. . .censure Bush--again.

Democratic senator proposes censuring Bush
Sen. Feingold wants action taken for president's mismanagement of Iraq

Quote :

"WASHINGTON - Liberal Democratic Sen. Russ Feingold said Sunday he wants Congress to censure President Bush for his management of the Iraq war and his 'assault' against the Constitution. But Feingold's own party leader in the Senate showed little interest in the idea. An attempt in 2006 by Feingold to censure Bush over the warrantless spying program attracted only three co-sponsors."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19900404/

/message_topic.aspx?topic=374007

You know, on the Iraq issue, I think reasonable people can agree that President Bush has not handled it well--in a number of areas. But this censure crap is just more virtually meaningless political theater--much like last week's Senate "slumber party." In addition, these blatantly partisan moves drive waffling Republicans back toward Bush. Is that the Democrats' plan? No wonder they haven't been able to end the war.

[Edited on July 23, 2007 at 10:51 AM. Reason : .]

7/23/2007 10:49:07 AM

not another hooksaw thread

7/23/2007 10:52:05 AM

It is one person trying to do this. Did you even read the article you posted?

Quote :

" But Feingold's own party leader in the Senate showed little interest in the idea"

Don't lump Democrats in with one person.

This is like saying all republicans are slimy weasels since Bush pardoned Scooter Libby, even though Cheney had been convicted of lying and obstruction of justice when he leaked the CIA operative's name.

7/23/2007 10:53:07 AM

Quote :

"Democrats Feingold Trying to censure Bush--again."

Fixed that for you. Do we need to make a thread condemning a party every time one of their members introduces a bad bill?

7/23/2007 10:59:31 AM

^^^ If you don't like my threads, don't fucking click on them. Is that too simple for you?

^^ and ^ Can you read? In addition, it's not Feingold's first time.

Quote :

"In addition, I have introduced Resolutions regarding both President Bush (H. Res. 636) and Vice-President Cheney (H. Res. 637) proposing that they be censured by Congress based on indisputable evidence of unaccounted for misstatements and abuse of power in the public record."

John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.)

http://www.house.gov/conyers/Censure_PR.htm

/message_topic.aspx?topic=374007

[Edited on July 23, 2007 at 11:01 AM. Reason : .]

7/23/2007 11:00:50 AM

I'm surprised at the lack of assassination attempts on dickbush....
....maybe potential assassins are stopped by worries of creating martyrdom

Oh well.......only 18 more months of national shame....

7/23/2007 11:04:26 AM

You don't want to answer my question hooksaw? How about we assume all republicans have no idea how to plan a budget or a successful tax platform. After all, Bush did just try to cut $420 million from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting which has been around since 1967. Luckily his ignorance was crushed in the voting 357-72.

markgoal hit the nail on the head

7/23/2007 11:07:54 AM

fucking public broadcasting is a joke anyway. THe only mistake Bush made was not getting rid of it entirely.

7/23/2007 11:09:54 AM

Thread title should have been - Another Democrat trying to censure Bush.

Why do you get so pissy when people point out your pathetic attempts at partisan hackery?

7/23/2007 11:12:59 AM

^^ I guess, but the CPB distributes federal subsidies to PBS, National Public Radio and hundreds of public radio and television stations

7/23/2007 11:14:42 AM

In todays world of ultra cheap broadcasting methods, there's no need for public funds to support radio/tv stations that can't make it on the market by themselves. It's unnecessary.

7/23/2007 11:16:59 AM

I personally enjoy not having to deal with commercials while listening to NPR. It could be like the arab propaganda radio that NO ONE is listening to that your tax dollars are funding. If you are going to bitch at least make it worth while.

7/23/2007 11:21:13 AM

^x6 I've answered your "question." Feingold is in fact not the only Democrat who has called for censure of Bush, as I demonstrated with my link to Conyers' own press release. One Democrat is singular, two Democrats is plural, see? In addition, Feingold had a whopping three co-sponsors for his 2006 censure attempt.

Please note the following points from my initial post: (1) I put the censure attempts in the larger context of a number of meaningless moves by Democrats--I mean, what have they actually accomplished? And (2), as I posted, Bush may actually deserve some type of censure concerning Iraq--did you miss that part? But I also think that a censure move will be very divisive and will ultimately hurt the Democrats' attempt to end the war--if that is in fact what they actually want to do. Now, which part don't you understand?

[Edited on July 23, 2007 at 11:24 AM. Reason : .]

