impeach bush for peace peach
Mikael's Accountability Blog

(Go to our Main Page:ImpeachForPeace.org)

Add to Google

Daily Impeachment News:

August 3, 2007

Minneapolis: ‘Bridges Not Bombs’ Protest, Saturday

Filed under: IfP Events, Impeachment News, Minnesota — Jodin Morey @ 2:29 pm

35wbridge2.jpgAs you know, a tragedy occurred Wednesday when the I-35W bridge collapsed in Minneapolis. We at Impeach for Peace want to extend our deepest sympathies and condolences to the victims involved and their families. Impeach for Peace is based in Minneapolis so this hits close to home. Impeach for Peace organizers have struggled with how our organization should respond now that President Bush is planning to visit Minneapolis on Saturday. We don’t want to appear as if we are using this tragedy to our political advantage, nor do we wish for Bush to do so. What we’ve decided is that we’re going to encourage citizens of Minneapolis to protest with the message, “Bridges not Bombs.” We have decided to exclude the concept of impeachment from this protest so as not to disrespect the seriousness of the tragedy with what many see as a partisan issue. While Impeach for Peace doesn’t blame Bush for this specific tragedy, we do see this event as being endemic of a larger failure of priorities. This administration has put the country’s resources into unjustified military actions instead of investing in our national infrastructure. Bush will be speaking at the I-35 Bridge on Saturday.

–UPDATE … We heard of another group meeting at the Guthrie on Washington St., but we’ve not heard a definitive time for Bush’s visit yet. We’re planning on meeting at 9:30am at the Guthrie (818 S 2nd St, Meet at the walkway between the Mill CityMuseum and the Guthrie), and possibly marching to the best spot, once more details become available. I’m not sure where the best place to park is, but I know that there is street parking around 5th Ave and 3rd St. If you are coming from the south, the light rail is one excellent option and an opportunity to talk to other commuters! Please revisit this webpage to get the specific time as we get closer to the event, and please forward this to all your friends.

For details contact Jodin:
612-328-1451

15 Comments

  1. Minneapolis: ‘Bridges Not Bombs’ Protest, Saturday…

    A tragedy occurred Wednesday when the I-35W bridge collapsed in Minneapolis. We at Impeach for Peace want to extend our condolences to the victims involved and their families. Impeach for Peace organizers have struggled with how our organization shou…

    Trackback by www.buzzflash.net — August 3, 2007 @ 2:50 pm

  2. [...] Impeach Bush For Peace » Minneapolis: ‘Bridges Not Bombs’ Protest, Saturday August 3, 2007 Minneapolis: ‘Bridges Not Bombs’ Protest, Saturday Filed under: Impeachment News, IfP Events, Minnesota — Jodin Morey @ 2:29 pm [...]

    Pingback by java » Welcome To Minneapolis, Asshole — August 3, 2007 @ 8:16 pm

  3. I like “Bridges not Bombs”. I also like Nick Coleman’s idea:
    “No NEW Collapses”.
    Bush’s NewsSpeak today was “We have an Intelligence Gap” which I would change to

    “We have an Infrastructure GAP”

    See You Saturday.

    Comment by Raginglefty — August 3, 2007 @ 8:47 pm

  4. Is there any more substantial proof that the Republican Neoconservative Death Cult is the greatest security threat to the United States? We have trillions for death. Not one cent for America. The owners of George (The Decider) Bush and his Neoconservative Death Cult proles are the greatest single threat to the further survival of all higher life forms on this planet. Impeach Now!

    Comment by Peter Butt — August 4, 2007 @ 10:18 am

  5. Free health care would be nice too

    Comment by Homeland Conspiracy — August 4, 2007 @ 12:54 pm

  6. you are the ones that came up with the “support bridges not wars” sign? i wish the worst on everyone who is ok with that sign. i dont care where you come from dem or rep, but there is a thing called decency, of which i thought Minnesota founded itself on. but not for you political whores, i hope the ones who passed in this tragedy haunt you forever. and since im a minnesotan, i will say “have a nice day”

    Comment by ben harwood — August 4, 2007 @ 1:24 pm

  7. Harwood: So you’re saying to respect the dead one should not attempt to ensure a tragedy like this never happens again? I believe it’s indecent to ignore the national infrastructure while waging an unjustified war in Iraq.

    Comment by Jodin Morey — August 4, 2007 @ 5:41 pm

  8. Respect for the dead is more important than political agenda. You don’t fix societies problems at the scene of a tragedy. You pressure your political leaders and peers to support you before hand. Were you so concerned about infrastructure prior to this? I think not, you are just looking to blame someone or something. And your using this tragedy because it is getting attention from the world. Since your organization failed at raising $$ or whatever, to support and spread its lies, lets politicize the death of 5 people and the injury of about a 100. You are perfect role models that any Minnesotan can be honored to live next to [not!!!]. thanks for embarrassing us in front of the rest of the nation :p

    Comment by ben harwood — August 5, 2007 @ 1:12 am

  9. Harwood, you assume too much about me. I have been an advocate of using our country’s resources for non-military purposes to serve the people for a very long time. What’s embarrassing the nation is our support for unjustified war, and the failure to use our resources to take car of our own country. This event is the very moment we should point out the failings of our country in regards to our infrastructure. No one seems to care when there is not a trajedy occuring. You’d have us wait until people are distracted by the latest TV Program. These people died because of a failure in priorities. Bush was attempting to use it for political purposes. Bush’s photo-op is a perfect time, and the most appropriate time to point this out.

