WaPo Polling Editor mad about requests for impeachment poll

Naperville, Ill.: Why haven't you polled on public support for the impeachment of George W. Bush?

Richard Morin: This question makes me mad...

_______________________

Seattle, Wash.: How come ABC News/Post poll has not yet polled on impeachment?

Richard Morin: Getting madder...

_______________________

Haymarket, Va.: With all the recent scandals and illegal/unconstitutional actions of the President, why hasn't ABC News/Washington Post polled whether the President should be impeached?

Richard Morin: Madder still...

_______________________

...

That said. we do not ask about impeachment because it is not a serious option or a topic of considered discussion--witness the fact that no member of congressional Democratic leadership or any of the serious Democratic presidential candidates in '08 are calling for Bush's impeachment. When it is or they are, we will ask about it in our polls.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2005/12/19/DI2005121900972.html

I think the logical response here is not to keep demanding that Morin run an impeachment poll, but that the Democratic leadership satisfy his criteria for doing the poll and start calling for impeachment.

Doesn't that guy realize he's going to read like an idiot when seen on the internet?

Babs Boxer is bringing the "impeachment" issue up right now on Leslie Blitzer's show.

Washington, D.C.: In her November 13 column, Post Ombudsman Deborah Howell addressed reader requests for The Post to polls to measure public support for impeachment.

Howell wrote: "First, there was a swarm to me and to Post Polling Editor Richard Morin asking that The Post do a poll on whether President Bush should be impeached ... The question many demanded that The Post ask is biased and would produce a misleading result, Morin said; he added that the campaign was started by Democrats.com."

Please explain WHY a question asking if President Bush should be impeached if he lied to the country about war is "biased".

Please also explain how this is consistent with polls the Post ran -- under your direction, I might add -- in 1998 asking whether then-President Clinton should be impeached if he had an affair with Monica Lewinsky. Do you now believe those questions you asked -- and reported on -- throughout 1998 were "biased"? If so, do you believe you and The Post owe Clinton an apology?

Why does The Post think it is appropriate to raise the spectre of impeachment when there is a Democratic president, but not when there is a Republican in office?

H.Res.635, which will create a select committee to investigate the Administration's intent to go to war before congressional authorization, manipulation of pre-war intelligence, encouraging and countenancing torture, and retaliating against critics, and to make recommendations regarding grounds for possible impeachment.
http://capwiz.com/pdamerica/issues/alert/?alertid=8329176&type=CO
Here is an action and some information concerning his bill

You would think that the questions being polled were based on his personal feelings and biases based on his response. Of course that wouldn't be very professional for a newspaper would it?

The WaPo says it does "not ask about impeachment because it is not a serious option or a topic of considered discussion"

Is it possible that reason "it is not a serious option or a topic of considered discussion" is that the WaPo isn't asking about it?

Far be it from me to suggest that the WaPo or any newspaper or other media outlet should use its collective or individual "mind" to actually say or suggest something that is not a reflection or report of what somebody else says or does.

morinr@washpost.com

Of course my e-mail was not junk. It was serious and considered.

:evilgrin:

She's a Dem leader to me.

NGU.

What a funny little reality that is -- like the NYT not reporting OH and then telling us they didn't because there's no story there. Circular.

Our bubblewrapped press.

The FISA Court clearly allows the government to wiretap immediately where there is need and gives up to 72 hours before they need to contact the court for approval. That negates the need for Bush to circumvent the court in order to get timely action. The only reason to circumvent the FISA court is if they would not likely approve the tap. IE: If there isn't probable cause or if the tap is politically motivated. Bush has clearly broken the law, and Americans are less free and less safe as a result. Our very democracy is threatened when a leader assumes for himself the power of prosecutor, judge and jury. America is a land of law, and Bush is not above the law.

Bush should be censured at least and frankly - I believe, impeached. Yesterday one congressman called for impeachment and another for censure. Why will the Washingron Post not run this as a poll? You ran a poll asking if Clinton should be impeached over Monica Lewinsky, would not a poll regarding a president breaking the law to spy on Americans be equally compelling?