in the wrong era. Soundly refuting
liberals online since 2000.
| CNS | Well Then: Hoyer: ‘The Fact Is You Don’t Need a Budget’ |
0 |
| Ballot Box | 2012 Watch: In wake of Proposition 8 ruling, Santorum attacks Obama |
0 |
| Gallup | 0 | |
| NYT | 0 | |
| Heritage | Disturbing: The 2012 Index of Dependence on Government |
0 |
Audacity of Truth
Gaffetastic:
Vice President Joe Biden had his “oops” moment Wednesday speaking in a 49er-crazed SF when he told a crowd at a city political fundraiser that “the Giants are on their way to the Super Bowl.” - SF Chronicle, 1-18-12
Senator Russ Feingold calls for censure of Bush
… over the NSA wiretaps ‘scandal’:
March 12, 2006— In an exclusive interview on “This Week with George Stephanopoulos,” Democratic Sen. Russ Feingold called on the Senate to publicly admonish President Bush for approving domestic wiretaps on American citizens without first seeking a legally required court order.
“This conduct is right in the strike zone of the concept of high crimes and misdemeanors,” said Feingold, D-Wis., a three-term senator and potential presidential contender.
He said President Bush had, “openly and almost thumbing his nose at the American people,” continued the NSA domestic wiretap program.
President Bush has long asserted that the so-called ‘warrantless wiretaps’ are an essential tool in the war on terror.
But in a copy of the censure resolution obtained by ABC News, Feingold asserts the president, “repeatedly misled the public prior to the public disclosure of the National Security Agency surveillance program by indicating his administration was relying on court orders to wiretap suspected terrorists inside the United States.”
Feingold cites three instances over a year-long period in which Bush outlined the necessity of a court order or a judge’s permission prior to a domestic wiretap of a U.S. citizen.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., also appearing exclusively on “This Week,” defended Bush.
“Russ is just wrong, he is flat wrong, he is dead wrong,” Frist said.
Will be interesting to see how this plays out. I think if the Dems don’t watch it, they’re going to overplay their hand here. They’re riding high after getting the upperhand last week on the national security front (even though it was based on faulty pretenses) but if they keep pushing it on the NSA surveillance issue, I think it’s going to backfire. I hope so.
Read more via Decision ’08, Political Pit Bull
(Cross-posted at Blogs For Bush)
Related Toldjah So posts:
- House approves Patriot Act, Senate panel rejects broad NSA inquiry
- NSA Surveillance Program ‘scandal’ – update
- Congressional probe of NSA surveillance may not happen afterall
- Admin briefs Congress on NSA surveillance
- Thomas Sowell on the NSA ‘scandal’ controversy
- NSA ‘scandal’ fallout: convicted terrorist conspirators wanting cases thrown out
- Intelligence officials: NSA leak has undermined ability to fight terrorism
- On politicizing the Patriot Act and the NSA ‘scandal’
- NYT: NSA scandal is worse than WWII Japanese internment camps
- Link between disposable phone sale surge and NSA leak?
- Whistleblower or leaker?
- Joe Klein: How to Stay Out of Power (and undermine the war in the process)
- Why it was important to keep the cat in the bag
- The Rep. Jane Harman flip flop
- NSA initially acted on its own after 9-11
- Investigations begin into the NSA eavesdropping leak
- “… the only thing outrageous about this policy is the outrage itself”
- Michael Barone on the MSM’s ‘eavesdropping’ coverage
- Brief history of warrantless searches
- Past presidents and the NSA
- Bill Clinton and the NSA
- WSJ: “Thank you for wiretapping”
- The Prez fires back
- Prez essentially says ‘let me do my job’
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Trackbacks
45 Responses to “Senator Russ Feingold calls for censure of Bush”
Comments
Blogads
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this blog do not necessarily reflect those of ST's advertisers, nor do their opinions necessarily reflect ST's. Island of Misfit Bloggers
Stats
- Once the Demogogs bite into a bone, damn the torpedos, full speed ahead. Never mind they’re 0 and 23 against Bush/Rove at this point. They count on a confused public and just keep restating the same mis-imformation over and over.
