Thursday, January 04, 2007

Regretably I'd Now Vote to Impeach the President

In the 2000 election I worked harder than most to get G.W. Bush elected President. I was in charge of Arkansas Right to Life's Union County effort to distrubute 5,000 voter guides to people which highlighted Bush's position on abortion with Al Gore's. I have made a sad journey from that place to the place where I am now- if I were in Congress and properly worded articles of impeachment were before me, I'd almost certainly vote to impeach him.

The man has exhibited no respect whatsoever for Constitutional limits on the power of his own office. The fourth amendment says that the people shall be secure in their effects from unreasonable search and seizure, nor shall any search be conducted without obtaining a warrant. Bush may not be watching the borders, but he is doing everything he can to watch the citizens of this country, probable cause or no. That warrant part is real important. It means the executive has a check and balance on its power. It has to go to another co-equal branch of government, the judiciary, to get permission to search.

They normally don't take long to get- judges issue them in the middle of the night in their pajamas. In certain emergency situations there is even a provision to get the warrants 48 hours after the search has been conducted. I'm not OK with that, but even that seems to be too restrictive for our Police-state President. What he wants is a blank check to monitor the communications of all Americans all the time with no outside scrutiny.

First we learn that his phone monitoring, despite his claims that they were only being used against Al-Quida suspects, are actually being used in mass against millions of ordinary Americans most of whom are not suspected of any crime. Because I speak out on public issues, my guess is that they have the phone numbers of everyone who called me or I called since this sorry business began. That can have a chilling effect on associating with those who critisize the government.

Now we learn that he wants to get in your mail without bothering to get a warrant. With the electronic communications one could at least argue that it lends itself to mass-monitoring so that a warrant for each case would be difficult and that the speed of electronic communications necessitates time-dependent analysis. What even inadequate excuse could be offered for this latest violation of the Constitution?

What makes his actions even more apalling is that they were done in a quiet "signing statement" after a bill was passed by Congress that specifically strengthened privacy protections for mail. If he had a problem with that, he should have vetoed it. Instead, he signed it and then quietly signed a memo saying that his "understanding" of the law basically meant that it did not apply to him whenever he felt like it shouldn't! Why even have a Congress when the executive can ignore their laws at will? Why have a judiciary if citizen's effects can be rifled without warrant and men imprisoned without trial?

I hope my fellow citizens realize the seriousness of these abuses before they grow so common and pervasive that all our freedoms are endangered.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

This mail action is consistent with the idea that Bush thinks he is above the law. He really does act like he thinks that. We can't afford to have such a person as President.

9:12 AM, January 04, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Perhaps you would rather have Gerald Ford. I am sick of you people who lose perspective about the culture war and what the real battles:

RMC Remembers President Ford

I was honored to join RMC Board Member Elizabeth Curtiss Smith at the state funeral services held for President Ford at the National Cathedral yesterday. Among the attendees were dignitaries from across the Nation and the world; Presidents and Congressional Leaders from both parties; member of the Supreme Court; members of the Press and hundreds of thankful American citizens. This was a telling tribute of the man that President Ford was and for his legacy. He was a leader for the Country not just for one Party; he restored the trust in the Presidency and stood as an honest and graceful force that helped heal the nation.

I had the privilege of meeting with President Ford in Indian Wells when he was keynote speaker at an event RMC (then RCFC) held during a Republican National Committee Annual Meeting. A resolution had been submitted that called for the RNC to deny support and funding for any Republican Incumbent or Candidate who would not support a ban on specific abortion procedures. This would have effectively cut off support for important Republican leaders like Senator Olympia Snowe, Nancy Johnson, Judy Biggert and a host of others. We called President Ford to talk with him about this resolution and seek his advice. Not only did he give his us his wisdom and counsel but he wanted to do more. He said that regardless of one's position on abortion, this type of divisive resolution was bad for our Party and bad for our Country. President Ford did join us at the RNC Meeting and he called upon the full RNC to oppose the resolution. His speech was inspiring as he held steadfast to his long held belief in limited government and personal responsibility. What I remember most are the moments I had to talk one-on-one with President Ford just prior to his speech. He spoke of the importance of our work and about the GOP's history as the Party of limited government intrusion. He spoke about his and Mrs. Ford's long support for personal freedom. He talked about the importance of the GOP putting aside differences and focusing on issues on which we most agree. His words were never truer than they are today. Our Party and our Country would do well to remember and learn from President Ford's example and his wisdom. As an organization we are lucky to have counted President Ford as a friend and member of our Advisory Committee, as a Party we are lucky to have had President Ford as and man of principle, and as a Nation we are lucky to have had President Ford as a deeply respected man who led with civility and grace.

