by pyrrho
Frankly, what has interested me more than the issue of should the president receive censure, is how the Democrats reacted to the call. It's important to remember that Feinstein proposed censure of Clinton, and this was after the Impeachment failed... but now they are hesitant. Well, they should be hesitant, although symbolic, to censure a President is serious and should be taken seriously. Saying he did wrong or even violated the law is not enough. It has to be, in my view, based on the idea that the President is going to continue to do that, or he has a false view of impunity, or his interpretation of the law sits so badly that the Senate must declare their opposition to it on the grounds that the President is not above the law.
Insofar as it calls for reviewing these issues, I think Democrats should be for that review, if not for the censure. That is, it will be their discretion and responsibility how they vote, but I believe they should support addressing the question.
I have a problem that this is such a surprise to the Senate Democrats. Rumor is that Feingold did not tell the other Senators his plans, so that much was a surprise, but the issues, and the last 5 years, these should not be news to Democratic Senators, or even Republican Senators. There are many views, I'll even add, many valid views, but to appear to not have a perspective on the situation behind this censure is a bit much, and I think that's the reaction we have seen so far from most Senate Democrats.
Still, that's a side issue, the real question should be... Should the Senate Censure the President?
Recent Comments