Published on March 13, 2006 By AsWayOpens In Politics
Once he makes it to the floor to introduce it, call or write your representatives to back it!
Nobody should be above the law and this is the very least we can do.

Comments (Page 4)
8 PagesFirst 2 3 4 5 6  Last
on Mar 16, 2006
Senators Harkin, Boxer and Chafee are coming on board and others are saying it is worth discussion.
on Mar 16, 2006
Which ones, just wasted another 10 minutes trying to find out online and can't find anything to do with it. You could at least say who they are.


Use loc.thomas.gov -- and you can find all bills and their recent action.

Me neither. There is a 0% chance I'll ever be voting for George Bush again.


on Mar 16, 2006
or thomas.loc.gov -- oops!
on Mar 16, 2006
Tom Harkin: Why I Fully Support Bush Censure

We have a President who likes to break things. He has broken the federal budget, running up $3 trillion in new debt. He has broken the Geneva Conventions, giving the green light to torture. He has repeatedly broken promises – and broken faith – with the American people. And now, worst of all, he has broken the law.

In brazen violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), he ordered the National Security Agency to conduct warrantless wiretaps of American citizens. And, despite getting caught red-handed, he refuses to stop.

Let's be clear: No American – and that must include the President – is above the law. And if we fail to hold Bush to account, then he will be confirmed in his conviction that he can pick and choose among the laws he wants to obey. This is profoundly dangerous to our democracy.

So it is time for Congress to stand up and say enough! That's why, this week, Senator Russ Feingold proposed a resolution to censure George W. Bush for breaking the FISA law. And that's why I fully support this resolution of censure.

Nothing is more important to me than the security of our country. Of course, we need to be listening to the terrorists' conversations. And sometimes there is not time to get a warrant. That's why the FISA law allows the President, when necessary, to wiretap first, and obtain a warrant afterward. But that's not acceptable to this above-the-law President. He rejects the idea that he should have to obtain a warrant before or after wiretapping.

We have an out-of-control President whose arrogant and, now, illegal behavior is running our country into the ditch. It's time to rein him in. And a fine place to start is by passing this resolution of censure. I hope that Senator Feingold's measure will be brought to the floor. And when it is, I will proudly vote yes.

Link
on Mar 16, 2006
" Senators Harkin, Boxer and Chafee are coming on board and others are saying it is worth discussion."


Which is what supporters here don't understand. They want DISCUSSION. Not a vote. They want lots and lots of hours of them standing there banging their fist and talking about how bad Bush is.

You realize that REPUBLICANS tried to put this to a vote the first day it was proposed and Democrats refused, right?
on Mar 16, 2006
There has been a lot of evidence, you as well as the majority of congress (who hold all the cards to do something), just choose to ignore it.


Present it. Put up or shut up.
on Mar 16, 2006
You realize that REPUBLICANS tried to put this to a vote the first day it was proposed and Democrats refused, right?


Democrats cant realize, only pontificate.
on Mar 16, 2006
Present it. Put up or shut up.


I've "presented" it to you before, but you didn't care to hear it then. I'm sure you don't really care to hear it now.
on Mar 16, 2006
I've "presented" it to you before, but you didn't care to hear it then. I'm sure you don't really care to hear it now.


What's the matter can't stand the pressure? Like he said, put up or shut up. If there was "any real" evidence they'd be doing A LOT more than calling for a censure! So as it stands now, "your" arguements hold no water. To borrow a line from bakerstreet:


a) If this was an obviously illegal practice, Feingold should be claiming the President should be held criminally liable, and working toward those ends. If they could rant loud enough to have President Clinton dealt with legally, they could easily do so here. They know this isn't something they can do, though.
on Mar 16, 2006
What's the matter can't stand the pressure? Like he said, put up or shut up. If there was "any real" evidence they'd be doing A LOT more than calling for a censure! So as it stands now, "your" arguements hold no water.


We've had this conversation so many times in the past, what's point? I'm not going to change your mind, and you're not going to change my mind.

Am I curious about one thing though, who is "they" you're referring to?

Oh, I came across this a few days ago and immediately though of you drmiler. You should check it out.

Link
on Mar 17, 2006
Yes, they want discussion, which is something I said earlier. I want people discussing this, as well.

They wanted a vote to end it, Bakerstreet. The Democratics said no because they want it investigated.
on Mar 17, 2006
You like to quote amendments. Try looking that one up. I think it is under the heading of innocent until proven guilty.
Tell that to Ken Starr with respect to Whitewater!
on Mar 17, 2006
We've had this conversation so many times in the past, what's point? I'm not going to change your mind, and you're not going to change my mind.

Am I curious about one thing though, who is "they" you're referring to?

Oh, I came across this a few days ago and immediately though of you drmiler. You should check it out.


The "they" I'm referring to are the democrats and the left in general! As far as me using quotation marks I guess you don't do a lot of blogging, do you? Or would you rather I use caps, LIKE THIS FOR EMPHASIS?
on Mar 17, 2006
I've "presented" it to you before, but you didn't care to hear it then. I'm sure you don't really care to hear it now.


You have only presented opinion, never fact. You have a problem with the latter apparently.
on Mar 17, 2006
lol, then you call for an investigation, which is being done on many levels right now. You don't introduce a bill to punish someone before the problem HAS BEEN INVESTIGATED... unless you are patently dishonest and don't mind pissing off everyone, including your own party, just to get your name in the paper.
8 PagesFirst 2 3 4 5 6  Last