Why is it that such a large majority of Republicans were in favor of NSA spying when President George W. Bush was in office, yet feel that current President Barack Obama should be impeached over it, and why were so many Democrats against NSA spying when Bush was president, yet are suddenly in favor of it now that Obama is the man in charge?
The only line of reasoning where this would make any sense to me is if we put impeachment off the table and just think about things from a trust and approval standpoint. Most Republicans trusted and approved of then President George W. Bush, so they weren't as paranoid about being spied upon as they are under Democratic President Barack Obama, and vice versa for most Democrats.
When we include the word impeachment, then that before-mentioned line of reasoning can be crumpled up and thrown in the trash.
Republicans
Before 2009: "Bush shouldn't be impeached for NSA spying."
2009-present: "Obama should be impeached for NSA spying."
Democrats
Before 2009: "Bush should be impeached for NSA spying."
2009-present: "Obama shouldn't be impeached for NSA spying."
It's all about consistency. If two men commit the same questionable act, should they not receive the same fate? What if these were heinous crimes? The two parties' (lack of) logic and hypocrisy would look like this:
Republicans
Rape occurring before 2009: "Let the guy go! She was wearing those sexy sweatpants and was asking for it!"
Rape occurring between 2009 and today: "Lock him up! For life! What the hell was his problem? She was wearing those nasty sweatpants!"
Democrats
Murder occurring before 2009: "Two words - fry 'em!"
Murder occurring between 2009 and today: "Well, he said he was sorry, that he's found Jesus, and seems to be a nice guy. Let's give him another chance. What would Jesus do?"
The only line of reasoning where this would make any sense to me is if we put impeachment off the table and just think about things from a trust and approval standpoint. Most Republicans trusted and approved of then President George W. Bush, so they weren't as paranoid about being spied upon as they are under Democratic President Barack Obama, and vice versa for most Democrats.
When we include the word impeachment, then that before-mentioned line of reasoning can be crumpled up and thrown in the trash.
Republicans
Before 2009: "Bush shouldn't be impeached for NSA spying."
2009-present: "Obama should be impeached for NSA spying."
Democrats
Before 2009: "Bush should be impeached for NSA spying."
2009-present: "Obama shouldn't be impeached for NSA spying."
It's all about consistency. If two men commit the same questionable act, should they not receive the same fate? What if these were heinous crimes? The two parties' (lack of) logic and hypocrisy would look like this:
Republicans
Rape occurring before 2009: "Let the guy go! She was wearing those sexy sweatpants and was asking for it!"
Rape occurring between 2009 and today: "Lock him up! For life! What the hell was his problem? She was wearing those nasty sweatpants!"
Democrats
Murder occurring before 2009: "Two words - fry 'em!"
Murder occurring between 2009 and today: "Well, he said he was sorry, that he's found Jesus, and seems to be a nice guy. Let's give him another chance. What would Jesus do?"
Comments
Post a Comment