Do you feel safer today?
President Bush signed into law on Sunday legislation that broadly expanded the government’s authority to eavesdrop on the international telephone calls and e-mail messages of American citizens without warrants.
I don’t. I liked the system that has been in place for a couple of hundred years that limits the power of one branch of government to act unilaterally.
By changing the legal definition of what is considered “electronic surveillance,” the new law allows the government to eavesdrop on those conversations without warrants — latching on to those giant switches — as long as the target of the government’s surveillance is “reasonably believed” to be overseas.
That isn’t very comforting. It’s even less comforting to know that this legislation was rushed through so that our legislators could get out of Washington in a hurry.
The legislation to change the surveillance act was rushed through both the House and Senate in the last days before the August recess began.
If there is one thing the American people should fear more than terrorism, it is legislation passed in the heat of the moment giving the government more power to invade our privacy and limit our freedoms.
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. Ben Franklin
UPDATED WITH GRATUITOUS EDITORIAL SNARK FROM BENZION
If Ben Franklin were alive today, he might say:
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserBOOOOOOMMMM!!!
[Shouts of 'Allahu Akbar!' in background as jihadis dance around in Benjamin Franklin's blood, holding his severed head aloft for the cameras.]
UPDATED WITH SATIRICAL EDITORIAL SNARK FROM HAMOUS
Wrong. If Ben Franklin were alive today he’d be clawing on the coffin door screaming, “Get me out of this damn thing!”
Filed Under Uncategorized ·
So, we should do what?
This is temporary legislation. The Dems didn’t want to go on vacation and have a terrorist attack occur without some sort of legislation, thereby giving the Repubs ammo to blame them. From the WaPo:
I am with you bigjolly!
Yo hamous…What luck for rulers!
Ok, Dolphy. Did you hear me say anything about whether I agree with the legislation? Did you miss the part about how the legislation expires in six months? It’s the part in bold.
Well, how do you catch them? The terrorists, that is? If we can’t monitor calls FROM HERE IN THE US.. TO places in the world where they send the marching orders from, what do we do? Cross our fingers? Hope for the best?
Total bunk.
If I have to go through a metal detector and have my bags and my person searched to get on a plane, then what difference does it really make if a phone call I make to Iran gets listened to? Seriously.
I get sick and tired of all of these “slippery slope” people with there “the next step will be…” garbage.
The government listening in on these calls is NOT the same thiing as them coming in and searching my house without a warrant or probable cause. What they do at the airport is closer to that then what this bill does. I’m happy to be searched at the airport and I’ll happily have someone listen to my next call to Saudi Arabia.
I don’t worry about the “slippery slopes”, I worry about my actual rights being violated, which includes a bomb going off in the restaurant where I’m enjoying dinner with my family.
Anyone who actually believes that the automatic next step to this bill is having the government put cameras in your home is a STUPID PARANOID NUTJOB (with emphasis added).
“At What Price”? The price of me having a better chance of not getting blown up in an airplane while going on a business trip is the security at the airport. If part of the price of not getting blown up while shopping is having phone calls to foreigners listened to, where is my check book?
It’ll be just fine until Hillary takes over. Talk about political prisioners - she’ll rank right up there with Saddam I’ll bet.
I don’t think they are going to listen in to anyone talking to grandma.
From the article:
“For example, if a person in Indianapolis calls someone in London, the National Security Agency can eavesdrop on that conversation without a warrant, as long as the N.S.A.’s target is the person in London.”
What is wrong with that? By the time they get a warrant, the call will be over. We have to play by rules against an enemy that can do whatever they want.
Hey atleast we are in good company.
Sorry Pete. The FISA courts have a purpose. We are either free or not free. We either have a Bill of Rights or not.
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/08/04/africa/AF-GEN-Zimbabwe-Surveillance-Law.php
HARARE, Zimbabwe: President Robert Mugabe has approved a law that will give the government sweeping powers to monitor the Internet and mobile and fixed telephones in a country where the independent press has been gagged.
The official Herald newspaper said Saturday that the Interception of Communications Act would allow the government to “sift for information it deems subversive or used for organized crime.”
Quite a bit of difference DJ. Jump to the extreme. But, what would you do? Never heard an answer from the slippery slope side…. Just cross your fingers and hope for the best? DON’T monitor calls going to the parts of the world where terrorists live? Just let them call and send emails however they please? Is that freedom?
