In regard to Bush and Cheney admonishing the New York Times about "ethics" - the National Catholic Reporter caught the irony of this administration's sudden ethical obsession.
Sound off on the important issues at
The Reporter recalled this "ethical" administration: 1) "Engineered U.S. energy policy in secret meetings with oil companies; 2) leaked the name of a CIA agent; 3) advocated the use of torture; 4) lead the country into the disastrous war in Iraq on false pretenses; 5) insisted long after all evidence and logic proved otherwise that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction; 6) insists still that the war in Iraq is part of the international war on terror, even though there were no international terrorists in Iraq at the time the United States invaded; 7) remains absolutely mum on the cost overruns and waste racked up by Haliburton, the company the vice president formerly headed that received billions in no-bid contracts for work in Iraq; 8) jailed people secretly without access to legal representation or trial; held suspects indefinitely without charge; and sent suspects off on 'rendition' flights to other countries, again without notifying anyone, where they were likely tortured; 9) supports as within the bounds of presidential power the secret mining of the phone records of U.S. citizens without warrant and without accountability to any court; and 10) essentially nullifies the intent of Congress with presidential "signing statements" that claim a presidential right to ignore a new law if the president deems it necessary for security reasons." (National Catholic Reporter, July 14).
Wasn't there a revolution in 1776 to shake off this kind of government? Have the Tories just been incognito all these years? All of the above has been ignored by the Republican Congress, yet for them, Clinton's dalliance with Ms. Lewinsky was grounds for impeachment. The hypocrisy gives new meaning to the word.