An Oath to the President or the Constitution?
TPM Muckraker raises an interesting question about former White House aide Sara Taylor's refusal to answer some questions put to her by the Senate Judiciary Committee:
"I took an oath the president, and I take that oath very seriously," Sara Taylor said in answer to a question early in the hearing.And what oath would that be?
And right after a break, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) asked her if she was sure about that. "Did you mean, perhaps, you took an oath to the Constitution?" Leahy asked. It was a telling exchange.When asked by Senator Leahy whether she took a second oath, Ms. Taylor corrected herself, and said she took an oath to the Constitution. It seems that White House appointees have some difficulty understanding the source of their power under our system of government. Senator Leahy helped her clear things up on that point:
"I know that the president refers to the government being his government -- it's not," Leahy reminded her.
posted by Tom Noyes at 7:06 PM
3 Comments:
With this slip from Sara Taylor, and with Monica Goodling administering loyalty exams to DOJ candidates, now I am pretty much convinced there really is a second oath.
I am glad you posted this. For years it has always bothered me every time I heard Bush say words to the effect of : I swore/promised (or my job is) to protect this country/the American people.
I always felt these statements in totality were quite revealing about Bush and his dictatorial disregard for the oath he actually took, not to mention what it unequivocally obliges him to protect.
We have all heard it before : "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States...so help me, God."
Bush has not only ignored but in fact betrayed this oath, worse than any person in our entire history.
As we can see how Mr. Bush's constitutional infidelity has worked out for him, it is becoming obvious God has NOT so helped him...at least not the God he publicly claims to worship.
And we can all thank God for that.
Thanks for your comments. I thought this was one of those telling moments that showed once again how those working for President Bush have no sense of perspective or history beyond "We won, now we can do what we want."
Well, as it turns out, they can't always do what they want; that's why we have divided government with checks and balances.
Our system has survived more than two centuries thanks to these principles, which is why watching a White House aide confuse loyalty to the current president and loyalty to the Constitution is so troubling.
Post a Comment
<< Home