Wilson reprimanded..on party lines.

[dudalb]

Rep Wilson of "You Lie" fame was "admonished" in the House today but on a 240-179 party line vote. Apparently most GOP members saw little or nothing to criticise in his behavior.
I have tried to be fair minded in my criticism of both sides, but this action has now convinced me that the GOP has gone totally off the rails. They seem to be catering to the most extreme elements in their party.
God, have they given up making any attempt to win the votes of moderates? It seems so. They seem to be expecting the hard core base to magically expand. Ain't gonna happen.

[DavidJames]

Quote:

The House passed a resolution of disapproval on a 240-179 vote that was mostly along party lines, reflecting the Democratic majority in the chamber. Twelve Democrats voted "no," while seven Republicans voted for the measure. Five representatives, all Democrats, voted "present."

Interesting that 17 Democrats didn't think enough of the resolution to vote yes.

FWIW, I thought the resolution was a waste of time. Wilson was an idiot, he apologized, move on.

It would be nice to have, in addition to Yes and No, have a third option...This is a dumb ass resolution and a waste of time

[Sporanox]

Yeah, there's not much good I can say about this. (Although I will concur with DavidJames in that the resolution was a waste of time)

I honestly don't know what to think of the Republican congressional leadership nowadays. I'm leaning towards ineffectual and possibly still corrupt in general, but only time will tell.

[applecorped]

Originally Posted by DavidJames

I..This is a dumb ass resolution and a waste of time

Agreed.

[corplinx]

I'm glad the health care reform bill passed so that congress can get around to the low priority votes like this one. Good job gang!

[Cynic]

This only makes the Democrats look petty, IMO. But next election cycle it's going to make for a good commercial.

[Meadmaker]

The day after the speech was "curriculum night" at my kid's school. In his opening remarks the principal noted that part of their mission was to teach the kids not to act like Joe Wilson.

I don't know what to think about the resolution. It's obviously political, and it obviously shouldn't have been necessary. Every member of Congress should have been unanimous in condemning this, so much so that any resolution would have been redundant, and there would have been no point for the Democrats to grandstand on it, because the condemnation should have been equally loud from both sides.

But the Republicans had a problem. They, or their near-official mouthpieces on talk radio and such, have been telling people to behave exactly this way at town meetings across the country. To condemn him too loudly might make people wonder about the other similar incidents around the country. I heard one caller to Hannity say with such pride how they had organized a demonstration at a town meeting and were so vocal that their congressman couldn't speak. She was so proud as she said it, and of course Hannity was supportive. Joe Wilson just didn't get that the circumstances were just a little different and that maybe that sort of behavior wouldn't be considered acceptable during a joint session of Congress. Of course, it shouldn't be considered acceptable in Congress, or in a town meeting, or anywhere where there is an invited guest, but that seems to have been forgotten.

[MattusMaximus]

Originally Posted by dudalb

Rep Wilson of "You Lie" fame was "admonished" in the House today but on a 240-179 party line vote. Apparently most GOP members saw little or nothing to criticise in his behavior.
I have tried to be fair minded in my criticism of both sides, but this action has now convinced me that the GOP has gone totally off the rails. They seem to be catering to the most extreme elements in their party.
God, have they given up making any attempt to win the votes of moderates? It seems so. They seem to be expecting the hard core base to magically expand. Ain't gonna happen.

Well, the GOP is playing the short-term politics game. They don't seem to have any real leadership, they don't seem to have any really decent ideas, the long-term demographics are moving against them, so all they can do is rant & rave to do all they can to motivate the more... passionate members of their base.

Now that may work a little bit for them in 2010, where I expect they'll pick up some seats in Congress (nothing unusual there in non-presidential election years for the ruling party to lose seats). But I think it's going to get them hammered again in 2012, where they'll likely lose any gains they may have made and also get squished by Obama in the presidential race.

Imo, the long term picture for the GOP is not looking good. The only way I see for them to make a big & long-lasting comeback is for the Democrats to royally screw the pooch somehow.

