Chuck Schumer, admonishing Judge Alito in January 2006:

Quote :

"We need to know: when a president goes too far, will you be a check on his power or will you issue him a blank check to exercise whatever power alone he thinks appropriate?"

Chuck Schumer in 2001:

Quote :

"U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 107th Congress - 1st Session Question: On Passage of the Bill (H.R. 3162 ) Vote Number: 313 Vote Date: October 25, 2001, 01:54 PM Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Bill Passed Measure Number: H.R. 3162 (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT ACT) Act of 2001 ) Measure Title: A bill to deter and punish terrorist acts in the United States and around the world, to enhance law enforcement investigatory tools, and for other purposes. Schumer (D-NY), Yea "

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=1&vote=00313

Chuck Schumer in 2002:

Quote :

"U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 107th Congress - 2nd Session Question: On the Joint Resolution (H.J.Res. 114 ) Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 Vote Number: 237 Vote Date: October 11, 2002, 12:50 AM Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Joint Resolution Passed Schumer (D-NY), Yea "

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=2&vote=00237

[Edited on January 10, 2006 at 9:23 AM. Reason : s]

1/10/2006 9:15:29 AM

"Enough of this fooling around...from now on refer to this j00 as "Chuckie--I want your guns--Schumer."

[Edited on January 10, 2006 at 10:12 AM. Reason : `]

1/10/2006 9:54:30 AM

So you're saying that, by voting for the patriot act and the war in Iraq, Schumer should support the completely unchecked power of the executive?

1/10/2006 11:19:35 AM

haha

don't you know that it's what politicians say, NOT what they DO, that's important?

1/10/2006 11:26:28 AM

that sounds like humankind in general

1/10/2006 12:00:21 PM

i just thought it was funny, that's all. no reason to get all defensive about it

1/10/2006 12:41:12 PM

Do as I say, not as I do.

They want everyone in America to stop driving SUV's, while they are driven around in fleets of Excursions/Escalades/Expeditions/Navigators/Suburbans....

1/10/2006 3:20:23 PM

only Feingold voted against patriot Act. But anyway, this is apples to oranges, patriot act (passed by congress) does not mean Bush rules by fiat, as bush is trying to do now.

1/10/2006 3:27:41 PM

nonsense....

1/10/2006 3:30:30 PM

lots of people have changed their mind on these issues since 2001. i am one of those people.

OMF FLIP FLIOPS!!!1

1/10/2006 3:49:40 PM

pssssst

Quote :

"October 25, 2001"

5 weeks after 9/11

Quote :

"October 11, 2002"

3 weeks before an election

1/10/2006 3:56:58 PM

haha that's funny to see liberals defending the patriot act and iraq war resolution

about the same as all those conservatives defending communist china in the other thread

[Edited on January 10, 2006 at 4:22 PM. Reason : s]

1/10/2006 4:21:37 PM

its funny to see someone act like its impossible to obtain more information on a topic and change your mind on it.

1/10/2006 4:24:53 PM

sure buddy, that's what happened.

1/10/2006 4:31:29 PM

i'm not defending the patriot act or the war

i'm defending doing what you have to do to stay elected

they aren't called "career politicians" for a reason

1/10/2006 4:32:18 PM

Chuck Schumer:

Quote :

"We need to know: when a president goes too far, will you be a check on his power or will you issue him a blank check to exercise whatever power alone he thinks appropriate?"

now that's just funny. he should have ended with, "and believe me, I'm speaking from experience here!!"

[Edited on January 10, 2006 at 4:40 PM. Reason : s]

1/10/2006 4:39:39 PM

The republican/democrat two-party system is a big sham, as anyone who stops for just a few seconds and thinks about it can discover.

From recent events, it is blatantly obvious that the democrats are merely masquerading as a genuine opposition party--when in reality they are going along with what the republicans are doing. For example, the democrats give you puffed up rhetoric about how they oppose the war in Iraq, but their actions show just the opposite. They should have gone to town on the fact that Bush and the republicans deliberately misled the public to go to war in Iraq (DOWNING STREET MEMO). There should have been impeachment proceedings. But there was virtually nothing. And now the democrats are voting in favor of the war and even speaking in favor of the war. Even the Clintons are for the war. Kerry wanted to send more troops than Bush was proposing. The democrats should be screaming bloody murder over the warrantless spying, and there should be impeachment proceedings. Bush has admittedly violated the Bill of Rights for crying out loud. But there is only some feeble rhetoric to give the appearance of an opposition.

