« Gordon Brown to Alan Turing: I’m proud to say sorry to a real war hero
Obama’s September 11 Proclamation. Another Act of Treason? »
Talk of Censuring Joe Wilson Heating Up Again
Update below:
Yes, Nancy Pelosi had shelved that option. But it seems that she, and other Democrats, are reconsidering. Behind the scenes, Democrats have been pressuring Wilson to apologize on the House floor, which so far he has refused to do — and his openly unrepentant behavior in the last 24 hours isn’t helping.
Josh Marshall has mixed feelings:
Whatever the politics of it, what Wilson did is simply so outrageous in the context of the history of Congress and really American history, that it really should not be allowed to stand. With all the outrageous stuff that goes on these days, with all the nonsense we chronicle here, this was simply shocking. When I heard the outburst during the speech I was certain it was someone in the galleries. The idea that a sitting member of Congress would scream out calling the president a liar to his face during an address to a joint session of Congress is simply unheard of.People note the raucous sessions of the British House of Commons where there are all manner of hoots and hollers and jeering. And they have different traditions over there. Remember, the Prime Minister is a member of the House of Commons. But I believe it is actually forbidden, even there, to call any member of the House, let alone the PM, a liar (indeed, it’s true).
What I guess it comes down to is that I’m not sure of the politics but I think it’s probably just the right thing to do, notwithstanding the politics.
That link goes to a post by Andrew Sullivan, which I had also seen, last night. He explains why that rule exists:
I see a lot of commentary that compares Joe Wilson’s “You Lie!” outburst with the ruckus that often happens in the House of Commons. But one thing you are not allowed to shout in the Commons is that another speaker is a liar. A lot of circumlocutions evolved to bypass this – “terminological inexactitude” is my favorite (Churchill, of course) – but the ban is for a reason. Once the opposition starts yelling “You lie!” they have essentially abandoned the deliberative process, by questioning the good faith of a speaker. Without an assumption of good faith or a factual rebuttal, just calling someone a liar abolishes the integrity of the debating process. It ends a conversation. And parliament is about conversation.
It’s true that this incident can easily become a distraction from the main issue, which is health care reform of course. But post-outburst restraint works both ways. One would think that Rep. Wilson, having not merely embarrassed himself on the House floor but in truth gotten himself in a lot of trouble (why else do you think the GOP leadership had him apologize so quickly?), would want to walk lightly upon the earth for a bit, let emotions cool. But instead he’s chosen to inflame them by using his own serious mistake as a fundraising tool. That’s a bit much, y’know?
There are people willing to help, though. Jonathan Allen at CQ Politics has some suggestions on how to call the president a liar and get away with it:
For a more socially and politically graceful way to say the president lied during a joint session of Congress, recall the words of a certain junior senator fromllinois in his response to President Bush’s 2008 State of the Union address.
Here’s what then-Sen. Barack Obama said: “And finally, tonight we heard President Bush say that the surge in Iraq is working, when we know that’s just not true.”
Using Obama as the model, here’s Notepad’s three-step guide to accusing the president of lying in a nationally televised address.
- Wait until after the speech. You probably wouldn’t boo at the opera, even if it stunk.
- Say it calmly and succinctly. Cheap insults from close proximity should be reserved for minor-league baseball games.
- Call him a liar without using any form of the word “lie,” which sounds harsh. You can even have fun with it by saying he has defied the gravitational physics of essential cosmic truths.
- Offer your own solution. Epithets don’t make policy.
Update: After I posted the above, I watched a video of Chuck Todd interviewing Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC). Rep. Clyburn told Todd that he is trying to broker a compromise with other Democrats to the effect that Wilson would (if he doesn’t apologize on his own on the House floor) be subject to a congressional resolution of disapproval. This is two steps down from censure. There’s disapproval, a reprimand, and then censure.
62 Responses to “Talk of Censuring Joe Wilson Heating Up Again”
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Why We Worry. Why We Worry said: Bad bad bad idea RT @TMV: Talk of Censuring Joe Wilson Heating Up Again http://bit.ly/2UC3zW [...]
[...] about Andrew Sullivan as of September 11, 2009 Talk of Censuring Joe Wilson Heating Up Again – themoderatevoice.com 09/12/2009 Yes, Nancy Pelosi had shelved that option. But it seems [...]
