Kvatch Kvestions - Bush's Credibility On Anti-terror Measures

Unaccustomed as I am to tackling a topic until I've come up with something pithy to say, I have to raise one issue regarding President Bush's outrage over the NYT article exposing US government subpoenas of information from the Swift banking database.

Bush has so poisoned the public's perception of his willingness to protect civil liberties--so damaged his credibility with secrecy and illegal activities--that the necessity and/or legality of this latest operation is no longer relevant to most Americans. With the exception of the Kitten Biting Republicans, nobody expects Bush to do the right thing, the prudent thing, or the legal thing. So 7 in 10 Americans, as well as a majority of the press, are probably sitting out there thinking, Screw Bush! Man deserves anything the NYT can dish out.


Bush - Credibility Fascinating to see those two words in the same phrase.
I agree that these matters are public interest and they need to stop using security as an excuse to avoid proper transparency.
What is really funny is that Tony Snowjob lamented,

"Traditionally in this country in a time of war, members of the press have acknowledged that the commander in chief, in the exercise of his powers, sometimes has to do things secretly in order to protect the public," Mr. Snow said. "This is a highly unusual departure."--NYT article dateline June 27, 2006

No, idiot. We all know that you are all liars and no one trusts you anymore.
We all know that you are all liars and no one trusts you anymore.

Ironically, the Swift program is probably legal under current law, but as you and Cartledge point out it no longer matters.

Lily, you're right, and it's interesting how often "transparency" laws are put on the books. Transparency should be the default. Not the exception.

Add a comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link