I am Glad He is in Attack Mode
Would someone please inform US Senator Russ Feingold that we are at war?
In an article today, Feingold described "Bush as in "an attack mode" on issues from the Patriot Act to the expanded use of wiretaps by the National Security Agency."
Now, why would Bush be in "attack" mode?
Would he prefer to have the President react by going into "surrender" mode?
Maybe he wants him to respond by going into "gaze at my navel" mode?
Perhaps Feingold would rather the United States respond to our enemies by going into "let's curl up in a ball and hope the bad men go away" mode?
8 Comments:
Fraley - how can a confessed conservative support such an over run government? perhaps a founding father can help you get something through your head:
"Those who would sacrifice essential liberties for a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin
I do not beleive using the phone or the library to communicate with an international terrorist organization is an essential liberty.
Well, neither do I. I also believe that listening to everybody in hopes of catching the one guy is against all that America stands for. The Fourth Amendment was not suspended by the authorization of force against Iraq.
"Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel," said Samuel Johnson. We are plagued by scoundrels aplenty.
First, I'd like to commened you on your appeal to emotion and not intellect with pictures from 9-11.
Yeah, let's just skip the debate on civil liberties. In the words of Senator Cornyn: "Civil liberties don't matter much when you're dead."
Second, Feingold's point was that the President is A.) conducting eavesdropping extralegally (he does not have the authority to wiretap without warrants) and B.) he should learn that congress is an equal branch of government and should work towards a compromise on the patriot act that respects civil liberties and protects America.
shouldn't he be attacking osama instead of spying on CNN news anchors?
i think your average 7th grader could tell feingold meant political attack mode. but that would have been less convenient for the 9/11 references.
Yes, you will see pictures of America under attack on this website. We are at war. Lucky for us, it's been more than 4 years since they've hit us. Perhaps it could have somehting to do with our President being in 'attack' mode???
I think the wire taps are necessary given the fact that we are fighting a war against an enemy on our own soil and living amongst all of us. Swift action is needed to thwart these unconventional attackers. I believe that you are a fool if you think President Bush is listening in on you and your buddies talking about which Michael Moore documentary to rent tonight.
thebull: no one is saying wire taps aren't neccessary.
To clarify, the authority exists for the government to eavesdrop on international calls.
The 4th amendment prevents the government from eavesdropping on US citizens within the US witout a warrant.
The FISA court approves just about every warant request it recieves.
The FISA court allows wiretapping to begin immediately as long as a warrant is requested within 72 hours.
The president has admitted he has engaged in wiretaps without warrants in direct violation of the constitution of which he swore an oath to uphold.
So why hasn't the president seeked the warrants retroactively in order to comply with the law?
Possible answers to that question:
1) the president believes the law doesn't apply to him.
2) The president can not provide any just cause to the FISA court to get the warrants approved.
further arguements for each
1 - The president has certainly demostrated an enormous ego and disrespect for the rule of law previously.
2 - There have already been reports that the government has been wiretapping groups which are not terrorist, but rather with political or ideological disagreements with the curent administration - such as anti-war groups, anti-abortion groups, journalists, etc. And this would be a clear violation of the 4th amendment.
I think you are a fool if you are willing to forfeit your essential liberties because you are scared of the bogeyman.
You are more likely to be struck by lightning than you are to be killed by a terrorist.
Post a Comment
<< Home