Wednesday, January 25, 2006

Getting Angry

Since I have a lot of time on my hands, in the mornings anyway, I've been reading a lot of news. I've also been following the blog of a friend of mine, which covers a lot of political and legal news. Here's what's beginning to take shape: a really angry person.

Frankly, I'm starting to get pissed off.

There's the war (which really isn't a war, it's an "Authorized Use of Force" - we live in an age of doublespeak). It's a mess that's only now trying to win the hearts and minds of the American People. We're stuck in it, so now we should start to care about it.

Then there's the NSA eaves dropping issue. Now, I agree with a lot of commentators, that all the people that are under surveillance are suspected terrorist operatives. They're bad guys, sure, but that doesn't mean that their right to a warrant should be ignored. It's a slippery slope. Once we start down that path, what's stopping people from pointing fingers, going on anti-terrorist witch hunts. It has the potential to become McCarthyism all over again.

Then there's the torture debate. That one really gets me riled up. I'm pissed off about the fact that there even was a debate in the first place. Even so, if were going to have the debate, let's start off with the fact that torture provides little to no useful information. In other words, it's all about just hurting someone for the sake of hurt. We're supposed to be the good guys, right? One of the necessities of being the good guy is not doing what the bad guy is doing. Again, it's a slippery slope. We start by torturing possible terrorists, we follow up by torturing war prisoners, we end up torturing American citizens. War's all about innovation: innovation in weapons, supplies, policies.

The debate was won, but then the President, quietly, signed a statement that basically says, that's great and all, but I'm still going to do what I damn well please.

Which brings me to the whole issue of unitary powers. It was the only thing that concerned me in the Judge Alito senate hearings. Basically what it boils down to is more powers for the presidency. It undermines the whole system of checks and balances. The thing[1] that Bush signed about the torture debate is one great example of the fact that this administration wants to do what it damn well pleases.

I operate under a theory that it only gets worse before it gets better. Things are starting to get really bad. Aside from the issues listed above, there's the prescription drug plan issues, the Jack Abramoff scandal, and other things. All these things are adding up, making people mad. We need to get people mad to make change in the administration.

The one nice thing I enjoy about my friends blog, is the fact that he backs up all his assertions with articles and statistics, cited in a strict manner, only adding his commentary on the outside. I've been a bit ranty[2] here, but I've been feeling that way about it this morning.

[1] Which, I wish to God I knew what it was called. It made me so made that I couldn't remember it.

[2] Interestingly enough, being ranty has its advantages. Maybe it's the caffeine, maybe it's the anger, but I've typing like a maniac (and probably sounding like one as well). Or maybe it's that I'm actually starting to get really concerned about these issues and the direction that the US is moving. I've got time on my hands, maybe I should start doing something.

3 comments:

Rob D said...

"come back in, sit down and watch the telli.. then you'll be happy."
-Fahrenheit 451

knobboy said...

The issue is addressed, the question is answered, and the matter is resolved:

"Q. How does a War Bill become a War Law?

A. It all begins with the president, who submits a bill to the president. If a majority of both the president and the president approve the bill, then it passes on to the president, who may veto it or sign it into law. And even then the president can override himself with a two-thirds vote."

Anonymous said...

Bread and circuses during the decline of ancient Rome; sports and scandals...

--LS