It was an interesting week in politics. Representative Jack Murtha (D-PA), a hawkish Democrat, recommended the redeployment of US troops within six months. Rep. Jean Schmidt (R-OH), a crazy person, insinuated that Murtha was a coward. Now, I really only have one issue here. I have gone back and forth in terms of which party I support, but I have been told by aquaintances and friends with years of political experience, people deeply entrenched in either party, that I would be best classified as a conservative Democrat. That may be, but I am still unaffiliated with either party. So my issue here is with political motive and procedure.

In addition to the official Oath of Office administered by the Speaker of the House, Schmidt took an additional vow to, "refrain from harsh words, name-calling and the questioning of character." (Read a statement she made shortly thereafter, by clicking here.)

It's not like this was such a long time ago, either. She was elected in a special election, narrowly beating her surprise challenger, Paul Hackett, a returning Iraq war veteran, and was sworn into office on September 6th. That's two and a half months ago. In doing what she did, she not only violated her own oath, which she took, no doubt, in order to try to give herself some air of honesty and integrity, (I personally don't believe she has any, but that's beside the point. Don't worry, I also think a lot of Democratic members of the House lack honesty and integrity.), but she also besmirched the good name of a very much senior member of the House, who happens to be a highly decorated war hero, and a well-respected military consultant to presidents of both parties.

Besides being booed (and rightfully so) by her colleagues on the House floor, she should have been censured. How could nobody have brought forward a resolution to censure her? It boggles my mind.

"Censure is usually a formal condemnation by the House or Senate of one of its own Members. It rebukes a Member for specific behavior considered to be inappropriate or demeaning to the institution. Article I, section 5, clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution grants Congress the authority to "punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour." From that grant of authority, Congress has denounced, reprimanded, censured, or expelled its Members. " (http://www.c-span.org/questions/weekly95.asp) I think calling another member of Congress a coward would qualify as "inappropriate or demeaning to the institution". Here are the rules for disciplining a Member. http://www.rules.house.gov/archives/rl31382.pdf