Feingold Audacity Advisory System
With even liberal Democrat senators cutting and running from 'Cut and Run' Russ' censure proposal, this newly devised advisory system is unveiled at
GUARDED.
However, if he makes the Sunday talk shows again next week, we may move up to ELEVATED.
19 Comments:
Audacity from Senator Feingold? As in the bold disregard of normal restraints for sure
George Bush campaigned for the presidency as the fellow who would bring honesty back to the White House. During his first full day on the job, while swearing in his White House staff, he reminded the assembled, "On a mantelpiece in this great house is inscribed the prayer of John Adams, that only the wise and honest may rule under this roof." But Adams's prayer would once more go unanswered. There has been no restoration of integrity. Bush's promise was a lie. The future of the United States remains in the hands of a dishonest man.
Over the past six years we’ve been treated to such tortured linguistic circumlocutions as: Bush's statements represented "embroidering key assertions" and were clearly "dubious, if not wrong." The President's "rhetoric has taken some flights of fancy," he has "taken some liberties," "omitted qualifiers" and "simply outpace[d] the facts." But "Bush lied"? Never.
Ben Bradlee explains, "Even the very best newspapers have never learned how to handle public figures who lie with a straight face. No editor would dare print this version of Nixon's first comments on Watergate for instance. 'The Watergate break-in involved matters of national security, President Nixon told a national TV audience last night, and for that reason he would be unable to comment on the bizarre burglary. That is a lie.'"
President Bush is a liar. There, I said it. Only in Madison and Washington could it be somehow worse to call a person a liar in public than to be one.
George Will, a frequent apologist for the lies of Reagan and now Bush, goes so far as to insist that President Clinton's "calculated, sustained lying has involved an extraordinarily corrupting assault on language, which is the uniquely human capacity that makes persuasion, and hence popular government, possible."
President Clinton was a rank amateur compared to the incumbent.
molliemous,
I have a question, which is better looking: your MoveOn fleece pullover or your I heart Dennis Kucinich mock turtleneck?
Seriously.
Seriously?
I feel pretty,
Oh, so pretty,
I feel pretty and witty and bright!
And I pity
Anyone who isn't me tonight.
I feel charming,
Oh, so charming
It's alarming how charming I feel!
And so pretty
That I hardly can believe I'm real.
And you?
just like Xoff, I must give props to Fraley's sense of humor while he is being assulted from the other side of the aisle...keep it up!
Dearest Neo,
I have no idea what an “assult’ is nor does this xoff person I presume.
But as for “assault” well my definition is: To attack with moral means, or with a view of producing moral effects; to attack by words, arguments, or unfriendly measures; to assail; as, to assault a reputation or an administration.
Guilty as charged.
I've read and re-read molliemous's responses to the criticism towards her. somehow, molliemous just doesn't quite live up to Fraley. but in at least attempting to model your humor after Fraley, it's good to see you living up to such a worthy idol.
oh, and by the way molliemous, good luck convincing the public that someone who said, among other things, the same thing the United Nothings (UN), practically every other country in the world, and even liberal democrats like Russ Feingold agreed with, is a liar. liberals are quick to point the finger (as long as their man or woman isn't in charge) when even their own predictions turn out to be false. As long as the person in charge agreed with their original prediction and was wrong, they forget about their original predictions.
Ah, why am I bothering...sleeping would be much more enjoyable than trying to educate a silly liberal.
http://cornyn.senate.gov/index.asp?f=page&pid=233&lid=1
I think molliemous forgot what her former Democrat Senator, Bob Kerrey of Nebraska, said about Bill Clinton: "He's not just a liar. He's an unusually good liar." And speaking of Presidents and their first full days on the job; remember when Bill Clinton said, "We will have the most ethical administration history?" I always wondered why he answered a question that no one asked. He would probably say it depends on what the meaning of "ethical" is.
As for Senator cut and run Feingold crowing about President Bush trampling the Bill of Rights. Why should we listen to a man who blatantly disregarded the first amendment with the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform. That amendment worked well, didn't it? What an absolute joke liberals are.
I think demonstrates that the Senators from my old party realize that the reports of Bush in trouble with the public are greatly exaggerated.
In other words they know that the MSN propaganda is just that.
I don't have a problem with Senator Feingold, he is being honest about what he believes, I think he's dead wrong but at least he is advancing those beliefs. His is the face of the fundraising arm of the Demorcratic party these days.
It will be a healthy thing for both the party and the nation for such a person to be nominated, that way the country can debate these ideas. If I am wrong and the country thinks he is right then so be it, that's what free societies do.
If I am right and he gets Royally trounced then my old party can return to sanity and perhaps offer alternatives to the Republicans.
