See, that cartoon raises what for me is the most galling part of all of this. Let's be honest--if Bush had asked Congress for the authority to do this--actually asked permission--I'm sure they would have gotten it. That doesn't mean I would have approved, but at least there would have been some check. Sure, the administration can claim it had to stay secret to work, but honestly, do we really think that terrorists don't think we are tracking them?
So what this tells us is that the administration has a total contempt for the rule of law, as if we needed more reminders.
that has been my point every time i get into a debate with republican friends! it's the attitude that the prez and his people have, that and the fact that i am sure the the terrorists figured even before they began any of this, that the u.s. and other governments would be tracking and spying and using every hi tech and low tech means to stop them and find them. that and i HATE the fact that it's come down to people having bought into the lie that if you aren't for EVERYTHING our government might do then you MUST be a traitor or hiding something that you don't want anyone to know about. how about "i don't want to let spying and evesdropping become the norm 20 years from now because we are all so used to it being a fact of life, having to guard everything one says in public or on a phone of e-mail." this is America!
The Democrats are up in arms that Bush is in severe violation of the Constitution in regard to these NSA Wire taps, correct? Now they're saying that if Bush would of come forward with this, the Democrats of given him permission to do this? Still the same, wouldn't that constitute breaking the constitution? Can you outline what the difference is between Bush doing what you're accusing him of doing and the Democrats giving him permission? You cannot have it both ways.
Speaking of "some check," as you so put it, can you outline specifically what you mean?
Also, I time and time and time again fail to get a response from anyone when I ask this:
For those of you against this “so called” domestic wiretapping issue where “innocent Americans” are being “spied” upon, I implore you to come forward with a secure and solid foundation as to how you would secure this great nation of ours if the responsibility were to become yours.
most times we've done pretty well securing this nation, when you think of just how many home grown groups we have here that espouse violence, let alone people from other countries. yes, we've had some godawful things but really nothing like we might have. we can fight terrorists and protect ourselves without letting the terrorists take away the very things that make us an example of freedom. think about it, there are people everywhere that are not good people, not even average ordinary people. in every country there are some that are very noble and some that are greedy, power hungry and convinced that they are better than most and that there's money to be made. so, why would it surprise anyone that each political party would have a few really good, a few really bad and the rest average? the really bad are the ones that the founding father's warned us to keep an eye out for, to not give them everything they asked for, even in the name of security (paraphrasing here) yes, the congress probably would have let them wiretap etc. the special court has only turned down 4 requests before this as i read, so why do what they are doing except to set a precedent that may come back in 10 or 20 years to bite us in the ...?
The Democrats are up in arms that Bush is in severe violation of the Constitution in regard to these NSA Wire taps, correct? Now they're saying that if Bush would of come forward with this, the Democrats of given him permission to do this? Still the same, wouldn't that constitute breaking the constitution?
I'll try and spell it out for you (like you're in grammer school):
The legislative branch makes the laws, the executive branch carries out the laws, and the judicial branch interprets laws and punishes law breakers.
Bush could have either followed the law as it exists or asked Congress to change the law.
He did neither.
Instead, he BROKE THE LAW (FISA) and went against the Constitution (Fourth Amendment).
So in this case:
The legislative branch made the law, the executive branch broke the law, and the judicial branch needs to punish the law breaker.
i think that if this country goes down the tubes as they say, it won't be because of the things that clinton did in office, even if EVERYTHING that anyone ever said he did was true. what will bring us down will be all the other people in washington that screw up, on purpose or by well meaning wrong decisions that will point at clinton and say "well, CLINTON..." instead of just minding their own motives and behaviors. i've said it before, no one that is a good parent will excuse their kid for spray painting someone's property or beating up a kid for their lunch money by saying that" my kid's not so bad, little billy down the street got a bj from his girlfriend!"
"We live in a democracy. Debating the government's ability to tap Americans' own phones without warrants is integral to any meaning of that word. ...The truth, sadly, is that the Bush administration could have gotten Congress to fix FISA but decided to ignore the legislative branch. It has acted in this case as it has acted throughout the war: contemptuous of criticism, dismissive of democracy, and impervious to correction. And that's one reason why we haven't had as much success as we might have hoped for. The president is always hailing the value of democracy abroad. One of these days, he'll find something good to say about it at home."
