Other than some mild tweaking of people in our more rambunctious comments threads, I have really tried to behave lately.
Until now. Tim sends me this story:
Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan is set to challenge House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., for her California congressional seat.
After filing papers for the seat in April, Sheehan told The National Press Club Thursday she’s going through with her campaign plans.
Sheehan, a California resident without a party affiliation, accused Pelosi of “signing blank checks” funding the Bush administration and being their “accomplice.”
Sheehan last year cited a feeling of betrayal from the Democratic leadership for not ending the war in Iraq.
“I’m doing it to encourage other people to run against Congress members who aren’t doing their jobs, who are beholden to special interests,” Sheehan said in 2007.
I really, really want to mock this, but she kind of has a god damned point.
Just Some Fuckhead
It would be even better if a real Democrat challenged Pelosi.
Blue Raven
Not to mention a Democrat from Pelosi’s district. There’s no law blocking a carpetbagger from a suburb of Sacramento to file anywhere she pleases, but I think there needs to be.
Sheehan gets my back up in other ways. This is one where I am glad I’m not in Pelosi’s district lest I feel honor-bound to work for her campaign despite my utter distaste for her handling of the Speakership.
calipygian
Nancy Pelosi wouldn’t be so bad if she were just a run of the mill back bencher that no one has ever heard of.
But as Speaker of the House, she has done real damage by “taking impeachment off the table”, renegging on ending the war and saying insanely stupid shit on The Daily Show
That said, if Sheehan was interested in doing something more than symbolism, she’d move to a Blue Dog district and run there. Running against Pelosi is little more than an ego-satisfying poke in the eye of the (wo)man.
Tax Analyst
Ooh…I want this! John, considering your long history with Ms. Sheehan, I think it’s imperative that you make an actual campaign contribution to aid her attempt at unseating Nancy Pelosi.
…Because I like seeing things that I never thought I’d ever see.
LanceThruster
I think Cindy Sheehan is a fine example of a citizen statesman/woman. I do not think she could operate under the Democratic Party control that helps enable Pelosi. As for me, I didn’t leave the party as much as the party left me. I’m still voting for Obama but feel that she was truly deserving of the campaign money I sent her. Pelosi and her tin ear need to go!
http://www.cindyforcongress.org
Tax Analyst
Just to be clear, I don’t actually favor Sheehan unseating Pelosi. I’d just like to see John post a copy of a small campaign contribution check from John to Cindy Sheehan’s campaign fund…say $5. (Account number blacked out, of course)
jake
Wow. I always wondered what happened to the totalitarian lock step thumb-sucking radicals who provided such tempting targets for acts of near-criminal mischief in college.
Now I know.
John Cole
You talking about the commenters flaming Glenn? Pretty breathtaking, ehh?
Scott H
Pelosi needs to have the fear of having to get a real job put into her. If an R reaps the seat, they can vote ’em out next time. It’s good that Pelosi will have to get out on the street and explain her sad-ass to keep her office.
Set ‘er up, john. I’ll contribute to Sheehan.
mapaghimagsik
Not my first choice of a challenging candidate, but I’d definitely vote for her over Pelosi — well, if I could vote in California.
Brachiator
The only problem here is that impeachment is little more than the wet dream of progressives. The only thing that is more fanciful is the delusion that Dubya is ever going to be prosecuted for war crimes. Just as the impeachment of Bill Clinton was a bunch of BS, there is no legally valid case for a Bush impeachment, just an odd penumbra of “crimes” that he has committed.
I really would like to fall in with Sheehan and Greenwald, and agree with the general idea that the Democrats need to be held accountable for their general gutlessness. But I’m not sure that Greenwald reads the public mood correctly.
Even allowing for Greenwald’s irony and outrage, it isn’t clear that the Republican Party has been destroyed, or that Republican voters are truly ready to punish or to reject the Republicans for their faults. Instead, it seems as though some Republican voters are simply peeved that McCain isn’t sufficiently pure to appeal either to the pro-business elites or the religious fundamentalists.
harlana pepper
Yup. She speaks for a lot of us. Let people laugh at and scorn her if they want. Those of us who had the good sense to oppose the war from the very beginning know what that feels like. If people had listened to us rather than the *real* nutjob, her son Casey would still be alive.
So, I will always love me some Cindy.
Tim in SF
I am in her district. I have a Cindy Sheehan sign in my window facing Haight Street. I am profoundly disappointed with Pelosi, so much so that I’d rather have the nut job. The fact is, she has a heart and I agree with her on a lot more than I agree with Pelosi. A LOT more.
Snowwy
Cindy’s would get my vote. She was fighting against the war madness long before most people woke up.
Alas, I can’t vote for her. OTOH, I’ve got Barbara Lee, so I’m good to go.
garyb50
You really, really want to mock what?
gypsy howell
She’s always had a goddamn point. A really good point. Tell me what “point” Pelosi or any of our other elected congresscritters have had. Including Obama, I’m sorry to say.
“What did he die for, Mr President?”
Genine
Actually, that’s funny. I was debating with a conservative friend of mine about the Iraq war. He conceded that me “and my ilk” (hehe) were right about it. But the problem was that too many “nutjobs” were against it in the beginning which is why no one took the protests seriously.
If we were right about what would happen… how are we the nutjobs?
Incertus
I only disagree with the argument that there isn’t a valid case for impeachment. I think there’s probably been a valid case to impeach any President who’s ever been elected, with the exception of William Henry Harrison who wasn’t in office long enough to warrant it. You can find something on pretty much anyone else.
But presidential impeachment has never been about whether or not the person deserved it. It’s about power–does the impeaching party have the power to knock out the President, and in every case, the answer was no (because Nixon quit first). So I don’t blame Pelosi one bit for saying, in essence, that impeachment talk was a waste of time, because there’s no scenario under which enough Republican Senators defect to get rid of Bush. There could be video of Bush getting double-teamed by Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden while Fidel Castro teabags him and you’d only get ten Republican Senators to vote for removal.
Tsulagi
Cindy still has enough parts to run?
calipygian
You mean to say that there isn’t?
I guess the best we can do is Bush holding hands with a Saudi potentate. Although I really wouldn’t rule out the possibility that that potentate did Texas teabag him.
Just Some Fuckhead
For me, it isn’t about impeachment. It’s about Congress being the lead branch of Government and opposing the excesses of the Bush administration. That isn’t happening under Pelosi. In fact, she is doing just the opposite. She is letting the Bush administration do whatever the fuck it wants either because she is too afraid to stand up to them or because she’s made a craven political decision, either of which means she shouldn’t in the goddamned job. And don’t get me started on Harry Reid.
HumboldtBlue
But as Speaker of the House, she has done real damage by “taking impeachment off the table”, renegging on ending the war and saying insanely stupid shit on The Daily Show
She was an embarrassment to herself and to Democrats last night. I tried to watch, but once that botoxed Baltimore Boob started in about how they need 60 votes in the Senate I couldn’t fucking take it.
p.a.
Sheehan may have become a gadfly and publicity hound, but she is right about this. It’s a poor metaphor in this case because Pelosi is a woman, but the Democratic leadership has acted like a bunch of castrati. (er- covey of castrati? coven? co-op? crew?)
skippy
i’m w/just some fuckhead and blue raven. pelosi needs to be shaken up, if not completely removed from her seat, but to do it thoroughly (and to have a chance in hell) it needs to be done by someone who has some experience in local politics from sf.
i was kind of hoping for a recall of pelosi coming out of baghdad by the bay, but i don’t see that happening either.
Corner Stone
Brachiator says:
Ummm…no reason to impeach…except…an odd penumbra of “crimes”…he’s…committed.
I think my head just sploded. No, wait. It definitely just went bluey.
The Other Steve
“The Democrats are the party of slavery and were the party that started every war in the 20th Century except the other Bush debacle. The Federal Reserve, permanent federal (and unconstitutional) income taxes, Japanese Concentration Camps and, not one, but two atom bombs dropped on the innocent citizens of Japan were brought to us via the Democrats.”
I’m surprised she didn’t mention the KKK.
Jon H
ActBlue only does actual Democrats, it seems.
Jon H
On the one hand, it would be nice to see Pelosi, Speaker Of The House, taken down by Sheehan. Perhaps the rest of the Dems would wake up.
On the other hand, the calcified Powers That Be might just figure Pelosi was the pound of flesh taken by the moonbats, and that no further action is required.
Jeff
i was kind of hoping for a recall of pelosi coming out of baghdad by the bay, but i don’t see that happening either.
The Baghdad by the Bay seems to have gone a little nutso after the Moscone-Milk murders. That’s when Dianne “DINO” Feinstein got her start (and I’ve hated her shriveled little heart ever since).
Now, if Gavin ran, that could [a] give Pelosi a challenge and [b] serve notice that no DINO is safe.
