But politics do not begin and end in Washington. So it is that the antiwar messages most likely to be heard and acted upon by Congressional Democrats and wavering Republicans trying to figure out how the war will play at the polls in November will come from their hometowns. It is there, at the grassroots, that a growing number of activists are organizing with an eye toward communicating to Congress that, as Wisconsinite Keith Schmitz says, “It’s OK to oppose the war.”

In daily conversations, with friends, neighbors, associates, in the grocery store line, we need to make mention how the war is hurting us here at home.  Here’s an example I used yesterday talking to friends from Shaftsbury VT.

Me:  ” I went to a meeting yesterday (Saturday) at the Bennington Public Library where Vermont House speaker Gaye Symington held a Town Meeting discussion. 

Friends:  “Oh, I heard about her, she’s quite attractive”…

Me: “Yes indeed, and smart too.  We had a very good discussion on the challenges of funding healthcare in Vermont and helping the uninsured”.
“The town meeting was videotaped by Catamount Public Access TV and will be playing on TV soon”

Friends: “If we could just get out of this war in Iraq, we’d have some money to do other things here at home”.

Me:  “Exactly!  That’s the first thing I said to some people when I left the meeting at the library”! 

This is an example of bringing the war home. We are setting the stage for letting friends know that its OK to oppose the war.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

url= BRINGING THE WAR HOME

I kept the poll open an extra day (because I was too busy to mess with it), so here are the results:

On the one hand, the poll is overwhelmingly in favor of the Vermont Legislature initiating impeachment proceedings as per the US House rules. On the other hand, unlike our other poll on Democratic Presidential Primary candidates, hardly anyone felt moved enough to actually vote. Are the results muted by a lack of enthusisam? What do you think?

On today’s broadcast of ABC’s Sunday morning “news” program This Week, Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) — who was recently selected GMD readers’ favorite Presedential hopeful — dropped a political bombshell on the public (and an unsuspecting Sen. Bill Frist, also on the program) by announcing he will formally introduce a motion in the Senate calling for the censure of President Bush over the NSA wiretapping matter (a clip of the appearence can be found here).

Although Frist pledged to use his power to keep the motion from seeing the light of day, it’s still agreat move because, as Georgia10 at DailyKos puts it:

The most obvious and immediate benefit of Feingold’s statement is that it keeps Bush’s illegal spying in the news.  While the media has declared accountability dead after the Senate Intelligence Committee voted not to investigate the program, Feingold’s motion ratchets up the heat and keeps the scandal alive.

It seems obvious to folks who frequent this board that Bush’s blatantly illegal conduct merits at least this action. Here’s Feingold:

STEPHANOPOULOS: So if you’re so convinced that the President has broken the law, why not file an article of impeachment?

FEINGOLD: Well, you know, that’s an option we could look at, if somebody thought that was a really good idea. There are other options out there. In fact, this conduct is right in the strike zone — even though the Founding Fathers didn’t have strike zones, they didn’t have baseball — but it is right in the strike zone of the concept of high crimes and misdemeanors.

“We, as a Congress, have to stand up to a president who acts like the Bill of Rights and the Constitution were repealed on Sept 11, [2001],”

In fact, a glance to the left side of the front page will remind you that Vermonters would like to see a far more definitive reaction, but anything that causes Sen Frist to get all twisted up and flustered has got to be good.

Frist:

“Russ is just wrong, he is flat wrong, he is dead wrong,”

Frist called the censure attempt “political” and a “terrible, terrible signal” to enemies of the U.S. abroad.

Will a successful censure movement take the wind out of the impeachment movement? I doubt it. Impeachment promoters will simply see this as gravy if it passes (and again, the motion actually seeing the Senate floor seems like an outside shot, at this point), and if it doesn’t pass, they’ll just get more riled up and determined.

I suppose it’s possible that if this censure notion were to become a much bigger deal than I think it will, it could end up “competing” with impeachment. But I seriously don’t see that happening. What do you folks think?

Once more the town of Hardwick has sad news, as another Hardwick native has been killed in Iraq. Christopher Merchant was only 32 and left four children, ages nine to fourteen. Once again, we in Vermont are left to wonder why our sons, brothers, and members of our communities must die in a futile and ill-conceived war against an enemy who never threatened the United States.

