If the democrats have enough balls, we may be saying "President Pelosi" before 2008. As the democrats have taken charge of the US House and now the Senate, as well, there's nothing stopping them from making some yummy impeachment pie for Bush and Cheney. I'm sure they will enjoy it. Yum. Yum.
Okay, okay. It really is time for every elected official to hold fast to their oath of office and to preserve (and restore), protect and defend the Constitution of the United States... from enemies both foreign and domestic.
Showing posts with label Constitution. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Constitution. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 08, 2006
Monday, November 06, 2006
Sa__ __ a__ H__sse__n: Hangman
There's nothing like playing an exciting game of hangman in Iraq, is there?! Exciting, indeed. And depending on which side of the fence you claim, it could excite (or incite) joy or anger. Shiites were indeed happy. Sunnis were upset. Both sides continue to disagree.
This isn't just a little cat fight between Muslim factions, this is about a clash of ideologies. Not just within Iraq, but with "us" "occupiers", as well.
Iraq will not become an instantly peaceful, tyrant-free country once Saddam Hussein is hanged. The Iraqi people have too many reasons to be excited. Ideology is a difficult thing to modify, especially in a people of tradition.
Peace and tranquility cannot be achieved with a verdict. It cannot be achieved by war and occupation.
It is acheived when all sides can value all human life, and humanely live together with their differences. It is about consideration for our neighbors. It is observing, protecting and defending those inalienable rights that all humans on this great planet have been endowed with by our creator. Sounds a lot like the documents that started a country several centuries ago, founded on those same principles.
Whatever happened to those principles?
Oh, right. Hanging chads... (Florida 2000 game of hangman: __ __ __ __ w__n!)
This isn't just a little cat fight between Muslim factions, this is about a clash of ideologies. Not just within Iraq, but with "us" "occupiers", as well.
Iraq will not become an instantly peaceful, tyrant-free country once Saddam Hussein is hanged. The Iraqi people have too many reasons to be excited. Ideology is a difficult thing to modify, especially in a people of tradition.
Peace and tranquility cannot be achieved with a verdict. It cannot be achieved by war and occupation.
It is acheived when all sides can value all human life, and humanely live together with their differences. It is about consideration for our neighbors. It is observing, protecting and defending those inalienable rights that all humans on this great planet have been endowed with by our creator. Sounds a lot like the documents that started a country several centuries ago, founded on those same principles.
Whatever happened to those principles?
Oh, right. Hanging chads... (Florida 2000 game of hangman: __ __ __ __ w__n!)
Friday, October 13, 2006
Democrats Whimper
Whimper is the sound an injured animal makes. The Democrats seem to be whimpering a lot lately. You'd think that with all the Republican scandals, the Democrats would have licked their wounds and become prepared to attack. Wrong.
Harkin made a comment that practically burst the bubble for many democrats in the room for last Sunday's Democrat Rally. He said that if the Democrats gain the majority in the House and Senate that they will not impeach. Some in the crowd made some noises, most of them sounded like whimpers. I whimpered inside, as well.
Harkin tried to redeem himself by saying that if they didn't want to impeach (the president), because they didn't want Cheney as president. Apparently, that appeased much of the crowd as they clapped and cheered at the comment.
It did not appease me. C'mon, if President Bush is found to be impeachable, who's to say that Cheney also has impeachable advances? I was hoping that it would be the Democrats, but apparently I am wrong there.
Harkin went on to say that the Democrats want to hold them accountable, and they want to investigate. I whimpered. I thought, what's accountable anymore? Hold them accountable is like telling the school yard bully to stop name-calling.
Well, that's all fine and dandy if Harkin wants to take the low road, but why vote Democrat on Nov. 7 if the democrats aren't willing to impeach and punish those who've mangled the Constitution, and to right the wrongs that were made against the Constitution and freedoms of the American people?
Accountability is one thing. Responsibility is taking the bull by the horns and doing what needs to be done to make the Constitution a valid, living, breathing document vital to our country. I hope the Democrats will change their tune, but I won't hold my breath.