    Comment by Jodin Morey — August 5, 2007 @ 2:15 pm

  10. sorry to say, but you are wrong my dear. nice to debate with you but its pointless to continue since you are blind. thanks and have a nice day.

    Comment by ben harwood — August 6, 2007 @ 12:22 am

  11. here are the people you disgrace with your political bs. http://www.kare11.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=261310

    Comment by ben harwood — August 6, 2007 @ 11:13 am

  12. Mr. Harwood,

    Press conferences after this tragedy included President Bush, Senators Norm Coleman and Amy Klobuchar, Representative Keith Ellison, Governor Pawlenty, Mayor Rybak as well as Bush Administration, MNDot and NTSB officials. EVERYBODY discussed this tragedy in political and economic terms as well as expressing their personal condolences in a public forum.

    We of ImpeachforPeace and the other peace activists who protested used a public forum available to us – a First Amendment protected (against Bush Administration wishes, but still our) Right.

    Are you of the opinion that politicians are the only ones who have the right to express their political and economic opinions at the time of a tragedy?

    Did you notice that Governor Pawlenty has changed his tune about vetoing the gas tax increase to pay for rebuilding our infrastructure?

    Unless you really feel that politicians are the only ones who can publicly express their opinions at a time of tragedy, you are a hypocrite for criticizing those who protested and praising Bush, Coleman and Pawlenty for ’stepping up’ at the time of crisis.

    Comment by Mikael — August 6, 2007 @ 5:00 pm

  13. please focus on the issuse at hand, INFRASTRUCTURE. you can honor the memories of the people who passed by addressing that issue. there is no link (direct or indirect) to the WAR in IRAQ. when you connect the two you disgrace the people who died in this tragedy and the people involved and who passed in the war.

    **i use to be in favor of the war in iraq, but after this experience i have changed my views. it appears to me that the entire mid east will never be peacefull. it seams that all they know is war. i think the US should just sit on the sidelines and let them kill eachother. change or freedom will never happen until the people of the mid east stand up for it themselves (similar to how our nation was built, if we can do it anyone can). i think we should only enter the picture when they get too powerfull or start to endanger the rest of the world.**

    again the war and the 35w bridge are NOT related.

    i think we should be focusing on how our bridges are inspected. sounds to me like thats the weakest link, i would hold the last person(s) who inspected the bridge responsible.

    Comment by ben harwood — August 9, 2007 @ 9:54 am

  14. Ben,

    There is a link between the gross administration misallocation of funds toward military industrial contracts and war-profiteering oil and other energy industry cronies and away from domestic needs – rebuilding our infrastructure being just one of the many needs not being met while Bush’s oil and ‘defense’ contracting cronies reap massive profits from this boondoogle.

    Bush inherited the greatest surplus in the history of the Republic and within 2 1/2 years of his first term had squandered it and converted it into the greatest deficit – which has continued to soar.

    Gas was $1.46 when Bush took office. We are rejoice when it drops down to $2.92 a gallon – twice the 2000 price.

    Over 80% of the promised rebuilding of New Orleans and other Katrina-related disaster areas has not been completed.

    Granted, the crumbling infrastructure was a decades-old inherited problem, but this ‘resident and his Administration couldn’t give a shit about American citizens health and welfare.

    Comment by Mikael — August 9, 2007 @ 11:13 am

  15. Minneapolis as in every town in America has been at risk for a long time. The Bush Regime has been undermining the American Spirit ever since Prescott Bush sold our secrets to Germany way back in 1900’s. George H.W.Bush was a coward in WWII when he put his plane in the water, because he was afraid to land on an aircraft carrier.He returned to be in the back ground with the CIA helped to broker the Eisenhower-Nixon Ticket.The Sr. Bush worked with the “moral majority” getting Ronald Regan as their torch bearer while the SR. Bush plotted for his control. George W. has been a proven failure with every ting he has been involved with. We the People have to send a lighting bolt through Washington.Our National Guard has been in Iraq during Katherina and falling bridge.The BBC Blair Bush Cheney assets must be frozen.We the People want World Peace as do the People of all the other countries.In GOD WE Trust.

