Congressmembers rule: No calling Bush a liar

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Congress_members_agree_No_calling_Bush_0716.html

Congressmembers rule: No calling Bush a liar
Michael Roston
Published: Monday July 16, 2007



A Congressional Democrat has been reined in for calling President George W. Bush a 'liar' during a Thursday hearing of the House Judiciary Committee, according to the Monday edition of the newspaper Roll Call. (subs. req.)

"Rep. Mel Watt (D-N.C.) offered a lengthy criticism of Bush’s record toward the end of Thursday’s hearing, which included a statement that Bush lied about the reasons for going to war with Iraq in 2003," writes Susan Davis. "Rep. Chris Cannon (R-Utah) offered an objection on the grounds that Watt’s words were 'unparliamentary' and violated House rules on debate and decorum that forbid personal attacks on Members, the president or vice president."

The exchange occurred just before the end of the hearing that expected to receive testimony from former White House Counsel Harriet Miers, who failed to appear. She cited the White House's exercise of 'executive privilege.'

Davis notes that a problem then occurred.

"Commercial and Administrative Law Subcommittee Chairwoman Linda Sánchez (D-Calif.) countered that the words were not 'unparliamentary,' which parliamentarians and leadership aides on both sides of the aisle later agreed was the wrong procedural call," she writes.

Cannon and his fellow Republicans then failed in a vote that attempted to 'take down' Watt's words. But because Rep. Sánchez's ruling was said to interfere with House precedent on the question, Rep. Cannon threatened "to take it to the House floor in a privileged resolution."

The two sides subsequently negotiated a compromise in which Sánchez agreed to vacate her decision that the words were not 'unparliamentary' in a subsequent hearing.

Cannon is not a stranger to controversy of his own over strong statements. He recently called former US Attorney for New Mexico David Iglesias an 'idiot' in a Fox News broadcast.

a liar and publicly and even if the language is withdrawn, it still happened. :)

and when I heard it as it was said I pumped my fist in the air and hollered alright without even thinking, just a reflex I've been wanting to show for some time I guess because it sure came smooth and natural.

STOP CAVING DEMOCRATS!

:woohoo:

The fact is: BUSH IS A LIAR and even he has admitted it publicly.

Facts are always appropriate for the record. You can call it an untruth, a misleading statement, an erroneous statement, or whatever you want, but when it's done intentionally, IT'S A LIE.

George Bush is, in fact, A LIAR.

Edit: spelling.

In Parliament, by contrast, stronger language is commonplace.

The sky is not blue.

The sun does not rise in the east and set in the west.

Water is not wet

you're not hurt, are you?

ouch

Or during impeachment proceedings.

Step One: Impeach the bastard.

Step Two: Prove his lies.

Step Three: Call him a liar.

Now THAT'S parliamentary.

Perjury, baby.

liar fake lie bitch bullshit asshole loser lying poser cheater lies idiot bullshitter cheat fraud hypocrite moron whore evil bush phony stupid dumbass slut thief cunt fool george w. bush false george bush republican shit deceiver jerk fibber gay president douchebag faker lazy traitor dubya fag liberal murderer nazi player politician politics tony blair bastard

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=liar

LOL

People have lost their fucking minds...

and some even consider it a mark of superiority to be polite to and about a war criminal

Well trained

lololol

Hey Cannon, go fuck yourself!

Nancy gets what she wants - a plausible reason why we cannot put it on the table - because the house ruled that we can't accuse him of lies.

MPs can usually find a way to get around the rule. One MP once accused another of uttering 'terminological inexactitudes'. A favourite term, based on a reluctant admission by a member of the Thatcher government, is 'economical with the truth'.

Was it Dan "shooting watermelon/illegitimate father" Burton?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/burton042298.htm
<snip>
A bitter dispute has erupted in the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee over Chairman Dan Burton's description of President Clinton as a "scumbag" and his decision to make public audiotapes of former associate attorney general Webster L. Hubbell's prison telephone conversations.

Waxman also circulated a letter to other House members in which he quoted comments Burton (R-Ind.) made last week to the editorial board of the Indianapolis Star. According to the newspaper's account, Burton said: "If I could prove 10 percent of what I believe happened, he'd be gone. This guy's a scumbag. That's why I'm after him."

"Please ask yourself whether this is the attitude and approach toward congressional investigations that the American people have a right to expect," Waxman wrote to his colleagues.
<snip>

Pot, meet kettle.

Hurrah for Watt!