Tuesday, March 14, 2006

Russ Feingold --- Unfit for Office

Russ Feingold has generated a great deal of press in recent days over his call to "censure" President Bush.

Never mind that Feingold's basis for doing so is based upon the most elaborate slurs of the moonbat far Left; what is most offensive about Feingold's efforts are that they are wholly unconstitutional.

In short, by adopting what purports to be a less radical step (to paraphrase and update my grandfather, a censure resolution and four bucks will get you a cup of Starbucks), Feingold is demonstrating his lack of interest in constitutional processes, and is behaving less respectably than others in the moonbat far Left, who at least have the wit to rely upon the Constitution, and call for impeachment.

With this action, Feingold --- who is rumored to have presidential ambitions (what Senator doesn't?) --- has done Republicans and Democrats alike the courtesy of demonstrating that he is wholly unfit to be President. Once again, an anti-constitutionalist attempts to masquerade as a "moderate," and fails miserably.

21 comments:

Willis said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Teresias said...

Feingold is virtually the only patriot in that charade called the Senate. The rest of them are spineless wimps prostrating themselves to the evil emperor and the shredding of the constitution. And you my friend are an execrable accomplice. Think about what you're saying.
Feingold could go much further and call the entire "war on terror" a sham and fraud which it is, but he wants to maintain his political viability.

James E. Martin said...

The second you condemn the impeachment proceedings against President Clinton, you have the credibility to condemn the censure on President Bush. Both are/were completely political.

James Young said...

Teresias, maybe you could point out where the Constitution provides for the notion of "censure." I suspect it's in the same area that mentions "abortion" and the "right to privacy."

As for you, nova democrat, you demonstrate the constitutional bankruptcy of the modern Democrat Party. Clinton was impeached for the crime of perjury. Of course, I don't condemn the impeachment of the Great Prevaricator, save for the spinelessness of the Senate in failing to convict him. And I rarely look to high-schoolers, or Democrats, to judge my "credibility."

Willis said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Willis said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
SouthoftheJames.com said...

Censuring a president is quite common and quite constitutional. Because the action is not punative, nor does it seek to remove him from office, it's just a statement of displeasure. Last time I check, the Congress had the power to do that. Bush would not be the first, nor the last, president to be censured.

It's ironic that you're yelling about Feingold seeing that his motion is a response to Bush's possibly unconstitutional decision to ignore federal law and do terrorist surveillance without going through the warrant process established by Congress. That is, unless you don't think that the constitution applies to presidents that you like.

Feingold never attempted to portray himself as a Moderate. Yet, when he supported the Ashcroft nomination and was open to nearly all of Bush's judicial picks, you probably didn't have a problem with those "moonbat" moves...

Anonymous said...

I agree with Mr. Conaway's remarks. This Blog is not in the Constitution but that doesn't make it unconstitutional. I have finally figured you out Young. You don't care about making rational points or the state of the union. You just want to be famous...so you figure if you keep making outlandish remarks that you will become the next Rush Limbaugh. You got a long way to go there buddy!!!

James E. Martin said...

"Quite Common", who can tell me the last president who was censured by Congress?


Hint: He Loved The Spoils System.


Hint: He was almost assassinated.


Hint: He didn’t think we should have a national bank.


Hint: The Cherokee don’t like him.


Hint: John Calhoun and Nullification.


THAT’S RIGHT: THE LAST PRESIDENT TO BE CENSURED WAS ANDREW JACKSON!

Not Ben said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
James Young said...

Not Ben, above, has baselessly accused me of anti-Semitism. Hence, his race-baiting comment has appropriately been deleted.

And nova democrat saves me the trouble of taking you down, Conaway, for your uncharacteristically ill-informed comment. I would add only that Jackson promptly ignored the "censure" (the only one. belying the notion that it is "quite common") and it was expunged three years later.

As for you, Anon 11:51, "blog" may not be in the Constitution, but a free press and free speech are. I am quite happy where I am, and have no desire to "become the next Limbaugh." Then again, I'm not so frustrated and ineffectual that I have to hide in anonymity.

Not Ben said...

I merely suggested that there are probably plenty of Senators that you would unfairly consider unfit for office. You were the one who said "anti-Semitism," leading me to believe that the lady doth protest too much.

James Young said...

No, Not Ben, you didn't "merely suggest[] that there are probably plenty of Senatores that [I] would consider unfit for office," an assertion that I wouldn't dispute (about Feinstein, you are incorrect, BTW). What you did was give a litany of Senators of the Jewish faith --- omitting only Joe Lieberman --- sufficient to imply anti-Semitism. Racism is the nuclear bomb of political debate, and you launched it, and expect to get away with it. No one --- NO ONE --- who knows me would do anything but laugh at such a charge. But I'm certainly not going to allow your outrageous and ridiculous slanders, cast behind a veil of pseudonymity, to stand here. Privilege of ownership.

SouthoftheJames.com said...

Yep, I slipped on that "quite common" remark. It happens.

Still, the rest of my post stands unrefuted...

Mitch Cumstein said...

Wow!

I read the comment from Not Ben before it was deleted. Suggesting that you are an anti-semite never occurred to me. It looked to me like he just listing a bunch senators who are typically at odds with conservatives. I think your reaction is a bit of a stretch.

As for you being a racist, I've never thought that. Arrogant dick? Absoutely! Racist? I have no reason to suspect that and wouldn't assume it.

Willis said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
NOVA Scout said...

I see no indication that Feingold is trying to position himself as a "moderate." It seem quite clear that he is positioning himself as a liberal, or as Howard Dean said last cycle, "the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party." Feingold has made a decision that Hillary is choking off all air and light at the right side of his Party and is making a play to the left with this censure stuff.

James Young said...

"Arrogant dick," Cum-stain. It's only arrogance if you think you're better than you are.

Interesting comment, nova scout, but I was referring to those weak-kneed types who suggested "censure" as an appropriate response to the Great Prevaricator's high crimes and/or misdemeanors. You might be correct, though. However, I nearly fell off my chair last night when Mara Liasson suggested that Feingold was trying to get to Hillary Clinton's left for the Democrat nominating process. That would take some effort, given her far Left credentials. Dems familiar with her history should not be fooled (as Republicans and the voting populace should not be) about her positioning herself as a moderate. Anyone who advocates a government takeover of one-seventh of the national economy is hardly on the "right side of [her] Party."

Mitch Cumstein said...

Cum-stain? Tsk, tsk.

Why is that you can make comments and then go back and say that you did so "with tongue planted firmly in cheek," but refuse to consider that the comments of others may have been offered in the same vein?

For the record, which one set you off? "arrogant" or "dick?"

Willis said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
James Young said...

Willis, you're a lowlife. Thank God you're an only child.