Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Matthew Yglesias: Failure to Relaunch

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-10-07 05:45 PM
Original message
Matthew Yglesias: Failure to Relaunch
http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=12627

Failure to Relaunch
Republicans seem unable to comprehend even the most obvious lessons of their 2006 election defeats.

By Matthew Yglesias
Web Exclusive: 04.10.07


Ever heard of the Logan Act? If not, you're lucky -- a normal, decent person who hasn't been exposed to oodles of right-wing propaganda. For the record, however, it was passed during the John Adams administration, during the era of the Alien and Sedition Acts, and subjects to criminal sanctions any citizen "who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States."

Precisely zero individuals have ever been convicted of violating this act. Indeed, for the past 200 years precisely zero individuals have been indicted for violations of the Logan Act. The one indictment in American history occurred in 1803, when the Adams-appointed U.S. Attorney for Kentucky indicted Francis Flournoy after he penned an article in The Frankfort Guardian of Freedom arguing that the western portions of the United States should secede and ally their new nation with France. No trial was held and Flournoy was not prosecuted.

That's the Logan Act. Why am I discussing it? Because, naturally, a small army of wingnuts has swarmed the internet arguing that George W. Bush should have Nancy Pelosi brought up on charges under it due to her trip to Syria

To which I say: Bring it on. The specter of a grossly unpopular president seeking a politically motivated prosecution of a popular opposition party legislative leader for violation of a never-enforced law would be a fantastic spectacle, exposing clearly the current of authoritarianism usually lurking just a bit further beneath the surface of the Bush administration.

More interesting than the content of the idea, however, is the simple fact of its popularity. It's a typical suggestion from a conservative base that, flying in the face of common sense, has reached the improbable conclusion that the Bush administration's political problems are due to an insufficient inclination to play political hardball. From this notion, all sorts of other nutty ones have sprung up.

"For all the talk about potential candidates who haven't entered the 2008 presidential race," wrote The New York Sun in an April 4 editorial that, by comparison, made the idea of Pelosi rotting in jail for taking a trip to a country with which the United States has diplomatic relations seem downright plausible, "the one who would bring the most to the race is Vice President Cheney." Sure he is. After all, "were Mr. Cheney in the race, it's hard to imagine that the president's approval ratings would not be five or 10 points higher. The reason," the Sun helpfully explains, "is that the administration would have a defender on the campaign trail as part of the public debate." That the defender in question would be even less popular than Bush himself goes unmentioned.

more...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC