New Poll: Majority of Americans Disapprove of Bush’s Warrantless Wiretapping
New Poll: Majority of Americans Disapprove of Bush’s Warrantless Wiretapping
A little more than a week ago, the right-wingers heralded the results of a poll that they claimed showed a majority of Americans supporting Bush’s illegal warrantless wiretapping policy. Here’s what that poll found:
Sixty-four percent (64%) of Americans believe the National Security Agency (NSA) should be allowed to intercept telephone conversations between terrorism suspects in other countries and people living in the United States.
Michelle Malkin used the poll results to suggest “America Is OK With NSA.” Redstate and the National Review also celebrated the results.
But there was a big problem with the poll question — it failed to say that President Bush was conducting the wiretapping without a warrant. Today, a new AP poll was released showing what Americans truly think of Bush’s policy:
56 percent of respondents in an AP-Ipsos poll said the government should be required to first get a court warrant to eavesdrop on the overseas calls and e-mails of U.S. citizens when those communications are believed to be tied to terrorism.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
I guess we disapprove because it’s ILLEGAL. Impeach the bastards before they destroy our country.
January 7th, 2006 at 4:49 pmwriting as an overseas e-mailer (I know it’s in reverse) this is a serious question, how does the Bush Administration define ‘tied to terrorism’?
January 7th, 2006 at 4:56 pmGary, the answer to your question is “any way they want.” Thank goodness Americans see the problem with Bush’s policy. We need to increase that number.
January 7th, 2006 at 4:59 pmREAD THIS FROM THE CHICAGO SUN TIMES IF YOU WANT YOUR JAW TO DROP OFF…..CONCERNING YOUR RIGHT TO ( NOT ) PRIVACY
January 7th, 2006 at 5:00 pmMy high school students, usually indifferent to current political affairs, were actually incensed when I told them that Bush was wiretapping American citizens without the required warrants… If this offends teenagers generally entralled with only their iPods and local gossip, then how does it miss 44% of polled grown adults?
January 7th, 2006 at 5:00 pmRE POST NO. 4 – LINK FOR CHICAGO SUN ARTICLE
http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-privacy05.html
January 7th, 2006 at 5:02 pmWhy is there any question as to the error(evil?) of the Bush/Rove/Cheney policy RE:wiretaps? He has had legal means to do the same thing all along.
January 7th, 2006 at 5:02 pmFINALLY POSTED CORRECTLY.
READ THIS FROM THE CHICAGO SUN TIMES IF YOU WANT YOUR JAW TO DROP OFF…..CONCERNING YOUR RIGHT TO ( NOT ) PRIVACY
http://www.suntimes.com/ output/ news/ cst-nws-privacy05.html
January 7th, 2006 at 5:03 pmSuzanne – that is yet another Orwellian step deeper into the invasion of our privacy, and the erosion of our civil rights. Anything to make a buck… Absolutely anything…
January 7th, 2006 at 5:05 pmThe results are a little different when the question is asked properly.
January 7th, 2006 at 5:06 pmTHE POLL IS STILL FLAWED! AP should have said should the president be required to obtain a warrant – keeping in mind that the president can apply for one 72 hours later.
The 72 hours would have bumped it up about 10 points.
January 7th, 2006 at 5:19 pmJames,
How about adding.
Knowing that the FISA court has only turned down 4-5 warrant request since 1978.
I am sure that would add another 10.
January 7th, 2006 at 5:23 pmLet me trying that again:
Knowing that the FISA court has only turned down 4-5 warrant requests, out of nearly 19,000 total requests, since 1978.
January 7th, 2006 at 5:24 pmMy high school students, usually indifferent to current political affairs, were actually incensed when I told them that Bush was wiretapping American citizens without the required warrants…
Personally, I’d be pretty incensed if you bring your politics into the classroom (especially if my child was in your class) … “wiretapping without the required warrants” is most certainly only one side of the story … if I were a teacher, would it be OK for me to say “wiretapping suspected terrorists is completely legal” thus entirely defining the issue by the way I interpreted it … of course not. There are legitimite reasons for believing the eavesdropping to be illegal … I cede this, but even if you were a political science teacher, is it your place to bring this up … knowing full well that they would likely take your side (some may not) because you are in a position of trust. Why not allow the students to debate the item back and forth without your personal opinion tainting either side … that way, they gain valuable experience from intelligently stating and supporting a claim and are allowed to arrive at their own conclusion … from this small case it would seem you’re less interested in education than ideological advocacy … what gives?
January 7th, 2006 at 5:27 pmNow I think the wingnuttery will claim
January 7th, 2006 at 5:28 pmthat polls mean nothing AGAIN.
Must be a drag to have to contradict yourself
ever other day, but when you spin one lie
after another to help the “boy-king”, it
is a predictable occupational hazard.
Gee, I don’t understand why “rule of law”
January 7th, 2006 at 5:30 pmconfuses wingnuts so much.
It must be hard when teaching the constitution
must be considered slanted because Chimpy
doesn’t follow it.
Just to make things clear:
January 7th, 2006 at 5:34 pmThe law is more important than Chimpy.
Sorry that your hero is a zero, but
the country is free and honorable because
of the rule of law.
Giacomo,
Actually, George Bush admitted to “wiretapping without a warrant” on national TV. At this point in time, every single person on the face of the Planet knows he admitted to doing it.
So, it is the ONLY side to the story. The left did not make this up. George Bush admitted to it. Warrantless wiretapping DID happen. The question is if it is legal or illegal. There is no other side to this story.
January 7th, 2006 at 5:35 pmAdding the 4-5 denials would be helpful, although it could be claimed such an addition is biased as it doesn’t also mention that warrants have been modified, etc.
The 72 hour deal just makes people realize that the government can act as fast as they like.
Thinkprogress, through their parent organization, has the funds to conduct such a poll (contracted through Zogby, etc). It would be nice if they did that – it’d likely hit the MSM.
January 7th, 2006 at 5:36 pmIt would likely hit the MSM (thinkprogress parent doing such a poll) simply because the numbers would be in the mid to high 60s range. That isn’t exactly something you can ignore – completely.
January 7th, 2006 at 5:38 pmThe results are a little different when the question is asked properly.
Spudge, I know you’re a bright individual … would you not cede that the answers to most poll often reflect the manner of the question?
Example
Do you feel it’s appropriate for President Bush to protect the United States from terrorist attack by eavesdropping on suspected terrorist calls without a warrant or not?
Any time you ask something and then a “or not”, most people go with the something … especially if you taint the question with “patriotic” language. I know this didn’t happen with the first poll, but it often does.
or
Do you feel that it is illegal for the US government to eavesdrop on American citizens without a warrant, even if those individuals might be in contact with suspected terrorists, or not?
Similar question … likely different answers. It’s why I tend to not put a lot of stock in opinion polls b/c they are rarely asked in a neutral manner and two similar polls can get completely different results … as we’ve seen here. Not to mention sample size, geographical location of the pollees, etc. …
January 7th, 2006 at 5:38 pmActually, George Bush admitted to “wiretapping without a warrant†on national TV. At this point in time, every single person on the face of the Planet knows he admitted to doing it.
You left out part of unbelievables comment … the one word that taints the comment … “required” …
Bush asmitted to eavesdropping sans warrant, but to say that they are required in this case is to mislead what Bush actually said, isn’t it. He claims it’s legal.
If she said Bush is wiretapping without warrants … he says it’s legal but others say it’s not … let’s discuss the different sides and the factors that come into play” … it could be a huge learning excercie … if she made the statement as she posted here earlier, it wasn’t a debate … it was a turkey shoot.
January 7th, 2006 at 5:42 pmSee, you are changing our question to make your point.
Here is our question:
Because that is THE question.
January 7th, 2006 at 5:42 pmGiacomo,
Yes, George Bush “claims it’s legal,” but that doesn’t change the fact that it is not.
January 7th, 2006 at 5:43 pm“But there was a big problem with the poll question — it failed to say that President Bush was conducting the wiretapping without a warrant.” Text by Faiz –
January 7th, 2006 at 5:43 pm*****While you’re busy repeating this info, I will busy myself and repeat that anybody who is not aware of the warrantless searches of people in the US receiving Al Qaeda calls does not deserve to be polled. (As astute as you are, you know this story has been prominently featured on the nightly news since December 16.)
their sample makeups are pretty much the same – which still means those of us that stick with cells are not included as well as those who choose not to participate. That still makes for samples that are relatively equivalent.
They know the sample size they need – it’s basic statistics – and they follow it.
The main issue, as you say, is the wording of the question. Neutral questions must be asked, any others are simply biased noise.
Fox tends to ask the most leading questions – but not by much. As for ‘different’ results – are just as biased as each other. One has no mention of warrants. That’s all. The ‘warrant’ inclusion accounts for the jump, not a leading question relative to the first.
As for most polls, they are within the sampling standard error. As you likely know, sample sizes are picked with the maximum allowable error (at a given confidence level) allowable. They pretty much all tend to fall within the same error zones.
January 7th, 2006 at 5:44 pmSee, I told you the wingnuts would
claim polls don’t matter.
It’s why I tend to not put a lot of stock in opinion polls b/c they are rarely asked in a neutral manner and two similar polls can get completely different results … as we’ve seen here. Not to mention sample size, geographical location of the pollees, etc. …
January 7th, 2006 at 5:45 pmPersonally, I’d be pretty incensed if you bring your politics into the classroom (especially if my child was in your class) … “wiretapping without the required warrants†is most certainly only one side of the story … if I were a teacher, would it be OK for me to say “wiretapping suspected terrorists is completely legal†thus entirely defining the issue by the way I interpreted it … of course not. There are legitimite reasons for believing the eavesdropping to be illegal … I cede this, but even if you were a political science teacher, is it your place to bring this up … knowing full well that they would likely take your side (some may not) because you are in a position of trust. Why not allow the students to debate the item back and forth without your personal opinion tainting either side … that way, they gain valuable experience from intelligently stating and supporting a claim and are allowed to arrive at their own conclusion … from this small case it would seem you’re less interested in education than ideological advocacy … what gives?
Comment by Giacomo — January 7, 2006 @ 5:27 pm
You’re just pissed off that I think your religion is delusional.
There’s a thing called ‘current events’. I know you’ve never heard of it… but I give them an opportunity to talk about what’s going on in the world they are about to enter. Of course you’d be pissed off, you want your progeny to only believe what you believe. How dare they hear another side of the argument – or even worse – GASP! the truth!!
January 7th, 2006 at 5:49 pmSpudgeboy: overseas calls should be modified to incoming or outgoing. (same with email).
“knowing that the FISA court has only turned down 4-5 warrant requests, out of nearly 19,000 total requests, since 1978?”
This is the part that might be a problem. It makes the question long and the idea is to keep it short. I think it might get people to focus more on that last piece.
The FISA court would also have to be reworded to ‘the special secret court that approves such warrants’ or some similar thing. Most people don’t know there is a FISA court or what it is.
I’d still ask the full question – I do feel the 4-5 day part is relevent – simply because it is no more biased than other polls out there.
I would guess that you would get a 65-68 percent disapproval on such a question. At least.
January 7th, 2006 at 5:49 pmIs that what was asked? If so, do you see how most respondents would side with the positive in that case … ask that same question but like this …
Reverse the order of the questions if you like, but both sides need to be spelled out succinctly.
January 7th, 2006 at 5:50 pmWow, I agree with mighty aphrodite!!
I agree 100% with this. There are people out there who are completely out of touch with what is giong on in this country. And no I am not taking a shot at right wingers. I am talking about peolpe that don’t vote, are not conservative or liberal.
Those people should not be polled, as they don’t have an opinion. Not because they aren’t smart enough. They choose to not care about politics.
January 7th, 2006 at 5:50 pmJudd/Faiz – Could your parent organization afford such a contract poll (ie outsource it to Zogby to gain the needed credibility *plus* the fact that it would be available on his web site and picked up)? It would seem a worthy use of funds – 70 percent disapproval ratings are a bit more than even Bush can stand.
January 7th, 2006 at 5:52 pmI think Americans are suspicious of the government.
January 7th, 2006 at 5:53 pmThe sissy-Mary neo-con fear everything con-job is getting
pretty weak these days.
Grow up and realize that the founding fathers
were worried about fascists like Chimpy
when they wrote the constitution.
With all due respect, Giacomo, it doesn’t matter the excuse, the President violated the law. He publically stated that he approved of the wiretaps without obtaining a warrant. Another blogger also brought up the fact that Bush’s excuse that he has done so because ‘we are at war’ is a fallacy. Only the Congress can enact the war powers (which they have not) AND what about the bs on the USS Abraham Lincoln?