In addition, we can wonder whether the kind of democracy we have in the United States, in which the government spies on its political opponents, is what Bush has planned for Iraq.

Small wonder that Bush’s popularity is at an all-time low and towns in Vermont are voting to support impeachment.

Vermonters who work hard and play by the rules deserve a government that guards our borders to keep us safe from attacks as well as from natural disasters.  Our troops deserve a government that only calls them out when there is a real need.  This means that we PREVENT attacks and PREVENT natural disasters when possible.  The Republican priorities are so skewed that the only ones benefiting are the very rich and the corporations.  Did someone forget to tell them it’s OUR tax money?

Why was NORAD not called out on 9/11?  Why is the whole country not calling for impeachment?  We are literally going bankrupt.

Why were the troops sent to Iraq without provocation and without the tools and protective equipment they needed to keep them safe?

Why are they using wmd like depleted uranium?  “Sixty-seven percent of babies born to the 400,000 vets who suffer from Gulf War Syndrome have birth defects,” said Joyce Riley, a former nurse who flew in Iraq and the founder and spokesperson of the American Gulf War Veterans Association. Iraq shows similar numbers of birth defects and high rates of leukemia (they call it the white death).

Army Regulation 700-48 requires mitigation of nuclear waste from these weapons. They are required by law to put into effect environmental remediation and medical treatment for those parties exposed. It’s just not happening.

Google ‘Doug Rokke’ (it’s much worse and more information that I can post here).

The very least we can do is test returning Vermont troops for DU once a year for as many years as it takes. Connecticut and Louisiana have implemented such laws.  New York has a bill in motion as well as about 11 or 12 other states.

Where does the Governor stand on this, and Dubie and Martha Rainville?  We need them to walk the walk as well as talk the talk.  They are the responsible parties in Vermont.  Support Our Troops is more than a slogan for a bumper sticker. By not speaking out they are effectively covering up a war crime and putting their Party before the people.

Mandatory testing of returning troops (since 1991) needs to happen — it’s the very least we can do.  Our sons, daughters, neighbors — shouldn’t be left swinging in the wind.

Barbara

(Promoted from the diaries, with a little format-editing. Hope thats okay… – promoted by odum)

A great question worthy of discussion here and elsehwere.  This question posed by the Rutland Herald and column follow below.

Are Democrats in trouble in Vermont politics?

March 9, 2006

By Darren M. Allen Vermont Press Bureau

MONTPELIER — She had the endorsements of the state’s political elite, outspent her opponents by nearly 8 to 1 and was widely expected to win an election in which Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean cast his first in-person vote in years.

So why did Hinda Miller an entrepreneur who founded JogBra, a popular state senator and capable grassroots campaigner lose her race for mayor of Vermont’s largest city to a Progressive who got in the race months later and quipped at one time that he was running for Burlington’s top job because someone from his party had to?

And, more importantly, what does Miller’s loss ; an eight-point shellacking in which she failed to carry even one of the city’s seven wards — mean for Democrats as they head into elections all over Vermont?

Political observers, candidates and party operatives of all three parties were scratching their heads Wednesday to explain how Robert Kiss, a Progressive state representative who only reluctantly carried his party’s banner in the mayoral race, pumped out a decisive victory.

Democrats, of course, suggested that, in the end, some nasty press coverage about Miller soured many voters at the same time that Kiss was the beneficiary of an outstanding army of grass roots volunteers who canvassed the city ward-by-ward and door-by-door.

“The Progressive Party ran an excellent campaign, and they canvassed the city very effectively and very thoroughly,” said Ian Carleton, the chairman of the Vermont Democratic Party and a Burlington city councilor. “You don’t get to be the party in power in the city of Burlington without having a strong party operation in place.”

But that is exactly what most political observers say about the state’s Democrats and what gives them the ability, year-in and year-out, to keep their grasp on legislative seats.

In Burlington, however, it is important to remember that it is the Progressives who have held the mayor’s seat for the past quarter century. Since Rep. Bernard Sanders, I-Vt., defeated six-term incumbent Gordon Paquette in 1981, the Progressives have ruled the roost, with the exception of Peter Brownell’s two-year interruption of Peter Clavelle’s reign between 1993 and 1995.

