I read it the same way.
OTOH, in Al Franken’s The Truth (with jokes) he envisioned a newly elected Dem Congress in 2008 impeaching W, who has only a couple months left in his term, just because they can!
If that day comes – let’s do it! 
Very true. The OP asked about “impeachment” and not “removal,” but I think it’s fair to say that he would be fine with your scenario.
And I love the 25th: it made for a great subplot in Air Force One.
Mayo
[/In stuffy Bush I voice]Wouldn’t be prudent…sniff[/end Bush I mode]
-XT
A recall is a democratic act. What the OP is proposing is not.
You know, BG, you’ve proposed some nutty ideas here before that one takes the cake. Presidential elections are often razor thin these days, and a recall amendment would guarantee that every president would face, and often lose, a recall. We could very well have a new president every year.
And that would be a bad thing why?
I mean, it’s a possibility the Brits* live with all the time. And they’ve managed prettly well with it.
*And every former Brit colony that has a parliamentary system. And they’ve managed pretty well with it.
The parliamentary system, from what I can recall, is very different from our republican system.*
*Note that’s lower case republican. As in, a republic, a form of government. Nothing to do with the Republican party.
A motion of confidence in a parliamentary system is not the same a recall.
Indeed. A motion of confidence can be dealt with in about a hour of debate in Parliament, if the house decides to limit debate to the mover of the motion and to the Prime Minister (or whichever other minister is defending the government). That costs a lot less that a recall ballot in which all the voters take part.
I don’t like the idea of the Electoral College, but given that the President is choen by it, a recall process would have to go like this:
(1) A recall wold be initiated by a petition signed by a majority of the Electoral College.
(2) When such a petitioon was received, the EC would reconvene, and ballot again for President and VP.
(3) If no candidate received a majority of votes, the Presient and VP would continue in office. (This is to deal with the situation of a third party having the balance of power in the EC).
(4) If a different candidate received a majority, then he/she would immediately replace the exiting President or VP.
You might also have to set up a process for replacing Electors who die during the 4-year term.
“Getting to the point?!” We passed that point how many deaths and screw-ups ago?
No, it isn’t. A recall is much, much harder to win. Therefore, less to be feared.
False dichotomy. A parliamentary system is often associated with monarchies, but it is every bit as republican as a separation-of-powers system.
You can’t know that in advance since we’ve had neither at the federal level in the US.
But even if it were true, a recall would just exacerbate the divisiveness in the country, and every president would be permanently campaigning as a primary function, not just as a secondary effort as it’s done now.
That does not seem to have happened (WRT governors) in states where the recall is an option. At least, Ahnold does not seem to govern as if he is permanently on campaign, AFAIK, or even as if he gives a shit about what anybody else thinks.
National, presidential politics is much more contentious, and the country as a whole s more deeply divided.
Personally, I’d like to see Bush ridden out of D.C. on a rail… but then we’d have to get rid of Cheney and everyone else who encourages Bush to behave the way he does. That’s a lot of rails.
However, it ain’t gonna happen.
I do have a question, however… if Bush had been exactly the way he is, but Democrat, how long would he have lasted in office? I’m betting he would’ve been kicked out a few months after 9/11. I think he gets way too much leeway just because he’s Republican.
As wonderful as that sounds, even someone who despises Bush as much as I can’t buy it. As incompetent as Bush is, I see nothing that makes him unable to perform the duties of his office. He can perform them, he just makes boneheaded decisions.
There is already a means to deal with dunderhead presidents- it’s the midterm election. Elect enough Democrats and that will clip his wings enough to keep any more real damage from happening.
Depends on who controls Congress. Partly, anyway. OTOH, Nixon was dumped when, IIRC, the Dems controlled the House and Pubs the Senate; and Johnson’s impeachment was partly a faction fight within the Republican Party.