The problem with Dems and wiretapping..

[kosar]

I see that nobody yet has addressed my key points, and I welcome that.

Good luck. I can't get anyone to answer a seemingly easy, one word answer, question.

'Do you consider America to be at war?'

I got one 'no' and one 'who cares.' lol

People probably consider it semantics and that it doesn't really matter. I think it does matter, as long this admin and it's apologists continue to use 'wartime' to justify their actions.

 

[AR182]

kosar quote:"This isn't about the spying, or any particular thing. It's about the obvious self-empowering of the executive branch going unchecked. "

i haven't watched the news other than watching o'reilly & sometimes hardball so i'm not really up to date with everything....

i know people are upset because bush hasn't gone to the phizer (sp?) court for warrants, which doesn't really bother me...

but other than that...what has bush done that previous presidents,specifically clinton, haven't done to think that bush is over extending his powers ?

 

[AR182]

kosar,

when a group of people kill 3,000 americans like on 9/11...of course we are at war.....and i can't imagine people not seeing that.....

i agree with you... about how will we know the war is over....unfortuantely i don't think there is a clear-cut answer.

 

[steve2881]

kosar, YES we are at war with global terrorism, NO the end cannot be defined as it had been previously. The world is changing and I beleive so is the office of the presidency.

 

[smurphy]

kosar,

when a group of people kill 3,000 americans like on 9/11...of course we are at war.....and i can't imagine people not seeing that.....

Yes, exactly - if those are the people we are at war with, then why did we invade Iraq at nearest opportunity and downplay the relevance of the actual man behind the 9-11 attacks? There are too many Bush apologists who refuse to acknowledge his basic lack of logic.

The 'war' on terror will end in their minds when a different party is in the white house. Until then, for some reason - probably entirely partisan - they want Bush to have as much power as possible. Why?

Why should someone who thinks Iraq was behind 9-11 but downplays Bin Laden be given more power? Clearly, Bush is either too stupid or too corrupt to warrant this..

 

[djv]

Why ar edem' what the chit who got in with my code.

 

[djv]

Why are Dem's out side this issue. With country split down the middle. Maybe someone else is on wrong side. Im for it. Just follow the law. Go get a warrant with in 3 days not to hard to do. I can even start my tap right away don't have to wait.
But to say I don't need a warrant is wrong. And I hope everyone stands for that. Do we really want to live in a dictatorship?

 

[steve2881]

Yes, exactly - if those are the people we are at war with, then why did we invade Iraq at nearest opportunity and downplay the relevance of the actual man behind the 9-11 attacks? There are too many Bush apologists who refuse to acknowledge his basic lack of logic.

The 'war' on terror will end in their minds when a different party is in the white house. Until then, for some reason - probably entirely partisan - they want Bush to have as much power as possible. Why?

Why should someone who thinks Iraq was behind 9-11 but downplays Bin Laden be given more power? Clearly, Bush is either too stupid or too corrupt to warrant this..

where were you and the rest of the democrats when they were all saying the same thing!!!! Now that we learned that sadam either shipped out the weapons, or never had them BUsh is their scapegoat?? I've never understood that. John Kerry ran under the same guise, gosh you guys have short memory.

 

[steve2881]

Why are Dem's out side this issue. With country split down the middle. Maybe someone else is on wrong side. Im for it. Just follow the law. Go get a warrant with in 3 days not to hard to do. I can even start my tap right away don't have to wait.
But to say I don't need a warrant is wrong. And I hope everyone stands for that. Do we really want to live in a dictatorship?

Dictatorship??? Dude please come back to reality you are so freaking dramatic. I guess now we are going to go into the Bush is Hitler thing......you guys never cease to amaze me.

And the country is not split on this issue. When it comes to national security the republicans are preceived as having a stronger stance. If you can't acknowledge that then I don't really have much to say. W basically won re-election ON THIS ONE ISSUE. An openly pro choice politician wins 2 terms in the 21st century?? The American people simply felt that his number one goal was national security, and they didn't feel that way about John Kerry. The Dems simply have an identity problem when it comes to national security. Its that simple.

 

[smurphy]

where were you and the rest of the democrats when they were all saying the same thing!!!! Now that we learned that sadam either shipped out the weapons, or never had them BUsh is their scapegoat?? I've never understood that. John Kerry ran under the same guise, gosh you guys have short memory.

