The Law Repeatedly Broken

The WaPo editorial board noticed this a.m. that this worst administration in history isn't following the law, is not obeying the Supreme Court's ruling against it, and is violating all clean air measures it is (for)sworn to protect and defend. What doesn't occur is the obvious conclusion that for violating the laws it is for)sworn to protect and defend, the president and his minions should be impeached.

THE BUSH administration never had any intention of doing what the Supreme Court commanded it to do a year ago today: regulate greenhouse gas emissions. We infer this because, even though President Bush ordered his agencies last May to work together to meet the court's directive, and even though the Environmental Protection Agency delivered to the White House last December its finding that those pollutants endanger public welfare, a prerequisite for regulation, EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson announced last week a plan to seek public input starting in the spring on how best to limit the emissions. Translation: punt to the next administration. This giant step backward is the starkest example yet of the chasm between the words and deeds of Mr. Bush on climate change.

I noticed that Avedon took a little different tack on this than I did, she lambastes WaPo's idiot 'savants' on ignoring that the war criminals at the White House are guilty of a whole lot more than just violate the Supremes' rulings on the environment.

"This giant step backward is the starkest example yet of the chasm between the words and deeds of Mr. Bush on climate change."

No, it isn't. Pretty much everything he's done since he took office has been even more stark and appalling, but you didn't deign to notice.

Like bringing freedom to Iraq by destroying their infrastructure and writing new laws that took away all of their power over their lives, instituting every evil thing about Saddam's reign but without the electricity and water.

And how about a guy who sued in the Supreme Court to prevent votes from being counted, talking about "democracy"?

My personal favorite is his claim that Jesus is his favorite philospher. By what reading of the Bible is anything Bush does consistent with the teachings of Jesus?

I mean, come on, the man uses lots of rhetoric and then runs around making wars and destabilizing the whole world, wrecking our nation's economy and making us weak, and of course doing everything he can to make the rich richer and the rest of us poorer. But he never got up and said, "I'm making the rich richer, making everyone else poorer, and wrecking the nation and the world," did he?

This business with the EPA is just one more in a long, long, hideous list of ways Bush has lied to us about what he's doing. And you always seemed to believe him. What changed your mind?

There's a slightly different, and not as extensive, exposition on this at The Sideshow (follow the link at her name) but I chose the one in WaPo comments for you to read here.

I will quote myself, too, but excuse me, and if you find this obnoxious, skip the rest.

Wishing luck to the particular proponents of public interest who are working to save us from bad air quality is cynicism in the extreme. The editorial board eschews its role in informing the public, so why would the worst administration in history do any better? The violations of trust that represent a criminal intent call for the impeachment of many members of the occupied White House, and it is past time for a responsible press to call for an end to the crimes against the country.

The lack of an outcry is an increasing crime against this country. The oath of office a president takes is to protect and defend the constitution. His job is to enforce the laws. This is no president.

It is past due for the press to proclaim a crime a crime, and when the country is being robbed, beaten and tortured, it is the press's duty to cry out.