Refusing to Exploit 9-11

Two days after President Bush used a nationally-televised address to exploit the memory of September 11 for political purposes – employing language and logic so crude that it would have made Richard Nixon cringe – the Republican Congressional leadership tried to plant a campaign yard sign in the wreckage of the World Trade Center. And the vast majority of House Democrats, lacking both the courage of their convictions and all other forms of that precious commodity, gave their assent to the desecration.

With the fall election season in full swing, House Republicans tried to take full advantage of the anniversary of the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington to suggest that the Congress has been anything more than a useless appendage of the Bush administration for the past five years. U.S. Rep. Peter King, R-New York, sponsored a resolution that, while it was promoted as a commemoration of one of the most solemn dates in American history, was in fact an apologia for Congressional assaults on civil liberties such as the Patriot Act.

A number of Democrats objected to the clumsy attempt by King and his compatriots to use the memory of 9-11 to justify their wrongheaded theory that the only way to fight terrorism is to shred the Constitution.

But when it came time to vote, the vast majority of Democrats joined Republicans in what will go down as one of the cheapest stunts yet in a Capitol that has seen more than its share of embarrassing behavior.

Only 22 member of the House refused to go along with the unseemly charade. Twenty-one Democrats and one dissident Republican, Ron Paul of Texas, refused to play politics.

Among the handful of House members who did the right thing was Wisconsin Democrat Tammy Baldwin, who complained that, "The Republican majority disgracefully politicized what should have been a solemn and sincere resolution."

Instead of honoring the memory of those who died and recalling the trauma that the attacks inflicted on the United States, Baldwin said, "[House Republicans] converted the resolution into an endorsement of the PATRIOT Act, punitive immigration bills, and other highly controversial measures, which many of my constituents oppose. The Republicans show enormous disrespect to the 9/11 victims and families by playing election year politics with something as solemn as the fifth anniversary of 9/11."

Joining Baldwin and Republican Paul in voting "no" were: Arizona's Raul Grijalva; Californians Mike Honda, Barbara Lee, Pete Stark and Lynn Woolsey; Georgians Cynthia McKinney and John Lewis; Illinoisans Danny Davis, Luis Gutierrez and Jan Schakowsky; Maine's Mike Michaud; Massachusetts' Barney Frank, Ed Markey and Jim McGovern; New Yorker Maurice Hinchey; North Carolina's Mel Watt; Ohio's Dennis Kucinich; Oregon's Earl Blumenauer; Virginia's Bobby Scott; and Washington's Jim McDermott. (An additional member, Democrat Mike Capuano of Massachusetts, voted "present.")

Unlike most members of Congress, these dissenters actually believe that their votes matter. And, this week, they used their "no" votes to reject the exploitation of the memory of 9-11 for political purposes.

Comments (32)

1. How can any of the electorate not see right through this administration?

   Thanks for listing all the dissenters.

   Eric

   Posted by Malcontent at 09/15/2006 @ 12:23am

2. Slightly off topic, but Bush's speech on 9/11 was a real nadir of his presidency - which as most of us know around here is saying a lot.

   Posted by Blinky at 09/15/2006 @ 01:49am

3. Herewith a link to an article that further details the issue of "Utilising the tragedy ".

   http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/23CFC910-6A3C-49D0-8AF7-263901C81 D47.htm

   Posted by areyouok at 09/15/2006 @ 03:25am

4. With a Democratic Party like this who needs Republicans? Let's get our next murder spree on. Thirty years ago I never guessed that America was soon to be transformed into a national version of the Manson Gang.

   Cserveny points out, as did some in the blogosphere when the report first came out, that the "weapons grade" enrichment described by Hoekstra-Harman as occurring at Natanz is a complete fabrication. Why, it was only last April, Cserveny reminds the esteemed members of the House, that the inspectors verified a 3.6 percent enrichment rate – not the 90 percent or more required to qualify as "weapons grade."

   Harman and her Democratic colleagues have no dispute with the Republicans – and the far-right neocons epitomized by Perle – when it comes to Iran. Both are determined to protect Israeli interests, at the expense of American interests, by threatening to go to war if Iran continues to pursue its apparent goal of joining the nuclear club, along with its neighbors, Israel and Pakistan. Everybody knows that what John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt call "the Lobby" is behind the current campaign to gin up another Middle Eastern war, this time with Iran. Israel's recent incursion into Lebanon was but a dress rehearsal for the main event – which is coming no matter how badly the Lebanese adventure turns out.