Censuring Wilson is such a stupid idea. It will make the Democrats seem like bullies and turn Wilson into a sympathetic figure to a wider audience than just the wingnuts.
Those clowns need to worry about passing health care, climate change and financial legislation, not this trivial BS.
The guy behaved boorishly and apologized for it. Let it die there.
He has gone from an obscure Congressman to the poster boy for the substantive bankruptcy that is the Republicans' opposition to health care reform. Censor him and he becomes a martyr. He is not worth spending any more time on. Let it go.
Well, there were two parts to Wilson's outburst- whether he was rude and disrespectful to make it (he was, of course) and whether he was right or wrong in substance regarding what Obama was saying.
It looks to me that Nancy is going to keep fanning the flames about the first issue in order to distract from the fact that the Senate considered the substantive part and saw reason to backpedal.
Kathy, I'm not sure where you are getting your information that Pelosi is reconsidering. Googling the “News Results” for “Pelosi censure Joe Wilson” all I saw was a Fox News story stating that Pelosi spokesman Brendon Daly said that the outburst was a breech of House rules that will need to be addressed on the House floor. Apparently the rules forbid calling the President a “liar” or say that he is “lying”, similar to the rule in the English Parliament.
I'll be surprised and disappointed if Pelosi reverses her thinking on the matter. Right now she's looking like the voice of reason, decorum and grace while surrounded by a receding sea of uninformed, ill-bred Republicans. You don't get dealt this kind of hand very often in the world of political theater, so she should take her winnings and coolly walk away from the table.
He should agree to do so Immediately following Harry Reid's apology on National television to President Bush for the same action, calling the sitting President a liar. If Wilson is supposed to apologize in the venue where the remark is made so should the unrepentant Harry Reid.
Go for it Harry, set an example of repent and civility. And go for it liberals, demand that Democrats and those calling for Wilson's apology on the House floor not practice hypocrisy on the national stage.
Joe Wilson offered an insincere apology. If he was truly apologetic he would not be proud of the fact that he called the president a liar.
There are many ways to censure the Joe Wilson. Because he embarrassed congress he should offer an apology on the House floor. I think that's all that's needed for censure. And he should stop being proud of the fact that he called the president a liar. If he's truly sorry he needs to “walk the walk” too.
Actually, Christine, Wilson's outburst is the only issue connected with Wilson's outburst. It was far worse than rude and disrespectful, although it certainly was that. It was a breach of congressional protocol about how a president is treated, and how the office of the president is treated, unprecedented in U.S. history.
I'm not even going to engage with you, in the context of this particular event, on whether the substance of Wilson's screamed slur was accurate or not. Because that is not the issue, and it's completely irrelevant to the point, which is that Wilson disgraced himself and the office he holds when he screamed out at Pres. Obama those words, “You lie! Lies!” while Pres. Obama was addressing a joint session of Congress. The truth or falsity of Wilson's words has no bearing whatsoever on the discussion of what Wilson did Wednesday night.
It's absurd to claim that Pelosi is fanning the flames. The entire Democratic leadership is up in arms over this, and rightly so. And Pelosi was the one who initially shut it down, or tried to. Joe Wilson is fanning the flames, and he is the only one who is fanning the flames.
They sure were not up in arms about harry Reid's remarks.
Hypocrisy.
I agree that it's trivial in comparison to passing health care reform, but it's not trivial in absolute terms. It's part of a larger problem, which is the Obama presidency's perceived legitimacy by far right extremists who are aided and abetted by the GOP establishment. It's serious. It's part of the reason (only part, but it is a part) why there's been so much resistance to Obama's policy agenda from the moment he took office.
It's serious. I'm not saying censure is a good idea; I'm only saying this is not a trivial issue, and the issue itself goes well beyond the specific issue of how a president is treated when addressing a joint session of Congress. The respect issue in general has a great deal to do (I want to say everything to do, but I'm trying not to be rigid) with who Obama is, and that is a serious issue.
To all the wingnuts, Reid didn't interrupt a Presidential speech to Congress. He spoke bad about the Chimper while he was on foreign soil. A very big difference.
http://newledger.com/2009/09/joe-wilsonbarack-o…
I don't think the disrespect was equivalent or the same…
All politicians should be allowed to say something stupid about the opposition, just don't be rude and childish and interrupt a speaker. Wait awhile and be stupid on Beck or Olberman…
[...] President. It seemed like nearly every congressional leader and most of the big media treated Mr. Talk of Censuring Joe Wilson Heating Up Again – themoderatevoice.com 09/12/2009 Yes, Nancy Pelosi had shelved that option. But it seems that she, [...]
