Did New York's Senator Chuckie Schumer lie to Congress & the American people? It seems so. Can you say "kick the liar out of the U.S. Senate....?"
The difference is, Chuckie Schumer did, in fact, lie---in order to ram severe environmental legislation through Congress, based upon a totally false premise---resulting in devastating loss to many American citizens, their livelihoods, and their entire communities. And the legislation Schumer sponsored had nothing to do with his state of New York. It was out West.
Apparently their value systems, or lack thereof, make it O.K. for Democrats to lie to get their way in support of their hard-left unsupportable agendas.
At the same time, they demand that conservatives---who value American citizens and their welfare above a lower species Spotted Owl that was not endangered by any activity of humans.... and who don't believe it is acceptable to deny water to Americans in another state, in order to protect the "pufferfish"---meet the Democrats' command that conservatives rise to a consistently restrictive, artificially-high standard established by.... guess who? The Democrats, of course.
Read about the Democrats' extreme double standard---in excerpts below and here link.
"Democrats, prominent among them New York Senator Charles Schumer, have held President Bush to an irrationally high standard of proof in asserting that “Bush lied” to the American people regarding what he knew about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction before our invasion of that country.
However, no one has held Democrats to a similarly high standard regarding their own initiatives. To that point, I’d like to discuss the so-called “Spotted Owl” federal legislation of 1996, when Senator Schumer was Congressman Schumer. And I’d like to pose the following question:
Did Chuck Schumer knowingly lie about the probable fate of the Spotted Owl in order to get a piece of legislation passed?
In other words, with regard to the science on which the Spotted Owl legislation was rammed through, what did Chuck Schumer know, and when did he know it?....
Had Mr. Schumer acted upon information that he certainly must have been aware of regarding the real reason for the Spotted Owl’s decline, he could have prevented what amounts to nothing less than a contemporary American tragedy.
But, as we know, he didn’t do so. Then-Congressman Schumer almost certainly (by the standards he currently demands of the President) chose to conceal evidence that might well have changed the course of the history of American legislation in the 1990s.
If we hold Senator Schumer to these same standards he now insists President Bush be held to, then Chuck Schumer lied! There’s no other way to say it. At least in the contemporary dialect of Democrat-speak.
Chuck Schumer either willfully ignored or misrepresented the scientific research at the foundation of the Spotted Owl legislation, and in doing so he put the lives of American citizens at risk.... the law based on his lies has resulted not only in the collapse of a vital regional segment of the American economy but in widespread human suffering among Americans....
Given the many fundamentally important challenges that face our nation today — particularly in the area of international policy, where we must confront with utmost resolve the immediate and real threat to our very way of life presented by Islamist terrorism — we cannot afford to countenance public servants such as Senator Charles Schumer, who would sacrifice the interests of his fellow Americans to the ill-advised and scientifically insupportable passage of such legislation....
Schumer has intimated that impeachment is an appropriate fate for a President who has “lied” to the American people in order to further his agenda. What fate is appropriate for a legislator who has done the same?
Perhaps Mr. Schumer should be called on to resign his position as a member of the United States Senate on the grounds that he has subverted his sworn duty to serve the interests of the American people to that of furthering a leftist/environmentalist political agenda that arguably runs precisely counter to the needs and interests of his, and every federal legislator’s, broader constituency.
By Democrats’ own standards, nothing less than Schumer’s resignation seems appropriate in the face of the social and economic damage to America’s interests his dereliction of duty has brought about...."