Clavelle, who endorsed Miller, was a Progressive until he became a Democrat in his unsuccessful bid to oust Republican Gov. James Douglas. He was surprised by Miller’s defeat.

“It was a high road campaign, and Bob Kiss worked hard,” Clavelle said. “It was an issue-oriented effort that worked. Burlington voters looked at the Progressives and liked what they saw.”

Republicans put up a respectable showing in Tuesday’s race. Veteran city council member Kevin Curley placed third in the first round of balloting in the city’s debut of instant runoff voting, garnering 26 percent of the vote. It was about 5 points behind Miller, and 13 points behind Kiss. In the second round, Curley’s votes were redistributed between Miller and Kiss. The final tally gave Kiss 54 percent of the vote to Miller’s 46.

“Frankly, I think the results may point to the increasing irrelevance of the Democratic Party in Burlington and, frankly, in other parts of the state,” said James Barnett, the chairman of the Vermont Republican Party.

“Obviously, the Democrats are not irrelevant,” he said. “But, as they become increasingly leftist, it drives liberal voters to the Progressives, who are the true believers in the cause.”

In one sense, another Progressive at the top of City Hall in Burlington is a non-story. In another, of course, it is a big deal, particularly when the Democratic candidate had the backing of the state’s most influential Democratic machine: that of Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., who said Miller was “a leader in her community … a great state senator” with “a certain flair that separates her from your average politician.”

She also had the solid endorsement of Dean, who said earlier this winter that he was excited to participate in a Town Meeting Day election in person for the first time in years so he could try out the city’s experiment with instant runoff voting.

Indeed, he sent out a press release announcing when he was going to cast his Ward 5 vote early in the morning so that news photographers could capture the event.

In the end, Miller lost the ward to Kiss by 72 votes. It was a pattern repeated in the city’s other six wards. In her own ward, she lost to Kiss by 22 votes. In fact, Curley won two wards in the city’s new North End, and Miller ended up without a single ward victory.

One longtime political observer and participant in many behind the scenes electoral activities said it came down to Kiss’ ability to knock on doors, run an efficient campaign and rely on his association with the Progressives.

“The Democrats haven’t been in power in the city since 1980, and the Progs know how to do this,” said the observer, who asked not to be identified because of his employer. “But is there a statewide implication? I don’t think so. It really serves to keep the Progressive blood supply flowing. But, make no mistake: this was a decisive victory.”

Decisive, observers say, because the Progressives took a page out of the Democratic Party’s playbook. Build a ground-level base of support, knock on doors, call the right potential voters and do it all over again until election day. Except that it didn’t work for the Democrats in the state’s largest city.

Barnett, however, was reluctant to draw any big statewide inference from the mayor’s race, but he did suggest it wasn’t meaningless, either.

“I think it is a big defeat for Howard Dean,” Barnett said. “The Democratic candidate who had the support of the entire Democratic establishment lost in the liberal hometown of the chairman of the national Democratic Party.”

One candidate for whom the ability of the national Democratic Party to get its preferred candidates elected is Sanders. He raised the ire of many of his Burlington Progressive soul mates when he sought their support for his current run at the U.S. Senate. He raised even more by endorsing Peter Welch, the Democratic president pro tem of the Vermont Senate, in his run for Sanders’ House seat.

He purposely stayed out of the mayor’s race this time.

“I am running for U.S. Senate, and virtually all of my political energy is going to go into that race,” he said in a brief telephone interview from his Washington offices. “I want to make sure that a Republican does not get my seat.”

He took note that Kiss won an election with far less name recognition and far less money. His likely opponent in the U.S. Senate race is multimillionaire businessman Richard Tarrant.

“Vermont is a small state and Burlington is a small city, and ultimately people know who you are and where you are coming from,” he said. “There are lot more important things out there than money. People know Bob Kiss, and he was able to get around the city. More than any of the other candidates, he supported the direction Burlington has moved toward in the last 25 years.”

Contact Darren Allen at darren.allen@rutlandherald.com

 

(Note: this diary’s literary style has in some part been inspired by Maryscott O’Connor. Mad props to her, and before you ask, I would SO hit that.)

