I feel foolish about it, but I'm surprised at the reaction of other 24th District Democrats to the news that Michael Arcuri supports the Bush Administration's grab for dictatorial power through the Military Commissions Act. That reaction: If the Democratic candidate supports it, don't criticize him for it.
What are we working for, anyway? Just to get our team in power, no matter what it takes to do so?
The hunger to win this election has twisted the identity of the 24th District Democrats into something downright ugly. The 24th District Democrats have now accepted the ideological frame of Karl Rove.
In this new way of Democratic thinking, defending America's fundamental freedom takes a back seat. The Geneva Conventions aren't so important any more. Neither are habeas corpus, the separation of powers, and the Bill of Rights. Most Democrats now seem to believe that these things can be sacrificed, so long as it helps a Democratic politician win election.
It appears that I'm in the minority in the Democratic Party on this issue. I think that sacrificing American liberty in order to help politicians get elected is unacceptable. I'm different that way, I guess, in having limits beyond which I'm not willing to go.
Oh, I'm not saying that the Democrats who continue to support Michael Arcuri like torture, or that they don't care about the Bill of Rights or habeas corpus. I'm just saying that they've made plain that they're willing to go along with the sacrifice of these things, in the pursuit of electoral victory.
I didn't think that Democrats were like that. What a terrible way to find out that I was wrong.
The sad thing is that these Democrats will complain on and on and about George W. Bush and Karl Rove, even though, all the while, they've accepted the Bush/Rove frame. They have accepted the idea that voters will reject a political candidate unless the candidate embraces a totalitarian security agenda. They have accepted the idea that Americans will respond more strongly to fear than hope and an appeal to fairness. They have also accepted the idea that ideas and values matter less than winning. That's pure Rove.
We didn't get a primary this year, so it's in the congressional general election that we will have to make a statement about what we want the Democratic Party to be. We'll see, the morning after Election Day, whether Democratic voters are in it for the team, or are motivated by the idea that America can still be as it has been promised to us.
Thursday, October 05, 2006
Continued Support for Mike Arcuri is Irrational
I understand that it's difficult for Democrats to not vote for a Democrat in times like these. Many Democrats feel that "they" have been out of power for too long, and they yearn to see someone from "their" team representing them in government. I understand. I've felt that way for years.
But, is Michael Arcuri really on your team? Are you willing to say that you're part of the team to legalize torture, to revoke habeas corpus, to end enforcement of the Geneva Conventions, to give amnesty to war criminals, and to allow the President of the United States to imprison anyone he wants?
Many Democrats rationalize their continued support for Michael Arcuri by saying that, once Arcuri is elected, he will return to the mainstream of the Democratic Party, and will end his support for President Bush and the Republican agenda.
I know it's hard to give up hope on Michael Arcuri, but hopes like these are irrational. The difficult truth is that, in the House of Representatives, the campaigning never stops. As soon as one election is over, members of the House begin positioning themselves for the next election, two years later.
So, if you say that it's an intelligent campaign move for Michael Arcuri to help the President of the United States and the Republican Party to dismantle the Bill of Rights, and you vote for him with that excuse in hand, get ready. Get ready, because you will have taught Mike Arcuri a bad lesson - that to win elections, he needs to cave in to the Republicans.
This won't be the last time Arcuri betrays your values. He'll do it over and over again, secure in the belief that you would never ever vote against him. He'll take you for granted, while he sets his sights on winning the affection of Republican voters.
If Arcuri is willing to sacrifice habeas corpus to get elected this time, what will he sacrifice next time? The right to a free press?
If you don't think there will be a next time, you're fooling yourself. Democrats who keep on supporting Michael Arcuri in spite of his betrayal of us are like women who stay with men who hit them. They make excuses, and say that it was just a one-time thing. No matter how many times they're hit, they say it was justified.
Allow Michael Arcuri to strike out and break your freedom now, and it won't be the last time. Your rational mind knows this to be true. Emotionally, you've built up a connection with the Arcuri for Congress campaign. That's understandable, but you have to have the moral strength to end this dysfunctional relationship.
Women who have children with violent husbands have a moral obligation to their children to leave their husbands, because it isn't just the women who get hit. The kids get hit too.
It's the same thing with Michael Arcuri. Maybe you're willing to give up your freedom. Maybe you're willing to risk it that you won't yourself be greeted at the door by Homeland Security agents ready to take you off to one of Bush's gulags on a trumped up charge.
If that's true, you need to stop thinking about yourself. You need to start thinking about the people who are more vulnerable than you. It's not just your freedom that has been taken away. You need to start thinking about others who, though innocent of any crime, will suffer the extreme consequences of the Military Commissions Act.
We already know of innocent people who have been picked up in the United States, flown off to prisons in undisclosed locations overseas, and tortured. These people never lifted a hand against the United States of America. Michael Arcuri supports the continuation of the program that abused these people.
If you support Michael Arcuri in this election, you're supporting that program too.
A Democrat came here last night and suggested that it's okay for Michael Arcuri to support this program of arbitrary imprisonment and torture, because it's what's needed to get elected.
What will be needed next time?
Getting a Democrat elected is not worth it. I am a Democrat, but I vote for freedom first.
But, is Michael Arcuri really on your team? Are you willing to say that you're part of the team to legalize torture, to revoke habeas corpus, to end enforcement of the Geneva Conventions, to give amnesty to war criminals, and to allow the President of the United States to imprison anyone he wants?
Many Democrats rationalize their continued support for Michael Arcuri by saying that, once Arcuri is elected, he will return to the mainstream of the Democratic Party, and will end his support for President Bush and the Republican agenda.
I know it's hard to give up hope on Michael Arcuri, but hopes like these are irrational. The difficult truth is that, in the House of Representatives, the campaigning never stops. As soon as one election is over, members of the House begin positioning themselves for the next election, two years later.
So, if you say that it's an intelligent campaign move for Michael Arcuri to help the President of the United States and the Republican Party to dismantle the Bill of Rights, and you vote for him with that excuse in hand, get ready. Get ready, because you will have taught Mike Arcuri a bad lesson - that to win elections, he needs to cave in to the Republicans.
This won't be the last time Arcuri betrays your values. He'll do it over and over again, secure in the belief that you would never ever vote against him. He'll take you for granted, while he sets his sights on winning the affection of Republican voters.
If Arcuri is willing to sacrifice habeas corpus to get elected this time, what will he sacrifice next time? The right to a free press?
If you don't think there will be a next time, you're fooling yourself. Democrats who keep on supporting Michael Arcuri in spite of his betrayal of us are like women who stay with men who hit them. They make excuses, and say that it was just a one-time thing. No matter how many times they're hit, they say it was justified.
Allow Michael Arcuri to strike out and break your freedom now, and it won't be the last time. Your rational mind knows this to be true. Emotionally, you've built up a connection with the Arcuri for Congress campaign. That's understandable, but you have to have the moral strength to end this dysfunctional relationship.
Women who have children with violent husbands have a moral obligation to their children to leave their husbands, because it isn't just the women who get hit. The kids get hit too.
It's the same thing with Michael Arcuri. Maybe you're willing to give up your freedom. Maybe you're willing to risk it that you won't yourself be greeted at the door by Homeland Security agents ready to take you off to one of Bush's gulags on a trumped up charge.
If that's true, you need to stop thinking about yourself. You need to start thinking about the people who are more vulnerable than you. It's not just your freedom that has been taken away. You need to start thinking about others who, though innocent of any crime, will suffer the extreme consequences of the Military Commissions Act.
We already know of innocent people who have been picked up in the United States, flown off to prisons in undisclosed locations overseas, and tortured. These people never lifted a hand against the United States of America. Michael Arcuri supports the continuation of the program that abused these people.
If you support Michael Arcuri in this election, you're supporting that program too.
A Democrat came here last night and suggested that it's okay for Michael Arcuri to support this program of arbitrary imprisonment and torture, because it's what's needed to get elected.
What will be needed next time?
Getting a Democrat elected is not worth it. I am a Democrat, but I vote for freedom first.
Wednesday, October 04, 2006
Will Michael Arcuri admit that he was wrong?
Many 24th district Democrats are starting to fret that I am openly denouncing Michael Arcuri's candidacy. Tonight, one wrote in with the complaint that my little blog here is giving the Republicans the victory that they want.
Well, that's flattering, but realistically, that's not how it works. It's the voters that will deliver the election to one candidate or another. I'm just giving out information to the voters. Lately, that information is damning to Michael Arcuri, but is that my fault?
I'm not a party hack. I'm nobody's shill. Nobody pays me to write this blog, and I'm not about to give up my independent voice to serve someone else's agenda. I set up this blog to promote the ideals that I think ought to be represented in the House of Representatives. I value those ideals over any political party, and over any political candidate.
I'm willing to be somewhat pragmatic, which is why I supported the candidacy of Michael Arcuri until last week. Michael Arcuri takes many wrong stands, and some right stands. He's a lousy campaigner, and he's an arrogant politician who takes pains to restrict communication with his constituents. On the other hand, a Democratic majority is important.
However, as I see it, the Military Commissions Act trumps everything else. The Military Commissions Act, HR 6166, is so devastating to the foundations of American democracy that I feel morally obligated to oppose any politician who supports it.
