First Rep. Heather Wilson (R-NM),
By on Feb 9th, 2006 at 9:02 am
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Health Care
Hoffman
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Yeah they’ll ask the questions…
But when they get the answers…
…will it go back to business as usual?
…or will Bushiva, L’il Dick, Gonzo, and the whole rotten stinking cabal be brought down?
February 9th, 2006 at 9:07 amIt’s all election-year theatrics. After the midterms it’s one long drunken lovefest until the final exam.
February 9th, 2006 at 9:32 am#1
February 9th, 2006 at 9:32 amYou really need a translater. What language are you using?
Phonies. They see the polls pointing towards a collapse in support for Bush so NOW they are going to get off the train heading for the cliff.
I call bullshit.
Especially Sensenbrenner, that tomato faced dickseed shouldn’t be withing five miles of a gavel.
-GSD
February 9th, 2006 at 9:34 amMaybe i’m crazy, but is it unreasonable to ask how many of the programs we are talking about? Say there were actually 2 one could bypass FISA and the other one wouldn’t. Not being under oath i think the Attorney General may have picking in his mind which program the Senators were asking about and given a truthful answer by thinking it was an another. They are so careful at what they say andhave a passion about inking the waters. If thisis such a specfic program ask them one question: What day did it start? This wouldn’t reveal anything about it. If it would be damaging to the program does political harm count in the Administrations mind? listen very carefully to the way they word all of this.
February 9th, 2006 at 9:38 amAh, but will they have the Backbone to actually do anything??
February 9th, 2006 at 9:41 amAh, our good friend James “Turn Out The Lights, The Party’s Over” Sensenbrenner.
Questioning the motivations of politicians is a very legitimate thing to do. We have a right to know in whose interests are they acting. I am curious as to why Rep Sensenbrenner wants these hearings. Is he concerned because the wiretapping of domestic groups with no ties to terrorism is likely unconstitutional? And is he even going to address the concerns about domestic spying? Or is he concerned because the Bush Administration has been indicating that they didn’t follow the FISA law because they didn’t think it would let them do what they wanted, so he wants to change it so they could do what they want to do?
His actions in the past indicate he is more in favor of the president’s wishes than he is of the country’s wishes.
February 9th, 2006 at 9:47 am#5 Good points, fly-man. Exactly which program is everyone going to be talking about? I hope that they are very specific so that Americans will not get the wrong impression. As you know, I’ve been one of the advocates of the “two program” theory (or more), and that the AG’s testimony was selective about which kind of wiretapping he was addressing. But I will be very disappointed if it turns out that the Chairman disallows any questions about domestic wiretapping.
February 9th, 2006 at 9:50 amRepublican = Pariah
February 9th, 2006 at 9:50 amLike a few other posters in this thread, I suspect the “concern” of lawmakers like Wilson and Sensenbrenner is just a Rove-directed bit of theater, as is the related Insight magazine story of Rove’s mafia-like strong-arming (no publication of Rev. Moon’s would genuinely take on the Bushies).
These “independent” and “strong” congressmen will enter their re-election campaigns having stood up to this unpopular president and his evil mastermind, even though they’re in the same party. By November, they’ll have convinced everyone that they value the interests of the American people over partisan politics, even if nothing of consequence happens with regard to the warrantless spying program or any of the myriad of other Bush scandals.
And if they retain their majorities in Congress, they won’t have to worry about subpoena-powered Democratic inquiries into their various shenanigans and potential impeachment proceedings.
February 9th, 2006 at 9:53 amYea I don’t trust the repubs to do the right thing.
Now they are only in re-election mode. If they get re-elected (god forbid) we all know they will go right back to obeying Lord Karl’s marching orders.
However, in the meantime, I’m loving this segment of politics.
Hey Karl, How many fingers you gonna be able to use to plug the holes in the dam? Look out baby, a flood is commin’!
February 9th, 2006 at 9:55 amFinally! Some elected Republicans that actually follow their words with deeds!
