I don't get it.

Senator Russ Feingold, this week, called for the Senate to censure President Bush over the NSA wiretapping situation.

Let's review a few things:

Censure is the second strongest thing Congress can do to a President, behind impeachment. Only one President in American history has received Senate censure, Andrew Jackson in 1834.

In the article, Senator Feingold is quoted as saying:

"We have a great case that they have done a poor job of fighting the war against terrorism," Feingold said of the Republicans in an interview yesterday.

According to the article:

Many Democrats, while sympathetic to Feingold's maneuver, appeared to be distancing themselves from his resolution yesterday, wary of polls showing that a majority of Americans side with the president on wiretapping tactics.

The article goes on to state that many Congressional Republicans have come down on Senator Feingold for proposing censure.


Now for what I think.

Let's start with the Administration doing a "poor job of fighting the war against terrorism", according to the Senator.

My question to the Senator is: "Do you want to stick with that story, Senator, or do you want to retract that one?"

Think back with me for a moment. Let's start at an arbitrary point ... the 10 years leading up to 9/11 would be good, right?

al Quaeda bombed three hotels where US troops were staying in Aden, Yemen in 1992

Some claim that al Quaeda helped with the shooting down of the helicopters in the incident immortalized in the movie "Black Hawk Down"

al Quaeda bombed the World Trade Center in 1993

al Quaeda bombed a US military facility in Riyadh in November 1995

They bombed the Air Force barracks, Khobar Towers, in Saudi Arabia in 1996

The 1998 bombings of the US embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Tanzania which killed more than 200, and wounded 5,000 more were credited to them.

They attacked the USS Cole in 2000 killing 17 US service members.

Then, there is, of course, 9/11, in which over 3,000 Americans died.

On the other hand, since 9/11, name a terrorist attack against American soil, or an American that was not in a war zone.

...

I'm waiting.

...

So, the President's government has done a better job of thwarting terrorism against Americans and American soil than President Clinton, or his father did, even if you factor in "dumb luck" ... such as the possibility al Quaeda has not made a target of us in that time frame.

Now for the "huevos" part.

Republicans are coming out against Senator Feingold's censure proposal.

I think they are dead wrong in this strategy.

I think they should encourage the Senator in his efforts. In fact, they should not only support this censure coming to the Senate floor, they should come out in favor of it being a roll call vote.

That's right.

A roll call vote, for those of you that don't know, means that every Senator's vote is recorded by name for posterity.

I think Republicans should push for the vote to come to the floor, and for it to be recorded.

Let every Senator go on record as to what they think.

A vote against censure, no matter what party, is a vote for the President.

I believe the phrase is: Hoist by your own petard.