Sunday, December 25, 2005

Christmas Free for All

Hope everyone is having a Merry Christmas...
List anything you want here...
What you are thankful for....
Anything at all....

Posted by The Game at 2:08 PM

11 comments:

Jim said...

I'm asking people on this blog to read THIS post separate from all the others. Whip me, beat me, make me write bad checks ON SOME OTHER POST, but PLEASE read this post and simply answer the question:

Can one of you "conservatives" provide some rationale for THIS ADMINISTRATION to bypass FISA when FISA allows it to act first and get permission later? When FISA has denied 6 requests out of thousands of requests per year since 1978?

Note: I don't have any problem at this point with the type of surveillance being done, how it's being done, why it's being done, or on whom it's being done so don't answer with responses to these facets of the issue.

December 25, 2005 5:22 PM
Jim said...

Then why the hell didn't the Bush administration work with the Republican majority congress to change FISA to accomodate their needs instead of bypassing the law altogether?

It's my understanding that the reason the FISA court did what it did to Resnick was because he was making illegal applications for warrants. That's abusing the law.

There doesn't seem to be any record of the administration trying to change the law, like the administration of "that idiot" Clinton did in getting FISA to include physical searches. Such physical searches would have allowed the search. But when officials abuse their power, they risk reprisals from the institutions that are supposed to hold them accountable.

That the Bush administration apparently did not work to change the law nor adhere to it leaves the appearance of an administration which does not respect the rule of law (words that sound oddly familiar).

That OK with you?

December 25, 2005 9:57 PM
Jim said...

SR: Hmmmm. The Patriot Act was passed on October 24, 2001. That's 43 days after 9-11. Seems like they had their wits together quickly enough to pass THAT little piece of legislation.

I am trying to understand. I'm trying to understand if the administration believes that it is not bound by the rule of law.

December 26, 2005 1:01 AM
Anonymous said...

I just want Green Bay and Oakland to win a damn football game.

December 26, 2005 2:58 AM
Google HiJacked My Site said...

I've been reviewing all the posts here and I must say, I am so proud of all my conservative friends.

To Jim and Rhyno; stop reading DU or Kos and maybe, just maybe you'll stop thinking as a liberal partisan and more like an American. Liberals think of the Constitution as silly putty that they can bend and mold to fit their twisted view of the world. Not one of you libs have the slightest clue what's in it or how to properly interpret it.

Liberal Constitution arm chair lawyers crack me up. Despite ALL evidence that has come out that Carter and Clinton used their warrantless search powers to eavesdrop on an even more widespread basis they attack Bush. Clinton used the IRS as an attack dog against his enemies and not one of libs said a word.

Did any lib say anything about unreasonable search and seizures when Ruby Ridge, Waco, Elian hit the headlines? Nope.

December 26, 2005 6:27 AM
The Game said...

Its really simple Jim,
Presidents have been doing this for a long time, you only get mad when a Republican does it, showing (like most liberals) that you are really just a political partisan. Libs have selective memorty and selective outrage when it comes to any issue.

December 26, 2005 11:18 AM
Jim said...

I don't think it's so simple, Game. Why do you suppose real CONSERVATIVES Jonah Goldberg, Lindsay Graham, George Will, and Bob Barr have concerns about the way THIS Administration is bypassing judicial and congressional oversight? The ones making excuses are the faux, CINO (I just made that up, but I like it) "conservatives" like Hannity, Rush, and the others who will blindly defend Bush under ANY circumstances.

SR, did you know that the administration and House and Senate negotiate the intelligence budget and other intelligence laws and matters IN SECRET every year without the public or the terrorists knowing about it?

Stop the knee-jerk Bush defense and answer the question: Is the power of the presidency unlimited?

December 26, 2005 11:41 AM
The Game said...

The problem, Jim, with the Pres having so much power is that when you have a scum bag pres. they use it for the wrong reasons...so I am a bit torn...I trust Bush to use his power to fight terrorism, but lets look at what another Pres. used it for (EH mentioned this already, but Jim somehow forgot to respond):

Clinton had the IRS go after ANYONE who was publicly against him...

Clinton "somehow" had hundreds of classified FBI files of prominant conservatives...

Do you see the diference here Jim?
Of course you don't, liberal thought is much too shallow and narrow minded...

And since you must never actually listen to Hannity or Rush (just puke back up what you read on liberal blogs) I'll inform you that they constantly attack Bush. For the borders, spending, not being agressive enough about Iraq...it is clear that the Left is the side that defended Clinton, so really you do not have a leg to stand on

December 26, 2005 3:54 PM
Anonymous said...

Cat Fight Woohoo!

December 26, 2005 6:36 PM
The Game said...

I said why Rhyno...you say the opposite of what we say 98% of the time...and since we are conservatives....the opposite is a liberal...

Going to play darts on hwy 100 later, want to come?

December 26, 2005 7:19 PM
Jim said...

Every president uses the IRS against people who are against their policies. Nixon did it, Clinton did it, I'm sure Reagan and Bush 41 did it, and Bush 43 is doing it now. The IRS has been investigating tax-exempt churches and organizations that have spoken out against the administration's policies.

The mysterious 900 FBI files of prominent conservatives? You mean the files of White House employees whose backgrounds were being updated for their White House passes? (It was actually about 400 files.) The prominent conservative cooks, butlers, and other White House staff? The files with only 5 recognizeable "prominent" conservative names? What do you know about this so-called "scandal"?

And thanks for reminding me that "liberal thought is much too shallow and narrow minded". I'll try to keep that in my shallow and narrow little mind.

December 26, 2005 8:43 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)