The parallels between 1972-4 and 2004-7 have been uncanny.
Unless the information compromises national security, get it out on the table and don’t hide it.
Call it monomania, paranoia, whatever... Nixon's retreat into the bunker of "executive privilege" was accompanied by statements that his critics were attacking the Presidency: the office, not the man in it. I believe Bush has suckered himself into the same last-stand defense: criticism of his performance does 'compromise national security', because in his own mind he embodies national security.
The motive doesn't matter, because the result is the same: mis-use of the powers of the office. Impeachable last time...
And speaking of Nixon/Bush parallels -- for your reading pleasure, here's a tongue-in-cheek posting at Slate.com
Current Events » in reply to I don't like Bush doing this.
Nixon-esque
The whole thread (27 posts)
- Bush ORDERS Harriet Meirs not to testify
- 1974: The U.S. Supreme Court ruled
- I can't speak to the legality, but it sure doesn't sit right (n/t)
- It is good to be POTUS
- I don't like Bush doing this.
- Outrageous behavior! Had this been Clinton the local rightwingers heads would be exploding!
- And these are the people who will "out" a covert CIA agent.