Democrats & Liberals: Archives

I believe it scares only the people who are up to no good. I have nothing to hide from anyone, so the way I see it, unless you are involved in something you shouldn’t be, then you have nothing to fear.

Carla,
What am I missing? Is this as bad as it looks? I don’t understand what would possess a president to sign an executive order which obviously violates the constitution. I must be missing something. A president has all kinds of legal advisors, including an Attorney General. There are all kinds of provisions for searches which go through a fast, questionable, yet obstensibly legal process.

If this is true, impeachment would have to be considered. I don’t think anyone, Democrat or Republican, would see any choice. If it’s true, it’s really not a partisan issue. A president can’t do that. Period. But like I said, I can’t believe something so cut and dried and clearly wrong could have happened. For now I’m tempted to stand back, and see if there are developments.

Ashley:

“…unless you are involved in something you shouldn’t be, then you have nothing to fear.”

The issue is that wrong and right are defined by law, not whim. Moreover, there is an entire history of privacy being a fundamental right of a citizen. The government simply does not have the power to do things in secret like this without some manner of oversite by the citizenry. And perhaps impeachment is that manner of oversite.

President Bush signed a secret order in 2002 authorizing the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on U.S. citizens and foreign nationals in the United States after advising senators,congressmen and federal judges to make sure no laws were broken. You don’t hear Rockerfella saying a word because he was advised and agreed. If this action saved one life it was worth it. This president,office of homeland security and the patriot act has kept us safe from terrorism since 9-11, remember 9-11? Any internal attack on this country, after this sad day in congress, (defeat of the patriot act) will be the fault of liberal democrats. Merry Christmas

This is against the law. There is absolutely no excuse for the President of the United States to violate the civil rights of US citizens. Even to stop terrorism.[sic]

Seriously. It’s ok for the President to let terrorists kill US civilians, if stopping them would violate the civil rights of some people.
No.
Civil rights are revered in this country. They should be. However, your claim that they are more valuable than the lives of people is simply wrong. When talking about violating civil rights, knowing the scale is key. Both the scale of the rights violated and the scale of the threat. And both of these scales are judgment calls.
The government, charged first and foremost with protecting the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness of its subjects. There is a fine line between protecting lives and disrupting them and no one on earth is qualified to make that judgment. Is protecting one life worth infringing on the liberties of one innocent person? What about ten people’s rights? One hundred? And what about the life the person that will die, what if he would discover a cure for AIDS and save millions of lives? You can’t know the future and therefore who are you to say that the preventing the potential death of these people is not worth infringing on the rights of others?
If the government violated these people’s rights arbitrarily, then yes it committed a crime. However, if the government had a credible threat and then acted on it, it should be applauded. While the government does have the burden of proving there was a credible threat, the only way to fully prove that something will happen in the future is to see if it happens. Should we do this instead?
It is not the responsibility of the people to applaud the government for what they do right, that is there job. It is our job to criticize, but lets avoid partisanship and criticize them when we can actually show that they did something wrong.

I believe it scares only the people who are up to no good. I have nothing to hide from anyone, so the way I see it, unless you are involved in something you shouldn’t be, then you have nothing to fear.

Actually it should scare anyone who believes in our constitution. Unreasonable search and seizure anyone? As phx8 suggests, it’s really so easy to do this legally, so it calls into question the motives of those who would do this.

Ken,
You know the US has porous borders, right? Illegal immigrants enter daily in large numbers. Agreed? Now, how do you reconcile that fact with the fact no terrorist attacks have occurred? And no, ‘luck’ is not an adequate explanation.

Are you really that afraid of terrorism? Would you sacrifice your rights, your freedom, and your constitution on your altar of fear?

There are many reasonable, measured steps which can be taken for security.

Do you have a link for Rockefeller’s role in this executive order?

The government, charged first and foremost with protecting the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness of its subjects. There is a fine line between protecting lives and disrupting them and no one on earth is qualified to make that judgment.

You completely contradict your point here. This is the REASON we have a system of checks and balances, because no one is qualified alone. And if the government is so charged with this protection, then it must do so by protecting the rights of everyone, not just those it wants to protect today.

Ken You’re wrong Senator Rockefeller did object at the time he was informed but was not allowed to go public with his dissent due to espionage laws. Everyone out there who does not see a problem with the government spying on them must be very ignorant of history both domestic and abroad. Perhaps you should all get out your history books and read up on what happens when personal privacy rights are violated by a government! This is very serious, my 78yr old mother is up in arms over this issue and you don’t get anymore patriotic than she is.

Are you really that afraid of terrorism? Would you sacrifice your rights, your freedom, and your constitution on your altar of fear?

I totally agree. If we sacrifice our rights, then there is nothing left worth protecting, and the terrorists have already won.

PS KEN Republicans also voted against making the Patriot Act permenant as it now reads, what’s wrong with the rest of the republicans that they couldn’t accept a three month extention to the Act, while they had an intelligent discussion on what should be included in it. Why are the republicans always using the fear in people to push through whatever they want, which usually turns out to be harmful to the middle and working class, while benefiting only their self interest?

Carla:

I think you ought to “hold your fire” on this line of thought for a while. This is another “slick back book” article released just in time to help with sales.

I am not discounting anything. It may be impeachable, and it may be not. What is certain is that there is a clear conflict of interest in that the writer of the story has timed it’s release to enhance their own and their publishers pocketbook.

Craig

Carla,

There is no defense for actions such as these.

Except that there was something called 9/11. Maybe you’ve heard of it?

Hopefully, Democrats will insist on impeachment and the downward spiral on the left will continue.

Um, I think we need a special counsel to investigate who leaked this information as well.

Ken Wrote
“This president,office of homeland security and the patriot act has kept us safe from terrorism since 9-11, remember 9-11?”

No what happened on 9/11? I missed Bush’s speech this week so I didnt get reminded about it for the millionth time.

Odd that the 9/11 commision gave our government terrible grades in reguards to securing our country. We all saw what a bang up job the department of homeland security did during Katrina, if that would have been a terriorist attack I cringe to think what would have happened. This adminstration was unable to provide bare essentals like bottled water, ice or MRE’s. So maybe the fact that we haen’t had a terriorist attack has little to do with this adminstration. Today the Senate decided not to re-new the “patriot act” which is a good thing considering it was hastely rammed through the system while the fear from 9/11 was fresh in the minds of all Americans.

As far as wire taps I guess this really doesn’t suprise me. A US citizen’s constitunal right to privacy is just one more that has been compromised over the last 5 years. But hey we can still own as many guns as we want! I doubt that is a right that will ever be violated.

phx8 said
“And no, ‘luck’ is not an adequate explanation.”
You are so right. It was the FBI, CIA, etc., that has kept us safe. And if spying is a part of keeping us safe…great get it on. Had a very wise history professor once (before they all became liberal) who taught if we want security from our government we must be willing to give up some freedoms. He was so right.
” Are you really that afraid of terrorism? “
After 30 years in the military and two wars, I am not afraid of terrorism for myself. I have lived a full life. But, my grands and great grands need something better than what the cut and run liberals offer. Afraid…talk to those who lost loved ones in 9-11. See if they are afraid of further attacks.
jonitodd…So, senator Rockefeller was a stealth objector….how convient! It must have been a secret!
Only the rebel republicans (liberal ones) voted no.
Fear, you talk about fear. The liberals are masters of doom and gloom. Listen to them sometime. Everything is going wrong according to them. The glass is always half empty.
Ashley said it quite well. If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.
Wish we had the List of Subversive Organizations under President Kennedy still around. ACLU would be at the top with the tree huggers a close second.

Merry Christmas again!

Note the immediate slant of this topic toward impeachment. Note how for a large segment of the liberal community, this issue is purported as disgust over (potential) civil rights violations but is in fact coated in glee that maybe, finally, at long last, they might have a chance to impeach. After all, this has been the #1 goal of the Democratic party for the last 5 years.

Dr. Shopper
Unless you live on the gulf coast do not speak of things that you do not know. Please do not mouth the lies of the media. The lies are just now coming out.
We had plenty of water, shelters, etc., here on the Mississipi coast. Signs in our yards say Thank You FEMA. I do not speak for New Orleans other than internal things caused their problems.

Ken, who uses fear as their tool to subvert justice and continually strip away civil rights? Is it really doom and gloom or a view of reality you can’t seem to understand?