I just love the “what if” senarios. “What if” someone violates my right to a private telephone call? “What if” someone listens in as I chew my kid’s butt out for being late getting home the night before. Don’t I have a right to chew in privacy?
But do you have a problem with cameras attached to traffic lights that film you as you as you run that red light? Do you have a problem with having your bags searched at the airport and having to go through a detector before you can board your flight? Do you have a problem with the security cameras that film you, and record your conversation, when you check out at the 7-11?
Where are the search warrents in those cases?
And I am sure that the communist group, the ACLU, is going to now limit their scrutiny to only Boy Scout troops and totally ignore the federal government. If you believe that, I have some ocean front resort property in Abiline to sell you.
Excuse me, but I think your right to plot bombing the movie theater I am in by calling your terrorist friends who are American citizens is trumped by my right to life, liberty and the persuit of happiness.
Correct me if I am wrong, but the original “wiretapping” program was not “wiretapping” at all, just a list of connections between phone numbers. Has anybody read the legislation to see if this new bill is any different?
# 8 Fasternu 426,
I’m with you on this one - I don’t think we can aford not to listen to this type of communication.
Retire05
AMEN! AMEN! AND AMEN!
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Listening to phone calls to foreigners with the belief that there may ba a terrorist link seems very much to me reasonable.
But hey, what about those warrants backed by oath or affirmation?
Where is the supporting oath or affirmation supporting the warrant when I’m being searched to get on a plane? Where are they when I enter a courthouse? Where are they for the women who goes to visit her husband in jail? Where are they when I re-enter the U.S.? Where are they when I go on a militry base?
In today’s world we must give up some rights in order to be safe. If you say we don’t and that all searches and detainments must come with a warrant, then maybe you should sent money to the next set of suspicious Imams held off a plane and questioned without a warrant so that they can sue the airlines.
Here’s the deal: How many of us call overseas a lot? I don’t. How many of us send overseas emails? I don’t, all that often, at least.
The bulk of my international calling or emailing is work-related anyway, and I cannot of necessity consider any calls made from my work phone or emails from my work email account private anyway.
I guess my point is this:
1. I’m not sure I’m giving up any “essential liberty” or losing 4th amendment rights if my call from Texas to Afghanistan is recorded.
2. Emails are NEVER private. Ever. They go over the public Internet, and who actually bothers to encrypt emails to Aunt Sally anyway?
3. Phone calls are only semi-private in the first place as well.
Isn’t it funny how all the Dims (And Rino’s too) were clammering and claiming how BAD the law was, but then they speedily pass this. Watch what they DO and not what they SAY! They know the truth about how effective this program is and are DOING what they aren’t SAYING - protecting their own a……backsides!
I don’t think Ben Franklin knew how technology would evolve or how there actually are people out there who want you dead at any cost. It, personally, doesn’t bother me about the new “electronic surverillance”. I’m not planning any terrorist activity or helping any terrorists. There is so much communication out there, the govenment can only concentrate on communication between suspected terrorists or those associated with terrorists so most of us shouldn’t have anything to worry about. Leave it to the liberal Dimwits to give terrorists more rights than the common citizen. Look at it this way, if your willing to talk on your cellphone in public, how much privacy do you think you deserve????
What is it the Government wants to do? They want to be able to listen in on phone calls place by suspected terrorist outside the United States to persons located inside the United States. Personally, not only do I not see a problem, I would be disappointed that they did not do this.
Last I heard terrorist located outside the United States do not have any Constitutional rights.
Oh NO
Oh NO they are going to listen to me call my brother in GALVESTON! and be bored….
We should ALWAYS have a healthy skepticism about Government.
When did Republicans and conservatives become such scared-y cats?
Heck, let’s just do away with the entire system of warrants, come on in there, Mr. Government Official Sir!
Why does one need a warrant to intercept a call that does not originate in the U.S.?
What is the propblem with our intellegence service listening to calls from suspected terrorist from outside the U.S. to locations inside the U.S.?
Is there not a strong possibility that by listening to calls from suspected terrorist outside the U.S. to persons inside the U.S. we may be able to stop a major terroist act from occuring inside the U.S.?
How loudly will we scream at the failure of government to protect us if another terrorist act occurred because we failed to monitor these phone calls?
What is the alternative? Wait until AFTER something happens? BOOOM! There goes NYC again…. What us the right thing if this isn’t? I have yet to hear an answer, not even a crappy one.