[Kaylee]

Originally Posted by Meadmaker

But the Republicans had a problem. They, or their near-official mouthpieces on talk radio and such, have been telling people to behave exactly this way at town meetings across the country. To condemn him too loudly might make people wonder about the other similar incidents around the country. I heard one caller to Hannity say with such pride how they had organized a demonstration at a town meeting and were so vocal that their congressman couldn't speak. She was so proud as she said it, and of course Hannity was supportive. Joe Wilson just didn't get that the circumstances were just a little different and that maybe that sort of behavior wouldn't be considered acceptable during a joint session of Congress. Of course, it shouldn't be considered acceptable in Congress, or in a town meeting, or anywhere where there is an invited guest, but that seems to have been forgotten.

So hopefully this reprimand will help people remember that this type of behavior isn't OK.

I'm glad the House passed the reprimand -- it makes it very clear that at least 240 representatives didn't condone this type of behavior.

[MattusMaximus]

Originally Posted by Meadmaker

I don't know what to think about the resolution. It's obviously political, and it obviously shouldn't have been necessary. Every member of Congress should have been unanimous in condemning this, so much so that any resolution would have been redundant, and there would have been no point for the Democrats to grandstand on it, because the condemnation should have been equally loud from both sides.

And therein lies the real problem for the GOP. Many of them did condemn Wilson's actions, but they weren't willing to really condemn them formally. The GOP is walking a damned tightrope -- they want to both appease the crazies and look like they're not appeasing the crazies so they appear reasonable to the political middle. But it's a strategy which is ultimately doomed to failure. They may make a few gains in 2010 playing this game, but it is going to come back to haunt them - bigtime.

It's so stupid... I just wish the GOP leadership would get some balls and tell the lunatics to take a hike. The sooner they do that, the better off all of us will be.

[tyr_13]

I thought something completely different when I read the thread title.

I got my 'party lines' confused.

[Meadmaker]

Originally Posted by MattusMaximus

And therein lies the real problem for the GOP. Many of them did condemn Wilson's actions, but they weren't willing to really condemn them formally. The GOP is walking a damned tightrope -- they want to both appease the crazies and look like they're not appeasing the crazies so they appear reasonable to the political middle. But it's a strategy which is ultimately doomed to failure. They may make a few gains in 2010 playing this game, but it is going to come back to haunt them - bigtime.

It's so stupid... I just wish the GOP leadership would get some balls and tell the lunatics to take a hike. The sooner they do that, the better off all of us will be.

That's pretty much my thought as well. Yes, this reprimand resolution was perceived, correctly, as a partisan effort, but the GOP could have totally blunted any partisan advantage by doing the right thing, which would have been to put out the word from the leadership that everyone was expected to vote yes, and pass it 435-0.

The problem is that would have made everyone happy, except the crazies, and the GOP decided to not make waves among the crazies.

[gtc]

Its hard for me to get particularly excited about what Wilson said. One of Australia's former Prime Ministers (Paul Keating) once stood up in Parliament and called the entire Senate 'unrepresentative swill'. That's only one of the more famous insults that have been bandied about in our Parliament.

[Peephole]

Admonish him for what? For being rude in interrupting Obama's speech? There's nothing wrong with criticizing authority.

This is almost as bad as when people got blasted for simply standing up to Bush after 9/11.

[Lurker]

WHile I disapprove og Joe Wilson't outburst (and especially that he was lying) I don't consider it all that important. He apologized, let's move on.

[T.A.M.]

Originally Posted by dudalb

Rep Wilson of "You Lie" fame was "admonished" in the House today but on a 240-179 party line vote. Apparently most GOP members saw little or nothing to criticise in his behavior.
I have tried to be fair minded in my criticism of both sides, but this action has now convinced me that the GOP has gone totally off the rails. They seem to be catering to the most extreme elements in their party.
God, have they given up making any attempt to win the votes of moderates? It seems so. They seem to be expecting the hard core base to magically expand. Ain't gonna happen.

While I agree with your sentiments that the GOP have gone off the rails and are now catering to the Rush/Beck/Palin Brigades, I am not sure the vote on, or the entire matter on, Joe Wilson really means anything to it.

