How much more of this Presidency can you take?

[Decker]

We already know Pres. Bush???s tongue would snap off its roller if he ever told the truth. Now it seems that the Attorney General of the United States is also a liar. It seems that, in violation of federal law, Bush authorized the Federal Government to spy on its own citizens. He lied about it. Here???s more evidence of Big Brother???s domestic spying: http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm
Excerpt:
???The National Security Agency has been secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans, using data provided by AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth, people with direct knowledge of the arrangement told USA TODAY.???

Here???s what Atty. Gen. Gonzales said about the spying that supposedly never took place:

NADLER: Number two, can you assure us that there is no warrantless surveillance of calls between two Americans within the United States?
GONZALES: That is not what the president has authorized.
NADLER: Can you assure us that it's not being done?
GONZALES: As I indicated in response to an earlier question, no technology is perfect.
NADLER: OK.
GONZALES: We do have minimization procedures in place...
NADLER: But you're not doing that deliberately?
GONZALES: That is correct.
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/000622.php

Looks like he lied to Congress the same way that the President lied to the American people.

My question, Is there anybody out there that still supports this president and/or administration? If so, why? And why shouldn???t Bush/Gonzales be subject to a vote of impeachment?

 

[GFR]

We already know Pres. Bush???s tongue would snap off its roller if he ever told the truth. Now it seems that the Attorney General of the United States is also a liar. It seems that, in violation of federal law, Bush authorized the Federal Government to spy on its own citizens. He lied about it. Here???s more evidence of Big Brother???s domestic spying: http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm
Excerpt:
???The National Security Agency has been secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans, using data provided by AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth, people with direct knowledge of the arrangement told USA TODAY.???

Here???s what Atty. Gen. Gonzales said about the spying that supposedly never took place:

NADLER: Number two, can you assure us that there is no warrantless surveillance of calls between two Americans within the United States?
GONZALES: That is not what the president has authorized.
NADLER: Can you assure us that it's not being done?
GONZALES: As I indicated in response to an earlier question, no technology is perfect.
NADLER: OK.
GONZALES: We do have minimization procedures in place...
NADLER: But you're not doing that deliberately?
GONZALES: That is correct.
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/000622.php

Looks like he lied to Congress the same way that the President lied to the American people.

My question, Is there anybody out there that still supports this president and/or administration? If so, why? And why shouldn???t Bush/Gonzales be subject to a vote of impeachment?

Abbie Hoffman is right again

 

[Decker]

???We???re not mining or trolling through the personal lives of millions of innocent Americans,??? Bush said, adding ???the privacy of ordinary Americans is fiercely protected in all our activities.???

 

[BigDyl]

I tell you what, You two must bee dem terrorists if yew have sumthin tuh hide!

 

[DOMS]

How much more of this Presidency can you take?

Not a whole hell of a lot. What's even more horrific is that whoever replaces him will lies to us and take our rights away just as fast.

It won't change until it gets so bad that people rise up. I'm not talking about an armed revolution (this isn't France), just people using their votes more wisely.

 

[clemson357]

Shit, I want this presidency to end just so I don't have to listen to the constant bitching by bandwagon liberals. Then again, Hilary will run in '08 and loose, and then the liberals will just start bitching again.

 

[The Monkey Man]

Vote third party or shutup

 

[Decker]

Even Newt Gingrich called this Big brother spying, "indefensible."

 

[BigDyl]

Even Newt Gingrich called this Big brother spying, "indefensible."

Ok, you know something's wrong when Newt disagrees...............

 

[Decker]

Shit, I want this presidency to end just so I don't have to listen to the constant bitching by bandwagon liberals. Then again, Hilary will run in '08 and loose, and then the liberals will just start bitching again.

Bitching is the only way to spread the message that our gov. is run by exceedingly crooked and incompetent people. I would hope the average american would take a somewhat passing interest in the destruction of his/her government. I would hate to think that the high crimes perpetrated against the US people would not infuriate any american citizen irrespective of party affiliation.

 

[Dale Mabry]

This last thing is not that big a deal, no personal information was released and they only had the bills, they didn't listen in to actual conversations. Do I believe this information was needed, no, but it is not a big deal considering it could not be tied back to an individual.

It's just another thing to bitch about for the party not in control.

 

[Decker]

This last thing is not that big a deal, no personal information was released and they only had the bills, they didn't listen in to actual conversations. Do I believe this information was needed, no, but it is not a big deal considering it could not be tied back to an individual.

It's just another thing to bitch about for the party not in control.