All

Time for the mighty Sicilian Eagle to dive into the fray on behalf of my president.

First off,a little birdie told me that is NSA doesn’t check constantly,all any terrorist has to do (and they are doing this…believe me..)is get pre-paid cell phones with American numbers,load them up with minutes on pre-paid calling cards and presto they have created a real time terrorist communications network thanks to us all over the world in a flick of an eye.

A US cell phone detonating a IED.

Nice,huh?

Imagine 25,000 cell-phones like that in Iraq,Afganistan,Pakistan,Iran,Palestine,VenezualaIndonesia,Nortth Korea,China.

Communicating intelligence,planning attacks..the whole gamit.

Do you really want to make an issue of this?

In January there will be a Congressionial inquiry and the above info alone,once out…and now consider it out…will again cause my lefty friends to wince.

Another dry hole,fellas…

Save the impeachment crap for,say Kerry or Pelosi…

Nice job they have done to your party.

If you don’t watch out,the Eagle will soar over there and straigthen things because he’s a nice guy.

This truly shakes me. I voted for Bush, and it wasn’t long after that i definitley regreted that decision. I thought our president was leading our country down the wrong path, but i didn’t know that he was infringing on our civil rights, basically spitting on our “american freedom.”

I put my opinions up on a public blog. I don’t care if someone listens in on me. As long as they don’t make fun of me in the morning.

I am glad the president had the courage to protect us.

Even the person involved might be protected. If you are a good Muslim, for example, or an Irish patriot, you might be involved with terrorists and not know it.

Re impeachment

Impeachment is a political decision. Much as you all hate Bush, you will never get rid of him. Who replaces Bush - Cheney.

I am saddened and appalled by many of the posts Ive just read. Saying that security and safety trump the ideas of freedom and privacy is a gross violation of the entire history of this country and the ideas it was founded upon.

This country was formed by people who were willing to lay their lives on the line for merely a hope of freedom; our men and women in the armed forces sacrifice safety every day in order to protect the freedoms we cherish.

Their lives are dishonored by those today who say that they are willing to give up what they died for in order to protect themselves.

Benjamin Franklin is quoted as saying that those who are willing to sacrifice their liberties for the promise of safety, deserve neither.
The founding fathers and those in the military whove died knew this to be true in their hearts.

If people have died for liberty, and we revere them for it, how can we now say that those very same liberties are less valuable than our own lives?

very well said Demon

I hate to dampen the impeachment party, but….

In the unlikely event of an impeachment by the Senate, not only would Chaney be President, but he and the Republican Congress would select the new VP.

This new VP would IMMEDIATELY go to the front of the line as the favorite as the Republican Presidantial candidate, and would have vast opportunity to get a leg up against not only Republican challengers, but also Democratic.

Whereas today, the Republicans will spend much of the 2007/2008 campaign jockeying within the party to win the party nomination.

Soooooooo, be careful what you wish for…….

Discussions like this reveal another aspect of the cultural conflicts in our society. On one side are people like Carla, phx8, Loren, and ant, who all seem to have a passionate belief in the most important idea on which the United States was founded: the legal system has legitimacy only so long as it has integrity and even-handedness, and binds the state as much as it does the individual. Others seem to believe that the legal system exists for the exclusive benefit of those who think, vote, and pray like they do.

In the 1970s miniseries “Holocaust” the Adolf Eichmann stand-in is a lawyer who rises in the Nazi hierarchy by perverting, not doing away with existing laws. The Nazis never tore up the Weimar Constitution, they simply said, whenever they wanted to, that it did not apply.

This is not to equate Bush and the Republicans with Hitler and the Nazis, in either the viciousness of their ideology, the level of their fanaticism, or the depth of their criminality. But what I think that some on this forum recognize and some do not is that the first step toward totalitarianism is the acquiescence of citizens in the corruption of their legal system in the name of a “higher truth”.

Liberty and privacy are not the same things. Franklin would not have found anything unusual in the government checking up on people who might engage in mass murder.

Paul C, D. Hastert’s not next in line?

Personally I would love to have Cheney as President. He’s such a corpo-whore, we dems would have a field day with his insanity. Cheney is to us what Howard Dean is to Ken Mehlman/E. Gillespie. But if Cheney is connected to the Libby affair somehow and BTW it appears now that the Delay findings have widened to include possible conservative NGO fronts (though not much is being said) we could get rid of Cheney first making George Junior all that much more vulnerable. we can only dream but George is plummeting whether we have impeachment hearings or not. Either way George goes down from here on out, curse of the second term.

What about the NY Times, those whores pulling back the story (Texas hold ‘em style) for supposed national security purposes? As if the Judith Miller debacle wasn’t enough of a black eye???

I do very much consider privacy to be one of my liberties. The freedom to communicate with another listening in i consider to be one of my freedoms in this country, this is the same as if i followed you everywhere you went listened to every word you said, and then when something a little suspicous arose taking you and interrogating you, and you know with the patriot act there is no trial. you will just be detained until they are convinced you are not dangerous… which could be a long long time.

:edit: without someone listening in :end edit:

Ken Your right our kids and grand kids do need to be offered something better- when are we going to learn that war will not end violence. We need to work harder to find non-violent solutions to the worlds problems. The right thinks they can get whatever they want with military might, it might work in the short run but it will never bring a lasting peace.

Many fine Americans have given their lives throughout our history for the preservation of our Constitutional liberties, and I think they would be rightly disgusted at how easily some of you have thrown up your hands and surrendered after a single act of terrorism. Fortunately, liberty has indeed been more precious than life to some real, patriotic Americans.

Franklin said “Those who would sacrifice essential liberties for a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

Our country is glorious because of Franklin and the other framers of our Constitution and our form of government, and also because of the real patriots who gave their lives for our liberties. The Constitution provides for checks and balances, most important being judicial review. When we discard the Constitution, we dishonor the patriots and abandon our country. And we lose the “war” on terrorism.

Nothing to hide, so nothing to fear? Want to buy my bridge? How about the Quaker meeting house that’s in the Defense Dept’s threat database for their anti-war beliefs? Go read up on Joe McCarthy….

9/11? Tragic, but not even a blip in the recent history of evil. Consider Iraq: some foreigners didn’t like their government because it wouldn’t give them big fat oil contracts, so they overthrew it by laying waste whole cities and killing tens of thousands of Iraqi citizens and maiming countless more. We lost two buildings. What I’m mad about is that the people who did it are still out there (and here’s a hint: they’re not now and never have been in Iraq).

Here you are: you think its fine for your government to spy on its citizens, throw people in secret prisons without charges or representation, torture, lie to its citizens (golly, sounds exactly like Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, doesn’t it?) — all ignoring the protections demanded by the Constitution. No, no, you say, we have to ignore the Constitution lest some nut-case manages to kill someone! We have to extend the Patriots-rolling-over-in-their-graves act! I’m glad you weren’t in charge in 1776.

Face it: as terrible as our 9/11 experience was, more people than lost their lives then will suffocate this year because the EPA won’t enforce environmental standards on contributors to the Republican party.

If you want to preserve America, if you want Americans to be safe and healthy and free, you might want to take a little more critical look at the policies of the President.

But sure, let’s save impeachment for the really horrible stuff, like lying about your sex life.

I admit to being badly shaken after 9/11. No doubt our leaders were as well. Did they take steps that they thought might help safeguard the nation even at the cost of infringing on Constitutional rights? It now seems quite possible.

So, what should be our response? The first order of business is to find out exactly what’s happened before jumping on any particular bandwagon. On the right, anyone who has ever said we must respect and uphold the Constitution and even be willing to die for the rights created by that document it should be very cautious about automatically defending the use of warrantless wiretaps. On the left, anyone who was fearful for their their country and the lives of their families should be cautious about automatically declaring such actions as utterly unconscionable and irresponsible.

These are strange times. If laws were broken and rights secretly rescinded, a heavy political price may well be paid. That’s probably as it should be. We are, after all, a nation of laws. But we’ll also need to judge the underlying motives for such crimes, if indeed they were committed. There’s a difference between infringing on liberties for the sake of pure power and infringing on them for the perceived common good. We’ll need to weigh these things as wisely as we can.

