McCain: Bush Does Not Have “The Legal Authority To Engage In These Warrantless Wiretaps”
McCain: Bush Does Not Have “The Legal Authority To Engage In These Warrantless Wiretaps”
Today on Fox News Sunday, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) said Bush’s warrantless domestic wiretapping program is illegal:
WALLACE: But you do not believe that currently he has the legal authority to engage in these warrant-less wiretaps.
MCCAIN: You know, I don’t think so, but why not come to Congress? We can sort this all out. I don’t think — I know of no member of Congress, frankly, who, if the administration came and said here’s why we need this capability, that they wouldn’t get it. And so let’s have the hearings.
McCain is the latest addition to a growing list of prominent conservatives — including Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA), Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS) and Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN) — who have expressed serious concerns about the legality of the program.
Karl Rove doesn’t want to spin it this way but concern about the warrantless domestic spying program is bipartisan.
UPDATE: Crooks and Liars has the video.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Support for it was bi-partisan, also. Jane Harmon was very revealing today. There is every indication that the leniency afforded Alito about presidential powers is because key Democrats supported NSA spying.
January 22nd, 2006 at 12:20 pmI agree. Let’s have the hearings. Let’s find out just exactly why Bush felt he could circumvent the law. Let’s find out just exactly why Bush felt he needed to behave like Royalty and do whatever he wanted.
If we can’t impeach this guy, we’re very a sorry republic indeed.
January 22nd, 2006 at 12:21 pmLeniency during the hearings, I should clarify.
January 22nd, 2006 at 12:21 pmOh, and this isn’t a Democrat problem. We’ve already heard from Dems’ who told Bush “No!”
This is a Repug problem. Pure. Simple.
It’s time to Impeach the b****d Bush!!!
January 22nd, 2006 at 12:22 pmAsk Jane Harmon why she felt Bush had the right to circumvent the law. Because she agrees with Bush. She is an intelligence commitee Democrat!
January 22nd, 2006 at 12:23 pmThe only hearings we need are IMPEACHMENT hearings! Bush has the authority through FISA to conduct this intelligence gathering. There is a reason why he did not go through FISA and it probably isn’t something that the administration wants the country to know. There is no need to give this administation any more authority – look at the abuse of the authority that they already have!
January 22nd, 2006 at 12:38 pmHearings will do no good because they will continue to lie about the reason for intelligence gathering just like they have lied about everything else for the last 5 years. You can’t get the truth from this administration, so putting them under oath and questioning them for days will still get us nowhere. The answer to every question will be “Answering that question will compromise national security”.
January 22nd, 2006 at 12:44 pmSo then when are Democrats who believe this going to introduce legislation to give the president the authority? Or are they uninterested in surveillance of al Qaeda?
January 22nd, 2006 at 12:51 pm#8, see #6
January 22nd, 2006 at 1:03 pm#8 Its a little more complicated than just saying OK you can do this. You need to make boundries and say what can an can’t be done. Not that this will mean ANYTHING to Bush because he will just do what the hell he wants anyway. The problem is what is going on now with GOOGLE. Bush is trying to spy on everyone. He wants to know who is doing what and if they are for or against him.
This is the problem. Bush IS A DICTATOR! It’s not that he is fighting terror, because he is NOT. He has no concern over terrorists. Quote “I just don’t think of him much anymore” in regards to OBL. Also, one of the High Ranking DOD personnel “OBL was never our objective”. So you see, there is not effort being made to fight terror. It is a ploy to keep cowards like you in the corner shivering with your little blankie.
Don’t worry, the real Americans will keep you safe from yourself by protecting your civil liberties.
January 22nd, 2006 at 1:04 pmvesparia, #6 is hysterical partisan pap.
January 22nd, 2006 at 1:05 pm#10 is nothing but crazy talk. Of course great efforts are being made to fight terrorism. Only a complete kook would state otherwise.
January 22nd, 2006 at 1:06 pmWell, USA Patriot, it’s not up to Democrats to introduce the legislation—better check your own party who has control of all legislation effecting the government.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but being uninterested in surveillance of al Qaeda has nothing to do with it. Even Republicans John McCain, Larry Craig, Graham, Lugar, etc. have misgivings about the invasion of privacy of Americans just because Bush sees a blood-thirsty terrorist at the end of every phone line. Frankly, I think they are really more concerned on keeping tabs who is opposing them politically, who Cindy Sheehan talks with, or which Democrats can be caught in a scandal they can use in 2006/2008.
By the way, your handle, “USA Patriot” is pretty cool the way it implies everyone else here is some kind of unamerican turncoat. Frankly, I think USA Dipshit sounds better.
January 22nd, 2006 at 1:09 pmJohn McCain, we won’t forget your latest betrayal in 2008.
McCain is basically a hooker for the Liberal Media.
January 22nd, 2006 at 1:10 pmGary Ruppert — USA Patriot —
January 22nd, 2006 at 1:13 pmwe won’t forget your latest betrayal
Gary Ruppert — USA Patriot —
is basically hookers for the Conservative Media. (FOX)
January 22nd, 2006 at 1:15 pm
January 22nd, 2006 at 1:15 pmUSA Ruppert, you’re wrong. So is Gary Patriot.
January 22nd, 2006 at 1:16 pmJohn McCain, we Forgive and will forget your latest betrayal in 2008
January 22nd, 2006 at 1:19 pmJohn McCain, we won’t forget your latest betrayal in 2008.
McCain is basically a hooker for the Liberal Media.
Comment by Gary Ruppert
Yeah, well, Mccain shouldn’t worry about 2008 anyway. McCain is pro-choice and broad-minded.
Correct me if I’m wrong, he hasn’t got a sailor’s chance in Hell of getting past the Christian Right’s grip on the Repugnican party.
January 22nd, 2006 at 1:20 pmI’d just like to thank Gary USA and Patriot Ruppert for all the hits they are giving ThinkProgress. Every comment they post makes this site more popular, prosperous, & successful. Great work!
January 22nd, 2006 at 1:22 pmUSA Ruppert/Gary Patriot/WWally …
useful only if one enjoys banging head into brick wall…
January 22nd, 2006 at 1:23 pmUSA Patriot is not Gary Rupert. That is wwallace.
Tag your it.
January 22nd, 2006 at 1:29 pmYes, patrick, as a conservative, rightwing dipstick myself, I rather appreciate the help they give me holding up the right point of view here.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but I sure wish they would back up what they say with a few facts instead of just throwing up those some old wornout cliches.
Now if you’ll excuse me, I think I will call the information operator in Pakistan and get myself wiretapped by the NSA, if I ain’t all ready.
January 22nd, 2006 at 1:29 pmDo you think that Karl Rove would like to put a wiretap on Patrick Fitzgerald?
What’s to stop him?
January 22nd, 2006 at 1:34 pmLet’s see. If the repubs control congress and have hearings on their leader, what can we expect? Let’s see, how much informaion generally comes out of hearings in which the repubs have a majority on the committee and want to make the prez look good? Answer: Zip, nada, zilch…. McCain is always looking to present himself as the middel of the road repub/dem. Actually, he’s a repub who will toe the line when necessary. He’s setting up the dems for another fall. Why doesn’t he ask for an independent investigation? Congress has clearly dropped the ball and why should the controlling party look to damage (further) their leader? They will not….so hearings will simply be a distraction from all the other crap being played by this prez.
January 22nd, 2006 at 1:35 pmJoe, “Well, USA Patriot, it’s not up to Democrats to introduce the legislation”
Why not? Why don’t all the Democrats in the Senate just quit and go home if they’re not going to do anything?
They have the ability to introduce legislation if they’re concerned about it. They’re obviously not concerned about it. They’d rather play partisan games than defend America from terrorists.
January 22nd, 2006 at 1:45 pmMcCain is being a wuss yet again
look, McCain needed to dress the president down when the president stabbed him in the back YET AGAIN at the signing of the anti terror bill…actually claiming he STILL had the right to torture.
McCain has lost any kind of credibility and has to do something in public about what the president did
in addition, McCain HAS to know the president can get any warrant he wants after the search is conducted
there is NOTHING to “work out”…there is NOTHING lost in expedience or efficiency by what the president claims to have the right to do
if McCain has an ambition at leadership he has GOT to take the reigns NOW
January 22nd, 2006 at 1:45 pmyou aren’t serious, are you?
the democrats cannot introduce bills, they are not even given offical status to conduct a friggin hearing
January 22nd, 2006 at 1:47 pmDo you think that Karl Rove would like to put a wiretap on Patrick Fitzgerald?
What’s to stop him?
January 22nd, 2006 at 1:48 pmYou’re obviously a master of the parlimentary system.
The fact is that Democrats can introduce bills on anything. They just refuse to do so.
January 22nd, 2006 at 1:55 pmThey can introduce all the bills they want to, but it doesn’t mean anything if the Republicans won’t allow votes on them or steal Democrat ideas and take credit for them. The only way the legality of Bush’s illegal domestic spying program on Americans with no ties to terrorists will be questioned is if a Republican does it. They are the only ones who can people to pay attention to it and take it seriously both in Congress and the media.
January 22nd, 2006 at 2:01 pmGary,
January 22nd, 2006 at 2:04 pmI don’t frequent Red blogs. Are they discussing the Democratic support for the NSA wiretaps?
They [democrats] have the ability to introduce legislation if they’re concerned about it. They’re obviously not concerned about it. They’d rather play partisan games than defend America from terrorists.
Comment by USA Patriot
Correct me if I’m wrong, but you have a good point about playing partisan games. Like the way Bush’s war on terror has not killed or captured Osama bin Laden, his second in command with the birdshit on his forehead, a one-eyed Talaban cleric or any other major players in this war: they are necessary to scare the crap out of the old people and assure the votes for the Repugnican party.
I mean, isn’t it just amazing how tapes of OBL surface just before an election, a major slippage in the polls, or just in time to help Bush remind the sheeple who it is protecting them from a ruthless killer?
Naw, I’m with you here about the use of partisan politics. Think they would get OBL before the 2006 elections when without OBL there would be no GWB? Of course not. He’s the best thing that ever happened to junior.
January 22nd, 2006 at 2:09 pmActually, No Child Left Behind was a Democrat introduced bill.
The fact is that you all can’t get votes on your partisan witchhunt bills, and thst’s for good reason.
January 22nd, 2006 at 2:10 pmDo you think that Karl Rove would like to put a wiretap on Patrick Fitzgerald?
What’s to stop him?
What’s to stop Bush from tapping into the DNC? Or any Democrat Congressman? Or any journalist?
Who would know that he was doing it, without a warrant?
January 22nd, 2006 at 2:11 pmNo, it’s because the Republicans are desperate to keep the media from finding out how crooked and out of touch with America they truly are.
January 22nd, 2006 at 2:15 pmI may be missing something, but is sounds to me like McCain wants to have ‘hearings’ so that it can be determined that this illegal activity is necessary, and thus there is no problem with it having been done prior to the ‘hearings’.
January 22nd, 2006 at 2:15 pm#35 “Actually, No Child Left Behind was a Democrat introduced bill.
The fact is that you all can’t get votes on your partisan witchhunt bills, and thst’s for good reason.”
Comment by Gary Ruppert
Are you nuts? This is Bushes wet dream. The idea might have been the Democrats, but Bush took that and ripped it apart and turned it into something horable. This bill is one of the worst that there is for kids the way it is handled. This was completly bragged that this was his parties bill and that he was going to make sure that it came to fuition.
