I'm all for it. Win or lose it will only help progressives. I'll send $$$, too.
Just tell me where and when and how much.

I admire her because she actually goes out and does what she says she's going to. She actually ACTS. She may not win, she may not be liked, she may go her own way but she's not violent or crazy or hurting anyone and she's working with the system. She's TRYING.

Now if only we could convince the still life that is the government to do the same.

I know I'll be pilloried for this, but I'm not sure this is a good idea. I want Nancy to put impeachment back on the table as much as anyone, but I also know she has a lot of experience in the house. I sort of feel that Cindy is an emotional candidate and I'm not sure that's what's needed now. Okay, I'll crawl under my desk and try to avoid the thrown tomatoes and eggs. ;)

[Deleted. Off topic-Sitemonitor]

Even if Cindy doesn't win, she will help keep Nancy honest. More power to you, Cindy.

I'm with Loonie! Cheney first => beyond a'hole warmongering, lying, coward.

Actually, Pelosi did have a strong reaction to this news:

Rapid eye-blinking and deer-in-headlights stare.

If Democrats and Americans feel betrayed by Democratic leadership, maybe they should pay more attention to Republicans in Congress that brag about being obstructionist.

Nancy Pelosi is not the problem. Sheehan's focus is off. This is a classic case of ready-fire-aim.

Why not take on a conservative Dem or a Republican? Why make liberal Dems the issue?

Aaargh,

A symbolic gesture at best. Sheehan would get thoroughly trounced...

pissed off patricia @ 6:

I know I'll be pilloried for this, but I'm not sure this is a good idea. I want Nancy to put impeachment back on the table as much as anyone, but I also know she has a lot of experience in the house. I sort of feel that Cindy is an emotional candidate and I'm not sure that's what's needed now. Okay, I'll crawl under my desk and try to avoid the thrown tomatoes and eggs. ;)

Not by me you won't. It is a bad idea.

I don't agree with Pelosi's stands on a number of issues, but Sheehan is not the public face for Dems to put forward in the anti-war movement.

I think she's hopelessly naive. First, there's no way to stop the war without at least 67 votes in the Senate. The Dems have 51, which includes Lieberman, who really isn't one. Second, if she lives in Sacramento, how can she run for Nancy's seat (SF)? Third, she wants to run to put impeachment back on the table? If she won, by the time she took her seat, Bush would have just days left before he left office. Yes, we need to end the war. But we must be realistic and also not sacrifice the political future which looks very good for our side. I appreciate all her public efforts to stop the war, but please leave politics to the adults!

I like what Cindy did, and I would support her in other ways, but I'm voting for Pelosi, and Cindy is delusional if she thinks she can give Pelosi "a run for her money". Pelosi is my congresswoman and she'll be my congresswoman until Pelosi decides to retire or God forbids dies. I would have voted for Cindy against Feinstein, but Cindy decided not to run against Feinstein.

Impeach Gonzales first, then Cheney, then Bush. Not that Sheehan has a chance.

Hey, this is good for keeping the subject in the press, but we're also going to have plenty of loony left talk by the MSM. Not that that's much of a change...

Watch Nancy get real popular with the Repugs all of a sudden.

What's her husband's name, Sluggo?

Sheehan is bound to win against Pelosi. Oh yeah, Mike Gravel will take the presidency in 2008. Sylvia Browne has predicted this and it will come true.

While I do support the impeachment of Bush and Cheney, I don't think Sheehan could ever beat out Pelosi for Speaker of the House. Pelosi has many years of Congressional experience (despite her recent cave-in to Bush about Iraq), and Sheehan only wants to get in the House to impeach Bush and Cheney. I don't think that would work out well. But that's just me.

The Champ is out.

Swashbuckler @ 27:

PNAAC Minister @ 25:

Anything that makes the MSM talking heads mutter the word "impeachment" can't be bad.

Actually, it can be bad. If one looks too extreme in wanting impeachment it hurts the cause.

What "cause"? We're about as close to impeachment now as we were three years ago.

Extreme times call for extreme measures . . and screw the 24%ers.

OUTSTANDING! I hope she does run, and I hope she wins. I'll send her campaign money.

Wretched Refuse @ 8:

How is this for a retirement epiphany?
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20070608/news_lz1e8boston.html

Time for the truth about the Liberty

By Ward Boston Jr.
June 8, 2007

Forty years ago this week, I was asked to investigate the heaviest attack on an American ship since World War II. As senior legal counsel to the Navy Court of Inquiry, it was my job to help uncover the truth regarding Israel’s June 8, 1967, bombing of the Navy intelligence ship Liberty.

