As Newfane, Dummerston, Putney and Marlboro Town Meetings all approve motions asking US Representative Bernie Sanders to present Articles Of Impeachment on the House floor, Bernie sez:

given the reality that the Republicans control the House and the Senate, “it would be impractical to talk about impeachment.”

He added that “all of our energy must go into the November elections with the goal of ending Republican control of the House and Senate.”

How does this effect the grassroots surge we’re seeing? Discuss! C’mon, you know you wanna…

Stop me if you’ve heard this one.

A high-profile Senator wants to run for executive office. Despite charges of elitism and being not politically consistent, the candidate seems to be running strong. The candidate runs largely on the strength of their pre-political “story,” which includes numerous accolades and awards for leadership, merit and success against the odds.

When focusing on the issues seems not to be enough, the opposition tries something different. They pull out (a) person(s) from decades past to undercut the candidate’s “story.” (A) Person(s) that have some intimate connection to the candidate’s personal narrative. The(se) person(s) claim that the candidate did not deserve the accolades and awards. That the candidate is a phony. Simply a ladder-climber. At the same time, the candidate’s “Americanism” is called into question. Despite testimony over the years to the candidate’s qualifications, the hits take a toll. The candidate loses.

And although the opposition Party claims to have played no part in the personal attacks, the fingerprints are there, and everybody knows the reality.

So, am I talking about Senator John Kerry or Senator Hinda Miller? The 2004 race for President or the 2006 Burlington mayor’s race?

Sure, there are differences. Mainly that in one election, the attackers and the attackees are not all that far apart on most issues, while in the other they were diametrically opposed in most ways. Which is worse? You tell me.

There’s been a lot of talk about Martha Rainville hiring the Swift Boat team to run her campaign’s media, and a lot of folks saying that this sort of campaigning wont fly in Vermont (remember when Susan Sweetser tried to dig up dirt on Bernie by calling his ex-wife? That didn’t work out so well for her…).

I guess we’ll know soon enough. You know the Rainville campaign is watching.

UPDATE: Yup. Dirty politics triumph again. The saddest part is that Kiss may have been able to win this outright without the Swift Boat tactics. Of course, we’ll never really know, will we?

…and now with this notion that negative campaigns dont work in Vermont firmly and finally put to rest, hold onto your seats, cuz 2006 is gonna get U-G-L-Y.

A little of whats going on to watch in the Vermont blogosphere of late.

Baruth has a spot-on piece from a few days back discussing the myth that Vermont is a progressive paradise and the dangerous complacency that notion can breed on the left. Required reading for sure.

In the Burlington mayor’s race, PoliticsVT reports that the recent spate of anti-Hinda Miller press bits are part of an organized attack campaign by the Progressive Party and the Kiss campaign. Of course, anytime the Progs get criticized, it’s like kicking a hornet’s nest, so the comments are flying over there. (Of course if the Dems reacted the same way to criticism, I might get a few more comments around here!)

Nat Kinney (Vermonters First) has coverage of Moretown’s organizing against the Town Meeting parental notification items we covered here a couple weeks back.

Also at Vermonters First, aq discusses the fracas around his rebuffed attempt to ask questions at the Governor’s press conference, and Douglas’s staff’s efforts to marginalize him. The Administration will try to make it all about Quinn himself, while Adam will try to make it about the Governor. Since he’s got a high profile staff, you’ve got to give the advantage to Douglas, but Adam is finding some unexpected support from the right (at least lukewarm support), so stay tuned if you like your politics a bit serialized. Good luck, aq.

Anything else worth sharing? Comment away…

At today’s (March 4) Democratic State Committee meeting, representatives from thr Rutland County Democrats reported on their recent resolution calling for the impeachmnet of president Bush. Also discussed at the meeting was the wording of the US House of Representatives official rules allowing a state legislature to initiate the formal impeachment process on the US House floor. Here’s a diary from yesterday with details of how this could play out.

It was decided that most (if not all) of the County Committees would call special “emergency” sessions on the matter, ideally leading to an emergency State Committee meeting — all with the goal of encouraging the Vermont Legislature (no Governor Douglas approval needed) to bring the matter of Impeachment before the US House. From all accounts, the County Chairs in attendence were quite enthusiastic.