The Military Commissions Act legalizes torture, ends enforcement of the Geneva Conventions, allows war criminals to walk free, allows the President to round up and imprison people in secret merely by naming them "enemy", revokes habeas corpus in defiance of the clear standards of the Constitution, and establishes a new system of courts with rules so overwhelmingly slanted against the accused that anyone could be convicted of anything - and put to death - even without evidence of guilt.
This is not just wrong. It is a threat to our very civilization. It is not an issue that I will compromise. I will oppose any politician who supports the Military Commissions Act. Period. No exceptions.
Now, if Michael Arcuri's campaign is feeling the heat and is threatened by this stand that I take, then it's up to Michael Arcuri to do the right thing. Every Democrat who comes to read this blog knows that Michael Arcuri did the wrong thing when he gave his support to the Republican Military Commissions Act.
If Mike Arcuri wants me to lay off, then all he has to do is what he should do anyway. All Michael Arcuri has to do is admit that he made a mistake when he endorsed the Military Commissions Act.
Just a little mea culpa, Mr. Arcuri, and then I'll lay off your campaign and I'll start pounding away at Ray Meier. It's that easy.
You know Michael Arcuri made a mistake. I know Michael Arcuri made a mistake. Now, will Michael Arcuri admit that he made a mistake?
It's his choice, not mine.
Well, that's flattering, but realistically, that's not how it works. It's the voters that will deliver the election to one candidate or another. I'm just giving out information to the voters. Lately, that information is damning to Michael Arcuri, but is that my fault?
I'm not a party hack. I'm nobody's shill. Nobody pays me to write this blog, and I'm not about to give up my independent voice to serve someone else's agenda. I set up this blog to promote the ideals that I think ought to be represented in the House of Representatives. I value those ideals over any political party, and over any political candidate.
I'm willing to be somewhat pragmatic, which is why I supported the candidacy of Michael Arcuri until last week. Michael Arcuri takes many wrong stands, and some right stands. He's a lousy campaigner, and he's an arrogant politician who takes pains to restrict communication with his constituents. On the other hand, a Democratic majority is important.
However, as I see it, the Military Commissions Act trumps everything else. The Military Commissions Act, HR 6166, is so devastating to the foundations of American democracy that I feel morally obligated to oppose any politician who supports it.
The Military Commissions Act legalizes torture, ends enforcement of the Geneva Conventions, allows war criminals to walk free, allows the President to round up and imprison people in secret merely by naming them "enemy", revokes habeas corpus in defiance of the clear standards of the Constitution, and establishes a new system of courts with rules so overwhelmingly slanted against the accused that anyone could be convicted of anything - and put to death - even without evidence of guilt.
This is not just wrong. It is a threat to our very civilization. It is not an issue that I will compromise. I will oppose any politician who supports the Military Commissions Act. Period. No exceptions.
Now, if Michael Arcuri's campaign is feeling the heat and is threatened by this stand that I take, then it's up to Michael Arcuri to do the right thing. Every Democrat who comes to read this blog knows that Michael Arcuri did the wrong thing when he gave his support to the Republican Military Commissions Act.
If Mike Arcuri wants me to lay off, then all he has to do is what he should do anyway. All Michael Arcuri has to do is admit that he made a mistake when he endorsed the Military Commissions Act.
Just a little mea culpa, Mr. Arcuri, and then I'll lay off your campaign and I'll start pounding away at Ray Meier. It's that easy.
You know Michael Arcuri made a mistake. I know Michael Arcuri made a mistake. Now, will Michael Arcuri admit that he made a mistake?
It's his choice, not mine.
No One Says Michael Arcuri Is A Great Choice Anymore
I've noticed something remarkable about Democratic supporters of Michael Arcuri over the last week. Ever since Michael Arcuri decided to abandon the mainstream of the Democratic Party and join forces with George W. Bush to promote HR 6166, the Military Commissions Act, Arcuri supporters have stopped being Arcuri supporters. They have become Arcuri apologists.
It's no wonder, when you think about it. Here Mike Arcuri is, telling Democrats that he would vote for a bill that legalizes torture, revokes habeas corpus, gives the President the power to imprison anyone without criminal charges, provides amnesty to war criminals, and replaces the right to a fair trial with secret courts that can convict people of crimes and sentence them to death even before a proper investigation of the alleged crime is taking place (I'm not kidding - it's in the law that Arcuri supports. READ IT.)
Even longtime cheerleaders of Michael Arcuri have stopped coming to this blog to say what a great choice Arcuri is. They used to say that if we just got to know Michael Arcuri, we'd want him representing us in Congress. They used to say that Mike Arcuri was a brilliant politician. They don't say that any more.
Now all these last few dogged Arcuri loyalists have to say in Michael Arcuri's defense is that, although Michael Arcuri is a bad choice for Congress, Ray Meier is worse. I don't hear anyone pretending anymore that Arcuri is the best candidate the Democrats could have had this year.
The Arcuri for Congress campaign knows that it's in trouble over its allegiance with George W. Bush and the Republican Party to support the new pro-torture law. Maimun Khan, who works on the Arcuri campaign, has released a half-hearted attempt to explain why it's really not so bad that habeas corpus has been revoked, and that Bush can arbitrarily throw people in prison without a trial, and that people can now legally be tortured even within the United States. I have sympathy for her. It must feel terrible to have to defend a Democrat for supporting what the New York Times calls a low point in our democracy, "our generation's version of the Alien and Sedition Acts".
Even old Bob Hyde, who stopped blogging in favor of Michael Arcuri a long time ago, stirred himself for a couple of days to try to write about how bad the Republicans, including Ray Meier, are. But Hyde can't seem to bring himself to praise Michael Arcuri.
The Arcuri for Congress campaign is reacting in typical fashion, by becoming even more defensive and secretive, trying to cut back on opportunities for Democratic voters to interact with the campaign. They even took down the link on the Arcuri for Congress web site to MoveOn's online endorsement contest. Apparently, Michael Arcuri is afraid that web site visitors might start going there to vote for Ray Meier instead of for him.
Anyone can see that it was a colossal blunder for Arcuri to support the infamous Military Commissions Act without bothering to read it first. However, it seems that Michael Arcuri just can't admit that he was wrong.
There's been nothing on the Arcuri for Congress web site about this issue. Instead, what's the news we get out of the Arcuri campaign? Michael Arcuri's "breaking news" is that uncut sheets of the Arcuri for Congress trading cards are now available.
Does that make up for Arcuri's support for George W. Bush's failed agenda?
I don't think even Michael Arcuri's last dogged defenders could say such a thing.
We Democrats deserve better than this.
It's no wonder, when you think about it. Here Mike Arcuri is, telling Democrats that he would vote for a bill that legalizes torture, revokes habeas corpus, gives the President the power to imprison anyone without criminal charges, provides amnesty to war criminals, and replaces the right to a fair trial with secret courts that can convict people of crimes and sentence them to death even before a proper investigation of the alleged crime is taking place (I'm not kidding - it's in the law that Arcuri supports. READ IT.)
Even longtime cheerleaders of Michael Arcuri have stopped coming to this blog to say what a great choice Arcuri is. They used to say that if we just got to know Michael Arcuri, we'd want him representing us in Congress. They used to say that Mike Arcuri was a brilliant politician. They don't say that any more.
Now all these last few dogged Arcuri loyalists have to say in Michael Arcuri's defense is that, although Michael Arcuri is a bad choice for Congress, Ray Meier is worse. I don't hear anyone pretending anymore that Arcuri is the best candidate the Democrats could have had this year.
The Arcuri for Congress campaign knows that it's in trouble over its allegiance with George W. Bush and the Republican Party to support the new pro-torture law. Maimun Khan, who works on the Arcuri campaign, has released a half-hearted attempt to explain why it's really not so bad that habeas corpus has been revoked, and that Bush can arbitrarily throw people in prison without a trial, and that people can now legally be tortured even within the United States. I have sympathy for her. It must feel terrible to have to defend a Democrat for supporting what the New York Times calls a low point in our democracy, "our generation's version of the Alien and Sedition Acts".
Even old Bob Hyde, who stopped blogging in favor of Michael Arcuri a long time ago, stirred himself for a couple of days to try to write about how bad the Republicans, including Ray Meier, are. But Hyde can't seem to bring himself to praise Michael Arcuri.
The Arcuri for Congress campaign is reacting in typical fashion, by becoming even more defensive and secretive, trying to cut back on opportunities for Democratic voters to interact with the campaign. They even took down the link on the Arcuri for Congress web site to MoveOn's online endorsement contest. Apparently, Michael Arcuri is afraid that web site visitors might start going there to vote for Ray Meier instead of for him.
Anyone can see that it was a colossal blunder for Arcuri to support the infamous Military Commissions Act without bothering to read it first. However, it seems that Michael Arcuri just can't admit that he was wrong.
There's been nothing on the Arcuri for Congress web site about this issue. Instead, what's the news we get out of the Arcuri campaign? Michael Arcuri's "breaking news" is that uncut sheets of the Arcuri for Congress trading cards are now available.
Does that make up for Arcuri's support for George W. Bush's failed agenda?
I don't think even Michael Arcuri's last dogged defenders could say such a thing.
We Democrats deserve better than this.
