Friday, October 06, 2006

Arcuri Supporters Should Thank Me

Democrats who still support Michael Arcuri, in spite of Arcuri's move away from the mainstream of the Democratic Party to embrace George W. Bush and the Republican agenda of torture, unrestrained presidential power, and the disintegration of the Bill of Rights, say that Arcuri had no choice but to support the Military Commissions Act.

These Democrats say that Michael Arcuri had to support the Military Commissions Act because the voters of the 24th congressional district like the law. They say that voters here appreciate the legalization of torture, the end to enforcement of the Geneva Conventions, the withdrawal of habeas corpus rights, and the institution of the power of arbitrary imprisonment by the President of the United States.

Well, if that's really true, then why are these Arcuri supporters so angry with me for pointing out that Michael Arcuri supports these measures.

If the voters of the 24th congressional district really support these attacks on America's freedoms, then Arcuri supporters ought to be coming here to thank me. After all, if they're right about our district's voters, then every time I write the truth that Michael Arcuri supports torture, I should be winning him more voters and helping his campaign.

Yet, Michael Arcuri's Democratic supporters aren't thanking me. They're coming here and telling me time after time that I'm making Michael Arcuri look bad by pointing out that he is on the record supporting revoking habeas corpus, legalizing torture, and abandoning the Geneva Conventions.

The way they write, you'd think that these positions are liabilities for Michael Arcuri. Why, you might even suspect that these Arcuri Democrats actually believe that 24th district voters are upset at Mike Arcuri for supporting George W. Bush and the Military Commissions Act.

Will these Arcuri Democrats please make up their minds? Either the people love the Military Commissions Act and I'm helping the Arcuri campaign, or the people hate the Military Commissions Act and I'm doing the Arcuri campaign great harm.

So which is it, Arcuri supporters?


Anonymous said...

Actually Jon - the reason Arcuri needed to voice support for the law was because the Republicans from Bush on down were going to do a full court press on it if he opposed it and there simply isn't enough time to educate the populace on it so they actually understand it.

Heck Jon - I'll bet the average person on the street can't even name the Democratic and Republican candidates for Congress unless they are in eyesight of one of their lawn signs.

If Bush says it's good for their security, a majority of people will simply accept that by default because they are used to having a President who looks out for their interests and doesn't lie to them.

Six weeks before an extremely close election is not enough time to debunk that sort of belief framework.

I don't really care how you think anymore because you are obsessed with your point of view and not with ousting the Republicans who have got us to this point.

I'm not angry with you, I just believe you no longer want to Take Back New York's 24th. You are now willing to leave it in the default Republican's hands because you've finally found an issue you can focus your long time unhappiness with Mike Arcuri on.

24 Independent said...

No, I want to take the district back, but take a look at the tag line up at the top of the blog. It' doesn't mention taking it back from the Republicans.

Yes, I am obssessed with working to preserve and restore American freedom.

You're wrong, by the way, about this district's voters and Bush. The polls have clearly shown that a very large majority reject Bush and don't trust him.

Arcuri was never under threat from Bush. Never was.

He didn't need to give torture a big hug. He chose to do it, and made that choice without even reading the legislation.

Doesn't that bother you?

Anonymous said...

That Bush's rating is unfavorable doesn't mean the voters don't believe him. They just don't like him. Big difference.

Anonymous said...

Eric Massa argues against torture.

"If we had used sound counterinsurgency techniques instead of resorting to torture, Iraq probably wouldn't have become as big of a mess as it is now. Rumsfeld's lack of proper leadership is directly responsible for the poor results we see today in Iraq. Torture didn't work before and it won't work now. What we need is less torture and more leadership."

Candidate just to the west, more conservative generally, more conservative district. Wish I lived there instead of the 24th.

Curious said...

12:24 Yes, but Massa's gonna lose to a guy who believes in torture--or at least in threatening his own wife with a loaded gun and the local population with a "loaded" vehicle. But you can wish you lived there if you like.

Anonymous said...


Maybe we need a candidate swap - Massa runs here, Arcuri there.