Is there anyone out there willing to defend, protect, and resuscitate the Constitution out there? Defending the Constitution should be the platform the Democrats should take, but no, they just sit in the corner and whimper.
Harkin made a comment that practically burst the bubble for many democrats in the room for last Sunday's Democrat Rally. He said that if the Democrats gain the majority in the House and Senate that they will not impeach. Some in the crowd made some noises, most of them sounded like whimpers. I whimpered inside, as well.
Harkin tried to redeem himself by saying that if they didn't want to impeach (the president), because they didn't want Cheney as president. Apparently, that appeased much of the crowd as they clapped and cheered at the comment.
It did not appease me. C'mon, if President Bush is found to be impeachable, who's to say that Cheney also has impeachable advances? I was hoping that it would be the Democrats, but apparently I am wrong there.
Harkin went on to say that the Democrats want to hold them accountable, and they want to investigate. I whimpered. I thought, what's accountable anymore? Hold them accountable is like telling the school yard bully to stop name-calling.
Well, that's all fine and dandy if Harkin wants to take the low road, but why vote Democrat on Nov. 7 if the democrats aren't willing to impeach and punish those who've mangled the Constitution, and to right the wrongs that were made against the Constitution and freedoms of the American people?
Accountability is one thing. Responsibility is taking the bull by the horns and doing what needs to be done to make the Constitution a valid, living, breathing document vital to our country. I hope the Democrats will change their tune, but I won't hold my breath.
Is there anyone out there willing to defend, protect, and resuscitate the Constitution out there? Defending the Constitution should be the platform the Democrats should take, but no, they just sit in the corner and whimper.
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
Corpus Habeas Corpus?
RIP Habeas Corpus
Once again, the Constitution lies under siege in this new millennium. Thanks to Keith Olbermann for reporting on this grave issue affecting all American citizens.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUzUljH8EHU
Olbermann delivers the bad news with such panache that no words I write could affect the same consideration. Have I given Keith Olbermann a Golden Ruler, yet? Well, he deserves one.
For acts of bravery and courage to stand up and protect our Constitution with all its rights and privileges afforded unto us, I hereby grant Keith Olbermann with the Golden Ruler. Mr. Olbermann, please use this Golden Ruler to continue measuring and correcting our leaders to the standards of truth and justice as carried out in the Constitution of the United States, and continue to defend our freedoms and rights, both here and abroad.
Once again, the Constitution lies under siege in this new millennium. Thanks to Keith Olbermann for reporting on this grave issue affecting all American citizens.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUzUljH8EHU
Olbermann delivers the bad news with such panache that no words I write could affect the same consideration. Have I given Keith Olbermann a Golden Ruler, yet? Well, he deserves one.
For acts of bravery and courage to stand up and protect our Constitution with all its rights and privileges afforded unto us, I hereby grant Keith Olbermann with the Golden Ruler. Mr. Olbermann, please use this Golden Ruler to continue measuring and correcting our leaders to the standards of truth and justice as carried out in the Constitution of the United States, and continue to defend our freedoms and rights, both here and abroad.
Wednesday, September 06, 2006
Ah... Gravitas!
Seriously... We need to get serious. And finally Keith Olbermann is giving true gravitas to the grave concerns of the state of the union.
As I read about the references to the traditions of network television news after Katie Couric's premiere performance, the accomplishments of those early pioneers in television news are indeed amazing. They were cowboys of their era, riding into a new frontier of journalism, with the ability to truly make a genuine difference to better this world because of their honest reporting.
Where have all the cowboys gone? Up until now, I thought they had gone to Comedy Central, because it seems in our culture today, the only way to say there's a major SNAFU here, is to pepper it with laughter. It takes balls to call out someone's bluff, or to point at authority and say they've done wrong, or to do some serious investigative reporting and publicize the real truth behind the smoke screens.
It was such reporting by CBS News that changed the tide for Nixon and quite possibly ended the Vietnam War. We, as the collective people, do not fully understand the impact television news has when they offer us their reporting perspectives on today's stories. And we should be concerned when the rhetoric of governmental offices are echoed in the evening news without the least bit of questioning, probing, or indepth independent investigation. We do not understand the full impact of the reprimand CBS News received after the whole investigation into the president's alleged time in the national guard. This was grave.
