|
JANUARY 5, 2006 - The
cover of Newsweek reads, "How Much Power Should They Have?"
In keeping with giving the Bush right's complete control of the
media conversation, the discussion concerning the domestic spying
done under orders of the Bush administration has been spun into the
irrelevant, distracting discussion they want to have. The
Bush/Limbaugh right wants to make it a discussion of whether or not
the president should have the right to spy domestically.
Obviously, this is not a legitimate line of discussion.
When the Bush daughters were caught drinking before they were 21,
there was only one issue: they broke the law. It is not
a legitimate defense to question whether or not the 21 year old
drinking age is a good thing. Such a debate can be had, but
the law is the law until it changes, and so their violation of the
law was punished, regardless of whether or not it is a good law.
The question with regard to domestic spying, without getting a
warrant, is simple: did someone do it? If the answer is
yes, as the president admits they did, then they broke the law
passed in the 1970's specifically banning this. Impeachment is
not the issue, criminal charges and imprisonment are.
A murderer can not defend himself by making it a debate about
whether murder should be legal, someone who commits fraud cannot
make it a debate about whether fraud should be allowed. The
law is the law. Whether or not someone is aware of a law or a
law is the best law, it still applies.
The simple fact is that President Bush has admitted to
intentionally, repeatedly violating the law. It is the duty of
the judicial branch to prosecute him and all involved. Period.
It is irrelevant whether or not anyone feels the president should be
allowed to spy domestically. The law was in existence, it was
clear. The president chose to violate it.
Anyone who will not hold the president accountable for this should
be run out of the country for refusing to uphold the basic laws of
our nation.
Discussion over.
| 
