Update below:
Yes, Nancy Pelosi had shelved that option. But it seems that she, and other Democrats, are reconsidering. Behind the scenes, Democrats have been pressuring Wilson to apologize on the House floor, which so far he has refused to do — and his openly unrepentant behavior in the last 24 hours isn’t helping.
Josh Marshall has mixed feelings:
Whatever the politics of it, what Wilson did is simply so outrageous in the context of the history of Congress and really American history, that it really should not be allowed to stand. With all the outrageous stuff that goes on these days, with all the nonsense we chronicle here, this was simply shocking. When I heard the outburst during the speech I was certain it was someone in the galleries. The idea that a sitting member of Congress would scream out calling the president a liar to his face during an address to a joint session of Congress is simply unheard of.People note the raucous sessions of the British House of Commons where there are all manner of hoots and hollers and jeering. And they have different traditions over there. Remember, the Prime Minister is a member of the House of Commons. But I believe it is actually forbidden, even there, to call any member of the House, let alone the PM, a liar (indeed, it’s true).
What I guess it comes down to is that I’m not sure of the politics but I think it’s probably just the right thing to do, notwithstanding the politics.
That link goes to a post by Andrew Sullivan, which I had also seen, last night. He explains why that rule exists:
I see a lot of commentary that compares Joe Wilson’s “You Lie!” outburst with the ruckus that often happens in the House of Commons. But one thing you are not allowed to shout in the Commons is that another speaker is a liar. A lot of circumlocutions evolved to bypass this – “terminological inexactitude” is my favorite (Churchill, of course) – but the ban is for a reason. Once the opposition starts yelling “You lie!” they have essentially abandoned the deliberative process, by questioning the good faith of a speaker. Without an assumption of good faith or a factual rebuttal, just calling someone a liar abolishes the integrity of the debating process. It ends a conversation. And parliament is about conversation.
It’s true that this incident can easily become a distraction from the main issue, which is health care reform of course. But post-outburst restraint works both ways. One would think that Rep. Wilson, having not merely embarrassed himself on the House floor but in truth gotten himself in a lot of trouble (why else do you think the GOP leadership had him apologize so quickly?), would want to walk lightly upon the earth for a bit, let emotions cool. But instead he’s chosen to inflame them by using his own serious mistake as a fundraising tool. That’s a bit much, y’know?
There are people willing to help, though. Jonathan Allen at CQ Politics has some suggestions on how to call the president a liar and get away with it:
For a more socially and politically graceful way to say the president lied during a joint session of Congress, recall the words of a certain junior senator fromllinois in his response to President Bush’s 2008 State of the Union address.
Here’s what then-Sen. Barack Obama said: “And finally, tonight we heard President Bush say that the surge in Iraq is working, when we know that’s just not true.”
Using Obama as the model, here’s Notepad’s three-step guide to accusing the president of lying in a nationally televised address.
- Wait until after the speech. You probably wouldn’t boo at the opera, even if it stunk.
- Say it calmly and succinctly. Cheap insults from close proximity should be reserved for minor-league baseball games.
- Call him a liar without using any form of the word “lie,” which sounds harsh. You can even have fun with it by saying he has defied the gravitational physics of essential cosmic truths.
- Offer your own solution. Epithets don’t make policy.
Update: After I posted the above, I watched a video of Chuck Todd interviewing Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC). Rep. Clyburn told Todd that he is trying to broker a compromise with other Democrats to the effect that Wilson would (if he doesn’t apologize on his own on the House floor) be subject to a congressional resolution of disapproval. This is two steps down from censure. There’s disapproval, a reprimand, and then censure.
PAST CONTRIBUTOR.