Lisa Mascaro of the Las Vegas Sun investigates a story the Washington Press Corpse refuses to touch - the complete blackout on coverage of the question of impeachment. 

After examining why Democrats won't impeach - because Pelosi and Reid took impeachment off the table in 2006 so Republicans couldn't use the fear of impeachment against Democratic candidates - Mascaro asks why most pollsters won't even include it in their polls, in spite of numerous polls showing broad support for impeachment as well as our unprecedented 2-year-old petition campaign for more impeachment polls.

At the offices of the Pew Research Center in Washington, Scott Keeter’s in box gets jammed up every so often with hundreds of e-mails asking him to poll on impeachment.

Pew and other pollsters say they have never seen anything like it — the impeachment movement is pleading for a clear assessment of its numbers.

Keeter said there’s a lively debate in the polling community about whether to ask the question, but Pew has declined. The issue does not appear to be concrete enough, Keeter said, and the organization is loath to query Americans on a topic that hasn’t matured in the public discourse in a way that gives respondents enough information to form opinions.

That said, he added that his neighbor has an “Impeach Them Both” sign in his yard.

As someone who reads all kinds of polls, I'm left speechless at the claim that the issue "does not appear to be concrete enough."

What on earth does that mean? What makes a polling topic "concrete" or not? As metaphors go, we're not talking apples and oranges here, we're talking quarks and galaxies.

Let's look at Pew's latest poll:

Two-thirds (67%) of Republicans today believe the U.S. is making progress in defeating the insurgents in Iraq, up from 53% in February. But very few Democrats (16%) or independents (31%) agree with this assessment, and views have remained unchanged throughout the year.

How "concrete" is "making progress in defeating the insurgents"? Nobody in the United States or Iraq (with the possible exception of Juan Cole) has a fucking clue if we are "making progress in defeating the insurgents." Nobody in the United States has any idea who the insurgents are, how many there are, how many have been killed, what resources they have, what motivates them to fight, how they recruit more insurgents, or any of the other concrete facts about the insurgency. If ever there was a gargantuan gooey globule of a question, this one is it.

Impeachment, on the other hand, is as "concrete" as it gets. It's not an abstraction; we've been through it a few times in our history, most recently in 1998, which is just 9 years ago. At the time, there were dozens of polls on impeachment by everying pollster including Pew! Does Pew think everyone in America has had amnesia about Clinton's impeachment?

As for Keeter's other excuse:

a topic that hasn’t matured in the public discourse in a way that gives respondents enough information to form opinions.

let's just look at the headline of Pew's latest poll:

Petraeus' Proposals Favored, But No Lift in War Support 

Petraeus testified before Congress at great length for most of two days on 9/11 and 9/12. Yet Pew started its poll on 9/12 - the very day Petraeus finished testifying!

How much of Petraeus' long and detailed report "matured in the public discourse in a way that gives respondents enough information to form opinions"?

Not very much, according to Pew's own poll!

Q.64 As you may know, General David Petraeus recently reported to Congress about the situation in Iraq. How much, if anything, have you read or heard about this?

A lot: 43%
A little: 43%
Nothing at all: 13%
Don't know/refused: 1%

So according to Pew's own data, 56% of Americans heard "a little or nothing at all" about Petraeus' "report."

Now using Pew's standards, you might think Pew wouldn't bother to ask those who only heard "a little" about Petraeus' "report" what they thought of it because they just told Pew they didn't have "enough information to form opinions."

But you'd be wrong! For the next 3 questions, Pew asked those who said both "a lot" and "a little"!

IF ‘A LOT’ OR ‘A LITTLE’ (1,2 IN Q.64) ASK [N=1081]: 

Q.65 General Petraeus made recommendations about troop withdrawals that President Bush has endorsed.  From what you’ve read or heard, do you approve or disapprove of these plans?

IF ‘A LOT’ OR ‘A LITTLE’ (1,2 IN Q.64) ASK [N=1081]:

Q.66 In describing the current situation in Iraq, do you think General Petraeus made things seem BETTER than they really are, or WORSE than they really are, or is he presenting the situation about the way it really is?

IF ‘A LOT’ OR ‘A LITTLE’ (1,2 IN Q.64) ASK [N=1081]:

Q.67 Did General Petraeus’s statements make you any more optimistic or less optimistic about the U.S. achieving its goals in Iraq, or has your view of the situation not changed?

Now if you only heard "a little" about Petraeus' "report," how on earth could you "form an opinion" (Keeter's own standard) on any of these questions?

So Scott Keeter ostensible "reason" for not polling on impeachment is utter bullshit and I'm calling him on it. By whatever "standards" Keeter uses for choosing polling questions, questions on impeaching Bush and Cheney are exactly as valid as any other questions they ask.

I will send this to Scott Keeter and I encourage you to do so as well. Just click "Send to a Friend" below and copy/paste skeeter@pewresearch.org in the "to" box. I will of course give Keeter  the opportunity to reply here in full without editing.

And while you're at it, sign our petition to all the Corporate Media pollsters urging them to ask Americans about impeachment!