Warner says no to Censure

[thatsrightimirish]

from:http://www2.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=415858 I don't know if this has been posted yet, if it has, sorry.

Question: On a different subject . . . when the idea of censuring the president was proposed, what was your reaction to that?

Warner: I understand the frustration Sen. Feingold is expressing. I think he’s speaking for an awful lot of Democrats. But I think the best thing we can do to curtail the president is to elect a Democratic Congress.

Question: Censure is not something you support at this point in time?

Warner: No.

What a weak sister. At least we know now he is not on Feingold's side.

[Greeby]

1. Oh, I thought this was about Senator Warner

:shrug:

[thatsrightimirish]

2. oops

Mark Warner sorry

[autorank]

3. VERY Good governor but he's blowing it by not being bold.

Warner could have done two things to propel himself to national prominence.

1) He should have done a massive felon pardon. We have an idiotic system in this state, VA, that makes it hard to get your voting rights reinstated. There are a couple of hundred thousand ex felons who "paid their debt" according to the law. Warner was aggressive with using the current system to get them voting again but he can also do this by fiat, just sign a decree.

I even wrote him and suggested this. Can you imagine! He had Kaine write me back* and explain why they didn't do it. Very nice letter.

NOT BOLD, NOT BOLD AT ALL. He did what every one expected.

2) He should have said, "I agree totally. Lets get this out of the way and elect a Democratic Congress to investigate every dirty trick played on the American people."

Instead, he shape shifted a little.

NOT BOLD, NOT BOLD AT ALL. He did what every one expected.

In VA moderate DEMs stand between a civilized general public and the religious zealots Falwell and Robertson who control the Republican party. I'm grateful to Warner and Kaine for stemming the tide and governing well. As a national politician, thought, you need to confound your "watchers" and blow some minds.

Two chances at the plate...will he get a third.

Maybe I'll write him again and say, "Mark, up the ante...go for impeachment by the new Congress you're going to help elect;)" Yeah, just what I'll do...


*Well, not write "me" individually, he just left town to campaign and said, Kaine, here's some stuff. t's all yours now.

[Syrinx]

4. I got excited for a second

I thought this was John Warner calling for a Democratic congress. That woulda been cool. Oh well.

[peacebird]

5. Mark Warner was a decent Gov, but no way is he a progressive or a liberal

He is a far right blue-dog Dem.

Not my choice for 2008 in any capacity.

[skipos]

6. I agree with him 100%

We need to have a democratic majority before we move on censure. Further, I'd rather be talking about impeachment more than censure, and again that is only possible with democratic majorities.

[Mr_Spock]

7. I also thought it was about a Senator Warner

oh, well.

[Sparkly]

8. Very smooth politician, but not a "team player..."

I don't mind if he opposes censure, but he doesn't say why.

What I dislike is that he tends to put down other Democrats and hold himself apart as special, in his "sensible center," rural NASCAR way. He complains that Democrats are criticizing Bush without offering enough specific plans, but he seems to criticize Democrats without offering enough specific plans. ("I've got to do some more thinking on this..." "So is that a plan? No. But it's some ideas.")

Things like this bother me:

Warner: Back to Iraq (laughter). I haven’t decided anything. . . . I’ve got a different approach than a lot of the potential Democratic folks. . . . That’s healthy for the Democratic Party. I have a standard line in my talk right now. I say you know, if you want somebody who’s going to check every box on Democratic orthodoxy, I’m not going to be the guy.

Question: Where do you depart from the Democratic orthodoxy?

Warner: Remember, I was the guy who said you elect me as a Democrat, I’m not going to take away your shotgun.

So other Democrats are going to take away people's shotguns? :eyes:

[Jai4WKC08]

25. Too used to being a red state governor

Warner probably thinks he won in VA by separating himself from mainstream Dems. And who knows, maybe he did.

But if he wants to be our presidential nominee, he needs to realize he would be representing the entire Democratic party. And that as president, he would be next to worthless without a Democratic Congress. You don't do either by bad-mouthing other Dems, or Dems in general.

Besides, a large part of how people vote is how they perceive the party label, irrespective of the individual running.

Ya know, I grew up in the South longer ago than I care to admit. And I remember there were black folk who tried to bend over backwards to prove to white folk that they were different, and better, than all the other black folk. Now, I'm old enough not to really blame them--they were trying to survive. But is it just me, or does this attitude by Warner seem like sorta the same thing?

[mmonk]

9. He's a politician.

Politicians are going with what they think is popular, not the constitution of the United States. Politicians don't give a damn about the constitution. We need people who want the office to serve the people, not themselves. The reason we are a weak party right now is we have too many of these "politicians". And "politicians " are always primarily concerned about their popularity and how they are perceived than about right or wrong or the truth. I'm a Feingold lean myself. I only respect our elected dems that are fighting this madness.

[Stinky The Clown]

10. Every time I read something about his guy, my views on him harden

And at this point, it is almost hard against.

By the way, I agree that censure is not the right thing. I personally favor getting our people elected in 06 and *then* going straight to impeachment.

[Pithy Cherub]

11. Mark Warner capitulates on principle to build his own political capital.

It is an imperative to stand up for moral values in democracy and hold the leadership accountable in plain view of the American public. Obviously, Warner is not into the accountability thing. :puke:

[SaveElmer]

13. I disagree...

Principle is not defined by the position you take. It is quite possible for someone to take a principled position exactly the opposite of yours. A perfectly logical and defensible case can be made to oppose censure.

