the analogy= given your expertise in the subject.

[Jack Rabbit]

42. You used the analogy beautifully

As for my expertise on the subject, I'm a mediocre club player.

[elocs]

38. I agree that resignation is more likely than impeachment

if the Senate vote would likely result in conviction. Nixon did not resign because he was going to be impeached, but because he knew he would be convicted in the Senate. If Bush resigns with anyone as VP who will not run in 2008, I am sure he would get a pardon just like Ford gave to Nixon. Having said that, I think it is highly likely that Bush will serve out his term even if there is impeachment. Depending upon how a potential impeachment is handled, Democrats could pay a price for it in 2008, but I think many here would not care and believe that impeachment is worth any price, even without conviction and even if investigations outside of an impeachment process brought to light the same things.

[wryter2000]

4. Precisely

Impeaching him without the possibility of conviction is pointless. It only makes him into a martyr.

Folks at DU are well aware of his crimes, although I'm sure much, much more will come out that will shock even us. Until the American public is on-board with booting him out, there's no point trying. I don't want an empty gesture. I want action.

Getting rid of Bush and Cheney isn't enough. There are more Bushes and Cheneys out there ready to take over. They might even prove competent enough to pull off their evil plans. We have to take down the whole neo-Con, faux Christianist, greed machine that got us here. That'll happen only when all of them are exposed.

[tomreedtoon]

5. The final stage? Kicking over the chess board?

That's not "fair," that's not "in the rules," but it is a perfect way to end a chess game, which was always a stupid metaphor for life anyway.

Life is far more like poker, where everyone has cards hidden up their sleeves and a pistol duct-taped under the table where they can reach it.

To call impeachment a "chess game" indicates the faulty thinking of a sophisticate, who thinks that proving wrong-doing will automatically result in the punishment of the guilty party. That didn't work for about five years in Bush's case, folks. It was when Bush's screw-ups actually affected people, as in Katrina, when the public started to turn on him. And it would be nice to think the Democratic Party had something to do with it, but aside from a few lone voices in the wilderness like Dean, none of them had the courage or the competency to do it.

Life ain't an Agatha Christie detective novel OR a chess game. Get over it, college profs.

[H2O Man]

6. Indeed it is a chess match.

And, like in any real-life contest, those who take the histrionic "I insist we jail him TODAY!" approach have one thing in common with the "let's move very, very, very cautiously" approach -- neither accomplish anything positive.

In chess, one gets certain opportunities but once. And if one allows that opportunity to pass by, it will never reappear in exactly the same way.

We such an opportunity, now. We cannot afford to let it pass by.

[marions ghost]

12. agreed

n/t

[omega minimo]

16. ...and if we let it pass by, we are Pawns forever, & President = King

Check Mate.

[H2O Man]

21. "The terror of the unforeseen

is what the science of history hides, turning a disaster into an epic." -- Philip Roth

Quote taken from "Guests of the Ayatollah" by Mark Bowden, Atlantic Monthly Press, 2006.

[omega minimo]

23. And what is it when the science of history hides

the terror of the foreseen?



:smoke:

[H2O Man]

25. What I would love to see

would be everyone who is in favor of investigations coordinating efforts to reach specific congressional leaders. It would be nice to have a group writing to Rep. "X" and saying, "please begin investigations on the lies that brought us to war in Iraq, and perhaps examine VP Cheney's role." And have another group writing to Rep. "X," saying, "Please begin the investigations of VP Cheney's lies that led to the invasion of Iraq, and hurry up with the impeachment." If we did that with two member of the House and Senate each week, then our elected representatives would begin to appreciate the feelings of a couple segments of the population.

[Rockstone]

7. Good Post, Cali

understood and agreed.

[NNN0LHI]

11. More like discount bungi jumping

Dangerous but worth it.

Don

[omega minimo]

13. "Respectful, Calm and Thoughtful" way to throw out the Red Herring again

Porphyrian is right (and heated)-- this is a bogus wedge issue and muddies the waters on DU, creating tension and LESS, not more, awareness about the process.

The greatest point of agreement amongst all who keep having this stupid pointless argument is that there MUST be Congressional investigations, hearings and (potentially) impeachment in the House, (potentially) a trial in the Senate.

Or Bush/Cheney could resign.

A guest on Thom Hartmann, Elizabeth De La Vega, last week advocates investigating all 5: Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice and Powell, for defrauding the public and the Congress.

There is a range of opinion and a range of actions. The folks who call for impeachment "ahead of time" do so because there is enough existing evidence, testimony and documentation to confirm that impeachable offenses have occurred. The folks who want this train wreck cleaned up RIGHT NOW do so because the main HIGH CRIME of this illegal war is continuing to kill people on a 24/7/365 basis.

