I was for it before I was against it.
One more post today on the issue of Americans' willingness to give up their civil rights in the name of security.
Crooks & Liars has a post up (9 megs, it's a biggie) featuring Glenn Greenwald and a rightie on a C-SPAN call-in show. The caller in this segment accuses Democrats of being "terrorist enablers," to use self-help parlance, with their insistence that the president work within the law. She doesn't make a coherent argument, but as C&L notes, she's obviously been listening to plenty of right-wing talk radio.
As Greenwald points out, it isn't just Democrats who are concerned about this disregard for our constitutional rights. The likes of Grover Norquist and Bob Barr are also outraged.
One argument I made against the Clinton impeachment was the way in which conservatives tried to take both sides of an issue-- on the one hand, no man should be above the law and Clinton lied about his affair. Since an affair isn't an impeachable offense, the argument had to be made the president should in fact be held to a higher standard than any other citizen. A classic case of double standards. But in this case, Bush not only lied about his actions, but did so to cover up illegal acts. A double whammy, if you will.
It all boils down to one thing: whether or not you believe that the rule of law is arbitrary, as long as it benefits your side.
Oh, and follow this link from OD1 to read another piece by Greenwald on the issue of people willing to give up their civil rights. I think you'll find that his blog is rather stylish.
Crooks & Liars has a post up (9 megs, it's a biggie) featuring Glenn Greenwald and a rightie on a C-SPAN call-in show. The caller in this segment accuses Democrats of being "terrorist enablers," to use self-help parlance, with their insistence that the president work within the law. She doesn't make a coherent argument, but as C&L notes, she's obviously been listening to plenty of right-wing talk radio.
As Greenwald points out, it isn't just Democrats who are concerned about this disregard for our constitutional rights. The likes of Grover Norquist and Bob Barr are also outraged.
One argument I made against the Clinton impeachment was the way in which conservatives tried to take both sides of an issue-- on the one hand, no man should be above the law and Clinton lied about his affair. Since an affair isn't an impeachable offense, the argument had to be made the president should in fact be held to a higher standard than any other citizen. A classic case of double standards. But in this case, Bush not only lied about his actions, but did so to cover up illegal acts. A double whammy, if you will.
It all boils down to one thing: whether or not you believe that the rule of law is arbitrary, as long as it benefits your side.
Oh, and follow this link from OD1 to read another piece by Greenwald on the issue of people willing to give up their civil rights. I think you'll find that his blog is rather stylish.
posted by Matt Sandwich | 5:59 PM
<< Home