I’m glad to see teachers talking to their students about this! They will be voting members of our country very soon and they need to get involved. We all need to get involved. It’s not about simply electing someone and them ‘doing their job while I do mine’. It’s only so apparent now that we need to be diligent about sustaining contact with our elected leaders so that they understand we’re not going to be duped any longer.
Had Bush not wanted to piss all over the law and our Constitution, he would have played by the law. Remember, he’s the one that calls the Constitution a “goddamned piece of paper”.
January 7th, 2006 at 5:53 pmGiacomo,
I could even go with that question. WHy? because it focuses on US Citizen’s right and not the fear mongering “terrorist” crap.
I agreed with mighty aphrodite and Giacomo back to back. Uh oh. :)
January 7th, 2006 at 5:54 pmOK, what’s going on here?? I have tried 3 times to post a link to this site and I have not been able to!
Is it TP or is it Big Brother?
January 7th, 2006 at 5:55 pmWhy not allow the students to debate the item back and forth without your personal opinion tainting either side … that way, they gain valuable experience from intelligently stating and supporting a claim and are allowed to arrive at their own conclusion … from this small case it would seem you’re less interested in education than ideological advocacy … what gives?
Comment by Giacomo — January 7, 2006 @ 5:27 pm
Yeah, that’s how teaching works… I forgot, you know EVERYTHING! What was I thinking, I should have asked YOU how to do my job instead of the actual Education System and people in it with hundreds of years of prior experience.
Children aren’t as gullable or stupid as you think they are. If anything, they think they aren’t challenged enough or gieven enough credit to think for themselves. They always challenge me, so I frequently challenge them, and they love it. But they no more swallow things hook line and sinker just because an adult tells them something. In reality, they routinely complain about other teachers who they think are pulling something over on the kids. I’d recommend you do some research on that, but by now, we all know that all you have to offer is speculation and conjecture of how you think it should be, and aren’t willing to consider anything but your own two cents.
January 7th, 2006 at 5:56 pmthey should be polled just because they vote or have the potential to vote. Excluding a segment of the population – one that has more republican leaning folks in it – discredits an entire poll – especially in the eyes of the policy makers.
Question #2 should be something regarding to – “If the Supreme Court (people trust it a bit more than lower courts) rules such actions to be illegal, should George Bush be impeached?”
Question #3 (conditional on #2): “If not, do you think President Clinton should have been impeached?” :)
January 7th, 2006 at 5:56 pmYou’re just pissed off that I think your religion is delusional.
Nah … you’re certainly not the only one to think that … I’d hardly be able to function if I got angry whenever someone disagreed with me …
There’s a thing called ‘current events’. I know you’ve never heard of it… but I give them an opportunity to talk about what’s going on in the world they are about to enter. Of course you’d be pissed off, you want your progeny to only believe what you believe. How dare they hear another side of the argument – or even worse – GASP! the truth!!
I’m all for current events … by all means allow them to talk, but why taint their conversation with your opinion. If there’s one thing I’ve learned about parenting, it’s that I can’t control what my children believes … I can certainly teach them to be good citizens and Christians as best I can, but if I’m poor at either, they’d eventually see right through me and reject everything (or most) of what I taught or said. I want them to hear the other side … 100% of the time … I never would shy away from honest and open debate … they’d be morons then. From your quote though, your students didn’t hear the “other side” … they heard “your side” … big difference … don’t get all pissy because I called you on it.
Again, I’ll ask. Would you be Ok with another teacher tainting the question in a pro-Bush manner … i think not (and neither would I by the way), because it’s thinking for the students and not allowing them to think for themselves. I know you understand what I’m driving at … I wonder if you’ll agree or just keep swiping at me defensively.
January 7th, 2006 at 5:56 pm#5 – “My high school students, usually indifferent to current political affairs, were actually incensed when I told them that Bush was wiretapping American citizens without the required warrants…”…in the meantime, I had to give the kids in my basket weaving class a gentlewoman’s ‘C’ because I wasted so much valuable time imparting THE “correct” knowledge to the future basket weavers of the world.
When I heard the various organizations the NEA supports and the infliction of your take on current events with your students, I’m THRILLED Mr. Aphrodite and I had the wherewithal NOT to subject our kids to public schools.
January 7th, 2006 at 5:57 pmIf she said Bush is wiretapping without warrants … he says it’s legal but others say it’s not … let’s discuss the different sides and the factors that come into play†… it could be a huge learning excercie … if she made the statement as she posted here earlier, it wasn’t a debate … it was a turkey shoot.
Comment by Giacomo — January 7, 2006 @ 5:42 pm
I love how you know the entire context of my conversation in that classroom based on a brief synopsis I posted here two days afterward. Stop trying to turn this into something it isn’t.
January 7th, 2006 at 5:59 pmLisa,
You are 100% correct. Politics should be talked about in school. DO we just kids be uninformed about any of the issues and then when they graduate, they are expected to vote when they are 18.
Give me a break. Politics are a public affair. The schools are funded by the federal government. Therefore what the federal government does IS important.
The children in California schools need to know about how Arnold has removed so much funding that my kids last school had to drop band. BAND!!! The kids need to know that a republican governor did that too them and that the Terminator is just that, part of an evil machine.
January 7th, 2006 at 5:59 pmthe bottom line is: people DO NOT want their phones tapped,email tapped, or any of it. It invades their freedom of speech,thought,assembly and on and on. There are NO results from it catching the bad guys,because they use OTHER METHODS talk. DUH! Bushie just wants to spy on anyone that doesn’t ‘fall in line’ with his dictatorship. Can it happen in America???…It IS happening. Nixon tried it and failed,and so will bushie. These idiots never learn how to properly use their power. How did bushie find out the paper was going to print the spy story?…HIS SPYS found out, then threatened them so they held it for a YEAR.
January 7th, 2006 at 6:02 pmChildren aren’t as gullable or stupid as you think they are. If anything, they think they aren’t challenged enough or gieven enough credit to think for themselves. They always challenge me, so I frequently challenge them, and they love it. But they no more swallow things hook line and sinker just because an adult tells them something. In reality, they routinely complain about other teachers who they think are pulling something over on the kids. I’d recommend you do some research on that, but by now, we all know that all you have to offer is speculation and conjecture of how you think it should be, and aren’t willing to consider anything but your own two cents.
You won’t say it will you … “I shouldn’t be brining my politics into a public classroom” … it’s not hard. You shouldn’t do it and neither should a republican/conservative. You keep blowing smoke up my proverbial butt with this “children are smart” mantra … of that, I’m well aware.
What I’m asking is why you feel it’s ok to slant your class toward a progressive mindset (in this case … who knows if you always do it … given the BS you keep tossing my way, maybe) … it’s not and you know it. I’m glad they challenge you and vice versa … this case you posted above was no challenge it was shooting fish in a barrell … don’t attack me because I noticed.
January 7th, 2006 at 6:03 pmI’m glad to see teachers talking to their students about this! They will be voting members of our country very soon and they need to get involved. We all need to get involved. It’s not about simply electing someone and them ‘doing their job while I do mine’. It’s only so apparent now that we need to be diligent about sustaining contact with our elected leaders so that they understand we’re not going to be duped any longer.
Comment by Lisa — January 7, 2006 @ 5:53 pm
Thanks Lisa… I appreciate the support. Most of their parents feel the same way, and because they love their children, want them to learn to think for themselves. If you have children of your own, they are fortunate to have a mother who values knowledge and education over blind subservience.
Giacomo is just miffed that he can’t convert me to his religion, so now he’s trying to vilify me. And as usual, it’s backfiring.
January 7th, 2006 at 6:04 pmUnbelievable – keep rockin with your students. Some of them will actually appreciate a teacher who challenged them to see the world with reality than just through a droning textbook. Hopefully, when my child gets into highschool, she’ll have teachers similar to you.
January 7th, 2006 at 6:06 pmby all means allow them to talk, but why taint their conversation with your opinion. If there’s one thing I’ve learned about parenting, it’s that I can’t control what my children believes
Giacomo – you just imploded right here. If you can’t control what they think (which is true), then my opinion doesn’t influence them…
January 7th, 2006 at 6:08 pmFrom your quote though, your students didn’t hear the “other side†… they heard “your side†… big difference … don’t get all pissy because I called you on it.
What other side would that be? You want me to lie to them? That other side? There is no other side…
You’re the pissy one, I’m just stating it like I see it.
January 7th, 2006 at 6:09 pmGiacomo, if you ask the question of students, without making them aware of the law that requires warrants and the ability to get them under FISA, that would be a political statement. Making them aware of the law, and then asking them their opinion on whether the President should be allowed to ignore it, is not.
If you asked me whether handguns should be restricted only to law enforcement personnel and carefully vetted other people with the need, but not allowed to be generally available to the public, I might answer yes, just looking at the amount of gun violence and knowing that handguns aren’t useful for anything other than shooting people. However, knowing that it is a protected right under the US Constitution, I would have to answer no.
January 7th, 2006 at 6:10 pmGiacomo – you just imploded right here. If you can’t control what they think (which is true), then my opinion doesn’t influence them…
Are you saying that I have no influence over my kids and that you have no influence over your classroom? I can’t control what they ultimately think, but I certainly can influence it … I’m sure you can see the difference.
What other side would that be? You want me to lie to them? That other side? There is no other side…
So when 40% to 60% (depending on the poll) of the nation feels differently than you do, somehow you can claim ignorance to the other side … the fact that you can’t allow for another side is what scares me … you’re so ingrained in your own thinking that you can’t even tell when the contrary point of you may be legitimate (notice I said earlier that your side has merit) … wow. Let’s hope you teach math or something empirical and not political science …
January 7th, 2006 at 6:14 pmAgain, I’ll ask. Would you be Ok with another teacher tainting the question in a pro-Bush manner … i think not (and neither would I by the way), because it’s thinking for the students and not allowing them to think for themselves. I know you understand what I’m driving at … I wonder if you’ll agree or just keep swiping at me defensively.
Comment by Giacomo — January 7, 2006 @ 5:56 pm
I do know what your driving at. I always know. I just don’t agree. There are pro-Bush teachers and they do state things in a Pro-Bush way. Just like the local news states things in a Pro-Bush way and I don’t think you’re harrassing them over it. It’s just human nature to have preferences. And it does not bother me (again this is a Progressive forum, I’m not in a conservative one spouting off). Unlike you, I respect the kids’ ability to think and decide for themselves at this age (typically 14-18). They weren’t born yesterday. And the biggest influence in their lives are their parents, not me. That’s the difference here. I don’t believe I can control anyone but myself. And I don’t think children are as gullable as you are infering in your posts.
January 7th, 2006 at 6:14 pmWhen I heard the various organizations the NEA supports and the infliction of your take on current events with your students, I’m THRILLED Mr. Aphrodite and I had the wherewithal NOT to subject our kids to public schools.
Comment by mighty aphrodite — January 7, 2006 @ 5:57 pm
And it will show in 20 years when they are featured on America’s Most Wanted.
January 7th, 2006 at 6:16 pmBack in the late 50’s when I was in high school, there was a course offered, called “Civics”, and I actually took it as an elective. There was parental control so as not to stomp on parental rights, but my folks did not restrict my choice of subjects. In that class, we took a bi-weekly bus trip down to the city library and read the national rags. The rest of the time we discussed items in the two city newspapers affecting city and state government as well as the Constitution and the laws at all levels from local to federal, internationals, and the UN.
January 7th, 2006 at 6:18 pmWhy did W’s parents bar him from a similar experience? I lived in Dallas at the time.
PLEASE, unbelievable and Giacomo, get personal attitudes and presumptions about the other out of this thread. My experience with discussion leading and facilitating leans toward opening the classroom forum with G’s “Bush is wiretapping without warrants … he says it’s legal but others say it’s not … let’s discuss the different sides and the factors that come into play.†While U’s “I told them that Bush was wiretapping American citizens without the required warrants.” is certainly a factual statement and teachers do have to “tell” students things. My approach would have been to open with “Who knows how wiretapping is in the news this week? If no student responds, which sometimes happens, then start off down G’s route. It is encouraging to know that the topic got some play in the classroom. Way to go Ms/Mr U!