Tuesday, October 03, 2006
Did Michael Arcuri Support the Iraq War or Not?
An entire election season has come and gone, and throughout it all, Michael Arcuri has refused to answer this basic question:
Did you support the Iraq War when it began in 2003?
There is no absolute evidence either way, but the clues are all there to suggest that, in fact, Michael Arcuri did support the invasion and occupation of Iraq.
There is, for one thing, no proof that Michael Arcuri did anything to try to convince Sherwood Boehlert to vote against the legislation authorizing the start of the Iraq War.
There is also the curiously consistent argument used by Mike Arcuri's defenders that, as a District Attorney, Arcuri could not have done anything in public to oppose the war. That's an absurd argument, given that as Attorney General of all of New York State, Eliot Spitzer took a public stand on the war.
Then there's the fact that Michael Arcuri calls himself "a Boehlert Democrat". Sherwood Boehlert voted for the war. So, when Arcuri embraces Boehlert's positions, he's embracing support for the Iraq War too. What is a Boehlert Democrat, if not a Democrat who thought that going to war in Iraq would be a great idea?
It seems that Michael Arcuri only started to criticize the Iraq War recently, when it became the popular thing to do.
This isn't just Monday morning quarterbacking, dwelling on the past. The positions that politicians took on starting the Iraq War are a good indication of what they would do in similar situations in the future. Given another reckless rush to war, we have every reason to believe that Mike Arcuri would jump on the pro-war bandwagon.
Michael Arcuri is a moral jellyfish, drifting to whatever positions the prevailing political currents take him. Instead of moving for himself, Arcuri takes the easy way out, and just hangs out with all the other flotsam. He doesn't even hope to be a leader. Arcuri's greatest policy ambition is to blend in with the water all around him, so that no one can see how little substance he actually has.
We Democrats deserved to have a candidate with a spine, not a moral invertebrate like Michael Arcuri. We got no primary, of course, because local party bosses didn't want to give Democratic voters a say. The result? We're left with the quivering mass of slipperiness that is Michael Arcuri.
In 2008, let's support the candidate that we don't feel that we have to apologize for.
Did you support the Iraq War when it began in 2003?
There is no absolute evidence either way, but the clues are all there to suggest that, in fact, Michael Arcuri did support the invasion and occupation of Iraq.
There is, for one thing, no proof that Michael Arcuri did anything to try to convince Sherwood Boehlert to vote against the legislation authorizing the start of the Iraq War.
There is also the curiously consistent argument used by Mike Arcuri's defenders that, as a District Attorney, Arcuri could not have done anything in public to oppose the war. That's an absurd argument, given that as Attorney General of all of New York State, Eliot Spitzer took a public stand on the war.
Then there's the fact that Michael Arcuri calls himself "a Boehlert Democrat". Sherwood Boehlert voted for the war. So, when Arcuri embraces Boehlert's positions, he's embracing support for the Iraq War too. What is a Boehlert Democrat, if not a Democrat who thought that going to war in Iraq would be a great idea?
It seems that Michael Arcuri only started to criticize the Iraq War recently, when it became the popular thing to do.
This isn't just Monday morning quarterbacking, dwelling on the past. The positions that politicians took on starting the Iraq War are a good indication of what they would do in similar situations in the future. Given another reckless rush to war, we have every reason to believe that Mike Arcuri would jump on the pro-war bandwagon.
Michael Arcuri is a moral jellyfish, drifting to whatever positions the prevailing political currents take him. Instead of moving for himself, Arcuri takes the easy way out, and just hangs out with all the other flotsam. He doesn't even hope to be a leader. Arcuri's greatest policy ambition is to blend in with the water all around him, so that no one can see how little substance he actually has.
We Democrats deserved to have a candidate with a spine, not a moral invertebrate like Michael Arcuri. We got no primary, of course, because local party bosses didn't want to give Democratic voters a say. The result? We're left with the quivering mass of slipperiness that is Michael Arcuri.
In 2008, let's support the candidate that we don't feel that we have to apologize for.
Monday, October 02, 2006
Michael Arcuri Supported Torture Law Without Reading It
More news on Michael Arcuri's decision to abandon the Democratic Party mainstream and join George W. Bush and the Republicans on HR 6166:
Yesterday, Mike Arcuri admitted to an audience of Democrats that he didn't bother to read the pro-torture law before he announced that he supports it.
Yes, you're reading that correctly. Michael Arcuri told everybody last week that he supports HR 6166, the Republican law that will...
Revoke habeas corpus
Legalize torture
Allow George W. Bush to declare anyone an "enemy" and then throw those people into prison for the rest of their lives, without ever charging them with any criminal charge
Set up kangaroo courts in which trials can begin even before an investigation into the alleged crime has been conducted...
... but when Michael Arcuri made that announcement at last week's debate, he hadn't even bothered to read the bill!
What's more, a week has gone by now since the text of the legislation was available, and Michael Arcuri still hasn't read it!
You want a congressman who doesn't bother reading a law before he votes on it? Then Michael Arcuri is your man.
Michael Arcuri came to that meeting and promised that he would not be a rubber stamp for George W. Bush. But what's the reality?
The reality is that Michael Arcuri was told to support HR 6166, and he did what he was told, without asking questions, without reading what he was being asked to sign onto.
That's the definition of a rubber stamp.
The worst thing of all: If elected to Congress, Michael Arcuri won't be a rubber stamp for the Democrats. Michael Arcuri will be a rubber stamp for George W. Bush and the Republican Party.
Why doesn't Michael Arcuri just cut to the chase and switch his party affiliation to Republican now, and be honest about it?
Yesterday, Mike Arcuri admitted to an audience of Democrats that he didn't bother to read the pro-torture law before he announced that he supports it.
Yes, you're reading that correctly. Michael Arcuri told everybody last week that he supports HR 6166, the Republican law that will...
... but when Michael Arcuri made that announcement at last week's debate, he hadn't even bothered to read the bill!
What's more, a week has gone by now since the text of the legislation was available, and Michael Arcuri still hasn't read it!
You want a congressman who doesn't bother reading a law before he votes on it? Then Michael Arcuri is your man.
Michael Arcuri came to that meeting and promised that he would not be a rubber stamp for George W. Bush. But what's the reality?
The reality is that Michael Arcuri was told to support HR 6166, and he did what he was told, without asking questions, without reading what he was being asked to sign onto.
That's the definition of a rubber stamp.
The worst thing of all: If elected to Congress, Michael Arcuri won't be a rubber stamp for the Democrats. Michael Arcuri will be a rubber stamp for George W. Bush and the Republican Party.
Why doesn't Michael Arcuri just cut to the chase and switch his party affiliation to Republican now, and be honest about it?
Michael Arcuri Denies Press Requests For Interviews
What we saw of Michael Arcuri today in interview was high in sound bites, but frighteningly low in details. It was more of the rule than the exception for Michael Arcuri to not really know much about the subjects he was asked about.
The word has gotten around that Michael Arcuri is trying to speak as little in public in possible because he's afraid that his ignorance will cause embarassing gaffes.
That would explain why Mike Arcuri has, for so long, ignored attempts by the press to help give him coverage through interviews.
Take Eric Kuhn, for example. Eric Kuhn interviews plenty of politicians for the radio, like Eliot Spitzer and Cindy Sheehan. Michael Arcuri could have gotten plenty of attention for his campaign with an Eric Kuhn interview, but he has refused to sit for an interview.
Here's what the Eric Kuhn web site has to say about Michael Arcuri:
Incompetent, lazy, campaigning. That's what we Democrats in New York's 24th congressional district got as a reward for not putting Michael Arcuri through a primary contest.
Note for 2008: Let's have a primary, and let the Democratic voters decide who should represent them. The County Democratic Committees seem not to be able to make a competent choice.
The word has gotten around that Michael Arcuri is trying to speak as little in public in possible because he's afraid that his ignorance will cause embarassing gaffes.
That would explain why Mike Arcuri has, for so long, ignored attempts by the press to help give him coverage through interviews.
Take Eric Kuhn, for example. Eric Kuhn interviews plenty of politicians for the radio, like Eliot Spitzer and Cindy Sheehan. Michael Arcuri could have gotten plenty of attention for his campaign with an Eric Kuhn interview, but he has refused to sit for an interview.
Here's what the Eric Kuhn web site has to say about Michael Arcuri:
'Kuhn and Company' strongly believes in giving both sides a chance to come onto the show. We have used numerous channels to bring Democrat Michael A. Arcuri on, but he has denied all requests thus far.
Incompetent, lazy, campaigning. That's what we Democrats in New York's 24th congressional district got as a reward for not putting Michael Arcuri through a primary contest.
Note for 2008: Let's have a primary, and let the Democratic voters decide who should represent them. The County Democratic Committees seem not to be able to make a competent choice.
Sunday, October 01, 2006
Michael Arcuri Reaffirms He Supports Torture Law
I just came back home from a meeting of the Ulysses Democratic Committee, not even a quarter mile away from my home. Even I, who have been covering this campaign all year, have trouble believing the duplicity of the Michael Arcuri for Congress campaign.
There Michael Arcuri stood in the kitchen of some of my neighbors, and talked about how important it is to elect himself to Congress so that we can defend liberty from George W. Bush. He even uttered the words "habeas corpus".