I wasn’t at the meeting, but I’m going to try and contact some of the key players who were in attendence to post a first-person diary. In the meantime, please discuss (especially if you were there and can provide some details). The national blogosphere is already talking it up.

Hold on to your hats, folks. This could end up being quite a ride!

From the AP:

The [health care reform] bill passed by a 77-58 vote despite determined GOP efforts to thwart it, including a walkout aimed at grinding consideration to a halt. That didn’t work, either, and Republicans eventually returned to the chamber for the rest of the debate.

The irony of the determined opposition was that the Democratic majority believes that it moved a great deal to accommodate the concerns that prompted Gov. James Douglas to veto last year’s version

Hmmm…sounds familiar somehow……Wait, don’t tell me……

What could I be thinking of…?

Virginia GOP Threatens Government Shutdown

No, no, before that…

Oh yeahhhh! That guy!

It all takes me back to Newt’s 1995 Federal government shutdown. And that went so well for the Republicans.

It’s just like the so-called “pro-choice” Republicans in Washington who helped put Alito on the bench and invite an immediate threat to the right to choose. For whatever reason, regardless of how they define themselves around election-time, Republicans — even Vermont Republicans –are becoming more and more monolithic, following the National Party line and the National Party playbook.

Now before someone points out the Texas redistricting issue and the Democrats’ self-imposed exile from the state, I’d caution you to remember that they were doing the only thing they could to prevent an illegal power grab done in concert with a corrupt federal government through an indicted and disgraced former House majority leader.

With Catamount Health? The Washington shutdown? Virginia? They simply weren’t getting their way in the same ol-same ol, time-honored Democratic process. The integrity of our Democracy wasn’t at stake. Only the Republican agenda (although many on the other side like to confuse the two…).

The “I” word had been getting a lot of play, and its only going to snowball over the next few days. Newfane has a town meeting item requesting Rep. Sanders pursue the process in Washington. A Rockingham resident is attempting to call a special town election on the matter.

This week saw the issue enter the Party infrastructure. The Rutland County Democratic Committee passed a resolution calling for the President to be impeached last Tuesday, and a handful of Democrats associated with Democracy for Vermont is reportedly going to show up at the Democratic State Committee meeting Saturday (tomorrow) and surprise folks there with the same proposal. Still others — including some high profile Democratic names — are talking behind the scenes about pushing for a statement from the Vermont Legislature.

Is this all a show? Fluff? Blowing off steam? Irrelevent and impotent grandstanding? There may be some of that (you do have to wonder why the hubbub suggests a surprise motion at the meeting tomorrow — why would folks want to ambush unsuspecting Party officers and staff if they were really serious, as opposed to trying to make a big showy splash, after all?).

But this could be more than fluff. The scuttlebutt in the national blogosphere is that there may be a sound, legal basis for a State Legislature to begin an impeachment process — there are already organized attempts underway in Rhode Island and Maryland — and many here and elsewhere feel that Vermont should have been leading the charge all along. (More below…)

Here is the Rutland Committee language:

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

Ed Garcia has blogged about the issue. The House Rules for the 109th Congress reportedly say that impeachment proceedings can be initiated “by charges transmitted from the legislature of a State (III, 2469)” (I say “reportedly” because I can’t actually find the quote first hand, only the oft repeated line from other blogs. maybe someone can help me out…?) It should be stated that there seems to be no basis to conclude that either the Newfane resolution or any comparable resolutions from the Democratic Party infrastructure could be anything more than purely symbolic gestures.

But its the Legislative option that really has the netroots going, and as I said, some states are steaming ahead. Rhode Island already has draft language of a resolution. Here’s the tail end:

Resolved, by the General Assembly of this state, that our Senators and Representatives in the United States Congress be, and they are hereby, requested to cause to be instituted in the Congress of the United States proper proceedings for the investigation of the governance of the Executive Branch by George W. Bush as President of the United States, and of his acts and doings as such, to the end that he may be impeached and removed from such office; and be it further

Resolved, That the Secretary of State of Rhode Island be, and is hereby, instructed to certify to each Senator and Representative in the Congress of the United States, under the great seal of this state, a copy of this resolution and its adoption by its legislature

Exciting isn’t it? There’s no question that its an appealing idea, and there have been a lot of Vermonters talking it up.