   It is coming because there is simply no opposition to the Lobby's ironclad control of the U.S. Congress.

   http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=9702

   Posted by fromredbird at 09/15/2006 @ 03:31am

5. Interesting names...and an interesting number...22.

   First...I saw Hinchey, but where is John Conyers' name? The firebrand who will "lead Bush's impeachment" when the Dems take the House next year? Did he miss the vote?

   Second...on that same track...the number usually thrown for "signing a pro-impeachment resolution" is THIRTY-EIGHT, not 22. Why are 16 of the Hard Core "progressive" Dems in the House, who whole-heartedly look forward to ouster Bush and Cheney....supporting their anti-terrorism legislation and going-along-to-get-along with Republicans???

   Could it be that voting against a resolution supporting those laws and measures is MORE dangerous to their careers, than wanting to impeach Bush?

   As Capt. Jack Sparrow would say "That's interesting!"

   Posted by Mask at 09/15/2006 @ 06:24am

6. I thought the speech was fine and I like Peter King. Did you actually hear the speeches and watch the ceremonies? I thought the dem being corrected by the crowd as he tried to bring the same old democratic montra into 9/11 was worth noting, but I guess not here...

   Posted by john maasch at 09/15/2006 @ 07:43am

7. As Capt. Jack Sparrow would say "That's interesting!"

   Posted by MASK 09/15/2006 @ 06:24am

   You don't have his poster hanging on your bedroom wall do you mask?

   (a hypothetical hero in a hypothetical universe for a hypothetical intellect)

   Posted by Will C. at 09/15/2006 @ 08:59am

8. "...was a real nadir of his presidency" What is a nadir? God created heaven & earth and the taxcut and little Jesus W. was sent from heaven to do God's work so let Congress give him everything he needs. Now, lets all rise up and sing "God Bless Corporate Amerika, One Nation ABOVE The Law!"

   Posted by jazzfan at 09/15/2006 @ 09:30am

9. Posted by WILL C. 09/15/2006 @ 08:59am

   No...we named the monkey "WILL"!

   Posted by Mask at 09/15/2006 @ 09:35am

10. Just gave my Rep "what for"....

    Posted by leftofcenter at 09/15/2006 @ 09:49am

11. Posted by LEFTOFCENTER 09/15/2006 @ 09:49am

    No names needed, LOC....but curious (on my post above) is your Rep one of the "38" who always shows up on the "signed a petition to bring bills of impeachment against Bush"...or not?

    Posted by Mask at 09/15/2006 @ 10:00am

12. Can I get the HR number please? I've read about 20 articles online and none mentions the number!

    Posted by jsolley at 09/15/2006 @ 10:37am

13. horrible speech. king is an idiot.

    bush has successfully divided the country into:

    full blown idiots, and

    the timidly opposed

    Posted by darladoon at 09/15/2006 @ 10:45am

14. Posted by JSOLLEY 09/15/2006 @ 10:37am

    202-224-3121

    TTY 202-225-1904

    Posted by Mask at 09/15/2006 @ 11:07am

15. Posted by DARLADOON 09/15/2006 @ 10:45am

    No "third option", DARLA.....hehe.

    Posted by Mask at 09/15/2006 @ 11:08am

16. Mask

    No...let's use names, please... Costello. And no, he doesn't tend to vote quite as "left' as I'd like....but in S IL we are kinda close to the Mason-Dixon line.

    Posted by leftofcenter at 09/15/2006 @ 11:11am

17. JSOLLEY

    and if you go to House of Reps you can put in your Zip+4 and email them

    Posted by leftofcenter at 09/15/2006 @ 11:13am

18. third option:

    "those who support the president, but don't know why, and don't realize they are getting massively screwed by him"

    Posted by darladoon at 09/15/2006 @ 11:36am

19. RE: the speech of Long Island representative Peter King. Expressions of enthusiastic adulation for this feral cur are to be expected from America's neo-fascists. The erosion of American democracy and our basic, even if never completely fulfilled, character as a nation unique in history makes them tremble with involuntary emotion.

    Is there some kind of new program in the Republican Party that encourages only draftdodgers to apply as candidates for public office under the Republican banner?

    • King served in the National Guard from 1968 to 1973.

    • Throughout his career, King has been one of the strongest and most outspoken supporters of the Irish Republican Army.