Wilson is an idiot, he continues to act like an idiot, he is not the first, or the worst, so they should all just move on.

TAM

[T.A.M.]

Originally Posted by Peephole

Admonish him for what? For being rude in interrupting Obama's speech? There's nothing wrong with criticizing authority.

This is almost as bad as when people got blasted for simply standing up to Bush after 9/11.

I think it is more about time and place then what he actually said.

TAM

[Meadmaker]

Originally Posted by Peephole

Admonish him for what? For being rude in interrupting Obama's speech?

Yes. That's it. For being rude. I want congressmen to act better than that.

Another trip down memory lane:

I remember in 1970 or thereabouts reading MAD magazine (it was good back then) and they did a parody called "West Coast Story", in which the two competing gangs (parodying "West Side Story") were made up of hippies and squares. The hippie gang was "The Rats", and the opening song parody (to the tune of The Jets' Song") included the following line:

"When you're a rat and some square starts to preach,
drown him right out call it freedom of speech!"

Now here's my point. In 1970, the 12 year olds reading Mad Magazine got that joke. They knew that the loudmouth hippies who protested public speakers all the time, loudly asserting their rights and "freedom" didn't have a clue and that "freedom of speech" didn't involve shouting louder than the other guy, or interrupting a speech that someone else was delivering.

Today, the right wing has taken over the mantle of the party of loudmouth, undisciplined, boors. (Ironically, I'll bet some of those same hippies were marching on 9/12, but now they are old, fat, and psuedo-conservativ.) Joe Wilson should raise his intellectual standards a little bit, and seek out some old copies of Mad Magazine for some guidance in manners.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Peephole

Admonish him for what? For being rude in interrupting Obama's speech?

Yes, for being rude in interrupting Obama's speech. Saying that Obama was lying is fine, but the interruption was a violation of the decorum we should be able to expect in that context. The proper remedy was an apology, one was offered and accepted, so I'd agree with the consensus that this resolution is a waste of time.

Quote:

This is almost as bad as when people got blasted for simply standing up to Bush after 9/11.

Well, not quite. The accusation by people like Hank Johnson that Wilson's outburst will lead to a resurgence of the KKK certainly constitute the sort of hysteria you suggest, but simple criticism of the outburst as inappropriate do not.

[David Wong]

Originally Posted by Peephole

Admonish him for what? For being rude in interrupting Obama's speech? There's nothing wrong with criticizing authority.

No. You don't want this. You don't want a situation where a speaker can't speak to congress-during his allotted speaking time-without being shouted down by the other congressmen.

This came up during the Bush years, I had liberal friends talk about how they were hoping anti-war activists would be able to storm the capitol while Bush was giving his state of the union, and shout him down, to show him how America really feels.

No. This is not a banana republic. This is not talk radio. We're going to have reasoned discourse like adults, where each side, according to the rules, gets to have their say, and be heard clearly, and politely, by the opposition. The opposition has its own opportunities to speak, according to those same rules. And they will expect the same courtesy.

Trust me, you don't want it any other way.

[applecorped]

Has Congress voted to reprimand Kanye yet?

[Kaylee]

Originally Posted by David Wong

No. You don't want this. You don't want a situation where a speaker can't speak to congress-during his allotted speaking time-without being shouted down by the other congressmen.

This came up during the Bush years, I had liberal friends talk about how they were hoping anti-war activists would be able to storm the capitol while Bush was giving his state of the union, and shout him down, to show him how America really feels.

No. This is not a banana republic. This is not talk radio. We're going to have reasoned discourse like adults, where each side, according to the rules, gets to have their say, and be heard clearly, and politely, by the opposition. The opposition has its own opportunities to speak, according to those same rules. And they will expect the same courtesy.

Trust me, you don't want it any other way.

Very well put and QFT.

[Praktik]

Originally Posted by Meadmaker

Today, the right wing has taken over the mantle of the party of loudmouth, undisciplined, boors.

