[Mb-civic] Fanning the political flames - Joan Vennochi - Boston Globe Op-Ed

[William Swiggard]

  Fanning the political flames

By Joan Vennochi  |  March 19, 2006  |  The Boston Globe

SCORCHED EARTH tactics usually don't leave winners. They leave 
destroyers and destroyed.

But some Democrats are playing with fire.

Senator Russell Feingold, Democrat of Wisconsin, is calling for the 
censure of President Bush, specifically concerning Bush's wiretapping of 
US citizens without a warrant.

Is Feingold's resolution motivated by pure political self-interest? He 
is a probable Democratic presidential candidate trying to stake his 
claim to the political left. Or is it principle? Feingold is the only US 
senator who opposed the original Patriot Act, and he voted against 
authorizing war with Iraq.

Either way, it creates a dilemma for Democrats.

Whipping up white-hot partisan frenzy wins adoration from lefty 
bloggers. But by the tenets of conventional political wisdom, it is a 
risky general election strategy. It also ignores this political reality: 
the president will never again be on an election ballot. Republicans in 
Congress will, as will a crop of Republican presidential candidates 
whose last name is not Bush. Shouldn't they, not Bush, be the Democrats' 
focus? Those in Congress can be held accountable in 2006 and 2008. At 
this point, Bush answers to the history books, not to voters on Election 
Day.

Current polls and surveys show people think as little of Bush as they do 
of Congress. Democrats in Congress should be thinking of ways to change 
that political reality. They need to increase their own favorability 
ratings at the expense of the opposition. Handing the opposition a 
weapon to use against Democrats is counterproductive, to say the least. 
But censure, and even impeachment, are seductive.

At this point, Democrats in Congress appear to understand the danger of 
pouring kerosene on the politics of Iraq and national security. 
Democrats thinking about running for president are another story.

In the Senate, Feingold has been on his own.

In the House, 29 of 201 Democrats have signed on to a resolution from 
Representative John Conyers Jr., Democrat of Michigan, that demands a 
special committee to investigate the Bush administration's 
''manipulation of prewar intelligence," among other things, and advise 
whether there are ''grounds for possible impeachment."

Only three of 10 US House members from Massachusetts signed on to it. 
They are Michael E. Capuano of Somerville, John. F. Tierney of Salem, 
and John W. Olver of Amherst.

Representative James P. McGovern of Worcester called the resolution 
''tempting," but concluded that it distracts from the party's goals of 
winning House and Senate races in the fall. Representative Barney Frank 
says, ''This is an understandable emotional response from people who are 
very angry. But why do we want to energize George Bush's people?"

Democrats with presidential aspirations are happy to energize the right, 
because that also energizes the left. It also helps them tap into money, 
headlines, and rabid supporters. ''It's very important for them to know 
we'll fight for their beliefs," John Edwards, the former US senator who 
was John Kerry's running mate, told the Globe.

Important to whom? It is important to candidates like Kerry and Edwards, 
because bowing to the left helps them in Democratic primary circles -- 
just as bowing to the right helps Mitt Romney gain credibility with GOP 
activists. It amounts to the short-term, feel-good politics of immediate 
self-interest. Does it help Democrats win in 2006? Will it win back the 
White House in 2008? No one knows. In the meantime, how long can 
Democrats such as Senator Hillary Clinton of New York resist the pressure?

A political survey done by American Research Group is helping the left 
make its case. It is based on 1,100 telephone interviews among a random 
sample of adults nationwide from March 13-15. Of those surveyed, 46 
percent said they favored censuring Bush for authorizing wiretaps of 
Americans without obtaining court orders; 44 percent opposed and 10 
percent were undecided. On impeachment, 42 percent favored a vote to 
impeach; 29 percent opposed and 9 percent were undecided.

The survey is particularly interesting when responses from independents 
are analyzed. On the censure question, 42 percent said they favored it; 
47 percent opposed. On the impeachment question, 47percent favored it; 
40 percent opposed.

It all adds fuel to the flames swirling around the White House. There is 
danger for the GOP, but also for Democrats: Will those flames consume 
those who fan them, too?

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/03/19/fanning_the_political_flames/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.islandlists.com/pipermail/mb-civic/attachments/20060319/65c9bcc1/attachment.htm