Bu$hCo Statecraft - "We're At War, So Anything Goes"
BARR: Well, gee, I guess then the president should be able to ignore whatever provision in the Constitution as long as there's something after the fact that justifies it.Apparently the Constitution is irrelevant as long as one can convince the public that they're being protected during a time of war, but an actual declaration...again irrelevant.
BARR: Bob, during wartime, you give some powers to the presidency you wouldn't give in peace time. Do we have a declaration of war, Dana?
ROHRABACHER: You don't have to do that.
BARR: We don't? That makes it even much easier for a president.
ROHRABACHER: No, you just have to make sure that the people of the United States understand that we are at war. They understand that al Qaeda slaughtered 3,000 of our citizens -- more people than the Japanese slaughtered at Pearl Harbor.
Then Rohrabacher demonstrates his approval for actions which are probably illegal:
BARR: Here again, this is absolutely a bizarre conversation where you have a member of Congress saying that it's okay for the president of the United States to ignore U.S. law, to ignore the Constitution, simply because we are in an undeclared war.Notice how Rohrabacher not only gets in a gratuitous dig on Senator Schumer, but raises the spector of the unthinkable.
The fact of the matter is the law prohibits -- specifically prohibits -- what apparently was done in this case, and for a member of Congress to say, oh, that doesn't matter, I'm proud that the president violated the law is absolutely astounding, Wolf.
ROHRABACHER: Not only proud, we can be grateful to this president. You know, I'll have to tell you, if it was up to Mr. Schumer, Senator Schumer, they probably would have blown up the Brooklyn Bridge. The bottom line is this: in wartime we expect our leaders, yes, to exercise more authority.
Now, I have led the fight to making sure there were sunset provisions in the Patriot Act, for example. So after the war, we go back to recognizing the limits of government. But we want to put the full authority that we have and our technology to use immediately to try to thwart terrorists who are going to -- how about have a nuclear weapon in our cities?
BARR: And the Constitution be damned, Dana?
ROHRABACHER: Well, I'll tell you something, if a nuclear weapon goes off in Washington, DC, or New York or Los Angeles, it'll burn the Constitution as it does. So I'm very happy we have a president that's going to wiretap people's communication with people overseas to make sure that they're not plotting to blow up one of our cities.
This is a classic example of Bu$hCo statecraft. Scare the public into believing that the threat is grave and that we must sacrifice liberty for security, and then use that position to justify...well...anything, everything.
Thanks to mikevotes at Born at the Crest of the Empire for the head's up and the inspiration.
It must be piss on the Constitution week, alright. I wonder if Bill Falafel O'Lielly will start THAT holiday, a rightwing whackjob's wet dream.
Bwhahahahahaha! You'll need to do better than that. You do recall that Echelon is supposedly a "broad-sweep" system, never acknowledged by NSA, right? You also recall that Bush has admitted to using NSA for surveillance of particular individuals, right. Come on, it was only 48 hours ago.
And, I do suppose that you are capable of staying on-topic in a post about statecraft and scare tactics, right? Whoops...nope, guess not.
Send it in an email next time.
So why are our soldiers in Iraq?
ARRRGGGGHHHH! Stop me before I again put fingers to keys!