Maybe that is why people are turning to the lighter side for their news. We all need a laugh ever so often, and sometimes we like to know what's going on around us, too. Thank goodness for Comedy Central's Daily Show and Colbert Report, where gravitas is spoken with a sprinkling of jest.
A new cowboy is riding on the horizon. Keith Olbermann. I've watched his show a couple of times, as I get a chance, since he is one of a few television newsmen that tries to tell it like it is, beyond the propaganda from biased agencies. Thanks to another cowboy, I've been able to see the continued rise of prominent people to speak up about the concerning state of our country. A couple of days ago Olbermann spoke up about his concerns on the direction of our country, lead by President G.W. Bush and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.
At the end of Olbermann's perspective look, he quoted Edward Murrow: "We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty." Olbermann continues with a strikingly mellow and sobering countenance, in the fashion of those old cowboys, like Cronkite and Murrow: "We must remember always that accusation is not proof, and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. We will not walk in fear - one, of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of un-reason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men; Not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate, and to defend causes that were - for the moment - unpopular."
If you look up Murrow's quote, some sources take that first sentence and end it with, "When the loyal opposition dies, I think the soul of America dies with it." Murrow is not talking about terrorist opposition, but loyal opposition--a big difference. Loyal opposition, in my humble view, are among "we the people" who honestly question, research, and investigate actions and intentions that stray from our Constitutional foundations. Loyal opposition defends our Constitution.
Keith Olbermann is bringing television news back to the journalistic integrity of days gone by. (And for those naysayers who think the past is irrelevant to day, just look to our Constitution if you want relevence to your own freedoms.)
Keith Olbermann delivers gravitas! (And he does carry out, too! Check out his blog!)
As I read about the references to the traditions of network television news after Katie Couric's premiere performance, the accomplishments of those early pioneers in television news are indeed amazing. They were cowboys of their era, riding into a new frontier of journalism, with the ability to truly make a genuine difference to better this world because of their honest reporting.
Where have all the cowboys gone? Up until now, I thought they had gone to Comedy Central, because it seems in our culture today, the only way to say there's a major SNAFU here, is to pepper it with laughter. It takes balls to call out someone's bluff, or to point at authority and say they've done wrong, or to do some serious investigative reporting and publicize the real truth behind the smoke screens.
It was such reporting by CBS News that changed the tide for Nixon and quite possibly ended the Vietnam War. We, as the collective people, do not fully understand the impact television news has when they offer us their reporting perspectives on today's stories. And we should be concerned when the rhetoric of governmental offices are echoed in the evening news without the least bit of questioning, probing, or indepth independent investigation. We do not understand the full impact of the reprimand CBS News received after the whole investigation into the president's alleged time in the national guard. This was grave.
Maybe that is why people are turning to the lighter side for their news. We all need a laugh ever so often, and sometimes we like to know what's going on around us, too. Thank goodness for Comedy Central's Daily Show and Colbert Report, where gravitas is spoken with a sprinkling of jest.
A new cowboy is riding on the horizon. Keith Olbermann. I've watched his show a couple of times, as I get a chance, since he is one of a few television newsmen that tries to tell it like it is, beyond the propaganda from biased agencies. Thanks to another cowboy, I've been able to see the continued rise of prominent people to speak up about the concerning state of our country. A couple of days ago Olbermann spoke up about his concerns on the direction of our country, lead by President G.W. Bush and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.
At the end of Olbermann's perspective look, he quoted Edward Murrow: "We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty." Olbermann continues with a strikingly mellow and sobering countenance, in the fashion of those old cowboys, like Cronkite and Murrow: "We must remember always that accusation is not proof, and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. We will not walk in fear - one, of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of un-reason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men; Not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate, and to defend causes that were - for the moment - unpopular."