VidaLoca
Brachiator,
But if the penumbra rises to the level of “high crimes and misdemeanors” then, insofar as impeachment is concerned, a valid case exists. Whether it rises to that level or not depends on the outcome of an investigation by the House of Representatives — who are sitting on their hands and looking off in the other direction. Thanks in no small part to the decision of Ms. Pelosi to preempt said investigation.
It’s impossible to determine that the case does not exist if the investigation never takes place — so the real issue is, is there enough of a reasonable belief in wrongdoing by the administration to justify the House opening an investigation?
Joe Max
I know Sheehan is eminently mockable, and she doesn’t stand a chance of winning, but she does have a goddamn point. The far left could make themselves useful by taking up these kinds of primary challenges against the Democratic Machine, just to move the Overton window.
VidaLoca
Clearly she’s not into that kind of rhetorical excess.
opit
Joe Max
First they’d have to clue in too what the ‘Overton Window’ is – hint, it doesn’t allow honest debate – and then they’d have to be a real alternative, instead of a ‘heads I win, tails you lose’ carney routine from their owners.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/5/9/205251/2950
That’s only one of my Overton Window links. Yeah : it’s that important.
opit
Joe Max
First they’d have to clue in too what the ‘Overton Window’ is – hint, it doesn’t allow honest debate – and then they’d have to be a real alternative, instead of a ‘heads I win, tails you lose’ carney routine from their owners.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/5/9/205251/2950
That’s only one of my Overton Window links. Yeah : it’s that important.
srv
Pretty boy just married a jazillionairess, flew Willie and Nancy in on the Google jet to her daddy’s Vermont-sized spread in Montana. Had a rodeo for the rehersal dinner.
Just people like you and me.
SamFromUtah
(er- covey of castrati? coven? co-op? crew?)
I think it’s probably a “chorus”.
xyzzy
As much I dislike Sheehan and anyone else who believes in a cause with nearly religious fervor, she might actually be better than Pelosi. It would be nice to have someone in congress who isn’t covering their ass (impeachment off the table) for former sins (telecom immunity, anyone?).
Chris Johnson
For FUCK’S sake.
Die in a fire.
Or take some goddamned moral responsibility. You’re all ‘oh noes, with his massive popularity he will never be held accountable’. In mid-2008! Concern troll.
Me, I’m just going to marvel that these guys have sunk to such a level that John is compelled to support CINDY FUCKING SHEEHAN of all people. I know how he feels, though it’s not as much of a stretch for me, as she didn’t anger me so.
How dare you say impeachment is little more than the wet dream of progressives, about my country. I don’t care how many politicians we have to tar and feather, we didn’t used to be THIS bad.
I baked you a rule of law, but I eated it :(
libarbarian
Didn’t she say she thought the Gov’t was behind 9/11? I feel sorry for her loss, but I have never thought highly of her opinions on much of anything. I don’t think she can pull it off.
Also, does a person who “opposed the war from the beginning”, but was wrong about a bunch of specific predictions he made, get to claim he was “right” about the war?
Jon H
“Didn’t she say she thought the Gov’t was behind 9/11?”
My take:
Behind as in “actual perpetrators”, no.
Behind as in “rooting for”, as in “Come on Osama, Momma needs a new casus belli!… oh crap Cheney you didn’t say anything about WTC coming down”, yes.
jake
Yup. I now avoid direct participation activist groups because there’s always at least one oblivious wank in there and I can not refrain from picking on him.
Bob In Pacifica
I was on a picket line in SF about a month ago. Sheehan showed up and hardly anyone noticed her. Let me say, sadly, no charisma.
This is a sore point for me. Matt Gonzalez, who’s running in obscurity as Nader’s VP, was President of SF’s Board of Supervisors and almost beat pretty boy Newsom for mayor a couple of election cycles ago. If Gonzalez had run against Pelosi he could have made a very interesting race. He could have beaten her outright. Even if he didn’t beat her he would have kept her feet to the fire during this whole FISA thing. It would have been a real threat to the Dems from the left. Seriously, Matt Gonzalez could have been the first Green representative in the House.
Alas.
Chuck Butcher
On the war let’s look at something, Bush seems to have made himself pretty clear, cut the funding and I’ll leave them there until you have to fund them or watch them die. That creates a rock and a hard place kind of deal and a very ‘no win’ situtation.