Did you follow my links, ElZagna? If not, you should. They will answer your question about where I got my information.
He should agree to do so Immediately following Harry Reid's apology on National television to President Bush for the same action, calling the sitting President a liar.
It was not the same action, as you very well know, and you don't have a leg to stand on to argue that you don't very well know that, because I twice pointed out the difference to you AND asked you to cite your source for even making the claim, and you ignored both.
You have nothing, Leonidas, and your comparison is not just absurd, but morally deplorable.
I'm beginning to think Harry Reid didn't even make the remarks you keep claiming he did, since you are apparently either unwilling or unable to produce the quote and the context for it from a reliable source — or any source, for that matter.
There is only one man left that can bring the parties together. . . .
http://assets.hulu.com/shows/key_art_jerry_spri…
and on domestic soil as well on National television during meet the press when he called Bush a Liar.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0909/…
and again:
http://www.rawstory.com/exclusives/reid_060105.htm
Well, here's a link. You can also find the Meet The Press transcript but you have to wade through the interview.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0909/…
I don't have a problem with Reid calling Bush a liar. If someone thinks someone else is lying they should speak up. With Wilson it was different since he was in a situation that demands decorum.
Having said that I think the Democrats are foolish to pursue scolding Wilson since it just makes them look petty. Wilson apologized, Obama accepted it and suggested moving on. In this case Obama is taking the high road but the House Democrats aren't content to follow him.
No Kathy your actions and those of other liberals are hypocritical and nothing more than partisan demagoguery. You are not really so much offended by the act of Wilson despite your assertions otherwise, as your refusal to demand the same standards from democrats reveals this clearly. You are posting drivel and venom because you see a chance to discredit republicans, not for some respect for the office of the presidentcy. I find you to be hypocritical, churlish, transparently disingenuous and close minded.
Oh and add unobservant to the list
I know I've posted this in at least two other threads but here you go:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0909/…
MR. RUSSERT: When the president talked about Yucca Mountain and moving the nation's nuclear waste there, you were very, very, very strong in your words. You said, “President Bush is a liar. He betrayed Nevada and he betrayed the country.”
Is that rhetoric appropriate?
More sources.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6646457/
http://www.rawstory.com/exclusives/reid_060105.htm
http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2005/06/…
You see not only did Reid call Bush a liar but puffed out his scrawny chest and strutted around proud of it, to the cheers of some liberal commentators.
Nope I have the facts, the sources, the reference links, and am not a hypocrite as I have said that Wilson's actions were inappropriate as well as those of the democrats and Harry Reid.
You on the other hand have hypocrisy, at least up to this point (something I hope you will change) and the need to reconsider what is morally deplorable when confronted with these facts, sources, and linked references when you look yourself in the mirror. So why don't you own up and say Reid needs to aopolgize. Oh thats right your not big on apologies are you, I recall you attacking a poster on this blog and when confronted with act you admitted error yet refused to apologize for your inappropriate remarks. Funny that someone demanding apologies from others has been so unwilling to take that step themselves when clearly in the wrong.
Good day ma'am.
Thank you for the links, DaGoat and Leonidas. Re Leonidas's equivalency argument, it doesn't stand. Calling the president (whichever president) a liar on Meet the Press may be uncivil, but it's not a breach of protocol and it's certainly not unprecedented. If you can't see the difference between calling the president a liar on Meet the Press and disrupting a presidential address before a joint session of Congress by screaming out “You lie! Lies!” then there's nothing more I can say to you on the subject.
Sen Reid did not shout his remarks during a joint session of Congress.
But not during a nationally televised joint-session of Congress.
But he never interrupted a joint-session of Congress to make these claims. Cretin.
Why bother with censure. Just censure the commerce from his state. Let his constituents punish him, unless they're willing to go to the poorhouse for his insolence. Let them go as a group then.
lionidas. heard your harry reid bs for three running days now on seven different posts. stick to the topic. The posts are not about you no matter how much you want everyone here to focus on you. Take it up with harry reid, he's the only one who can do anything about your complaint. Bringing your whining here, is just that. Mealymouthed whining. And off topic.
I suppose we are well passed the point where displaying bad manners is its own worse punishment.