- Then when it all comes back to bite them, (I’m still convinced eventually when the full Senate bi-partisan “expanded” review board goes back over the UAE port dustup and have a clue as to what the real situation was/is they’ll somehow see it all differently), they all suddenly get amnesia.
- But I’m with you ST. Lets hope they just keep chewing on the NSA issue until they realize its their own ankles they’re biting just after the PR disaster hits. They just can’t seem to get away from the BDS campaign, no matter how many times they fall on their collective faces. Personally I hope they keep it up right to the 2008 elections.
- Along those lines I also hope that Bush gets the opportunity to appoint another justice to the SCOTUS. I think the next one, which would definately balance the court and put everything up for grabs, will be a Kodak moment for watching a frantic uncontrolled Liberal meltdown.
- Bang
Team!!!!
Remember – it is time to stop our internal bickering with the fall elections so close. We have to retain both the House and the Senate or the moonbats will spend 2 years working this kind of get even with Bush and Rove garbage with a majority in one or both of the Congressional houses.
We’ve heard the impeachment chatter in the House for sometime and now the Senate is loading up the dump truck with rhetoric.
This election may be more important than what is ahead in 2008.
Let’s hope the administration does not give them any more fuel so we can work on getting people elected.
I think it is OK to violate the Constitution to attain the bigger goal and this is where I don’t think I’m in sync with my fellow liberals. I wish more liberals would highlight an alternative angle of opposition to the wiretapping policy (just as they should in the case of the Patriot Act). And that is, the Govt should ensure the public that there is enough checks and balances for the authorities who handle these data/calls/personal information so that they are not misused or don’t fall into the wrong hands for future exploit. Very unfortunately, most of the opposition has been based on the Right-To-Privacy theory which is kinda moot when pinpointing the target is so difficult in the presence of something called Sleeper Cells. The concern is legitimate if you are totaly unsure about the confidentiality and proper handling of that information. So not only is this a failure on the part of the opposing team, the Govt did a major f-up by not marketting it well once it was leaked. This is my humble opinion.
I just picked up the definition of Conservatism from Wikipedia (and I trust them at least in theories and science even if some historical accounts are disputed). It says:
“Conservatism [derivative of conserve; from Latin conservare, to keep, guard, observe] is a philosophy defined by Edmund Burke as “a disposition to preserve, and an ability to improve”.[1] Classical conservatism does not readily avail itself to the ideology of objectives. It is a philosophy primarily concerned with means over ends. To a classical conservative, the goal of change is less important than the insistence that change be effected with a respect for the rule of law and traditions of society. The traditional enemy of conservatism, therefore, is radicalism (not, as is often asserted, liberalism).”
So I have a feeling in the case of homeland security Democrats are being more conservative than the Bush admin since the latter doesn’t really wanna play by the rules. This is interesting to me. I think honestly, the whole division of liberalism and conservatism perpetuated by the mainstream media in this country is very very shallow.
Russ Feingold knows that impeachment of Bush – which will be the only item a Democratic-controlled Congress would work on in 2007 – would cause a massive public backlash against Democrats (sorry, steve). Thus, his un-Constitutional “censure” proposal – an appeal to demagogary and hate with no legal force whatsoever (and thus no downside). Ideal Democratic legislation.
Feingold was against the War on Terror before he was against it (unlike Kerry, HRC, etc.). He is, from the point of view of the MSM and the rest of the al Qaeda-wing of the Democratic party, an ideal candidate.
Feingolds’ gambit is less about the Republicans then it is about the Democrats. It is more about 2008 then 2006. The Left will not permit another warmonger to become the President. So before 2008 it is ncessary to smoke out and discredit any potential presidential candidate that voted for or agreed with going to war in Iraq. The Left will also clean-out all warmonger politicians in 2006, regardless of their party affiliation. Peace
Sister, you don’t have to clean up my response to steve. That should say it all.
