Kit’s not "answering" anybody

Those who have read my scribblings for a while will know that I’ve come down hard on one Kit Jarrell, who writes over at Euphoric Reality. Kit’s never done anything particularly nasty to me, and I bear her no personal ill will. But she is representative of the worst of political discourse as it is practiced by the right today: jingoistic, intolerant, bigoted, ready to advocate the mass murder of civilians (especially Islamic civilians) at the drop of a hat. And like most of her ilk, Kit cannot bring herself to address the actual arguments being made against the foreign and domestic policies of Our Sainted President.

Kit’s recent screed entitled Answering the Left About Liberty is a typical example of the sort of obfuscatory, dishonest rhetoric employed by the right in these times. Kit tries to make the case that a quote from Benjamin Franklin (“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”) isn’t relevant to arguments against Bush’s illegal wiretaps. She also claims to be “answering” the use of this quote in said arguments. Unfortunately, her own argument fails on several points — not least of which is that it is factually wrong.

Speaking of the preamble to the Consititution, Kit tells us that

“Securing the blessings of liberty” is the last reason mentioned.

Kit seems to be implying that liberty is the least important reason that the US was created.

Is it any coincidence that the right to bear arms was the 2nd Amendment made?

The Second Amendment does not trump the amendments listed after it. Nor do ‘executive privilege’ or ‘the inherent powers of the Presidency’ trump those amendments — most especially not the Fourth Amendment, which specifically guards against unreasonable searches and seizures.

The government has no reason to “spy on” regular Americans such as you and I, and frankly, they don’t have the time, personnel, or inclination.

Yet that is exactly what the Bush administration is doing: spying on domestic political opponents and wasting resources and manpower on thousands of worthless leads

Kit asks a rhetorical question:

Are you willing to sacrifice thousands of American civilians simply to protect those who would do us harm?

This is simply another steaming pile of bullshit. The concerns that have been raised regarding the administration’s use of illegal warrantless wiretaps are not about “protecting those who would do us harm”. The concerns raised by Democrats and Republicans alike go to the very core of what this nation is supposed to be: a nation ruled by laws, not men. Are you, Kit, willing to throw away the rule of law simply to make a pretense of fighting terrorism?

Liberals would counter, “What about the military? You’d sacrifice them, all right!” ... Many who believe the wiretapping program is wrong would be the first to jump up in defense of abortion…’

Note that Kit doesn’t bother to actually cite any real arguments against the illegal wiretaps. No, a couple of Kit-invented straw men are all she has the courage to take on.

And, of course, it’s very clear that Bush is already sacrificing the miltary. Marines are dying from lack of body armor. And the 2006 budget submitted by the White House will eventually cause some 600,000 retirees to be dropped from the military’s healthcare program, as well as raise healthcare premiums for veterans. Support the troops, indeed.

We’re waiting, Kit. Point out to us all these “liberals” who have said that terrorists should be protected? Who are they, Kit? What have they actually said? Who actually argues that terrorists should not be wiretapped?

No one. Not one damn American believes that, Kit. Just stop the lying.