« Yearly Kos | Main | "War"time President or Lame Joke? »


March 13, 2006

Support Senator Feingold

-- by John Emerson

Senator Feingold of Wisconsin will introduce a resolution to censure President Bush for illegally spying on Americans at home. This is the boldest move so far of any major Democrat, and we need to support him.

I doubt that the resolution will pass, and it might not even get much Senate support, but this is a chance to show the world, and the media, that opposition to Bush is not a fringe position.

More here, including Senate contact information.

It just takes a few minutes to phone, email, or write your Senator.

Update: You can also ask your representative to support Rep. Conyers House Resolution 635, asking the House to investigate the possibilty of impeachment.

http://johnconyers.com/citizencosponsors


Posted by John Emerson at March 13, 2006 11:34 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.seeingtheforest.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-t.fcgi/1707


Comments

I was listening to his resolution, and the start of the debate. Of course it isn't going to pass, but it sure is showing up the hypocrisy of the Republicans, who insist that Bush spying on us is prohibited by law but somehow "constitutional" and that the constitution overrides the law. Considering how low Bush's poll numbers are right now, they'd better think twice about this argument.

Posted by: MJ [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 13, 2006 5:00 PM

Feingold's measure is politically motivated. And funny how you and your ilk continue to press that what the president has done in listening to al Qaeda terrorists and associates is truly illegal. You fail to properly point out just how so. All arguments issued so far have been off-base or have come up short in validity.

Posted by: Sickofspin at March 13, 2006 5:10 PM

Mr Spin Clown:

Political motivation is bad? Talk to Rove and Bush about that.

The case against Bush has been made elsewhere. I didn't "fail to point out" anything.

Posted by: John Emerson [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 13, 2006 5:37 PM

To Spin Clown,

Bush broke the law by Taking The law into his own Hands.(No Warrant from FISA Court).When he is caught he states that he Told Partisan Hacks Specter and Roberts of Subcommittee so he thinks he is off the hook.

This court was created so Prsidential Power could be checked.Nixon thought he could wiretap anyone
and this Law was justly created.

Bush should have been Impeached September 12th 2001 for his pitiful performance at The Florida School.This Wiretap Issue is just another reason
to hasten his and The GOP's departure from our Great Country.

Posted by: VPJEB2006 at March 14, 2006 9:19 AM

The difference between then and now is that none of us was ever going to have President Clinton's penis in our mouths without our knowlege and consent.

You can call the Congressional Switchboard toll free at 1-888-355-3588 or 1-888-818-6641 and ask to be connected to your Senator's office.

Talking points (the polite kind)

* The President admitted to conducting a domestic spying program outside the scope of FISA, despite knowing that FISA is the exclusive means of such surveillance inside the United States. President Bush broke the law, and this is the only way this Republican Congess can hold him accountable.

* President admitted he did not brief the full intelligence committees. This is against the law.

* We don't have to wait for an investigation before censure. President Bush admitted to his crimes publicly. An investigation is needed, but that should not preclude censure at this time.

* Andrew Jackson was censured in 1834 for refusing to hand over papers to Congress and assuming power not granted by the Constitution. With his stonewalling of the investigation and by ignoring FISA, this is exactly what President Bush has done, and he should also be censured accordingly.

CALL!

Posted by: grannyinsanity [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 14, 2006 12:15 PM

No, Bush has not broken the law, and I'll side with the Attorney General over partisan democrats and the likes of you any day.

False claims:

* The President admitted to conducting a domestic spying program outside the scope of FISA, despite knowing that FISA is the exclusive means of such surveillance inside the United States.

Yes, the President has acknowledged that listening in on international stemmed calls that are al Qaeda sourced, or al Qaeda related has occured. You and your ilk want to pretend this is domestic spying and that Aunt Mary is being listened to for her apple pie recipe. This is not occuring, and the FISA argument is no longer being made by those with any credibility on the issue.

* President admitted he did not brief the full intelligence committees. This is against the law.

Members of the intellegence committees were briefed. Show us this supposed requirement that says all members must be briefed.

* We don't have to wait for an investigation before censure. President Bush admitted to his crimes publicly. An investigation is needed, but that should not preclude censure at this time.

No, the President made no such admission. All we have here is your manipulation of fact. Also, please show us in the Constitution outlining how Congress can censure the President.

If you don't know, don't have all the facts, ask questions instead of pretending what you state is fact. That's just wrong of you to do.