On that sunny, clear day 40 years ago, Israel’s combined air and naval forces attacked the Liberty for two hours, inflicting 70 percent casualties. Thirty-four American sailors died, and 172 were injured. The Liberty remained afloat only by the crew’s heroic efforts.

Israel claimed it was an accident. Yet I know from personal conversations with the late Adm. Isaac C. Kidd – president of the Court of Inquiry – that President Lyndon Johnson and Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara ordered him to conclude that the attack was a case of “mistaken identity.”

The ensuing cover-up has haunted us for 40 years. What does it imply for our national security, not to mention our ability to honestly broker peace in the Middle East, when we cannot question Israel’s actions – even when they kill Americans?

Today, survivors of Israel’s cruel attack will gather in Washington, D.C., to honor their dead shipmates as well as the mothers, sisters, widows and children they left behind. They will continue to ask for a fair and impartial congressional inquiry that, for the first time, would allow the survivors themselves to testify publicly.

For decades, I have remained silent. I am a military man, and when orders come in from the secretary of defense and president of the United States, I follow them. However, attempts to rewrite history and concern for my country compel me to share the truth.

Adm. Kidd and I were given only one week to gather evidence for the Navy’s official investigation, though we both estimated that a proper Court of Inquiry would take at least six months.

We boarded the crippled ship at sea and interviewed survivors. The evidence was clear. We both believed with certainty that this attack was a deliberate effort to sink an American ship and murder its entire crew.

I am certain the Israeli pilots and commanders who had ordered the attack knew the ship was American. I saw the bullet-riddled American flag that had been raised by the crew after their first flag had been shot down completely. I heard testimony that made it clear the Israelis intended there be no survivors. Not only did they attack with napalm, gunfire and missiles, Israeli torpedo boats machine-gunned at close range three life rafts that had been launched in an attempt to save the most seriously wounded.

I am outraged at the efforts of Israel’s apologists to claim this attack was a case of “mistaken identity.”

Adm. Kidd told me that after receiving the president’s cover-up orders, he was instructed to sit down with two civilians from either the White House or the Department of Defense and rewrite portions of the court’s findings. He said, “Ward, they’re not interested in the facts. It’s a political matter, and we cannot talk about it.” We were to “put a lid on it” and caution everyone involved never to speak of it again.

I know that the Court of Inquiry transcript that has been released to the public is not the same one that I certified and sent to Washington. I know this because it was necessary, due to the exigencies of time, to hand-correct and initial a substantial number of pages. I have examined the released version of the transcript and did not see any pages that bore my hand corrections and initials. Also, the original did not have any deliberately blank pages, as the released version does. In addition, the testimony of Lt. Lloyd Painter concerning the deliberate machine-gunning of the life rafts by the Israeli torpedo boat crews, which I distinctly recall being given at the Court of Inquiry and including in the original transcript, is now missing.

I join the survivors in their call for an honest inquiry. Why is there no room to question Israel – even when it kills Americans – in the halls of Congress?

Let the survivors testify. Let me testify. Let former intelligence officers testify that they received real-time Hebrew translations of Israeli commanders instructing their pilots to sink “the American ship.”

Surely uncovering the truth about what happened to American servicemen in a bloody attack is more important than protecting Israel. And surely 40 years is long enough to wait.

Boston served as chief counsel to the Navy’s Court of Inquiry into the attack on the U.S. Navy intelligence ship Liberty. He also served as a naval aviator in World War II on the carrier Yorktown and as an FBI agent prior to his assignment to the Navy’s Judge Advocates General Corps. He is a graduate of the the College of William and Mary School of Law and a resident of Coronado.

Ward, I have seen videos about this attack and I do think it should be investigated and we, as U.S. citizens should be outraged. I know that you as a military man had a duty to our country and did not reveal the information when you were investigating. Perhaps you should have been as brave as Joe Wilson when you knew the truth and exposed the acts at that time. We have an obligation to let our citizens know when our government does the wrong things that cost our soldiers and sailors their lives. We don't have an obligation to Israel or any other nation over and above the citizens of our country. I do wish you luck in your efforts today. Will you please view the link that I am posting.

http://myfightfordemocracy.blogspot.com/2007/07/new-declaration-of-indep...

BALLS, FINALLY, YOU GO GIRL!!!
At least SOMEONE has some balls, everytime the dems come to me for money I tell them "Grow some damn balls and I will give you money" I had great hope for Pelosi but she is useless. Go CINDY!