If you look up Murrow's quote, some sources take that first sentence and end it with, "When the loyal opposition dies, I think the soul of America dies with it." Murrow is not talking about terrorist opposition, but loyal opposition--a big difference. Loyal opposition, in my humble view, are among "we the people" who honestly question, research, and investigate actions and intentions that stray from our Constitutional foundations. Loyal opposition defends our Constitution.
Keith Olbermann is bringing television news back to the journalistic integrity of days gone by. (And for those naysayers who think the past is irrelevant to day, just look to our Constitution if you want relevence to your own freedoms.)
Keith Olbermann delivers gravitas! (And he does carry out, too! Check out his blog!)
Be Not Afraid!
Over this past Labor Day weekend, our church celebrated 150 years of Catholic faith in our community. They spoke of brave and courageous pioneers that came to America for a brighter future.
These ancestors endured many hardships that today we can hardly imagine. They traveled with their few belongings, with horse and oxen on roadless paths to get to this point they called "home." As settlers in this foreign place, they battled the harshness of the northern plains, the bitterly cold winters and the sporatically hot summers. They helped each other to build their communities to what they are today out of their own sweat and toil. And they built their communities here, in America, for the promise of freedom and prosperity that they did not find in their homeland. They truly lived by the phrase "be not afraid."
In reflection of our ancestors' brave conquest of a new world, my own courage drastically pales in such comparison. I look at our country, and even our world today, and it seems we have lost that brave courage that spurred our forefathers to sacrifice all to live in this great country.
It is those who devalue our courage and our bravery, who say you are less of a person for standing up for what is truly right, that strike such fear against our courage. It is those who subvert the American way by demoting the values of the Constitution that create our "fear factor" today.
The "fear factor" is what brought our ancestors here many, many years ago. The fear of economic disaster. The fear of living in a corrupt country. The fear of tyranny. Our ancestors came here, to the United States, because of a document that held more power than any person could ever legally obtain in this country. It is this document that safeguards our freedom. The United States is the envy of the world, not due to our previous industrial economic success, but because of this document, the Constitution.
I am sure many of you have amazing stories of your own ancestry coming to the United States seeking the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution. Such an elegant statement could ever be made was written in another document that started our country on the path to democracy. Those words "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happinesss"--unalienable rights to the people, as the Declaration of Independence most eloquently declared. That is why people sacrificed all, for the promise of a better tomorrow.
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
The preamble of the Constitution succinctly echoes those words from the Declaration of Independence, and places the undeniable importance of the people in this new country at the very beginning with "We the people..."
Be not afraid... Yes, be not afraid... As long as the Constitution of the United States continues to be defended and stands as a living document for we, the people... Be not afraid.
These ancestors endured many hardships that today we can hardly imagine. They traveled with their few belongings, with horse and oxen on roadless paths to get to this point they called "home." As settlers in this foreign place, they battled the harshness of the northern plains, the bitterly cold winters and the sporatically hot summers. They helped each other to build their communities to what they are today out of their own sweat and toil. And they built their communities here, in America, for the promise of freedom and prosperity that they did not find in their homeland. They truly lived by the phrase "be not afraid."
In reflection of our ancestors' brave conquest of a new world, my own courage drastically pales in such comparison. I look at our country, and even our world today, and it seems we have lost that brave courage that spurred our forefathers to sacrifice all to live in this great country.
It is those who devalue our courage and our bravery, who say you are less of a person for standing up for what is truly right, that strike such fear against our courage. It is those who subvert the American way by demoting the values of the Constitution that create our "fear factor" today.
The "fear factor" is what brought our ancestors here many, many years ago. The fear of economic disaster. The fear of living in a corrupt country. The fear of tyranny. Our ancestors came here, to the United States, because of a document that held more power than any person could ever legally obtain in this country. It is this document that safeguards our freedom. The United States is the envy of the world, not due to our previous industrial economic success, but because of this document, the Constitution.
I am sure many of you have amazing stories of your own ancestry coming to the United States seeking the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution. Such an elegant statement could ever be made was written in another document that started our country on the path to democracy. Those words "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happinesss"--unalienable rights to the people, as the Declaration of Independence most eloquently declared. That is why people sacrificed all, for the promise of a better tomorrow.
