Warrants Issued To Arrest Bush and Cheney

Not to get too political here, but I think this is awesome:

“Town Clerk Annette Cappy stands in her office in Brattleboro, Vt. Friday Feb. 29, 2008, holding a sample ballot with an article which voters will consider that would instruct the town’s attorney to draft indictments allowing President Bush and Vice President Cheney to be arrested by local authorities for crimes against their Constitution. On primary day Tuesday March 4, 2008, its residents will vote on whether to issue warrants for the arrest of Bush and Cheney, should they ever visit.”

More here.

12 Responses to Warrants Issued To Arrest Bush and Cheney

  1. John Sherrod March 5, 2008 at 4:42 am #

    I applaud the town for having the audacity to pass this measure, but in all fairness the ballot should have listed the crimes the two are accused of committing. Having said that, I’m certainly not sticking up for Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney. They are worthy of impeachment many times over for their many crimes against the American people.

  2. Joe Miller March 5, 2008 at 8:54 am #

    why is it “awesome?”

  3. zoecarnate March 5, 2008 at 2:02 pm #

    Hi Joe,

    I think John Sherrod alluded to it in his comment above–George W. Bush and Dick Cheney have demonstrated callousness and gross negligence to the U.S. Constitution, and, I’ll add, the Geneva Conventions. They continue to flout both pugnaciously, to say nothing of the Christian faith they both claim to espouse. They should be tried for war crimes, crimes against US liberties, and crimes against humanity.

    And please know, this isn’t a left-right kind’ve critique. While I come from a center-left wannabe-anarchist point of view, John is responding as a committed Libertarian.

    While I doubt they’ll be prosecuted on a Federal level (though you never know), if local towns and cities across America passed legislation similar to Brattleboro’s, Bush and Cheney might have to watch their travel routes for a good long time–at least, until they’re willing to take the hard steps of restitution and reconciliation.

    Bush and Cheney’s United Methodist Church could pass similar resolutions on local or statewide levels to administer church discipline.

    Get your town to issue a warrant for Bush and Cheney’s arrest here.

  4. Mr. Cheeseburger 9000 March 5, 2008 at 3:12 pm #

    In theory, I like the idea of the town attorney. But deciding whether to indict someone is a decision best left to the town attorney.

    Why wait for the vote? Draft it if you think it can be proved.

  5. Joe Miller March 6, 2008 at 2:15 am #

    I am critical of the marriage between “Church and Politics on all sides. So from that perspective, I find this move ment represents a gross ignorance of US Law. If anyone truly thinks this silly people represent any real “threat” to Bush, they are just living a fantasy. If a little hick town cop tried to get near Bush, he would be stopped and/or arrested on Federal Charges. I think it is fine to voice opposition, but Christians supporting this kind of fantasy is just as bad as religionists on the Republican side.

    Just my 2 cents.

  6. John Sherrod March 6, 2008 at 5:21 am #

    Joe, I would assume that the town police chief in that Vermont town took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic. I have no doubt that you’re right about Federal officials coming to Bush’s rescue, but that doesn’t mean the town police chief shouldn’t uphold his oath of office.

  7. Joe Miller March 6, 2008 at 10:15 pm #

    With respect, your remarks demonstrate a lack of how the law works in a Constitutional Republic.

    Ignorant-Symbolism over Educated-Substance is never a good thing; no matter how one feels about an issue.

    I would hasten to add that this is certainly not the most important issue in our world, nor more important than our faith in Jesus, so I don’t want to get super dogmatic about it. I just wanted to share my difference of opinion.

    Thanks brother for giving me space on your blog to dissent.

  8. John Sherrod March 11, 2008 at 2:35 am #

    Joe, I’d love to have you flesh out the first sentence of your last post so that I can better understand your position. If you have the time. Thanks!

  9. Jon March 15, 2008 at 3:58 pm #

    I’m not sure I agree this is “awesome,” though it is refreshing in a way. I could see Bush and Cheney being tried for treason and mass murder, but should they? Unconditional love means unconditional… even to the most benighted souls, who are the ones who likely need it most.

    The traps of the ego lie everywhere.

  10. zoecarnate March 15, 2008 at 4:44 pm #

    Great point, Jon. But please not I’m not saying I want any particular punitive outcome–’cause I don’t, ’cause I agree with you. But being judged and being condemned isn’t necessarily the same thing–to me ‘judgment’ is being known in weighed in complete honesty and integrity. There is such a thing as restorative justice, rather than vengeance-driven justice. And of course, creatively applied grace and forgiveness factor in to this majorly. I’m thinking Truth & Reconciliation Commission, South Africa type stuff.

  11. zoecarnate March 15, 2008 at 4:45 pm #

    *please note

  12. Jon March 15, 2008 at 7:48 pm #

    Cool. Well said.

Leave a Reply to Mr. Cheeseburger 9000 Click here to cancel reply.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.