Flaky.

When Cindy Sheehan announced her "retirement" from the peace movement, she said she was burned out from overwork, overexposure, family conflict and abuse from her foes.

And now, a few weeks later, she wants to run for Congress? Or, rather is threatening to run for Congress, if Pelosi doesn't impeach? What's that all about? Where is this woman coming from?

Impeachment would be a great thing, but it will fail. There aren't enough votes in the Senate. Nixon was forced out only when he was told by Republican Senators that he had lost their support. Bush and Cheney will win an impeachment fight - which will leave the Democrats in disarray heading into 2008. Unless there is a breakthrough in the judiciary committee hearings on domestic spying and Cheney's violation of the classified document laws, and indictments are handed down, impeachment is just a bad idea.

If Sheehan thinks she has something to offer Californians in the areas of health care, immigration, the environment and war policy, well and fine. But she shows nothing but naivety and poor judgment with this threat to run.

What if an pro-life fundamentalist in Mississippi threatened to run against a Republican congressman unless that person introduced a bill outlawing abortion? C&Lers would laugh.

Seems to me that Pelosi is scared to do what the vast majority of Americans voted her in to do. We want impeachment for this corrupt Administration now.

Amazing... some people still think there's hope.

It looks like her point is not to try and win the race, but to make Pelosi lose (votes) if she doesn't pursue impeachment. She probably doesn't give a shit about winninng, but rather is trying to get Pelosi and the others off their collective asses. In the meantime, if she runs, it might get the media taking about impeachment, ...maybe. Regardless of the time he has left in office, or how strong of a case they currently have, if offenses have been made by the current administration, it should be the duty of every Congressperson to pursue impeachment, win or not. Shine some light on the cockroaches!

I'll donate to Cindy's run ir Nancy doesn't put forward articles of impeachment against President Bush and Cheney! I'll give Cindy the whole $2000.00 because I know she'll be the people's candidate. Not a washington insider sope.

I hope that every incumbant Democrat has one or more Democratic challengers, every single one of them in Congress. Because personally that is the only way they will ever listen to the people who voted them into office in the first place, they also have to be held accountable. And right now none of them are being held accountable to the degree that they should.

Cindy and others who are calling for democrats heads have completely fallen for the Republican obstructionist agenda. The Republican leaders are relying on a general lack of knowledge about HOW the legislature works. I am absolutely positive that a lot of evil chuckles are being uttered this morning by some truly despicable folk who see how well this strategy is working. Nancy Pelosi and most of the democrats in the House and Senate are NOT at fault for their inability to pass badly needed legislation and if we continue to blame them then we are just shooting ourselves in the foot. We must continue to hold the Republican obstructionists responsible for their votes or should I say lack of votes. Going after democrats is not the answer.

crazy lady is crazy

right or wrong, you can't say Cindy isn't trying. she's doing more than just offering an opinion, which is more than anybody on this comment section is doing.

Limp-Dick Blimpaugh @ 46:

Seems to me that Pelosi is scared to do what the vast majority of Americans voted her in to do (my emphasis). We want impeachment for this corrupt Administration now.

What?? The vast majority of American voters? Since when is her district in California the vast majority of American voters? That's like saying the vast majority of voters voted Dennis Hastert or Sam Brownback into office to outlaw abortion.

Turk Meister @ 43:

Sheehan just made it more difficult for Pelosi to reverse course and not only put impeachment back on the table, but on the agenda as well. If Pelosi complies (not likely), she will be charged by the rabid right with making a personal, political calculation to protect her own job and succumbing to the threats of one individual. Impeachment is more than warranted against Bush, Cheney, Gonzales, yada, yada, yada, but Sheehan just made it less likely.

Sheehan is not a media whore, she's a media creation. The media decided that she should be the face of the anti-war movement because she intially comes off as a bit of a flake with a goofy hat, not the intelligent, articulate woman that she actually is.

Bingo.

Annoyed Canuck @ 44:

Flaky.

Impeachment would be a great thing, but it will fail. There aren't enough votes in the Senate. Nixon was forced out only when he was told by Republican Senators that he had lost their support. Bush and Cheney will win an impeachment fight - which will leave the Democrats in disarray heading into 2008 ... What if an pro-life fundamentalist in Mississippi threatened to run against a Republican congressman unless that person introduced a bill outlawing abortion? C&Lers would laugh.

Bingo again.

