July 23, 2007


From the Huffington Post:
Sen. Feingold Proposes Censuring Bush

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.

Feingold, a prominent war critic, said he soon plans to offer two censure resolutions _ measures that would amount to a formal condemnation of the Republican president.

The first would seek to reprimand Bush for, as Feingold described it, getting the nation into war without adequate military preparation and for issuing misleading public statements. The resolution also would cite Vice President Dick Cheney and perhaps other administration officials.

The second measure would seek to censure Bush for what the Democrat called a continuous assault against the rule of law through such efforts as the warrantless surveillance program against suspected terrorists, Feingold said. It would also ask for a reprimand of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and maybe others.
Click here for the complete text


Mary Ellen said...

I have no idea why the Democratic leadership in the Senate is not supporting this. It makes absolutely no sense. Not that Bush gives a rats ass if he's censured. I suppose he'll just issue another one of his executive privilege decrees that say they aren't allowed to censure the king during a time of war.

Someone needs to grab that crown from his head and kick his royal ass from here to Timbuktu.

two crows said...

g'morning m e--
yep. I couldn't believe it when I read that either.
what the hey are the dems afraid of, anyway? it's not like they're being asked to censure him when he was at the height of his power or anything.
and its not as if he doesn't deserve censure or far worse.

it seems for every step forward, these lily-livered people NEED to take 2 back.

if they keep it up, they'll take steps backward, all right: back to their home states.

Mary Ellen said...

Reid made a remark about a week or so ago about how the Republicans are nothing but lip service. They oppose the war in media interviews, but when it comes down to a vote, they support the President. I can say the same thing about them. They talk tough about how they oppose the President, but when it comes down to it...nothing but lip service.

two crows said...

I don't know NEARLY enough to understand what really happened tuesday night: the dems wanted an up-down vote. the reps required a 60% majority. ??? which party is in power here?
but, a clear majority DID vote to bring the troops home, at least.

I DO know the dems filibustered and kept votes from reaching the floor when they were out of power.
**sigh** like I say-- I dunno how all that works.

I just know I'm sick and tired of the status quo in Iraq [I almost accidently typed Vietnam -- thanks, Freud] and the gov't generally.

TomCat said...

Great minds, TC.

I agree with Russ and think his heart is definitely in the right place, but feel that it's an empty gesture. Until the Dems have a supermajority in the Senate to force cloture, nothing good will be allowed to come to the floor for a vote.

TC, how this works is that according to the rules of the Senate, the minority party may block a vote by filibuster, as long as the majority party cannot muster a 60% vote (60 votes) to cut off debate and bring the motion to the floor. The Dems did it when they were in the minority, but as is traditional in the Senate, reserved its use for only the most egregious occasions. The GOP broke with that tradition and are filibustering everything, unless it's something they want too, like pay raises for Congress. If they continue to filibuster at the current rate, they will triple the all time record in Senate history. Does that clear it up, TC?

two crows said...

yes, TC I did understand that part.

and, as for the raises. all they have to do is NOTHING to get those to pass. they actually have to vote AGAINST a COLA to keep it from being put in place.

TomCat said...

Sorry... when you said "I dunno how all that works", I tried to answer. Somehow I think they would also vote themselves 24k gold toilet seats. :-(