I’d like to see George II strung up by his ‘nads, but exactly what would come out of a House impeachment? It won’t pass – period, you already know that. It would occupy a lot of time, and there are things to try to get done. I understand the fury, I have it, and I don’t mean irritation but exactly what are the goals? If it is to make a point, has that point been made or does it require the actual charges read? It will be partisan in the extreme, does that help or hinder? I’ve been crammed into the middle of this for over 2 1/2 years, some of it during a political campaign of my own. I saw the margins in the House and Senate not reach break proof numbers an had to start all over again in my analysis. I don’t say I’m right, I am also a construction worker/contractor and from that a pragmatist.
theturtlemoves
Not to be too obnoxious here, but isn’t saying that having a son die in Iraq is qualification for public office a little like saying being a prisoner in ‘Nam qualifies one to be president? Sorry for her loss and all that, but nothing I’ve seen of her leads me to believe she’s really that bright or fit to unseat the Speaker of the House. As has been pointed out by others, she’s said some amazingly stupid shit over the years and I’m not sure “filled with grief” accounts for all of it.
John Cole
Nothing obnoxious about it. She is wholly unqualified for office, and has said some pretty crazy things. That being said, she does have a point about the shitacular Democrats.
Incertus
You do realize that Newsom and Pelosi appeal to the same groups in San Francisco, right? They’re power-structure people, both of them. Hell, when Newsom was running for Mayor against Gonzales, as Bob in Pacifica mentioned (I was living there and voted Gonzales), it was close enough that the Democratic party flew the Clintons in to help seal the deal for Newsom. That’s doesn’t happen to someone to the left of Pelosi–the left doesn’t exactly love the Clintons, after all.
Besides, Newsom has his eyes on Sacramento next, not the House. And I wouldn’t be surprised if he was looking at another capital after Sacramento, if he can make it that far.
J. Michael Neal
No, it wouldn’t. Who can get elected in that district is meaningless to the Blue Dogs, and trying to get elected in their districts.
I don’t get the hate for Pelosi. Exactly how would you have liked her to play the hand she has? Impeachment is off the table because, even if she pushed it, I doubt that it would get a majority in the House, let alone what would be needed to get it through the Senate.
On the other stuff, enough of the party deserted her. How do you want her to solve that problem? Yes, the Democratic Party has been useless, but there are specific people to blame for that, and Pelosi isn’t one of them.
Running someone against Pelosi won’t do jack to make Congress more progressive. Running credible alternatives to the people that are the source of the trouble is the answer. Electing enough Democrats that the conservative members of the caucus can’t derail everything is the answer. Harassing Nancy Pelosi isn’t the answer.
LanceThruster
I was going to block quote the criticism of Sheehan/impeachment I was addressing but will instead just kinda group my thoughts and leave it at that.
I’ve heard Cindy on radio interviews and was amazed/impressed at how articulate she was and the strength of her ideas even with a kind of mousy vocal quality. I don’t give a rat’s ass about her so-called “charisma.” I’ve seen vids of various speeches she’s given and come away with similar views. If you’re not angry, your not paying attention. I’ve also seen/heard Nancy Pelosi say some really stupid/disgusting/obsequious sh*t (especially when kowtowing to Israel/AIPAC) and much prefer Cindy’s sometimes gap-toothed smile to Nancy’s botoxed one (the pic on her book cover “Know Your Power” makes me think she’s a frustrated femme fatale). Though it would be nice for a “real” Democrat (whatever that is these days) to run against Pelosi, no one stepped up to the plate. Sheehan did; for very good reasons, tactically and strategically imho. Pelosi and all Dems need to be held accountable for both their duties as Congressional members and the will of their constituents.
Speaking of accountablility, I don’t give a flying f*ck if they can get an impeachment resolution passed or not. It isn’t about the final vote; it’s about the investigation, the charges, witness testimonies…the type of elements laid out by Rep. Kucinich. Even those of the GOP who came around on Nixon didn’t do so until the sh*t really started hitting the fan. Demonstrate the many crimes of GWB and see which goopers can justify their defense of this scum.
To not even attempt to hold this criminal misadministration accountable for the sake of political expediency violates their oath of office as far as I’m concerned. Nobody swore to ensure their reelection or to benefit their party over principle. Regardless of outcome, make the Congressional report ten times as long as the Starr Report. Gawd knows there’s enough to fill twice as many pages than that.
The Democratic voters have long pleaded for Democratic leadership with spine. In return, the Democratic leadership has acted like Civil War general McClellan or WWII general Montgomery where no action would be forthcoming until all their ducks were in a row. F that!
Do what is right because it is the right thing to do, not because one is certain to get the outcome they desire. That is what I see in Cindy Sheehan. That is why I support her.