Oh what the hell.. Not sure its such a hot idea... Not sure its not... So, what the hell, go for it, I doulbt it will work out, but really given the shitty state things are in right now, its probably no more crazy as ideas goes than all the rest floating around...
Probably won't get off the ground anyway...

For what its worth to you as a woman who probably never reads these rants, I don't think all the trouble you are setting yourself up for worth it Cindy...but whatever.. I think all of us would be better served, you included Ms. Sheehan, if attention and energies were focussed on removing Dick Cheney George Bush and the entire lot of bastards who have perverted the executive branch of our government from power... With extreme prejudice if need be...........But that's just me....JD

Sent this to my Congressperson the week before the July 4 break:

Dear Representative Brown-Waite,

To say I am thoroughly disgusted with the "Executive Branch" of our government is an under-statement in the extreme.

It is not my intention to be sarcastic, but apparently neither the President nor the Vice-President understand the terms "representative" or "democracy."

These men have made a mockery of our fundamental values as a country and a society and as human beings. While they are enjoying their tight-knit clique.

They have committed a number of serious crimes yet have not been held accountable for any of them. Why not?

I am a registered Independent voter because I do not want to be trapped by any ideology. I tend to be conservative by nature when it comes to money, resources and lives, but liberal when it comes to people, the environment and most social issues.

George Bush fraudulently claims to be "saved." He fraudulently claims to be conservative. There is nothing genuine about his religious posturing or anything else he does. Most of the people I know are Republicans, yet none of them can tell me anything he's done right or anything he's done that's made things better.

I left the service for the sole reason that George Bush was elected. I was fortunate to get out before he wasted a lot of American and Iraqi lives but I knew he was up to no good and I knew his character was deeply flawed as evidenced by his lifetime of failure and being rescued by his father.

I'm sure you've heard all of this before, but as far as I'm concerned everybody who allows these men to continue committing crimes is equally culpable. I don't care what political party they are affiliated with and I don't care what their excuses are.

For example, when representatives in our Congress who voted for the Iraq war claim they weren't given all the facts or that they were lied to were negligent.

I knew Iraq didn't have WMD's. I knew Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. I knew Iraq was no threat to our national security. Why is it that I knew those things yet people in our government didn't?

I knew because I wanted to know what the truth was and I did my own research by reading new sites from around the world.

The people who "didn't know" didn't want to know. That much is very clear.

This emporer is buck naked and I fully expect our representatives to stop the partisan nonsense and start representing us.

Frankly, I've been embarrassed to be a citizen of this country and I don't like that.

I hope for our country and your own integrity that you'll be one of those who steps up and does the right thing.

Very Best Regards,

CafeenMan

=======================================
Her reply:
=======================================

Dear CafeenMan:

Thank you for expressing your opinion of President George W. Bush. I appreciate the opportunity to respond to your concerns.

As you may know, the United States Constitution sets forth the general principles that control the impeachment process. The power to impeach is vested in the House of Representatives, while the Senate has the power to try impeachments. Impeachment proceedings in the House may proceed if a Member declares a charge of impeachment or introduces a memorial listing of the charges under oath.

A President may be removed from office upon impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. To this date, no Member has initiated impeachment proceedings. This is likely because the President is not under any criminal investigation and has not been charged with a crime.

I respect your views on the Iraq War; however the reasons behind the war in Iraq were fully explored in the 2004 election. The American people chose to return President Bush to office with a historic number of votes cast and clearly decided that the liberation of Iraq was proper.

I thank you for your input on this matter.

Sincerely,

Ginny Brown-Waite
Member of Congress

=======================================
My reply to her's:
=======================================

Dear Representative Brown-Waite,

Although I didn’t mention impeachment in my previous letter, I certainly feel it is a good idea. However, I think it’s a minor issue compared to the number of people who are suffering due to GOP policies.

Impeaching the President is not the same thing as continuing to allow our soldiers to be slaughtered in an unwinnable war against an enemy that nobody can identify.

In 2004 the people may or may not have given President Bush a mandate. That issue is irrelevent today in 2007. What is relevant is that most of the American people want this war over. They want our soldiers back home with their families. They want the extended tours of duty to end. They want the “backdoor draft” (soldiers not being allowed to ETS per their contract) to end as well.

Iraq won’t be stable until the Iraqi people want it stable. Historically people have proven again and again that they don’t respect or keep things that are given to them – particularly freedom. If they wanted it badly enough they would have been fighting their own war before we got there. President Bush has made a mess of that country and we may as well face the fact we can’t fix it. Nobody has an answer. “We’ll stand down when they stand up” is nothing more than empty rhetoric.

