Well there you have it

[ProSense]

March 15, 2006

The reaction from Feingold's colleagues

Posted 3:17 pm | Printer Friendly

The past few days, in the wake of Sen. Russ Feingold introducing his censure resolution, we've all seen (and probably felt) some frustration.

Snip...

What's going on? Is Feingold right when he says Dems are "cowering" in fear of the White House and prefer to "run and hide"? I thought I'd try and get the other side of the other story.

Snip...

First, a lot of Dems were bothered by the fact that Feingold took the party off-message...

Second, there's a sense that Feingold helped bring Republicans together...

Third, there was not even a hint of party strategy on this....

Fourth, Dems saw that Bush was starting another series of Iraq speeches, and the party was ready to pivot from ports to the war....

And fifth, one Senate staffer in particular said if Feingold wanted to push warrantless searches again, there were (and are) effective alternatives to a censure resolution. The staffer told me:

"Rather than just rush to a vote, which would be stupid, we want to get Specter to hold a hearing on it in Judiciary where it has been referred. Imagine a hearing with a panel of experts discussing whether Bush's behavior deserves censure. Wouldn't that be much better as a first step then a rushed vote in which we lose and R's declare victory and say we were silly?"

Just to be clear, I support Feingold's resolution. On the substance, I'd like to see senators vote for it. But after talking with some Hill staffers, I'm a little less ready to embrace the Dems-cravenly-abandon-Feingold idea than I was before.


http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/6864.html

[ProSense]

1. Another

Snip...

Conversely, it's not clear what Feingold hopes to accomplish with his censure motion. Bush's shortcomings are already getting plenty of attention, so he's not galvanizing any new media attention. He obviously didn't bother telling his fellow Democrats about his plan, which has had the result of making the party look muddled and stupid. And Republicans, far from being nonplussed by his censure motion, are having a field day with it.

Political theater has its own rules, and fair or not, the only measure of success is success. So while I'd vote for Feingold's motion, I don't think I'd hire him as a political theater consultant.

POSTSCRIPT: And what about my half answer? It's this: all the people complaining about Democratic senators who are waffling on Feingold's motion even though they voted to censure Bill Clinton need to lighten up. As I hope everyone knows, the censure motion against Clinton was an attempt to derail the impeachment proceedings, not a genuine expression of censure. And Feingold, as I hope we also remember, was the only Democratic senator to side with Republicans and refuse to vote for dismissal of the impeachment charges. So let's keep the holier-than-thou stuff down to a dull rumble, shall we?

UPDATE: The Clinton censure stuff is complicated for a number of reasons, but Elton Beard points out that although the House censure motion was indeed intended as a way of derailing impeachment, the Senate censure motion was introduced after the impeachment proceedings were over. I still think it's important to keep the political background in mind here, but I was wrong to suggest that senators who sponsored the Clinton censure motion were trying to do Clinton a favor. Sorry about that.


http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2006_03/008426.php

[Mass]

2. Spot on.

[Mass]

3. Another one from DU.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x658525

Skinner ADMIN Tue Mar-14-06 01:33 PM
Original message
Mixed feelings on Feingold's censure resolution Updated at 4:54 PM

My heart is with Senator Feingold on this. It seems obvious to me that Bush has been breaking the law with his warrantless domestic wiretapping program. Presidents are not above the law. When a president breaks the law, he should be held accountable. At the very least, he deserves to be censured by the Congress. In fact, his punishment should probably a lot worse than that.

...
I support Senator Feingold's censure resolution. But I have mixed feelings about it because right now it appears poised to fail. And when I say "fail" I don't mean "lose on a party-line vote" -- The resolution is poised to fail in a spectacular and public way, with a substantial number of elected Democrats too afraid to take even a small stand in favor of what is right.

If this thing loses with a large number of Democrats defecting, then Bush's supporters are going to paint this as a victory for Bush -- and not only that. They are going to claim that this vindicates his warrantless domestic spying program. They are going to claim that this is "proof" that the program is lawful, and has the support of Congress. And that would not be so great.

I do not know how hard Feingold worked behind the scenes to line up support for his resolution. If he has put a lot of effort into it, then good for him and shame on the Dems who refused to support him. But if he's doing this in a half-assed way and didn't really try to get other Democrats to support it, then I am a little nervous about what might happen. I can't help wondering if we might have better helped our cause by simply introducing a generic "sense of the Senate" resolution which forces Senators to express their support or opposition to the principle that "the government of the United States should not spy on its own citizens without a warrant," or to the principle that "the president of the United States is not above the law."

[ProSense]

4. I had this same concern

If this thing loses with a large number of Democrats defecting, then Bush's supporters are going to paint this as a victory for Bush -- and not only that. They are going to claim that this vindicates his warrantless domestic spying program. They are going to claim that this is "proof" that the program is lawful, and has the support of Congress. And that would not be so great.

IMO, the Repubs will do this even if every Dem votes for it. The timing of this was awful.

[MH1]

5. I think you're right.

And that's the biggest concern, IMO - regardless of political points won or lost, at the end of the day Feingold's move may have set up the "vindication" of Bush's program. Sigh.

[karynnj]

6. I agree

I'm surprised we're already getting people rethinking this already. I sure hope they can keep this in committee.

[wisteria]

7. Yeah, I hope it stays good and buried in committee or perhaps,

Feingold can withdraw the resolution. I just taking a stab in the dark here, I don't know for sure if this can be done.

[MH1]

8. I posted this and the Kevin Drum bit out on one of the threads in GD.

Actually a couple. Along with a comment that I think Feingold effed up.

:hide:

:scared:

Ah well I need to head for bed anyway. I'll scrape up the charred remains of my DU identity tomorrow.

[wisteria]

9. Your a brave soul! n/t