And as far as 9/11 goes, I don’t really care what their own pet theory is just as long as their main goal is a full and honest investigation. LIHOP, MIHOP, false-flag, rgross negligence and incompetence, or just an incredible confluence of coincidences, the fact that the bodies charged with investigating this crime scene keep telling me “move along, there’s nothing to see here” tells me there is something to uncover as that is exactly what the Bush criminals have said about all their neferious activities.
Cindy Sheehan got in the race for exactly the right reasons. She saw things that needed changing and has worked herself to a frazzle to try and change them, both on her own, and with the help of others who are equally outraged and frustrated. If this is not the ideal citizen of our Republic, then fuck this country and every one in it.
NonyNony
On the other stuff, enough of the party deserted her. How do you want her to solve that problem?
Um, Pelosi’s the leader. Or she’s supposed to be. She’s the one who gets the blame for not being able to lead. Sure the Dems who are acting, frankly, stupid deserve their share of the blame as well. But Pelosi wanted the leadership job. If she can’t hack it she needs to step down and let someone else do it.
Frankly, from what I’ve seen of her leadership she might as well have let Steny Hoyer have the damn job. He seems to be the one calling the shots. It makes her look like a fool and the Dems look weak when their leader is so obviously unable to lead.
(Note that this is in no way an endorsement of Steny Hoyer for Speaker. He’d be a lousy Speaker. But at least then he could take the blame for the screw ups that he actually deserves to be getting.)
Incertus
NonyNony,
According to Ed Kilgore over at Salon, Pelosi held the caucus together better than damn near any other leader in recent history.
So you can give her shit for a lot of stuff, but you can’t do it for not holding the caucus together, because she’s done her job on that front, at least compared to her rivals.
a. pismo clam
I also would love a more aggressive, savvy Democratic party, but you don’t get that supporting Cindy Sheehan, who is a good, well-meaning woman, but nothing more. She will never hold office. She’s broadly unacceptable to many voters, and it’s trivially easy to make her sound like a ninny using her own words. She is “qualified” for office in the same way that McCain: tragic circumstance, and an eagerness for the limelight.
If all of you folks that find Sheehan persuasive, or that find Pelosi enraging would just send a few dollars to _anyone_ challenging a blue dog representative, you would have made a real difference. Supporting Sheehan is the same kind of inane search for ideological purity that led to people voting for Nader because they didn’t think it made a difference. Pelosi’s seat is a lock; go look for another target and stop wasting your and other people’s time.
Politics is politics. Vote for what you want, advocate for what you want, but do not foolishly lust after what you cannot obtain.
Bush will never, ever pay for his crimes. No impeachment. No Hague. Even once Bush is out of office and we discover more details on his crimes (I’d bet $1000 they listened in on Democratic opponents), no nation is willing to take on a bellicose, stupid nation like the U.S. on a point like this. Sure, some judge in a Napoleonic system like Italy or Spain will likely try, but it will be quickly shut down by the national government. Bush will die rich and happy, never touched by the arm of justice.
Sorry, I hate it too. Stop dreaming about Sheehan and impeachment, they’re both impossible. Go give money to anyone running against a blue dog; kos has the list.
LanceThruster
As Vincent Bugliosi said, there is no statute of limitations on murder. Bush should spend the rest of his days looking over his shoulder.
As far as the viability of the Sheehan campaign goes, I truly don’t care. This is not some PUMA insanity where a vote for anyone but Obama is a vote for McCain. A vote for Cindy will not risk the make-up of the Supreme Court for decades to come. This is for as great a number as possible of progressive voters to say that the actions of Nancy Pelosi do not represent their views. Let Pelosi scramble to justify her votes, her actions, and try to sell herself to her constituents based on that record. Anyone have a problem with that?
She’s got the poll numbers, the money, and party backing, and name recognition, and “experience”, and telegenic good looks; so this should be a cakewalk for her. If Cindy’s campaign does not make a big enough dent in the final numbers, then Nancy can legitimately conclude that the will of the people does not matter and continue to disregard it.
Having her son killed in an illegal and immoral war does not in itself qualify her for office, but his blood, and the blood of countless others, sure paid the price for her right to seek office as a method of initiating change in this country. She has not tried to go straight to the highest office like many other less-than-viable candidates who never held any elected office before from all parties have done. She’s gone where her run for office may tap into the local consciousness and provide incredible visability. The entrenched Democrats need to see that triangulation is not the only way, nor most desirable way to govern. In doing so, Cindy Sheehan already has her victory before the election is even held.
I can think of worse pipe dreams. The system is that almost anyone can seek elective office. Even Alan Keyes observed that part of why the system is flawed is that it like a horse race except a vote is not like a bet. You’re supposed to vote for who you want to win; the person you think actually comes closest to representing those views you are most passionate about. Instead it is more often than not cast for who you think everybody else thinks will win that you don’t find completely repulsive. And this group think has led to some really horrendous choices. It also seems to assume that if the win cannot be gained right away, then to compromise one’s positions is preferable. I’m not a one-issue voter but feel that anti-war candidates were right about the one thing having the greatest impact on the lives of all Americans whether they know it or not as well as millions of other people around the globe. If it means to be on the losing side to back people like that, than all I can say is
I am Sparticus!
Brachiator
I had to make a few minor adjustments related to the little earthquake we had in Southern California, so instead of replying to the other posts to me in this thread, please allow me to concur with you here. Well said.
I also note that while Vincent Bugliosi has made an interesting and at times persuasive case for impeachment, it just ain’t gonna happen.
Right now, the Democrats seem unable to govern and chew gum at the same time, let alone mount a challenge to the Republicans, and the Republicans in turn will never allow Bush to be tarnished by an impeachment.
And sadly, Sheehan is perhaps too consumed by personal grief and outrage to be a viable challenger to Pelosi. At best, the validity of some of the issues she raises might inspire a more stable crew of people to challenge Pelosi and others in both parties who deserve to be ousted.
Rome Again
Nancy does what she can to keep all the dominoes standing; Cindy will do what she can to knock some down.
I don’t think she’s fancy or articulate or charismatic; but I’m kind of sick of those things in a politician anyway. I want to see a rise of new leaders filled with truth and values and ethics.
vaux-rien
If Pelosi is a DINO then who’s a real Democrat?
Even after FISA her lifetime ACLU rating (92%) is better than Kucinich’s. So, what? Charles Rangel, Barbara Lee and Barney Frank can stay and the rest are closet Republicans?
I’ve lived in New York for five years but Pelosi was my representative for 15 years and she never did anything to piss me off, I have to assume that most of you people calling for her head have not been paying attention to her for very long.
I don’t think that crazier, less effective leaders is really the key to progress but maybe I’m just not progressive enough.
Jon H
“Pelosi’s seat is a lock; go look for another target and stop wasting your and other people’s time.”
It’s because her seat is a lock that she does such stupid shit and keeps bowing to the demands of Bush. If she thought her seat was in jeopardy, she might well do more to keep the DINOS in line.
Trying to replace DINOs in conservative districts with more liberal candidates is bloody stupid since it’s unlikely to work and risks giving the seat to the GOP.
If we can’t hand a fucking San Francisco seat to someone who doesn’t wear Republican kneepads, we might as well just all become Republicans and sign the Bush loyalty oath, for fuck’s sake.
It’s bad enough we’re stuck with Reid in the Senate.
Jon H
“Supporting Sheehan is the same kind of inane search for ideological purity that led to people voting for Nader because they didn’t think it made a difference.”
Uh, no.
Firstly, Pelosi’s not the President, she’s only one out of 435 in the House. She’s simply not that important. Nor is her particular seat that important. Sucks that Hoyer would be the likely Speaker if she lost, but that’s life.
Secondly, it’s highly unlikely that SF would end up with a Republican Congressman if Sheehan ran well, so the Nader comparison is absurd.
harlana pepper
Apparently, it’s too bad Cindy didn’t ‘behave’ and do all those crazy things to get people to *pay attention* to what the fuck was going down. Then maybe we could all take her seriously and not feel compelled to ‘mock her.’
Holeeee, fuck. Of course Cindy Sheehan is not a viable candidate! It *is* a symbolic gesture, yes! So what? Symbolic gestures are what she’s all about, what she does best. Big fucking deal. She’s not worried about being taken seriously, as long as something is done to stop the killing. If she wants to stand on her head riding a unicycle while playing a banjo and clanging cymbals with her knees, and that would get us out, I got no beef with that.
At least she’s trying to do *something,* however unconventional that may seems to some folks.
harlana pepper
I’ve never seen so much whiny nitpicking of a person who is basically on our side. Some of you just don’t *approve* of the method.
Am I the only one who remembers the 60’s for fucks sake? People had to step outside of their comfort zones and act a little hairy, but all that crazy-ass whoopin’ and hollerin’ did do a lot to help end the Vietnam war.
No, not *everyone* did. Many others did what they could in other ways, just like activists here on this board. I’m sure we have some on here, right?