Gary – you need to tell Donald that you need a replacement or that you need stronger arguing points. Better yet, how about getting some arguing points? So far all you have done is stated things with ABSOLUTELY NO SUPPORT. You have been asked for supporting data for your claims but so far on a scale of 1 to 10 your at -100.
January 22nd, 2006 at 2:17 pmWell according to Jane Harmon, she is more than ready to change the existing law to accomodate the thus far alleged illegal wiretaps. Yeah, she’s the Democrat.
January 22nd, 2006 at 2:17 pmKeith – Yeah, I see that too. Since it is illegal, this is the only approach they have. To say that it was necessary. Who cares if it breaks the law or the Constitition.
Let’s not focus on whats right or wrong, let’s focus on whats necessary. This is the direction our county is going/gone. So much for our laws. Good by America, Hello Nazi Germany.
January 22nd, 2006 at 2:19 pmthe underfunding of a program that cost money was deliberately intended to bankrupt public education
just as no bid prescription drugs was intended to bankrupt that program
this is one sick puppy turning America back into the days of 1905.
we’re in tons of trouble..especially with people that are defending these policies, voting against their own interest, actually encouraging the administration to give their money, their parents money, and most important, their children’s money to wealthy people
people that will never spend the money, the sole purpose of giving them your money is to widen the gap between haves and have nots
you need to start looking our for your children and stop defending this administrations actions simply because he claims he is a member of your party
first, he is NOT a republcian, his polices fly in the face of convervative politics, and second, start protecting your family and stop making this a “my side your side” thing
January 22nd, 2006 at 2:20 pm#40,
Don’t even try that. Jane Harmon is the one who pointed out that Bush violated a law by not consulting with all members of the appropriate House and Senate committees.
January 22nd, 2006 at 2:20 pmtrolls trying to pat themselves on the back….tiny minds in tiny robots to’keep the sheep asleep’. Not working,here, or anywhere else. The pandoras box is open and won’t close till the crooks a gone.
January 22nd, 2006 at 2:21 pmJoe Sixpack, I have disagreed with you in the past, but you are making a lot of sense. We CAN disagree,yet make the goverment better. I don’t drink, but Joe, have a beer on me.
Fight the power,
January 22nd, 2006 at 2:27 pmAfter the fact. The soft dems running around writing notes on napkins stating their objection to the spying. BULLSH*T.
They should have blown the whistle IMMEDIATELY. They don’t fight the illegal war. They don’t fight illegal wiretaps. They are complicite.
I see your point. The Democrats need to stop letting themselves get pushed around on issues where the American people would agree with the Democrats if they knew all the facts. It seems like they don’t fully understand how dirty and corrupt the Republicans are or else they would be fighting harder to preserve our democracy.
January 22nd, 2006 at 2:34 pmWhat McCain is saying is that the power to wire tap without warrant would have been given to the President if he had only asked.
Say WHAT?
January 22nd, 2006 at 2:40 pmI want to reiterate a point I made in a previous thread that we are not talking about a few targeted wire taps.
We are talking about DATA WAREHOUSING and DATA MINING.
EVERYTHINGS being recorded and stored for future inspection.
That’s what people are missing. We are now, officially, a Police State, courtesy George W Bush and his good pal, Osama Ain’t been laidin a while.
January 22nd, 2006 at 2:43 pmWelcome to Orwellville.
January 22nd, 2006 at 2:44 pm“the democrats cannot introduce bills”
Of course they can.
January 22nd, 2006 at 2:44 pmThe FACT is that Bush had started doing this BEFORE 9/11.
January 22nd, 2006 at 2:46 pmOf that I do not doubt Mr Ho. But now we know.
What are we gonna do about it?
To listen to George Will and Cokie Roberts this morning, it appears America’s just gonna role over and say, well, we’d rather be safe
January 22nd, 2006 at 2:49 pmTh FACT is since Bush has done so many signings, many of the bills congress (republican dominated) created were basically reinterpreted by Bush lawyers and to be re-interpreted by ALITO and the supreme court. ALITO is the one that hellp to get the SIGNING thing passed,Under Reagan and Sr, to me, this is a conflict of interests.
Not a lwayer, so I expect to be corrected by those that may be. =)
January 22nd, 2006 at 2:50 pmIf our rights under the Constitution are worthless, if the president has all the power of a king, then we have no freedom and the terrorists have won. The only question remaining is exactly who are the terrorists?
January 22nd, 2006 at 2:56 pmLook, the United States was never meant to be a nation where everyword you say over the phone, every email you write to someone, every websearch you ever made, is stored on massive JukeBoxes and other Optical storage mediums to be mined at a later date for keywords that my get you sent to jail.
Even if nothing you say is ever used against you, do you really want some 26 year old computer geek over at NSA sitting around laughing at you telling your girlfriend how her butts not big?
I don’t know about you but now every word I type, every email I send, everything I say on the phone I now second guess, wondering how it might be used against me somewhere in the future.
This is not America.
As John Stossel would say, Give me a BREAK.
January 22nd, 2006 at 2:58 pmAye, I speak to all I know Worfeus.
The Message is getting out.
The people, even on the Christian stations are waking up to the number three and all inclusive signifcance of it. The Three unfolding stages of matter and time. The three rings.
the +|-
January 22nd, 2006 at 2:59 pmvis a vis
this to that
N to South
the grey between
Left to right
up to down
the point between 360 and 0
The Zero point
Ying and yang
thesis synthesis antisynthesis
The FACT is that Clinton had started doing this BEFORE 9/11.
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:00 pmBias shall Imprison us, Tapped phones, Emails, Laws…fear.
3 is key
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:00 pmfact is HE LIED, and he knew HE LIED:
“…Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires — a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we’re talking about chasing down terrorists, we’re talking about getting a court order before we do so. It’s important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution.†bush 2004
see/hear it for yourself: http://thinkprogress.org/ 2005/ 12/ 20/ bush-caught-on-tape/ #comments
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:00 pmWORFEUS is a “good pal” of Osama bin Ladin. Watch, WORFEUS will be unable to prove he’s not…
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:01 pm#The FACT is that Clinton had started doing this BEFORE 9/11.
Comment by USA Patriot — January 22, 2006 @ 3:00 pm
it speaks, but not.
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:01 pm#The FACT is that Clinton had started doing this BEFORE 9/11.
Comment by USA Patriot — January 22, 2006 @ 3:00 pm
it thinks but little and sees much less.
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:03 pm“WALLACE: But you do not believe…”
Without probing the disease-ridden recesses of the Mainstream Media Whore, note that phrases such as “But you do not believe…” and “But you believe…” now represent the zenith of American Journalism!
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:08 pmThe FACT is that Clinton had started doing this BEFORE 9/11.
Comment by USA Gary— January 22, 2006 @ 3:00 pm
Lie.
The FISA law originally did not cover physical searches, only wiretaps. The Clinton Administration conducted legal warrantless physical searches until, with the support of the White House, the FISA law was expanded to cover physical searches, too.
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:16 pmI was not referring to physical searches, patrick. I didn’t mention physical searches. Thank you for demonstrating your ability to mindlessly regurgitate talking points, regardless of context. LOL
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:20 pmWiretaps, trying to get intenet search records, it all sounds like Bush is looking for his enemies instead of terrorists. Nixon, Now more than ever!
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:22 pmI was not referring to physical searches, patrick. I didn’t mention physical searches. Thank you for demonstrating your ability to mindlessly regurgitate talking points, regardless of context. LOL
Comment by USA Patriot — January 22, 2006 @ 3:20 pm
Dude, don’t you even know your own talking points? The official right-wing talking point on Clinton is “well, Clinton did warrantless wiretaps, too,” which is false and confuses wiretaps with physical searches, which were legal at the time.
I’m sorry that you fumbled your own talking point, but it’s not my fault. Now hop back over to your right-wing blogs and study up, bub.
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:25 pmpatrick, keep digging. LOL
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:26 pmHistory teaches that grave threats to liberty often come in times of urgency, when constitutional rights seem too extravagant to endure.
Justice Thurgood Marshall
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:26 pmPoint to Patrick.
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:28 pm“McCain is the latest addition to a growing list of prominent conservatives — including Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA), Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS) and Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN) — who have expressed serious concerns about the legality of the program.
Karl Rove doesn’t want to spin it this way but concern about the warrantless domestic spying program is bipartisan.”
There’s no such thing as bipartisan when presidential elections are on the horizon. McCain has already shot off several of his own toes bucking the President on important issues. My guess is after the 08 elections the name McCain will never be heard again in any serious political discussion unless it has something to do with fraud.
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:28 pmThe fact that Clinton did ’something’ is not relevant as his actions in this case were not illegal. WERE NOT ILLEGAL you dip-stick. The law was not amended to make what he did illegal until AFTERWARDS you moron. The fact you would bring it up shows the rest of us just how damned dumb you realy are. Like so many other republicons, ignorant as shit, and damned proud of it! You repubs are the ones that are in love with OBL, you let him get away didn’t you?
P.S. Seems like when Bush speakes, if you interpret his statements to mean exactly the oposite of what he says, the message comes thru load and clear….
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:29 pmMy guess is after the 08 elections the name McCain will never be heard again in any serious political discussion unless it has something to do with fraud.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — January 22, 2006 @ 3:28 pm
Your guess and a quarter would’nt make a phone call.
Mr. McCain is going to be a key political player for as long as he is breathing, of that, I would bet the farm.
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:33 pmI guess whatever winger think-tank funds these guys cut its pay rates for trolls – it’s bottom-of-the-barrel time. They haven’t even studied their own talking points. Sad.
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:35 pmMcCain has already shot off several of his own toes bucking the President on important issues
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — January 22, 2006 @ 3:28 pm
Really, really poor analogy. To compare a man who not only served with valor, but ended up spending 8 years in the Hanoi Hilton, and even then refused to leave when his opportunity came so that others could leave, to man, (and I use that term loosely) who was too afraid to even get near Viet Nam, is hubris.
Then again, Hubris is your middle name, isn’t it?
I-HUBRIS-I?
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:35 pmha ha – that’s a good one, worfeus…
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:42 pm“hubris-between-the-i’s” – yea, that works!
Really, really poor analogy.
Comment by WORFEUS —
I don’t take anything away from the man’s service to our country when I criticize the moves he’s made or in my opinion disallow his qualifications for the office. In the same way your allusion to Bush’s so-called shirking of duty is not relevant to today.
What a man may or may not have done thirty years ago is not a good reason to stand behind him today. John Murtha is a perfect case in point.
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:43 pmReally, really poor analogy.
Comment by WORFEUS —
I don’t take anything away from the man’s service to our country when I criticize the moves he’s made or in my opinion disallow his qualifications for the office. In the same way your allusion to Bush’s so-called shirking of duty is not relevant to today.
What a man may or may not have done thirty years ago is not a good reason to stand behind him today. John Murtha is a perfect case in point.
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:43 pmThe right has no respect for a mans military service. This is clear.
It’s all pomp and hype to recruit them, but once they’ve served, and particularly if they end up being incapacitated through battle wounds, then they are chaff to be discarded into the wind.
Jack Murtha, bloodied thrice for his country, dedicated 4 decades to his nation, and the scum call him a coward.
