/dev/null Posted February 28, 2010 Share Posted February 28, 2010 http://apnews.myway.com/article/20100228/D9E4T02G0.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted February 28, 2010 Share Posted February 28, 2010 Damn that evil George Bush, taking away our freedoms!! I wonder how many of the board lefties will start calling for Obama's impeachment now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 28, 2010 Share Posted February 28, 2010 Hmm, wasn't front page news around here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outsidethebox Posted February 28, 2010 Share Posted February 28, 2010 Hmm, wasn't front page news around here. Of course not. The CHOSEN one did it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted February 28, 2010 Share Posted February 28, 2010 Did you notice "court approved" wiretaps.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outsidethebox Posted February 28, 2010 Share Posted February 28, 2010 Did you notice "court approved" wiretaps.... OK. I get it. Bad when Bush does it. Ok when Obama does it. Got it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted February 28, 2010 Share Posted February 28, 2010 Did you notice "court approved" wiretaps.... That were already in place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted February 28, 2010 Share Posted February 28, 2010 Did you notice "court approved" wiretaps.... Did you notice "Thrown away were restrictions and greater scrutiny on the government's authority to spy on Americans and seize their records. "... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 28, 2010 Share Posted February 28, 2010 Did you notice "Thrown away were restrictions and greater scrutiny on the government's authority to spy on Americans and seize their records. "... No, no, no, no, no! A thousand times no. Democrats are good. Their intentions are pure. They wouldn't do anything like using personal information against Americans ever! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 28, 2010 Share Posted February 28, 2010 OK. I get it. Bad when Bush does it. Ok when Obama does it. Got it. The rhetoric has officially begun the transition from "I inherited this from Bush" to "Bush did it, so I can do it." I'm not sure how or when they'll do it, but I suspect it won't be long before someone points this out and a Robert Gibbs-like dude says "I don't remember any Republicans yelling about this when Bush did it." Lather. Rinse. Repeat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted February 28, 2010 Share Posted February 28, 2010 No, no, no, no, no! A thousand times no.Democrats are good. Their intentions are pure. They wouldn't do anything like using personal information against Americans ever! Yeah, and nor would those angelic republicans that created this whole thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted February 28, 2010 Author Share Posted February 28, 2010 The rhetoric has officially begun the transition from "I inherited this from Bush" to "Bush did it, so I can do it." I'm not sure how or when they'll do it, but I suspect it won't be long before someone points this out and a Robert Gibbs-like dude says "I don't remember any Republicans yelling about this when Bush did it." Lather. Rinse. Repeat. Yeah, and nor would those angelic republicans that created this whole thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted February 28, 2010 Share Posted February 28, 2010 OK. I get it. Bad when Bush does it. Ok when Obama does it. Got it. Nah, it's bad when Obama does it. This is a black eye on him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted February 28, 2010 Author Share Posted February 28, 2010 Nah, it's bad when Obama does it. This is a black eye on him. Who are you and what have you done to our conner? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 28, 2010 Share Posted February 28, 2010 Yeah, and nor would those angelic republicans that created this whole thing. At least the tapping during Bush's term was done on known Al Qaeda phones from outside the country making calls to phones inside the country. Now it's been opened up to everyone - a regular Craig Livingstone smorgasbord of information on, well, let's see - political enemies perhaps? Nah, it'd never happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted February 28, 2010 Share Posted February 28, 2010 At least the tapping during Bush's term was done on known Al Qaeda phones from outside the country making calls to phones inside the country.Now it's been opened up to everyone - a regular Craig Livingstone smorgasbord of information on, well, let's see - political enemies perhaps? Nah, it'd never happen. Oh give me a break. Yeah, Obama and the democrats are going to wire tap their political enemies. That statement is just stupid. And yes, we should all be proud of those top-secret, warrantless wiretaps during the Bush administration. Most of the intelligence leads generated under what was known as the "President's Surveillance Program" did not have any connection to terrorism, the report said. But FBI agents told the authors that the "mere possibility of the leads producing useful information made investigating the leads worthwhile." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted February 28, 2010 Share Posted February 28, 2010 Oh give me a break. Yeah, Obama and the democrats are going to wire tap their political enemies. That statement is just stupid. And yes, we should all be proud of those top-secret, warrantless wiretaps during the Bush administration. Clinton did it and was publically known for US business gain from companies that openly support his elections. Australia got PO'ed as he was giving inside info to the companies that supported him when doing foreign trade relations and dealing with foreign companies. Australia got pissed as a lot of the monitoring of Asian countries occured from Australia and was support be be for defense/terrorism purposes only. Do a little research I believe it was called Echelon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted February 28, 2010 Share Posted February 28, 2010 Clinton did it and was publically known for US business gain from companies that openly support his elections. Australia got PO'ed as he was giving inside info to the companies that supported him when doing foreign trade relations and dealing with foreign companies. Australia got pissed as a lot of the monitoring of Asian countries occured from Australia and was support be be for defense/terrorism purposes only. Do a little research I believe it was called Echelon. Thanks for the tidbit... The Clinton administration program, code-named Echelon, complied with FISA. Before any conversations of U.S. persons were targeted, a FISA warrant was obtained. CIA director George Tenet testified to this before Congress on 4/12/00: I’m here today to discuss specific issues about and allegations regarding Signals Intelligence activities and the so-called Echelon Program of the National Security Agency… There is a rigorous regime of checks and balances which we, the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency and the FBI scrupulously adhere to whenever conversations of U.S. persons are involved, whether directly or indirectly. We do not collect against U.S. persons unless they are agents of a foreign power as that term is defined in the law. We do not target their conversations for collection in the United States unless a FISA warrant has been obtained from the FISA court by the Justice Department. Meanwhile, the position of the Bush administration is that they can bypass the FISA court and every other court, even when they are monitoring the communications of U.S. persons. It is the difference between following the law and breaking it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted February 28, 2010 Share Posted February 28, 2010 Who are you and what have you done to our conner? I've been critical of Obama on here before. The chances of there being anyone else even remotely as qualified as him for the job to vote for is slim to none in 2012. So I'll still likely vote for him. You know the Republicans won't be able to get anyone with a brain past the primaries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted March 1, 2010 Share Posted March 1, 2010 I've been critical of Obama on here before. The chances of there being anyone else even remotely as qualified as him for the job to vote for is slim to none in 2012. So I'll still likely vote for him. You know the Republicans won't be able to get anyone with a brain past the primaries. Obama will run on his record, which if he continues as he has for his first year will be lousy. Our defecit says that, his handling of the economy says that and the polls on nearly every major issue say that now. He is proving to be mostly an idealogue, committed to an agenda even in the face of declining public support and economic conditions that strongly suggest another course. He is the equivilant of Dick Jauron. Committed to his approach even if the results suggest he should makes changes in order to get a winning result. There are a lot of parallels between the two. Both nice guys, both intelligent, both put into positions of leadership without a track record of winning, both stubbornly commited to their approach, both with popularity that declined and both appointed people of quesionable ability to important positions. You could easily argue that Jauron was far more qualified to be a head coach in the NFL than Obama is to be President. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts