so i was reading this, about iran/contra, and found an awesome little section that should frighten and appall (but not shock or surprise) you:
But some members of the Iran-contra committee denounced the committee majority for reaching “hysterical conclusions” about a “grand conspiracy.” No such conspiracy existed, the minority said; instead, the president had just shown a “compassionate, but disproportionate” concern for American citizens held captive in Lebanon. And, in any event, the president was the nation’s “foreign policy leader,” and if he wanted to sell arms to terrorists and never tell Congress about it, well, then, they saluted him. In the future, the president should be more “robust” in defending his “constitutional powers.”
The minority report was signed by a Wyoming representative named Richard Cheney. This was the same Cheney who, as chief of staff in the Ford administration, had tried to obstruct the Church Committee investigation; who believed that presidency must regain the powers it supposedly lost after Watergate.
when i read stuff like this, i obviously get all irate and rant about dick cheney being evil and fascist and whatnot. but sometimes, i think about other things, like the ways in which people try to rationalize and defend their own desire to stay in power. and i don’t just mean cheney – i mean people in general. i’m sure there were many conservative americans in 1987 who totally agreed with cheney, and i’m equally sure those same people (including ol’ dick) would have been outraged – OUTRAGED, i tell you! – had anything of the sort come from a democrat. and i’m sure the reverse is true for some on the left. it’s all about power and holding on to it.
none of this is news, of course. just something i was thinking about…