why cant we have a national recall election?

[tinanator]

just wondering if there are laws prohibiting it? They seem to be all the rage and since there wont be an impeachment...

[SnoopDog]

1. That is the one problem with our Constitution...

It does not allow for the 'recall' or even the impeachment of the President or Congress by the citizenship....

We as the people should have this ability...

What would happen if foreign terrorists gained control of the Presidency and Congress - we would have no legal ability to remove them.

Sort of how it is right now...

[tinanator]

3. what about state by state?

could you start no confidence ballot measures?
might be fun :)

[Warpy]

4. Not in state constitutions, either

the only way to rid ourselves of scum is through impeachment or defeat in the next election cycle.

[SnoopDog]

5. I have been racking my brain about that...

I think the Constitution says something like.. "what isn't in the Constitution (laws, rights, etc) is then up to the States or the people".

I really think the only way is, indeed, to use State's rights.

So, how do we get 50 Governors to fight for our Democracy?

This could be a good idea.

[forgethell]

9. Over the years,

for reasons that seemed good and sufficient, liberals and progressives have pretty much destroyed the concept of "state's rights". And, in any event, State's rights never included the ability to remove the President. That issue was covered in the Constitution. Impeachment. Get a petition going.

Section. 4.
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people

[SnoopDog]

11. Right now, even a petition won't help...

Our government is now in the hands of "American" terrorists. They will nullify our petition.

So what do we do?

Revolution? I am not opposed to this...

I would prefer that we get our States and people to impeach President fuckup.

[forgethell]

13. State's and people

can't. Only Congress, who represent the people can impeach.

Revolution? OK, but you'll get your ass shot off. Revolution is not a block party, but serious business, and if you go into it unprepared to die....

[SnoopDog]

16. I know it is serious business..

What would happen, my friend, if President Fuckup mandates that all citizens, oh I don't know, say, 'you will have to go into concentration camps'. What would you do then?

Exactly how much can we take? Or should take?

Everything, and I mean everything this bush government does is contrary to our well being. They have done absolutely nothing for us and more precisely have enacted laws to cause us more harm.

[forgethell]

17. Maybe so,

but I'm not holding my breath waiting for the concentration camps. That will never happen, because, as bad as Bush is, and that's bad enough, he is not Hitler.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Spinoza]

32. So You Say You Want A Revolution...

You better make sure the US Marines are on your side. Today, they would fight against you.

[tinanator]

24. I find this encouraging and empowering

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people"

sounds to me like carte blanche to do whatever we the people feel is necessary under these circumstances. Would a no confidence movement be a good or neutral thing for the Bush regime?

[forgethell]

25. But,

under the Constitution the only way to remove the President is by impeachment. A no confidence vote would be as useless as those silly "war crimes" trials that the nut-jobs are always having about some American leader, or the other. Totally useless.

The sad fact of the matter is, George Bush has won. He will not be removed from office until 2008, when , by law, he must step down, and cannot run again.

There will never be a "war crimes" trial because no American president will ever permit another to be tried by an international court. It would set a very bad precedent. America's interests so often run against what the rest of the world wants that no President could feel safe.

The thing to do is banish the angst about Bush and work to elect some one more to your liking next time.

[tinanator]

27. if I could count the votes I would

but its Bush who's killing and destroying domestically and abroad, I cant overlook that or the circumstances preventing legitimate elections here. I think its far more important to diminish his support and pressure the other two branches through popular opposition RIGHT NOW, than it is to plan for later elections and hypothesize about candidates while Rome incinerates.

[forgethell]

28. Well, yeah,

you can pressure Congress. What does the judiciary have to do with it, unless some prosecutor brings charges? You can agitate in the streets, write letters to the editors, etc. and generally waste your time instead of working to build a strong Democratic party and finding a viable candidate for it.

Because Bush will serve out his time. His troops have shown that they work harder than we do, they organize better, they raise more money, and that there are more of them than there are of us.

But go ahead. Hell, I could be wrong. I just don't think so.

[Tigress DEM]

49. There are at least 2 petittions going, and yes it does help.

In order for the House to start the proceeding they need a reason, and the demand of the voters to impeach is a real compelling reason especially with the treasonus activities of this administration.

