what's the big deal?

There is a big row developing in Washington, DC, (gasp!! no, it can't be! say it ain't so!) over the search of a Congressman's office in connection with an established criminal investigation. Many members of the Congress, on both sides of the aisle, are protesting that it violates the separation of powers. I am not sure that I have developed an opinion on this yet, but that has never stopped me from typing before.

Let me respond the those Honorable (I capitalize the term as it is the correct way to address or refer to members of the Congress, NOT because I admire, respect or think highly of them or any aspect of thier profession), members of the House and Senate. The word I am looking for is:

BULLSHIT.

There may be some clarification of positions in the coming weeks however I would like to say that being an elected representative does not endow one with any form of sanctuary, legal or physical. There may be some good reasons why the various law enforcement communities should give a greater berth to the Congress, the courts, and the Executive Branch, but this is definately not a separation of powers issue. The outcry from the capitol area tells me that there is quite a bit more fruit to be plucked by the justice department, if they only care to look for it.

update 1:

John Nichols, writing in a blog on "The Nation" website, has a slightly different perspective. see it at:

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?bid=1&pid=86392


Before I go off into the sunset, I would like to observe that this is one of those issues that both clarify and obscure the principles of the Constitution. In the end, it will clarify something, (we are not yet sure what, or how it might relate to the issue before us), probably in the Supreme Court. It also muddies things considerably. If this separation of powers argument stands, it will be a license for all the Nixon/Bush/J.Edgar Hoover clones that come into power in the future. It actually removes accountibility from elected officials, and, in some obscure lines of reasoning would absolve the current administration for acts many consider criminal or treasonous for any culpability for those acts. Being voted in by the electorate would then be a license for anything.

According to the Constitution, the legislature has power over the executive branch through parliamentary rules, and the power of impeachment. It also enjoys similar authority over the judiciary. In the case that we have before us, two branches of government acted to subborn the third under very narrow and defined circumstances, in a manner that would be above comment and reproach if it was anyone but a congressman. I realize that the shadows of many principles fall across the facts of this case, but I just don't see the wrongdoing. I have to note that some of the cloud-producing facts here are:

the accused is a black man and a Democrat, being pursued by an administration that hold no respect for either of the above, (or anything else for that matter). The fact the prez is a prick and dictator wannabe, and that his administration a bunch of greedy thugs will muddy the waters considerably; in this instance it doesn't mean that the Justice Dept is wrong.

the FBI already has sufficient evidence to hang the guy, this intrusion was not really necessary for a successful prosecution. the reputation for investigatory overkill, as well as the record of using innuendo and rumor to accomplish a political purpose will also be a factor.

the issue of "reasonable doubt" has been given a really big boost here.


I also have to ask, just how far does the Congress think that this privelege extends? The house of the suspect was searched, without outcry, so that is a limit in itself. What about a local office of the suspect? A campaign headquarters? And finally, would there be an outcry if the suspect was an aide to a congressman, if his or her office in the Capitol facilities was searched, would that raise a furor like this one, or does the aura of privelege extend only to the person of the representative?




If either of you reading this cares to, check again in a few weeks, I may have changed my mind and buried this article altogether. I am all for curbing the abuses of the present government, (all branches), but I hope that this incident is not turned into a cause celebre' and buried under a banner of righteous indignation. The congressman is a crook, and a weasel, and deserves what he gets, and probably a lot more. The fact that he is being prosecuted, (NOT persecuted), by a corrupt administration and a bunch of @ssholes does not give him any additional measure of legitimacy or rights that none of the rest of us get. Period.


update 2:

I really hope that this incident does NOT fall on the President. I am having visions (or delusions) that this will become fodder for those who keep shouting for the President's impeachment, and, like other similar efforts, it will be counter-productive. Let the courts handle this, we will all get more mileage from that course of action, rather than obfuscating the issues with a lot of shouting and name calling.

so there.



update 3:

this is turning into a turf war and a p*ssing contest between the Congress and the Justice Dept.

according to a story published online by the cybercast news service, (no, I never heard of them either), the Speaker of the House is being mentioned as being a part of the corruption investigation underway. whoever would have thought it........?

