Permit me to take an opposing viewpoint on censure hearing...

...and the lack of Democrats at the hearing? I think it might be a good thing. With less speakers, the argument is more focused than if there were 6 or 8 Democrats speaking for 3 minutes at a time. I think Feingold, Fein, and Dean are coming across very well. I think the Repubs look very weak. They have the numbers but they have not won the argument.

Please don't take this as a criticism, because we are on the same side, but I don't want any more excuses for this administration. I think the American people are far ahead of our politicians. They have had it with Bush. So where is the opposition party? That's us. Courage isn't easy. It's necessary. Now.

out essentially on his own for this. Where's Kerry, Clinton, Reid, etc?

and I dare say he's bringing around some Republican viewers watching today.

this hearing is good for the Public Discourse no matter how many people show up. Anything that focuses the public's attention on

1. Balance of power between the 3 gov't branches

2. The pres is not above the law

can only be a good thing. This has been a heck of a debate.

When there is a Dem president, and a Dem congress, look for the repukes to take the opposite view that they are taking today. It's good to have them on record.

This debate is for the future...

Even if the censure doesn't happen, he's forced the Republicans to cement themselves into this "The President can do whatever he wants, whenever and to whomever" position that they will have to live with when there is a Democrat in the WH.

The Democrats are not capable of doing anything unless they regain power. This must be looked at in that context, in my opinion.

Sorry. I am really not buying into that logic. The Dems intentionally turned their backs on Feingold.

I have to think and make decisions about my support of the DCDems accordingly.

What you see is what you get. Or don't see for that matter. He's done a lot of bi-partisan work for campaign finance reform with dubious results. Now here is something that has to be done and he's alone. Now he receives a complete education on how what must be done will not be done while the crooks are in charge. Those "educated" others, like Murtha, whose duty overcame their "political" sense don't have ulterior plans which almost always lead to inaction, not action.

What one does with the lesson remains to be seen. It certainly is not a personally rewarding experience in the current situation, unless your clear conscience is a consolation.

For those who think that having the MSM against you is politically damning as it was and is to Gore, when those GOP creatures are down for the count none of that disgusting, grovelling calculation will exist.

NSA spying and its legality that the press was just ignoring.

So, yes, Feingold scores a great victory on this just by having these hearings and having them on RECORD.

Some people argue that IranContra and BCCI were pointless, but I always argue that it EXPOSED the wrongdoing and got it into the HISTORIC RECORD. Russ' hearing is doing that - no matter how it turns out or how it is spun by the media.

I think your argument overlooks the reality that this hearing will end with a vote. That vote will in all probability kill the censure movement.

How unlikely is it that all the Dems gave Feingold their proxy? Not very I am sure.

Yes, there are ways to move a vote to the floor of the senate with an unfavorable recommendation. But I really don't think that is going to happen. Do you?

and he should be correct?


He would be blowing crap in the wind and wasting precious time.


We may not win this battle , but I do believe that we will win the TRUTH War.

thanks! :hi:

... I can't imagine that Russ' shoulders are wide enough to carry all the RW media spite that he's going to get for this. It would have been nice for at least a solid contingent of Dems to show up in support of his resolution.

still was a good hearing, amazing really.

that there did not have to be any hearing at all. Specter, because he wants to be perceived as "fair", decided to let it happen. I think it was for the good. Otherwise, there would have been nothing. Nada. Zilch. I think it was a victory for Democrats - regardless how many showed up.

water down his argument. MAY HAVE...

That's what is going to bury the Dems on this. It's Friday. All weekend, we'll be hearing "Why didn't any Democrats show up? Are they weak and spineless? No. Democrats obviously support President Bush."

They boxed themselves in on this one...big time.

But much of the media will report otherwise, in my opinion. If they report it at all? Democrats cannot do anything until they regain power. Bottom line.

:)

and those that are not in the 34% for the Dimson will be listening.

We may not win this battle, but I am convinced now, we will win the TRUTH War, by peaceful means.

We are the PEACEKEEPERS

This is my 10,000th post. Amazingly Im complimenting Biden. LOL!!!!

I think the hearing exposed the very radical view, that inm times of war, congress cannot limit the powers of the President. He is free to what he wants.

That is the essence of their argument.

see tumbleweed blowing across the room and coyotes howling.

Second, it is a LACK OF RESPECT not only for Feingold but for the witnesses who took their time out to come and testify (even the asses like Turner) not to bother to show up. They didn't have to agree, but they could have made a showing instead of being absent.

Third, on focused argument. The argument for free speech goes that the antidote to false arguments is MORE speech, not less. Even if some might have blathered on, it's possible to focus on the ones that do, or the parts that are cogent.

that very few dem leaders are supporting censure outside the hearings either.

If they supported censure generally, but declined to attend a rigged kangaroo hearing in protest then I could agree with you.