[Liberty Belle]

73. Bribery? Bush lined his pockets with corporate cash,

appointed corporate cronies to oversee "regulatory" agencies, let them weaken all of our consumer and environmental protection laws and rammed through countless bills to benefit his big corporate campaign contributors.

Sure sounds like bribery to me.

[LoganW]

35. You "think"???

How about actually reading it?

Check the tenth amendment.

[tinanator]

37. why dont you read the be pleasant amendment

Im sure you can find it somewhere

[Tigress DEM]

43. Moderator has been alerted.

So if you're not a freeper, you best go read the new rules about how to conduct yourself. Personal attacks aren't allowed.

You have the right to your opinion, but it isn't your place to judge people on how much they know or don't know about the Constitution.

We are here to help each other get more educated about the political process and it works really well when we respect the rules put out on this board.

Believe me, if you are honestly just new and this is all a misunderstanding, there will be a time when you are expressing your opinion and you will be glad the rules are there.

It's easy to get carried away, and you're a newbie, so people will cut you some slack if you lighten up. If you continue to attack people though, you ruin it for everyone - so don't.

[SnoopDog]

71. By the way....

Yes, I have read the Constitution - many times.

Most people, not all people, try to post positive, informative information to HELP OUR CAUSE.

I am glad you are a student of our Constitution and are able to suggest that I read it.

I have no right to say this, but, to be a respected contributer of DU, I would have recommended the following:

'Hey Snoop, you are right - the Amendment you are referring is #10 and here it is'.

We have a fight here to regain our Country. Lets work together.

[Tigress DEM]

48. Post #41 says it can be done, and you are on the right track with why.

[eaglenetsupport]

41. Actually it can be done

It's been started before but the congress headed off at the pass the procedure and dumped prohibition rather than letting the people do it.
Once Congress realized the people were calling and implementing a convention by initiative procedure they amended themselves and passed/killed prohibition.

By the dictates of Article V of the Federal Constitution, we can do anything that the state legislatures can do if you can get 2/3 of the states to start the procedure. There are 43 states that have the initiative procedure. Just as the state legislatures can call for a constitutional convention so can the people by initiatives as they can do any thing the legislatures can do. The peoples powers in initiative procedures are a more sovereign or superior power than legislatures. For example a state legislature can not over turn what the people pass in initiative. So it's never been done before but the authority to do it is there and most likely will be done at some point according to supreme court that examined the eight initiatives that killed prohibition.

two citings

"Article V provides that Congress on the application of two-
thirds of the state legislatures shall call a convention for
proposing amendments." l6 Am.Jur. 2d 333. The Supreme Court has
interpreted "shall" to mean "must" on this issue in Article V.
United States vs. Sprague, 282 US 7l6, 75 LEd 640, 7l ALR l38l.

Congress's job is "ministerial" or not a choice in this matter.

second

"The method of ratification by conventions in the
states rather than by state legislatures has been employed
in the past (21st Amendment) and will probably be employed
in the future." l6 Am.Jur. 2nd, Sec. 24, page 336. (The
21st Amendment, which repealed the 18th Amendment, Prohibi-
tion, was the only amendment to the Constitution which was
ratified by convention).

[Tigress DEM]

46. Now here IS someone who has read the Constitution saying it can be done.

Imagine that?

Thanks! How do we know which states can call and implement a convention by initiative procedure? More specifically, is Minnesota one of them? How about Ohio? I bet they would LOVE to be part of booting out the pretender.

[eaglenetsupport]

52. Article V of the Federal Constitution is mute on

how conventions are to be called. Therefore, that issue is left to the states. So all states by the dictates of Article V have in their respective states laws the ability to propose and organize a convention.

Article V splits the amendment procedure in two, that of
proposing amendments and that of ratifying amendments. Either
Congress or Constitutional Convention may propose a change to the
Constitution with either a vote of two-thirds in both houses or
by application of two-thirds of the states in convention.
Similarly an amendment becomes effective as part of the
Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths
of states or by conventions in three-fourths of the states.

