Monday, March 13, 2006

Censure Part 2: White House Response

Scott McClellan has responded to Feingold’s call for censure.
"I think it does raise the question, how do you fight and win the war on terrorism?" McClellan said. "And if Democrats want to argue that we shouldn't be listening to al Qaeda communications, it's their right and we welcome the debate. We are a nation at war."
Apparently McClellan missed the part when Feingold said:
There can be debate about whether the law should be changed. There can be debate about how best to fight terrorism. We all believe that there should be wiretapping in appropriate cases. But the idea that the President can just make up a law in violation of his oath of office has to be answered.
I’m amazed at the White House’s ability to willfully ignore the fact that this is a debate not about national security but about enforcing the limits of executive power—even when they’re reminded in plain English. Rather than addressing the arguments of the opposition, the administration keeps lobbing “fighting the terrorists” bombs. It’s rhetoric by brute force.