Posted on 10/02/2007 12:31:22 PM PDT by RetSignman
I think someone in the Republican Party should invite Rush to speak on the Senate floor to reply to the outrageous lies perpetrated by members of the democratic party.
The lying statements of Reid and others are now on public record and Rush deserves to have HIS rebuttal on record.
I, for one, am going to write to as many Senate Republicans as possible to petition them to invite Rush to appear.
I invite other FReepers to do the same, maybe we can get at least one of them to grow a spine and do what's right.
PAY-PER-VIEW even!!!!
Please see post 14.
Probably the best thing is to let Rush do what he does best, 3 hours a day of air time. Reid will find out what Clinton did, that he was no match for that much exposure day after day, month after month.
Reid apparently doesn't’t know how to pick his battles.
Great idea. However, Rush is a far better speaker than any of those clowns (dim-o-crat or repulsican), and they’ll never allow someone with a “mere” HS education to outshine all of those law and political “science” degrees. ‘Twould be King Kong amongst the ants.
If that is the only way for Rush to clear his name and have it on record then it should be done, maybe we find a Republican Senator with a spine. LET’S FIND ONE.
I’d rather give Rush a few minutes in a dark alley with Dingy Harry.
Ditto the DittoMaster to Congress!
HEY DUMMIES... Do ANY of you actually have a functioning brain cell?
No need to answer... Rhetorical question!
No, that wouldn’t be allowed. A Republican senator should introduce a resolution commending those, including Rush Limbaugh, who defend the honor of the military by exposing military impostors to the public.
No, that wouldn’t be allowed. A Republican senator should introduce a resolution commending those, including Rush Limbaugh, who defend the honor of the military by exposing military impostors to the public.
>>The Rules: No one speaks in the Senate who isn’t a Senator, or the roll call clerk, who only speaks through a microphone during a roll call vote, or on rare occasions the vice president. Former Senators are allowed on the floor as a courtesy, but may not speak. Occasionally someone they want to honor is allowed on the floor, but may not speak. If you doubt me, please identify for me the last person who wasn’t a senator who spoke on the floor. When the President or a dignitary is invited to address Congress, such as a foreign head of state, he or she speaks to a joint session in the House chamber.<<
If Mr. Smith goes to Washington is accurate, a new Senator cannot even speak until he is presented as a senator and his credentials are recognized. He cannot eve personally defend his credentials on the floor.
I’ve no doubt that the Dems would allow that...right after they have their guest speaker from moveon.org.
There is already a rule against it:
US Constitution: Section 9 - Limits on Congress
No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
In the context of the Constitution, a Bill of Attainder is meant to mean a bill that has an negative effect on a single person or group
I’m right behind you in spirit.
My silly blue state of Merryland has moonbats for senators, we need to find a good Oklahoma boy to get the job done. The Master Of Rasters may be able to help.
That is right. Their credentials have to be accepted and they have to be sworn in before they can speak.
>>In the context of the Constitution, a Bill of Attainder is meant to mean a bill that has an negative effect on a single person or group<<
I believe negative effects are allowed as long as they don’t include declaring guilt or punishment for guilt.
I think we both had the same idea.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1905327/posts/posts?page=28#28
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.