But, just a few minutes earlier, when he was asked by Ulysses Democrats if he indeed supported HR 6166, he said yes, because it's important to protect American soldiers. HR 6166, which will signed into law by the President of the United States any day now, does the following:
1. Revokes habeas corpus
2. Allows torture to create "extreme pain", and even the use of sex as a form of torture
3. Allows the President of the United States to declare any person to be an enemy, and thereby to take away every one of that person's rights
4. Allows the President to throw people into jail for the rest of their lives without charging them with a crime
5. To set up kangaroo courts in which
a- defendants do not have the right to see the evidence against them
b- neither defendants nor their representatives cannot cross examine people who testify against them
c- defendants can be banished from the courtroom at any moment, even if they do not disrupt the proceedings
d- the trial can begin BEFORE an investigation into the alleged crime takes place
e- evidence that is the product of torture and other forms of coercion is allowed
f- defendants have no 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination
g- defendants do not even have to be told the nature of the crimes of which they are accused
h- records of the trial can be kept secret from the American people forever
Michael Arcuri reaffirmed at this very same meeting that he supports everything that you see above, yet he has the audacity to come into my village and tell people that he will defend liberty?
Has he no shame?
Michael Arcuri is either a scoundrel or an idiot. Quite likely he is both.
There Michael Arcuri stood in the kitchen of some of my neighbors, and talked about how important it is to elect himself to Congress so that we can defend liberty from George W. Bush. He even uttered the words "habeas corpus".
But, just a few minutes earlier, when he was asked by Ulysses Democrats if he indeed supported HR 6166, he said yes, because it's important to protect American soldiers. HR 6166, which will signed into law by the President of the United States any day now, does the following:
1. Revokes habeas corpus
2. Allows torture to create "extreme pain", and even the use of sex as a form of torture
3. Allows the President of the United States to declare any person to be an enemy, and thereby to take away every one of that person's rights
4. Allows the President to throw people into jail for the rest of their lives without charging them with a crime
5. To set up kangaroo courts in which
a- defendants do not have the right to see the evidence against them
b- neither defendants nor their representatives cannot cross examine people who testify against them
c- defendants can be banished from the courtroom at any moment, even if they do not disrupt the proceedings
d- the trial can begin BEFORE an investigation into the alleged crime takes place
e- evidence that is the product of torture and other forms of coercion is allowed
f- defendants have no 5th Amendment right against self-incrimination
g- defendants do not even have to be told the nature of the crimes of which they are accused
h- records of the trial can be kept secret from the American people forever
Michael Arcuri reaffirmed at this very same meeting that he supports everything that you see above, yet he has the audacity to come into my village and tell people that he will defend liberty?
Has he no shame?
Michael Arcuri is either a scoundrel or an idiot. Quite likely he is both.
Does Michael Arcuri Endorse The Use of Rape?
"The bill would effectively eliminate the idea of rape as torture."
- New York Times, September 28, 2006
The bill that the New York times is talking about here is the bill that Michael Arcuri supports.
Consider that.
I think Mike Arcuri should explain to us all why he supports a bill that eliminates the idea that rape of prisoners of war is a form of torture.
I also want to hear from all the Democrats here in New York's 24th congressional district who say that we ought to overlook this issue.
I want to hear from those Democrats why we should vote for a man who says that using rape against prisoners of war is a good idea.
By endorsing HR 6166, Michael Arcuri endorsed the use of rape. That's not just something I made up. That's the judgment of the editors of the New York Times.
Come on. Tell me why it's okay to vote for the pro-rape candidate.
Republicans can join in on this one too, because Ray Meier supports the torture-by-rape law too.
When will you allow your political party loyalty to give way to your sense of shame?
- New York Times, September 28, 2006
The bill that the New York times is talking about here is the bill that Michael Arcuri supports.
Consider that.
I think Mike Arcuri should explain to us all why he supports a bill that eliminates the idea that rape of prisoners of war is a form of torture.
I also want to hear from all the Democrats here in New York's 24th congressional district who say that we ought to overlook this issue.
I want to hear from those Democrats why we should vote for a man who says that using rape against prisoners of war is a good idea.
By endorsing HR 6166, Michael Arcuri endorsed the use of rape. That's not just something I made up. That's the judgment of the editors of the New York Times.
Come on. Tell me why it's okay to vote for the pro-rape candidate.
Republicans can join in on this one too, because Ray Meier supports the torture-by-rape law too.
When will you allow your political party loyalty to give way to your sense of shame?
Is Mike Arcuri's Failure on HR 6166 Just One Issue?
In a comment to an earlier article, a reader asked how I could oppose the candidacy of Michael Arcuri just because of "one little issue".
That so-called "one little issue" is Mike Arcuri's support for HR 6166, the law that gives President Bush the powers of a dictator.
Is that just one little issue?
Well, it certainly isn't little.
The impact of HR 6166 is worse than McCarthyism, because instead of happening in a committee hearing that's open to the public, it all goes on behind the scenes, in secret, where there is no chance to bring it under control. This law represents an unprecedented threat to our democracy. Think on the scale of Jim Crow, on the scale of slavery, and you'll get a good idea of the huge size of the problem. America will have to work for a generation to overcome the impact of this one law - if we ever overcome it at all.
It isn't one issue either.
The danger of HR 6166 is that it deals with so many issues at one time. It's a comprehensive bill that attacks American liberty in a huge number of ways, making it impossible for America's traditional standards of decency and fairness in the legal process to withstand the onslaught.
The following are just some of the many serious issues related to Michael Arcuri's support for HR 6166.
Establishing kangaroo courts
Allegations of Michael Arcuri's disregard for civil rights as District Attorney
Torture
Revoking habeas corpus
Scapegoating foreigners
Secret CIA prisons
War Crimes
The integrity of Internet communications
The Bill of Rights
Conviction and punishment without any trial
The future of freedom in America
Voting against the will of the majority of Democratic voters, and the majority of Democrats in Congress
Privacy in our own homes
Legal amnesty for war criminals
A Democratic politician supporting George W. Bush
Rape of prisoners
Bringing the suspicion of dishonor to American soldiers (you know, the "troops")
The Iraq War
America's tarnished reputation in the world
Michael Arcuri's servitude to the DCCC
The equation of dissent with terrorism
Imprisonment without any trial at all
An end to the presumption of innocence
Unrestrained presidential power
By supporting HR 6166, Michael Arcuri has put himself on the wrong side of all these issues... and more.
One little issue? Not by half.
That so-called "one little issue" is Mike Arcuri's support for HR 6166, the law that gives President Bush the powers of a dictator.
Is that just one little issue?
Well, it certainly isn't little.
The impact of HR 6166 is worse than McCarthyism, because instead of happening in a committee hearing that's open to the public, it all goes on behind the scenes, in secret, where there is no chance to bring it under control. This law represents an unprecedented threat to our democracy. Think on the scale of Jim Crow, on the scale of slavery, and you'll get a good idea of the huge size of the problem. America will have to work for a generation to overcome the impact of this one law - if we ever overcome it at all.
It isn't one issue either.
The danger of HR 6166 is that it deals with so many issues at one time. It's a comprehensive bill that attacks American liberty in a huge number of ways, making it impossible for America's traditional standards of decency and fairness in the legal process to withstand the onslaught.
The following are just some of the many serious issues related to Michael Arcuri's support for HR 6166.
By supporting HR 6166, Michael Arcuri has put himself on the wrong side of all these issues... and more.
One little issue? Not by half.
Saturday, September 30, 2006
Michael Arcuri Would Ruin a Democratic Majority
I'm a Democrat. So, I understand why people write here saying that, even though Michael Arcuri is scum, we should vote Arcuri. They're saying that, above all else, we should help the Democrats get a majority in Congress.
I understand why people make that argument, but that argument relies upon an unstated premise. That unstated premise is this: That a Democratic majority in Congress would have voted against HR 6166, the pro-torture, anti-freedom bill that Michael Arcuri supports.
That unstated premise is false.
Do the math: Even if the Democrats had 25 more seats in the House of Representatives to gain a clear majority, HR 6166 would have passed. 34 Democrats crossed party lines to vote for HR 6166.
The reality that these Arcuri-loyalists don't want to admit is that the Democratic majority will not be able to change very much, if enough of those Democrats keep on supporting the Republican agenda, as Arcuri would do.
Mike Arcuri told us that if he gets into Congress, he will vote with the Republicans. If he gets in Congress Mike Arcuri will help George W. Bush. That's what Mike Arcuri told us this week.
Michael Arcuri is a Lieberman Democrat. He is part of the problem.
I understand why people make that argument, but that argument relies upon an unstated premise. That unstated premise is this: That a Democratic majority in Congress would have voted against HR 6166, the pro-torture, anti-freedom bill that Michael Arcuri supports.
That unstated premise is false.
Do the math: Even if the Democrats had 25 more seats in the House of Representatives to gain a clear majority, HR 6166 would have passed. 34 Democrats crossed party lines to vote for HR 6166.
The reality that these Arcuri-loyalists don't want to admit is that the Democratic majority will not be able to change very much, if enough of those Democrats keep on supporting the Republican agenda, as Arcuri would do.