Too much paranoia. Get some nuts!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAPXGuRIXsA
I say bomb the spammers. LOL. Those are terrorists too. Or at the very least obnoxious as all heck!
Who is going to do the monitoring and is this another “goverment” department or is it going to be the responsibility of DHS?
While I certainly do think our civil liberties are important, I don’t think it would be what was on my mind as I lay dying from some fanatic Muslim’s bomb blast. Apparently not all share my sense of priorities though:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/8/6/112523/3173
I mean hey, I might be dead, but at least the government doesn’t know what I’m planning on grilling this weekend. Gotta keep those priorities straight.
This is funny and sad at the same time. If a President Clinton or a President Obama signed this into law you guys would be going crazy. At least BigJolly has some respect for our most basic liberties.
Fastie,
Last time I looked, NYC is still there! Could some terrorist do something similar or worse again?
Probably!
SO WHAT? Have we become a nation of ninnies and wimps?
Going to Afganistan was the right thing to do if for no other reason to demonstrate to the other governments in the area what could happen if they harbor or sponsor terrorists.
Otherwise, my idea of the correct response to Al Quaida and others of their ilk is the following:
“Is that all you have? You hit like a sissy boy! Hit us with you next best shot and see what happens again!”.
All this hand-wringing and posturing about the “War on Terror” does more to encourage the very folk we want to demoralize.
The strength of this country is its ability to take a hit and come back swinging.
Stepping on the personal freedoms that separate us from the rest of the herd is not the way to go. This is no more than Bush-Rovian cheap posturing. Guess who is no longer credible. Perhaps Barbara should have read the tale about the “Boy who cried Wolf” a couple of extra times to little Georgie.
Simple
The government can listen, view, tape or scan your area in anyway they want - they just can’t use the information without a warrant. If you have something to hide or doing something you are worried about then watch out. I have had a FBI file since 1972 and I don’t worry about it. Just like my suppressor and night scope for my rifles I have all the legal permits required from the various government agencies. I would much rather they do this than see my kid’s school blownup or my church sprayed with lead. As for the ml’s keep up the hot air. I am saving pig’s blood and carry pork skins on planes to place in the seats for the Islamic types and they don’t even know it - that is the fun part.
Have a nice day I know I will.
Ummm Houdem,
President Clinton had this same power and used it. Go read the historical facts please.
As did
James Carter
Ronald Reagan
and Bush 1
The difference is this is Bush 2 conducting the surveillances.
# Fasternu 426 Says:
So, we should do what?
Sit on your hands and ask: “So, we should do what?”
Or.. maybe, something like, write every politician that has the power to interfere with your freedoms.
Or.. something!
Or.. anything!..
But, not nothing.
Simple
So I take it that you will defend President Bush when the libs start screaming he failed to protect us, if a nuke goes off in the port of Houston or elsewhere.
I mean we would not want anyone to think we were weenie boys or any thing?
How many of you out there truely believes that their personal freedom is in jepordy because we have people listening to phone calls between suspected terrorist outside the U.S. and possible agents inside the U.S.?
How many of you out there believe that there is a real possiblity of your being killed or your families killed by terrorist?
Apparently so.
Here aregue with Tony Blankley for awhile.
http://video1.washingtontimes.com/fishwrap/2007/08/tony_blankley_on_terrorism_and_1.html
Common sense should be the guiding light to every aspect of our society, especially when dealing with laws. Wonder if dictator, communism, or strict Islamic societies have common sense in their systems, NOT. Where is my freedom of speech when I yell “fire” in the theater or telling a “bomb threat joke” at the airport? The phrase “Slippery Slope” should be carefully weight on the “common sense” scale before used otherwise it could lead to abusive in its significant purpose of warning people about a certain issue. Wonder if there is a “slippery slope” in common sense?
At least you guys and the manly he-men of dailykos aren’t afraid of bombs. You guys are an inspiration to us lowly milquetoast types.
There’s a strawman if I ever heard one…
…but it’s for the children! You don’t want children to get blown up do you?
Sorry. Couldn’t resist.
WWTHDRPD?
(What Would The Honorable Dr. Ron Paul Do?)
Ron Paul would eat you because he is a cannibal….
I have yet to see yelling “fire” in a theater or slander laws take away my ability to criticize Bush or Governor Good-Hair.
I have yet to see the government’s ability to search me without warrant or probable cause at the airport lead to police coming into my house in the middle of the night without them.
Is there something magical about phones and email that will cause these things to happen?
