100 to 0

[ewagner]

After listening to Russ Feingold on This Week with George STEPHANOPOULOS, I immediately posted in a couple of other blogs stating that Feingold's resolution to Censure George W. Bush doesn't stand a chance of a snowball in hell. Politically, I think I'm right but I am starting to realize that there is much more than politics involved here.

I'm actually beginning to think that Feingold is engaging in an act of STATESMANSHIP.

I think that Feingold's Censure Resolution should pass the Senate by a vote of 100 to 0. I think every Senator, regardless of party affiliation should stand shoulder-to-shoulder with their fellow Senators because they are not standing so much AGAINST George W. Bush but FOR the Senate of the United States and the Constitution.

I'm beginning to see that it is all about the Senate. It's about separation of powers. It's about checks and balances. It's democracy against monarchy.

Truthfully it's not all that complicated. Here's how it boils down "in a nutshell".

Bush circumvented the FISA courts because he didn't like the way the law was written. Instead of going back to Congress to change the law, he openly violated it for more than two years. After the fact, he had his Attorney General cook up the lame "unitary executive" and "the power was implicit in the Iraq War Resolution" excuses and then blatantly admits that he broke the law and will continue doing it.

That's unchecked power in the executive branch folks.

The "unitary executive" argument says that the President can obey or disobey laws passed by Congress as he wishes. He can have al la carte enforcement of the law.

Unless the Senate stops him.

Unless the Senate Censures him. Unless the Senate reasserts its authority and constitutional position as a check and balance against dictatorship.

100 to 0

That's how Feingold's censor resolution should pass.

[BuyingThyme]

1. ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=446700

[IsItJustMe]

2. I would suggest contacting your Senators in your state to support Russ.

[Old and In the Way]

3. In theory, it should.

But Republicans put Syndicate before country. Frist can't allow an "up or down vote" on this issue. Can you imagine how much of a problem it would be for the Republicans? Support Bush or support the country?

The recent MS-NBC poll has almost 250,000 people voting....86% for impeachment.

[Horse with no Name]

4. There is grandeur in Senate protocols and statesmanship

Too bad the Republicans turn every thing they touch to shit.

[aden_nak]

5. I actually hope it doesn't pass.

No, seriously. The Republicans in congress are waking up to the realization that Bush is going to drag them down in 2006. I can just about guarantee you that the only GOPers that will vote in favor of it will be the ones facing tough elections this November. So I actually kind of hope they aren't smart enough to vote for it. That way we can throw it back in their faces later on.

[ewagner]

6. Missing. The. Point.

The point is that our conversations in this matter should be presented in terms of saving the Senate. Saving the Constitution.

NOT BASHING BUSH

[WilliamPitt]

7. Hit nthem in their self-interest

100-0 not to defend the constitution, but to defend the Congress from the Executive.

[ewagner]

8. Exactly

I've been trying to spread the word.....but there's not a lot of interest. I put it on my blog site (in sig line) but that means it will be read by exactly one (1) more person today :rofl: