Representative Wexler Wants Cheney Impeachment Hearings . . . .

. . . . And He Wants You To Sign Another Petition For Them [http://wexlerwantshearings.com/]

I can't help but get the feeling that this is yet another in a long line of the Democrats' bums' rush tactics.

In the last few years, I've signed at least a half a dozen petitions urging Congress to begin impeachment proceedings against Bush and Cheney, and hold more investigations that would compel evidence of what this administration has been up to, with absolutely no results. And I vaguely recall the American people throwing Republicans out of office in the 2006 elections, replacing them with Democrats because (according to the exit polling), "Voters had had enough of Bush, Cheney, Republicans, the war in Iraq, and wanted change and out of Iraq."

So much for "Elections have results".

Why does a U.S. States congressman need yet another petition before holding hearings? Have the others gone astray? To the wrong address? Are members of Congress unaware of the polls which support, by a majority, removing both Bush and Cheney from office?

Wexler isn't without some seniority and power in Congress. He's on the House Judiciary Committee (he sits on the Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property Subcommittee), the Committee on Financial Services (he sits on the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, and the Domestic and International Monetary Policy, Trade, and Technology Subcommittee, and the Capital Markets, Insurance, and Government Sponsored Enterprises Subcommittee), the Foreign Affairs Committee (of which he chairs the Europe Subcommittee and sits on the Middle East and South Asia Subcommittee).

So what is this petition for and who needs to be convinced? How many signatures will be enough? Last week, Wexler wrote on Huffington Post:

If we can get 50,000 or even more people to sign up in support of this effort I will report back to each and every Democratic colleague of mine the true power that exists behind this movement.

I don't know what the magic is in the 50,000 number, but it's been met and ignored before. One petition calling for impeachment at ImpeachBush.org has 985,871 signatures. If that hasn't been enough (as well as all of the other petitions and polls) to move Congress to get this show on the road, it's a mystery what Wexler's petition can accomplish.

But I guess we'll see very shortly what Wexler can do with it, because last I looked, more than 123,000 people had signed Wexler's petition.

Representative Robert Wexler Makes The Case For Impeachment Hearings

U.S. Congressman Robert Wexler [D-FL] writes:

I was serving in Congress and on the Judiciary Committee for the ridiculous and politically motivated impeachment hearings of President Clinton. During that witch hunt Newt Gingrich, Tom DeLay, and Ken Starr wasted a year and a half on investigations and hearings about President Clinton's personal relations. However, this attempted coup d'etat by Republicans against President Clinton was not and should not be the standard of impeachment that was enshrined by the Founders in our Constitution.

First, impeachment hearings are only proper when significant allegations exist that the President or Vice-President, or others civil officers, committed actions - within their official duties - that constitute 'High Crimes and Misdemeanors.' The allegations against Clinton - involving a personal affair - never reached this threshold. The serious charges against Cheney involve alleged crimes that are central to his duties of Vice-President; namely war and peace, the widespread violations of civil liberties, and the security of the United States and our covert agents.

Unlike the show trial put on by Republicans against President Clinton, a proper impeachment hearing would involve a fair and objective presentation of the facts without hyperbole or political gamesmanship. The hard evidence that is presented at the hearings will be judged fully both by Congress and the American people. The evidence alone will determine the outcome, and if it is determined that Vice President Cheney committed "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" he should be properly impeached and put on trial before the Senate.

After the Democratic Party regained control of Congress, many - myself included - thought that it might be possible to meet President Bush half-way on the large issues facing our nation. Unfortunately, Bush has been nothing more than an ideological obstacle. He has vetoed stem cell research. He has vetoed efforts to bring our troops home from Iraq. He vetoed children's health care. So, the idea that we are somehow inhibiting Congress from passing our agenda by holding impeachment hearings - unfortunately - is a false argument.

Instead, I believe that we can both live up to our Constitutional obligation by holding hearings and pass a Democratic agenda. If President Bush perceives that the Democratic Congress is weak and unwilling to aggressively push our agenda - he will continue to veto legislation, such as children's health care - that is supported by a majority of Americans. The only way to move a progressive Democratic agenda is by acting through strength and following through on our core principles. A Congress willing to stand up to the abuses of the Bush Administration through impeachment hearings will demonstrate a strength of will that will more likely convince Bush to accommodate on issues such as Iraq, health care, and energy and environmental issues.

Today, I was joined by two other members of the House Judiciary Committee, Reps. Luis Gutierrez and Tammy Baldwin, who penned an online editorial with me calling for these impeachment hearings. In support of this effort I am releasing a call to action on video and launched WexlerWantsHearings.com. The full op-ed from the three Judiciary Committee Members can be read at this site. If we can get 50,000 or even more people to sign up in support of this effort I will report back to each and every Democratic colleague of mine the true power that exists behind this movement.

A Sign Of Things To Come

Democratic Representative Linda Sanchez has military constituents arrested for staging an anti-war sit-in at her office.

U.S. Representative Linda Sanchez, Democrat from California, up for reelection in 2008

From the LATimes:

Six antiwar demonstrators were arrested Wednesday at the Garden Grove office of Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-Santa Ana) after camping there overnight and telling her they wouldn't leave unless she promised not to approve more funding for the war in Iraq.

Most of the protesters are members of the group Military Families Speak Out, and some have relatives in the armed forces. They entered the office about 7 p.m. Tuesday during an open house. They sat on the floor in the lobby and refused to leave unless the congresswoman made the statement they wanted. Sanchez, who opposes the war, refused.