Ken

thanks for setting me straight on what a steadfast and valiant effort FEMA put forth in the face of Katrina. It must have been only the “libreal media” that showed me and the rest of the world the thousands of people in New Orleans going for days without basic things like food and water wading around helplessly while Mike Brown made dinner reservations and looked for a weekend dog sitter, give me a break. You are right, I don’t live in the gulf area but I did attend college there 8 years ago. I have a few friends who still live in the area and they have assured me what we all saw was the truth. You say in Mississipi that FEMA did an adequate job and I believe you, but dont pretend that was the case in New Orleans. Also don’t blame “internal things” for FEMA’s shortcomings either. Katrina was the biggest natural disaster this country has ever seen I’ve heard the talking point how this was a state and local goverenment problem and that is a joke. Name one state goverenment that wouldn’t have been overwealmed by this disaster.

PS
I’m sure Brownie was planning on leaving his postion anyway.

Carla,

If the other things won’t stick, illegal war, obfuscation of fact finding and truth, possible bombing of a news station, war crimes on civillian populations and others. This might not stick especially with a republican congress. they’d force it somehow to an ‘up or down vote’ and he’d have the keys back to the White House. That’s how these types operate, he’d serve out his term.

I think we can rest assured that the truth of what he and his pentagon advisory are doing overseas will become known more and more. things are starting to unhinge everyday so it’s only a matter of time until something comes out that will just be the straw that broke the camel’s back. Thusly instigating such a move to really can this guy once and for all.

This is something that happened in the days and months RIGHT after 9-11 when nobody had any idea if the attacks were over and that weren’t more major attacks in the offing. In short, it was well within the president’s authority during a time of national emergency, which was this clearly was.

It was NOT a free license for law enforcement across the country to eavesdrop on anyone but people with known or suspected associations with Al Qaida and other overseas terrorist organizations.

If there had been another 9-11 attack in 2002, would that have been okay with liberal posters here?

The president actually has very broad emergency powers, and there have been instances when habeas corpus was completely suspended. The president can actually put people in prison without trial in such circumstances, which goes far beyond the relatively mundane act of eavesdropping on those with suspected terrorist ties.

Jack wrote:

Liberty and privacy are not the same things. Franklin would not have found anything unusual in the government checking up on people who might engage in mass murder.

I don’t find anything wrong with that, or monitoring phone calls to attempt to prevent terrorism, as long as those doing the “checking up” obtain a warrant by successfully arguing to the judicial branch that their actions are called for, as required by the Constitution.

” Those that would give up essential liberty in pursuit of a little temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security “
Ben Franklin was correct when he penned this and senator Sununu, a republican, was correct when he quoted this today on the floor.

At this one will be investigated!

Arlen Specter said today that he thinks this is wrong and said the senate will have hearings about early next year. On merit I do oppose these wire taps becasue it trespasses on every American’s civil rights. I am curious to see just who was being spied on, and it looks like for once we will actually get to hear the truth via federal investigation. It would be funny if Cindy Sheehan, Joe Wilson, and Al Franken’s name come up on that list.

DISCLAIMER
Attention right wing conspiracy freaks the last sentence contains irony and the writer in no way claims that to be the truth

But we will see!

This is interesting: liberals become very indignant if you say that they lack the toughness, patriotism or resolve to defend the United States.

They often go so far as to say that the reason they oppose the war in Iraq is because they think it’s a distraction from the fight against Al Qaida and domestic terrorists.

But when it comes down to brass tacks, you find that they don’t want to fight domestic terrorism either, not unless it conforms to the failed model of law enforcement that effectively tied us into knots during the Clinton administration and early Bush Administration. The system which put barriers in communication between law enforcement and intelligence services, which requires extensive review by lawyers and multiple judicial orders for each step which would allow us to even monitor a potential terrorist.

What we see now is this: if there has just been a major terrorist attack on our soil which kills 3000 Americans, it is NOT okay with them (okay, some of them—I don’t want to say that all liberals are this hysterical) to monitor the phone calls of people with known or suspected Al Qaida ties.

We’re not talking about jailing people, mind you. Not even detaining them. We’re talking about cutting the red tape and allowing intelligence services ot merely listen to them in order to head off rapidly devoloping attacks.

That’s what this comes down to—the complete refusal of the more out there segments of the American left to allow law enforcement to protect the American people in any way, shape or form.

Sanger,

So what are we saying, we agree that these provisions were a bit over-reaching?

See the problem with the Patriot act is two fold

One: are the “sunset provisions” meaning congressional assembly cannot go over HOW the Patriot act was used over the five year term.

AND TWO: Is the fact that the laws and provisions can be “JIG-SAWED” together to create new laws. Such you can take six or seven of them and put the together to give agencies the rights to to just about anything. That’s how broad the provisions really are.

In Patriot act two there are provisions to potentially kill protestors by whatever means, imaging that jigsawed with six or seven other odd provisions. The power a sitting president would have would be near maniacal like within a stalinist or medeival sense, really. It would be a push button monarchy instead of a nation of laws. This needs to go and be possibly replaced with something hopefully a hell of alot more responsible and transparent.

I believe it scares only the people who are up to no good. I have nothing to hide from anyone, so the way I see it, unless you are involved in something you shouldn�€™t be, then you have nothing to fear.

It should scare you that the government has kept this secret for 3 years. If it is no big deal then why keep it from the public?

Except that there was something called 9/11. Maybe you’ve heard of it?

The real question is has Bush heard of it? OBL strikes America, he strikes Iraq. Our borders are wide open for terrorist to come on in, Bush spies on Americans. Say what? Carla is right, if this doesn’t get a rise out of you then your partisan political sickness may be terminal.

I don’t know what is scarier, that Bush has grossly violated the Constitution he took an oath to uphold, or that people are actually defending his actions. Do any of you that are defending this action realize that we have Americans fighting and dieing for this country and all it stands for? Some scream and yell “unpatriotic”, “un-American” and charge that liberals are hurting troop morale when they so much as question the administration about the war. Do some of you really think they are honoring the sacrifices that our troops are making by giving up the very rights they are fighting to protect? This is crazy! Will nothing wake America up?

And for those who say if you are not doing anything wrong you have nothing to fear. Have you ever heard the of “the slippery slope”? 9/11 was the peak, and we have been sliding down the slope ever since. If we continue going down this slope, then the terrorist we are trying to stop, have won. Period.

As far as impeachment goes, I cannot believe he wasn’t impeached after Katrina. It is unbelievable to me that a President can be impeached for lying about a stained blue dress, but a President cannot be impeached for the needless deaths of thousands in New Orleans and tens of thousands in Iraq, he cannot even be impeached for violating his oath to uphold the Constitution! What has happened to our great country?

If there is any “partisan political sickness” involved … it’s with Ms. Ryan … regurgitating the same old “we had the Bush administration” garbage. One of government’s primary responsibilities is to protect it’s people. While abuse of individual’s rights is one issue … protecting us from ANYONE connected with terrorism … is something I applaud. Wake up Ms. Ryan!

Novenge, there are simply NOT provisions in the Patriot Act which permit law enforcement officials to kill “protesters by any means”.

Not unless you want to say that others laws already on the books and generally agreed upon by society could be taken to illogical extremes using the same “jigsaw” provisions you mention.

Laws against disturbing the peace, trespassing, insurrection—or even jaywalking for that matter—could, if you use this “jigsawing” approach, be used to to excuse kill protesters.

You could just as easily say, if you’re determined to do so, that enforcing any laws could in some version of reality lead to totalitariansim.
It’s a very easy to assert if EVERYTHING is interpreted according to its most remote possibility at the end of a slippery slope.

This is, I think, an example of the left’s hysteria when it comes to the Patriot Act. Is there one single abuse of the Patriot Act that anyone can point to? Has there even been ONE instance when it has been used to interfere with the rights of honest citizens instead of terrorists? Can anyone cite even ONE instance?

I hope that the left realizes this one thing: if the Patriot Act is defeated or gutted and there is another terrorist attack on American soil, the left would, I’m sure, love to blame the president for it.

All he’ll have to do, however, is say “Well, I tried my best. For three years there were no further attacks but then the Democrats fillibustered the anti-terrorism measures I tried to implement, emasculated our law enforcement, and just look where it led.”

If I were a partisan Democrat, I wouldn’t be inviting a situation where the blame for future terrorist attacks could easily be put squarely on my party.

God protect us; but one more attack as 9/11 and no one will be worried about our civil rights, but about our protection from the government at any cost!

On the left, anyone who was fearful for their their country and the lives of their families should be cautious about automatically declaring such actions as utterly unconscionable and irresponsible.

