Daily Kos

Norquist Comes Out Against Wiretaps

by Doug in SF

Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 01:16:13 PM PDT

The San Francisco Chronicle ran in interesting strange bedfellows story today discussing illegal wiretapping, and the opposition thereto by neo-con Democrat and Hoover Institute fellow Larry Diamond, and Grover Norquist, of all people. They apparently agree that "the Bush administration's program of domestic eavestrdopping by the NSA without obtaining court warrants has less to do with the war on terror than with threats to the nation's civil liberties."
Both men are rabid supporters of the war, of nation-building, and the like, but credit Norquist with some foresight:

The President's friends are exactly who you want telling him this. No one else has the credibility. We are being team players by telling him, not by keeping quiet. Even if you believed an angel was making these decisions, and that's not what I'm saying, at some point the person in the White House will change. Hillary Clinton might be making these decisions.

Nice to know that he isn't certain the Republicans will win in 2008!

On a related topic, Keith Olberman highlighted the administration's parsing of the term "domestic" spying, where they say it's international spying because they are monitoring international calls. I kept finding myself wondering why Olberman and others don't simply say, "the problem is that the spying is on US citizens on American soil." Who they happen to be talking to and where is of no concern to the government, at least without a warrant that is amazingly easy to obtain, through a process that was established for speed and wartime.

Tags: wiretapping, Grover Norquist, Diamonds, civil liberties (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 19 comments

  •  Oh my god -- (4.00 / 3)

    I agree with something Grover Norquist says??!!  Excuse me, I have to go take a shower!

    "No self-respecting woman should wish or work for the success of a Party that ignores her sex." -- Susan B. Anthony http:www.twtp.org

    by Yellow Dog Dem Woman on Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 01:18:13 PM PDT

    •  It's even worse then before the war (none / 1)

      when the only Liberal voice to stand up to the chickenhawks was Pat Buchannon. At leaste Pat was someone I mearly disagreed with more often than not, I fucking hate Norquist.

      "Just when they think they know the answer, I change the question!" -Roddy Piper

      by McGirk SF on Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 04:11:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Reminds me of the old adage... (4.00 / 3)

    ...about broken clocks being right twice a day.

    [Funny thing about that: a clock that is dead stopped will be right twice a day.  A clock that is fast can be right more than twice a day.  A clock that is just a little slow can go days without being right once.]

    But I digress.

    The point I want to make is that while Norquist is a pig, he is a pig of influence, and his defection from the ranch on this point signifies a compound fracture of neoconservative and far right leadership.  There are no longer any excuses for Democrats to remain idle on this issue, or even to triangulate a la Hillary's remarks of yesterday.  Bush's surveillance program and its rationale are not "strange" -- they are criminal.

    "I've waited all my life for a Republican Barack Obama. Now he shows up and he's a Democrat." - Frank Luntz

    by The Termite on Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 01:23:47 PM PDT

  •  It's important to note... (none / 1)

    ...that the reason Norquist objects is NOT because he is concerned about the constitution.

    His own words reveal that he objects because he fears the future damaging impact to Republicans when Dems take over the executive branch and White House.  

    --------------------------------

    "In religion and politics, people's beliefs and convictions are gotten at second-hand, and without examination." --M. Twaine

    by Hells Bells on Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 01:25:05 PM PDT

    •  and unilateral executive too! (none / 1)

      I've been saying, if they gave a moment's thought to Unified Executive President Hillary Rodham Clinton, they'd poop in their pants.

      Seems like Grover has had a change of heart to go along with a change of underwear.  

      Now we have to get them to oppose Alito for the same reason...

      by G2geek on Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 02:09:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Repeat after me (4.00 / 2)

    The enemy of my enemy is not my friend.  Grover would just as soon drown you in a bathtub and deny you any say in a representative democracy.  The man is EEEEEEEVIL.  
    Who cares why he is now worried about wiretapping.  We do not need Norquist's support.  
    Lather, rinse, repeat.  

    -3.63, -4.46 "Choose something like a star to stay your mind on- and be staid"

    by goldberry on Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 01:26:47 PM PDT

  •  Poor Grover (4.00 / 3)

    He brought his monster to life, and now that it's lurching towards the village, spreading destruction, he wants to help bring it down.

