Michael Arcuri Supports Revoking Habeas Corpus, Torture, Roundup of Foreigners
There was some very bad news for us Ulysses Democrats this last week. Michael Arcuri, the Democratic candidate for Congress in our district, announced that he supports George W. Bush and the Republicans in their worst legislation ever.
Michael Arcuri supports the new torture law, the law that:
The New York Times calls this law “our generation’s version of the Alien and Sedition Acts”. It includes a measure that the New York Times editorial board says, “would effectively eliminate the idea of rape as torture.”
The rape of prisoners is no longer to be considered torture?
This is the bizarre, perverted world that Michael Arcuri entered when he said during last week’s debate that he would vote for HR 6166 if he were elected to Congress.
Democrats, you know that these are not our values. Michael Arcuri may be a Democrat-in-name, but he is not a Democrat-in-deed. Michael Arcuri has declared that he will support George W. Bush, instead of protecting the Bill of Rights.
Put your partisan politics aside for a moment, and look down deep into your heart. Can you really bring yourself to vote for a man who promises to support Bush’s right to torture, even through rape, if he is elected to Congress? Can you bring yourself to vote for a politician who says that it’s a good idea to revoke habeas corpus?
I cannot.
The time has come for us all to make a fundamental moral decision. Do we stand with freedom or do we stand against it?
If we stand for freedom, we cannot stand for Michael Arcuri.
An eye-opening post Jonathan. I must say that as a new Ulysses resident (I moved here in April) I was excited to find your blog with all its local political coverage. This will be my first election (in the States) and your blog informed me of issues that other media failed you. Thank you for your dedication!
If not Arcuri then who? I have yet to hear of any independents in the race, but maybe they have failed to garner any decent coverage.
Thanks, Garik.
Ray Meier, the Republican, is as bad as Michael Arcuri. He supports the new law, just like Arcuri. Mike Sylvia is the candidate for the Libertarian Party, and he opposes the new law.
Of course, we always have the choice to enter the voting booth, vote in other contests, and leave the choice for House of Representatives blank.
Then again, we could do a write in campaign. Les Roberts, perhaps?
Garik,
Welcome to Trumansburg. We are lucky to have Jonathan. I’ve learned a lot from his blog. You’re right about mainstream media. The coverage of this bill has been pathetic. Jonathan’s principles won’t allow him to vote for someone who is so unprincipled, that he would endorse this horrible bill. I’m of the opinion,however, that we have to vote for Arcuri. A vote (under our current system) for anyone other than Arcuri or Meier has no chance of electing that 3rd party. It does represent the potential loss of a vote for Arcuri or Meier, and I’m guessing in your case that probably would’ve been a vote for Arcuri. So a vote for Sylvia instead of Arcuri is a vote for maintaining the status quo which Jonathan has described very well. If you vote for Sylvia, and Meier wins by a whisker, and we don’t get the 15 seats that the Democratic Party needs to take back congress, then you will be in part responsible for the continued abuses of the Bush administration. (just as Nader voters are in part responsible for the mess we are in today) I agree with all of Jonathan’s complaints about Arcuri, but I’m going to vote for him. Hopefully, he will win, and then Jonathan, and you, and I can start looking for who we can support to run against him in the 2008 primaries. If you’re disgusted with the Democratic Party then infiltrate it and fix it, because it’s our only hope.
Allen, I respect your motivations, but I can just as easily say that if you vote for Michael Arcuri, you will be in part responsible for the continued abuses of the Bush Administration – after all, Michael Arcuri tells us that he’s going to vote in Congress to help those abuses continue!
I agree that, in 2008, whether Arcuri is in Congress or not, we need a different candidate. We gave it a shot with someone else this year, but the Democratic party bosses in the other counties buried their heads in the sand and endorsed Arcuri before Arcuri could be tested. I hope they’ve learned their lesson about the need for a primary, where the Democratic voters have the chance to have a say in the process.