Bigjolly, do you submit to searches at the airport?
#44 is he a C.H.U.D.?
Peter, I have no expectation of privacy at the airport. I’m sorry but I do not see the comparison as applicable.
“write every politician that has the power to interfere with your freedoms.”
And tell them what? What is the alternative to listening in on TERRORISTS OUTSIDE THE COUNTRY TALKING TO THEIR CONTACTS INSIDE THIS ONE?
How has anyone here had their freedoms interfered with by NSA or any other gov’t agency listening to (again) TERRORISTS OUTSIDE THE COUNTRY TALKING TO THEIR CONTACTS INSIDE THIS ONE?
Name one, c’mon, somebody speak up please? And yes, Simple NYC is still there but in case you forgot, there’s a big hole in the ground and 3,000 people lost their lives. The next time it could be worse.
Here’s something for you:
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/188958.php
I guess it’ll take another big smoking hole in the ground and several thousand more bodies to realize that there is really a boogey man out there….
We’re going to be PC’d to death by people that are too scared to do the right thing.
Get some Nuts!
#23 BigJolly
Hmm… I’m not sure… I seem to recall it happening sometime during September of 2001, but I’m not certain of the exact date… did something significant happen around that time?
I recall something that made people angry. I missed the memo on giving up my rights because I’m scared someone is going to hurt me.
When you take a plane, you are an individual citizen doing business with a private company in order to travel freely. Why would you not have an expectation of privacy?
Um, just a wild hair here, but, perhaps because I was in a public place, using public facilities?
I will take Jimb’s advice and read the text of the legislation tonight but it doesn’t seem to me you should be worried about giving up the right to converse with known or suspected terrorists overseas.
All of you who are afraid you are about to have your personal right infringed upon are living in a dream world. Give me 30 minutes and a UT freshman who is computer savvy and I can give you your whole medical history just from your email address. It is called “hacking” and don’t think it is not possible. You already lost any privacy you mistakenly thought you had once this nation started using your Social Security number for your credit.
And using a cell phone that switches band widths, I can sit outside you house and listen to your phone calls on a cordless phone if I can find the right band width.
Here’s a suggestion; if you are afraid the NSA program is going to monitor your phone calls, don’t talk to terrorists who plot our demise. Pretty simple.
How will it effect you? Unless you are making calls to the Hindu Kush mountains to a friend named Ben…..
http://encarta.msn.com/media_461511728_761560851_-1_1/Hindu_Kush_Mountains_Pakistan.html
But, calling North Zulch most likely WON’T get you monitored.
http://www.topix.net/city/north-zulch-tx
I guess waiting for that warrant is more important than knowing what was said from one terrorist to another. They will kill us with our own rules and there are way too many to willingly let them.
retire05, following your logic, if you don’t want to be hacked (which is illegal, btw) don’t go to the doctor.
BTW, did anyone bother to read the bolded type up top? Some people would “reasonably believe” that North Zulch is overseas.
Fastie,
We kill about 30k people per year in alcohol related deaths on American Highways. Thats about 150,000 since 9/11.
I could offer we execute every DUI driver on the side of the road, bomb to smithereens distilleries, or dismantle breweries, however I will not offer such ridiculous solutions.
My feeling is that the USA is a LOT TOUGHER than some of the ninnies I hear blathering in public.
Should attacks go unanswered….NO…but at the same time making a lot of hot wind hoopla like the Bush Administration likes to do for the benefit of the press…well don’t you think it would be a lot better if this sort of thing would be done SECRETLY? I mean, don’t you think that someone if had the ability to assemble a nuclear bomb to blow up a port, well they might be able to READ a newspaper or White House Press Release.
Ergo…my contention that all of this dustup over FISA is nothing more than cheap pandering by panderer in chief…GWB.
I know that if the US Govt announced that it would be listening in on all phone calls and e-mails….well I would find alternative forms of communication were I running a criminal or terrorist (essentially the same thing) organization.
Geez….what a bunch of ninnies!
Simple, in the interest of fairness, I must remind you that this was a Democratic passed bill that went BEYOND what GWB requested.
So, what would you do if it were your decision to make? I have yet to hear any alternative. Is it a law enforcement problem? Why have spies of we don’t use them? Prevention of terror attacks requires foreknowledge, or is it better to just pick up the mess afterwards and shake an angry fist?
http://www.barbneal.com/wav/tvthemes/secretag.wav
Waiting…….
bigjolly, I think it would be hard to make the case that you “reasonably believe” North Zulch, Texas is anywhere BUT the US.