Other bloggers have been tossing around the pros, cons, and ramifications:

But is the Legislature interested? They’ve clearly got a lot on their plate, and Health care has been sucking the air out of every room for miles of Montpelier. Would there be interest in pursuing a course of action that — in a best case scenario — would likely die on the US House floor?

Still…

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=politics&id=3949805

When Martha Rainville comes to your town asking for your vote, ask her if:

Vermont is one of the ten other states a California National Guard file says are engaging in this practice,

is the Vermont National Guard responsible for putting Vermonters at a Montpelier anti-war rally on a DOD list of possible terrorists?  (Senator Leahy has written to vp Dick Cheney asking why this happened),

and what criteria is used to identify someone as a (possible) Vermont terrorist, and where does the request come from;

do all requests for surveillance come through the Governor’s office, as titular head of the National Guard, or just through the Commandant?

Are grandfathers on the list too, or just grandmothers?  Has the database for Quakers been secretly infiltrated?  Are health food stores monitored for vegans?  An ‘inquiring mind wants to know’ ….

We seem to have new rules every day from the Feds as to what behavior is appropriate and what is not, and I’m sure Martha will be most happy to respond to our concerns.

Barbara

From the wires:

Vermont National Guard specialist Christopher Merchant was killed in Iraq, the National Guard says.

He was the 21st U.S. service member with Vermont ties to be killed in action in Iraq.

Merchant was a member of C Company of the 1st Battalion of the 172nd Armor Regiment based in Morrisville.

Although its been said many times, it always bears repeating: however one may feel about this war — or even wars in general — the courage and committment it takes to put ones life on the line as Christopher Merchant did is the very definition of heroism. Although our state is unquestionably diminished by his passing, we are honored by his life and sacrifice. Our thoughts go to his family, friends, and community.

From Aristotle to Harry Truman: never truer than today —

“It is also in the interests of a tyrant to keep his people poor, so that they may not be able to afford the cost of protecting themselves by arms and be so occupied with their daily tasks that they have no time for rebellion.” – Aristotle

“Once a government is committed to the principle of silencing the voice of opposition, it has only one way to go, and that is down the path of increasingly repressive measures, until it becomes a source of terror to all its citizens and creates a country where everyone lives in fear.” – Harry S. Truman

In January the Army Corps of Engineers awarded Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg Brown & Root $385 million dollars to construct detention centers  in the United States to deal with “an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs,” KBR said.  The New York Times reported these centers will each hold 5,000 people, but focussed on Halliburton’s reputation for overcharging,  missing the real news.

Check out new ‘homeland security’ rules, posted at the U.S. Army website, (http://www.army.mil/usapa/epubs/pdf/r210_35.pdf)  about the Pentagon’s Civilian Inmate Labor Program. This program “provides Army policy and guidance for establishing civilian inmate labor programs and civilian prison camps on Army installations,” and was revised 1/14/05.

A DOD database includes at least 20 references to U.S. citizens or U.S. persons, including Vermont protesters.  Senator Leahy complained to Cheney months ago, but I have not heard of a reply..  This pResident can claim wartime powers and override any laws.  All he has to do is claim someone as an ‘enemy of the people’ and that person is arrested, losing all rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

Doug Thompson of Capitol Hill Blue reported on a GOP meeting at the White House when Bush was told his hardcore push to renew the more onerous provisions of the Patriot Act could alienate conservatives.  “I don’t give a goddamn,” Bush retorted. “I’m the President and the Commander-in-Chief.  Do it my way.”

“Mr. President,” one aide in the meeting said. “There is a valid case that the provisions in this law undermine the Constitution.”

“Stop throwing the Constitution in my face,” Bush screamed back. “It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!”

Thompson said, “I’ve talked to three people present that day and they all confirm that the President of the United States called the Constitution “a goddamned piece of paper.”  (The White House has not denied it).

Draw your own conclusions.  Is martial law closerthanwethink? 

Barbara

It’s so unusual to have good news to report that I have to write about this right away. The Senate Health & Welfare Committee voted 5-0-1 (Ed Flanagan absent) to support the emergency contraception bill. It will probably go to the floor for action on second reading Thursday, then, assuming it passes, to third reading Friday. Of course, things could delay it, but I suspect they’ll want a clear calendar before they take next week off for Town Meeting.

This is very encouraging news. Please call the Sergeant at Arms at the State House, (800)322-5616, and leave a message for your senators asking them to vote YES on H. 237 when it comes to the floor.