By Nat Parry
August 15, 2007
A little over a year ago, I wrote an article called “Washington’s Orwellian Consensus,” which faulted Congress for rubberstamping many of George Bush’s sweeping assertions of presidential power, particularly his claimed right to spy on some American citizens without warrants.
The article noted that “the near-term outlook appears to be for a consolidation of George W. Bush’s boundless vision of his own authority” – but added the caveat, “at least until the November elections.”
It now seems that the caveat was not necessary. The implication that a Democratic victory in the 2006 congressional elections might rein in the authoritarian inclinations of the Bush administration appears to have been unfounded.
Read on.
1 comment:
Nine months ago voters came to the polls hoping Congress could help them. They were disgusted with the Iraq war, worried about medical coverage, and disenchanted with "Washington." Some who did not vote, per my observations, were good Southern Baptists. East Tennesseans don't talk much about politics. It's yes or no, and Bush was no. Even choosing a Senator, in my view, was more finding a fresh face rather than someone who grew up in Washington.
Now we have 15 months left until elections. Are we going to waste it by haggling over which candidate is the prettiest?
The real issue is whether the House will start the ball rolling for impeachment. Who expects a president to take over a big job in a dirty house? The White House needs some muck raked out. Listen to Fein and Nichols.
Post a Comment