U.S. Senator Russell Feingold wants to censure President Bush and possibly others in the Administration over events leading up to Iraq and for the handling of the Iraq War.
That would be a terrible idea and a step backwards for the United States.
As Feingold prepares the resolution which already appears to have support from some Democratic leaders, the question that should be asked is--whether it will do more good than harm at a time when we are trying to deal with a crises in the Middle East and Iraq, when terrorists have only grown in numbers and when America requires major infrastructure improvements such as focusing upon the rebuild of New Orleans.
The censure would be “impeachment lite”.Although Feingold mentioned on Sunday news program words such as “criminal”, there will be a time and place for making that judgment.
President Bush’s legacy is surely on the line and it will be judged upon whether he can achieve peace and stability in a country and in an area which has become a tinderbox ready to explode.There is a good argument that Congress should make a “historical record” to prevent future military incursions until and unless the country has all of the facts and war is deemed absolutely necessary.But, the censure resolution is bad for a number of reasons.
For America to solve this Iraq nightmare, it will take a bi-partisan effort to override any possible Presidential veto.By embarrassing the President, it would be a certainty that Republicans would rally around the flag and make it much more difficult to work for Democrats and Republicans to work together.
Censuring the President would just be a waste of time, inflame the nation’s emotions when we have serious business at hand.
Censuring President Bush would instill confidence in the terrorists who would love nothing more than to repudiate President Bush and to embarrass him as a symbol of the “evil empire”.
We should wait for the full report from General Petraeus and from Ambassador Ryan Crocker for military ground level and for foreign relations assessments.Precipitous action, now that the Surge is in operation, would be unfortunate with events moving very quickly.
The way out of Iraq is to force the Iraqis to be responsible, to provide them the support that is absolutely needed and to make certain that removal of troops is the wise course of action.Partisanship for political gain will not work.It hurt the Clinton Administration during impeachment and it will further damage the Bush administration during the time of need.
No doubt, President Bush has made some serious miscalculations during this horrifying experience which has caused over 3500 American deaths fighting a war that probably need not to have been fought.Bush has made other mistakes and it has cost and will cost his party dearly.But, a censureship vote only opens up a wound for no really good reason and does not salve our sores.We need healing.We need closure.We need to work together in a bi-partisan way with the support of the Administration as was promised when the Democrats took over.Yes, President Bush defied all odds after the election and went on his own course.History will prove whether he has been right or wrong.Leadership will fix Iraq and return America to a just cause in the Middle East and throughout the world.Tearing down the man who happens to be occupying the Oval Office is a waste of time, will result in the opposite of what the resolution drafters desire and will hurt America in the short and in the long haul.Let’s send the censureship packing.
Mr. Sabludowsky’s article presents a perfect example of why we can’t end our occupation of Iraq. He and those who share his views have swallowed the Bush administration’s propaganda hook, line & sinker, right down to how they expect you to think about an issue. They’re perfectly willing to wait around and see if Bush and his bunch will finally do the right thing and start behaving responsibly. In the meantime more young, American men and women are dying in Iraq, our Constitutional rights continue to be eroded, Katrina victims continue to be ignored and on and on. Bush and his cohorts have been in office for almost seven years and we have yet to see any positive fruit born of their ill-conceived and unfortunate plans for our country. Why would anyone think any of this would change substantially in the next year unless the people, through their elected representatives in Congress, force those changes? Change doesn’t just happen. Bad situations don’t just evolve into good situations. It takes a concerted effort from grass roots to Congress to rectify bad policy.
Mr. S. writes, “Tearing down the man who happens to be occupying the Oval Office is a waste of time, will result in the opposite of what the resolution drafters desire and will hurt America in the short and in the long haul.” This is just another example of how thoroughly indoctrinated he and those of like mind have become. In fact, those who crafted our Constitution took the exact opposite approach and recommended that the people remove those who would harm our Constitution or, in the extreme case, overthrow the offending government. To do otherwise or to sit idly by is considered shirking your obligations as a citizen and patriot. It is not a “waste of time” under any circumstances to remove wrongdoers from office. The only thing that would truly “hurt America” would be to do nothing and wait in vain for the situation to correct itself.