John McCain, decorated, a POW, a hero who let his men go first after years of torture in a Vietnamese POW camp, when he does not agree with the right, is a coward and a traitor.
Paul Hackett, Scott Ritter, John Kerry, Max Clelland, on and on and on.
It turns my stomach to think of the cowards on the right who never served condemning these mens service to their countries.
It makes me sick.
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:47 pmI-CHICKENHAWK-I,
better run, I think I hear Osama commin,
RUN!
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:48 pmWhen you open your mouth to disgrace these great men, you only disgrace yourself I-DIDNTSERVE-I.
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:50 pmSo now patrick is criticizing conservatives for not sticking to talking points. Classic! LOL
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:52 pmBut thus is the rhetoric of the behind the scenes cowards.
Send other peoples kids off to fight wars, then sit around with their fat, lazy security mom wifes talking about how brave they are, and how cowardly the liberals are for not supporting the war.
I imagine one must summon great courage to awake everyday in their lime green doublewide, resuse a 3 week old coffee filter, cash in their foodstamps for 10 cents on the dollar to by a bottle of JD, and sit at their 3 legged kitchen table using their new computer from rent-a-center to tell the world how brave it is to support a war that you don’t have to fight in.
You’re heroes to us all.
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:54 pmWOR-chickenhawk-FEUS left Tim McVeigh, who served in Desert Storm, off his list of veterans who cannot be criticized in any way. LOL
The standard that WOR-chickenhawk-FEUS is espousing here – that veterans cannot be criticized or debated in any way – is simply un-American.
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:55 pmWORFEUS, did you support the war in Afghanistann?
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:57 pmNever said that.
I just said it’s hubris for little pusses like you to critcize them.
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:57 pmOh and BTW Nimrod,
To be a Chickenhawk, one has to actually support a war they are unwilling to fight in.
That’s a club reserved for you and your clan.
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:58 pm“I just said it’s hubris for little pusses like you to critcize them.”
Of course. Typically, it was just empty ad hominem.
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:58 pmI-HUBRIS-I?
Comment by WORFEUS
Hey Worf….you’ve got a pretty smart mouth when I’m otherwise occupied. Where are you now? I haven’t got all day.
January 22nd, 2006 at 3:58 pmLOL,
I-RUNAWAYEVERYTIMEISEEWORFEUS-I,
what happened to you last night?
Puss.
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:00 pmWOR-chickenhawk-FEUS, did you support the war in Afghanistan?
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:01 pmAnd BTW I-CANTREAD-I, 79, 80, 81, 83, are all directed to you, and awaiting your witty retort,
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:01 pmWhen you open your mouth to disgrace these great men, you only disgrace yourself I-DIDNTSERVE-I.
Comment by WORF
If that’s your argument you’re an idiot. Hitler served in WWI and John Kerry served in Vietnam and neither one of those guys came out the wiser for it. So, what’s your point, only men who served in wartime are qualified to speak of politics and war?
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:02 pmWOR-chickenhawk-FEUS, did you support the war in Afghanistan?
Comment by USA Patriot — January 22, 2006 @ 4:01 pm
Yes, and I was willing to fight in it to.
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:02 pm“Yes, and I was willing to fight in it to.”
So you fought in it?
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:02 pmHitler served in a non combat role I-NIMROD-I.
Read a book.
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:02 pmWOR-chickenhawk-FEUS, did you support the war in Afghanistan?
Comment by USA Patriot — January 22, 2006 @ 4:01 pm
Yes, and I was willing to fight in it to.
Comment by WORFEUS
So in other words you’re not smart enough to see that the war in Iraq is against the same enemy we fought in Afghanistan and part of the war we’ve been fighting against Islamic foes since Mohammed screwed his first 9 year old?
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:04 pm“…served in a non combat role…”
So anyone who served in the military in a non-combat role is also prohibited from expressing an opinion now? Wow, left-wing intolerance of dissent keeps raising the bar.
And always remember, these are the same folks who just a few years ago called people who served in Vietnam “baby killers.”
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:05 pmSo in other words you’re not smart enough to see that the war in Iraq is against the same enemy we fought in Afghanistan
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — January 22, 2006 @ 4:04 pm
Yea, guess I’m not that smart.
You must be a genius.
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:06 pmNever said that Patriot.
You seem to be expressing your opinion fine.
I just said your were a PUSS for doing it.
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:07 pmWhen you open your mouth to disgrace these great men, you only disgrace yourself I-DIDNTSERVE-I.
Comment by WORF
I don’t have the power to disgrace anyone.
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:08 pmWhen McCain stood on the tarmac and said he was’nt going until his men were all free, after 7 years of torture, beatings, starvation, isolation, brainwashing, humiliation, etc, he passed over into a realm you and the critter you call USA PATRIOT, well never enter into.
He is above us all for that one, selfless act. He is not free from judgement, but calling him a coward, traitor, chicken, etc, is what ensures that you, and the minions who follow you, will forever be in the septicpit you now occupy.
You’re not the devil. You’re just the guys who run into the liquour store the buy the devil a pack of smokes.
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:11 pmbut calling him a coward, traitor, chicken, etc,
Comment by WORFEUS
Putting words in my mouth to defame my person and destroy my honor makes you the same as a murderer. That’s what the Bible says. Just thought you’d like to know that before I go.
Later.
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:17 pmWOR-chickenhawk-FEUS, so you fought in Afghanistan?
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:19 pmYea, guess I’m not that smart.
Comment by WORFEUS
Then start here. You have miles to go before you sleep.
http://carlisle-www.army.mil/usawc/Parameters/02autumn/peters.htm
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:23 pmWhere did I-SUBTLESMEAR-I disparage Senator John McCain?
McCain has already shot off several of his own toes bucking the President on important issues
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — January 22, 2006 @ 3:28 pm
The concept of soldiers shooting themselves in the foot during VietNam, was commonly spoken of during the 70’s.
In fact, it was a household term. I don’t know if it originated in Nam, doubt it, probably goes back to the revolution, but that aside, it was commonly associated with cowardice, and running from the fight.
A disgraceful way to avoid combat service.
Using such an analogy, to subtly seed the thought that McCain is a coward, while perhaps lost on some less persnickety than I, is as obvious as the crew cut on your thick flat topped melon.
You may think you’re slick, slick, but you’re not.
Thats just the residual slime creating that appearence.
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:24 pm#13, Joe6pack says “Frankly, I think they are really more concerned on keeping tabs who is opposing them politically, who Cindy Sheehan talks with, or which Democrats can be caught in a scandal they can use in 2006/2008.”
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:27 pmI think he is right.
Recall that A. Gonzalez told two differing stories about why they did not go to Congress for power. First he said he didn’t think they could get it – then he said they had it implicitly since 10/2001. If they believed they had the power since Oct. 2001, why would they later consult Congress? Now we learn that they have been spying on Americans since February 2001, fully 6 months before the so called authority. This is a White House out of control – they think we are subject to them, but they are our public servants.
Oh and as for your lazy link?
Throwing out a link without a detailed argument and supporting theory is like a baby laying on its back, spreading it’s legs and saying “here change me, I crapped myself”.
If you’ve got something intillegent to say, say it. But don’t bother wasting space lazily throwing out a link to somebody elses ideas, you lazy troll you.
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:29 pmI-LAZY-I
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:31 pmLAZY-I, wasn’t that a ranch in a John Wayne western?
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:32 pmWOR-chickenhawk-FEUS, so you fought in Afghanistan?
The term “baby killer” was commonly spoken during the 70’s, by liberal Democrats.
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:33 pmNo, I did not fight in Afghanisthan.
Never said I did. But I would have been willing to.
I was too old to enlist in Deseret Storm, though I did fill out the paperwork.
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:36 pmAnd I am familiar with the term baby killer.
So?
What is it’s relevence to our discussion?
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:36 pmI see the eunuchs are squating in their basements with a laptop today.
USA eunuch, the only thing you have fought in your life is your cowardice.
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:40 pmThis is from the new Newsweek:
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:40 pmThe Pentagon has its own domestic spying program. Even its leaders say the outfit may have gone too far.
In fact, I think the Marine recruiting officer is still laughing.
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:43 pmRead that Marie
We all know that domestic spying is going to be endemic throughout all departments of the executive branch, just like torture. Interested in finding out how Bolton used the DOJ intel.
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:44 pmYes Citizen80203
WORFEUS has been here swatting the flies by himself. They’re everywhere.
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:45 pmIf Sen. McCain truely wants the support of the American voters in 2008, then he needs to call President George W. Bush a liar, thug and vicious bastard! He needs to demand that a Special Counsel is appointed to investigate the NSA Spygate Scandal, and he needs to demand that Dubya resigns or is impeached for breaking the FISA laws!
McCain has to decide whether to kiss Bush’s butt or to kick Bush’s ass? If he decides to cover for Dubya, then he must forget about running for president in 2008!
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:47 pmHow GUTSY for McCain to go to the edge of the precipice but stay so firmly belted into his PART LORALS.
DUH, McCain. We all have figured out what you said. But can you say the “I” word?
Its one thing to say your fearless commander and chief broke the law. Its another to say that he needs to be held accountable for his misdeads.
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:48 pmGood job Worfeus
Did you know that everytime a eunuch fly lands it pukes, sh*ts, and lays eggs.
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:49 pmJay – Resignation is not good enough. This Administration needs to be Impeached and then Imprissoned.
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:52 pm#119 ~ Comment by Jay Randal — January 22, 2006 @ 4:47 pm
Just an FYI
John Conyers has started the ball rolling. We need to petition our news media to do their job and cover relevent events.
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:53 pmWORFEUS, “But I would have been willing to.”
Talk is cheap, you chickenhawk hypocrite.
The relevance of the term “baby killer” is that it is the same people who once used that term to describe people like Kerry and Murtha who now hold up people like Kerry and Murtha as above criticism. It’s just blatant hypocrisy.
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:56 pmBut President Bush hasn’t engaged in any wrongdoing, let alone any impeachable offense.
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:58 pmVIDEO of Committy Hearings on Domesic Spy Programs
January 22nd, 2006 at 4:59 pmUSA Eunuch
What decade are you squatting in?
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:00 pmTalk is cheap, you chickenhawk hypocrite
Comment by USA Patriot — January 22, 2006 @ 4:56 pm
Yea, you can say that again brother.
You can say that again.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:02 pmOh and BTW, in 1991 I did more than talk. I drove down to the recruiting center and filled out the paperwork to join up.
I cannot help it they did not accept me.
All a man can do is toss his hat into the ring.
It’s not his fault if the ring tosses it back.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:05 pmOh and how many times have you tried to enlist? Have you even bothered to learn your eligability to serve?
Or is this all you do?
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:06 pmPost 125 USA Patriot > Bush is guilty as sin of breaking the law, so wake up and smell the sewer!
Post 122 RemoveBush > After Bush resigns, then demand his imprisonment > I agree with you!
Post 123 Max-1 > Bravo for Rep. Conyers > at least he has guts!
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:07 pmI’m am curious now I-MIGHTSERVE-I,
Are you within an age group that you could enlist now?
Are there any restrictions that keep you from serving?
There must be right, because, I mean you would not be in here if there was’nt, right?
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:10 pmUSA Patriot – You want to talk about hypocrisy. Here you go.
