That's funny. So they claimed the previous admin was breaking laws and then not only did they realize they weren't but took extra steps to make sure they now are.
Or like many here have said, once you open the door a little, it will only open wider. And for that I agree Bush screwed up. . On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Jerry Barnes <[email protected]> wrote: > > "Meanwhile, Obama ran as a constitutional law professor." > > Here is part of the platform from the Democratic Party in 2008. > > Our Constitution is not a nuisance. It is the foundation of our democracy. > It makes freedom and > self-governance possible, and helps to protect our security. The Democratic > Party will restore our Constitution to its proper place in our government > and return our Nation to our best traditionsincluding our commitment to > government by law . > > As we combat terrorism, we must not sacrifice the American values we are > fighting to protect. In recent years, weve seen an Administration put > forward a false choice between the liberties we cherish and the security we > demand. The Democratic Party rejects this dichotomy. We will restore our > constitutional traditions, and recover our nations founding commitment to > liberty under law. > > We support constitutional protections and judicial oversight on any > surveillance program involving Americans. We will review the current > Administrations warrantless wiretapping program. We reject illegal > wiretapping of American citizens, wherever they live. We reject the use of > national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a > crime. We reject the tracking of citizens who do nothing more than protest a > misguided war. We reject torture. We reject sweeping claims of inherent > presidential power. We will revisit the Patriot Act and overturn > unconstitutional executive decisions issued during the past eight years. > > > Seems like Obama has plenty of company in forgetting about campaign > promises. > > That's okay, Eric Holder's got your back:* > > Eric Holder*: Yeah. I believe that the law is constitutional. One of the > things I think is somewhat regrettable is that the program that Ive not > been read into and dont know all the dimensions of it, but as I understand > it that the program is a very, very useful tool, a potential tool for us in > fighting terrorism. I think that what is unfortunate is that we could have > had that tool congressionally sanctioned at a much earlier stage. I think > that, as we saw in the Steel Seizure concurrence of Justice Jackson, the > president has his greatest power when he acts consistent with congressional > directives, and I think that in this instance thats instructive. Had the > administration come to Congress and asked for that enhanced authority many > years before, I have no doubt that the Congress would have granted him that > tool. Having done that, though, and having had Congress say that this is an > appropriate thing to do, as I said I think that is a very useful tool, and > one that we will make great use of. > > Oh, never mind. He thinks the FISA Ammendment should have been passed > sooner. > > Well, it's only one party, right? > > Nope. > > In April of 2009, the U.S. Senate voted unanimously to make it impossible to > change any aspect of the Patriot Act without a 60-vote supermajority. > > While the two parties may not agree on who to give the tax-payer spoils to, > they sure as hell can agree on wanting to keep the citizens in the ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:338436 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
