Throwing Congressional Tantrums Won't Keep Bush Admin for Domestic Spying for Political Purposes

[demobabe]

A BUZZFLASH EDITORIAL

It hasn’t taken much courage to go out on a limb, as we did in our BuzzFlash editorial yesterday, to claim that the Bush Administration is almost certainly amassing its illegal and legal domestic spying powers for primarily partisan purposes.

No, it’s not courage. It’s just common sense.

We recently laid out the Bush Administration/Rovian three-pronged game book for firmly controlling election outcomes and unilaterally determining the law in the United States -- and don’t think Rove’s long-term strategy for one-party rule is going away, even if he has officially resigned from the White House (remember that this is the crew that openly and brazenly stole the 2000 election, and Rove hasn’t resigned from being a strategist for the Republican Party.)

The reason that the Bush/Cheney administration is so fiercely fighting the surrender of information about their illegal spying on American citizens is because what they have done is far, far worse than Watergate. They have violated the most basic of Constitutional guarantees to achieve political advantage.

Anyone who can’t see that this is what they are doing in their multiple front effort to expand domestic surveillance powers is either naïve or politically compromised.

Full article here: http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/editorials/159

[shance]

1. They're spying to prevent any organized resistance against them.

n/t

[noise]

5. Could be

They are using tactics from Saddam Hussein's playbook. That should raise a red flag for every single American citizen. If Bush can't or won't do his job within the confines of the Constitution he should quit. To date, we haven't heard a single compelling reason to give Bush the crutch of police state powers to prevent terror attacks. Fearmongering isn't a sufficient reason.

People who claim Bush's tactics are ok because of no attacks since 9/11 fail to ask two important questions:

Is there a correlation between Bush's anti-American tactics and the lack of new attacks? We don't know. We can look at 9/11 for reference. Was the problem the lack of torture and domestic spying? Or were the attacks more attributable to a POTUS and his Cabinet who refused to do their jobs (criminal negligence at best)? I would argue the latter. Many of the claims made to support Bush's tactics are based on talking points instead of tangible evidence.

What price are we paying for Bush's tactics? His tactics are increasing terrorism around the world. His tactics have destroyed the US reputation. His tactics have trashed the Constitution. His tactics have led to innocent people being tortured and held without access to legal counsel. Is this price worth it? No. What's even worse is that there is no proof his tactics are the reason for no attacks in the US since 9/11. So we are paying a steep price based on propaganda and fearmongering.

[Skidmore]

2. Impeachment would go a long way toward wresting power back

from the junta.

[indepat]

3. For a long time I've proffered on DU board that domestic spying was all about

partisan politics (you're with us or you're against us) and little about terrorism.

[demobabe]

4. kick

:kick: