Q: Will Mike Castle’s position on the impeachment of George Bush be an election issue in 2008?

Filed in National by on July 22, 2007

A: It should be.

Let’s look at what some people are saying about impeachment…

“It’s necessary to initiate impeachment to prevent Mr. Bush from further closing off lines of investigation by use of the pardon power. Then we proceed from there.”

Hube – Please note the word “initiate”, there. The sense is that just starting the proceedings makes a big difference. Does Mike Castle think that we are a country of laws? Does he think that the President is just another citizen when it comes to obeying the law? Those are legitimate questions to ask. (Don’t hold your breath waiting for the News Journal to ask them.)

Deborah Newell Tornello says,

“Impeachment Matters–Even More […] We must impeach the President and Vice President of the United States, and we must begin proceedings to do so immediately, not just for the purpose of exacting a punitive remedy, but also toward enacting a vitally important preventive measure–one that may be the only available means by which to protect the country from the impending imposition of martial law at home as well as the declaration of war against Iran and possibly other countries in the Middle East.”

My wingnut friends will say that the imposition of martial law is hardly inevitable. Given Bush’s record, I don’t. What does Mike Castle think?

House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers has said that if three more Congress Members get behind impeachment he will start the impeachment proceedings. If Castle balks can he still claim to be a moderate in 2008?

ACTION ITEM: Call Castle this week and ask him to sign onto H Res 635, Conyers’ bill for an investigation into grounds for impeachment.

Wilmington Office
(302) 428-1902

Dover Office
(302) 736-1666

Washington Office
(202) 225-4165

About the Author ()

Jason330 is a deep cover double agent working for the GOP. Don't tell anybody.

Comments (25)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Hube says:

    My wingnut friends will say that the imposition of martial law is hardly inevitable. Given Bush’s record, I don’t.

    That’s because you’re a friggin’ nutjob.

  2. jason330 says:

    I hope I’m wrong – but I know you, being the big libertarian that you are, will be on the barricades next to me when it happens…right?

  3. Dave says:

    This is what Democrats do instead of accomplishing something meaningful. That’s why they’re looking up at Bush’s approval ratings.

  4. jason330 says:

    Meaningful? Impeachment isn’t ?

    Maybe you’d like to suggest a more “meaningful” course – or are you leaving that kind of thing up to the brainiacs that you’ve brought in to give FSP more wingnutty edge?

  5. Dave says:

    Meaningful = Solving entitlement problem.

    Meaningful = Fixing or ending NCLB.

    Meaningful = Closing the minority homeownership gap.

    Meaningful = Securing the border.

    Meaningful = Encouraging entrepreneurship.

    Meaningful = Solving healthcare crisis.

  6. jason330 says:

    Gosh I wonder why Republicans didn;t do any of that when they were in the majority?

    Anyhoo – all of that comes with a price tag and with us spending over $700 billion in Iraq so far – what do you propose? A tax increase…gasp!!!

    Impeachment is job oneright now.

  7. Dave says:

    Actually, the GOP did take steps in all of those directions while in power.

    The Dems have done…have done…oh, well. Have a nice day.

  8. J says:

    “Anyhoo – all of that comes with a price tag and with us spending over $700 billion in Iraq so far – what do you propose?”

    Jason –
    I don’t think it’s fair to use the figure above without acknowledging the fact it is actually $$$ that goes right back into our economy.

    I don’t know the costs of ordinance these days but I’m sure it’s hefty, so let’s say for the sake of argument that we’ll never again see $200B including loans.

    That leaves the remainder in our economy (hated Haliburton types, military pay, housing/auto/personal expenses of military families in the U.S., etc.)

    I understand that the number is intended to inflame feelings toward the war effort, but it is far from the truth.

    Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Haliburton, Bell Helicopters, military pay, contractors, and on and on and on.

    Hate them all, but the money stays here.

    The only people who ignore that are politcal opportunist…not you…but politicians, uh, uh..Pelosi, Reid.

  9. jason330 says:

    Wow. That is some awesome economic development program we have going (right under our noses). And yet, I have to wonder if there might be a better way.

  10. J says:

    I know your joking, but facts are facts.

    On a much lighter note and in no way comparing it to a deadly assignment overseas, it is really no different than the Toll Booth jobs program the Dems have going on in this country (as if technology couldn’t do away with those folks).

    In both cases we can probably do without, but private interest (in the toll booth case – unions) keeps them going.

  11. A coupe in the middle of a war. President Surrender “I’m Bananas” Pelosi. Sounds like something worth considering. Let’s make America a banana republic with Speaker “I’m Bananas” herself leading the way.

    Speaker Pelosi couldn’t lead a girl scout troop out of a thunderstorm. She certainly can not lead a great nation in time of war. Her only answer is cut and run. Her only plan is failure. Mike Castle is too much of a reasonable person to stomach that tripe.

    I wonder what convicted felon or unindicted co-conspirator will she appoint to Homeland Security or Defense. I guess Murtha could handle Defense and we will hope the Arabs don’t want to do business with him. Hastings can lead homeland security. He can lie under oath so he can definitely keep secrets. Maybe Jefferson can take treasury, He knows the value of cold hard cash.

    Yeah, impeach the Pres and VP. We need a GOP cake walk in 2008. Hillary is not so easy.

  12. kavips says:

    Someone above wrote that Pelosi could not lead a girl scout troop out of a thunderstorm. I was wondering how they knew…..were they there when it happened? If not, why would one even say it? And if so, why would someone with a masculine name be hanging around a girl scout troop wandering around in the middle of the woods?