    Sure, Grover, you can help. But just remember, the last pot of tar and bag of feathers is for you.

    -dms

    Having trouble finding stuff on Daily Kos? This page has some handy hints and tricks.

    by dmsilev on Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 01:31:21 PM PDT

  •  interesting subtext (4.00 / 3)

    Norquist's quote contains an interesting subtext, in as much as he's basically saying that the President doesn't consider anyone who isn't part of his little echo-chamber circle to be a credible source of anything.

    Not like we didn't know that, but still.  To have it spelled out by Norquist, of all people, raises the eyebrows...

    by jasonbl on Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 02:03:50 PM PDT

    •  we're seeing the split (4.00 / 2)

      ...between ideological neo-cons, who at least are loyal to their own principles (whether we agree with those principles or not), and the ...what's the word for this?... the cult of personality types whose motto is "My Leader, right or wrong!"

      This is not a split I expected.  But hot damn!, it sure is good to see some cracks in the monolith!

      by G2geek on Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 02:11:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Well, he's not going to get me in bed. (4.00 / 2)

    But it's good to hear he has some sense about something.

    The prophet is a fool, the spiritual man is mad; For the multitude of thy iniquity, and the great hatred...

    by Tirge Caps on Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 02:09:17 PM PDT

  •  This is important for a few reasons (none / 1)

    Thanks for posting this diary, I was about to do the same.

    First, Alito. In the article, Norquist says:

    Norquist said, ironically, he was particularly concerned about the problem because the Democrats appeared to be so weak.

    "For 40 years we always assumed the left would take care of our civil liberties," he said. "If there were problems, the Democrats were the ones who would push back. But now with a Republican Congress and a Republican in the White House, the ACLU can't get their calls returned."


    It's quite possible that there are many more concerned conservatives hiding in the shadows, but unwilling to be vocal in their opposition to warrantless eavesdropping. I bet a few Republican Senators want to vote against Alito, but politically would pay too high a price. A Dem filibuster would provide cover for these folks. And political cover is incentive for them not to invoke the nuclear option.

    Second, the latest Rove spin.
    The latest spin from Rove is that a majority of Americans approve of Bush's warrantless wiretaps. Even though polls show the opposite to be true, the MSM is slow to catch on. Adding Norquist's name to those who oppose the president on this can cut through the media parroting cloud.

    by catfish on Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 02:10:56 PM PDT

    •  majorities; and let the Dems do it... (4.00 / 3)

      Let the Dems take care of our civil liberties eh?  And is that admitting that the Repubs are doing otherwise?  Surpirse....

      Re. majorities:

      This is important to understand.  A majority of Americans would support the idea of NSA having a role in domestic detection of potential terrorists, BUT a majority of Americans also object mightily to any of that operating purely on executive say-so outside of any legal limits.  

      This is not much different from the idea that Americans support the use of wiretaps by law enforcement subject to the checks and balances of appropriate legislation and judicial warrants.

      Voters know there is a world of difference between activities carried out within the law, and activities carried out in a creepy gray zone outside of the law.  

      This is why it's important to look at how poll questions are phrased.  And why it's important to phrase them clearly, to differentiate between legal activities w/ checks & balances, and extralegal or illegal activities with no limits.  

      by G2geek on Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 02:18:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Are you arguing or agreeing? (none / 0)

        Like I said: "Even though polls show the opposite to be true, the MSM is slow to catch on.".

        And this from the Daou report:

        And like clockwork, we get this from CNN: Poll finds U.S. split over eavesdropping, not to mention this from Rasmussen.

        by catfish on Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 02:48:10 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  From the daou report (none / 0)

        Should have included this part: Daou predicted how the warrantless wiretap scandal would play out:
        Looking at the contours of previous scandals, I ventured this prediction: "Polls will emerge with 'proof' that half the public agrees that Bush should have the right to "protect Americans against terrorists." Again, the issue will be framed to mask the true nature of the malfeasance. The media will use these polls to create a self-fulfilling loop and convince the public that it isn't that bad after all. The president breaks the law. Life goes on."

        So I think it quite noteworthy that Norquist is publicly voicing his opposition to the CW.

        by catfish on Thu Jan 26, 2006 at 02:54:44 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Permalink | 19 comments