    Comment by Tim — August 10, 2007 @ 6:11 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

"I just want you to know that,
when we talk about war, we're really talking about peace."
-Bush, June 18, 2002

"War is Peace"
-Big Brother in George Orwell's 1984

Do-It-Yourself
Impeachment
Blog Categories
Our Whole Site

As heard on
the radio...
Bush hears the voices logo
• KFAI radio interview
• "I Hear The Voices"
• Oct 5th Ad
• Oct 5th Interview
• Mike Malloy
• Peter Werbe
Get Impeach For Peace Stuff!
(pins, bumper stickers, hats, etc.)
Impeach Bush for Peace Stuff logo
protest picture
Calendar
Picts/Vid
Why Should Bush Have Been Impeached?Charges against Bush

Charges & Evidence

Videos

Bush's Defense
Arguments Against Bush Impeachment...

• If we impeach Bush, we’ll get President Cheney!
The first impeachment resolution introduced by McKinney included Bush, Cheney, and Rice. Although, even if we only initially pursue Bush, initiating the impeachment process will lead to an investigation that will implicate lots of people in the Bush administration who are guilty of committing crimes, including Cheney.

No matter who we get to replace Bush, we’ll be showing those in power that anyone who breaks the law will be held accountable.

• Promoting impeachment will seem too “extreme.”
Demanding that crimes be investigated is NOT extreme. Some previous impeachment attempts were considered extreme because they were pursued for actions that didn't rise to the level of a Constitutional crisis, which is what the impeachment tool is meant to be used for. Nixon's impeachment, however, was bipartisan.

  • We should wait to impeach...
Wait to impeach? We've waited 3 or more years too long already. We had enough evidence to impeach years ago. Remember, an impeachment only means you have enough evidence to warrant a trial, just like an indictment. Our congress people didn't take an oath to bipartisanship. They took an oath to the Constitution. Besides which, our troops, Iraqi civilians, and our own civil liberties are all waiting for this.
 
• Before we impeach, we should get some legislation passed...
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?

• It hurts the democracy to go through a presidential impeachment. And Bush is a lame duck anyway.
Holding government officials accountable for their actions strengthens our democracy. Letting lawlessness stand weakens it.

Sometimes reprimanding a child (president) doesn't make the family (Washington) a happy place. But you still have to do it so the child and his siblings (future presidents) learn about accountability. Impeachment is horribly UNDERUSED, which is part of why there's so much corruption at the top. Politicians must learn to fear it. People think things are better because we improved the make-up of our law-making body, Congress. But Bush is BREAKING LAWS. So, it doesn't matter how many laws Congress passes if they don't serve their OVERSIGHT duties as well by impeaching. They swore to defend the Constitution. What are laws without enforcement?

Besides, considering Bush's track-record of breaking laws, he can still do a lot of damage. Our troops, Iran, and our Supreme Court are all endangered so long as he remains in office. Waiting until Bush is out of office will leave us complicit in any further crimes he commits. The Union of Concerned Scientists has estimated that the death toll from a "tactical" nuclear weapon of the kind Bush is contemplating using in Iran would be at minimum 3 million men, women, and children. The path of death would stretch across country boundaries into India.

Perhaps worst of all, we set a terrible precedent by allowing Bush to stay in office after he's broken so many laws. Impeachment will stop future presidents from using Bush's actions as justification for even more lawbreaking and erosion of civil liberties.

• I'm a Democrat/
Republican. If we support impeachment it will lower the chances of my party winning in 2008.
So, your party would rather win elections than do what's right for the country? I hope you're wrong. I also hope the public is willing to throw additional support to any party that holds our elected officials accountable for their actions. This has been historically true with every single impeachment effort launched. And this impeachment effort would begin with majority support (unlike most past impeachments including Nixon).

• Impeachment will never happen. Congress members will block it.
Well, all we need is a majority of support in the House. And 2/3rds vote in the Senate to remove Bush from office will happen once the evidence gets aired on the floor of the House, and subsequently the national media outlets. The political pressure will become too great.

Today's impossibility is tomorrow's reality. Congress members will realize that tying their political future to Bush reduces their chances of getting elected. Remember, one way or another, Bush is gone by 2009— but members of Congress may retain their offices beyond that date. Bush's poll numbers are extremely low, and most Americans support impeachment. This is a bipartisan movement. This means that if we make the pressure unbearable for Members of Congress, they'll turn on him to keep their own seats (like they did with Nixon). It's already starting to happen. While many Members of Congress have behaved unethically in the last few years, it's important to understand that this is related to their warped view of what's in their self-interest. Let's wake them up to their true self-interest (impeaching the president), by showing them our support for impeachment.

And even if we only impeach, and the Senate fails to do their duty and remove him from office, it will only implicate the Senators who fail to do their sworn Constitutional duty.

• But Speaker of the House Pelosi said that Impeachment was "off the table."
Pelosi most likely said this to remove any appearance of conflict-of-interest that would arise if she were thrust into the presidency as a result of the coming impeachment. What we need to do is to pressure Pelosi not to interfere with impeachment maneuverings within her party. Sending her Do-It-Yourself impeachments legitimizes her when she joins the impeachment movement in the future.

(Read More)