And here I was, thinking that ALL Republicans were the party of the “mouth”. It’s so very easy to say the words, but much more difficult to follow up your words with the deeds to aupport them.
Eventually, “ethics” and “personal responsibility” will return to the elected Republicans. It’s been so very long since they’ve expressed these traits, I was beginning to lose hope that they would ever stand up for their misdeeds and failed actions. Of course, it’s going to take time for this to happen. It’s not like all the elected Republicans will repent and change their lying ways over night.
February 9th, 2006 at 9:58 amI can see it now:
February 9th, 2006 at 10:01 amSensenbrenner – “Do you agree that FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) ‘expressly prohibits’ the specific activities under this program?”
Gonzales – “No.”
Sensenbrenner – “Good enough for me!”
I also take issue with the we have to have it unconditionally to maintain the sheer existence of this program,s. Does that mean they can morph this assumed power laterally to provide for Technological advances, without permission? You know just like the declaration of war is never ending, so will be this new power, that we can’t tell you why we need it we just need more, and it is the only thing that works.
February 9th, 2006 at 10:01 am#3 – I can understand why you might be confused. You see, Big Pappa is talking about the Republicans expressing the trait “taking responsibility for your actions” and “asking the tough questions, even if it’s your political party that is telling the lies”.
You see, the elected Republicans have suffered from “hubris”. That’s when you let your own self importance blind you to the unethical and illegal behaviors of your prties administration. Sort of like saying one thing, then turning around and doing the complete opposite. You know: “We support the troops” and then cutting the budget for Veterans. Or: “No nation building!” then sending our military to go build a nation. Or: “Restore honor & dignity to the White House” and then defying the Constitution and enacted laws to spy on womever you want with no oversight or responsibility to anyone.
Of course, if you suffer from cranial-anal impact (that’s when your head hits where the good Lord splits) then you’re probably not going to accept the fact that the elected Republicans are lying to America and breaking laws left & right, willy-nilly, with no accountability other than greed and power.
February 9th, 2006 at 10:11 amElection year and so it goes. Republicans don’t care about anything but winning. They will do it at any and every cost and could not care any less for individuals they serve.
You hear it everyday right here from the trolls. NeD, IRI, and all of the other names they post under parrot the exact same message “we are winners and you are losers.” It is flimsy, weak and just an evasion of truth.
This is the beginning of the ugly road of republicanism to winning an election. Because, ultimately, that is all they really want. It has nothing to do with America or Americans.
February 9th, 2006 at 10:15 amIt’s already clear that the NSA took the programs developed under Admiral John Poindexter, Total Information Awareness, even though Congress in 2002/2003 explicitly refused to fund the project and ordered it shut down due to civil liberties questions.
Here’s a basic overview link page.
So, how is it legal now?
February 9th, 2006 at 10:16 amHeather Wilson on TV last night looked like the White House had already got to her. She was backing off big time.
February 9th, 2006 at 10:17 amWhen did Douglas Feith shut down his ops?
February 9th, 2006 at 10:21 amThe real problem is that Gonzo and the Bushistas think we are stupid. In one of his answers he said that George Washington also did wiretapping!
These guys will say anything because they don’t think the American people are listening. Sad truth is they may be right.
February 9th, 2006 at 10:23 am#16 – What I find most amusing is their attitude: “We’re in power now forever!”
They completely forget that history shows that no single party remains on power forever. All these powers that they’re granting Pres. Bush will soon be wielded by a Democratic President. Oh, how they’ll howl then about how it’s not right for someone NOT a Republican to have the same power as Pres. Bush!
If it weren’t so sad, I’d laugh over how they BMW (b**ch, moan & wail) about how they were treated when they were in the minority and now they’re acting even worse ever since they’ve been in the majority. Once they’re back in the minority, I’m sure they’ll complain even more than they used to.
Oh well! What goes around, comes around! I’ll save some salt for the crow they’ll be eating on that day.
