If you look up the definition of a one-trick pony, you'll see a
picture of Buch next to it.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10536559/site/newsweek/
Dec. 19, 2005 - Finally we have a Washington scandal that goes beyond
sex, corruption and political intrigue to big issues like security
versus liberty and the reasonable bounds of presidential power.
President Bush came out swinging on Snoopgate—he made it seem as if
those who didn’t agree with him wanted to leave us vulnerable to Al
Qaeda—but it will not work. We’re seeing clearly now that Bush thought
9/11 gave him license to act like a dictator, or in his own mind, no
doubt, like Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War.
No wonder Bush was so desperate that The New York Times not publish
its story on the National Security Agency eavesdropping on American
citizens without a warrant, in what lawyers outside the administration
say is a clear violation of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance
Act. I learned this week that on December 6, Bush summoned Times
publisher Arthur Sulzberger and executive editor Bill Keller to the
Oval Office in a futile attempt to talk them out of running the story.
The Times will not comment on the meeting,
but one can only imagine the president’s desperation.
The problem was not that the disclosures would compromise national
security, as Bush claimed at his press conference. His comparison to
the damaging pre-9/11 revelation of Osama bin Laden’s use of a
satellite phone, which caused bin Laden to change tactics, is
fallacious; any Americans with ties to Muslim extremists—in fact, all
American Muslims, period—have long since suspected that the U.S.
government might be listening in to their conversations. Bush claimed
that “the fact that we are discussing this program is helping the
enemy.” But there is simply no evidence, or even reasonable
presumption, that this is so. And rather than the leaking being a
“shameful act,” it was the work of a patriot inside the government who
was trying to stop a presidential power grab.
No, Bush was desperate to keep the Times from running this important
story—which the paper had already inexplicably held for a year—because
he knew that it would reveal him as a law-breaker. He insists he had
“legal authority derived from the Constitution and congressional
resolution authorizing force.” But the Constitution explicitly
requires the president to obey the law. And the post 9/11
congressional resolution authorizing “all necessary force” in fighting
terrorism was made in clear reference to military intervention. It did
not scrap the Constitution and allow the president to do whatever he
pleased in any area in the name of fighting terrorism.
-----
Yang
a.a. #28
AthD (h.c.) conferred by the regents of the LCL
a.a. pastor #-273.15, the most frigid church of Celcius nee Kelvin
EAC Econometric Forecast and Sorcery Division
Proudly plonked by Lani Girl and Crazyalec (aka aka Yang's little poltregeist *****)
The Bush 'balanced' budget: 1.6 trillion and worsening
The Bush 'economic' policy: 12.5 million FEWER jobs than Clinton and counting
The Bush Iraq lie: -2156 GIs, one friend's co-worker's son and mounting
Having Bush ***** up my country: Worthless
-----
"Now, did I want to go? Hell no."
-duke (duckgumbo32@cox.net), aka PedophilEarl J Weber, 63
year old mateless, heirless biological failure
of Afton Oaks Apartment, Baton Rouge, on why
a Neocon chickenhawk like him pussied out of
the Vietnam War.
.
|