And we can add to that list: the mantle of victimhood.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by Kaylee

So hopefully this reprimand will help people remember that this type of behavior isn't OK.

Which type of behavior would that be? Heckling the President during his address to a joint session of Congress?

Quote:

I'm glad the House passed the reprimand -- it makes it very clear that at least 240 representatives didn't condone this type of behavior.

Really? Seems to me the only thing clear in this resolution is that at least some of these 240 representatives are petty, partisan hypocrites.

[Eyeron]

This is why I hate partisan politics.

The GOP will never do anything good in a liberal's eye.

And this is a retarded resolution. This is why I firmly believe that liberals believe in free speech only for themselves, not conservatives. Got to silence the awful psychotic conservative as much as they possibly can. Oh my. How dare the Conservatives do this awful thing. Why OBAMA IS GOD AND BLACK AND THEREFORE IS ABOVE CRITICISM!

Liberals are the ones who put the con into conservative.

Let's just admit it. The American President is God and should never be mocked under any circumstances. And this shouldn't fall along party lines.

Oh, and President Obama was overheard in between an interview in calling Kayne West a jackass.

[DavidJames]

Originally Posted by Eyeron

This is why I hate partisan politics.

The GOP will never do anything good in a liberal's eye.

And this is a retarded resolution. This is why I firmly believe that liberals believe in free speech only for themselves, not conservatives. Got to silence the awful psychotic conservative as much as they possibly can. Oh my. How dare the Conservatives do this awful thing. Why OBAMA IS GOD AND BLACK AND THEREFORE IS ABOVE CRITICISM!

Liberals are the ones who put the con into conservative.

Let's just admit it. The American President is God and should never be mocked under any circumstances. And this shouldn't fall along party lines.

Thank you for your thoughtful and reasoned analysis. Your use of capital letters was an excellent and persuasive technique to support your view.

And you hate partisan politics?

[applecorped]

How about artisan politics?

[Eyeron]

Quote:

And you hate partisan politics?

Yes I do, actually. It is completely irrational to me.

I'm sorry but when I get frustrated I tend to use a lot of sarcasm and ridicule.

The reason why it is irrational to me is because of the crap like admonishing Wilson along party lines. If a liberal had done that to Former President Bush it would be all right. And that is the biggest problem I have with partisan crap. And this is a bit complicated for me to explain.

Essentially, the biggest thing I hate about partisan politics is that the action being criticized is often done by the people who are doing the criticizing. It is okay for them to do so but not okay for anybody else. anything my party (or side if you will) can do no wrong and it's only the other side or party who is wrong, not us. And it is all about image because image is what is important in politics, not substance. If you don't have the right image you'll never get the vote.

Another example I hate is the people who are complaining about the obama as Hitler pictures or the Joker, many of them are the same ones who portrayed Former President Bush as Hitler and a Chimpanzee. If it is so wrong then perhaps they shouldn't do it themselves because if you ridicule people that gives them leave to ridicule you (general not specific) back. People often dish it but can't take and often expect other people to take their ridicule. That's arrogance and ego right there. Also irrational, at least to me.

The only true way to take the moral high ground is to not do the same action or behavior that is being criticized. Regardless of the justification or reasoning or logic behind it, it is just a way of saying "it's okay for me to do so and not you because I'm better than you nyah nyah". And there is no true difference when people do the same action for different reasons.

For me, if something is morally wrong it should be applied evenly across the board or it ceases to be morality. It instead becomes a game of double standards and special privileges, which is something I just can't personally stand.

And it also frustrates me to see such rational people engage in this kind of behavior. It seems to me that rational people should realize the irrationality of partisan politics and the divisiveness it causes.

[T.A.M.]

Originally Posted by Eyeron

This is why I hate partisan politics.

The GOP will never do anything good in a liberal's eye.

And this is a retarded resolution. This is why I firmly believe that liberals believe in free speech only for themselves, not conservatives. Got to silence the awful psychotic conservative as much as they possibly can. Oh my. How dare the Conservatives do this awful thing. Why OBAMA IS GOD AND BLACK AND THEREFORE IS ABOVE CRITICISM!

