A Challenge For Defarge
If leading Democrats such as Hillary Clinton truly feel that the executive branch does not currently have the authority to intercept communications between suspected terrorists overseas and their contacts in America, they should do something about it more concrete than merely muttering empty partisan rhetoric. I challenge the Queen of Triangles—or any other Democrat, for that matter—to put forward a bill in the Senate to specifically ban the warrantless intercepts conducted as a result of the President's executive order. Alternately, she should in short order present another bill authorizing "a lawful way" of tracking down the terrorists targeted by Bush's executive order that does not offend liberal sensibilities. The Senator should put it to a vote for the historical record, if what she says is truly what she feels. Quite frankly, I don't think she's capable of that level of leadership.
"Obviously, I support tracking down terrorists," Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., said in a speech Wednesday. "I think that's our obligation. But I think it can be done in a lawful way." --Hillary Rodham Clinton
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 12:17 AM
Comments
1
Obviously Hillary isn't capable of any level of leadership. Bill wasn't either. Too bad, the US suffered as a consequence.
Posted by: Mescalero at January 26, 2006 12:22 AM (K7jHt)
2
Conversely, I'll challenge any Republican to come forward and amend FISA to, "modify the standard of proof for issuance of orders regarding non-United States persons from probable cause to reasonable suspicion." Oh wait, some one already tried that . . . Sen. Michael DeWine of Ohio in 2002.
The Administration shot that down because it was obvious that courts might, "find a "reasonable suspicion" standard unconstitutional."
Beat on Hillary all ya want, she doesn't have a chance in 2008 anyways, but every time I stop in here you have some new spin justifying Bush's domestic spying. I say new, because each week these arguments get shot down. Stop being a Bush apologist, it's not becoming.
The Administration shot that down because it was obvious that courts might, "find a "reasonable suspicion" standard unconstitutional."
Beat on Hillary all ya want, she doesn't have a chance in 2008 anyways, but every time I stop in here you have some new spin justifying Bush's domestic spying. I say new, because each week these arguments get shot down. Stop being a Bush apologist, it's not becoming.
Posted by: Fred at January 26, 2006 08:26 AM (xX+1y)
3
Once again, Fred, you guys on the left are so busy jumping to conclusions that you don't see the obvious (don't feel bad, your buddy Glen Greenwald is much better versed in law, and jumps the shark as well).
The Adminstration clearly believes that they have the authority under the Executive's Article II Powers and the AUMF to carry out his executive order to the NSA.
The fact that the Adminstration rebuffed Dewine's bill does not weaken the Pserident's postion, it actually reinforces the consistancy of his beleif that his authority already existed.
Only if they had supported Dewine's bill would they have weakened their position.
Once again, lefties look at something, and draw a 100% wrong conclusion.
The Adminstration clearly believes that they have the authority under the Executive's Article II Powers and the AUMF to carry out his executive order to the NSA.
The fact that the Adminstration rebuffed Dewine's bill does not weaken the Pserident's postion, it actually reinforces the consistancy of his beleif that his authority already existed.
Only if they had supported Dewine's bill would they have weakened their position.
Once again, lefties look at something, and draw a 100% wrong conclusion.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at January 26, 2006 09:01 AM (g5Nba)
4
Fred,
Start reading and listening some more. Even the MSM and top Demoncrats are toning down the "illegal" rhetoric. Another pseudo-scandal.
Start reading and listening some more. Even the MSM and top Demoncrats are toning down the "illegal" rhetoric. Another pseudo-scandal.
Posted by: Specter at January 26, 2006 10:17 AM (ybfXM)
5
Even the "always-correct-say-what-I've-been-told-to" Katie Couric, and that outstanding investigative reporter Matt Lauer have changed their terminology. They are now saying, on air, "eavesdrop on suspected terrorists" when 48 hours ago they were using "domestic spying program"
Posted by: Specter at January 26, 2006 11:01 AM (ybfXM)
6
You know what? I no longer care what the left thinks or perceives. If it is working for us in our endeavor to defeat radical Islamic terrorists, and keep Americans safe, then keep it up!
Posted by: Old Soldier at January 26, 2006 12:46 PM (X2tAw)
7
As Specter noted,
Even the "always-correct-say-what-I've-been-told-to" Katie Couric, and that outstanding investigative reporter Matt Lauer have changed their terminology. They are now saying, on air, "eavesdrop on suspected terrorists" when 48 hours ago they were using "domestic spying program"
So, Fred, why are you so lame as to continue the KOS-like rhetoric that insists on using the term "Bush's domestic spying?"
Overcome by dementia at your tender age? Or is it really your ability to engage in rational dialog that is hampered by preexistng notions and rigidity of talking points?
Even the "always-correct-say-what-I've-been-told-to" Katie Couric, and that outstanding investigative reporter Matt Lauer have changed their terminology. They are now saying, on air, "eavesdrop on suspected terrorists" when 48 hours ago they were using "domestic spying program"
So, Fred, why are you so lame as to continue the KOS-like rhetoric that insists on using the term "Bush's domestic spying?"
Overcome by dementia at your tender age? Or is it really your ability to engage in rational dialog that is hampered by preexistng notions and rigidity of talking points?
Posted by: Retired Spy at January 26, 2006 01:27 PM (BRgB4)
8
The fact that the Adminstration rebuffed Dewine's bill does not weaken the Pserident's postion, it actually reinforces the consistancy of his beleif that his authority already existed.
That's the funniest thing I've ever heard. I'm glad I checked this tard-shack out one more time.
That's the funniest thing I've ever heard. I'm glad I checked this tard-shack out one more time.