Ales all around!
Tapping foam below the fold.

Ales on my tab:
For residents of NEWFANE, MARLBORO, PUTNEY, DUMMERSTON, and BROOKFIELD! At Town meetings last night, FIVE Vermont towns passed resolutions calling for the impeachment of George W. Bush for high crimes and misdemeanors.
Whether or not this is a PRACTICAL action is of minimal relevance. What is relevant is the statement made – and the news coverage it is generating.

The lackluster, fumbling responses from the podpeople are also quite entertaining:
Jim Barnett, chairman of the Vermont Republican Party, said, “We should not be impeaching presidents just because we disagree with them.”

Right on! You go, Jim!

We should not impeach presidents because we disagree with them. We impeach presidents because they BREAK THE LAW.

Is there anyone out there, besides John Yoo and Alberto Gonzales, who can look me in the eye with a straight face and tell me this President has not broken the law?

If there is, it would undoubtedly sound like this” “Geoj Dubah Buth hath naw boken duh waw.”
Why so muffled?
Because while making that statement, they would undoubtedly be otherwise occupied, giving Dubya a prostate massage with their tongues.

Courtesy of a Kagro X diary on dKos, here’s Maplefrost’s RUTLAND RESOLUTION, which hopefully one day will be engraved in stone on a marker somewhere in the Rutland Courthouse Historic District:

RESOLUTION

WHEREAS, Section 603 of the Manual of the Rules of the U.S. House of Representatives provides for impeachments to be initiated on a motion based on charges transmitted from a state legislature, and

WHEREAS, George W. Bush has committed high crimes and misdemeanors as he has repeatedly and intentionally violated the United States Constitution and other laws of the United States, particularly the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and the Torture Convention, which under Article VI of the Constitution is a treaty as part of the “supreme law of the land”,

WHEREAS, George W. Bush has acted to strip Americans of their constitutional rights by ordering indefinite detention of citizens, without access to legal counsel, without charge and without opportunity to appear before a civil judicial officer to challenge the detention, based solely on the discretionary designation by the President of a U.S. citizen as an “enemy combatant”, all in subversion of law, and

WHEREAS, George W. Bush has ordered and authorized the Attorney General to override judicial orders for the release of detainees under U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (formerly INS) jurisdiction, even though the judicial officer after full hearing has determined that a detainee is held wrongfully by the Government, and

WHEREAS, George W. Bush has ordered at least thirty times the National Security Agency to intercept and otherwise record international telephone and other signals and communications by American citizens without warrants from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, duly constituted by Congress in 1978, and designated certain U.S. citizens as “enemy combatants”, all in violation of constitutional guarantees of due process, and

WHEREAS George W. Bush has admitted that he willfully and repeatedly violated the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and boasted that he would continue to do so, each violation constituting a felony,

NOW THEREFORE the Rutland County Democratic Committee submits that his actions and admissions constitute ample grounds for his impeachment, and that the General Assembly of the State of Vermont has good cause for submitting charges to the U.S. House of Representatives under Section 603 as grounds for George W. Bush’s impeachment.

The County Committee further submits that Articles of Impeachment should charge that George W. Bush has violated his constitutional oath to execute faithfully the office of President and to the best of his ability to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

In all of this George W. Bush has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President, subversive of constitutional government to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice, and to the manifest injury of the people of the State of Vermont and of the United States.

WHEREFORE, George W. Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any offices of honor, trust or profit under the United States.

February 28, 2006

Adopted: February 28, 2006

Just the existence of this, along with the five resolutions passed at Town Meetings last night, is cause for celebration in itself.
Vermont is LEADING THE WAY.
Hopefully, other states in New England – the birthplace of the nation – will follow. Perhaps we are the best suited to remind the country of the impetus for forming this nation in the first goddamned place:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness……..And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

Therefore, the arguments that this movement is “futile”; “cannot succeed”; “will hurt Democrats” are respectively untrue, irrelevant, and straight-ahead bullshit.
Those saying that are politicians. The PEOPLE are not career politicians. The people can make this sort of statement without fear of political repercussions. The people are not running a campaign for Senate against a monied carpetbagger who wants to make his mark in Vermont so he can retire to Florida.
The people have nothing to lose – except through inaction, timidity, and fealty to the influence of politicians.
But even politicians get it right sometimes.
Here, then, is a compelling argument for the impeachment of George W. Bush, framed around the argument that he has abrogated his oath of office:

That oath constituted a compact between the President and the American people. That compact has been broken. The people’s trust has been betrayed. The nation’s chief executive has shown himself unwilling or incapable of enforcing its laws, for he has corrupted the rule of law.

