Bu$hCo Statecraft - "We're At War, So Anything Goes"

On CNN last night, a surreal conversation took place between Wolf Blitzer, former Representative Bob Barr and Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R. 46th District of California). In the space of less than two minutes Rep. Rohrabacher demonstrated exactly what is wrong with the right and their reaction to Bu$hCo's illegal use of NSA for domestic surveillance.
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.

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.
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.

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.

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.
Notice how Rohrabacher not only gets in a gratuitous dig on Senator Schumer, but raises the spector of the unthinkable.

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.


You can almost see their brains working (or not). They're riding along and somebody challenges them with logic and they start blubbering, "Yeah?! Well...well what if somebody blows up Washington? What about THAT, huh? Take that, you namby-pamby!"
But my favortite was the bit about the Constitution burning up. "Well if they attack us, then we won't have a Constitution, and how bad would that be? You leftist kooks!"
That's just frightening. Brrrr...

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.
Neil, you are spot on. Their talking points consist of "oh yeah?" and defensive finger-pointing. Truly pathetic.
Put you in my weekend blog roundup-


So there!
Like I said at my site - you're wrong on this issue. But your idol, Bill Clinton, seems to be the king of wiretaps by leaps and bounds.



Your dredging up old Echelon information? As justification for Bu$hCo specifically employing NSA as a tool for domestic surveillance?

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.
Ah, so now I understand it. We are at war with Al Qaeda.

So why are our soldiers in Iraq?
"Cause Ieraaaaq is a front line in the War on Terror, and we will never back down. We will stay the course."

ARRRGGGGHHHH! Stop me before I again put fingers to keys!
This spying thing is some serious shit. It can't go to the court for approval because ________(fill in the blank).
That's an amazing exchange - stop by my blog when you get a chance - I'll have more one that.

Add a comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link