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
The preamble of the Constitution succinctly echoes those words from the Declaration of Independence, and places the undeniable importance of the people in this new country at the very beginning with "We the people..."
Be not afraid... Yes, be not afraid... As long as the Constitution of the United States continues to be defended and stands as a living document for we, the people... Be not afraid.
Monday, May 15, 2006
Under God: Are You Covered?
Just as Christian women have recently come out from being under the head covering of men, it seems that Christian men are also coming out from being under the head covering of God. If you read the New Testament, you'll see that the apostle Paul was a big advocate of head covering. You can read that in one of two ways: headcovering = limiting, or headcovering = protecting and reflecting glory.
Now, I am sure that many people see the headcovering with its potential to be submissive, limiting and even oppressive. And for men who feel it is their duty to command the world, having to deal with a headcovering to God goes against their own ability to do whatever the heck they want. Thus, ditch the headcovering and ditch God--but not entirely. Use the headcovering of God as a cloak to hide indiscretions and secret plans. You see how that can really hide all the bad stuff and make people think that everything is being done in the light of God.
George W. Bush is experienced in this type of clandestine action to take one thing that is good and is limiting and use it to hide and in a way shield him from his diverging activities. As president, the laws enacted by our democracy's representatives are his headcovering. They are there not just to limit him, but to protect his head and when the law is upheld due to his efforts, he is rightly glorified. However, when the headcovering is not used on the head --are you following the analogy here?--Ok... When the law is circumvented and instead of placed as a protective covering over the right foundation of our government (the Constitution), it is used as a shield to deflect and contort the law, what is there to protect the head (the US Constitution and the proper use of government)? Nothing.
The struggle to keep "under God" in the pledge of allegiance may be nothing more than symantics to some. To others it signifies that headcovering, the law, not just of God, but the laws of our country. And still to others it is the push to keep the public thinking that God is protecting us, when in actuality it is distorted and is only protecting the personal interests of those leaders.
Did I mention that when men and women keep the headcovering over their heads, it protects and reflects glory to them? Ok, so what's so great about being limited and submissive? We don't harm ourselves or harm others (our protection--it is in this protection that even if others harm us, we forgive and heal), it keeps us focused on the mission designated by our Creator, and allows our Creator to mold us into the creation that we have been designed to become (the reflection of glory is from the Creator in becoming what we are meant to be). That same headcovering is there not just to help yourself, but others, too. When we become what God made us to be, then we learn that the head covering not only protects our head and heart, but puts our hands into service to serve God and those who God places into our care. (You can see how restrictive it would be if that headcovering were used as a cloak or shield--the ability to serve God and others is severly restricted or nonexistent.)
There are people out there that wear that headcovering to physically represent their faith. You'll see devout Jewish men wearing their yarmulke, nuns in their habits, traditional Catholic women wearing prayer veils, and Islamic women wearing burkhas. It reminds them of their faith, and stands for the protection, guidance and reflects the glory given by their Creator. It shows respect for their Creator, and in return, honor.
Now, I am sure that many people see the headcovering with its potential to be submissive, limiting and even oppressive. And for men who feel it is their duty to command the world, having to deal with a headcovering to God goes against their own ability to do whatever the heck they want. Thus, ditch the headcovering and ditch God--but not entirely. Use the headcovering of God as a cloak to hide indiscretions and secret plans. You see how that can really hide all the bad stuff and make people think that everything is being done in the light of God.
George W. Bush is experienced in this type of clandestine action to take one thing that is good and is limiting and use it to hide and in a way shield him from his diverging activities. As president, the laws enacted by our democracy's representatives are his headcovering. They are there not just to limit him, but to protect his head and when the law is upheld due to his efforts, he is rightly glorified. However, when the headcovering is not used on the head --are you following the analogy here?--Ok... When the law is circumvented and instead of placed as a protective covering over the right foundation of our government (the Constitution), it is used as a shield to deflect and contort the law, what is there to protect the head (the US Constitution and the proper use of government)? Nothing.
