"They know we have a great shot at winning, so they're probably taking their dollars elsewhere.As much as I'd like to see in a change in Wisconsin's Senate representation, I think we will yet again have to "wait 'til next time".
-- Michels on the NRSC's decision to pull $1.2 million in ads, a decision forecast in last week's REPORT."
As long as I'm on the subject of the Senate race, I have a question about Russ Feingold's claim that 'reading' something, means your 'actions' are justified. Feingold claims that because 'he read the Patriot Act', his lone 'nay vote' is therefore justified. Does this mean that the other 99 Senators didn't read the Act? Does the 'act' of doing 'anything' justify the 'results'? If it's a given that the other Senators didn't read the Patriot Act, wouldn't it necessarily follow that if they had, they ALL would have voted against it?
Senator, why not just stand up and say: "I'd rather quibble over the details of this Act because there's a slight chance that a person's individual rights may be infringed and therefore the person could be inconvenienced for a short time, than sign an Act that -among other provisions - removes walls that prevent our law enforcement agencies the ability to talk to one another in the course of a criminal or terrorist investigation which may prevent more acts of terrorism occuring in our country."
I guess it is shorter just to say "I read it."
No comments:
Post a Comment