Daily Kos: GOP’s New Anti-Clinton FauxGate: “Plantation” Sensation!
Republicans have referred to an imaginary “liberal plantation” for over a decade
now. … (Just Google GEORGE WILL LIBERAL PLANTATION — or click here.) …
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/1/17/143951/052 – 19k – Cached – Similar pages
Project for the OLD American Century-liberal news from unbiased …
at one time “liberal plantation” and “democrat plantation” were republican talking
points 1-19 · Dick Cheney has to wear shoes that don’t match because of …
http://www.oldamericancentury.org/ – 101k – Jan 20, 2006 – Cached – Similar pages
Vision Circle
His goal is not to take charge of the liberal plantation run by the Democrats,
but to free blacks from it. http://66.201.46.115/news/article.asp? …
http://www.visioncircle.org/ – 37k – Jan 20, 2006 – Cached – Similar pages
Cynicus Prime: liberal plantation carries on
In case anyone doubts the existence of the Liberal Plantation, witness:. Editorial:
A nomination that will divide … In losing a woman, the court with …
cynicusprime.blogspot.com/2005/11/liberal-plantation-carries-on.html – 22k – Cached – Similar pages
Conservative Truth – The Democratic Plantation – Tom Barrett …
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:10 pmThe Democratic Plantation. January 31, 2005. By Tom Barrett. The Democrat Party
touts itself as the party of inclusion. Yet it practices the worst kind of …
http://www.conservativetruth.org/article.php?id=2731 – 11k – Cached – Similar pages
Worfeus
You need not expain yourself to USA eununch. Just because I fought in GW1, does not mean I was not a “Hippy” that killed babies in 1969 while protesting fetus rights.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:10 pmRemoveBush, lots of people have for decades used the word “plantation” in various contexts. That’s a given. Do you have a point?
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:13 pmWell that’s easy Citizen.
I was alive then. In fact, I was close to enlistment age.
I never called anyone a baby killer. No one in my family ever called anyone a baby killer.
No one I ever knew back then ever called anyone a baby killer.
But I was a hippie, and so were most of the people I knew.
And we all support Murtha now.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:13 pmDo you have a point?
Exacly eunuch.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:14 pmJay, if you already know Bush is guilty, then why do you want an investigation? In the Jim Crow era, Democrats used to do the hanging before the trial, but I guess it’s still your practice? LOL
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:15 pmOnly a fringe group called them babykillers, and if they had only directed their comments to the President and his staff and not towards the troops,their comments would be valid, however distasteful.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:16 pm“if you already know Bush is guilty, then why do you want an investigation?”
“if you know he got a blow job, then why do you want an investigation?”
What a squatting eunuch!
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:18 pmOnly a fringe: “…reminiscent of Ghengis Khan…”
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:18 pmI-RUN-I asked me a lot of questions today, some of them personal.
I answered them immediately honestly and even a with a little personal detail.
Yet after answering his questions, the 3 questions I asked him have gone unanswered.
Go figure.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:20 pmI will ask them again.
Perhaps he did not see them.
I-RUNFAST-I,
I’m am curious.
Are you within an age group that you could enlist now?
Are there any restrictions that keep you from serving?
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:21 pmPost 138 > lol > Republicans considered President Clinton guilty before any impeachment hearings!
I believe that Bush should be given a fair trial, but not hanged > I am against the death penalty unless someone rapes and murders children!
If lying about a BJ warrants impeachment, then lying about WMD in Iraq and authorizing illegal wiretaps demands impeachment!
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:21 pmSame questions to you USA.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:21 pmUSA CHICKENHAWK
Are you within an age group that you could enlist now?
Are there any restrictions that keep you from serving?
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:22 pmAside from being a moron that is.
Don’t worry about that though cause they straigtened Gump out.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:23 pmLying and obstruction in the context of a sexual harassment civil lawsuit merited impeachment.
President Bush did not lie about WMD or authorize illegal wiretaps.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:24 pmWorfeus
If you ask a eunuch a question they need to squat on it for at least forty eight hours before the can begin to formulate an answer. Otherwise, they become incoherent like USA eunuch.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:24 pmNope.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:25 pmoh, well then let me ask it again. Maybe it will help.
USA CHICKENHAWK
I-RUNAWAY-I
Are you within an age group that you could enlist now?
Are there any restrictions that keep you from serving?
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:25 pmheh,
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:25 pmhttp://www.bradenton.com/mld/bradenton/news/politics/13675006.htm
Of course, I might be a 4 star general, as far as you know. LOL
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:26 pmSo you have been a squatting coward your whole life then, nice.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:27 pmGump made it, WOR-chickenhawk-FEUS couldn’t. Enough said. LOL
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:27 pmNope.
Comment by USA Patriot — January 22, 2006 @ 5:25 pm
I commend you for you honesty, albeit somewhat coerced.
Now go sign up and shoot us all an email from the front.
We will look at you through wide new eyes.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:27 pmMcCain’s on Board…
He made the rounds of the Sunday talk shows today, telling everybody that he’s decided the President acted illegally in getting NSA to do those domestic wiretaps without warrants….
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:27 pmPost 148 > Bush did LIE about WMD in Iraq and he willfully bypassed the FISA Court to wiretap & snoop!
Bush has lied to Congress and that is grounds for his impeachment and removal from the presidency!
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:27 pmOf course, I might be a 4 star general, as far as you know. LOL
Comment by USA Patriot — January 22, 2006 @ 5:26 pm
In Bush’s Army, you probably are…
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:28 pmAfter I said I’m NOT in an age group that could enlist, WORFEUS says, “Now go sign up and shoot us all an email from the front.”
Wow, sheer genius! No wonder the marines took Gump instead of you. LOL
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:28 pmJay, this is not true: “Bush did LIE about WMD in Iraq and he willfully bypassed the FISA Court to wiretap & snoop!”
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:29 pmLike I said; So you have been a squatting coward your whole life then, nice.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:29 pmWallace,
Do you have all of your teeth?
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:31 pmActually USA PATRONIZER
My LAST question was are there any restrictions keeping you from serving.
So I assumed when you chose to offer a 1 line answer to a two part question, you were considering my final question as the summary question and answering accordingly.
Sorry to have mistaken you for someone with a logical mind.
I will proceed accordingly.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:31 pmHow GUTSY for McCain to go to the edge of the precipice but stay so firmly belted into his PART LORALS.
DUH, McCain. We all have figured out what you said. But can you say the “I†word?
Its one thing to say your fearless commander and chief broke the law. Its another to say that he needs to be held accountable for his misdeads.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:32 pmPost 161 > it is true > Bush bypassed the FISA court to snoop without warrants and he lied about WMD in Iraq too!
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:33 pmWOR-chickenhawk-FEUS, “So I assumed when you chose to offer a 1 line answer to a two part question”
Since I pasted the question I was answering, you are in effect admitting here that you’re either an illiterate or an imbecile. Maybe both. ROFL
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:33 pmMcCain’s on Board…
Uh oh….
Patriot, I-wrong-I,
RUN!
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:34 pmJay, this is still not true: “Bush bypassed the FISA court to snoop without warrants and he lied about WMD in Iraq too!”
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:34 pmNot a USA Patriot – Show me the proof that Bush did not lie about WMD’s and has not performed Illegal wire tapping. The CIA told the Administration that the intelligence did not support their claim that Iraq had WMD’s. This was all over the news, were you sleeping for a year?
Now I have asked and I have provided my proof that Bush DID WIRETAP ILLEGALLY, where is your proof?
Show us something besides your lips moving, like a normal Republican. Give us evidence. In case you don’t know what that big word means. It means:
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:34 pm# attest: provide evidence for; stand as proof of; show by one’s behavior, attitude, or external attributes; “His high fever attested to his illness”; “The buildings in Rome manifest a high level of architectural sophistication”; “This decision demonstrates his sense of fairness”
# your basis for belief or disbelief; knowledge on which to base belief; “the evidence that smoking causes lung cancer is very compelling”
# an indication that makes something evident; “his trembling was evidence of his fear”
# testify: provide evidence for; “The blood test showed that he was the father”; “Her behavior testified to her incompetence”
# tell: give evidence; “he was telling on all his former colleague”
# (law) all the means by which any alleged matter of fact whose truth is investigated at judicial trial is established or disproved
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
Wallace,
Answer my question now… Do you have all of your teeth?
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:35 pmSince I pasted the question I was answering, you are in effect admitting here that you’re either an illiterate or an imbecile. Maybe both. ROFL
Comment by USA Patriot — January 22, 2006 @ 5:33 pm
Ahh finally.
Point to Patriot. I overlooked your repost.
Well done son.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:36 pmWhat a waste of technology on this particular subject.
I heard something today on CNN In The Money that made me want to puke.
Congress and senators are paid $165,200 per year. When they retire or get chased out of office, no matter how long the term, they get $82,600 a year in retirement. For life.
Not only that, but they are elgible for social security for work they did before and after their tenure.
Not only that they are in a Thrift Program, set up by the federal government. They give 15% of their salary, the government donates them an additional 5% for a total of 20%. This amounts to an additional $33,400 per year in retirement. They pay no taxes on any of this shit.
This is the same people sitting up there in Washington who wont approve a raise in the minimum wage. Why should they. They got you at the bottom of the heap where they want you.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:36 pm“The CIA told the Administration that the intelligence did not support their claim that Iraq had WMD’s.”
No, the DCI told the president it was “a slam dunk” that Iraq had WMD. It was all over the news.
“I have provided my proof that Bush DID WIRETAP ILLEGALLY”
No, you did not.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:37 pmPost 169 > sorry but it is true! Bush bypassed the FISA Court to snoop without warrants and admits doing so! That is grounds for his impeachment, since breaking federal law rises to a “high crime”!
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:37 pmSo you are too old to enlist, right, that is what you are saying.
Ok, fair enough. How old were you in 1991?
Did you try to enlist then?
This is an honor system thing, so you can lie, tell the truth, or just call me a liar. Balls in your court.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:38 pmJay, repeating your talking point won’t make it true.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:38 pmHere’s a fun-filled scenario:
Al Gore successfully contests the results of the Florida election and is inaugurated in Jan. 2001. Having just come from the popular Clinton administration (and having been deemed the most hands-on VP in history) he is completely up to speed on the criminal activity of Osama bin Laden and plans to continue monitoring the Iraq no-fly zone. Gore plans to “break the ice” with prominent Egyptioan physician, Dr. Ayman AlZawahiri, by suggesting that many Muslims might lower their hostility level by singing union tunes followed by ardent wife smooching.
Gore is in close administrative contact with all EU members (The close relationship President Gore has with Prime Minister Chirac has not suffered any from Tipper Gore’s environmental protests of French hygiene practices. Gore,a uber-man who sensitively takes feminist fashion suggestions, does compassionately express his disdain for foie gras, earning another “Dog and Pony Show Award” from PETA.)
During the summer of 2001, micro-manager extraordinairre President Al Gore, personally notices the high level of interest of 20 young Muslim men at various flight schools around the nation. Brilliant leader that he is, he wonders why these students have all played hookie for the landing portion of the class. Sensitive to the cultures of others, Gore consults with a member of the Nation of Islam to determine how NOT to offend any of these dedicated students.