Steve, to help the Far Left in its Holy Jihad against Warmongers and Other Infidels, here is an Enemies List of those who were for the War on Terror before they were against it:
1. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (a.k.a. Hilly the Hun)
2. Sen. JFK (John F. Kerry)
3. Ex-Sen. John Edwards
4. Howard Dean (yes, he is the current posterboy of the moonbat Left, but I once heard an unsubstantiated rumor that he is supposed to have said something nice about the War on Terror – and one can’t be too careful)
5. Sen. Jay Rockefeller (what’s an Enemies List without a Rockefeller on it?)
6. Sen. Joseph Lieberman (actually, he was for the War on Terror before he was for it. And his IQ is too high to win the Democratic nomination in ’08. Still, he’s probably a Zionist so feel free to pile on.)
7. William Jefferson Clinton (Constitutionally barred from running, but has said nice things about Bush 43, and he continues to triangulate on the War on Terror)
8. Al Gore (endorsed Dr. Dean and thus cost him the ’04 nomination)
9. The Late Sen. “Scoop” Jackson (died in 1983, but must have a Dead White Male on the List to make it official)
10. Former Mayor Ed Koch (still alive, but one also cannot have too many Zionists on the List as well)
That’s what I have so far, although other readers could probably add more name to help out.
Democrat Ned Lamont will announce his bid to unseat Liberman tomorrow. That will take care of Lieberman. Except for Edwards, who denounced his own Iraqi vote and Dean who never supported the war, your list is a good one. Rockefeller could save himself if he hammers Pat Roberts. The Left is very serious about destroying all politicians who supported the war in Iraq. Peace
Edwards may have denounced his own War on Terror vote, but have you never heard of the Far Left’s time-honored custom of “guilt-by-association” (see Jack Abramoff, another Zionist interloper)?
steve says, “Democrat Ned Lamont will announce his bid to unseat Liberman tomorrow. That will take care of Lieberman.”
I don’t think it will be as simple as you think it is.
Lieberman may not be liked by his party, but he is well-liked by his constituents.
Link
Link
Not so simple eh?
I don’t think Lamont’s announcement to ‘unseat’ Lieberman will take care of Lieberman as you so suggest steve.
My thoughts….Lieberman is going to trounce any challenger this time around. He will be re-elected.
My thoughts….Lieberman is going to trounce any challenger this time around.
Unless the Democrats and the MSM pull a “Florida” and start counting hanging chads, dimpled chads, scratched chads, imaginary chads, etc.
A certain resident troll is whistling past the cemetery. We’ve all heard the same tired bromides and angry predictions before in 2000 and 2004. The Liberals always go for the “We’re not Bush” approach, and refuse to put forth any sort of plan. They’re going to try to tough this out with the smear tactics , and phoney MSM driven “Outrage of the day/week” scams to the bitter end. I think they won’t change direction till they lose a few more rounds. Life is hard when you are a legend in your own mind.
- Bang
Why don’t they instead censure Russ Fiengold over his attempts to silence political freedom in the campaign finance “reform” bill?
I support the senator.
Please, Frist let this go to a vote.
Not only will this resolidfy the republicans again, this will also give a major blackeye to dhimmicrat hopefuls for president.
Wonder how Hillary will vote.
Funny how the senator keeps saying that the President broke the Law, but the courts haven’t said he has.
If the president broke the Law, then the sentator should not be looking for censure and going for impeachment. I know Conyers(sp) of Michigan wants that.
Please let this go for a vote.
This will be like the dhimmicrats trying to move forward and stepping on the rake…**WHACK** right between the eyes.
Well the bottom line is that the 43 neo-con crowd are simply not honest and never will be to the American public. No WMD’s,no real pressure on Pakistan to turn over Taliban and Al-Queda insurgents,shady business deals with countries who helped Bin L aden launder money(The U.A.E 1 of 3 yes 3 nations who thought it was a good idea to legitamize the Taliban hell even Saddam and the Iranians weren’t that brazen) No bid contracts to Halliburton during our debacle in Iraq and during Katrina all the while youse on the right are crying about the ineffective Dems on the local level, The totally unqualified Miers nomination,Scooter Libby,etc,etc, hell come 06′ you should consider youseselves lucky we don’t start impeachment procedings over the laws he broke during the FISA scandal.worse president EVER!!!!!!!!
