--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, MDixon6569@ wrote: > > > > > > In a message dated 2/9/06 11:15:01 P.M. Central Standard Time, > > shempmcgurk@ writes: > > > > > Obviously Kennedy shouldn't have approved the wiretaps > > > in the first place--at least morally; it was legal for > > > him to do so--and apparently he did so reluctantly. > > > > > > But how MDixon thinks the FBI's vastly worse behavior > > > reflects badly on *Teddy* Kennedy, who has been outspokenly > > > opposed to Bush's ILLEGAL wiretapping of many thousands of > > > Americans, is really hard to figure. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Absolutely incredible. > > > > > > Not so incredible once you know the way this woman thinks. > > > > She supports old racist and segregationists like Al Gore Sr. who > > voted against the Civil Rights Act because she'll defend Democrats > > uber alles. > > > > What I found incredible was that She can defend to the hilt or > > apologize for Robert Kennedy who was allowing the spying on of an > > American civil rights leader who did no harm to anybody but became > > the closest thing to an American saint. > > I explicitly said he should not have done it. > > Then I pointed out that he underwent a major > transformation in his character after his > brother's death. > > Do you deny either of those points? > > > Yet, bash Bush using his authority to protect American citizens > > from acts of terrorism like we saw on 911 and for years prior to > > that. > > You are going to croak from Kool-Aid poisoning. > > > I would just > > like Judy to tell me the name of one American citizen that has been > > spied on illegally. > > How can I do that? The administration certainly > isn't going to tell me, nor has it informed the > innocent people that they've been illegally spied > upon. > > However, those in a position to know say many > thousands of Americans have been surveilled, and > in almost all cases no connection to terrorism has > been found. > > > Perhaps Al Qaida needs a *bill of rights*. I > > really believe in my heart of hearts that America's most liberal > > are really pissed that terrorism > > hasn't hit home again big time just so they can blame it on Bush. > > If you really believe that, you're *deeply* disturbed. > > In any case, the conclusive rebuttal to the right- > wingers who claim the administration should be > allowed to spy on Americans is: > > President Hillary Rodham Clinton. >
If her presidency will be anything like her husband's, I would support her 100%. Bill Clinton's presidency was characterized by the implementation of conservative principals we haven't seen since Reagan. Certainly, no one can say that the present Bush administration -- and Republican House and Senate! -- with its tax and spend $2.4 trillion deficit and intact Social Security program and still intact progressive income tax system is conservative...it isn't. So why not try another Clinton administration along with a Republican House and Senate, as was the case for 6 of 8 Bill Clinton years? Of course, it irks me that a woman whose only claim to fame is that she is a wife of a somebody and is a nobody in her own right can aspire to the presidency...especially when a MUCH more qualified and self-made woman like Condi Rice will be available... ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