9/11/01 – Al Gore, busy teaching “union label” songs to young children (reminiscent of Gore’s fabled childhood), is stunned to receive news of the terrorist attacks on the WTC from his chief of staff, Naomi Wolf. Wanting to show his sensitivity and grief, Gore drops the song sheet and runs crying and screaming from the room. Downing a “might-sized” Midol and gaining his composure, Gore consoles the nation. Gore vows to “track down” (”hunt down” seems a bit aggressive to Gore and Wolf)the poor, misunderstood, Muslim co-conspirators and find out how we can all just get along. Vice President Lieberman resigns when Gore announces to the nation that no armed retaliation will take place for the 9/11 attacks.
Gore announces to the nation that NO monitoring of incoming telephone call from possible terrorists to people in the US will take place. After consulting with Dr. Phil and Oprah, President Gore is convinced that with enough “talk therapy” (which could be the motivation for those phone calls) Muslim extremists will adopt a less rigid stance toward Western mores.
Gore mandates, with the approval of the Democratically controlled House and Senate, that those who turn themselves in will be provided with religiously sensitve meals, and will “endure” the President’s long-winded, but informative speeches 24/7. No one will be forced to wear women’s panties on their head and the re-education classes will conclude in 90 days. Peace Secretary Dennis Kucinich announces the Presidents fervent wish that those who hate “decadent Western values” will understand as the US tries to make peace with EVERYONE.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:39 pmNo, you did not.
Comment by USA Patriot — January 22, 2006 @ 5:37 pm
Uhh, you’ll have to do better than the troll response of no you did not.
That’s ann coulter tactics, and unbecoming for a troll of your stature.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:39 pmUSA eunuch
You are a small boy of 14-17 aren’t you? No wonder, look kid get back to your homework and leave the discussion for the adults.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:40 pmWORFEUS, you’ll have to do better than “you’ll have to do better.” LOL
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:41 pmPost 177 > lol > your defending Bush forever does NOT make him innocent of bypassing the FISA Court! Bush chose to break the law, so now he faces an investigation and impeachment!
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:42 pm“Here’s a fun-filled scenario:”
Nice, now there is another eunuch squatting here.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:43 pmJay, your irrational hatred of Bush doesn’t make him guilty of anything.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:43 pm#173- Gosh, Paul, I finally agree with you – the graft and corruption you describe seems almost as nauseating as that in Mexico.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:43 pmOK Not a USA Patriot, here you go once again. Now don’t be so senial.
Amendment IV – Search and seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment VIII – Cruel and Unusual punishment. Ratified 12/15/1791.
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Amendment IX – Construction of Constitution. Ratified 12/15/1791.
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:44 pmWallace,
I’ll keep asking until you answer – Do you have all of your teeth?
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:45 pmRemoveBush, it’s “cruel and unusual punishment” to listen to a terrorist’s cell phone call? ROFL
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:45 pmunbelievable, Why? Are you trying to sell some more of yours? LOL
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:46 pmNo, but that is what we do to the prisoners when we transport them to a secret base. Once again are you not paying attention?
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:46 pmWheres your proof Not a USA Patriot?
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:47 pmUnbelievable
You are right it is old wallace!
I knew I was right about the boy child.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:47 pmPost 184 > did I say anything about irrational hatred? NO!
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:47 pmIt is about Bush breaking the FISA laws > he chose to do it, so now he faces impeachment!
unbelievable, Why? Are you trying to sell some more of yours? LOL
Comment by USA Patriot — January 22, 2006 @ 5:46 pm
What? No, I am trying to find you a better job than posting here. Do us all a favor.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:48 pmYou are right it is old wallace!
I knew I was right about the boy child.
Comment by Citizen80203 — January 22, 2006 @ 5:47 pm
I wondered how easy it would be to get him to admit to it… something like fish and barrels… :)
Now if he’ll tell me how many good teeth he has, I think I can he;p find him a better paying gig than this one… Give him a salary increase and the rest of us a break.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:51 pmWheres your proof Not a USA Patriot? Common now, don’t be shy!
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:51 pmRemoveBush
USA aka Wallace is a boy child. I estimate his age to be 14-16, so don’t expect too much.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:53 pmMcCAIN is ONBOARD.
RUN PATRIOT!
RUN I-RIGHT-I
I think I see Justice coming down the pike
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:53 pmRUN FOR YOUR FREAKIN LIVES!
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:54 pmRemoveBush, since you’re making the charge, it’s up to you to offer some proof, not me.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:55 pmi think you’ve got his number, citizen, 180…i’ve been wondering for quite a while about this “usa-wally-the-parrot”…i’m guessing a precocious 13yr old…a very awkward age for sure…still can’t get past the “i-know-you-are-but-what-am-i” stage…so annoying to say the least…
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:55 pmNotice how those on the left would rather hurl insults than make arguments. So typical.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:56 pmLittle boy (USA Patriot), I did when I provide you with the Constitution ammendments which states what the President can and cannot do. I have provided undeniable proof from the Constitution, now you must PROVE that my assertions are incorrect IF YOU CAN.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:57 pmNotice how those on the left would rather hurl insults than make arguments. So typical.
Comment by USA Patriot — January 22, 2006 @ 5:56 pm
So, how many teeth? Two? Four?
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:58 pmRemoveBush, merely reciting Constitutional amendments doesn’t begin to prove your ‘point’.
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:59 pmNotice how those on the left would rather hurl insults than make arguments. So typical.
Comment by USA Patriot — January 22, 2006 @ 5:56 pm
LOL, now thats rich :D
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:59 pmPost 202 > nobody on the left is hurling insults in here! This thread is about McCain even agreeing that Bush broke the FISA laws!
January 22nd, 2006 at 5:59 pmProblem is katy
I now feel bad for verbally b*tch slapping the child the last week, kind of.
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:00 pmunbelievable, unlike you liberal Democrat welfare queens, we Republicans have dental polans. So I have all my teeth. LOL
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:00 pmI did’nt realize you were so funny FATRIOT.
Thats a good one. You must really be a comedian in your other life, right?
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:00 pmwe Republicans have dental polans
Comment by USA Patriot — January 22, 2006 @ 6:00 pm
What is a dental polan?
Does that mean you have Polish dentists?
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:01 pm“nobody on the left is hurling insults in here”
That’s all they’re doing, That’s all they ever do.
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:01 pm#205, your an idiot. I don’t normally go calling people names, but your the exception to the rule. Do you not know how the rule of law works? Once an assertion is made and the facts are proven, hence Bush eavesdropped illegally according to the Constitution, it is up to the Defendant to show how it is not against the law.
It’s just like a murder case when there is a body with a bullet in the head, a gun with the defendants finger prints on the gun, and gun powerder resedue on his hands, to prove that he could not or did not fire the gun.
So I have shown where in the law that this is against the law, now you have to show where in the law it is allowed or can be interpreted as allowed.
Geeze.
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:02 pmLOL, just kiddin buddy, you’re a funny dude… :D
You crack me up.
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:02 pmLook at poor WORFEUS, reduced to nitpicking typographical errors. LOL
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:02 pmWorfeus
Seriously, he is a child. So, it is best he is ignored like any petulant child.
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:03 pmYes, and poor PATRIOT reduced to making them…
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:04 pm“it is up to the Defendant to show how it is not against the law.”
Ah, the Constitution says “guilty until proven innocent”? Interesting. LOL
“So I have shown where in the law that this is against the law”
No you haven’t. You merely recited a bit of the Constitution.
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:04 pmSeriously Patriot, (can I call you Pat?), I was just kiddin.
Polan was a funny word. You invented it. I just thought it was funny.
Sorry, I do not worry about your typos. I just liked the word you came up with. :D
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:05 pmYeah you moron, the Constitution is the law. I’m done with such a moronic, childish, ignorant, bafoon such as you USA Patriot.
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:06 pmLike I said earlier, I’ll bet you’re really, really smart.
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:06 pmwally-the-parrot won’t be studying the Constitution till next year – guess we ought to give the boy a break…naaaaaah.
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:08 pmGood job, Worfeus! You tricked USA Eunuch into admitting he’s really Wallace (and probably Gary Ruppert & I-RIGHT-I, too). Hah!
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:08 pmThe Constitution is the law. You haven’t mentioned specifically how the president might have violated it.
Explain how exactly surveillance of the enemy in a war constitutes an “unreasonable search” for example. Why do you believe it’s unreasonable to surveill al Qaeda?
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:08 pmActually, I’m patrick and unbelievable as well. LOL
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:09 pmI think he’s Bob Novak.
I heard he was’nt getting too much at Fox, so he has to moonlight.
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:11 pmActually, I’m patrick and unbelievable as well. LOL
Comment by USA Parrot — January 22, 2006 @ 6:09 pm
Uh huh. Yawn.
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:12 pmWorfeus
He is a clever teen, but like most teenagers he is cleverness incongruent with his postings.
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:12 pmPolan is a funny one though.
usa patriot, you aren’t serious, are you?
there is nothing wrong with surveilling anyone, especially al qaeda.
now, you tell the rest of us why you want to allow the president to surveil anyone he wants to
I believe in all of fisa, only one warrant was denied
in addition, surveiling can take place before the warrant is even requested
so there is no reason whatsoever not to get a warrant
there is no excuse, and if you really are a patriot, you are going to have to start fighting for your constitution like the real patriots here on this thread
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:13 pmoh gawd no, patrick…this kid ain’t no IRI…ugh…THAT is an insult…
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:14 pmuseful only if one enjoys banging head into brick wall…
Comment by katy #22
katy,
…or Bushiva, L’il Dick and Jeff Gannon’s woodies against their backsides…
The Brokeback coalition…
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:14 pmExplain how exactly surveillance of the enemy in a war constitutes an “unreasonable search†for example. Why do you believe it’s unreasonable to surveill al Qaeda?
Comment by USA Patriot — January 22, 2006 @ 6:08 pm
Because if you had any digital saavy you would understand what the President is really trying to tell you when he talks about mining the data collected from the central exchanges.
All out of LATA calls go through Digital switches at one point, and what he is subtly saying is that ALL CALLS in the US that pass through digtital switches are being data warehoused for later data mining.
Bush and the administration spoke openly in 2003 on the difficulty in searching through the volumes of data to find what they were looking for. They even showed pictures inside of NSA of analysts going through the data.
You have to understand digital communications and data warehousing and mining technologies, at least at a basic level to understand this, but once you do, you will see that ALL calls may be recorded and stored in digital formats, and then searched with massive supercomputers looking for keywords that match digital signatures.
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:18 pmLooks like I-RIGHT-I is hiding under the bed again. Guess someone told him there was another Osama bin Laden tape last week. What a bunch of bedwetters – willing to meekly surrender all their rights every time the bogeyman pops up.
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:19 pmIt’s 1984 and you did’nt even get me a calendar.
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:20 pmWorfeus – excellent explanation of why this RNC spin falls flat. But you have to give USA Parrot some credit, at least he didn’t fumble his own talking points this time. :)
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:21 pmAs his President Bush might say, it’s hard, hard work copying & pasting from the RNC website, after all. :)
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:22 pmThank God for small miracles.
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:22 pmIt’s been fun – gotta run. Keep up the good work, Worfeus & all. :)
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:23 pmBush chose to skirt the FISA laws to snoop on whomever he pleased, and he claims “War Powers” to do so, but the Congress never declared war on Iraq, just a police action to destroy WMD that never existed, so Dubya has NO cover to spy on Americans > PERIOD.
