Sen Feingold proposed it
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070722/ap_on_go_co/feingold_censure
or do you think its another publicity stunt?
2007-07-22 08:12:51 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
thats what Im thinking coragryph...another publicity stunt
2007-07-22 08:17:00 · update #1
It's a way for Congress to say "bad boy".
Which is like telling Charlie Manson we don't like him any more.
It's a political statement with no net effect whatsoever, hence a waste of time in this political climate.
2007-07-22 08:15:43 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 8⤊ 3⤋
It's BS! For what? Feingold and the other Democrats in Congress are whackos just looking for some publicity and to make the American people think they are doing something. They voted for us to go to war, so they have no room to talk. What a waste.
2007-07-22 15:42:37 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The Democrats should rename themselves the "publicity stunt party" because they have proven to be very ineffective controlling both houses of Congress.
How about work with some moderate Republicans to pass some legislation?
2007-07-22 17:04:36 · answer #3 · answered by The Stylish One 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It's laughable. Finestein that funneled billions of dollars in government contracts to her husbands companies when she was Chairperson of the Appropriations Committee wants to Censure anyone. She should be drummed out of the Senate on ethics charges.
2007-07-22 16:06:59 · answer #4 · answered by ohbrother 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think most democrats have already made a conscience or, unconscious decision to censor Bush - to their lost.
The fact that Feingold, or any democrat, purposes and champions ignorance is not surprising.
By all means, go for it. As I say, most libs already have. Nothing new.
But to openly advocate censorship is just more evidence of the great lib hypocrisy.
2007-07-22 15:21:48 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
I like the idea, mainly because there's ACTUAL reason for censuring him as opposed to when the Repubicans censured Clinton (and that was for having an extramarital affair and lying about it, nobody's lives were lost over that). However, it's likely to die on the floor.
The whole claim about it being a publicity stunt is bull. The Republicans censuring Clinton for no actual reason but to just appear that they were accomplishing something in Congress was a publicity stunt.
2007-07-22 15:21:24 · answer #6 · answered by iwannarevolt 4 · 2⤊ 4⤋
That it is against the Freedom of Speech act in the Bill of Rights, and it goes against everything America stands for, Freedom. Liberals get freedom of speech, and act like idiots in colleges such as Columbia, and American, and they're even allowed to throw food at invited guest speakers like Condoleeza Rice, and Karl Rove.
It appears to me Sen. Feingold, is out to take Americans rights away, If George is the first, who will be second? You, me, another American citizen? Maybe Feingold needs to learn about America, her history, rights, freedom, choice, the Bill of Rights, and the Constitution? YEA!
2007-07-22 15:23:09 · answer #7 · answered by xenypoo 7 · 3⤊ 3⤋
It's just another stunt by the whiny ultra libs to try and drag down Pres Bush and the GOP. To me it just seems desperation, b/c their pres candidates are some of the worst I have ever seen.
2007-07-22 15:17:51 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
Foolish to even entertain this question. At least no one has attacked us since he's been in office so he must be doing something right. They are never going to stop, when are you going to realize that after the next president gets in the and pulls out of Iraq either you fight them over there or fight them over here you make the choice.
2007-07-22 15:17:48 · answer #9 · answered by ama125mx 3 · 6⤊ 2⤋
I am for censuring Bush "questions" on Yahoo! answers. This is his last term, let it go people.
2007-07-22 15:15:49 · answer #10 · answered by A Person 3 · 6⤊ 0⤋