or, which of these characters
should we really believe?
[ed.'s hint: believe.only.in.cut.of.the.
sails.of.one.captain.jack.sparrow! yo ho!]
i thought it might seem rather deliciously,
eloquently ironic, to allow then-attorney-
general john ashcroft -- in an address to
the annual meeting of the federalist society,
on november 12, 2004 -- to describe what this
administration says it believes about
the rule of law -- and the role of the law -- in
protecting individual liberties from government
usurpations. . . in short, its constitutional theory.
it is profoundly unfortunate that no one, no
one, in the upper eschelons of the administration,
walks this hollowly-noble talk, anymore.
[query: did they, ever? i dunno. . .]
it took about twenty-two-sound-bites, and almost
six-full-minutes of video -- but, well worth the
ultimate effect, i think. take a look:
[sorry about the uneven sound -- to
include the repeal of habeas/hanging clips,
and the allegorical-great-writ references,
sacrifices needed to be made. . .]
well, now -- that is some heady-stuff, no?
it is also tragically ironic that no
one at the federalist society will hold
this administration accountable for
such wildly-hypocritical talk -- where
is the society on alberto gonzales? -- after
all, at the time ashcroft gave this address, he
was the white house counsel, and the legal
opinion on the torture, rendition and detention-
without-charge-or-release-or-p.o.w.-status, policies. . .
so -- what say you, good federalists, everywhere?
i'll tell you what we say: we -- the rest
of us, law-abiding, yet liberty-loving, people
of america say. . . "we've started to
sing, lord cheney" -- we are singing!
are you listening? we are singing!