According to other news accounts, the group Iraq Veterans Against the War was also involved in the protest.

The lawmaker's staff initially chose not to call police and allowed the group to stay overnight. Police removed the protesters in handcuffs about 8:15 a.m. Wednesday, while Sanchez was attending a meeting of Orange County Latino leaders.

The protesters were taken to the Garden Grove Police Department, where they were issued misdemeanor citations for trespassing. Five were released pending an October court hearing, but Robert Dietrich was being held because he refused to sign a document promising to appear in court.

Sanchez, Orange County's only Democratic member of Congress, voted in 2002 against giving President Bush authorization to invade Iraq. More recently she voted to begin pulling troops out within 90 days.

Tuesday night Sanchez said she could not support the protesters because the $145 billion in Iraq war funding was in the same bill that would provide money to build the C-17 aircraft in California.

"I never voted for this war," she said. But "I'm not going to vote against $2.1 billion for C-17 production, which is in California. That is just not going to happen."

Protesters did not accept Sanchez's argument.

There's just no way around it, Loretta: Voting for the funding is voting for the war.

"This is a war that was made up and people are dying, and there is no reason for it," said Ed Garza, who was one of those arrested and who has a nephew in the military.

Medea Benjamin, who was not at the protest, said, "It's quite immoral for Sanchez to say she is more concerned about jobs in her district than the lives of our soldiers." Benjamin is co-founder of the national women's peace group Code Pink.

Declaring the start of the sit-in, Patricia Alviso, whose son has served two tours in Iraq, said, "We risk arrest to demonstrate the level of our commitment to peace, and we risk arrest because our children risk far more."

Once seated on the lobby floor, Alviso began reading the names of Californians killed in Iraq.

"Jeromy D. West," she said.

"God forgive us," the others responded.

"Aaron Boyles."

"God forgive us."

Such sit-ins have become more popular in the last year because of war critics' desperation over the situation in Iraq, Benjamin said

Before Congress approved $95 billion for the Iraq war in March, protesters conducted sit-ins in the offices of several Democrats, including Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Rep. Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts. Also targeted were the offices of Republican critics of the war, such as Sen. Olympia J. Snowe of Maine.

Democrats have been targeted more than Republicans by the nonpartisan Military Families Speak Out because they control Congress, co-founder Nancy Lessin said. Code Pink is planning to camp out and conduct a hunger strike next week at the home of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco).

When protesters refused to leave Sanchez's office Wednesday, more than a dozen police officers surrounded it.

Those arrested were Garza, 60, of Santa Ana; Alviso, 55, of Huntington Beach; Dietrich, 61, of Los Angeles; Jarret Lovell, 34, of Costa Mesa; Abraham Ramirez, 23, of Fullerton; and Tutrang Tran, 25.

Residents in Ms. Sanchez's district need to find a candidate to run against her, in both the Democratic primary and then, should Sanchez win, another candidate to run against her as an Independent. Ideally, a hispanic veteran. The full force of dissatisfaction has to be brought to bear on Democratic incumbents.

Congressmen Spar Over 'Schindler's List' Airing

"The list is life."

The Jewish News Weekly of Northern California reports:

A debate over the television airing of "Schindler's List" erupted in the U.S. Congress this week when two Republican lawmakers sparred over its appropriateness.

Rep. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) urged public outrage to stop the networks "from polluting the minds of our children."

NBC's airing of Steven Spielberg's Oscar-winning film Sunday took network television "to an all-time low, with full-frontal nudity, violence and profanity being shown in our homes," Coburn, co-chairman of the Congressional Family Caucus, said in a statement Tuesday.

Arguing against the new television rating system, which labeled the film "TV-M," for mature audiences, Coburn said Sunday's broadcast "only encourages the airing of more sex and violence.

"I cringe when I realize that there were children all across this nation watching this program. They were exposed to the violence of multiple gunshot head wounds, vile language, full frontal nudity and irresponsible sexual activity."

Coburn's statement prompted Sen. Alfonse D'Amato (R-N.Y.) to take the Senate floor to denounce his colleague.

"When I first received this statement, I thought it was a prank," D'Amato said.

"To equate the nudity of Holocaust victims in the concentration camp with any sexual connotation is outrageous and offensive. I am shocked and appalled that any member of Congress would make these kind of statements. I am particularly embarrassed that they were made by a member of my own party."

In a later statement, Coburn said the issue was not the quality of the movie, but whether the movie belonged on network television.

The movie "was an excellent and informative program that should not have been aired on a network."

The National Jewish Coalition, the Jewish Republican group, accused Coburn of "political grandstanding."

"Clearly on this issue, Coburn is a voice of one," Matt Brooks, NJC executive director, said, adding that NJC will make its views on this issue known directly to Coburn.

NBC, which broke Sunday evening viewership records when about 65 million Americans tuned in to see the movie, sharply criticized Coburn's comments.

"I just wonder if Congressman Coburn is aware that there was a Holocaust, that millions of people died and it's not something anybody should ever forget," NBC West Coast President Don Ohlmeyer told Variety.

Oklahoma Jews were also quick to condemn Coburn.

"We're outraged and horrified that someone who represents us in Oklahoma could have these feelings," Edie Roodman, director of the Jewish Federation in Oklahoma City, said in a telephone interview.

"To equate nudity in the Holocaust to nudity does not make sense. It proves that we have not done enough education."