Had the two Senators been tied to the decrees of their parties leadership, this process would have taken a little longer and might have resulted in Bush simply nominating another candidate who is just as unappealing to the Democrats. This delay would only have served to give ammo to President Bush and prevented the Dems from focusing their efforts in an area where they could have an actual impact. Instead, these Democrats were able to compromise and choose their battles. They now can shift their focus to activities that will genuinely affect the actions and efforts of the White House, like passing a law making water boarding illegal. What ever your views on the legality of water boarding are, the fact is the Senate Intelligence Committee has reviewed the technique and approved it. Whether or not I, or anyone else, thinks it's illegal is irrelevant. It's not illegal until Congress passes legislation making it so, or the Courts find it repugnant to existing law. Neither of which has happened.
Saturday, November 3, 2007
Compromise through Party Irresponsibility
Yesterday, two democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee announced that they would break ranks with the party and support Mukasey's nomination for Attorney General. Despite grave concerns over Mukasey's refusal to declare waterboarding an illegal and torturous method of interrogation (which given the fact that the specifics of the technique are top secret and therefore unavailable for his review and comment, isn't all that out of line), Sen. Dianne Feinstein and Charles Schumer were able to find some common ground with Mukasey. They were confident that he would maintain a high degree of independence and would abide by and uphold the law in spite of pressures from Bush. In a closed door meet with Schumer, Mukasey said that if Congress chose to enact a law banning "enhanced" interrogation techniques, Bush would have to follow it. Schumer stated that "He flatly told me that the president would have absolutely no legal authority to ignore such a law" and that "He also pledged to enforce such a law and repeated his willingness to leave office rather than participate in a violation of law."
Had the two Senators been tied to the decrees of their parties leadership, this process would have taken a little longer and might have resulted in Bush simply nominating another candidate who is just as unappealing to the Democrats. This delay would only have served to give ammo to President Bush and prevented the Dems from focusing their efforts in an area where they could have an actual impact. Instead, these Democrats were able to compromise and choose their battles. They now can shift their focus to activities that will genuinely affect the actions and efforts of the White House, like passing a law making water boarding illegal. What ever your views on the legality of water boarding are, the fact is the Senate Intelligence Committee has reviewed the technique and approved it. Whether or not I, or anyone else, thinks it's illegal is irrelevant. It's not illegal until Congress passes legislation making it so, or the Courts find it repugnant to existing law. Neither of which has happened.
Had the two Senators been tied to the decrees of their parties leadership, this process would have taken a little longer and might have resulted in Bush simply nominating another candidate who is just as unappealing to the Democrats. This delay would only have served to give ammo to President Bush and prevented the Dems from focusing their efforts in an area where they could have an actual impact. Instead, these Democrats were able to compromise and choose their battles. They now can shift their focus to activities that will genuinely affect the actions and efforts of the White House, like passing a law making water boarding illegal. What ever your views on the legality of water boarding are, the fact is the Senate Intelligence Committee has reviewed the technique and approved it. Whether or not I, or anyone else, thinks it's illegal is irrelevant. It's not illegal until Congress passes legislation making it so, or the Courts find it repugnant to existing law. Neither of which has happened.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I agree, I think it was wise for the Democrats to let this one go, and choose a different battle. Whether we think waterboarding should be illegal or not, having a Attorney General that upholds the law is much more important. He is widely respected for his integrity.
Post a Comment