Others were more *conventional* people, like RFK and MLK, who ended up being sacrificed on the same altar whose name is now ‘the war on terror.”
But working together, they ended the national nightmare.
jenniebee
I’ve been thinking for a while that the blogosphere needs to take the next logical step, form the Constitutional party, and run its own people for national office in target seats. Personally, I’ve got my eye on Eric Cantor’s seat in 2010 or 2012…
Notorious P.A.T.
You bet she does. Pelosi comes from as liberal a district as you’ll find, yet she never, ever takes a risk in favor of Democratic positions. She was the one who took impeachment “off the table”, wasn’t she?
Bob In Pacifica
LanceThruster, my comment about her “charisma” was only about her electability, not whether or not I’d like to see her knock Pelosi out of office. She won’t.
On the other hand, running a strong candidate against Pelosi, someone who could win, would push the national political discussion farther to the left. Gonzalez is a Green, so besides being against the war he would be a leader in ecological issues, economic issues, healthcare, etc. It would have been the most exciting congressional race this year.
In any case, I’m in another congressional district. So far, Jackie Speier is voting okay for me.
Tom65
Sheehan has a point, but she’s barking mad otherwise. I’d love to see Pelosi get a serious primary challenge, just to put the fear of God in her.
Gus
Pelosi’s no DINO. That’s the whole fucking problem. The Dems are in the bag for big business almost as much as the Reps are. They’re willing to give us middle class suckers a few more crumbs, so unfortunately they’re the best we can do right now. I say go Cindy Sheehan. She has no chance, but if she can raise some issues and make a few Dems uncomfortable it’s worth it.
Incertus
Sorry, but this is just fucking stupid. If Sheehan’s campaign doens’t make a big enough dent in the final numbers, then Pelosi will be representing the will of the majority of her constituents, even if you disagree with her. Jesus fucking Christ–that’s what a democracy is all about.
LanceThruster
Ineresting and valueable observations from all sides. While the ACLU ratings tell part of the story, it’s the larger issues that make or break her effectiveness.
To Nancy With All Due Respect
I am also in awe of Cindy for her recognition of the danger to our republic from the foreign entanglements with Israel.
She wrote in an email not too long ago:
AIPAC (American-Israeli Political Action Committee) must register for what it is: a foreign lobbyist group and its influence peddling in the US government must end. It is illegal for candidates to accept foreign money and it must be made illegal to accept money from AIPAC. If our elected officials had any integrity, they would know that their allegiance lies with the US and not be co-opted by and lulled into a disordered allegiance to another country oftentimes to the detriment of our own.
You show me another politician who has the integrity to express a view such as this, they’ll have my support as well.
LanceThruster
Stupid is as stupid does.
It’s a democratic republic. We choose elected officials in the hope that they’ll reflect our views.
People can choose to put Pelosi back in for any number of reasons (including the perception that their first choice cannot win), and still not agree with substantial elements of her positions/platforms. Politicians are seen to be populists when they follow the polls, and leaders when the choose to do what is right despite the polls. In this regard, Pelosi seems to be the worst of both worlds.
I think Sen. Obama is totally wrong on his FISA vote but he will still get my vote. And Cindy Sheehan still gets a chunk of my limited funds for political donations (I’m in David Dreier’s district and he’s never gotten my vote!).
That’s what democracy is all about.
Gay Veteran
Brachiator Says: Just as the impeachment of Bill Clinton was a bunch of BS, there is no legally valid case for a Bush impeachment, just an odd penumbra of “crimes” that he has committed.
Really? How about illegal wiretapping (FISA)? War crimes, such as war of aggression, torture, murder?
Bush won’t be impeached because of the complicity of too many high-ranking Democrats.
binzinerator
I hope Sheehan wins. It’s precisely because she’s got a goddamned point, and she’s willing to do something about it that makes all this other stuff about her being crazy, fruity, publicity hound, no experience a pile of bullshit.
If she’s the only one who’s going out there and trying to change the bullshit by challenging Pelosi — and you’re sitting there with your thumbs up your butt complaining about the spineless Dems who’ve given the most unpopular and criminal president every damned thing he’s wanted, from FISA to torture to Iraq, well people you got no fucking right to ridicule her for running.
You want someone who is qualified for office and doesn’t say things you think are crazy and above all who will put the enablers on notice. Fine. Then where the fuck are these people?
These experienced people are all in the tank, or they really don’t believe in what they say, cause if they did they would be running already.
