View Full Version : Why are republicans ok with the lies, crimes and incompetence?
LordOpie
02-14-2006, 10:40 PM
from Gore's speech:
During the period when this eavesdropping was still secret, the President went out of his way to reassure the American people on more than one occasion that, of course, judicial permission is required for any government spying on American citizens and that, of course, these constitutional safeguards were still in place.
But surprisingly, the President's soothing statements turned out to be false. Moreover, as soon as this massive domestic spying program was uncovered by the press, the President not only confirmed that the story was true, but also declared that he has no intention of bringing these wholesale invasions of privacy to an end.
doesn't this bother republicans? and if so, why not? seriously. do you like being lied to? esp by someone who was going to bring 'dignity back to the white house'?
copied from another thread, but honestly.
Old Man G Funk
02-15-2006, 10:29 AM
copied from another thread, but honestly.
I'm also waiting for the answer to that one. Thank you for bring up the question.
stinkyboy
02-15-2006, 10:40 AM
Post of the year!
I would LOVE to hear a response from an educated republican.
Yes, this means N8 should STFU!
fluff
02-15-2006, 10:50 AM
What do you guys want? Why don't you just go the whole hog and carry out the terrorists suicide bombings yourselves?
Sheesh, Bush is protecting you from yourselves, do you not understand that?
How dim can you get.
stinkyboy
02-15-2006, 11:05 AM
Sheesh, Bush is protecting you from yourselves, do you not understand that?
How dim can you get.
New sig for ya N8...
narlus
02-15-2006, 11:08 AM
getting an original thought from N8 is like getting a proper pronunciation of 'nuclear' from our president.
just ain't gonna happen.
Old Man G Funk
02-15-2006, 11:18 AM
Algore locos.
Non sequitor.
sanjuro
02-15-2006, 11:45 AM
David Limbaugh
In what can only be called a major reversal, two Democratic leaders, Rep. Jane Harman and former Senate majority leader Tom Daschle, admitted the controversial NSA surveillance program was necessary for fighting terrorism.
But necessary or not, they strongly question whether the president has the authority to conduct the warrantless searches without congressional authority.
I saw this piece and I knew something was funny about it. I looked up Jane Harman and I found this in a media watchdog site: http://mediamatters.org/items/200512230007
While she supports the NSA domestic spying program (which is what she was quoted on), she actually said this: "Like many Americans, I am deeply concerned by reports that this program in fact goes far beyond the measures to target Al Qaeda about which I was briefed."
And Tom Daschle wrote an editorial in the Washington Post entitled "Power We Didn't Grant".
Domestic Spying is not necessarily an illegal act, but what the Bush Administration did was illegal, by wiretapping without any warrants. Democrats are not backing down from this.
Old Man G Funk
02-15-2006, 11:46 AM
Apparently no one cares...
Support for domestic spying probe falters
WASHINGTON, Feb. 15 (UPI)
Support for a U.S. congressional investigation into domestic terror spying is waning following a White House lobbying effort, The Washington Post reports.
Why not go straight to the source? The Post goes into far more detail and it seems as though part of this is the brow-beating that Rep. senators are getting the the White House:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/14/AR2006021401812.html
They attributed the shift to last week's closed briefings given by top administration officials to the full House and Senate intelligence committees, and to private appeals to wavering GOP senators by officials, including Vice President Cheney. "It's been a full-court press," said a top Senate Republican aide who asked to speak only on background -- as did several others for this story -- because of the classified nature of the intelligence committees' work.
John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), the Senate intelligence committee's vice chairman, has drafted a motion calling for a wide-ranging inquiry into the surveillance program, according to congressional sources who have seen it. Rockefeller declined to be interviewed yesterday.
Sources close to Rockefeller say he is frustrated by what he sees as heavy-handed White House efforts to dissuade Republicans from supporting his measure. They noted that Cheney conducted a Republicans-only meeting on intelligence matters in the Capitol yesterday.
Old Man G Funk
02-15-2006, 11:48 AM
I saw this piece and I knew something was funny about it. I looked up Jane Harman and I found this in a media watchdog program: http://mediamatters.org/items/200512230007
While she supports the NSA domestic spying program (which is what she was quoted on), she actually said this: "Like many Americans, I am deeply concerned by reports that this program in fact goes far beyond the measures to target Al Qaeda about which I was briefed."
And Tom Daschle wrote an editorial in the Washington Post entitled "Power We Didn't Grant".
Domestic Spying is not necessarily an illegal act, but what the Bush Administration did was illegal, by wiretapping without any warrants. Democrats are not backing down from this.
Are we surprised by the mischaracterization? It's Limbaugh's (both of them actually) only schtick.
LordOpie
02-15-2006, 07:41 PM
I would LOVE to hear a response from an educated republican.
bump
so, honestly, republicans... are you ok with it all or do you believe the assessment is wrong?
ALEXIS_DH
02-15-2006, 10:37 PM
bump
so, honestly, republicans... are you ok with it all or do you believe the assessment is wrong?
i suspect that many "republicans" (or for the matter, hardliners of any side) stick to their garrisons only for not having to accept "yeah i suck, i´m a gullible numbnuts enchanted by an action-hero-like-dude who turned out to be a dumbass????"
fluff
02-16-2006, 05:16 AM
It reminds me of the sad people who remain with an abusive partner because they're afraid of the alternative.
mmaddmark
02-16-2006, 08:13 AM
its all based on the trickle down your leg theory of ole regan. if you have "crime" then you can spend more cash on preventing crime. etc... what came first the chicken or the egg....it dont matter,as long as the chicken keeps producing eggs,we eat.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.