Mike Arcuri told us that if he gets into Congress, he will vote with the Republicans. If he gets in Congress Mike Arcuri will help George W. Bush. That's what Mike Arcuri told us this week.
Michael Arcuri is a Lieberman Democrat. He is part of the problem.
Friday, September 29, 2006
This Democrat Stands Against Michael Arcuri
Michael Arcuri has been a terrible candidate from the start, but what he did last night is unforgiveable.
Michael Arcuri has announced that he supports George W. Bush on torture. Mike Arcuri has announced that he supports George W. Bush on revoking the right to habeas corpus. The Arcuri for Congress campaign confirmed to me on the telephone today that Michael Arcuri would gladly help President Bush dismantle the Bill of Rights.
Michael Arcuri said last night at a debate that he would have voted for HR 6166, a law passed by Congress this week that effectively rips the guts out of our democracy.
What does that mean, practically speaking?
1. I cannot support the candidacy of Michael Arcuri any longer.
2. Michael Arcuri will not get my vote.
3. I feel duty bound as an American citizen to oppose the campaign of Michael Arcuri for Congress.
Let me be clear: I do not support the campaign of Ray Meier. Ray Meier also supports this terrible law.
I will be doing as much as I can between today and Election Day to convince Democrats in the 24th Congressional District to do one of two things:
A. Abstain from casting a vote for any candidate in this race.
B. Cast a protest vote in favor of the third party candidate.
The third party candidate does not support the new law. I just spoke to Mike Sylvia, the Libertarian candidate for Congress in our district, and he said that he is against the torture bill, without equivocation. "I am horrified by the abuses of the Bill of Rights contained in this new law," he said to me. That's a word-for-word quote.
The Republican blogger who calls himself "Biggus Dickus" doesn't think that we Democrats are going to lift a finger in protest against this. He doesn't think that we'll oppose Michael Arcuri on this matter. He writes, "the truth is the far-left voters are going to be pulling the lever for Arcuri anyway. It's just amusing to watch them get all indignant before the inevitable happens."
Dick, you couldn't be more wrong.
Unlike the Republicans, we Democrats have more principles than partisanship. Michael Arcuri doesn't deserve our support, and he won't get it.
I don't want a Republican majority in Congress, but this is more important than party loyalty. This is about doing the right thing. Ray Meier and Michael Arcuri both stand for the wrong thing. So, the only right thing to do is to stand against them both.
Michael Arcuri has announced that he supports George W. Bush on torture. Mike Arcuri has announced that he supports George W. Bush on revoking the right to habeas corpus. The Arcuri for Congress campaign confirmed to me on the telephone today that Michael Arcuri would gladly help President Bush dismantle the Bill of Rights.
Michael Arcuri said last night at a debate that he would have voted for HR 6166, a law passed by Congress this week that effectively rips the guts out of our democracy.
What does that mean, practically speaking?
1. I cannot support the candidacy of Michael Arcuri any longer.
2. Michael Arcuri will not get my vote.
3. I feel duty bound as an American citizen to oppose the campaign of Michael Arcuri for Congress.
Let me be clear: I do not support the campaign of Ray Meier. Ray Meier also supports this terrible law.
I will be doing as much as I can between today and Election Day to convince Democrats in the 24th Congressional District to do one of two things:
A. Abstain from casting a vote for any candidate in this race.
B. Cast a protest vote in favor of the third party candidate.
The third party candidate does not support the new law. I just spoke to Mike Sylvia, the Libertarian candidate for Congress in our district, and he said that he is against the torture bill, without equivocation. "I am horrified by the abuses of the Bill of Rights contained in this new law," he said to me. That's a word-for-word quote.
The Republican blogger who calls himself "Biggus Dickus" doesn't think that we Democrats are going to lift a finger in protest against this. He doesn't think that we'll oppose Michael Arcuri on this matter. He writes, "the truth is the far-left voters are going to be pulling the lever for Arcuri anyway. It's just amusing to watch them get all indignant before the inevitable happens."
Dick, you couldn't be more wrong.
Unlike the Republicans, we Democrats have more principles than partisanship. Michael Arcuri doesn't deserve our support, and he won't get it.
I don't want a Republican majority in Congress, but this is more important than party loyalty. This is about doing the right thing. Ray Meier and Michael Arcuri both stand for the wrong thing. So, the only right thing to do is to stand against them both.
Michael Arcuri Supports the Bush Torture Law!
Last night, Mike Arcuri threw the election to Ray Meier.
I called the Michael Arcuri for Congress campaign just a few minutes ago, and they confirmed that, at the debate last night, Arcuri announced that if he were in Congress, he would have voted in favor of HR 6166.
Yesterday, that same legislation, under the bill number S 3930, was approved by the United States Senate.
More on this to come.
Much more.
I called the Michael Arcuri for Congress campaign just a few minutes ago, and they confirmed that, at the debate last night, Arcuri announced that if he were in Congress, he would have voted in favor of HR 6166.
Yesterday, that same legislation, under the bill number S 3930, was approved by the United States Senate.
More on this to come.
Much more.
Thursday, September 28, 2006
Sherwood Boehlert Betrayed Our Trust with 6166
Sherwood Boehlert betrayed the citizens of New York's 24th Congressional District yesterday. He voted for the HR 6166, the bill that revokes a large number of our freedoms.
Maybe you don't know what HR 6166 does. After all, the name HR 6166 seems pretty harmless - just a bunch of boring paperwork, right?
Wrong.
Here's what the legislation will do if the Senate passes its version, S 3930, today:
If it becomes law, this legislation will:
1. It will revoke habeas corpus
2. It will create a secret committee appointed by Bush and Rumsfeld that has the power to declare any person - even a US citizen - to be an enemy, instantly depriving them of their legal rights. There will be no appeal allowed.
3. It will allow police to search your home without a search warrant
4. It will revoke protection of prisoners of war under the Geneva Conventions
5. It will give George W. Bush amnesty for any war crimes he has committed
6. It will allow for people to be put on trial in front of a kangaroo court military tribunal, even if they aren’t in any military, and have not engaged in military attacks against the USA
7. It will allow the government to convict people of crimes on the basis of secret evidence that the accused never sees
8. It will make it legal for the government to use testimony extracted through torture
9. It will end the legal right to be protected from forced self-incrimination
10. It will allow the government to imprison people without telling them what crimes they are being charged with
11. It will remove the right to cross-examine witnesses
12. It will allow for the records of trials to be kept secret from the American public
13. It will enable trials to begin even before a thorough investigation of the alleged crime has taken place
14. It will take away the right to a speedy trial
If you say that the law won't do these things, it tells me you haven't even read the law. Many members of Congress haven't read the law. Did Sherwood Boehlert bother to read it before he voted yes?
This is a betrayal of the most basic American values. Sherwood Boehlert has lost forever the ability to be fairly called a moderate. This is not a moderate law. This is extremism of the worst kind.
This isn't the kind of issue that wins or loses elections. This is about what's right and what's wrong.
I don't care if you're a Republican, Democrat, or independent voter. We all ought to be able to see that legislation is a serious threat to the American way of life. Our freedom is on the line.
Please, call Senator Schumer this morning. Call Hillary Clinton. Ask them to vote AGAINST S 3930.
Maybe you don't know what HR 6166 does. After all, the name HR 6166 seems pretty harmless - just a bunch of boring paperwork, right?
Wrong.
Here's what the legislation will do if the Senate passes its version, S 3930, today:
If it becomes law, this legislation will:
1. It will revoke habeas corpus
2. It will create a secret committee appointed by Bush and Rumsfeld that has the power to declare any person - even a US citizen - to be an enemy, instantly depriving them of their legal rights. There will be no appeal allowed.
3. It will allow police to search your home without a search warrant
4. It will revoke protection of prisoners of war under the Geneva Conventions
5. It will give George W. Bush amnesty for any war crimes he has committed
6. It will allow for people to be put on trial in front of a kangaroo court military tribunal, even if they aren’t in any military, and have not engaged in military attacks against the USA
7. It will allow the government to convict people of crimes on the basis of secret evidence that the accused never sees
8. It will make it legal for the government to use testimony extracted through torture
9. It will end the legal right to be protected from forced self-incrimination
10. It will allow the government to imprison people without telling them what crimes they are being charged with
11. It will remove the right to cross-examine witnesses
12. It will allow for the records of trials to be kept secret from the American public
13. It will enable trials to begin even before a thorough investigation of the alleged crime has taken place
14. It will take away the right to a speedy trial
If you say that the law won't do these things, it tells me you haven't even read the law. Many members of Congress haven't read the law. Did Sherwood Boehlert bother to read it before he voted yes?
This is a betrayal of the most basic American values. Sherwood Boehlert has lost forever the ability to be fairly called a moderate. This is not a moderate law. This is extremism of the worst kind.
This isn't the kind of issue that wins or loses elections. This is about what's right and what's wrong.
I don't care if you're a Republican, Democrat, or independent voter. We all ought to be able to see that legislation is a serious threat to the American way of life. Our freedom is on the line.
Please, call Senator Schumer this morning. Call Hillary Clinton. Ask them to vote AGAINST S 3930.
Wednesday, September 27, 2006
Is Unreasonable Search And Seizure Okay Or Not?