Finally, Mr. S. refers several times to “censorship” of the president. Senator Feingold has submitted a bill of ‘censure’ or vehement disapproval of the president’s actions. He’s not advocating censorship. That appears to be the exclusive province of the Bush administration as witnessed by their control of the media, the executive and judicial branches of our government and our children’s educational systems. By offering this bill of censure, Senator Feingold is fulfilling an important duty as a public servant and citizen of this country.
Written by D.P.
on 7/24/2007
harry reidis right in there in bed with the white house and the rest of the scoundrels that are part of the trilateral commission membership, skull and bones and the elitist of this country. People go into politics in order to help make changes that are unfair to society, but once in there, they are bought off or bullied into going along with the joneses. there is only on way to make any real change in america,fire them all and start with teenagers
Written by angel in phoenix
on 7/23/2007
Sigh...given that democrat-controlled congress has failed to do anything but moan and groan (lower approval then Bush)...someone in here help me. I hear all the time from the Dems that the American people want the troops to come home, to impeach Bush/Cheney and who knows what else. Fine...if that is the people's wish, what's stopping them? But...ask a democratic what they would do different in the war in Iraq...you get called some very interesting names...with no answers Also...Nixon had no impeachment...not even a hearing. There were hearings on the Watergate break-in. Only 2 presidents have ever been impeached...Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton. Now...without too much name calling...what bad thing has happened to you that has been Bush's fault. This will require some careful and deep thought before answering. If Bush/Cheney are to be impeached...then what are the charges? Be careful with the "Bush lied" logic...people that have used it have been shown to look foolish. Time for some rational discourse. Oh...Stephen...have someone proof your work...sloppy, sloppy, sloppy.
Written by LT
on 7/23/2007
I say censure IRAQ. And if that don't work, then Censor it.
Written by You ain't seen nada que nada yet Amigos
on 7/23/2007
I am so tired of reading this kind of mindlesss drivel disguised as " commentary". This author is either hopelessly stupid, or just another Bushie political hack regurgitating the White House talking points. Not only do Bush, Cheney, Gonzales and others richly deserve impeachment, they deserve to be tried as the war criminals they are. Only when this whole despicable crew is dressed in orange jump suits will we finally be able to even talk about healing or closure. I watched the entire Nixon impeachment with fascinated interest, for the entire three months that it took...we have more than enough time to impeach these crooks. If Congress fails in this vital duty, they all deserve to be thrown out. Support the Bill of Rights and our Constitution! Impeach!!!
Written by David
on 7/23/2007
The only thing wrong with Feingolds action is that its way way too late. Congress should have stood up to the destroyers Cheney/Bush et al LONG before now. Bushies have ruined a good thing - our country. And what they don't destroy or steal in the next two years wont be worth a plug nickel by the time voters wake up...
Written by David
on 7/23/2007
to nate smith: are you AFRAID of fixing your own country and adopting a posture of peace? do you have to have conflict at all times in order to somehow feel fulfilled? i'd be radical too if some cronies that had effectively seized power of an entire country started coming after me and destroying my way of life in order to "preserve" theirs. but wait, it's already happening on our own soil! the upper classes, the privileged, and the connected are the only people who benefit from times of war, and they are destroying working class liberties and ways of life in order to preserve and feed their money machine. by the way, "IT" will really get going if we DON'T pull out of war. it's guaranteed.
