So it seems what the Republican'ts are saying about impeachment is that it'd be partisan if the Democratically lead congress decided to Impeach the chimp. Well, i just read this diary about Bush's upcoming/threatened veteos and a perfect frame for this just occurred to me.
It is a partisan act for Bush to use the veto.
Think about it.... both are in the constitution to provide checks and balances. Wouldn't it follow that if one is partisan, the other should be as well?
Isn't it clear that bush only vetoed 1 bill while Republicans where in control of congress but now that Democrats are in control, he's about to use all these vetoes?
Attacking his vetoes is a short and long term strategy. It'll hit his current flurry of vetoes and future ones as well. If Democrats try to talk about each individual veto, they'll never get a strong message across since the Corporate media really won't carry much of it. This is especially true if Democrats try to explain why Bush shouldn't have vetoed. However, calling the veto partisan is a simple talking point and will attract the talking heads. They love the drama; It's their kind of game.
It's also important to link it to the talking point that impeachment is partisan. Linking it to impeachment This way makes it harder for the talking heads to just brush it off instead of actually 'debating' it. We can only hope they win the 'debate' about whether vetoes are partisan... you catch my drift right?
Just a thought that occurred to me while ready the diary i linked above. I don't usually write diaries, i just lurk, but i felt i should share this thought with others and get some feed back.
If you think it's a good frame, please recommend so more people can see it.
thanks.