I'm not here to represent the Democrats. I'm arguing the point that I don't think the administration is nearly faultless enough to be presented with any more power.....I don't give a rat's ass which party it is. When my president responds to an attack by downplaying the actual attackers and invading a different country alltogether I don't want to give that president any more authority over anything. He's either incompetent or working from an alterior agenda that I want no part of.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

If they intercepted message from terrorist country via data mining that has key words like city bomb or anything else I sure hope they don't waste 10 minutes on getting warrent to hear conclusion of conversation.
I would say yes we are definately at war--when will it end?? don't think korean war has ever ended and we still have troops there--Can see where Matt is coming from as it is not declared war--but more of ongoing war of different nature as war on drugs-crime ect--only to much greater degree of importance.
--also would not lump Dems in general in catagory of weak on defence-terror ect.
Unfotunately you have liberal element that gets all the headlines and unfortunately give Dem party in general a bad rap.
Classic example--You have NYT-Kerry-Kennedy with their recent demands to fillibuster Alito nomination. These professional liberals unfortunatly are backed by the Soros-Moveon-crowd with all the money. They have to chirp for monatary reasons--One huge reason for GOP taking so many spots in races past 10 years is they draw much more politcal campaign funds than Dems --and their funds represent party in general--the Dems big hitters in the contributing side are your liberal elements--with the moderate contibutors far down the ladder.How else could Dean ever be nominated Dem chairman. Sad news or good news, depending which side of fence your on, you will never get majority to side with liberals until the minorities are the majority--bout 15 years the way I see it--

 

[steve2881]

If they intercepted message from terrorist country via data mining that has key words like city bomb or anything else I sure hope they don't waste 10 minutes on getting warrent to hear conclusion of conversation.
I would say yes we are definately at war--when will it end?? don't think korean war has ever ended and we still have troops there--Can see where Matt is coming from as it is not declared war--but more of ongoing war of different nature as war on drugs-crime ect--only to much greater degree of importance.
--also would not lump Dems in general in catagory of weak on defence-terror ect.
Unfotunately you have liberal element that gets all the headlines and unfortunately give Dem party in general a bad rap.
Classic example--You have NYT-Kerry-Kennedy with their recent demands to fillibuster Alito nomination. These professional liberals unfortunatly are backed by the Soros-Moveon-crowd with all the money. They have to chirp for monatary reasons--One huge reason for GOP taking so many spots in races past 10 years is they draw much more politcal campaign funds than Dems --and their funds represent party in general--the Dems big hitters in the contributing side are your liberal elements--with the moderate contibutors far down the ladder.How else could Dean ever be nominated Dem chairman. Sad news or good news, depending which side of fence your on, you will never get majority to side with liberals until the minorities are the majority--bout 15 years the way I see it--

you are 100% correct. Thank you for correcting me. I will state what I beleive about this issue.

1) Dems in general are all for a strong defense, the problem is they are perceived to be weak on this issue. In this media day and age we all know that perception is more important than reality.

2) They have let there party be taken over by the sorrows crowd, and shunned the leiberman branch of the party, and I beleive this will be to the party's demise.

3) They are challenging Bush on the wrong issue's. I would compare it to pitching to a good hitter, if he is great at hitting fastballs, throw him curves. It is that simple.

4) Stop bashing Bush. He is not running in 08. START STATING IDEAS, WHAT WOULD YOUR PARTY DO DIFFERENTLY IN IRAQ. Yeah, we know you wouldn't have gone in, well thats the past, what are you going to do in the future??
Social Security,Healthcare,National Security,etc...

 

[steve2881]

when your leading candidate for pres. in 08 (h. Clinton) meets with Harry Belafonte a couple days after he meets Chavez in venezuala, something in the party has gone awry.

Bellafonte should be avoided like the plague by democratic leaders.

 

[Chadman]

More on this later, but I want to ask why, Wayne, you concern yourself at all with the 10 minute delay worry in that situation. Currently, they would not have to wait or stop doing one thing. They can monitor and check it out, under the current law, and then file the paperwork up to 3 days later. I keep drumming this beat, and no conservative can explain why this is not enough to protect Americans. Not one of you. Until you do, your points really seem non-existent to me.

