slapnose.com

You know, I find myself wishing Bush had more time left in office -- because I think his term will run out before he can be impeached.

You should look up all the tyrannical things Lincoln did before the Civil War even was declared. The horror! It's not like Congress has revied this program every 45 days since it was begun.

I think George Bush's understanding of his power as President has something to do with the executive power as outlined by John Locke.

Oh Fritz.. what the hell.

First - I don't give a rat's ass what Lincoln did, nor does it have the tiniest thing to do with what George W. Bush has done nearly 150 years later. Do you want to debate the legality and morality of Lincoln's actions before the Civil War, or do you want to discuss the CURRENT president illegally spying on American citizens?

Congress has not "reviewed" this program. Certain members of Congress have "been briefed" on this program, meaning they were told about it, but had no power to stop it or oversight over its execution. It was top-secret and they were forbidden to reveal it in any way, let alone do anything about it. There are also several reports from the actual Senators briefed on this program that the information they got was not accurate in light of what we now know.

I don't give another rat's ass about from which political philosopher George Bush may have gotten his criminal ideas. He has very likely broken the law. Do you care about that? Laws? Does Bush have the right to break the law? Did Bill Clinton?

Nothing prevented the administration from conducting this surveillance legally. There is no rational explanation except that they were spying on people they shouldn't have been, and the courts would have rejected their requests. What other reason could there be for circumventing the legal process to obtain warrants?

As usual, you pathetically avoid any real discussion of any real events, instead hiding behind irrelevant historical references and vague philosophical nonsense. It's really sad.

Congress has no power to stop the President? That certainly would be tyranny, if it were true. Unfortunately, for the fever swamps of American liberalism at least, it's not.

The quote from Lincoln:

"To state the question more directly, are all the laws, but one, to go unexecuted, and the government itself go to pieces, lest that one be violated? Even in such a case, would not the official oath be broken, if the government should be overthrown, when it was believed that disregarding the single law, would tend to preserve it? But it was not believed that this question was presented. It was not believed that any law was violated."

Actually, I would suggest you read a recent New Republic story re: torture, to get a sense of what the President's duty re: the law and its preservation is. You'll, I trust, notice a certain nuance that your above comments lack.

And, it's a shame you don't care about political philosophy.

sigh..

I didn't say Congress has no power to stop the president, I said they had no power to stop him in this instance, based on the "briefings" they were given about this program.

The government is in no danger of being overthrown. That fact alone makes the Lincoln comparison ludicrous. If you want to defend Lincoln's extra-legal activities, you cannot do it absent the idea that the very existence of the federal government was in danger. I can't imagine that even the most ardent right-winger thinks that is currently the case.

It's bullshit and you know it. If anyone other than George W. Bush or Ronald Fucking Reagan was found to have done this, you would be apoplectic.

Obviously, I didn't say I don't care about political philosophy. Straw man crap. For someone who styles themselves as such an intellectual, you sure have a problem addressing arguments as they are presented. I said I don't care from what political philosopher Bush derives his notion of executive power. Read it again.

I will also note that, once again, you fail to address the issue at hand. Do you support the president's right to circumvent the judicial branch and order secret surveillance of American citizens with no oversight? Do you? Do you have an answer for why it would ever be necessary to conduct surveillance in this way? Why it was not possible to follow the law and obtain a court order? Huh? Come on, defend it. Not in Lincoln's words, who I might point out is dead, but in your own.

Which laws get circumvented to preserve the republic?

Laws against torture, next spying on citizenry, sprinkle in the mundane government contracting regulations, maybe a law or two about public broadcasting... the list starts to get long indeed.
Really small potatoes compared to what needs to be done to preserve Christmas.

Slapnose Merchandise! At last!