Then you have the Republicans. Wake up and look at what they're doing. The national debt has skyrocketed from 4 trillion to over 8 trillion dollars under Bush and a republican controlled congress. The size and power of government has been dramatically increased. The democrats have to be absolutely loving this. And you know that if a democratic president had jacked the national debt up this high and increased the size and power of government like this, republicans and "conservatives" would be denouncing it. But I guess if republicans do it, it's "conservative" and good.

Then the republicans do absolutely nothing about the massive illegal alien immigration problem, EVEN AFTER 9/11 (which would have been the perfect opportunity to finally do something). Under Bush, the nation has seen the largest wave of illegal immigration in the nation's history. And now Bush is calling for amnesty for the illegals, and calling patriotic groups like the Minutemen "vigilantes."

These recent events are really exposing the two parties for what they are, and consequently more and more people are starting to break out of their blind loyalty to the two parties and abandon them.

[Edited on January 10, 2006 at 4:51 PM. Reason : `]

1/10/2006 4:48:27 PM

that's the first sane post you've made, salisbury... too bad it doesn't belong in this thread.

[Edited on January 10, 2006 at 5:15 PM. Reason : .]

1/10/2006 5:14:58 PM

As if the Democrats weren't screaming about the warrantless NSA spying. For Christ's sake, they're juxtaposing Bush with Nixon. What more do you want?

http://www.democrats.org/a/2006/01/new_dnc_web_vid.php

Generally though, you're right. The two parties, and ultimately all parties, are just different turds from the same asshole.

1/10/2006 5:42:38 PM

Quote :

"They should have gone to town on the fact that Bush and the republicans deliberately misled the public to go to war in Iraq (DOWNING STREET MEMO)"

they did.

Quote :

"There should have been impeachment proceedings."

Doesn't that take like amajority vote or something?

Quote :

"The national debt has skyrocketed from 4 trillion to over 8 trillion dollars under Bush and a republican controlled congress."

maybe it has something to do w/ the fact that bush isn't a republican...

Quote :

"And you know that if a democratic president had jacked the national debt up this high and increased the size and power of government like this, republicans and "conservatives" would be denouncing it. But I guess if republicans do it, it's "conservative" and good."

welcome to politics. The dems blast the repubs for everything they do and the repubs blast the dems for everything they do. Its been going on since at least clinton. get over it.

Quote :

"Then the republicans do absolutely nothing about the massive illegal alien immigration problem, EVEN AFTER 9/11 (which would have been the perfect opportunity to finally do something)"

Bush aint gonna piss off the spics.

Quote :

"Under Bush, the nation has seen the largest wave of illegal immigration in the nation's history."

Wholly unfair to compare, given the nature of population growth. Put simply, more spics means you have more spics that will cross the border. AKA, quit being sensationalist.

Quote :

"And now Bush is calling for amnesty for the illegals"

Bush aint gonna piss off the spics.

Quote :

"and calling patriotic groups like the Minutemen "vigilantes.""

What would you call someone who is taking the law into their own hands, whether you agree with their purpose or not?

1/10/2006 5:52:28 PM

Quote :

""We need to know: when a president goes too far, will you be a check on his power or will you issue him a blank check to exercise whatever power alone he thinks appropriate?""

YES YES YES!!!!

Clearly this is quite the thread. Schumer has wanted to give the president a blank check from day one. WHAT A COGENT ARGUMENT!!!!!!!!!!!!

1/10/2006 6:32:39 PM

its not so much an argument as a humorous observation. he should have ended with, "and believe me, I'm speaking from experience here!!" and then hung his head in shame

1/11/2006 7:47:31 AM

Quote :

"What would you call someone who is taking the law into their own hands, whether you agree with their purpose or not?"

The President.

1/11/2006 8:09:52 AM

uh the illegal immigration issue has been partially helped. Federal funding for new guards has been tripled in the past 2 years and in addition instead of sending the illegal immigrants back across the border they are send to work camps where they help build fencing along the border as well as clear shrubbery and other things. This is only Texas of course.

Though... the bill that would let companies bring over workers for "projects" got me riled up. I don't know what happened to that though.

1/11/2006 8:17:11 AM