David Brooks Misunderstands Harry Reid, and Democracy

In some recent posts I have quoted from David Brooks’ columns, sometimes even favorably. Conservative are right some of the time, and even when wrong are capable of making points worthy of consideration. Today is not one of those days. David Brooks might believe he is being clever when he makes fun of Harry Reid’s actions to call a closed meeting of the Senate and to urge the Senate to fulfill its promises to investigate the Bush Administration’s misuse of intelligence to unnecessarily go to war. Rather than being clever, Brooks is taking a stand in opposition to rule of law and the idea of separation of powers which this nation was founded upon.

Brooks cherry picking of facts to point out that members of the Clinton Administration believed Saddam had WMD does not justify his argument. There were major differences between Clinton and Bush in that Clinton was trying to find the truth rather than to distort intelligence to justify a decision he already made. Clinton might have believed Saddam was seeking WMD, but he did not go to war when he knew Saddam was contained. Instead he went after Bin Laden, despite the opposition of Republicans.

Brooks might think he is being clever in attempting to make Reid appear foolish, but today it is Brooks who is the real fool for not realizing that instead of an all powerful King, this nation was established with a President whose actions are subject to review by the people and their represenatives in Congress. Harry Reid is trying to reestablish this important principle–something a true conservative should understand and support.