ShareThis Page
The Thursday wrap |

The Thursday wrap

| Thursday, March 16, 2006 12:00 a.m

Constitutional scofflaw: In his failed bid to get a censure vote to the Senate floor, Sen. Russ Feingold said President Bush had violated his oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States through his warrantless terrorist-surveillance program. We’re no fans of the program. But we would advise the Wisconsin Democrat to look in the mirror and review his efforts to undermine that same Constitution through his campaign finance “reform” efforts.

Partisan woofing: The Republican Party is considering a complaint with the Federal Election Commission over the activity of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. The Hill newspaper reports CREW has filed complaints against at least 20 GOPers since its February 2003 inception but has targeted only one Democrat. CREW is headed by former top Democrat operatives. One was Bill Clinton’s pollster. Another is a big donkey donor. The GOP should file the complaint; the FEC should investigate whether CREW, a 501(c)3 tax-exempt organization, is a watch dog or a lap dog.

A coarser Hillary: A largely unheralded quote book could be Hillary Clinton’s undoing. Tom Kuiper is out with “I’ve Always Been a Yankees Fan: Hillary Clinton in Her Own Words.” One of our favorite quotes came as preschoolers posed on the lawn of the Arkansas governor’s mansion: “I want to get this (expletive) over with and get these damn people out of here.”

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.