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200605/POL20060525c.html

the net effect of this sudden eruption of innuendo and news leaks is that the truly guilty will be able to shield themselves with the general impression that this is, as much as anything, another political name-calling event that has no significance whatsoever. I mentioed earlier, that if this hits the President, he will most likely escape any serious consequences, (with his ratings, what else can go wrong?), and the historic record of this episode will always be obscured by the huge BS factor.

I am thinking now that we have the government that we deserve. It is time for a serious downsizing. We are in an era of consequences for the things that we have, and have not done. I don't know how that will shake out, but it is time to scrap this SUV of a government and get something a bit easier to live with.

The notion of "executive privilege" has been bandied about quite a bit over the past couple of years; are we now going to have a round of shouting over congressional privilege?

The documents that were taken from the congressmans office were not classified, nor were they the personal property of the congressman. No one is above the law. the FBI and Justice Department may be a bunch of morons, (duh, ya think?), but they were not out of line here.

Right now, I am going to get a little popcorn and enjoy watching the pachyderms party implode. My concern is: what will remain standing when it does?


update 4

Today, police entered the Rayburn Office Bulding in Washington, D.C., (the same building the FBI entered), in response to a report of shots fired. I wonder if this too is an abuse of the Constitution? If not, why? If the Capitol and associated offices are somehow immune from the normal workings of law enforcement, why then does anyone (besides the occupants of that building) care whether shots were fired or not?


update 5

I will try to make this the last one. Today, Senator Bill Frist reversed himself on network TV on the issue of the legality of the search, stating that no citizen is above the law, (or words to that effect). I ask myself if this is a bellwether, if the Congress has seen the reaction of those citizens who may or may not vote for them, and decided which side of the bread that the butter is, in fact, on.

The President has ordered the documents that were seized to be sealed for about six weeks, to allow a "cooling off". This may or may not be seen as a good idea, but where is the outcry over a President meddling in a criminal investigation? Justified or not, the raid did take place, and is a matter of record. The last President that attempted to inset himself into the workings of the justice system resigned. This just keeps getting deeper....

why you ask?

I was scanning the news today, and see that the top news stories are:

"The DaVinci Code is about God and sex--mostly sex"

"Apple countersues Creative over iPod interface"

"Senate declares English to be the official language"

well, I am heartened to some extent that the media is able to recognize the truly earth shattering events that affect us, and strive to deliver these, above the fold, as the saying goes.

I think that these things are reported on because most of the other things one might wish to read about are way over our heads. In some cases, we may understand particular incidents, but not how they fold into the ebb and flow of politics, economics, science or whatever. The result is, we simply put these issues aside and wait for someone to deliver tem up in a small, digestible sound-bite.

As for Apple and Creative Labs, come on guys, the issue is not who stole who's technology or concepts, it is the fact that your product is manufactured in China, where everything is stolen.

As for the 'DaVinci Code', it is, first and foremost, a movie. Why don't we have a huge debate with an accompanying uproar by conservationists, ecologists, sportsmen and gun manufacturers over 'Bambi'.

And then there is the U.S. Senate. Thank God for those people! And here I was afraid that I might have to learn French or Italian to get a bite at a classy restaurant. It occurs to me though, that this brave act of legislative chutzpah might have a few unintended consequences, related in a general way to the question "who is the final arbiter of the use of the language?". Will laws be overturned or contracts voided over a dangling participle? What will the ramifications of using the term "what's up?" be? Will a traffic cop be forced into using excruciatingly correct grammar instead of "license and registration please", and if he/she does not use the corrrect verbiage, what are the ramifications of ignoring them?

This might be fun for a while. Be sure to follow the campaigns and speeches of Senators ruiing for something, (and that is all of them), if you dare, peg them on the correct use of the language.

he's at it again

Pat Robertson revealed yesterday that God told him that the U.S. would be hit by three major hurricanes this year, and possibly a tsunami.

bummer.

