|
Stevo... I'm not sure I see it as you do.
I think most here do feel the terrorists are a threat, however, they also feel that the rule of law must be obeyed. Given that there were steps to do what Bush did legally, why would he feel the need to break the law?
In this case it isn't a matter of feeling threaten by the governemnt rather it is holding the government up to the same laws by which all Americans must abide.
To add to this, clearly what we have here is a partisan issue for some. Many have felt that this Administration has been pushing the legal limits on many issues and changing laws to give themselves more power in other areas. Further, the Administration has stretched the truth in order to get into a war that the Administration really wanted.
People who view the government in this fashion have felt powerless for some time. The law has been on the Administration's side. The spin has been going the Administration's way and the media hasn't been asking any of the tough questions.
If the President broke the law, can you blame these people for grasping at the one crack in the Administration's armour that has presented itself?
In the end this is about more than Bush breaking the law just as it was more than Clinton just lying under oath.
__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke
|