7/23/2007 11:23:57 AM

Quote :

"I put the censure attempts in the larger context of a number of meaningless moves by Democrats--I mean, what have they actually accomplished"

What have the Democrats and the Republicans accomplished, you mean?

Seems like the Democrats are hard at work trying to get what the majority of the voters want. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?

7/23/2007 11:40:37 AM

So then, how do you explain how the democrats were working on immigration reform, and the fact that their approval rating is one of the worst in the history of our country?

Fact is they haven't done shit....and all they are doing is making up investigations, something like over 200 independent investigations going on right now....

[Edited on July 23, 2007 at 11:52 AM. Reason : w]

7/23/2007 11:51:03 AM

^^i like when this troll tries to imply he's not a democrat, then he comes with some shit like that

[Edited on July 23, 2007 at 11:51 AM. Reason : ^^]

7/23/2007 11:51:25 AM

Wait, so democrat approval rating AND republican approval rating are both in the shitter? Sounds like someone is either a) lying or b) implying the populous no longer wants a two party system. If b is the case, why do independents never win major elections? It is easy to pull shit out of one's ass and present it as fact.

7/23/2007 11:55:10 AM

^^^^ Yeah, and the voters are really happy with the "work" of the Democrat-led Congress:

Americans' Confidence in Congress at All-Time Low

Quote :

"PRINCETON, NJ -- The percentage of Americans with a 'great deal' or 'quite a lot' of confidence in Congress is at 14%, the lowest in Gallup's history of this measure -- and the lowest of any of the 16 institutions tested in this year's Confidence in Institutions survey. It is also one of the lowest confidence ratings for any institution tested over the last three decades."

http://www.galluppoll.com/content/?ci=27946

19% Say Congress Doing Good or Excellent Job

Quote :

"Just 19% of American voters believe that Congress is doing a good or an excellent job. That’s down from 26% a month ago and just four points above the ratings given to the Republican Congress on Election night 2006. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 37% give Congress a 'fair' rating while 41% say poor. Among Democratic voters, 24% say Congress is doing a good or an excellent job. That’s down eleven points from 35% a month ago. Forty-one percent (41%) of Democrats say their team is doing a fair job while 31% say poor. Just 13% of American voters believe that Congress has passed any legislation over the past year that will significantly improve life in America. That’s down from 17% on Election Night 2006."

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/19_say_congress_doing_good_or_excellent_job

These numbers are worse than Bush's.

[Edited on July 23, 2007 at 11:58 AM. Reason : .]

7/23/2007 11:56:25 AM

Quote :

"So then, how do you explain how the democrats were working on immigration reform, and the fact that their approval rating is one of the worst in the history of our country?"

What do you mean "explain"? Rephrase your question.

Quote :

"Fact is they haven't done shit....and all they are doing is making up investigations, something like over 200 independent investigations going on right now...."

Well, I'll fault the Democrats for not going out on a limb and just de-funding the troops. But I don't necessarily blame them for not going that far (yet) given the current state of politics and the vitriol with which the media and the spin machines go to work. Can you imagine how much louder the "hate america, hate troops" noise will get out of the the Bushcon camp if that were to happen? They'll put Tony Snow on a meth drip so he can be a 24 hr voice of "reason" to the media.

But to say they haven't done shit is pretty retarded considering they keep getting blocked by the mindless right wing crowd still aligned with the President and the machine that got him elected.

7/23/2007 1:10:44 PM

rephrase: Why is Congress approval ratings at an all time low?

so now you are admiting they haven't done shit.....but thats because republicans are blocking everything.....so in essence, they havent done shit just like I originally stated.

7/23/2007 1:45:14 PM

1) Congress almost ALWAYS has a lower approval rating than the President, usually substantially lower.

2) As you seem obsessed with what the Democrats have accomplished (while holding the slimmest of majorities in the Senate and without control of the Executive Branch), you seem to point out little but your limited knowledge of the Federal Government. While Congressional Democrats certainly deserve their share of criticism, you have failed to point out any actions or inaction on their part by which they have failed. Until you do, this is nothing more than ignorant partisan babble.

Have you ever taken a civics class (serious question)? At the very least, I encourage you to consult the following song: http://www.school-house-rock.com/Bill.html

7/23/2007 1:48:25 PM

^^^ NEWSFLASH: The Democrats control Congress! In addition, please provide a detailed list of these alleged Democrat accomplishments.

