I thought it was established after he grew the beard and hid out in Europe for awhile that Algore was crazy? At the very least, mentally inbalanced... (OK, Al, you DID invent the internet, whatever you say...)
And I wish the Hildabeast would elaborate on her plantation comment. No, Hil, I don't know what you mean. And I doubt anyone really does. You threw that out there, in typical Democrat fashion, to insinuate that the Republicans are racist. Without, as usual, any facts or examples to back that up) But since EVERYONE simply KNOWS that Republicans are racist, we're all supposed to chuckle like they did at the event and go along with it. Low blow from the Senator, but what else did we expect??
Personally, I would've asked her to explain why there's only one black senator in their party, why the only African American supreme court justice was appointed by a Republican, why no African American was appointed to anything higher than secretary of agriculture in the Clinton administration, why the Democrats have no black governors, etc., etc., etc.
In reality, the Dems like to pretend they're for the African American, but really they mean just keeping them on welfare so that they'll continue to be dependent on the government (namely, the Democrats). To me, THAT sounds more like a plantation. I also would have asked her to name one initiative in the last 30 years the Dems have done to actually improve the lives of African Americans.
Sage, you are asking why the hypocrites demand to be hypocrites. Even old Al Franken denies that he's a racist and that he's hired more Blacks than he's given credit for. Franken is so touchy, that the wrote a letter to the editor of the Dubuque, Iowa, Telegraph-Herald demanding to have his say be the official record.
I look forward to seeing the NSA issue played out to the fullest extent. Regardless of any crazy persons looking for their extra 15 minutes. And by "played out to the fullest extent" I do not mean playing blame games, impeachment, or other partisan non-sense. I do mean how this effects executive powers, what consitutes "time of war" powers, and checks and balance.. i.e fundamental constitutional principals.
Wing, you have the Granddaughter of the Rosenbergs and the son of the Rosenbergs suing the NSA for listening in to their calls to their clients. Both are Rabid Communists and hate America deeply. Neither will admit they are talking to Al Qaeda or other known terrorists.
Wing, you have the Granddaughter of the Rosenbergs and the son of the Rosenbergs suing the NSA for listening in to their calls to their clients. Both are Rabid Communists and hate America deeply. Neither will admit they are talking to Al Qaeda or other known terrorists.
And?
What's your point? This answers nothing. The questions still exsist. What constitutes war time powers in a war that will likely last generations and generations? What's the limit of executive powers? What roll should congress play?
What if a Democrat in the White House was listening to your favorite right wing political group?
Do you trust all Presidents from now till the end of time with special "secret" powers?
It's a constitutional issue, not a partisan issue.
Wing, I posted something from the LA times and also from Debbie Schlussel's site that might help answer what you're saying.
The thing is, it's not a constitutional issue. We were not spying on Americans, per se. We were listening to phone calls between US citizens and known terrorists abroad. Something that other Presidents have done - democrat and republican.
Nobody can come up with ONE instance where someone's privacy has been violated. (not even under the Patriot Act) Not one, Wing. It's all hysteria designed to try to smear Bush. Same ol' same ol'.
I've just stopped really caring, to be honest.
The thing is, it's not a constitutional issue. We were not spying on Americans, per se. We were listening to phone calls between US citizens and known terrorists abroad. Something that other Presidents have done - democrat and republican.
I respectfully disagree. It is a constiutional issue. This is not about even spying, that's just what brought the issue out. It's about executive powers and that pesty thing called checks and balances.
I'm glad that faith in your government is good enough for you. I hold more traditional conservative values when it comes to government powers, that is limited power, checks and balances, preserving the constituion as closely as possible (and that's where the real debate gets started). No President should have unchecked, unquestionable power. Not a President named Clinton or Bush or any future President.
And nobody has "unchecked, unquestionable" power, Wing. Nobody.
There *are* checks and balances.
You're operating on faulty assumptions.
Oh really? Care to explain what those are?
Explain what WHAT are? Your faulty assumptions?
Start with "unchecked, unquestionable" powers. I'll wait here.
DP,
The US government has the technology to listen to any phone call, cell or landline, or read any email. They can monitor nearly anybody from space, and if you don't believe that, go to Google maps and dial up your home address.
Do you honestly believe that career politicians, whose ultimate goals are re-election and the power that comes with it would NEVER cross any boundaries as far as civil liberties and privacy are concerned, I have some swampland in Florida to sell you.
--Cobra
Cobra, honey, in your world, I'm sure anything's possible.
Commenting by HaloScan
