Rep. Norm Dicks gets an introduction from me to let him know that i live in his neighborhood now:
Dear Mr. Dicks, I write to you in a state of confusion. It's always been my understanding that no one is above the law. That is supposed to include the president of the United States. Perhaps, that should especially include the Prsident. And not too many years ago we proved that to former President Clinton. He was impeached for lying about an extra-marital affair. This time around, however, President Bush seems to be skating away from a much bigger lie. To wit, he had been approving unwarranted wiretapping in secret even as (and long before) he issued the following quote: "Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires - a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so"- George W. Bush April 20, 2004. This is not sex in the Oval Office. This is not parsing the definition of "is". What Bush has done is lie baldfaced to all of America about breaking a federal law. And he then continued to break it up until the present. He didn't just state the law, he told us he was following it. My confusion stems from the fact that you call the Republican party the Moral Party. Remember when your party said it was going to bring morality back to the White House? Why aren't you now going after Bush and holding him accountable for his lie? Democrats and Liberals (and, yes, there is a difference)alike would applaud you for sticking to your higher agenda. To not do so will bring you back down to where you were before gaining control of our government. As a representative of the people, you either stand firm for what makes our country great or you hide behind the colors of your party. You can choose to be an American or you can choose to be a party liner.It's your choice, but voters like me will remember your actions or lack thereof.
(this is not part of the letter)
also, Sen. John McCain wants high school students to decide whether Intelligent Design should be taught in their schools. Normally, this type of thinking would be considered an extremely liberal way of life. those colleges that let this happen tend to not be taken seriously by any other. evergreen state college comes to mind. but, if we let them decide on this, then i think it only fair that we allow them to vote on the drinking age, the voting age, the driving age, letting military recruiters on campus or not, condoms in the cafeteria...well, you see where i'm going with this. in short, it sounds like a political move by mccain to continue straddling the fence until he knows for sure who he needs to truly appease when it's voting time. not that i don't think children can't make an informed decision. i just don't see how the parents will stay out of it.