I was and am fearful for my country and the lives of my family. Not because of terrorism, because our government has used fear to hijack our country and our rights. We have more to fear from our own government then we do from any outside threat.

It is ridiculous that anybody would be willing to give up their rights for no real security. Our troops are willing to fight and die for this country and all it stands for, shouldn’t we?

To all who see no problem with our rights being violated. Move to another country with fewer rights than we have and be “safe”.

What Vast left-wing consipracy said.
Additionally…
First question: Why even act surprised or outraged?
Second question: Why aren’t you already?

I’ve long known this entire administration has ABSOLUTELY NO REGARD FOR OUR CONSTITUTION. Really, no regard for people in general. Here. Abroad. Nobody.
Nothing they did or could do can surprise me now. Honestly.
Even in 2000 when they gained power it was through an unconstitutional appointment by the Supreme Court. Everything that has followed since has been of a piece with that unprecedented break with our founding principles.
After all, what more can be expected from fascists whose ideologies and actions have never bore any resemblance to American principles?
And yes, OF COURSE they must be impeached — THE WHOLE F*CKING LOT OF THEM.
There is actually a very long list to choose from — really we can take our pick, fellow citizens.
Come one, come all! Take a turn on the Wheel O’ Impeachable Offenses — everybody hits an Offense! Nobody goes home without a copy of the Constitution!
:^/
Unfortunately and less stunningly dramatic though, none of these impeachable offenses have anything to do with cheating on the first lady by getting a blow-job from an intern in the oval office.

If I were a partisan Democrat, I wouldn’t be inviting a situation where the blame for future terrorist attacks could easily be put squarely on my party.

sanger,

Just how do you come to this conclusion? Bush and the Republicans are in control of Washington. They are calling the shots, badly I might add. They have invaded a country based on faulty intelligence, that had no connection to terrorism (it sure does now though), they have done little to address our wide open borders, they have made new enemies around the world and tarnished our image. Anti-American sentiment is running high. We are in a much more dangerous situation today, and you can thank Bushco for that. But hey way to go guys, spying on Americans, that should keep us safe! “You’re doing a heckava job, Bushie!”

Even in 2000 when they gained power it was through an unconstitutional appointment by the Supreme Court.

This is exactly why he has no respect for the Constitution. None.

New guy, unless you have known contacts with Al Qaida, I’d like to hear about which of your rights have been violated because I’m aware of not a single instance of any honest citizen’s rights being “violated” by the Patriot Act.

Hell, if you DO have contacts with Al Qaida, I’d like to hear about that too! So specifically which rights? When and where, and mention something that happened to you or somebody you know—don’t just repeat something you read on the Daily Kos.

Speaking for myself, I feel that my rights are best preserved when I’m not being attacked by terrorists. Obviously you feel differently.

Unfortunately and less stunningly dramatic though, none of these impeachable offenses have anything to do with cheating on the first lady by getting a blow-job from an intern in the oval office.

Adrienne,

I’ll give him a blow-job myself if it means taking America back! 8^o

I’m aware of not a single instance of any honest citizen’s rights being “violated‎ by the Patriot Act.

FBI agents used a USA PATRIOT Act “sneak and peek” search to secretly examine the home of Brandon Mayfield, who was wrongfully jailed for two weeks on suspicion of involvement in the Madrid train bombings. Agents seized three hard drives and ten DNA samples preserved on cotton swabs, and took 335 photos of personal items. Mayfield has filed a lawsuit against the U.S. government, contending that his rights were violated by his arrest and by the investigation against him. He also contends the USA PATRIOT ACT is unconstitutional.

I’m aware of not a single instance of any honest citizen’s rights being “violated‎ by the Patriot Act.

In May 2004, Professor Steve Kurtz of the University of Buffalo reported his wife’s death of heart failure. The associate art professor, who works in the biotechnology sector, was using benign bacterial cultures and biological equipment in his work. Police arriving at the scene found the equipment (which had been displayed in museums and galleries throughout Europe and North America) suspicious and notified the FBI . The next day the FBI, Joint Terrorism Task Force, Department of Homeland Security and numerous other law enforcement agencies arrived in HAZMAT gear and cordoned off the block surrounding Kurtz’s house, impounding computers, manuscripts, books, and equipment, and detaining Kurtz without charge for 22 hours; the Erie County Health Department condemned the house as a possible “health risk” while the cultures were analyzed. Although it was determined that nothing in the Kurtz’s home posed any health or safety risk, the Justice Department sought charges under Section 175 of the US Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act—a law which was expanded by the USA PATRIOT Act. A grand jury rejected those charges, but Kurtz is still charged with federal criminal mail and wire fraud, and faces 20 years in jail. Supporters worldwide argue that this is a politically motivated prosecution, akin to those seen during the era of McCarthyism, and legal observers note that it is a precedent-setting case with far-reaching implications involving the criminalization of free speech and expression for artists, scientists, researchers, and others.

I’m aware of not a single instance of any honest citizen’s rights being “violated” by the Patriot Act.

A North Carolina county prosecutor charged a man accused of running a methamphetamine lab with breaking a new state law barring the manufacture of chemical weapons. If convicted, Martin Dwayne Miller could get 12 years to life in prison for a crime that usually brings about six months.

I’m aware of not a single instance of any honest citizens rights being “violated” by the Patriot Act.

“Within six months of passing the PATRIOT Act, the Justice Department was conducting seminars on how to stretch the new wiretapping provisions to extend them beyond terror cases,” said Dan Dodson, a spokesman for the National Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys. “They say they want the PATRIOT Act to fight terrorism. Then, within six months, they are teaching their people how to use it on ordinary citizens.”

I mean, hell, I almost gave up my whole Presidency for just a couple of em.

And I bet you got a real purty mouth, doncha?

Bill,

Forget it! You can’t help us now. How ‘bout Hill, she’s a senator.

Why yes, I do have a real pretty mouth, and big sharp teeth.

This is NOT the only thing that this president and/or his administration has done that is flat out illegal. Bush has commited more impeachable offenses that Clinton could ever have even dreamed of!

JayJay:
“I’ll give him a blow-job myself if it means taking America back! 8^o”

Honey, all I can say is, whatever you do, don’t swallow!
I wouldn’t want a nice guy like you to pick up any of their nasty Neocon germs. (They’re so into globalisation, you never know where these Clowns have been!) ;^)

Seen on bumper sticker:
If you are not outraged, you’re not paying attention!

Honey, all I can say is, whatever you do, don’t swallow! I wouldn’t want a nice guy like you to pick up any of their nasty Neocon germs. (They’re so into globalisation, you never know where these Clowns have been!) ;^)

Adrienne,

I heard he was impotent anyway. Or was that incompetent? 8^>

JayJay:
“I heard he was impotent anyway. Or was that incompetent? 8^>”

Well, the first lady during her stand-up routine claimed that Curious George was always asleep by nine — while she watched ‘Desperate Housewives’. So, no doubt you’re correct. As for the latter it’s a given, no?

Some some basic groundwork for the purposes of discussion:

The Fourth Amendment

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

Franklin’s actual quote:

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

The quote quote inscribed on the stairwell of the Statue of Liberty:

“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

Presidential Oath of Office:

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

From George W. Bush’s Twin Towers Speech

“Freedom and fear are at war. The advance of human freedom, the great achievement of our time and the great hope of every time, now depends on us….I will not forget the wound to our country and those who inflicted it. I will not yield, I will not rest, I will not relent in waging this struggle for freedom and security for the American people…Freedom and fear, justice and cruelty, have always been at war, and we know that God is not neutral between them. Fellow citizens, we’ll meet violence with patient justice, assured of the rightness of our cause and confident of the victories to come. In all that lies before us, may God grant us wisdom and may he watch over the United States of America.”

Ashley, Ken,

“I believe it scares only the people who are up to no good. I have nothing to hide from anyone, so the way I see it, unless you are involved in something you shouldn’t be, then you have nothing to fear.”

“Ashley said it quite well. If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.”

I’m sorry, but this vulgar display of ignorance is thoroughly nauseating to me. You think you have nothing to hide? You’re naive. Let’s say, for the sake of argument that you have never broken a law in your life, nor do you ever intend to. I don’t know how many times I must put this argument to shame. Oral sex is illegal in my state, how ‘bout yours? You like pornography Ken? Could be illegal in your state. You like a drink every now and then Ashley? It was called prohibition, and there are many who would like to see it happen again.

