If at first you don't succeed, just say you did (The Sequel)

DB is so pissed off about the fact that Bush has broken the law and is spying on Americans with no oversight that there hasn't been a post here about it yet.

And this won't be an auspicious beginning to the rants here. But one thing begs for immediate blogging because it's something that has appeared here before.

DB pointed out that the White House asked for authorization to use force in Iraq, not once, but twice. The first request was worded so broadly that the president would have been able to do just about anything he wanted. It never made it to a vote; instead a more narrow version passed. But that didn't stop the administration from acting as if the first one made it through, no problem.

Well, the White House is arguing that the authorization for use of force in Afghanistan is what gives Bush the legal authority to reinterpret the only law governing the process of spying domestically.

Guess what they're talking about in USA Today?

The congressional debate and vote took place Sept. 14, 2001, as the nation reeled from the attacks on New York City and Washington, D.C. It was the day Bush went to Ground Zero and, using a borrowed bullhorn, told workers there that "the people who knocked down these buildings will hear all of us soon!"

On Capitol Hill, the White House proposed a resolution that would give the president authority to "deter and prevent any related future acts of terrorism and aggression against the United States." Members from both parties objected that the language was too broad.

"It would have given him authority to do anything he wanted, anytime, anywhere," recalls Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore. The wording was revised.

Just like Iraq. They asked for a blank check and acted as if they got it.