A HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA... Oh, that's rich. Yes, it does. And, if it doesn't, why is the favored solution to the whole deal to change the law?
I and others here and elsewhere have repeatedly detailed how he has broken the law and continues to break the law. Your side says, (1) nuh unh!, and (2) well, let's just change the law. You guys are too much. Seriously. You are. Was Clinton convicted of Whitewater crimes? Of sexual harassment? Seemed like perjury used to be good enough for you. But then, he was a Democrat. You prove yet again that you are a crazy person when you accuse Patrick Fitzgerald of political motivation in the grand jury proceedings. Moreover you prove yet again that you have no sense of irony when the original leak was blatantly politically motivated, as has been proven beyond any doubt with stuff like Cheney calling reporters and telling them that Plame was "fair game." But the really good stuff is the threat that somehow this will bite me or others following this story seriously (while you and the Bush folks hope against hope you can sell a gigantic story as a non-one) in the ass. Every single thing you posted in the run up to the Iraq war and in the years of occupation that have followed has been false while every counterpoint made by me and others has been true. How many bogus stories about WMD or collusion with Al Qaeda have you triumphantly posted here only to be proven wrong again and again? And you're going to try to score on Leopold. That's ingenious. But then, it's become apparent you just like being bitten on the ass.
basso, please tell me you're not saying that Fitzgerald's investigation is politically motivated. You're not saying that, are you? And if you are, can you provide any evidence of that? I can't think of a motivation by Fitzgerald, a man of unquestioned integrity, to "get" Libby, Rove, or anyone else. And I agree with much of what Batman posted. You've consistently attempted to provide every conceivable excuse for actions of the Bush Administration that have involved deceiving the American public, and assaulting our civil liberties. I can't recall you saying anything derogatory about Bush, no matter what the issue. Yes, I believe you when you say you oppose some of his stands on the issues, but you never, that I can recall, post about your disagreements, unless someone "calls you out," regarding something like gay marriage. In my opinion, you go out of your way to avoid posting anything that could remotely be seen as critical of Bush and his policies, something that is not true of most liberal/moderate/Democratic members here, when talking about failures of leadership by Democrats, or personal failures, like Clinton lying about a blow job. Why not? Keep D&D Civil.
You know? I'm sure it's very important for you to make either me or Leopold look foolish. But I think you're missing the big picture here. I don't think you should be so worried about Rove. We know the answer of Cheetahs' question now. Cheney is most assuredly the source of the leak. If Rove is turning states evidence to get out of an indictment, I think you need to start worrying about Cheney suddenly resigning because of health reasons, or an indictment, whichever comes first.
Didn't Clinton already propose to expand wiretapping in order to keep up with current communications technology? Wasn't that already dealt with? Aside from e-mail, and cell phone technology what new technologies are we dealing with? Again, according to what the administration is saying they are talking about telecommunications and e-mail communications.
I'm not taking basso's side in that I agree with argument he presented, but at least his argument that you responded to here did put forth some substantive idea.
I'm not saying that. i am saying that the clamour for the special prosecutor to be appointed, a clamour spearheaded by the nytimes, which published wilson's oped, and along with the WaPo and various flavors of MSNBC, is knee deep in this kefluffle, that clamour was politically motivated.
Yeah, I get that. It's the moving goalpost I find boring. He gave up on what he was arguing before and started a new one. And here we go again. Now I'm meant to beat that argument up enough that he runs away from it and starts demeaning Joe Wilson's character or whatever. It used to be frustrating, now it's just boring. The way you know an argument's definitively won with this guy is that he shifts tactics, just like the Bush WH. When you win that one they change again. Why bother?
And I'll regret this, but p.s. it was proposed that Bush approach Congress and the FISA courts about amending the law to reflect changing technologies and Bush didn't want to do that because he thought he would lose that fight. So he did it in secret and in violation of the existing laws instead. All the while telling the American people that "when you talk about wiretaps, that requires a warrant" and allowing A. Gonzales, when asked about the program in question, to tell Congress in his confirmation hearings that he wouldn't respond to hypothetical queries. These guys lie for a living and basso defends those lies for a hobby. BORING.
I wouldn't use the word, "BORING." Disturbing is a bit more accurate, then it goes downhill from there. One of the things that bothers me is how folks like basso will say they don't agree with Bush on all the issues (I think that's true wuth basso, same with Hayes), and yet when those other issues come up, he remains silent (not always true with Hayes, to give him credit). A bit hypocritical, no? Keep D&D Civil.
