Sums It Up

Conservative Mark Earnest, commenting at Bérubé's:

The President is does not take an oath to keep the country perfectly safe, he takes an oath to uphold the constitution. Living in a free country is inherently dangerous, and always will be. The same liberties and freedoms that make us great also are enjoyed by jerks to can take advantage of them to cause harm. Try suggesting to a conservative that thinks safety is the number one value and goal in America that we should change the national anthem to better reflect this: “O’er the land of the safe / And the home of the scared”

Comments

[marie antoinette]

I just went back and read the US Constitution and indeed, there's nothing in there about safety.

[Roxanne]

Yep. As I wrote over at Noribz' a couple of days ago, strict constructionism only applies to teh ovaries. And property.

[upyernoz]

yeah, the 4th amendment is even pretty crystal clear. but when they're trying to limit their president suddenly they're all abuzz about "implied powers of the president"

[Ashley Bowers]

Yes you are right about that, but this President cares nothing about his oath to the people or our protection!

[Mark Earnest]

The real sad thing about this quote is that it is not even really relevant in the current context. We do not lose any security by following the established legal procedures for obtaining warrants and even doing warrant-less searches and wiretaps (which ARE legal in emergencies so long as a warrant is applied for within 72 hours).

The fact that Clinton did it does not make it ok (despite what some talk show hosts think) The fact that those same talk show hosts were horrified when Clinton did it and now cheer Bush on is maddening.