The struggle to keep "under God" in the pledge of allegiance may be nothing more than symantics to some. To others it signifies that headcovering, the law, not just of God, but the laws of our country. And still to others it is the push to keep the public thinking that God is protecting us, when in actuality it is distorted and is only protecting the personal interests of those leaders.
Did I mention that when men and women keep the headcovering over their heads, it protects and reflects glory to them? Ok, so what's so great about being limited and submissive? We don't harm ourselves or harm others (our protection--it is in this protection that even if others harm us, we forgive and heal), it keeps us focused on the mission designated by our Creator, and allows our Creator to mold us into the creation that we have been designed to become (the reflection of glory is from the Creator in becoming what we are meant to be). That same headcovering is there not just to help yourself, but others, too. When we become what God made us to be, then we learn that the head covering not only protects our head and heart, but puts our hands into service to serve God and those who God places into our care. (You can see how restrictive it would be if that headcovering were used as a cloak or shield--the ability to serve God and others is severly restricted or nonexistent.)
There are people out there that wear that headcovering to physically represent their faith. You'll see devout Jewish men wearing their yarmulke, nuns in their habits, traditional Catholic women wearing prayer veils, and Islamic women wearing burkhas. It reminds them of their faith, and stands for the protection, guidance and reflects the glory given by their Creator. It shows respect for their Creator, and in return, honor.
Friday, May 05, 2006
Omega Glory
With all the discuss of corruption (especially on Len Hart's blog: existentialistcowboy.blogspot.com) on Capitol Hill, and even in the White House, along with many practices by our government that seem to really subvert the Constitution of the United States, I started to think back to an old (I mean original) Star Trek episode: Omega Glory episode (#54, first aired 3/1/68). Although I am not a true Trekkie, I remember seeing this show when I was young, and the overtones of our US civilization stuck with me.
Wikipedia has a nice overview of this episode. Their summary of the Omega Glory: Captain Kirk must battle a deadly virus and prevent a meaningless war.
Sound familiar? In 1968, the good and bad guys were different than today, but it can easily be changed to today's political climate within the US. Ok, the feared deadly virus today: Avian Bird Flu (I'm sure our president will talk your ear off with coherent discuss about this, since he is way more knowledgeable about this virus than about his current war in Iraq). And today, we are in a pretty much meaningless war in Iraq (Sorry, no WMDs and really, if Saddam was really as dicky of a dictator as they say, then why is the US just as dicky or even more so. Yes, Saddam tortured and used chemical weapons on his people. Pssst--The US has done this, too, on Iraqis--have you forgotten Abu Graib and white phosphorus? Doesn't sound very nice to me.)
Can you see the word "freedom" turn into a "worship word"? I can.
Close to the end of the show, Capt. Kirk finds what looks like a tattered copy of the US Constitution and says "Look at these three words written larger than all the rest, and with special pride never written before or since -- tall words, proudly saying "We the people" .. these words and the words that follow ... must apply to everyone or they mean nothing."
Is the Omega Glory predicting our present and future?
Wikipedia has a nice overview of this episode. Their summary of the Omega Glory: Captain Kirk must battle a deadly virus and prevent a meaningless war.
Sound familiar? In 1968, the good and bad guys were different than today, but it can easily be changed to today's political climate within the US. Ok, the feared deadly virus today: Avian Bird Flu (I'm sure our president will talk your ear off with coherent discuss about this, since he is way more knowledgeable about this virus than about his current war in Iraq). And today, we are in a pretty much meaningless war in Iraq (Sorry, no WMDs and really, if Saddam was really as dicky of a dictator as they say, then why is the US just as dicky or even more so. Yes, Saddam tortured and used chemical weapons on his people. Pssst--The US has done this, too, on Iraqis--have you forgotten Abu Graib and white phosphorus? Doesn't sound very nice to me.)
Can you see the word "freedom" turn into a "worship word"? I can.
Close to the end of the show, Capt. Kirk finds what looks like a tattered copy of the US Constitution and says "Look at these three words written larger than all the rest, and with special pride never written before or since -- tall words, proudly saying "We the people" .. these words and the words that follow ... must apply to everyone or they mean nothing."