Posted by: Sickofspin at March 14, 2006 5:01 PM

Spinclown:

I understand you to be saying that you will not be contacting your Senators in support of Feingold. That's really a blow to us, I had you listed as a "sure thing".

The Attorney General is a partisan Republican and employee of Bush who was hired because his opinions agreed with Bush.

I imagine that the Jackson censure is adequate precedent for another censure.

We're not really going to argue the facts of the case here, certainly not with a sorry hack like you. I have no idea what you think that you think you are accomplishing here with your lame trolling.

John

Posted by: John Emerson [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 14, 2006 5:29 PM

When will we ever learn that we cannot argue with people who are being willfully obtuse.

Don't teach a pig to sing, it wastes your time and it makes the pig mad.

That is why it has to be as black and white as possible.

"The difference between then and now is that none of us was ever going to have President Clinton's penis in our mouths without our knowlege and consent.

got it?"

Posted by: grannyinsanity [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 14, 2006 6:19 PM

Posted by: bains at March 14, 2006 7:20 PM

I post here because the truth must be offered in contrast to Seeing the Forest fabrications, manipulations, and distortions. If that makes me a troll, so be it. Call me the Truth Troll then.... The frequency of my posts, tells us how often you fabricate.

Posted by: Sickofspin at March 15, 2006 6:37 AM

I got an e-mail from the Repugs this morning asking me to sign a petition stating that the Democrats are undermining national security by trying to censure Bush. So that's how they're planning to spin this -- the usual the Dems are weak on national defense. What rot!

Bush should be impeached, not just censured. There isn't even a chance in Hell that he'll actually be censured, but at least it brings up the breaking the law issue. And yes, he is breaking the law. The constitution does not give him the Divine Rights of Kings, not even as Commander in Chief.

Posted by: MJ [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 15, 2006 7:44 AM

Spinclown:

Funny thing, everything you write is RNC crankout cliches and spin. That's why no one listens to you.

Bush's magic is gone. His approval is at about 35% because of all his failures and lies. If I were you I'd ask myself if I wanted to be the last one on the sinking ship.

Posted by: John Emerson [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 15, 2006 7:49 AM

John,

No, everything I write is the truth, reason, and common sense. I'll keep doing what I'm doing thank you because it's the right and honorable thing to do. I'll leave the pretending and distorted reality to you.

Posted by: Sickofspin at March 15, 2006 10:54 AM

Spinclown:

Anyone can say stuff like that, but coming from you it's just silly.

Bush is dead meat, and you plan to go down with him.

Posted by: John Emerson [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 15, 2006 11:12 AM

Well, if you're saying that Bush isn't up for re-election, you're absolutely correct. Come 2009, there will be a new occupant in the White House. So then, why do liberals continue to campaign against Bush in the form of bashing as opposed to promoting their own vision to regain the presidency?

If censure is your focus, then why so many of Feingold's ilk quickly distance themselves from him and his proposal if it truly had any teeth to it?

You see, your argument is lose-lose either way.

Posted by: Sickofspin at March 15, 2006 1:44 PM

Because he's going to President for another two years and ten months, and he could do an enormous amount of harm during that period, worse than he's done already.

The rest of your post, like most of what you write, is just quibbly game-playing shit. I'm not a political stratagist, I just think that Bush is the worst President ever.

Posted by: John Emerson [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 15, 2006 1:57 PM

You have a right to your opinion, but I have to correct you - I don't play games with the truth. I take issues very seriously and know empty rhetoric when I see it - hence why I'm so passionate about offering reasoned and honest contrast to what you post.

I think Bush has done an excellent job in the war on terror, as evidenced by the lack of another 9/11 like attack on our soil. As evidenced by the liberation of 50 million people. As evidenced by other countries in that region holding unprecendented free elections to one extent or another (Saudi Arabia, Egypt), achieving some independence (Lebanon from Syria), ridding themselves of weapons programs (Libya), and focusing on the fight against terrorism with us (UAE, Pakistan).

I'm not a big fan of much of Bush's domestic agenda which I've expressed my concerns about, but by and large I think he's been the right man for the job since 2000.

Posted by: Sickofspin at March 15, 2006 2:54 PM

You sure as shit sound like a Republican hack -- You have never surprised me so far.

Your air of superiority is obnoxious and laughable, and I've spotted at least one misrepresentation on this thread.

Very few others are impressed by Bush's successes.

Posted by: John Emerson [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 15, 2006 3:47 PM

John,

I really don't care if I've surprised you or not. Like I said, my reason for posting here is not to convince you your 'arguments' are misplaced and misguided - my purpose is to provide and maintain proper perspective for any readers that might view this blog.

