Long ago and far away in a land called America the President and his administration decided that they really, really wanted to bomb the bejeebers out of a country that posed no threat.

So they went to the Congress and asked “pretty please.”

They said the country needed to be bombed, because they had all these things that they shouldn't have, and that they were doing things they weren't doing, and that they were being run by a big meanie who tortured people and arrested without charges and left them to rot in prison with no trial. 

And the Congress, still shaken because bad guys took over some planes and committed a horrible act entirely unrelated to the country that the administration wanted to bomb, said, “Oh, OK.” and granted the President the right to use Military Force without asking Congress for permission.

Thre's more…

The President jumped up and down with glee and after pretending to follow the rules laid out in the authorization, started the bombing.

And many, many Innocent People died. Plus a few thousand soldiers. And twice as many people as were killed became refugees. Many of the refugees are starving and will probably die.

So the people in America decided it was time to end the war. Luckily, there was an election coming. And those who wanted to be elected had Strong Words so say about the war.  They promised, if elected to bring the war to an end. 

And the people in America worked hard, and elected many of those who said Strong Words about ending the war. And the people rejoiced. They were very excited, because the war was going end! 

But then the Strong Words didn't turn into Tough Votes to end the war. They told the people that their hard work hadn't been enough. The New Winners with Strong Words didn't have enough friends with Strong Words who would help them end the war. So they just went along and did what the Other Guys wanted.

The Other Guys, however, didn't like some of the other things the New Winners wanted to do. So they, even though there were even fewer of them, decided to not go along with the New Winners. They said “we won't let you! We'll just keep talking until you do what we want!” So the New Winners went along with the other guys, because the Other Guys have magical powers and don't need as many friends to get their way.

And then the Other Guys said, “Hey, guess what! We think the last authorization to use force worked out just swell!  And the President wants Even More Authorization. So we should give him one!  This one will be different, though, because we used a different letter in the name of the country!  It will be even gooder!”

And so, there was a vote in the Senate (which is one part of the Congress). A whole bunch of people, even some of the New Winners just went along. Because not going along would make the Other Guys Very Cranky. And when they get Very Cranky, they call the New Winners mean names.

So, now we're waiting for the other part of the Congress, called the House, to vote. They'll probably vote to give the President More Authorization, with a whole new letter in the country's name. 

But because it's different, we know he'd never, ever use it! The Other Guys are right. This President should get his way. The New Winners should just go along. 

The following members of the party of the New Winners did not choose to enable the Bush administration to decide unilaterally to  start a war with Iraqn:

   Biden (D-DE)
   Bingaman (D-NM)
   Boxer (D-CA)
   Brown (D-OH)
   Byrd (D-WV)
   Cantwell (D-WA)
   Dodd (D-CT)
   Feingold (D-WI)
   Hagel (R-NE)
   Harkin (D-IA)
   Inouye (D-HI)
   Kennedy (D-MA)
   Kerry (D-MA)
   Klobuchar (D-MN)
   Leahy (D-VT)
   Lincoln (D-AR)
   Lugar (R-IN)
   McCaskill (D-MO)
   Sanders (I-VT)
   Tester (D-MT)
   Webb (D-VA)
   Wyden (D-OR)

 All the rest of apparently thought that the last time they voted to give the President an Authorization to use force went just swimmingly.

Here in Vermont, we are fortunate to have national representatives that have the interests of ordinary citizens at heart. (This is not something to take lightly; standards of democracy have devolved so that we all accept that public officials care more about their own fortunes than the people they are duty-bound to serve.) My big complaint, however, is that our reps brush off the matter of impeachment. I’d like to challenge them on the three most-cited reasons not to impeach President Bush and Vice President Cheney:

Another reason the run-out-the-clock excuse doesn’t work: We are at the “11^th Hour” in terms of facing climate change. The world cannot afford seventeen more months of inactivity on the U.S.’s part.

One of the most cogent arguments for impeachment I’ve heard comes from a friend of mine. “I hate to think of what not impeaching the president and vice president says to young people,” she said incredulously. “It would be like saying, we know someone robbed a bank but we’re not going to arrest him because it’s not convenient.”

1) We’ve got less than a year-and-a-half of Bush’s presidency, so let’s focus on the future. The implied argument is: what damage can Bush do in 500 days? And the answer, alas, is a lot. Right now, the administration and its think-tank lackeys are spoiling for a war with Iran. Bush knows that the people don’t want war with Iran, so his inner circle is devising ways to sell it; public opinion is merely an impediment to Bush’s goals, not a reason to rethink them. However, impeachment proceedings would constrain Bush/Cheney’s capacity to launch into a war that everyone knows would be a bloody disaster.

Another reason the run-out-the-clock excuse doesn’t work: We are at the “11^th Hour” in terms of facing climate change. The world cannot afford seventeen more months of inactivity on the U.S.’s part.

One of the most cogent arguments for impeachment I’ve heard comes from a friend of mine. “I hate to think of what not impeaching the president and vice president says to young people,” she said incredulously. “It would be like saying, we know someone robbed a bank but we’re not going to arrest him because it’s not convenient.”

(Amen! – promoted by JulieWaters)

We passed the following resolution at our County Committee meeting Monday evening and will ask the Bennington County Republican Committee to join us in co-signing and sending to Governor Douglas.
 