No, it is not about groupthink mentality, it's about defining the limit of governmental intrusion into private citizens' lives. It's about the President and Atty. Gen. lying to the public and Congress. It's also a slippery slope--this administration has lied to the public at every step over this spying. How do you know that the spying is not more in depth than what's currently being told to us? What's more, the 4th amendment to the constitution prohibits this type of arbitrary spying.

If the information is not relevant to battling terrorism, and this expert concludes that such widespread spying actually hinders the US's anti-terrorist efforts, http://www.defensetech.org/archives/002399.html , then why is our government spying on us?

Excerpt:
It'd be one thing if the NSA's massive sweep of our phone records was actually helping catch terrorists. But what if it's not working at all? A leading practitioner of the kind of analysis the NSA is supposedly performing in this surveillance program says that "it's a waste of time, a waste of resources. And it lets the real terrorists run free."

 

[clemson357]

It's just another thing to bitch about for the party not in control.

Exactly.

 

[Decker]

Exactly.

No, not 'exactly.' What is the appeal to you of partisan motivation as the foundation of my criticism of this spying program? Are all political critics motivated by party affiliation?! Is there no such thing as policy or only politics?!

How low does one have to go before party loyalty/groupthink melts away to independence of thought?

Looking at the issue itself, instead of some perceived ulterior motive, I find it hard to believe that any small government republican or libertarian would not be on my side.

--Less government intrusion
--Governmental accountability to the people
--The preservation of the people's 4th Amendment Constitutional Rights
--Equal application of the Rule of Law

versus

Well, all this blind hatred of all things Bush is making me bitch and whine about a president whose only trying to do his job.


Which line of argumentation is more convincing?...more real.

 

[Dale Mabry]

No, not 'exactly.' What is the appeal to you of partisan motivation as the foundation of my criticism of this spying program? Are all political critics motivated by party affiliation?! Is there no such thing as policy or only politics?!

How low does one have to go before party loyalty/groupthink melts away to independence of thought?

Looking at the issue itself, instead of some perceived ulterior motive, I find it hard to believe that any small government republican or libertarian would not be on my side.

--Less government intrusion
--Governmental accountability to the people
--The preservation of the people's 4th Amendment Constitutional Rights
--Equal application of the Rule of Law

versus

Well, all this blind hatred of all things Bush is making me bitch and whine about a president whose only trying to do his job.


Which line of argumentation is more convincing?...more real.

It would be like me getting pissed about a Dr who shared my "Case" with colleagues without divulging who it was about. Who cares?

BTW, ladies, I am disease-free, it was just a point I am making.

Believe me, when GW is gone I am a happy camper, but this is a non-issue.

 

[maniclion]

It would be like me getting pissed about a Dr who shared my "Case" with colleagues without divulging who it was about. Who cares?

BTW, ladies, I am disease-free, it was just a point I am making.

Believe me, when GW is gone I am a happy camper, but this is a non-issue.

No he's not, his doctors friend is the doctor of a womans daughter I know and she was warned to steer clear of him.

 

[Decker]

It would be like me getting pissed about a Dr who shared my "Case" with colleagues without divulging who it was about. Who cares?

BTW, ladies, I am disease-free, it was just a point I am making.

Believe me, when GW is gone I am a happy camper, but this is a non-issue.

I understand. You don't care, but for the reasons I stated in post #12, I do care but I won't belabor the point. Your doctors analogy breaks down where questions of constitutionality and lying arise (issues n/a to a doctor's authorized consultation involving confidential information).

 

[Decker]

...BTW, ladies, I am disease-free, it was just a point I am making.....

So, no flare-ups or messy inconvenient drips. You've done well.

 

[clemson357]

How low does one have to go before party loyalty/groupthink melts away to independence of thought?

This is coming from the guy who last week said something like 'Modern conservativism is repulsive to anyone with a brain.' Don't talk to me about blind partisan loyalty.


Decker, you might have an audience, except for the fact that everyone is just worn out on the bitching. Its like the little kid who cries wolf. When there is nothing of substance to bitch about, liberals will just fabricate things like 'George Bush hates black people,' or start talking about some bullshit, non-issue port deal. It may be the case that this is a real issue, but liberals have largely lost their credibility.

I remember two years ago liberals were bitching about the President 'endangering the safety of the American people' by letting the assault weapon ban lapse. It was such an urgent, huge fucking issue. The bill lapsed, crime went down for the first time in two years, and the liberals moved on to bitching about something else.

 

[maniclion]

You call it bitching, I call it openly criticizing the government which goes both ways, and which I'm alway's on the "bitching" side no matter who is in office.

 

[Decker]

This is coming from the guy who last week said something like 'Modern conservativism is repulsive to anyone with a brain.' Don't talk to me about blind partisan loyalty.

I stand by that statement. All I have to do is point to Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage or Coulter. Modern conservatism does not necessarily entail small gov. republicans or libertarians. Modern Conservatism is a propaganda/marketing ploy that deals in junk science and character assassination instead of meritorious debate. Like I said, Modern conservatism is repulsive to any thoughtful person.

Decker, you might have an audience, except for the fact that everyone is just worn out on the bitching. Its like the little kid who cries wolf. When there is nothing of substance to bitch about, liberals will just fabricate things like 'George Bush hates black people,' or start talking about some bullshit, non-issue port deal. It may be the case that this is a real issue, but liberals have largely lost their credibility.

I remember two years ago liberals were bitching about the President 'endangering the safety of the American people' by letting the assault weapon ban lapse. It was such an urgent, huge fucking issue. The bill lapsed, crime went down for the first time in two years, and the liberals moved on to bitching about something else.

No doubt the liberals have their excesses when it comes to selecting cogent issues. But I fail to see how the obvious liberal misgivings affect the ongoing illegality of this administration.

Surely you can see the difference.

And once again, is all criticism of Bush/republicans due merely to the critic's party affiliation? I think the only valid type of criticism comes from arguments of merit and not this ubiquitous ulterior motivation. There is valid criticism outside of partylines.

 

[maniclion]

And further more Susan, as little as the liberals are doing as of now the only people to "bitch" about are the conservatives, if they can call themselves that. I mean honestly isn't "conserve" part of the label they have yet they have been throwing money around like crazy and are doing the worst job trying to conserve energy in our energy orgy as of late.

 

[clemson357]

I am all for small government and individual liberty, it is just hard to even get motivated to read up and be informed on the issue when you have to wade through so much partisan crap. It just get to the point where the phrase "President Bush has **insert negative commentary here**" is so annoyingly redundant that it is equivalent to a parrot in a cage squacking "polly want a cracker, polly want a cracker, polly want a cracker."

 

[clemson357]

I stand by that statement. All I have to do is point to Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage or Coulter. Modern conservatism does not necessarily entail small gov. republicans or libertarians. Modern Conservatism is a propaganda/marketing ploy that deals in junk science and character assassination instead of meritorious debate. Like I said, Modern conservatism is repulsive to any thoughtful person.
No doubt the liberals have their excesses when it comes to selecting cogent issues. But I fail to see how the obvious liberal misgivings affect the ongoing illegality of this administration.

Then don't talk to me about 'seeing through party lines' and 'groupthink'(which I notice is your new favorite term).

I am sure you desparately want people to 'see through party lines' to agree with your point, yet when it comes back around the other way, you will still be babbling about conspiracy theories and propoganda machines.

 

[bio-chem]

the govt will be fine till '08 when the dems will blow yet another opportunity to regain the white house do to the fact they can agree on nothing and come up with a plan for nothing. as long as they put up a half way decent candidate other than hillary they would be the favorites to win. lets not get our fingers crossed

 

[maniclion]

It's not what they may be doing with that information now, but what someone with the wrong mindset may try to do with it at a later date.

one way to use all that information is in "social network analysis," a data-mining method that aims to expose previously invisible connections among people

 

[fufu]

I could go for another 298 years.

 

[Decker]

Then don't talk to me about 'seeing through party lines' and 'groupthink'(which I notice is your new favorite term).

Believe me, calling a spade a spade is not parroting ideas from 'them' or the 'other'. All those modern conservatives I've mentioned have been discredited. They are freakshows. Want to know why there is no supply-side department in any credible school of economics in the country? B/c it's crank bullshit designed to deceive instead of illuminate.

What about Gingrich's criticism of the president. Or is he a closet liberal?

I am sure you desparately want people to 'see through party lines' to agree with your point, yet when it comes back around the other way, you will still be babbling about conspiracy theories and propoganda machines.

I've shown you that the president is a serial liar, That atty Gen. lied to congress, That Bush has violated federal law. I have yet to run into anyone that can defend the president.

Where's the conspiracy in the NSA's blocking the Justice Department's investigation of the illegal spying? http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/05/11.html#a8245

 

[Decker]

the govt will be fine till '08 when the dems will blow yet another opportunity to regain the white house do to the fact they can agree on nothing and come up with a plan for nothing. as long as they put up a half way decent candidate other than hillary they would be the favorites to win. lets not get our fingers crossed

I'm hoping for a Feingold/McCain race myself.

 

[clemson357]

If you can't see the absurdity of what you are saying, then there is nothing I can do for you.

Decker - "All modern conservatives are unintelligent and immoral. However, please drop your party affiliations long enough to pay attention to my constant droning."