Ohio has the initiative procedure. I'd have to google for Minnesota, but it is most likely they do have the procedure as these laws were adopted in the hay-day of populism and Minnesota was one of the populism states.

citing

"Under a state's constitution, it has been held
that submission of the question of convention or no
convention to voters and election of delegates in case a
majority of votes favor a convention would be valid, but
that the calling of a convention to pass on a proposed
amendment without submitting the question of convention
or no convention to a vote would be invalid." Re
Opinions of Justices, 204 NC 806, l72 SE 474.
and

"(V)oters of the several states are excluded by terms
of Article V from direct participation in the process of
amendment of the Constitution. Their participation is
restricted to voting for delegates." l6 Am.Jur. 2nd 337.

Therefore, because of the Republican form of government and
the restrictions that lie in Article V, leaving a direct voice of
the people out of the question at hand, the power the people
have in this case is that of calling a convention and that of
electing the correct delegates. To write an Initiative that
requires a State or Federal legislator to vote one way or another
is unconstitutional by Supreme Court case history.

So.... the question is

"Should the people of the state of Ohio call for a constitutional convention and set an election for delegates for the purpose of
considering national recall procedure?" YES or NO

Under this proposal we would urge our own committee members
who ran the qualification petition campaign to run as delegates.
We would not rely on talking politicians into our position.
The key factor is winning the initial election and being in the
majority.

[Yupster]

58. A Constitutional convention is awfully dangerous though

Last time it was done to amend the Articles of Confederation, the convention went way further than they were asked to go, scrapped the whole Articles, and wrote an entirely new Constitution.

I'm also interested in the Confederate Constitutional convention. They ended up making only minor changes to the US Constitution - line item veto, single six year term for president. Interesting that when they had the chance to completely rewrite the US Constitution, they didn't change much.

[Tigress DEM]

65. Well, we definately need a lot of work done..,.

We need to make sure the right to vote and have a paper trail gets in there and that the checks and balances are restored.

We mostly need to remove people who are causing damage if impeachment doesn't do it. The rest we can work through due process.

I know people think that if the PEOPLE actually ran the country it would be nuts.... but look what we have now.

I won't get into the whole confederate thing. People who hate can still do good things I guess, but I still have a problem with the hating.

[Selatius]

97. The Federal Constitution needs a lot of work

We would need to seriously consider things such as instant run-off voting, abolition of the Electoral College, and a taxpayer subsidized election system with a ban on outside money. These are only some suggestions floating out there.

Others such as having individual states elect their House representatives by proportional representation as opposed to using congressional districts, empowering the people directly with the ability to recall representatives, senators, and even the reigning president (a la Venezuela), and allowing the people to pass federal laws through popular referendum (a la Switzerland) are more radical suggestions that, in my opinion, merit critical discussion.

[onehandle]

2. Not in the Constitution. nt

[XuChi]

6. why would it be different this time?

All you would do is spend a lot of time and effort and get the same as last time.

[OneTwentyoNine]

12. Really? Would Ohio be locked down again because of "Terra" threats??

Funny..I guess after all the votes were counted without the media or ANYONE being able to watch all the terrorists just up and left Ohio.

Of course after reading your other posts I doubt that you saw anything strange about a lock-down vote count and CNN changing their polling numbers at 2:00 am.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

15. Hmmm

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

18. I second that. n/t

[leyton]

7. We just had one.

Nov 2, 2004.

[forgethell]

8. It's not part of our system.

There is no constitutional or legal provision for it.

In the states where it has been done there is a constitutional provision. Other states do not have this process.

In short, you're trying to play basketball with football rules. First, get the rules changed.

[FreedomAngel82]

10. I guess

nobody ever thought about something like this ever happening.

[forgethell]

14. Sure they did.

America is not the first republic in the world, the first democracy, and certainly not the first dictatorship.

President Bush will not be impeached because not enough Congressmen or Senators were elected who were willing to do it. The people have spoken.

[lojasmo]

19. The democratic party did that legislation in California many years ago

Look where it got us.

[paineinthearse]

20. why cant we have a national recall election?

