The story du jour seems to be Senate Minority leader Harry Reid’s guerrilla theater from yesterday:
WASHINGTON (AP) – Unable to win their way with votes, outnumbered Democrats used a rarely invoked Senate rule to force a secret session as a way to dramatize their assertions that the Bush administration misused intelligence in the run-up to war in Iraq.
“They have repeatedly chosen to protect the Republican administration rather than get to the bottom of what happened and why,” Democratic leader Harry Reid said Tuesday in demanding that the Senate chamber be emptied of everyone but members and a few staffers.
Republicans angrily derided the use of Rule 21 – which dates back to 1795 – as a political stunt but agreed two hours later to have a bipartisan group check on how the Senate Intelligence Committee is coming along in its investigation of prewar intelligence.
“The United States Senate has been hijacked by the Democratic leadership,” said Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee.
As with so many issues these days where you stand seems to depend on where you sit.
Left-leaning bloggers are positively gleeful over the brouhaha. Anything to discomfit the Administration.
Right-leaning bloggers are indignant at the action.
Centrist bloggers appear to believe that both sides are behaving badly. I agree. Republicans are wrong in any foot-dragging on investigations of events leading up to the invasion of Iraq. Such investigations should proceed with all due speed. There were, what, seven or eight investigations of the events leading up to the declaration of war on Japan that were conducted while World War II was in progress.
But Democrats are wrong, too. Investigations won’t help the Democrats one bit: lots of Democratic senators voted in favor of the invasion. Democrats are far more likely to make themselves appear feckless in matters of national defense than they are to vindicate their own past votes. And “he started it” is the excuse of kids wrestling in the backseat of the car. “He” didn’t start it, anyway. I trace it back to the hammer-and-tongs approach taken by Dems late in the second Reagan term. Robert Bork, Edwin Meese, John Tower.
Then the Republicans retaliated by pillorying House Speaker Jim Wright (which catapulted Newt Gingrich to power). And so on.
Harry Reid should remember the story of the Caliph, the Grand Vizier, and the Donkey. It’s a long time until November, 2006 and, even if Democrats can succeed in nationalizing the midterm elections, and a lot can happen in the meantime. Very little of it will be under his (or President Bush’s) control.
The right thing (for both parties) to do is to stand down. Turn the other cheek. Shame the devil. Rely on good policies and good governance to gain the confidence of the voters. Not guerrilla theater.
I disagree with Dan Berczik of Bloggledygook, however. The Senators aren’t behaving like children. They’re behaving as though they have the emotional development of infants.
Joe Gandelman of The Moderate Voice (of course, darn him) has a superb round-up and commentary of his own so I won’t attempt one here.
Outside the Beltway’s round-up is good, too.
Oliver Willis’s round-up is worth looking at, too.
I was under the impression that the US Senate had important business, but Senator Reid has disavowed me of that belief.
“Investigations won’t help the Democrats one bit”
Strange as it may seem, there are often important grounds for Congressional investigation even if partisan gains won’t be made. But I’m quite content to let the chips fall where they may in an honest investigation of how we went to war, and the intelligence that got us there, myself.
And it’s hardly an unimportant topic, is it?
Gary, you wrote:
I couldn’t agree more, Gary. That’s why I wrote in the body of the post
Perhaps I’m wrong but I sensed more than a desire for the truth in the theater that was going on the other day.