So Dale...

You like things just the way they are, then? Let's all play by the stacked-deck, political rules, eh? No rocking the boat and all that. It'll wash itself out in no time and we all can go back to what we were doing. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, and that sort of thing. Be a good boy. Lie down. Take your medicine. Our War Time president, our Commander-in-Chief, has all things in perfect control and the backing of the good men and women of Congress, and you know, everyone knows, Karl has told us as well as the vice-president, how much our president cares about us, the little people, and how hard he's working for the peace of all mankind. So, please Mr. Senator Feingold, don't do anything so rash, so bold, so audacious as to...slap the president's hand for being a simple liar and mundane law-breaker? You're saying this censure-thing is a bad, stupid idea? Is that what you're saying, Dale?

I dont think so.
I think McFeatters is making censure look like what it really is, a seventeenth century style slap with a glove where what's really needed is a far stronger measure.
It's like giving Jeffrey Dahmer an environmental citation for offensive fumes and like teaching a pig to whistle.

It's a waste of time and it annoys the pig, only this time it's a boar and the reaction might be much more than mere annoyance.
An administration that has the cohones to push the "unitary executive" concept to the breaking point might not waste any time crafting a punitive and destructive response to the entire legislature for daring to allow one of its members to have the temerity to impugn its fearless leader.

Sir Thomas More angered Henry VIII with his mere silence on The Oath of Supremacy and The Act of Succession and it resulted in his beheading.

Beheading was replaced with more civil and human punishments in the twentieth century and in the latter half we have witnessed no less than a dozen nullifications of legislative bodies by angry civil potentates.

Pray tell, in a nation where the enemy combatant designation can be assigned to almost anyone and tenured Senators can find themselves on No-Fly lists out of petty vengeance, is it really that hard to believe that a Presidential tantrum could result in suspension of our entire lawmaking body?

JeffH in TX

I dont think so.
I think McFeatters is making censure look like what it really is, a seventeenth century style slap with a glove where what's really needed is a far stronger measure.

It's like giving Jeffrey Dahmer an environmental citation for offensive fumes and like teaching a pig to whistle.

It's a waste of time and it annoys the pig, only this time it's an angry boar and the reaction might be much more than mere annoyance.

An administration that has the cohones to push the "unitary executive" concept to the breaking point might not waste any time crafting a punitive and destructive response to the entire legislature for daring to allow one of its members to have the temerity to impugn its fearless leader.

Sir Thomas More angered Henry VIII with his mere silence on The Oath of Supremacy and The Act of Succession and it resulted in his beheading.

Beheading was replaced with more civil and humane punishments in the twentieth century and in the latter half we have witnessed no less than a dozen nullifications of legislative bodies by angry civil potentates.

Pray tell, in a nation where the enemy combatant designation can be assigned to almost anyone and tenured Senators can find themselves on No-Fly lists out of petty vengeance, is it really that hard to believe that a Presidential tantrum could result in suspension of our entire lawmaking body?

HINT:Such an action would be taken under "national security concerns".

JeffH in TX

If the democrats have been collectively weak on anything it has been a spine.

The world is full of naysayers who are able to predict the success or failure of an idea without actually trying it. The utility of a vote on the censure motion is clear. The result of such a vote will tell the people of the US which of their Senators will defend the US Constitution and which will lay down for the cheap tyrant in the White House today. Make no mistake about the fact that bush is trodding on the Constitution which in bold terms requires a warrant before the government can invade a citizens privacy. Secondly, if there is a sizeable vote for a censure motion which calls upon the President to desist from his violations of the Constitution, there will then be a clear case and a momentum for impeachment. There already is a clear case for impeachment based on bush's violation of his oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the US. It is probable that some weak-kneed politicians do not want to risk the next election on the unknown public reaction to a censorship motion. They are fools and deserve to be thrown out of office. Nobody is bigger than the Constitution or the law in the US. Throw the bum out. And let him take shooter Cheney with him. Cheney should be added to the censure motion.

You people are really scaring me. I think Jeffery is right about how easy it would be for this tyrant to declare maritial law, abandon elections and set himself up as dictator. Or he could just fix every election so the voting machines always elect whomever he wants. And we, by posting these comments, will be hunted down and tried for sedition.

I too think the Democrats lack spine. They'd go farther in these times if they slapped their foot down and said "Enough!"

But I see two main factions in the Democratic Party that are at odds with one another. There is the DLC faction, which is akin to the good ol' boy network, and the Progressives. The DLC wants the basic business as usual. The Progressives have a far better vision of what America could be.

