Rotating Header Image



In Nancy Pelosi’s San Francisco territory, Pelosi was greeted in her latest visit there with a presentation on the beach. I made my revision, seen above, to reflect awareness of the worst problem facing our nation today. Because, impeaching President Bush — the original statement by these folks in San Francisco — is the belly-button study upon the elephant in the room: absence of national security by refusal to secure our borders and remedy the vast irregularities in unbridled immigration to this nation (of both the legal and the illegal kind).

We can impeach or we can solve these problems. With Pelosi’s Congress in place, it looks like they’re going to enable the Bush plans that the Republican Congress stood against. That means, with Pelosi’s Congress, Bush is actaully going to have an easier go of certain plans that only a Republican House stood against. If impeaching Bush is the suggested course of action, then we should also impeach Congress.

Is it not more sensible to place requirements to do the voter’s bidding upon the White House and Congress? Does impeaching any one player ever really make any difference? Allegedly angry voters outed Republicans from Congress recently but unfortunately, those allegedly angry voters elected eager helpers to the very goals and plans that they allege they’re angry about: willing Democrats to assist the very problems about which most voters are, in fact, angry.

Here’s one of those willing enablers now:


House of Representatives Democratic Leader Steny Hoyer of Maryland said on “Fox News Sunday” that immigration was one of the topics discussed when congressional leaders were invited to the White House last week to meet with Bush.

“He (Bush) smiled and he said, ‘You know, I think I’m going to have a lot easier time dealing with you on immigration than I had dealing with the House Republican leadership on immigration,'” said Hoyer.

“I think that’s the case,” said Hoyer, who did not detail the plan.

3 C O M M E N T S

  1. W.C. Varones says:

    I was at the Beach Impeach event.

    I’ve got pics and commentary from the ground here.

  2. Jodin says:

    And with unconstitutional Presidential Signing Statements, veto power, and the power of “Commander in Chief” at his disposal, how do you think Congress is going to get ANYTHING accomplished without first impeaching Bush?

    If your tire blows while you’re driving, do you stop to fix it? Or do you continue driving on your rim because to stop would take too much time?

  3. -S- says:

    And yet by your “theory” there (blown tire, driving in a rim), you’d keep the bad vehicle and just replace the tire/s.

    It’s Congress that’s the problem. You can replace “tires” attitudinally in some sense of vengeance or personal power, so to speak, but, until you start designing and insisting upon a reliable vehicle, all you’ll have is more burned rubber on the same vehicle.

    It’s Congress that is the problem. Angry Liberals chastised the only people in Congress who have held Bush in check on many aberrant goals (open borders and alleged “guest workers” — in reality, amnesty and the sale of American citizenship– and instead of chastising those who enable the same goals (Hastert, Pelosi, for example) you chastise those who disagreed with the goals themselves.

    Devoting all this energy to crying “impeach” while voting to support those who insist upon even more offensive goals is a waste of your time and the nation’s.

    If you want to impeach, impeach Congress. Voting for people with far more Liberal policies and goals than even Bush’s is nonsensical.

    Why not vote to impeach Ted Kennedy and John Kerry, for example? Or John McCain? Or Hastert? Or Murtah? Or Leahy? Or John Salazar? The list among Democrats is vast as to Liberals who run parallel to if not more aggressively toward the same goals that Bush has attempted to advance that it’s the utmost insincerity and inefficiency to allege that “it” is “Bush’s fault.”