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:27 pmunbelievable, unlike you liberal Democrat welfare queens, we Republicans have dental polans. So I have all my teeth. LOL
Comment by USA Patriot — January 22, 2006 @ 6:00 pm
Then maybe you should support pay raises for teachers Wallace, so we can afford to eat and pay rent.
All your teeth… Okay, that rules out a few options. How about your strength? How much can you lift?
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:28 pmWhat a man may or may not have done thirty years ago is not a good reason to stand behind him today. John Murtha is a perfect case in point.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I #78 & 79
I’ncurable-pu’Rulent-a*sI’nfection
you really are lower than possum sh*t…
As an Al Cracker Bushite buttsuckingba*licker you take the art to a new low…
To demean the service under combat conditions of two brave men,(as much as I despise McCain I honor his service), in order to defend a coward and deserter is beyond condemnation and disgust…
I hope any family, friends and children you have who agree with your brand of genuflecting, political prostitution (no, outright whoring bec you don’t get paid) and spewing mindless rhetoric and propaganda are quickly rounded up and disposed of properly…
Your ignorant racism is enough to want you turned into fertilizer, but your denigrating the service of true patriots- and your betters- is proof positive that you DESERVE to be…
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:29 pmActually, I’m patrick and unbelievable as well. LOL
Comment by USA Patriot — January 22, 2006 @ 6:09 pm
You wish…
You must be having a good day, getting all this attention.
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:32 pmunbelievable, unlike you liberal Democrat welfare queens, we Republicans have dental polans. So I have all my teeth. LOL
Comment by USA Patriot #209
USeless Patsy,
That dental “polan”, does that come with a 16” or 20” chain?
Does it cut good, pardner?
You racist Al Crackers crack me up with your inbred arrogance…
Your days are numbered though sh*thead…
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:35 pmSee ya Patrick.
As for the idea of all calls being recorded, this of course does not mean that they are all listened too. Far from it.
Digital Keyword searches turn up the ones they want to hear, which are themselves voluminous.
And I would say, that as a citizen, if we are in a time of war, and the only way to protect from terrorists was to record all calls, then I perhaps doing this is the only way.
But here’s the rub. Bush and company have a way of using intelligence from the war on terror in other non terror related crime fighting programs. In fact, they are talking about it now, taking away our privacy to fight child molestors.
See they pick the worst offenses you can think of, and say “would’nt you be willing to trade your privacy to stop this, or prevent that?”
And we can debate whether or not it’s worth giving up our privacy for these things, which I think it’s not, (live free or die) but we need to come up with sunset clauses on the data and disposal times and procedures, containment, and most of all, applicability to the war on terror.
The Patriot act and the laws designed to protect us from terror were made in the heat of battle, fear and reaction.
They should never become part of our daily civil laws, and information obtained from the war on terror should never be used for other civil criminal activities.
Unless of course you want to declare America now a Totalitarian Police state where paranoia replaces reason, and cowardice replaces courage.
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:35 pm[...] (via thinkprogress.org) Today on Fox News Sunday, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) said Bush’s warrantless domestic wiretapping program is illegal: [...]
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:35 pmUSA Patriot, formerly known as wwallace, has been banned from posting on this site. This user, however, continually switches IP addresses and email address to post to this site.
We need to cooperation of users on this site to enforce the ban. Stop engaging him. It’s impossible to moderate his comments if the entire thread is responding to his remarks.
Thanks.
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:35 pmSorry Judd.
I really did not know any of this.
I will ignore him.
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:38 pmPost 246 Judd > Is USA Patriot a paid Bush supporter? Just wondering since he wants to dominate thinkprogress threads!
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:43 pmMy bad Judd
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:44 pmWe will all ignore any NEW name for wwallace in here! Thanks Judd for telling us and we all appreciate your site!
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:49 pmYou have to take the fight to them. You must continually hammer home the point that anyone who defends the right of the president to circumvent the Constitution and rule of law is a traitor to his fellow countrymen as well as each and every person who has spilt blood to secure these freedoms of ours.
You must hammer home the point that nobody, NOBODY, is against spying on foreign terrorists to defend our nation. However, if it is necessary to spy on an AMERICAN CITIZEN you must follow the rule of law. Otherwise, you jeopardize the entire Consitutional pillars this country was founded upon.
Seriously, what is the difference between a person who knowingly acts in support of a foreign entity that threatens our freedoms and one who does the same domestically? There are no good and bad threats to freedom.
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:52 pmJudd,
Will do. Thanks for the info.
January 22nd, 2006 at 6:55 pmI have no intention of responding to that little puke but his use of that tired, old shibboleth “Welfare Queen” deserves some refutation:
From Reason magazine, a libertarian publication, an article by… (blech!), that twirp John Stossel, hardly friends of the left or the progressive movement, debunks this ridiculous myth.
Confessions of a Welfare Queen March 2004
How rich bastards like me rip off taxpayers for millions of dollars
John Stossel
Law grinds the poor, and rich men rule the law.
– Oliver Goldsmith
Ronald Reagan memorably complained about “welfare queens,” but he never told us that the biggest welfare queens are the already wealthy. Their lobbyists fawn over politicians, giving them little bits of money — campaign contributions, plane trips, dinners, golf outings — in exchange for huge chunks of taxpayers’ money. Millionaires who own your favorite sports teams get subsidies, as do millionaire farmers, corporations, and well-connected plutocrats of every variety. Even successful, wealthy TV journalists.
That’s right, I got some of your money too.
My Life as a Welfare Queen… read on…
Ban them all, Judd. You or I or any of us wouldn’t last 30 seconds at Freep.
January 22nd, 2006 at 7:12 pmJudd, right on…and thanks for banning “it”…
January 22nd, 2006 at 7:13 pmnow, how about the worst: IRI…
please.
Welfare Queens and vets who got spit on, same thing. Never happened. GOP bullshit.
January 22nd, 2006 at 7:14 pmBan everyone and I’ll have to look for spicier pastures though katy.
Being in a Blog is like going to a monastary to reinforce a spiritual belief.
When you see the arugments of the right, it really helps you to solidify your own positions. I am not a democrat, but I do consider myself a liberal, and I like this new progressive term. But I vote my conscience, not party lines, so I always believe in giving both sides equal time, and hearing their arguments out.
It is because of this I see they have no real arguments for any of it. Just George Bush is our Lord, Savior and King, and either follow him or die.
Mee thinks they watched Excalibur one too many times.
January 22nd, 2006 at 7:22 pm[...] So the amazement of seeing these guys on television laying their cases for how the administration should be scolded for its blatant disregard for Congress, the FISA court, and the Constitution is wearing off a little. But a little perspective has shown me that something needs to happen, something more than simply voting the president’s party members out of Congress this fall (though what a treat that would be!). Just today, Sen. John McCain called for a congressional investigation. It’s good to see the gears of government finally starting to turn in the right direction, no pun intended. [...]
January 22nd, 2006 at 7:33 pmWe should invite wwwallace, IRI. USA Patriot and the like to continue. Those “persons of interest” make me think how righteous I am. Sort of like if Bush is for it, I’m agaist it. It is illegal to spy without a warrant. period. The warmonger-in-Chief should be impeached for the war criminal that he is
January 22nd, 2006 at 7:46 pmworfeus, i am as open minded as they come, though very opinionated…i caught the tail end of hippie-ness, always designated myself a Democrat and voted as such … parenthood brought a more conservative bend to my leanings, but i never gave up the ideal of helping the fellow man and the common good…now, as an “empty-nester” with 2 smart kids in college (on financial aid), i’m facing a bleak future that i had HOPED would be so much better for those kids than the one i was looking at when i was their age – like the one i was seeing for them before this bush cabal came into power… and now i’m scared…and degenerates who name themselves “right-between-the-eyes” are the reason i’m scared – these types and their idols are the epitome of everything that is wrong with the world today… dare i say? no better than the terrorists that they rail against all the time, with obviously no understanding of the hows nor whys…
January 22nd, 2006 at 7:46 pmno, i don’t want everyone banned…but that one is useless…of NO use.
Thanks for the info, Judd. If he creeps back in under yet another ID, please let us know so we can add it to the ‘ignore’ list.
January 22nd, 2006 at 7:56 pmand degenerates who name themselves “right-between-the-eyes†are the reason i’m scared – these types and their idols are the epitome of everything that is wrong with the world today… dare i say? no better than the terrorists that they rail against all the time, with obviously no understanding of the hows nor whys…
Comment by katy — January 22, 2006 @ 7:46 pm
katy,
If it at all helps – IRI isn’t as bad as he pretends to be. He’s even admitted it – that this is a game in which bravado expands through anonymity. His mom is a liberal and his dad was a libertarian. I think he just knows which buttons to push to create a bit of drama and get some attention.
January 22nd, 2006 at 8:04 pmWhy won’t Judd explain why he chooses to ban dissenting voices? I thought progressives consider themselves open-minded. That’s obviously just delusion.
[This comment is also by wwallace. He was banned for continually attacking other users. -- Judd]
January 22nd, 2006 at 8:37 pmok “believable”
whatever.
just keeping muddying the water like you’re paid to do.
and wipe that rove-spunk off your chin.
January 22nd, 2006 at 8:51 pmjust a hint: never take a “political” job that requires knee pads.
[Comment deleted by admin.]
January 22nd, 2006 at 8:57 pmPost 264 > This is Judd’s thread, so he has a right to control it as he sees fit! We agree to abide by thinkprogress rules when we post our thoughts on here!
January 22nd, 2006 at 9:08 pmbelievable- for an attack-dog wingnut troll, you sure do whine alot.
January 22nd, 2006 at 9:11 pm#25, #30 and #36
Do you think that Karl Rove would like to put a wiretap on Patrick Fitzgerald?
What’s to stop him?
What’s to stop Bush from tapping into the DNC? Or any Democrat Congressman? Or any journalist?
Who would know that he was doing it, without a warrant?
I never got a response from any right-wingers.
Do they have a response?
January 22nd, 2006 at 11:13 pmI think Think Progress got this one wrong — slightly.
The real news regarding what McCain said is that it contradicts a key piece of Alberto Gonzales’ defense of the spying program — that Congress wouldn’t have approved it anyway.
Check out JABBS’ post and ask yourself: did Gonzales lie?
January 23rd, 2006 at 1:39 amGuess the quote
XXXII
Then none was for a party;
Then all were for the state;
Then the great man helped the poor,
And the poor man loved the great:
Then lands were fairly portioned;
Then spoils were fairly sold:
The Romans were like brothers
In the brave days of old.
XXXIII
Now Roman is to Roman
January 23rd, 2006 at 5:14 amMore hateful than a foe,
And the Tribunes beard the high,
And the Fathers grind the low.
As we wax hot in faction,
In battle we wax cold:
Wherefore men fight not as they fought
In the brave days of old.
Many years ago I heard a profound statement by a priest at a mission in Mexico. He said:
“If God steps outside of the truth…I will stay with the truth”.
Truth must be upheld. Some of you will understand what I am getting at. Pretty funny, what we think we know and what really is. Facts becoming just the interpretation of them. None of them standing up on their own integrity so they are not subject to opinion and are clear in their interpretation.
I am afraid humanity is becoming such that we do not even know what truth is. Not religious opinion or partison pomp.
