Democrats are accustomed to being attacked by this administration. Our war veterans are labeled cowards, our values are bent and mischaracterized, our patriotism is constantly questioned, and our every criticism is met with some reference to 9/11. But, it appears to be the Republicans’ turn to feel the lash. Rather than apologize for going around Congress to illegally spy on American war protesters, or to listen in on our electronic communications, the administration is painting its critics as weak on defense. And, since this is an election year, they are effectively asking the GOP to take up their talking points and back up their ludicrous justifications.

The New York Times reports:

With a campaign of high-profile national security events set for the next three days, following Karl Rove’s blistering speech to Republicans on Friday, the White House has effectively declared that it views its controversial secret surveillance program not as a political liability but as an asset, a way to attack Democrats and re-establish President Bush’s standing after a difficult year.

Whether the White House can succeed depends very much, members of both parties say, on its success in framing a complicated debate when the country is torn between its historic aversion to governmental intrusion and its recent fear of terrorist attacks at home.

The Times goes on to note how successfully the GOP has framed the debates over the Patriot Act and the Homeland Security Department. We know how they do it. Overly simplified rhetoric is repeated endlessly by all the various outlets of the mighty right-wing wurlitzer. But, to be successful, the wurlitzer must be firing on all cylinders. That is simply not the case right now.

Georgia10 does a good round up of the conservative skepticism:

Yet right-wing propagandists lie and claim not only is Bush’s spying program wildly popular among Americans, but that it’s just unpatriotic, Osama-lovin’ liberals who are calling for an investigation of the program.  But the fact that the nation’s leading conservatives are speaking out against Bush  is undeniable:

  • Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC): “I don’t know of any legal basis to go around [FISA].”
  • Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA):  “There is no doubt that this is inappropriate.”
  • Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS): “I am troubled by what the basis for the grounds that the administration says that they did these on, the legal basis, and I think we need to look at that far more broadly and understand it a great deal….
  • Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN): “I [want hearings]. I think this is an appropriate time, without going back and should the president have ever tried to listen to a call coming from Afghanistan, probably of course. And in the first few weeks we made many concessions in the Congress because we were at war and we were under attack. We still have the possibility of that going on so we don’t want to obviate all of this, but I think we want to see what in the course of time really works best and the FISA Act has worked pretty well from the time of President Carter’s day to the current time.”
  • Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE):”No president is ever above the law. … We are a nation of laws. You cannot avoid or dismiss a law.”

For a long list of other Republican members of Congress who come out against the program, check out Media Matters here.

Don’t forget that the nation’s leading conservatives have spoken out at Bush’s program in unequivocal and blunt terms:

  • Bob Barr: “[F]ederal law still clearly states that intelligence agents must have a court order to conduct electronic surveillance of Americans on these shores. Yet the federal government overstepped the protections of the Constitution and the plain language of FISA to eavesdrop on Americans’ private communication without any judicial checks and without proof that they are involved in terrorism.””
  • Grover Norquist: “Public hearings on this issue are essential to addressing the serious concerns raised by alarming revelations of NSA electronic eavesdropping.”
  • David Keene (Chairman, American Conservative Union): “This is not a partisan issue; it is an issue of safeguarding the fundamental freedoms of all Americans so that future administrations do not interpret our laws in ways that pose constitutional concerns.”

Bush’s spying program is so repulsive to the core of our democracy that even some of his most ardent supporters will not come to his defense. Just as every other time Bush has face criticism from his own party (Social Security, Iraq War) his administration is embarking on a full-blown, campaign style offensive this week. Alberto Gonzales, Deputy National Intelligence Director Mike Hayden, and other officials will flood the airwaves with their empty rhetoric of  a “limited program” which “saves lives.”  The goal is not just to convince Americans and to paint liberals as anti-national-security.  Bush also faces the daunting task of fending off the growing mass of conservatives demanding answers.

I’ve said this before and I’ll keep saying it. There is no way that the NSA program was limited to spying on known al-Qaeda members’ phone calls to American citizens. If it were limited to that there never would have been a need to go around the FISA court. If it were limited to that, there would not have been 10 or more NSA employees so outraged that they felt the need to leak to the New York Times. If it were limited to that, the President would have been able to convince the New York Times not to run the story.

The NSA program was clearly targeted at people that the NSA employees thought there was no legal justification to spy on. It’s obvious. And if this were not the case the President and Karl Rove would have already put the issue to bed. They would not be seeing the likes of Grover Norquist signing petitions for Patriots to Restore Checks and Balances.

I’m used to being told to take my concerns and shove them up my ass. But what happens when you tell large swaths of your base to go get fucked?

Will the principled Republicans back down?

Is this a case of Karl Rove deciding “the best defense is a good offense?”

I don’t know, but it looks like they are forcing a constitutional showdown onto their own party. And we are only too happy to join in the fray.