I am not a real fan of the entrenched two party system myself. Maybe it's time to alter some things in regards to how we allow things to happen. Like making campaign finance public thereby leveling the playing field, and making their wages about where the median wage is. That'll scare off the free loaders. Raises could be based on their ability to raise the median wage in the country.

It is very important to understand that articles for impeachment are more far reaching than we think! The argument is whether or not to censure the IDIOT. Ok, censure him, it is a definite step in the right direction because following midterm elections which most Americans are sick and tired of a Republican led Congress, surely articles for impeachment will follow when the Democrats return. Now, with articles for impeachment it is very certain that if you impeach the IDIOT you will also find sufficient evidence and grounds to impeach dick, Cheney. Why because the IDIOT did not act alone in anything and before his dad let him go down, dick must follow too! So I say censure the prick and after elections move swiftly for impeachment. This way you will shoot two birds with one stone! Oops, am I talk dick language, "shoot two birds?"

Dave, I hear you and others expressing fear of reprisals for viocing opinions. I feel that too.
If fear is guiding us, is it all over?

Ok, Dale. It is a waste of time and has no power. My origional thought was to use it as a basis for impeachment motions. By making the republican congress go on record as opposing any criticism of the president we make them all more vulnerable in the mid-terms, and thus elect more democrats to begin real investigations.

Whatever devices we employ, I think we need to begin soon, so as to have things in place by November.

Fearful people are the most easily led to slaughter.

Fearful people are not worthy of self-government.

Fearful are repugnant to witness.

Fearful people have never accomplished anything.

Fearful are the guardians of the status quo.

Fearful people are responsible for the death of others.

Fearful people are comfortable on their knees.

Fearful people are unworthy of being called Americans. They are as sheep!

I'm going to disagree with you, and say that the best outcome for this resolution is for the Senate to bring it to a vote... and have Feingold be the only Yea vote... just as he was the sole No against the original Patriot Act.

My fellow liberals will hop on the Feingold bandwagon even quicker, while I also believe that thinking moderates who may not believe in the censure motion will see the Wisconsin Senator for what he is: One of the only men of true principle in the Senate. There's really no arguing that Feingold is on-the-money with his determination that the President did, in fact, break the law by authorizing the NSA spying program. It's unanimous in the Senate that this program is valuable to our intelligence collection efforts, but as Feingold notes, that simply does not execuse the White House from going through the proper channels to change the law to give the program a solid legal standing.

Yesssssssssss Corbett. Feingold needs a vote. Big things start with small efforts. As John Conyers stated, he wanted his impeachment rhetoric on the record for future reference. I see no future in holding back, even if it is without support.

.....and then there's Sandra Day O'connor (sp?) warning us of dictatorship. Brave words! No Media!

(1) Its divisive and futile.
Futile, yes. Divisive? When do we actually stand up and ask the president to follow the rule of law? It’s the right thing to do, even if Republicans are two dishonest to do it.
(2) Wouldn’t mean anything?
Wrong, it would show Americans that Senators are interested in more than maintaining their power by taking on the President head on when he’s wrong.
(3) Diversion?
Its their job to be a check and balance. Let them do their job for once. They get paid enough.
(4) He genuinely believes his war time powers under the Constitution….
If you believe your right and break the law, you still broke the law. If the President is right, let him pull out the Constitution and the War Powers act and prove it. We are a nation of laws not faith. We should live that way.
(5) Whigs
If the President is wrong he should be censured. To fail to the right thing because you fear the consequences is nor moral, not right, and not conservative.

Russ Feingold is a very bright, highly credentialed Senator, who seems to have principle's. Remember this is the "only" Senator who did not vote for the original implementation of anti-constitutional Patriot Act. Notice I said anti and not "un". This evil legislation isn't even worthy being codified into law, and he could see through it's artifice of protecting the people. Even Byrd, the maestro concerning the filibuster didn't oppose it, but now that he's up for re-election he waxes poetically how he should have opposed it too, along with Feingold. Feingold knows very well that his "dirtbag" Democratic associate's wouldn't support censure. He's using it as a tool to keep this issue, of Bush's illegal spying on the front burner. He's not letting it go, and plans on torturing the imcumbent sob's in the White House concerning this spying issue. So it's the best tactic possible, and in a way brilliant for a man that's virtually fighting this axis of evil single-handedly. In fact he's the only hope for the Democratic party if they really are interested in re-claiming the Whitehouse. When I read how member's of the Press and our corrupt leader's conducted themselves at the recent annual National Press Club banquet, I almost puked. America has become the "Empire of the Rising Scum", and the scum is most dense at the top.