 

[gardenweasel]

first off,anybody with even kato kaelin`s i.q. realizes that there`s no evidence that iraq was directly linked with 9/11...


lets cut through all the political b.s. and be straight with one another.....

this is a political witch hunt....the patriot act debate is a witch hunt and a political mistake for the democrats...i remember harry reid crowing about "killing the renewal of the patriot act"...and then,somebody talked some sense into him and he tried to cover his ass...

this is why dems can`t win elections...why don`t they get it?

how many times do you get slapped in the face before you put your hands up?

carter did it...clinton took it a step farther with physical searches....where was the indignation from the aclu and the civil libertarians?

seriously....does anyone think bush is using this surveillance to get info on his political enemies?....and if so,why were democratic congressmen kept in the loop?...

it`s not like he obtained fbi files on democratic politicos and keeps them in the white house...(i don`t know how clinton skated on that one..900 files.....that wasn`t an accident.....that`s an impeachable offense,imo...not a blowjob or lying about same)...

do you think he`s after left wing madjackers?....

what do you know about this that everyone else doesn`t?....

if and when evidence comes out that bush misused his authority....for personal or political gain...i`ll be with you guys...

right now..there`s no proof of that...

what is irritating is that you say 9/11 happened on bush`s watch,and when he tries to do everything in his power to circumvent another catastrophe,you say he oversteps his bounds...with no proof of abuse...and with many political scholars weighing in on his side...and the precedent set by carter and clinton....democrats....

the dems always...ALWAYS...want to have it both ways...

who here really thinks that bush`s motivation is political and not security based?

and who`s civil rights have been personally abused?....who`s life has been altered?....other than the fact you haven`t been blown to bits?

b.d.s. strikes again...

sometimes i wish.....that bush was the fascist that you all say he is.....so i could watch people like you guys learn some respect for authority.....

i kid...

 

[bjfinste]

first off,anybody with even kato kaelin`s i.q. realizes that there`s no evidence that iraq was directly linked with 9/11...

You're wrong there. I don't think anyone in this forum believes that, but when I was in my hometown over Christmas and saw some people I grew up with, some of them STILL think that. I told this one guy who is a police officer in St. Paul that I thought the war in Iraq was a crock and that we shouldn't be wasting our time there, and his response was, "Bullshit! We had to get our revenge for 9/11!" I just walked away... no idea how to even respond to that.

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

I see your point Chad but don't think that is possible in all circumstances--however as most am in the dark on what that are doing--what they can and can't do. We gets lots of carping from boths sides,myself included with anyone knowing parameters--however with everything being leaked and broadcasted by liberal outlets I believe it might be best that way if we are to have an "covert" intelligence. Until someone other that terrorists and their attorneys have conclusive proof of abuse --I said have it--if we run into another Watergate bust their ass like they did Nixon--just one example of the people not puting up with abuse of power.

Steve --intent was not to correct you --just to add 2 cents--I took it you were referring to liberal element of dem party to begin with.

---and on Belefonte--can not believe some that align themselves with him--heres something that might surprise some but comes as no surprise to me--is AARP voted him man of the year--could go on for some time on AARP.

 

[steve2881]

Dogs....

Dogs....

I was being sicncere, you were correct. I was really trying to get at what you said perfectly. That is the perception of being weak on defense, you were correct.

Dems may not actually be weak on it, they are just perceived that way in the national forum.

 

[steve2881]

You're wrong there. I don't think anyone in this forum believes that, but when I was in my hometown over Christmas and saw some people I grew up with, some of them STILL think that. I told this one guy who is a police officer in St. Paul that I thought the war in Iraq was a crock and that we shouldn't be wasting our time there, and his response was, "Bullshit! We had to get our revenge for 9/11!" I just walked away... no idea how to even respond to that.

bj, you are correct there are many people that still believe that 9/11 equals Iraq. I disagree and still think that it was correct to to what we did. After 9/11 we had to get proactive. We could not hope that the reason Saddam was not letting UN inspectors in was because he just wanted to thumb his nose at us. We had to take the best info that we had and make a pro-active position. Also, if you think that just because there may have been no linkable relationship between Saddam and Bin Laden in no way means that Sadaam would have hesitated to sell any type of wmd's to any fanatical Islamic group to harm Israel or the U.S.

 

[djv]

No one said the can't listen at once. They can get the warrant 3 days later. So the BS they cant wait is just that BS. It's a play for more power. If anyone cares to look the other way and let that happen. Well I guess they will believe Iraq is a friendly place to.
Even liberals like Clinton used the taps but followed the law. It's no that hard to do. But then you have some guys just think there above the law. And America is split on this issue. Who ever said that were not is not watching the polls. And remember the guy leading the charge to investigate is a REB. I say tap first and get your paper work in order with in 3 days.