Voters have no need to bring formal charges against elected officials (impeachment), but we can remove one from office. This is called a reform election.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recall_election

Very good point. Trying to explain to someone what a "patriot" truly means. :(

Plenty of articles about. Plenty of quotes..

Then of course, there is what the "government" tells us , as to what patriotism should mean.

:flag:[/size]

This movement was less than successful because in the United States recall elections are currently prohibited in the federal system. The majority of states allow recall elections in local jurisdictions, but only 18 states permit recall elections to remove statewide officers (as of 2006}

Currently prohibited in the federal system.....where a change to the 2nd Amendment would have to occur.

oops....that's another topic:p :p

He serves US...he, or she, just needs to be reminded of that fact from time to time.

This day in history
 

Well keeping with the this day in history theme, and connected to this one as well..


April 19 1775
The "shot heard around the world" was fired. Colonial Minute Men took on British Army regulars at Lexington and Concord, Mass., starting the American Revolution.

Not you alone, nor you and 100 of your closest friends have the ability to persuade the decisions made by the President. He is elected to use his best judgment while representing us in political affairs and NO WHERE is listening to your opinions listed as a criteria for holding that office.

The only say you or your 100 friends has is whether or not you will vote for or against said politician the next time he runs.....unless it's a local official as Anime has shown us.

Well, unless you and your 100 friends are VERY VERY RICH, get one of those special interest groups going or the like.. Make a few donations. Money Talks. :) Unfortunately.

And why shouldn't the opinions of the VERY VERY successful be considered?

It's not like I want the homeless guy giving me advice....

Look, I see your point, ok? But that does NOT change the fact that the president is a PUBLIC SERVANT, which was what you were disputing. It doesnt get any simpler than that. The president is a public servant. Period. End of story. ANY elected or appointed official is a public servant. And though you or I might not have his ear, our congressmen and senators sure as hell do, and they do what we tell them.

Not one time did I dispute that elected officials are considered public servants.

My argument is and always has been that elected officials are not literally "our servants" as has been your argument since post #32 (it does NOT change the fact that they're our servants! Repeat to yourself as necessary.) and post #38 (Presidents, governors, mayors, judges...they're there to do our collective bidding.), and post #40 (I'm sayin their "best judgement" had damn well better be what the public wants).

Shall I continue?

Wait a minute...do you really think guys that they really do your bidding or what is on their agenda? There is a big difference. The lobbyists pockets are VERY DEEP.

As you can plainly see from the above, you did indeed dispute the fact that the president is a public servant. Ya got a real short-term memory problem, dont ya? And just because you or I dont have direct access to him does not change that fact.

Clearly one of us lacks the cognitive skills to differentiate between " a servant of the public" and a "public servant". You reckon that's why I continually asked you to make any elected official "serve" you?!?!?!?

but hey.....you go right ahead and pretend like you were confused

One word for ya...SEMANTICS!