There are 3.5 ways for a Presidents's term to end:

1. In 4 years.
2. Death.
3. Impeachment.
3.5 Can step aside temporarily due to incapacitation.

The constitution would have to be amended to allow removal by a recall election.

[Sapphire Blue]

21. Re: 3.5 - Does that cover mental incapacitation?

[karynnj]

23. Yes But you don't get a new election You get Cheney and they

nominate a new vp

[paineinthearse]

29. Great, hestert

And DeLay moves up to Speaker.

UGH!

[Tigress DEM]

55. Just signed a pettition to remove DeLay....

http://ga3.org/campaign/withoutdelay

11,455 citizens have signed - what are you waiting for?

Delay's misdeeds:

http://www.pcactionfund.org/withoutdelay/facts

[Tigress DEM]

51. Chenney is on the impeachment list too.

Treason. In fact there are multiple positions that can be impeached.

In Minnesota the ImpeachNow group is going to be part of the protest against the war in Iraq which is exactly 2 years old tomorrow, 3/19/05.

[karynnj]

61. Sorry, should have guessed as he is at least equally complicit

So I guess we get Dennis Haskett,if he's involved, we get Ted Stevens - who can wear his Hulk tie to the swearing in!

[Tigress DEM]

68. We impeach enough of them, the rest will get the message.

Even slick politicians behave better if they think the heat will be on them next. It was the whole reason for checks and balances in the first place. Keep the people in power honest and accountable to the people so we wouldn't get stuck under tryanny again.

[ohioan]

96. And if HE'S impeached, Condi's right behind him

And if SHE's impeached, we'll get Snow

And if HE's impeached, we get good ole Rummy.

Think HE's bad? Never fear - if we impeach him, Gonzales is waiting in the wings.

They've got a pretty deep bench. Maybe we should just try to win the next election.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[amjucsc]

30. Sorry, but impeachment is the only Constitutional mechanism...

to get a sitting President out of the White House.

[tinanator]

31. and how does that work?

Wasnt Clinton impeached?

[LoganW]

33. Umm...

Please don't tell me you've actually never bothered to read the constitution? I almost feel bad telling you because now you won't, but please go take 15 minutes of your time to actually read it.

According to the constitution the house impeaches a president or other federal office holder. (same things happen, except only the president gets the chief justice to preside) AFTER that the SENATE tries them and then you either have an impeachment or you don't.

[tinanator]

36. ummm

silly boy, Im asking how impeachment removes a president if it didnt remove clinton, not whether or not you think I should study the Constitution. If youd like to supply some details feel free.

[LoganW]

38. omg

"Im asking how impeachment removes a president if it didnt remove clinton"

That's exactly WHY I'm telling you to read the constitution. If you did, you would know why. In fact I told you why.

Clinton was impeached by the HOUSE as stipulated in the constitution. However, the constitution further requires that a trial and conviction follow in the SENATE. Clinton was impeached in the house but NOT convicted in the senate. That's why it didn't remove him from office.

[tinanator]

39. thanks

appreciate it

[Tigress DEM]

44. You are a class act, tinanator.

[Yupster]

60. The House impeaching is kind of like

a grand jury indictment.

It doesn't make you guilty, it requires that you stand trial.

Not an entireley good analogy, but kind of.

[Tigress DEM]

66. Makes sense to me.

[Yupster]

59. Yes Clinton was impeached

The House votes to impeach, the Sentae votes to remove.

Clinton, like Andrew Johnson was impeached, but not removed.

[eaglenetsupport]

50. Well yea I guess I agree under

under existing law. But I've been thinking about recall at the national level. It could be done. You wouldn't need legislatures to agree or even help. It could be done by the people. The empowerment of such a procedure would produce the greatest registration of voters the country has ever seen. Given the fact that 80% of the none voters would vote democratic should they vote is the part that I'm interested in, not the recall itself. Check out what happens in states when popular progressive initiative is on the ballot. The simultaneous release of initiatives across multiple jurisdictions creates a national agenda. See prohibition: eight states through the "Committee of Lawyers" in eight states in one news conference in one hour created an unstoppable national agenda. In my opinion, the release across multiple jurisdictions would take on a life of it's own and would prove easier than any single state going it alone. This was the original theory on the medical marijuana initiatives. The problem there is they could never all get on the same sheet of music.