Written by karmaduck
on 7/23/2007
wow.. First off, we should not (not that we can't) impeach the President; for the VP is a thousand times worse, and many times I think it is him that is running (ruining) the country. Bush doesn't seem smart enough to pull some of these stunts, more like the cowboy riding in after the instigator. "Look over here", "yaa-hoo I'm there".. Second, Bush is very bad president in all ways. He would have to throw-up on a prime minister to take the cake.. But to impeach him just wastes time and money that could be better spent fixing the mess we are in. Congress can barely make a decision, let alone a sound decision, and there is a majority there. Last thing this country needs is another distraction from Katrina, Iraq, Afghanistan, N. Korea, Terrorists, and oh did we forget about those illegal aliens. If this stunt is started, discussions for solutions would be sidelined.. Would the GOP be thinking about anything else, but the saving their party's face. I think it is important to hold some one accountable for their actions and decisions, but not at the expense of human life.. A delay, means this War continues, while people point fingers.. I know history will remember this president for the good (umm?? midway becomes a NR-) and bad (oh the list is so long)
Written by It's Me, Mr. Comma
on 7/23/2007
"Censuring President Bush would instill confidence in the terrorists who would love nothing more than to repudiate President Bush and to embarrass him as a symbol of the “evil empire”."
The terrorists are not lacking in confidence or boldness. This insane war in Iraq has been their recruitment poster and they've gained thousands of NEW followers and much experience from it, all thanks to Bush. The terrorists would "love nothing more" than to destroy the U.S., and this war and our president is helping them. Terrorists, the insurgency, and Shiite militias are firmly resolved to give their lives for their cause, and Bush out of favor with the American public is something they already know about. Terrorists aren't going to get any more mileage from a censure or impeachment of Bush, than the U.S. got out of the execution of Saddam Hussein.
It took our free, democratic society decades to go from slavery to affirmative action, and if you read anything about Middle Eastern culture or the history of Iraq, you'd know that the country is not ready to have democracy forced on them, or even given to them. This was a huge pie-in-the-sky plan from day one.
"Mission accomplished" and "bring-em-on" Bush should not be censured; he should be impeached! I'm old, and I've never gotten this excited about a president's words and actions. Another 18 months of this?
Written by The Reader
on 7/23/2007
"Censuring President Bush would instill confidence in the terrorists who would love nothing more than to repudiate President Bush and to embarrass him as a symbol of the “evil empire”."
The terrorists are not lacking in confidence or boldness. This insane war in Iraq has been their recruitment poster and they've gained thousands of NEW followers and much experience from it, all thanks to Bush. The terrorists would "love nothing more" than to destroy the U.S., and this war and our president is helping them. Terrorists, the insurgency, and Shiite militias are firmly resolved to give their lives for their cause, and Bush out of favor with the American public is something they already know about. Terrorists aren't going to get any more mileage from a censure or impeachment of Bush, than the U.S. got out of the execution of Saddam Hussein.
It took our free, democratic society decades to go from slavery to affirmative action, and if you read anything about Middle Eastern culture or the history of Iraq, you'd know that the country is not ready to have democracy forced on them, or even given to them. This was a huge pie-in-the-sky plan from day one.
"Mission accomplished" and "bring-em-on" Bush should not be censured; he should be impeached! I'm old, and I've never gotten this excited about a president's words and actions. Another 18 months of this?
Written by
on 7/23/2007
Ditto - Honest American! ...Are you out of your mind? Bush and Cheney deserve far more than censure...they deserve impeachment and war crimes trials!... Don't forget Rumsfeld and all his croneys at Haliburton.
Written by Another Honest American
on 7/23/2007
Written by
on 7/23/2007
To the guys who want Bush and Cheney drawn and quartered at minimum.
they all ignore the real problem because ,in capital letters ,
they are AFRAID of facing up to Radical Muslims and this gives them a way out for a few years until it really gets going .
Written by nate Smith
on 7/23/2007
Well done, Stephen...you have accurately regurgitated the White House talking points. Nothing to read here, just a partisan hack who can't even be bothered to proofread his own drek.