I said it before, I’ll say it again. Today’s liberties are tomorrow’s litigations. Just because what you do today is legal doesn’t mean it will be tomorrow. How about if tomorrow those ‘damn democrats’ take away our right to bare arms? Or they abolish religion? You don’t break any laws? I call BS. I bet you could think of at least 3 or 4. The real point is that this kind of attitude is what paves the way for dictators.

In the end, you’re opinion (while you’re entitled to it), praise be to God, doesn’t matter jack. You plainly and simply lose. You can’t justify such actions as those you are espousing unless you plan to amend the constitution. Sorry.

“They that can give up essential liberty
to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety” - Franklin

You want to give up our freedom in order to protect our freedom? Do you hear yourself?

This may be slightly off topic, but when has that stopped me? You know, linking the invasion of Iraq to fighting terror (when it was obvious there were no terrorists there except Saddam) reminds me of the joke about the guy walking down his residental street one evening, and seeing a neighbor on his knees under a street light obviously looking for something. The man walks up and says, “Lose something?” The neighbor says, “Yeah, I dropped a twenty dollar bill.” The man says, “Hmmm, around here, huh?” And the neighbor says, “Actually, no, I think I lost it down the street a ways, but the light’s better here.”

Silly joke, I know, until you realize that there’s billions of barrels of oil under the streetlight.

On Robert Benjamin’s comment upthread: The first step toward totalitarianism is the acquiescence of citizens in the corruption of their legal system in the name of a “higher truth.” I believe Mr. Benjamin points to the crux of the issue regarding wiretaps by a government agency that has betrayed its mandate, directed by a president that has failed to uphold his responsibilities to protect and defend the constitution.

Adrienne:

You are a balm for my troubled soul—thanks!

Speaking for myself, I feel that my rights are best preserved when I’m not being attacked by terrorists. Obviously you feel differently.

sanger,

If this is how you truly feel then lets go all out and protect ourselves right. Why kill tens of thousands of innocent people at all, if we can just thwart terrorists by taking away the rights of Americans? Why not just suspend the Constitution and build a wall around the perimeter of the U.S. We can all have microchips embedded in our forearm for easy identification and GPS tracking. Lets put up surveillance cameras on every street corner,so that law enforcement can identify terror suspects living among us. Let’s tape everybody’s conversations, you never know when you might catch a break and stumble upon a conversation between terrorist.

Let’s put filters on the Information Super Highway to censor any information that may be used by terrorists in any way shape or form, and do the same at the library. Lets suspend the free press and have a central press run by the government, after all they know best, right? We wouldn’t want anything that might remotely jeopardize national security out in the hands of the public.

Lets allow surprise inspections of any residence for any reason, you never know were a terrorist might be hiding out. Lets put up check points on highways and allow searches of vehicles, after all the terrorist have to get around somehow. Let’s put up border patrols at all state borders and require passports to move about the many states.

And for heaven’s sake we don’t want the terrorist to go free, once we catch them, so lets trash the judicial system, and allow our central government to decide what is best. They’ll do the right thing, I’m sure.

Then lets do profiling to come up with a profile of a typical terrorist, the exterminate anybody that fits the profile. We would be super secure then. Right?

Speaking for myself, I would rather take my chances with the terrorist, then to give up the principles that make being an American so great.

In Germany, they came first for the Communists, and I did not speak out- because I was not a Communist;

Then they came for the Social Democrats, and I did not speak out- because I was not a Social Democrat;

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out- because I was not a Trade Unionist;

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out- because I was not Jewish;

Then they came for me,—
and there was no one left to speak out.

-Rev. Martin Niemöller, 1945

No doubt our torture-loving Alberto Gonzales told Bush that spying on Americans is legal.

Looks like the right is really showing their true color on this one. Yellow. All this time they have been trying to convince everyone that the left was weak, that we were for communism, that we were un-American, etc. Who did they think they were fooling? They won’t even stand up for a basic American principle. This is not simply an issue of invasion of privacy, this is only the beginning.

Let’s not forget history. 1930’s Germany started out a Democracy, until a terrorist attack on The Reichstag . On February 28, 1933, President Hindenburg and Chancellor Hitler invoke Article 48 of the Weimar Constitution, which permits the suspension of civil liberties in time of national emergency. This Decree of the Reich President for the Protection of the People and State abrogates the following constitutional protections:

* Free expression of opinion
* Freedom of the press
* Right of assembly and association
* Right to privacy of postal and electronic communications
* Protection against unlawful searches and seizures
* Individual property rights
* States’ right of self-government

What more is needed to get this purported leader of democracy impeached? To accomplish his aims, he is a liar, a torturer, and now we discover, a lurker of untold magnitude. I am heartsick at how low we have sunk as a nation. How can anyone of us as Americans - we are AMERICANS for God’s sake!! - condone this latest news of big brother illegally watching, listening, recording thousands of Americans over the last three years? I don’t know about the rest of you, but I’m really tired of being little sister. Is our sense of security really worth living in a police state? Because that is where we are, my brothers and sisters. Can anyone of you ever have imagined five years ago that our government leaders would actually engage in a dialogue over whether torture should be used in interrogations? Or that dissent with our President means a person isn’t a patriot? Or that having my phone conversations listened in on by the CIA without any legal safeguards is okay? We have a right and a duty to be outraged. Our personal freedoms and national conscience are being nibbled away bit by bit and we are allowing it to happen. Patrick Henry, where are you? Thomas Jefferson, we have let you down. Brave soldiers who fell at Bull Run, Gettysburg, Iwo Jima, Hamburger Hill, have we allowed you to die in vain because the country you fought for and shed your life’s blood for no longer stands for liberty and justice? Where, we the people, is our moral outrage? Please write to your senators and congressmen and congresswomen and demand an end to this nightmare of a presidency. Thank you.

Sanger,

Obviously you arent aware of the fourth amendment in the bill of rights. Well here it is:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

You should read the bill of rights and learn what rights you are supposed to have.

As for being accused of being Al Qaida, I’m insulted. You sound just like the Bush administration. “If you are not with us, you are against us”. We’ve made a lot of allies with that phrase. Whateve happened to the other war? You know the one where we were supposed to catch Bin Laden.

Also, you obviously didn’t like that I told you to move to another country. Now you know how we liberals have felt when the same statement has been told to us. I love this country, but our basic freedomes are being taken away from us. What’s next? “Sorry *Bill* but you don’t have the right to free speech anymore. I know you want to say something in your defense but you can’t anymore. Sucks to be you, now give me the keys to your car. I need another for my kingdome”. That is the path we are starting to take as a country. This is not what our ancestors died for.

Bryon

PS- I would have replied earlier but President Bush called me yesterday and said I had to be in bed by 12:30 am estern time. Otherwise I would have gone to Abu Graib under the Everyone in bed by 12:30 Act.

I really can’t believe the narrow minded answer, “well if you have nothing to hide….”
That is unreal to me! This effects our right to privacy in many other issues, right to choose, human rights, gay rights, medical care just to mention a few. We as a country cannot allow ANY changes to our current laws. President Bush could have done this legally without difficulty. This just shows his arrogance. The next change will be Dictator Bush!

Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus, Roosevelt imprisoned Japanese Citizens. This is a time of war, action must be taken.

This country was founded on principles of FREEDOM, NOT principles of SAFETY!! We are becoming so obsessed with the idea that our lives must be totally risk-free that, as Benj. Franklin put it, we are giving up our essential liberty. The Bush Administration and those in the media who are their puppets are playing this for everything they can. You can’t read a newspaper or watch a news program without seeing some new scare tactic about something. Every “edition” of the nightly news has yet another segment devoted to frightening the public. Then along comes Bush with that carefully cultivated sad-eyed “trust Uncle George” look and assures us that HE can keep us secure. All we have to do is abandon our rights. Just sit back, open another beer, watch the idiotic “reality” shows on the channel of our choice, and let him and those right-wing religio-nutcakes run our lives for us.
I don’t know about you-all, but I say “BULLSHIT!” Better Free than Safe! It’s more than high time we dumped this gang of crooks, sneaks and warmongers.

If we are willing to allow our military to risk it’s life to protect the American way of life, shouldn’t we be willing to actually live it? The military says ‘they are here to protect democracy, not practice it.” The ‘practice democracy’ part is the responsibility of the American citizens and our elected officials. If we’re not willing to live up to our end of that bargain, why should they?

