Mukasey Confirmation Assured
The news is that Michael Mukasey's nomination has been forwarded to the Senate for confirmation -- with an 11-8 vote in the Judiciary Committee.
Like many I'm troubled by his unwillingness to declare waterboarding torture -- based it would seem on ignorance of its nature and use and constitutionality. I'm also troubled by his expansive views of presidential power. That being said, the deed is done, and it's likely this was the best we could hope for with a bit more than a year left in the Bush regime's tenure.
So, what's next? We could go on and fight and argue and denounce Schumer and Feinstein for breaking ranks. They have expressed their reasons, which are largely pragmatic, and at heart I'm a bit of a pragmatist as well. In politics you have to take the cards dealt you, do the best and then move on. We must beware of Pyrrhic victories, calling for purity and punishing those who don't follow suite.
Since his confirmation is assured, there is something Congress can do. It would appear that he has assured Feinstein and Schumer that he would enforce a Congressional ban on torture --specifically waterboarding. Therefore, it is incumbent on Congress to pass a veto proof anti-torture bill that would outlaw the use of waterboarding and similar forms of interrogation, sooner rather than later. Then we must hold Mr. Mukasey to his promise. GW might not like this, but this must be the deal.
Comments
Show some SPINE.
The Dems are being pushed around by a lameduck pres with no public support. Weak, weak, weak.
I don't know about Schumer, but Feinstein is probably the most popular politician in California -- and she's not up for re-election this cycle, that I know of.
In the meantime, Congress can and should pass the necessary laws and hold Mukasey to his promises.
From a purely political sense, keeping it from a vote is likely to cost the Democrats more than passing on him. He'll get a narrow victory, which should be a reminder that he's on a short leash.
Bush may be unpopular, but Democrats must keep the long term in focus and they'll not get the presidency without the middle.
The pragmatist may not be the popular option and from a prophetic standpoint we can and should speak out, but politicians have to win elections and Pyrric victories now and Rudy as president won't do us much good.
The "necessary laws" against torture, including waterboarding, already exist. Attempting to pass new laws to make it even more illegal could be vetoed by Bush or he could just ignore them by signing statement. And Mukasey's confirmation testimony included his belief that the president is above some laws! So, how does confirming Mukasey enable ANY form of holding him accountable???
During Watergate the Senate forced Nixon's new attorney general nominee, Archibald Cox, to agree to a special prosecutor to investigate his boss before he would be confirmed. This weak Senate couldn't even get Mukasey to agree that waterboarding is illegal before he was confirmed. Weak!
The argument "we need to keep the center with us" fails to see that the public is WAY AHEAD of the Beltway. 75% of the public and 58% of Republicans want torture stopped and investigated--and those responsible prosecuted--even to the highest levels of government. Impeachment of Cheney and Bush have majorities larger than those who called for Nixon's impeachment--and far larger than when Clinton was impeached.
This Congress has lower scores of approval than Bush--and the only time the people approve is when they take aggressive action against him. The center has abandoned this administration and its lawlessness. "Pragmatism" should argue for doing the right thing--because failure to do it is undermining support for Democrats. They look weak and they look like they have no principles for which they are willing to fight.
Americans love those who put principle above their own survival, including political survival. The absolute failure of Democrats to fight for anything is what loses the middle.