Senator Russ Feingold, whose claim to fame is having brought America ineffectual, unconstitutional campaign spending laws, now wants Congress to censure President Bush for a variety of reasons, basically amounting to the fact that Feingold disagrees with everything President Bush has ever done in the war on terror.
Since a censure of the President of the United States by a co-equal branch of government would have zero force of law -- there being something called a separation of powers in the United States -- it would amount to nothing more than bad-mouthing the president a little louder than usual.
It would also demonstrate lack of American unity, weakness, and unseriousness in the war on terror to the rest of the world, terrorists included.
Not to worry. Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid helpfully chimed in: "The president already has the mark of the American people — he's the worst president we ever had. I don't think we need a censure resolution in the Senate to prove that."
"He's the worst president we ever had."
What serious leader talks that way?
The left's hunger to utterly destroy its political rivals -- not just to beat them at the polls, but to destroy them at any cost -- is becoming too obvious.
Go ahead, Feingold and Reid. Wear your hatred on your sleeve. Let it define you.
THE UN-REMITTING HATE for Bush is part of a long continuity going back to Eisenhower. The left did the same thing to Reagan ('Ronald Ray-gun', 'Bedtime for Bonzo', 'Cowboy Capitalism', etc.,). The media accused of Nixon of being dumb (and, of course, evil). President Ford was 'so dumb he could not walk and chew gum at the same time'. Reagan was a reckless imperealist, who was so dumb he could not read government reports. Bush Sr. was a gullible 'wimp', who started Iraq War 1 as a war for oil. Now Bush Jr. is 'Chimpy', dumb, selfish and mean, fighting yet another 'pointless' war for oil.
Trueman, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, and Clinton were 'victims of right-wing conspiracies'.
Actually, what the left means is that to them, liberal democracy IS the 'right wing'. Therefore, anyone who advocates liberal democracy is a 'right-winger', who opposes Socialism.
I think we can be fairly sure that the next Republican president will be subjected to the same slanderous vitriol that the current president is subjected to.
The next president is also likely to be Republican. By the time of the next election, the war in Iraq will continue, at least as a peace-making and peace-keeping project, Israel will have attacked Iran, Lebanon will be on the edge of conflict, Darfur will still be a problem, Afghanistan and Pakistan will remain war-ridden.
In war-time, Americans elect Republican presidents, because they want to win, and it usually works. Eisenhower won in Korea, Nixon won in Vietnam (and the congress lost by letting the N. Vietnamese break the truce and invade), Reagan won the cold war, Bush Sr. got rid of the Soviet Union and won Gulf War 1.
Ergo, the electorate are likely to elect a Republican President, and criticize him or her half to death while he or she wins wars for them.
Posted by: DemocracyRules | July 23, 2007 at 01:05 PM