- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
The previous poster makes a valid point - that people often won't speak frankly when their remarks are being recorded or otherwise monitored.
However, in this particular case, that argument doesn't wash. First of all, I gather that the idiotic rantings of Rep. Schmidt were broadcast live on C-Span. Not exactly private there. To the contrary, she was all too eager to grandstand in her American flag blouse (what a patriot!) and do her pathetic best to smear a seasoned war veteran when it suited her interests.
Secondly, why should the deliberative proceedings of our politicians (if that's what you want to politely call the hog-wallow of Washington) be exempt from the panopticon? The powerful feel utterly entitled to constantly spy on the rabble, which is consonant with Congress's habit of exempting itself from laws it passes for everyone else. (This happened under Democrats as well as Republicans.) This is the rare case when society's omnipresent surveillance can be used against our lame-brained taskmasters. Enjoy the rush.
Defeat is too good for Rep. Schmidt. She should be sent to Iraq immediately following the elections with the inadequate body armor and other provisions that her fellow Republicans have seen fit to bestow - or not - on our soldiers. She is an utter disgrace to the country, or what's left of it. It boggles the mind that there many - SO many - just like her.