Nemo

It's nice see that there is still a "Mr. Smith that went to Washington." All is not lost, yet!

There is something about a conscience that frightens the weak and the guilty. The more they attack "Mr. Smith" the more they expose their corruption.

Notice how quickly Cheney took "offense."

Potential supporters of a Presidential Censure are presently under fire by Republicans: 'If you are for this, they say, you are extreme!' The Fear Card is being played and it would seem that it is trumping all others in the deck.

The Democrats in Congress must show some backbone, stand up to this bluff, to prevent future roadblocks on the road to impeachment.

Mr. Clinton avoided a Congressional Censure because the Republicans voted against it so impeachment proceedings could be pursued. Democrats on the Judiciary Committe were the only votes for Censure at that time in hopes that only a 'glove slap' would be administered.

If Democrats support this call for Censure, it will force the Republicans to play something other that the Joker of Fear. They must play with more than rhetoric, knowing that once Censure is taken off the table, the road to impeachment widens.

A loss by the Democrats in the Censure arena is not a failure of the Democrats to represent their constituents, a majority who would support impeachment if the President was found to break the law (which he said he did, by the way).

Voting down the Censure resolution is the next step to take in the trail to impeachment.

Yeah, it's going to be bloody. But our Constitution and basic liberties are worth the wounds we will receive and the scars we will have to endure.

Personally I feel that it's time for Articles of Impeachment - but as Dale points out, if the President is guilty of High Crimes and Misdemenors, it's due to being allowed to get away with it.

Devisive? I'll say it. The only devision is that between Right and Wrong here. Between Citizen and Sonderkommando.

Democrats may well pay a political price for standing up to Bush - as well as personal consequences from this petty and power mad administration.

But, if I may be so bold as to point out, the ultimate destination is the same either way. The only question is when.

Great post Tom, about the "fearful people".
It's these pathetic cowards who for fear of some boooogerman, who have given up our rights without a peep, and it's time to tell them to put up or shut up.
If they can do Nothing, they can at least stand together and show the American people that they have some semblance of unity, and the willingness to protect America. How do they expect to defeat a war mongering fear promoting wacko, who calls them cowards and un-American, when that's exactly what they convey when they hem and haw and let slide Every F'ed up measure that this wack job sends down the line. I hate to say it, but if it hadn't been for the Republicans who railed against the DP deal, we'd be seeing the UAE getting settled in at our ports right now.
Basically they are USELESS!
At least Feingold seems worthy of a vote if he throws his hat in. Sticking to your guns for the right reasons, is just what we need.
Keep sticking it to them Russ. Many of us admire that. I didn't serve this country to protect her and her constitution just to give up My rights because of some boooogerman!

I think it's time the democrates start to use their power. They can start by closing down the congress and the senate. Remember when Harry Reid closed down the Senate, I was so proud of him. THey need to walk away, but they have to take a stand and start fighting. We talk about impeachment like it is somehow something we shouldn't do all the time. Hell we have never impeached a president. It seems like a good place to start with someone who was selected by the supreme court not elected by the people.

Wait a minute? Do we have people arguing against censure out of fear of presidential retaliation? That sounds like a president who really needs to be censured.

To lie down now is to invite bigger and more frequent executive abuses. To cite a well-known exemplar, the policy of placation did not work well in Czechoslovakia. We ended up with the subjugation of Europe and a culture of death camps.

We will never know what would have happened if Chamberlaine had stood up in 1938 and said "no" to that invasion, but we do know that that early, easy capitulation did not stop Hitler but emboldened him to invade Poland.

If we let Bush run out the remaining three years of his term unobstructed, there may be no 2008 election. In five years, he has gutted the Constitution, legalized torture, launched a greedy campaign of private-sector imperialism, turned the media into a propaganda machine, emasculated Congress, and terrified the populace. With that kind of head start, three years—-almost 40 percent of his eight-year term—-is plenty of time to convert from democracy to tyranny. We are already at the brink.

No successful movement has ever emerged full-fledged like Athena from the head of Zeus. Movements start small. They do not win right off. But demonstrations of minority power build upon each other until change is inexorable.

It is the worst kind of defeatism to say why censure because we will never win. Of course we won't win, but who cares? The fight builds momentum. It asserts our integrity. We move closer to our goal of taking our country back.

And, personally, I'd like to distract Congress right now. They’re not doing us any good.

If the Democrats are unwilling to make the effort to censure Bush, and put themselves on record as an opposition party, then they may as well turn in their keys and go home.

So, this is where we stand: leave "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance but take "justice for all" out? (It's a rhetorical question).