Liberals are the ones who put the con into conservative.

Let's just admit it. The American President is God and should never be mocked under any circumstances. And this shouldn't fall along party lines.

Oh, and President Obama was overheard in between an interview in calling Kayne West a jackass.

Like I said earlier, this is a matter of "time and place" rather then what was actually said.

As for the rest of your whine, well there is some cheese to go with it over there in the fridge.

TAM

[leftysergeant]

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

Yes, for being rude in interrupting Obama's speech. Saying that Obama was lying is fine, but the interruption was a violation of the decorum we should be able to expect in that context. The proper remedy was an apology, one was offered and accepted, so I'd agree with the consensus that this resolution is a waste of time.

Wilson lied. He did so intentionally. His actions also gave a stamp of approval to the dirt baggery that the Republicans have unleashed on the public, to the harm of public discourse. Time for the grown-ups to rein in the crazies. The Republicans have had their chance.

The measure was neccessary. The Lower Right talking heads have been defending Wilson, building him up as a martyr. He isn't. He is a miscreant who got called out. His apology was about the lamest I have ever heard.

There is a cultural war going on, and the Republicans are leading the charge against culture. They were asked to stand down and return to civilized conduct. They didn't.

This vote will, I hope, embolden the Democrats who were worried about what might happen if they take too firm a stand. They may grow a backbone and learn to ignore the Republican snivellers and start restoring the country to some semblance of order. I think they have sent a message to the dirt baggers that they are not going to win by being schmucks.

[DavidJames]

Originally Posted by Eyeron

The reason why it is irrational to me is because of the crap like admonishing Wilson along party lines. If a liberal had done that to Former President Bush it would be all right. And that is the biggest problem I have with partisan crap. And this is a bit complicated for me to explain.

Essentially, the biggest thing I hate about partisan politics is that the action being criticized is often done by the people who are doing the criticizing. It is okay for them to do so but not okay for anybody else. anything my party (or side if you will) can do no wrong and it's only the other side or party who is wrong, not us. And it is all about image because image is what is important in politics, not substance. If you don't have the right image you'll never get the vote.

Another example I hate is the people who are complaining about the obama as Hitler pictures or the Joker, many of them are the same ones who portrayed Former President Bush as Hitler and a Chimpanzee. If it is so wrong then perhaps they shouldn't do it themselves because if you ridicule people that gives them leave to ridicule you (general not specific) back. People often dish it but can't take and often expect other people to take their ridicule. That's arrogance and ego right there. Also irrational, at least to me.


The only true way to take the moral high ground is to not do the same action or behavior that is being criticized. Regardless of the justification or reasoning or logic behind it, it is just a way of saying "it's okay for me to do so and not you because I'm better than you nyah nyah". And there is no true difference when people do the same action for different reasons.

For me, if something is morally wrong it should be applied evenly across the board or it ceases to be morality. It instead becomes a game of double standards and special privileges, which is something I just can't personally stand.

And it also frustrates me to see such rational people engage in this kind of behavior. It seems to me that rational people should realize the irrationality of partisan politics and the divisiveness it causes.

Thanks for the explanation, sometimes sarcasm doesn't translate well on a forum.

As for your comments above which I put in bold. I have my doubts much if any of what you say is true, although I could be wrong. Maybe you could provide some examples.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by DavidJames

Thanks for the explanation, sometimes sarcasm doesn't translate well on a forum.

As for your comments above which I put in bold. I have my doubts much if any of what you say is true, although I could be wrong. Maybe you could provide some examples.

There are links to two examples of Democrats heckling Bush during a joint address to Congress a little further up in this thread. (ETA: Which, unless the Democrats also censured their own afterwards, covers the first two points you doubt.)

I don't think it'd be too hard at all to find examples of "[Bush|Obama]=Hitler" hypocrisy on Democratic Underground, but it's almost quitting time for me and I can't be bothered to track any down right at the moment.

However, this is one we can put to the test right here and now: Do you object to comments that compare Obama to Hitler? Did you object to comments that compared Bush to Hitler? Either way, on what grounds were your objections based?