Kellie Rose Ferguson
RMC Executive Director

9:44 AM, January 04, 2007  
Anonymous Mark Moore said...

Ford or Bush? I think you are leaving off some of my options, including the option to not legitimize any of them with my vote.

And what exactly has Bush done on abortion? He signed a bill banning partial birth abortion with loopholes a mile wide, and when the courts threw it out he just let it go. It is still not in effect now. It was milked for political purposes, but has not saved a single child.

Some presume that these judges he is selecting will vote to overturn Roe, but THEY have never said that, and Bush never even promised to nominate men that he thought would do that. All we know for sure about them is that they will help him trample on civil liberties. Never mind that we caught him trying to sneak in a pro-abort with Harriet Myers.

As I am not a statist, I can't separate the "culture war" from a decent respect civil liberties. They are both a part of the "culture" I want for myself, my friends, and my family. In other words, I am not going to support a Police-State President just because he has dropped hints that he someday might do something unspecified to end abortion.

Would you trade the constitution and a free society for a ban on abortions? I am 100% pro-life and I wouldn't. But it would be a fool's bargin to believe a politician who offered to respect the right of innocent life while at the same time disrespecting all our other rights. Such men don't deliver on their promises anyway.

My, but you do sell out your birthright for a mess of pottage from these politicos. You are upset that I am complaining about an ongoing evaporation of our civil liberties because you want this President to fight for your cause in the "Culture War". Ironically, he is not on your side in that either.

10:03 AM, January 04, 2007  
Blogger Mr. Toast said...

9:44- the real battle, eh? You mean, as long as Bush whispers sweet-nothings in your ear while stabbing you in the back, you're pleased as punch?

You're sick of "us"? I'm sick of you gullible Republicans who give politicians a pass because they use all the "right" religio-conservative buzzwords. The man's not even up for re-election, buy you're so drunk on the Republican Kool-Aid, you stutter and stammer through an illogical defense of the indefensible.

10:15 AM, January 04, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"We can't afford to have such a person as President."

But we have, and most likely will for two more years. We couldn't afford Clinton, either. Which begs the question, "How long before this whole thing comes tumbling down due to the overburdening weight of incompetence and tyranny?"

10:26 AM, January 04, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

9:12 - He thinks no such thing. Bush just isn't inadvertently listening to the average American's phone conversation. If certain key words are picked up on, that's who they listen to. You're just another in a long line of gullible people who have bought into the lie that our civil liberties are being violated. The Constitution also states that the President is supposed to defend the country and Clinton certainly didn't. Yet you people think he was the greatest president ever! You need a reality check. I will also tell you that it's been no coincidence that we haven't had a terrorist attack in the past 5 years. Yet we had at least 3 on Slick Willie's watch. Who should REALLY be impeached here? That's right....Clinton WAS impeached.

3:34 PM, January 04, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think you have the wrong thread, pal. No one here has attempted to defend Clinton.

We find tyranny just as distasteful and frightening coming from Republicans as we do from Democrats.

5:04 PM, January 04, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Where are the real conservatives?

What has become of the belief that government should meddle in lives as little as possible, keep the military home except when unavoidably needed, and setting spending to match revenue?

I used to think those folks building bunkers and talking about how the government was going to track everything we did were batty as a Blanchard Springs Caverns. Now they look like the voice crying out in the wilderness.

8:31 AM, January 05, 2007  
Blogger rob_star said...

Anonydullard cannot read apparently, since the Constitution states nowhere that the president is to defend the country or protect the citizens therein. I will give him that it is implied in the fact that the president is the commander in chief.

More importantly, though, is that the founders did not feel compelled to put that in writing but what they did put into the presidential oath of office is the following more important sentence:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.

You see, the founders felt that the ideas in the Constitution were more important than anyone's immediate safety and that is why this particular president should be hanged on the lawn of the White House for treason against his country and failure to uphold his duty to PROTECT THE CONSTITUTION.

12:53 PM, January 07, 2007  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rob- great points; but careful, baby. Talk like that gets you visitation rights, if you know what I mean.

2:50 PM, January 07, 2007  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home