You wrote the following: "I've spotted at least one misrepresentation on this thread."

Why didn't you provide example then? Talk is cheap.

Posted by: Sickofspin at March 15, 2006 4:12 PM

Yes, the President has acknowledged that listening in on international stemmed calls that are al Qaeda sourced, or al Qaeda related has occured. You and your ilk want to pretend this is domestic spying and that Aunt Mary is being listened to for her apple pie recipe. This is not occuring, and the FISA argument is no longer being made by those with any credibility on the issue.

Several falsehoods here. Your use of the word "credibility" is meaningless BS. "Our ilk" includes many non-liberal non-Democrat legal scholars. The Aunt Mary joke is lame as shit. You have completely misrepresented the issue that has been raised.

As far as rule of law goes, Bush has about the worst record in American history. It's not just Democrats who say that. It does not make me happy to agree with Bob Barr, but on a few things I do.

Posted by: John Emerson [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 15, 2006 4:23 PM

You haven't demonstrated how what I wrote is erroneous at all. You've expressed your opinion, that's it. I have misrepresented nothing. SHOW us what illegality has taken place. SHOW us what rule actually has been violated. All you have is speculation. All you have is talking points. This misrepresentation is all on you......

Like I said, if what Feingold implies in his censure is true, then his liberal peers would be standing right beside him. They're not.

Posted by: Sickofspin at March 15, 2006 6:00 PM

Harken, Boxer, Kerry, and one other Senator have already either co-sponsored or otherwise spoken favorably og Feingold's proposal. Dayton has pulled back from his early rejection.

The cowardice of Dems is in no way an argument here. If someone gets ahead of the pack, we praise him. And frankly, your use of that lame, talking-point argument makes you seem even more hackish than before.

I'm willing to waste a small amount of time slagging on you, Spinclown, but as far as "SHOWING" you anything, I won't try. there's quite a lot of stuff out there, if you're interested.

Posted by: John Emerson [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 15, 2006 6:07 PM

Translation: John's got nothing.

Yes, I know there's a lot of speculation and partisan rhetoric out there - but the bottom line is most all those who initially raised argument have backed away. Gee, why IS that? No traction perhaps?

Funny how the approach of the liberals is now, 'we want to work with the President to revise the oversight in such matters.'

Translation: Turns out the President's legal analysis was correct, and we want some of that power....

You suffer from partyline tunnel vision John.

This issue has been adjudicated in the courts. Don't forget that Congress authorized the use of military force. This very sort of interception of terrorist terrorist affiliated communications is indeed part of the authorized use of military force. If you think for a minute that I'm making that up, then why in the heck do you think SO MANY legislators have backed way off from their claims of feigned concern? Only the most partisan liberals persist in unfounded argument. Go ahead, review the timeline, see just how many have peeled off, I dare 'ya!


Posted by: Sickofspin at March 15, 2006 7:04 PM

By now this is just you and me, Spin Clown, so your bluffing and crowing don't go anywhere.

False. This issue has not been adjudicated in the courts.

As I said, many of those bothered by Bush's behavior are nonpartisan, and some are partisan Republicans. You just stuck a generic line into your hackery, even tough it was inapplicable.

"Traction" is also hack talk.

Legislators ar mostly cowards. I already told you that. I disagree with most Democrats on this so far, though they may come around.

Bush is at 33%, and you're going down with him.

Posted by: John Emerson [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 15, 2006 7:14 PM

Can't deal with the truth huh? How many people are supporting Feingold's proposal?

Posted by: Sickofspin at March 15, 2006 8:19 PM

Funny thing, there hasn't been a poll yet. There hasn't been much discussion yet either, either in the Senate or among the general public. The proposal is only a few days old. So we'll see.

But the Republican hacks are hopping around like fleas who've lost their dog. They care a lot.

In a Zogby poll 52% of Americans thought impeachment should be considered. They say that this was a partisan poll, but the best way to prove that would have been for some other polling group to ask the same question, and guess what -- nobody did. The only ones asking the question are Democrats, and when they do the answer is 52%

Poll

As the argument continues, your hackisness becomes more vivid and your pretensions to sincerity and reasonableness get thinner and thinner, Mr. Spin Clown.

Posted by: John Emerson [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 16, 2006 5:14 AM

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


Remember me?



Email this entry to:


Your email address:


Message (optional):


Return to main page