The process of investigations and hearings in Congress will CONTRIBUTE TO THE PROCESS OF EDUCATING PEOPLE AND INFLUENCING PUBLIC OPINION and Congressional vote tallies. The Dems don't need to "sell this hard to Americans," it needs to be openly investigated and IT NEEDS TO BE ACCURATELY REPORTED IN THE MEDIA. If that's possible. The reality that we have a compromised megacorporate media that does the bidding of the White House is one reason that people yell so loud and passionately about ending this 6 year farce SOONER, RATHER THAN LATER .


"The procedure for impeachment involves investigations before impeachment, and our elected representatives know the fucking procedure."

"No, the procedure for impeachment does not demand investigations."

The red herring bogus wedge just creates more of these confused semantic slap fights on DU and does a disservice to ALL concerned. Maybe your next OP you could "go on and on" with what you think needs to happen, constructively, rather than these dismissive critiques of people who really care about this and are on the same side.

:think:

"That and I wanted to point out to the "do it now" crowd, that actually getting bush out, is more important than immediate gratification."

And insinuating that the "do it now" crowd are out for "immediate gratification" is REPEATING A REICH WING FRAME. That can't help.

[H2O Man]

14. Elizabeth is right on target.

She is one of a number of voices of reason on this issue. There are many more.

It's worth noting that there are even unreasonable voices, such as republican radio's Jay Severen, who have been right on target about the need to press this issue.

[cali]

15. And you've been equally vocal

about all the divisive, loud posts calling dems spineless, and advocating shutting down the Whitehouse phones, right?

No? You're too busy accusing me of REICH WING FRAMING.

I csn use caps too: BULLSHIT. There is nothing right wing or reich wing about what a wrote. It's a dispicable, lying response to someone you disagree with. Congratulations on the scummy tactic.

[omega minimo]

17. "Instant gratification" re: impeachment is a Reich Wing frame

Repeating it is not helpful.

Pointing that out is not "accusing me of REICH WING FRAMING." Not at all. I suggested that repeating that meme is not helpful and it is dismissive of the real concerns of people who are on your side.

The example I gave of the exchange b/w you and porphyrian has been seen over and over again on DU. People who are on the same side arguing semantically and hairsplitting confusedly. What a sad waste!

I have been "too busy" providing info and links that could help folks understand the process better and argue about misused words less. Maybe :evilgrin:


I don't know about those other threads that you think I should have been "equally vocal" on (as if I have no credibility here if I wasn't) but I have seen this particular "scummy tactic" used on other subjects. Making those demands of other DUers to be on certain threads is silly.

There was more constructive in my reply than you realize. Please consider it. It is not a "dispicable, lying response"-- it is ANOTHER call for us to get together, be informed, understand the process and quit BICKERING over terms that are not being used correctly.

:hi:

[cali]

20. Either provide evidence or admit

you're simply making shit up. Show me all the "reich wingers' who have articulated anything like what I've stated.

You know damn well you won't be able to.

Oh, and there is NOTHING useful about accusing another DUer of repeating reich wing memes- particularly when it's so patently untrue.

[omega minimo]

22. The whole point is: all this infighting is a waste

including getting all huffy and missing the point: "instant gratification" serves to dismiss those who it's used against. Who does that serve? Remember "sour grapes" after the 2004 election? Who did that serve? Where do these memes come from? How do they get into the DU meme stream? You tell me. Why are people here so quick to diss the concerns of people on their side? Does it matte what terms we use? Hell yeah. Including knowing what we're talking about when discussing the process of Congressional investigations, hearings and impeachment.

I'm sorry my attempts at clarity have annoyed you. The only thing you got out of my posts is that your ego is bruised? I'm sorry. But this pointless bickering is exactly what the problem here is.

There is a lot of information available on impeachment for anyone interested. Threads on DU and a good source is
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org

[cali]

24. Nope, My ego remains unbruised.

I'm not fond of hypocricy. I think you're being hypocritical. There was nothing divisive about my post. It was rather inoffensive. It explained a point of view in language far from inflamatory. Let me suggest that if you are sincere about educating people on impeachment you start educating here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2848082&mesg_id=2848082

And I won't hold my breath for any evidence that anything I wrote was a reich wing meme.

[H2O Man]

26. The "infighting"

can serve some purpose if it helps us define the differences we have, as long as those differences do not keep people from taking progressive actions.

[porphyrian]

29. I've found a good argument keeps a topic kicked...

...way past the time the flogged horse has died. As long as something in the thread is good, it gets the info out there.

[H2O Man]

30. Good point.

I think it's good to respect other's opinions. There are those who think we should concentrate on urging congress to investigate the administration. There are those saying "impeach Bush!" I am convinced we should concentrate first on VP Cheney. But I not only respect other peoples' opinions, I find them encouraging.