"most times we've done pretty well securing this nation, when you think of just how many home grown groups we have here that espouse violence, let alone people from other countries. yes, we've had some godawful things but really nothing like we might have. we can fight terrorists and protect ourselves without letting the terrorists take away the very things that make us an example of freedom. think about it, there are people everywhere that are not good people, not even average ordinary people. in every country there are some that are very noble and some that are greedy, power hungry and convinced that they are better than most and that there's money to be made. so, why would it surprise anyone that each political party would have a few really good, a few really bad and the rest average? the really bad are the ones that the founding father's warned us to keep an eye out for, to not give them everything they asked for, even in the name of security (paraphrasing here) yes, the congress probably would have let them wiretap etc. the special court has only turned down 4 requests before this as i read, so why do what they are doing except to set a precedent that may come back in 10 or 20 years to bite us in the ...?"
You didn't answer my question. The only thing you did was answer my question with a question. Again, given your NSA wire tap concerns, I implore you to come forward as to how you would secure this nation of ours against terrorists if the responsibility were to become yours.
This debating in comment fields is growing tiresome.
I am not trying to give you guys a hard time, I do want to get an honest look at what you guys think about how this nation could be secured given your concerns over the NSA wire tapping issue.
That being said, doing it via blogger.com is sort of tiresome since it's interface leaves a lot to be desired (although I cannot argue with the price, it's free unless one pays for the "premium features", etc.).
Does anyone have any plans on setting up a discussion board system where we could more easily "argue" amongst each other, or does anyone really care? *shrug*
I don't know, I think it would be easier if a discussion board system were set up where we could all share our views, rants, etc.
I've more than once thought about setting something like that up since I have the capability to run a board on my own server here, but I wouldn't have a lot of time to add the points that I would like. Would anyone be interested in helping run it? Perhaps I am wasting my time, but I thought I'd ask nevertheless.
See, that cartoon raises what for me is the most galling part of all of this. Let's be honest--if Bush had asked Congress for the authority to do this--actually asked permission--I'm sure they would have gotten it. That doesn't mean I would have approved, but at least there would have been some check. Sure, the administration can claim it had to stay secret to work, but honestly, do we really think that terrorists don't think we are tracking them?
ReplyDeleteSo what this tells us is that the administration has a total contempt for the rule of law, as if we needed more reminders.
that has been my point every time i get into a debate with republican friends! it's the attitude that the prez and his people have, that and the fact that i am sure the the terrorists figured even before they began any of this, that the u.s. and other governments would be tracking and spying and using every hi tech and low tech means to stop them and find them. that and i HATE the fact that it's come down to people having bought into the lie that if you aren't for EVERYTHING our government might do then you MUST be a traitor or hiding something that you don't want anyone to know about.
ReplyDeletehow about "i don't want to let spying and evesdropping become the norm 20 years from now because we are all so used to it being a fact of life, having to guard everything one says in public or on a phone of e-mail."
this is America!
Jonathan --
ReplyDeleteAccording to what you just said:
The Democrats are up in arms that Bush is in severe violation of the Constitution in regard to these NSA Wire taps, correct? Now they're saying that if Bush would of come forward with this, the Democrats of given him permission to do this? Still the same, wouldn't that constitute breaking the constitution? Can you outline what the difference is between Bush doing what you're accusing him of doing and the Democrats giving him permission? You cannot have it both ways.
Speaking of "some check," as you so put it, can you outline specifically what you mean?
Also, I time and time and time again fail to get a response from anyone when I ask this:
For those of you against this “so called” domestic wiretapping issue where “innocent Americans” are being “spied” upon, I implore you to come forward with a secure and solid foundation as to how you would secure this great nation of ours if the responsibility were to become yours.
I am still waiting on a response....
most times we've done pretty well securing this nation, when you think of just how many home grown groups we have here that espouse violence, let alone people from other countries. yes, we've had some godawful things but really nothing like we might have. we can fight terrorists and protect ourselves without letting the terrorists take away the very things that make us an example of freedom.
ReplyDeletethink about it, there are people everywhere that are not good people, not even average ordinary people. in every country there are some that are very noble and some that are greedy, power hungry and convinced that they are better than most and that there's money to be made.
so, why would it surprise anyone that each political party would have a few really good, a few really bad and the rest average?
the really bad are the ones that the founding father's warned us to keep an eye out for, to not give them everything they asked for, even in the name of security (paraphrasing here)
yes, the congress probably would have let them wiretap etc. the special court has only turned down 4 requests before this as i read, so why do what they are doing except to set a precedent that may come back in 10 or 20 years to bite us in the ...?
