Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <We knew you'd say that.> Who is "we"? There a couple of you behind the keyboard?
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh Or do you think being "King of Typos" entitles you to use the Royal "we"?
Originally Posted By bboisvert Only the Bush-borg may use the term "Royal" in conjunction with the pronoun "we".
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <Only the Bush-borg may use the term "Royal" in conjunction with the pronoun "we".> Nonsense.
Originally Posted By cmpaley Excuse Us? We, the Supreme Pontiff and Emperor of the Most Holy Churro Pontifex Maximus Imperius Churroius) may use the Imperial and Papal We when making declarations that pertain to the Church of the Most Holy Churro of Disneyland and the Empire of the Divine Churro. It's in Our job description.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Here's an editorial (from Newsday, which supported the invasion of Iraq BTW) that puts it well and sensibly: <a href="http://www.newsday.com/news/printedition/opinion/ny-vpnsa074616611feb07" target="_blank">http://www.newsday.com/news/pr intedition/opinion/ny-vpnsa074616611feb07</a>,0,6863012.story?coll=ny-opinion-print "As the Senate hearing on warrantless wiretapping continues today, observers should keep in mind what this exercise on Capitol Hill is not about. It's not about whether we want to know what terrorists abroad are saying to people in the United States. Of course we do. There's no debate about that. It's not even about whether the National Security Agency's eavesdropping is legal. The administration's legal argument is specious, but Congress can't resolve that issue. That's one for the courts. What's key for the Senate Judiciary Committee and Congress is why President George W. Bush ignored the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in 2001 when he authorized monitoring phone calls and e-mail without court oversight. Bush said it's critical for national security. But the nation can have security without abandoning the rule of law. In 1978, FISA erected a legal framework for wiretapping spies and terrorists and created a secret court to oversee that surveillance. Bush should have operated within that law. If doing so would have made the NSA wiretapping ineffective, he should have asked Congress to amend the law. In trying to justify doing neither, Bush is dancing as fast as he can to defend the indefensible." (snip) "Bush previously claimed the same expansive power as commander in chief when designating citizens as enemy combatants and jailing them without charges or trials. He insisted then too that the courts had no oversight authority. The Supreme Court rejected that power grab, saying: "A state of war is not a blank check for the president." Indeed."
Originally Posted By Beaumandy <<If doing so would have made the NSA wiretapping ineffective, he should have asked Congress to amend the law. In trying to justify doing neither, Bush is dancing as fast as he can>> Dabob, your a smart guy, so why can't you figure out that Bush didn't want to take this SECRET program in front of congress for the entire world to see. You see, the program was SECRET for a reason. A SECRET program is SECRET because we don't want to tip off the bad guys what we are doing. Bush had a bi partisan committee he shared the program with, he had lawyers look at the program many, many, many times and he reviewed the SECRET program every few months with the commitee to make sure it was legal. What other secret programs do you want Bush to discuss out in public? Should we just open up all our top secret military locations that might be harming the spotted owl? At what point do people on the left get the fact that this obsessive " gotcha " game with Bush only puts their lives in danger along with the rest of us? At what point do the libs understand that America, right now, sees them as terrorism support? YOu think the program is illegal?? Fine, change the rules to make it legal. Stop with the Bush is a criminal crap. That talking point didn't help Kerry and it's not going to help the dems this fall. I say the Senate puts this to a vote and see who wants to discontinue the practice of spying on terrorists. You know if that were to happen these whiny " outraged " non serious dems would all run for cover and vote to keep the program going. In other words... they are useless.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<If doing so would have made the NSA wiretapping ineffective, he should have asked Congress to amend the law. In trying to justify doing neither, Bush is dancing as fast as he can>> <Dabob, your a smart guy, so why can't you figure out that Bush didn't want to take this SECRET program in front of congress for the entire world to see. You see, the program was SECRET for a reason. A SECRET program is SECRET because we don't want to tip off the bad guys what we are doing.> There was no need to tip anyone off. As Elain Kamarck put it today (no link, as I'm copying from today's paper and I guess it's not on the web yet): "So the next question is: 'Why, Mr. President, didn't you seek to update our laws so that they are in keeping with the new technology?' The answer is likely to be that going to Congress would reveal the program to the enemy. But every year Congress passes an intelligence budget that is not revealed to the enemy, to the public, or even to the rest of the government. Surely there is a way to do this." < YOu think the program is illegal?? Fine, change the rules to make it legal.> That's backwards. If Bush thought existing law wasn't good enough, he should have gone to Congress (the body that makes laws) and asked them to ammend it, rather than simply making a naked power grab and hoping no one found out about it.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh He did go to Congress, and told key members what he was doing, and none of them seems to have had an objection.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 I believe the law requires that he notify the entire relevant committees, not just "key" (handpicked) members.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <I believe the law requires that he notify the entire relevant committees, not just "key" (handpicked) members.> Which law? He notified the leadership of both houses, and both parties, and the leaders, of both parties, of the intelligence committees.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy Hey Dabob, why are the dems who were on those committes only " outraged " once the program was leaked to the public? I still think Jay Rockefellar is the leaker in all of this. Dude needs to go to prison.
Originally Posted By imadisneygal "You see, the program was SECRET for a reason. A SECRET program is SECRET because we don't want to tip off the bad guys what we are doing" My problem with this statement is this: Who in the world doesn't know that wiretapping is a possibility and wouldn't expect it to be happening to them? I mean, these terrorists aren't going to find out that they've been tapped and say, "WHAT?! A wire tap? How do they do that? Where did they get the technology??!" I don't buy this as an excuse for not going public because it's no surprise that governments use phone taps. It wouldn't have been revealing some super-secret technology never before seen that we were using against terrorists. Most people, even those upset about the legality question, would have heard "The President is using wire taps to gather evidence against known Al-Qaeda associates inside and outside of the U.S." and said, "GOOD!" My problem now is that it seems below board and sneaky. Wire tapping isn't new and it isn't secret. No one should be surprised that the U.S. government would use it against an enemy, least of all the enemy themselves.
Originally Posted By gadzuux But in bush's world, what constitutes the "enemy" is different than for you and me.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Hey Dabob, why are the dems who were on those committes only " outraged " once the program was leaked to the public?> Perhaps because they weren't among the handpicked few Bush told, when he was supposed to tell the entire committee.