Deck, I want to believe you're smarter than this, and if you actually go back and read some of what i've written, rather than relying on the 3am drunken recaps of our furry winged marsupial, you'll see that i've been out front on the gay marriage issue, leading the charge on sudan, and have said repeatedly, that if libby perjured himself, he deserves his punishment. your suggestion that democrats routinely criticize democratic failings, is, IMHO, not supported by the facts, but i would turn the tables- how about honestly debating a policy of Bush w/ which you disagree, rather than falling back on tired cliches like "deceiving the American public, and assaulting our civil liberties" when no such deceiving/assaulting has taken place? how about an honest examination of the wiretap and NSA issues? here' i'll start you off: The NSA program, revealed 4 months ago in the Times, and recently rehashed in a sensational page 1 story in USA Today, assuming it even exists, does not invlove wiretaps. rather it involves dataming to establish calling patterns that may be of use in thwarting, or identifying those involved, in a terrorist attack. names and addresses are not used, only numbers. why should this troubloe you?
There is so much wrong with this post. Are you really just ignoring facts that are inconvenient for you to recognize? They are just looking at the numbers we are calling, and that are calling us? Really? Because it is secret, and with no real oversight, are we supposed to take the govts. word for it? Anyone who does that might as well have "SUCKER" tattooed on his forehead. As to why we should be concerned about that, it is because with a phone number they can easily get names, addresses, and from there a ton of other personal information. It shouldn't be too hard to figure out why a person who is truly concerned with freedoms and civil liberties should be concerned about that. Those cliches are what is really happening. The lies and deception have been shown over and over again. From what Bush did not tell congress prior to going into Iraq, but that he himself had been made aware of, to his IAEA report lie, etc. Batman earlier pointed out that Bush's statement about wiretaps and warrants, only for people to find out later, that they weren't always using warrants for wiretaps. That is as clear a cut example of deception as one could get. Bush's secretive dealings, refusal to follow the law, and willingness to deceive congress and the nation has sadly made what you call cliche standard operating procedure for this administration. Those kinds of lies and dishonesty shame our nation more than any protest that has happened yet.
Well, since you asked... Diebold Systems Vulnerable http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=107604 Big win for Bush as he protects the middle class from the wealthy's higher taxes (Tax cuts during a war...) http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=112593 Colin Powell Speaks, " I wanted more troops.." http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=112259 Culture of Corruption http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=106710&page=1&pp=20 Big Brother's Secret Calling Plan http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=112713&page=1&pp=20 Do Democrats hate the military? No, they are the military. (IAVA PAC) http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=112975 Hey, I don't post in every thread myself, but you seem to avoid a lot of topics that reflect (in my opinion) poorly on the Bush Administration and the GOP. I can't go back more than 11 pages, so this is what I could come up with quickly. Keep D&D Civil.
The NSA program, revealed 4 months ago in the Times, and recently rehashed in a sensational page 1 story in USA Today, assuming it even exists, does not invlove wiretaps. rather it involves dataming to establish calling patterns that may be of use in thwarting, or identifying those involved, in a terrorist attack. names and addresses are not used, only numbers. why should this trouble you? What about Invansion of Privacy do you not get? BTW, you know the Patroit Act started out its life as the Drugs + Obscenity Act, right? One clever rename later and should anybody be surprised that the Patroit Act was not used for its original purposes? Can we say bait and switch? Datamining for terrorists is one thing. Datamining journalists to see who their sources are for article that the Bush Admin does NOT like (ie political purposes) is quite another. Given the Bush Admin's serious wood for porno, abortion, religious right wingnut cause du jour, etc., would it surprise you that the datamining did not creep into those areas? Bottomline is the Bush Admin has zero cred. Its words should not be believed or trusted.
Oh, I don't know... I'm not that smart. Better looking than smart, if you want to know the truth. Why do you support the Administration circumventing the Constitution in the name of national security? You bet it troubles me. I have a relative who's been working in Iraq, and now Afghanistan. Having been in touch with him, I can assume that I am on a "list." Damn right it troubles me. Bush has flat out lied about getting court ordered wiretaps for any surveillance of Americans. That sure as hell bothers me. Why doesn't it bother you? Keep D&D Civil.