Ohhh, so we have no expectation of privacy in public places? So if you are walking down the street, the police should be able to search you and your effects without probable cause or a warrant?
bigjolly, what I am trying to explain to you is that you have more to fear from a freshman hacker than you do from the NSA program. And if you want to know my medical history, ask me. I have nothing to worry about. Unless you try to steal my blood pressure medicine then you will find out what my temperment is when someone steals from me.
Talk about behind the times; the Clinton did exactly what you are afaid of. They wiretapped even Catholic bishops. And lots of other religious groups. I don’t remember any outrage from the left on how we were all going to lose our rights to privacy over that little deal.
And while you are at it, please quote the part of the Constitution that guarantees you a right to “privacy”. It doesn’t. It says that you are protected against “unreasonable” search and seizure but it doesn’t give you the right to privacy, per se. It is for that very reason that the police can search your car (if the cause is reasonable) without a search warrent.
Peter, you are using a strawman argument. If the police has a reason to suspect you of a crime, they can search you, while on a public street, without a warrant. The search has to be “reasonable”.
Case in point: you are seen running down the street with a bag in your hand and a shop owner is saying “I was just robbed by a guy carrying a bag”. The police has a right to stop you and search you.
Reasonable. Something the left doesn’t comprehend.
retire05, please re-read my post and you will see “probable cause”.
Japs and Nazis would have run all over us while we quibbled about the details.
Hamous, I’ve been to North Zulch. Still not sure it’s in the US.
Fastie,
I have actually found that it is the fear of the unknown that puts one’s enemies off balance.
Telegraphing one’s punches is not a sound strategy (or strategery for you Bush-bots).
Terrorists and terror organizations behave much like criminal organizations. It was possible to cripple (not kill entirely) the five Mafia families of NYC with wiretaps obtained under pre-9/11 guidelines.
Public showing of one’s strengths also exposes one’s weaknesses.
Simple
Yeah, too bad the NYT and Democrats on the NSA oversight committee telegraphed those punches to our enemies last year.
“fear of the unknown”
What unknown? We know who they are and if you call their area code, somebody should listen in. And that violates your freedoms?
Simple
Let me get this straight. You guys are against listening to terrorist suspect call areas (outside of the US) of the world that are full of terrorists. All because you don’t trust our government? The project WAS somewhat of a secret until some do gooding busy bodies at NYT and others thought it was more important to go after the evil regime of Bush-Halliburton-WalMart-McDonalds Cabal. Now you guys would extend every bit of trust towards the terrorists, but our government is not to be trusted?
I really do question our motives, intentions, and sanity.
http://www.barbneal.com/wav/tvthemes/tzone01.wav
Rosie would be proud of you guys….
Not a bad day. I’ve been snarked on the front page twice, been called a “manly KOS guy” and a Rosie-ite.
Not to mention a lefty, a RINO and a strawman bringer upper.
Hmm. Must’ve done something right.
bigjolly - you should go for the coup de grâce. Post a chart showing the correlation of terrorist attacks to the erosion of our civil rights
But my snark was directed at Benzion so you can’t count that one.
Don’t steal my glory.
I’m working on the chart. What kind of tree was that again?
Redbud
Bring on the chart you big, manly koskid you.
8^)
Maybe if we unionized the NSA you’d be happy?
Now that’s some directed snark right there.
How ’bout if we only listen in on pit bull owners?
/I better stop while I’m ahead. He’s a lot bigger than me
Big Jolly and Squawk both have it right.
It is precisely BECAUSE GWB and his administration are not trusted to find their a$$ w/ both hands, let alone make decisions that are weakly conveyed to be in our best interest, the thought of this executive branch of government that not only believes itself to be worthy of our willing sacrifice of ANY rights guaranteed by the constitution, but forces this unwilling act through secrecy is reason enough to WORRY.
Sarge may have his head up Bush’s, Cheney’s and Rove’s a$$ as a good Republican should - but I don’t and never will.
But they’re on opposite sides of the argument.
#84 Exactly
I am glad they passed this bill even for 6 months. If i give someone a thrill with my sexy voice as they listen in, so be it….. and its free too lol
Once again, what rights are actually being given up here?
I guess I just don’t have that ACLU mindset.
