Saturday, August 4, 2007
Do we have more to fear than fear itself?
I was looking through the list of Senate Democrats who voted for the surveillance reform bill yesterday. Sixty votes were needed, and 60 votes were obtained. To get to 60, some usually reliably anti-Bush Democratic Senators voted to give Bush everything he wanted for another six months. Among these surprising Bush supporters were Carper of Delaware, Mikulski of Maryland, and our own Jim Webb. Prior to the Democratic cave-in, Sen. Lott had explicitly warned of an imminent terrorist attack and claimed that voting with Bush was necessary to try to prevent the attack. Lott even advised residents to leave town until Sept. 12, the day after the sixth anniversary of the attacks of 9/11/01. Of all the Dems needed to get to 60, is it possible Carper, Mikulski, and Webb signed on, because their own constituents would likely be affected by any such attack? Why Mikulski and not Cardin? Is it because Mikulski's term is up before Cardin's? [Biden still hopes to be nominated, and obviously Warner voted with Bush.] It sure seems like important information about our safety is being kept from us. I hate not knowing whether I'm being paranoid or whether the most rational explanation is that the information is so bad and so imminent that the costs of publishing in terms of panic and damage to our political institutions outweighs the damage of the attack itself.