[Tigress DEM]

56. How about a real clean up of this treasonus administration?

Who are the pukes killing our freedoms? If we can get people from every state to move on this (and many are moving on it already to some degree) it will be a show of solidarity the world hasn't seen since the French told the nobles off... and we won't even need to behead anyone.

[tinanator]

57. Justice for all or justice for none

lets not rule out beheadings.
Imagine the rallies that could
be held to build support.

[Tigress DEM]

67. Doh!

[LoganW]

34. Christ people READ the constitution

This is half of what's wrong with the country today. People don't even bother to learn how the government works at the most basic level.

[Tigress DEM]

42. You're not being helpful.

Talking about what could be is how ammendments come about, or bills and laws that augment the Constitution.

If you have something to say worthwhile, then say it. If you're just going to put people down, you're making a very bad beginning on this board.

[eaglenetsupport]

45. Everyone can't know everything

that's why they have experts in different disciplines. I'm sure LoganW knows things that you or I don't. I think it's good that he/she asks the question.

[Tigress DEM]

47. I'm not asking LoganW to know everything. I'm asking him to be respectful.

Logan isn't the one who asked questions. He is the one mocking people for not "having read the Constitution" yet unlike yourself who actually took the time to post appropriate sections, Logan is just belittling people.

[eaglenetsupport]

53. Well it looks like I may

have gotten my posters mixed but the thrust is still the same. I don't like belittling either. Sorry

[Tigress DEM]

54. Not a problem... I've done that more times....

than I want to count. And the content of your posts tell me you are open minded, so I didn't have any problem with your statement even if it had been directed at me.

BTW

I just crossed over the 1000+ post mark on another thread I started about Where are people protesting tomorrow?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1670702

3/19/05 is the 2 year anniversary of the beginning of the war in Iraq.

[eaglenetsupport]

40. not a prohibited problem

it is an enactment problem. No such procedure as national recall just as there is no such thing as a national initiative procedure, never been enacted, only state wide.

[leyton]

62. Do you honestly think this country would recall him?

We failed to kick him out during the last election. If we try this, we will get what the Republicans got in 1998 - a royal ass-whooping.

[tinanator]

63. hell yeah or why worry about it?

I think there is something slightly different about a recall/throw the bums out movement, and his perceived popularity right now isnt near what they might have pretended previously. Since we dont have the impeachment option we could direct our attention to the public and ballot initiatives, whether anti-Bush or anti-War or anti-PATRIOT Act, we certainly have lots to fight if we are going to fight at all.

[eaglenetsupport]

64. Recall is a very interesting situation

Recalls build a life of there own. The throw the bum out mind set begins to build the moment the petition begins to be circulated. I want to be clear, I'm not advocating a convention to establish a recall procedure, I'm merely musing on the possibility of putting together a plan that would rally the troupes. As far as an election to recall potential for success, considering a politician at or slightly below 50% approval mark, his chances don't get better as time of petitioning goes on. Any recall begun with a 50% rating would be successful.

The value of considering such a proposal lies in motivating voters, that don't normally vote. Roughly half of the potential voters don't register and half of those don't show up on election day. The 25% that "decide" are split between two parties about equally so 13-14% run the country and thereby the world. Now this is not a position of strength but signs of extreme vulnerability of the ruling party. The republicans wish to ignore or write off these voters as apathetic or I don't care. In the Proposition One campaign we studied these voters extensively. We found that these voters do care immensely and in fact have an agenda. They care about clean air to breath, clean water to drink, nuclear war, education for all and health care for all, equal justice for women and all others and of course peace in our time. They're predominately boomers. We found that the non-voters have lost faith or never had faith that pulling that handle would do any good. The fact is these are us, progressive somethingcrats. Just because we've barely crossed over a threshold and now vote only places us a teeny bit ahead of were they are at. We have never had our agenda addressed in any serious manor. We are left out here voting for a party that is quite a few shades redder than most you or I. If in fact the non-voters didn't care than we would be in a substantially worse situation then we are. You give this group real empowerment at their own hands, and one best get the hell out of the way because their going to beat a path to that booth.

