Our Democratic leaders on the record on Censure resolution

[HamdenRice]

The progressive blog, Shakespeare's sister, explains how Democratic Senators reacted to reporters' questions about the resolution, based in part on this article from the WaPo. It reminds me of Michael Moore trying to get a Congressman, any Congressman, to stop and talk about signing up his kids for military service:

http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/14/AR2006031401519.html

Dodging Dems
| posted by Shakespeare's Sister | Wednesday, March 15, 2006 | permalink |


The Dems react to Feingold’s resolution:


"I haven't read it," demurred Barack Obama…

"I just don't have enough information," protested Ben Nelson…

"I really can't right now," John Kerry said as he hurried past a knot of reporters…

Hillary Rodham Clinton brushed past the press pack, shaking her head and waving her hand over her shoulder…

Sen. Charles Schumer, known for his near-daily news conferences, made history by declaring, "I'm not going to comment." Would he have a comment later? "I dunno," the suddenly shy senator said…

"Was it a good idea for Senator Feingold to bring up this resolution?" came the first question, from CNN's Ed Henry.

"He brings up some very important issues," Debbie Stabenow (Mich.) ventured.

Henry was unsatisfied. "So do you support censure, or not?

Stabenow took another stab. "It needs to have hearings," she said.

Mary Landrieu (La.) pursed her lips. "Senator Feingold has a point that he wants to make," she said. "We have a point that we want to make, talking about the budget."

…The number two Democratic leader, Richard Durbin (Ill.), darted out of an elevator and into lunch when he thought nobody was looking.

"I haven't made any judgment," said Jeff Bingaman (N.M.)…

"Most of us feel at best it's premature," announced Sen. Christopher Dodd (Conn.). "I don't think anyone can say with any certainty at this juncture that what happened is illegal."

…"It's a question that's been asked 33 times in the last few hours," . "And so, for the 34th time, I'm going to say the same thing: I'm going to wait . . .''
Credit to Iowa’s Tom Harkin, who is apparently the only Senate Democrat currently supporting Feingold.

"The president broke the law and he needs to be held accountable," he said. "Talk about high crimes and misdemeanors!" Harkin said he'll vote for the Feingold resolution -- if it comes up.

That wasn’t so hard now, was it?

[Skidmore]

1. Like I said yesterday,

damn them all to hell.

[bspence]

2. Democrats suck

It's true. They don't represent their base AT ALL. Unfortunately, they're the only game in town to align with.

Republicans KISS ASS to their base, and they get (have gotten) a sizable chunk of the centrists. Democrats need to realize that their base are the ones who are going to campaign passionately to get them elected. I'll die if we have another "ho hum" candidate like Gore or Kerry. I will! Seriously!

[HamdenRice]

4. Democrats don't suck ...

but DC Democrats are in a bubble.

[blm]

3. DANA MILBANK is spinning on some of this and YOU are falling for it.

You can be for censure and still want to read it first in Obama's case, and Milbank is SPINNING Kerry's words to make them sound like he's lined up against censure when we already know he's for it.

[Botany]

5. I have heard from a friend on Kerry's staff that he will support

Feingold.

But it is time to call every Democratic Senator and Republican Senators if they are from your state.

THE PRESIDENT BROKE THE LAW ..... ARE YOU GOING TO STAND UP FOR THE CONSTITUTION?

Call the DNC too .... just say no to spineless dems or as I call them Vichy Democrats.

202-863-8000 DNC ask to speak to somebody on the Chairmen's staff. Hell, ask to
speak to Dr. Dean.

[blm]

8. It would be helpful if Dems saw through Milbank spin, while we're at it.

.

[Botany]

14. By pass Millbank .....

Get the story out own our own.

Of course the Rove & company manipulate the media but now the story about
Russ Feingold's move to censure bush is getting out in front of the old press.

Call all the Democratic Senators and your own Senators if they are repugs.

Millbank was awful to Conyers when he was looking @ the 04 election.

[OzarkDem]

6. What's Landrieu telling us? Her opposition to censure is for sale?

What an incredibly stupid way to get support for Hurricane Katrina victims and reconstruction - whoring your vote to the GOP to get them to live up to their obligations.

[KoKo]

7. Senator Durbin gave a speech after Feingolds SUPPORTING HIM!

This article is lying about that. I and others heard and watched him on C-Span....

[blm]

9. Milbank is doing his whoring job for BushInc and Dems are falling for it

AGAIN.

The media is emphasizing discord while MINIMIZING the support for censure.