The only ones I don't respect are those who are opposed to impeachment.

[porphyrian]

31. Cheney should absolutely be impeached.

I think more than one buck stopped at his desk.

[porphyrian]

27. Yeah, what you said.

If nothing else, as long as we address threads like this, it keeps the topic kicked while we go back and forth with our point for others to read or ignore.

[H2O Man]

28. Yep.

And maybe people will pick up a pen, and write to Reps Waxman and Conyers this week, and suggest an investigation of the VP's role in lying the nation into war. And maybe add his unholy role in the Plame scandal.

Impeach Dick Cheney.

[omega minimo]

32. Speaking of infighting and taking progressive actions...

Your idea is excellent. Set it up! Since Rep. Waters participated in the California Impeachment Forum in April, she may be a very good one of two to start with....


Posted by H2O Man
The "infighting" can serve some purpose if it helps us define the differences we have, as long as those differences do not keep people from taking progressive actions.


That may be so. There is a need to define our differences, but we can’t even do that effectively (let alone progress to action) if we have all-over-the-map definitions of TERMS. Most of the off-the-cuff arguments about impeachment that I’ve seen are very confused about what impeachment IS. What the process IS. And arguing over misunderstandings is a great way to avoid EVER taking any action at all.

The argument about hearings vs. impeachment vs. hearings vs. impeachment vs. investigations vs. impeachment is ridiculous. That’s not infighting, that’s inbreeding :evilgrin: A bunch of blindfolded Democrats all grabbed on the to elephant and fighting over whether the part their holding is the whole animal. SHEESH.

Along with the example quoted above, here’s another case of those on the same side splitting hairs and fighting needlessly:

8. I actually agree with you, but I think that investigations are crucial to any resignation, and the propects of a looming impeachment and conviction are are great resignation motivators. That and I wanted to point out to the "do it now" crowd, that actually getting bush out, is more important than immediate gratification.



This seems muddled to me. We agree that investigations and hearings are necessary-- even if we don’t, it doesn’t change the fact that that’s the way the process works. So what the F are we fighting about?

It does get in the way of “progressive action.” People aren’t really “defining our differences” because the confused terms only create the appearance of disagreements where they don’t exist.

[133724]

33. the key is to drag 200M people along for the ride. If you don't you won't win....

[omega minimo]

35. The key is whether this administration broke the laws or not

No one "wins"

[Tatiana]

34. In my opinion, some of the most important investigation hearings should be televised.

It's one thing for us to tell people what's going on. It's another for the masses to see it for themselves.

I also think that everyone in our party has to be totally committed towards finding out the truth (no agreements to cover-up, no magic bullet theories or solutions). When the public becomes aware of what has truly been going on in the White House (especially the office of the VP), impeachment will no longer seem like a debate, but a forgone conclusion.

[omega minimo]

37. Absolutely! Good point. Great post

:kick:

[sweetheart]

39. is it?

Another way to impeach would be for 5 million people to march on washington and take over the congress
and the television stations to impeach the entire government for systemic war crimes, and to start over.

.. or act within the expected thought patters, accept an "off the table" impeachment, organically welling in the
veins of an impetuous and angry public, and slowly turn on the tap for revenge handing them bush over the
next 2 years and expending all their political capital to look venal, losing in 2008, and boiling in
hot oil of arrogance.

The citizenry is charged by the declaration of independence to impeach any government like this one:
"whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government"

That is the obligation today, everything else is a charade and a game to these people, a change
at the boardroom house rules roulette table, but no way to change the course of the ship, bound by the rules of
an archaic wargame innovated before computing permitted battlefield reality to modify the course
of such a game to show more honest outcomes.

Chess was innovated in old ancients before computing, when a peice had to have very definite rules for its
behaviour in the rule-space, and now with computing, we can simulate morale, supply chains, weather, battlefield conditions
and weaponry of all sorts in to a postmodern simulation of chess 2006, and as our new game plays out,
there is no winner, just a poor and decimated battlefield.

I do agree, cali, that strategic timing and not wasting moves, are good strategies in chess,
but there is no unpredicatble side effect, no irrational television mob in chess, no
thinking living sentient human beings either.

:-)

Everyone close your eyes and make a progressive wish, then imagine it coming true, then get real,
the whole thing is becoming more corporate and the corporate war machine will never indict itself,
its good dope this democratic victory, but i'm really not expecting anything except to win the
presidency in 2008. Without that win, this is peter frampton comes alive.

[omega minimo]

41. wow

:toast:

[MazeRat7]

40. But but but.. the children want to play "whack-a-mole"

All that strategy and patience, there is no instant gratification... Ah come on cali...cant we just play whack-a-mole... :sarcasm:

MZr7