January 7th, 2006 at 6:18 pmI do know what your driving at. I always know. I just don’t agree. There are pro-Bush teachers and they do state things in a Pro-Bush way. Just like the local news states things in a Pro-Bush way and I don’t think you’re harrassing them over it. It’s just human nature to have preferences. And it does not bother me (again this is a Progressive forum, I’m not in a conservative one spouting off).
And if they taint the issue, they’re wrong … so are you. 2 wrongs make a right now?
And the biggest influence in their lives are their parents, not me. That’s the difference here. I don’t believe I can control anyone but myself. And I don’t think children are as gullable as you are infering in your posts.
Parents are more influential you’re right … but yet you excuse the tainting of your classroom because 1) everyone else does it and 2) kids are smart. Unbelievable … you are unbelievable. I’ll be sure to tell a Christian to start talking about the Bible in schools because “kids aren’t gullible” … they shouldn’t and you shouldn’t.
January 7th, 2006 at 6:18 pmWhat I’m asking is why you feel it’s ok to slant your class toward a progressive mindset (in this case … who knows if you always do it … given the BS you keep tossing my way, maybe) … it’s not and you know it. I’m glad they challenge you and vice versa … this case you posted above was no challenge it was shooting fish in a barrell … don’t attack me because I noticed.
Comment by Giacomo — January 7, 2006 @ 6:03 pm
Once again you assume the worst in others who don’t think exactly like you. You really should get over that, because everyone your kids come incontact with is trying to sell them something – whether an education, a viewpoint, or even drugs. Don’t kid yourself into thinking I have so much power that I’m corrupting children… I just casually pointed it out in response to a conversation we were having on why Congress is investigating the President.
And I did tell them that 20% of this country will believe anything a ham sandwich says just so as long as it supports their delusions (okay unclench, I’m joking).
January 7th, 2006 at 6:22 pmPublic school is exactly the place where politics should be discussed. Students will be voting soon (or in the army). Having discussions in class in political science, or current events, or civics (do they even teach that any more?)is precisely what a good education should include. Private schools may have their good points, but like home-schooling, the tendency to prosyletize is strong. The country is diverse, and not to teach children as much as possible about all positions of the issues is to do a disservice. Kids must be taught to think for themselves, to think about what they feel and what it means.
January 7th, 2006 at 6:23 pmUnfortunately, the politicians in charge today are more narrowly focused, and public school children are suffering.
Elective classes that make for well-rounded individuals are being eliminated for lack of funds.
To the topic however, when people are asked the question in a clear manner, the answers will undoubtedly reflect that Americans believe that unwarranted eavesdropping and wiretapping is against basic American foundations.
Bush claims that leaking this story has lessened our security somehow, as if the terrorists are idiots who don’t know we are spying on them. Bush is the idiot.
The poll is bogus. The sample is too heavily weighted towards Democrats — 52% Democrat, 40% Republican.
In any case, executive branch powers are not determined by opinion polls.
January 7th, 2006 at 6:26 pm“Once again you assume the worst in others who don’t think exactly like you. ”
LOL Pot-Kettle-Black
January 7th, 2006 at 6:27 pmYou won’t say it will you … “I shouldn’t be brining my politics into a public classroomâ€
You have heard of the Bill of Rights haven’t you? There’s this little thing in there called Freedom of Speech.
The school would rather teachers bring their politics to school (why they offer courses on government, ethics and history in teh first place), than their neurosis. I feel sorry for your kid’s teachers if you getthis bent out of shape about a conversation over something Peeping George actually admitted…
Unbelievable – keep rockin with your students. Some of them will actually appreciate a teacher who challenged them to see the world with reality than just through a droning textbook. Hopefully, when my child gets into highschool, she’ll have teachers similar to you.
Comment by Lisa — January 7, 2006 @ 6:06 pm
Thanks Lisa, you can count on it… while Giacomo loses sleep and begins crafting the Inquistion II for his kid’s school district…
January 7th, 2006 at 6:29 pmWally, you should go and tell the prez that you need to be replaced because your not being successful in your job.
January 7th, 2006 at 6:29 pmRemoveBush, you should bang on the basement door and tell your mommy to let you out into the real world for a while, it’d do you a lot of good.
January 7th, 2006 at 6:30 pmIf unbelievable was my kid’s teacher, I’d tranfer him to another school, and implore the school board to fire her ASAP.
January 7th, 2006 at 6:31 pmPLEASE, unbelievable and Giacomo, get personal attitudes and presumptions about the other out of this thread. My experience with discussion leading and facilitating leans toward opening the classroom forum with G’s “Bush is wiretapping without warrants … he says it’s legal but others say it’s not … let’s discuss the different sides and the factors that come into play.†While U’s “I told them that Bush was wiretapping American citizens without the required warrants.†is certainly a factual statement and teachers do have to “tell†students things. My approach would have been to open with “Who knows how wiretapping is in the news this week? If no student responds, which sometimes happens, then start off down G’s route. It is encouraging to know that the topic got some play in the classroom. Way to go Ms/Mr U!
Comment by David K. — January 7, 2006 @ 6:18 pm
Funny how you did exactly what you criticized… If you don’t like human behavior, you shouldn’t hang around them.
You people need to get a clue. I didn’t post a verbatim conversation, just gave the gist of it. At least I told them the truth.
January 7th, 2006 at 6:33 pmI agree Bush must be Impeached
In the UK were getting there 109 MPs so far I can give you there names http://edmi.parliament.uk/ EDMi/ EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=29437&SESSION=875
if you sort by Party you will see even 21 Labour MP’s
you can start here http://www.impeachblair.org/article26.shtml
and then Click on EARLY DAY MOTION
where in America can I find the equivelant data
January 7th, 2006 at 6:34 pmAnd if they taint the issue, they’re wrong … so are you. 2 wrongs make a right now?
I love how you think you’re some authority on right and wrong. You’re so silly Giacomo… And all the spinning… just because you cannot ever admit you are wrong.
Parents are more influential you’re right … but yet you excuse the tainting of your classroom because 1) everyone else does it and 2) kids are smart. Unbelievable … you are unbelievable. I’ll be sure to tell a Christian to start talking about the Bible in schools because “kids aren’t gullible†… they shouldn’t and you shouldn’t.
Comment by Giacomo — January 7, 2006 @ 6:18 pm
Go right ahead, some of the little Giacomos and Aphrodities of teh world already do it all the time. And the other kids call them names or ignore them. Pretty much exactly like it is in here. And I don’t have to say a word… I can just stand back and watch them work it out themselves. And they will.
January 7th, 2006 at 6:38 pmYou have heard of the Bill of Rights haven’t you? There’s this little thing in there called Freedom of Speech.
That’s your defense? The bill of rights. Keep grasping. “I can slant my class any way I want to because this is America”. I don’t even think you buy that … great, we have a bunch of teachers guiding students down whatever ideological road the teacher holds … who cares about actaully opening their minds to all angles.
The school would rather teachers bring their politics to school (why they offer courses on government, ethics and history in teh first place), than their neurosis. I feel sorry for your kid’s teachers if you getthis bent out of shape about a conversation over something Peeping George actually admitted…
You know exactly why I’m bent out of shape … you’re proselytizing … it’s not about one case … yet you defend it. I bet you’d be pissed if someone told your kid they “were going to hell without Jesus” … thats the extreme example but under your logic, teachers should be allowed to bring their politics and ethics to school … it’s pure BS and you know it.
January 7th, 2006 at 6:39 pmIf unbelievable was my kid’s teacher, I’d tranfer him to another school, and implore the school board to fire her ASAP.
Comment by walllace — January 7, 2006 @ 6:31 pm
Nutcases like this do exist. The Board never sides with them. They know that if they did, THEY would be the next ones fired…
January 7th, 2006 at 6:42 pmThat’s your defense? The bill of rights. Keep grasping. “I can slant my class any way I want to because this is Americaâ€. I don’t even think you buy that … great, we have a bunch of teachers guiding students down whatever ideological road the teacher holds … who cares about actaully opening their minds to all angles.
According to you, that’s what their Pro-Fascism teachers will do, balance me out. Gieacomo, I’m flattered that you think I have so much influence on these kids, (especially for someone who claims to not believe in the Devil), but the reality is that 85% of children will be whatever their parents are. So don’t fret – your kids will mostly likely be fearful little Republicans just like you.
January 7th, 2006 at 6:45 pmI bet you’d be pissed if someone told your kid they “were going to hell without Jesus†…
Comment by Giacomo — January 7, 2006 @ 6:39 pm
Nope. I’m not wound like you. Sticks and stones, Giacomo, it’s all just sticks and stones.
January 7th, 2006 at 6:47 pmWhat I’m asking is why you feel it’s ok to slant your class toward a progressive mindset (in this case … who knows if you always do it … given the BS you keep tossing my way, maybe)
If the facts are “biased” against Chimpy they must be kept out of the classroom. Gotcha.
Why not allow the students to debate the item back and forth without your personal opinion tainting either side … that way, they gain valuable experience from intelligently stating and supporting a claim and are allowed to arrive at their own conclusion
LOL… Fine. Except he hasn’t let “his personal opinion taint either side” by noting the basic facts surrounding this issue.
I’m intrigued by your teaching theories. What do you think of this idea that you gave me? We’ll let the kids debate whether marijuana is bad for you, and allow them to arrive at their own conclusion.
January 7th, 2006 at 6:48 pmI think a better question would have been, “Should the Bush Administration be required to comply with the current law and get a warrant from a judge within 72 hours of monitoring phone and Internet communications between American citizens in the United States and suspected terrorists, or should the government be allowed to monitor such communications without a warrant?”
As it reads now, I’m sure most respondents think he has to WAIT before he gets a warrant to start monitoring calls.
January 7th, 2006 at 6:50 pmInteresting that most Americans oppose wiretapping and that upsets the trolls so much. Funny how much. Guess you burn in Hell or something for being wrong…
Time for dinner… Just worked up an apetite in here.
Have a good evening everyone!
January 7th, 2006 at 6:50 pmAccording to you, that’s what their Pro-Fascism teachers will do, balance me out. Gieacomo, I’m flattered that you think I have so much influence on these kids, (especially for someone who claims to not believe in the Devil), but the reality is that 85% of children will be whatever their parents are. So don’t fret – your kids will mostly likely be fearful little Republicans just like you.
Keep excusing it … “everyone else does it” … “Republicans do it too” … “I can’t really hurt anyone” … “i don’t have the influence, the parents do” … I really can’t believe how many roadblocks you keep erecting.
Say it with me “NO teacher should ever slant a class ideologically, the fact that some do changes nothing” …
Nope. I’m not wound like you. Sticks and stones, Giacomo, it’s all just sticks and stones.
I call BS … the only reason you’re “pro-slant” in the classroom is beacuse you’re the one doing it … if a family member of yours fell victim to it, you’d be pissed off because it’s not right …
If the facts are “biased†against Chimpy they must be kept out of the classroom. Gotcha.
And again … a clear example of why this phenomenon is so dangerous. Because you don’t agree with the opposing viewpoint means the opposing viewpoint is not valid … you have no room for any other ideas that don’t adhere to what you aldready think … how blissfully ignorant.
LOL… Fine. Except he hasn’t let “his personal opinion taint either side†by noting the basic facts surrounding this issue.
“The basic facts” … here it is again. This is the same as saying “the only reality that exists is the reality that I believe in” … all others are wrong or irrelevant. Tell me, where does that “progressive” moniker come from … obviously it’s not earned from being open-minded>
We’ll let the kids debate whether marijuana is bad for you, and allow them to arrive at their own conclusion.
If you want to let them debate about medicinal use or about why it’s illegal … in a high school, go for it. Why would I think that subject should be taboo.
Time for dinner… Just worked up an apetite in here.
Enjoy … catch you later.
January 7th, 2006 at 7:04 pmRepeat after me, they dont care about Laws. Consitutions. Abortion. You, as a Political State, must be kept in a Crisis management position. (think Terror alerts, the Commies, AL Qaeda, Bird Flu..) Synarchy. Let me bolster this ‘lack of Laws’ Argument.
January 7th, 2006 at 7:04 pmVice President Dick Cheney, the “Herman Göring” of the Bush Administration, has come out with the blunt admission that everything that LaRouche said back in January 2001 was true. On Dec. 20, while traveling to Oman on Air Force Two, the Vice President spoke to reporters, and delivered an unabashed defense of Carl Schmitt’s Führerprinzip (Leader Principle) of absolute executive power. Cheney, facing a growing revolt from the Congress, the military and intelligence institutions, and the American people, against his over-the-top push for Presidential dictatorship and his promotion of Nuremberg war crime offenses, let it all hang out, admitting that he came into the Vice Presidency, fully committed to the imposition of rule-by-decree government.