February 9th, 2006 at 10:31 amWashington Post has an article today about the NSA illegal program and the FISA Courts. Seems that the illegally gathered data is tainting warrants, and the administration/justice department apparently was warned about this taint.
February 9th, 2006 at 10:34 amMark, good point – it will backfire, evil usually comes back to haunt.
February 9th, 2006 at 10:36 amA miracle?
WASHINGTON (Feb. 9) – A group of 85 evangelical Christian leaders on Wednesday backed legislation opposed by the White House to cut carbon dioxide emissions, kicking off a campaign to mobilize religious conservatives to combat global warming.
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticleSearch.aspx?storyID=248004+08-Feb-2006+RTRS&srch=global+warming
Weren’t they the same ones who said global warming is a myth?
February 9th, 2006 at 10:44 amLily–Christians aren’t all one monolithic block that think in lockstep. Many of us are genuinely concerned with the destruction of God’s Creation. And many of us aren’t the stone-casting, gay-hating, poor-bashing b@st@rds that unfortunately seem to get so much airplay on the broadcast networks (and rake in the dough from rubes who can’t see through the BS in television sermons).
February 9th, 2006 at 10:51 amhe’s a wanker. I don’t want him on our side.
February 9th, 2006 at 10:53 amPreznit,
I meant the Evangelicals who’ve gotten Bush to cater to their every whim.
February 9th, 2006 at 11:00 am#27 Lily:
I saw an article about this last week. I forget the name of the Pastor, but a right wing influential Pastor is backing this heavily. He says he has been converted into believing in global warming and all Christians should be good stewards of the earth since it is God’s creation. I’ll try to find the link. BRB
February 9th, 2006 at 11:31 amHere is an article that talks about the “coalitions” formed and why some have changed their minds about global warming.
http://www.ajc.com/services/content/news/science/stories/0208warming.html?cxtype=rss&cxsvc=7&cxcat=15
February 9th, 2006 at 11:39 am*Jaw drops to floor*…Whoa…!
Did I read that right? Sensenbrenner?? We are talking about the same man here, right? Mr. Patriot Act, Mr. Real-ID, Mr. No-Flag-Burning, Mr. Repeal-The-22nd-Amendment James Sensenbrenner?
This says something, to my way of thinking. Personally, Sensenbrenner has struck me as being a bit of a scary dude based on some of the issues he’s supported — he’s one person I would have fully expected to throw his support in favor of the President on the NSA wiretapping issue. However, if he’s raising questions, I may need to revise my opinion of him a little. Not all that much — let’s not go overboard here — but a little.
February 9th, 2006 at 12:30 pmYou really need a translater. What language are you using?
Comment by Antagonist #3
Antichrist,
…run along and play now kid…
…I’ve no time for silly pranks…
…somebody should really put a lock on your parent’s computer…
February 9th, 2006 at 1:02 pmHedley Lamarr #18 – you’re correct…
February 9th, 2006 at 2:33 pmmy favorite franken guest, tom oliphant, just concurred…
too much heat for her…but he gave her kudos for at least trying…
guess she deserves that much…
but this sensenbrenner – probably shouldn’t be trusted…
It’s obviously a sham. On one side is the “Rove’s twisting arms” story, on the other a couple of otherwise-administration-water-carriers supposedly calling for serious review.
What serious review? Oh yes, there must be testimony to the Intelligence Committees. Why those? Because they’re behind closed doors, in secret. Then they’ll come back and say “well, the administration answered all my questions and I’m satisfied I can trust them.” And we’ll never know, since the hearings are held under cloak of secrecy.
This is typical, a standard maneuver. Please don’t get too excited about it.
(Sorry I’m a day late on this.)
February 10th, 2006 at 12:06 pmDanny T.
Good work. I am going to read some more on this.
March 24th, 2008 at 4:20 amSex Girls Having Sex Rough Sex
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 7th, 2008 at 12:33 am