I've been seeing a theme in and around left blogistan this week. It's a veritable outpouring of frustration over Democratic reaction, or lack thereof, to Feingold's censure resolution. It's not even so much the fact that most of them are not backing it, but the utter (dare I say it?) wimpishness of their response. I can't help but think the Democratic Senators are in need of a visit from Alec Baldwin's character in
Glengarry Glen Ross.
Greg posts here. Meanwhile Michael Stickings gets in on the action here. I've taken to calling this the Glengarry Glen Ross theme. My thoughts on the flip, as well as some choice Mamet dialogue.
Greg is one who is clearly fed up by the complete unwillingness of most of the Senators to take a stand on principle one way or the other:
Do you honestly think the President's lawbreaking isn't as big a deal as Clinton's perjury? Then stop dicking us around and actually say it. I might not agree with you, but I'd at least respect you for taking a stand.
That is the key point. Everywhere I turn I see Democrats talking about the politics of it and preceptions and how 'it's just not smart politics right now. The Carpetbagger's conversations with the ubiquitous Dem insiders is rife with this sort of thing:
[A] lot of Dems were bothered by the fact that Feingold took the party off-message. The DP World controversy was still reverberating, and congressional Dems had hoped to keep the momentum going this week with a vote on the "Sail Only if Scanned (S.O.S.) Act," . . . Dems saw that Bush was starting another series of Iraq speeches, and the party was ready to pivot from ports to the war. . . . Yesterday, however, whenever a Dem senator tried to talk about the war, reporters just asked about Feingold.
It just want to make me scream 'Take a fucking stand already!' The reason they were asking you again and again about Feingold is because you never answered the question, do you think the president should be censured? It's a simple question, needing only a yes or a no answer. Instead we get endless hemming and hawing about needing more information or talking about polls and the political ramifications and whining about how it took them all off-message. Look, life will take you off message. If you want to talk about port security take a position on the question and bring it around to what you want to talk about.
And this is why we need to go Glengarry Gen Ross on our spineless senators I just want to sit them down and say:
Go and do likewise, gents. The money's out there, you pick it up, it's yours. You don't--I have no sympathy for you. You wanna go out on those sits tonight and close, close, it's yours. If not you're going to be shining my shoes. Bunch of losers sitting around in a bar. "Oh yeah, I used to be a salesman, it's a tough racket." . . . And to answer your question, pal: why am I here? I came here because Mitch and Murray asked me to, they asked me for a favor. I said, the real favor, follow my advice and fire your fucking ass because a loser is a loser.
On a more positive note Michael Stickings puts it thusly:
Democrats do need to think about how best to get elected this fall. They do need to think about the optics of censure. But they also need to do the right thing, to stand up for what's right over and against what's politically expedient. They haven't -- and won't -- but they need to stand with Senator Feingold.
Courage, Democrats, courage. You will be rewarded for it.
Indeed.