Love that kind of pragmaticism. It could rationalize away every significant principle this country had.
It’s because enough people in this country really believe they cannot obtain things like privacy or end to torture or the Iraq war or justice, that Bush and his dirtbags were able to do the things they did.
It becomes self-fufilling. There is a candidate who is against all this, and what is the reaction? Pooh-pooh-pooh. Can’t win. Crazy. Foolish.
Why not give money to people who are challenging the Blue Dog Dems and support Sheehan and demand to get that bastard Bush impeached and put that son of a bitch on trial for war crimes?
The reason Bush was able to do what he did is partly because of this lack of will. And if he and his neocon sociopaths get away with it, it will also be because of a lack of will. And this lack of will isn’t just found in Congress.
There was that old saying of ‘we get the government we deserve’. I used to think the Bush years were a reflection of a stupid or uninformed or complacent people. But I see Bushism can also happen when enough of the nation lacks the will to do something to defend its own core principles.
LanceThruster
Stupid Cindy Sheehan Quotes
And I agree with every one of them.
Stupid commenter quotes:
How dare she say anything about Israel! That is the Lord’s country. Ohhh, this woman just burns me up.
trollhattan
Uh, anyway, since Pelosi’s not going anywhere and since a Cindy Sheehan candidacy won’t be able to impact her in any meaningful way, I’d encourage folks to shift their eyes eastward, where likely felon Doolittle’s seat is up for grabs the first time in decades.
Charlie Brown (no kidding) has a legitimate shot at placing the verrry conservative district in Democratic hands. Otherwise, we’ll be sending the demented McClintock to congress for the next two decades. One seat at a time, folks.
Tax Analyst
I’m in SoCal, so of course I’m not in Jackie Speier’s district, but from what I’ve seen and read of her she’s probably one of our best representatives.
As to Pelosi – I understand the anger and frustration, but she is NOT the enemy and hasn’t done all that bad so far. That’s not to say I’m 100% thrilled or agree with her every move or statement. But it does no good here to tilt windmills. When all is said and done the thing to do is hold things together and try and get 60% super-majorities wherever possible in the upcoming GE. You don’t do that by putting the Blue Dogs in the headlights on posturing issues…that is unless you think there really is no difference between that Blue Dog rep and the Republican candidate for that office. You can think that if you want, but remember that this is the type of thinking that is partially responsible for Dubyah’s ongoing presence in the White House, thank you very much, Ralph Nader. And as much as I’d love to see Bush impeached it IS a posturing issue at this point and nothing more.
In order to make progress on your key issues you first need enough people in the position to vote for it and pass it. With Republican intrasigence and intractability that means you build super-majorities or you have little more than squat. When you have those numbers THEN you pressure your Reps to stand up and be counted right down the line.
Tax Analyst
Uh, excellent point(s). You know it’s not entirely impossible to beat some of these ass-hats. I can’t remember his name, but there was one Republiclown up around the Bay Area in what was considered to be a very safe Republican District that got his hat handed to him in the ’06 race. “Jerry” (?) SomethingOrOthter??? Whatever…I think he was the only CA incumbent beaten in the ’06 Congressional Election.
If ever there was a time to focus on this type of character this is it. And yeah, I think Doolittle’s race was quite close in ’06 as well and could be had this time around.
Thanks, trollie-man…good reminder.
LanceThruster
Understood Bob. I was just making a point as well in that I’ve seen people mock her for being “ugly” or in need of some dental work.
I value the assessments of all the posters in here, even the ones I’d grudgingly have to agree with. I am also not in her district so other than my donations to Sheehan, the point is academic. But I must admit it feels good (what’s so bad about feeling good?) to reject an otherwise “safe” Democratic politician in favor of someone who expresses, in however “flawed” a manner, the outrage over issues I find paramount.
KOS talked of withholding his Obama campaign donation over his FISA vote. For my part, I hope Pelosi thinks long and hard about how different things might be if she had made tough but principled choices rather than rationalizing the decision to run from a fight. Granted it is not entirely on her shoulders, but as has been expressed here, that’s the job she signed up for. I’m glad a woman is in the position, but I also wish the woman in the position would try more often to do the right thing in regards to upholding the Constitution, even if the outcome might be failure in the short term. The fact that she doesn’t ensures failure in the long term. It may already be too late to set things right.
Until then, Go Cindy!
LanceThruster
Seems as if there’s a shitload of “wholly unqualified” people already in office, right up to the top. I’ll take Cindy Sheehan’s “unqualifications” anyday.