Ashley

“I believe it scares only the people who are up to no good. I have nothing to hide from anyone, so the way I see it, unless you are involved in something you shouldn’t be, then you have nothing to fear.”

Frankly, comments like yours scare me more than the fact that POTUS has apparently usurped the power and authority of congress and the FISA court. Why not just declare martial law and be done with it? I’m sure that would make us all safer. Right?

For those who think that decimating the Bill of Rights is justified if it protects us from terrorists, here is a wake up call.

According to testimony before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs committee in June, “[The Environmental Protection Agency] has cataloged some 15,000 facilities in the United States that manufacture, use or store hazardous chemicals for productive, legitimate purposes in amounts that could cause extensive harm if turned against us as weapons. DHS, using a different methodology, has identified 3,400 facilities that could affect more than 1,000 people if attacked. Only a fraction of the nation’s chemical facilities are regulated for security by the federal government or subscribe to voluntary industry security standards.”

My outgoing US Senator and incoming Governor, Jon Corzine, introduced legislation in October 2001 that would have required chemical plants to use best available technology to improve their security. Since then, Chemical Industry lobbyists and Senate Republicans have made sure that this bill never got out of committee.

In June of this year, Sen. Susan Collins called for a new bill to tighten plant security. Jon Corzine, still fighting for this protection, said that he was optimistic that it could finally pass.

Guess what. It is still going nowhere, and even if it passes, it is so weak that it might as well be worthless. Here is what OMB Watch has to say about Collins’ bill.

As someone whose daughter lives 2 miles away from the Secaucus NJ Chemical Industry complex, what some call the biggest in-place WMD in the world, I am tired of hearing how much security we have achieved at the expense of our constitutional rights.

As always, the liberal mind leaves a very good discussion and uses this forum for “Bush Bashing”
Single minded filthy mouthed liberals have a problem with reality. Void of common sense some will continue to wander aimlessly in there hated of the man who beat them.

If liberals have their way, we’ll need fifty pages of documents filled out in triplicate and a judicial review before an American soldier can pull the trigger of his rifle in a combat zone.
You poeple need to wake up.

The president has extremely broad powers in a national emergency, and eavesdropping on potetential terrorists is an extremely minor measure.

The president has made clear that he is going to KEEP monitoring those with terrorist ties, and thank god he is.

This has nothing to do with anybody criticizing the administration. Liberals don’t have to worry: their right to spend all day flaming the administration on the Daily Kos and marching in support of the rights of Al Qaida and Saddam Hussein is in no danger whatsoever.

That liberals have totally gone over to the forces of irrationality is totally clear.

Pretending that this is a choice between “freedom” and “safety” is nonsense, as is bringing in that cliched and overused Reverend Niemöller quote.

That quote really needs to be updated, actually. Then liberals can really be proud to post it on their refrigerators.
__________________________________________

On 9-11, Al Qaida killed 3,000 Americans but I spoke out against George Bush because I was not a Republican;

Saddam Hussein killed a million people, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Republican;

Then George Bush freed millions of people from tryanny, and I DID speak out against that- because I AM a Democrat;

And then when the terrorists came to kill me,
I was just glad to see that nobody had ever violated their civil rights in trying to stop them.

—-
I almost thought it was a joke broadcast this morning on CBS newsradio. He has issues with people leaking information to the press. Let him gripe about it when Novak and Rove are in jail, or in other words, when hell freezes over. It’s just another example of how Rpblcns think that the rules only apply to people who disagree with them. Also note how many times he said 911, Gary Trudeau could have written that speech, and it would be funny.

em>”people who are up to no good”

Bush probably thinks YOU are up to no good, posting in this blog.

“a President can be impeached for lying about a stained blue dress”

The drive to impeach William Jefferson Clinton, 42nd president of the United States, began as soon as he was elected. It was revenge for Nixon’s impeachment by the VRWconspiracy and nothing else.

See here http://www.papersplease.org/davis/index1.html for an example of a Bush’s policies in action.

If this is the price we must pay to protect our “freedom” and keep us safe, I say “Thanks, but no thanks”. I’ll take my chances with the terrorists rather than to live under a regime which has so little regard for my rights under the Constitution.

While it may be true that we haven’t been attacked by the terrorists since 9/11, they are still winning if we allow our great nation to resort to “Gestapo” tactics as a means of preventing such attacks.

Sanger,
The fact that you aren’t willing to question anything that goes on in the government scares me. How far will you let this go before you open your eyes? How many freedoms needs to be stripped from you before you realize they went too far? Pretending this is a choice between freedom and safety? tell me, would you allow yourself to be monitored constantly by, let’s say, a bracelet you had to wear because it makes you feel safer?

Impeachment proceedings were not brought against Bill Clinton for lying about his sex life. Impeachment proceedings were brought against him because of lying about his sex life under oath in front of a Federal Grand Jury.

‘W’ just can’t win. The liberals will cry inpeachment because he is attempting to protect our safety, but if/when another 911 happens, they will be the first ones to say that he has failed to protect the country.

The influx of illegal aliens from the south is nothing new, this was going on for the four years of Bush Sr. and also for the entire 8 years of Clinton. But of course the left coast forgets to tell us about the bad of the clinton administratiion.

Regarding Wiretapping American citizens, I watched the broadcast this morning and did not hear word 1 about wiretapping American citizens. Additionally, where is the call to uncover the leak to the NY Times, which was patently illegal and directly threatens the lives of American citizens, and the call for a special prosecutor to uncover that leak? Amazing the 2 obvious faces in the mainstream media and left leaning complainers. Valerie Plame was a low level known CIA employee and the investigation to uncover the source of the leaks is ongoing and front page news. But when the media likes the story, in other words it may cause a negative impact to this country and Bush, then there are no such calls because it is doing the right thing. I believe that the NY Times may have some criminal problems here since it knowingly published classified information. Great place we live, the dems have the media, and the republicans have the brains.

Doug,
“… I watched the broadcast this morning and did not hear word 1 about wiretapping American citizens.”

Which broadcast? Even Fox news last night noted the problem. It appears US citizens are being wiretapped without a warrant for calls going overseas. If true- and as I said at the beginning of this thread, I find it hard to believe- but if true, it is a violation of YOUR constitutional rights, specifically the fourth amendment.

“Valerie Plame was a low level known CIA employee…”

How do you know?

The NYT is in a no-win situation. Liberals are furious the Times delayed publishing this story, when it could have come out right before the election. Conversatives are furious that it came out at all, and that somewhere along the line, classified information was leaked.

For once, everyone agrees! The NYT sucks.

Some idle speculation… Maybe this is along the lines of an urban legend, but supposedly there is the capability of initiating a wiretap which is triggered by certain words, such as ‘nuclear.’ I suppose that can be applied to phrases as well. Wonder if that plays any part?

Final note. I’m glad this is an issue. I’m sorry so many Americans would give up their constitutional rights so easily.

W’ just can’t win. The liberals will cry inpeachment because he is attempting to protect our safety, but if/when another 911 happens, they will be the first ones to say that he has failed to protect the country. The influx of illegal aliens from the south is nothing new, this was going on for the four years of Bush Sr. and also for the entire 8 years of Clinton. But of course the left coast forgets to tell us about the bad of the clinton administratiion. Posted by: dodge at December 17, 2005 01:51 PM

Dodge,

How is secretly wiretapping our own citizens without a warrent, protecting the country? There is even a special court set up to issue expediant warrents in such cases. This bill even bypassed this court. How about real national security. How about securing industries that pose a potential risk, like chemical plants, nuclear plants, biological industries. How about securing those? How about securing our borders. No it is not a new thing to have bad border control, but spying on your own citizens is. So, if we can do that, then why can we not secure our borders now? Supposedly this wiretapping is to thwart terrorists, if such extreme measures, as war and trashing the Constitution need to be taken then the measure of fixing our border security certainly should not be too much to ask.

Bush has failed to protect the country, and I am saying it now, before any other attacks. He has made us more valnerable than before 9/11.

I don’t give a crap what Clinton, Bush Sr., Reagan or any other President did with regards to this matter. GW Bush is the sitting President who is doing these things and who is in control of fixing these problems now. Today, Clinton has more power than me or you to fix these problems. If Clinton were the sitting President today doing these things, what would you say then? If it is any different then you are saying now, then you are just blinded by partisanship. If it were Clinton doing these things I would be just as outraged!