The way I’ve heard it described, republicans always ’stick’ to their opinions, because the only ’stones’ they have are in their head :)
Funny …
You’ve been clear minded in the past. What do you think about High School teachers tainting a classroom toward their particular political ideology … I’m betting you’re against it, but I could be wrong.
January 7th, 2006 at 7:06 pm#17 – “Gee, I don’t understand why “rule of lawâ€
January 7th, 2006 at 7:16 pmconfuses wingnuts so much.” – afterthought
****Gosh, moonbat, you shouldn’t be so surprised – progs and Dems had an IMPOSSIBLE time understanding the application
of sexual harrassment law, cronyism, illegal foreign political contributions, rape, and perjury. Your hypocrisy demonstrates your short memory.
“And it will show in 20 years when they are featured on America’s Most Wanted.”
January 7th, 2006 at 7:20 pmComment by unbelievable — January 7, 2006 @ 6:16 pm
*****Only if people like you outlaw conservative political expression (a danger with the intolerant left)or religion.
“The basic facts†… here it is again. This is the same as saying “the only reality that exists is the reality that I believe in†… all others are wrong or irrelevant.
I believe that apples fall down. The only reality that exists is the reality in which apples fall. I suppose that for you they might fall up, then.
Tell me, where does that “progressive†moniker come from … obviously it’s not earned from being open-minded
And insisting that there is no such thing as objective truth makes one “open-minded”? LOL- actually it puts you in the same intellectual camp as the Maoists in China when they said “All truth is politics.”
Do you really think the laws just mean whatever you say they mean instead of what was written in black and white and voted on? Fascism has always depended on people such as yourself who are willing to discount simple facts as “mere politics”.
January 7th, 2006 at 7:29 pmIsn’t it interesting that many public school teachers are willing to indoctrinate their students – but not surprising as liberalism is a lazy and convenient mindset. (Want to see the “tolerant” left – watch them try to shut down speakers of the opposition viewpoint. It is easier to remove controversial speakers as it might take some brains to engage in an argument exercise.) Hatching new moonbats should prove easy in the incubated environment of many schools.
January 7th, 2006 at 7:36 pmHey aphrodite and Guacamole, its me Joe checking in. Boy, the subject of this post sure does get us by our shorthairs, don’t it? What disasterous polls for us Repuglicans! Phew!
Correct me if I’m wrong, but did you see the rest of the polls released yesterday? Boy, he’s really stinking up the Oval Office isn’t he? I mean, he really SUCKS, man.
How about that one on junior’s job ratings: 40% approve, 59% disappove. As a rightwing conservative, I think I am entited to throw up Bill Clinton here and mention that never once, not even when he was impeached, did Clinton’s job performance fall below 54%.
January 7th, 2006 at 7:40 pmYou’ve been clear minded in the past. What do you think about High School teachers tainting a classroom toward their particular political ideology … I’m betting you’re against it, but I could be wrong.
The Problem here lies in the Word ‘TAINT’, to ‘teach’ a class History is one thing, to method act the parts, or to TAINT the pupils in ANY direction wouldnt be teaching now would it? The Problem, to me with the Nutty Professors, Democratic, Republican and Otherwise. Sure you can TEACH a dog to attack, and thats a BAD thing right? But truly, If the Dog followed the order given, it then did so because it believed it did the right thing? Or did it only do the Thing it was taught? Such is Why we are Human. A human should never taint another is that a Suitable answer that bypasses the hot button issue of Politics?
January 7th, 2006 at 7:42 pmMA,
That’s a pretty interesting characterization, considering the fact that right wingers are the ones taking the easy way out.
Thousands of Americans gave their lives for our liberties, and you wingnuts would throw it all away for the easy fix of Bush saving you from the big, scary terrorists.
I see your “lazy” and raise you a “cowards”.
January 7th, 2006 at 7:43 pmCould any conservatives posting on this site suggest a legitimate reason WHY Bush did not seek warrants, when he had 72 hours to do so?
January 7th, 2006 at 7:45 pm“The poll is bogus. The sample is too heavily weighted towards Democrats — 52% Democrat, 40% Republican.
In any case, executive branch powers are not determined by opinion polls. ”
The executive branch governs with at least one eye on opinion polling. More importantly, a body that can check the executive branch likes strong backing from opinion polling when they take a particular course.
No one is saying that an opinion poll determines POWERS, just that it can influence ACTIONS.
As for the poll being flawed – 50+42=92. 8 percent are “independent”. People who are proud of their party broadcast it – those that don’t like to call themselves independents, as well as those who are sick of their party. Things have changed since the last elections…
January 7th, 2006 at 7:49 pmGiacomo,
Last thing I’m gonna say on the issue… I wasn’t tainting them, or trying to sway them. You weren’t in the classroom. You don’t know the full context. You don’t know the relationship I have with them, with their parents or with the school district. You assumed an awful amount of paranoid delusion and reacted to it as if you’d literally been set on fire. You freaked out without asking a single question first on the context, or what else followed the information. You never assume the positive. Ever. Only the negative Devil is ruining the children mentality… watch, you’ll do it again in response to this post.
One rule in my classroom is that anything I say is fair game. They are not only allowed to challenege what I say, but I actually give them bonus points if they can catch me saying something that they can refute with facts and evidence (opinions and emotion do not qualify). And believe me, if they put as much effort into studying as they do trying to correct me, they’d all be Rhodes scholars.
It was no different with this information either. I don’t have an evil ‘agenda’ to convince them to vote Democrat (because I’m not one), but simply an agenda to get them interested in the world and to vote.
They frequently come to me to ‘talk’ about a variety of things. They say it is because I do not judge them or invalidate their opinions. Mostly, I listen. I don’t believe in lecturing kids in that condescending old school way that you, IRI and Afro constantly use without considering their perspectives. My father was like that and I hated it. So in my classroom they are always feel to speak their minds, knowing everyone has and is entitled under the Constitution to have their own perspectives – including me.
January 7th, 2006 at 7:57 pmExcuse me, but this is not “American Idol.” Polling has nothing to do with the FACT that Bush committed a felony.
January 7th, 2006 at 7:58 pmMy formative years were spent in North Dallas at Walnut Hill Elementary, Hillcrest HS and Thomas Jefferson HS. At none of those schools was I steered towards one political belief or another. 35 years later, my sons were asked only to make sure that mom and dad voted. Now black moms and dads can’t vote because they might vote democratic? Is that really fair?
January 7th, 2006 at 7:59 pmI agree with Jonathan #84. My fellow wingnuts, I ask you who said the following:
“I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.”
He also said: “If Tyranny and Oppression comes to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.”
Correct me if I’m wrong, but it was President James Madison. I mean, if this was about Clinton and the war in Bosnia, the Repuglicans would be in the streets screaming, “Off with his head!”
January 7th, 2006 at 8:00 pm#85 – Lily – that’s the question I’ve been asking as well! Since FISA specifically allowed for taps to start immediately with warrant requests to come within 72 hours LATER, why weren’t the warrants asked for? I’d like to know WHO was tapped and why the Administration was afraid to go to a secret court for the warrants? Given the track record of the court (handful of denials out of the tens of thousands granted…)
That is the question. If you want to spy on someone – and have all of the legal ways to do it (FISA), why are you spying on that someone without using the tools you have – unless you are concerned that the court would through out your request based on the WHO it is. Makes one wonder.
January 7th, 2006 at 8:08 pmInteresting news story.
Three Algerians arrested in an anti-terrorist operation in southern Italy are suspected of being linked to a planned new series of attacks in the United States, Interior Minister Giuseppe Pisanu said Friday.
The attacks would have targeted ships, stadiums or railway stations in a bid to outdo the September 11, 2001 strikes by Al-Qaeda in New York and Washington which killed some 2,700 people, Pisanu said.
I haven’t seen this covered in the media here.
It would also be interesting to know whether NSA intercepts played a role in catching these terrorists.
January 7th, 2006 at 8:12 pm#92
January 7th, 2006 at 8:14 pmIt doesn’t make one wonder at all. Obviously Bush was spying on his political opponents.
Troll#93
January 7th, 2006 at 8:20 pmWell, which one is it? A ship, a stadium, or a railway station? If you believe a Berlusconi stooge like Pisanu, you’re a complete fool.
I’m sure this will incite the trolls again, but figure it’s worth passing it along to the progressives…
I have a nephew who was going a project for history class. The teacher gave them each two words that they had to define, use in a sentance, and then present on poster board with supporting photographs.
My nephew got ‘Impeachment’ and ‘Pro Tempore’.
Disclaimer: My brother was telling me this. I was not involved. My brother and his wife are not political people and generally tend to vote Republican.
For Impeachment, my nephew pasted photos of Nixon, Clinton and Bush Jr.
For Pro Tempore he pasted all of these psychedelic old photos of Ted Stevens from the 60’s because he thought the guy was funny looking (’like the Six Flags geezer’ he told my brother).
My nephew is in fifth grade…
January 7th, 2006 at 8:20 pm#85
Could any conservatives posting on this site suggest a legitimate reason WHY Bush did not seek warrants, when he had 72 hours to do so?
Comment by Lily — January 7, 2006 @ 7:45 pm
Lily,
Good question. Since no cons. has answered it, I think it deserves repeating. However, I’d be surprised if anyone responded. It’s been my experience that rightwingers here will ignore questions that deal with the heart of an issue.
I also would like to take this opportunity to ask a 2nd question: Bush and the conservatives have been blabbing about how this revelation has damaged national security. In what way?
January 7th, 2006 at 8:23 pm#93, Comment by richb
January 7th, 2006 at 8:25 pmI would doubt it as they are still not hiring Arabic translators. I know at least two in the military who have applied and have been ignored. One understands about ten dialects.
#92
I think that’s why no wingers here will respond. The answer is pretty much obvious.
January 7th, 2006 at 8:26 pmBush doesn’t govern via polls like Clinton does. Bush does what’s right.
January 7th, 2006 at 8:28 pmCould any conservatives posting on this site suggest a legitimate reason WHY Bush did not seek warrants, when he had 72 hours to do so?
Comment by Lily — January 7, 2006 @ 7:45 pm
I think it was IRI, maybe, who said that Bush didn’t need them. Something about it being a matter of him doing what his position affords him to do to protect us (as in the situation trumphs the Constitution). I can’t seem to get an answer which qualifies it in light of the law, and not just their opinions on the matter though. Probably because they don’t have an answer. So, good luck!
January 7th, 2006 at 8:29 pmBush doesn’t govern via polls like Clinton does. Bush does what’s right.
Comment by Gary Ruppert — January 7, 2006 @ 8:28 pm
This should be good… While you’re here Gray, how about answering Lily’s question for us?
January 7th, 2006 at 8:31 pmLast thing I’m gonna say on the issue… I wasn’t tainting them, or trying to sway them. You weren’t in the classroom. You don’t know the full context. You don’t know the relationship I have with them, with their parents or with the school district.
Fine … then why not just say that without all the excuses to begin with … I wish this post was your first one …
January 7th, 2006 at 8:35 pm#79
Mighty Aphro, you are an ass. Please…tell us how people like Unbelievable are trying to outlaw religion.
As for conservative political expression, again I ask the same question. Would “people like you” include the fine folks who run this site? Well, your sorry ass is still here, isn’t it? I don’t see the administrators banning anyone from this site based on their political views.
If you want to go after anyone for restricting political views, I think you need to go after a few of the conservative blogs. I haven’t posted to any, nor have I visited very many to read the comments, but from feedback seen on this site and crooksandliars.com, folks posting leftwing views are kicked out.
Finally, I seem to believe that it was the rightwingers who were essentially telling the Democrats to shut up about any comments or opinions that were in opposition to the President. Any negative comments about him or the War on Terror were met with accusations of treason and labels of “traitor.” You really do make me laugh.
January 7th, 2006 at 8:36 pmGary Ruppert what kind of drugs are you taking? Let’s see the things that Bush has done that’s right.
1) Failed to get off his sorry a*s on 9/11 when he was told we were under attack and begin acting like a leader.
2) Falsified information and lied to the American People as well as to Congress, which by the way in its self is an Impeachable offense.
3) Outed a CIA agent for retrobution because someon stood up against him and said his facts were incorrect.
4) Spied on Americans without a warrant. Not just terrorists, but Americans who had nothing to do with terrorists. By throwing out a huge net to spy illegally he violated our constitutional rights.