Quote :

"PRINCETON, NJ -- The percentage of Americans with a 'great deal' or 'quite a lot' of confidence in Congress is at 14%, the lowest in Gallup's history of this measure -- and the lowest of any of the 16 institutions tested in this year's Confidence in Institutions survey. It is also one of the lowest confidence ratings for any institution tested over the last three decades."

http://www.galluppoll.com/content/?ci=27946

^ Can you read? Serious question--you're not partisan, though, right?

[Edited on July 23, 2007 at 1:55 PM. Reason : .]

7/23/2007 1:50:20 PM

NEWSFLASH: It takes 60 votes and a signature, or 67 votes without a signature to accomplish ANYTHING.

7/23/2007 1:54:40 PM

^ I guess the Democrats ideas just aren't selling.

PS: You can't run in '06 on the war and vague promises of withdrawal and then win the majority and not make withdrawal happen. On top of that, all we hear is "The mean old Republicans won't let us have our way!"



[Edited on July 23, 2007 at 1:59 PM. Reason : .]

7/23/2007 1:56:22 PM

Democrats have a majority in congress. That doesn't mean they 'control' congress. This is shown by the fact that they can't muster 60 votes to cut off debate on bills. The fact that congress is ineffective is not due to just the democrats or republicans it's due to both of their inadequacies.

If we had a viable 3rd (4th, and 5th) party then these pricks would have to work together and form coalitions and maybe actually work for the American people for once.

7/23/2007 1:57:04 PM

^ I'd love to see it--because I'm not a Republican.

PS: You need to tell that to the Washington Post--they obviously didn't get your syntax memo.

Democrats Win Control of Congress

Quote :

"WASHINGTON -- In a rout once considered almost inconceivable, Democrats won a 51st seat in the Senate and regained total control of Congress after 12 years of near-domination by the Republican Party."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/09/AR2006110900147.html



[Edited on July 23, 2007 at 2:03 PM. Reason : .]

7/23/2007 2:00:47 PM

I'm a 'registered' democrat but I'd hardly consider myself aligned with either party.

That's why I hate a 2 party system. Sure, it limits their ability to fuck things up TOO much but it also makes it nearly impossible for them to fix things. Just like the rest of our burgeoning govt. Works great for about 15-20 years and then it goes downhill.

7/23/2007 2:02:42 PM

I would have to say that the two largest failures of the democrats are their attempts at defunding the war and immigration reform.

7/23/2007 2:04:34 PM

^ I'm still waiting for the list of Democrat "accomplishments."

7/23/2007 2:06:02 PM

both sides seem content at holding their ground and accomplishing nothing. unfortunately this is bad for everyone. BUT maybe this will mean that more incumbents will be voted out, which would be fine with me.

7/23/2007 2:11:44 PM

Passed Legislation:

* 2007-02-02 — House Page Board Revision Act of 2007, Pub.L. 110-2, 121 Stat. 4, 2 U.S.C. § 88b-3
* 2007-05-25 — U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007, including Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007, Pub.L. 110-28
* 2007-06-14 — Preserving United States Attorney Independence Act of 2007, Pub.L. 110-34


Pending or failed:

* Clean Energy Act of 2007
* Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007
* Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Prevention Act
* Disapproving of Iraq War troop surge of 2007
* District of Columbia Vote in House of Representatives
* Employee Free Choice Act
* Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act
* Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 (Ethics Reform Bill)
* Implementing the 9/11 Commission Recommendations Act of 2007
* Iraq War De-Escalation Act of 2007
* Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007
* Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Act of 2007
* Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007 - Vetoed
* Universal National Service Act of 2007
* HR 1591 – Vetoed (an earlier version of U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007)




It's also notable that the democrats and republicans are basically tied in the Senate with 49 each with 2 independants. Bernie sanders generally votes with the Democrats but Lieberman who 'caucases' with Dems cannot be reliably classified as a democrat on major political issues regarding the war.

7/23/2007 2:12:36 PM

^ That's some weak shit.

7/23/2007 2:48:00 PM

Quote :

"^ I'm still waiting for the list of Democrat "accomplishments.""

The list is as long as the Republican's accomplishments, so look that one up.

7/23/2007 2:50:57 PM

Quote :

"^ That's some weak shit."

The Republicans don't control Congress, troll. You can't have it both ways: The Democrats ran on Iraq and they won, now they actually have to do something. If the Democrats don't, they're simply impotent--and their suck ass polls show it, too.

BTW, some of you are continually foaming at the mouth about Bush being so stupid. Well, the Democrats sure as hell haven't outsmarted him yet--he seems to keep doing what he wants. Maybe the Democrats aren't as smart as they tell themselves they are, huh?