And I ask you this. Before we invaded the sovereign country of Iraq, they had a joke of an army, no air force to speak of, no navy and no WMD’s. They simply weren’t a threat to us. Now that we’ve devasted the country and they have even less, how on earth are they going to “follow us over here”?

Have you ever known people whose own lives were a train wreck but felt they were in a unique position to tell other people how to live their lives? Don’t you think we have enough problems in our own country that we should be solving instead of worrying about “saving” the Iraqi people from twisted men like Saddam?

Why is it that when foreigners need to be saved from someone we don’t like we’re happy to go over and do it, but when people in our own country need to saved we blame them as being lazy welfare cheats?

If you read my original letter again you’ll see that I wasn’t asking you to impeach the President. I was asking you to do your part to represent the people who elected you. Over 60% of us want this war over. I don’t know the poll numbers on people wanting the President and Vice-President out of office but their approval ratings are sending them a message they just aren’t getting. Just because they don’t get it doesn’t mean you have to not get it with them.

Very best regards,

CafeenMan

Haven't heard back from her

pissed off patricia @ 6:

I know I'll be pilloried for this, but I'm not sure this is a good idea. I want Nancy to put impeachment back on the table as much as anyone, but I also know she has a lot of experience in the house. I sort of feel that Cindy is an emotional candidate and I'm not sure that's what's needed now. Okay, I'll crawl under my desk and try to avoid the thrown tomatoes and eggs. ;)

Patricia you are right on. Not to worry your pissed off head though :lol:. Let’s be real. It is not going to happen. What it will do is draw some attention to the impeachment cause. And that is good. Besides I think she should run for Diane Feinstein’s Senate seat.

Why doesn't she run against a Republican? How about trying to hurt some of the people who got us into this war. This is an empty threat, a publicity stunt, and frankly a really boring move. Instead of dividing our side, why doesn't she work with Dems to get what she wants. Threats get you know where. Stop aiming your fire at the people most likely to support you.

:lol:

A strong case for impeachment needs to be made to the public before impeachment proceedings begin (and I agree--it will have to be Cheney first).

I'm not saying that there's not a strong case for impeachment--there is--but your average Joe-Blow citizen needs to understand, in terms he or she can understand, why Bush and Cheney are being impeached, or else many of them will simply think it is payback for Clinton. I work with a bunch of people who know nothing about what's going on (habeas corpus? what's that? was the general response I got when I tried to tell them about the Military Commission's Act). They think Bush has done nothing worse than Clinton did, and when they defied me to explain why I thought Bush was worse, nothing I said to them made sense. Unfortunately, the majority of Americans are just like them.

But the Democrats need to get their butts in gear and start doing something about it. It's time.

Doggiebobo @ 73:

PurplePatriot @ 71:

This just in:

A homeless person, going by the name, "Pappy" who lives under an overpass on the 101 announced today that he will run against Nancy Pelosi unless she introduces articles of impeachment and completely outlaws all corrupt, slimy, shitty things that politicians have ever done.

According to many blogs, liberals are coming out of the woodwork to say, "You go Pappy! Finally someone with balls to stand up to the establishment! He gets my vote! Pelosi is worthless! Seven whole months and hardly anything bad about the past 50 years has changed! Go Pappy!"

Your coverage out on Hwy 101 is different than that "just in" news reports here.
The guys name is "Pansy" and he sells flowers in Mendicino.

That lucky bastard, Pansy. I love the Mendicino coast! Hiked jughead last year, then went up to Shelter Cove. You see, I live in Oklahoma ... I'd almost consider living under a bridge out there over living in a house here.

kbonline: So thanks. Pelosi is now that much less likely to reconsider her position on impeachment. And you’ve give the wingers fresh red meat and a new reason to label you and all who support your fight against the war as naive. You’re hurting our cause. Please stop.

Totally agree. This is just stupid. And she would go down like a stone. So why does she destroy what not only she has built up?

Pelosi is only another wing of the WarParty. Do any of you think that a woman that was reared in a big-City machine environment and is a millionaire many times over has your interests at heart? Please. Run, Cindy, run. Watch Nancy fandango when her fiefdom is threatened. She would then accept help from Rove. Trust me on that.

Steny Who-now? And isn't James Coburn dead?

