Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
He committed two offenses, one to the President and one to the House of Representatives of which he's an elected member of and which sponsored the President speaking before the joint session of Congress.
He violated House rules and longstanding tradition by his remarks. He was in effect saying that he was on equal ground with the President of the United States of America.
His apology was nearly a non-event. All words and no substance, in fact he used the event to gather sympathy from his peers by returning to his position after the fact, perhaps even more so.
Certainly the Dems are making a political calculation by serving this rebuke, but there's no argument that they are fully within their bounds by doing so.
Of course, you think the burden is on Pelosi and not Wilson who's lapse of judgment started this affair. And I thought Republicans were about personal responsibility!
-spence
|
So the same standard should have been applied to Pete Stark when he accused Bush of being a liar and also disrupted the House during the 2007 SCHIP debate. The difference was that he refued to apologize and the Dems didn't call for one from him. Pelosi did call his comments "inapproriate", which is a far cry from how she responded to Wilson's comment.
Here is what Pelosi had to say about Stark.
"While members of Congress are passionate about their views, what Congressman Stark said during the debate was inappropriate and distracted from the seriousness of the subject at hand,..."
Spence, your defense of the Dems is usually a lot like Wilson's apology - "All words and no substance".
Now I'll just wait for your convoluted, doublespeak excuses why Wilson is such a bad guy and the Dems that do the same thing are salt of the earth servants of the people of the US.
Threaded Mode