Well, yeah. Pardon you for stating the obvious…..wait. That’s…oh, wow, man, did I ever screw up! That’s….uh…..Henry Hyde, talking about the overwhelming importance to the health of the Republic of impeaching Bill Clinton!
Whooooops.
Okay, wait a minute, dammit…I’ll find you a better one………

  I believe that this nation sits at a crossroads. One direction points to the higher road of the rule of law. Sometimes hard, sometimes unpleasant, this path relies on truth, justice and the rigorous application of the principle that no man is above the law.

  Now, the other road is the path of least resistance. This is where we start making exceptions to our laws……This is when we pitch the law completely overboard when the mood fits us, when we ignore the facts in order to cover up the truth.

  Shall we follow the rule of law and do our constitutional duty no matter unpleasant, or shall we follow the path of least resistance, close our eyes to the potential lawbreaking, forgive and forget, move on and tear an unfixable hole in our legal system? No man is above the law, and no man is below the law. That’s the principle that we all hold very dear in this country.

No man is above the law! I’m down with that….what? That’s WHO? HAMMER TIME? You mean that’s the Bugman? Tom DeLay, talking about……impeaching Clinton……..shitshitshitshitshit.

Okay….how ’bout this:

Because of the unwillingness of members of Congress to stop the usurpation of power by the President, they are acquiescing in it and they are part of that overall problem. But I think the greater problem is that the members of Congress don’t understand what impeachment is and don’t really understand what abuse of power is. Just as many average citizens have no real concept of what impeachment is, I’m finding out through having worked on this issue and studied it over the last few months that there is a surprising lack of understanding among the members of Congress about it. There is also a lack of understanding of what our government ought to be and what it was intended to be. It’s difficult enough to get members of Congress to focus on some of the specific concrete examples that are readily understandable…….as a practical matter, *it may be impossible to get them to focus on some of these more fundamental, yet more difficult to understand, concepts. That they are difficult to understand, of course, is an indication of how far we’ve drifted from basic constitutional principles.*

Oh, that’s that greasy little man: former Congressman Bob Barr, once again arguing for the neutering of the Big Dawg.
Although something’s happened to Bob – he found God, or started seriously losing sleep over his karma lately, or something. But never mind that.

Would someone care to explain to me what, in the here and now, is so fucking DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND?

My point, and I hope I made it, is that a statement from the PEOPLE is, necessarily, free of political taint or restraint. Read the foregoing quotations again – and remember that most of this was over a BLOWJOB.

Tell you what:
Getting back to Bush for a moment, if you don’t mind terribly…….if it’ll get this fucker impeached, I’ll PERSONALLY blow him. I gotsa rotsa risterine, and I’m sure SOMEBODY’ll step forward to help me pay for the years and years of psychotherapy I’ll require.

Free it from the politicians. Make it a POPULAR MOVEMENT. It has BEGUN, and let no one stop it. No one. No political agenda may stand in the way of this statement being made by the people to whom George Walker Bush swore an oath that he has repeatedly abrogated.

There’s been so many things thats held us down.
But now it looks like things are finally comin’ around.
I know we’ve got, a long long way to go,
and where we’ll end up, I don’t know.
But we won’t let nothin’ hold us back,
we’re putting our selves together,
we’re polishing up our act!
If you felt we’ve been held down before,
I know you’ll refuse to be held down anymore!

Don’t you let nothing, nothing,
Stand in your way!
I want ya’ll to listen, listen,
to every word I say, every word I say!

Ain’t No Stoppin Us Now!
We’re on the move!
Ain’t No Stoppin Us Now!
We’ve got the groove!

