A long time ago, a couple conversations started more or less simultaneously. In Newfane, Dan DeWalt and others were working on Town Meeting Resolutions that requested then-Representative Bernie Sanders initiate impeachment proceedings. At the same time across the internet, there were discussions such as those in this diary of mine from January of 2006 about the possibility of using obscure House rules in section 603 of the Jefferson’s Manual to bring the conversation to Washington via a state legislature. From that latter conversation came the “Rutland Resolution” that swept Vermont’s Democratic County Committtees, itself drawing press attention from across the country. When the Rut-Res was stymied at the State Committee, largely through the intervention of Senator Leahy’s staff, the “603” crowd retreated and regrouped. At this point the gap was bridged between the two groups, and by this last legislative biennium, a synergy had formed. The grassroots coalition of Progressives, Independents and Democrats that worked the Town Meeting angle leveraged their renewed success into the goals of the Democratic Rutland Resolution movement (until about a week ago, the Progressive Party rebuffed our effort to get them on record with a Rut-Res). The result was a thing of beauty. A true merging of grassroots and netroots across party lines towards progressive goals.
For my part, I’ve been involved from way back, talking to legislators and others, making phone calls, crafting letters to state committee members, and more recently launching vtimpeach.com (for which I just dropped a setup/hosting check in the mail). Truth to tell, when I spoke with Kagro X (the second person I asked to be a front pager when GMD started), I admitted to him that much of the reason I wanted to start this blog was to support the nascent Impeachment movement in this state. It has been a long, deeply emotional relationship.
It is therefore with sadness that I announce my divorce from the Vermont Impeachment Movement over irreconcilable differences. You see, we’ve drifted apart over the past months. So far apart that I no longer feel welcome in my former “spouse’s” company.
The problem started when this “beautiful” synergistic movement was greeted in the worst possible way from the Democratic leadership. Here was organized, statewide, grassroots energy towards progressive goals. A veritable army ready to support real policy changes locally and nationally – all we asked was a little respect from elected officials. But as we all know, the movement was greeted with scorn from the offices of Senators Sanders, Leahy and Speaker Symington. Shumlin was not much better, choosing to try to crudely play the movement for (presumably) later advantage (the truth is – the only major Democratic elected who has dealt honorably with the Impeachment Movement has been Peter Welch, although good luck getting those organizers who are irrationally contemptuous of him to admit it).
What followed then was all too predictable. With our elected “leaders” choosing not to lead, a leadership vacuum was created. And nature abhors a vacuum. Into that vacuum rushed people like James Leas and Dennis Morriseau – people with agendas far beyond impeachment, and far too much unrestrained self-righteousness and contempt for those who do not share their views to bother restraining themselves. Those of us in the original “603” crowd began to get regular servings of rhetoric like this one from Morriseau, sent out to whoever’s email address he could get his hands on and regarding Peter Welch:
I think little Pete is “the enemy”. In fact I’m sure of it, so I doubt he can be
moved by anything.
Very quickly, the greater culture of the movement began to reflect this rhetoric. Finally, last week came this from Freyne Land:
Welchie’s “no” vote on the latest Iraq War funding bill is too-little, too-late for a couple of the folks who’ve organized Vermont’s statewide “Impeach Bush & Cheney” Campaign.
“This bill, that has the support of Democratic Party leaders Pelosi and Reid, funds the war without any limits,” said Iraq War veteran Adrienne Kinne. “The Iraqis want this occupation to end. The American people want our soldiers home now. I fear Peter Welch’s no vote is too little too late. Peter Welch has been going along with that failed Democratic Party leadership for too long, and this terrible bill is the result.”
“We call on Peter Welch to speak out against the Democratic Party leadership that talks peace and makes war,” said Kinne. “We call on Peter Welch, Patrick Leahy, and Bernie Sanders to initiate investigation of Bush and Cheney, not just underlings like Alberto Gonzalez.”
“This bill, sponsored by the Democratic Party leadership, forces us to ask how Peter Welch and Pat Leahy can remain in a party that accepted Bush and Cheney’s demands to fund the war without any meaningful conditions,” said James Marc Leas. “A party that talks peace but makes war has lost credibility. Peter Welch and Patrick Leahy can do much more to end this war if they stop supporting a pro-war party. Just as Jim Jeffords left the Republican Party, Peter Welch and Patrick Leahy should leave the Democratic Party.”
I, and the other Dems in the 603 movement became angry. These two organizers had single-handedly branded the Vermont Impeachment Movement an anti-Democratic Party movement, delivering a kick to the groin to all of us Democrats who had worked so hard on this for so long before people like Leas even knew there was an Impeachment Movement.
When confronted with our anger and our expectation that there would be a clarifying statement, we were met with the typical self-righteousness and scorn we’ve come to expect from the “you’re-with-us-or-you’re-with-the-Bushites” wing of the left. The slash and burn crowd who can’t recognize that those in positions of leadership must take responsibility for their words and work to bring people together – even if that means subsuming one’s own ego from time to time. The closest we got to an apology from Leas was:
You ask me to apologize because you misread our statements as speaking for the movement as a whole, even though Peter Freyne introduced it clearly as the views of two of the people within that movement. Fine. I apologize. And in the future I will state, “speaking for myself,” to make clear that I am speaking for myself, not for the movement as a whole. In this case, however, even without such an express disclaimer from me and Adrienne, Peter Freyne made it clear that we were speaking for ourselves and that there could be other views among those who’ve organized Vermont’s statewide ‘Impeach Bush & Cheney’ Campaign. Why don’t you apologize for the misreading? The only evidence you give that it was not clear is the fact that you misread it.
Basically, “it’s not my fault, and I’m sorry you’re too stupid to see that.” Now that’s leadership.
But he spent the majority of his response – paragraphs and paragraphs – with stuff like this:
I think you are attacking Adrienne and me because you have no idea what to say or do about the Democratic Party cave in and support for this war. I am wondering whether your priority is to protect the Democratic Party no matter what they do. Prove me wrong by putting out your own statement to Peter Freyne and the rest of the media stating your view, speaking for yourself of course, about the war funding vote. I am more and more interested in knowing what your view is on the subject.
Guy doesn’t spend much time on the blogs, obviously.
Unfortunately, we’ve seen nothing from any of the others in the movement’s current leadership making the point that Democrats are still welcome.
And nobody wants to stay where they’re not welcome.
So I’m afraid the divorce is final, but the truth is, I’ve already been seeing someone else; the National Impeachment Movement. Organically speaking, it only makes sense for the Vermont Movement to fully merge with the national, as all attention is now on Washington and efforts there. We in Vermont have shown them the way, organized and pushed the matter through our capitol – empowering and furthering the conversation from coast to coast. Nationally of course, the movement is fueled by groups like Progressive Democrats of America and Democrats.com – and in case you didn’t catch those names, they remain Dem-friendly.
I would also be remiss if I didn’t mention another positive legacy of the Vermont Impeachment Movement – the vaulting of Dan DeWalt onto the national scene. Dan is one of the more decent and thoughtful people I’ve met, and clearly has no problem living with disagreements among allies over things such as Party affiliation. The nation is only a better place now that Dan has earned a wider audience.
But whether or not the state movement is about to lose all its Dem membership, I don’t know. Certainly the many I’ve talked to are done with it after the Freyne Land quote. Organizers need to realize for their own sake that their supposed allies across the country are largely Democrats, and if they insist on insinuating or stating that Dems should be marginalized from the group, they will inevitably find it is they themselves banished to the margins – again.