I know the non-voter like the back of my hand as I've been focused on them as the key for more than twenty years. I'm here to say to today that these are I and I understand. They may in fact be the most right on of all the groups in their position to not participate. They might very well be more correct than us. No politician in a three piece suit in a speech is going to convince them of anything. They won't listen, they don't believe them. However they will listen to US. We know them because they are us. We will listen to them because they are we. The progressives must form an alliance with the non-voter and convince them that the time to rise up is upon us. Given the numbers outside of MSM interpretations even a small 10% registration of this demographic group inundates the system. In my view once this process begins it will roll over the current political process like a steam roller the likes of which our country has yet to see. Here are the nuts and bolts of why they attack democracy itself. Since the Nixon administration the writing is on the wall and the opposition has understood the future of the entire world is progressive and liberal. The only opportunity the republicans have, given the numbers, is to suppress, confine, ostracize, and otherwise disenfranchise and keep the boomers out of the booth.

I know I'm in the minority within a minority but that's OK because I know I'm correct. THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION IS THE GREATEST OPPORTUNITY FOR REAL CHANGE IN MY LIFETIME. I am so convinced of this that on Nov 5, 2004 I came out of a ten year political retirement. I see the winds of change whirling about and I intend to be at that finish line for we are the only chance our mother has.

[ohioan]

82. The Founding Fathers purposely designed the Constitution NOT to

have recalls in order to enable a President to do their jobs without fear of being tossed out of office mid-term because they did something politically unpopular. That's why they limited grounds for removal from office to high crimes and misdemeanors determined through impeachment and trial.

While recall may seem like an attractive option right now to those who despise Bush, it's a double-edged sword. For example, Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson all took steps to advance civil rights, against the wishes of a majority of the American people. A constitutional recall would likely have been easily sustainable given the mood of the country at the time. No president would have gone out on a limb to do the right thing under those circumstances. We'd have had no Civil Rights Act or Voting Rights Act if Johnson knew he'd be thrown out of office for pushing and signing these into law.

I can't stand Bush. I want him gone. And he will be in 3 1/2 years. And I'm going to work like hell to increase Democratic numbers in Congress to keep in check in his last two years. And I'm going to break my neck working to take over the White House and Congress in 2008. But I think it's not only a complete waste of time and energy trying to change the Constitution to boot him out early (and merely put someone else of the same ilk in his place) but it's also terribly dangerous in the long-run.

[ohioan]

69. Why not, instead of wasting our time engaging in a futile act,

work like hell to make sure Democrats pick up House and Senate Seats next year, take back the majority and the White House in 2008?

No matter how attractive it may seem to us, we will not succeed in recalling or impeaching Bush. We should avoid engaging in fantasies and fight smart.

[SnoopDog]

70. How can we win if there is ELECTION FRAUD?

In case you all don't realize this - the extreme right is and have taken over our country. We actually have terrorists - American Terrorists - running our country.

It isn't like 'oh come man-it ain't that bad'. Well, it is. Our treasury is being looted, our air, water, and food are allowed to be polluted. Laws are being enacted to 'fuck' the majority of the people. Our rights are being taken away. Our Constitution is being SHITTED on. We are hated throughout the world. And...and they probably are going to attack everyone 'they' don't like. Like Iraq, Iran, Syria, .. Who else?

We need to get our country back.

[ohioan]

74. We'll get out country back by voting these people out of office

Expending our energies speculating about recalls and impeachments won't get us anywhere.

[SnoopDog]

75. It is futile to attempt to suppress a liberal mind...

I personally have the ability to work on more than thing at a time.

This includes impeachment and what ever other means to get our own Hitler out of office.

You too should try to utilize your energies on more than one thing.

[ohioan]

77. My dear, I'm quite adept at focusing on more than one thing at a time

I just don't waste my time engaging in actions that are a complete waste of time, like trying to get Bush impeached, which will NEVER happen. And even if it did happen and he were removed from office, we'd end up with the same regime in power - President Cheney is no better. Nor is President Hastert.

