<p>Saw this on CNN tonight. Apparently, the movement is gaining quite a bit of steam. Vermont though - not a surprise I guess.
National Dems are backing away - they think they’re in a strong enough position already - no need to do anything drastic. But there was still some speculation as to whether this would catch on nationally. Count me in…</p>
<p>I think the city council of Berkeley (or was it SF?) tried to do the same. I guess it’s better for a city or state to involve itself in National politics than it is local.</p>
<p><a href=“http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20070307/cm_thenation/1172344;_ylt=Ap4l.wIJTvGAHRaQgcB.ByMDW7oF[/url]”>http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20070307/cm_thenation/1172344;_ylt=Ap4l.wIJTvGAHRaQgcB.ByMDW7oF</a></p>
<p>"Late Tuesday night, there were confirmed reports that 36 towns had backed impeachment resolutions, and the number was expected to rise.</p>
<p>In one town, Putney, the vote for impeachment was unanimous.</p>
<p>For the record, Middlebury says:</p>
<p>We the people have the power – and the responsibility – to remove executives who transgress not just the law, but the rule of law.</p>
<p>The oaths that the President and Vice President take binds them to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.” The failure to do so forms a sound basis for articles of impeachment. </p>
<p>The President and Vice President have failed to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution” in the following ways: </p>
<ol>
<li><p>They have manipulated intelligence and misled the country to justify an immoral, unjust, and unnecessary preemptive war in Iraq. </p></li>
<li><p>They have directed the government to engage in domestic spying without warrants, in direct contravention of U.S. law. </p></li>
<li><p>They have conspired to commit the torture of prisoners, in violation of the Federal Torture Act and the Geneva Convention. </p></li>
<li><p>They have ordered the indefinite detention without legal counsel, without charges and without the opportunity to appear before a civil judicial officer to challenge the detention – all in violation of U.S. law and the Bill of Rights. </p></li>
</ol>
<p>When strong evidence exists of the most serious crimes, we must use impeachment – or lose the ability of the legislative branch to compel the executive branch to obey the law. </p>
<pre><code> George Bush has led our country to a constitutional crisis, and it is our responsibility to remove him from office. "
</code></pre>
<hr>
<p>Ha. My town - they’d probably re-elect him! Well, OK, maybe not…</p>
<p>Impeach Bush only if Cheney is impeached first.</p>
<p>Yeah, and they are also give sex offenders the lightest sentences in the country.</p>
<p>agree with dstark. I’ve always thought Cheyney was worse than Bush - and behind most of the mess we’re in…</p>
<p>They are both named in the Impeachment resolution. They are working to impeach both Bush and Cheney.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>All six people in the town? Including Uncle Ruprecht?</p>
<p>Vermont has about the same population as the city of Seattle. Either would vote to impeach practically any Republican… </p>
<p>And both have a high density of Subaru ownership. Coincidence? I think not… Sounds like a consipiracy to me.</p>
<p>(The Bush administration attracts leftist vitriol in volumes not seen since Reagan was president, and he deserves much of it. Was there ever a politician more tone-deaf that GW?)</p>
<p>This is nothing new.</p>
<p>I was amazed to discover upon reading (and finally finishing) David McCullough’s biography “John Adams” that there were widespread calls for his impeachment during his Presidency, related to his call for the construction of an American navy to protect US shipping from predations by both French and British privateers. That action was widely viewed by American Republicans (led by Th Jefferson, Adams’ own VP) as the prelude to a declaration of war against newly republican France, which was, at the time, caught up in the throes of the Reign of Terror.</p>
<p>“Was there ever a politician more tone-deaf that GW?”
No…not by a long shot. We’re making history with this guy…and it won’t be pretty to read.</p>
<p>“The Bush administration attracts leftist vitriol in volumes not seen since Reagan”</p>
<p>I admit I was young, but I don’t remember anger about Reagan being this strong or this sustained or this widespread.</p>
<p>The political tone-deafness is more apparent in the vitriol W attracts from the right. Think Harriet Miers. Ultimately, if your goal is to stay in power, it doesn’t matter how angry you make 40% of the country. It’s when you enrage 70% of the country that you have a real problem on your hands. But I don’t think they realize it even now.</p>
<p>It makes me mad that friends of mine who voted for Bush now dislike him so much. I mean, what the heck were they thinking? How could they have been so blind? They deliver that nut to us and now they REGRET it? I don’t know - it bugs me.</p>
<p>Reagan was liked by most of the country - even by those who disagreed with him. I wasn’t young. 
</p>
<p>I was teaching when Reagan was pres, and living among a lot of Democrats.
Many didn’t like his education policies, but no one i knew was embarrassed by him or disgusted with him. George W. Bush is no Ronald Reagan.</p>
<p>weenie - I had a birthday lunch with my 78 year-old mom last month (my b-day).
She started ranting about Bush/Cheney, the war, the rich-get richer policies, the secrecy, the torture, all of it, during lunch. She said, loudly in the restaurant while I hid behind my menu - "And I VOTED for him! What was I thinking! "
So yes, there’s a lot of that out there.</p>
<p>But my mom loved Reagan. and liked Bush I ok - she’s never voted for a Democrat in her life. </p>
<p>You have to admit, the media did a pretty good job promoting them. If you’re a Republican, you had to be really aware to see how they really are not what they seem. They are not the “conservatives” of their day.</p>
<p>I also think many Republican’s think that any Democrat wants a socialist society. That, I don’t get. Yet these same folks don’t want anyone to touch their social security!</p>
<p>weenie: agree! Just before the election, my hubby and I went around our neighborhood, knocking on doors for Kerry. We had many lively conversations (and some doors slammed in our faces - imagine that - not very neighborly). Now when we go to neighborhood parties, some of those same folks are standing around bashing Bush. We just zip our lips - can’t say I told you so- but it’s infuriating. He was bad THEN and he’s bad NOW!</p>
<p>^ “You have to admit, the media did a pretty good job promoting them. If you’re a Republican, you had to be really aware to see how they really are not what they seem.”</p>
<p>I know, I can see that the first time around (unless, of course, they knew anything about his cohorts, Cheney, Rove, and Rumsfeld who had a long history of being evil), but the second time around?! Oh my gosh.</p>
<p>It’s just unbelievable. I can barely talk to my Republican friends about politics, because I really harbor a resentment about it.</p>
<p>I can understand your frustration, but at least they’e getting it now. They’re not among the 25% that still think everything is hunky dory and that these guys are “protecting us from terror.”</p>
<p>I know. Who the heck IS that 25%?!</p>
<p>The ones on their payroll? :)</p>