Is the Omega Glory predicting our present and future?
Monday, March 13, 2006
Does That Make Censure?
"The president has broken the law," says Senator Russ Feingold (D-Wisconsin). Sen. Feingold views Bush's public surveillence without a warrant as an offense against the constitution and grounds for censure in the US Senate. Feingold's five-page resolution will be presented to the US Senate today.
Republicans that support Bush, however, have rebutted the notions of censure and possible impeachment in the House, not by proving Bush did not offend the constitution, but by linking the Democrats actions with hindering the war on terror and degrading the US international reputation.
Senate majority leader Bill Frist claims that this action will "weaken the United States in a time of war."
Ah, reality check, Mr. Frist. Ok, we started a war based on weak intell in Iraq, when we still had not finished one in Afganistan and have yet to capture Osama bin Laden, the kingpin of 9/11. We have ignored our own constitution by detaining US and US-based foreigners without any due process, allowed a president to spy on our citizens without a warrant that would nullify any evidence received this way in a court of law, and weakened constitutional rights under the guise (disguise) of the unwinnable war on terror. As insurgents and the workings of an Iraqi civil war surface, the US military situation is not looking very good there. And then there's Hurricane Katrina, proving that Homeland Security isn't so secure after 9/11 after all the money we've dumped into such an idea as homeland security. You think President Bush is making the US safer, Mr. Frist, really? C'mon. I think we've done a "helluva" job weakening US foreign and domestic impressions very well, already.
And you, Mr. Frist, want to claim that standing up for the constitution would weaken international impressions of the United States? On the contrary, defending the Constitution of the United States would be a symbol of a strengthening United States, showing the world that we are responsible for upholding our laws and willing to stand strong behind the one document, the foundation that sets the United States as a great nation.
Senator John Warner (R-Virginia) claims that Feingold's censure announcement is "political grandstanding... And it tends to weaken our president." Actually, the process of censure will either prove that President Bush is strong in upholding the Constitution, or as weak as his actions prove him to be.
If we don't defend the Constitution of the United States when it is tested, either by the president or any other action by the US government, then the checks and balances imparted by the Constitution have failed.
If we don't uphold the Constitution of the United States, then we are a weak nation.
Republicans that support Bush, however, have rebutted the notions of censure and possible impeachment in the House, not by proving Bush did not offend the constitution, but by linking the Democrats actions with hindering the war on terror and degrading the US international reputation.
Senate majority leader Bill Frist claims that this action will "weaken the United States in a time of war."
Ah, reality check, Mr. Frist. Ok, we started a war based on weak intell in Iraq, when we still had not finished one in Afganistan and have yet to capture Osama bin Laden, the kingpin of 9/11. We have ignored our own constitution by detaining US and US-based foreigners without any due process, allowed a president to spy on our citizens without a warrant that would nullify any evidence received this way in a court of law, and weakened constitutional rights under the guise (disguise) of the unwinnable war on terror. As insurgents and the workings of an Iraqi civil war surface, the US military situation is not looking very good there. And then there's Hurricane Katrina, proving that Homeland Security isn't so secure after 9/11 after all the money we've dumped into such an idea as homeland security. You think President Bush is making the US safer, Mr. Frist, really? C'mon. I think we've done a "helluva" job weakening US foreign and domestic impressions very well, already.
And you, Mr. Frist, want to claim that standing up for the constitution would weaken international impressions of the United States? On the contrary, defending the Constitution of the United States would be a symbol of a strengthening United States, showing the world that we are responsible for upholding our laws and willing to stand strong behind the one document, the foundation that sets the United States as a great nation.
Senator John Warner (R-Virginia) claims that Feingold's censure announcement is "political grandstanding... And it tends to weaken our president." Actually, the process of censure will either prove that President Bush is strong in upholding the Constitution, or as weak as his actions prove him to be.
If we don't defend the Constitution of the United States when it is tested, either by the president or any other action by the US government, then the checks and balances imparted by the Constitution have failed.
If we don't uphold the Constitution of the United States, then we are a weak nation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