[Eyeron]

Quote:

Maybe you could provide some examples.

I'm just going to drop it. These things always fall on deaf ears and nobody ever sees it. Sorry.

[drkitten]

Originally Posted by Eyeron

I'm just going to drop it. These things always fall on deaf ears and nobody ever sees it. Sorry.

In other words, you got called on your bull----.

[leftysergeant]

Originally Posted by Eyeron

The reason why it is irrational to me is because of the crap like admonishing Wilson along party lines. If a liberal had done that to Former President Bush it would be all right.

No. And the Republicans would have been on him like white on rice.
FAIL. I forget who it was, but, as I recall, the Republicans got their panties in a bunch when a Democratic congressman made a comment that some interogators were using Nazi-style tactics, and the knuckle-dragging hawks started shrieking that he had called our soldiers Nazis. (Turns out that the Dem was telling the truth, but that it was actually low-life contractors doing the torture.)

Quote:

The only true way to take the moral high ground is to not do the same action or behavior that is being criticized.

We on the left are a bit tired of being told to just lie down and take it when we are being raped.

Quote:

For me, if something is morally wrong it should be applied evenly across the board or it ceases to be morality. It instead becomes a game of double standards and special privileges, which is something I just can't personally stand.

Where's the beef. It is against the rules to call someone a liar in the middle of the speach. Or on the House floor, for that matter. The Brits don't even allow that, and their sessions look downright barbaric at times.

Then there's the fact that the little punk was, himself, lying. FAIL.

[Eyeron]

Quote:

In other words, you got called on your bull----.

Whatever works for you.

[Meadmaker]

It occurred to me what should have happened. Joe Wilson's conduct was a disgrace that brought shame upon the House of Representatives. In addition to his own personal apology, the leader of the House, Nancy Pelosi, should have offered an apology on behalf of the entire House.

I've been in a few leadership positions, and I can recall a couple of times when "my people" did something I really wish they hadn't done, and how I went to try and make ammends despite the fact that I, personally, had done nothing wrong.

But of course, this wouldn't occur to Pelosi, or to almost anyone on either side of the aisle, because they don't actually see themselves as part of one body, and Pelosi wouldn't see Wilson as one of "her people". Wilson was one of "the other people". So instead of having a unanimous sense that all involved condemned the rudeness, there was opportunism on how to exploit the behavior of "the other side".

[eeyore1954]

Originally Posted by Eyeron

The reason why it is irrational to me is because of the crap like admonishing Wilson along party lines. If a liberal had done that to Former President Bush it would be all right. And that is the biggest problem I have with partisan crap.

If a liberal had done it to President Bush I believe almost all of the democrats would have voted against the admonishment and almost all the republicans who voted against it would have voted in favor of the admonishment

I am disappointed that the house felt they didn't have better things to do

[Kaylee]

Originally Posted by theprestige

Which type of behavior would that be? Heckling the President during his address to a joint session of Congress?


Really? Seems to me the only thing clear in this resolution is that at least some of these 240 representatives are petty, partisan hypocrites.

I don't hear well (almost deaf as a matter of fact), but it did sound like heckling in the second link. The first link sounded made up.

FWIW, I don't think any president, regardless if he belongs to the Democratic or Republican party, should be heckled during his speech.

And I say this even though I sincerely believe that Bush stole the election twice.

[XBoxWarrior]

Originally Posted by Meadmaker

In addition to his own personal apology, the leader of the House, Nancy Pelosi, should have offered an apology on behalf of the entire House.

To whom? I believe her facial expression showed dismay for the comment...she has no responsibility to apologize for a house members ignorance.

Originally Posted by Meadmaker

But of course, this wouldn't occur to Pelosi, or to almost anyone on either side of the aisle, because they don't actually see themselves as part of one body, and Pelosi wouldn't see Wilson as one of "her people".

Well technically he isn't one of "her people"...He is one of Boehner's "people"...he chose to defend this moron's outburst. It's red meat for the KKKrazies....