I know you know someone that has a negative vibe,
and if you’re trying to make it they only push you aside.
They really don’t have, no where to go.
Ask them where they’re going, they don’t know.
But we won’t let nothin’ hold us back,
we’re gonna put our selves together,
we’re gonna polish up our act!
And if you’ve ever been held down before,
I know you’ll refuse to be held down anymore!

Don’t you let nothing, nothing,
Stand in your way!
I want ya’ll to listen, listen,
to every word I say, every word I say!

Ain’t No Stoppin Us Now!
We’re on the move!
Ain’t No Stoppin Us Now!
We’ve got the groove!

-McFadden and Whitehead

For mankind to hate truth as it may bring their evil deeds to light and punishment, is very easy and common, but to hate truth as truth, or God as God, which is the same as to hate goodness for its own sake, unconnected with any other consequences, is impossible even to a (premised) diabolical nature itself.
-Ethan Allen

It’s the last call for alcohol. You ain’t got to go home but you got to get the hell outa here.
Unless, of course, you care to comment on my sincere attempts at sedition.

Freedom and Unity.

(Note: this diary’s literary style has in some part been inspired by Maryscott O’Connor. Mad props to her, and before you ask, I would SO hit that.)

Ales all around!
Tapping foam below the fold.

Ales on my tab:
For residents of NEWFANE, MARLBORO, PUTNEY, DUMMERSTON, and BROOKFIELD! At Town meetings last night, FIVE Vermont towns passed resolutions calling for the impeachment of George W. Bush for high crimes and misdemeanors.
Whether or not this is a PRACTICAL action is of minimal relevance. What is relevant is the statement made – and the news coverage it is generating.

The lackluster, fumbling responses from the podpeople are also quite entertaining:
Jim Barnett, chairman of the Vermont Republican Party, said, “We should not be impeaching presidents just because we disagree with them.”

Right on! You go, Jim!

We should not impeach presidents because we disagree with them. We impeach presidents because they BREAK THE LAW.

Is there anyone out there, besides John Yoo and Alberto Gonzales, who can look me in the eye with a straight face and tell me this President has not broken the law?

If there is, it would undoubtedly sound like this” “Geoj Dubah Buth hath naw boken duh waw.”
Why so muffled?
Because while making that statement, they would undoubtedly be otherwise occupied, giving Dubya a prostate massage with their tongues.

Courtesy of a Kagro X diary on dKos, here’s Maplefrost’s RUTLAND RESOLUTION, which hopefully one day will be engraved in stone on a marker somewhere in the Rutland Courthouse Historic District:

RESOLUTION

WHEREAS, Section 603 of the Manual of the Rules of the U.S. House of Representatives provides for impeachments to be initiated on a motion based on charges transmitted from a state legislature, and

WHEREAS, George W. Bush has committed high crimes and misdemeanors as he has repeatedly and intentionally violated the United States Constitution and other laws of the United States, particularly the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and the Torture Convention, which under Article VI of the Constitution is a treaty as part of the “supreme law of the land”,

WHEREAS, George W. Bush has acted to strip Americans of their constitutional rights by ordering indefinite detention of citizens, without access to legal counsel, without charge and without opportunity to appear before a civil judicial officer to challenge the detention, based solely on the discretionary designation by the President of a U.S. citizen as an “enemy combatant”, all in subversion of law, and

WHEREAS, George W. Bush has ordered and authorized the Attorney General to override judicial orders for the release of detainees under U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (formerly INS) jurisdiction, even though the judicial officer after full hearing has determined that a detainee is held wrongfully by the Government, and

WHEREAS, George W. Bush has ordered at least thirty times the National Security Agency to intercept and otherwise record international telephone and other signals and communications by American citizens without warrants from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, duly constituted by Congress in 1978, and designated certain U.S. citizens as “enemy combatants”, all in violation of constitutional guarantees of due process, and

WHEREAS George W. Bush has admitted that he willfully and repeatedly violated the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and boasted that he would continue to do so, each violation constituting a felony,

NOW THEREFORE the Rutland County Democratic Committee submits that his actions and admissions constitute ample grounds for his impeachment, and that the General Assembly of the State of Vermont has good cause for submitting charges to the U.S. House of Representatives under Section 603 as grounds for George W. Bush’s impeachment.