NO that would be Carter if your talking worst president ever.
Tommy, do you enjoy making yourself look so ignorant? The donkeycrats can not as a minority start an Impeachment. No way, no how. If anyone ought to be censured the line starts with Russ Feingold, Jay Rockefeller, James McDermott, Harry Reid, Albert Gore, Jr., Waffles Kerry and do I really need to go on? The Donkeycrat party is one of total irresponsibility.
Wow, Tommy is in full BDS meltdown! Get a grip man, it’s early in the week to be off your meds.
PCD it’s the 43 admin that’s ignorant not us on the left. Hell we are spending almost a trillion dollars to liberate citizens from repressive dictatorships while youse on the right are trying to take away a women’s right to an abortion here in the states and then you call mer ignorant? We’ll find out in November bro. We’ll let the electorate speak. Then youse are going find out just how much support the G.O.P really has.Can’t freaking wait BTW.
Tommy, when your donkey gets kicked again, will you need to check into Bellevue for observation? I mean you are having reality problems now. You deal in slick packaging but no substance. Bush hate doesn’t win elections. You don’t seem to accept that.
as for abortion tommy:
a women’s right to an abortion
Is technically not a right.
It is not in the Constitution and is not under the Bill of Rights.
Looks like, as with Eminent Domain, the States are taking matters into thier own hands on how to deal with Abortion.
“Then youse are going find out just how much support the G.O.P really has.Can’t freaking wait BTW.”
Oh boy, neither can I! I wonder how many seats the dems will lose this time!
Tom Delay, btw, has just won the gop primary here with 62% of the vote and there’s no way his district will ever elect a democrat!
The trial on the phony charges concocted by Ronnie Earle will take place before the election, so you will be seeing this headline in time for the national campaign:
“Texas Jury Exonerates Tom Delay; Texas Attorney General Files Disbarment Proceedings Against Ronnie Earle.”
Jackoff Abramoff represents the Cheney wing of the Republican Party. Gingrich, Delay, Burns of Mt., Hayworth, Hastert,Melhmen, Ralph Reed, Grover Norquist, Ney and Doolittle-Ca., are all members of Cheney’s Zionist/Armageddonist, neo-con, warmonger alliance. bush, is only representing his Big Oil self. Peace
” … Cheney’s Zionist/Armageddonist, neo-con, warmonger alliance… ”
Steve, are you a Jihadist or something? :^D Or just one of those guys from College Democrats?
I think Steve’s last name is Sheehan, him and Cindy were separated at birth.
Raj wrote, “I think it is OK to violate the Constitution to attain the bigger goal…”
Then later in your post you talk about poor marketing.
I know you are new to politics and let me suggest to you that you the sources of information you are reading are the sources or information marketing that HAD YOU BELIEVING that Bush or NSA was violating the constitution. The problem is that the Democrats/liberals have a serious problem with inaccurate accusations and false allegations.
It’s up to you Raj on who you want to believe. The liberal/Democrat marketing plan which continues to mischaracterize conservatives or people who are more interested in ideas/solutions/facts/common sense. I’m generalizing here of course. And Republicans aren’t but 50% conservative so it’s hard to try to sway you on anything with regards to party affiliation.
But when you go around talking about someone violating the constitution you are either a constitutional expert or repeating what you’ve heard.
Another commont trait of liberals is to do like the 8:11 poster Tommy and in every post offer a laundry list of accusations. It’s like a machine gun style approach to debating but only shows one thing and that is that Tommy hates Bush and can’t stick to the topic at hand. There is never any real engaging debate with Tommy. If you try to focus and discuss an issue it is impossible.
