Sunday, December 18, 2005
W Defends... What?
Not us, not breaking the law for absolutely no good reason. There is not any legal basis for tappimg calls without a warrant. None.
The little man that claims to be our president, a leader, has still failed to explain the inadequacy of his PATRIOT Act wiretap courts, why their expedited rubber-stampings of requests are inadequate, why this little pissant must break the law. (Josh tells you more than you need to know about the court here.)
Meanwhile, Tim Grieve at Salon's War Room asks:
Certainly there wasn't any legitimate need to avoid doing it properly but then, there wasn't any respect for law either.
His breaking the law is crapping on you and crapping on what this country represents.
"His" administration is like the Republican administrations in the 20s on crack -- not a good thing at all.
December 18, 2005Breaking the law for absolutely no acceptable reason is wrong. That's what they're doing. And breaking the law is not "a vital tool" for anything in this country except taking it further down the slippery slope away from freedom and democracy.
In Address, Bush Says He Ordered Domestic Spying
By DAVID E. SANGER
WASHINGTON, Dec. 17 - President Bush acknowledged on Saturday that he had ordered the National Security Agency to conduct an electronic eavesdropping program in the United States without first obtaining warrants, and said he would continue the highly classified program because it was "a vital tool in our war against the terrorists."
The little man that claims to be our president, a leader, has still failed to explain the inadequacy of his PATRIOT Act wiretap courts, why their expedited rubber-stampings of requests are inadequate, why this little pissant must break the law. (Josh tells you more than you need to know about the court here.)
Meanwhile, Tim Grieve at Salon's War Room asks:
So what did the president think? Why did he think he needed to go around the rules set forth by Congress in order to achieve the objective of keeping Americans safe? It's hard to come up with an answer to that question. And in fact, it doesn't matter. If the procedures set forth in FISA weren't good enough for this administration, there were ways to change them. Ignoring them -- and in the process, the courts, the Congress and the Constitution -- wasn't one of them.How about: He/they just didn't care. Laws are for reality-based people, not faith-based people who, or who claim, to only answer to God and not to man (don't have to answer to man, that is, the electorate, when you can steal and rig elections -- Florida, 2000, electronic voting with easy-to-hack software and no paper trails, gerrymandering).
Certainly there wasn't any legitimate need to avoid doing it properly but then, there wasn't any respect for law either.
His breaking the law is crapping on you and crapping on what this country represents.
"His" administration is like the Republican administrations in the 20s on crack -- not a good thing at all.
Website Counters