I can only say that censure would be useful only if it could stop this cycle of bad behavior. I fear nothing can.
Well using your logic maybe all the folks complaining about Wilson need to contact him instead of whinning here. But you see I'm not complaining about Reid, I'm pointing out the blatant double standard of those who are complaining about Wilson. The dish it out but can't take it crew.
Considering the tone of some recent original articles posted is it any wonder some flames will appear. Now not saying thats the reason in all cases, but the posting once was fairly moderate except for Shaun mullen, now your lucky if you don't have 1/2 of the original posts fond on the front page thick with vitrol.
Look at how the situation really works. The Address was about health care reform/public option of which some 70% of the citizens want. Obama was elected by a majority, a democracy. When Wilson sniped Obama about health care reform We want and elected him to enact, Wilson sniped the American people. The only proper thing to do, since Congress obviously cannot contain him, is to boycott his state. Let the people who elected him feel the consequences of trying to dissolve a legitimate democracy by defacing our elected leader publicly.
Pretty simple really; while shopping online, just look for the words “South Carolina” as the address of the business. If you find them, don't buy. And if you really want an impact, to send a message about how the overwhelming majority feels about the public option, look up any state [Governor or representative majority] that is against it and omit them from your shopping/vacation list too. They're not listening now to the democratic 70% and they intend to ignore us as long as the MedMob coer$ion is in place.
If you cherry pick your poll and ignore most of the other ones. No one who thinks it through really believes this. If there was truly that level of support why couldn't democrats pass a healthcare bill with a filibuster proof majority? Because 70% of the public approving is not really there. If it was we'd have had a healthcare bill signed into law in July.
what Democrats are against the public option in the House (of course all Republicans will oppose any health care reform bill).
The Hill provides this handy dandy list of the 23 who have announced their opposition:
John Adler (N.J.), Jason Altmire (Pa.), John Barrow (Ga.), Dan Boren (Okla.) Rick Boucher (Va.), Allen Boyd (Fla.), Bobby Bright (Ala.), Travis Childers (Miss.), Jim Costa (Calif.), Henry Cuellar (Texas), Parker Griffith (Ala.), Frank Kratovil (Md.), Betsy Markey (Colo.) Eric Massa (N.Y.), Jim Matheson (Utah), Charlie Melancon (La.), Walt Minnick (Idaho), Tom Perriello (Va.), Earl Pomeroy (N.D.), Heath Shuler (N.C.), Bart Stupak (Mich.), John Tanner (Tenn.), Gene Taylor (Miss.)
As you can see, of the 23, 16 are from the South or other Deep Red states…
..Adler is in New Jersey, Costa is in California, Markey is in Colorado, Kratovil is in Maryland, Stupak is in Michigan, and Altmire is in Pennsylvania. http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-326632
*****…, whenever you can, boycott online the deep south commerce where the GOP reigns and deliver a particular sting to New Jersey, California, Colorado, Maryland, Michigan and Pennsylvania. And remember kids, don't forget to especially not shop S. Carolina until a full-fledged and sincere apology is heard from Mr. Wilson.
Look, you don't have much money to spend anyway and most of us need to tighten our belts, so for the interim between now and christmas, just don't spend money in these stubborn states who buck a majority-rule, in other words: who buck democracy in favor of a tyrannical rule of the elite rich and their stupid [frankly] loyal poor ranks. [Is there another word we could find to describe those that are loyal to people who mean to do them harm?]
Also, when each state does a turnaround publicly, if that actually happens, do the opposite, reward them with lavish business. Splurge on that one big item or seven little ones and be sure to do it promptly as a reward to them!
*ignores Leonidas' laughingly-obvious spin*
Here's the way to do it overall. Just don't spend in any State in the above list until Christmas, that is, until the governor of that State makes a public announcement in support of the public option. When they do, go on a mini-spending spree there [as much as you can afford and not more]. Look at it this way, if you're sick of paying your ransom-premiums and stupidly insane deductables to stay alive, take that money and instead do the governor-reward incentive. Sit on it until you hear from each state how they will support the public option or not. Spend accordingly, or don't. It's just a few short months until New Year's Day so it won't take long.
Score 1 for Joe Wilson:
WH ON HEALTH CARE, ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/09/…
Good to see Obama recognize the weakness that was in democratic proposals and to correct them. Maybe something good came out of Wilson's “You Lie” after all. The new White House admission and change to address the problem is a serious step toward a more bi-partisan acomodation. Good move Mr. President in not allowing your ego to interferere with the best interest of the nation.