Though I support censure, I do agree that the most emphatic way to castrate Bush is to take away his rubber stamp Congress. As a Virginian I can tell you Warner has been a very good Governor, and been plain spoken. He spoke honestly when he took office about what it was gonna take to fix things, which ultimately ended up including a tax increase, and he ended up the most popular Governor in recent Virginia history (hard to say all of history since Thomas Jefferson and Patrick Henry have both been Governor).

[Pithy Cherub]

14. Yes, one must stand up for what one holds in high esteem.

Mark Warner may have mixed motives as he was the founder/CEO of Nextel and censure is a direct result of warrantless wiretapping. The telecoms are in that mix up to their ears. So principle is doing what is right, consistently. I agree with you that to hold an opposite principle is not a bad thing, except when opposition is meant to preserve the status quo that is sorely in need of being responsive and responsible to our American democracy. Bush broke the law plain and simple, Warner completely missed the obvious.

[SaveElmer]

15. He hasn't had any association with Nextel for quite some time...

And any kind of motivation for personal gain would be completely out of character for him. And one does not have to be for censure to acknowledge illegality. I have no doubt Warner would fully support a thorough investigation. I believe he just feels censure should not be the main priority in the political campaign. That is a defensible argument.

[Pithy Cherub]

16. Warner doesn't think we should investigate how the Iraq war

was started either. That's an eggregious affront to every American that shed blood on that travesty. Warner has not even meekly allowed for the fact that Bush willingly broke the FISA laws. On two exceedingly important issues connected to what Warner is ill-equipped to discuss (national security) he has stood up like wet over-cooked spaghetti. That is not a president. He may be a good person on some things but on the most important current hot issues, he willingly took a political
pass.

sp

[NCarolinawoman]

18. Yes, not thinking it's important how we got into this war is the statement

he gave that bothers me the most.

I strongly believe, as Wes Clark does, that we need to hold people accountable, and we need to learn from it all so we don't repeat the same mistake.

Warner seems determined not to ruffle feathers, and he is starting to come across as weak.

I believe he's going after the votes of Republican leaning Independents in NH. Many of them probably voted for Leiberman last time out.

[Jai4WKC08]

23. If he's doing that, it's a mistake

Thank goodness. ;)

Repub-leaners in NH will probably vote in the Repub primary. They didn't have to last time.

[dolstein]

24. An adult voice in the midst of little children . . .

Gee, what a novel idea -- elected a Democratic majority in Congress. Of course, if the left-wing genuinely wanted to govern this country, as opposed to wallowing in their own triviality, they'd be saying the exact same thing Warner is saying. The Democrats don't have the votes to censure Bush. How typical of the left to embrace something that (a) is doomed to failure and (b) is purely symbolic. God forbid they should try to put forward a platform that is capable of attacting the sustained support of a majority of the electorate.

Mark Warner knows something the left-wing doesn't -- how to convince people who aren't already in your corner to give you political support. You don't do that by embracing censure. No matter how orgasmic that prospect may be to a left-winger, they've only got one vote. We're not going to win elections until we convince people that haven't been voting Democratic to start doing so. Warner figured out how to do that in Virginia. He didn't do that by simply trash talking Republicans.

[CTLawGuy]

27. well, thanks for the advice

are you a Democratic consultant? You should be, you'd fit right in.

on the other hand, maybe people who don't vote democrat might vote for someone who is willing to confront the man in the white house with a 30% approval rating, and might be willing to say that they stand for something.

But oh no, we can't stand for something, it will make someone not like us. We can't have that, we might only win 99% of the vote.

[wisteria]

12. He seems to be frightened to take on issues associated with Iraq

and President Bush. Remember when he said we should not revisit the past and investigate how exactly we were lead to war, but to focus on the future. This comment on censure falls right into this category.
I do not agree with him that we should not hold Bush accountable for his lies and law breaking. It is fine to focus on 2006 elections,and hope that Dem's are elected, but I don't think this will matter in dealing with Bush at this point- after all, he is a lame duck.

[napi21]

17. I'm not sure exactly how I feel aobut censure NOW.

I happen to agree with Warner on this one. No censure vote is ever going to pass in Congress or the Senate right now. The Majority will not let it happen! It makes more sense to me to campaign on that issue. Tell the people if they elect a Dem majority, we WILL hold censure hearings and get at the truth this admin has been hiding for almost 6 years!

Holding hearings now that fail, I think is foolish, and just makes the Dems look like they've lost the battle.

[skipos]

19. While so many just react with emotion, your post has logic.

Censure is 100% guaranteed to fail while republicans have solid majorities.

[ShortnFiery]

20. Is he DNC?

[wyldwolf]

26. ha ha ! Of course he is.

[thatsrightimirish]

21. I think

Trying to censure him now with all the Republicans voting against it would be better then the wait and see approach which would fail.

[nickshepDEM]

22. There's your next president folks. Smooth and correct as always.

[saltpoint]

28. I won't one-issue Mark Warner, but it draws me toward more

generous appreciation of Senator Feingold and his motion to censure the president.