If my neighborhood suddenly had a problem with some creepy guys hanging out on playgrounds explaining sex using textbook terminology to small children, and my city council passes some ordinance allowing only parents or guardians of children under 15 on city playgrounds, I’m not about to take it up as a free speech issue and demand the ordinance be removed.
I guess I’m just begging for enslavement…
#87 A 7th grade government refresher:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act
Aw, man, I forgot one. Amend my #73 above to include communist ACLU member. I hate it when I do that.
And thanks to Dude for the correction, “manly KOSkid”, not “manly KOS guy”.
If the executive branch of government through questionable measures had bills passed which called for you to surrender your weapons would you give them up so willingly too?
Liz, I really don’t care if it was GWB, Bill Clinton, JFK, FDR, Abe Lincoln, George Washington or gasp, Ronnie R, I don’t want any of my freedoms taken away because a bunch of people get scared of a bunch of unknowns.
Big Jolly - We agree. Although I do hold a special distrust of Bush 2.
#91 Elizabeth, an 8th grade government refresher: the executive branch of government does not pass bills, the legislative branch does. Your BDS is showing
Wow! Approaching 100 on a non-OC thread and on Monday! And done without Shakey, gregg, or EvilE. How’d that happen?
OK, Liz and BJ. Tell me, which rights or freedoms am I losing here, if Afghanistan calls my house and they listen in or record the call, realize that I’m no terrorist, and move on?
As for emails, they were never private in the first place, so again: What rights am I losing?
Jimb, strawman?
Let’s see. It has nothing to do with Afghanistan. How’s about I call my uncle in Italy? Is he a terrorist? Or he calls me? Do I now get put on a watchlist? If you say no, then you need to remember what fear does to people.
And I encrypt emails routinely. Why should that put me on a watch list?
Nobody said that you should be put on a watch list for encrypting emails. Just saying that in most cases, email is not secure and you have no expectation of privacy when communicating by email.
Other than that, pick a country. Any country. What violations of the 4th amendment is there if someone records that call because one end of it is in another country? How are you not secure in your “person, house, papers, or effects”?
#94 Fine, you anal retentive goofball. “Have bills pushed through….” Happy?
So we are not going to use every available tactic to capture terrorists? This bill is for 6 months. I am for less government except when fighting a war on terror. If this surveilance saves lives, you who cry foul, are going to say let them die? naaa
Look, we can argue endgames all night long. The fact of the matter is that it is settled law that the government has to have a warrant to tap my phone. Now, a new law is passed saying that a warrant is no longer required. Were it not settled law, we would have no need for a new law. Even this administration agreed with this and requested a new law.
I have now lost the requirement that a third party review the government’s need to tap my phone. I have now lost judicial review. I have lost. I have lost. We all lose when we succumb to unknown fear and give up our rights. It matters not that in practice judicial review was often cursory and rubber stamped. I lost.
I’m reading the bill tonight but I think that’s true only if you are calling or being called by a known or suspected terrorist overseas.
In order for any of that information to be used against you, a warrant is still required. I am going to read the bill sometime tonight and expound on that a bit more later.
I guess, other than that, we’ll have to agree to disagree. I’ve never regarded telephone calls to international destinations all that secure/private anyway, and I’m not buying the slippery slope argument in this case. Do I like the idea? Not really, but it is what it is. Even the Dems aren’t running to your rescue on this, apparently. Call me when the jack-booted-thugs are breaking into my house at night.
The bottom line is, this administration has proven itself to be untrustworthy time and time again on matters both miniscule and enormous, yet so many just keep marching blindly ahead, still believing they have your best interest at heart. When ANY government - no matter who the president or what the party majority is - has to be overseen and held accountable to US - who they work for! And this administration side steps that little fact at every opportunity and repeatedly tells us, “It’s none of our business.”
If going along with that is being a good Republican - go right ahead… I’d rather be a good AMERICAN.
#104 Give me concrete examples of where this administration has proven itself to be untrustworthy time and time again. For the sake of brevity, please exclude the Iraq war, since we already know your position there. Also exclude border control since his position on that was well known after his first term as governor.
#105 Okey Dokey Smokey, Let’s start simply, shall we?
HARRIET MIERS
#105 Hammie
Now you tell me what grand things have come to pass during this administration. GWB’s great achievements ( or even some things noteworthy.) You can list them alphabetically if you like…..
tax cuts
Taliban out of power
more tax cuts
Hussein out of power
still more tax cuts
Kadhafi gave up his WMD program
John Roberts
Sam Alito
Harriet Meirs???? Where is she? Is that the best you can come up with?