Everyone knows the real “you lie” stemmed from MedMob's GOP “say anything that will kill the public option”. We're not stupid Leonidas. Nobody proposed covering illegals, even liberals have to make their bills and everyone knows the incoming illegal tide needs disincentives to come here.
Now, sit on that cash until New Years and reward any state whose governor stands up and announces publicly support for the public option.. It's the simplest solution if you're one of the 70% who want the public option. The “hard work” you have to do is….nothing!..lol…what could be easier? : )
LOL Sil,
Boycott all you want but jobs are moving from north to South. We welcome company's here not treat them as evil things like forced union States. Many of those States are slitting their own economic throats and we are more than happy to take their business.
Hi there Leonidas, Please dont post articles from elsewhere or long excerpts from articles from elsewhere in the comments section, as stated in TMV commenting rules. That rule, in part, is so that the flow of comments is not broken up by one person, allowing others to easily follow comments by others, and to keep the comments on topic, meaning about the article posted at TMV. You are welcome in your comment, to post a link to an article from elsewhere.
Thanks,
Dr.E
Editor, TMV
[with permission from a dear friend of mine]
“Christmas Cash Ain't Coming To Town”
You better watch out
Or we will not buy
Better not shout
“Obama you lie!”
Christmas cash ain't comin' to town
We're making a list
And checking it twice
Gonna find out where's naughty and nice
Christmas cash aint' [is?] comin' to town
State revenues start shrinking
While others start to rise
What happens to your sweet tax base
Should come as no surprise
Oh!
You better not screw
The People again
One Medmob buck and we'll withold ten
Christmas cash ain't comin' to town..
*******
You know the tune. : )
No problem Dr. E.
But came we have a editor ruling about what is considered a lengthy excerpt? I always took that to mean don't post something that was pages long and thought that a few paragraphs would be acceptible.
The rule:
…is not very specific at all. Can we get an editor clarification on what “lengthy text” means precisely? This would be very helpful.
Thank you Leonidas, try a couple paras of the article is what our Ed in Chief has said, and then link to the rest of the article. Other commenters can then read the rest of the article wherever your link leads them.
Thanks,
Dr.E,
Editor TMV
Dashing through a blog
Someone spiked his nog
O'er the limit he drank
We're laughing to the bank
Bells on bob tails ring
Making spirits bright
What fun it is to laugh and sing
At the foolish folk tonight
Jingle bells, Jingle Bells
Jingle all the way
Listen to the bells
On the fools funy hat
and the funny things he says
Jingle bells, jingle bells
Jingle all the way
Oh, what fun it is to watch
company's move our way.
*This just in*
70% of TMV viewers prefer Sil's jingle to Leonidas'..
.lol…: )
*shrug*
Maybe so. Maybe not.
P.S. thanks for cash for clunkers a lot of foreign automakers with plants in the South you know.
Don't worry. This is just a “trigger” boycott. It wasn't due to start until now. The difference is that Wilson actually pulled the trigger…
Ok so you and Roy Roger's horse are boycotting.
*shrug*
Oh Sil, be sure to boycott the Toyoda Prius too, this most fuel efficient car and one of the most enviromentally friendly in the US market, will be built in the South starting in 2010.
Don't you read? The boycott will be over by 2010. *sheesh* Just a few short months is all, between now and New Year's day should do it. Of course there may be a trigger then too if another Medmobber shoots off his mouth and tries to kill the public option. It just really all depends. If Toyota gets hurt in the process, I guess they'll write to the representatives in the South. This is how democracy works.
“Censuring Wilson is such a stupid idea.”
But so characteristic of them (and their camp followers elsewhere, including here).
All that's missing (but it's beyond their grasp) is a new round of South-bashing, with an emphasis on South Carolina and following the “caning” episode (among the few who actually know any history, or other things, on the Left these days, as they reveal) with quotes from Ruffin's diary (especially the end).
(Bonus if there's anything in the health care bill or future “stimulus” laws for improvements to Ft. Sumter)
“P.S. thanks for cash for clunkers a lot of foreign automakers with plants in the South you know.”
(Greenville-Spartanburg, *** SOUTH CAROLINA ***, where state-of-the-art auto manufacturing is done)