Written by Rick Nuber
on 7/23/2007
one cannot heal while the infection is still rampant -- that being the neocon administration. it must be removed and replaced with those who are willing to transcend politics and truly serve the people instead of selling out.
saying "if we bail now we let the terrorists win and leave ourselves vulnerable" is a tactic to divert eyes and minds from the cure, which is to retract and regroup as a whole, and fix ourselves socially and economically. if this nation's image is so tarnished that it invites attack from extremist groups (which have been there all along, natch, and are merely receiving tons of attention for political gain), it's a product of the accelerated "war on terror" itself. it's our own fault the world is giving us the stink-eye -- both the fault of fatheads who orchestrated the war, and the people for remaining complacent and not educating themselves. irony of the highest degree.
likely on the hit list: pakistan, iran, venezuela, cuba. the first is already starting ("we think bin laden is hiding in pakistan...", isn't that convenient).
go read some jfk; the man spoke truth and paid for it with his life.
Written by karmaduck
on 7/23/2007
I can't help but wonder if Feingold is cognizant of the definition of the word "treason", specifically as it applies during a time of war. Given the conduct of the Democrats since the last election, I wonder if ANY of them know.
Written by J. Woody
on 7/23/2007
Written by anna
on 7/23/2007
Like Bob Ross posted, there is a significant difference between censor and censure.
As well, there is no word "censureship" as found in the last sentence of the article.
Written by JJ
on 7/23/2007
Your writing has to infuriate liberals. You make way too much sense. You are actually proposing solving the problem rather then continual grandstanding.
Written by Rick G
on 7/23/2007
This poorly written and off the mark. The Republican Party (the same ones who vilified Clinton) are the first to want a stop put to these proceedings. It is funny how things change when you're the one in power. Having sexual relations is not the same as putting soldiers in harms way, not protecting your own (Katrina), and destroying civil rights and liberties (too many to name).
Censure =
1 : a judgment involving condemnation
2 archaic : OPINION, JUDGMENT
3 : the act of blaming or condemning sternly
4 : an official reprimand
Censorship =
1 a : the institution, system, or practice of censoring b : the actions or practices of censors; especially : censorial control exercised repressively
2 : the office, power, or term of a Roman censor
3 : exclusion from consciousness by the psychic censor
Written by Wilson
on 7/23/2007
In late Dec 04 I had dinner with a bunch of lawyers attending a short course in Calif. They were fired up about not finding WMDs. Most of them thought Bush had f'ed up, although none thought he had out-n-out lied. I asked if any of them had recalled the grainy B & W videotape Powell showed at the UN, the part with the three-quarter rear view of the jet flying across the screen from right to left, trailing a white line. Most of them remembered that. "OK, let's forget the CIA and DIA. Forget that MI5 and the Securite' and the whole GRU/KGB enclave agreed, as did the Mossad, etc., etc. I'm an air guy and I'll explain the signifcance of the jet. It's a Mirage F-1, and land-based (no Carriers in the Iraqi Navy) single engine jet." I'll skip the details here, but I walked them through why there is no credible explanation why a land-based one lung bird would EVER have a fuel jettison switch on a drop tank; on a bag of gas. QED, it was a gas dispenser. "OK, guys, you're all lawyers. Your client is in the dock. Now that you understand the import of the tape, what defense can you construct for you boy? He either had chemicals or he wanted us to think he had chemicals. Anybody think of third explanation?" Table was quiet. You can slice this and dice the pre-war intell any way you want, and a bi-partisan US Senate committee already has, plus the Brits put a judge on it. There is some room to argue that Bush made an error, but NOT that he lied. Moreover, based upon things like that tape, I still believe as of this afternoon, that Bush made a reasonable call. In fact, based upon things like that tape (HUD film from a F-14 as I recall), it would have been irresponsible to have not gone in. Pople die from missed intell. The famous Ranger climb up the cliffs at Point D'Hoc (1944) wasn't needed because the guns had been moved the week before. The Son Tay prison camp (1970) was bust for the same reason; out guys had been moved.