Impeachment proceedings were not brought against Bill Clinton for lying about his sex life. Impeachment proceedings were brought against him because of lying about his sex life under oath in front of a Federal Grand Jury.

This is the best argument for impeachment.

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.‎

As long as Bush is President he is under this oath! He has trashed the Constitution and disregarded this oath, he took it in front of the American people. Clinton lies under oath about his private sex life: “Impeach!” Bush lies under oath about protecting and upholding the Constitution: “Your doing a heckava job, Bushie!”

Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus, Roosevelt imprisoned Japanese Citizens. This is a time of war, action must be taken.

Tim:

That is not Unconstitutional:

Article I, Section 9.
The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

Richard Benjamin:

Do you think anyone here listens to what you are saying? It seems everyone is too busy concocting their latest retort or scathing criticism.

There are gaping holes in this country’s defenses regarding possible terrorist attacks. Mr Benjamin’s daughter is on the front lines, as are millions of other Americans. There is plenty of blame to go around for this country’s lack of real defenses. We’re sitting on more WMD than the rest of the world combined.

One of the ways we could make ourselves a little safer is getting rid of this vast chemical and nuclear monkey on our backs. We don’t need most of it, do we Mr. Benjamin?

jayjay:

Maybe you have forgotten, we are at war, just how many special courts must be have to go thru to get the permission we need ? How long will that take ? If you snooze….you looze. Yes we should secure the industries and large plants and buildings. Just like we should have taken action during the 1st world trade center bombing….why didn’t we secure it then ?

Of course you dont care about the previous presidents and what they did. That would only show you how Clinton did not secure the border for the eight years her was in office. But of course that is 20/20 hindsight.

I could care less about Clintons private sex life. Its the lying under oath that makes me ill.

SANGER,

IN PATRIOT ACT TWO, YES THERE ARE, FACT!

In Patriot act two there are absolutely such provisions, which is why congress hasn’t enacted it. Read it sometime before you blow smoke up my butt, okay!

Google up: SUNSET PROVISIONS PATRIOT ACT TWO sometime.

Dodge Wrote
“That would only show you how Clinton did not secure the border for the eight years her was in office”

You make it sould like the borders are locked down and not a single illegal immigrant has gained entry to the country since W has been in charge. That couldn’t be further from the truth our borders are just as porus as they have ever been. Way to use an example of a problem that has never been taken care of by any adminstration and try and twist it to make Bill Clinton look bad. I’m sure it sounds persuasive when you listen to rush say it.

As far as adding security to the World Trade Center that problem was addressed, but when maniacs fly airliners into them, metal detectors, and extra security staff doesn’t do much help.

As to your comments about being at war, you are right we are at war. But that doesn’t mean we as United States Citizens should forfeit our basic civil rights. Like Jayjay said there is a process already in place that can grant warrants without the huge beurecratic mess. From what it sounds like so far from the information released this pretty much cuts out the paper trail. We will all know more in a few months since even repbulican senetors like Arlen Spector promised hearings.

Ray
I heard that liberals were rewriting history, but did not believe it. Now I do….
President Nixon impeached? I don’t think so.

I’m going to surprise a lot of folks here and agree with the left with this issue. I am not willing to give up a single right that I have.

The truth is that I’m leaning a lot toward the Libertarian Party now. I guess I’ve always felt that way but couldn’t find where I really fit in. I DO know it isn’t with the left side of the isle. That side left me a long time ago. I am a lot more in line with the Republicans than the Democrats, but Libertarian seems to suit me better.

Ken
you’re right Nixon cut and run and resigned.

I’m sure both Nixon and Heckiva job Brownie would have be vindicated during their trials, but for some reason resigned before the truth came out and swallowed them whole.

I can’t believe what I’m reading here, by some of you. What, were you sleeping through your history classes in school? Particularly American History? Our FREEDOM has been bought at the highest of prices, with blood and loss. For any of us to give up a single civil liberty is to dishonor the men and women who have fought to protect those very liberties you are so “freely” buying a little security with. Benjamin Frankly rightly stated: “They who give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” That statement holds true to this day, and especially now.

So often I hear the argument from zealous right-wingers “oh, constitution, schmonstitution, those were different times, and the writers of the constitution weren’t fighting terrorists on our soil back then - times have changed.” To that I say, “WANNA BET???” Do you think those Brits weren’t terrorizing our ancestors back then in the 1700s? Do you think for a minute that our first American families weren’t terrorized by them, right here, on our soil? Our men went to war and came home to find their families burned to death in their homes, their entire towns demolished - if they got to come home at all. Don’t tell me times have changed, because, my friends, they have not.

Our Constitution is our law. It’s there to protect us from tyranny and oppression. It’s there to ensure our freedom and our civil liberties. To disregard and disrespect our Constitution and selling out our civil liberties is to allow America to stop being America. We are “the land of the free,” not “the land of the safe.” Anyone who doesn’t know this needs an American History lesson - current White House occupants included, in fact, most of all.

Maybe you have forgotten, we are at war, just how many special courts must be have to go thru to get the permission we need ? How long will that take ?

Dodge,

ONE! It is a special court set up just for this purpose, to get warrants quickly. It is basically a rubber stamp court and has turned down very few requests. The Bush administration didn’t even bother getting warrants through this court. This is a gross violation of the Constitution, no matter how you look at it.

Yes we should secure the industries and large plants and buildings. Just like we should have taken action during the 1st world trade center bombing….why didn’t we secure it then ?

Then why haven’t we? The second attack on the world trade center was unprecedented. Did Clinton do all he could to prevent 9/11 from happening? No. Did he violate the U.S. Constution? No. That was in the past, like you said that is 20/20 hindsight. We need to stop fixating on the past and look forward. Because of 9/11 we need to improve our foresight. Why has that not happened? There are many measures that can be taken that do not violate the Constitution that would make us a much more secure than spying on Americans. Yet they have not even been addressed. Why?

Of course you dont care about the previous presidents and what they did. That would only show you how Clinton did not secure the border for the eight years her was in office.

Clinton was far from perfect, but he never did anything like what Bush is doing. Ditto for Bush I, and Reagan, etc.

I could care less about Clintons private sex life. Its the lying under oath that makes me ill.

But Bush’s total disregard for the U.S. Constitution while he is under oath to protect and uphold it, doesn’t? That makes no sense, dude.

The truth is that I’m leaning a lot toward the Libertarian Party now.

tombd,

I am with you. Except I am more in line with the Democrat party, the Republican party has never represented me. I was quite impressed with the Libertarian Party when doing research on them. IMO, they are the best of both worlds. I hope that people will get sick and tired of both mainline parties and turn to third parties, esp. Libertarians. They probably come the closest to representing the principles of the Constitution.

Maybe you have forgotten, we are at war

dodge,

Maybe you have forgotten, this is America, and we are Americans.

James Bamford, author of two books on the NSA, said the program could be problematic because it bypasses a special court set up by the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to authorize eavesdropping on suspected terrorists.

“I didn’t hear him specify any legal right, except his right as president, which in a democracy doesn’t make much sense,” Bamford said in an interview. “Today, what Bush said is he went around the law, which is a violation of the law — which is illegal.”

The thing that makes this so bad and a violation of our Constitutional rights is not so much that they are spying on Americans, it is that they are doing it while bypassing the Judicial Branch. Even though there is a special court to quickly issue warrants.

Often appearing angry in an eight-minute address, the president made clear he has no intention of halting his authorizations of the monitoring activities and said public disclosure of the program by the news media had endangered Americans.

Bush’s willingness to publicly acknowledge a highly classified spying program was a stunning development for a president known to dislike disclosure of even the most mundane inner workings of his White House. Just a day earlier he had refused to talk about it.

Forget the investigation, he has admitted it and said he will not halt in violating the U.S. Constitution that he took an oath in front of Americans to preserve, protect and defend. Impeachment proceedings should start immediately.

jayjay;
My comment about Clinton not securing the border, maybe I didn’t go far enough. Bush is not securing the border as well. I think, at least for now, that is one of the things i do not like about this administration. ‘W’ has done a few things I don’t care for, and the southern border, i think is the most important at this time. Lets see where this ‘wiretap’ thing leads before we all go off of the deep end. It will be very difficult to get the straight story however, once the press starts spinning.
No jayjay i haven’t forgotten that we are at war and i haven’t forgotten that we are Americans. I would just like to stay in one piece for the short time I have left.