News about the John McCain torture bill gets worse. I already knew that the legislation would strip habeas corpus rights, allow testimony obtained through torture, and deprive us of the right to a fair trial. Now, I'm reading through it again, and seeing that the newest version of this legislation allows for prosecutors to obtain evidence from people's homes without a search warrant.
No, I'm not kidding. Yes, it's wild. It's outrageous. It's so out of hand that I needed to check my own reading on the matter to make sure I wasn't just seeing things. I'm not. Read this article yourself. Catch the part where it informs us that "prosecutors could ignore American legal standards on search warrants" under this new legislation? Catch the part where it says that, over the weekend, the Republicans in the White House and Congress purposefully removed the provision that would have protected these warrantless searches of people's homes within the United States?
Catch the part where it says that the Democrats aren't sure yet whether they're going to oppose this?
Am I living in some kind of crazy nightmare? If our politicians won't stand up against this insane legislation, if they won't stand up for our basic Constitutional rights to a fair trial, to freedom from self-incrimination, to the right to due process, and to the right of protection from unreasonable search and seizure, then what the bloody hell will they stand up for? This legislation rips away half of the protections of the Bill of Rights, for goodness sakes!
Don't believe the excuse that only the Constitutional rights of foreigners will be taken away. The President of the United States will get the power, through his own secret committee, to declare ANYONE an enemy combatant, seized here in the United States or not, and then all the Constitutional rights of that person get taken away instantly - because there is no more habeas corpus right for the prisoner. If you aren't recognized by the legal system as even existing, you have no access to lawyers, no contact with the outside world, and no opportunity to do anything about it. They get to do anything to you that they want - and you never ever get the right of appeal, or even the right to a trial.
These freedoms that the Republicans are trying to take away are the freedoms that we Americans won way back in the Revolution of 1776. Senator Patrick Leahy is right. This legislation is downright unAmerican... if you believe that an essential part of being an American is having freedom. If all that you believe is that being an American is about waving the flag, don't worry. They're not taking away your right to wave the flag.
Where are the Republicans on this issue? Why aren't they jumping up and down and screaming about how this expands the power of big government? Are the Republicans for big government now?
How about you, Biggus Dickus, the only other blogger who is covering this race between Michael Arcuri and Ray Meier any more? Why aren't you writing about this? How come all you can write about is how sad you are that you couldn't see Laura Bush? Are you not paying attention?
I'm grateful that Michael Arcuri spoke out against this terrible legislation last week, though he did so in meek, uncertain language - and in the Rome Sentinel, which is neither widely read on paper nor easily available online.
The last we heard from Ray Meier, he supported the fake "compromise" that's the foundation of the terrible legislation now being proposed. Since then, Ray Meier has been busy in an ideological embrace with George W. Bush's wife, who supports the attempt to take our freedoms away through this new law.
If Ray Meier stands against this totalitarian legislation, then he needs to say so - loud and clear. We need to hear from both Mike Arcuri and Ray Meier in a way that this grave issue merits - in clear, official statements released to all area newspapers, and published online where everyone can see them.
This issue ought to be above partisan politics, something that Republican and Democratic voters alike can agree upon. No mealy-mouthed half answers and evasions. You now either stand up for freedom or you sit down and watch American freedom being torn apart. Which is it? Are for freedom, or are you against it?
No, I'm not kidding. Yes, it's wild. It's outrageous. It's so out of hand that I needed to check my own reading on the matter to make sure I wasn't just seeing things. I'm not. Read this article yourself. Catch the part where it informs us that "prosecutors could ignore American legal standards on search warrants" under this new legislation? Catch the part where it says that, over the weekend, the Republicans in the White House and Congress purposefully removed the provision that would have protected these warrantless searches of people's homes within the United States?
Catch the part where it says that the Democrats aren't sure yet whether they're going to oppose this?
Am I living in some kind of crazy nightmare? If our politicians won't stand up against this insane legislation, if they won't stand up for our basic Constitutional rights to a fair trial, to freedom from self-incrimination, to the right to due process, and to the right of protection from unreasonable search and seizure, then what the bloody hell will they stand up for? This legislation rips away half of the protections of the Bill of Rights, for goodness sakes!
Don't believe the excuse that only the Constitutional rights of foreigners will be taken away. The President of the United States will get the power, through his own secret committee, to declare ANYONE an enemy combatant, seized here in the United States or not, and then all the Constitutional rights of that person get taken away instantly - because there is no more habeas corpus right for the prisoner. If you aren't recognized by the legal system as even existing, you have no access to lawyers, no contact with the outside world, and no opportunity to do anything about it. They get to do anything to you that they want - and you never ever get the right of appeal, or even the right to a trial.
These freedoms that the Republicans are trying to take away are the freedoms that we Americans won way back in the Revolution of 1776. Senator Patrick Leahy is right. This legislation is downright unAmerican... if you believe that an essential part of being an American is having freedom. If all that you believe is that being an American is about waving the flag, don't worry. They're not taking away your right to wave the flag.
Where are the Republicans on this issue? Why aren't they jumping up and down and screaming about how this expands the power of big government? Are the Republicans for big government now?
How about you, Biggus Dickus, the only other blogger who is covering this race between Michael Arcuri and Ray Meier any more? Why aren't you writing about this? How come all you can write about is how sad you are that you couldn't see Laura Bush? Are you not paying attention?
I'm grateful that Michael Arcuri spoke out against this terrible legislation last week, though he did so in meek, uncertain language - and in the Rome Sentinel, which is neither widely read on paper nor easily available online.
The last we heard from Ray Meier, he supported the fake "compromise" that's the foundation of the terrible legislation now being proposed. Since then, Ray Meier has been busy in an ideological embrace with George W. Bush's wife, who supports the attempt to take our freedoms away through this new law.
If Ray Meier stands against this totalitarian legislation, then he needs to say so - loud and clear. We need to hear from both Mike Arcuri and Ray Meier in a way that this grave issue merits - in clear, official statements released to all area newspapers, and published online where everyone can see them.
This issue ought to be above partisan politics, something that Republican and Democratic voters alike can agree upon. No mealy-mouthed half answers and evasions. You now either stand up for freedom or you sit down and watch American freedom being torn apart. Which is it? Are for freedom, or are you against it?
Ray Meier Supporters Love Rick Santorum
Reason #12 to Not Vote for Ray Meier: Ray Meier Supporters Love Rick Santorum
Ray Meier tries to portray himself as moderate, but the nature of his supporters belies the radical nature of his campaign.
Consider this: Ray Meier's supporters are avid fans of Rick Santorum. Consider what our local far right wing blog, Sounding the Trumpet, has to say about Ray Meier and Rick Santorum:
On Ray Meier: "Boehlart was probably one of the most liberal Republicans in Congress. He voted several times against the ban on partial birth abortion, and got a %100 rating from NARAL for 2005 and 2006. Club for Growth tried unsuccessfully to oust him during a primary by supporting his opponent David Walrath the last two elections. However, now we finally have a candidate that conservatives can be proud of — Ray Meier. He’s prolife, been endorsed by the Republican Study Committee and New York’s Conservative Party."
On Rick Santorum: "Rick Santorum has been one of the strongest voices for family, traditional values and the war on terrorism in the Senate. As one of the top three leaders of the Senate, he has not only articulated conservative values but also been able to effectively advance the conservative cause."
There you have it from a Republican voice itself: Ray Meier is no Sherwood Boehlert. On the contrary, the right wing activists are excited because Ray Meier promises to be more like Rick Santorum. Rick Santorum is the extremist Senator from Pennsylvania who has proposed sending gays and lesbians to prison - just for being gay. Santorum takes anti-government hatred to such an extreme that he's proposed a bill that would forbid the National Weather Service from offering free weather forecasts to Americans - because he thinks that doing so would be too socialist.
The same right wing blogger who praises Rick Santorum and Ray Meier is also an enthusiastic proponent of Intelligent Design, a new form of Creationism that denies the reality of biological evolution through natural selection. It seems that if you support making science education into a prop for religious instruction, Ray Meier is the candidate for you.
That extremists of this sort are itching for Ray Meier to be elected to the United States House of Representatives ought to give us pause. We don't need another Rick Santorum on Capitol Hill, and that's reason #12 to NOT vote for Ray Meier.
Ray Meier tries to portray himself as moderate, but the nature of his supporters belies the radical nature of his campaign.
Consider this: Ray Meier's supporters are avid fans of Rick Santorum. Consider what our local far right wing blog, Sounding the Trumpet, has to say about Ray Meier and Rick Santorum:
On Ray Meier: "Boehlart was probably one of the most liberal Republicans in Congress. He voted several times against the ban on partial birth abortion, and got a %100 rating from NARAL for 2005 and 2006. Club for Growth tried unsuccessfully to oust him during a primary by supporting his opponent David Walrath the last two elections. However, now we finally have a candidate that conservatives can be proud of — Ray Meier. He’s prolife, been endorsed by the Republican Study Committee and New York’s Conservative Party."
On Rick Santorum: "Rick Santorum has been one of the strongest voices for family, traditional values and the war on terrorism in the Senate. As one of the top three leaders of the Senate, he has not only articulated conservative values but also been able to effectively advance the conservative cause."