Harriet Meirs might not have been our choice for a supreme court judge but she is a fine woman! GW knows her better than we do, she is probably ten times better than Ginsburg
I can give you some bad things too if you need some help:
Medicare expansion
NCLB
Not vetoing a single spending bill for seven years
The clinton’s did this very same type of surveillance, didn’t they? Remember the old couple who just happened to hear Newts phone conversation, recorded it and sent it to the DNC? IF we are gonna get freaky, what about all the missing FBI files during the Clinton years? If listening to my phone call can save lives, so be it.
Liz, the only problem with what you’re saying is that it is tainted by BDS, for lack of a better term. Bush has gotten a lot wrong, and he’s gotten a lot right. And you should know without a doubt that “so many just keep marching blindly ahead, still believing” is an incorrect statement.
What gets me is that “so many people” act as if this is the first time we’ve had a president that has made mistakes.
If you ask me, something has shifted/slipped in the American psyche, and for the first time ever, we view “this administration” as having a lock on some special sort of incompetence or evil unparalleled in history. Of course, I only have 19 years of adult life to base it on, but I’ve looked at history and this really seems strange. Is it just me?
Still waiting for your list Hammie…. ZZzzzzzz…
(Nice touch - to say, “Oh, BTW, don’t bring up Iraq (which includes all foreign policy) or illegal immigration.”)
Bet you’re waiting for Tom Delay to return to the good ol’ boy’s club…
Also bet you didn’t inhale either…. so it’s OK.
#114 - ??
Hammie put his list in 108…
#114 Whaaa? I did my list (108) AND yours (111)! You’re really out there tonight. Iraq is the sum total of our foreign policy??? How in the hell did Tom Delay get into this? And for the record, I inhaled like a mofo. But that was long, long, ago in a land far away.
Elizabeth, please try to get some help for your BDS. Because from where I am sitting, it looks to be terminal if unattended.
Now, let’s be very clear. You would not be making this argument in 1942. Roosevelt wiretapped many, many suspected Nazis and he didn’t let the world know it or get permission from the American voter or from Congress. He did what he felt was best for our nation at a time of war, and in case you slept through 9-11, we are at war. Nor do I think that you felt your rights were being threatened when Clinton was wiretapping Catholic bishops because of their anti-abortion stance.
And while you may think that President Bush is a total idiot, he must be smarter than the Congressmen and Senators, including Hillary Clinton, that authorized the use of military force against Saddam by being able to fool them. So if you think Bush is so stupid, how stupid do you think all these people are who are now crying in their beer saying they were “fooled”?
Now let me give you a little background for you to chew on:
in 1978, two patriotic Senators, John Kerry who negotiated with the North Vietnamese in violation of federal law and Teddy Kennedy, who allowed a young woman to drown, were shoving through the FISA which, for the first time in our history, prevented the Executive branch of government from monitoring foreign nationals in our country. And what was Mr. Kennedy doing at the same time? He was in contact with the KGB (of Russia) in order to advance his political career and the wallets of his friends. In ‘80, Kennedy used former Senator John Tunney (D-CA) to send a message to the KGB that he was willing to speak out against Carter and again in ‘83, Kennedy requested a meeting with Yuri Andropov for the purpose of “arming himself [Kennedy] with the Soviet leader’s explanations of the arms control policy so that he can use them later for more convincing speeches in the U.S.” So while Kennedy was trying to limit our ability to monitor foreign agents, he was working with the KGB to undermine the Presidency. Don’t believe me? Research it.
We are at war. There are people in this world that want to remove your head from your shoulders. We need to know who they are and where they are and if means some machine records you talking dirty to your better half, so be it. No one cares what you say. But we do care what Mohammed Islam says to his friends in Tehran. We do care what Muslim imams in the United States are saying to other imams in Saudi Arabia and if you can’t live with that, too damn bad. My right to life trumps your right to some preceived privacy that is not guaranteed by the Constitution. These people don’t give a damn that you don’t like Bush. They don’t care of you are a liberal, an independent or a Republican. You are an American and they want you dead. And if your life is less important to you than knowing that your government is trying to find the bad guys, you are not just suffering from BDS, you are foolish.
Still waiting for your list Lizzie…. ZZzzzzzz…
#108 I apologige - was busy and missed it since it was so insignificant.