5) Returned only 6K dollars of over 100K in money from Abromaf.
Yeah! I would say that the Bush Crime Family is doing whats right!
January 7th, 2006 at 8:36 pmThe warrants were not sought because we needed to monitor the terrorists immediately without the risk of the court dismissing a warrant on a technicality.
As well, list of the people who have FISA warrants against them is not really secret either.
January 7th, 2006 at 8:37 pmWell bozo, that’s what the law is about. I say that the MIB’s should go over to your house and turn it upside down just because they can. I would bet that you would then scream about your rights being violated.
Besides, what part of 72 hours do you not understand?? Incase you cant do the math, I’ll do it for you. That’s 4 days.
January 7th, 2006 at 8:41 pm1) Failed to get off his sorry a*s on 9/11 when he was told we were under attack and begin acting like a leader.
Bush had a very elaborate system in place where our defense efforts were undertaken on that morning. Bush didn’t need to stomp out of the classroom to do anything.
2) Falsified information and lied to the American People as well as to Congress, which by the way in its self is an Impeachable offense.
Prove one lie he told Congress.
3) Outed a CIA agent for retrobution because someon stood up against him and said his facts were incorrect.
Plame was not a covert agent, therefore she could not be outed.
4) Spied on Americans without a warrant. Not just terrorists, but Americans who had nothing to do with terrorists. By throwing out a huge net to spy illegally he violated our constitutional rights.
No he didn’t. There’s nothing that proves that innocent people were “spied” on.
5) Returned only 6K dollars of over 100K in money from Abromaf.
Harry Reid only returned 0K out of over 100K given to him by Abramoff.
As well, Bush feels no need to donate legal donations.
January 7th, 2006 at 8:42 pmYou can do it for 72 hours. If you find something, warrant granted. If you don’t find anything, evidence destroyed. That is how it works Gary.
January 7th, 2006 at 8:44 pmGary, you need to get a clue. I’m done talking to you as it’s like talking to a chair. No matter how much information and truth I present to the chair that chair is just going to stay there. Even if the house is on fire and I tell the chair to run, you will just stand there.
January 7th, 2006 at 8:44 pm“The warrants were not sought because we needed to monitor the terrorists immediately without the risk of the court dismissing a warrant on a technicality.”
_____
In other words, we ignored the law because we were afraid the taps were illegal. Great defense!
PS: How do you know these taps were on “terrorists”? Answer: You don’t.
January 7th, 2006 at 8:45 pm107: Gary – Proof (of the list). And as for the warrants – of the thousands issued, a handful were denied over the 26 years since FISA. Risk of dismissing? What risk?
What an ass.
January 7th, 2006 at 8:46 pmCheck out the photos from the protest of Bushie’s
visit to Chicago at
htpp://bushinchicago.bravehost.com
Coming soon to the site is a link to the audio of the
protest, “Primal America”.
“Primal America” is raw, unedited audio footage from
the January 6, 2006 protest against George W. Bush’s
visit to Chicago.
George W. Bush gave a speech at the Chicago Hilton
while hundreds of American’s demanded the impeachment
of Geroge W. Bush.
“Primal America” is raw audio with a primal beat.
It is History in the Making.
The Creation of American
Memorabilia.
In “Primal America” you will hear the beat to:
FIRE THE LIAR
GEORGE BUSH HAS GOT TO GO
STEP DOWN STEP DOWN
BRING THE TROOPS HOME NOW
SHAME ON YOU
2008 IS MUCH TOO LATE
DRIVE OUT THE BUSH REGIME
MOCK EXECUTION
MARCH TO THE STREETS
THE DEBTONATOR
“Primal America” is raw, unedited and uplifting.
It possesses the true American Spirit.
Check out the scene at
http://bushinchicago.bravehost.com and make sure you
January 7th, 2006 at 8:46 pmcheck back for the link to the audio of “Primal America”.
Fine … then why not just say that without all the excuses to begin with … I wish this post was your first one …
Comment by Giacomo — January 7, 2006 @ 8:35 pm
‘Excuses’ would be what you call my explanations that you don’t agree with… I see.
First? I did…
#41
I love how you know the entire context of my conversation in that classroom based on a brief synopsis I posted here two days afterward. Stop trying to turn this into something it isn’t.
Comment by unbelievable — January 7, 2006 @ 5:59 pm
January 7th, 2006 at 8:48 pm113: RDL: and that’s the bottom line. But, the wingnuts refuse to listen. (I’m not surprised)
January 7th, 2006 at 8:48 pm#102
Bush doesn’t govern via polls like Clinton does. Bush does what’s right.
Comment by Gary Ruppert — January 7, 2006 @ 8:28 pm
No…Bush does what he, and only he, thinks is right. To hell with anyone else’s opinion. And speaking of opinion, he recently told NBC’s Brian Williams, during some time that he spent with the president, that he (Bush) reads the news, but that he doesn’t like to read opinions. That much is true.
As for Clinton, I’d be interested to know which decisions he made based on public opinion that you feel were wrong.
January 7th, 2006 at 8:48 pmThe fact is that the FISA court had numerous activist judges who would have been likely to deny warrants for spurrious reasons
January 7th, 2006 at 8:49 pmThe warrants were not sought because we needed to monitor the terrorists immediately without the risk of the court dismissing a warrant on a technicality.
As well, list of the people who have FISA warrants against them is not really secret either.
Comment by Gary Ruppert — January 7, 2006 @ 8:37 pm
Gary, thanks for the answer. Would you mind telling us why the 72 hour rectroactive warrant application was also dismissed when FISA almost never turns them down… ?
January 7th, 2006 at 8:51 pm#95, I’m not a troll here, I’ve posted often, why the nasty tone calling me a fool, I quoted a newstory opinion.
January 7th, 2006 at 8:52 pmGary, you need to get a clue. I’m done talking to you as it’s like talking to a chair. No matter how much information and truth I present to the chair that chair is just going to stay there. Even if the house is on fire and I tell the chair to run, you will just stand there.
Comment by RemoveBush — January 7, 2006 @ 8:44 pm
Too funny… (and, sadly, too true with these trolls)!!!
January 7th, 2006 at 8:53 pmThe fact is that the FISA court had numerous activist judges who would have been likely to deny warrants for spurrious reasons
So that’s the new talking point? I guess you’ve finally conceded that a warrant is necessary so you have to blame the judges for not granting the warrants. But of course, you stubbornly refuse to blame Bush for this. Is there anything you’re willing to blame Bush for?
January 7th, 2006 at 8:54 pmI do blame Bush somewhat for repeating the claims that there were no WMDs in Iraq.
January 7th, 2006 at 8:56 pm“The fact is that the FISA court had numerous activist judges who would have been likely to deny warrants for spurrious reasons
Comment by Gary Ruppert”
–
What are you smoking? So, a handful of denials over 26 years out of what 20,000 (more? less?) approved requests? That’s activist? Too funny. (Oh, and please provide proof that the FISA court had these activist judges – doh!)
It’s clear, the wingnuts are in a different universe.
Now, go back and really answer the question.
January 7th, 2006 at 8:56 pmThe fact is that the FISA court had numerous activist judges who would have been likely to deny warrants for spurrious reasons
Comment by Gary Ruppert — January 7, 2006 @ 8:49 pm
Like who? And why would any judge, activist of otherwise, not want to stop terrorists? It’s like people who are afraid to fly in airplanes without ever considering that the pilot doesn’t want to die either…
January 7th, 2006 at 8:56 pmThat one judge who quit was an activist judge
January 7th, 2006 at 8:58 pmI do blame Bush somewhat for repeating the claims that there were no WMDs in Iraq.
Comment by Gary Ruppert — January 7, 2006 @ 8:56 pm
How much is ’somewhat’, and why only somewhat? Who gets the rest of that blame?
January 7th, 2006 at 8:59 pmunbelievable: – unbelievable! :) I really didn’t think there were people this dense. Gary Puppet…er….Ruppert is a trip (or is tripping) :)
January 7th, 2006 at 8:59 pmThat one judge who quit was an activist judge
How was he an activist judge? Was it because he committed the unconstitutional sin of disagreeing with Gary Ruppert?
January 7th, 2006 at 9:00 pmSo Bush refused to obey the law in the event the warrant was legally denied? This makes no sense. If he ignored the law about seeking a warrant, what makes you think he would honor the law if the warrant was refused?
January 7th, 2006 at 9:02 pmThat one judge who quit was an activist judge
I haven’t seen any proof of this yet … I did hear someone say (maybe it was O”Reilly, so take it with that in mind) that the reason the judge quit is because he was the “leaker” … if he takes a leave of absence from his federal judgship … we’ll know (b/c a jusge can’t sit and be under federal investigation)
January 7th, 2006 at 9:02 pmunbelievable: – unbelievable! :) I really didn’t think there were people this dense. Gary Puppet…er….Ruppert is a trip (or is tripping) :)
Comment by MrTimPA — January 7, 2006 @ 8:59 pm
You know what’s saddest – he’s just being a good boy – doing what he’s told – honoring his mother and father and all that other brain washed parroting those so-called authority figures like to demand from people… He doesn’t actually think about it really, or he’d be embarrassed that he’s using his real name. And fortunately for us, that ever gullable flat-earth society population of 20% isn’t enough to save the Republicans in November…
January 7th, 2006 at 9:04 pmhtpp://bushinchicago.bravehost.com
Proof that the government was part of the events on 9/11.
What do you have to say about that you Bush supporting zombies?
January 7th, 2006 at 9:07 pmif he takes a leave of absence from his federal judgship … we’ll know (b/c a jusge can’t sit and be under federal investigation)
Comment by Giacomo — January 7, 2006 @ 9:02 pm
What if, like Sandra Day O’Connor he is resigning to care for an ill relative? Or he himself is ill? Or corruption in the system made him ill? You might wanna ask those questions first before you start building the bridge to span that chasm…
January 7th, 2006 at 9:09 pmAnd fortunately for us, that ever gullable flat-earth society population of 20% isn’t enough to save the Republicans in November…
Be careful that you don’t assume that because someone doesn’t agree with you, that automatically makes them a lunatic fringe dweller. As soon as the person is “fringe” in your mind, you automatically ignore everything they say … even though they might have some fine ideas. Remember, you yourself told me that you’re continually on the path to further enlightenment (or adding to your knowledge base … something like that) … you could miss something valuable. When I first came here, I, perhaps erroneously, assumed that most posts were from “the fringe left” … I’ve since learned that the spectrum is far wider than that …
January 7th, 2006 at 9:09 pm#133: unbelievable: Well, we don’t know if he’s honoring his ma and pa – but he is doing a great job as one of Bush’s lil political foot soldiers (not like he’ risk his ass in the “shit” in Iraq). What was the term? Keyboard warriors?
As for November – geez, even the woman who cuts my hair (got a hair cut this morning) – who’s a rabid repub – is pissed off, and trust me, if she’s got her panties in a bunch over this crap, I see good things ahead this fall… :)
January 7th, 2006 at 9:11 pmGary – are you under the influence? #1. Did you read the 9/11 Commission Report? The so called ‘elaborate system’ was nonexistent! Not only that, when Bush heard about the 2nd plane, he decided to sit there and read, “My Pet Goat”! Ummmmm, we were being attacked! Hellooooo! #2. In summary ‘Suddam has been trying to by yellow cake uranium in Africa’! Suddam has weapons of mass destruction, when not even 18 months before both Condi and Collin were saying that Suddam didn’t have the capability for WMD. For pete’s sake, I could be the Everready Bunny here and keep going, and going, and going…#3) Like hell she wasn’t! Not only that, ol’ Novak publicized the cover corporation they were using. I wonder how many asses were in serious jeopardy over that! #4) We don’t KNOW that because they REFUSE to tell anyone who they have (and most likely continuing to) spy on! Even that’s beside the point, ANY American being spied on without a warrant IS ILLEGAL! #5) The discussion wasn’t about Reid; smoke and mirrors, dude. Legal donations? Really? I heard it’s ‘pay to play’. If you donated a significant amount of money, you got to a personal appointment with the ‘king’. And why, for christ’s sake, didn’t he give ALL the money back to the Native American tribes Abramoff stole it from?
Are you telling me it’s ok for you to keep tainted goods even after you find out tainted? From the law I know, it would be confiscated. That’s what makes pawn shops a risk factor when doing business with them.
Step away from the Kool Aid, Gary. It might taste good, but has a wickedly bitter aftertaste because it reaks of dishonest poison.