There you have it from a Republican voice itself: Ray Meier is no Sherwood Boehlert. On the contrary, the right wing activists are excited because Ray Meier promises to be more like Rick Santorum. Rick Santorum is the extremist Senator from Pennsylvania who has proposed sending gays and lesbians to prison - just for being gay. Santorum takes anti-government hatred to such an extreme that he's proposed a bill that would forbid the National Weather Service from offering free weather forecasts to Americans - because he thinks that doing so would be too socialist.
The same right wing blogger who praises Rick Santorum and Ray Meier is also an enthusiastic proponent of Intelligent Design, a new form of Creationism that denies the reality of biological evolution through natural selection. It seems that if you support making science education into a prop for religious instruction, Ray Meier is the candidate for you.
That extremists of this sort are itching for Ray Meier to be elected to the United States House of Representatives ought to give us pause. We don't need another Rick Santorum on Capitol Hill, and that's reason #12 to NOT vote for Ray Meier.
Tuesday, September 26, 2006
Vote Online To Help Mike Arcuri Get MoveOn Attention
I'm breaking my pledge to not write about Mike Arcuri tonight, because there's a chance to offer easy online assistance to the Michael Arcuri for Congress campaign... and the Arcuri campaign, true to form, isn't helping anyone find it.
MoveOn is holding an online ballot on whether to endorse Ray Meier or Michael Arcuri in the 24th District campaign.
This should be a no-brainer for MoveOn, a progressive organization, but well... those of you who have been paying attention to this campaign will understand what MoveOn is doing. They're looking for proof that Michael Arcuri has some degree of online support.
If Michael Arcuri fails to get at least 2/3 of the online votes, he doesn't get their endorsement. With that endorsement comes a lot of "attention" to our district - meaning support in the effort to prevent Ray Meier from getting elected, though of course not coordinated with the Arcuri campaign itself.
The Arcuri for Congress campaign web site won't give a link to this important opportunity to promote its own standing. So, you'll have to follow the link from here.
Please, go over to the MoveOn site and pick up Michael Arcuri by his own bootstraps - give him a vote.
MoveOn is holding an online ballot on whether to endorse Ray Meier or Michael Arcuri in the 24th District campaign.
This should be a no-brainer for MoveOn, a progressive organization, but well... those of you who have been paying attention to this campaign will understand what MoveOn is doing. They're looking for proof that Michael Arcuri has some degree of online support.
If Michael Arcuri fails to get at least 2/3 of the online votes, he doesn't get their endorsement. With that endorsement comes a lot of "attention" to our district - meaning support in the effort to prevent Ray Meier from getting elected, though of course not coordinated with the Arcuri campaign itself.
The Arcuri for Congress campaign web site won't give a link to this important opportunity to promote its own standing. So, you'll have to follow the link from here.
Please, go over to the MoveOn site and pick up Michael Arcuri by his own bootstraps - give him a vote.
Don't Believe The Hype On McCain - Bush Torture Law
Republican congressional candidate Ray Meier has come out in favor of the Bush / McCain torture legislation. What does that mean? Oh, good question.
The Republicans want you to believe that this legislation is a "compromise" that's reasonable and in accordance with the Constitution of the United States. They want you to believe that, but frankly, it's a load of bull. It's a shell game. It's a scam.
Pay attention to what the law proposed by John McCain and George W. Bush actually would do, and you'll be terrified.
1. The law would remove the right of habeas corpus. That means that, whatever laws are in place protecting the other legal rights of people imprisoned by the federal government, they have no practical effect. After all, if a prisoner does not have the right to be legally acknowledged by the judicial system of the United States, then that prisoner has no legal access to any legal protections at all. This measure endorses the international system of CIA prisons established by George W. Bush.
2. The new version of the legislation actually provides fewer legal protections for people than the earlier version proposed by Bush did. Don't believe me? Believe the Washington Post, which runs the story on its front page this morning: Detainee Legislation to Have Fewer Restrictions.
3. The legislation takes away the right to a speedy trial.
4. The legislation removes the freedom to choose not to incriminate oneself. That freedom is guaranteed to all people, citizen and non-citizen alike, in the 5th Amendment to the Constitution in the Bill of Rights.
5. The legislation would deprive people of the right to know what why they are being imprisoned, including what criminal charges are being made against them. Section 810, article 10 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice states that "When any person subject to this chapter is placed in arrest or confinement prior to trial, immediate steps shall be taken to inform him of the specific wrong of which he is accused and to try him or to dismiss the charges and release him." The McCain - Bush legislation would nullify Section 810, article 10 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
6. The McCain / Bush legislation would permit the use of testimony that was forced from prisoners through the use of torture. That's currently prohibited, even in military trials, by the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Section 831 d, which reads, "No statement obtained from any person in violation of this article, or through the use of coercion, unlawful influence, or unlawful inducement may be received in evidence against him in a trial by court-martial." The new law removes this protection. Torture away!
7. Under the new law, prisoners could be put on trial on criminal charges even before an investigation into the charges took place! Section 832 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice makes this guarantee: "No charge or specification may be referred to a general court-martial for trial until a through and impartial investigation of all the matters set forth therein has been made." What kind of criminal trial could you have before an investigation into the charges has been made? the trial of a kangaroo court, that's what. A kangaroo court is just what John McCain, George W. Bush and Ray Meier have proposed.
8. Under the new law, prisoners will not have the right to cross-examine witnesses against them. In the new system, someone can testify against you and you'll never have the opportunity to question or refute what the witness claims.
9. Have you heard that the new "compromise" legislation guarantees protection under the Geneva Conventions? John McCain says it does. John McCain is lying. Here's verbatim text from the new law: "Geneva Conventions Not Establishing Source of Rights- No alien unlawful enemy combatant subject to trial by military commission under this chapter may invoke the Geneva Conventions as a source of rights."
Think you're safe from this new law? People who were found to have nothing to do with terrorism were seized in the United States and thrown into those secret CIA prisons, where they were tortured while being interrogated. Why couldn't it happen to you? If you're thrown into one of those CIA prisons, under the law pushed by George W. Bush, John McCain and Ray Meier, you wouldn't even have the right to be recognized by a court of law. They could keep you there for the rest of your life, and torture, you, and no one would ever know what happened to you.
Yes, you.
The law allows a special government committee, with members appointed by George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld, to declare you an enemy combatant - and neither you nor your family will have the right to appeal this decision.
Don't just believe what the Republicans and the people on the TV tell you about this law. Read it yourself.
Ray Meier thinks that's okay. Are you willing to go along with it?
The Republicans want you to believe that this legislation is a "compromise" that's reasonable and in accordance with the Constitution of the United States. They want you to believe that, but frankly, it's a load of bull. It's a shell game. It's a scam.
Pay attention to what the law proposed by John McCain and George W. Bush actually would do, and you'll be terrified.
1. The law would remove the right of habeas corpus. That means that, whatever laws are in place protecting the other legal rights of people imprisoned by the federal government, they have no practical effect. After all, if a prisoner does not have the right to be legally acknowledged by the judicial system of the United States, then that prisoner has no legal access to any legal protections at all. This measure endorses the international system of CIA prisons established by George W. Bush.
2. The new version of the legislation actually provides fewer legal protections for people than the earlier version proposed by Bush did. Don't believe me? Believe the Washington Post, which runs the story on its front page this morning: Detainee Legislation to Have Fewer Restrictions.
3. The legislation takes away the right to a speedy trial.
4. The legislation removes the freedom to choose not to incriminate oneself. That freedom is guaranteed to all people, citizen and non-citizen alike, in the 5th Amendment to the Constitution in the Bill of Rights.
5. The legislation would deprive people of the right to know what why they are being imprisoned, including what criminal charges are being made against them. Section 810, article 10 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice states that "When any person subject to this chapter is placed in arrest or confinement prior to trial, immediate steps shall be taken to inform him of the specific wrong of which he is accused and to try him or to dismiss the charges and release him." The McCain - Bush legislation would nullify Section 810, article 10 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
6. The McCain / Bush legislation would permit the use of testimony that was forced from prisoners through the use of torture. That's currently prohibited, even in military trials, by the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Section 831 d, which reads, "No statement obtained from any person in violation of this article, or through the use of coercion, unlawful influence, or unlawful inducement may be received in evidence against him in a trial by court-martial." The new law removes this protection. Torture away!
7. Under the new law, prisoners could be put on trial on criminal charges even before an investigation into the charges took place! Section 832 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice makes this guarantee: "No charge or specification may be referred to a general court-martial for trial until a through and impartial investigation of all the matters set forth therein has been made." What kind of criminal trial could you have before an investigation into the charges has been made? the trial of a kangaroo court, that's what. A kangaroo court is just what John McCain, George W. Bush and Ray Meier have proposed.
8. Under the new law, prisoners will not have the right to cross-examine witnesses against them. In the new system, someone can testify against you and you'll never have the opportunity to question or refute what the witness claims.
9. Have you heard that the new "compromise" legislation guarantees protection under the Geneva Conventions? John McCain says it does. John McCain is lying. Here's verbatim text from the new law: "Geneva Conventions Not Establishing Source of Rights- No alien unlawful enemy combatant subject to trial by military commission under this chapter may invoke the Geneva Conventions as a source of rights."
