Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I don't think punishing Joe Wilson is a good idea.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
daedalus_dude Donating Member (327 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:34 AM
Original message
I don't think punishing Joe Wilson is a good idea.
I'd rather not set such a strong precedent that the first amendment is totally void during congress meetings. The long-term consequences would probably be prison terms for people like Code Pink etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
trocar Donating Member (44 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:45 AM
Response to Original message
1. Rules
If, and I haven't read them, the House Rules indicate such behavior is not allowed, he should be punished. If the rules don't indicate his behavior was wrong, he shouldn't. I believe it's as simple as that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal_in_LA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 03:47 AM
Response to Original message
2. slightly off topic: Current CNN poll: Whose public disruption is worse? Joe is beating out Kanye
Whose public disruption was worse?
Kanye West 42% 33062
Serena Williams 10% 7621
Rep. Joe Wilson 46% 36287
None was bad 2% 1953
Total Votes: 78923

www.cnn.com
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gravel Democrat Donating Member (598 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 04:16 AM
Response to Original message
3. Hours & hours spent on Wilson, Not 5 minutes on whether Mandatory Insurance is constitutional
that ought to raise some questions, but somehow I doubt it

and not a peep about the whole enforcement thing. Really?

Those that wanted early passage with no debate are
getting at least half of what they wanted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 04:38 AM
Response to Reply #3
7. Drive a car? Drive a car without insurance?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TicketyBoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 04:55 AM
Response to Reply #3
10. It's constitutional. Check it out
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ixion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:38 AM
Response to Reply #10
14. it's a BS handout to insurance companies
constitutional or not, it's garbage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anniebelle Donating Member (701 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 04:17 AM
Response to Original message
4. That precedent has already been set in the House Rules.
And it wasn't just 'congress meetings' it was an address by the President to congress and also to the American people. No, I don't think this has anything to do with Code Pink or freedom of speech. You can't yell 'Fire' in a theater either. Is that an affront to free speech? Personally, I think he owes the people of this country tuning in to see their President, and have to listen to these hateful, bigoted pieces of scum that call themselves republicans. IMHO
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueMTexpat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 07:38 AM
Response to Reply #4
22. +1!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
armyowalgreens Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 04:19 AM
Response to Original message
5. Code Pink is annoying. They are often just a rude and illogical as the other side.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:22 AM
Response to Reply #5
18. they aren't members of the House.
there are rules that govern the behavior of visitors to the chamber but they differ from those that apply to members.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TicketyBoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 04:31 AM
Response to Original message
6. I kinda like Barney Frank's take on it.
One of the Democrats voting "present," Barney Frank of Massachusetts, said, "I think it's bad precedent to put us in charge of deciding whether people act like jerks. I don't have time to monitor everyone's civility.""


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090915/ap_on_go_co/us_heal...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zbdent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 04:46 AM
Response to Original message
8. Don't forget that a Dem was forced to publicly apologize for something that
Edited on Wed Sep-16-09 04:47 AM by zbdent
the Repugs convinced the media he said, but he didn't ...

The media bought that a Dem Representative called the troops Nazis ... when all he did was say that some of the reports from Abu Ghraib (sp?) suggest stuff we heard of from the 1930s & 1940s in Germany. No calling the troops Nazis. But the media allowed the spin to go that far ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
daedalus_dude Donating Member (327 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 04:51 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. Public shaming is one thing. Invoking a law is another.
I don't think the Republicans made that incident into a legal issue.

Certainly the democrats should demand an apology.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KharmaTrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:11 AM
Response to Original message
11. He's Got Plenty Of First Ammendment...
Somehow this is starting to turn into a rushpublican talking point. It's not as though there wasn't ample time and opportunity to speak out or rebut. The Capitol was crawling with news crews with microphones all but dying to interview any and all rushpublicans who wanted to sound off. Had he waited 15 minutes, he could have had his 15 minutes on a variety of teevee channels and made his point. That's not what he was doing.

This was an act of disobedience to the House in general. The President was an invited guest and House rules prohibit any type of outburst of that sort. It's not "free speech"...spare me. This shitstain hasn't shut up since. It's called "decorum"...RULES...ya know things that make a society civilized.

I've long objected to Code Pink disrupting hearings with their antics that not only make their organization look "loony" to many tuning in but hurts their message as well. But Code Pink are citizens...not members of any legislative body. They didn't take an oath to uphold the rules of the House...Wilson did and broke the rules. He should have been censured.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WVRICK13 Donating Member (930 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:27 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. I Agree
There are certain expectations if civilized behavior in an event like the address by the President. I would not have approved such an outburst against Bush or any other President regardless of my personal feelings. I also think the signs should have been taken away from the members of Congress. This was a formal address not a protest march. It is embarrassing when our law makers act like spoiled children during formal functions. It shows a lack of respect for the American people and our form of Government.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KharmaTrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:20 AM
Response to Reply #13
16. It's Deliberate Disrepect...
Wilson's outburst was premeditated...I heard another rushpublican, Trent Franks, admit he was shouting, too...Wilson's first outburst didn't take, the second did. It was intended to show disrespect for the President, pure and simple. I agree that Democrats booing booooosh was both low class and a violation of decorum and shouldn't have been tolerated...and for the most part wasn't. They brought up Pete Stark yesterday who called booooshie a liar in a floor debate...not to the man's face...and the rushpublicans were all but ready to throw him in yard-arms. The hypocrisy here and their lame defense of Wilson shows how unprincipaled these asshats are. No contrition since they're too busy trying to do all they can to destroy this President.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
daedalus_dude Donating Member (327 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:16 AM
Response to Reply #11
15. I wasn't aware that he took an oath. In that case punishment is fine.
I just don't want to seem hypocritical. I was cheering when the guy threw a shoe at the chimp.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KharmaTrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:46 AM
Response to Reply #15
20. At The Start Of Each House Session...
Each Representative vows to uphold the rules of the House...Congressman Clyburn cited the rule that was violated. Rarely is there any fine involved in this, just an appology by Wilson to the entire House would have been sufficient. That's the issue her.

The shoe throwing was a whole different situation. That was a press conference...and the guy who threw the shoe (and yes I cheered as well) surely violated Iraqi law that is far different than the Wilson situation. Imagine had that incident happened in the White House Press room...the thrower would still be at Gitmo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CJCRANE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 07:18 AM
Response to Reply #15
21. That guy broke the rules and went to prison
Edited on Wed Sep-16-09 07:20 AM by CJCRANE
and rightly so.

I don't understand this argument that elected Republicans get a free pass because a journalist or a protester did something or a liberal blogger wrote something nasty in their journal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CJCRANE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 05:24 AM
Response to Original message
12. It wasn't a meeting or a debate and you know that.
Just let an elected Democrat do the same thing to Bush and let's see what the hypocrites say then.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:21 AM
Response to Original message
17. precedent? bwahahaha. hardly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 06:23 AM
Response to Original message
19. I don't think
that we should legalize Lonnie Anderson's hair. It would send the wrong message to children, especially in a time that they should be studying for the lunch regents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frylock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-16-09 12:57 PM
Response to Reply #19
23. well played, sir..
well played.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 18th 2014, 02:00 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC