The New York Times does not have Russ Feingold’s back. But that is probably because they are missing the point.
We understand the frustration that led Senator Russell Feingold to introduce a measure that would censure President Bush for authorizing warrantless spying on Americans. It’s galling to watch from the outside as the Republicans and most Democrats refuse time and again to hold Mr. Bush accountable for the lawlessness and incompetence of his administration. Actually sitting among that cowardly crew must be maddening.
Still, the censure proposal is a bad idea. Members of Congress don’t need to take extraordinary measures like that now. They need to fulfill their sworn duty to investigate the executive branch’s misdeeds and failings. Talk about censure will only distract the public from the failure of their elected representatives to earn their paychecks.
We’d be applauding Mr. Feingold if he’d proposed creating a bipartisan panel to determine whether the domestic spying operation that Mr. Bush has acknowledged violates the 1978 surveillance law, as it certainly seems to do. The Senate should also force the disclosure of any other spying Mr. Bush is conducting outside the law. (Attorney General Alberto Gonzales has strongly hinted that is happening.)
The Senate Intelligence and Judiciary Committees should do this, but we can’t expect a real effort from Senator Pat Roberts, the Intelligence Committee chairman, or Senator Arlen Specter, chairman of the Judiciary Committee. They’re too busy trying to give legal cover to the president’s trampling on the law and the Constitution.
What Gail Collins doesn’t seem to understand is that Russ Feingold is only dramatizing and highlighting the stonewalling of Roberts and Specter. While Collins does go on to urge Senator Reid to close down the Senate (as he most assuredly should do) she fails to give Feingold credit for bringing the unresolved issue of the NSA program (and other illegal domestic surveillance) to the forefront of our political debate.
Collins writes off his efforts, thusly:
With so much still unknown about the domestic spying, the censure resolution merely allows the Republicans to change the subject to fairy tales about Democratic leaders’ trying to impeach Mr. Bush. They are also painting criticism of Mr. Bush as unpatriotic. That’s tedious nonsense, but watching Mr. Feingold’s Democratic colleagues run for cover shows how effective it is.
Before Russ brought up censure his colleagues were already running for cover and they were getting away with it. If we can’t get a real investigation then we should censure the son of a bitch.
Right. If all he had done was to have “proposed creating a bipartisan panel” then you wouldn’t even be talking about it at all!
Also, if “Mr. Bush has acknowledged violates the 1978 surveillance law” then what is there to investigate???
Moron or shill?
overall, it is a very tough editorial. But she still is a moron for the very reason you identified.
But I heard that Bush is strong-arming Republicans in the Republican-controlled Senate to intimidate them out of investigating the illegal wire-tapping. Evil Genius Rove — who should have been indicted months ago for lying to a grand jury (Fitz where are you?) — must surely be behind the cover-your-cowardly-ass or we will go for the jugular, withhold funds, and make sure you don’t get reelected strategy. Which seems to be working. Republican cowardly behavior is a no-brainer. I just don’t get the Democrats.
If we had to choose, which would we rather have (and which would be better for the long-term health of the nation)?
Even if, by some miracle, a censure vote passed the Senate, it wouldn’t have any real effect on the Bush Administration. If Congress were to finally get off its ass and reassert its constitutional prerogative of oversight into the executive branch, that could perhaps put an end, once and for all, to Bush’s wanton disregard of the law of the land.
I’m not saying that I’m against Feingold’s resolution, but I do believe that pushing for a real investigation is far more vital for the American republic. The Times seems to think that this is the priority. Censure should be a secondary option.
but Russ is pushing for an investigation. The censure motion was the only way to keep this is the news and shame Democrats into insisting on an investigation.
Collins is missing the entire point. Censure accomplishes nothing, but calling for censure dramatizes the need for an investigation.
The problem with Collins’s attempt at thinking boils down to a couple sentences:
It ALLOWS them? Like Republicans need the permission of Dems to change the subject? Like the Dems weren’t running for cover already? Yet again we hear the sad song of the frightened liberals: If only Feingold hadn’t made his resolution, the GOP wouldn’t have called Bush critics unpatriotic. If only everybody just kept quiet, the Bushies wouldn’t attack us. If only we keep our eyes closed, the monsters wont’ get us.
The Dems DID call for an investigation and got predictably shot down by their GOP colleagues. Big surprise. The only mystery is how this simple fact escapes a supposed journalist like Collins.
What is it with people like this? Bush has gotten thousands killed with his self-serving lies. His henchmen have slandered everyone who opposed him. They’ve shredded the constitution, cheated their way to power, and grown so arrogant that they don’t even bother to try to cover up their lawbreaking. And yet the Collinses of the world, over and over again, keep on telling themselves, and us, that he won’t hit them again if they can just not make him mad. America doesn’t need frightened neurotics like this telling us how to behave.
As long as the investigation concludes that Mr. Danger committed no crime.
He has already decreed that it is a crime even to suggest that he committed a crime.
So the politicians would have to be careful with their speeches during the investigation, which of course, would be televised. But I am confident that their staff is skilfull enough so that they could all make very impressive speeches that would please their devotees enough to get out the checkbooks without compromising themselves or committing a crime.
Investigation sounds more serious than hearings too.
You write:”The New York Times does not have Russ Feingold’s back. But that is probably because they are missing the point.”
No BooMan.
It is YOU who are missing the point.
The NY Times is a bought and sold corporate entity. They were the ROOT of the anti-Dean forces on the so-called “left” in 2003/2004, and produced edition after edition of that paper with large AND small, overt AND covert attempts to diminish Dean’s chances and to inflate Kerry’s. I was still reading and watching the news then. In fact it was an image on the front page of a Sunday Times the late summer of 2003 that was the initial shock that started to awken me to the fact that the whole media system was rotten. That there essentially WAS no real “liberal” presence in the big-time media. The image was large, in coolor and right on the front page. Kerry hovering over Dean like a hawk about to pounce on a fat little mouse. I had been in Europe for about a month, and my receptors had been wiped clean of their usual accumulation of media bullshit as a result. I opened that paper…I remember the very instant…and the light dawned.
“Why…they’re in on the fix!!!”
Duh.
And 6 months or so later…after CAREFUL preparation, after Dean was repeatedly painted as a “flake”, as a loser on BOTH sides of the media aisle …
“ARRRGGHHHH!!!”
GOTCHA!!!
Well…they still are.
In on the fix.
The same corporate forces that were afraid…rightfully afraid…of Dean are afraid of Feingold, too. BET on it.
And the Times will twist and tgurn in an attempt to seem “liberal” while simultaneously running the consensus centrist…meaning corporate-approved…DemRat up the flagpole.
In the spirit of “winnability”.
Right.
In the spirit of the corporate fix.
Two candidates, one plan. (With minor variations. BushCo and BushCo Lite. Nice)
You can bet on that, too.
NEWSTRIKE!!!
Pay these assholes no mind.
Maybe they’ll just fade away.
AG
NYT smear of Dean painfully obvious. It was fully coordinated from the top. Front page “human interest” stories. News columns about the so-called scream incident and other things. Columnists like Dowd criticizing Dean’s wife for her clothing and work/family commitments, editorials and even op ed and editorial page essays.
As for the Feingold editorial, I am sick of hearing about the fabulous winning strategy the Democrats have–if we just give them a chance, wait, don’t anger anyone. Total crap. Just what has it all gotten us?
“Just what has it all gotten us?”
The fix.
“…fabulous winning strategy?”
No. Fabulous LOSING strategy.
When the fix is in so deep that it becomes obvious and yet the so-called “losers” do not protest…i.e. Kerry in Ohio…you KNOW the fix is in.
BIG time.
Dems my ass.
The are USING you.
As cover.
“Why…we’re LIBERALS!!! Just look at the netroots.”
Bullshit.
AG
Bullmoose puts his DLC two cents in, regarding the Feingold Censure Resolution:
http://bullmooseblogger.blogspot.com/2006/03/censure-compromise_114260506758648117.html
Since he doesn’t allow comments, allow me to, for the sake of argument, assume he is running for re-election as a democrat this November, and is following his own advice.
Reporter: Mr. Moose, when the administration broke the law regarding torture, what did you do?
Candidate Moose: (proudly) I did nothing.
Reporter: And when the president outed a covert CIA agent dealing with WMD, what did you do in your congressional oversight role?
Moose: Not a thing.
Reporter: And when the administration started spying on Americans without a warrant, your position was?
Moose: Nothing.
Reporter: Your opponent in the primary election has made the following statement. “All that is necessary for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing.” How do you respond?
Yes, Mr. Moose. Ho do you respond?