Think you're safe from this new law? People who were found to have nothing to do with terrorism were seized in the United States and thrown into those secret CIA prisons, where they were tortured while being interrogated. Why couldn't it happen to you? If you're thrown into one of those CIA prisons, under the law pushed by George W. Bush, John McCain and Ray Meier, you wouldn't even have the right to be recognized by a court of law. They could keep you there for the rest of your life, and torture, you, and no one would ever know what happened to you.
Yes, you.
The law allows a special government committee, with members appointed by George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld, to declare you an enemy combatant - and neither you nor your family will have the right to appeal this decision.
Don't just believe what the Republicans and the people on the TV tell you about this law. Read it yourself.
Ray Meier thinks that's okay. Are you willing to go along with it?
A Vote for Ray Meier is a Vote for Bush
Reason #11 to Not Vote for Ray Meier: A Vote For Meier is a Vote For Bush
I've said it before, but not as part of this list of 30 reasons to not vote for Ray Meier, so I'll say it again: A vote for Ray Meier is a vote for Bush.
Everyone knows what's going on with the visit of Laura Bush to hold an elitist soiree fundraiser with Ray Meier, with tickets going at $1,000 and $2,000 a pop. The numbers show clearly that a huge majority of likely voters in our district think that George W. Bush is a terrible President and has taken America in the wrong direction. Yet, Meier's base still adores Bush.
Ray Meier can't have President Bush himself here, or he'll lose the independent and moderate Republican swing vote that is essential to his campaign. He can, however, have Bush's wife come into town. It's not polite to criticize the President's wife (though Republicans did it throughout the 1990s). Heck, even I won't carp on Laura Bush here.
However, I will point out what the visit makes clear: Ray Meier is George W. Bush's man. That's the message Meier is sending to his political base with the visits of Laura Bush and Dick Cheney: Don't worry, I'm one of Bush's Republicans.
Vote for Ray Meier, and you vote for a man who will vote to support Bush's agenda of failure in Congress.
Vote for Ray Meier, and you might as well be voting for Bush. We've seen that mistake made two times too many already. We must not repeat it this year. That's reason #11 out of 30 to NOT vote for Ray Meier for Congress.
I've said it before, but not as part of this list of 30 reasons to not vote for Ray Meier, so I'll say it again: A vote for Ray Meier is a vote for Bush.
Everyone knows what's going on with the visit of Laura Bush to hold an elitist soiree fundraiser with Ray Meier, with tickets going at $1,000 and $2,000 a pop. The numbers show clearly that a huge majority of likely voters in our district think that George W. Bush is a terrible President and has taken America in the wrong direction. Yet, Meier's base still adores Bush.
Ray Meier can't have President Bush himself here, or he'll lose the independent and moderate Republican swing vote that is essential to his campaign. He can, however, have Bush's wife come into town. It's not polite to criticize the President's wife (though Republicans did it throughout the 1990s). Heck, even I won't carp on Laura Bush here.
However, I will point out what the visit makes clear: Ray Meier is George W. Bush's man. That's the message Meier is sending to his political base with the visits of Laura Bush and Dick Cheney: Don't worry, I'm one of Bush's Republicans.
Vote for Ray Meier, and you vote for a man who will vote to support Bush's agenda of failure in Congress.
Vote for Ray Meier, and you might as well be voting for Bush. We've seen that mistake made two times too many already. We must not repeat it this year. That's reason #11 out of 30 to NOT vote for Ray Meier for Congress.
Ray Meier Is Part of A Disintegrating Ideology
Reason #10 to Not Vote for Ray Meier: Ray Meier is Part of a Disintegrating Ideology
The events of the last few days in Washington D.C. have been remarkable, but they are not the most remarkable we shall see. The government of George W. Bush is on the verge of falling apart as the result of its own radical ideology.
The Bush Republican ideology says that the law doesn't matter, that the Constitution doesn't matter, that the Bill of Rights can be chucked right on out the window whenever the President of the United States deems it necessary. This ideology makes the President into a dictator who is above the law.
Ray Meier is a part of this ideology. He supports Bush, and he has refused to distance himself from Bush's pro-torture, anti-freedom legislation.
George W. Bush and John McCain have performed a very clever shell game to come to their "compromise", but the plain fact is that their proposed legislation still changes the law to make torture legal (just so long as it doesn't kill the prisoner or cause major permanent harm to the body) and still provides amnesty for war criminals.
The Bush-McCain torture legislation also takes away our right to habeas corpus protections - the foundation of all our other freedoms. That outrage was pointed out by the Republican chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday. Senator Arlen Specter called this attempt to rip the bottom out of American democracy "inexplicable", and pointed out that it is in clear violation of the Constitution, which only allows habeas corpus to be temporarily suspended in the case of a rebellion against the government or an invasion by a foreign power.
As Senator Specter pointed out, there is no invasion and there is no rebellion. Yet, George W. Bush is asking Congress for a permanent revocation of habeas corpus rights.
It's not just me, some blogger off in an Upstate New York village, who's saying that this legislation is a threat to our democracy. United States Senators, Republican and Democrat, are coming together to denounce the McCain-Bush proposal on the grounds that I cite here. Senator Patrick Leahy made the following statement yesterday, for example:
The so-called "compromise" of George W. Bush and John McCain is falling apart because it isn't a compromise at all. It's the same old pig, dressed up in a hat and lipstick.
Republicans and Democrats are coming together to say no to Bush's anti-freedom ideology. Bush's ideology is on the verge of disintegration. Yet, Ray Meier still holds on to that ideology, standing with Bush no matter how crazy Bush gets.
Ray Meier doesn't have enough sense to step away from a destructive ideology, even while it's crumbling before his very eyes: That's reason #10 out of 30 to NOT vote for Ray Meier for Congress
The events of the last few days in Washington D.C. have been remarkable, but they are not the most remarkable we shall see. The government of George W. Bush is on the verge of falling apart as the result of its own radical ideology.
The Bush Republican ideology says that the law doesn't matter, that the Constitution doesn't matter, that the Bill of Rights can be chucked right on out the window whenever the President of the United States deems it necessary. This ideology makes the President into a dictator who is above the law.
Ray Meier is a part of this ideology. He supports Bush, and he has refused to distance himself from Bush's pro-torture, anti-freedom legislation.
George W. Bush and John McCain have performed a very clever shell game to come to their "compromise", but the plain fact is that their proposed legislation still changes the law to make torture legal (just so long as it doesn't kill the prisoner or cause major permanent harm to the body) and still provides amnesty for war criminals.
The Bush-McCain torture legislation also takes away our right to habeas corpus protections - the foundation of all our other freedoms. That outrage was pointed out by the Republican chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday. Senator Arlen Specter called this attempt to rip the bottom out of American democracy "inexplicable", and pointed out that it is in clear violation of the Constitution, which only allows habeas corpus to be temporarily suspended in the case of a rebellion against the government or an invasion by a foreign power.
As Senator Specter pointed out, there is no invasion and there is no rebellion. Yet, George W. Bush is asking Congress for a permanent revocation of habeas corpus rights.
It's not just me, some blogger off in an Upstate New York village, who's saying that this legislation is a threat to our democracy. United States Senators, Republican and Democrat, are coming together to denounce the McCain-Bush proposal on the grounds that I cite here. Senator Patrick Leahy made the following statement yesterday, for example:
"This provision would perpetuate the indefinite detention of hundreds of individuals against whom the Government has brought no charges and presented no evidence, without any recourse to justice whatsoever. That is un-American, and it is contrary to American interests.
Going forward, the bill departs even more radically from our most fundamental values. It would permit the President to detain indefinitely – even for life – any alien, whether in the United States or abroad, whether a foreign resident or a lawful permanent resident, without any meaningful opportunity for the alien to challenge his detention. The Administration would not even need to assert, much less prove, that the alien was an enemy combatant; it would suffice that the alien was “awaiting [a] determination” on that issue. In other words, the bill would tell the millions of legal immigrants living in America, participating in American families, working for American businesses, and paying American taxes, that our Government may at any minute pick them up and detain them indefinitely without charge, and without any access to the courts or even to military tribunals, unless and until the Government determines that they are not enemy combatants.
Detained indefinitely, and unaccountably, until proven innocent. Like Canadian citizen Maher Arar. As the Canadian Government recently concluded in a detailed and candid report, there is no evidence that Mr. Arar ever committed a crime or posed a threat to U.S. or Canadian security. Yet, while returning home to Canada from a family vacation, he was detained, interrogated, and then shipped off to a torture cell in Syria by the Bush-Cheney Administration While the Canadian Government has now documented that the wrong thing was done to the wrong man, the Bush-Cheney Administration has, as usual, evaded all accountability by hiding behind a purported state secrets privilege."
The so-called "compromise" of George W. Bush and John McCain is falling apart because it isn't a compromise at all. It's the same old pig, dressed up in a hat and lipstick.
Republicans and Democrats are coming together to say no to Bush's anti-freedom ideology. Bush's ideology is on the verge of disintegration. Yet, Ray Meier still holds on to that ideology, standing with Bush no matter how crazy Bush gets.
Ray Meier doesn't have enough sense to step away from a destructive ideology, even while it's crumbling before his very eyes: That's reason #10 out of 30 to NOT vote for Ray Meier for Congress
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
