Mother 'May I?'

Even though the far left of the Democratic Party, along with the party itself, have lost control of both Houses of Congress and the Presidency, they have not lost their controlling attitude.
Efforts to exercise some sort of control seem genetic with liberals. When they lose control at the ballot box, they drift out of control with the aid of a like-minded far left dominant media.
A case in point is the present heated debate over “eavesdropping on al-Qaida electronic transmissions by the National Security Administration” (NSA).
President George W. Bush states as Commander in Chief during a time of war he has the constitutional authority and power necessary to defend the United States and its citizens against all enemies of the nation.
This was affirmed by Congress after 9/11/01. At that time, President Bush was authorized to use all necessary means to defend the United States and its citizens against any and all terrorists and terrorist organizations, including al-Qaida.
President Bush states he has not authorized NSA to eavesdrop on electronic communications that originate and remain inside the United States. That would be a violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments.
Furthermore, President Bush, after repeated demands by Democrats in Congress, agreed to brief certain members of the Select Committees on Intelligence of both Houses of Congress.
“Meet the Press” interviews on Sunday, Feb. 12, were conducted with several members of the Select Committees on Intelligence from both Houses of Congress.
On the Senate side was Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kan., and former senator (and former chairman) Tom Daschle, D-S.D., and the House side representatives were Chairman Rep. Peter Hoekstra, R-Mich., and Vice Chairman Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif.
A letter from vice-chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, U.S. Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W. Va., (not present) outlining his objections to the NSA program, was read by Tim Russert to those present.
Sen. Pat Roberts, responding immediately, stated that the letter signed by Sen. Jay Rockefeller had been locked in Sen. Rockefeller’s office safe for the past three years.
As a result of the White House briefing, Rep. Jane Harman stated emphatically that the NSA program authorized by President Bush was not only necessary but should be kept active. Former Sen. Tom Daschle agreed.
Both Sen. Roberts and Rep. Hoekstra were then in agreement with both Democrats.
So what is the problem?
In simple nursery school terms, President George W. Bush had not played the “Mother, May I?” game with the U.S. Congress.
Desperate to rein in the President and keep him under some sort of liberal congressional control, those on the left interviewed on “Meet the Press” kept saying, “All the President has to do is ask us for the necessary authority and we will gladly give that authority to him.” All President Bush has to ask is, “Mother, May I?”
Had President Bush accepted ever so small a compromise, permanent damage to the executive authority of the presidency could have been done.
About the reading of the letter that U.S. Sen. Jay Rockefeller kept locked in his office for three years, Rep. Jane Harman said the following:
Had Sen. Rockefeller released the letter prior to The New York Times leak of the top secret information about the NSA program last fall, he would have been in violation of the “Foreign Intelligence Espionage Act.”
Wow!
Sen. Pat Roberts added that information of that sort released accidentally and with no intention to cause harm would be less serious.
Such was not the case.
The background of the story goes back more than a year when the White House was advised The New York Times was preparing to publish news articles disclosing the use of electronic eavesdropping on al-Qaida suspects.
President Bush advised The Times publishers and reporter that such a publication would prove severely damaging to national security interests of the United States.
Nothing was done for one year.
Without further notification, The New York Times published the damaging articles at the height of the debate on renewal of the Patriot Act by Congress last December 2005.
The New York Times had been vehemently opposed to the Patriot Act.
Rep. Jane Harmon said it well. The release of information about the NSA eavesdropping on al-Qaida would be in violation of the Foreign Intelligence Espionage Act.
Establishing intent should be no problem.
The seriousness of a violation of the Espionage Act cannot be overemphasized. The disclosure of this top secret information by The New York Times to the world deprives President Bush of one of the most valued tools that he has in combating terrorism.
To deprive the president of his ability to act instantaneously in detecting threats by terrorist groups may result in the deaths of many innocent U.S. citizens as in 9/11/01.
This is no time to play nursery school games.