Comments on: Presumption of Guilt http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/03/22/presumption-of-guilt/ Beating Them With Their Own Sickle And Hammer Tue, 24 Nov 2009 21:12:34 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2 hourly 1 By: Draven32 http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/03/22/presumption-of-guilt/comment-page-1/#comment-48453 Draven32 Thu, 23 Mar 2006 19:26:50 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/03/22/presumption-of-guilt/#comment-48453 The reason the investigation was backed down from has nothing to do with covering the party butt and everything to do with the problem that is a full investigation is carried out by Congress, then all the sreaming lefties will be screaming for the heads of the congressmen when they suddenly figure out the surveillance program is legal. The reason the investigation was backed down from has nothing to do with covering the party butt and everything to do with the problem that is a full investigation is carried out by Congress, then all the sreaming lefties will be screaming for the heads of the congressmen when they suddenly figure out the surveillance program is legal.

]]> By: Jay http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/03/22/presumption-of-guilt/comment-page-1/#comment-48452 Jay Thu, 23 Mar 2006 12:42:59 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/03/22/presumption-of-guilt/#comment-48452 OK...I'll even concede to you on that issue. Lets for the sake of arguement say that the majority of Americans want Bush to be censored. Or, maybe just all democrats...which I think you can see is actually not true since his motion got shot down...but regardless...here we go...All dems want him censured. The move was good for the dems... It still isn't enough to get people elected. The mainstream are not stupid. I will say it again, and take this as REAL advice. Honest and true advise... IF THE LEFT WANT TO GET ELECTED...they will have to provide ideas and solutions...not just anti-Bush stuff. They will have to step up and offer an alternative solution to problems, not just complaints. And if a dem is ever to be president again...they will HAVE to be a hawk. OK…I’ll even concede to you on that issue. Lets for the sake of arguement say that the majority of Americans want Bush to be censored. Or, maybe just all democrats…which I think you can see is actually not true since his motion got shot down…but regardless…here we go…All dems want him censured. The move was good for the dems…

It still isn’t enough to get people elected. The mainstream are not stupid. I will say it again, and take this as REAL advice. Honest and true advise…

IF THE LEFT WANT TO GET ELECTED…they will have to provide ideas and solutions…not just anti-Bush stuff. They will have to step up and offer an alternative solution to problems, not just complaints.

And if a dem is ever to be president again…they will HAVE to be a hawk.

]]> By: jimmy http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/03/22/presumption-of-guilt/comment-page-1/#comment-48451 jimmy Thu, 23 Mar 2006 08:47:00 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/03/22/presumption-of-guilt/#comment-48451 "Its not good for Dems, its good for the liberal fringe freaks." I suppose that's up for debate. I think you're underestimating the mainstream support for this censure among the Democrat base. Obviously audience of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart is not central, but it isn't ultra left either. Ratings alone show that. If they don't, then there are an awful lot more liberal fringe freaks than mainstream leftists. Here's an interesting clip to watch, (http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/03/22.html#a7627). Watch that clip and listen to the applause. Now that's not a metre of right and wrong, obviously, but it is a measurement of support. I do think that there's a significant number of people in the States that aren't necessarily enraged like the far left, but would like to see at least some kind of slap on the wrist for going to far. Again, I'll say that a New York audience on the Daily Show hardly represents the average American, but I think that this measure eeks into the acceptance of the centrists and really rallies the mid to far left. It also gives the Dems SOMETHING to rally behind and look coherent with, something that you rightfully pointed out that they don't do, and I agree. I said it before as well, I don't think this is a measurement of right and wrong, but as for playing the politics game I think that this was the right move. I also think that it WAS an opportunity for Dems to gel and look coherent and they're, as usual, utterly failing to do so. “Its not good for Dems, its good for the liberal fringe freaks.”

I suppose that’s up for debate. I think you’re underestimating the mainstream support for this censure among the Democrat base. Obviously audience of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart is not central, but it isn’t ultra left either. Ratings alone show that. If they don’t, then there are an awful lot more liberal fringe freaks than mainstream leftists. Here’s an interesting clip to watch, (http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/03/22.html#a7627). Watch that clip and listen to the applause. Now that’s not a metre of right and wrong, obviously, but it is a measurement of support. I do think that there’s a significant number of people in the States that aren’t necessarily enraged like the far left, but would like to see at least some kind of slap on the wrist for going to far.

Again, I’ll say that a New York audience on the Daily Show hardly represents the average American, but I think that this measure eeks into the acceptance of the centrists and really rallies the mid to far left. It also gives the Dems SOMETHING to rally behind and look coherent with, something that you rightfully pointed out that they don’t do, and I agree.

I said it before as well, I don’t think this is a measurement of right and wrong, but as for playing the politics game I think that this was the right move. I also think that it WAS an opportunity for Dems to gel and look coherent and they’re, as usual, utterly failing to do so.

]]> By: Woman Honor Thyself http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/03/22/presumption-of-guilt/comment-page-1/#comment-48450 Woman Honor Thyself Thu, 23 Mar 2006 05:52:40 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/03/22/presumption-of-guilt/#comment-48450 <strong>GaG Order for CarteR</strong> They're angry, they're motivated, and they say their voices are going to be heard: A conservative, pro-military group has launched an effort to have former President Jimmy Carter censured by Congress. GaG Order for CarteR
They’re angry, they’re motivated, and they say their voices are going to be heard: A conservative, pro-military group has launched an effort to have former President Jimmy Carter censured by Congress.