# 74:

Know exactly what you mean. I visited Mendicino last month and loved the coast
line, tho the citizens of that small community are even more l i b e r a l than most.
Living in Texas, I too could easily relocate to that region were it not for the cost
of living....an area where some of "us" liberals have mucho money; but still in the
minority as compared to the LARGE number of wealthy Repigs

While Sheehan will always have my respect for being such an early, outspoken, and highly visible opponent of this wretched war, her political instincts seem to be getting worse and worse. Does anyone seriously want to suggest that running a candidate against Pelosi should be the top priority of progressives these days?

Ahem,

She is planning on running against Nancy Pelosi when? Oh right, in 2008 -- BY WHICH POINT BUSH CO. WILL BE OUT OF OFFICE! Her campaign is already irrelevant.

I respect Cindy Sheehan's moxie, and have been a supporter of her ideas, but there is a point where she needs to consider what is best for the country, not just for her own hurts, which are not insignificant.

The last thing we need is another Nader 2000 debacle, where a well intentioned left winger runs on "principle" and ends up sacrificing all of us just to be able to say "nyaa nyaa, I told you so." Seriously, I would have much preferred Gore over Bush in 2000 despite Nader's claims of there being no difference between them.

Why, Cindy, that would be as helpful as another Nader run. Hey, wait! Maybe Ralph can challenge her too? They could go on CNN and Fox together!
Haven't we learned a lesson?

If Nancy puts impeachment on the table, wouldn't she have to ask Sam the Butcher to get off?

He was there delivering her the meat.

I admire Cindy-She has sutained the ultimate loss,But she needs to focus on issues that will be a win situation for her-running against Nancy Pelosi will just make her more of a joke on Fox news.Impeachment as we saw with Clinton is a huge waste of time-These guys will hopefully out the door soon and then we can try and move our country forward again

let me know where to send my first check.

What a clown...she's delusional if she thinks she could ever be taken seriously in a political arena. She acts like she was the only one to lose someone in Iraq.

Damn you Dems. Don't you get it. You have to do everything possible to get those sick ass republicans out of the WH and keep your hold on Congress/Senate. Every vote that Cindy would take from Nancy is a vote to get a Republican in. As sweet as impeachment is just focus on getting your Dem in the Whitehouse. Impeached or not Bush/Chenney will be know as wankers forever. If you let someone like Rudy into the Whitehouse because of Dem infighting I will be so pissed that I will no longer give away free joints and beer to Dems that travel up the Alaska Hwy visiting. I want to love Yanks again so get rid of Bush. Don't screw it up.
As far as the progressive thing goes - be practical. It won't happen fast. And it won't happen at all if you don't get a Dem in the WH. Any Dem wil do. Then some progressive things can happen and thats good. So you guys stop being infighting weenies and pick your Dem and fight like mad to get her/him into the WH. And I mean fight no holds barred. And I want every Dem to grow a set of big balls and cut the nice crap. Unite yourselfs. Go out there and kick the shit out of those pricks in the WH. Then we can all sit back have a puff and a cold one and get back to making the world better.
xoxoxo from way up the AK Hwy.

Nancy Pelosi is not the enemy, you fool. Why isn't Cindy attacking the people who brought this war on, and those who continue to do so? That is, Republicans. Attacking progressive voices in your own party means you don't get it at all. God spare us the voices of the zealous self-righteous.

Hey, Cindy, I got a great idea! Convince Ralph Nader to run! Wow, he might get 2% of the vote! And then, in 50 years, he might get 20%! Oh, but we'll all be dead, won't we?

Go and demonstrate all you want. Dramatize the horrors of the Iraq war. Go to the Red states, organize there. Do something useful, instead of turning this into the typical leftwing clusterf---.

"Come, firm Resolve, take thou the van
Thou stalk of Carl-hemp in man!"

-- Robert Burns

Cinday Sheehan inspires me, in fact so much that: http://denisecares.blogspot.com/

There you go. Split the democratic vote and give Pelosi's seat to the Republicans.
Sheehan can help the liberals like Nader did. Wonderful.

matt greer @ 97:

If nothing else , this keeps the discussion on the table, and reminds people why we put the dems in power. I think the Republicans will hang her for it, and obviously paint every democrat in America with the "they supporte Cindy Sheehan, aren't they morons" brush.
But it is hard for me not to support her for 2 very fundamental reasons, first, who the hell cares how much experience peolosi has, the more experience means the more special interest groups, lobbiers, and buisness people she owes favors to. Experience does not help much if you do not use it in the proper way. I am ready to listen to someone who TELLS THE TRUTH!!!! Secondly, all of the blogging we do, all of our biting remarks, and witty comments really doesnt mean diddly. The initial leap from ordinary life to where she went must have been the hardest thing she ever did, and I think if we had a little bit more of her resolve inside us we would all be better off.

very well put!

