Bush caught in a bald faced lie.

We did have one minor leaguer show up.

Bricker?

Sam Stone?

Updike?

Scylla?

In Iraq, as the Lousiana guard found themselves when Katrina occurred.

A War? Where are the taxes to beat the axis, the declaration of war and the glorious self sacrifice of the well to do in support of this?

Because a warrant can be granted with very little effort, however there are reports that are pointing to the possibility that some of the enemies of the state like Gays and Activists are being the targets. For some funny coincidence they are people opposed to the administration, that would not stop a warrant from being granted, no? :dubious:

As I see the pathetic attemp at using 9/11 to justify this, it is someone else that needs to shut up.

:rolleyes: We have not forgotten 9/11 neither how Bush’s supporters poison the grief from 9/11 to hide his incompetency and power trips.

Metacom, you said a lot of stupid shit, but this part really stands out:

No. Not lying is a different thing from not revealing secrets. He did not need to “correct the speechwriter” and admit that we were conducting secret wiretaps. He simply needed to not claim that we weren’t.

There is still a segment of the population that would see that as a lie (of omission), but at least it would be defensible.

Also, why do you think that conducting secret wiretapping operations makes the US a safer place to live?

For bonus points, what in your mind will constitute a “complete victory” over the terrorists?

On preview:
lonesome loser, you have just horribly insulted Sam Stone and **Bricker **by including them in a list with Updike.

What makes this whole thing even more troubling is there was no need for the president to bypass FISA. FISA gives him the authority to wiretap first, and get a warrant later-- 3 days later. And the FISA court hardly ever turns down a warrant-- something like only 5 out of 4,000 ever. This just looks like a power grab, and people are pissed-- rightly so.

So, this whole argument about national security first is a pile of stinking BULLSHIT.

Well said Mr. Mace.

That hits the nail on the head.

He could have done it legally but he chose not to.

Will somebody give Dubya a blow job so we can impeach him already!

Please, even if I don’t agree with Bricker, **Sam Stone ** and Scylla; they are in the mayor leagues, **Updike ** actually is in the planktonian larvatic wiffle t-ball division.

Are you volunteering? :smiley:

Time to stop hiding under your bed, dude.

I could be wrong, but it seemed to me that Metacom was being sarcastic.

Or perhaps I’m the one being whooshed. :wink:

Although a firm believer in “taking one for the team”, I do have limits.

He’s gotta buy me dinner first.

This is not a simple stain on a party dress. Bush has repeatedly burned holes in the US Constitution. The call for impeachment has begun.

Aw man. I hate living near the airport.

Of course, according to some, Mr. Bush is quoted as saying the constitution is just a piece of paper.

They fact that it is not paper is not the point.

Thak you this is pretty much the attitude that pisses me off right here.

Do you guys NOT think the threat of a terrorist attack is viable?

The problem Shakes, is who decides who the terrorists are?

We need checks and balances, in any system.

And you think tapping American citizens, who are protected by the constitution and laws you know,phone calls have stopped any?

Just how many Americans took part in 9/11?

The claim that having to obtain warrants makes you any less safe is certainly not. A warrant to conduct surveillance operations on anyone actually planning something shouldn’t be hard to get.

Yes, and your point is still lower than seahorse manure as my reply showed.

Sure it’s possible, but that doesn’t make me run sobbing to the president asking him to be my own personal safety-nanny:
“Save me, Ohhh Save Me Mr. Bush! I’ll do ANYTHING. Just please keep me SAFE!”