The Democrats are up in arms that Bush is in severe violation of the Constitution in regard to these NSA Wire taps, correct? Now they're saying that if Bush would of come forward with this, the Democrats of given him permission to do this? Still the same, wouldn't that constitute breaking the constitution?
ReplyDeleteI'll try and spell it out for you (like you're in grammer school):
The legislative branch makes the laws, the executive branch carries out the laws, and the judicial branch interprets laws and punishes law breakers.
Bush could have either followed the law as it exists or asked Congress to change the law.
He did neither.
Instead, he BROKE THE LAW (FISA) and went against the Constitution (Fourth Amendment).
So in this case:
The legislative branch made the law, the executive branch broke the law, and the judicial branch needs to punish the law breaker.
P.S. You may find this useful.
maria, you are great!
ReplyDeleteThanks, Sherry! I appreciate ALL your comments. :-)
ReplyDeletemaria, three words: pot, kettle, black.
ReplyDelete"Bush could have either followed the law as it exists or asked Congress to change the law.
He did neither."
Like Clinton did? *cough*
i think that if this country goes down the tubes as they say, it won't be because of the things that clinton did in office, even if EVERYTHING that anyone ever said he did was true.
ReplyDeletewhat will bring us down will be all the other people in washington that screw up, on purpose or by well meaning wrong decisions that will point at clinton and say "well, CLINTON..."
instead of just minding their own motives and behaviors.
i've said it before, no one that is a good parent will excuse their kid for spray painting someone's property or beating up a kid for their lunch money by saying that" my kid's not so bad, little billy down the street got a bj from his girlfriend!"
2 wrongs don't make a right.
Andrew Sullivan says better today than I did:
ReplyDeletehttp://time.blogs.com/daily_dish/2006/01/fixing_fisa.html
"We live in a democracy. Debating the government's ability to tap Americans' own phones without warrants is integral to any meaning of that word. ...The truth, sadly, is that the Bush administration could have gotten Congress to fix FISA but decided to ignore the legislative branch. It has acted in this case as it has acted throughout the war: contemptuous of criticism, dismissive of democracy, and impervious to correction. And that's one reason why we haven't had as much success as we might have hoped for. The president is always hailing the value of democracy abroad. One of these days, he'll find something good to say about it at home."
wonderfully put. thanks for sharing that.
ReplyDeleteSherry ---
ReplyDeleteI quote you:
"most times we've done pretty well securing this nation, when you think of just how many home grown groups we have here that espouse violence, let alone people from other countries. yes, we've had some godawful things but really nothing like we might have. we can fight terrorists and protect ourselves without letting the terrorists take away the very things that make us an example of freedom.
think about it, there are people everywhere that are not good people, not even average ordinary people. in every country there are some that are very noble and some that are greedy, power hungry and convinced that they are better than most and that there's money to be made.
so, why would it surprise anyone that each political party would have a few really good, a few really bad and the rest average?
the really bad are the ones that the founding father's warned us to keep an eye out for, to not give them everything they asked for, even in the name of security (paraphrasing here)
yes, the congress probably would have let them wiretap etc. the special court has only turned down 4 requests before this as i read, so why do what they are doing except to set a precedent that may come back in 10 or 20 years to bite us in the ...?"
You didn't answer my question. The only thing you did was answer my question with a question. Again, given your NSA wire tap concerns, I implore you to come forward as to how you would secure this nation of ours against terrorists if the responsibility were to become yours.
This debating in comment fields is growing tiresome.
ReplyDeleteI am not trying to give you guys a hard time, I do want to get an honest look at what you guys think about how this nation could be secured given your concerns over the NSA wire tapping issue.
That being said, doing it via blogger.com is sort of tiresome since it's interface leaves a lot to be desired (although I cannot argue with the price, it's free unless one pays for the "premium features", etc.).
Does anyone have any plans on setting up a discussion board system where we could more easily "argue" amongst each other, or does anyone really care? *shrug*
I don't know, I think it would be easier if a discussion board system were set up where we could all share our views, rants, etc.
I've more than once thought about setting something like that up since I have the capability to run a board on my own server here, but I wouldn't have a lot of time to add the points that I would like. Would anyone be interested in helping run it? Perhaps I am wasting my time, but I thought I'd ask nevertheless.
Any thoughts?
Braden