]]> By: Jay http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/03/22/presumption-of-guilt/comment-page-1/#comment-48449 Jay Thu, 23 Mar 2006 04:26:44 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/03/22/presumption-of-guilt/#comment-48449 Its not good for Dems, its good for the liberal fringe freaks. Hating and opposing Bush is not a legitimate issue that will get anyone elected. If Democrats ever want to get elected they will need to actually come up with ideas, and offer actual solutions to problems...not just complaints and whining. Its not good for Dems, its good for the liberal fringe freaks. Hating and opposing Bush is not a legitimate issue that will get anyone elected. If Democrats ever want to get elected they will need to actually come up with ideas, and offer actual solutions to problems…not just complaints and whining.

]]> By: jimmy http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/03/22/presumption-of-guilt/comment-page-1/#comment-48448 jimmy Thu, 23 Mar 2006 04:08:13 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/03/22/presumption-of-guilt/#comment-48448 Al Capone went to jail for tax evasion. Sometimes you take the swipe you can. That's my only guess, anyway. I don't think it'll make any difference. It's clear, like it or not, that the law and Mr. Bush rarely worry about each-other, so I can't see how a moral condemnation will matter in the slightest. I guess ultimately it's good for Feingold in 2008, good for Dems in 2006 and good for anyone who really, really doesn't like Bush. Al Capone went to jail for tax evasion. Sometimes you take the swipe you can. That’s my only guess, anyway. I don’t think it’ll make any difference. It’s clear, like it or not, that the law and Mr. Bush rarely worry about each-other, so I can’t see how a moral condemnation will matter in the slightest. I guess ultimately it’s good for Feingold in 2008, good for Dems in 2006 and good for anyone who really, really doesn’t like Bush.

]]> By: Jay http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/03/22/presumption-of-guilt/comment-page-1/#comment-48447 Jay Thu, 23 Mar 2006 02:14:56 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/03/22/presumption-of-guilt/#comment-48447 If a censure would accomplish nothing tangible then why waste time on it? If you really think Bush broke the law, keep putting efforts to investigate....it will only hurt the democrats more. If a censure would accomplish nothing tangible then why waste time on it? If you really think Bush broke the law, keep putting efforts to investigate….it will only hurt the democrats more.

]]> By: jimmy http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/03/22/presumption-of-guilt/comment-page-1/#comment-48446 jimmy Thu, 23 Mar 2006 01:44:59 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/03/22/presumption-of-guilt/#comment-48446 Given the rumbling from both parties before the vote I would say that it's pretty clear that the majority voted to cover the party butt, not because they found no need to investigate. Of course, there's no way to prove that, so what can I say? It seems clear from the mountains of empirical examples that the President could go on national TV and eat a baby live and given the absolute control the right has on every facet of the government there wouldn't be an investigation. That is, unless it just looks TOO obvious to the public and it hurts party members in the midterm elections, which is why, I think, we're going to see no investigation but there has been a censure motion. An investigation could bring out all sorts of nasty facts, but going along with a censure looks good for the midterms and doesn't really accomplish anything tangible. Of course, none of this has anything to do with right or wrong. Given the rumbling from both parties before the vote I would say that it’s pretty clear that the majority voted to cover the party butt, not because they found no need to investigate. Of course, there’s no way to prove that, so what can I say? It seems clear from the mountains of empirical examples that the President could go on national TV and eat a baby live and given the absolute control the right has on every facet of the government there wouldn’t be an investigation. That is, unless it just looks TOO obvious to the public and it hurts party members in the midterm elections, which is why, I think, we’re going to see no investigation but there has been a censure motion. An investigation could bring out all sorts of nasty facts, but going along with a censure looks good for the midterms and doesn’t really accomplish anything tangible.

Of course, none of this has anything to do with right or wrong.

]]> By: Jay http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/03/22/presumption-of-guilt/comment-page-1/#comment-48445 Jay Thu, 23 Mar 2006 00:41:28 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/03/22/presumption-of-guilt/#comment-48445 Jimmy, no matter party lines or not, the majority found no need to investigate...so how can you try to punish someone, just because YOU think they were wrong...while the majority disagrees? Jimmy, no matter party lines or not, the majority found no need to investigate…so how can you try to punish someone, just because YOU think they were wrong…while the majority disagrees?

]]> By: jimmy http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2006/03/22/presumption-of-guilt/comment-page-1/#comment-48444 jimmy Wed, 22 Mar 2006 22:05:10 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2006/03/22/presumption-of-guilt/#comment-48444 Oh geeze. You're kidding. The left has been going crazy trying to investigate and the administration had been stonewalling them. Calls for investigation have been consistently voted down along party lines, and in case you're drunk, it wasn't the left that voted them down. This as a generalization is just crazy talk. Crazy, candy-land, wazzo-blowing talk. And this is talking through my hat, but I'm pretty sure Censure is just an ethical condemnation, it isn't in any way legal. Oh geeze. You’re kidding. The left has been going crazy trying to investigate and the administration had been stonewalling them. Calls for investigation have been consistently voted down along party lines, and in case you’re drunk, it wasn’t the left that voted them down. This as a generalization is just crazy talk. Crazy, candy-land, wazzo-blowing talk.

And this is talking through my hat, but I’m pretty sure Censure is just an ethical condemnation, it isn’t in any way legal.

]]>