There are good articles out there. I’ve linked to them in past discussions here at ST’s. ST conveniently posted her past posts above so you can easily browse through them to see some of these articles.
It’s up to you. You can take the lazy way out and continue with misinformation or do the due diligence.
I’ll wait and see.
Raj, Betsy’s Page makes an interesting point.
Bold emphasis is mine..
SPEAKING of Russ, The following is what Molly Ivans wrote:
Here here Molly! GOod luck with that one! I’d be happy to see the Democrats nominate Russ. Prepare for a trouncing…
Censure Russ Feingold anyone?
- Reid has come out against the censure, so apparently the party core isn’t too happy about Feingolds ploy, which was an obvious trial balloon to see how many of the hard left in the party he might be able to rally in anticipation of a presidential run.
- Problem is its not the “nuanced” approach the Dems have been trying to achieve, tip-toeing through the backlash landmines that they can step on, and end up looking even weaker on the WOT.
The Dems feel they made some political hay on the UAE port dustup, and Feingolds manuevers could offset that quickly, and even worse put some of the hopefuls like Hillery in a bad situation. If she backs him with this idiocy, and it peoves unpopular with the electorate, she gets hurt, ect.
- Reids comments, the usual “we all need to be assured blah blah blah”, but not supporting Feingolds move may be some more visability into the ongoing fight between the Deaniacs and Clintonista’s within the party.
- McCauliffe was just on FOX, and watching him you see the problem the Dems have in a nutshell. The gal interviewing him asked four times what the Dems plan was and each time he repeated the same meme’s about Bush, you’ve heard them all before.
- The Dem message continues to be, threaten the Iraqui’s and if they don’t get it together pull out all the troops now. No idea of what to do when and if we did that and al Qaeda/Iran/Syria responded by over-running the country with masses of Insurgent incursions and doing everything they could without us there to instigate all out civil war. Then the country would be right in the hands of Iran and the Jihadists, and still the Dems have no alternatives, other than “Bush bad”.
- Lets see. the Dems in the past three years have:
- Called for an announced time table, to be sure the mad Mullahs would know exactly how long they had to wait to move in.
- Called for an immediate pullout, leaving the whole situation to collapse, and making all the gains we’ve made useless.
- Called for threats followed by withdrawal, again leaving a mess with absolutely no alternatives, so somewhere down the line we’ll get to do it all over again at even higher cost in money and lives.
- The Dems don’t have a clue. Turn the operation of things over to people with no plan and these sort of ideas? Only if we’re as crazy as they are.
- Bang
Bang wrote, “- McCauliffe was just on FOX, and watching him you see the problem the Dems have in a nutshell. The gal interviewing him asked four times what the Dems plan was and each time he repeated the same meme’s about Bush, you’ve heard them all before.
Yep. I’ve heard them. One inaccurate accusation after another. I feel like a broken record .
The Democrats will be known as the Peace Party and if Reid is not into that he can join the War Party(Republicans). As can Biden,Clinton and anyone else who wants violence and war to be the greater part of America’s foreign policy. Peace
Do you think you can figure out why your party doesn’t vote the way you want them to? It’s because your position is not attractive Steve. And not based on truth.
- If the Dems don’t stop the anti-American crusades they’re going to be known as the “Peace of crap” party. A lot of the electorate already feel that way, and who could blame them.
- On another note. Al Sadr, the firebrand cleric finally came out today, after yesterdays attacks on civilians, and blamed said attacks on al Qaeda, which is a new one for him. He also urged calm on the part of his militia, although four men were discovered hung from some power line towers by Iraqi police.
- Officials say the men had explosives strapped to their bodies, and two had granade launchers. The police believe the men may have been al Qaeda, since two were from Syria, and said they think they were killed by Al Sadr’s men. If the various Iraqi groups begin to hunt down and dispatch al Qaeda insurgents, the whole situation on the ground could change in a hurry.
- Bang
I wonder if this the PLAN Dean said the Dhimmicrats after all this time finally have for 2006…..