Crossposted from MY LEFT WING
My dear friend Armando gently rebuked me exactly one week ago today for what he interpreted as premature condemnation of the silence of Senate Democrats regarding Feingold's resolution to censure George W. Bush for his criminal activities per warrantless wiretaps vis a vis the National Security Agency.
Said Armando last week, on Wednesday, March 15th: "My problem with this diary is it is premature."
and...
"You URGE, You don't condemn. Condemnation comes when they fail to respond."
Well, darlin', it's been 11 days, now. Still too soon to condemn the spineless, appeasing, pathetic, craven Democrats?
Over at My Left Wing, gottlieb posted a STRONG condemnation of the Democrats, one I'm tempted to simply lift wholesale for my own nefarious purposes. I'll resist that temptation and just give you a taste:
Censure? Impeachment is a slap on the wrist for our War-Criminal-in-Chief. Censure? What the fuck is that?
Censure: An expression of disapproval.
The Democrats can't even get up the gumption to express their disapproval? It's less than a slap on the wrist. It's more like a roll of the eyes and they can't even do that?
Why, because they don't want to look weak?
Cower: To cringe in fear.
So let's get this straight: In order not to look weak, the Democratic strategy is to cringe in fear?
I have that right? That can't be right. Is that right?
Democrats: an extinct political party known for its cowardice and capitulation to high crimes and misdemeanors.
I'm sorry; it's beyond anger and frustration now with the chronically foolish, afraid of their own shadows jackasses. It's now in a realm of uncontrolled laughter at the contortion of spineless simpletons bending over backwards to suck their iddy-biddy diddies.
Forget Nancy Pelosi.
I know I'd like to.
WHERE ARE THE SENATE DEMOCRATS?
Wherever they are, it's not standing in unity behind Russell Feingold, the Senator from Wisconsin who had the common sense of decency and patriotism to stand up and ATTEMPT to hold a criminal President to account for his crimes.
Why? Not prudent? Approval rating not low enough yet?
Despicable. Pathetic. Boxer and Harkin are the only ones to co-sponsor this resolution.
Where are Kerry and Kennedy? What the MOTHERFUCK is going ON, here?
From the WaPo, March 14, 2006:
Democratic leaders reacted cautiously to Feingold's move. Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) commended him "for bringing this to the attention of the American people. We need a full and complete debate on this NSA spying." Reid and Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (D-Conn.) told reporters they wanted to examine the resolution before endorsing or rejecting it.
That's a lotta goddamned examining going on, I bet. It's March 22, 2006 - anybody got anything to say now?
The Associated Press
Sunday, March 19, 2006; 3:47 PM
WASHINGTON --
. . .
... Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois said it is too early to tell if either censure or impeachment of Bush would be appropriate.
"I can't rule anything out until the investigation is complete. I don't want to prejudge it," said Durbin, the Senate's No. 2 Democrat. "But if this president or any president violates the law, he has to be held accountable."
. . .
Since then, few Democrats have embraced the proposal, while some Republicans have sought to the cast the move as a shameless political ploy over a vital national security issue. Feingold is considered a presidential contender for 2008.
. . .
"It's valuable that Senator Feingold is moving us forward to finally be a catalyst to have the kind of hearings and the kind of deliberations as to what lies behind this warrantless wiretap situation," said Durbin, calling the overall inquiries so far by the Republican-controlled Senate inadequate.
"We have a responsibility to ask the hard questions, to find out what the nature of the program is and whether the president violated the law," Durbin said.
Durbin makes a really, really good point: You can't really censure someone until you have an investigation... an investigation that has been, conveniently, tabled indefinitely - sent to a committee where it will not be allowed to go forward by... the fucking REPUBLICANS in charge of the fucking committee.
So, it would seem we are at an impasse: you can't censure someone for a crime they have not yet been found to have committed. So how do you find out if the crime was committed?
YOU FUCKING INVESTIGATE.
Perfect, right?
Only I ain't hearing diddly from the Senate Democrats about the investigation that isn't happening. THAT is the response they should be giving, instead of "No comment."
Here's what you do, you fucking dolts: sign on as co-sponsors and bring it to a vote. While presenting arguments before the vote, you make it perfectly fucking clear that IT NEEDS TO BE INVESTIGATED.
Two-thirds of the country think this deserves censure disapprove of this President, and they haven't even heard all the FACTS.
How many people need to approve of the censure resolution before the inept, pathetic, craven Democrats take a motherfucking stand?