No House resolution honoring SEAL's bin Laden mission

[Fair&Balanced]

Originally Posted by monster

So my friend and I were talking about this while we were walking this morning and she asked: if this needs to be part of congressional record for the sake of history, what about all the stuff that got recorded and was later shown to be wrong outside of congress -how does that get corrected in the history books? The example she gave was the recent statement along the lines of 90% of Planned Parenthood's money being used to fund abortions... (I realise I don't have the exact wording, but you kbnow the one I mean)

The Congressional Record presents the unedited words and actions of members of Congress, not necessarily the truth or the facts.

A future historian studying American attitudes about abortion in 2011 will get the facts about Planned Parenthood from other reliable sources and will get a perspective on how the issue was demigogued and PP was falsly vilified by conservative members of Congress from speeches and votes recorded in the Congressional Record.

As an aside and totlly unrelated:

Here is the Congressional Record (Globe) from 1838 where a Southern Congressman introduced several resolutions stating that the Federal Government should stay the fuck out of the issue of slavery in the southern states.

http://books.google.com/books?id=AD0...page&q&f=false

You cant find these kind of source documents anywhere else.

[monster]

So why don't we want history to be truth and facts?

[Fair&Balanced]

Originally Posted by monster

So why don't we want history to be truth and facts?

In your Planned Parenthood example, the Congressional Record will show the unedited truth about how conservatives in Congress lied about the issue, relying solely on their own words and actions. It is not the purpose of the CR to correct the lies.

The facts about Planned Parenthood are available from other reliable sources.

[monster]

But the killing if Bin Laden is not?

Or does it just need to be there is some format to prompt historians to look at the other resources?

[Fair&Balanced]

Originally Posted by monster

But the killing if Bin Laden is not?

Or does it just need to be there is some format to prompt historians to look at the other resources?

The Congressional Record is not intended to be a record of the details of national events, but simply how Congress responded to those events, in the form of resolutions, speeches, etc.

I suspect the national security archives will have details on the entire operation when it become declassified 50 or 100 years from now.

As Dana noted, historians rely on a variety of documents and sources.

As one of those sources, the Record is unique in offering the unedited words and actions of Congress.

[DanaC]

It is just as important to a research historian to be able to get at the lies that were told as well as the facts. It is just as useful to know the rumours and the bluster as it is to know the votes and the results.

Not all history is about setting down the facts. Some of it is an attempt to get a grip on what people were thinking, talking about, preoccupied with and playing politics around. Political shennanigans tell us a great deal about the mentality of the time we're looking at.

[monster]

@ F&B


Hmmm. I'mm'a contemplate it some more.

thanks, I appreciate your opinion.

eta: and Dana's too. And most participants.

[footfootfoot]

Originally Posted by monster

...I appreciate your opinion.

...And most participants.

I refuse to participate in any thread that would have me as a poster.

[infinite monkey]

Originally Posted by footfootfoot

I refuse to participate in any thread that would have me as a poster.

Wily one.

I'm putting my sig back.

[DanaC]

This has been a really interesting discussion.

[Jill]

Originally Posted by monster

and Jill, sorry, I had not seen all the other shit going on and apologise if I made anything worse. I was truly just interested in it because you started the thread about it. I try to stay away from the politics threads for exactly this reason but you seemed like a rational person to discuss stuff with. I am ignorant about American politics -and a lot of Brit politics these days too- but I don't find it helpful to be told so and then given political labels when I question, so I stay away. yup chicken. I didn't mean to pile on in any way shape or form, and I am sorry for giving that impression.

No worries, monster. I should have known that you didn't mean it personally, and I shouldn't have allowed the nonsense from the other thread to spill over into this one. It was really my bad for overreacting and not just taking your question at face value. FT(not Congressional)R, I posted a reply to what went down in that thread, here.

Originally Posted by DanaC

It is just as important to a research historian to be able to get at the lies that were told as well as the facts. It is just as useful to know the rumours and the bluster as it is to know the votes and the results.

Not all history is about setting down the facts. Some of it is an attempt to get a grip on what people were thinking, talking about, preoccupied with and playing politics around. Political shennanigans tell us a great deal about the mentality of the time we're looking at.

Politically speaking, a good example of why an official Congressional Record of votes on Resolutions can be important, is to look at the Resolution to institute Martin Luther King Day as a National Holiday.

"In 1983, CBC member Rep. Katie Hall (D-IN) re-introduced the King Holiday legislation, H.R. 3706. In the House of Representatives and in the Senate, the bill was hotly contested. The major issues raised in the House was that the passage of the bill would elevate Dr. King to the status of the founding father, George Washington and that it would be too costly to grant federal workers an additional holiday.

"The holiday bill passed the House on a vote of 338-90 in August 1983. Despite bi-partisan support and support from the Senate leadership, Sen. Jesse Helms (R-NC) led a bitter opposition to the bill in the Senate. Calling Dr. King a Communist, Helms circulated negative material in an effort to defeat the bill. Nevertheless, the Senate approved the bill by a vote of 78-22 in October 1983."

http://www.avoiceonline.org/mlk/legislation.html

Why is the Congressional Record of the votes on that Resolution important today (well, 3 years ago, actually)?

Then-Presidential candidate John McCain was one of the 22 Senators who voted against that Resolution.

Originally Posted by DanaC

This has been a really interesting discussion.

I, for one, am very glad it has turned into that! Thank you for helping make it so!

[Uday]

Originally Posted by Jill

"House Republicans say they have no plans to follow the Senate in passing a resolution honoring the military mission that killed Osama bin Laden.

"The decision by GOP leaders follows new rules they enacted in January scrapping the tradition of congratulatory measures, which they complained clogged up the House floor.

"The Senate on Tuesday passed a resolution, 97-0, commending “the men and women of the United States Armed Forces and the United States intelligence community for the tremendous commitment, perseverance, professionalism and sacrifice they displayed in bringing Osama bin Laden to justice.” The measure commended President Obama and reaffirmed the Senate’s commitment “to disrupting, dismantling and defeating al Qaeda.” It also recognized former President George W. Bush’s efforts after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks."

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/15...h-a-resolution

Gee, what happened to that supposed Republican patriotism, rah-rah USA, Support Our Troops stuff? Where's the flag-waving when it actually counts for something?

Shame on them.

On the other hand, you do not make a big deal when someone shoots a mad dog.

And that is what happened here. As my friend said, "they took out the trash".

Also, there is not much a bunch of fat politicians can do to honor men such as these seals. It is like a mouse honoring a lion.

[Big Sarge]

Uday, I agree totally.

[monster]

I do too, to be honest. Do I need to hand in my bleeding heart liberal card?

[Big Sarge]

Montie has been healed of her possession by evil liberal demons. Hallelujah! One more has followed the light to enlightenment