No mas, I give up.

Back on August 6, I posted about a law that basically usurped the 4th Amendement rights from a lot of Americans. I intimated in this post that the democrats were asleep at the switch while this legislation was being pushed through.

No Best Man of Consequence sent me an e-mail last night quoting a New York Times article:

Congress accidentally gave President George Bush the power to conduct warrantless searches and seizures when it passed a wiretapping bill earlier this month. Democrats are embarrassed they voted without understanding language that would allow—among other things—some physical searches, and the collection of business records, without a court order.

Another quote from the Times:

“We did not cover ourselves in glory,” said one Democratic aide, referring to how the bill was compiled.


________________

This is sickening on a number of levels. How does one accidentally give broad powers in violation of The Constitution to the executive? How is a bill accidentally passed? I am certain I saw a Schoolhouse Rock episode once when I was a kid that detailed how tough it really is to get a law passed.



That YouTube video is 3 minutes long. Longer than anyone spent reading this pathetic piece of legislation. It also demonstrates that Congress doesn't actually debate laws anymore. They just sign them out of fear.

Scaredy cat signing quote from the times:

Though many Democratic leaders opposed the final version of the legislation, they did not work forcefully to block its passage, largely out of fear that they would be criticized by President Bush and Republican leaders during the August recess as being soft on terrorism.

Once again we have checkers playing politicians in a chess playing world. This isn't even hard folks. I bet if I asked my 13 year old son how he would handle this kind of criticism he could easily come up with a deflection strategy that would be viable.

How about this, and keep in mind I 've spent exactly 3 minutes thinking about it.

Hypothetical politician responding to hypothetical criticism that he is soft on terrorism when faced with passing legislation that significantly impacts the rights of American citizens.

"When taking my oath of office after the citizens of (insert state here) saw fit to elect me as their representative I swore to uphold The Constitution of the United States of America. This legislation, while it may be expedient, does not protect the bests interests of Americans because it impinges upon their civil liberties. Voting for legislation that oppresses law abiding citizens is a violation of my oath and I will not sign, EVER. This administration has refused to do what's hard, which is protect Americans from terrorism without infringing upon the freedoms that make this country what it is. Until President Bush and the republican party take freedom as seriously as I do, and are willing to do the hard work involved in protecting that freedom, we will not be safe from ourselves, much less terrorists."

Think that would send any critical right wing elements scrambling? I do. Imagine what someone who does political spinning professionally could come up with.

No 1 of Consequence