January 7th, 2006 at 9:16 pmBe careful that you don’t assume that because someone doesn’t agree with you, that automatically makes them a lunatic fringe dweller. As soon as the person is “fringe†in your mind, you automatically ignore everything they say … even though they might have some fine ideas. Remember, you yourself told me that you’re continually on the path to further enlightenment (or adding to your knowledge base … something like that) … you could miss something valuable. When I first came here, I, perhaps erroneously, assumed that most posts were from “the fringe left†… I’ve since learned that the spectrum is far wider than that …
Comment by Giacomo — January 7, 2006 @ 9:09 pm
Psychology expert now? You keep forgetting I was once a conservative. I understand that side. It’s about being ‘good’ and obeying authority-figures while never questioning them. That’s what he’s doing. It’s what you do with religion. Repeat what you’re told. Not judgment or criticism – just observation.
In three months at TP not one troll has presented anything valuable. But I told you, I never say never because I’m not an absolutist or have a closed mind. So, if it ever does happen, I’ll personally let you know first. So, thanks, Dad, for the lecture, but I’m in my thirties now, and I think I can handle it from here.
January 7th, 2006 at 9:18 pmSorry but the link is not working…. The link in #133 is not correct.
Why will the link not post? I have tried at least 10 times and it will not go. I guess the MIB’s are hard at work tonight. So look for the clues to use to put it all together. But not know/ing who is doing this will make it a little difficult, 911but I am sure you will be able to figure it out. coverup10pg
January 7th, 2006 at 9:19 pmAs for November – geez, even the woman who cuts my hair (got a hair cut this morning) – who’s a rabid repub – is pissed off, and trust me, if she’s got her panties in a bunch over this crap, I see good things ahead this fall… :)
Comment by MrTimPA — January 7, 2006 @ 9:11 pm
I hope so Tim, I certainly hope so. And then maybe we can get some therapy and medication (via National Healthcare) for all these schitzophrenic trolls… :)
January 7th, 2006 at 9:20 pmHere’s a question: In the phrase “those communications are believed to be tied to terrorism”—believed by whom? Based on what? A hunch? A conversation with God? Or perhaps some actual evidence?
That’s the crux of the question; not can conversations be wiretapped, but how is it determined that the wiretap is legitimate, and not an abuse of power used against, say, political opponents. That’s why we need judicial oversight; it would be nice if the Congress also took an interest in preserving the check and balances outlined in the Constitution.
Frankly, the President, Congress and the Supreme Court Justices all take an oath to protect the Constition. Anyone who fails to do so should be removed from office.
January 7th, 2006 at 9:20 pmhey, removebush, check the “http:” part at the beginning of the link in your post…
January 7th, 2006 at 9:24 pm#140 – unbelievable: heh heh – I do hope so! As a PA resident, I’ll do my part in getting rid of pRick Santorum. He may not be involved in the current scandle, but he’s gotta go. :)
January 7th, 2006 at 9:24 pm#140 – unbelievable: heh heh – I do hope so! As a PA resident, I’ll do my part in getting rid of pRick Santorum. He may not be involved in the current scandle, but he’s gotta go. :)
Comment by MrTimPA — January 7, 2006 @ 9:24 pm
Good luck there! I have no doubtthat you’ll do what you can! I imagine it’ll be easier than it seemed this time last year when we werre faced with 4 more years of Peeping George…
I shoud go… typing skills decreasing… and they’re pretty bad to begin with…
Was fun all – have a good night!
January 7th, 2006 at 9:28 pm#144: unbelievable: “Peeping George” – gotta love it! :) g’night..:)
January 7th, 2006 at 9:30 pm#135 – Stop getting your hair cut from this person. Give your money to someone else. Do it now. Impeach the bastards.
January 7th, 2006 at 9:31 pm#140,
Exactly. When the administration says they’re listening to terrorist phone calls, how do we know the people being listened to are really terrorists who intend to hurt Americans? The administration is just telling us to trust them. I refuse to trust them, but you can at least argue that point. However, they are also telling the courts to just trust the administration. That part is illegal.
January 7th, 2006 at 9:32 pm#147
The 5-Year Plan has exceeded quota!
We are winning the war against Eurasia!
Your rights are being protected by the endless vigilance and unflagging resolve of His Excellency.
All is well. Sleep tight, citizen.
January 7th, 2006 at 9:36 pmThe founding fathers would suggest that we
January 7th, 2006 at 9:38 pmare not supoosed to trust them.
In fact, our patriotic duty is not to
trust them.
We hire representatives and judges NOT
to trust them.
This administration proves more than any
other that the founding fathers we correct
in there lack of trust toward powerful
executives.
I am not sure even they envisioned a
fascist cabel like this bunch.
W has a basic problem – he does not know the difference between God and the tooth fairy.
January 7th, 2006 at 9:40 pm“I am not sure even they envisioned a
fascist cabel like this bunch.”
___
They did. And they declared independence from it. ;->
January 7th, 2006 at 9:40 pm#152 He also does a LOT of inexplicable damage to his own face.
January 7th, 2006 at 9:42 pm#146: california_reality_check – Nah – much as our politics differ, she does a good job and is a friend of the family. I believe in engaging those who’s political views differ from mine – in serious debate. I don’t always win, but it’s usually a good discussion. I did manage to convince my dad – lifelong republican – to vote democrat this past election… (but, then again, anyone with a few active neurons… no wait, 50% of this country… nevermind…)
January 7th, 2006 at 9:43 pmSorry, Walt — I meant to reference #150.
January 7th, 2006 at 9:43 pmBush doesn’t govern via polls like Clinton does. Bush does what’s right.
Comment by Gary Ruppert — January 7, 2006 @ 8:28 pm
Translation: I am in desperate need of a strong father figure who will ignore my opinion and will tell me what to do.
The warrants were not sought because we needed to monitor the terrorists immediately without the risk of the court dismissing a warrant on a technicality.
Comment by Gary Ruppert — January 7, 2006 @ 8:37 pm
Translation: I subscribe to the notion that following the law is just a technicality one can choose to ignore. It’s ok because my father figure said so.
Harry Reid only returned 0K out of over 100K given to him by Abramoff.
As well, Bush feels no need to donate legal donations.
Comment by Gary Ruppert — January 7, 2006 @ 8:42 pm
Translation: I further have the need to cling on to my fantasies. In spite of having been corrected several times during the last few days, I still insist on muddying the fact that Harry Reid received money from former Abramoff clients while Pres. Bush received money from Abramoff himself.
The fact is that the FISA court had numerous activist judges who would have been likely to deny warrants for spurrious reasons
Comment by Gary Ruppert — January 7, 2006 @ 8:49 pm
Translation: The fact is that when facts are not on my side, I make stuff up. Like hypothetical scenarios that make no sense.
I do blame Bush somewhat for repeating the claims that there were no WMDs in Iraq.
Comment by Gary Ruppert — January 7, 2006 @ 8:56 pm
Translation: Authority figures are never wrong. Even if they admit they have been wrong. Strong authority figures never lie either: If Pres. Bush made claim A, and later made the contradicting claim B, then both claims A and B are correct.
That one judge who quit was an activist judge
Comment by Gary Ruppert — January 7, 2006 @ 8:58 pm
Translation: If by now you haven’t realised I blow hot air faster than a steam engine, you need to have your head checked.
January 7th, 2006 at 9:44 pm#150 – Walt – no, his problem is that he’s too busy worryin about those injuries (scratches) he gets when he’s choppin his Cedar.. (You did see the video of him visiting the hospital and making the comments about that, eh? – if not, I think C&L has the clip)
I just wonder what his obsession is with chopping down all that “cedar” is on his “ranch”. I’ve lived in Texas and sure there’s lots of scrub brush ‘n stuff – but hell, 1600 acres is a lot of land.. Perhaps he could just hire some of those imigrant workers (on his worker program) to clear it all, once and for all…:)
January 7th, 2006 at 9:48 pm#155: Gregor – You hit the nail on the head.
January 7th, 2006 at 9:51 pm#156
Clearing brush is:
A) Repetitive
B) Mindless
C) Involves breaking things
D) Does not require precise motor skills
It’s the perfect Presidential pastime!
January 7th, 2006 at 9:54 pmRunningDogLackey and MrTimPA have a problem with numbers representing the square of W’s IQ. 149 guys! The root is 12.2.
January 7th, 2006 at 9:58 pm#159: Walt, thanks, I take a bow to you for pointing that out….:) (Funny – did the trolls run off to hide under their collective bridges?) :)
January 7th, 2006 at 10:01 pmBoy those MIB’s sure are busy and don’t want this to get through. I’ll try it again. Check the next 3 posts for the complete link.
http://www.wantto
January 7th, 2006 at 10:01 pmpart 3
/911coverup10pg
January 7th, 2006 at 10:03 pm#159
Sorry, Walt. MrTim and I are both Pennsylavanians, where quality counts more than quantity…and on a Saturday night, it’s hard to count at all!
January 7th, 2006 at 10:04 pmDamit! I cant get the second part of the link to post. Who knows. why that would be? I would like some info as to why this link will not post.
January 7th, 2006 at 10:06 pmOK remove the (s) of the knows
January 7th, 2006 at 10:07 pm#163: RDL – ah, another Pennsylvanian – I figured there were a few of us out there…:) But, who’s counting – esp on a saturday night! :) (and as I said earlier, the trolls seemed to have retreated to their respective bridges! heh heh)
January 7th, 2006 at 10:09 pm#166
Yes, observing the world from high atop Mt. Washington, overlooking the Pittsburgh skyline. A Democrat enclave for sure.
And, yes, the trolls have fled. Their talking points have failed them again. Huzzah!
January 7th, 2006 at 10:16 pmUnbelievable I bet you’re one of those great teachers that kids remember all their lives.
January 7th, 2006 at 10:17 pmCan someone try to post the link I have encoded in the 3 posts? Maybe it’s something I am doing?
January 7th, 2006 at 10:19 pmRemoveBush,
I finally got that site to work, but it wouldn’t let me post it. Maybe it’s banned.
h@t@tp://@ww@w.w@antto@know.in@fo/911co@veru@p10pg
Try the link above, but delete the “@s”
January 7th, 2006 at 10:22 pm#113, Susan and Debtonator
January 7th, 2006 at 10:24 pmThanks for being there and for the pix.
“56 percent of respondents in an AP-Ipsos poll said the government should be required to first get a court warrant to eavesdrop on the overseas calls and e-mails of U.S. citizens when those communications are believed to be tied to terrorism.”
Well, I believe that poll is bullshit. Americans don’t give a damn about other Americans’ privacy when they are breaking the law let alone planning the next terror strike.
But let’s say it’s true and AP???? found five people that think that way….I say screw them and their opinion unless they are constitutional scholars and have the guts and the bucks to bring it to court.
If the Filthy Left thinks that put up polls and limp wristed threats of impeachment is going to keep Bush from stopping the next 9-11 you have seriously underestimated the man. But the question arises; why would the Filthy Left try and stop surveillance of suspected mass murderers that have vowed to hit us again? Hummmm????? Why would they do that? Here’s why, ……
THEY HATE BUSH AND CHRISTIAN CONSERVATIVES MORE THAN THEY LOVE THEIR COUNTRY AND APPARENTLY THEIR OWN LIVES.
In my opinion that makes you losers the equivalent of suicide bombers. It’s only a matter of time before we start dealing with you with that in mind.
January 7th, 2006 at 10:25 pmI have enjoyed all the informative replies to our twelve year old troll, Gary Ruppert, who seems a bit unable to grasp the facts. You may as well give him up as a hopelessly incorrigible child.
January 7th, 2006 at 10:32 pmIf we’re targeting Americans who are planning an attack, why can’t we get a warrant?
There’s no need to resort to baseless character accusations. I don’t have Christian conservatives, I just don’t want to live in a theocracy.
We don’t want Americans to get hurt. We’re just asking the question “Why?” which seems to be a forbidden question to conservatives. We want to know the reasons for things. You are content to blindly obey Bush, assume the Bible is infallible, etc.
January 7th, 2006 at 10:35 pm#169, I was able to get it and read it, but I can’t post the link here either. Maybe it’s banned.
January 7th, 2006 at 10:40 pmYo, I-RIGHT-I. Take your meds before the men in white coats show up.
January 7th, 2006 at 10:41 pmThanks Marie and Fight the Power, I was beginning to think that my statements about Bush had caused the MIB’s to put on the Highest Alert. We all know how they react when they are questioned.