Mike, I don't think Cindy is that dumb. She'll pull out of the race rather than risk a repuke seat. At least (and I plan to ask her and expect to get a direct answer, refreshingly honest woman that she is) she isn't an avoidant selfish scumbag like Nader.

what did pelosi do before she got her turn at the trough? nobody is born a politician you just mature until your sociopathic tendacies take over and realize that you could do it.
so what if she is naive, we need more naive politicians
pelosi is owned like most democrats and all republicans, by aipac

The Democratic Party all too often thinks that they have thinking people in their hip pocket, simply because the GOP alternative is so unspeakable.

In this way, they've grown complacent.

More power to you, Mrs. Sheehan!!!

"I’ve grown tired of her ways of getting attention. She has absolutely no idea of what it takes to run a campaign or be an elected official."

yeah, we should just live politics to the professional elites...um no

i agree, pelosi and reid need to get a set of big BALLS and impeach the bastards in the executive office. just how many crimes must they commit before the democrats(and i am an angry one)get off their fat lobbyists butts and do something. we can vote in new unemcumbered representatives if these two don't do what the majority wants.

Cindy Sheehan's threat to contest Pelosi's seat may be naive to an extent but I fully understand why she's threatening it.Someone needs to DO SOMETHING to force this matter.What I'd love to know is on whose authority did Nancy Pelosi make that "impeachment is off the table" decision??Who gave HER the mandate to make such a sweeping and frankly ridiculous statement.The first rule of any possible political battle is NEVER shut off options, especially those that can wield some power and send a message.So what if there are'nt enough votes for impeachment.It shows that you've got backbone and that at the VERY LEAST you're prepared to put it on the record for history and as a message to the country that you stood for rule of law and the constitution of the country at a time when it was in mortal peril of being destroyed by a power crazed administration.THAT'S the question that will be asked in history:where the hell were the defenders of the constitution during those years and who were the politicians that stood up for democracy during the nation's darkest hour.

Joseph Lane, Amen. The dems are like the wife who makes pie while the guy who's raping her kids twists their minds into a life of failure and despair.

I think pelosi cut a deal with bush to not impeachment for rumsfeld's resignation.

WELL WTF Who da fuck does she think she is, IS to sell us out so Fucking Cheap . . .

As an SF resident and Pelosi fan, and one with considerable admiration for what Cindy Sheehan has done, with all due respect, she hasn't a chance. San Franciscans are pretty loyal to Pelosi and intelligent enough to be pragmatic about what has gone on with regard to impeachment and the war. While I do believe that the dems can start seriously thinking about possibly impeaching Bush, I think the more appropriate target is Cheney, and I also believe that SF residents are sophisticated enough to understand that their can be big time fallout if impeachment is carried out without careful groundlaying for the case.

Pelosi never should have taken impeachment off the table in the first place. I like her,but I don't think she's working very hard to
support the people that voted the dems into power. Cindy Sheehan is merely trying to light a fire underneath her,which isn't such a bad idea. I hate to say it, much as I hate him, but Newt Gingrich would have started impeachment procedings already. And Cheney
MUST be impeached first,there's no doubt about it. Then Nancy would become the president,which wouldn't be such a bad thing!

Go Cindy, GO!!!

take these fools out, if she was running in my district she gets my vote.

good luck Cindy, if you run or if you get us impeachment articles you are a Hero of the highest order.

stogoe, everything BUT the domestic root-rot.
I'd like to get Conyers to tell us why he shut up so fast. Guess backroom deals are OK for Pelosi, while they yammer on about the WH. Keepin' info we have a RIGHT to have (and the people's power) safely OUT of our hands. Feeling powerless? That's exactly the way dems and repukes see it. The DEMS want to continue their luxury cruise and are guilty of the same secretiveness as the repukes.

Pack of Liars.

She "gets things done?"

Make a list of her accomplishments. Then make one for Pelosi. Compare. OOOOO THAT WAS EASY--but it's the sort of homework some people seem to be utterly incapable of.

I admire Sheehan's efforts and personal sacrifice, and I don't want to be harsh to her, but as others have already pointed out, she's already abandoned one campaign because of the heat. That's not a big recommendation.

"Progressives?" *snort* Try "windsocks." You couldn't get enough of Pelosi a few months ago, and now you're screaming for her head. Same with anyone else on the scene: mindlessly worship 'em, then ditch 'em and vilify 'em as soon as they make a single misstep...or another object of worship peeks around the corner. Protip: this is why no one else takes you seriously, and why you'll never accomplish jack $#!%.

