Which is why we live in a system in which the govt. has the right to pass new legislation to deal with new forms of communication. And if they don't know what they are looking for, it is a definite infringement of U.S. citizens rights to have their govt. go fishing without any system of oversight. The system to changed and adapt is there. There is no need to circumvent that.
Al has not even hinted that he would run again for President. He seems content not to run. But now that he has finally found his voice, some others of us wish he would run. I didn't vote for him the first time, but I would now.
what is the difference between a neo demo and a plain demo? why do you boast a report by the administrations own justice department? would you label specter and barr as confused/displaced repusb? Top Republican raises impeachment over surveillance flap you can call gore a lib but fringe and idiot? please..
Then they should have lobbied to have the law changed. Instead, they simply broke the law knowing that with a GOP majority in Congress, they didn't have to worry about that pesky "oversight" issue.
You are a bafoon Roxran, please, stick to making sweet love to your toy rifle and thinking that the government has your best interests at heart. Us idiot Liberals will lead the fight to protect the Constitution so that you can keep your firearms, liberty and privacy secure. God, what a twisted world we live in--you would be LIVID had this been Clinton's administration. You and your NRA buddies are selling your souls in the hope that Bush will allow you to keep your AR-15's and suffer "minor intrusions" on your privacy in the name of security. I have a Federal Firearm License, do you think that the government doesn't have a tab or two on me?! Why would such a "cold dead hand" rugged individualist be satisfied that your King is taking a dump on the Constitution and our personal liberties? Stick to the Hangout and start threads about home fighting techniques and the merits of the 5.56 vs. 7.62 x 39 and let the grown-ups discuss important matters. EDIT: Rox, I think there are issues we see eye-to-eye on and I would think I'm one of the "idiot fringe liberals" that you can find common ground with--I don't usually resort to name calling, but your bit about us "idiots" really set me off....I'll be more civil at the range!
The FBI thought MLK was a commie. Remember commies, basso? That's who right wing reactionaries like yourself hated back in the 1950s and 1960s, before y'all started hating Bill Clinton and Saddam Hussein. Conservatism doesn't work unless conservatives have someone or something to hate.
well, i wouldn't have put saddam and mr. bill in the same sentence, but let's see how saddam reacts when he's in the docket. ("that depends on what the meaning of the words mass murder is..."). in truth, i supported clinton and voted for him. my distaste for the man only came when he betrayed the trust i, and so many others, had put in him.
GONZALES: Well, I don't know why -- I don't know why there would be a need for a special counsel at this time, Larry, because what I can tell you is that from the very beginning, from its inception this program has been carefully reviewed by the lawyers at the Department of Justice and other lawyers within the administration and we firmly believe that the president does have the legal authority to authorize electronic surveillance in order to gather up foreign intelligence particularly, Larry, when we're talking about foreign intelligence of the enemy in a time of war. --AG Gonzales on Larry King last night
I thought the speech was pretty good. The main point I focused in on was Gore talking about how historically we have abridged rights in time of crisis - but then swung the pendulum back. His well stated objection to the current administration is that they are flat out saying these abridgements will continue in perpetuity. That is a little disconcerting. Then again, I am ashamed to say I always find myself snickering when a politician quotes a guy named Frankfurter....(yes, I know he was on the SC).
Sorry to butt in but I think that's a little uncalled for. Sure Roxran's posts get larded with a little too much hyperbole but who's posts around here don't do that every now and then?
But I have not come to praise Roxran but to debate him. I'm one those who don't believe its totally clear cut (I'll leave it for others to decide if I am a fringe idiot liberal) but I do believe that its likely that this does violate Constitutional separation of powers and am very worried regarding the argument that the President essentially has unfettered powers in regard to national security. In your quote above you are referencing the DOJ letter to Congress where they state their argument saying that under Constitution article II and the AUMF that the Executive is essentially empowered to do whatever it wants when it comes to national security. As I said in the thread that you posted it they do make a good and compelling argument but it is not foolproof and there are some trouble spots that even an amatuer like me can see. Gore has also responded directly to many of the points of it in his speech and so have many other Constitutional scholars. The thing that needs to be considered about that letter is that its not law or a judicial decision but is an argument put forward by the Executive branch to support its own actions. As such it is inherently biased and cannot be considered as the absolute word on issue..
He was in The Rocky Horror Picture Show too. So now we know what Justices wear under those black robes.
Not mine. When I am editing a new manifesto for the disenfranchised and making it public through this forum (where it spreads through the world like stardust), I always take out every last smidgen of hyperbole. When one is blessed with a message as rational, beneficial, and revolutionary as the message I have to give the world, hyperbole is not necessary.
Thats why I added the edit but didn't want to erase my gut reaction to him identifying me as an idiot fringe liberal--that was uncalled for. I see your point Sishir, I didn't help by quoting the wrong post
sweet! IMO Gore can be so much more effective if he just stays out of politics and becomes a thorn in the side of the republicans.
It as if Gore read Roxran's and/or Basso's posts and replied to them directly. Sure those posts are based on the whitehouse's responses, but Gore did such a nice job of responding that he might as well post here.
I was referring to Gore as the idiot he is...and absolutely not towards posters on the counter I actually admire...Of course some I don't.
