"A government more dangerous to our liberty, than is the enemy it claims to protect us from."

It has been my opinion since early 2003 that President George W. Bush and his Congressional rubber stamps are more dangerous to America than the terrorists from whom he purports to be protect us. (I make no judgments as to the motives or patriotism of the President.) There have been no indications to the contrary since then and lots of further evidence to support the opinion. The terrorists can kill and injure, but they can't take our bill of rights. Only we can do that. This week not Osama Bin Laden or Saddam Hussein or the Dear Leader of Korea (as much as they might like to), but Mr. Bush and his enablers in Congress have damaged our rights. I do not say this lightly. Keith Olbermann says it well:

"Beginning of the End of America"

On the other hand here is the ultra-divisive propaganda sent by the Republicans. President Bush and his propagandists inundate me with e-mails like the following-- I suppose I got on a list through one of my misguided relatives.):

There is nothing more important than protecting the American people and ensuring that we have the intelligence we need to stop attacks on our homeland. The vast majority of Democrats in Congress did not agree. Shockingly, 84% of the Democrats in the House voted against interrogating terrorists, as did 73% of the Democrats in the Senate.

The Democrats who voted against this bill out of concern for terrorist civil liberties include all of their key leaders in Congress: would-be Speaker Nancy Pelosi, House Majority Leader-in waiting John Murtha, and Senate Democrat leader Harry Reid. Would the Military Commissions Act have ever seen the light of day in a Democrat-led Congress?

The law signed yesterday continues a vital program that has played a prominent role in questioning every senior al-Qaeda leader now in our custody. Republicans in Congress worked to successfully extend this program, and Democrats overwhelmingly voted "No." That's a very clear difference.

I'm sorry, but our freedoms ARE more important than our short-term safety. Give me a break, "Voted against interrogating terrorists" -- typical Republican straw-man lies. I do not know ANYONE who opposes "interrogating terrorists." And it is the civil liberties of all Americans that we are concerned about.

Is there anyone on the right who argues the merits any more? Can they manage anything besides straw-man arguments and ad hominem attacks? There is a very clear difference. Democrats, as a rule, support a strong defense, tough counter-terrorism measures, AND our Bill of Rights; Republicans, as a rule, support whatever President Bush wants.

In November we can, if we will, restore Congressional oversight of the executive (even Roosevelt in the midst of WWII had tough oversight!) and force the President to moderate his most extreme positions. If we say nothing, if we allow the Republican assault on our rights to continue, if we reelect a Congress that refuses to exercize its Constitutional duty of oversight, then our children and grandchildren may indeed someday ask, "Where were you, Grandpa, when our rights were eroding?"