Written by Kelly Haggar
on 7/23/2007
History does not "prove" right or wrong. Actions in this regard are either right or wrong - no waiting period required. What's wrong is telling the world we will pre-emptively invade a country because it has WMD's. And then remain there indefinitely on a multitude of false assertions It's a lie. Its time for idiots like you to own up to the reality of these lies that have human consequences - including my own family members I've lost. I can only hope that your limp wristed dribble will come back to haunt you the same way its haunted me. At least then you might second guess the reality that is screaming in your face.
You say: "Tearing down the man who happens to be occupying the Oval Office is a waste of time, will result in the opposite of what the resolution drafters desire and will hurt America in the short and in the long haul."
...and give no reasons why or how. This is hardly an opinion let alone journalism.
How to make an angry American:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgfzqulvhlQ
Written by Ron Paul for Prez
on 7/23/2007
Your article says, in part, "No doubt, President Bush has made some serious miscalculations during this horrifying experience which has caused over 3500 American deaths fighting a war that probably need not to have been fought. Bush has made other mistakes and it has cost and will cost his party dearly. But, a censorship vote only opens up a wound for no really good reason and does not salve our sores. We need healing. We need closure. We need to work together in a bi-partisan way with the support of the Administration as was promised when the Democrats took over."
How ludicrous! On its face the statement above betrays a woeful obsequiousness towards the Bush Administrations undue and flagrant ABUSE of power! Feingold's recommendation is barely a slap on the wrist at this point. The current administration has hijacked political power in 2 very questionable elections. They have been gavelled into office by a neoconservative-leaning Supreme Court. They have intimidated and questioned the very patriotism of any elected official who dared to slow the rush to war with Iraq. They have massively destabilized the Middle East for the sake of goals that they steadfastly REFUSE to elucidate. They have guaranteed that terrorism will grow exponentially as a result of their wilful and ignorant disregard of international law. They have authorized torture. They have spied on American citizens. They have termionated US Attorneys for political reasons. They have "outed" a covert US CIA operative to punish Joe Wison for his honesty.
The list of impeachable offenses committed by this administration is seemingly endless. Yet this website has the temerity to demand "moderation" for the current occupant of the White House! What a blatant and transparent apologlist is Stephen Sabludowsky for all the wrongs perpetrated by these hypocrites currently in office!
Written by Concerned Citizen
on 7/23/2007
Holy crap this article made me laugh. Does anyone with a middle school education edit this publication? Censure and censorship are two entirely different things, my friends. You can't use them interchangeably.
Written by Jason
on 7/23/2007
I cannot agree more, you have written an excellent article. You touched all key points. I commend you. You can see things apparently Senator Feingold cannot. I hope he reads your article. I did not vote for him then, and I would never vote for him now, and I am from Wisconsin. Thank you!
Written by Kath Stan
on 7/23/2007
I don't think I read anything I disagree with.
Written by Geoff
on 7/23/2007
Are you out of your mind? Bush and Cheney deserve far more than censure...they deserve impeachment and war crimes trials! The two of them have done more damage to this country in 7 years than all of the rest of the politicos combined. Not only have they killed thousands of innocent people in Iraq, and 3632 (to date) of America's finest men and women forced to fight his profane war to salvage his "daddy's" honor, but he has raped the Constitution and Bill of Rights of YOUR country too! It doesn't take much to do a little research to determine that he is the absolute worst president this country has ever had, but then again...anyone who stole two elections shouldn't have been trusted in the first place. I didn't vote for him, and if you did - shame on you!
Written by An Honest American
on 7/23/2007
"there will be a time and place for making that judgment" re: criminality?
Really? What better time than now, before the criminals have a chance to get away with more crimes at the expense of American lives?
Written by Bob Ross
on 7/23/2007
There's a difference between "censure" and "censor". You might want to look it up.
U.S. Senator Russell Feingold wants to censure President Bush and possibly others in the Administration over events leading up to 
To
Buzz Right Back on this article