Cindy Sheehan has fire in her heart. Although I doubt she could get higher than representative, she could shake up the capitol lame ducks....

C. Montgomery Burns @ 19:

pissed off patricia @ 6:

I know I'll be pilloried for this, but I'm not sure this is a good idea. I want Nancy to put impeachment back on the table as much as anyone, but I also know she has a lot of experience in the house. I sort of feel that Cindy is an emotional candidate and I'm not sure that's what's needed now. Okay, I'll crawl under my desk and try to avoid the thrown tomatoes and eggs. ;)

I have to agree. I respect Cindy Sheehan and appreciate her efforts, but Nancy has the experience.

Repeat after me FOX News drones, “The Democrats in the house and senate do NOT have the votes to change anything loyal Bushies don’t want them to.”

You miss the point. The signal impeachment sends to Bush/Cheney/Rove matters. And things change over time. After investigation and by the time a vote to impeach happens, there actually may be enough votes to impeach.

If people followed your advice in the 70s, and did nothing until enough votes to impeach was a "slam dunk," Nixon would have stayed in power. There is more than one way to skin a cat.

Rollo, Then it's time Olbermann expose the votes of all the holdups in the houses. Exposure is a luscious thing.

What you propose is that the snake continue to eat it's own tail.

Just saw this on CNN.

Sheehan running for Pelosi seat is not attacking Democrats but taking back the party. If your party is not doing what you want them to do then get involve and take your party back. Cindy have already demonstrated her ability to keep her head on top while being heavily criticize and ridicule, all the while speaking of peace. The majority of Democrats are comfortably numb and wont dare make courageous stand like Sheehan has. She is sharp and capable of reasoning and logic and does not falter or get push aside for spinning attack. Who get impeach first doesn't matter, its not like one has to stand in line, this process should all go as soon and quickly as possible. Whatever it takes to make a stand against corruption. I definately do not want to hear that this will be over in 2008 and just wait it out. When a criminal rob your house do you say "we'll wait it out and the robber will move away and you wont have to deal with it anymore?"

What good is having experience of becoming comfortably numb in the seat of congress?
How many calm deep breath does Pelosi need before she realize as Cindy has that impeachment is the only answer the president have the ability to respond to.

Bush and the whole bunch have acted as king, and have no regard for the Constitution (it's only a piece of paper) or the Bill of rights (only one of ten of the rights still observe)

It's going to take a common man(woman in this case) to represent the common people of America, and someone who is not afraid of the challenge. I hope Cindy would win and change the face of the congress.

For those that don't know "Helter Skelter" Charles Mansion got the chicks that were with him to perform his dirty deeds, but started with small crime and then they kept growing and became entangle that they kept doing the crime because of the trapping of the stuff they did before. He used emotional blackmail to get them to do whatever he wanted them to do, if he had straight about what he was about then they surely would have left his behind long ago.

We have a modern day Charles Mansion in the White House today, using emotional calling card of patriotism and national security with fear base decision making process much like the girls that were involve with Mr Mansion. The crime they began to be implicating in become woven in deeper with each year and more determine to hang onto power with each new passing of disregard for the law.

Nancy does not see this nor willing to see this as the case being for our present Commander in Chief. Cindy has no problem in dealing with something that she never became implicated with supporting this regime. Sometime its the pauper that can save a kingdom and not the prince.

paranoia @ 145:

For those that don't know "Helter Skelter" Charles Mansion got the chicks that were with him to perform his dirty deeds, but started with small crime and then they kept growing and became entangle that they kept doing the crime because of the trapping of the stuff they did before. He used emotional blackmail to get them to do whatever he wanted them to do, if he had straight about what he was about then they surely would have left his behind long ago.

We have a modern day Charles Mansion in the White House today, using emotional calling card of patriotism and national security with fear base decision making process much like the girls that were involve with Mr Mansion. The crime they began to be implicating in become woven in deeper with each year and more determine to hang onto power with each new passing of disregard for the law.

Nancy does not see this nor willing to see this as the case being for our present Commander in Chief. Cindy has no problem in dealing with something that she never became implicated with supporting this regime. Sometime its the pauper that can save a kingdom and not the prince.

The anti-Cindy crowd want to keep our troops in Iraq, but are too dishonest to admit it.

Check will be in the mail as soon as she announces. Might have to move to CA to vote too!! Get rid of Pelosi and the rest of the do nothing congress.

Impeach now!