Just remember, you don’t have to be doing anything illegal for them to monitor you. All they have to do is SUSPECT you as PART of a terrorism network. That’s a heck of a lot of lee-way. Whether you think the emails and websites you visit are “harmless”, it doesn’t matter. There is someone out there that doesn’t. If you’re O.K. with overstepping the 4th amendment, you’re inching down a slippery slope. I know it may sound extreme at this time but, don’t forget, when we nonchalontly start to give away our rights to privacy it is extremely hard to get them back.

“They came after the Jews, and I was not a Jew, so, I did not protest. They came after the trade unionists, and I was not a trade unionist, so, I did not protest. Then they came after the Roman Catholics, and I was not a Roman Catholic, so, I did not protest. Then they came after me, and there was no one left to protest.‎

Matthew, there is an excecutive order in place which has to be reviewed and signed every 45 days, and it says only that law enforcement agencies can eavesdrop on those with affiliations with Al Qaida and other overseas terrorist organization.

And this is violating our rights how?

Saying that it could be used to monitor your and my emails and websurfing is just ridiculous—I don’t, and you don’t either (I hope) have any connections with overseas terrorist organizations.

And if we DO have such connections—inadvertently, perhaps—then law enforcement isn’t going to find anything to use against us, now are they?

It would be absurd to add to your little quote there:

“And then they came for the Al Qaida terrorists, but I was not an Al Qaida terrorist so I didn’t protest.”

We’re not talking about a suspension of habeas corpus, of anything related to search and siezure—nothing like that. We’re talking about how after 9-11 law enforcement was given the authority to simply LISTEN to and WATCH those with known affliations to terrorists.

Matthew, you and others here are NOT speaking out for your rights and mine. You are speaking out on behalf of those who want to take all of our rights away—who want, in fact, to blow us up like they did on 9-11 and chop off our heads.

Sanger, I’m not saying this is a violation of our rights. I’m saying someone in the intelligence field COULD use this Exec order to spy on anyone just by claiming a person might be linked to Al Qaida. I know what you’re saying, I don’t want the EVILDOERS to hit us again, and i’m down with roving-wiretaps, etc. But what is wrong with showing it to a judge first? Do you think a judge is gonna defend a terrorist? No. But he or she will make sure the bugging is legit. That’s all.

Disregard my first sentance.

Actually I am saying that law enforcement agencies COULD violate our rights.

sanger:

You will never win that argument. you are using logic.

Craig

greetings all
After reading every post here ,Im beginning to become very concerned that some one has put some kind of hallucangnic agent in the vast majority of the dems who are posting here,,,,

1.President clinton was not Impeached for recieving a blow job in the oval office while discussing the bombing of bosnia with a US congressman,,,nor was he Impeached for his speech to the american people stating I did not have sex with that woman….He was Impeached for telling the same lie to a federal judge while under oath,,,,however because of his connections he was found to be above the law and was disbarred and is the only past president who can no longer practise law in front of the supreme court,,,however if any one else here tonight did the same thing we’d be looking at any where from 1 to 3 years in prison simply ask martha stewuart ,or perhaps lil kim…..Next,,,,,

2.Blaming president Bush for the neglect scene during hurricane Katrina ,,,with 100s of buses left to flood and not used to evacute residents ,,while the governor could not and would not ask for federal intervention ,,,the army cor of engineers told people the leve’s would not hold if the storm was a cat 4 or higher ,,ray nagin and and the governor knew 48 hours in advance that katrina was a 5 slowing to a 4 at minimum so why did they wait to call a city wide evac for 24 hours ,,,and once done why did they not use those buses to get people out of harms way…Not pres bushes fault….

3.Presidential powers during time of war:
for the vitrolic posts claiming president bush should be impeached for allowing the NSA to moniter international phone calls this is so outragous that meerly responding to it is like telling a child why they are not allowed to play in the middle of a 6 lane highway…however here goes ,,president bush is determined not to allow the terrorists to strike us again and un like his predcessor has and continues to do everything with in his power to protect us all ,,,evan the rabid mouthed anti american anti war protestors ,,, during time of war if needed president bush could suspend virtually any and all rights we take for granted….and ifeel so far (cross your fingers) he’s managed to stop any additional attacks ,,

4.Securing the border ,,neithor president Clinton’s adminastration nor president bush’s has adaquitly stoped the flow of illegal immigrants to this country which is why we currently have 11 million and many more coming daily.,,,,now for once put aside politics and consider this ,,,if only 5 per 100,000 are al quada terrorist cell members that means 550 are currently in place awaiting orders….probibly distrubuted throughout the lower 48 states ..having spent time in the milatary directly advising senior commanders about worst case scenerios let me give you one to consider :

4a.Worst case Scenerio..
average of say 12 in a cell dstributed in each state upon recieveing orders via tape release by bin laden or henchmen ,,one team member takes 200 flares that he drives around his state and simply tosses into the wildest dryest areas he has located ,2 members get into there modified pickup truck with holes cut in back and begin to shoot people at gas stations and public areas then move on to new location .2 members take specialy bred organic worm casting’s infected with biological contamints and dump into water sources with in each state,,2 members take to the air in small crop dusting planes using antrax spores obtained in Iraq and begin spraying areas with population centors ,,2 members set off small explosives in oil refinery /storage facilities and remaining 3 attack 1 nuclear facility with intent of gaining access to control room and shuuting off the water that cools the fuel rods…all of this would be done in each state simutaniously ,,,,and may include sabatoge of local dams as well ….

5.Please put aside politics and truly consider the actions ive just stated ,,,the enenemy we are fighting are inhumane animals willing to kill them selfs to advance thier cause ,,,,they dont care about miranda rights lawyers nothing but destoying the USA,,,,,that is what we should be discussing ,,how to make it more difficult for them to do this kind of thing…

6.north korea reprocessing 8000 nuclear fuel rods ,,,ever wonder what theyve done with all that material ? 0ne rod sold to bin laden and attached to a suicide belt could make 8 to 10 blocks of any magor city uninhabitable for 100s of years ,,,considering north korea derives 80% of its hard currency from sales of illegal weaopons sytems does any one think for evan a NY minute that kim song would not make a deal with them,,,?

6.Iran day by day there new leader makes inflamatory statments that the entire world is now beginning to realize he must be dealt with and it’ll be soon ,with the first nuke reactor due to go on line by march ,,the world will not and can not allow this to accur ,nor do i believe president bush will allow it ..

7.5 years from now i believe we will look back at this moment in time as the time we wasted in partisian bickering while not taking desisive actions needed to save this country for we are on the brink of world war 3 that will make these days look like paradise …..

Craig Holmes,

Judgeing by how much you added to the discussion i’m surprised you can even recognize logic.

Hahahahahaha

I just love feux indignation, it looks soooo funny written down.

Have none of you ever heard of “Tempest” or “Echelon”?

Both started in the mid to late 90s btw.

Look em up.

Rylee,
Utter fearmongering….what you don’t seem to understand is that bush’s policies have and are making us way more vulnerable than if say, we had actualy maintained our focus on finding those responsible for 9/11. Your rationale for ILLEGAL domestic spying by the N.S.A. sounds eerily like the neocon argument for the war in Iraq.
“Give me liberty, or give me death”
This is why our uncles, our brothers our moms, our dads went to war to fight and sometimes to die. I don’t understand why it’s taken until this point for some to realize that our freedoms that were won at such a cost are being pissed away in the name of…..of what? It’s time for people to stand up to this.
Who gave this man (bush) the power to disregard the constitution and the law of the land?? If Clinton should have told the truth to the grand jury, doesn’t that also mean that bush has to ontain a warrant for the N.S.A. to engage in spying on American citizens? I mean, REALLY!!

You will never win that argument. you are using logic.

Craig,

Too bad our government doesn’t use logic. That is the real problem.

Matthew, I think we agree. You approve of roving-wire taps, the key provision of the Patriot Act (which the Democrats have now vowed to filibuster), so I’ll meet you more than halfway on this one.

I agree that this COULD be abused, and if it is let’s raise a chorus of outrage together.

Hell, the laws against jaywalking could be abused if law enforcement decided to use it to persecute political dissidents who have pissed off George Bush.

If Michael M