[KoKo]

10. WaPo and NYT's have both done hatchet articles referring to

"some Democratic strategists say....."

"Democratic aides say...."

"other Democrats say....:

Nothing is EVER sourced. One has no way of knowing who made the comments.

I posted about the "Some Democrats say" thing after Feigold's censure speech criticizing the hack jobs at WaPo and NYT's but it sunk off into archives.

While "some Dems" do need to be held accountable for not supporting Feingold...articles with anonymous sourcing and not one Dem Aide or Op going on record means that it's just propaganda.

I'm so sick of NYT's and WaPo I don't even go to their sites anymore to read anything...

[blm]

12. That's the sure sign that they're pushing a storyline to protect Bushboy.

.

[HamdenRice]

11. My "man on the street" problem with Democratic leaders' reaction

Putting aside the possibility of spin by the WaPo writer, putting aside the fact that a losing censure vote might be a strategic setback, putting aside the need of Senators to read the resolution, etc, etc, etc ...

I think this is the problem: Everyone knows Bush is an incompetent lawbreaker. Why do they need to take a small "p" political approach to this fundamental issue of lawfulness versus lawlessness?

Is there any sentient progressive who does not believe Bush deserves to be censured? Why can't they just for once, vote their gut moral instinct.

Is this really the occasion to be strategic? If they are strategic on something as basic as this, on what other issues might they "strategically" vote against their own moral gut instinct?

And as for reading the resolution -- Didn't Conyers say they passed the Patriot Act, a far more important and complex bill, without having time to read it? I mean do they think Feingold is going to sneak in something inappropriate?

I call bullshit on the "need to study it" issue. Anyone could tell them it's a resolution to censure the president for the illegal wiretap program you have read about endlessly in the press: "Are you for it or ag'in it?"

[blm]

15. Process - censure is supposed to follow an investigation.

Feingold is stepping outside of process, understandably, because the GOP will not allow investigation.

Part of the problem is that it is legitimate for Dems to want to study censure under unconventional terms.

Remember, even Feingold voted FOR impeachment proceedings to continue against Clinton because he believed in letting the processs play out and would not ACCEPT censure instead.

So, it's hard to blame Dems when they really believe in process to achieve a goal.

[magellan]

17. There is no hard and fast procedure to censure

Probable Censure Procedure (from C-SPAN)

1. A resolution censuring the President is not contemplated by the rules of the House. This means it has no inherent privilege; it is not a question of the privileges of the House, nor is it a matter of personal privilege. Thus, there is no framework for considering it.
   
2. A special rule from the House Rules Committee would be required for its floor consideration and to set debate parameters.
   
3. A censure resolution could be drafted, considered, and then reported from the House Judiciary Committee, or
   
4. A censure resolution could be introduced and taken up immediately under the auspices of a special rule from the House Rules Committee, or
   
5. A censure resolution could be introduced by an individual Member, and referred to the House Judiciary Committee for its consideration.
   
6. In the Senate, a censure resolution could be introduced and would be referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee, or
   
7. The Senate Judiciary Committee could draft, consider and report out a censure resolution to the full Senate; or
   
8. A unanimous consent agreement could be worked out in advance to introduce a censure resolution by sending it to the desk and providing for its immediate consideration.
   
9. Floor debate and possible amendment of a censure resolution would most likely be governed by a unanimous consent agreement among all Senators.
   
10. If there is a single objection to a unanimous consent agreement, the Majority Leader could move to proceed to a censure resolution.
    
11. Adoption of a motion to proceed requires a majority vote, unless it is filibustered. In that case, a 3/5ths vote (60 or more) is required to end the filibuster.
    

[magellan]

16. OMG -- excellent point!!

"And as for reading the resolution -- Didn't Conyers say they passed the Patriot Act, a far more important and complex bill, without having time to read it? I mean do they think Feingold is going to sneak in something inappropriate?"

You are so right!! They didn't seemed worried about the inappropriate parts of the Patriot Act, did they? The excuse for voting for it was, "Oh, we'll fix the bad later." The Patriot Act affects everyone in this country. Censure is a friggin' letter of reprimand!

Do the Senate Dems care about the rule of law any more than the Repugs, that's what I've seriously started wondering. And I don't like the answer I'm coming up with.

[Mrspeeker]

13. I thought Durbin and Kerry backed it

Maybe I was wrong, or maybe their wrong...seems like a party should be sticking together against the opposition party.

[blm]

18. Milbank is spinning - he's emphasizing discord and minimizing support.

Everyone who's called Kerru's office was told he's in support of the censure. Milbank obviously didn't bother to do that.