Nor is President Stevens
Or President Rice
Or President Snow
Or President Rumsfeld
Or President Gonzales
Or President Norton

and so on and so on.

Of course, by the time we run through the line of succession, we'll be long past 2008 and we'll likely be dealing with President Frist or whomever else they designate since, having been so focused on impeachment (which would take a huge effort given our minority status) we'd likely have little left to launch an effective presidential race.

[SnoopDog]

80. It sets the stage for 'the will of the people"...

And for the basis of a legitimate government.

[ohioan]

84. How?

Please play out the scenario . . . Assume Bush is impeached and removed from office. Then what?

[SnoopDog]

87. People will then realize that...

The invasion of Iraq is wrong.
Allowing polluters to pollute is wrong.
A heartless bankruptcy bill is wrong.
Destroying SS is wrong.
Not educating our children is wrong.
Looting our treasury is wrong.
A huge deficit is wrong.

It will then pave the way for a legitimate democratic government - one who respects ALL PEOPLE and the HEALTH and WELFARE of ALL People.

Then the fucking repuks would not able to destroy our country.

[ohioan]

89. A recall will make them realize all of this?

Sort of like Clinton's impeachment made people realize that he really was a horrible, degenerate person who didn't deserve to be President?

And, while people slowly come to this realization, who will be governing the country? Cheney? And the Republican Congress?

How do you propose to launch a recall that succeeds where the 2004 election failed?

[SnoopDog]

91. Well, first of all - all politicians since ww2 are only out for

themselves and corporations. Meaning... I feel Clinton was ok - not the best - but ok. To say he was 'horrible and degenerate' because he got a blow job is not the same for this monster we call * who KILLS innocent people while destroying the very land he is president of.

Thankfully, slowly, American citizens are realizing that the son of a bitch president is evil and is destroying our country. Look at his 'approval' ratings. Going down.....

[ohioan]

93. Every single politician since WWII (except Clinton)?

You know what's in the heart of every single politician? And every single one of them is evil, except Clinton?

I know for a fact that is not true.

And if Bush's taknking poll numbers demonstrate that people are starting to realize how bad he is, why is a recall necessary to prove this to them?

[SnoopDog]

94. Misunderstanding....

I feel that our government fails to do *anything* for 'we the people". Some do more harm than others. I did not at all say Clinton was 'great' or 'trash'. All I said was is was ok, not the best, but ok.

My point is that a blow job does not warrant impeachment however killing innocent Iraqis and Americans is.



Also, I am interested in knowing what you have done for the last 2 decades to help our democracy as you posted....?

[ohioan]

95. I sent you a private post - check your Inbox

[ElectricIron Sweeney]

72. Acts are not futile, people are

Any look at the constitution is valuable. A better one could
be written. The democratic party is not the answer, because
party is not the answer. To live with the current constitution
one only has to take the line about not more than one
representative for every 40000 persons whatever as a guide.
Whatever the outrageous number of voters per representative we
have now, it is nothing close to the figure we had with the
bigging of this country. Believing that democracy is the
answer would it really make a difference to have more
representatives trying to represent fewer voters? Were our
fore fathers more deserving of better, and more direct
representation? I am doubtful that one person can represent
two persons with any fidelity. How is that one person can be
allowed to represent 270000 if that is the correct figure
pulled suddenly from my ear?

[ohioan]

76. Then go off and try to write a new Constitution

In the meantime, I'm going to stay here in reality and work to make real change.

All of this "the sky is falling" hysteria is really getting us nowhere. Yes, we are in terrible shape right now. We have a despicable and corrupt Administration in office. But this is not the worst situation we have ever faced - this country's been through terrible times and worked their way through it. I refuse to get caught up in this "woe is us, nobody in history has ever had to endure what we're going through, let's tear the country down and start over again" mentality.

My grandmother, who endured the vestiges of slavery, faced vicious and pervasive discrimination, survived the Depression, couldn't vote until she was in her 30s, who had to teach her children how to suppress their feelings and comments in order to avoid being lynched, would spring from the grave and snatch me bald-headed if she even suspected that I was whining and moaning about the conditions we face today.

