The New York Times stops just short of the "I" word on the editorial page of this Sunday's paper.
In a piece titled, "The Imperial Presidency 2.0", The Times writes that Democrats have the "moral responsibility" to "right the dangerous wrongs of the past six years." If Democrats do not, then they are "no better than the Republicans".
We have to consider where we in the progressive blogosphere ought to stand, when the New York Times is standing no further away than a first-date kiss from calling for Bush in the dock.
First, let's look at the editorial. Then I want to ask the question again, because I think it's worth asking: what are we contributing to the discussion on this matter if we are not willing to go further than the Times?
In 2006, the voters sent Mr. Bush a powerful message that it was time to rein in his imperial ambitions. But we have yet to see any sign that Mr. Bush understands that — or even realizes that the Democrats are now in control of the Congress. Indeed, he seems to have interpreted his party’s drubbing as a mandate to keep pursuing his fantasy of victory in Iraq and to press ahead undaunted with his assault on civil liberties and the judicial system.
The Times notes several of the President's transgressions, and brings up his newest: the signing statement asserting authority to open the mail of American citizens without a warrant.
The law is clear on this. A warrant is required to open Americans’ mail under a statute that was passed to stop just this sort of abuse using just this sort of pretext. But then again, the law is also clear on the need to obtain a warrant before intercepting Americans’ telephone calls and e-mail.
The Times says that the Democrats in Congress now have the "moral responsibility" to restore "the rule of law over Mr. Bush's rogue intelligence operations" and restore "the balance of powers between Congress and the executive branch."
Very interestingly, The Times warns Congress not to listen to the "absurd notion" that they should "look ahead" rather than "right the dangerous wrongs of the last six years".
This is a false choice. Dealing with these issues is not about the past. The administration’s assault on some of the nation’s founding principles continues unabated. If the Democrats were to shirk their responsibility to stop it, that would make them no better than the Republicans who formed and enabled these policies in the first place.
The New York Times stops just short of the "I" word. But, I am forced to wonder, how does the Times expect Congress to go about "restoring the rule of law" to an Administration willing to engage in overtly extra-legal actions? By passing more laws for the Administration to ignore?
I think the implication is clear.
The national conversation is shifting, and will continue to shift as Bush leaves reality further behind, next week. If we in the left blogosphere aren't careful, we're going to be in the odd position of playing catch-up with the public and the New York Times on the question of George W. Bush.
It's gonna be an interesting month.