Be careful when using the 'I' word

[struggle4progress]

Sunday, March 19, 2006
By JOHN M. CRISP
SCRIPPS HOWARD NEWS SERVICE

<snip> Impeachment is a legitimate constitutional remedy, but it's drastic step, one that, like a vote of no confidence, should be taken infrequently, perhaps once a century or so. Use it much more often than that and it quickly becomes a divisive political tool that's trotted out against trivial targets. <snip>

Clearly, the conventional processes of elections and legislation are preferable to the drastic measure of impeachment.

But the country is changing quickly in ways that will be difficult to revoke. <snip>

Newfane, Vt., however, isn't hesitating. It called for Bush's impeachment at its annual town-hall meeting, making a small but courageous gesture that sends a message: Impeachment isn't strictly about who's president. It's also about who we are and what we want to be.

http://www.bergen.com/page.php?qstr=eXJpcnk3ZjczN2Y3dnFlZUVFeXk0MDAmZmdiZWw3Zjd2cWVlRUV5eTY5MDAwMzAmeXJpcnk3ZjcxN2Y3dnFlZUVFeXkxNA==

[lanah]

1. The founders included impeachment in the constitution

because of people like George W Bush. It has never been more appropriate!

[unblock]

3. exactly, and welcome to du!

:hi:

[unblock]

2. "perhaps once a century"???

well, that presumes that the president doesn't spit on the constitution and, when called on it, simply moon the nation.

republican abuse of the impeachment power on clinton doesn't grant the president immunity for the next 100 years!

[MrModerate]

4. Not to mention, the Clinton impeachment . . .

Was Soooo 20th Century.

[MrSlayer]

5. Well we can get this century's impeachment out of the way immediately.

Because unlike the frivolous impeachment of Clinton, the Chimp truly deserves it.

[feelthebreeze]

6. Okay so Newfane can do it, can any township?

What are the rules that allow for this and disallow for this kind of action? I would love to push this agenda for my town, but is it an option for any town, anywhere, in USA?

[struggle4progress]

7. Don't ask, "Can we?" but say instead "We should!"

If you ask "Can we?" the immediate retort is usually "No!" followed by a quick change of topic.

The simple retort is usually incorrect -- but since discouraging you might save the establishment a big political headache, you'd be told it's impossible anyway.

Here's some ideas about how it's sometimes done.

Write a clear resolution. Follow the principle KISS: "Keep it short & simple." Get some other people to read it over and improve it. Then organize some pressure for it. At public events, collect signatures directed at people on the city council to introduce it.

Stir up some controversy about it. Can you get a city council member to support it? Can you get somebody to loudly oppose it? A good noisy fight is worth something. Get friends to write letters to the editor on the subject. Set up tables on the sidewalk and let people write postcards right there to city council people or the newspaper; you collect the postcards and mail them. Can you organize a protest in front of city hall on a related subject and get TV coverage?

etc etc ...

[pacalo]

8. I wonder what his stance was during the Clinton administration.

That's when he should have written his article.

If ever there was a time for impeachment, it is now. The one who bought his way into the oval office has a list of impeachable offenses. Clinton didn't abuse his presidential duties. His crime was being an effective, popular president who came from the Democratic Party.