This bold revelation came just three days after the NOAA announced that, according to current forecasting models, the U.S. would probably be hit by three major storms this season, and just two weeks after a tsunami warning was issued for Hawaii and California

damn that guy is good! better do what he says.....

a few election year thoughts

We are approaching the summer months, those idyllic days when we enjoy the outdoors, (or sometimes the indoors), and put up with all manner of handshakers, pamphleteers and telemarketers who want us to vote for somebody or something.

Just the way it is, can't do anything about it.

Yes, you can.

Find out who the incumbents are at the local and state level, and take a few minutes to email them on a topic that you are concerned about, (or at least one that you are knowledgable enough about to spot some bullshit when you see it). Do they respond? If so, that is good, provided that the response is not some canned "thank you for your comment" correspondence. Was the answer understandable? Again, if you understand it, it is a good thing, give them a little credit for that. If you feel that you are being ignored or sidestepped, then make a point of finding out who the challenger is, put a sign in your yard for them, and then vote for them. truthfully, an incumbent that is too busy to answer a question is worthless, you won't do any worse voting for some other dork, even if you don't know anything about them.

On the national level, you do have a congressperson up for election this November, and possibly a Senator as well. If you have a chance to meet them, ask them what the federal budget is for this fiscal year, then ask them how much revenue the government will take in to fund those outlays. Even if you don't know the answer, you can spot non-specific answers quite easily, and they are a good indicator that this person is, to borrow an old colloquialism, an asshole. If you do not have any contact with these people, then email them with a question regarding an issue that you care about, (one can view pending legislation on the House and Senate websites). The content of the answer is important, but so is the bullshit factor. Guage it for yourself, and again, put a sign in your yard for whoever opposes them and vote the bastards out.

If you have a little free time and energy, (I already know you have access to a computer), make a point of emailing often, and, if you are not too bashful, a few written letters are helpful. If nothing else, an answer will show how much you matter.

Go get em!

....well, I've been busy....

I see that I have not contributed too this project a lot for six or more months. Truth is, I have been busy, and it is all I can do to keep up with not getting anything accomplished.

Today was one of those days when one hurries to do not too damn much. I did a few light chores, made a couple of phone calls, (more on that later), and found time to scrounge through the refrigerator for some leftover pot roast and noodles. I heated that mix up, and turned on the idiot box too see if I could lose my concentration. What I watched was the 1940 film version of Steinbecks "The Grapes of Wrath". Let me say that the film was a bit dilluted from the novel, and had definately been adapted to fit the moment, (I suppose moments were a lot longer then...), but I was simply dumbstruck by how much the scenario that is the backdrop of the book and movie matched the social and economic landscape that we have before us today. Why hadn't we/I noticed that before? If I get the time, I may pontificate on this a bit later, but I am amazed that the general populace is as accepting of the status quo as it seems to be. perhaps I am not too engaged with the general populace, and live in my own little universe, (as we all do to one degree or another).

I have heard a little bit about a new record by Neil Young. Today, I streamed the entire work from a site that actually encouraged a free listen. I had heard that the record had been produced in under a week, with a pickup band. Under many circumstances, that fact would cause me to roll my eyes and wonder what the world was coming to, but in my opinion and experience, Mr. Young works well when he works fast. In any case, I live by the adage that nothing is ever free, so I listened skeptically at first. Let me say right now that this is an overtly politcal work, the 21st century equivalent of a pamphlet or tract, a viewpoint is presented and its purpose is to influence the listener. How successful that will be remains to be seen, but this album is a winner. One need not agree with the politics presented here to enjoy the work and appreciate the views and the way that they are presented here. In many, many instances, I am usually very unimpressed with celebrities who have appeared on TV or the big screen, or stage, who may have flown the Atlantic and flaunt their fame with opinions, meant to enlighten the rest of us. I will refrain from mentioning any names, (but you know who I am typing about), but this album lacks that preachy quality. It is unambiguously and unapologetically political, but one does not sense that the artist is looking down on the listener as he dispenses his wisdom, it is, an editorial, presented in the hope of influencing opinions and actions, but mindful and respectful of the differences between individuals. I admire that. If you are interested, you may listen to the album, (it runs about 45 minutes) at this link. I know not how long this will be good, so try it and forgive me if it doesn't work.

http://www.mvyradio.com/features/neil_young.php