Posted by: jpe at January 26, 2006 04:30 PM (REIFB)
9
heeeeeee'sssss baaaack....we needed some entertainment. Hey jpe - didya read about Kerry's aborted attempt at a filibuster? What a joke...and you put this guy up for President?
Posted by: Specter at January 26, 2006 08:16 PM (ybfXM)
10
Ya Specter, and then Kattie preceded to get her ass handed to her by Dean, and da da da, Bloggers come out once again and sink the MSM with some fact checking:
ThinkProgress
"Katie then cited a Center for Responsive Politics study as her evidence, but a look at CRP's website show that Democrats accepted no money from Abramoff."
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/couric-caught-on-tape/
You can only tread water for so long.
ThinkProgress
"Katie then cited a Center for Responsive Politics study as her evidence, but a look at CRP's website show that Democrats accepted no money from Abramoff."
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/01/26/couric-caught-on-tape/
You can only tread water for so long.
Posted by: Fred at January 26, 2006 08:22 PM (cZQrj)
11
Fred,
You guys are splitting such fine hairs. Abramoff directed specific clients to direct specific amounts to specific Democratic politicians. Now, you might be able to draw a line between these direct and indirect contributions within the "reality-based" community, but the average American voter sees Abramoff directing funds to politicans through a middleman. And you know what?
They'd be right.
You guys are splitting such fine hairs. Abramoff directed specific clients to direct specific amounts to specific Democratic politicians. Now, you might be able to draw a line between these direct and indirect contributions within the "reality-based" community, but the average American voter sees Abramoff directing funds to politicans through a middleman. And you know what?
They'd be right.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at January 26, 2006 09:10 PM (0fZB6)
12
Fred,
Are you talking about another your stellar leaders:
Howlin' Howie "AYIIIIIIEEEEEEEEE" Dean?
LOL...gotta love the Dem leaders. Kerry who says, before counting votes, that he and Splash "I Can't Figure Out What Clubs I Belong To" Kennedy, "We are going to filibuster." What a bunch....And Hillary who can't even get 30% of the people behind her for Pres. Who else ya got? Howie?
Are you talking about another your stellar leaders:
Howlin' Howie "AYIIIIIIEEEEEEEEE" Dean?
LOL...gotta love the Dem leaders. Kerry who says, before counting votes, that he and Splash "I Can't Figure Out What Clubs I Belong To" Kennedy, "We are going to filibuster." What a bunch....And Hillary who can't even get 30% of the people behind her for Pres. Who else ya got? Howie?
Posted by: Specter at January 26, 2006 10:14 PM (ybfXM)
13
Well, Fred, it appears that Kate and Matt did their research. Per Matt Lauer,
"We went to the Center for Responsive Politics and technically [emphasis mine] Howard Dean may be correct but while 66% of the money in this situation went to Republicans, 34% of the money not from Abramoff [directly] but from associates and clients went to Democrats."
And you are so bold as to say that Howie handed Katie her ass? Doesn't appear that way. Howie just crawled under a very flimsy technicality.
"We went to the Center for Responsive Politics and technically [emphasis mine] Howard Dean may be correct but while 66% of the money in this situation went to Republicans, 34% of the money not from Abramoff [directly] but from associates and clients went to Democrats."
And you are so bold as to say that Howie handed Katie her ass? Doesn't appear that way. Howie just crawled under a very flimsy technicality.
Posted by: Retired Spy at January 27, 2006 10:08 AM (BRgB4)
14
If it looks like ...., smells like ...., tastes like ...., the Howie stepped in it. The majority of the American people want the money, no matter the claim of tainted or not, either returned or donated.
From this poll:
Do you think elected officials who
received contributions from Jack Abramoff or the organizations he represented
should return the money, donate it to charity, or do you think it is okay to
keep the money?
Return it.....29%
Donate it.....56%
Keep it.....7%
Depends.....3%
Not sure.....5%
And the interesting thing in the breakdown of that question was the way Democrats answered the question:
Return it.....33%
Donate it.....58%
Keep it.....4%
Depends.....2%
Not sure.....3%
So....Freddie....by an overwhelming margin people want tainted money gotten rid of. How do you then say "But it's miiiiiinnnnnnnnneeeee...." and get reelected. Not bright.
Oh and before you try to say the poll was unbalanced like the last IPSOS poll was:
POLITICAL IDENTIFICATION
When you think about politics, do you think of yourself as a Democrat or a
Republican?
1. Democrat 38%
2. Republican 33
3. (Independent) 22
4. (Other) 4
5. (Refused/Don’t know) 2
From this poll:
Do you think elected officials who
received contributions from Jack Abramoff or the organizations he represented
should return the money, donate it to charity, or do you think it is okay to
keep the money?
Return it.....29%
Donate it.....56%
Keep it.....7%
Depends.....3%
Not sure.....5%
And the interesting thing in the breakdown of that question was the way Democrats answered the question:
Return it.....33%
Donate it.....58%
Keep it.....4%
Depends.....2%
Not sure.....3%
So....Freddie....by an overwhelming margin people want tainted money gotten rid of. How do you then say "But it's miiiiiinnnnnnnnneeeee...." and get reelected. Not bright.
Oh and before you try to say the poll was unbalanced like the last IPSOS poll was:
POLITICAL IDENTIFICATION
When you think about politics, do you think of yourself as a Democrat or a
Republican?
1. Democrat 38%
2. Republican 33
3. (Independent) 22
4. (Other) 4
5. (Refused/Don’t know) 2
Posted by: Specter at January 27, 2006 11:24 AM (ybfXM)
Processing 0.0, elapsed 0.0103 seconds.
18 queries taking 0.0072 seconds, 22 records returned.
Page size 13 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.