Senator Cornyn Mocks Senator Feingold’s Censure Resolution
Hugh Hewitt points us to this fabulous posting on Sen. John Cornyn’s web site. I wish more Senators had his sense of humor, and guts to call out one of his “distinguished colleagues”
Results of Feingold Censure Resolution (S.Res. 398): Day 2
Democrat co-sponsors of Feingold Resolution: 0
al Qaeda communications intercepted by Feingold Resolution: 0
Terror attacks prevented by Feingold Resolution: 0
UPDATE: Maybe this is catching on?
Frist enlists bloggers’ help on Feingold censure resolution
The Wall Street Journal examines the real motivation behind Feingold’s stunt,
The Impeachment Agenda
Russ Feingold reveals what many Democrats really want.
Republicans are denouncing Senator Russ Feingold’s proposal to “censure” President Bush for his warrantless wiretaps on al Qaeda, but we’d like to congratulate the Wisconsin Democrat on his candor. He’s had the courage to put on the table what Democrats are all but certain to do if they win either the House or Senate in November.
In fact, our guess is that censure would be the least of it.
March 15th, 2006 at 12:28 pm
How is the level of debate ever going to improve in Washington?
During the Clinton administration, we had “logjams” in Congress, under Bush we have “polarization”. Most presidents have had contentious relations with Congress and there is nothing new about “mudsligning” and political stunts.
March 16th, 2006 at 9:50 am
While I am sure there were political motivations behind Feingold’s censure motion, I support him wholeheartedly. He’s one of the very few Democrats willing to speak out against this administration’s crimes, of which there are many. While the clearly insane and mentally incompetent George Bush leads us towards another destructive disaster based on lies in the Middle East, it’s going to take more politicians like Feingold to halt the march of reckless Bush imperialism. Exposing Bush’s crimes here on the homefront is a good start.
March 16th, 2006 at 3:57 pm
John,
What are Bush’s crimes? I thought we were:
A.) Innocent until proven guilty.
B.) Are not considered crimminals until proven guilty in a court of law.
It’s my belief that you are spewing rather than engaging in a substantive discussion.
March 17th, 2006 at 10:40 am
George Bush publicly admitted to not obtaining FISA warrants before or after instituting NSA wiretaps. This is a crime. And to your point, George Bush certainly doesn’t seem to feel those “terrorists” held in Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib without the right to a trial are “innocent until proven guilty.” Bush invokes the “war on terror” and everybody seems ready to hand him dictatorial discretion over the country’s affairs. Sorry, but I still believe in the rule of law.
March 24th, 2006 at 5:07 pm
The Bush Administration has REPEATEDLY LIED about the reasons for the preemptive invasion of Iraq.
Bush has engages in UNAUTHORIZED, UNLAWFUL WIRETAPPING like Nixon.
Bush supports TORTURE in violation of domestic and international law.
These constitute HIGH CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS because they violate the AMERICAN CONSTITUTION.
Bush thinks he is above the law. He has got to be stopped.