The County Committee further submits that Articles of Impeachment should charge that George W. Bush has violated his constitutional oath to execute faithfully the office of President and to the best of his ability to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

In all of this George W. Bush has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President, subversive of constitutional government to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice, and to the manifest injury of the people of the State of Vermont and of the United States.

WHEREFORE, George W. Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any offices of honor, trust or profit under the United States.

February 28, 2006

Adopted: February 28, 2006

Just the existence of this, along with the five resolutions passed at Town Meetings last night, is cause for celebration in itself.
Vermont is LEADING THE WAY.
Hopefully, other states in New England – the birthplace of the nation – will follow. Perhaps we are the best suited to remind the country of the impetus for forming this nation in the first goddamned place:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness……..And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

Therefore, the arguments that this movement is “futile”; “cannot succeed”; “will hurt Democrats” are respectively untrue, irrelevant, and straight-ahead bullshit.
Those saying that are politicians. The PEOPLE are not career politicians. The people can make this sort of statement without fear of political repercussions. The people are not running a campaign for Senate against a monied carpetbagger who wants to make his mark in Vermont so he can retire to Florida.
The people have nothing to lose – except through inaction, timidity, and fealty to the influence of politicians.
But even politicians get it right sometimes.
Here, then, is a compelling argument for the impeachment of George W. Bush, framed around the argument that he has abrogated his oath of office:

That oath constituted a compact between the President and the American people. That compact has been broken. The people’s trust has been betrayed. The nation’s chief executive has shown himself unwilling or incapable of enforcing its laws, for he has corrupted the rule of law.

Well, yeah. Pardon you for stating the obvious…..wait. That’s…oh, wow, man, did I ever screw up! That’s….uh…..Henry Hyde, talking about the overwhelming importance to the health of the Republic of impeaching Bill Clinton!
Whooooops.
Okay, wait a minute, dammit…I’ll find you a better one………

  I believe that this nation sits at a crossroads. One direction points to the higher road of the rule of law. Sometimes hard, sometimes unpleasant, this path relies on truth, justice and the rigorous application of the principle that no man is above the law.

  Now, the other road is the path of least resistance. This is where we start making exceptions to our laws……This is when we pitch the law completely overboard when the mood fits us, when we ignore the facts in order to cover up the truth.

  Shall we follow the rule of law and do our constitutional duty no matter unpleasant, or shall we follow the path of least resistance, close our eyes to the potential lawbreaking, forgive and forget, move on and tear an unfixable hole in our legal system? No man is above the law, and no man is below the law. That’s the principle that we all hold very dear in this country.

No man is above the law! I’m down with that….what? That’s WHO? HAMMER TIME? You mean that’s the Bugman? Tom DeLay, talking about……impeaching Clinton……..shitshitshitshitshit.

Okay….how ’bout this:

Because of the unwillingness of members of Congress to stop the usurpation of power by the President, they are acquiescing in it and they are part of that overall problem. But I think the greater problem is that the members of Congress don’t understand what impeachment is and don’t really understand what abuse of power is. Just as many average citizens have no real concept of what impeachment is, I’m finding out through having worked on this issue and studied it over the last few months that there is a surprising lack of understanding among the members of Congress about it. There is also a lack of understanding of what our government ought to be and what it was intended to be. It’s difficult enough to get members of Congress to focus on some of the specific concrete examples that are readily understandable…….as a practical matter, *it may be impossible to get them to focus on some of these more fundamental, yet more difficult to understand, concepts. That they are difficult to understand, of course, is an indication of how far we’ve drifted from basic constitutional principles.*

Oh, that’s that greasy little man: former Congressman Bob Barr, once again arguing for the neutering of the Big Dawg.
Although something’s happened to Bob – he found God, or started seriously losing sleep over his karma lately, or something. But never mind that.

Would someone care to explain to me what, in the here and now, is so fucking DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND?

My point, and I hope I made it, is that a statement from the PEOPLE is, necessarily, free of political taint or restraint. Read the foregoing quotations again – and remember that most of this was over a BLOWJOB.