January 23rd, 2006 at 8:16 amJust the plain old simplistic “What it is”…
“theRev”
Why would God step outside the Truth?
Sign the petition! Stop unchecked police power!
http://petition.savethecourt.org/fwd/campaigns/savethecourt/register/fc3c4e7fd9e7c7702f2d1c855b206fc5
People for the American Way
January 23rd, 2006 at 8:22 amThere is a very real question here.
In response to the question as to whether Bush has the current authority to engage in these warrant-less wiretaps, McCain said “You know ,I don’t think so, but why not come to congress? We can sort this all out. I don’t think-I know of no member of congress, frankly, who, if the admistration came and said here’s why we need this capability, that they wouldn’t get it.
Does he mean that if Bush sends Gonzales to congress asking for the authority they’ll rubberstamp the administration, or That he wants the Administration to come to congress to justify legally why they need the broad powers.
This would get the discussion out it the air where the congress could either accept the reasoning of the administration that the violation of the rights of every american citizen who is listened on is justified, or the congress could say NO, follow existing law AKA the FISA act. But at least the congress of the United States would be allowed to actually furfill their constitutional duties.
I might not agree with their decision but at least then I would know that individual members of congress actually got the chance to voice the diverse opinions of the people of this country through the votes that their representatives cast and not the bush administrations upsertion of those powers by exective fiat.
January 23rd, 2006 at 8:39 amGood point, Clif-
January 23rd, 2006 at 8:46 amYesterday the Republican strategy was to say “come on in! we’ll retrofit those out-dated FISA laws for ya, Georgie!”
And the Democrats couldn’t get on board fast enough with this idea. The Democrats are complicite.
What laws CAN’T President Bush break in the name of national security, then? Can he send a hit squad to my house, or disappear me to a secret prison if he thinks I’m aiding terrorists by not agreeing with him? Can he shut down “opposition” newspapers, in the event that a meaningful one actually existed?
By extension, does every executive-branch officer or employee then have the right to do these things on his say-so?
Marshall law? More giveaways in the dead of night to Halliburton? Nuking Iran?
If we managed to preserve civil liberties in the face of the U.S.S.R. – a formidable enemy, to be sure – then why does the paranoid party think we can’t do so now?
No, surely this is sheer opportunism and a grab for power, sprinkled with salt for the wounds by that beacon of integrity, Karl Rove. History will not look kindly on this administration.
If wartime powers include the right to supercede any and all laws, then we’d better make damn sure the person doing the superceding is of high moral character, has never been arrested, censured by the S.E.C., evaded military service, used his office to line his pockets, sniffed cocaine, cheated on his –
oh, sh*t.
January 23rd, 2006 at 8:47 am#273 I disagree with your point, many democrats and republications do not agree with the Administrations position, but to understand this you would have to understand that not all politicans are as axnious as Bush to tear up the constitution. I believe that if the program is brought to the congress that the administration would face stiff resistance to their views and stand a good chance of their view being rejected. I do not expect congress to go very far with the idea about inpeachment, that is too big a political bomb for them to deal with.
January 23rd, 2006 at 9:01 amI am afraid humanity is becoming such that we do not even know what truth is. Not religious opinion or partison pomp.
Just the plain old simplistic “What it isâ€â€¦
“theRevâ€
Comment by “the Rev” #270
“Rev”,
Yes we do, that’s why we’re here posting everyday…
They (the demon inbreds) are trying to wear us down with feelings of hopelessness because we see how lost they are and how they resist being “found”…
But we have generations to think about…
We must eradicate the right wing inbred “we’re all mushrooms” attitude and inaction…
The only victims are those who choose to be worn down…
I for one will fight against this tyranny until it falls…
January 23rd, 2006 at 9:02 amI never got a response from any right-wingers.
Do they have a response?
Comment by BG #267
Unfortunately BG they’ve been booted…
January 23rd, 2006 at 9:07 amI do not expect congress to go very far with the idea about inpeachment, that is too big a political bomb for them to deal with.
Comment by Clif #275
Clif,
Part of the “impeachment” problem is two-fold:
1) After having just “impeached” Bill Clinton for an admittedly frivolous reason to NOW impeach Bushiva (no matter how deserving he is) would reinforce a dangerous message, that being that the “presidency” is basically a joke…
2) As Democrats/Progressives we have to ask ourselves (looking at the list of presidential succession) do we want L’il Dick to take over as president? How about Dennis Hastert or Blunt?
Therein- my friend- lies the rub…
January 23rd, 2006 at 9:13 amNo and that is the dems side of the bomb.
January 23rd, 2006 at 9:14 amYesterday the Republican strategy was to say “come on in! we’ll retrofit those out-dated FISA laws for ya, Georgie!â€
And the Democrats couldn’t get on board fast enough with this idea. The Democrats are complicite.
Comment by Gus, OBGYN, Gigolo, Lover #273
Yeah Gus and Clif,
John Kerry looked and sounded like he did on the campaign trail (on MSNBC I believe) talking about how he’d be willing to “change the FISA law”…
He’ll NEVER be president!
January 23rd, 2006 at 9:15 amDoes he mean that if Bush sends Gonzales to congress asking for the authority they’ll rubberstamp the administration, or That he wants the Administration to come to congress to justify legally why they need the broad powers.
Comment by Clif #272
Clif,
of course they’ll do whatever they can to make their party, their king and their treason look “acceptable” at all costs…
Hell, they’re covering up a “war” for profit here, and they’ve got to make it look good (believable)…
January 23rd, 2006 at 9:19 amNot all of them and that is why Bush and Gonzo resisted and tried to hide what they are doing.
January 23rd, 2006 at 9:22 amJudd, right on…and thanks for banning “itâ€â€¦
now, how about the worst: IRI…
please.
Comment by katy
Excuse me for lifting up your skirt!
January 23rd, 2006 at 9:38 amUsing such an analogy, to subtly seed the thought that McCain is a coward, while perhaps lost on some less persnickety than I, is as obvious as the crew cut on your thick flat topped melon.
You may think you’re slick, slick, but you’re not.
Thats just the residual slime creating that appearence.
Comment by WORFEUS
That was quite a reach. By the way I see you really like to bash me when you know I’m not around. That makes you a pussy.
January 23rd, 2006 at 9:41 amIRI, since worfeus is not here now aren’t you the pot calling the kettle black?
January 23rd, 2006 at 9:46 amIRI, since worfeus is not here now aren’t you the pot calling the kettle black?
Comment by Clif
Only if you can find some Worf bashing Clif.
January 23rd, 2006 at 9:57 amName calling is a form of bashing ref #284
January 23rd, 2006 at 9:58 amName calling is a form of bashing ref #284
Comment by Clif
I see. I’ll give you that one but he is a pussy.
January 23rd, 2006 at 10:05 amNo in another post he stated that during the time I was in the Gulf War he volunteered and No one who volunteers to serve their country SHOULD be called a pussy but I know that some can’t help themselves when it comes to name calling,….. thanks for another point
January 23rd, 2006 at 10:09 amOf course this is a lie. But it’s pretty ironic for Judd, who gets paid to attack other people, to object to that very practice.
January 23rd, 2006 at 10:31 amWhere’d go IRI?
January 23rd, 2006 at 10:42 amUSA Patriot, formerly known as wwallace, has been banned from posting on this site. This user, however, continually switches IP addresses and email address to post to this site.
We need to cooperation of users on this site to enforce the ban. Stop engaging him. It’s impossible to moderate his comments if the entire thread is responding to his remarks.
Thanks.
Comment by Judd — January 22, 2006 @ 6:35 pm
January 23rd, 2006 at 10:43 amWhere’d go IRI?
Comment by Clif
I’m around.
January 23rd, 2006 at 10:52 amI’m around.
January 23rd, 2006 at 10:52 amBLAH BLAH BLAH….. there are no democratic or republican leaders, they ALL work for the same corporate interests.
how much more slight of hand will we take?
we don’t need to impeach just this administration, we need to IMPEACH THE GOVERNMENT & start over
January 23rd, 2006 at 11:18 amwe don’t need to impeach just this administration, we need to IMPEACH THE GOVERNMENT & start over
Comment by sonic
It won’t do any good as long as we allow losers to vote. If you want to change the character of our elected officials you have to change the hearts and minds of the electorate. Failing that you must change the rules about who gets to vote. We get the government we deserve.
January 23rd, 2006 at 11:47 amIRI, do you believe that every American has a right to vote? Who are the “losers” and who gets to decide?
January 23rd, 2006 at 12:36 pmwwallace and I-Right-I
Do you think that Karl Rove would like to put a wiretap on Patrick Fitzgerald?
What’s to stop him?
What’s to stop Bush from tapping into the DNC? Or any Democrat Congressman? Or any journalist?
Who would know that he was doing it, without a warrant?
January 23rd, 2006 at 1:47 pmOur Constitutional Republic is now lost. Most American voters are getting what they deserve, although they don’t understand (or won’t admit, despite the evidence) what it is they are getting/losing. The majority of the dumbed down, apathetic, American Idol watching, Xian Fundie American public actually like what they see.
Things will get a lot worse before they get better. The Fascist Dictator Bush and his band of criminals have control of the corporations ($), the media, your vote (electronic voting machines), the Judiciary, both Houses of Congress, the military, key government agency positions and the swing States’ Secretary of States. Sorry Dem.’s, Greens, Independents, et al, these lunatics are in charge of the asylum and won’t go away regardless of how much criminal activity is exposed.
Only large scale lawful civil disobedience, street protests and daily unrest will slow them from continuing to shred the Constitution, destroy the environment, loot the Treasury, deny our Civil Liberties, kill our children and innocent civilians, alienate us from the rest of the world, abandon the less fortunate, bestow upon corporations greater standing than people and otherwise undermine our nation.
Unfortunately this won’t happen in my lifetime, especially if protestors are caged in Free Speech Pens…uh, I mean Zones. The ReThuglicans will pick up at least 2 Senate seats and 4-6 House seats in the ‘06 elections, and the Dem.’s will once again be “shocked” and left scratching their heads when they fail to understand how so many people can be so stupid.
All Hail the unilateral pResident!
January 23rd, 2006 at 2:02 pmIRI, do you believe that every American has a right to vote? Who are the “losers†and who gets to decide?
Love,
progressive and proud
There is no right to vote in this country. The vote is a privledge. Unfortuanatly this country just has too many privledged characters. I’d like to see about 75% of the country default on the new voting restictions act that I would endorse if elected your next Fearless and Imperious Leader. The qualifications and restrictions would include:
“The applicant must be a citizen of these United States;
January 23rd, 2006 at 4:29 pmHe must present a photographic confirmation of his identity;
He must be able to show continuous residence in one state for no less than one year prior to his application, that state being the one in which he seeks to be enfranchised;
He must be able to present receipts for having paid sales, property, or income taxes within the state of his residence, no more than one year before his application, and for a total amount not less than $500;
He must present a Certificate of Proficiency in constitutional understanding, earned no more than one year previously by his state’s elections authority, said certificate to be awarded upon achieving a grade of 85% or higher on a multiple-choice test composed of twenty computer-selected questions on constitutional principles;
In exchange for the privilege of voting in a specified election, he must agree to forgo and forswear until after the next general election:
any position of profit or trust under the Constitution, in any federal, state, or local office, whether elective, appointive, or Civil Service;
any and all payments from any organ of government, regardless of the reason for them;
any and all personal or categorical privileges, exemptions, or subventions that may be awarded by any organ of government.”
