"You have to decide..."

Several times since the Republican misadventure in Iraq turned sour, I have been told by a few defenders of the decision to invade that "even Bill Clinton believed Saddam had WMD". These folks seem to think that means he also supported the invasion.

I have known that was not true. I am glad, now, to be able to give chapter and verse. A transcript of President Clinton's remarks of March 14, 2003 -- less than a week before the invasion -- has been posted at the Hillary Clinton website. Here are some excerpts:

"... you have to decide if it matters whether we bend over backwards to try to disarm him in a way that strengthens rather than divides the world community. If you don’t think it matters, then you’re with a lot of the people in the current administration...

[Saddam]'s finally destroying his missiles, so let’s give him a certain date in which, in this time, he has to destroy the missiles, reconcile the discrepancies in what we believe is the truth on chemical weapons, reconcile the discrepancies on biological weapons, reconcile the issue of the Drones, and offer up 150 scientists who can travel outside of Iraq with their families for interviews. ... I’m for regime change too, but there’s more than one way to do it. We don’t invade everybody whose regime we want to change..."

I, like President Clinton, believed President Bush was acting foolishly in the months leading up to March of 2003. I was quite vociferous about that, despite the ridicule of a whole gaggle of my Republican friends. I saw an administration hyping the case for preemptive war. They may have believed some of what they said about WMD, but they blatently hyped it. They knew Saddam was not an immediate threat to the US and they knew Saddam was unconnected to the terrorist attacks of 2001 (and never SAID he was, as they are quick to point out) but blatently lied about the first and actively promoted the second impression, and those misconceptions became majority assumptions in the US. The Machiavellian neo-cons viewed war as an exercise of the unique power of the world's only remaining superpower. It was an opportunity, the neo-cons seemed to think, that the US should not pass up. From slimy politics, to slippery slope, to free fall.

What a different and better world this would be today if the election of 2000 had not been compromised.

What a difference it will make for our country if in 2008 we can elect a statesman (or woman) to repair the tragic mistakes of the Republicans. I will be thrilled to support Edwards, Biden, Clinton, Obama, or Dodd.

Surveillance Under Carter

Flying like dandelion fluffs through the blogoshere are allegations that Bush's unwarranted surveillance has precedent in the Carter administration. Once taking root as truth in one blog garden it spreads like Kudzu to other right-wing plots and soon gazillions are munching on the bushy accusations.

In fact Carter did authorize needed surveillance (as Bush has every right and the responsibily to do) but specifically instructed that it be done in strict adherance to the FISA law. Carter did exactly what I believe Bush should have done. By the way, reasonable Republicans in the Senate are also pressing for the Bush White House to follow the law.

Here is Carter's specific order:
http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo12139.htm

Excerpts with my emphasis in red:

1-101. Pursuant to Section 102(a)(1) of the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1802(a)), the Attorney General
is authorized to approve electronic surveillance to acquire foreign
intelligence information without a court order, but only if the
Attorney General makes the certifications required by that Section.

1-104. Section 2-202 of Executive Order No. 12036 (set out under
section 401 of this title) is amended by inserting the following at
the end of that section: ''Any electronic surveillance, as defined
in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, shall be
conducted in accordance with that Act as well as this Order.''.

1-105. Section 2-203 of Executive Order No. 12036 (set out under
section 401 of this title) is amended by inserting the following at
the end of that section: ''Any monitoring which constitutes
electronic surveillance as defined in the Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act of 1978 shall be conducted in accordance with that
Act as well as this Order.''.

Now, as someone who has watched Carter since 1966, I trusted that he would not have criticized the Bush order if he had done the same. He is too smart and too detail oriented, not to mention too honest, to let that happen.

Rant Time

What if it were President Gore?

Can you imagine how quickly articles of impeachment would have been drawn up by Congressional Republicans if President Gore had authorized domestic spying WITHOUT EVEN the available RETROACTIVE WARRANT and in direct contravention of expressly written law?

Well, it's my country, too, and even I have to get serious sometimes. W., Karl, Tom, Dick, Alberto, et al ignore the law and the truth and basic American principles when it serves their purposes.

Feel free to reply with your arguments, O Disciples of Shrub, but if you want my respect, don't you set up strawmen by saying things that indicate those of us who oppose Bush on this issue are not concerned about terrorism. We believe Bush has the tools to monitor the communication he SAYS he is motivated to monitor. We are not so stupid as to trust this miscreant, however, with dictatorial power and, even if you do trust this little man -- the guy who told Mr. Dirty Politics, Lee Atwater, to get dirtier; the guy who made thousands of "push-poll" phone calls in SC to label John McCain a race-mixer; the saint who panders to the evangelicals with same mouth that gushes obscenities elsewhere -- he will only be President for 1080 more days (barring another coup), you certainly should not trust his unknown successor.

Is there a reader who does not know in his/her heart and mind, with absolute certainty, that the present Republican Congress WOULD draw up articles of impeachment if a President Gore authorized domestic spying WITHOUT EVEN the available RETROACTIVE WARRANT and in direct contravention of expressly written law?

The Republicans are the strict constructionists? Give me a break.