I must be one of the top 1000 people on Bushes list with all the letters I send to ALL of the Senators and Congressman.
January 7th, 2006 at 10:45 pmRemoveBush,
I will give it another try -I tried twice already….
Was 911 Allowed to Happen?
January 7th, 2006 at 10:49 pmNope, didn’t work…
January 7th, 2006 at 10:50 pmYikes. The truth is really getting under IRI’s skin tonight.
Hope he towels-off the foam in time for church tomorrow!
January 7th, 2006 at 10:52 pmWhat’s up with that link?? It only shows detailed information that can be found by doing your own search, but it is compiled in a cronilogical order with some commentary.
Why I say, WHY?
January 7th, 2006 at 10:52 pmI just saw this on Raw Story.
January 7th, 2006 at 10:58 pmBritish lawyers linked to $1m payment for favours at US Congress
By Philip Sherwell in Washington and David Harrison in London
Forgive me, but this is a test. Testing 1 2 3. Having troubles posting.
Proceed on topic but don’t feed the trolls…
Theresa
January 7th, 2006 at 11:05 pmHi All,
January 7th, 2006 at 11:12 pmJoining this debate rather late, but I just want to say:
1) Unbelievable:You are the kind of teacher I adored. You challenged me to THINK! That is a GREAT thing! You must be a fantastic teacher. You gave FACTS, not opinions as others have accused you of. You presented it, and let young Americans think for themselves. Gaic. just doesn’t get it. It’s about raising a human to function and think on their own, not about cloning. Bravo, Unbelievable. Keep opening doors (and minds) of our future!
2)Trolls: You are a SAD bunch indeed tonight.
Not even worth my time, nor anyone on this blog. There is NO case. You have NO defense. You simply will not admit your guy (and you) are wrong. That’s too bad. It’s actually based on early traumatic events in which the only way (said person’s)can cope is to create a fantasy life. Things must be perfect in that person’s life; otherwise reality (AKA, truth of their life experience) will come crashing down around them.
Sad. But true.
3)To Susan & Debtonator: GLAD to have you here tonight. When I didn’t see either of your names here last night I thought, “Oh No. The SS…oops, Bush’s people… had you arrested.” Glad to see you back.
This will probably be my only post tonight. I’m beat. Just wanted to add my 2 cents tonight.
Good night, all.
Oooh goody.
Someone is keeping hope alive. Thank you!
BTW, Rice seems to be the only one of this cabal still with teflon on. Therefore I hope for her indictment even more than Rove’s.
January 7th, 2006 at 11:14 pmSo many people who worship at the shrine of Bush and the shrine of irrational fears of “the other” (i.e. terrorists, etc.) don’t care about their own personal civil liberties or rights to privacy in these cases, because they believe they are innocent and will never have their rights infringed upon. That’s the core illusion here.
Well I’m not a terrorist! And I don’t know any terrorists! So the Bush White House can just come on in and check me out, because they’re protecting me from “the other”.
But for a government to be so callous and disinterested in personal privacy rights and civil liberties, a government that has already proven that it makes mistakes constantly, is a government that doesn’t care about your innocence if it gets in the way of the search for “the other”.
And if they make a mistake and you get entrapped in a bad situation, the Bush administration isn’t really going to be bothered to listen to you and your claims of innocence. And when you end up in that secret prison in Jordan, who is going to listen to your claims of innocence then?
There’s no rational excuse for anyone to have their civil rights trampled on with careless disregard (or malicious disregard is probably more like it). But just because you say you are innocent is irrelevant. Innocence is relative when it comes to dictatorships. Innocence is relative when it comes to fascist regimes. Innocence was relative when it came to Soviet gulags. Innocence was relative when it came to concentration camps. Innocence is relative when it comes to “winning” the “war on terror”.
January 7th, 2006 at 11:33 pmJoining this debate rather late, but I just want to say:
1) Unbelievable:You are the kind of teacher I adored. You challenged me to THINK! That is a GREAT thing! You must be a fantastic teacher. You gave FACTS, not opinions as others have accused you of. You presented it, and let young Americans think for themselves. Gaic. just doesn’t get it. It’s about raising a human to function and think on their own, not about cloning. Bravo, Unbelievable. Keep opening doors (and minds) of our future!
True Blue
I second that.
January 7th, 2006 at 11:37 pm#187, Amazed, it’s not just about ‘the other’. It’s more complex than that, it involves a neocon belief that a society is better controlled internally if there is an external enemy – it’s known as the ‘moral lie’. The external enemy does not have to be real but perceived as real.
January 7th, 2006 at 11:50 pmIt’s about individual neocons making a fortune.
It’s about deceiving/breaking laws/killing/anything as an acceptable (morally acceptable) method of attaining, maintaining and retaining control.
It’s about Israel remaining the greatest power in the middle east.
I’ts about gaining American corporate power in foreign territories.
It’s about gaining American political control of foreign territories. etc.
RemoveBush,
I think it’s a bug in Think Progress’ tool -it seems to me it cannot handle the dot-info suffix.
So here, paste these two into your browser’s address bar -replace the space with a dot ‘.’:
http://www.wanttoknow info/911coverup10pg
January 7th, 2006 at 11:52 pmI’ll regain my sanity when I see George Bush cross examined under oath. I know I will. I know Iknow I know I will.
January 8th, 2006 at 12:12 amIf it’s 56% now, wait until the hearings start. Whew!
January 8th, 2006 at 12:16 amIt’s only gonna get much much worserer!
I think mighty needs to be “polled” if you know what I’m sayin’(I am the Love-Sharing OBGYN).
January 8th, 2006 at 12:18 am“New Poll: Majority of Americans Disapprove of Bush’s Warrantless Wiretapping”
Here’s a little lesson for you left wing moonbats on how the MSM works. Go to topline summary of this poll and take a look at the political beliefs of those who took the poll:
http://www.ipsos-na.com/news/client/act_dsp_pdf.cfm?name=mr060106-3topline.pdf&id=2928
Hmmmmmm. Isn’t that interesting? 52% percent side with Democrats and only 40% side with Republicans. Now read the headline again.
MAJORITY OF AMERICANS Disapprove of Bush’s Warrantless Wiretapping.
Nice try Faiz. Your can send in your application to the New York Times.
January 8th, 2006 at 1:11 amI just stumbled across this:
January 8th, 2006 at 1:51 amhttp://www.worldcantwait.net/
#118
Gary Rupert,
I guess those activist judges (you made up) don’t have much power, because they have only blocked 5 warrant requests since 1978.
January 8th, 2006 at 3:03 amJanuary 7th, 2006 8:50 pm
Arcata City Council calls for Bush impeachment
By Kimberly Wear / Eureka Times-Standard
ARCATA — A split City Council passed a resolution demanding the impeachment or resignation of President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, citing violations of international and constitutional law.
The White House responded that the president “remains focused on the business the American people elected him to conduct.â€
The resolution lists a series of allegedly impeachable offenses, including “the crime of misleading the American people and Congress into waging an unnecessary and brutal war in Iraq,†“the criminal failure of the president to respond adequately to the Hurricane Katrina disaster,†“torturing human beings in violation of the Geneva Convention†and “ordering the secret surveillance of American citizens.â€
Councilman Dave Meserve and Councilwoman Harmony Groves penned the resolution that passed 3-2 Wednesday, joined by Councilman Paul Pitino, with Mayor Michael Machi and Councilman Mark Wheetley dissenting.
â€All elected officials swear to uphold and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic,†Meserve said. “This obligates us to act when the president violates the Constitution. We hope that other cities will join us in demanding the impeachment of Bush and Cheney.â€
January 8th, 2006 at 5:45 amJanuary 7th, 2006 8:50 pm
Arcata City Council calls for Bush impeachment
By Kimberly Wear / Eureka Times-Standard
ARCATA — A split City Council passed a resolution demanding the impeachment or resignation of President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, citing violations of international and constitutional law.
The White House responded that the president “remains focused on the business the American people elected him to conduct.â€
The resolution lists a series of allegedly impeachable offenses, including “the crime of misleading the American people and Congress into waging an unnecessary and brutal war in Iraq,†“the criminal failure of the president to respond adequately to the Hurricane Katrina disaster,†“torturing human beings in violation of the Geneva Convention†and “ordering the secret surveillance of American citizens.â€
January 8th, 2006 at 5:46 amThe President remains focused on the business the American people elected him to conduct.†Namely, “the crime of misleading the American people and Congress into waging an unnecessary and brutal war in Iraq,†“the criminal failure of the president to respond adequately to the Hurricane Katrina disaster,†“torturing human beings in violation of the Geneva Convention†and “ordering the secret surveillance of American citizens.â€
He’s doing what he was elected to do! Get it?
Don’t like it? Go VOTE! Hah..
January 8th, 2006 at 7:32 amSigned Diebold
200 The likes of You tomz should take responcibility of all the deaths ( You are a mass murderer also by vote )
January 8th, 2006 at 8:03 amSo Bush got elected to murder, torture and rewrite the constitution thats waht your saying you Ars_hole
January 8th, 2006 at 8:05 amOK. I can’t wait any longer. Why is anybody surprised? Years ago, had to have been after 9/11/01 my local police department used the PATRIOT act to wiretap phones to find a runaway 16 year old purse snatcher. Don’t know if they did mine, since he was a friend of my son and it’s my understanding that they will never have to tell me if they did. Absolutely by no stretch of the imagination having the remotest connection with anything terroristic. So I should be surprised that the President thinks it’s ok? Where have you all been sleeping? Give me some of the mind-bending drugs you’ve been taking for the past 6 years. Please.
Unbelievable- Have to assume it’s not English you teach…
January 8th, 2006 at 10:22 amPoll: Majority of Americans disapprove of Bush’s warrantless wiretapping…
From Think Progress:
January 8th, 2006 at 10:48 amA little more than a week ago, the right-wingers heralded the results of a poll that they claimed showed a majority of Americans supporting Bush’s illegal warrantless wiretapping policy. Here’s what that poll found:
Sixty-fou……
Unbelievable I bet you’re one of those great teachers that kids remember all their lives.
Comment by Marie — January 7, 2006 @ 10:17 pm
Yeah, for having my face plastered all over the local news after having been shot by some zealous parent… :)
Seriously, thank you. I left Corporate America to do something that I love – I hope that in the process I might make a difference for at least one child… I appreciate your kind words.
January 8th, 2006 at 11:26 am1) Unbelievable:You are the kind of teacher I adored. You challenged me to THINK! That is a GREAT thing! You must be a fantastic teacher. You gave FACTS, not opinions as others have accused you of. You presented it, and let young Americans think for themselves. Gaic. just doesn’t get it. It’s about raising a human to function and think on their own, not about cloning. Bravo, Unbelievable. Keep opening doors (and minds) of our future!
Comment by True Blue — January 7, 2006 @ 11:12 pm
Thanks – and you guys are the kind of parents whose children will add to society – in a big way. They are always the most respectful and curious kids in the room. And they always have something to teach me. Thanks for you kind thoughts. It’s all about the kids, you know?
January 8th, 2006 at 11:36 amHmmmmmm. Isn’t that interesting? 52% percent side with Democrats and only 40% side with Republicans. Now read the headline again.
MAJORITY OF AMERICANS Disapprove of Bush’s Warrantless Wiretapping.
Nice try Faiz. Your can send in your application to the New York Times.
Comment by Tom Kaz — January 8, 2006 @ 1:11 am
Uh, Tom, hate to embarrass you here, but anything higher than 50% IS the majority. See, if you take 100% (the highest % you can have), and divide it by two (the number of options you are given), you get 50%. Anything that receives 50.1% or higher (rounding to the tenths place), can claim an actual majority. So, since 52% is higher than 40% – it is officially a majority…. Faiz was correct.
January 8th, 2006 at 11:46 amGregor – thanks, the link worked the way you suggested it would.
January 8th, 2006 at 11:50 amThey poll is heavily weighed with democrats. 52% democrats to 40% republicans. Of course Faiz thinks this poll is worth considering. It’s bogus!
January 8th, 2006 at 2:20 pmTHEY HATE BUSH AND CHRISTIAN CONSERVATIVES MORE THAN THEY LOVE THEIR COUNTRY AND APPARENTLY THEIR OWN LIVES.