  RESOLUTION

WHEREAS we believe that all children should have access to comprehensive, age-appropriate, quality health care, and

WHEREAS at least one-third of Vermonters rely on SCHIP funding to sustain programs such as Doctor Dynasaur insurance for children and teen-agers up to age 18, and pregnant women, and

WHEREAS President Bush has incorrectly described the SCHIP bill as providing coverage for families earning up to $80,000 a year, and

WHEREAS the U.S. Senate has passed 68 to 31 a $35 billion bill over five years, sustained by a tobacco tax, the president is refusing to allow any new tax for the SCHIP program, and

WHEREAS the current allocation of $5 billion a year in federal funds will not allow states to maintain their current programs,

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Bennington County citizens, Republicans and Democrats alike, call upon Governor Douglas to communicate with President Bush and insist that he not veto the SCHIP bill, reminding the president to keep his promise to expand SCHIP he made during his 2004 campaign.

  September 24, 2007

Everybody get out yer Sunday best for the Head of Homeland Security's li'l Vermont flyby. This'll be the closest to a Bush visit outside of Cheney's brief stop inside a fenced-off area of the Burlington airport some time back (where Douglas famously declared “aren't we lucky to have George W. Bush in the White House!”).

Now that was a fun demonstration. Ah, good times…

I haven't heard anything official, but its a safe bet that someone will be on hand to make some displeasure known. If you want to join the fun, grab a sign, a bullhorn, or some stilts and head on out. The Dems' press release says WIlliston, but the AP report says “Vermont Department of Motor Vehicles office on Burlington's North Avenue.” I don't have a when, so if somebody knows something more specific, please put it in the comments (and I or another front pager will try to update this diary)  UPDATE: Freyne sez 2:20 in Burlington.

Vermont has overwhelming Democratic majorities in the state House and Senate. 4 of six statewide, constitutional offices are held by Democrats. Democrats (in reality, if not name) control each of Vermont's seats to the national Congress.

But no Democrat has stepped up to the plate to even make meaningful noise about running for Governor. It's an embarassment.

For months, people have been warning that somebody needs to get off the dime on this (even while resentment has been growing at the prospect of an avalanche of A-list Dems who will likely go what they see to be the easy route – stepping up for the office when Douglas eventually steps down voluntarily – instead of stepping up now when their party and their state need them). For months people have been warning that if a Dem doesn't announce, Anthony Pollina (the former Progressive Party candidate for all things statewide who seems to have no interest in doing anything other than starting at the top), would get out in front and label the Dems weak, ineffective, and try to turn the “spoiler” argument on its head. By the end of the summer I've said…

Well, the summer's over:

Pollina plans to hold a series of meetings around the state in mid October to gauge support for a gubernatorial bid. If there's strong grassroots support – it's likely that he'll run.

It's nothing short of appalling that a Dem hasn't stepped up and at least rattled the cages about running. Matt Dunne is the only candidate mentioned, but he is deferring on making a decision until November, by which time the egg will already be on the Dems' collective faces (and frankly, the fact that he's waiting until so close to year's end suggests that his decision will be to run again for Lt. Governor).

I find myself embarassed as a Democrat – especially since so many of us have been screaming at the party to avoid this very scenario for months.

At this point, the only other name bouncing around the rumor mill is, once again, Leahy staffer, former state Representative and all-around Democratic go-to guy Chuck Ross. Ross evokes strong feelings on every side of Democratic circles, as he is largely credited (blamed?) with virtually single-handedly scuttling the original “Rutland Resolution” on impeachment that percolated through the grassroots before landing in the lap of the Democratic State Committee. Ross is, however, one of the few names in Vermont who could mount a serious financial challenge to Douglas, and it's likely that the liberal wing of the party would rally behind him and eschew Pollina given some basic fence-mending and earnest bridge-building.

But whether its Chuck, Matt, or Champ the Lake Monster – whoever ithe Dem candidate is to be – he or she has an extension until mid-October (from the sound of the above report) to get in clearly, with their head held high, and avoid starting out in the hole in a race that's going to leave room for few – if any – missteps.

Please – let's not start the whole thing with the biggest misstep of all: letting the Democratic rank-and-file down by playing elections catch-up and leaving us all feeling a bit humiliated.

It’s time to make it official:  Bill Richardson will receive my vote in the primary.

Why pick the 4th in running candidate just breaking into double-digits? 

More than any other candidate, Bill Richardson offers the following:

1.  Face-to-face negotiating experience with our most dangerous enemies.  Unlike Clinton and Obama, Richardson won’t speculate  about nukes because he knows that’s a poor play in the art of brinkmanship.  It’s unfortunate that we are at the point of brinkmanship because of the Bush administration; but it’s for that very reason that I believe Richardson is the most able leader to clean up Bush’s mess.

2.  Executive leadership.  Candidates who have previously been in the governor’s seat have a great perspective on how to get the job done.  Senators tend to waffle.  Our next Commander In Chief needs to be a solid leader who will deliver sensible foreign policy and stand behind it.

3.  Ethnic bridge.  In my opinion, Bill Richardson creates a stronger ethnic bridge than Barack Obama.  America’s Hispanic tradition is very strong, and I suspect we might see a position bump for Richardson in the early Florida primary.  I feel very comfortable with Richardson as America’s ambassador of our rich ethnic heritage.

4.  Bipartisan support.  Once again, I refer back to Richardson’s experience in turning around New Mexico, a complicated state to govern.  If he can please Republican’s in his home state, he has a good chance of keeping Red America pleased with his work as a solid Democrat.

5.  Dark Horse Candidate.  Simply put, Richardson is currently a sleeping also-ran.  But once we get out of Iowa and New Hampshire, watch out.

Respectfully submitted,

Nate Freeman