King Cheney

As I noted in the previous post, consistency doesn't seem too much to ask for, but it is, evidently, too much to expect from today's GOP.

Waxman decries Cheney security exemption - Yahoo! News: "Cheney's office — over the objections of the National Archives — has exempted itself from a presidential executive order that seeks to protect national security information generated by the government, according to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform."

I have said this many times, but the conservative fear of encroaching government power is something I respect. So, when conservatives complained that Clinton was playing fast and loose with executive power, I listened. I didn't always agree, but I always understood that this was a serious, foundational issue.

But conservative principle seems lacking once again. Had Al Gore asserted this, we would have had numerous investigations and possibly a call to impeach both Al and Bill. After all, they were willling to impeach Bill over the Monica thing--so you tell me, would they have impeached over outing a CIA operative or something like this? Absolutely.

But Cheney does this and the right just sits there, grinning moroningly (Simpsons ref). I feel stupid even asking, but do any of these people think of the principles involved? Do they think that Hilary Clinton's vice president should be able to assert their independence from, well, every other branch of government?

That is the part that puzzles me. This isn't rocket science. If GWB and Cheney can do this, then some liberal administration can use that as precedent. If they can use signing statements to invalidate legislation, then so can a Clinton or Obama admin. Hell, I am scared of a Hilary Clinton admin expanding on these powers, and I am a liberal. Why the hell conservatives don't worry about this amazes me.