It was only when my party decided that believing Catholics and those who actually trust the US government over say Iran or France are not welcome did I leave. And it wasn't until the party's final leftward shift on social issues did my mother who voted Demorcratic in every election since 48' cross the line in 2004.
Until that time the party will remain in the minority and not be a serious contender in the arena of ideas, and unless ideas are challenged seriously both parties will suffer and the country will too.
When Feingold called for a censure of President Bush for spying on innocent Americans without a warrant he said: "It's a big step, but what the president did by consciously and intentionally violating the Constitution and laws of this country with this illegal wiretapping has to be answered. There can be debate about whether the law should be changed. There can be debate about how best to fight terrorism. We all believe that there should be wiretapping in appropriate cases---but the idea that the president can just make up a law, in violation of his oath of office, has to be answered."
The spineless jellyfish in the Democratic leadership would do well to get a grip on the fact that the POTUS isn’t trusted or believed by an ever-increasing majority of the governed. The Republicans know it…they smell the rotting corpse of this presidency.
George Clooney puts it quite succinctly in his piece on The Huffington Post. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/george-clooney/i-am-a-liberal-there-i-_b_17119.html
The fear of been criticized can be paralyzing. Just look at the way so many Democrats caved in the run up to the war. In 2003, a lot of us were saying, where is the link between Saddam and bin Laden? What does Iraq have to do with 9/11? We knew it was bullshit. Which is why it drives me crazy to hear all these Democrats saying, "We were misled." It makes me want to shout, "Fuck you, you weren't misled. You were afraid of being called unpatriotic."
Bottom line: it's not merely our right to question our government, it's our duty. Whatever the consequences. We can't demand freedom of speech then turn around and say, But please don't say bad things about us. You gotta be a grown up and take your hits.
I am a liberal. Fire away.
Where was Molliemous when Bill Clinton said, in his 1998 State of the Union address, that Iraq had WMD? Hmmmm? How about when Clinton attacked Iraq because of its WMD program.
Remember, George W. Bush was the 3rd president to attack Iraq.
Molliemous was in Bosnia.
"...the reports of Bush in trouble with the public are greatly exaggerated."
Bwah! Yes, I'm sure that 34% approval rating is just a typo.
The Republicans have consistently put up roadblocks to getting answers about anything this administration is doing. They've blocked investigations and calls for accountability. What are they afraid of? Go, Feingold!
From this morning's Washington Post:
"(Senator)Feingold said he is "extremely pleased with the way this is going." He said he is particularly buoyed the barrage of criticism from Republicans. "If such a crazy idea has such limited appeal, why do they have the attack dogs calling all over the country about this?" Feingold asked. "It touches a nerve."
It sure as hell didn't hit their funny bone.
To set the record straight...
"When Feingold called for a censure of President Bush for spying on innocent Americans without a warrant" he was in fact vastly misrepresenting a program which may or may not be legal but which is far from being decidedly illegal. In fact, if Feingold considers people with close ties to Al-Qaida to be "innocent Americans," I wonder if he considers the 9/11 hijackers to be "innocent Americans" as well.
If your phone number is on the laptop or cell phone of a known Al-Qaida terrorist, that certainly satisfies reasonable cause. There were numerous oversights of the program and members of congress were briefed on a regular basis. Too many people were briefed on the program as it turns out.
Now that the program is exposed, its potential for detecting and preventing further terrorist attacks is drastically reduced. Considering that it has already prevented multiple attacks, I hope the administration has a backup program to put into place. I further hope they don't tell anyone about it, especially congressmen who care more about their own elections than they do the safety of their constituents.
Great post! I linked to it: http://aladysruminations.blogspot.com/2006/03/russ-feingold-guarded.html.
34 pct.
Yup the president is so unpopular that the Senate Democrats are running away from Feingold as fast as they can.
Do you believe even for a second that Mr. Reid, Clinton, et/al wouldn't be all over this resolution if this was reality, do you remember how they reacted on the ports deal?
If you want to buy into this that is your call. When you can win at least one house of congress then you can tell me how much trouble republicans are in.
It is the unwillingness to see such reality that keeps the party in the state that it is in, but by all means continue.
You have 8 months to convince Americans that you are right. If you fail to do so then I will conclude that I am correct.
Watch the way your "leaders" act that will be the clue.
Another great post supporting the President's "illegal" foreign intelligence surveilence program. This one outlines the legal arguments and history behind the creation of the program, the reason they bypassed the FISA court, and the circumstances which led to the FISA Appeals Court first and only meeting to discuss the role of the FISA court in the current conflict. A well written piece WITH CITATIONS rather than the opinion of a Senator trying to make a name for himself by attacking a president in the middle of a war.
http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200603150741.asp
Post a Comment
<< Home