wow...Rex brings up an excellent point and information on an extreme abuse of power and all the conservatives can do is say "blah blah blah?" we villified Clinton for getting a b.j., but will let W slide on this? pretty damn sad if you ask me........
Oh give me a break. He briefed the Democrates on it at least a dozen times and they made on objections. But now that it is an election year and the NYT just came out with the story (which they have been hanging onto for a year) the Democrats now want to get on their high horses. If they had any questions about it they should have said something when they were briefed. And while I think he made a mistake (it would have been easy for him to get a warrant), it is not as serious as some are making it out to be, since the eavesdropping was very limited. He claims he has authority to do it, but I have my doubts. Regardless, I hope whoever leaked the story is prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Even top Democrats say the leak is a serious violation of the law - much more serious than what Bush did.
I agree with much of what you say here, but I am far from convinced that either FISA or the Patriot Act trump the 4th amendment of the Constitution - which is the supreme law of the land. The way to protect the constitution is to adhere to it; not ignore it. The jury is still out as to whether or not he had authority to wiretap or otherwise eavesdrop on the private conversations of American citizens, even if the communications did derived from an overseas source. Both sides seem to have plenty of credible sources to back up their position. I don't see any reason to have any kind of a formal investigation, but somebody needs to look into the matter and see just what authority the president has and does not have regarding FISA.
You compare Clinton, and his actions while in office, to Pres. Bush doing everything that it takes to secure our nation? You're giving Clinton way too much credit. The only response one could possibly make to a statement like that is "Blah, blah, blah, blah". Look at the details of this whole thing. Tell me what is wrong with what has been done. Bush has not broken any laws. He enacted a law that allowed us to do this. It is not political strategist listening to these calls, it's NSA officials. They are not listening to kennedy's and pelosi's calls. The NSA has been monitoring select calls made from, and to, countries that harbor and train terrorist. Since 9/11, there has not been a terrorist attack on our shores. The way I see it Bush and cabinet are doing a great job in that regard. All the left could do after 9/11 is bitch and whine about how Bush had put us in the position to be attacked. Now you say that he is doing too much? What is it with you people? Why does everything have to be political? I guess the left will not be happy until Bush is getting BJ's from rice in the oval office. God, knows that is more important that doing everything he can to protect us and our children. Do you know why everything has to be political to the democrats? Because everything they do is politically motivated. They find it impossible to believe that someone would make a decision based on the best interest of our country. Are they listening to my calls. I doubt it. Would I care? No. I have nothing to hide. Do you? I say that if listening to me talk to someone about LSU can do anything to protect our country from an attack, then listen away.
Well if communism has nothing to do with peoples rights then there never should've been a lack of personal rights in China, N. Korea, the Sovet Union, etc. Communism first started as an economic philosophy but has become a system of totalitarian rule where ordinary people have no rights and those in charge have the right to do whatever the hell they want.
I have nothing to hide from the government either but I don't want them listening into my phone calls. It's a matter of privacy and security in the home and an illegal use of the governments powers, not to mention that it makes a complete mockery of the U.S. Constitution. If the government wanted to get a warrant and listen in on people that is fine with me, because you have to have a good reason for the justice department to issue a warrant. The justice department doesn't just hand out warrants all pimbly-nimbly and is a check on the president's and congress's powers to monitor it's law abiding citizens. Salty, I usually agree with just about everything that you say politically but this is one time that I have to disagree with you and all of the other conservatives (people who are defending bush on this one) because I just don't see how anybody can defend illegal searches and spying.
Easy. It isn't illegal. The power was granted. Can you name a single change that has been implemented by the Bush administration since 9/11 that the dems haven't complained about? I can not think of a single one off the top of my head. Seriously. Everything with them is political. Everything. And when all else fails they just go back to saying that he stole the election. Both of them. Even if a democratic leader was to say something with substance, I wouldn't believe it. At this point I find everything they say or do suspect. Do I like everything about Bush. No. He has really let me down on some issues. I don't believe his stance on illegal immigration is strong enough for one. Hell, it seems like no one in Washington even has a stance on illegals. I see this as a great threat to our national security and believe that Bush's lack of enforcement is politically motivated. See. I can criticize the man. He is not a god in my eyes. I am not some loyal little puppy being led around on a leash. Even though I disagree with him on some issues, I trust him. I believe he is a good man with a good heart and will do the right things for our country. I can't think of many dems that I could say that about. Not today. Not anymore.
But not because they didn't have the ability to surveil whom they saw fit, but because it appears that they ignored numerous warnings. The Feds have always had the capability to spy on the bad guys. And nothing says that the Patriot Act would have prevented 9/11. I'll say it again, the degradation of Constitutionally guaranteed rights in the face of fear is the ultimate victory for terrorism.
Well terrorism has been winning for a long time then. Constitutional rights have always been restricted during times of war - sometimes actions were taken & sometimes they weren't, but the government has had the option. Your thought process sounds more along the lines of people's response to communism than what is currently happening with terrorism.