Tell you what:
Getting back to Bush for a moment, if you don’t mind terribly…….if it’ll get this fucker impeached, I’ll PERSONALLY blow him. I gotsa rotsa risterine, and I’m sure SOMEBODY’ll step forward to help me pay for the years and years of psychotherapy I’ll require.

Free it from the politicians. Make it a POPULAR MOVEMENT. It has BEGUN, and let no one stop it. No one. No political agenda may stand in the way of this statement being made by the people to whom George Walker Bush swore an oath that he has repeatedly abrogated.

There’s been so many things thats held us down.
But now it looks like things are finally comin’ around.
I know we’ve got, a long long way to go,
and where we’ll end up, I don’t know.
But we won’t let nothin’ hold us back,
we’re putting our selves together,
we’re polishing up our act!
If you felt we’ve been held down before,
I know you’ll refuse to be held down anymore!

Don’t you let nothing, nothing,
Stand in your way!
I want ya’ll to listen, listen,
to every word I say, every word I say!

Ain’t No Stoppin Us Now!
We’re on the move!
Ain’t No Stoppin Us Now!
We’ve got the groove!

I know you know someone that has a negative vow,
and if you’re trying to make it they only push you aside.
They really don’t have, no where to go.
Ask them where they’re going, they don’t know.
But we won’t let nothin’ hold us back,
we’re gonna put our selves together,
we’re gonna polish up our act!
And if you’ve ever been held down before,
I know you’ll refuse to be held down anymore!

Don’t you let nothing, nothing,
Stand in your way!
I want ya’ll to listen, listen,
to every word I say, every word I say!

Ain’t No Stoppin Us Now!
We’re on the move!
Ain’t No Stoppin Us Now!
We’ve got the groove!

-McFadden and Whitehead

For mankind to hate truth as it may bring their evil deeds to light and punishment, is very easy and common, but to hate truth as truth, or God as God, which is the same as to hate goodness for its own sake, unconnected with any other consequences, is impossible even to a (premised) diabolical nature itself.
-Ethan Allen

It’s the last call for alcohol. You ain’t got to go home but you got to get the hell outa here.
Unless, of course, you care to comment on my sincere attempts at sedition.

Freedom and Unity.

Two quick updates:

First: Speaker Gaye Symington invites you to her Town Meetings on Friday, March 10 at 6pm in Rutland (Bardwell House located at 142 Merchants Row#1)and Saturday, March 11 at 1pm in Bennington (Bennington Free Library). It is fantastic that she is doing this, and a good turn out will help Dems keep control of the debate on Health Care (and other issues), and may encourage her to do more such events — particularly after the session concludes. Let’s turn out and support this initiative! For more information or questions, email speaker@leg.state.vt.us

Second: A new front page poll on Vermont-initiated impeachment is now up, and will be up until Saturday. Check out Freyne’s column on the issue and rush back to vote! Spread the word!

[Im taking the unusual step of promoting a post from another thread as a front page diary, because it’s a Town Meeting news bit. This was posted by user Ed, pesumably the Ed in the quote below, but I dunno…]

In Town Meetings today, voters in Brattleboro, Marlboro, Halifax, Guilford, Dummerston and Putney adopted a resolution calling for legislative action to “address significant gaps in the current Plan to be used in a nuclear emergency”. The vote in favor of the resolution was 84% (eighty-four %) in Brattleboro, unanimous in Guilford, and nearly unanimous in the four other towns.

“The news that excessive vibrations in a steam line Saturday caused problems on the very first day of Entergy Nuclear’s Vermont Yankee power increase added to apprehension people already have about the evacuation plan”, according to Ed Anthes, a member of Nuclear Free Vermont by 2012. “The delay in notifying the public about the problem also raised concerns.”

Nuclear Free Vermont by 2012, the local grass roots activist organization that sponsored previous resolutions in 2002, 2003, and 2004, initiated the current campaign.

“In the years since the 9/11 attacks emphasized the need for workable evacuation plans, we have worked with area Selectboards, state legislators and emergency management personnel in an effort to address severe deficiencies in the plans”, said Ed Anthes, of the group. “This vote will show the state legislature and Vermont Emergency Management that people in the evacuation zone want improvements now.”