7/23/2007 3:04:43 PM

Can you not read? You make comments like this

Quote :

"The Republicans don't control Congress, troll. You can't have it both ways: The Democrats ran on Iraq and they won, now they actually have to do something. If the Democrats don't, they're simply impotent--and their suck ass polls show it, too. "

And I already addressed the topic

Quote :

"Well, I'll fault the Democrats for not going out on a limb and just de-funding the troops. But I don't necessarily blame them for not going that far (yet) given the current state of politics and the vitriol with which the media and the spin machines go to work. Can you imagine how much louder the "hate america, hate troops" noise will get out of the the Bushcon camp if that were to happen? They'll put Tony Snow on a meth drip so he can be a 24 hr voice of "reason" to the media."

To which you apparently don't have much of a reply.

Quote :

"BTW, some of you are continually foaming at the mouth about Bush being so stupid. Well, the Democrats sure as hell haven't outsmarted him yet--he seems to keep doing what he wants. Maybe the Democrats aren't as smart as they tell themselves they are, huh?"

It takes time to work through the court system when a Dictator starts interpreting the law his own way. Time is on his side, and if he can just ride it out 1 more year.

7/23/2007 3:09:22 PM

Quote :

" It's also notable that the democrats and republicans are basically tied in the Senate with 49 each with 2 independants. Bernie sanders generally votes with the Democrats but Lieberman who 'caucases' with Dems cannot be reliably classified as a democrat on major political issues regarding the war."

7/23/2007 3:09:43 PM

^^ Yeah, so you obviously agree with my point--Bush has outsmarted the Democrats in Congress.

7/23/2007 3:14:20 PM

Outsmarted? Temporarily I suppose if that is what you want to call it. So what? What point are you trying to make?

7/23/2007 3:16:01 PM

You have still failed to show how it's the democrats fault despite them not actually having the majority in the Senate. (Yes, they have a majority in the House, but they haven't had any trouble passing things through the house either.)

7/23/2007 3:16:41 PM

^ What, aren't the people behind the Democrats' agenda?

^^

Quote :

"Maybe the Democrats aren't as smart as they tell themselves they are, huh?"

Quote :

"Bush has outsmarted the Democrats in Congress."

hooksaw

You should have been able to get your answer from context. Hey, you proved my point for me. QED.



[Edited on July 23, 2007 at 3:24 PM. Reason : .]

7/23/2007 3:20:46 PM

You're changing the subject.

You said the democrats run the Senate but have yet to prove that they actually have a majority.

Once you appropriately address my question I will address yours.

7/23/2007 3:22:35 PM

^ You don't decide what's appropriate for me. Now I'm not going to respond--piss off.

7/23/2007 3:26:24 PM

Wow, you're becoming worse than TreeTwista when you are losing a debate. Are you the same person?

7/23/2007 3:29:58 PM

^ I'm not losing shit--but your team is losing approval points by the day. DON'T FEED THE TROLLS.

7/23/2007 3:33:25 PM

Answering a question with a question when you have no real answer is really just a stupid way to try to avoid actually dealing with the question. It reeks of salisburyboy posts. Next you'll be posting something like:

HEY UR DEMOCRATS ARE 19% APPROVAL LOLZ YOU WIN FUCK THE UJEWS!

7/23/2007 3:36:28 PM

It's sad you think my team is the Democrats. It speaks volume to your reading comprehension.

7/23/2007 3:40:09 PM

Quote :

"Wow, you're becoming worse than TreeTwista when you are losing a debate. Are you the same person? "

keep my name out of your mouth you stupid faggot

^and your team IS the democrats, dummy...you say:

Quote :

"Seems like the Democrats are hard at work trying to get what the majority of the voters want. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?"

its pretty obvious

State409c = TypeA = Blind Hate = a democrat

7/23/2007 4:18:10 PM

So, as an NCSU fan, if I were to make a statement like

"It seems like UNC is trying to attack our weaknesses by forcing Jay Davis to throw the ball"

That would make UNC my team?

You guys are brilliant when it comes to logic!

Quote :

"keep my name out of your mouth you stupid faggot"

I haven't said anything about aids infested vagina yet, so I don't hardly see how I had your name in my mouth.

7/23/2007 4:22:57 PM

wow thats a good one, what did you read that in the Jokes section of Bald Man Weekly

if you're not a democrat then how come you read Pelosi's blog...sounds like something no republican or independent would ever do

7/23/2007 4:25:26 PM

Quote :

"sounds like something no republican or independent would ever do"

Wow, the depth of your ignorance hasn't been reached yet, has it?

7/23/2007 4:27:47 PM