    • In late August 2006, King endorsed racial profiling as a law enforcement tool. He proposed that people of "Middle Eastern and South Asian" go through additional security checks due to their ethnicity and religion, saying that all Muslims aren't terrorists but that all recent terrorists are Muslim

    [Irish terrorists are good but racial Arabs and the Muslim religion are bad.]

    • In June 2005 he was quoted as saying that he supported President George W. Bush's position that there was a connection between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda.

    • In 2005, he stated that Valerie Plame deserved to be outed as a supposedly covert CIA operative. King also suggested that the media "be shot" for pursuing the story and identifying White House aide Karl Rove as the then-alleged leaker.

    Posted by fromredbird at 09/15/2006 @ 12:09pm

20. clearly, a great guy, mr. king.

    Posted by darladoon at 09/15/2006 @ 12:14pm

21. Uh, DARLA...think you missed my point...

    "bush has successfully divided the country into:

    full blown idiots, and the timidly opposed" ---Posted by DARLADOON 09/15/2006 @ 10:45am

    I was asking about a "third option" because I ASSUME you don't consider yourself in either of THOSE TWO catagories, right?

    Posted by Mask at 09/15/2006 @ 12:20pm

22. Posted by LEFTOFCENTER 09/15/2006 @ 11:11am

    Dang, LOC....Jerry Costello? Wow. Yep, you're right.

    Costello won't impeach Bush, even under a Democratic House. (One of the numerous conservative Dems the "pro-impeachment" crowd fail to take into account)

    Posted by Mask at 09/15/2006 @ 12:23pm

23. i'm timidly opposed mask.

    Posted by darladoon at 09/15/2006 @ 2:18pm

24. What is a nadir?

    the opposite of zenith.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 09/15/2006 @ 2:31pm

25. liberty your links are no good.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 09/15/2006 @ 2:41pm

26. i'm timidly opposed mask.

    Posted by DARLADOON 09/15/2006 @ 2:18pm

    WHAT?!?!?

    Posted by Mask at 09/15/2006 @ 2:45pm

27. liberty, is this what you meant?

    HR994 Title: To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow Federal civilian and military retirees to pay health insurance premiums on a pretax basis ...

    Posted by johannesrolf at 09/15/2006 @ 2:49pm

28. I was asking about a "third option" because I ASSUME you don't consider yourself in either of THOSE TWO catagories, right?

    Posted by MASK 09/15/2006 @ 12:20am

    That would be people who claim to be moderate liberals, but spend all their time/energy defending....wiat for it...facist wanna-be types.

    Like you.

    Eric

    Posted by Malcontent at 09/15/2006 @ 7:35pm

29. No...we named the monkey "WILL"!

    Posted by MASK 09/15/2006 @ 09:35am

    excellent info. you're poster talks to you

    Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha

    Posted by Will C. at 09/15/2006 @ 11:08pm

30. Concerning your article which acknowledged the dissident Democrats for their display of courage, thanks. THE REPUBLICANS HAVE TURNED 9/11 COMMEMORATIONS INTO A CELEBRATION. CELEBRATING A FAILURE. THIS IS ROVIAN, TURN YOUR WEAKNE3SSES INTO STRENGTHS. It is basically the same as the 2004 strategy which sought to turn Kerry,s strengths into weaknesses.

    Posted by predator at 09/16/2006 @ 10:41am

31. just as COLON powell is trying to atone for his sins from his speech at the U.N. ,the republicans will do anything to win this election for rear of being indicted for war crimes if the democrats take enough seats .Their love of money,power(greed ,etc.)overcame their logic for going to war and not looking closely into 911 ..... Wellstone as not yet died in vain ,His memory will come back to haunt the republicans and bush (whom has hidden all presidential papers to protect his father and all prez.'s since reagan (the real nutcake )Nixon was a pussycat compared to all repukes since reagan ,just say NO to what :Drugs have gained under every republican because GHWB is the Drug Lord ..of all times .,just ask Noriega ,if you can find him

    Posted by abell at 09/16/2006 @ 1:14pm

32. Abell, I have long maintained that Powell is the wild card in the whole Iraq schlemassel. he appears to have a conscience. he has lost more face by lying than either Bush/Cheney or Rice, because they have none to lose. he knows everything. if he ever sings, the Bush gang is finished.

    Posted by johannesrolf at 09/16/2006 @ 6:20pm