Three of the six candidates seeking the Democratic nomination for Congress in Maine's 1st District and incumbent 2nd District Rep. Mike Michaud have endorsed a proposal that would be silly -- if it was not so wrong, so serious and so important.

Michaud, Chellie Pingree, Ethan Strimling and Mark Lawrence all have called for the House of Representatives to impeach President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. Then they want the Senate to hold a trial, convict the two and remove them from office.

Lawrence says that if he is elected, he will seek an impeachment vote in the House as soon as he takes office. Presumably, the others will do the same.

They would have to work quickly. The new Congress will be sworn in on Jan. 3. The new president will be inaugurated on Jan. 20.

Simple logistics and political common sense make it clear that the call for impeachment is political posturing, not a realistic proposal. Some might excuse this as the sort of meaningless bombast we have come to expect in election campaigns, but I think it's more serious.

I oppose impeachment not because I have a high regard for either Bush or Cheney. I don't. I think historians will rank Bush with Warren G. Harding, Franklin Pierce and James Buchanan as the worst presidents ever.

Moreover, I agree with Michaud, Pingree, Strimling and Lawrence that Bush and Cheney have twisted and violated the Constitution and the law in ways that should outrage the nation. They led us into a war on false pretenses, they have compromised and violated civil liberties in this nation and abroad. They have swept innocent men and women off the streets and locked them in foreign prisons. They have stonewalled and lied to Congress and the American people. They have embraced torture. That's just part of the list.

An effort to impeach them two or three or four years ago would have had merit.

Seeking to do so when they have three weeks to serve minimizes and politicizes what should have been a serious discussion about the direction of our democracy.

Impeachment may make for good election sound bites but it is impossible -- and all these candidates know it.

Impeachment is, and should be, complex. Think back to the investigations and hearings that led to the impeachment -- and subsequent acquittal -- of Bill Clinton or to the more complex hearings, including appeals to the Supreme Court over the White House tapes, that led to Richard Nixon's resignation.

Impeachment is a powerful tool, created in the Constitution for use in only the most serious cases. Misused -- trivialized -- it would become dangerous to the nation. Think how different the country would be if impeachment became the United States' version of a vote of no-confidence in the government, toppling presidents quickly and with ease. Using impeachment as a modern-day, post-election show trial against a soon-to-be-gone Republican president would mock the intent of the process.

On her Web site, Pingree argues that "the issue of impeachment is really about how people view and understand the Constitution and it's much bigger than our current president. As in the Watergate era, we are at a 'teachable moment' when the public, as well as the politicians and government officials, would benefit from a full public investigation and review of the substantial body of information that suggests that the Bush administration has disregarded the rule of law it pledged to uphold. Impeachment is not a matter of political strategy or convenience but an important safeguard of our democracy."

Fine. Use the moment. Hold hearings. Develop the teachable moment. Congress -- no matter who is elected -- has that power. But suggesting impeachment of a president with three weeks to serve is a sick joke.

The new president, no matter who is elected, undoubtedly will make important changes. All the presidential candidates oppose torture and are willing to define it. All seem prepared to end the worst practices at Guantanamo. It is unlikely that any will embrace the policies that have trampled on civil liberties.

No matter who is in office, making these changes, and others in complex areas such as health care, economic policy and the environment, will require a level of intelligent, bipartisan cooperation among members of Congress and the White House. A meaningless, posturing proposal for impeachment would poison the atmosphere of the new Congress just when it should be looking forward, not backward.

Michaud, Pingree, Lawrence and Strimling -- and their competitors in both districts, Democrats and Republicans -- have many good ideas and qualifications. This single, wrong response to a failed Bush presidency is not reason to vote for or against any of them. Like Bush and Cheney, this proposal soon will be gone, if not forgotten.

Jan. 3 and Jan. 20, 2009, will be important dates for the United States. A new president will pledge to change the way things are done in Washington. A new Congress, including at least one new member from Maine, will be eager to be part of the process.

Impeachment? Nonsense.

David B. Offer is the retired executive editor of the Kennebec Journal and the Morning Sentinel. E-mail davidboffer@hotmail.com.