  13. kavips says:

    Despite their low scores on integrity, those people you mention are still many points higher on the integrity scale than Cheney, Gonzales, Rove, Snow, Myers, Rice. The only one untouched by the curse of irresponsible incompetence, is Gates.

    The problem seems to be that you just don’t know it yet……

    For the other 99% of Americans, Pelosi offers a refreshing change….

  14. kavips says:

    New thought: Integrity issue occur whenever no one is watching. Competency issues occur when everyone is ……

  15. J says:

    “For the other 99% of Americans, Pelosi offers a refreshing change….”

    Pelosi is represents everything that’s wrong with this country’s leadership. She’s a loser of the worse kind because she planned this rise to the top from childhood and is still unprepared.

    Change? she’s done ZERO for this country since she became Speaker.

    Adam Putnam sums it up best here (Note this was written on May 25th, 2007 and still applies TODAY!)

    Putnam: A Five-Month Democrat Legacy of Broken Promises and Zero Accomplishments
    “How Quickly They Have Become Everything They Campaigned Against”

    May 25, 2007

    WASHINGTON – Congressman Adam Putnam, Chairman of the House Republican Conference, issued the following statement today commenting on the five-month mark of the new Democrat majority:

    “Today the Democrats mark five months of broken promises and zero accomplishments.

    “They campaigned to change the way Washington works, to make this Congress the ‘most open and honest in history,’ but their record is just the opposite. They promised fiscal responsibility, but instead they drove through the biggest tax hike in history and ignored the generational crisis of entitlement spending. They promised more scrutiny on earmarks, but time and again they have broken their own rules to hide dubious earmarks from the American people. They promised to support the troops, but they tried every trick in the book to slow-bleed our troops until Republican unity forced them to back down.

    “When a leading Democrat’s ethics violation was exposed, Democrats circled the wagons to cover it up. And just this week, Democrats scrapped their promises on lobbying reform, instead passing with Republican support a Republican bill that last year they derided as a ‘sham.’ Not one substantive piece of the Democrats’ legislative agenda has been enacted into law.

    “After five months, Democrats have delivered higher taxes, ballooning spending, an earmark bonanza, ethics cover-ups, empty promises and a failed agenda. Meanwhile, Republicans are breaking records in passing amendments to Democrat bills, despite Democrats’ best efforts to deny us the opportunity offer them.

    “The only remarkable thing about the Democrats’ first five months is how quickly they have become everything they campaigned against.”

  16. Von Cracker says:

    What does Pelosi actually represent that makes her a loser and everything wrong with this country? Is it because she’s a Dem? A woman? From San Fran? What exactly?

    All I ever hear out of the right are fantastical statements with no FACTS to back them up, only just opinion.

    I wasn’t for impeachment because it’s an extraordinary measure, and should be used in the direst circumstances, such as blow jobs.

    But now I am all for it. Not because it’s a republican (if you can call the cabal in the WH that), but for the reason that the Executive is making outlandish power-grabs, breaking the law, and refuses to be accountable, by not submitting to what is the inherent right of Congress. The over-reaching executive privilege whine has got to stop, and Bush is only backing himself into a corner, looking for a fight.

    And if you’re gonna bitch about the Dem Congress, then you really should take into consideration the Filibuster-loving GOP. They are the obstructionist, as it pertains to the lack of legislation coming through.

    Maybe the Dems should consider the “Nuclear Option” now….the GOP had no problem invoking that, just for judicial nominees. So, using a rethug technique to save American soldiers lives would be on good moral standing, and no one on the right could have a legitimate gripe.

  17. jason330 says:

    The fact that nobody can make a case for why Bush should not be impeached without maligning Democrats speaks volumes.

    Sticking to the topic at hand does not appear to be a Republican virtue.

  18. so an economy bouyed by death and misery at the expence of our international reputation and the creation of domestic insecurity is ok by so called conservatives?
    the viet nam war also bouyed the economy, all wars have. shame on you J.
    our soldiers are not fighting for stockholders to reap dividends.

  19. jason330 says:

    I think his/her comment is some kind of unfunny satire. She/He isn’t serious.

  20. kavips says:

    J provides the republican slant of the congress, Of course they try to downplay its effectiveness.

    Here is the Democrats take. Of course they try to up-play its effectiveness.

    So even as “J” tries to belittle Pelosi, he proves once again, that despite whatever charges they throw at her, her effectiveness has outperformed Hastert’s House by a longshot.

  21. Dave says:

    Kavips — There is so much comedy in that statement, I don’t know where to start.

    How many bills (besides renaming post offices) have gone to the President for his signature or veto during this Congress?

  22. Dave says:

    If you call this effective, you have issues.

  23. Chris says:

    Yes Dave…but remember…that we (conservatives) are the dilusional ones.

  24. kavips says:

    Mr. Chairman: if I got issues, then I am afraid you’ve got more.

    If you call this effective, you have 88 more issues in the 109th republican congress…..than Pelosi’s 110th ever did…..

    (For those with slow servers:
    Democrats: 50 post offices/ Republicans:138)

  25. kavips says:

    Whenever one examines facts, it becomes obvious that you have very good reasons for being so….(delusional)

    And speaking of naming post offices, not only did the Republicans change the names more often than did the Democrats, but they arrogantly chose to name the post offices after their political supporters. The Democrats, of course, felt obligated to rename them after real heros, such as those killed in Iraq, or an ex-president who died just as this congress was coming into session.