We don't need to write a new Constitution - as imperfect a document as it is (and it can never be perfect), it holds us in pretty good stead. We need to stop whining and stop behaving like Republicans are some kind of superhuman beings who cannot be stopped by normal means (like voting them out of office). That's what they WANT us to think! If we think they're omnipotent, they will be omnipotent. But they got where they are today by figuring out and then using the mechanisms of power to their advantage. It's not all that complicated or sinister. We can do the same thing. But as long as we're wasting our time and energy wringing our hands and demanding revolutions that will never happen while the Republicans happily go right on about their business solidifying their power, we're going to continue to be screwed.

[SnoopDog]

78. Disagree...This is the absolute worst time in our country's history.

We need to rid ourselves of this evil government.

We are not experiencing a normal American Democracy. They, they are destroying America.

Yes, work on voting them out - but - work on getting these bastards and bastardettes out of office before they destroy not only America but the world.

I advocate the legal means of ridding ourselves of our disgusting government.

[ohioan]

79. You think so? There are plenty of folks who actually lived through

other periods in our history who would disagree with you.

Do you really think that impeachment would get these people out of office? How exactly would that work?

[SnoopDog]

81. Through out history we the people ...

have fought and died for the right of liberty and freedom.

You may want to sit on your behind 'hoping' for a fair election - I personally say we need to fight our battles on EVERY front - very similar to the fucking republicans.

Note: not all republicans are evil - just the mofos currently destroying our country.

[ohioan]

83. Don't put words in my mouth

I said nothing about "sitting on my behind" doing anything. I just think that it's foolish to fight battles that get us nowhere. And impeachment and recall are just that.

[SnoopDog]

85. Again, disagree... It sets a mind set for people to realize that

this government is evil.

Anytime I hear someone or an entity say something is impossible - I work harder to make it so. It's a good thing - you should try it.

[ohioan]

86. Thanks for the lecture, but I would venture that I'm doing far more

and more effectively than most people to effect change and have been for more than two decades.

Are you familiar with Charles Hamilton Houston?

[SnoopDog]

88. No I am not...

I will find out more of Houston...

But, what exactly have you done for more than two decades? Please let me know as maybe I can learn something.

[ohioan]

92. Charles Houston = "The Man Who Killed Jim Crow"

Houston was the architect of the brilliant and complex strategy to overturn the separate but equal doctrine. It was a strategy that took decades, but Houston realized that this kind of change, to be effective and lasting, could not be done overnight.

So he carefully and gradually developed a line of cases that, when put together, eventually demonstrated that "separate but equal" is a fiction in that separate is INHERENTLY unequal. It literally took decades, but the Houstonian Strategy eventually culminated in Brown v. Board of Education, the landmark 1954 case outlawing segregation in public accommodations.

In my view, the most remarkable thing about Houston's strategy is that instead of tearing down the Constitution, he turned the Constitution on itself, using it to correct its own flaws. It was absolutely brilliant.

Sadly, Houston died not long before the Brown decision was decided, so he never saw the results of his work. But Thurgood Marshall, his student and protege, continued his philosophy and taught a generation of civil rights lawyers how to bend the Constitution toward justice. Unfortunately, we hear little about Houston outside of legal and civil rights circles. But he and Marshall likely saved this nation from a second civil war.

Here are some links to articles about Houston.

"Chief Counsel of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Charles Hamilton Houston, and his protégé’s successor Thurgood Marshall, mapped out a strategy in the courts to attack racial segregation and discrimination through the use of the Fourteenth Amendment. In a series of victories, segregation laws were overturned, and the courts, using their equitable powers, fashioned remedies which changed the face of the nation. On the heels of landmark decisions in education, public transportation, voting rights and criminal justice, Congress acted under provisions of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to implement the provisions of those decisions. Moreover, a series of Executive Orders and similar state actions made the goal of achieving equal opportunity a national policy."
http://www.law.uc.edu/alumni/counselor/winter01/pg08.html

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/trialheroes/charleshoustonessayF.html

http://www.law.cornell.edu/houston/housbio.htm

[SnoopDog]

90. So, I did a quick search on Mr Houston...

Seems to be a patriot of humanity... Someone I would respect.

This relates to our story how?