As they have previously, Democratic leaders staunchly oppose Kucinich's impeachment effort. They expect to table the resolution by referring it to the Judiciary Committee, where they expect it to die.
House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyers (D-Md.) suggested yesterday that engaging in a lengthy debate over impeaching Bush in the waning days of his administration is not a productive use of the House's time.
I'm shocked. Shocked.
So, is this a colossal waste of time? Or do we need to impeach to ensure there won't be another law-breaking, Constitutional-trashing administration like Bush's?
While we're on the topic of the Iowa Democratic caucus, one of the most important "events" that take place during the proceedings is the designation of a second-choice candidate for those candidates that don't win 15 percent support during the caucus. As a result, second-tier candidates may have a role in deciding who wins the caucus by directing their supporters to back someone else.
Kucinich has already asked his supporters to back Obama. (An interesting choice, given that he backed Edwards over Dean in 2004. Why the nod for more conservative candidates?) And Ralph Nader asked his supporters to go for Edwards.
Christopher Dodd says he won't make any deals during the caucus. Presumably, his supporters will decide for themselves who to back.
The big mover and shaker and Iowa could be Bill Richardson, who enjoys about 10 percent of support in the state. Given that the top three Democratic candidates are polling about even, even a few percentage points one way or the other could significantly alter the outcome of the caucus. According to an "exclusive" in today's Iowa Independent, Richardson is planning to throw his support behind Obama, a surprise, given the buzz that Richardson was angling for the VP spot on a Clinton ticket after his defense of the New York Senator during a recent debate.
(In an unrelated matter, check out the poll numbers from MoveOn.org members. It pretty much mirrors the composition of national Democrats, doesn't it? With two exceptions, of course: about twice as much support for Kucinich as found in national polls, and an undecided amount that hovers near ten percent.
So much for MoveOn.org being a "radical" organization. In reality, it appears to be a mirror of rank-and-file Democratic supporters...who make up a plurality of the entire electorate...)
