Today, the Republican National Committee released a 60 second message for airing on talk radio. You may not be able to hear it on AM550 in Phoenix if it doesn't play well in Senator Feingold's district.

So, in the spirit of a fair and balanced presentation on Senator Feingold's censure resolution, and because the Voice of Arizona's Pro-Bush factions are so tongue-tied they seem incapable of discussing or even addressing the censure motion on its merits, let's see what the big boys at www.GOP.com have to say.

You Cons and Neocons can thank me later for expressing your position more cogently than you've been able to thus far.

Here's the RNC message:

"WASHINGTON, DC – The Republican National Committee (RNC) today released a new radio ad entitled “Censure” highlighting Sen. Feingold’s attempt to censure the President for ensuring that the United States is monitoring terrorist communications.

“Censure” will begin airing tomorrow in Wisconsin radio markets and is available at www.GOP.com.

Voice Over:

September eleventh changed our country.
And it changed how America responds to terrorists.
President Bush is working to keep American families safe.
Passing the PATRIOT Act which has disrupted over one hundred and fifty terrorist threats and cells making sure the US is monitoring terrorist communications.
But some Democrats are working against these efforts to secure our country, opposing the PATRIOT Act and terrorist surveillance program.
Their leader is Russ Feingold.
Now Feingold and other Democrats want to censure the President. Publicly reprimanding President Bush for pursuing suspected members of al Qaeda.
Some Democrats are even calling for President Bush’s impeachment.
Is this how Democrats plan to win the War on Terror?
Call Russ Feingold and ask him why he’s more interested in censuring the President than protecting our freedom.
Paid for by the Republican National Committee not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee www.gop.com.
The Republican National Committee is responsible for the content of this advertising."

Compare this with Senator Feingold's Monday remarks: ""The President has broken the law, and the censure resolution I introduced is intended to hold him accountable. Nobody says that we shouldn't be monitoring suspected terrorists. Of course we should, and we can under current law. We have yet to hear a reasonable argument from the president or anyone else why it was necessary to break the law."

Compare this with Senator Feingold's Wednesday remarks: "I was taught that it's the Congress that makes the laws and the president is supposed to sign them and he's supposed to enforce them. He's not just supposed to make them up. And on this illegal wiretapping, he apparently just decided that he didn't like things the way there were, and made up his own law. I don't think we can let him get away with that. So I think it's a pretty mild step to say, by resolution, Mr. President, you did the wrong thing. How about admitting it, and maybe apologizing?"

Let's reconcile the RNC talking points with Feingold's remarks to demonstrate, once and for all, that the Senator is more interested in obstructionist political grandstanding than he is in fighting terrorism.  

RNC: "Now Feingold and other Democrats want to censure the President. Publicly reprimanding President Bush for pursuing suspected members of al Qaeda."
Feingold: "Nobody says that we shouldn't be monitoring suspected terrorists. Of course we should, and we can under current law."

RNC: "Call Russ Feingold and ask him why he’s more interested in censuring the President than protecting our freedom."
Feingold: "And on this illegal wiretapping, he apparently just decided that he didn't like things the way there were, and made up his own law. I don't think we can let him get away with that. So I think it's a pretty mild step to say, by resolution, Mr. President, you did the wrong thing… "

Senator Feingold contends that "we have yet to hear a reasonable argument from the president or anyone else why it was necessary to break the law."

Has the RNC presented that "reasonable argument"? 

I've reported, you decide! 

C'mon Bushbackers!  Any "reasonable arguments" to add beyond burning buildings?