In my opinion that makes you losers the equivalent of suicide bombers. It’s only a matter of time before we start dealing with you with that in mind.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I #171
I-Triflinscumbagrightwingbusha*slicker-I,
“Hating so-called Christian conservatives”:
neither you nor anyone else can ever make me (or any thinking Progressive American patriot) believe that the likes of Pat “the saintly Assasin” Robertson, Jerry “Tinky-Winky Falwell, Ralph “Christian coalition man of Abramoff graft” Reed, Hobnobbing Hobson, or George “Jeff Gannon Broke Back” Bushiva are anything more than “false prophets”, fake Christians and demons…
Hating hypocrites will save our lives in the long run…
At present, we’re loving our country enough to FIGHT for it, by speaking truth to power.
Yes, I detest racist, bigoted, hypocritical, small minded, ultra conservative extremist Al Crackers (like yourself) because my chances of being imprisoned, attacked, and murdered are far greater for me at YOUR ilk’s hands, than some terrorist in a Toyota pickup or on a donkey…
(Tim McVeigh wasn’t from Iraq, and there are plenty of his/your kind of treasonous terrorist cells around America, just visit red state.org, stormfront.org or any other white supremacist hate sites)…but then you already know that…
YOU are America’s real enemies…
January 8th, 2006 at 3:29 pmPlease push this issue. It will be easier to paint you as weak on terror.
Why would you read the AP polls ? Have they EVER panned out for you on election day? None.
January 8th, 2006 at 7:01 pmWho cares about the poll? This is not some focus group. Bush admitted to committing a felony in a televised speech. I guess John Yoo wasn’t there to stop him. If he wants to claim it wasn’t a felony (it obviously was) give the scumbag his day in court, toss him in the slammer, and throw away the key.
January 8th, 2006 at 9:33 pm“If the Filthy Left thinks that put up polls and limp wristed threats of impeachment is going to keep Bush from stopping the next 9-11 you have seriously underestimated the man.”
Don’t worry, disinfo-dude, after watching your AWOL, selected pResident sleep through 9/11, bog us down in Iraq, botch Katrina….nothing we do or don’t do will suddenly make your Maximum Leader competent. He certainly won’t be stopping the next attack. It’ll happen before the 2006 mid-term…these criminals need it to happen to distract and deflect.
January 9th, 2006 at 2:18 amI got lucky enough to get thru on C-Span one morning and asked a question of one of the writers from Mother Jones magazine. I asked him that given the bitterly politically polarized environment America is currently experiencing if he thought that America might someday revisit the civil war, to which he replied:
“I don’t think the caller mean’t that literally. but what happened was that after 9/11 america experienced a (collective mental breakdown). the further away from 9/11 we get, the more people recover from this (collective madness).”
I hope he’s right, but I kinda doubt it…and inbreds like I-triflin’-I, Puny hermaphrodite, and Scary Pookbutt reinforce my skepticism everyday!
January 9th, 2006 at 10:25 amSome things to always consider when looking at polls (as I said earlier) is poll sample and demographics. I’ve found the following on this particular poll …
1. Party Leanings – The poll is slanted 52-40% towards Democrats, even though the voters in the 2004 election were split evenly at 37% between Republicans and Democrats.
2. Religion – 19% of respondents had “no” religion, while in 2004 only 10% of voters had “no” religion, and they voted overwhelmingly for Kerry (+36%).
3. Income Level of Respondents – In this poll 15% of respondents made under $15,000 per year. In 2004, only 8% of voters were in this income bracket, and voted 63-36% for Kerry.
4. Marital Status – In this poll, only 56% of respondents are married. In 2004, 63% of voters were married, and voted 57-42% for Bush.
5. Geography – In this poll, only 17% of respondents were from “rural” areas. In 2004, 25% of voters were from rural areas, and voted 57-42% for Bush.
6. Race – In this poll, there were 71% white respondents and 12% Hispanic respondents. In 2004, 77% of voters were white, and only 8% Hispanic. Bush won the white vote 58-41% and Kerry the Hispanic vote 53-44%.
Perhaps the headline should have been “President Bush, GOP unpopular among people who don’t vote for the GOP”.
January 9th, 2006 at 10:47 amPerhaps the headline should have been “President Bush, GOP unpopular among people who don’t vote for the GOPâ€.
Comment by Giacomo #215
jaggoffmore,
These past five years, if there is any ONE fact that stands out about information- under the criminal Bushite junta- it’s that almost any information one can provide to bolster one’s claims can conversely (accurately) be disproved…
One can only take the word of the person(s) attempting to prove his/her/their assertion(s) that the information he/she/it/they provided is in fact valid…
Myself, I tend to cleave to the sage advice of Public Enemy, who advise that when it comes to most statistics we simply, “Can’t Trust It”…
January 9th, 2006 at 11:59 amThese past five years, if there is any ONE fact that stands out about information- under the criminal Bushite junta- it’s that almost any information one can provide to bolster one’s claims can conversely (accurately) be disproved…
Let me refer you to my post 21 … I don’t like any polls and don’t trumpet the results. They often (or can easily) reflect the pollers ideology.
January 9th, 2006 at 12:05 pmLike so many paranoid types who see a conspiracy under every Bush, two of my local libs sent a letter to the editor bashing Bush for warrantless wiretapping of Americans. People who are conspiring with AlQaeda aren’t purported to be Americans but, silly me, when have details ever mattered to Bush haters???
January 9th, 2006 at 1:54 pmMA-
Do you really think that Bush cares about what Al Qaeda is doing? Hell no, in fact, he’s way too busy worrying what people learning about the width and depth of Republican corruption. In his own incompetent way, he’s probably praying for AQ to do something, anything, to get the American people distracted and afraid again. Just like before 9/11- neglect, stovepoint, and deflect info from being actioned.
On the other hand, Bush and the Republican Syndicate’s growing criminal exposure is certainly a real threat to their personal security. Hence, warrantless wiretaps for the one group that does threaten their political and legal survival. The Democrats and a growing majority of Americans who recognize the threat to our civil liberties and democracy. It’s not paranoia, MA, it is a fact.
I want to see Bush, Cheney, et al impeached and put on trial. I want them charged and convicted on crimes against humanity and crimes against this country.
Does that make me a terrorist? Or a patriotic American citizen? Which side are you on MA?
January 9th, 2006 at 6:51 pmPresident Bush’s post Sept. 11, 2001, authorization to the National Security Agency to carry out electronic surveillance into private phone calls and e-mails is consistent with court decisions and with the positions of the Justice Department under prior presidents.
…
In the Supreme Court’s 1972 Keith decision holding that the president does not have inherent authority to order wiretapping without warrants to combat domestic threats, the court said explicitly that it was not questioning the president’s authority to take such action in response to threats from abroad.
Four federal courts of appeal subsequently faced the issue squarely and held that the president has inherent authority to authorize wiretapping for foreign intelligence purposes without judicial warrant.
In the most recent judicial statement on the issue, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, composed of three federal appellate court judges, said in 2002 that “All the … courts to have decided the issue held that the president did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence … We take for granted that the president does have that authority.â€
In other words, even the court that grants the warrants concedes that in certain situations, the warrants are not needed.
January 11th, 2006 at 9:03 am[...] We’re not entirely there yet, but we’re getting pretty fucking close. And not too many people really seem to care. When did this country become so pussified? When I ride down the road and see leftover “W ‘04″ stickers, I don’t see Republicans – I see panty-waste dipshits that voted with their cowardice. Since when is government something we’re actually supposed to trust? And, if we should, why? Where is the fucking evidence that any of this illegal and unethical surveillance has done anyone any shred of good at all period? No convictions on anything post-9/11. No fucking RESULTS. [...]
January 27th, 2006 at 8:25 pmBush, Cheney and their gang are nothing but Fascists. Now they are having the Pentagon look at your internet use, supposedly looking for people using porn sites. PLEASE!!!!! How anyone could swallow this B.S. is beyond me. This government has ceased to be a democracy. The media belongs to big business and won’t really begin to talk about this at legnth until they have no choice. It’s time to remove these criminals from office, and those members of Congress who won’t look into their crimes. IN OTHER WORDS, VOTE THOSE CORRUPT REPUBLICANS OUT OF OFFICE AND PUT PEOPLE IN WHO WILL DO WHAT THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO DO: PROTECT THE PEOPLE AND A DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT. Bush and Cheney will look SO GOOd in orange prison jumpsuits!!!
January 30th, 2006 at 2:11 ampeople do not understand this issue, it is complicated and therefore much easier to just accuse the president of unlawful conduct rather then understand and explain the facts. when a government agency applies for a wiretap during any investigation, it applies for a warrent that covers the target of the investigation and that persons phone line. the government does not get individual warrents for every phone call or indiviual warrents for every person the target of the investigation talks to over the phone. for example, if i was to contact someone in this country who was the target of a drug investigation and their phone was tapped via a warrent, the government would have my phone conversation recorded even though they did not aquire a warrent to record MY phone calls. If the target of an investigation is in a foreign country then the government does not need a warrent since our constitutional protections are not extended to foreigners in foreign countries. If the target of the investigation is in the U.S. then a warrent is required and would be obtained. Some people hate bush so much that they would disagree with anything and everything he does, simply because he is doing it. You constantly hear pundits on tv and elsewhere complaining that bush is illegaly spying on american citizens, and while it may be true that american citizens may be one side of some of these recorded conversations, they are not being illegally spied on. basically it all boils down to not talking to suspected terrorists who reside in foreign countries over the phone, and if you must talk to foreign suspected terrorists then make sure you are not discussing terrorist activity, and if you are discussing terrorist activity then make sure you are both in the us when the call is made. those of you involved in petty crimes and drug dealing with still be afforded the same constitutional protections you always were.
February 11th, 2006 at 1:48 pmI really respect all of your views and I certainly don’t want my constitutional liberties sacrificed for any reason. After all, with so many loose interpretations of the Constitution to begin with, where will it leave us if we can’t have a right to our most basic principals. But you know what? I am willing to sacrifice a little of my liberties to prevent a terrorist attack. And you know what you probably don’t realize is that those who are being wiretapped are probably not American citizens. And if they are, then we may have a problem, but I would surmise that over 95% of those being wire tapped are foreigners whose only aim in this world is to harm America, her citizens, or her interests. Who really gives a rip if it’s illegal. So what, big freakin’ deal. Hey I have nothing to hide and you probably don’t either. But you know who does? Of course those who will go to the ends of the earth to do anything to harm American citizens. American citizens are not being wiretapped, and if they are, then they must be for some reason, i.e., perhaps they are connected to terrorism in some sort of way, and if they’re not, then the wiretaps will prove their innocence. But if they are connected, thank God we found out before they committed some atrocity against our people. Do you remember when the towers fell? I do. And I praise God above (yes, I said God, because this is a country founded on Christian principals) that we have a president willing to take a little gruff to protect America. This isn’t about Bush, it’s about America. Remember this country is pretty much split right down the political spectrrum so at least half of us are right and half of us are wrong. I would love to agree with you, but that would make us both wrong.
Cheers,
Mitch
November 2nd, 2006 at 12:21 amSissy Adult Baby
I enjoyed reading your blog. It is so interesting reading other peoples personal take on a subject.
March 14th, 2008 at 6:28 amParty Planning Chicago
I enjoyed reading your blog. What a great thing it is to be able to share information like this on the Internet.
March 14th, 2008 at 8:34 pmYoung Girls Youngest Boys Gallery Young Girls Naked
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 16th, 2008 at 12:24 amPee Public Pee Public Pissing
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 16th, 2008 at 6:53 pmparenting teenagers
Sounds like an idea of the month!
March 16th, 2008 at 8:01 pmKds Bbs Pics Russian Child Models Ls Girls
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 17th, 2008 at 9:15 pmFree Porn Free Cartoon Pokemon Porn 100 Free Porn
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 18th, 2008 at 8:03 pmFree Porn Free Gay Porn Free Porn Vids
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 20th, 2008 at 6:16 pmFree Granny Porn Lesbian Milfs Free Mom And Son Sex
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 21st, 2008 at 4:36 pmAss Tight Ass Ass Worship
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 23rd, 2008 at 12:54 pmFree Granny Porn Milf Camps Friend’s Hot Mom
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 24th, 2008 at 6:25 amFree Porn Free Full Length Porn Movies Free Full Length Porn Movies
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 30th, 2008 at 6:21 pmPreteen Preteen Pussy Model Pre Teen Underwear
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 30th, 2008 at 6:49 pmGay Sex Gay Ass Gay Ass
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 31st, 2008 at 7:20 pmDistance Learning Teachers Having Sex With Students Very Hot School Girls
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 2nd, 2008 at 12:57 pm