IRI,
January 23rd, 2006 at 5:08 pmRight on! That would make Cheney a resident of Texas and not eligible to run alongside W in the year 2000.
[...] Step #2: Pretend that Congress has approved said “eavesdropping” when it’s on record that they hadn’t. The more you say it, the more dumbfucks will believe it. I mean, come on! You’re the fucking president. SOMEONE will believe it. [...]
January 23rd, 2006 at 5:52 pmwwallace and I-Right-I
Do you think that Karl Rove would like to put a wiretap on Patrick Fitzgerald?
What’s to stop him?
What’s to stop Bush from tapping into the DNC? Or any Democrat Congressman? Or any journalist?
Who would know that he was doing it, without a warrant?
Comment by BG
What would stop him is the same thing that stopped Hillary from using the information she gathered on her opponents from those IRS files she wasn’t supposed to have…..some one would rat them out, just like they did Hillary.
January 23rd, 2006 at 6:17 pmSo the only thing that would stop Rove from wiretapping Patrick Fitzgerald is the fear that “someone would rat him out?”
January 23rd, 2006 at 9:49 pmIs Bush asking us to depend on “rats” to uphold the law?
January 23rd, 2006 at 10:25 pmSo the only thing that would stop Rove from wiretapping Patrick Fitzgerald is the fear that “someone would rat him out?â€
Comment by BG
I might have said that a man’s honesty, integrity and respect for the laws of the land would prevent him or anyone else from misusing their power but of course that’s bullshit. Lady Justice holds in one hand a set of scales and the other a sword. She does not hold the sword in vain and it is the sword that man respects and fears. That is true of you too. Tell me I’m wrong.
January 24th, 2006 at 8:59 amI might have said that a man’s honesty, integrity and respect for the laws of the land would prevent him or anyone else from misusing their power but of course that’s bullshit.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I #306
I’gnorant-Remedial-I’nbred,
Confession is said to be good for the soul…
Too bad you don’t possess one…
But at least you’re trying to familiarize yourself with “truth”…
January 24th, 2006 at 12:03 pmBush’s position is that he doesn’t need a warrant to wiretap American citizens domestically. And who he wiretaps is top secret information.
So if Karl Rove wiretapped Patrick Fitzgerald it would only be unethical but not illegal in Bush’s view.
The sword is taken out of Lady Justice’s hand.
January 24th, 2006 at 12:31 pmBush’s position is that he doesn’t need a warrant to wiretap American citizens domestically. And who he wiretaps is top secret information.
So if Karl Rove wiretapped Patrick Fitzgerald it would only be unethical but not illegal in Bush’s view.
Comment by BG
That is NOT Bush’s position. That is the position the Filthy Left has taken on Bush’s position.
The sword is taken out of Lady Justice’s hand.
The sword can never be taken out of the Lady’s hand as it was God not man that put it there in the first place. But, just in case she drops it for awhile there is always the Second Amendment as a last resort. Do you not find it odd that it is the Liberal/Socialist/Leftist/Progressive that would remove that last resort option if they had the power to do so?
January 24th, 2006 at 2:49 pmDo you not find it odd that it is the Liberal/Socialist/Leftist/Progressive that would remove that last resort option if they had the power to do so?
Comment by I-RIGHT-I #309
That’s a myth, and right wing NRA talking point…
Progressives would be da*ned fools to disarm when right wing Al Crackers like you are armed…
…and running the government…
January 24th, 2006 at 3:37 pmComment by I-RIGHT-I #309
That’s a myth, and right wing NRA talking point…
Progressives would be da*ned fools to disarm when right wing Al Crackers like you are armed…
…and running the government…
Comment by big papa
And yet they won’t let you have a machine gun, want to sue the gun manufacturers, and think banning assault rifles is going the keep you ghetto folk from killing each other off before your girl children can become old enough to have an abortion.
Don’t ax me. I think it’s nuts too. How the hell are we supposed to have a good old fashioned race war without the proper tools? And you’re right, we do have all the guns yet the liberals want to keep you from fighting on a level playing field. I say it’s racism. Racism I tell you!
January 24th, 2006 at 3:58 pm#309 I-Right-I
Bush has said repeatedly that he believes that he can wiretap American citizens without a warrant.
But while running for President the last time, he repeatedly said that he wasn’t wiretapping without a warrant and that the law was clear that he couldn’t do it without a warrant.
He is now changeing his stance because he got caught and doesn’t want to be punished. By claiming that what he did is legal, he hopes to take the sword of justice away.
He apparently has no fear of being found “unethical” but is afraid of being found “guilty”.
January 24th, 2006 at 7:24 pmBush broke the law by not getting a warrant. He can spy on US citizens that are engaged with terrorist, but he must get a warrant. He can even get a warrant after the fact. However, he just skipped this step. This is where I think he broke the law. Is it really that complicated. Lets have a hearing to see through spin. My guess he did what he did so he would have to document spying on people like McCain or you. And why not stop at the “terrorist”. Too bad they aren’t spying on corporations like Enron and the like. In a way Bin Laden has already defeated America. Most are too stupid and scared to fight back. Just send the “Support our troops” to go over and chase down the innocent and get blown to bits by the guilty. Its going on five years and we haven’t found Bin Laden yet? Are we scared to kill him. Does Bush know that if we kill Bin Laden then the terrorist will sneak a nuclear device into the country and detonate it somewhere. Does Bush already know that there is nothing he or anyone can do to stop it. Our coward leadership was the perfect target for 9/11. As days go by I can see how probably half the Germans thought the Nazis’ were evil filth, but were powerless against ignorance. In America… “Ignorance is Power”. At least 60% understand we have an idiot on our hands. Two bad that 60% isn’t spread out evenly.
January 24th, 2006 at 10:52 pmalright mccain. :)
January 25th, 2006 at 4:38 am#309 I-Right-I
Bush has said repeatedly that he believes that he can wiretap American citizens without a warrant.
Comment by BG
Bullshit. Show me where he said “American Citizens”.
January 26th, 2006 at 10:55 amI have no clue if Bush has specifically said “I think it is legal for me to wiretap American citizens,” but i think his actions imply that viewpoint. I’m not sure how you could think otherwise. Just look at the cold hard facts. He has admitted to wiretapping American citizens without a warrant and says that it is lawful. In other words he believes it is lawful for him to wiretap American citizens without a warrant. So i’m not sure why you are calling bullshit on the comment by BG. I’m sorry he was a step ahead of you and had actually put 2 and 2 together. So the bullshit is from you my friend.
February 9th, 2006 at 1:31 am[...] As referenced on the front page this morning, Senator John McCain came out in opposition to the President’s use of the NSA to monitor domestic communications. From Think Progress: WALLACE: But you do not believe that currently he has the legal authority to engage in these warrant-less wiretaps.MCCAIN: You know, I don’t think so, but why not come to Congress? We can sort this all out. I don’t think — I know of no member of Congress, frankly, who, if the administration came and said here’s why we need this capability, that they wouldn’t get it. And so let’s have the hearings. [...]
February 21st, 2006 at 2:40 amJust a clarification, McCain is Pro Life; he believes in exceptions for rape, incest, and the life (not health) of the mother. And he isn’t a wuss; he just won’t be told what to think. Why is it that anyone who isn’t brainwashed by their party can ‘t actually have a disagreement, but HAS to be making the decision purely for political posturing and not what they believe is right. You are morons.
March 5th, 2006 at 10:39 amAlso, section 18 of the FISA act clearly prohibits electronic warrantless wiretaps if there is probable cause that any of the parties involved is a “United States Person.” Read the law. Bush didn’t lie about WMD. I think he honestly believes that they were there to this day. Al Gore said they had them, Ted Kennedy said that they had them, Billy C said that they were trying to get them, just to name a few, so if there is a liar, he is probably in the CIA, not the whitehouse. Actually, there is always a liar in the whitehouse, but probably not in this case. Bush is a moron, but he is not directly responsible for every failure of government. If he knowingly lied, I’m pretty sure that they would have “found” evidence of WMDs. Pretty obvious.
March 5th, 2006 at 10:45 am[...] McCain: Bush Does Not Have “The Legal Authority To Engage In These Warrantless Wiretaps,” ThinkProgress, January 22, 2006 http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/22/mccain-wiretaps-illegal/ [...]
September 18th, 2006 at 4:01 pm[...] McCain: Bush Does Not Have “The Legal Authority To Engage In These Warrantless Wiretaps,” ThinkProgress, January 22, 2006 http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/22/mccain-wiretaps-illegal/ [...]
September 18th, 2006 at 4:09 pmYes I do Believe That this time bush has gone to far..
September 19th, 2006 at 2:33 amwe have a right not to be wire tapped, without a warrant or any reasonable cause it’s in the constitution, unless of course I geuss george bush wants to rewrite the constitution as well as all our laws, just so as to suit his AHEM personal needs we need to band together and stop this man and his what i would call evil plan, as well as cheny and specter all of them i think it is about time that we have George W bush impeached!
you all remember how goerge bush got his presidancy this current term?
how he ILLEGALLY beat govoner al gore, you know by getting the supreeme court judge to simply “rule” that george bush be president even though he did not get the popular vote?? remember that? gore won the popular vote, by a longshot I think and bush didn’t like that
so he broke every rule of politics, and got the courts to rule in his favor
ie george W bush is not really the president, he is just pretending to be the president, HE apparently has everyone fooled.. are you fooled by this man?? dont be, he is a crook, and all he ever seems to do is break the law, every law and rule of politics he has broken, and if it were up to me he wouldn’t be president… but it’s not up to me it’s up to all of us.
it’s up to all of us to GET THE BUSH OUT!! I think I have said enough , so lets have some action please… he does not have us in his interests.. he only has himself, let us do him a great big favor and let him off the hook, ie let us cancel his presidancy, effective immediately, so he can do no further harm, and trust me he will, he is george w. bush, and that’s what george w. does…
Oh and I forgot to mention, about george bushes election or so called election, because he wasn’t elected president, he got a judge to RULE that he was president, I don’t know how he pulled that one off!! never before has a president have a judge simply say, ” ok your president”
September 19th, 2006 at 2:38 amand then hand him the keys to the white house!! presidential elections aren’t supposed to be run this way nor should they ever be!! I have strong suspicions that he had some connections to this judge and or paid some huge sum of money as a bribe… anyone else have the same suspicions?? hmmm…..
meridia reviews meridia review
February 3rd, 2007 at 7:48 am[...] he signed NSA wiretap order – Dec 17, 2005 BBC NEWS | Americas | US judge rules wiretaps illegal Think Progress » McCain: Bush Does Not Have “The Legal Authority To Engage In These Warrantles… Federal judge rules warentless wiretaps illegal – Wikinews That’s just the wiretaps… Would you [...]
February 14th, 2007 at 3:25 pm[...] he signed NSA wiretap order – Dec 17, 2005 BBC NEWS | Americas | US judge rules wiretaps illegal Think Progress » McCain: Bush Does Not Have “The Legal Authority To Engage In These Warrantles… Federal judge rules warentless wiretaps illegal – Wikinews That’s just the wiretaps… Would you [...]
February 14th, 2007 at 3:30 pm