I believe the ACLU opposes certain portions of the Patriot Act, which is their democratic right in our society. I haven't read their position paper in detail.
Expressing their democratic rights they claim to want "common sense reforms" Their big deal today and current fund raising topic is "warrantless wiretapping".
My post objects to the idea that not letting Bush just have his way on anything related to security is somehow playing politics or unpatriotic (irony intended).
I believe that is exactly what is occurring. The democrats desperately need a win in '06. Not to mention '08. They are playing politics with this issue. Frankly, I don't care since both sides do the same thing - play politics on issues.
It comes down to whether you think our system is designed for unilateral leadership by a powerful executive or a system of compromise and consensus across the division of powers in our government branches, the electorate, NGO's like the ACLU, the media, etc.
Don't forget that the party in power is 'the party in power'. This is what is bugging the democrats. They are not in power but want to make the decisions anyway. Or, to put it another way - they believe they should have a 51% vote on any decision. They get that at the ballot box. Regarding the ACLU - I hope you are not suggesting that it is a centered organization in terms of their politics.
I think Bush would be much, much more effective if he engaged and coopted his opponents instead of demonizing them with demagogic appeals to emotion and fear. Obviously he disagrees.
As would kennedy, pelosi, reid, schummer, rockefeller durbin et al. Would you agree?
But if Bush's positions and leadership style are so popular, why does he struggle to get key parts of his program passed, when they are passed at all?
Each President encounters opposition to some of their programs from within and outside their party. Nothing new here. |
