Sunday, August 20, 2006

His Majesty's Constitution


"The ends justify the means. Oh, and by the way, President Bush says the means are constitutional. And he's never wrong"~The Philadelphia Inquirer Editorial Page

I would like to start this post by thanking newly appointed field-negro, The Honorable Anna Diggs -Taylor for her sweeping denunciation of frat boy's warrantless surveillance program. She ruled that the administration's use of warrantless surveillance was both illegal as well as unconstitutional. Good for her, and good for us, the American people, who will benefit from this ruling. King George and his minions have time and time again been blocked by the courts for their attempt to "bum rush" (that's field speak for attack) our constitutional rights. And this latest ruling just underscores how arrogant and out of touch King George and his crew in the white castle really are.

I must say, that I am not always proud of my profession, but the ruling from this judge made me proud to be a member of a profession whose job it is to look out for, and protect the constitution of our country. Unfortunately, not all of us think that way, and power and holding on to it has become more important than what has actually makes our country great in the first place.
I mean, best case scenario would be the doctored photo of one Mr. Rove actually being a real photo. But I guess, the good judges ruling will have to do for now.

I keep asking myself why I am not so willing to embrace frat boy with his war on terror; and the answer is becoming increasingly clear to me as things begin to unfold politically. It is, after all, almost time for the mid term elections, and all the ugliness that is politics in America is starting to rise to the fore again. The mantra for his majesty and his side kicks has become; it's either you side with us on this war on terror, or you side with them, the terrorist. The choice is clear, republicans and safety, or democrats and terror.

Well let me answer that for you Mr. Rove; my black ass is not siding with you or the terrorist, because that is false choice. It's a a straw man, set up to divide us, so that you can gain political points. Honestly, some of the people siding with frat boy on this issue have become almost-and I emphasize almost, for fear of becoming like them- as bad as the wack job religious fanatical terrorist that we are in this fight with. They don't represent the America I want to live in, with their one sided monolithic view of the world, their moralization of all things good and evil, and their unyielding intolerance.

They -the right-have bought into the Limboughfication-my word-of American discourse. Them bad and we good. You are either with us, or a "cut and run" traitor. It's why people like Dick Cheyney and Karl Rove scare the living sh#% out of me. Too dogmatic, too power hungry, and too willing to win at all costs politically in order to push forth their own agenda.

So to Judge Taylor, I say, you go girl, way to stick it to King George and his crew. Now of course you know what's coming next. The right wing talk shows will be in full attack mode, and salivating to start ranting about liberal activist judges who are way out of control. But we wont believe it this time, we have heard that song way too many times before, and it aint a hit anymore. In fact, the beat is kind of played. So King George, you might want to reconsider your strategy this fall, I don't think the scare and vote, your are with us or against us tactic is going to work anymore. Americans actually value their constitution and their freedoms way too much. And not even you, King George, with all your King's men, will be able to change that simple fact.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Hi, F-N. Though I completely disagree with your analysis in this recent post, I do enjoy your writing. You and I BOTH know Judge Taylor-Diggs ruling will be thrown out on appeal. Sticking it to "King George" (I know you don't really believe that) isn't a good enough reason to circumvent presidential wartime powers. You know that I'm right.

From the Washington Post story: "Regardless of what your position is on the merits of the issue, there's no question that it's a poorly reasoned decision," said Bobby Chesney, a national security law specialist at Wake Forest University who takes a moderate stance on the legal debate over the NSA program. "The opinion kind of reads like an outline of possible grounds to strike down the program, without analysis to fill it in."

However, I have a different article you may be interested in looking at. Let me know what you think.