Many liberals are taking the enemy of my enemy is my friend approach to Bob Barr’s recent lambasting of il ducetto's recently revealed grab for 1984 style tyrannical powers in an Atlanta Journal Constitution op-ed. Barr is right that his awol-ness is wrong but note the dirtly little slight of hand the old impeacher engages in:
First, in the best tradition of former President Bill Clinton's classic, "it-all-depends-on-what-the-meaning-of-is-is" defense, President Bush responded to a question at a White House news conference about what now appears to be a clear violation of federal electronic monitoring laws by trying to argue that he had not ordered the National Security Agency to "monitor" phone and e-mail communications of American citizens without court order; he had merely ordered them to "detect" improper communications.
Talk about your false equivalencies. When Clinton did his little scramble he was accused of extra-marital sex (oh, yeah, and he was in the middle of a deposition, where lawyers parse words all the time – stupid, politically, but not unusual). His awol-ness stands accused of ordering government employees to break a federal law which prevents the government from violating the constitutional rights of citizens. And his little dances with wolves routine is in response to reporter, not a lawyer’s question. (Surely the correct analogy is to clinton’s notorious denial, “I didn’t have sex with that woman.”) And sue me, but I can distinguish between the lies a middle-age guy tells about violating his marriage vows and the lies a president tells about violating his oath of office.
Even as the old impeacher seeks a reputation as the scourge of executive branch evasion, the msm (Olbermann excepted) intones fatuously that no one serious is talking about impeachment. Why? In part, perhaps because, in brilliant anticipation of their control of the executive branch and the constitutional crisis that would inevitably follow, the republicans, under the leadership of the old impeacher, himself, turned the issue of what was a high crime into such a circus that the msm no longer has the stomach to demand one.
So the msm tells the citizens that we don’t have the stomach for an impeachment. And they don’t poll to see whether the citizens actually agrees with them (too truthy). And they don’t (Olbermann excepted) say things like, “there won’t be an impeachment because no republican would vote to impeach il Ducetto, even if he strangled Laura in a live interview with Katie Couric – because Republicans just don’t believe that constitutional restrictions apply to the executive when their party controls the executive. Their party means more to them their country.”
If our political system is incapable of impeaching a president who has admitted spying on American citizens without a warrant, which he could have gotten, after the fact, in a nano-second, it is in part because Bob Barr, the old impeacher, personally rendered that clause of the constitution useless.
